Urine treatment

treatment,
reuse and
diversion component
technology review
Literature Overview

Mariska Ronteltap, March 2011

 Reports
Technology Review Urine Diverting Components 3

ECOSAN_AT / Issue 3: Use of Urine 35

Practical Guidance on the Use of Urine in Crop Production 68

Toepassingsmogelijkheden voor urine in de landbouw 137

Verwijdering medicijnresten en hormoonverstorende stoffen uit urine 214

Praktijkproef toepassing urine zorglocatie Anderen 225

H2O: Ervaring met urinescheiding in Europa 254

Are pharmaceutical residues a problem for urine reuse in agriculture? 257

Three years of operation of the UD system in GTZ headquarters 277

Table of Content
Technology Review | Urine diversion components
Overview of urine diversion components such as waterless urinals,
urine diversion toilets, urine storage and reuse systems
Imprint

Published by:
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Technische Zusammenarbeit GmbH (GTZ)
Sustainable sanitation - ecosan program
Postfach 5180, 65726 Eschborn, Germany
T +49 61 96 79-4220
F +49 61 96 79-80 4220
E ecosan@gtz.de
I www.gtz.de/ecosan

Place and date of publication: Design:

Eschborn, December 2009
Authors:
Dr. Elisabeth von Münch, Dr.-Ing. Martina Winker
Responsible editor:
Dr. Elisabeth von Münch
Acknowledgement:
Nathasith Chiarawatchai, Florian Klingel,
Christine Werner and Patrick Bracken
(authors of an earlier version),
Dr. Håkan Jönsson, Dr. Elisabeth Kvarnström
and Dr. Arno Rosemarin
(reviewers of the current document)
Printed on 100% recycled paper
creative republic
Thomas Maxeiner Kommunikationsdesign, Frankfurt am Main
www.creativerepublic.net
Photos:
Cover: © Philipp Feiereisen, Steffen Blume, Lukas Ulrich,
Abdoulaye Fall, Sören Rüd, Robert Gensch, iStock
Back: © GTZ, Steffen Blume, Elmer Sayre, Sören Rüd,
Patrick Zimmerer, Alexandra Höhne/Rwanda Village Concept Project,
Elisabeth von Münch, Stefanie Lorenz
Inside: © Elke Mühlegger/EcoSan Club Austria, Patrick Zimmerer,
Philipp Feiereisen, Julia Littmann, Håkan Jönsson, Abdoulaye Fall,
Steffen Blume, Philipp Feiereisen, Robert Gensch, Heike Hoffmann,
Arne Panesar, Michael Kropac
PrePress:
Rohland&more, Offenbach

Printed and distributed by:

Schätzldruck, Donauwörth
Technology Review | Urine diversion components
Overview of urine diversion components such as waterless urinals,
urine diversion toilets, urine storage and reuse systems
4
Foreword 5

This publication is an important contribution of the GTZ

program “Sustainable sanitation – ecosan” as it pulls together
scattered knowledge around the topic of urine diversion in a
concise manner.

The program is commisioned by the German Federal Ministry

for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). The
ecological sanitation (ecosan) approach is able to address both:
child health which needs to be improved through better sani-
tation, and sustainable management and safe recycling of
important resources such as water and nutrients, in particular
phosphorus.

It is a positive development that more and more people are now

becoming aware of the present worldwide sanitation crisis –
which is killing thousands of young children each day. It is also
becoming more widely known that phosphorus (in the form of
phosphate rock deposits), is a non-renewable, limited resource.
High-quality phosphate rock will run out in the future.

The safe use of urine as a fertiliser can enable all farmers

to grow more food – not only those who have the means to
buy artificial fertilisers. When prices for artificial fertiliser
increase again – as in 2008 when prices increased by up to
eight times in some countries – farmers relying on urine will
be less affected by such fertiliser price hikes.

I am sure this technology review will help and inspire people

working on sustainable solutions for excreta management.
Feedback about this publication is welcome and should be sent
to ecosan@gtz.de.

Let us jointly continue to work towards the aim of safe and

sustainable sanitation for all!

Andreas Kanzler
Head of Water Section
Division Water, Energy, Transport

Deutsche Gesellschaft für

Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
Eschborn, Germany

Eschborn, December 2009

6 Contents
4.5 Further design information..................................... 19
1 Summary........................................................................................... 8 4.6 Use and maintenance of waterless urinals................ 19
4.7 User acceptance of waterless urinals........................ 20
2 Introduction to urine diversion (UD).................................... 8 4.8 Suppliers and costs of waterless urinals.................... 20
4.9 How to choose the right type of waterless urinal.... 20
2.1 Definition of UD..................................................... 8
2.2 Purposes of UD installations................................... 9 5 Urine diversion toilets .............................................................. 21
2.3 Benefits of UD systems............................................ 9
2.3.1 Benefits of all types of UD toilets and 5.1 Definition................................................................ 21
waterless urinals....................................................... 9 5.2 Basic design information for UD toilets.................. 21
2.3.2 Further additional benefits of UDDTs compared 5.3 Urine diversion dehydration toilets (UDDTs)......... 21
to pit latrines............................................................9 5.3.1 Basic design information......................................... 21
2.4 Challenges with UD systems................................... 10 5.3.2 Odour control for urine collection system............... 22
2.4.1 Social acceptance amongst users.............................. 10 5.3.3 Construction methods and materials....................... 22
2.4.2 User cooperation...................................................... 10 5.3.4 Use and maintenance.............................................. 22
2.4.3 Urine reuse/disposal issues....................................... 10 5.3.5 Project examples...................................................... 22
2.4.4 Urine precipitation.................................................. 10 5.4 UD flush toilets....................................................... 22
2.5 Quantity of urine.................................................... 11 5.4.1 Overview on historical development....................... 22
2.6 Quality of urine....................................................... 11 5.4.2 Basic design information......................................... 22
2.6.1 Source considerations.............................................. 11 5.4.3 Odour control for the urine collection system......... 23
2.6.2 Pathogens................................................................ 11 5.4.4 Materials.................................................................. 23
2.6.3 Nutrients................................................................. 11 5.4.5 Use and maintenance.............................................. 23
2.6.4 Micro-pollutants...................................................... 12 5.4.6 Project examples...................................................... 23
2.7 Urine treatment....................................................... 12 5.5 Suppliers and costs for UD toilets........................... 23
2.7.1 Treatment objectives................................................ 12 5.6 How to choose between a UDDT
2.7.2 Treatment by storage............................................... 12 and a UD flush toilet............................................... 23
2.7.3 Other urine treatment technologies......................... 12
2.8 Are UD systems more cost effective?....................... 13 6 Urine piping and storage tanks.............................................. 24
2.9 Technical components used for achieving UD........ 13
6.1 Urine piping............................................................ 24
3 Reuse of urine as fertiliser in agriculture........................ 13 6.1.1 Functional principles............................................... 24
6.1.2 Materials.................................................................. 24
3.1 How to use urine as a fertiliser................................ 13 6.1.3 Pipe size and layout................................................. 24
3.1.1 Basic guidelines....................................................... 13 6.1.4 Odour control.......................................................... 24
3.1.2 Specific advantages of urine compared 6.2 Urine storage tanks.................................................. 24
to other mineral fertilisers..................................... ..14 6.2.1 Functional principles............................................... 24
3.1.3 Disadvantages of urine compared 6.2.2 Locations................................................................. 25
to other mineral fertilisers..................................... ..14 6.2.3 Materials.................................................................. 25
3.1.4 Should urine be applied undiluted 6.2.4 Urine tank size........................................................ 25
or diluted with water?............................................ ..15 6.2.5 Number of urine tanks needed................................ 25
3.2 A re hormones and pharmaceutical 6.2.6 Urine overflow pipe................................................. 26
residues in urine problematic for reuse?................... 15 6.2.7 Examples................................................................. 26
3.3 Is urine an “organic fertiliser” 6.3 Ventilation for pressure equalisation
and can it be used in organic farming?.................... 16 of pipes and tanks.................................................... 26
6.4 Maintenance of urine pipes and tanks..................... 27
4 Waterless urinals......................................................................... 16

4.1 Definition and purpose...............................................16 7 References........................................................................................ 27

4.2 Historical development of waterless urinals............. 17
4.3 Odour control methods (general)............................ 17 7.1 References used in this document........................... 27
4.4 Odour control for connection of urinal 7.2 Video clips............................................................... 29
to sewer or storage tank........................................... 17 7.3 Additional photos.................................................... 29
4.4.1 Rubber tube seal...................................................... 17
4.4.2 Curtain valve seal ................................................... 17 8 Appendix:
4.4.3 Sealant liquid (blocking fluid)................................. 18 Worldwide listing of suppliers for waterless urinals,
4.4.4 Other methods for the odour seal........................... 19 UD pedestals and squatting pans ....................................... 29
List of Tables & Figures: 7

Table 1. Average chemical composition of fresh urine

(literature values) and stored urine (simulated values,
see Udert et al. (2006))....................................................... 12

Figure 1. Waterless urinals for men.

Left: Centaurus model of Keramag company.
Right: Plastic urinal from Addicom, South Africa,
with Eco-Smellstop device (sources: left: E. v. Münch,
Delft, 2006; right: Addicom)............................................. 16

Figure 2. Two types of odour seals for waterless urinals.

Left: Flat rubber tube (Keramag Centaurus).
Right: (left side) See-through pipe fitting;
(right side) see-through EcoSmellstop (ESS) unit
showing the blue silicon curtain one-way valve inside
(source: (left): E. v. Münch, 2007; right: Addicom)........... 18

Figure 3. EcoSmellstop (ESS) unit with pipe fitting

and extractor. Inside the ESS is the silicon curtain
valve (source: Addicom)...................................................... 18

Figure 4. Example instruction sheet, showing

replacement of sealant liquid for Uridan urinals
(other urinals with sealant liquid have a similar
maintenance routine) (source: Uridan)............................... 18

Figure 5. Left: Indoor UDDT (pedestal type) in Johannes­

burg, South Africa in the house of Richard Holden (source:
E. v. Münch, 2006). Right: UDDT squatting pan in Banga-
lore, India, with three holes: the area in the front is for anal
washing, middle is for faeces and back is for urine (source:
D. Schäfer, 2008)................................................................ 22

Figure 6. UD flush toilets. Left: Gustavsberg

(in Meppel, the Netherlands); Right: Dubbletten
(in Stockholm, Sweden), (sources: E. v. Münch, 2007)...... 23

Figure 7. Left: Low-cost solution: 20 L plastic jerrycan for

urine storage at individual toilet level in Ouagadougou,
Burkina Faso (source: E. v. Münch, 2006)
Right: Below-ground plastic urine storage tanks
at Kullön, Sweden during the construction process.
The tanks will be covered with soil (photo:
Mats Johansson, source: Kvarnström et al., 2006).............. 26

Figure 8. Urine storage tank made of a 150 m³

plastic bladder at Lake Bornsjön near Stockholm,
Sweden (photo comissioned by: E. v. Münch, 2007).......... 26

Figure 9. Plastic urine storage tank in Ouagadougou,

Burkina Faso as part of the EU-funded project ECOSAN_UE
led by CREPA (source: S. Rüd, 2008)................................ 26
8 1 Summary
The target audience for this publication are people who
are new to the topic of urine diversion or new to the topic odour blocking mechanism (most notably with a flat rubber
of ecological sanitation (ecosan), and who:
ÿ  need to obtain an overview of the main issues for
urine diversion and the main technical components
ÿ  want to know which are the main important docu-
ments for further reading
ÿ  have a particular interest in developing countries,
with a pro-poor perspective
ÿ  need information on available suppliers worldwide
and on costs for waterless urinals and urine diversion
toilet pedestals and squatting pans.
This publication explains the purposes of urine diversion, its
benefits and challenges, urine precipitation, urine treatment
and reuse in agriculture. It provides an overview on design and
operational aspects for equipment needed, such as waterless
urinals and urine diversion toilets including supplier informa-
tion and indicative costs. The publication also provides basic
design information for urine piping and storage tanks (inclu­
ding tank sizing, odour control and ventilation design issues).
Urine diversion is the term used to describe keeping urine and
faeces separate from each other at the point of excretion. The
four main purposes of implementing systems with urine diver­
sion (UD) are: to reduce odour, to prevent production of wet
faecal sludge, to reduce water consumption and to collect pure
urine for use as fertiliser in agriculture.
Further benefits include minimised excreta-related groundwater
pollution, the fact that the toilet can be indoors (as opposed
to a pit latrine) and better control over micro-pollutants dis-
charged to the environment. The challenges include social
acceptance, user cooperation, urine reuse or disposal issues
and urine precipitation.
Equipment used in urine diversion systems includes waterless
urinals, urine diversion toilets (either with or without flush
water), urine piping and urine storage tanks. The most com-
mon and cheapest method to treat urine for pathogen removal
from faecal cross-contamination is by extended storage.
Urine can safely be used in gardening and agriculture as a
nutrient-rich fertiliser, provided relevant reuse guidelines (see
WHO, 2006) are followed. If there is no use for the urine, waterless type, they can collect the urine pure, meaning
it can be discharged to a sewer or possibly infiltrated in the
ground (if local soil and groundwater conditions permit this
without adverse impacts on groundwater quality).
Waterless urinals enable the collection of undiluted urine and
are already widely used in many industrialised countries (par-
ticularly in Germany) in public or communal buildings (not
common at household level). But so far, they are usually just
connected to the sewer system and the urine is neither collected
nor reused. Odour control in waterless urinals is crucial for
user acceptance, and is achieved by (i) various designs for an
tube, silicon curtain valve or sealant liquid), and (ii) by en-
suring correct maintenance procedures.
Urine diversion dehydration toilets (UDDTs) collect faeces
“in a dry system” (i.e. separately from urine, flush water and anal
washwater) in vaults or buckets located underneath the UD
pedestal or squatting pan. For pro-poor approaches in deve­
loping countries, UDDTs are more suitable than UD flush
toilets, as the latter still require a sewer system and treatment
for brown­water. UDDTs can easily be designed to suit users
who use water instead of toilet paper by providing a separate
drain hole for anal washwater.
Odour control and pressure equalisation within urine pipes and
urine storage tanks need to be included in the design in the case
of indoor multi-toilet systems. Waterless urinals and UDDTs
are a promising step forward towards implementing water sa­
ving, more sustainable sanitation and reduced depen­dency on
costly artificial fertiliser, thus contributing to poverty reduction.
2 Introduction to urine diversion (UD)
2.1 Definition of UD
Urine diversion (UD) devices collect urine separately from
faeces and from water (or with minimal flush water). A urine
diversion toilet has two outlets with two collection systems: one
for urine and one for faeces (and possibly a third one for anal
washwater), in order to keep these two (or three) excreta or
wastewater fractions separate. UD toilets may, or may not, mix
water and faeces, or some water and urine, but they never mix
urine and faeces. Section 5.1 provides an overview of the two
main types of urine diversion toilets: UD toilets with­out flush
water (these are called urine diversion dehydration toilets or
UDDTs) and those with flush water (UD flush toilets).
Urinals – widely used by men at public toilets, restaurants,
schools, etc. – work as urine diversion devices because urine
is collected separately from faeces. When urinals are of the
without dilution with water.
Urine diversion may be used in ecological sanitation (ecosan)
concepts, but not all ecosan projects use urine diversion.
Ecosan is an approach to sanitation which focusses on reuse
of nutrients and organic matter contained in excreta and
wastewater, and emphasises sustainability in all aspects 1.
1 The definition of “sustainable sanitation” is provided in the
first vision document of the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance
http://www.susana.org/lang-en/intro/156-intro/267-vision-document

2.2 Purposes of UD installations
The purpose of a UD installation is usually one, or several
of the following four purposes – which can be split in two ÿ  If there is concern about hormones and pharmaceuti-
categories:
Purposes relevant for all types of UD systems (described in
more detail in Section 2.3.1 below):
1. to reduce water consumption
2. to be able to collect urine pure and undiluted so
that it can – after sanitisation by storage – be safely
used as fertiliser in agriculture.
Purposes relevant for UDDTs (urine diversion dehydration
toilets) compared to pit latrines (described in more detail in
Section 2.3.2 below):
3. to reduce odour
4. to avoid production of wet, odorous faecal sludge,
which has to be removed by someone when the pit
latrine is full.
2.3 Benefits of UD systems
2.3.1 Benefits of all types of UD toilets and waterless urinals
ÿ  Water savings: UDDTs and waterless urinals require
no flush water, whereas conventional urinals use around
4 L per flush (flush toilets use about 8-12 L per flush;
pour flush toilets use 2-3 L per flush). UD flush toilets
can also reduce water consumption when compared to
conventional water-flushed toilets: this is because the
“urine flush” uses a low volume to flush away remai­
ning urine drops and used toilet paper (0.5 to 2 L of
flush water, depending on the toilet model). If urine-
soiled toilet paper is collected in a bin, rather than
flushed away, water savings could be even greater.
ÿ  The collected urine can be used as fertiliser, which
can increase crop yields. As explained further in UDDT than the pit of a pit latrine. This is particularly
Section 3, urine is a liquid fertiliser rich in nitrogen
and phosphorus. This is of particular importance for
those farmers in developing countries who cannot ÿ  Minimised toilet-related groundwater pollution with
afford mineral fertilisers.
ÿ  Recycling of phosphorus from urine may become
necessary in the mid-term future and is easier to
achieve if urine is collected pure rather than mixed
with wastewater. Phosphorus is an essential element
for agricultural production. It is either available in the
soil or added with fertiliser, and is produced from mined
deposits of phosphate rock. High-grade phosphate rock
reserves are running out: at current rates of exploitation
(increasing at around 3% per year), the economic re-
serves of phosphorus will last no more than 50 years.
The economically viable reserves in the United States
for example, will be depleted within 25 to 30 years
(Rosemarin et al., 2008; Cordell et al., 2009). In the
future, increased efforts to recycle the phosphorus 9
content of human and animal excreta are inevitable
(EcoSanRes, 2008).
cal residues entering drinking water sources via house­
hold wastewater (sewage), then the separate collection
of urine can simplify removal of these substances from
the environment. Particularly for industrialised coun-
tries, this could be a major driving force in favour of
UD systems (see Section 3.2).
ÿ  Urine diversion may also create business opportunities
for the private sector via the sale of UD technology and
related services.
ÿ  In many cases, cost savings can be realised when im-
plementing UD systems especially regarding economic
costs when a system-wide analysis is performed (inclu­
ding external costs due to groundwater pollution for
example), see Section 2.8 for details.
2.3.2 Further additional benefits of UDDTs compared
to pit latrines
ÿ  There is significantly less odour when urine and faeces
are not mixed – as in a UDDT – compared to the case
where urine and faeces are mixed as in a pit latrine.
ÿ  Since UDDTs are odour-free when designed and oper-
ated correctly and since they do not need contact with
the soil to infiltrate liquids, UDDTs can be indoors,
which leads to improved security, privacy and user
comfort. This aspect is very important especially for
women and girls, for whom it may be too dangerous
to go to the toilet outside in darkness (sexual assaults).
ÿ  No production of wet faecal sludge: Faeces collected
in a dry manner, separately from urine and water, are
not offensive, especially after an extended drying period.
Hence, it is much easier to empty the faeces vault of a
important for hilly or crowded areas where access to
pit latrines by conventional trucks is impossible.
nitrate and pathogens. Pit latrines and septic tanks are
designed to infiltrate liquid into the soil, which can
lead to groundwater pollution if the population density
is high, the groundwater level is high or there are pre­
ferential pathways in the soil to the groundwater.
UDDTs on the other hand collect the urine and faeces
above-ground and therefore do not pollute the ground­
water. Note that onsite greywater disposal can also lead
to groundwater pollution and this issue is not addressed
by urine diversion toilets.
10 2.4 Challenges with UD systems
2.4.1 Social acceptance amongst users
Regarding social acceptance, the successful adoption of
urine diversion systems is closely linked to:
ÿ  Users' motivation and willingness to change existing
habits and behaviours, for example:
„ The willingness of men to sit down on pedestal-type
UD toilets for urination if no urinals are being provi­
ded – this does not apply to squatting-type UD toilets;
„ The willingness to move backwards a little bit so that
anal washwater can be collected separately from faeces
in the case of UDDTs and “anal washers”.
ÿ  Supportive attitude of all stakeholders involved
(users, maintenance staff, planners, farmers, important:
politicians and so on).
ÿ  Possible use of urine as a fertiliser (or some other
disposal option for collected urine if reuse in tances are large (noise, air pollution and CO₂ emissions).
agri­culture or aquaculture is not possible).
ÿ  Cultural obstacles like superstition of the users.
Odour nuisance (be it only perceived or actual) is a further
potential obstacle to social acceptance, but with the correct
design and operation, odours from waterless urinals and lead to groundwater pollution with nitrate (depen­
UD toilets are the same or less than conventional urinals and
toilets. Also, UDDTs have significantly less odour and flies
than pit latrines, and can therefore be placed indoors which
may prove to be a significant driver for social acceptance.
Social acceptance also depends to a high degree on:
ÿ  The current sanitation situation (are people used to
“flying toilets” (plastic bags), pit latrines or flush toilets?)
and the users’ expectation for the future.
ÿ  The prevailing norms regarding reuse of human
ex­creta and related taboos.
ÿ  Available service providers who can offer a collection
and maintenance service.
Hence, careful planning with stakeholder participation is crucial.
2.4.2 User cooperation
There are three main issues to be kept in mind regarding
user cooperation:
1.  Users have to “think a bit” when they use UD toilets
for the first time (this point does not apply to water­
less urinals, which are used in the same way as water-
flushed urinals). Thus, urine diversion toilets need
some upfront awareness raising to ensure correct usage
and social acceptance.
2.  If users do not cooperate, toilet misuse can result in
odour (e.g. if users urinate in the faeces compartment
of a UDDT) or in a “messed-up” toilet (e.g. if users
defecate into the urine compartment of a UD toilet) –
although this is not dissimilar from pit latrines and
flush toilets.
3.  Cleaning of UD toilets is a little more time consu­
ming than cleaning of conventional toilets, due to
the separate urine section in the toilet bowl.
2.4.3 Urine reuse/disposal issues
The following issues regarding urine reuse or disposal are
ÿ  Urine needs to be transported to the reuse areas which
leads to increased traffic, and is problematic if the dis-
ÿ  W hen urine is used in agriculture, the farmers need to
be trained on the correct methods (see Section 3.1).
ÿ  If urine cannot be reused, it is sometimes infiltrated
in the ground. In some circumstances, this has no ad-
verse environmental impacts. In other cases, this can
ding on the amount of urine infiltrated per area, soil
properties, groundwater table) – just like with pit
latrines (but with pit latrines there is the added pro­
blem of pathogen transport to groundwater).
2.4.4 Urine precipitation
The information given in this section was mainly taken
from Larsen and Lienert (2007). In fresh urine, the main
nitrogen compound is urea. During storage, urea is hydro-
lysed to ammonia/ammonium and hydrocarbonate by urease
enzymes present in the urine storage container, soil and in
aquatic systems (see also Table 1). This process is accompa-
nied by an increase in the pH value. The increased pH value
results in precipitation of struvite (MgNH₄PO₄) and calcium
phosphate (Ca₁₀(PO₄)₆(OH)₂) crystals. Those crystals can form
incrustations, also called “urine stone”.
Precipitation in urine pipes and storage tanks occurs in both
water-flushed and waterless systems. In addition skin cells,
hair and excreted organic complexes will also settle.
The end result may be hard precipitates (incrustations) or soft,
viscous, paste-like precipitates (deposits). Incrustations tend
to occur on the inner walls of pipes and pipe bends. Soft
deposits occur in storage tanks (where they form a sludge at
the bottom of the tank) and in near-horizontal urine pipes.
The following design parameters reduce the extent 2.6.2 Pathogens
of precipitation:
ÿ  Short retention time: precipitation often occurs at
locations where the urine flow velocity is low or even
stagnant (such as siphons, horizontal pipes, U-bends
of the toilet). Such arrangements should therefore be
avoided.
ÿ  Smooth surfaces and hydrophobic materials should
be used. Scratching of surfaces by mechanical cleaning
should be avoided. Plastic PVC pipes are commonly
used for urine pipes.
ÿ  If flushing with water: Flushing with soft water,
such as rainwater, is preferred to flushing with hard
water (soft water has less calcium and magnesium
which can precipitate with the urine’s ammonium
and phosphate).
ÿ  Pipes with a relatively large diameter (at least 2.5 cm)
are less likely to get clogged.
Using no flush water at all (as in waterless urinals) does not
eliminate the problem, since urine also contains calcium and
magnesium which can precipitate with ammonium and phos-
phate to form struvite. In waterless UD systems, more soft
deposits tend to occur than hard incrustations, whereas for
water-flushed UD systems it is the other way around. Info­r­ma­
tion about maintenance tasks to prevent or remove blockages
in urine pipes is provided in Section 6.4.
2.5 Quantity of urine
The quantity of urine produced by an adult is around 0.8
to 1.5 L per adult per day (WHO, 2006, Volume 4) – it mainly
depends on the amount a person drinks and his or her transpi­
ration. Children produce approx. half as much urine as adults.
A widely used design figure, based on Swedish data, is 1.5 L/
cap/d (or 550 L/cap/year)2.
2.6 Quality of urine
2.6.1 Source considerations
The description of urine quality in this section applies to
urine collected without cross-contamination with faeces. Such
cross-contamination is dealt with via urine treatment methods
(see Section 2.7).
Additionally, it should be highlighted that the quality of the
collected urine is related to the health and life style of the
people excreting it and to the urine collection system. For ex-
ample, if urine is collected from a hospital or an old-age home
it will most likely contain more pharmaceutical residues than
urine from healthy and young people. And if urine is led
through copper pipes it may have a high copper concentration.
This has to be kept in mind during the design phase, especially
when reuse is planned.
11
There are four types of pathogens relevant for sanitation:
bacteria, viruses, parasitic protozoa and intestinal helminths.
It is important to know that urine in the bladder of a healthy
person is sterile (meaning it contains no pathogens). Only
very few diseases are transmitted via pathogens in urine. The
only disease which needs to be considered from a risk perspec-
tive when urine is reused in agriculture is Schistosoma haema-
tobium – and only in areas where this disease is endemic
(WHO, 2006, Volume 4). In contrast, the amount of patho-
gens in faeces can be very high, depending on the prevalence
of diseases in the population.
2.6.3 Nutrients
Macro-nutrients in excreta include N, P, K and S (nitrogen,
phosphorus, potassium and sulphur) of which N and P are
the most important.
With regards to the nutrients contained in urine, the follow-
ing design figures are used (derived mainly from Swedish
data but considered to be quite universal, see Jönsson et al.,
2004):
ÿ  Mass of nutrients excreted with urine: 4 kgN/cap/yr,
0.36 kgP/cap/yr and 1.0 kgK/cap/yr.
ÿ  Concentrations of macro-nutrients in urine (design
figure): 7300 mg/L N; 670 mg/L P; 1800 mg/L K.
ÿ  Concentration figures are based on a person’s diet
and should preferably be verified onsite.
ÿ  80% of the nitrogen excreted by a person is excreted
with the urine, and the rest with the faeces. Hence,
in terms of nitrogen fertiliser, urine is more important
than faeces. For phosphorus, 55% is excreted with the
urine, the rest with the faeces.
ÿ  Adults excrete the same mass of nutrients as taken up
in their diet, as there is no retention of nitrogen and
phosphorus in the human body, except for children
where a small amount is retained for bone growth.
The chemical composition of fresh and stored 3 urine is
summarised in Table 1 (see next page) and the following
observations are highlighted:
ÿ  Fresh urine contains nitrogen mainly in the form
of urea; stored urine contains nitrogen mainly in the
form of ammonium/ammonia (the transformation
process is described in Section 2.7.2).
ÿ  The lower phosphate, magnesium and calcium con­
centrations in stored urine compared to fresh urine
are due to precipitation processes during storage.
2 Cap = capita = person
3 Stored urine means urine which is completely hydrolysed
(Udert et al., 2003), and this typically occurs within 2-4 weeks depen­
ding on the amount of urease present (Maurer, 2007).
12 Table 1. Average chemical composition of fresh urine (literature
values) and stored urine (simulated values, see Udert et al. (2006))4 .
Significant changes during storage are indicated in bold.
Parameter Fresh urine Stored urine
pH 6.2  9.1
Total nitrogen, TN (mg/L) 8830 9200
Ammonium/ammonia-N, 460 8100
NH 4 + and NH3 (mgN/L)
Nitrate/nitrite NO 3 + NO 2 0.06 0
(mgN/L)
Chemical oxygen demand, 6,000 10,000
COD (mg/L)*
Total phosphorus, TP (mg/L) 800 – 2000 540
Potassium, K (mg/L) 2740 2200
Sulphate, SO 4 (mgSO 4 /L) 1500 1500
Sodium, Na (mg/L) 3450 2600
Magnesium, Mg (mg/L) 120 0
Chloride, Cl (mg/L) 4970 3800
Calcium, Ca (mg/L) 230 0
* COD is a measure of the organic components.
2.6.4 Micro-pollutants
Micro-pollutants in urine could include the following
categories of substances:
1. Natural hormones
2. Pharmaceutical residues, including hormones
from contraceptive pill
3. Heavy metals
4. Persistent organic pollutants (POPs)
The last two categories of micro-pollutants – heavy metals
and POPs – are virtually non-existent in urine as they would
originate from the food a person has eaten. Urine is an im-
portant pathway for the body to eliminate organic degrada-
tion products which are toxic to the human body, but these
substances are easily biodegradable by soil microorganisms for own consumption. This is because disease trans-
after excretion. The first two categories of micro-pollutants –
the natural hormones and pharmaceutical residues – do occur
in urine and can be managed (see Section 2.7.3 and 3.2).
2.7 Urine treatment
2.7.1 Treatment objectives
Urine treatment has the following objectives:
ÿ  Pathogen kill (this is the main objective): Collected
urine may be contaminated with faecal pathogens if
4 Source: Maurer (2007)
care­less users deposit faeces in the urine compartment
of a UD toilet (this is termed “cross-contamination” of
urine with faecal material). As mentioned above, pure
urine is virtually patho­­gen-free.
ÿ  Other possible treatment objectives may include:
„ Volume reduction by evaporation or by conversion
into solid form (struvite) to reduce transport costs.
„ Extraction (further concentration) of nutrients.
„ Elimination of micro-pollutants.
2.7.2 Treatment by storage
The simplest, cheapest and most common method to
treat urine with the aim of pathogen kill, is extended storage
in storage tanks.
Storage of urine in a closed tank or container (not necessarily
gas tight) is an efficient treatment method for reducing patho-
gens in urine: The decomposition of urea into ammonia/
am­mo­nium and hydrocarbonate – which is facilitated by the
na­tural enzyme urease – leads to an increased pH value (pH
around 9) which has a sanitising effect (meaning it kills patho-
gens), so that bacteria, parasitic protozoa, viruses and intestinal
helminths die off over time. An environment with a high tem-
perature and low dilution with water enhances this effect.
Time itself also leads to pathogen kill.
Safe reuse of urine in agriculture can be ensured if the fol-
lowing re­com­mended storage times are used (for details see
WHO, 2006, Volume 4):
ÿ  Urine originating from larger systems (community level)
– where cross-contamination with faeces cannot be
ruled out – should be stored for at least one month if
it is used on food or fodder crops which are processed.
For a higher safety margin, 6 months of storage can be
used (in which case the urine can be used on all crops).
But if the ammonia level in the urine is greater than
2 mgN/L (which it should be for undiluted urine) then
shorter storage times will suffice (Winker et al., 2008).
ÿ  No storage is needed when urine from own production
(or from systems where cross-contamination with fae-
ces is definitely not occurring 5) is used for crops grown
mission within the household via the urine-oral route
is much less likely compared to day-to-day contact of
the household members.
2.7.3 Other urine treatment technologies
Advanced urine treatment technologies can include bio-
logical processes (nitrification), chemical processes (struvite
precipitation; ozonation) or physical processes (membrane-
based). Some of these high-tech methods (such as ozonation
5 For example when urine is collected from waterless urinals.
and membrane-based processes) can remove micro-pollutants
from urine (see Larsen and Lienert (2007); Tettenborn
(2007)). This is useful to know if there is concern about ing option of open defecation.
micro-pollutants in urine (see Section 3.2).
2.8 Are UD systems more cost effective?
Possible cost savings of urine diversion systems may be re-
lated to the following aspects (in each case, one needs to con-
sider which systems are being compared):
ÿ  If a centralised sewer system and wastewater treatment
plant can be avoided by using UD toilets, then cost
savings will be significant. However, the collection
and treatment of greywater, industrial wastewater
and rainwater still requires a sewer system of some
sort (separate, decentralised systems may often be urine piping to a urine storage tank (or to a sewer) and a
preferable). Note that the remaining greywater in UD
systems contains a far lower concentration of patho-
gens and nutrients compared to conventional domestic
wastewater.
ÿ  In regions where water is scarce and expensive, water
savings from UD toilets (in particular UDDTs) can
lead to overall cost savings compared to flush toilets.
ÿ  In regions where soil fertility is poor and fertiliser ex-
pensive, farmers may have production cost savings or
higher yields when using urine as a fertiliser instead of
mineral fertiliser or no fertiliser at all.
Regarding potential energy savings, this needs to be analysed
on a case by case basis. Energy savings may be possible with
UD systems in three areas:
1. If the system is set up to use less water, energy savings
are possible with respect to pumping, processing and
distribution of the tap water.
2. Energy savings may be possible at the wastewater
treatment plant, which receives a lower load of nitro-
gen in the sewage if urine is collected separately
(hence less oxygen required for nitrification process).
3. If urine replaces artificial mineral fertiliser, then ener-
gy savings are possible for fertiliser production as well
as for fertiliser transport (most African countries have
no local mineral fertiliser production facilities).
A life cycle analysis, comparing the energy demand for nutri-
ent removal and mineral fertiliser production versus nutrient
recovery identified a considerable energy saving potential with
urine diversion nutrient recovery (Maurer et al., 2003).
On the other hand, the following aspects can lead to UD which require the macro-nutrients N, P, K or S (nitrogen,
systems having higher costs than conventional systems:
ÿ  In comparison with conventional sewer-based sanitation
systems, urine diversion systems using UD flush toilets
tend to have a higher initial investment cost as they re-
quire additional components for the separate collection,
transport and treatment of the urine and faeces.
ÿ  A UDDT usually has a slightly higher capital cost 13
than a simple pit latrine or – of course – the do-noth-
Adequate financing and operating schemes have to be found
that ensure financial sustainability and make the system affor­d­
able for the users. Further information is available in the fact
sheet of the SuSanA working group on “costs and economics”
(http://www.susana.org/index.php/lang-en/working-groups/
wg02/documents-wg02).
2.9 Technical components used for achieving UD
To achieve urine diversion, the following technical com-
ponents are used: waterless urinals, urine diversion toilets,
reuse system for the urine. Further information is provided
in Sections 4 to 6.
There are two main variants of UD toilets: UDDTs (urine-
diversion dehydration toilets - no flush water is used at all)
and UD flush toilets (water is used to flush the faeces away
and to rinse the urine compartment).
3 Reuse of urine as fertiliser
in agriculture
3.1 How to use urine as a fertiliser
When sanitation projects are set up where collected urine
is to be used as fertiliser, consultation with farmers and soil fer-
tility experts is essential, as the engineers setting up the sanita-
tion projects usually lack the necessary agricultural expertise.
3.1.1 Basic guidelines
The benefits of urine as a fertiliser and its application me­
thods have been well documented, for example in SuSanA
(2008), PUVeP (2008), Morgan (2007), WHO (2006) and
Jönsson et al. (2004). Some highlights from these documents
are summarised below.
Urine is a quick acting fertiliser that can be used for any crops
phosphorus, potassium or sulphur 6). The fertilising effects
of these nutrients in urine are the same as those of artificial
mineral fertiliser if the same amount of nutriens is applied.
Hence, reuse of urine in agriculture has the potential to re-
duce demand for artificial mineral fertiliser.
6 Sulphur is an important macro-nutrient, needed in
approximately the same amount as phosphorus, and often lacking.
14 Below are some rules of thumb for the use of urine as a ferti-
liser with respect to its nutrient content (taken from Jönsson
et al. (2004) and others):
ÿ  Urine is a nitrogen-rich complete fertiliser, containing
also sodium and chloride. This makes it well suited as
fertiliser for crops thriving on nitrogen (such as maize)
and especially for crops also enjoying sodium, such as
chard (similar to spinach). Care should be taken when
applying it for crops sensitive to chloride (such as pota-
toes and tomatoes), although yields of these crops can
also be much improved by appropriate urine application.
ÿ  If all urine from one person is collected, it will suffice to
fertilise about 300-400 m² of crop per person per year,
e.g. producing for example 250 kg of maize (roughly
equal to the food intake of one person per year).
ÿ  Apply the amount of urine that one person excretes in
one day on one square metre per cropping season (this
means approx. 1.5 L undiluted urine per square metre).
If we assume that there is 7 gN/L in urine (typical value
for Swedish conditions), then 1.5 L urine/m2 will cor-
respond to 105 kg N/ha, which is a low to normal dose
for cereals (depending on the country, soil and expec­
ted harvest from the field).
ÿ  The crop yield also depends very much on the soil, and
urine will always work better in “living soils” compared
to barren, sandy soils. The nitrogen converting bacte-
ria must be present and compost helps enormously 7.
Some recommendations for the methods on how urine should
be applied as a fertiliser are:
ÿ  Between last fertilisation and harvest a period of at
least one month should always be applied (for both
large and small scale systems).
ÿ  The person applying the urine to the fields should
follow good personal hygiene practices (thorough means that a huge volume of water is transported
hand washing after applying the urine, and if possible
also wearing gloves and boots).
ÿ  The best nitrogen fertilising effect is obtained when
urine is applied close to the ground and directly incor-
porated or watered into the soil in order to minimise
ammonia losses to the air. In order to avoid leaching,
and for climates with heavy rainfall or very sandy
soils, frequent application of small amounts of urine is
favourable but not essential. It is necessary to balance
maximum crop yield with what is practical in real life.
ÿ  Urine should always be applied to the soil next to the
plant (in furrows) but not onto the plant. Otherwise
it might lead to “burning” of the leaves.
Note: “We fertilise the soil, not the plant!”.
7 Source: Peter Morgan, Aquamor, Zimbabwe in 2008
3.1.2 Specific advantages of urine compared to
other mineral fertilisers
As pointed out by Elisabeth Kvarnström (Stockholm En­vironment
Institute), one of the great advantages of urine is that “the content of
heavy metals and organic compounds is very low, as these only come from
the food which you have once consi­dered having a high enough quality to
ingest. Artificial mineral fertilisers can have a relatively high content of
heavy metals.”
Secondly, when farmers are able to use the urine from their
families and neighbours in their own fields, this fertiliser is
essentially for free (but if urine has to be transported over a
distance from production to use, there are transport costs).
Urine fertiliser is also independent from the availability and
price of mineral fertiliser on the world market. Furthermore,
urine contains micro-nutrients which the soil may need for
higher soil fertility.
3.1.3 Disadvantages of urine compared to
other mineral fertilisers
Whilst urine is a proven fertiliser, it has some drawbacks
compared to artificially manufactured chemical fertilisers:
ÿ  Urine is, compared to artificial fertilisers, a diluted
fertiliser: The N, P, K and S concentration in urine
is much lower than in artificially manufactured ferti-
liser. Urine’s nutrient content – expressed with the in-
ternational fertiliser convention of N:P₂O₅:K₂O 8 –
is approximately 0.7:0.15:0.22 – compared to for ex-
ample di-ammonium-phosphate (DAP) or (NH₄)₂HPO₄
with the composition N:P₂O₅:K₂O of 21:46:0. This
whenever urine fertiliser is transported.
ÿ  Urine contains traces of pharmaceutical residues and
hormones, and potential buyers of crops fertilised with
urine may be put off even if the actual health risks are
extremely low (see Section 3.2).
ÿ  Urine is a multi-component fertiliser, containing N, P,
K and S in a slightly variable ratio, which may or may
not be the right fertiliser for a given soil and crop.
The macro-nutrient concentrations in urine may vary
somewhat (although in relatively narrow ranges), de-
pending on people’s diet and whether toilet users add
flush water to the toilet.
ÿ  Urine is a liquid fertiliser, whilst some farmers may
prefer a solid fertiliser if this is what they are used to
(unless urine is converted to struvite, by addition of
magnesium and raising pH, which is also a proven
process).
8 This means 0.15% by weight of P₂O₅, or 1500 mg/L P₂O₅ (mul-
tiply % value by 10,000).
The following disadvantages are not specific to urine as a 3.2 Are hormones and pharmaceutical residues 15
fertiliser but still need to be kept in mind: in urine problematic for reuse?
ÿ  Like other fertilisers, urine can cause plant fertiliser
burn (also called leaf scorch) if not applied correctly. The information in this section is based on Winker (2009)
Fertiliser burn is the visible symptom of insufficient and the input from Arno Rosemarin (Stockholm Environment
water in a plant associated with an over application Institute). The publication of Larsen and Lienert (2007) is also
of fertiliser salts (salts dissolved in urine) 9. recommended in this context.
ÿ  Urine adds salinity to the soil and therefore its use as
fertiliser to pot plants is only recommended when the Hormones and pharmaceutical residues are two types of mi-
soil can easily be exchanged. cro-pollutants which occur in urine (concentration levels are
ÿ  A lso like other fertilisers, urine can lead to ground­ available in Winker (2009)), as humans excrete them with
water pollution (with nitrate) and nutrient run-off their urine and faeces (as a rule of thumb: two thirds of phar-
(resulting in eutrophication in water bodies) if excess maceutical residue substances are excreted with the urine, one
amounts are applied. third with faeces, although the figures can vary widely for in-
ÿ  Urine is a multi-component fertiliser (with a fixed dividual substances 10).
ratio of N, P, K and S) which should only be applied
until the first nutrient reaches its optimum for the If urine is reused in agriculture, some of these micro-pollu­
soil (probably nitrogen or sulphur). Otherwise (if tants can be taken up by plants and thereby enter the human
applied until phosphorus is sufficiently supplied) food chain. This is a risk, but a small one. A full evaluation of
it can cause over-fertilisation of nitrogen and sulphur. the potential toxic effects of pharmaceuticals ingested by hu-
mans via urine-fertilised crops is very difficult and has not yet
been done. The potential risks from consuming crops fertilised
3.1.4 Should urine be applied undiluted with urine need to be compared with the risks related to pesti-
or diluted with water? cide use on crops, as well as antiobiotics and hormones given
to farm animals (poultry and cattle) which can be traced for
Urine can be applied either undiluted or diluted with example in milk and eggs. At the end of the day, it comes down
water, depending on the soil and the gardener’s or farmer’s to a risk analysis and risk management strategy.
preferences. Some gardeners dilute urine with water in a
ratio of 1:3, 1:5 or even up to 1:15, and this dilution has the Animal manures and sewage sludge containing pharmaceuti-
following advantages: cal residues and hormones are already now being used on fields.
1. R educes risk of plant “ fertiliser burn” (see previous It was shown that the load of hormones and antibiotics in
section). human urine is in fact much lower than in animal manure
2. Enables irrigation and fertilisation in one step (also (however not all groups of substances can be compared in
called “ fertigation”) and with one piece of equipment. this way as they are not all present in animal manure). With
But nozzles of drip irrigation may clog when a urine- sewer-based sanitation systems, these types of micro-pollu­
water mixture is used for fertigation. tants are not removed in conventional sewage treatment plants
3. Reduces odour during application, especially if a and are thus discharged into surface water bodies and can
high dilution ratio is used (1:5 or greater). reach the groundwater (detected concentrations of pharma-
4. Minimises the risk of applying too much fertiliser ceutial residues in groundwater are in the order of 50 ng/L in
to potted plants, as the pot will overflow before too several locations in Germany).
much nitrogen is applied.
When comparing the two approaches (discharging urine with
On the other hand, applying urine undiluted has the advan- treated wastewater to surface water versus urine application to
tage that a smaller volume of an odorous liquid has to be soil), it is likely to be safer to discharge urine to soil rather
handled. than water. The micro-pollutants can be degraded better in
the aerobic, biologically active soil layers (high concentration
When applying urine undiluted, fertiliser burn of the roots is of micro-organisms per cubic centimetre) with longer residence
avoided by adding urine in furrows, somewhat to the side of times than in water bodies whose ecosystems are much more
the plants (approx. 15 cm). Odour nuisance is minimised by sensitive. This has previously been proven in the case of hor-
immediately covering the urine with soil after the urine has mones 11, and more research is needed to prove it for other
been added to the furrows. Usually, irrigation water is added types of micro-pollutants as well.
directly after the urine application.

9 Root cells actively absorb fertiliser salts from soil solution, and
under normal conditions maintain a higher osmotic pressure. If excess
fertiliser salts are applied (i.e. concentrated urine which is not diluted),
the osmotic pressure of the soil solution is raised. This means water can-
not enter the cell and may actively move out of it. The resulting injury is
known as fertiliser burn or physiological drought (Robert Holmer,
Ecosanres discussion forum, 2008).
10 To be more precise: around 70% of pharmaceutical substances
are excreted via urine accounting for 50% of the overall ecotoxicological
risk (Larsen and Lienert, 2007). The ecotoxicological risk of the fraction
of pharmaceutical residues contained in urine and in faeces is the same
regardless of the higher number of substances excreted via urine.
11 This finding is of particular relevance regarding the artificial
hormones which are excreted in urine from women taking the
contraceptive pill.
16 Terrestial systems (soil) are more suitable for natural degra­
dation of pharmaceuticals than aquatic systems because:
ÿ  The oxygen levels are around 50,000 times higher
in soil than in water.
ÿ  Exposure to UV light helps to degrade pharmaceuti-
cals, although this only applies to the surface (1-2 cm
soil depth) and crops can shade the ground.
ÿ  The high specific surface of soil particles maximises
the exposure of adsorbed chemicals, maximising the
kinetics of degradation.
ÿ  The wide biodiversity of the fungal and bacterial flora
of soil is adapted to degrade various types of organic
molecules, both complex and simple.
Finally: “Drug residues in sustainable sanitation products used
to supply plant nutrients can hardly be a serious issue in regions
where malnutrition, groundwater and surface water pollution
due to inappropriate sanitation and irrigation with untreated
wastewater is a reality” 12.
3.3 Is urine an “organic fertiliser” and
can it be used in organic farming?
The definition of “organic fertiliser” may be according
to two different categories:
1. Organic in the analytical chemistry sense (a com-
pound which contains carbon and may contain other
elements such as hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen).
2. Organic in a “green”, “eco” or “natural” sense.
Fresh urine contains urea and is thus an organic fertiliser in
the analytical chemistry sense. Stored urine contains ammo-
nia and no urea (see Section 2.6.3), and is therefore not organic
but rather a “mineral fertiliser” in the analytical chemistry
sense. In other words: Urine is both a natural mineralised or
mineral fertiliser, and an organic, ecological or natural ferti-
liser 13.
The “organic farming” 14 regulations differ between countries
with regards to which type of fertiliser is allowed (and is in
this context called “organic fertiliser”). For example, countries
in the European Union are subject to the EU organic farming
legislation, where urine is not considered an allowed fertiliser.
In China on the other hand, urine is considered a natural fer-
tiliser and thus allowed in organic farming. Making urine al-
lowed for organic farming in the EU remains an important
challenge. It should be possible as urine is a natural fertiliser
with a similar composition as for example pig urine.
12 Source: Jörn Germer on Ecosanres discussion forum,
April 2009.
13 Source: Håkan Jönsson (on Ecosanres Discussion Forum, De-
cember 2008, http://www.ecosanres.org/discussion_group.htm)
14 A possible definition of “organic farming/agriculture”: Organic
agriculture is a production system that sustains the health of soils, eco-
systems and people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversity and
cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of inputs with
adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and
science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships
4 Waterless urinals
This chapter draws on the publication by v. Münch and
Dahm (2009). Note: “waterless” means “without water” in
English. Some people also use the term “waterfree”. We do not
recommend any particular urinal model in this publication.
4.1 Definition and purpose
A urinal is a specialised toilet for urinating only, which is
used while standing up, and is designed primarily for male
users. Urinals are widely used around the world, especially in
public facilities being frequented by a large number of boys
and men, because they save space and costs compared to toi-
lets (simpler design; no separate cubicles needed, although in
many cases separation panels are installed). Urinals are not
commonly used in private households due to their additional
space requirements.
A limited number of urinals for females (to be used while
standing or squatting) are on the market but they are not
widely accepted for various reasons, such as females having
greater needs for privacy as they have to partially undress.
Squatting-type urinals (squatting pans without an outlet for
faeces) are sometimes used for girls in African or Asian prima-
ry schools to save on space and costs compared to toilets.
Conventional urinals are flushed with approx. 4 L of water
either after each use or based on a timer, whereas waterless
urinals (see Figure 1) use no water for flushing.
The main motivation for using waterless urinals is to:
1. Save water and hence costs – these urinals are
connected to a sewer system.
2. A llow collection of pure, undiluted urine for use in
agriculture as a nitrogen and phosphorus-rich fertiliser
– these urinals are connected to a urine storage tank.
Waterless urinals are the first and easiest step towards urine
diversion and, possibly, ecological sanitation (ecosan).
Figure 1. Waterless urinals for men. Left: Centaurus model of Keramag
company. Right: Plastic urinal from Addicom, South Africa, with EcoSmell­
stop device (sources: (left) E. v. Münch, Delft, 2006; right: Addicom).
and a good quality of life for all involved (source: International
Federation of Organic Farming Movement, http://www.ifoam.org/).

4.2 Historical development of waterless urinals
In 1894, Mr. Beetz from Austria patented a drainage possible for rural areas).
device (trap) which allowed urinals to be made "flushless". The
trap used a sealant liquid (the mechanism is explained in
section 4.4.3). This patent was then commercially exploited
by the company F. Ernst Engineer in Zürich, Switzerland
who was the sole supplier of waterless urinals worldwide for
approximately 100 years.
In the early 1990s, water saving came into fashion and several
companies appeared on the market using derivatives of the
Beetz patent. At more or less the same time Hepworth, a UK
plumbing manufacturer, patented a drainage device (one way
valve) which was in fact a flat tube. A similar device is used
in small boats to drain spray water from the bilge. Derivative
patents of the flat tube elements are used today in waterless
urinals and marketed by various sanitary ware companies, for
example Keramag (model Centaurus).
In 2002, a Swiss engineer living in South Africa (Peter Dahm)
patented a one way valve similar to the flat tube design but
using a “curtain” mechanism in order to reduce maintenance
requirements. This unit, which is now used in waterless uri-
nals of several suppliers, is sold under the name of EcoSmell-
stop (ESS).
At present, Germany is probably the country with the highest
number of waterless urinals per capita, as the price of munici-
pal tap water in Germany is one of the highest in the world,
and Germans are consequently very interested in all water-
saving opportunities (1,200 waterless urinals of Keramag are
in use in the public toilets of Hamburg in Germany).
Waterless urinals are commonly used in industrialised coun-
tries for public toilets which are not connected to the sewer
(such as rest stops along highways). It would be beneficial if
they became widely used in developing countries as well.
4.3 Odour control methods (general)
To gain wide acceptance, waterless urinals must meet the
accepted standards applicable for conventional waterborne in-
stallations. Their odour emission must be less or at worst equal
to the old system. To achieve this odour-free performance four
aspects are absolutely crucial for waterless urinals:
1. Suitable mechanism to block the odour coming back
from the sewer and urine storage tank, for example
(discussed in detail in the sections below):
„ rubber tube seal
„ curtain valve seal
„ sealant liquid (blocking fluid)
„ plastic table tennis ball placed in a funnel which
is inserted in the opening of a jerrycan; or
„ place urinal in a well ventilated area (located outside 17
of houses), and put up with some odour (may be
2. Appropriate surface of the urinal bowl (smooth,
non-sticky, e.g. with wax coating).
3. Correctly designed interrelation between urinal bowl
and the drain fitting to minimise crevices where
urine can accumulate.
4. On an operational level: a thorough maintenance re-
garding the bowl and the odour blocking device. The
surface of the urinal bowl is usually wiped clean once,
twice or several times per day with a moist sponge.
For the odour blocking device, the maintenance
depends on the specifications of the urinal supplier
(see below).
4.4 Odour control for connection
of urinal to sewer or storage tank
4.4.1 Rubber tube seal
For this method, a flat rubber tube is used (Figure 2).
This rubber tube is flat at the bottom when not in use (and
hence blocks odour from the sewer or urine storage tank)
but opens up when urine is flowing through. This one-way
valve allows passage of grit up to 2 mm.
Urine precipitates (“urine stone”), which stick to the rubber
tube need to be cleaned off with water regularly (otherwise
the flat rubber tube does not close properly anymore). The
cleaning frequency depends on the number of uses per day
(cleaning once per month under average circumstances may
be sufficient). The rubber tube needs to be replaced around
once a year. The rubber material is sensitive to solvents, acids,
and deodorising tablets often used in urinals. Therefore, the
use of acids or aggressive cleaning agents must be avoided. This
system is used for example by the German company Keramag
in their Centaurus model.
4.4.2 Curtain valve seal
The curtain valve seal is similar to the rubber tube seal,
but was designed to reduce maintenance requirements. This
type of one-way valve has “self-cleaning properties” as a small
pressure difference forces the urine to wet the whole inner
surface between the “curtains”, therefore flushing them clean.
The element is designed in a manner to minimise build-up of
urine precipitates or urine sludge and thus keeping the sea­­ling
surfaces clean. Like the flat rubber tube seal, this one-way
valve also allows passage of grit up to 2 mm.
The silicon curtain element is integrated into a plastic casing
(Figure 2). The placing of the EcoSmellstop (ESS) element
into a plastic sleeve has two purposes, firstly to guarantee that
18 no odour from the sewer or urine storage tanks escapes into
the room, and secondly to allow an easy removal of the ESS
unit for maintenance purposes. For replacement of the
curtain (if simple cleaning is no longer possible), the entire ing fluid) which is made of vegetable oils or aliphatic alcohols
plastic casing is removed with a small plastic extractor tool – they are biodegradable if released to the sewer or urine stor-
(Figure 3), then discarded and replaced with a new ESS. This
replacement process may be necessary about once per year
and takes only a few seconds. It can be performed without
having to touch the ESS element by hand.
The ESS manufacturing process is not simple as the injection
moulds are of extreme complexity, and the mixing and injec-
tion requires very sophisticated machinery. For this reason, it
is not yet possible to manufacture the ESS locally in develo­
ping countries, but it can easily be imported as it is small,
light-weight and low-cost. This patented ESS unit is used by
the companies Addicom, Kellerinvent AG and F. Ernst Inge-
nieur AG 15 since 2006.
Figure 2. Two types of odour seals for waterless urinals. Left: Flat rubber
tube (Keramag Centaurus). Right: (left side) See-through pipe fitting;
(right side) see-through EcoSmellstop (ESS) unit showing the blue
silicon curtain one-way valve inside (source: (left) E. v. Münch, 2007;
(right) Addicom).
Figure 3. EcoSmellstop (ESS) unit with pipe fitting and extractor.
Inside the ESS is the silicon curtain valve (source: Addicom).
4.4.3 Sealant liquid (blocking fluid)
This system works with a sealant liquid (also called block-
age tank. The sealant liquid, with a specific gravity of around
0.8, floats on top of the urine contained in the trap and thus
constitutes an effective odour barrier. Urine immediately pe­
netrates the sealant liquid and flows to the drain. Urine pre-
cipitates are collected in a cartridge or inner cylinder of the
trap. The maintenance program of waterless urinals with a
sealant liquid consists of cleaning of the urinal bowl, and
the regular exchange of the cartridge (or the sealant liquid,
see Figure 4). The required exchange frequency depends on
the number of users. With each use and in between uses,
some urine precipitates accumulate which eventually renders
the trap inoperative. Foreign objects, such as cigarette stubs,
accelerate the process. At this point the cartridge has to be
cleaned or replaced.
If the trap starts to smell, while it is still freely passing urine,
merely a refill with the sealant liquid can resolve the problem
for some designs. In the USA, this is currently the most com-
mon type of waterless urinal, as under current legislation only
these liquid-filled traps are approved for waterless urinals.
Figure 4. Example instruction sheet, showing replacement of sealant
liquid for Uridan urinals (other urinals with sealant liquid have a similar
maintenance routine) (source: Uridan).
Possible advantages of sealant liquid systems in the context of
developing countries may include:
ÿ No need to be exchanged when full with precipitates,
but can be easily cleaned.
ÿ After being cleaned, they can be refilled with some
thick cooking oil16 (this does not last as long as the
recommended liquid, but is available almost anywhere).
There is no clear evidence yet which of the three systems dis-
cussed above is better for low-cost, low-maintenance applica-
tions, and this may depend on the preference of the individu-
als or companies responsible for the urinals’ maintenance.
4.4.4 Other methods for the odour seal
Other methods for odour control are on the market (see
also suppliers listing in Appendix). One example is the system
by Urimat where the sealant liquid is replaced by a float (hy-
drostatic float barrier) which is magnetically activated thus
opening the channel to the overflow chamber. For low-cost
applications in developing countries, this system has the dis-
advantage of a higher complexity compared to the systems
described above 17.
Small-scale simple systems may utilise just a pipe or hose (with-
out any odour trap) connecting the urinal with the tank. Here,
the odour can be controlled by having the urine pipe (filling
hose) going down to almost the bottom of the collection vessel,
thus creating a liquid seal in the collection vessel. Another op-
tion is to pour some cooking oil into the collection vessel, thus
creating a thin sealant film in the collection vessel itself. A cut-
off condom on the urine outlet pipe has also been used.
Another very simple option for a waterless urinal is the “eco-lily”,
where a plastic funnel is inserted into the opening of a plastic
jerrycan. An old light bulb or a table tennis ball is placed into
the funnel to act as odour seal (it should float up when urine
enters the funnel but could end up sticking to the funnel).
The disadvantage of the light bulb over the plastic ball is that
the solder and metal cap on the light bulb contains heavy metals
which can contaminate the urine.
4.5 Further design information
The space requirement of a urinal is less than that of a toi-
let, which makes them popular for any venue where many men
need to urinate (soccer stadiums, restaurants, schools, etc.).
Waterless urinals are usually wall hung and do not require
piping for flush water nor flushing devices, thus allowing a
considerable cost saving. The flushing devices as well as the
traditional water traps in the outlet piping (U, P or “bottle”
shaped) of conventional urinals tend to attract a considerable
amount of vandalism (hence waterless urinals can further re-
duce maintenance costs). Waterless urinals do not need to be 19
connected to a sewer but can be connected to a urine storage
tank instead (important for remote locations not connected
to sewers). Obviously, water for hand wash basins and water-
f lushed toilets (if not replaced by waterless toilets) is still
required next to the waterless urinals.
Materials
Urinal bowls are typically made of acrylic, ceramic, stainless
steel or glass-fibre reinforced polyester, but can also be made
of simple low-cost plastic, provided that it has a smooth sur-
face (for odour control). Self-construction of inexpensive
waterless urinals is also possible. When using plastic urinal
bowls, one option is to use linear low density polypropylene
as it is one of the most inert plastics (non-stick surfaces). The
hot production process at 180°C guarantees a smooth, non-
porous surface, therefore minimising bacterial biofilm growth. 
Converting water-flushed urinals to waterless urinals
It is in principle also possible to convert conventional water-
flushed urinals to waterless urinals (depending on the bowl
design), for example by using the ESS, which is also sold as a
stand alone unit. It is very important to get a snug fit of the
ESS into the urinal drain.
4.6 Use and maintenance of waterless urinals
The instructions given below are not for urinals at house-
holds but for installations at institutions or public places 18.
At household level, different maintenance routines apply than
those described below due to much lower frequency of use.
The urinal bowl should be cleaned daily, just like any other
(water-flushed) urinal. There are 100% biodegradable clea­
ning solutions on the market that are simply sprayed onto
the urinal bowl and not wiped off. For example, URIMAT
MB-AktivReiniger with tensides is used for the 50 waterless
urinals in the GTZ headquarters in Eschborn, Germany.
15 The company F. Ernst Ingenieur AG used the sealant liquid sys-
(in its waterless urinals installed mostly in Switzerland and Germa-
tem
but changed over to the EcoSmellstop system in October 2006, and
ny),
is now retrofitting all of its approx. 100,000 urinals which were installed
prior to that date (F. Ernst AG operates its urinals under a maintenance
contract should the client not decide otherwise).
Hakan Jönsson: “the important properties of oil for this use are
16
density
lower than water - most oils have a density around 0.7 kg/L - this
way it floats on urine; hydrophobic - maintains a lid above the urine and its
content; and both of these are shared by cooking oils. Cooking oils are partly
unsaturated and will thus oxidise faster and need replacement, but this is
secondary
to them being generally available”.
17 Hans Keller used to run the company Urimat and has the pat-
ents. But he now runs Keller Invent which bought F Ernst AG (hence
Keller moved from hydrostatic float barrier to ESS).
Mr.
18
In countries with wide-spread sewer systems, urinals are not
used at household level. But in countries where onsite sanitation is com-
mon, waterless urinals at household level are used together with urine di-
version dehydration toilets.
20 Any type of odour seal (be it flat rubber tube, curtain seal or
sealant liquid) needs to be cleaned (or replaced if cleaning is
no longer possible) at regular intervals to keep it fully func-
tional. The frequency of cleaning or replacement of the odour
seal system depends mainly on the number of uses per day as
well as user and cleaning staff behaviour (in terms of foreign
objects discarded in urinal). It can therefore vary widely,
ranging from once a week to once every six months.
The flat rubber tube and ESS units can be cleaned many times
before having to be replaced. Some sealant liquid cartridges
can­not be cleaned but need to be replaced when they fail,
whilst for example the Uridan system can be cleaned, and
the sea­lant liquid replaced, any number of times. To give an
example: According to information given by Ad­dicom, an ESS
ele­ment can last for 16 months with careful maintenance, such
as spraying the urinal bowl regularly with the cleaning agent
“DestroySmell” (containing tensides and active microorga­nisms),
and removing the ESS element and rinsing with diluted citric
acid to slow down the formation of urine precipitates on the
curtains.
Empirical evidence gathered in low-income settings in South
Africa (such as public parks and taxi ranks in Johannesburg)
since 2004 suggests that the curtain seal (ESS system) can
perform with less maintenance than the flat rubber tube. In
regions where diligent maintenance of urinals cannot be gua­
ranteed (such as public toilets in informal settlements in sub-
Saharan Africa), the ESS system may therefore be a better
choice of the two. More side-by-side comparisons between
different waterless urinal types are required, particularly for
urban, low-income areas in developing countries with a poten-
tially high level of abuse and neglect.
4.7 User acceptance of waterless urinals
Experience worldwide has shown that waterless urinals en-
joy the same level of user acceptance as water-flushed urinals
do, since for the male users there is no behaviour change re­-
quired (many users do not even notice that they are using a
waterless urinal). For those men who are shy and do not like
using urinals in public places (for lack of privacy), it makes no
difference whether the urinal is water-flushed or not.
In cultures where anal washing with water is practiced, each
urinal can be installed in a cubicle to guarantee privacy. For
example, many Muslim males wash their genitals with water
after urinating, which requires water supply and separate drai­
nage facilities. Prior to providing waterless urinals, one has
to establish whether the community in question is willing
to accept such facilities. Note also that in some cultures
men are used to squatting when urinating. Waterless urinals
could be placed on the ground instead of being wall-hung.
In some instances, there may be a psychological barrier of users
or cleaning staff (“if a urinal is not flushed it cannot be hy­gie­
nic”). The thought that water is always equal to hygiene is an
understandable misconception. However, when faced with a
well-functioning, odourless waterless urinal, those fears are
quickly alleviated, which is why demonstration projects can
be useful. Today’s waterless urinals are designed to be odour-
less and simple to maintain.
As waterless urinals are a novelty for many people, any smell
emitted from a waterless urinal gets blamed on the new system.
However a smelly water-flushed urinal is accepted as normal
as they have a long odorous history. It is a fact that any type
of urinal (water-flushed or waterless) will not smell if well
maintained. The extent of maintenance required for water-
less urinals can be higher or lower compared to water-flushed
urinals, depending on the type of waterless urinal used (as
explained above).
4.8 Suppliers and costs of waterless urinals
The following options exist for buying waterless urinals in
developing countries:
ÿ  Imported waterless urinals with or without patented
odour control devices
ÿ  Plastic waterless urinals manufactured locally and
imported ESS element or liquid seal inserted for
odour control
ÿ  Self-constructed waterless urinals made from plastic
containers.
For low cost applications, simple plastic urinals may be a good
option. These can be produced in a "rotation moulding" pro­
cess. This is a cheap and simple process to make a single-skin
type unit, which can be replicated in any country.
Suppliers lists for waterless urinals are provided in the Appendix.
For reference installations either contact the manufacturers or
see the case study descriptions of sustainable sanitation
projects on www.susana.org. Many of these projects incorpo-
rate waterless urinals. Photos of waterless urinals are also
avai­­­l­able here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtzecosan/
sets/72157613881735035/
4.9 How to choose the right type of waterless urinal
When choosing a waterless urinal from the large range of
suppliers and models, the following guide questions can be
used (for waterless urinals in institutions and public places 19):
1. Do the urinals need to be as cheap as possible?
2. Do the users prefer ceramic urinals over plastic urinals?
19 Note: For waterless urinals at households, the maintenance con-
siderations are quite different. Households want to use maintenance ma-
terials that can be found in a general store at a minimal cost.
3.  re the urinals available locally (local distributor)
A Further design considerations which are important for all types
or do they have to be imported?
4. Does the supplier offer you to get in contact
with the suppliers’ existing clients?
5. Does the supplier have reference letters?
6. How many units has the supplier sold already?
7. Do the urinals need spare parts and can they be
obtained locally with minimal waiting times?
8. Is there likely to be any vandalism in the location
where the urinals will be installed?
9. W ho will do the maintenance and will they be
diligent or rather unreliable?
10. A fter how many uses does the odour seal need
replacement (or after what time period)?
11. How long does each event of odour seal
replacement take?
12. How difficult is the odour seal replacement routine?
5 Urine diversion toilets
5.1 Definition
Urine diversion (UD) toilets are designed to not mix urine
and faeces at the point of collection in the toilet. There are
two main main types of UD toilets and both types can be
built indoors:
1. Urine diversion dehydration toilets (UDDTs)
 No flushwater is used. These toilets are often called
“ecosan toilets” but this would wrongly label one
particular toilet type as the toilet to be used in
ecosan projects.
2. U D flush toilets
Water is used to flush the faeces away and to ple system where the urine is captured in a bowl which is
rinse the urine compartment.
These toilets may be implemented within new sanitation
systems or may complement existing systems. In any case, For the faeces, a straight drop (or chute if toilets are on seve­
additional pipework such as a pipe from the toilets to the
urine storage tanks becomes necessary (see Section 6).
5.2 Basic design information for UD toilets
Careful planning and appropriate design is essential for
successful application of UD toilets. They should be designed
or chosen based on the needs and the customs of the users.
The preferred posture of the user can be:
ÿ  Sitting toilets (with pedestals):
these can be wall-hung or floor mounted; or
ÿ  Squatting toilets (with squatting pans): many people
are used to toilets which are used in a squatting position.
21
of UD toilets (details are provided in Section 5.3 and 5.4):
1. Do the users wash their anal area with water after
using the toilets or do they use toilet paper (“washers”
as opposed to “wipers”)? This is customary in many
Muslim and Buddhist cultures but may also be linked
to factors other than religion.
2. Needs of disabled people, elderly, children when
using the toilet
3. Specific needs of females
(menstrual hygiene; privacy and security needs)
4. Odour control for the urine collection system
5. Will the toilet be an indoor or an outdoor toilet
(indoor is likely to become the norm in the future
and is possible with UD toilets)?
5.3 Urine diversion dehydration toilets (UDDTs)
This section on UDDTs contains only basic information.
For more information on this important technology and its
operation and maintenance requirements see:
ÿ  Technology review on UDDTs by GTZ
(http://www.gtz.de/en/themen/umwelt-infrastruktur/
wasser/9397.htm)
ÿ  Berger and Lorenz-Ladener (2008); Morgan (2007);
Austin (2006); Kvarnström et al. (2006); Winblad
and Simpson-Hebert (2004)
The benefits of UDDTs compared to pit latrines were listed
in Section 2.3.2.
5.3.1 Basic design information
UDDTs do not use water for flushing. They use a very sim-
integrated in the front of the toilet pedestal or squatting pan.
From here, the urine is drained off to a storage container.
ral levels in the house) is provided from the toilet pedestal or
squatting pan to a collection vault or bin.
A vent pipe is provided to ventilate the faeces chamber, remove
odour from the room and to speed up the drying process.
UDDTs are not designed for composting to take place in the
faeces vault but just for drying.
In regions where people practise anal cleansing with water, a
third outlet hole is used, to collect and treat the anal washwater
separately from urine and faeces (see Figure 5). It is best not
to mix anal washwater with urine to keep pathogen levels in
the urine at a minimum, if urine is to be used as a fertiliser.
22 The anal washwater can be infiltrated in a gravel filter or
treated together with greywater in a subsurface constructed
wetland. UDDTs are especially popular wherever there is water
scarcity and a demand for cheap fertiliser. They can be built
indoors or outdoors.
Figure 5. left: Indoor UDDT (pedestal type) in Johannesburg, South
Africa in the house of Richard Holden (source: E. v. Münch, 2006).
Right: UDDT squatting pan in Bangalore, India, with three holes: the area
in the front is for anal washing, middle is for faeces and back is for
urine (source: D. Schäfer, 2008).
5.3.2 Odour control for urine collection system
An odour seal may be used on the urine pipe if the toilet
is indoors, especially in systems with many toilets (the same
types of seals as for waterless urinals can be used, including
the ESS (see Section 4.3)). Some UDDTs even have an inte-
grated fan (such as the toilet of Separett), which removes odour
from both the faeces bucket and the urine pipe. No separate
odour blocking device is necessary in this case.
For outdoor UDDTs with individual urine storage tanks, the
connection to the urine storage tank is usually direct, with-
out any odour trapping device. The faeces chamber has a vent
pipe to remove odour from the toilet, and dry additives assist
in odour control.
5.3.3 Construction methods and materials
Possible materials for the toilet pedestal or squatting pan
are: ceramic, concrete, acrylic or glass-fibre reinforced plastic.
The toilet can either be self-constructed or prefabricated.
Metal components (except for stainless steel) cannot be used
since urine is corrosive.
5.3.4 Use and maintenance
The main operational requirement when using UDDTs is
that the faeces vault is kept as dry as possible (no addition of
urine or water). The urine and faeces containers need to be
emptied when full.
Covering material should be added to the faeces vault after
each defecation. Covering material can be ash, sand, soil,
lime, leaves or compost and should be as dry as possible.
The purpose of adding covering material is to:
ÿ  reduce odour
ÿ  assist in drying of the faeces (to soak up excess moisture)
ÿ  prevent access for flies to faeces
ÿ  improve aesthetics of the faeces pile (for next user)
ÿ  increase pH value (achieved when lime or ash is used).
5.3.5 Project examples
UDDTs are used in many rural and urban sustainable
sanitation projects worldwide. They have been installed
at households, schools, prisons, universities etc. and for public
toilets (see for example SuSanA case studies on:
http://www.susana.org/lang-en/case-studies).
5.4 UD flush toilets
5.4.1 Overview on historical development
UD flush toilets were invented in Sweden in the 1990’s
(Kvarnström et al., 2006). They were first adopted in eco-
villages and holiday homes. Today, they are also used in some
housing projects and public buildings in several countries
in Europe, although still only at a pilot scale. A detailed study
(called NOVAQUATIS) on UD flush toilets was conducted
by Eawag, Switzerland (Larsen and Lienert, 2007).
5.4.2 Basic design information
The benefits of UD flush toilets compared to flush toilets
were listed in Section 2.3.1. The UD flush toilet has a parti-
tion in the toilet bowl isolating a bowl for urine in the front,
and a bowl for faeces in the back. The bowl is similar to
bowls used for UDDTs, except that for the UD flush toilet,
water is used to flush the faeces away. The flushing mechanism
for the urine part is designed in one of two ways:
1. The urine pipe stays open and therefore receives a
certain amount of flushing water when the bowl is
flushed (see Figure 6); or
2. t he urine pipe is closed by a valve and therefore
receives no flushing water (this is the case for the
Roediger NoMix toilets).
The UD flush toilets can reduce water consumption com-
pared to conventional water-flushed toilets because the water
required for the “urine flush” is less than the amount for the
“ faeces flush”.
UD flush toilets can also be combined with the concept of
vacuum toilets (realised for example by the company Roedi-
ger for a pilot project in Berlin Stahnsdorf and by the Swe­
dish company Wost Man Ecology, see Appendix). This type
of toilet collects urine and a small, concentrated amount of
brownwater (faeces with about 1 L of flush water).
Figure 6. UD flush toilets. Left: Gustavsberg (in Meppel, the Netherlands);
Right: Dubbletten (in Stockholm, Sweden); (sources: E. v. Münch, 2007).
5.4.3 Odour control for the urine collection system
For the urine pipe, several types of odour seals are used by
the toilet manufacturers, such as a valve (Roediger NoMix toi-
lets), a urine/water seal (Gustavsberg toilets) or a novel silicon
seal (Dubbletten toilets).
Odour locks in the UD toilet’s urine pipe are required to pre­
vent back flow of odour into the toilet room; but these are not
necessary in the case of short urine pipe systems of up to 3-4 m.
For the faeces part, odour control is achieved by a water seal in
a U-bend (just like for conventional flush toilets).
5.4.4 Materials
As UD flush toilets have been designed for users in high-
income countries, they have been manufactured only in cera­
mic and have a similar appearance to conventional flush toilets.
5.4.5 Use and maintenance
The faeces section of UD flush toilets is cleaned in the
same way as for conventional f lush toilets (with a brush).
Toilet paper is flushed away together with the faeces.
A particular problem found with the Roediger NoMix toilet 23
is that toilet paper thrown into the urinal bowl is not flushed
away with the small urine flush; and hence more than one
flush becomes necessary – negating the water saving effect of
this type of toilet 20.
Another problem of the Roediger NoMix toilet is that the valve
on the urine pipe can get blocked over time. In this case, urine
is no longer collected in the storage tank but flows to the faeces
section of the toilet, or the valve is not closing anymore causing
odour problems in the toilet room. Therefore, the user needs to
carry out preventative maintenance by adding diluted citric acid
to the valve once per month for a period of 24 hours.
5.4.6 Project examples
UD flush toilets are used in some industrialised countries
and they are not a low cost option. So far they are mainly used
in Sweden and in some projects in Germany, the Netherlands,
Switzerland and Austria.
Two project examples for which detailed descriptions are avail­
able are (both on http://www.susana.org/lang-en/case-studies/
region/europe):
ÿ  Urine and brownwater separation at the GTZ
main building, Eschborn, Germany
ÿ  Urban urine diversion & greywater treatment
system, Linz, Austria
5.5 Suppliers and costs for UD toilets
Information on models and suppliers can be found in
the Appendix. The costs for some of these toilets are relatively
high, as the number sold is quite low. If the market for these
types of toilets grows and more suppliers enter the market,
then the unit costs will decline.
5.6 How to choose between a UDDT
and a UD flush toilet
For pro-poor approaches in developing countries, UDDTs
are more suitable than UD flush toilets, as the latter still require
a reliable 24-hour water supply, a sewer system and a treatment
process for the faeces-water mixture (brownwater).
In countries with existing infrastructure for wastewater treat-
ment, the UD flush toilet may become competitive with the
conventional flush toilet in the future if the benefits listed in
Section 2.3 are drivers for the required switch.
20 The Roediger NoMix toilet is a first prototype which requires
further development of its design.
24 6 Urine piping and storage tanks
A comprehensive description of the technical details for
urine pipes and tanks is available in Kvarnström et al. (2006).
Some key considerations are provided below.
6.1 Urine piping
6.1.1 Functional principles
The urine piping system connects waterless urinals or the
urine section of a UD toilet to the urine storage tank. As
urine generates a considerable amount of urine precipitates
and sludge (see Section 2.4.4 for causes), special attention has
to be paid to the design and maintenance of the urine piping
system.
6.1.2 Materials
Urine pipework is normally made of durable plastics such
as polyethylene (PE) or polyvinyl chloride (PVC).
6.1.3 Pipe size and layout
To maximise the flowrate of the urine (and any sediments),
the insides of the pipes should be smooth. Flow restrictions,
such as sharp 90º bends, should be avoided as much as possible.
The minimum recommended diameter of the pipes is 50 mm,
but the optimum range is from 75 mm to 110 mm.
For larger systems (several toilets connected to one urine tank),
the slope of the pipe should be at least 1% to minimise urine
precipitation. For individual toilet systems, the slope should
be at least 4%, but can be built with smaller diameter pipes,
down to about 15 mm.
For inspection and cleaning, the pipes should be made of the growth period (see Section 3).
accessible (by provision of inspection openings).
As a rule of thumb: keep urine pipes as short as possible
and with the highest possible slope. Horizontal pipes should
not exceed 200 m because of the problems of sludge accu-
mulation in the continuously wetted side of the pipe 21.
Over time crystals and sludge may accumulate in the slow
flowing horizontal parts of the pipe system, so periodic flush-
ing may be necessary (once every few years in the best case;
more frequent in the worst case) 22.
6.1.4 Odour control
To prevent odours, the piping system should be only spar-
ingly ventilated, pressure equalisation is enough (see Section 6.3
for more details on ventilation). Also the pipe opening needs to
be immersed into the liquid in the storage tank. This is parti­
cularly important in long vent pipes that can act as chimneys
with upward flow of air 23.
This means that the incoming pipe to the urine storage tank
should go down almost to the bottom, so that a liquid seal is
formed preventing undue gas movement through the piping
system. But it is not recommend to place a bucket at the base
of this pipe, as it might fill with sludge and thus introduce a
flow restriction.
6.2 Urine storage tanks
6.2.1 Functional principles
The urine which is collected by means of a waterless urinal
or by a urine diversion toilet flows to a urine storage tank.
These tanks have a lid and are closed to prevent odour and loss
of nitrogen via ammonia gas. The tanks are either emptied by
the users themselves (small-scale systems) or emptied by a pump
and truck arrangement. The urine is then transported to the
point of agricultural reuse or to further storage or treatment.
Urine storage tanks have one or several of the following three
main purposes:
1. To bridge the time in between collection/emptying
events.
2. To sanitise the urine: over time, pathogens in the
urine are killed off (increased pH due to urea conver-
sion to ammonia (see Section 2.7.2).
3. To bridge periods where plants are not fertilised: The
plants’ need for fertiliser is not constant all year round
(except in the tropics). Fertiliser nutrients are generally
only needed just before sowing and in the beginning
There are two types of urine tanks: the receptor urine tank at
the toilet and the urine storage tank for storage, sanitisation
and reuse (these functions can be realised in the same vessel
or in separate vessels).
21 Source: Arno Rosemarin (March 2009)
22 Hakan Jönsson (March 2009): “My fairly extensive experience is
that as long as there is at least a slope of 1% and the diameter is 75 mm or
more, then the sludge will flow out at the rate of generation and flushing is
not necessary. The reason why extensive pipes should be avoided is that fre-
quently there has been problems with groundwater leaking into the pipes, di-
luting the urine!”
23 Source: Arno Rosemarin, March 2009, based on experience with
large-scale urine diversion system with indoor UDDTs in Erdos, China.
6.2.2 Locations
The location of the urine storage tanks can be:
1. At toilet level: If the urine is to be used in the house-
hold garden, a simple plastic jerrycan can be used.
2. At household/building level (several toilets together).
3. A t community level (several houses together) –
this is possible if distances between houses are short.
As the urine tanks must be emptied regularly, suitable access
for persons or vehicles is required.
The tanks can be located either in the cellar of the building,
next to the building or below ground. Urine tanks below
ground have the disadvantage that leaks from the urine tank
are difficult to detect (a leaking urine storage tank can lead t storage = desired storage time 25
to groundwater pollution with ammonia and nitrate or to ftimefraction = fraction of time that the users stays at the
the tank being filled with groundwater). Underground tanks
have the advantages however that they are usually cheaper
to build, have a better insulation in winter (relevant for cold
climates) and the access to the manhole is usually also easier.
In the case of underground tanks it is important to take the
groundwater level into account – to avoid tanks floating in the
event of rising groundwater.
Whilst the tanks are closed and designed to minimise odour,
some odour could still occur. Hence, the tanks should be in with water, then a larger urine storage tank is required com-
a well-ventilated area and away from kitchens, offices and
bedrooms to minimise odour complaints.
A secondary urine storage tank at the farmer’s premises may
be necessary to enable the farmers to apply the urine when they
need it (Figure 8).
6.2.3 Materials
Urine storage tanks need to be completely watertight to
avoid loss of urine fertiliser, groundwater contamination and
groundwater entering. They are most commonly made of glass
fibre reinforced plastic, PE, PP or PVC, but they can also be
made of rubber bladders or high-quality reinforced concrete
(there are a fair number of concrete urine tanks in Sweden,
but they need to be built to a high standard to avoid leakages).
Metal components cannot be used since urine is corrosive (ex-
cept for stainless steel, which could be used but is expensive).
Plastic tanks which are sold for rainwater harvesting are also
suitable as urine storage tanks, and can be a good solution in
developing countries.
6.2.4 Urine tank size 25
The urine tank system may be set up to use one large urine
storage tank or several smaller tanks (even down to using a large
number of 20 L jerrycans). In either case, the required total
storage volume (Vstorage) can be estimated as follows (addi-
tional safety factors may be applied):
Vstorage = Nusers · purine · t storage · ftimefraction
with:
Nusers = number of users
purine = specific urine production per person
(~ 1.5 L/cap/d of urine if the user is at the
premises 24 hours per day 24)
premises where the toilet is.
The required storage time (t storage) was already discussed in
Section 2.7.2). For example, typical design criteria for a sto­
rage tank are 360 L of urine per person per year (if they spend
2/3 of their time at the premises) and a storage time of one
month.
It is obvious from this equation that if urine is flushed away
pared to a toilet where urine is collected undiluted.
When designing the size of the urine storage tank, considera-
tion also needs to be given to the capacity of the emptying
vehicle. Details on possible emptying vehicles in the low-cost
context are provided in Slob (2006).
If transportation occurs manually, the collection tanks
should not be larger than 20 L which equals 20 kg when
full (this would already be too heavy for the elderly,
females and children).
6.2.5 Number of urine tanks needed
For proper sanitisation (to kill pathogens originating from
cross-contamination with faeces) it is important that the urine
is stored without fresh urine entering before it is applied in
agriculture. Hence, at least two tanks are recommended (a re-
ceptor tank and a storage tank).
For large installations, the use of several urine storage tanks is
advisable so that one can be taken out of service if necessary.
24 Plus flushing water if UD flush toilets are used, unless they have
a valve like the Roediger NoMix toilet model.
25 This could also be the desired time between emptying events if
sanitisation by storage is not the aim (for receptor tank with additional
storage elsewhere).

26 6.2.6 Urine overflow pipe
Installation of a urine overflow pipe on the tank is not
recommended, as this increases costs and introduces a risk of
contamination of the urine when there is an overflow or block­
age in the ordinary wastewater system. Also, if there is an over­
flow arrangement, users may be tempted to just let the urine
overflow and not ensure its use. It is better that the urine is
pumped to an acceptable disposal point with a portable waste­
water pump if the collection tank becomes too full.
6.2.7 Examples
Examples for urine storage tanks of different sizes are
shown below.
Figure 7. Left: Low-cost solution: 20 L plastic jerrycan for urine storage at in-
dividual toilet level in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (source: E. v. Münch, 2006).
Note: it might be quite difficult to lift up a full jerrycan out of this enclosure.
Right: Below-ground plastic urine storage tanks at Kullön, Sweden during the
construction process. The tanks will be covered with soil (photo: Mats
Johans­son, source: Kvarnström et al., 2006).
Figure 8. Urine storage tank made of a 150 m³ plastic bladder at Lake
Bornsjön near Stockholm, Sweden (photo comissioned by: E. v. Münch,
2007).
Figure 9. Plastic urine storage tank in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso as part
of the EU-funded project ECOSAN_UE led by CREPA (source: S. Rüd, 2008).
6.3 Ventilation for pressure equalisation
of pipes and tanks
The pipe and tank system should only be pressure equal-
ised (not ventilated) which is best done by a small hole in the
tank for equalisation with the urine tank pressure. This al-
lows the replacement of headspace air by urine flowing into
the tank, and vice versa when emptying the tank.
The reasons why the pipe system should not be ventilated are:
ÿ  To eliminate ammonia emissions and odour.
ÿ  To reduce risk of sucking the liquid out of any liquid
urine seals in the UD toilets.
A one-way valve or air admittance valve placed at the top of
the vent pipe can also be a good option. Advantages of such
a valve are 26:
1. that ammonia is not emitted,
2. internal pressure is equalised ensuring proper drainage
downwards to the tank (emptied urine pipes mean no
standing urine and less precipitation),
3. t he installation can be done inside the building just
above the top floor in the building so that the top of
the vent pipe does not need to penetrate the roof like
old-fashioned ventilation pipes,
4. saves on construction costs,
5. eliminates problems caused by condensation ice in
cold climates and UV weathering of plastic pipes.
These one-way air valves are popular in Sweden for greywater
and urine systems, and many new houses no longer have pro-
truding vent pipes.
The urine tank should not be opened more often than neces-
sary in order to prevent odour development and ammonia-
nitrogen losses. Important points concerning the tank’s
ventilation system are:
26 Posting by Arno Rosemarin (SEI, Sweden) on Ecosanres discus-
sion forum, August 2008.
ÿ  Normally no vent pipe is needed, provided that the
main opening is not very tightly sealed.
ÿ  In places where odour control is essential, a small
diameter vent pipe can be used for pressure equalisa-
tion of the tank.
ÿ  If the tank is emptied by a pump, provisions should be
made for sufficient flow of air into the tank. This pre-
vents excessive vacuum in the tank, which can cause
tank implosion.
6.4 Maintenance of urine pipes and tanks
It is difficult to predict how frequently pre-emptive main-
tenance should be carried out as this depends on local circum­
stances. Trial and error will lead to an optimised cleaning
schedule. Experience has shown that correctly installed pipes
generally need no cleaning, except for the odour seal or 90°
bends (which should be avoided).
Detailed instructions for cleaning and preventing blockages in
U-bend odour seals are provided in Kvarnström et al. (2006),
from where the following paragraphs are taken:
“In all installations there is a risk of blockages occurring mainly
in the odour seal in the urine pipe. It is a result of fibres and other
particles entering the piping system and of chemical precipitation
of struvite and calcium phosphates from the urine caused by the
increase in pH which occurs when its urea is degraded. The pre-
cipitation also forms a viscous sludge, which will slowly flow to-
wards the tank provided that the slope of the pipes is correct.
Most blockages that occur in urine-diverting toilets are soft block-
ages caused by precipitation on hair and paper fibre. The other
type is hard blockages, caused by precipitation directly on the pipe
wall 27. The blockages are removed either mechanically by a drain
auger or chemically by use of strong solutions of caustic soda
(2 parts of water to 1 part of soda) or acetic acid (>24%).”
It is important that the cleaning is carried out without affect-
ing the quality of the urine in the urine storage tanks is not
negatively affected.
If the urine can flow freely and immediately without addi-
tions of water directly after urination to the storage tank,
then no or very few blockages in the pipe will occur.
At the bottom of the urine storage tank a layer of sludge
forms over time (containing precipitates and crystals – see
Section 2.4.4), with high levels of nitrogen, phosphorus,
calcium and magnesium. If the full nutrient value of urine
is to be used for fertiliser purposes, then it needs to be en-
sured that also the bottom sludge layer is emptied and reused.
Incomplete emptying would also result in reduced available
storage volume.
27 Hard blockages tend to occur when water is mixed with urine,
whereas soft blockages tend to occur in pure urine systems.
7 References 27
7.1 References used in this document
Austin, L. M. (2006) Guidelines for the design, operation and
maintenance of urine diversion sanitation systems, Volume 4,
Report to the Water Research Commission, WRC TT 275/06,
South Africa,
http://www2.gtz.de/dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en-guidelines-
urine diversion-sanitation-systems-2006.pdf
Berger, W. and Lorenz-Ladener, C. (2008) Kompost-Toiletten
– Sanitärtechnik ohne Wasser (in German). Ökobuch Verlag,
Staufen bei Freiburg, Germany (www.oekobuch.de). Table of
contents: http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/de-
TOC-ONLY-kompost-toiletten-ohne-wasser-2008.pdf
Cordell, D., Schmid-Neset, T., White, S. and Drangert, J.-O.
(2009) Preferred future phosphorus scenarios: a framework
for meeting long-term phosphorus needs for global food de-
mand. International Conference on Nutrient Recovery from
Wastewater Streams, Vancouver, Canada, May 2009,
http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en-preferred-
future-phosphorus-scenarios-2009.pdf
EcoSanRes (2008) Closing the loop on phosphorus, EcoSan-
Res Factsheet 4, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stock-
holm, Sweden, http://www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/ESR-
factsheet-04.pdf
Jönsson, H., Richert Stintzing, A., Vinnerås, B. and Salo-
mon, E. (2004) Guidelines on the use of urine and faeces
in crop production, EcoSanRes Publications Series, Report
2004-2, Sweden, www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/
ESR_Publications_2004/ESR2web.pdf
Kvarnström, E., Emilsson, K., Richert Stintzing, A., Johans-
son, M., Jönsson, H., af Petersens, E., Schönning, C., Chris-
tensen, J., Hellström, D., Qvarnström, L., Ridderstolpe, P. and
Drangert, J.-O. (2006) Urine Diversion - One Step Towards
Sustainable Sanitation. Report 2006-1, EcoSanRes Programme,
Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden,
http://www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/Urine_Diversion_2006-1.pdf
Larsen, T. A. and Lienert, J. (2007) Novaquatis final report.
NoMix – A new approach to urban water management.
Eawag, Dübendorf, Switzerland, www.novaquatis.eawag.ch/
publikationen/final_report_E
Maurer, M. (2007) Urine treatment – absolute flexibility,
Eawag News, March 2007, results from Novaquatis research
project, Dübendorf, Switzerland, http://www2.gtz.de/
Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en-urine-treatment-absolute-
flexibility-2007.pdf
28 Maurer, M., Schwegler, P. and Larsen, T. A. (2003) Nutrients SuSanA (2009) Urine and brownwater separation at the GTZ
in urine: energetic aspects of removal and recovery. Water main office building, Eschborn, Germany. Case study of sus-
Science and Technology, 48 (1), p. 37-46. Abstract available tainable sanitation projects. Sustainable Sanitation Alliance,
here: http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/ http://www.susana.org/lang-en/case-studies/region/europe
en-ABSTRACT-ONLY-nutrients-in-urine-energetic-
aspects-of-removal-and-2003.pdf Tettenborn, F., Behrendt, J. and Otterpohl, R. (2007) Re-
source recovery and removal of pharmaceutical residues -
Morgan, P. (2007) Toilets That Make Compost - Treatment of separate collected urine. Final report of the
Low-cost, sanitary toilets that produce valuable compost demonstration project "Sanitation Concepts for Separate
for crops in an African context, Stockholm Environment Treatment of Urine, Faeces and Greywater" (SCST). Institute
Institute, EcoSanRes Programme, Stockholm, Sweden, of Wastewater Management and Water Protection, Hamburg
http://www.ecosanres.org/toilets_that_make_compost.htm University of Technology, Germany, http://www.tu-harburg.de/
aww/publikationen/pdf/endbericht_tutech151009.pdf
Münch, E. v. and Dahm, P. (2009) Waterless urinals: a pro-
posal to save water and recover urine nutrients in Africa. 34th Udert, K., Larsen, T., Biebow, M., Gujer, W. (2003) Urea
WEDC International Conference, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, hydrolysis and precipitation dynamics in a urine-collecting
May 2009, http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/ system. Water Research 37(11), p. 2571-2582.
en-waterless-urinals-a-proposal-to-save-water-and-recover-
urine-nutrients-in-africa-2009.pdf Udert, K., Larsen, T. and Gujer, W. (2006) Fate of major
compounds in source-separated urine. Water Science and
PUVeP (2008) Philippine allotment garden manual with an Technology 54 (11-12), p.413-420, http://www.
introduction to ecological sanitation. Periurban Vegetable iwaponline.com/wst/05411/0413/054110413.pdf
Project (PUVeP), Xavier University College of Agriculture,
Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines, http://puvep.xu.edu.ph/ WHO (2006) WHO Guidelines for the Safe Use of Waste-
publications.htm or http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ water, Excreta and Greywater. Volume 4: Excreta and grey-
ecosan/en-philippine-allotment-garden-manual-2008.pdf water use in agriculture. World Health Organisation, Geneva,
Switzerland, http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/
Rosemarin, A., Ekane, N., Caldwell, I., Kvarnström, E., wastewater/gsuweg4/en/index.html
McConville, J., Ruben, C. and Fogde, M. (2008) Pathways
for Sustainable Sanitation - Achieving the Millennium Winblad, U. and Simpson-Hébert, M. (2004) Ecological
Development Goals. SEI/IWA. Available for order from: Sanitation - revised and enlarged edition. Stockholm Envi-
www.ecosanres.org. Table of contents available here: ronment Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, www.ecosanres.org/
http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en-TOC- pdf_files/Ecological_Sanitation_2004.pdf
ONLY-pathways-for-sustainable-sanitation-2008.pdf
Winker, M. (2009) Pharmaceutical residues in urine and po-
Schönning, C. and Stenström, T.-A. (2004) Guidelines for tential risks related to usage as fertiliser in agriculture, PhD
the safe use of urine and faeces in ecological sanitation sys- thesis, Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, Institute
tems, EcoSanRes Publications Series, Report 2004-1, of Wastewater Management and Water Protection, Germany,
www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/ESR_Publications_2004/ http://doku.b.tu-harburg.de/volltexte/2009/557
ESR1web.pdf
Winker, M., Vinnerås, B., Arnold, U., Muskulos, A. and
Slob, M. (2005) Logistic aspects of ecological sanitation in Clemens, J. (2008) New fertilisers from advanced wastewater
urban areas. Case study in low-income community in Delhi, treatment: Their potential values and risks. In: Proceedings of
India. MSc Thesis, University of Twente, The Netherlands 13th RAMIRAN International Conference, Potential for
and WASTE, Gouda, http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ simple technology solutions in organic manure management,
ecosan/en-logistic-aspects-of-ecological-sanitation-2005.pdf June 2008, Albena, Bulgaria, http://www.tu-harburg.de/aww/
publikationen/pdf/winker_etal_final.pdf
SuSanA (2008) Food security and productive sanitation
systems. Fact sheet of Sustainable Sanitation Alliance,
www.susana.org/lang-en/working-groups/wg05/own-docs-05
7.2 Video clips 8 Appendix 29

The following video clips are available on Youtube.com:

Worldwide listing of suppliers for waterless urinals, UD
ÿ  Many videos on waterless urinals can be found
pedestals and squatting pans
by 29 entering the keyword “waterless urinal” in
the search field of Youtube.com.
The Appendix is provided as a separate file to keep
ÿ  Waterless urinal at UNESCO-IHE in Delft,
the file size of this document low. It can be downloaded here:
the Netherlands (2007): www.youtube.com/
http://www.gtz.de/en/themen/umwelt-infrastruktur/
watch?v=z0GKD3JAUOY
wasser/9397.htm
ÿ  Waterless urinal maintenance at University of
Witwaters­­rand, Johannesburg, South Africa (Addicom):
We thank all suppliers who have provided information
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTa4yerQL1o
on their products.
ÿ  Videos on UDDTs can be found by entering
“ecosan toilet” in the search field.

7.3 Additional photos

The GTZ ecosan team and partners have uploaded a large

number of ecosan-related photos to the photo sharing website
Flickr.com:
ÿ  Waterless urinals: http://www.flickr.com/photos/
gtzecosan/sets/72157613881735035/
ÿ  Urine diversion toilet seats and squatting pans:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gtzecosan/
sets/72157612793192986/
30 Notes
31
Published by:

Deutsche Gesellschaft für

Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH

Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5
65760 Eschborn / Germany
T +49 6196 79-0
F +49 6196 79-1115
E info@gtz.de
I www.gtz.de
Sustainable  Sanitation 

P r a c t i c e
 

Issue 3. 04/2010

Opening minds and closing loops 
– productive sanitation 
initiatives in Burkina Faso and 
Niger 
 
Experiences from use of urine in 
Arba Minch, Ethiopia 
 
Pharmaceutical Residues in 
Urine as Fertiliser  
 
Backyard urine recycling in the 
United States of America 
 
Food Security and Productive 
Sanitation‐ practical 
guidelines on the use of urine 

Use of Urine partner of
Impressum 
 
published by / Medieninhaber, Herausgeber und Verleger 
EcoSan Club 
Schopenhauerstr. 15/8 
A‐1180 Vienna 
Austria 
www.ecosan.at 
Editors / Redaktion 
Elke Müllegger, Günter Langergraber, Markus Lechner • EcoSan Club 
Journal Manager / Journal Management 
Isabelle Pavese 
Contact / Kontakt 
ssp@ecosan.at 
 
Disclaimer / Haftungsausschluss 
The content of the articles does not necessarily reflect the views of EcoSan Club or the editors and should 
not  be  acted  upon  without  independent  consideration  and  professional  advice.  EcoSan  Club  and  the 
editors  will  not  accept  responsibility  for  any  loss  or  damage  suffered  by  any  person  acting  or  refraining 
from acting upon any material contained in this publication. 
Die in den Artikeln vertretenen Standpunkte entsprechen nicht notwendigerweise der Haltung und Ansichten des EcoSan Clubs oder 
des  Redaktionsteams.  Der  praktischen  Anwendung  dargestellter  Inhalte  muss  eine  unabhängige  Begutachtung  und  professionelle 
Beratung  vorausgehen.  EcoSan  Club  und  das  Redaktionsteam  haften  in  keiner  Weise  für  Schäden  (Sachschaden  oder 
Personenschaden), die durch die Anwendung, oder Nichtanwendung der in dieser Publikation vermittelten Inhalte, entstehen. 
Reproduction / Reproduktion 
Permission  is  granted  for  reproduction  of  this  material,  in  whole  or  part,  for  education,  scientific  or 
development  related  purposes  except  those  involving  commercial  sale,  provided  that  full  citation  of  the 
source is given. Cover photo excluded. 
Die Reproduktion, Übernahme und Nutzung der Inhalte von SSP, vollständig oder teilweise, für Bildungszwecke, für die Wissenschaft 
und im Zusammenhang mit Entwicklung ist unter Voraussetzung der vollständigen Quellenangabe gestattet und erwünscht. Titelbild 
ausgenommen. 
aim and scope / Offenlegung der Blattlinie gemäß § 25, Abs. 4 Mediengesetz 
Sustainable  Sanitation  Practice  (SSP)  aims  to  make  available  high  quality  information  on  practical 
experiences with sustainable sanitation systems. For SSP a sanitation system is sustainable when it is not 
only economically viable, socially acceptable and technically and institutionally appropriate, but it should 
also  protect  the  environment  and  the  natural  resources.  SSP  is  therefore  fully  in  line  with  SuSanA,  the 
Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (www.susana.org). • SSP targets people that are interested in sustainable 
sanitation  systems  and  the  practical  approach  to  it.  •  Articles  are  published  after  blind  review  only.  • 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice is published quarterly. It is available for free on www.ecosan.at/ssp. 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice (SSP) hat zum Ziel praxisrelevante Information in hoher Qualität im Zusammenhang mit „sustainable 
sanitation“ bereit zu stellen. „sustainable“ also nachhaltig ist ein Sanitärsystem für SSP wenn es wirtschaftlich machbar, soziokulturell 
akzeptiert, technisch als auch institutionell angemessen ist und die Umwelt und deren Ressourcen schützt. Diese Ansicht harmoniert 
mit  SuSanA,  the  Sustainable  Sanitation  Alliance  (www.susana.org).  •  SSP  richtet  sich  an  Personen,  die  sich  für  die  praktische 
Umsetzung  von  „sustainable  sanitation“  interessieren.  •  Artikel  werden  nur  nach  einer  Begutachtung  veröffentlicht.  •  Sustainable 
Sanitation Practice erschient vierteljährlich, kostenlos unter: www.ecosan.at/ssp. 
Information on the publisher / Offenlegung gemäß § 25 Mediengesetz 
publisher:  EcoSan  Club,  Schopenhauerstr.  15/8,  A‐1180  Vienna,  Austria  •  chairperson:  Günter 
Langergraber  •  website:  http://www.ecosan.at/  •  scope:  EcoSan  Club  was  funded  as  a  non  profit 
association  in  2002  by  a  group  of  people  active  in  research  and  development  as  well  as  planning  and 
consultancy in the field of sanitation. The underlying aim is the realisation of ecological concepts to close 
material cycles in settlements.  
Medieninhaber:  EcoSan  Club,  Schopenhauerstr.  15/8,  A‐1180  Vienna,  Austria  •  Obmann:  Günter  Langergraber  •  Gegenstand  des 
Vereins:  Der  EcoSan  Club  wurde  2002  als  gemeinnütziger  Verein  von  einer  Gruppe  von  Personen  gegründet,  die  in  Forschung, 
Entwicklung, Planung und Beratung in der Siedlungshygiene ‐ Sammlung, Behandlung oder Beseitigung flüssiger und fester Abfälle aus 
Siedlungen ‐ tätig waren und sind. Das Ziel des EcoSan Clubs ist die Umsetzung kreislauforientierter Siedlungshygienekonzepte (EcoSan 
Konzepte) zu fördern, um einen Beitrag zum Schutz der Umwelt zu leisten.  
 
Cover Photo / Titelbild 
© fotolia. http://de.fotolia.com 
 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  2  Issue 3 /2010 
 Editorial 
 
The SuSanA factsheet on "food security and productive sanitation systems" states that  
 
"The  nutrient  content  of  human  excreta  depends  on  the  diet  and  varies  between  countries  as  well  as 
between individuals. Excreta contain all essential micronutrients and an average amount of plant available 
macronutrients of 4.5 kg/person/year (kg/p/a) for nitrogen, 0.6 kg/p/a for phosphorus and 1.2 kg/p/a for 
potassium. Most plant nutrients are found in the urine with a formulation similar to ammonium and urea 
and comparable results on plant growth. A combined application of faeces and urine is advantageous, since 
faeces  are  a  very  good  soil  conditioner  due  to  its  high  share  of  organic  matter.  The  use  of  excreta  in 
agriculture  improves  the  pH,  the  nutrient  content  and  water  retention  capacity  of  the  soil  as  well  as  the 
ability of plants to withstand insects, parasite attacks and pests". (see www.susana.org) 
 
"Use  of  urine"  is  the  thematic  topic  of  the  third  issue  of  Sustainable  Sanitation  Practice  (SSP).  If  urine  is 
collected separately, treated and converted to agricultural usage, the biggest step towards nutrient reuse and 
highly efficient water protection is taken. 
 
The papers present various aspects on the use of urine: Practical experiences from the use of urine in Ethiopia, 
West  Africa  and  from  the  United  States  of  America  are  presented.  Findings  on  the  fate  of  pharmaceutical 
residues  in  urine  are  summarized  in  another  article.  The  final  contribution  gives  an  outline  on  updated 
guidelines on the use of urine that will be published during 2010. 
 
The  next  issue  (issue  4,  July  2010)  will  present  the  main  results  from  the  ROSA  project  (Resource‐Oriented 
Sanitation  concepts  for  peri‐urban  areas  in  Africa)  which  lasted  from  October  2006  until  March  2010  and 
proposed resources‐oriented sanitation concepts as a route to sustainable sanitation. ROSA was implemented 
in four pilot cities: Arba Minch in Ethiopia, Nakuru in Kenya, Arusha in Tanzania, and Kitgum in Uganda. 
 
Information on future issues is available from the journal homepage (www.ecosan.at/SSP) and will be regularly 
updated.  Please  feel  free  to  suggest  further  topics  for  issues  of  the  journal  to  the  SSP  editorial  office,  Ms. 
Isabelle  Pavese  (ssp@ecosan.at).  Also,  we  would  like  to  invite  you  to  contact  the  editorial  office  if  you 
volunteer to act as a reviewer for the journal. 
 
SSP is available online from the journal homepage at the EcoSan Club website (www.ecosan.at/SSP) for free. 
We do hope that SSP will be frequently downloaded and further distributed to interested people. 
 
With best regards, 
Günter Langergraber, Markus Lechner, Elke Müllegger 
EcoSan Club Austria (www.ecosan.at/ssp) 
 
 
 
Content: 

- Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 
in Burkina Faso and Niger ............................................................................................................................... 4

- Experiences from the use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia ......................................................................... 12

- Are pharmaceutical residues in urine a constraint for using urine as a 
fertiliser?....................................................................................................................................................... 18

- Backyard  Urine  Recycling  in  the  United  States  of  America:  An 
Assessment of Methods and Motivations .................................................................................................... 25

- Food  Security  and  Productive  Sanitation;  Practical  guideline  on  the 

use of urine in crop production .................................................................................................................... 31

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  3  Issue 3 /2010 
  
 
 
implementing 
 
organisation: 

Opening minds and closing loops – 
productive sanitation initiatives in Burkina 
Faso and Niger 
This paper shows how two agriculture funded sanitation projects in rural 
Niger and Burkina Faso have introduced sanitized urine and faeces as new 
fertilizers for improved local nutrient management, food security and health. 
Authors: L. Dagerskog, M. Bonzi 

Abstract 
The link between food production and sanitation is at the centre of two agriculture funded sanitation projects 
in Burkina Faso and Niger. Productive sanitation is used to increase food security, based on the fact that urine 
and  faeces  from  a  family  of  ten  contain  nutrients  equivalent  to  approximately  100 kg  of  chemical  fertilizer, 
locally  worth  ~80 US$.  Urine  contains  the  main  part  of  these  nutrients  and  is  relatively  easy  to  collect  and 
reuse.  The  agriculture  extension  officers  have  a  key  role  in  supervising  participative  tests  with  urine  as  a 
fertilizer  that  help  create  demand  for  sanitation.  Farmers  are  trained  on  how  to  produce  liquid  and  solid 
fertilizers from urine and faeces, by eliminating the dangers and capturing the resources via the good use of 
simple  urinals  and  “productive  toilets”.  The  article  describes  the  arguments  and  methodology  used  in  the 
projects and perspectives for up scaling in Burkina Faso and Niger. 
 

Introduction  Nutrient  management  and  the  link  to 

By emphasising the strong link between sanitation  sanitation 
and  agriculture,  the  Regional  Centre  for  low  cost 
Water  and  Sanitation  (Centre  Régional  pour  l'Eau  The big picture 
Potable  et  l'Assainissement  à  faible  coût,  CREPA)  On  a  global  level,  the  price  hike  of  chemical 
has  obtained  funds  from  the  agriculture  sector  fertilizers  in  2008  and  the  emerging  “peak 
with  the  main  objective  to  improve  food  phosphorous” and “peak oil” indicate that the era 
production  in  rural  areas  via  the  promotion  of  of  cheap  chemical  fertilizers  is  coming  to  an  end 
sanitized  urine  and  faeces  as  fertilizers.  The  two  (see  Cordell,  2010  for  details).  Since  there  is  no 
main productive sanitation projects at the moment  substitute for phosphorous in food production, our 
are  the  ECOSAN_UE2  project  in  province  of  societies  will  need  to  improve  nutrient 
Kourittenga,  Burkina  Faso,  and  the  PS‐Aguié  management  on  all  steps  along  the  productive 
project  in  the  province  of  Aguié,  Niger  (see  boxes  cycle.  
at  the  end  of  the  article).  Urine  is  central  in  both   
projects,  since  it  is  relatively  easy  and  cheap  to  The  agriculture  sector  is  trying  to  reduce  nutrient 
collect  and  represents  a  substantial  and  often  losses  from  soils  as  well  as  recycling  animal 
neglected source of nutrients. This article develops  manure  and  plant  residues,  but  relatively  little 
the  arguments  used  to  involve  the  agriculture  effort  has  been  made  to  recycle  the  nutrients 
stakeholders  and  the  methodology  and  current  present  in  the  food  taken  away  from  the  field  for 
results of the two projects.  human  consumption,  and  subsequently  excreted 

Key actions for introducing sanitized urine and faeces as fertilizers: 
 Illustrative examples of the quantity of fertilizer in human excreta and results of reuse 
 Simple urinals for “liquid fertilizer” production and composting/dry latrines for “solid fertilizer” production 
 Involve the agriculture extension officers 
 Participative evaluation of urine as a fertilizer to create demand for productive sanitation 
 Sensitization on dangers and resources in excreta – and how to eliminate dangers and maintain the resources 
 Follow up on the whole productive sanitation chain i.e. collection, sanitization and reuse. 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  4  Issue 3 /2010 
Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

N = 2.8 kg 
as  urine  and  faeces.  The  global  N = 2.8 kg  P = 0.45 kg 
phosphorous  flow  analysis  by  Cordell  et  P = 0.45 kg  K ~ 1.3 kg 
al.  (2009)  estimates  that  only  10%  of  K ~ 1.3 kg  ~ 500 l 
In the urine and 
Consumed per    urine 
phosphorous  in  human  excreta  is  faeces per 
recycled to arable soil, while 50% ends up  person per year  person per year   
in  water  and  40%  under‐ground  or  on 
non‐arable  soil.  These  losses  are 
~50kg 
equivalent  to  around  20%  of  the  annual 
  faeces 
phosphorous mined (Cordell et al. 2009).  
  Figure 1. The average annual fertilizer production per person 
In  Burkina  Faso  and  Niger  chemical 
fertilizers  are  out  of  reach  for  most 
farmers, while a growing population increases the  part of consumed plant nutrients is incorporated in 
pressure on arable land. Table 1 shows the difficult  growing  body  tissue.  Dagerskog  (2007)  used  the 
soil  fertility  and  sanitary  situation  in  these  two  method  proposed  by  Jönsson  et  al.  (2004)  and 
countries  with  low  chemical  fertilizer  use,  high  statistics on protein consumption (FAOSTAT, 2005) 
nutrient  losses  from  agricultural  land,  a  high  to estimate the human fertilizer production for the 
percentage of open defecation in rural areas and a  ten countries in West Africa concerned by CREPA’s 
high  number  of  child  deaths  per  year  due  to  ECOSAN  program:  Benin,  Burkina  Faso,  Congo, 
diarrhoea.   Côte  d’Ivoire,  Guinea,  Guinea  Bissau,  Mali,  Niger, 
  Senegal  and  Togo.  An  average  person  in  these 
Safe recycling of urine and faeces can help improve  countries excretes annually 2.8 kg of nitrogen (N), 
both  food  production  and  health,  but  the  farmers  0.45 kg of phosphorous (P) and approximately 1.3 
are  rarely  aware  of  the  possibilities  of  how  to  kg  of  potassium  (K)  with  the  urine  and  faeces 
“eliminate the danger” and “use the resources” in  (Figure 1). 
human excreta.    
  This  regional  average  was  used  to  illustrate  the 
Table 1. Challenges with soil fertility and  value  of  human  excreta  in  Burkina  Faso.  The 
sanitation in Burkina Faso and Niger  annual  quantity  of  N  and  P  in  urine  and  faeces 
from  a  family  of  ten  persons  corresponds 
Burkina  roughly to the quanitity of N and P in 50 kg of 
Niger  
Faso   urea and 50 kg of NPK(14‐23‐14) which are the 
Chemical fertilizer use   two  most  common  chemical  fertilizers  in 
5.9  0.9 
1996‐20021 (kg NPK*/ha/yr) 
Burkina Faso (Table 2). 
Estimated nutrient balance  
2002‐20042 (kg NPK*/ha/yr)  
‐ 43  ‐ 56   
Open defecation in rural areas  The local market price of 50 kg of Urea and 50 
83  92  kg  of  NPK  in  Burkina  Faso  is  about  80 US$ 
in 20063 (%) 
Annual child deaths due to  (SOGEDIF,  Feb.  2010).  The  total  Burkinabè 
24 300  26 400  
diarrhoea4  population  of  ~15,6  million  inhabitants  then 
excrete  the  equivalent  of  125  million  US$ 
* NPK = N+P2O5+K2O  worth of fertilizers per year. In addition, urine and 
1 
Morris et al (2007)  faeces are complete fertilizers, containing the main 
2 
Henau and Baanante (2006) 
3    plant  nutrients  (N,  P,  K)  as  well  as  the  important 
UNICEF/WHO (2008)
4 
UNICEF/WHO (2009)   trace elements and organic matter. 
   
  Table 2. The annual quantity of nutrients in the 
excreta from 10 persons compared with chemical 
The fertilizer value of human excreta fertilizer 
To  capture  the  attention  of  agriculture  Fertilizer  N (kg)  P (kg)  K (kg) 
stakeholders  it  is  important  show  that  human 
Urine et faeces from 10 
excreta  contain  a  substantial  amount  of  plant  28  4.5  13 
persons in one year 
nutrients. According  to  Jönsson  et  al.  (2004)  the  50 kg of urea and 50 kg of 
amount  of  nitrogen  and  phosphorous  in  human  30   4.9  7 
NPK(14‐23‐14)  
excreta  can  be  calculated  from  protein   
consumption.  There  is  an  equilibrium  over  the 
human  body  ‐  what  comes  in  sooner  or  later  also 
comes  out,  except  during  growth  when  a  minor 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  5  Issue 3 /2010 
Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

Comparing urine and faeces as fertilizers
The  distribution  of  plant  nutrients  between  urine 
and  faeces  depends  mainly  on  the  digestibility  of 
the food. In general the absolute majority of N and 
K  are  excreted  with  the  urine  while  P  is  more 
evenly  distributed  between  urine  and  faeces  (see 
Jönsson  et  al.  2004  for  details).  Faeces,  rich  in 
phosphorous  and  organic  material,  are  a  suitable 
base  fertilizer  while  the  nitrogen  rich  urine  is  a 
suitable cover fertilizer. 
 
The baseline study for the project in Aguié, Niger, 
showed that defecation is mostly done in the fields 
around  the  villages,  while  the  shower/ablution 
area  is  the  preferred  place  for  urinating  (CREPA, 
2009). In this situation, a better urine management  Figure 2. Two bags of fertilizer were brought along 
would  make  the  greatest  difference  to  the  local  for sensitization sessions in Niger to illustrate the 
nutrient  recycling.  However  this  does  not  mean  annual amount of nutrients that are present in the 
that open defecation should be encouraged for any  excreta from one family  
reason. While defecating in the fields can bring the 
nutrients  in  faeces  back  into  the  productive  cycle,  The  population  is  sensitized  on  the  amount  of 
it  is  a  health  hazard  and  a  sub‐optimal  way  of  fertilizer  they  produce  (Figure  2)  and  the  local 
recycling as it is not applied at the place, time and  agriculture extension officers are trained. 
dose to optimize plant growth.  
 Urine  collection  starts  via  simple  urinals  (jerry 
can and a funnel) to enable tests with the locally 
Results and project experiences  produced “liquid fertilizer”. 
 Participative  tests  are  done  to  demonstrate  the 
Introducing the new fertilizers ‐ methodology 
virtue  of  urine  as  a  nitrogen  fertilizer  (urine 
Both projects have followed a similar methodology  compared to urea) at farmer field schools and on 
when  introducing  sanitized  urine  and  faeces  as  individual fields. 
fertilizers. The methodology is based on how other 
 Participative evaluation of the test plots. 
new fertilizers are usually introduced, via practical 
participative tests:   Training of village facilitators and artisans. 
 All  concerned stakeholders  are  informed  on  the   Sensitization  in  the  villages  using  SARAR/PHAST 
new  fertilizers,  showing  the  experience  from  tools  for  understanding  the  dangers  as  well  as 
CREPA’s  ECOSAN  projects  in  West  Africa  and  the  resources  in  human  excreta  and  on  how 
photos  from  other  projects  around  the  world.  good  use  of  latrines  and  urinals  can  help 

Table 3. The scale at local level of the two projects
ECOSAN_UE2,   PS‐Aguié 
 
Kourittenga, Burkina Faso  Aguié, Niger 
Number of villages involved:  30  11 
25 farmers involved in participative 
366 farmers trained on urine application 
Vegetable farmers :  tests, 22 others applied urine on own 
methods 
initiative 
1255 farmers tested urine in 30 farmer  122 farmers tested urine in eight 
Cereal farmers:  field schools, 500 have done tests on own  farmer field schools, 65 have done 
initiative   tests on own initiative 
Agriculture extension officers 
29   10 
trained: 
A total of 5,7 ha for cereal tests in farmer 
A total of 0,7 ha for cereal tests in 
Surface fertilized:   field schools (half with urine) and 27 ha for 
farmer field schools (half with urine) 
individual tests (with and without urine). 
Urine collected :  ?  > 125 m3 during 2009 
Households producing solid  150 (another 60 toilets under 
318 (712 toilets still to construct) 
fertilizer via toilets:   construction) 
Households producing liquid 
2000  1143  
fertilizer via urinals: 
 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  6  Issue 3 /2010 
 Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

UDDT with adobe superstructure  Urine separation integrated on the slab Urinal dug down for squatting

Figure 3. UDDT and urinal in Kourittenga, Burkina Faso    
eliminate the dangers and capture the resources.  Aguié)  and  a  UD  Fossa  Alterna  (called 
 Construction  of  fertilizer  factories  (latrines)  that  “composting  toilet”  in  Aguié)  (Figure  4).  The  dry 
enable the production of “solid fertilizer” as well  toilet is built off the ground and faeces is sanitized 
as “liquid fertilizer”.  by  desiccation  together  with  ash,  while  the 
composting  toilet  is  a  shallow  pit  toilet  were 
 Follow  up  on  the  whole  productive  sanitation 
sanitization  is  enhanced  by  composting  through 
chain i.e. collection, sanitization and reuse. 
the addition of organic material and some ash after 
 Use inter‐village visits to spread the message. In  defecation.  All  toilets  have  two  vaults/pits  used 
Niger  the  first  pilot  farmers  were  taken  on  a  alternately. 
study trip to exchange and train with farmers in   
Burkina Faso. These first pilot villages were then  Both models were subsidized with around 50  US$ 
visited by other villages in the province.  to cover the imported materials and mason fee for 
the  vaults/pits.  The  composting  toilet  has  been 
Scale  very popular – no roof is needed, no stairs and the 
The  two  projects  operate  on  a  limited  scale,  but  anal  wash  water  can  enter  the  pit.  A  study  by 
serves  as  references  for  further  productive  Djariri  (2009) showed  that  it  would  be possible  to 
sanitation  initiatives  in  Burkina  Faso  and  Niger.  decrease  the  subsidy  part  to  30 US$  with  some 
Table  3  provides  a  summary  of  the  scale  of  the  technical modifications. This is approaching IFAD’s 
two projects.  aim  of  a  maximum  subsidy  of  20   US$  per 
installation.  
Production of liquid and solid fertilizer   
In both projects urine collection was soon started  Storing large volumes of urine is expensive and can 
using  simple  urinals.  After  the  urine  tests  as  be  difficult.  In  Aguié  the  farmers  are  advised  to 
fertilizer and sensitization sessions on the dangers  enrich  their  compost  or  “dirt  pile”  or  apply  the 
and  resources  in  excreta,  the  latrines  were  urine  to  the  field  even  during  the  dry  period 
introduced.  In  Kourittenga  it  was  decided  to  opt  (covered  with  soil)  if  they  run  out  of  storage 
for the urine diverting dry toilet (UDDT), and build  possibilities.  
solid  double  vaults  with  cement  bricks  with  a 
180 US$ subsidy (Figure 3).  Urine quality 
  In  Niger  the  urine  was  sampled  during  four 
In  Aguié,  all  pilot  village  households  got  the  different  occasions  and  analyzed  with  the  results 
simple  urinal,  and  were  then  offered  a  choice  presented in Table 4 : 
between  a  low  cost  UDDT  (called  “dry  toilet”  in   

Urine can either be transferred from a pot to the  The composting toilet with urine diversion  The dry toilet in local 

jerry can or enter directly. Dug down it is adopted  material except the slab 
for the squatting position  and vent pipe. 

Figure 4. Urinals and toilets in Aguié, Niger 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  7  Issue 3 /2010 
Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

Table 4. Results from analysing agronomic parameters in Aguié urine
Parameter   N  P  K  Na   Mg  Ca  pH 
(n=number of jerry cans analysed)  (n=37)  (n=33)  (n=28)  (n=9)  (n=3)  (n=3)  (n=29) 
Unit  g/l  g/l  g/l  g/l  mg/l  mg/l   
Average  6,0  0,8  0,9  3,1  20  36  8,8 
Standard deviation  1,1  0,2  0,3  0,2  1,6  3,1  0,2 

The  urine  is  especially  rich  in  nitrogen,  and  in  the  that  can  cause  food  poisoning.  However,  the 
higher  range  of  the  3‐7 g N/l  given  as  indicative  infective  dose  is  quite  high  and  clostridium  is 
values in Jönsson et al. (2004). It can also be noted  frequently  present  in  the  intestines  of  both 
that  sodium  concentration  is  much  higher  than  humans and animals and also widely distributed in 
magnesium and calcium. In irrigation water where  the  environment  due  to  its  spore  forming 
the concentration of sodium salts is high relative to  capability (FDA, 2009). 
other types of salt, a sodic soil may develop, which 
is characterized by a poor soil structure: they have  Application of urine in agriculture 
a low infiltration rate, they are poorly aerated and  In  Kourittenga,  urine  tests  were  done  on  a 
difficult  to  cultivate  (FAO,  1985).  Even  though  the  relatively  large  scale.  To  facilitate  application,  the 
salt  concentration  is  quite  high  in  urine,  the  total  furrows  were  opened  and  closed  using  animal 
salt  quantity  applied  per  year  is  not  high  when  traction  and  the  urine  was  poured  directly  from 
compared  to  irrigation  water.  However  salinity  is  the jerry cans (Figure 5).  
complex  and  further  research  on  urine  use  and   
salinity  would  be  welcome  to  avoid  long  term  In  Aguié,  the  preferred  application  method  has 
problems.  been with a bucket and cup. The urine in Aguié was 
  dosed  to  give  the  same  nitrogen  quantity  as  the 
Laminou  (2009)  followed  the  volume  of  urine  locally  recommended  dose  for  urea.  With  a  urine 
generated  from  10  men,  10  women  and  concentration  of  about  5  g N/l  and  with  urea 
10 children  (ca.  10  years  old)  in  two  villages  in  containing  46%  N,  10  grams  of  urea  corresponds 
Aguié. On average the men produced 1.7 l/day, the  roughly to 1 litre of urine. After the application it is 
women  1.9  l/day  and  the  children  0.9  l/day.  With  important  to  water  down  thoroughly,  or  wait  to 
50% of the population under 15 years, the average  apply  until  after  a  rain.  Some  farmers  have  had 
daily  urine  production  would  be  about  1.35  litres  problems  with  wilting  plants  after  urine 
per person. Using the concentrations in table gives  application,  especially  young  tomato  plants.  A 
that the average person in Aguié urinates annually  solution  has  been  to  avoid  application  during  the 
~  3  kg  N,  0.4  kg  P  and  0.45  kg  K  with  the  urine,  hottest  part  of  the  day  and  to  reinforce  watering 
which  is  higher  than  expected,  except  for  the  two  following  days  after  application.  For 
potassium.  It  should  be  noted  though  that  the  cereals,  urine  application  has  been  made  after  a 
study  was  made  just  after  harvest  time  when  good rain when the soil is humid.  
people have plenty to eat.   In  both  projects  the  local  agriculture  extension 
  officers  have  been  supervising  the  participative 
Laminou  (2009)  also  analyzed  the  sanitization  of  tests. 
urine after 30 days of storage, and found no micro‐  
organisms  except  for  anaerobic  sulphite  reducers 
that  were  present  in  3  out  of  9  samples. 
Clostridium Perfringens is one bacteria of this type 

Figure 5. Urine transport and application in Kourittenga
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  8  Issue 3 /2010 
 Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

 
It  is  important  that  farmers  see  sanitized  human 
excreta as something that complement rather than 
replaces  existing  fertilizers.  Recycling  human 
excreta helps reduce losses, but to increase fertility 
in  degraded  soils  all  available  resources  are 
needed:  animal  manure,  crop  and  food  residues, 
chemical fertilizers as well as human excreta. 
 

Overcoming mental barriers
OM 10,5kg  OM with urine 
17,5 kg  To  consider  human  urine  and  faeces  as  potential 
resources  requires  a  change  of  mindset.  Such 
Figure 6. Individual test in Kourittenga on  change  does  not  come  over  night,  and  initial 
sorghum where organic matter (OM) has been  resistance is normal. Here are some experiences of 
used as base fertilizer and urine as an  how  mental  barriers  were  over  come  in  the  two 
additional source of nitrogen (pile to the right)  projects: 
 The  farmers  want  to  see  to  believe.  It  was 
Agronomic results with urine  important  to  quickly  start  with  urine  collection 
and testing.  
During the tests, urine has been compared to urea 
 In  Muslim  societies  urine  is  considered  impure 
as  a  nitrogen  fertilizer,  or  complementing  the 
and  something  that  one  should  never  get  in 
farmer’s  traditional  way  of  fertilizing  using  only 
contact with. On the other hand, the importance 
organic matter. The test on sorghum in Figure 6 is 
of cleanliness in Islam provides a good argument 
an  example  of  an  individual  in  Kourittenga  who 
for  collecting  and  taking  away  urine  from  the 
tested the nitrogen effect of urine on sorghum.  
compound.  Men  also  squat  when  urinating,  so 
 
the  alternative  to  dig  down  the  urinal  was 
The  tests  in  the  farmer  field  schools  were 
appreciated.  When  applying  urine,  gloves  and 
monitored  more  closely,  and  Table  5  summarizes 
mouth  protection  are  used,  and  the  same 
millet  results  from  four  farmer  field  schools  in 
clothes  are  not  used  when  praying.  If  urine 
Aguié in 2009. All test plots (T0‐T3) of 200 m2 had 
touches  the  clothes  or  skin,  the  accepted 
organic matter (OM) as base fertilizer at a dose of 
solution is to wash well with water. 
20  ton/ha.  T1  and  T2  also  had  50  kg/ha  of  Super 
Simple Phosphate (SSP) as extra base fertilizer. The   The fields closest to the village has always given 
N‐application  was  either  through  5  grams  of  urea  the best yields  since  animals  and  people  relieve 
(T1)  or  0.5  litres  of  urine  (T2  and  T3)  per  plant,  themselves there and no‐one has ever hesitated 
which with 10000 millet plants/ha gives around 25  to  eat  what  is  produced  from  these  fields.  The 
kg N/ha.  new way of recycling excreta is an improvement 
  of what is already done. 
Urine gave roughly 10‐20 % more than urea. This is   It  is  possible  to  eliminate  the  danger  and  keep 
not  surprising  as  urine,  a  part  from  nitrogen,  also  the  resources  by  simple  storage  for  urine  or 
contains  some  phosphorous  and  potassium.  drying/composting  for  faeces.  After  sanitization 
Compared to the control with only organic matter,  urine  is  called  “liquid  fertilizer”  and  faeces  is 
urine  increased  the  yields  in  general  by  40‐50%.  called  “solid  fertilizer”,  which  makes  it  easier  to 
One 25‐litre jerry can of urine gave around 2‐3 kg  talk about. 
extra grains in the Aguié conditions.   The  urine  odour  is  said  to  be  the  fertilizer  ‐  if  it 
Table 5. Millet harvests (kg/ha) at four farmer field schools in Aguié. 
Tsamiya  Malloumey  Zabon 
Village   Dan Bidé 
Bakoye  Saboua  Moussou 
T0 (OM)  781  660  1244  1209 
T1 (OM+SSP+Urea)  1160  893  1318  1000 
T2 (OM+SSP+Urine)  1257  1072  1637  1111 
T3 (OM + Urine)  1161  948  1773  1399 
Surplus yield T2 compared to T1 (%)  8  20  24  11 
Surplus yield T3 compared to T0 (%)  49  44  42  16 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  9  Issue 3 /2010 
Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

doesn't  smell, it  is  no  good! In  Kourittenga,  it  is  but  the  construction  and  good  use  of  productive 
compared  to  the  traditional  spice  soumbala,  toilets  require  skill  and  knowledge.  A  large  scale 
which  is  considered  to  be  better  the  stronger  program that provides these new skills and follows 
odour it has.  up on the whole system will need a lot of time and 
 It  is  people  behind  desks  who  can  be  the  real  resources.  However,  simple  urine  collection 
barriers.  Farmers  are  often  very  pragmatic  in  captures  the  majority  of  plant  nutrients  in  human 
their  struggle  to  get  a  decent  harvest.  The  excreta and can be done to a much lower cost, and 
productive  sanitation  approach  that  both  with  less  skills  and  follow  up.  An  interesting 
improve  the  living  conditions  and  food  approach  would  be  to  scale  up  urine  recycling  via 
production has been received with open arms in  the  agriculture  sector  while  sanitation  programs 
the two projects.  promote  faeces  management.  The  agriculture 
extension  officers  already  widely  present  in  the 
 A  much  appreciated  activity  in  Aguié  was  the 
rural  areas  could  disseminate  knowledge  on  urine 
“blind  taste‐tests”  of  vegetables  and  cereals 
reuse,  and  prepare  the  grounds  for  further 
fertilized with urine and urea. The results show a 
sanitation interventions.  
sweeter taste for urine fertilized vegetables, and 
 
in  general  a  higher  buying  preference  for  the 
As  an  alternative  to  large  national  programs  a 
urine  fertilized  vegetables  both  based  on  taste 
recent example from Malawi (Bramley and Breslin, 
and appearance (Saley, 2009).  
2010)  show  that  basic  productive  sanitation 
services also can be spread on grass root level via 
Scaling up potential  business  opportunities  for  small  scale 
In  Burkina  Faso,  the  use  of  excreta  derived  entrepreneurs.  There  are  signs  of  this  dynamic  in 
fertilizers  could  either  be  scaled  up  like  other  the  two  projects  discussed  in  this  article;  In 
agriculture innovations, or it could go through the  Kourittenga  people  have  initiated  urine  collection 
national  sanitation  program  (PN‐AEPA)  that  is  on  public  places,  and  in  Aguié  an  individual  has 
about to roll out. The PN‐AEPA includes the UDDT  already  bought  140  jerry  cans  of  urine  from  his 
as  a  technical  option,  but  it  does  not  explicitly  neighbours to enrich his compost.  
allocate  resources  for  accompanying  farmers  with 
the recycling. Fortunately, in Burkina Faso it is the  Conclusion 
Ministry  of  Agriculture  who  is  in  charge  of  water 
In the pilot villages in Kourittenga and Aguié, urine 
and sanitation, so there are good opportunities for 
and faeces are now looked upon as potential liquid 
synergy  between  sanitation  and  agriculture 
and solid fertilizers. An important reason has been 
programs, if the political will is there. 
the  methodology  of  participative  tests  with  urine. 
 
In  rural  areas  food  production  is  the  main 
The  ongoing  EcoSan  projects  in  Burkina  Faso  are 
occupation  and  an  effective  entry  door  to  create 
still  preparing  the  base,  and  the  information  and 
interest  for  sanitation,  at  least  among  the  men. 
results are slowly reaching the top. To convince the 
The  women  tend  to  be  more  interested  by  the 
decision makers there is still a lot of advocacy work 
comfort,  hygiene  and  pride‐side  of  productive 
needed,  with  precise  and  reliable  data,  as  well  as 
sanitation.  Already  a  simple  urinal  makes  a 
good  economic  arguments.  Part  of  this  work  is 
difference,  as  the  urine  odour  in  the  shower 
being done within the project in Kourittenga.  
disappears with the collection.  
 
 
In  Aguié,  Niger,  the  local  partner  project  partner 
On  a  global  scale,  with  the  absence  of  political 
(PPILDA)  will  continue  to  support  farmers  and 
awareness and will, the incentive to recycle human 
eventually  extend  the  approach  to  the  entire 
excreta  will  come  with  increasing  fertilizer  prices. 
intervention  zone  (260  villages).  On  national  scale 
In  Burkina  Faso  and  Niger  were  commercial 
in  Niger  the  Rural  Development  Strategy  (SDR) 
fertilizers are beyond the purchase power of most 
could  be  a  suitable  framework  to  take  the 
farmers,  there  is  already  a  strong  recycling 
approach  further.  The  director  of  the  SDR 
incentive.  The  important  knowledge  of  urine 
executive  committee  has  shown  interest  but 
collection  and  reuse  can  be  spread  by  the  local 
wishes to have more national research on hygienic 
agriculture  extension  officers.  They  are  in  a  good 
and agronomic aspects. 
position to lead the yellow revolution! 
 
 
From an agro‐economic point of view, the subsidy 
 
of  180 US$  in  the  Burkina  project  or  50 US$  in 
 
the Niger project for a productive toilet can help a 
family to potentially collect around 80 US$ worth 
of fertilizer per year. This is a short pay back time, 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  10  Issue 3 /2010 

 Opening minds and closing loops – productive sanitation initiatives 

References  Morris  et  al.  (2007):  Fertilizer  use  in  African  Agriculture  – 
Bramley,  S.,  Breslin,  E.  (2010):  Lessons  Learnt  and  Good  Practice  Guidelines,  World  Bank, 
Sanitation as a Business: A new spin on the challenge of sanit Washington DC, USA. 
ation. Sustainable Sanitation Practice 2, 10‐14.   Saley, M. (2009): Etude organoleptique des produits maraîchers 
Cordell,  D.,  Drangert,  J‐O.,  White,  S.  (2009):  The  story  of  issus  de  l’application  des  urines  hygiénisées  et  de  l’urée. 
phosphorus:  Global  food  security  and  food  for  thought.  Project  report,  PS‐Aguié  project,  Niger 
Global Environmental Change 19, 292‐305.  http://www.ecosanres.org/aguie/documents/EtudeOrganole
Cordell,  D.  (2010):  The  story  of  phosphorous  –  sustainability  ptique‐SALE.pdf (in French)  
implications of global phosphorous scarcity for food security.  UNICEF/WHO (2008): Progress on drinking water and sanitation 
PhD  thesis,  University  of  Technology,  Sydney,  Australia,  and  –  special  focus  on  sanitation,  JMP  report, 
Linköping University, Sweden.  http://www.who.int/entity/water_sanitation_health/monito
CREPA (2009): Etude de l’état des lieux AP‐Aguié. Project report,  ring/jmp2008.pdf 
PS‐Aguié project, Niger (in French).  UNICEF/WHO  (2009):  Diarrhoea:  Why  children  are  still  dying 
Dagerskog,  L.  (2007) :    ECOSAN  et  la  valeur  des  fertilisants  and  what  can  be  done, 
humains ‐ le cas du Burkina Faso, ITN conference paper, 26‐ http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/978924159841
28 Nov. 2007, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (in French).  5_eng.pdf  
Djariri,  M.L.  (2009):  Réduction  des  coûts  des  ouvrages   
d’assainissement  dans  le  cadre  du  projet  assainissement   
productif  à  Aguié  au  Niger.  MSc  Thesis,  2iE,  Ouagadougou,   
Burkina  Faso 
http://www.ecosanres.org/aguie/documents/Memoire‐  
ReductionDesCouts‐DJARIRI‐lowres.pdf (in French) 
FAO,  (1985),  Irrigation  Water  Management:  Introduction  to 
irrigation,  Irrigation  water  management,  Training  manuals  ‐
 1, http://www.fao.org/docrep/R4082E/R4082E00.htm  
FAOSTAT,  statistics  from  2005  on  protein  consumption  in 
different  countries: 
http://faostat.fao.org/site/609/default.aspx#ancor,  (Date  of 
visit: Oct 2007) 
FDA,  (2009):  Bad  Bug  Book  –  Foodborne  Pathogenic  Micro‐
organisms  and  Natural  Toxins  Handbook, 
http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodSafety/FoodborneIllness/Foo
dborneIllnessFoodbornePathogensNaturalToxins/BadBugBoo
k/default.htm (date of visit: 25 March 2010) 
Henau,  J.C.,  Baanante.  (2006):  Agricultural  Production  and  Soil 
Nutrient  Mining  in  Africa:  Implications  for  Resource 
Conservation  and  Policy  Development.  IFDC,  Muscle  Shoals, 
AL,  USA 
http://www.africafertilizersummit.org/Background_Papers/0
3%20Henao%20and%20Baanante‐‐
Agricultural%20Production.pdf 
Jönsson,  H.,  Richert  Stintzing,  A.,  Vinneras,  B.,  Salomon,  E. 
(2004):  Guildelines  on  the  use  of  urine  and  faeces  in  crop  Name: Linus Dagerskog
production.  EcoSanRes  Publications  Series,  Report  2004‐2,  Organisation: CREPA Headquarters 
Stockholm, Sweden.  Town, Country: Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso 
Laminou, S. (2009) : Identification des risques sanitaires et des  e‐mail: linusdagerskog@yahoo.fr 
opportunités de production de fertilisants dans le système de 
collecte  d’urine  du  projet  assainissement  productif  dans  le 
département  d’Aguié  au  Niger.  MSc  Thesis,  2iE,  Name: Moussa Bonzi
Ouagadougou,  Burkina  Faso,  Organisation: CREPA Headquarters 
http://www.ecosanres.org/aguie/documents/Memoire‐ Town, Country: Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso 
RisquesSanitairesEtDesOpportunites‐LAMINOU‐lowres.pdf 
(in French)  e‐mail: bouabonzi@yahoo.fr 

The ECOSAN_UE2 project in Burkina Faso is financed mainly with EU food security money (~1.5 million Euro, 2008‐2011). 
CREPA  together  with  the  National  Environment  and  Agriculture  Research  Institute  (INERA)  and  the  Ministry  of 
Agriculture  implement  the  project  covering  30  villages  in  the  Kourittenga  province.  Ecological  sanitation  is  combined 
with soil and water conservation techniques to improve food production.  
The International Fund for Agriculture Development (IFAD) granted a 200 000 US$ pilot project for CREPA, PPILDA (a 17 
million  US$  IFAD‐funded  rural  development  project  run  by  the  Ministry  of  Agriculture  in  Niger)  and  Stockholm 
Environment  Institute  (SEI)  to  test  urine  as  a  fertilizer  in  the  Aguié  province  in  Niger.  The  objective  was  to  show  the 
effectiveness of  urine  and  to  develop  strategic  tools  as  well  as  low  cost  appropriate  technologies for  an  eventual  up‐
scaling within the PPILDA rural development project and other IFAD funded projects. The PS‐Aguié project was carried 
out  during 16 months  from Nov  2008‐Feb 2010.  See  www.ecosanres.org/aguie  for  more  information,  fact  sheets and 
tools.  
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  11  Issue 3 /2010 
  
 
 
overall project: 
 
 

Experiences from the use of urine in Arba 
Minch, Ethiopia 
Urine crop trials in Arba Minch, Ethiopia, showed the possibility for improving 
soil fertility and increasing crop yield.  
Authors: K. Kassa, F. Meinzinger, W. Zewdie 

Abstract 
In this paper an overview of practical experiences with the collection and the use of urine from urine diversion 
dry toilets in Arba Minch is discussed. At two crop trial sites maize was fertilized with urine and the maize yield 
and  the  effect  on  soil  was  studied. At  one site,  the  yield of  urine  fertilized  maize  was  increased  seven  times 
compared  to  unfertilized  soil.  Analyses  of  the  soil  fertilized  with  urine  showed  that  Kjeldahl  nitrogen  and 
salinity  was  increased  while pH  was decreased  at  higher  rates  of  urine  application.  Urine  contains  important 
nutrients  for  the  plants  and  increases  the  quality  of  soil;  however  precautions  against  the  development  of 
salinity in the roots of plants are required. The urine crop trial sites have changed the attitude of many people 
who had a chance to visit. 
 

Introduction 
The  EU‐funded  project  called  ROSA  (Resource‐
Oriented  Sanitation  concepts  for  peri‐urban  areas 
in  Africa)  proposed  resource‐oriented  sanitation 
concepts  as  a  route  to  sustainable  sanitation  to 
meet  the  UN  MDGs.  These  concepts  have  been 
applied in four pilot cities in Eastern Africa, namely 
Arba  Minch  (Ethiopia),  Nakuru  (Kenya),  Arusha 
(Tanzania)  and  Kitgum  (Uganda).  Arba  Minch  is 
located  about  550 km  south  of  Addis  Ababa,  the 
capital  of  Etiopia,  and  has  a  population  of  about 
80'000.  ROSA  Arba  Minch  was  working  in  the 
whole of Arba Minch town on the management of             
solid  waste,  greywater,  faeces  and  urine  to  Figure 1: Typical storage tank in UDDT toilet 
improve  sanitation  of  the  town  and  to  increase 
agricultural  productivity  in  the  Arba  Minch  area. 
Different  resource  oriented  sanitation  systems 
have  been  implemented  in  Arba  Minch  town 
including 15 urine‐diversion dry toilets (UDDTs), 30 
Fossa alternas, 9 Arborloos, 7 greywater towers, 1 
biogas unit and more than 5 composting sites.  
 
One  of  the  most  commonly  used  technologies  for 
the  source  separated  collection  of  urine  are 
UDDTs.  Urine  is  diverted  from  faeces  using 
separating pedestals. Urine is a valuable flow since 
it contains phosphate, nitrogen and potassium and   
can be used directly or after storage. It is a low cost  Figure 2: Urine storage in UDDT toilet 
alternative  to  the  application  of  nitrogen  rich  Considering the contents of the major nutrients in 
mineral fertilizer in plant production. The chemical  urine,  research  in  applying  urine  in  agriculture 
composition  of  urine  and  its  plant  availability  is  especially  in  developing  countries  is  needed.  The 
comparable to chemical fertilizer (Johansson et al.  use  of  urine  as  fertilizer  in  arid  and  semi  arid 
2001; Kirchmann and Pettersson, 1995).   regions  like  Arba  Minch  gives  some  knowledge 
  input and also may contribute to the change of the 
attitude  of  the  people  and  even  decision  makers. 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  12  Issue 3 /2010 

Experiences from use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia 

The  use  of  urine  in  agriculture  may  increase  this  was  not  sustainable.  Therefore,  female  and 
agricultural  production  and  eventually  reduce  youth  group  has  been  identified  which  has  been 
vulnerability in developing countries.  originally organized to collect the town solid waste 
  from  households  and  business  centres.  These 
The  objective  of  the  research  conducted  in  Arba  entrepreneurs  are  now  transporting  urine  from 
Minch town was to test urine as fertilizer for maize  UDDT  toilets  to  the  area  of  use  by  donkey  carts 
on  two  types  of  soil  with  different  fertility.  The  (Figure  4).  The  donkey  cart  was  given  by  ROSA 
yield  of  maize  was  used  to  evaluate  the  effect  of  under  the  condition  that  the  entrepreneurs 
urine  application.  The  impact  of  urine  on  the  transport  excreta  and  solid  waste  to  earn  extra 
quality  of  the  soil  was  also  investigated  by  income  by  transporting  things  different  from 
measuring  parameters  such  as  conductivity,  pH  waste.  The  UDDT  users  have  proposed  a  certain 
and  nutrient  content.  The  trial  sites  were  amount of money they are willing to pay for these 
furthermore used to demonstrate the use of urine  services.  
to farmers and other community members.    
 
Use of urine and analyses  For  a  hygienic  point  of  view,  human  urine  is  a 
“safe”  fertilizer  with  less  concern  regarding  risks 
Urine separation, collection and transport in Arba  for  disease  transmission  when  handling 
Minch  (Kvarnstrom, et. al., 2006) and it is an uncommon 
transmission route of disease. In rural Ethiopia, it is 
Urine is stored in plastic jerry cans or plastic water 
common  to  urinate  on  fresh  wounds  to  stop 
tanks, which are available from local market, in the 
bleeding. In order to reduce the risk from possible 
vaults of the UDDTs. Joints of urine collecting pipes 
contamination  by  faeces,  urine  is  stored  at  the 
are  connected  by  adhesives  and  flexible  plastic 
production  or  reuse  sites.  Some  families  were 
pipes  are  used  to  reduce  nitrogen  losses  in  the 
using  the  fresh  urine  directly  in  their  gardens. 
form of ammonia. The sizes of the tanks depend on 
Urine  is  one  of  the  components  of  co‐compost 
the size of the family using the UDDT. Initially, the 
produced by organized youth groups; recently the 
transfer  of  urine  from  the  UDDTs  tank  into  the 
compost  producers  have  started  selling  their 
transportable  jerry  cans  was  done  by  pump. 
products to private farmers.  
However,  this  resulted  into  breakage  of  two 
 
pumps,  therefore,  a  cheap  method  of  collection 
The  use  of  urine  as  a  fertilizer  in  agriculture  in 
was  introduced  which  is  a  plastic  hose  connected 
Ethiopia  is  generally  faced  with  some  cultural 
at  the  bottom  of  the  urine  tank  and  lowered  to 
objections, although wastewater use in agriculture 
pour  the  urine  and  raised  and  bent  to  seal  it 
is  a  common  practice  in  Addis  Ababa.  In  Arba 
(Figures  1‐2).  In  some  occasions  neighbours  were 
Minch reuse of urine was not practiced until ROSA 
complaining and UDDT owners were also ashamed 
started  it  in  trials.  There  was  a  widespread 
of the odour produced when the stored urine was 
perception  that  urine  may  burn  the  plants.  A  part 
transferred into transporting jerry cans. Taking this 
from the burning effect, many households in Arba 
as  lesson  urine  was  poured  carefully  from 
Minch,  who  were  interviewed  in  the  beginning  of 
container to container to avoid nuisance.  
the  project,  stated  that  they  would be  hesitant  to 
 
eat  vegetables  fertilized  by  urine.  Nevertheless, 
Initially,  the  urine  used  to  be  transported  by  the 
urine trial farms were prepared in Arba Minch. The 
ROSA project in a pick‐up car (Figure 3). However, 
trial  sites  were  successful  in  showing  that  urine 

 
Figure 4: Donkey cart used for transporting urine, 
Figure 3: Transportation by pickup car 
solid waste, and dried faeces 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  13  Issue 3 /2010 

Experiences from use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia 

Table 1: Urine application on the maize plant at Arba Minch University Plot (planting on 28.06.2007)
N applied (kg  Urine added (ml) 
Code 
N/ha)  21.6.07  04.8.07  28.8.07  17.9.07  Sum 
T25  25  100  50  50  38.1  238.1 
T50  50  200  100  100  76.2  476.2 
T75  75  300  150  150  114.3  714.3 
T100  100  400  200  200  152.4  952.4 
improves  yield  and  they  were  also  successful  in  The application of the urine on the farm was done 
initiating an attitude change. Many people in Arba  in  different  portions  at  different  development 
Minch  have  eventually  consumed  urine  fertilized  stages  of  the  plant  before  the  first  signs  of  the 
maize,  lettuce  and  tomato  although  they  knew  it  maize  tassel  and  cob  appearance.  Operators 
was fertilized by urine.   applying  urine  in  the  farm  were  complaining  of 
strong smell in the direction of wind but there have 
Methods  been  no  problems  with  odour  once  the  urine  was 
poured  on  the  soil  even  at  high  temperatures  in 
Urine fertilizer trials   Arba Minch. 

Arba Minch University farm trial plot  ROSA office farm trial plot, Secha  
The  urine,  which  was  collected  from  UDDTs,  was  Two plots each with a size of 4 m2 and 16 planting 
transported  in  20  litre  jerry  cans  and  stored  in  a  spots  were  prepared  at  the  ROSA  office  site  and 
tank  located  at  the  farmland.  Twenty  plots  each  two  maize  grains  were  planted  in  each  spot.  Each 
with a size of 16 m2 were prepared in Arba Minch  spot of the first plot was treated with 1.2 litres of 
University  farm  (Figures  5).  Five  application  rates  urine  in  four  portions  while  the  second  plot  was 
of  urine  based  on  nitrogen  amount  were  chosen  watered only with water. All watering was done at 
including  four  replicates.  The  application  rates  the same day for all plots. The amount of nitrogen 
were 25kg N/ha, 50kg N/ha, 75 kg N/ha, and 100kg  added  in  terms  of  urine  was  175  kg/ha.  Finally, 
N/ha, respectively (Table 1). The yield of each plot  each  plant  stand  was  analyzed  for  the  yield  and 
was analyzed when the crops were mature.  biomass when the crops were mature.  
 
Physicochemical analysis 
2.5  gram  of  soil  taken  from  20  cm  depth  were 
analyzed  for  potassium  using  flame  photometer 
after extracting with 100 ml of ammonium acetate 
buffer  solution  (Dewis,  et  al.,  1970,  APHA,  1992). 
2.5 gram were analysed for Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) 
after  extraction  (Dewis,  et  al.,1970,  APHA,  1992). 
pH  and  conductivity  were  analysed  after  shaking 
the  dispersed  sample  (1:5  sample:  water)  (Dewis, 
et  al.,1970).  Urine  was  analysed  for  phosphate, 
potassium, nitrogen, pH and conductivity according 
to standard methods (APHA, 1992). 
 

  Results from crop trial plots 
Figure 5: Urine application method on farm 
Characteristics of urine  
The application of urine was done by watering cans 
The urine samples were collected from ROSA office 
after  mixing  with  50%  irrigation  water.  The  plants 
for  use  at  the  ROSA  office  trial  plot  and  from 
were  counted  in  rows;  the  urine  irrigation  water 
construction  site  UDDT  toilets  for  use  at  the  Arba 
mixture was applied nearby the roots of the plants 
Minch  University  trial  plot  as  described  above. 
keeping  the  watering  at  the  same  pace.  The 
Table 2 shows the charcteristics of the urine from 
application  was  done  back  and  forth  until  the 
the 2 sites.   
mixture in the watering can was finished (Figure 5). 
Table 2: Typical characteristics of nutrients in urine collected from two UDDT sites in Arba Minch (ROSA office 
and construction site) 
NH4+‐N  N‐org  TKN  PO43‐‐P  K+  pH  Conductivity  
Sample/Parameter 
g/l  g/l  g/l  g/l  g/l  ‐  mS/cm 
Urine ROSA office  3.3  0.3  3.7  0.4  1.6  8.8  25.9  
Urine construction site  3.9  0.4  4.2  0.6  2.7  8.9  35.8  

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  14  Issue 3 /2010 

 Experiences from use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia 

  Crop yields from trial sites  
It  was  shown  that  there  is  a  difference  in  quality  Figures  6‐8  show  the  maize  yield  on  Arba  Minch 
depending on way of storage, storage time and the  university trial farm which was fertilized by urine at 
differences  in  use  of  the  toilets.  The  urine  from  the  rate  of  25,  50,  75  and  100 kg N/ha, 
ROSA office was collected from office workers who  respectively.  Figure  7  shows  the  maize  yield 
drink  water  when  they  need  and  the  urine  from  increases  with  increasing  urine  application  rates. 
the construction site UDDT was collected from day  However, finally the increase is stabilized with the 
workers  who  had  a  possibility  of  dehydration.  increase of urine amount. The difference between 
Besides,  the  conductivity  of  urine  from  the  the  yield  of  the  fertilized  and  unfertilized  maize 
construction site was higher maybe because it was  was  not  much  compared  to  the  results  from  the 
stored for a number of days in open sun in a water  ROSA office trial plot shown in Figure 9‐12. Figure 8 
tank but the urine ROSA office was relatively fresh  shows  biomass  of  maize  without  the  cob  but  the 
and  was  stored  under  the  shade  in  the  vault  of  change is not significant. One reason for this might 
UDDT.  be  the  damage  caused  by  wildlife  before  analysis. 
Figure  9‐12  show  the  results  of  the  ROSA  office 

   
Figure 6: Urine experiment on maize at Arba Minch  Figure 9: Left: urine fertilized; right: unfertilized maize 
University farm  collected from ROSA office farm. 

   
Figure 7: Maize yield (crop trial performed on Arba  Figure 10: Maize yield (crop trial results of the ROSA 
Minch University farm. The farm land is relatively fertile)  Office demonstration farm) 

   
Figure 8: Average of maize biomass measured without  Figure 11: Weight of maize biomass (ROSA office), 175 
cob cover and root (University farm)  kg N/ha equivalent of urine was added. 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  15  Issue 3 /2010 
 Experiences from use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia 

trial  farm  where  there  is  big  difference  between  From  these  two  experiments,  it  is  possible  to  say 
the  urine  fertilized  and  unfertilized  maize  most  that  less  fertile  soil  has  a  tendency  to  give  good 
probably  because  of  the  initial  lower  soil  fertility.  yield  with  urine.  Hence,  the  Ethiopian  highlands, 
The  maize  yield  fertilized  by  urine  at  a  rate  of  which  are  particularly  suffering  from  nutrient 
175 kg N/ha  is  seven  times  more  than  the  depletion,  are  a  promising  region  for  using  urine 
unfertilized  maize  (Figure  10).  The  related  maize  and compost conditioned with urine.  
biomass fertilized by urine is twice as much as the 
unfertilized one (Figure 11).  Impact of urine application on soil quality 
Figures  13‐15  show  the  soil  quality  changes  after 
urine  addition  at  the  Arba  Minch  University  trial 
farm  plots.  The  conductivity  of  the  soil  increases 
with increasing urine application which means that 
there  is  a  possibility  of  increased  salinity  as  more 
urine is added to the soil (Figure 13). Farmers who 
are  going  to  use  urine  as  a  fertilizer  must  irrigate 
with  more  irrigation  water  to  leach  the  salt 
accumulation  in  the  root  zone  of  the  plants.  The 
dilution ratio can start from 3:1 urine to water and 
above.  If  1  litre  of  urine  is  added  either  diluted 
with 25% or 75% the nutrients that are supplied to 
the  plat  are  the  same.  The  problem  arises  when 
  concentrated  urine  is  added  salt  is  being 
Figure 12: Control (left) and urine fertilized maize  accumulated  on  the  soil  surface  and  not  reaching 
(right) at the ROSA office trial plot  the  plant  root.  Yet,  when  the  urine  is  mixed  with 
more  water  the  nutrient  may  be  leached  or 
A comparison of the results from the two trial plots  washed away before the roots absorbed it. 
shows  the  dependence  of  the  effect  of  urine  on   
the  initial  soil  quality.  Although  the  initial  soil  Figure  14  Kjeldahl  nitrogen  and  potassium  of  soil 
quality  is  not  indicated  here  since  it  was  not  fertilized by urine. The amount of nitrogen slightly 
sampled,  the  Arba  Minch  University  trial  plot  is  increased with addition of urine which is one of the 
very rich and it was in use as a farm while the farm  positive  values  of  urine  as  a  fertilizer.  Potassium 
in  ROSA  office  is  lacking  nutrients  and  was  not  in  variation  with  increasing  amount  of  urine  was 
use  for  agriculture  before.  The  results  of  Arba  neglegible. 
Minch University farm trial plots also showed that   
the maize yield and biomass increased in response  The pH of neat urine applied was about 9 (Table 2). 
to the increased urine application, but at a slower  The pH of soil measured after application of urine 
rate  at  higher  urine  applications.  Jönsson  et  al  indicated  in  Figure  15  decreased  with  increasing 
(2004)  indicated  that  the  effect  of  crop  yield  application  of  urine  on  the  soil.  This  might  be 
increases with increasing fertiliser application rates  described by as the fact that ammonium is nitrified 
and  then  remains  constant  at  higher  in  soil,  releasing  two  protons  and  thus  decreasing 
concentrations.   the pH. However, this might be only a temporarily 
 

 
Figure 13: Conductivity of urine fertilized soil after harvesting  Figure 14: Potassium (filled) and TKN concentration (clean) in 
maize  the soil fertilized with urine, after harvesting maize
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  16  Issue 3 /2010 
Experiences from use of urine in Arba Minch, Ethiopia 

climatic  zones  and  preferably  in  cooperation  with 

farmer associations. 
 
 
Acknowledgements 
The work was carried out within the project ROSA 
(Resource‐  oriented  Sanitation  concepts  for  peri‐
Urban areas in Africa; Contract No. 037025‐GOCE; 
duration:  1.10.2006‐31.3.2010),  a  Specific  Target 
Research Project (STREP) funded within the EU 6th 
Framework  Programme,  sub‐priority  „Global 
Change and Ecosystems“. The authors are grateful 
Figure 15: pH of urine fertilized soil after harvesting  for  the  support.  We  thank  Mr  Yesuf  Ali  for  the 
maize  anlaysis of soil samples. 
 
effect since when nitrate is taken by plant root two   
hydroxide  ions  are  released  which  this  therefore  References 
APHA  (1992):  Standard  Methods  for  the  examination  of  water 
result  in  the  neutralization  of  the  protons  in  the 
and  wastewater.  18th  Edition,  American  Public  Health 
soil (Schönning, 2001). Then there might be no pH  Association/American  Water  Works  Association/Water 
decline permanently in a soil treated with urine.   Environmental Federation, Washington DC, USA.  
  Dewis,  J.,  Freitas,  F.  (1970):  Physical  and  chemical  methods  of 
soil and water Analysis, FAO, Soil Bulletin No. 10. 

Conclusions and Recommendations   Jönsson,  H.,  Stinzing,  A.R.,  Vinneras,  B.,  Salomon,  E.  (2004): 
Guidelines  on  the  use  of  and  faeces  in  crop  production. 
Urine collection, transport, treatment and reuse is  EcoSanRes Publication Series p 4. 
one  of  the  difficult  step  in  resources‐oriented  Johansson,  H.,  Jönsson,  H.,  Hoglund,  C.,  Richert  Stintzing,  A., 
sanitation  systems  because  the  society  and  the  Rodhe, L. (2001): Urine separation‐closing the nutrient cycle. 
Stockholm  water  company,  Stockholm,  Sweden. 
decision  makers  may  not  be  aware  of  the 
Available:www.stockholmvatten.se/pdf_arkiv/English/urinse
advantages.  In  Arba  Minch  the  transport  and  p_eng.pdf. 
collection  of  urine  from  UDDTs  was  first  done  by  Kirchman,  H.,  Pettersson,  S.  (1995):  Human  urine‐chemical 
car  but  gradually  entrepreneurs  were  involved  to  composition  and  fertilizer  efficiency,  Fertilizer  Research  40: 
independently  transport  by  donkey  cart  without  149‐154. 
external  support.  This  is  a  good  progress  to  Kvarnstrom,  E.  Emilsson,  K.,  Stintzing,  A.R.,  Johansson,  M, 
sustainability  of  the  implemented  sanitation  Jönsson,H.,  Petersens,  E.,  Schönning,  C.,  Christensen,  J., 
Hellstrom,  D.,  Qvarnstrom,L.,  Ridderstolpe,  P.,  Drangert,  J. 
systems.  (2006):  Urine  diversion:  one  step  towards  sustainable 
  sanitation. Report 2006‐1, EcoSanRes publication series, p37. 
Youth  groups  also  use  urine  to  enrich  the  co‐ Schönning,  C.  (2001)  Urine  diversion  ‐  hygenic  risks  and 
compost,  which  they  produce  from  faeces  and  microbial  guidelines  for  reuse.  In:  Höglund,  C  (2001): 
organic  waste.  Costumers  are  happy  to  buy  the  Evaluation of microbial health risks associated with reuse of 
source separated human urine, PhD thesis, Royal Institute of 
produced  compost  so  that  the  youth  groups  can  Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. ISBN 91‐7283‐039‐5. 
gain an income. 
   
 
The response of maize plant for urine is very good 
but it depends on whether the soil is already fertile 
in  terms  of  nutrients  or  not.  The  response  is  very 
good  in  the  ROSA  office  trial  farm,  while  it  is 
smaller at the University trial farm, where the soil 
had already a relatively high initial fertility.   Name: Kinfe Kassa
  Organisation: ROSA, Arba Minch University 
Urine  increases  soil  fertility  but  the  development  Town, Country: Arba Minch, Ethiopia 
of  soil  salinity  might  happen  especially  in  areas  e‐mail: kinfe_k@yahoo.com 
where  irrigation  water  is  scarce.  Therefore, 
appropriate measures such as drainage might need  Name: Franziska Meinzinger 
to  be  taken  and  salt  tolerant  crops  should  be  Organisation: ROSA, TU Hamburg‐Harburg,  
selected.  Town, Country: Hamburg, Germany 
In  order  to  make  urine  accepted  by  the  Ethiopian 
farmers  widely  repeated  research  and  Name: Wubshet Zewdie  
demonstration  should  be  done  in  different  agro‐ Organisation: ROSA, Arba Minch University 
Town, Country: Arba Minch, Ethiopia 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  17  Issue 3 /2010 
  
 
 
implementing 
 
organisation: 
 

Are pharmaceutical residues in urine a 
constraint for using urine as a fertiliser? 
This paper provides an overview about pharmaceutical residues in urine and 
their potential role as constraint for reuse of the urine in agriculture. 
Author: M. Winker 

Abstract 
Urine  is  an  excellent,  complete  plant  fertiliser  (containing  nitrogen,  phosphorus  and  potassium),  but  also 
contains certain amounts of pharmaceutical residues even after prolonged storage as a treatment step. If those 
substances are polar and hardly biodegradable they can be taken up by plants and thereby possibly enter the 
human  food chain.  Research  has  shown  that  the  low  pharmaceutical  concentrations provided  with urine  are 
unlikely  to  affect  plant  development  and  growth.  A  full  evaluation  of  the  potential  toxic  effects  of 
pharmaceuticals  ingested  by  humans  via  urine‐fertilised  crops  is  very  difficult  and  has  not  yet  been  done. 
Perceptions of societies towards urine reuse vary widely and can work as a driver or a constraint for reuse. 
 
pharmaceutical  residues  to  agricultural  fields 
Introduction  (Lienert  et  al.,  2007a;  Winker  et  al.,  2008b).  Only 
recently  the  fate  of  pharmaceuticals  regarding 
Urine  can  be  used  as  an  alternative  fertiliser  for 
their  accumulation  in  soils,  transfer  to 
agriculture.  It  contains  large  amounts  of  nutrients 
groundwater,  and  incorporation  by  plants  came 
such  as  80%  of  nitrogen,  50%  of  phosphorus,  and 
into the focus of research. However, these effects 
70%  of  potassium  usually  present  in  domestic 
cannot be excluded as fairly high concentrations of 
wastewater as well as various micronutrients (Ciba 
pharmaceuticals  are  expected  in  urine  (Winker  et 
Geigy AG, 1977; Larsen and Gujer, 1996; Otterpohl, 
al., 2008b). 
2002;  von  Münch  and  Winker,  2009).  But  this 
 
usage  of  urine  includes  the  risk  of  transfer  of 
The  urine  normally  ends  up  in  the  domestic 

Key message:
 Pharmaceutical residues are contained in urine but only in few investigations concentrations have been 
measured so far. Predicted (German) concentrations were in the range of 0.1 to 103 μg/l of urine and 
determined for 124 substances. 
 Data from literature show that plants are generally able to take up pharmaceuticals. Concentrations in plant 
parts detected were very low (in the range of ng/kg) even though plants were exposed to high concentrations 
(mg/kg soil). Nevertheless, pharmaceuticals were also found in edible plant parts. 
 Pharmaceuticals can also cause phytotoxic effects in dependence of the applied pharmaceutical concentration. 
Also here, it has to be mentioned that high concentrations were applied. 
 Overall, different plant species have dissimilar sensitivity levels towards the same pharmaceutical as studies 
have shown. Unfortunately, it is impossible to extend these conclusions to long term effects in general. 
 Exposure of rye grass to pharmaceuticals contained in urine at expected “natural” levels as well as at higher 
concentrations did not affect dry matter production during the growth period of three months either for single 
pharmaceuticals, or for the combination of carbamazepine, ibuprofen, and 17α‐ethinylestradiol. 
 Only carbamazepine was shown to be taken up by roots and aerial plant parts of rye grass. The concentrations 
in aerial rye grass parts were in the mean 4950 μg/kg DM (dry matter), and in roots 225 μg/kg DM. This leads to 
the assumption that only pharmaceuticals which are persistent in soil and not biodegraded are transferred to 
plants in measureable concentrations. 
 Potential effect of pharmaceutical substances contained in urine towards plants cannot be determined in 
germination experiments. The urine matrix itself is much more affecting the seedlings due to its specific matrix 
than the active agents. 
 Farmers and consumers are open to urine as fertiliser, although they are aware of the aspect of pharmaceutical 
appearance. The perception varies not only among the stakeholder groups but also between countries. 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  18  Issue 3 /2010 

Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

wastewater  in  conventional,  sewer‐based 

collection  systems.  Many  of  these  pollutants  are 
not  removed  in  sewage  treatment  plants  and  are 
thus discharged into surface water bodies and can 
even reach the groundwater. 
 
The collection, storage and reuse of urine include 
various  challenges.  This  article  provides  an 
overview  about  recent  research  (excluding 
advanced  treatment  technologies  for  urine  as  an 
excellent  overview  on  that  is  provided  by Maurer 
et al. (2006)). Additionally, it is also explained why 
the  uptake  of  pharmaceuticals  in  plants  and  the 
effects on plant physiology and development is of 
major  interest  when  crops  are  fertilised  with 
urine.  The  article  is  based  on  the  results  of  the 
PhD thesis of Winker (2009). 
 

Concentrations  of  pharmaceutical 

residues  in  urine  and  the  effect  of 
 
storage  Figure 2. Measured mean concentrations of active 
Urine  contains  pharmaceuticals:  around  70%  of  agents in German source‐separated urine done by 
the  pharmaceuticals  taken  in,  are  excreted  via  Strompen et al. (2003) and Tettenborn et al. (2007) 
urine  accounting  for  50%  of  the  overall  (Vinnerås et al., 2008). 
ecotoxicological risk (Lienert et al., 2007a; Lienert 
et al., 2007b). Urine analysed in various occasions  excretion  rates  per  person  for  212  active 
showed  concentrations  from  2200 ng/l  substances  along  Swiss  standards  (Fehler! 
(fenoprofen; Strompen et al., 2003) to 545000 ng/l  Verweisquelle  konnte  nicht  gefunden  werden. 
(ibuprofen;  Tettenborn  et  al.,  2007)  (Figure  1).  Table  1  shows  roughly  the  variations  of  excretion 
Apart of these substances, substance belonging to  possible among the different active agents as well 
various  indication  groups  as  well  as  natural  as  it  points  out  the  fractions  of  unchanged  and 
hormones  were  detected  in  human  urine  (Winker  metabolized substances. 
et al., 2008b). 
   
As  analytics  are  sometimes  difficult,  Lienert  et  al.  Overall, it has to be pointed out that the effect of 
(2007a)  and  Winker  et  al.  (2008b)  established  storage,  induced  by  pH  augmentation  due  to 
theoretical  calculations  to  receive  a  potential  ureolysis  (Udert  et  al.,  2003),  remains  uncertain. 
overview  for  Swiss  and  German  urine.  Winker  Such  as  Butzen  et  al.  (2005)  detected  efficient 
(2009)  could  determine  average  concentrations  in  removal for diclofenac after six month; for further 
general  German  urine  for  124  active  substances  pharmaceuticals  partial  removal  at  different  pH 
(for  details  see  https://www.tu‐ levels.  In  contradiction  to  these  findings,  Gajurel 
harburg.de/aww/pharma/).  Also  pharmaceutical  (2007)  did  not  find  any  decay  of  clofibric  acid, 
concentrations in the urine of single person under  carbamazepine,  diclofenac,  and  ibuprofen  in 
medication  were  calculated  for  173  substances.  spiked  urine  during  a  one  year  storage  period 
Additionally, Lienert et al. (2007a) determined the  under  all  investigated  storage  conditions. 
Preliminary  sampling  in  the  urine  storage  tanks  in 
Table 3. Excretion of 212 pharmaceuticals (Lienert et al., 2007a (modified)). Total percentages excreted via 
urine as well as substances excreted unchanged as parent compound as well as metabolized. 
  Total    Unchanged    Metabolized 
 
  min  av  max    min  av  max    min  av  max 
Excretion (%)    0  64  100    0.1  35  100    1  42  124 
SD (N)    ±27% (212)    ±33% (132)    ±28% (57) 

“av” determined average of the collected data (for details see Lienert et al., 2007a); “SD” stands for standard deviation; 
“N” stands for sample size.

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  19  Issue 3 /2010 

Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

the  GTZ  headquarters  in  Eschborn,  Germany, 

indicated  similar  tendency.  Several  beta‐blockers 
and antibiotics were found in urine stored for more 
than  1.5  years  (Montag  and  Schürmann,  2010; 
Institute  for  Environmental  Engineering,  RWTH 
Aachen; personal communication). This finding will 
be followed up within investigations regarding the 
storage behaviour  of active  substances performed 
by the RWTH Aachen within the project SANIRESCH 
(2010).  Hence,  it  has  to  be  concluded  that 
pharmaceutical residues are present in urine after 
storage and have to be kept in mind when it comes 
to reuse in agriculture. 
 

Uptake  and  effects  of  pharmaceutical 

residues towards plants 
Plant experiments 
 
Greenhouse experiments in pots  Figure 3. Overall dry weight of plant parts of rye 
grass determined during the full growth period. n = 
The fertilising effect of urine is clearly documented 
natural concentration (white bars), a = artificial 
(Muskolus,  2008;  von  Münch  and  Winker,  2009) 
concentration (grey bars). “Control 1” indicates 
but nearly no investigations focused on application 
plants treated with MeOH and urine, “Control 2” 
of  pharmaceuticals  by  urine  except  Schneider 
did not receive any application beside water; “3” is 
(2005) and Winker (2009). In the results presented 
the designation for the combination of CZ, IBU, and 
here  the  focus  is  laid  on  uptake  of  certain 
EE2 (Winker, 2009). 
pharmaceuticals  by  rye  grass.  Schneider  (2005) 
applied  diclofenac,  sulfamethoxazole  or 
sulfamethazine  but  in  concentrations  5*105  detected  at  artificial  concentrations  (10  times 
(diclofenac)  and  9*105  (sulfamethoxazole)  higher  higher than expected in AGU). CZ concentrations in 
than expected for an average German urine (AGU,  roots  showed  a  mean  concentration  of 
Winker  et  al.,  2008b)  while  sulfamethazine  is  not  225 μg/kg DM while a mean of 4950 μg/kg DM was 
even  present  in  AGU  at  all.  Winker  et  al.  (2010a)  reached in aerial plant parts. This correlates to an 
applied  carbamazepine  (CZ),  ibuprofen  (IBU),  and  average of 0.21% of the total amount of CZ applied 
17α‐ethinylestradiol  (EE2)  alone  and  in  to each pot was found in the roots of rye grass, but 
combinations  in  the  expected  natural  as  well  as  30% in the aerial plant parts. 
higher dosed concentrations of those in AGU.   
 
f  aerial  plant  matter  (Figure  2)  was  identified  for  Germination experiments 
the entire 3 months experimental period. No visual  Plants  show  their  highest  sensitivity  as  seedlings. 
effects  were  observed  except  Control  2  which  Therefore,  this  development  stage  is  very 
received  only  irrigation  water  without  nutrients  appropriate  for  investigations  regarding  potential 
and  thus  showed  only  about  25%  of  the  biomass  pollutants.  Germination  tests  of  cress  and  four 
production  compared  to  the  fertilised  grass.  The  different  cereals  (Winker  et  al.,  2010b)  were 
lack of fertilisation led to a large weight reduction.  performed  where  the  seeds  were  germinated  in 
The  overall  dry  matter  of  all  plants  fertilised  with  urine‐water mix containing one up to five different 
urine  did  not  show  any  effect  irrespective  of  the  pharmaceutical  substances  in  raising 
kind  and  concentrations  of  added  pharmaceutical  concentration. 
(Figure 2).   
  The  seedlings  show  sensitivity  against 
IBU  and  EE2  could  not  be  detected  in  any  soil  pharmaceutical  agents  (Table  2;  Winker  et  al., 
sample  after  the  3‐month  growing  period.  In  2008b).  The  sensitivity  lies  far  above  the 
contrast  to  IBU,  CZ  was  detected  in  all  pots  concentration  levels  expected  in  average  German 
irrespective  the  concentration  level.  On  average,  urine.  In  the  most  cases  the  sensitivity  lies  even 
49%  of  the  applied  CZ  was  recovered  3  months  above  the  investigated  range  of  concentrations. 
after  application.  In  plants,  only  CZ  could  be  Apart,  the  urine  matrix  itself  is  much  more 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  20  Issue 3 /2010 

Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

Table 4. Influence on dry weight of the seedlings by addition of one active agent. “>” indicates that the 
limiting concentration causing an effect was not reached and lies most likely above the tested level (Winker 
et al., 2010b). 
Substance  Cress  Winter wheat  Winter rye*  Winter barley  Oat 
>1.000.000 
EE2  > 1000 fold  >1000 fold  >1000 fold  > 1000 fold 
fold 
E2  >10.000 fold  > 1000 fold  >1000 fold  > 1000 fold  > 1000 fold 
CZ  >10.000 fold  > 1000 fold  AGU conc.  >1000 fold  > 1000 fold 
10 fold  1000 fold 
PI  > 1000 fold  >1000 fold  > 1000 fold 
‐ better  ‐ worse 
1000 fold 
IBU  >1000 fold  > 1000 fold  > 1000 fold  > 1000 fold 
‐ better 
* “worse”: the concentration let to a negative effect of the dry weight; “better”: the concentration let to a statistically 
relevant increase of the dry weight. 

affecting  the  seedlings  due  to  its  specific  matrix   

than  the  active  agents.  Nevertheless,  in  certain  Pharmaceutical concentrations in plants depend on 
cases  reactions  of  seedlings  towards  the  amounts  of  pharmaceuticals  available  in  the 
pharmaceutical  substances  could  be  observed.  respective  growth  medium.  Mapping  of  naturally 
Overall,  it  can  be  concluded  that  the  potential  occurring  concentrations  in  plant  parts  is  nearly 
effect  of  pharmaceutical  substances  contained  in  impossible.  The  literature  screening  performed 
urine  towards  plants  cannot  be  determined  in  (Winker,  2009)  identified  studies  which  could  be 
germination experiments.  split  into  45  datasets  (DS)  reporting  9 
pharmaceuticals.  All  studies  were  performed  with 
Literature review  concentrations  above  those  expected  by  urine.  In 
As  already  stated,  nearly  no  literature  is  available  18  datasets  application  rates  were  2‐182  times 
on  the  uptake  and  effect  of  pharmaceuticals  by  higher than those expected to be reached by urine 
plants spread via urine. Nevertheless, research was  fertilisation  (see  Table  3,  ratio  DS/AGU)  and  for  8 
done  regarding  the  uptake  of  several  active  of these datasets bioaccumulation or phytotoxicity 
substances  and  their  effects.  Data  from  literature  was  reported.  The  others  showed  DS/AGU  ratios 
show  that  plants  are  generally  able  to  take  up  between  2*103  (chlorotetracylcine  (Patten  et  al., 
pharmaceuticals  (Winker  et  al.,  2008a).  The  1980)  and  2*108  (chlorotetracycline  (Jacobsen  et 
concentrations  usually  detected  in  plant  parts  are  al., 2004) and were thus too high to be of help for 
in  the  range  of  ng/kg.  Pharmaceuticals  have  also  an evaluation of fertilization with urine. 
been  found  in  edible  plant  parts  such  as  carrot   
roots  and  cereal  grains  (Dolliver  et  al.  (2007)  and  Pharmaceuticals  also  cause  phytotoxic  effects 
Boxall et al. (2006)). In addition, Brian et al. (1951)  depending  on  the  concentration  of  the 
and  Stokes  (1954)  reported  excretion  of  pharmaceutical  substance  resulting  in a  change of 
griseofluvin via guttation drops at the leaf apex of  colour to darker green (Grote et al., 2004); lacking 
wheat seedlings. The rate of movement in plants is  and incomplete colouring (von Euler, 1948; Rosen, 
influenced  directly  by  rate  of  transpiration,  which  1954);  lower  chlorophyll  content  in  leaves  (von 
in  turn  is  affected  by  air  humidity  and  Euler  and  Stein,  1955);  as  well  as  hard  and  waxy 
temperature.  This  finding  leads  to  two  leaves  (Rosen,  1954).  Moreover,  Rosen  (1954) 
contradictory  assumptions.  On  the  one  hand,  reported  a  lack  of  lateral  root  development 
pharmaceuticals accumulate in leaves (Brian et al.,  subsequent  to  pharmaceutical  exposure  and  von 
1951; Stokes, 1954), and higher uptake rates have  Euler (1948) found thickened coleoptiles. 
been found in older leaves (Grote et al., 2004). On   
the  other  hand,  leaves  are  able  to  secrete  Studies  have  shown  that  different  plant  species 
pharmaceuticals  (Brian  et  al.,  1951;  Stokes,  1954)  have  differing  sensitivity  levels  towards  the  same 
and  to  degrade  organic  chemicals  taken  up,  in  a  pharmaceutical.  However,  it  must  be  pointed  out 
process  comparable  to  liver  metabolism  (Komoßa  that  many  articles  were  published  20  to  30  years 
et  al.,  1995).  Moreover,  Kumar  et  al.  (2005)  ago  and  the  sensitivity  and  selectivity  of  chemical 
reported  that  the  correlation  between  the  analyses  at  that  time  was  somewhat  lower. 
concentration  applied  and  uptake  is  nearly  linear,  Furthermore,  it  is  not  possible  to  extend  these 
but it is currently impossible to generalise on these  conclusions  to  long‐term  effects  in  general,  as 
findings.  most  tests  described  in  the  literature  did  not  last 
for a whole growing season. 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  21  Issue 3 /2010 

 Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

Table 5. The 8 datasets reporting concentration similar to those in the case of urine fertilisation (DS/AGU ratio 
<200) which showed phytotoxic or bioaccumulative effects (Winker, 2009). 
Concentration  Ratio 
Substance  Plant species  Reported impacts1  Ref. 
applied   DS/AGU2 
Phytotoxic: negative impact on w, h, r, 
Chloroquine  soybean  8000 ng/kg  182  Jjemba, 2002 
s, l  (13 d after germination) 
Phytotoxic: positive impact on h, r  
Chlorotetracycline  spring wheat  160 ng/kg  82  Batchelder, 1982 
(27 d after germination) 
Phytotoxic: negative impact on w, h, r, 
Chlorotetracycline  pinto bean  160 ng/kg  82  Batchelder, 1982 
s, l  (45 d after germination) 
Uptake: 0.013 ng/kg FW in s and l  Kumar et al., 
Chlorotetracycline  green onion  100 ng/kg  51 
(42 d after transplantation)  2005 
Uptake: 0.01 ng/kg FW in s and l (42 d  Kumar et al., 
Chlorotetracycline  cabbage  100 ng/kg  51 
after transplantation)  2005 
Phytotoxic: negative impact on w, h, r, 
Metronidazole  soybean  2000 ng/kg DM  67  Jjemba, 2002 
s, l  (13 d after germination) 
Phytotoxic: positive impact on h, r  
Oxytetracycline  spring wheat  160 ng/kg  2  Batchelder, 1982 
(27 d after germination) 
Phytotoxic: negative impact on w, h, r, 
Oxytetracycline  pinto bean  160 ng/kg  2  Batchelder, 1982 
s, l  (45 d after germination) 
1
 Letters denote weight (w), height (h), roots (r), stalk (s), and leaves (l). 
2
 "Ratio DS/AGU" describes the concentration applied in the specific investigation summarised in one dataset (DS) related 
to  the  pharmaceutical  concentration  calculated  to  be  reached  in  case  of  urine  application.  DS/AGU  =  1  describes  equal 
conditions,  <1/>1  implies  that  lower/higher  concentrations  would  be  applied  by  a  fertilisation  with  urine  under  the 
described conditions. (March 16, 2008).

900  responded;  Blume  and  Winker,  2010)  were 

positive  towards  the  idea  of  urine  reuse  in 
Importance of the topic in societies  agriculture.  71%  stated  explicitly  that  they  would 
buy  crops  which  have  been  fertilised  with  human 
The  reaction  of  societies  varies  when  they  are  excreta according to WHO guidelines (WHO, 2006). 
confronted with the issue of urine‐fertilised crops.  Other  studies  showed  similar  results.  Muskolus 
The  concerns  regarding  pharmaceutical  residues  (2008)  interviewed  inhabitants  in  Berlin  as well  as 
differ  between  the  different  stakeholders.  A  very  people  with  an  agricultural  background,  and  62% 
important  stakeholder  group  are  farmers.  In  of  both  groups  stated  that  they  would  buy  food 
Switzerland,  a  high  percentage  of  farmers  (57%)  produced with urine as fertiliser. 
would  accept  urine  as  fertiliser  (Lienert  et  al.,   
2003). For them, the fate of pharmaceuticals in the  Samwel  (WECF,  www.wecf.org;  personal 
environment  is  one  of  the  concerns  mentioned.  communication)  reported  a  varying  attitude  in 
Approx. 80% of Swedish farmers were interested in  Easter  European  and  Central  Asian  countries: 
using  urine  as  fertiliser  (Tidåker  et  al.,  2004).  The  Acceptance  depends  very  much  upon  the 
issue  of  spreading  pathogens  and  pharmaceutical  awareness  of  the  issue  by  involved  authorities.  In 
residues  to  the  fields  via  any  sewage product  was  the  Ukraine  and  Romania,  members  of  the 
the second highest concern after heavy metals and  authorities  responsible  for  hygiene  and 
other  organic  compounds.  Nevertheless,  as  environment  do  reject  the  usage  of  urine  due  to 
pathogens  or  pharmaceutical  residues  were  the  risk  of  spreading  pharmaceutical  residues.  A 
grouped  it  remained  unclear  which  of  the  two  major constraint is the lack of legal frameworks for 
aspect were in their major focus. Muskolus (2008)  UDDTs  and  reuse.  In  Central  Asia  and  the 
interrogated  farmers  around  Berlin.  They  tend  to  Caucasian  region,  implementation  of  urine 
react  conservatively  when  confronted  with  the  diversion  systems  and  reuse  of  urine  are  well 
issue.  Only  one  quarter  of  participating  farmers  accepted  by  the  authorities.  For  example  in 
expressed  a  positive  attitude  towards  urine  as  Western  Georgia  and  Northern  Kyrgyzstan  urine 
fertiliser.   diversion  systems  are  very  welcome  due  to  high 
  groundwater levels – normal pits simply fill up with 
Users  of  urine‐diverting  systems  or  potential  water.  Moreover,  when  a  community  is  well 
consumers  of  agricultural  products  fertilised  with  informed,  Samwel  (2010;  WECF,  www.wecf.org; 
urine  were  interrogated  in  several  studies.  personal  communication)  observed  also  that 
Amongst  the  users  of  urine  diversion  flush  toilets  groundwater protection can be a strong driver.  
at  GTZ  headquarters  (Blume  and  Winker,  2010)  a   
remarkable 90% of the participants (218 persons of 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  22  Issue 3 /2010 

Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

Sinar (2008) showed that apart from appearance of  Brian,  P.,  Wright,  J.,  Stubbs,  J.,  Way,  A.  (1951):  Uptake  of 
antibiotic  metabolites  of  soil  microorganisms  by  plants. 
pharmaceutical residues in urine, it is important to 
Nature, 167(4244), 347‐349. 
investigate a societies’ attitude on pharmaceutical 
Butzen,  A.,  Werres,  F.,  Balsaa,  P.  (2005):  Aufbau  und  Einsatz 
consumption  and  that  a  difference  between  rural  einer  problemorientierten  Analytik  mit  dem  Ziel  eines 
and  urban  areas  might  exist.  In  Ghana,  the  Monitorings  ausgewählter  Pharmaka  in  Böden  und  Urin. 
frequently  used  pharmaceutical  groups  (often  Bonner Agrikulturchemische Reihe, 21, 25‐54. 
referred  to  as  indications)  are  antimalarials,  Ciba Geigy AG (1977): Teilband Körperflüssigkeiten. In: Lentner, 
antibiotics,  analgesics,  antifungals  and  C.  (editor),  Wissenschaftliche  Tabellen  Geigy,  8th  edition, 
CIBA‐GEIGY AG, Basel, Switzerland, pp. 51‐97. 
antihelminthics;  in  urban  areas  pharmaceuticals 
Dolliver, H., Kumar, K., Gupta, S. (2007): Sulfamethazine uptake 
addressing  diabetes  and  cardiovascular  diseases  by  plants  from  manure‐amended  soil.  J  Environ  Qual,  36(4), 
are  also  consumed  (Sinar,  2008).  While  in  Ghana,  1224‐1230. 
consumption  of  contraceptives  is  negligible,  they  Gajurel,  D.  (2007):  Investigation  of  elimination  of  selected 
most  likely  play  a  major  role  in  Peru.  17α‐ pharmaceuticals  in  urine  during  storage,  by  UV  irradiation 
ethinylestradiol  is  available  for  all  women  for  free  and  by  ozonsation  (in  German),  report,  DFG‐
Förderkennzeichen:  GA  1063/2‐1,  Institute  of  Wastewater 
and  very  popular  (Webb  and  Fernández  Baca, 
Management  and  Water  Protection,  Hamburg  University  of 
2006)  as  a  result  of  the  family  planning  below  Technology,  Hamburg,  Germany.  URL:  http://www.tu‐
president Fujimori.  harburg.de/aww/forschung/pdf/endbericht_dfg01.pdf 
Grote, M., Freitag, M., Betsche, T. (2004): Antiinfektivaeinträge 
aus  der  Tierproduktion  in  terrestrische  und  aquatische 
Conclusion  Kompartimente,  Ministerium  für  Umwelt  und 
If  urine  is  reused  in  agriculture,  some  of  the  Naturschutz,L.u.V.d.L.N.‐W., Germany. 
pharmaceutical residues will be taken up by plants  Jacobsen,  A.,  Halling‐Sørensen,  B.,  Ingerslev,  F.,  Hansen,  S. 
and  thereby  enter  the  human  food  chain.  This  is  (2004):  Simultaneous  extraction  of  tetracycline,  macrolide 
and  sulfonamide  antibiotics  from  agricultural  soils  using 
expected  especially  for  polar  and  hardly  pressurised  liquid  excretion,  followed  by  solid‐phase 
biodegradable  substances. A  full  evaluation  of  the  extraction  and  liquid  chromatography‐tandem  mass 
potential toxic effects of pharmaceuticals ingested  spectrometry. J Chromatogr, 1038(1‐2), 157‐170. 
by humans via urine‐fertilised crops is very difficult  Jjemba,  P.  (2002):  The  effect  of  chloroquine,  quinacrine,  and 
and has not yet been done.   metronidazole  on  both  soybean  plants  and  soil  microbiota. 
Chemosphere, 46(7), 1019‐1025. 
 
Moreover,  research  carried  out  so  far  shows  that  Komoßa, D., Langebartels, C., Sandermann, H. (1995): Metabolic 
processes  for  organic  chemicals  in  plants.  In:  Trapp,  S.  and 
the  expected  concentrations  of  pharmaceutical  Mc  Farlane,  J.  (editors):  Plant  contamination,  Lewis 
residues  in  average  urine  do  not  reach  Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, pp. 69‐103. 
concentration levels which affect plant growth and  Kumar, K., Gupta, S., Chander, Y., Singh, A. (2005): Antibiotic use 
development. This finding can be supported by the  in agriculture and its impact on the  terrestrial environment. 
fact  that  the  load  of  hormones  and  antibiotics  in  Adv Agron, 87, 1‐54. 
human  urine  are  much  lower  than  in  animal  Larsen,  T.,  Gujer,  W.  (1996):  Separate  management  of 
anthropogenic  nutrient  solutions  (human  urine).  Water  Sci 
manure which is already used in agriculture.  Technol, 34(3‐4), 87‐94. 
 
Lienert,  J.,  Bürki,  T.,  Escher,  B.  (2007a):  Reducing 
Overall, it can be concluded with the statement of  micropollutants with source control: substance flow analysis 
Jörn  Germer  (cited  in  von  Münch  and  Winker  of 212 pharmaceuticals in feces and urine. Water Sci Technol, 
(2009))  that  “Drug  residues  in  sustainable  56(5), 87‐96. 
sanitation  products  used  to  supply  plant  nutrients  Lienert,  J.,  Güdel,  K.,  Escher,  B.  (2007b):  Screening  method  for 
ecotoxicological  hazard  assessment  of  42  pharmaceuticals 
can  hardly  be  a  serious  issue  in  regions  where 
considering  human  metabolism  and  excretory  routes. 
malnutrition,  groundwater  and  surface  water  Environ Sci Technol, 41(12), 4471‐4478. 
pollution  due  to  inappropriate  sanitation  and  Lienert,  J.,  Haller,  M.,  Berner,  A.,  Stauffacher,  M.,  Larsen,  T. 
irrigation with untreated wastewater is a reality”.  (2003):  How  farmers  in  Switzerland  perceive  fertilizers  from 
  recycled anthropogenic nutrients (urine). Water Sci Technol, 
  48(1), 47‐56. 
References  Mauer,  M.,  Pronk,  W.,  Larson,  T.  (2006):  Treatment  processes 
Batchelder,  A.  (1982):  Chlortetracyline  and  oxytetracycline  for source‐separated urine. Water Res, 40(17), 3151‐3166. 
effects  on  plant  growth  and  development  in  soil  systems.  J  Muskolus, A. (2008): Anthropogenic plant nutrients as fertiliser, 
Environ Qual, 11(4), 675‐678.  PhD  thesis,  Institut  für  Pflanzenbauwissenschaften, 
Blume,  S.,  Winker,  M.  (2010):  Three  years  of  operation  of  the  Humboldt‐Universität  zu  Berlin,  Berlin,  Germany.  URL: 
urine‐diversion system in GTZ headquaters in Germany; user  http://edoc.hu‐berlin.de/dissertationen/muskolus‐andreas‐
opinions and maintenance challanges. In: IWA Conference on  2008‐04‐18/PDF/muskolus.pdf 
Sustainable  solutions  for  small  water  and  waterwater  Otterpohl, R. (2002): Options for alternative types of sewerage 
treatment systems, 19‐22 April 2010, Girona, Spain.  and  treatment  systems  directed  to  improvement  of  the 
Boxall,  A.,  Johnson,  A.,  Smith,  E.,  Sinclair,  C.,  Stutt,  E.,  Levy,  L.  overall performance. Water Sci Technol, 45(3), 149‐158. 
(2006): Uptake of veterinary medicines from soils into plants.  Patten,  D.,  Wolf,  D.,  Kunkle,  W.,  Douglass,  L.  (1980):  Effect  of 
J Agric Food Chem, 54(6), 2288‐2297.  antibiotics  in  beef  cattle  feces  on  nitrogen  and  carbon 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  23  Issue 3 /2010 

Pharmaceutical Residues in Urine as Fertiliser  

mineralization in soil and on plant growth and composition. J  Protection,  Hamburg  University  of  Technology,  Hamburg, 

Environ Qual, 9(1), 167‐172.  Germany.  URL:  http://doku.b.tu‐
Rosen,  W.  (1954):  Effects  of  streptomycin  on  certain  green  harburg.de/volltexte/2009/557/ 
plants. The Ohio Journal of Science, 54(2), 73‐78.  Winker, M., Behrendt, J., Otterpohl, R. (2008a): Pharmaceuticals 
SANIRESCH  (2010):  Website  of  the  BMBF  project  in the environment ‐ an overview via database (in German). 
SanitaryRecycling  Eschborn,  German  Technical  Cooperation,  In:  Fachhochschule  Lübeck:  20.Norddeutsche  Tagung  für 
Eschborn, Germany, http//:www.saniresch.de (date of visit: 1  Abwasserwirtschaft  und  Gewässerentwicklung,  20,  Lübeck, 
February 2010).  Germany, pp.41‐50. 
Schneider,  R.  (2005):  Pharmaka  im  Urin:  Abbau  und  Winker,  M.,  Clemens,  J.,  Reich,  M.,  Gulyas,  H.,  Otterpohl,  R. 
Versickerung  vs.  Pflanzenaufnahme.  In:  Bonner  (2010a):  Ryegrass  uptake  of  carbamazepine  and  iburpofen 
Agrikulturchemische Reihe, 21, Bonn, Germany, pp.54‐81.  applied  by  urine  fertilization.  Sci  Tot  Environ,  408(8),  1902‐
1908. 
Sinar, E. (2008): Pharmaceuticals in human sanitary products for 
use  in  tropical  agriculture.  Master  thesis,  University  of  Winker,  M.,  Dimova,  D.,  Ritter,  K.,  Otterpohl,  R.,  Clemens,  J. 
Hohenheim,  Stuttgart,  Germany.  (2010b):  Effect  of  five  pharmaceutical  substances  contained 
http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en‐ in urine on the germination of cress and cereal seedlings. In: 
pharmaceuticals‐human‐sanitary‐2008.pdf.  IWA Conference on Sustainable solutions for small water and 
waterwater  treatment  systems,  19‐22  April  2010,  Girona, 
Stokes,  A.  (1954):  Uptake  and  translocation  of  griseofulvin  by  Spain. 
wheat seedlings. Plant Soil, 5(2), 132‐142. 
Winker,  M.,  Tettenborn,  F.,  Faika,  D.,  Gulyas,  H.,  Otterpohl,  R. 
Strompen, S., Werres, F., Balsaa, P., Overath, H. (2003): Analytik  (2008b):  Comparison  of  analytical  and  theoretical 
polarer  Arzneimittelrückstände  in  Urinproben  einschließlich  pharmaceutical  concentrations  in  human  urine  in  Germany. 
der  Entwicklung  der  hierzu  notwendigen  adäquaten  Water Res, 42(14), 3633‐3640. 
Verfahren  mittels  GC‐MS/MS.  In:  Wupperverband:  Das 
Projekt  Lambertsmühle:  Zukunftsfähiges   
Abwassermanagement  im  ländlichen  Raum?,  Remscheid,   
Germany, pp.32‐53. 
Tettenborn,  F.,  Behrendt,  J.,  Otterpohl,  R.  (2007):  Resource 
recovery and removal of pharmaceutical residues. Treatment 
of  separate  collected  urine  within  the  EU‐funded  SCST‐
project,  Institute  of  Wastewater  Management  and  Water 
Protection,  Hamburg  University  of  Technology,  Hamburg, 
Germany. 
Tidåcker, P., Sjöberg, C., Jönsson, H. (2004): The use of sewage 
fertiliser  products  on  arable  land  requirements  from  the 
farmers' perspective. In: Werner, C., et al. (editors): "Ecosan ‐ 
closing  the  loop"  ‐  Proceedings  of  the  2nd  International 
Symposium on ecological sanitation, 7‐11 April 2003, Lübeck, 
Germany, pp.455‐462. 
Udert,  K.,  Larsen,  T.,  Biebow,  M.,  Gujer,  W.  (2003):  Urea 
hydrolysis  and  precipitation  dynamics  in  a  urine‐collecting 
system. Water Res, 37, 2571‐2582. 
Vinnerås,  B.,  Clemens,  J.,  Winker,  M.  (2008):  Non‐metallic 
contaminants  in  domestic  waste,  wastewater  and  manures: 
constraints to agricultural use. In: The International Fertiliser 
Society, Proceedings, 641, United Kingdom, pp.1‐31. 
von  Euler,  H.  (1948):  Nukleinsäuren  als  Wuchsstoffe  in 
Gegenwart  von  Colchicin  und  von  Streptomycin.  Arkiv  för 
kemi, mineralogi och geologi, 25 A(8), 1‐9. 
von  Euler,  H.,  Stein,  M.  (1955):  Einfluss  von  Streptomycin  und 
von Tetracyclinen auf die Entwicklung keimender Samen. Cell 
Mol Life Sci, 11(3), 108‐110. 
von Münch, E., Winker, M. (2009): Technology Review on Urine 
diversion  components.  Overview  of  urine  diversion 
components such as waterless urinals, urine diversion toilets, 
urine  storage  and  reuse  systems.  German  Technical 
Cooperation  (GTZ)  GmbH,  Eschborn,  Germany.  URL: 
http://www.gtz.de/en/dokumente/gtz2009‐en‐technology‐
review‐urine‐diversion.pdf 
Webb, R., Fernández Baca, G. (2006): Anuario Estadístico: Perú 
en Números 2006. Instituto Cuánto, Lima, Peru. 
WHO (2006): WHO Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, 
Excreta and Greywater. Volume 4: Excreta and greywater use 
in  agriculture.  World  Health  Organisation,  Geneva,  Name: Martina Winker
Switzerland,  http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/ 
wastewater/gsuweg4/en/index.html  (date  of  visit:  1  Organisation: German Technical Cooperation 
February 2010).  (GTZ) GmbH, Sustainable sanitation – ecosan 
Winker,  M.  (2009):  Pharmaceutical  residues  in  urine  and  program 
potential  risks  related  to  usage  as  fertiliser  in  agriculture.  Town, Country: Eschborn, Germany 
PhD thesis, Institute of Wastewater Management and Water  e‐mail: martina.winker@gtz.de 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  24  Issue 3 /2010 
  
 
 
implementing 
 
organisation: 
 

Backyard Urine Recycling in the United 
States of America: An Assessment of 
Methods and Motivations  
This  paper  discusses  the  newly  emerging  urine  harvesting  movement  in  the 
United States of America. 
Authors: L. Allen, J. Conant 

Abstract 
In the United States of America awareness and practice of ecological sanitation is in its infancy. In this article 
we briefly assess the urine harvesting practices of a small group of individuals in the San Francisco Bay Area, 
California, Portland, Oregon, and coastal Massachusetts. Though there are no coordinated or sponsored urine 
harvesting projects, a few Americans, learning primarily from the international urine harvesting community, as 
well  as  from  historic  practices,  are  beginning  to  implement  individual‐scale,  “backyard”  urine  harvesting 
projects. We found that urine reuse is gaining in popularity, is accepted in certain social groups, and that urine 
harvesters have seen exceptionally beneficial results from using the urine fertilizer. Urine harvesting seems a 
good first step towards ecological sanitation practices because it is legal in the United States, whereas other 
practices are not. Some U.S. regulations are now changing around ecological sanitation practices, which bodes 
well for a trend toward greater acceptance of urine recycling and other ecological sanitation practices. 
 
 
harvesting  projects.  We  believe  there  is  similar 
Introduction  interest  and  practice  of  urine  harvesting  in  other 
parts of the USA as well. 
In the United States of America, despite advanced 
 
technology,  high  levels  of  education,  and  growing 
The  USA  have  a  long  history  of  composting  toilet 
concern  about  environmental  sustainability, 
use,  mainly  in  rural  areas  that  do  not  have  sewer 
awareness  and  practice  of  ecological  sanitation  is 
or  septic  systems.  Traditionally,  American 
in  its  infancy.  In  this  article  we  briefly  assess 
composting  toilets  have  not  separated  urine.  All 
residential‐scale  ecological  sanitation  practices  in 
manufactured  American  composting  toilets  today 
the  USA  by  focusing  on  the  urine  harvesting 
combine urine, except one, "Nature's Head", which 
practices of a small but active, and representative, 
is  designed  for  use  on  boats  and  has  only  been 
group of individuals in the San Francisco Bay Area, 
available  since  2007  (Nature's  Head,  2010).  The 
California, Oregon, and Massachusetts.  
most popular book on the subject, The Humanure 
 
Handbook,  by  Joseph  Jenkins  (Jenkins,  2005;  first 
Urine  harvesting  practices  in  the  USA  are  growing 
edition  1994,  now  in  its  3rd  edition),  advocates 
from  the  grassroots  level.  Though  there  are  no 
combined  sources,  though  most  rural  compost 
coordinated  or  sponsored  urine  harvesting 
toilet users encourage people to "pee outside" and 
projects, a few Americans, learning primarily from 
not in the toilet. There is only one book about urine 
the  international  urine  harvesting  community,  as 
harvesting  from  the  USA  (Steinfeld,  2004)  which 
well  as  from  historic  practices,  are  beginning  to 
includes information on the global urine harvesting 
implement  individual‐scale,  “backyard"  urine 

Key messages: 
 Urine reuse is practiced in the United States of America even though there are no coordinated projects 
 Urine is socially accepted in certain social groups  
 Urine recycling is gaining popularity  
 Regulations are changing around sustainable sanitation practices 
 Urine recycling is legal, contrary to popular belief 
 International information on urine recycling could spur growth of USA's urine adoption 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  25  Issue 3 /2010 

Backyard urine recycling in United States of America 

movement,  as  well  as  a  few  examples  from  the   

USA  s.  A  few  public  examples  of  urine  diverting  As  a  matter  of  public 
toilets are found across the country, including one  policy,  urine  reuse  can 
at  the  office  of  2020  Engineering  in  Bellingham,  reduce  infrastructure 
Washington. Currently, there are plans to build the  costs  and  conserve 
largest  urine  diverting  project  in  the  U.S.  in  a  energy.  Recent  research 
future six story building in Seattle, Washington, at  also shows that urine may 
the headquarters of the Bullitt Foundation (Pryne,  be  an  efficient  source  of  Figure 1: Fertilizing roses with 
2010).  hydrogen  for  energy  urine. 
  (Boggs et al. 2009). 
During  January  2010,  we  conducted  interviews   
with  seven  individuals  in  the  San  Fransisco  Bay  Urine  harvesting  projects  funded  by  international 
Area, California, and two individuals in other states  or  national  agencies  are  found  all  over  the  world, 
who  practice  some  form  of  urine  recycling  from  urine  diverting  flush  toilets  in  apartments  in 
(capturing  and  using  urine  to  fertilize  plants).  Sweden  (Esrey,  S.  et  al.  1998),  and  the  GTZ 
Systems  ranged  in  sophistication  from  a  simple  5  headquarters  in  Germany  (GTZ,  2005),  to 
gallon  (18.9  liter)  bucket  (Figure  1)  to  collection  community‐scale  urine  collection  in  Tepoztlan, 
from  urine‐diverting  compost  toilets. Interviews  Mexico  (Esrey,  S.  et  al.  2001)  and  city‐scale  urine 
with  urine  recyclers  covered  basic  quantitative  diverting dry toilets in Dongshen, China (SEI, 2004). 
aspects  (quantities  of  urine  collected  and  specific   
collection  methods),  as  well  as  qualitative  aspects  For  backyard  gardeners,  urine  diverting  toilets 
(individuals’  motivation,  sources  of  information,  provide  a  free  source  of  fertilizer  while  reducing 
observed  benefits,  and  social  acceptance  of  the  household  water  consumption  due  to  fewer  toilet 
practice).  flushes. Each adult produces an estimated 1.5 liters 
  per day, (WHO, 2006) which contains about 4 kg of 
The  results  of  the  interviews  show  that  people  nitrogen, 0.36 kg phosphorus, and 1 kg potassium 
have  learned  from  a  variety  of  sources,  with  the  per  year.  This  amount  is  enough  to  fertilize  about 
international  ecological  sanitation  movement  300‐400  square  meters  of  crop  for  each  person 
being  a  major  one. Urine  recyclers  expressed  the  (Jonsson  et.  al.  2004).  The  range  of  low‐cost 
belief  that  American  society  in  general  holds  an  options  for  collection  makes  backyard  urine  reuse 
unfavorable view of the practice, but reported that  accessible for all income levels and for both renters 
among  their  friends  and  colleagues  there  is  much  and homeowners.  
interest and acceptance. Though the scope of this 
study is extremely limited by the small number of  Legal aspects 
interviews  conducted,  the  information  about 
In  Alameda  County,  California,  where  we 
successes  and  challenges  leads  to  a  few 
conducted most of our interviews, there is no legal 
preliminary  suggestions  for  best  management 
code  that  specifically  prohibits  use  of  urine  or 
practices,  and  highlights  an  undocumented 
regulates  backyard  urine  use,  although  public 
segment  of  the  ecological  sanitation  movement: 
perception  generally  views  it  as  unacceptable  or 
Americans. 
perhaps  illegal.  The  two  legal  regulatory  bodies 
 
that  could  potentially  regulate  backyard  urine  use 
Urine reuse is gaining attention at the global level 
are  the  state  plumbing  code,  which,  in  California, 
as scientists, agronomists, backyard gardeners, and 
mandates one toilet per dwelling unit connected to 
development  professionals  look  to  this  universally 
either  a  private  septic  system  or  to  municipal 
available  substance  for  solutions  to  a  variety  of 
sewerage  (IAPMO,  2007),  or  the  Environmental 
water  and  sanitation  problems.  Urine  collection 
Health  Department,  which  regulates  a  large  range 
reduces  toilet  water  use  by  as  much  as  80%  by 
of concerns related to health and the environment. 
decreasing    flushes  (Larsen,  et.  al.,  2001),  and 
Staff  in  California’s  Environmental  Health 
reduces energy needed by sewer treatment plants 
Departments  reported  that  they  had  no 
to  remove  nitrogen  (Wilsenach  and  van 
regulations  on  urine,  and  had  never  been  asked 
Loosdrecht, 2006). Plant nutrients, mainly nitrogen 
about it's use before (Allen, 2010).  
and  phosphorus,  can  be  captured  from  urine  and 
Regulations  in  the  United  States  that  historically 
used as agricultural fertilizer, reducing demand for 
prohibited  legal  ecological  sanitation  practices  are  
chemical  fertilizers.  Composting  toilets  that 
changing.  In  2009  the  California  state  plumbing 
separate urine from feces can be easier to manage 
code,  which  regulates  greywater  reuse,  was 
and  have  fewer  odor  problems  than  non‐
revised  to  allow  for  simple  and  legal  grey  water 
separating composting toilets, as they contain less 
reuse, allowing irrigation of edible crops, reducing 
liquid.  

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  26  Issue 3 /2010 

Backyard urine recycling in United States of America 

discharge depth, and waiving permit requirements  Motivation 
for  very  simple  systems  from  washing  machines. 
Nine  urine  recyclers  were  interviewed  during 
Since  2001,  beginning  with  the  state  of  Arizona, 
January  and  March,  2010.  Since  there  are  no 
drought‐affected  states  like  Arizona,  Texas,  and 
sanctioned  urine  recycling  projects  in  the  USA, 
New  Mexico  have  revised  grey  water  standards, 
the  authors  found  the  participants  through 
and  wetter  states  such  as  Oregon  are  revising 
networks  of  environmental  organizations.  The 
standards  to  allow  for  legal  rainwater  reuse.  In 
participants had a diverse range of occupations: a 
addition,  composting  toilet  use  has  been  on  the 
director  of  a  small  ecological  justice  non‐profit 
rise  for  many  years  (While  there  is  a  lack  of 
organization,  an  "eco‐artist"  and  dog  border,  an 
quantified  growth  trends,  reports  in  the  media 
architect specializing in green design, a gardener 
affirm  the  growth  in  use  and  interest  in  compost 
and  public  park  employee,  a  supervisor  in  a 
toilets:  see 
construction company,  an ecological designer, a 
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/07/compo
medical program manager, a small businessman, 
sting‐toilets‐us‐cities.php,  and  http://www.carol‐
and a statistician. 
steinfeld.com/compostingtoilets.html  though  the 
 
regulations  around  it  in  most  states  remain 
The  nine  individuals  surveyed  range  between  27 
prohibitive at worst, and unclear at best.  
and  60  years  of  age;  live  in  cities  of  the 
 
metropolitan  Bay  Area:  Oakland,  Berkeley,  and 
Given  California’s  history  as  a  region  of  “early 
San Francisco, or in Portland, Oregon, and coastal 
adopters”  and  cultural  visionaries,  it  is  not 
Massachusetts.    Five  of  the  nine  own  their 
surprising  that  a  fledgling  ecological  sanitation 
homes,  while  four  are  renters.  The  average 
movement should emerge here. It is also timely at 
period  they  have  practiced  urine  recycling  is 
the  current  moment,  as  California  has  been  in 
around  two  years,  though  one  individual  has 
drought  for  three  consecutive  years.  According  to 
maintained  the  practice  over  a  period  of  twelve 
the  California  Drought  Center  the  last  two  water 
years.  All  nine  survey  participants  voluntarily 
years  have  resulted  in  63  and  72  percent  of 
practice  other  forms  of  residential‐scale 
average  annual  precipitation  (CA  Department  of 
ecological  resource  stewardship,  including 
Water Resources, 2009). 
recycling  and  composting,  both  locally  common 
 
practices.  Most  are  innovators  in  other  ways: 
The  change  in  state  regulations  on  greywater 
seven  of  the  nine  practice  some  form  of 
reflects  a  growing  awareness  of  the  need  for 
unregulated  grey  water  reuse,  while  two  of  the 
increasing  water  efficiency  practices,  while  the 
nine  collect  and  channel  some  portion  of  the 
practices  of  individual  urine‐recyclers  reflect  a 
rainwater  on  their  property  (also  an 
growing  desire  for  more  progressive 
unsanctioned and unregulated practice). 
environmental policies. Urine harvesting is an easy 
 
first step for individuals concerned about reducing 
Given  the  propensity  of  this  group  to  engage  in 
water use and restoring natural cycles.  
ecological  practices,  it  is  not  surprising  that  their 
 
The  law  presents  a  major  barrier  in  the  USA  to 
adoption  of  many  ecological  practices.  Many 
sustainable  practices,  like  greywater,  rainwater, 
and composting  toilets, are  illegal  under  local  and 
state  building  regulations.  Because  of  this,  early 
adopters  of  ecological  practices  in  the  United 
States  are  often  breaking  local  or  state  laws. 
Though most do so without consequence, there is 
a  history  of  a  few  "pioneers"  being  fined,  losing 
property,  and  being  forced  to  remove  the 
unpermitted  projects  (Kettmanm,  2009).  
Organizations are hesitant to attempt projects that 
break local laws, thus further slowing the progress 
of ecological sanitation implementation in the U.S. 
Residential urine harvesting falls outside of existing 
laws; with increasing knowledge about its benefits, 
and legality, more users will be able to implement   
the practice without fear of legal consequence.  Figure 2: This "Pee‐pee‐ponics" system uses urine 
to water Figure and fertilize plants. Credit: Nik 
Bertulis 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  27  Issue 3 /2010 

Backyard urine recycling in United States of America 

motivations  are  fairly  similar;  all  cited  “saving 

water”  or  “problems  with  sewers”  as  a  prime 
motivating  factor;  seven  cited  “fertilizer”  as  a 
primary factor, while four spoke of the importance 
of having a “free and available,” fertilizer, and that 
the  practice  itself  is  “simple  and  accessible,” 
“makes  sense,”  and  is  “a  good  way  to  turn  a 
problem  into  a  solution.”  One  cited  feeling  good 
that  "my  nutrients  are  being  cycled  without 
compromising further our stressed watershed" and 
"saving  energy  at  pumps  and  processing  at  the 
waste treatment facility." 
    
Due  to  the  lack  of  public  U.S.‐based  urine  reuse  Figure 3: Urine cured this formerly sick 
projects, the majority of individuals learned about  lemon tree in San Francisco. 
and  were  inspired  to  practice  urine  harvesting 
answers  showed  a  general  lack  of  concern  with 
from  ecological  sanitation  projects  in  other 
precise  dilution  ratios;  dilution  ratios  range  from 
countries.  Five  attended  a  workshop  or  lecture 
undiluted use to a ratio of 8:1. No one stored the 
where  they  learned  about  urine  recycling  projects 
urine  for  longer  than  a  week,  and  did  not  report 
in Mexico, Zimbabwe, Sweden, and China. The rest 
any issues with odors.  
came  to  the  practice  through  the  experience  of 
 
“living rurally” (where regulations are more lax and 
Seven  of  the  nine  reported  seeing  significant 
outdoor  latrines  are  common),  growing  up  on  "a 
results  from  using  urine  as  fertilizer.  They  were 
family  farm,"  or  simply  “not  wanting  to  flush  the 
delighted  in  “roses  blooming  all  winter  long,” 
toilet”  due  to  ecological  concerns.  These  people 
“luxuriant  plant  growth,”  "super  happy  bamboo," 
learned  about  the  fertilizing  benefits  later  on, 
and  that  their  "bougainvillea  really  took  off  and 
through  informal  conversations  with  friends.  One 
started  blooming  much  more  [after  receiving 
person  began  collecting  urine  while  living  without 
urine]."  Their  reports  on  edible  plants  reported  a 
a  flush  toilet  during  a  home  remodel,  but  didn't 
“citrus tree perked up,” “I grew very large broccoli, 
reuse  it  (he  poured  it  down  a  shower  drain)  until 
and  had  happy  trees,”  “my  kale  and  tomatoes 
he  attended  a  lecture  and  learned  about  other 
were  really  happy,”  “I  cured  a  sick  lemon  tree” 
people around the world fertilizing with urine.  
(Figure 3), and “after fertilization my peppers took 
off.” Only one respondent observed no results, but 
Materials and methods  reported  that  he  started  “only  recently”  and  the 
A  variety  of  low‐tech  methods  were  used  to  trees  he  fertilizes  are  currently  dormant,  and 
separate  the  urine.  Three  of  the  respondents  use  another  respondent  said  he  "hadn't  done  any 
pre‐fabricated Separrette urine‐diverting inserts in  formal  trials  and  the  results  were  merely 
custom made compost toilets as shown in Figure 4  psychological  benefits  at  this  point."  One  person 
and  5  (most  of  the  prefabricated  composting  noted a dramatic reduction in family water use. His 
toilets  made  in  the  U.S.  do  not  separate  urine),  family  of  three,  who  also  maintain  many  other 
while  the  other  five  use  homemade  systems  ecological  practices  including  reuse  of  grey  water 
ranging  from  “a  plastic  bucket”  (Figure  1)  and  “a  from the laundry and a composting toilet in one of 
yogurt  container”  to  “an  antique  urinal  that  was  the  two  bathrooms,  has  measured  its  water 
used  on  trains.”  One  uses  a  self‐made  urine  savings “from 130‐140 gallons (492‐ 530 liters) per 
diverting  toilet  and  one  respondent  uses  a  "pee‐ day  down  to  60‐70  gallons  (227‐265  liters)  per 
pee ponics" system (shown in Figure 2): an outdoor  day.” 
urinal  that  directly  fertilizes  a  planted  container 
(with a soil medium of 2/3 fine wood chips and 1/3  Social acceptance 
potting  soil).  Four  respondents  are  the  sole  users 
Cultural  acceptability  is  an  important  indicator  of 
of  their  systems;  two  (who  both  live  alone)  use 
the adoption potential of any sanitation practice or 
their  systems  with  one  or  two  guests,  while  the 
technological  change;  because  urine  collection  is 
remaining three maintain systems that are used by 
largely  unfamiliar  in  the  United  States,  peoples' 
three  or  more  people  (a  family  of  two  and  three 
reactions  to  it  show  a  particular  sensitivity.  One 
and a collective house of five, respectively).  
person  “only  talks  about  it  to  people  [she]  thinks 
 
will  be  interested,  like  other  gardeners,”  and 
All  of  the  respondents  use  the  urine  to  fertilize 
“sometimes  worries  what  people  will  think”; 
garden  plants  and  fruit  trees.  Respondents’ 
Another, who works in the building trade, “doesn’t 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  28  Issue 3 /2010 

Backyard urine recycling in United States of America 

All  of  the  nine 

respondents 
demonstrated  a  sense 
that  urine  collection  as 
they practice it is neither 
legal  nor  illegal,  with 
comments  ranging  from 
“I’m  sure  it’s  illegal”  to 
“There’s  no  law  against 
it  to  my  knowledge,”  to 
“I  try  not  to  know  the 
law.”  These  responses 
demonstrate at once the 
lack  of  regulation  of  the 
    practice,  the  lack  of 
Figure 5: Composting toilet  Figure 4: Urine and faeces collection 
information about it, and 
with Separrette diverting  from toilet in Figure 4. 
the  spontaneous, 
insert.  “grassroots” approach of 
these  individuals  in 
talk  about  it  with  her  co‐workers,”  and  cites 
addressing  the  perceived  problem.  One 
“respecting  the  other  people  who  live  on  [her 
respondent said she felt secretive about it and did 
property]”  as  a  concern.  A  third  also  cites 
not  want  her  neighbours  to  know,  though  she 
“personal  challenges:  a  roommate  didn’t  like  it,” 
wasn't sure if it was actually illegal.  
and another says that his friends “seem to feel like 
its  something  they’d  feel  uncomfortable  doing.” 
The  final  person,  who  uses  an  antique  urine  pot,  Conclusion 
cited  perhaps  the  most  extreme  concerns  over  As  a  major  world  power  and  an  exporter  of  both 
acceptability, saying, “I have to decide what to do  culture  and  technology,  the  United  States  of 
when  company  comes  over,  usually  I  hide  [the  America  has  a  unique  ability  to  affect  the 
system]  when  guests  come  over  for  a  party,”  and  perception  and  acceptance  of  sanitation 
“at first I didn't tell my girlfriend.”  technologies  globally.  Given  the  widespread 
  acceptance  of  the  flush  toilet  as  the  “gold 
At  the  same  time,  each  of  the  respondents  standard”  of  sanitation  technology  and  the 
reported  clearly  positive  reception  from  those  to  increasing  scarcity  of  both  fresh  water  and  fertile 
whom  they've  revealed  their  practice,  ranging  agricultural soils, we believe that wide acceptance 
from  “bemusement”  and  “generally  positive”  to  of  ecological  sanitation  in  the  United  States  can 
“intrigue”  and  “inspiration.”  One  person  says  that  both  conserve  resources  locally  and  play  a  crucial 
after seeing his system, “Some [friends] have even  role  in  shifting  perceptions  of  these  practices 
built  their  own  [urine  diverting  composting]  worldwide.  
toilets.”   
  From  this  small  sample  of  ecological  sanitation 
Four  of  the  nine  cited  small  technical  challenges,  practitioners in one region of the United States we 
such as difficulty emptying the urine container and  can draw several conclusions: acceptance of these 
minor  odor  issues,  but  none  found  these  practices  is  minimal,  with  practitioners  made  up 
challenges insurmountable.  largely  of  people  who  share  both  a  high  level  of 
  ecological  awareness  and  a  willingness  to  engage 
Reporting  other  insights  into  their  practices,  one  in practices that diverge from the perceived norm. 
said  the  ability  to  make  the  change  to  urine  At  the  same  time,  the  material  benefits  (water 
collection  “speaks  to  how  adaptable  we  are  as  savings  and  fertilization)  are  so  considerable  as  to 
humans.  Our  cultural  norms  are  socially  be  observable  almost  immediately,  and 
constructed,  we  have  such  a  phobia  around  pee  acceptance,  while  slow,  is  growing,  as 
and  poo,”  but  it’s  “easy  to  adapt.”  The  architect  demonstrated  by  the  fact  that  the  average  period 
who  specializes  in  green  design  and  tries  to  of  practice  among  the  nine  people  surveyed  is  a 
incorporate  other  ecological  practices  into  his  mere two years. 
buildings,  expressed  concern  that  public  health   
norms  in  the  United  States  have  “made  living  The  recent  change  in  California’s  state  plumbing 
sustainably  illegal”  and  are  so  rigid  as  to  have  regulations  to  better  accommodate  residential 
“made the perfect the enemy of the good.”  grey  water  reuse  bodes  well  for  a  trend  toward 
 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  29  Issue 3 /2010 

Backyard urine recycling in United States of America 

greater  acceptance  of  urine  recycling  and  other  IAPMO,  (2007):  California  Plumbing  Code  (2007):  Chapter  29 
Plumbing Systems, IAPMO, Ontario, CA,  p 410 
ecological sanitation practices. Given that concerns 
among  our  respondents  to  issues  of  social  Jenkins,  J.,  (2005):    The  Humanure  Handbook,  3rd  Edition, 
Joseph Jenkins, Grove City, PA.  
acceptance  appear  to  weigh  more  heavily  than 
Josson,  H.,  Richert  Stintzing,  A.,  Vinneras,  B.,  and  Salomon,  E. 
technological  or  infrastructure  challenges  and  (2004)  Guildelines  on  the  use  of  urine  and  faeces  in  crop 
those  empirical  benefits  are  readily  apparent,  it  production,  EcoSanRes  Publications  Series,  Report  2004‐2, 
appears  almost  certain  that  more  progressive  Sweden.  
regulatory frameworks will lead inevitably to wider  Kettmanm, M. (2009): Getting Grief for Going Green, The Santa 
cultural  acceptance  of  ecological  sanitation  in  the  Barbara Independent, Sep. 10th, 2009 
United States.  Larsen,  T.,  Peters,  I.,  Alder,  A.,  Eggen,  R.,  Maurer,  M.,  and 
Muncke,  J.  (2001):  Re‐engineering  the  toilet  for  sustainable 
 
wastewater  management.  Environ  Science  Technology  May 
The  increased  exposure  and  awareness  of  global  1, 2001 / Volume 35 , Issue 9 / pp 192 A – 197 A. T. 
ecological  sanitation  practices,  including  urine  Nature's  Head  (2010):  Composting  Toilets  for  Marine,  RV, 
harvesting, will help promote increasing ecological  Cabins,  and  Trucks.  A  Nature's  Head  Composting  Toilet, 
sanitation practices in the United States.   http://www.natureshead.net/store/index.phpmain_page=pr
oduct_info&products_id=1  (date of visit: 3 February, 2010). 
 
Pryne,  E.  (2010):  Rain,  even  urine,  would  help  make  Bullitt  HQ 
city's 'greenest building ever', Eric Pryne, March 15th, 2010, 
Recommendations  The Seattle Times.  
There  is  a  lack  of  studies  and  projects  on  urine  SEI,  (2004)  SEI  EETP  Office,  2004,  China  –  Sweden  Erdos  Eco‐
Town Project Document, Erdos, Inner Mongolia, China 
recycling  in  the  United  States.  We  believe  there 
should be U.S.‐focused studies and organized urine  Steinfeld,  C.  (2004):  Liquid  Gold:  The  Lore  and  Logic  of  Using 
Urine to Grow Plants, Carol Steinfeld, Sheffield, Vermont.  
recycling projects. 
WHO,  (2006):  Guidelines  for  the  Safe  Use  of  Wastewater, 
 Americans can be socially accepting of urine use.  Excreta and Greywater. Volume 4: Excreta and greywater use 
 Urine  harvesting  is  a  good  first  step  toward  in  agriculture.  World  Health  Organization,  Geneva, 
Switzerland.  
ecological sanitation practices. 
Wilsenach,  J.,    and  Van  Loosdrecht,  M.,  (2006):  Integration  of 
 Increased  knowledge  that  urine  harvesting  is  Processes to Treat Wastewater and Source‐Separated Urine‐ 
legal  in  the  USA  can  increase  numbers  of  Journal of Environmental Engineering, vol 132, p 331 
adopters of the practice.    
 Increased  exposure  of  the  international 
ecological  sanitation  practices  can  positively 
affect practices in the USA. 
 
 
References 
Allen,  L.  (2010):  Phone  conversation  with  staff  at  Berkeley 
Environmental  Health  Division  and  Alameda  County 
Environmental  Health  division  on  Jan  28th,  2010  by  Laura 
Allen.  
Boggs, B., King, R., and Botte, G. (2009): Urea electrolysis: direct 
hydrogen  production  from  urine‐  Chem.  Commun.,  2009, 
4859 ‐ 4861, DOI: 10.1039/b905974a 
CA Department of Water Resources (2009): California's Drought 
Update  Sep.  30th  2009.  Retrieved  from 
http://www.water.ca.gov/drought/ on 1 February, 2010. 
Esrey, S. et al. (1998): Ecological Sanitation. Esrey, S. Gough, J., 
Rapaport,  D.,  Sawyer,  R.,  Simpson‐Hebert,  M.,  Vargas,  J., 
Winblad,  U.,  Swedish  International  Cooperative 
Development Agency, Stockholm, Sweden.  
Esrey, S. et al. (2001): Closing the Loop: Ecological Saniation for 
Food Security. Esrey, S., Anderson, I., Hillers, A., and Sawyer, 
R.,  Swedish  International  Cooperative  Development  Agency, 
Mexico.   Name: Laura Allen
GTZ  (2005):  "Urine  separation  and  reuse  project  at  the  main  Organisation: Greywater Action  
building  of  GTZ  GmbH”.  –  data  sheets  for  ecosan  projects  Town, Country: Oakland, California; USA 
016.  Syahril,  Sonny,  Räth,  Nicola,  Klingel,  Florian;  Werner,   e‐mail: laura@greywateraction.org 
Christine  and  Bracken,  Patrick,  ecosan  sector  project, 
Gesellschaft  für  Technische  Zusammenarbeit  (GTZ)  GmbH, 
Eschborn,  Germany  ,  digitally  available  at:  Name: Jeff Conant
http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en‐ecosan‐pds‐016‐ Organisation: Greywater Action  
germany‐gtz‐eschborn‐2005.pdf  Town, Country: Oakland, California; USA 
e‐mail: jeff.otherworlds@gmail.com 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  30  Issue 3 /2010 

  
 
 
organisation: 
 
 

Food Security and Productive Sanitation; 
Practical guideline on the use of urine in crop 
production  
This paper describes an upcoming publication containing a practical guideline 
on the use of urine in crop production. 
Authors: A. Richert, R. Gensch, H. Jönsson, L. Dagerskog, T. Stenström, M. Bonzi 

Abstract 
The publication “Practical Guideline on the Use of Urine in Crop Production”, is a collaborative effort of several 
international  organisations  and  institutions  active  in  the  field  of  sustainable  sanitation  and  agriculture  under 
the  aegis  of  the  Sustainable  Sanitation  Alliance  (SuSanA)  working  group  on  Food  Security  and  Productive 
Sanitation with Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) as the lead. It will be launched during 2010. 
The  Guideline  is  directed  towards  decision  makers,  professionals  and  extension  workers  in  the  sectors  of 
agriculture,  water  &  sanitation, planning and  environment  as  well  as  the  donor  community.  The  main  target 
group is professionals in the sector of agriculture. The text gives practical guidance on the use of urine in crop 
production as a vital component of sustainable crop production and sanitation systems. It covers key aspects of 
how to use urine as a fertiliser in productive sanitation systems and also includes guidance on how to initiate 
activities  that  will  facilitate  the  introduction  of  new  fertilisers  to  the  agricultural  community.  The  handbook 
should  help  in  establishing  links  between  research  and  professionals  interested  in  implementation  of 
sustainable sanitation systems. It is easy to read and informative, with examples from case studies and tips on 
further reading for those interested. 
 
different  regions  reflect  differences  in  the 
Use of urine in crop production  uptake of the consumed crops and thus in the 
plant  nutrient  supply  needed  for  maintained 
Consumed  plant  nutrients  leave  the  human  body 
crop  fertility  in  the  region.  Irrespective  of  the 
with  excreta,  and  once  the  body  is  fully  grown 
amounts and concentrations of plant nutrients 
there is a mass balance between consumption and 
in  the  excreta,  one  important  fertilising 
excretion. This has three important implications: 
recommendation is thus to strive to distribute 
1. The amount of excreted plant nutrients can be  the excreta fertilisers on an area equal to that 
calculated  from  the  food  intake,  for  which  used for producing the food.  
data  is  better  and  more  easily  available  than   
for excreta.  Source  separation  and  safe  handling  of  nutrients 
2. If  all  excreta  and  biowaste,  as  well  as  animal  from the toilet systems is one way to facilitate the 
manure  and  crop  residues,  is  recycled,  then  recirculation and use of excreta in crop production. 
the  fertility  of  the  arable  land  can  be  Urine contains most of the macronutrients as well 
maintained,  as  the  recycled  products  contain  as smaller fractions of the micronutrients excreted 
the  same  amounts  of  plant  nutrients  as  were  by  human  beings.  Nitrogen,  phosphorus, 
taken up by the crops.  potassium  and  sulphur  as  well  as  micronutrients 
3. Differences in composition of excreta between  are all found in urine in plant available forms. Urine 

Key massages: 
 Urine used as a fertiliser can help in the mitigation of poverty and malnutrition, and improve the trade balance 
of countries importing chemical fertilisers.  
 Food security can be increased with a fertiliser that is available free for all.  
 Safe  handling  of  urine  including  treatment  and  sanitisation  before  use  is  a  key  component  of  sustainable 
sanitation as well as sustainable crop production.  
 The "Practical Guideline on Use of Urine in Crop Production" will be published during 2010 and will be available 
from the EcoSanRes and SuSanA webpages, i.e. www.ecosanres.org and www.susana.org, respectively. 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  31  Issue 3 /2010 

Food Security and Productive Sanitation, guideline coming up 

is a well balanced nitrogen rich fertiliser which can  pathogen  transmission  since  most  pathogens  are 

replace  and  normally  gives  the  same  yields  as  excreted with faecal matter. The amount of faecal 
chemical fertiliser in crop production (Figure 1).  cross‐contamination  is  directly  related  to  the 
health  risk  in  the  system  for  urine  use  in  crop 
production. Collection systems for urine should be 
designed  to  minimise  the  risk  of  faecal  cross‐
contamination.  Groups  that  are  potentially  at  risk 
are  collection  personnel  and  field  workers, 
households,  local  communities  and  product 
consumers.  As  regards  other  contaminating 
substances  excreted  with  human  urine  (heavy 
metals,  hormones  and  pharmaceuticals)  possible 
health  risks  are  far  smaller  than  those  associated 
with  the  common  sanitation  system  and  the  risk 
for  negative  effect  on  the  quantity  and  quality  of 
the crops is negligible. 
   
Figure 1. The yield and size of vegetables improves 
The  WHO  guidelines  for  safe  use  of  excreta  in 
with urine use (Picture from Moussa Bonzi, 
agriculture  (WHO,  2006)  promote  a  flexible  multi‐
CREPA, Burkina Faso).
barrier  approach  for  managing  the  health  risks 
  associated  with  the  use  of  excreta  in  agriculture. 
The  urine  from  one  person  during  one  year  is  This  concept  is  comprised  of  a  series  of 
sufficient to fertilise 300‐400 m2 of crop to a level  measures/barriers  from  ‘toilet  to  table’.  Each  of 
of about 50‐100 kg N/ha. Urine should be handled  the  barriers  has  a  potential  to  reduce  health  risks 
in  closed  tanks  and  containers  and  should  be  associated  with  the  excreta  use  and  it  is 
spread directly onto the soil, not on the plant, in N  recommended  by  WHO  to  put  in  place  several  of 
doses equivalent to what is recommended for urea  these  barriers  if  needed  in  order  to  reduce  the 
and  ammonium  fertilisers.  In  the  small  scale,  health risk to an acceptable minimum (Figure 2). 
plastic watering cans are suitable for spreading the   
urine,  while  in  larger  scale,  spreaders  for  animal  Barriers  include  for  example  storage,  crop 
slurry are suitable. Air contact should be minimised  restrictions,  withholding  periods  and  reduced 
in  order  to  avoid  ammonia  losses  and  the  urine  contact,  correct  handling  and  cooking  of  the  food 
should  be  incorporated  into  the  soil  as  quickly  as  crop. The practical guideline gives examples of how 
possible.   urine  can  be  handled  in  a  safe  way  in  order  to 
minimise  risk  of  pathogen  transmission  based  on 
Economics  the WHO Guidelines for safe use of excreta in crop 
production. 
The  economical  value  of  the  urine  can  be 
calculated  by  comparing  with  the  price  of mineral 
fertiliser  on  the  local  market  or  by  calculating  the  Institutional aspects for up‐scaling 
value  of  the  increased  yield  of  the  fertilised  crop.  Economic  and  institutional  aspects  are  important 
An  example  from  Burkina  Faso  gives  at  hand  that  as  productive  sanitation  systems  become 
the annual amount of plant nutrients in the excreta  mainstream.  A  challenge  is  to  integrate  use  of 
from one family is roughly equal to the quantity in  excreta in existing regulatory frameworks. Initially, 
one  50  kg  bag  of  urea  and  one  50 kg  bag  of  NPK.  the  following  activities  are  suggested  when 
According to Dagerskog and Bonzi (2010) the value  productive sanitation systems are implemented: 
of  this  per  person  is  approximately  10 US$,  while   Identify all stakeholders and clarify drivers 
the  value  of  the  increased  yield  of  maize  is  and restrictions for each of these groups in 
approximately  50 US$  per  person.  The  value  of  a  relation to the implementation of urine 
20 litre jerrycan of urine was estimated to be 25 US  separation, storage, transport and use; 
cents.    Include and target the end users (the farmers) 
in the planning process; 
Barriers  protect  producers,  workers   Organise an arena for joint analysis, planning 
and consumers  and monitoring of the stakeholders; 
 Organise local communities so that there is a 
Health  risks  associated  with  the  use  of  human  structure for implementation and a structure 
urine in plant production are generally low. Source  for monitoring  
separation  of  urine  is  a  strong  barrier  against 

Sustainable Sanitation Practice  32  Issue 3 /2010 

Food Security and Productive Sanitation, guideline coming up 

Figure 2. Barrier concept for safe use of urine as a fertiliser.
Very  important  in  dissemination  and  up‐scaling  of 
the  use  of  urine  as  a  fertiliser  are  participatory 
local demonstrations involving all parties. Urine as 
a fertiliser needs to be introduced in the same way 
as any new fertiliser to the agricultural community.  
Logistics for handling of urine are discussed in the 
guidelines  and  examples  are  given  for  large  and 
small  scale  handling  of  urine.  The  logistics  are  a 
challenge  and  there  are  environmental  as  well  as 
practical  and  economical  implications  of 
transporting  urine  if  there  is  no  reuse  possible  on 
site.  However,  as  is  pointed  out  in  the  text,  local 
reuse  is  often  possible  and  urban  agriculture 
provides  possibilities  for  recycling  of  human 
excreta. 
 
Although  there  is  a  wealth  of  location  specific 
Name: Anna Richert
information  in  this  guideline,  every  location  is 
Organisation: Stockholm Environment Institute 
unique  and  further  translation  and  adaptation  of 
Country: Sweden 
the  guidelines  is  required.  The  last  chapter  of  the 
e‐mail: anna@richert.se 
guideline  gives  recommendations  on  how  local 
guidelines  can  be  developed  and  reasonably  Name: Robert Gensch
structured.  Existing  local  guidelines  from  Burkina  Organisation: Xavier University 
Faso and the Philippines are provided as an annex.  Country: Philippines 
 
Name: Håkan Jönsson
 
References  Organisation: Stockholm Environment Institute 
Dagerskog,  L.,  Bonzi,  M,  (2010):  Opening  minds  and  closing  Town, Country: Sweden 
loops  –  productive  sanitation  initiatives  in  Burkina  Faso  and 
Niger. Sustainable Sanitation Practice 3, pp.4‐11.  Name: Linus Dagerskog
WHO (2006): Guidelines for the safe use of wastwater, excreta  Organisation: CREPA HQ 
and  greywater;  Volume  4:  Excreta  and  greywater  use  in  Town, Country: Burkina Faso 
agriculture. World Health Organisation, Geneva, Switzerland. 
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/wastewater/g Name: Thor‐Axel Stenström 
suweg4/en/index.html, pp.295‐306. 
Organisation: Stockholm Environment Institute 
Reinoso R., Torresa L.A., Bécares E. (2008): Efficiency of natural 
Town, Country: Sweden 
systems  for  removal  of  bacteria  and  pathogenic  parasites 
from wastewater. Science of the Total Environment 395, 80‐
86. 
Name: Moussa Bonzi
 
Organisation: CREPA HQ 
Town, Country: Burkina Faso 
Sustainable Sanitation Practice  33  Issue 3 /2010 
Stockholm Environment
Stockholm Environment Institute,
Institute, EcoSanRes
EcoSanRes Series,
Series, 2010-1
2009-1

Practical Guidance on the Use of

Urine in Crop Production
Anna Richert, Robert Gensch, Håkan Jönsson,
Thor-Axel Stenström and Linus Dagerskog
Practical Guidance on the Use of
Urine in Crop Production

Anna Richert(1), Robert Gensch(2), Håkan Jönsson(1),

Thor-Axel Stenström(1) and Linus Dagerskog(1),(3)

With contributions from:

Elisabeth von Muench(4), Martina Winker(5), Claudia Wendland(6),
Marianne Kjellén(1), Moussa Bonzi(3), Cofie Olufunke(7),
Almaz Terrefe(8) and Peter Morgan(9)

(1)
Stockholm Environment Institute
(2)
Sustainable Sanitation Center, Xavier University, Philippines; CIM; lead of SuSanA
working group 5
(3)
Centre for Low Cost Water Supply and Sanitation (CREPA)
(4)
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ)
(5)
Hamburg University of Technology
(6)
Women in Europe for a Common Future (WECF)
(7)
International Water Management Institute (IWMI)
(8)
Society for Urban Development in East Africa (Sudea)
(9)
Aquamor
EcoSanRes Programme
Stockholm Environment Institute
Kräftriket 2B
106 91 Stockholm
Sweden

Tel: +46 8 674 7070

Fax: +46 8 674 7020
Web: www.sei-international.org and www.ecosanres.org

This publication is downloadable from www.ecosanres.org

Head of Communications: Robert Watt

Publications Manager: Erik Willis
Research and Communications Manager, EcoSanRes Programme: Arno Rosemarin
Layout: Richard Clay

Cover Photo: Application of urine on eggplants during a comprehensive

urine application field testing study at Xavier University, Philippines
© William Vergara Repulo

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form

for educational or non-profit purposes, without special permission from
the copyright holder(s) provided acknowledgement of the source is made.
No use of this publication may be made for resale or other commercial
purpose, without the written permission of the copyright holder(s).

Copyright © September 2010

ISBN 978-91-86125-21-9
Contents
Foreword vii

Reading instructions viii

Executive summary ix

PART I · General information and recommendations for the use of urine in crop
production 1

Characteristics of human urine 1

Macronutrients – amounts and plant availability 1
Excreted amounts and volume 3
Analyzing human urine 4
Chemical pollutants 4
Salinization 5

Economic value of urine 7

Crop fertilization with urine – research results and practical experiences 10

Cereals in Northern Europe 10
Cereals in India 10
Vegetables in South Africa 11
Vegetables in Western Africa 11
Vegetables in Eastern Africa 11
Vegetables in Northern Europe 12
Vegetables in Central America 13
Fruit in India 13

Application strategies 15
Application time 15
Application rate 16
Storage techniques 18
Storage in soil 20
Application techniques 20
Odour when using urine as a fertilizer 22
Combined application of urine and organic fertilizers 22

Treatment and sanitization 23

Health risks 23
Multi barrier concept 23

Handling system for use of urine as fertilizer 29

Larger scale systems 29

Gender aspects 33

Institutional aspects of agricultural use of urine 35

Regulatory framework 36
Urine use in organic agriculture 37
 Crop experiments using urine as a fertilizer 38
Demonstration experiments 38
Controlled experiments to test the fertilizing potential 38
Controlled experiments to test the real life fertilizing effect 39
Farm and crop rotation experiments 39
Statistical considerations 39
Dissemination of results 39

Web-based tools for calculation 40

PART 2 · How to develop local guidelines 41

The productive sanitation approach 41
Local site conditions 41
Plant requirements and nutrient content in urine 42
Application recommendations 42
Risk management 44

PART 3 - Example of a local guideline 46

Guideline for application of sanitized urine (Takin Ruwa) in the agricultural conditions
of Niger 46
Excerpts from the guideline 47

References 52

Foreword
T his book gives practical guidance on the use of
urine in crop production as a vital component of
sustainable crop production and sanitation systems. It
also includes guidance on how to start activities that
will facilitate the introduction of new fertilizers to the
agricultural community. The handbook should help in
establishing links between research and professionals
interested in implementation of sustainable sanitation
systems. It is easy to read and informative, with
examples from case studies and hints on further reading
for those interested.
The target group is mainly professionals and extension
workers in the agricultural sector. In addition, the authors
would like to see this text used by water and sanitation,
planning and environment professionals in order to
establish cross-sectoral links since the use of urine in
crop production touches on several of these areas at the
same time. Important readers are also decisionmakers
on all levels, as well as the donor community.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
The text has been produced as a collaborative process
within the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance (SuSanA1)
Working Group 05 on Food Security and Productive
Sanitation Systems. Stockholm Environment Institute
has taken the lead in the authorship, and important
contributions have been made by the following people
and institutions:
Anna Richert (SEI; lead author), Robert Gensch
(Xavier University, Philippines; chair of SuSanA
working group on food security), Håkan Jönsson
(SEI), Thor-Axel Stenström (SEI), Linus Dagerskog
(CREPA and SEI), Elisabeth von Muench (GTZ),
Martina Winker (Hamburg University of Technology),
Claudia Wendland (WECF), Marianne Kjellén (SEI),
Dr Moussa Bonzi (CREPA), Cofie Olufunke (IWMI),
Almaz Terrefe (Sudea), Peter Morgan (Aquamor),
workshop participants.
The document has been peer reviewed by Dr Ralf
Otterpohl and Mr Christopher Buzie at Hamburg
University of Technology.
1 http://www.susana.org/
vii
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Reading instructions
T he text is based on scientific knowledge as well as
practical experiences on the of urine as a fertilizer
and will focus on the urine use in crop production
only. Other technical aspects related to the supporting
sustainable sanitation technologies and how urine
is finally collected are only included if they have an
implication for the use of urine as a fertilizer. For further
information on technical components of the supporting
sanitation systems please see for example ’Technology
Review – Urine Diversion Components’ (von Münch
and Winker 2009) or the ’Compendium of Sanitation
Systems and Technologies’ (Tilley et al., 2008).
The guideline is divided into three major parts:
PART 1 of the guidelines gives general information and
recommendations on the use of urine in crop production
including information on urine composition, value
and use in crop production, health risk management
based on World Health Organization (WHO)
recommendations as well as institutional aspects and
knowledge development for the implementation of
urine use in crop production on local level. The first part
acts as a generic resource base related to the use of urine
in agricultural production.
viii
PART 2 gives an introduction on how this wealth of
information can be translated further to the respective
local site/country specific needs and conditions by giving
recommendations on how locally adapted guideline
versions can be developed and reasonably structured.
It summarizes the most important factors that directly
or indirectly influence the farming activities related to
the urine use.
PART 3 is an annexed local guideline from Niger
translated into English to give a colorful example of
such a local guideline.
It is the intention of the authors that this guide should be
used as a general resource book and as a support tool for
the development of local guidelines on the use of urine
in crop production. At the beginning of key chapters of
Part 1 there is a short box headed “practical guidance”
with practical tips indicating what is most important,
and what could be included in a simplified guideline. If
time for reading the entire guideline is a constraint, it is
recommended to focus on the executive summary and
the boxes introducing each chapter and then proceed to
Part II on how to develop local guidelines.

Executive summary
T he Practical Guidance on the Use of Urine in Crop
Production is directed towards decision makers,
professionals and extension workers in the agriculture,
water and sanitation, planning and environment sectors,
as well as the donor community. The main target group
is professionals in the agricultural sector. The text gives
practical guidance on the use of urine in crop production
as a vital component of sustainable crop production and
sanitation systems. It covers key aspects of how to use
urine from productive sanitation systems as fertilizer
in crop production and also includes guidance on how
to initiate activities that will facilitate the introduction
of new fertilizers to the agricultural community.
The handbook is intended to help in establishing
links between researchers in the field of sustainable
sanitation and agricultural practionners, as well as end-
users interested in implemented sustainable sanitation
systems. It is easy to read and informative, with
examples from case studies and tips on further reading
for those interested.
Urine used as a fertilizer can help in the mitigation
of poverty and malnutrition, and improve the trade
balance of countries importing chemical fertilizers
if adopted at large scale. Food security can be
increased with a fertilizer that is available free for all,
regardless of logistic and economical resources. Safe
handling of urine including sanitization before use is
a key component of sustainable sanitation as well as
sustainable crop production.
Consumed plant nutrients leave the human body with
excreta, and once the body is fully grown there is a mass
balance between consumption and excretion. This has
three important implications:
Table 1: Yield of vegetables as an average of three years of field trials in Burkina Faso.
Egg plant
(t ha-1)
Unfertilized control 2.8a
Mineral fertilizer 17.8b
Stored urine 17.7b
Urine (b) and mineral fertilizer (b) gave a statistically significant yield increase compared to unfertilized control (a). However, there is no
statistical difference between yields using urine (b) or mineral fertilizer (b)
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
The amount of excreted plant nutrients can be calculated
from the food intake, for which data is better and more
easily available than for excreta.
If all excreta and biowaste, as well as animal manure
and crop residues, is recycled, then the fertility of the
arable land can be maintained, as the recycled products
contain the same amounts of plant nutrients as were
taken up by the crops.
Differences in composition of excreta between different
regions reflect differences in the uptake of the consumed
crops and thus in the plant nutrient supply needed for
maintained crop fertility in the region. Irrespective of
the amounts and concentrations of plant nutrients in the
excreta, one important fertilizing recommendation is
therefore to strive to distribute the excreta fertilizers on
an area equal to that used for producing the food.
Source separation and safe handling of nutrients from
the toilet systems is one way to facilitate the recirculation
and use of excreta in crop production. Urine contains
most of the macronutrients as well as smaller fractions
of the micronutrients excreted by human beings.
Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and sulphur as well as
micronutrients are all found in urine in plant available
forms. Urine is a well balanced nitrogen rich fertilizer
which can replace and normally gives the same yields
as chemical fertilizer in crop production. Table I shows
an example of yields from field research in Burkina
Faso, where yields of urine-fertilized crops did not
differ from mineral fertilized crops.
The urine from one person during one year is sufficient
to fertilize 300-400 m2 of crop to a level of about 50-
Source: CREPA
Gombo Tomato
(t ha-1) (t ha-1)
1.7a 2.1a
2.7b 5.7b
2.4b 5.2b
ix
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Figure I: The yield and size of vegetables improves with urine use.
100 kg N/ha. Urine should be handled in closed tanks
and containers and should be spread directly onto the
soil, not on the plant, in N-doses equivalent to what is
recommended for urea and ammonium fertilizers. In the
small scale, plastic watering cans are suitable for spreading
the urine, while in larger scale, spreaders for animal
slurry are suitable. Air contact should be minimized in
order to avoid ammonia losses and the urine should be
incorporated into the soil as quickly as possible.
The economical value of the urine can be calculated
by comparing with the price of mineral fertilizer on the
local market or by calculating the value of the increased
yield of the fertilized crop. In Burkina Faso the value of
a 20 l jerrycan of urine can be estimated to 25 US cents.
A person produces around 500 litres of urine per year
corresponding to ~ 6-7 dollars. Including the nutient
value of faeces the annual value reaches approximately
10 $US. However the increased maize yield from using
this amount of fertilizer is estimated to 50 $US.
x
Photo: CREPA, Burkina Faso, Dr Moussa Bonzi
An example from Niger shows that the annual amount
of plant nutrients in the excreta (urine + faeces) from
one family is roughly equal to the quantity in one 50
kg bag of urea and one 50 kg bag of NPK, see figure 2.
The majority of these nutrients are in the urine, which
is relatively easy to collect.
Health risks associated with the use of human urine in
plant production are generally low. Source separation
of urine is a strong barrier against pathogen
transmission since most pathogens are excreted
with faecal matter. The amount of faecal cross-
contamination is directly related to the health risk in
the system for urine use in crop production. Collection
systems for urine should be designed to minimize the
risk of faecal cross-contamination. Groups that are
potentially at risk are mainly collection personnel
and field workers, groups that come in direct contact
with the excreta. Other categories where risks
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Figure 2: The annual amount of nutrients in excreta from one family in Niger is equal to nutrients
in the two bags of fertilizers. Photo: Linus Dagerskog, CREPA/SEI

exist, however diminished, are households, local agricultural land at levels corresponding to the plants
communities and product consumers. needs.

Urine is a high quality fertilizer with low levels of heavy The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines
metals. Regarding hormones and pharmaceuticals for safe use of excreta in agriculture (2006) promote a
excreted with urine, the risk of negative effects to flexible multi-barrier approach for managing the health
plants or human beings is low if urine is spread on risks associated with the use of excreta. This concept

Figure 3: Barrier concept for safe use of urine as a fertilizer.

xi
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
comprises a series of measures/barriers from ‘toilet to
table’. Each of the barriers has a potential to reduce
health risks associated with the excreta use and it is
recommended by WHO to put in place several of these
barriers, if needed, in order to reduce the health risk to
an acceptable minimum, see figure 3.
Barriers include, for example, storage, crop restrictions,
withholding periods and reduced contact, correct
handling and cooking of the food crop. The text gives
examples of how urine can be handled in a safe way in
order to minimize risk of pathogen transmission based
on the WHO Guidelines for safe use of excreta in crop
production.
Institutional aspects are increasingly important as
productive sanitation systems become mainstream.
A challenge is to integrate use of excreta in existing
regulatory frameworks. Initially, the following activities
are suggested when productive sanitation systems are
implemented:
• Identify stakeholders and clarify drivers and
restrictions for each one in relation to the
implementation of urine use in crop production.
• Include and target the farmers in the initial planning.
xii
• Organize an arena for feed-back and interaction
between stakeholders.
• Organize local communities so that there is a
structure for implementation and a structure for
monitoring.
Dissemination and knowledge development on urine as
a fertilizer is best gained through local demonstration
experiments involving organizations that work with
small scale farmers and local communities as well
as local research organizations. The new fertilizer
should be introduced with the same methodology as
when introducing any new fertilizer in the agricultural
community.
In order to be implementable in a local context there
is often an additional need to further translate or adapt
the wealth of information given in this text to the
respective local site conditions. Part two of the book
gives recommendations on how local guidelines can be
developed and structured and it summarizes the most
important factors that directly or indirectly influence
farming activities related to urine use. It is complemented
by an example of an existing local guideline from Niger
that is annexed to the publication.

PART I · General information and recommendations for
the use of urine in crop production
Characteristics of human urine
Practical guidance:
Urine is a well-balanced nitrogen-rich quick-
acting liquid fertilizer. The nutrient content in
urine depends on the diet. If the nitrogen content
in urine is not known, then as a rule of thumb, a
concentration of 3-7 grams of N per litre of urine
can be expected. Phosphorus in urine is excreted
in a plant-available form making urine an efficient
phosphorus fertilizer as well. The quantity of urine
produced by an adult depends on the amount of
liquid a person drinks, a common figure is 0.8-1.5
litres per adult per day.
T he text in the following section presumes that the
urine is handled according to the WHO (2006)
guidelines for the safe use of wastewater, excreta and
greywater in agriculture and aquaculture.
Consumed plant nutrients leave the human body with
excreta, and once the body is fully grown there is a
mass balance between consumption and excretion, see
figure in box 1. This has three important implications:
The amount of excreted plant nutrients can be calculated
from the food intake, for which the data are better and
more easily available than for excreta.
If all excreta and biowaste, as well as animal manure
and crop residues, is recycled, then the fertility of the
arable land can be maintained, as the recycled products
contain the same amounts of plant nutrients as were
taken up by the crops.
Differences in composition of excreta between different
regions reflect differences in the uptake of consumed
crops and thus in the plant nutrient supply needed for
maintaining crop fertility in the region.
Irrespective of the amounts and concentrations of
plant nutrients in excreta, one important fertilizing
recommendation is to strive to distribute the excreta
fertilizers on an area equal to that used for growing the
crop.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Urine is an aqueous solution made up of more than
95 per cent water, with the remaining constituents
made up of urea, creatinine, dissolved ions (chloride,
sodium, potassium, etc), inorganic and organic
compounds or salts. Most of these remain in solution,
but there can be a tendency for phosphorus-rich
substances to sediment in containers that are stored for
hygienization. This substance has a syrupish texture,
and if urine is collected in a piping system, this “urine
syrup” can sediment in pipes if the inclination is not
sufficient.
Macronutrients – amounts and
plant availability
Urine contains significant quantities of the main macro
nutrients required by plants; nitrogen (N), phosphorus
(P) and potassium (K). Nitrogen occurs in high
concentration (mostly as urea), whereas phosphates
and potassium occur in comparatively lower
concentrations, in dissolved plant available forms.
Urine used directly or after storage is a high quality,
low cost alternative to the application of N-rich
mineral fertilizer in plant production. The nutrients
in urine are in ionic form and their plant-availability
compares well with chemical fertilizer (Johansson et
al., 2001; Kirchmann and Pettersson, 1995; Simons
and Clemens 2004). Urine also contains large amounts
of phosphorus, potassium, sulphur and micronutrients,
but due to its high content of N, its P/N and K/N ratios
are lower than in many mineral fertilizers used for
crop production, and lower than what many crops need
according to fertilizer recommendations.
An advantage of urine in comparison with organic
fertilizers is that the phosphorus exists in forms
that are plant-available. This means that urine is
quite efficient as a phosphorus fertilizer, which has
implications for the future with regard to the concept
of Peak Phosphorus and the fact that phosphorus is a
finite resource.
1
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Table 2: Proposed default values for excreted mass and nutrients.  Vinnerås et al., 2006

Blackwater
Parameter Unit Urine Faeces Toilet paper
(urine+faeces)

Wet mass kg/person,year 550 51 8.9 610

Dry mass kg/ person,year 21 11 8.5 40.5

Nitrogen g/ person,year 4000 550 4550

Phosphorus g/ person,year 365 183  548

Since it is quite difficult to analyze human urine
for nutrient content, there is a need for a method to
calculate the composition of urine from easily available
data. Such a method, which uses the FAO statistics
(see www. fao.org) on the available food supply in
different countries, has been developed by Jönsson and
Vinnerås (2004). This method uses equations derived
from the FAO statistics and an estimation of the average
excretion by the Swedish population (table 2), where
many measurements on excreta have been made.
Based on this estimate of average excretion, on the
food supplied to the Swedish population according to
the FAO statistics and on statistical analysis of different
foodstuffs, relationships (equations 1 and 2) have been
developed between the food supplied according to FAO
and the excretion of N and P.
N = 0.13* (Total food protein)
……..............Equation 1
P = 0.011* (Total food protein + vegetal food protein)
..................... Equation 2
In equations 1-2 the units of N and P are the same as
those of the food protein. As is shown by equation
2, there is a strong positive correlation between the
contents of protein and phosphorus in the food stuffs.
Furthermore, vegetal food stuffs contain on average
twice as much phosphorus per gram of protein as animal
ones, which is why the vegetal protein is counted twice
in equation 2.
These equations are useful for estimating the average
excretion of N and P in different countries. The input
to such estimates are FAO statistics on food supplied,
found on the FAO website. Examples of inputs and
results of such estimates for a few countries are given
in tables 3 and 4.
These estimates assume that the loss between the
food supplied and the food actually consumed, i.e.

Table 3: Food supply (crops primary equivalent) in different countries in 2000.  FAO 2003

Vegetal
Total energy Vegetal energy Total protein
protein
Country kcal/cap,day kcal/cap, day g/cap, day
g/cap, day

3029
China, Asia 2446 86 56

Haiti, West Indies 2056 1923 45 37

India, Asia 2428 2234 57 47

South Africa, Africa 2886 2516 74 48

Uganda, East Africa 2359 2218 55 45

2
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Table 4: Estimated excretion of nutrients per capita in different countries.  Jönsson and Vinnerås 2004

Nitrogen (kg/cap, year) Phosphorus (kg/cap, year) Potassium (kg/cap, year)

China 3.5 0.4 1.3

Haiti 1.9 0.2 0.9

India 2.3 0.3 1.1

South Africa 3.0 0.3 1.2

Uganda 2.2 0.3 1.0

Sweden 4.0 0.4 1.0

the food waste generated, is of the same relative size
in the different countries. This assumption is verified
by Chinese data. The total excretion reported by Gao
et al., (2002) for China was 4.4 kg of N and 0.5 kg of
P. These values agree quite well with those calculated
in table 4, considering how difficult it is to carry out
representative measurements of the excretion of a
large population.
shows that in these areas urine could provide a
nitrogen rich fertilizer of the ratio 10:1:4 and faeces
a more evenly balanced 2:1:1 fertilizer. The weighted
average nutrient content, which would be the result of
application of these two fertilizers derived from the
same number of people during the same time, yields
approximately a 7:1:3 fertilizer ratio.

Basic data on urine composition can also be found in
the following: NASA Contractor Report No. NASA
CR-1802, D. F. Putnam, July 1971. This document is
available online at:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.
gov/19710023044_1971023044.pdf
Table 5 below shows the calculated N, P and K
values of urine and faeces and urine + faeces for the
10+ age group of rural households in the Limpopo
province of South Africa (CSIR, 2008). The table
Excreted amounts and volume
The quantity of urine produced by an adult mainly
depends on the amount of liquid a person drinks and
perspires. Children produce approximately half as
much urine as adults. Excessive sweating results
in concentrated urine, while consumption of large
amounts of liquid dilutes the urine. Vinnerås et al.,
(2006) suggested a design value for urine generation
to be 1500 g/p,d based on measurements in Sweden,
while Schouw et al., (2002) found that in Southern
Thailand between 0.6-1.2 L/p,d of urine was produced.

Table 5: N:P:K excretion of nutrients per capita per annum and the ratio for urine, faeces and
urine + faeces fertilizer in South Africa  CSIR, 2008

Product kg/p/yr Ratio

N P K N P K

Urine 3.56 0.34 1.26 10 1 4

Faeces 0.42 0.24 0.21 2 1 1

Urine + faeces 3.98 0.58 1.47 7 1 3

3
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Analyzing human urine
Correct sampling and analyzing of urine is difficult,
and results of single analysis of unpooled samples
should be interpreted with care. Laboratory analyses
will give the most correct answers, however, such
analyses may not always be possible for field
conditions and absence of laboratory equipment.
Simple analytical methods are available, but
these have not been validated for human urine.
Measurements of conductivity have been suggested,
which may be an interesting possibility. A tool that
has been developed for analysing animal slurry has
been used successfully for human urine, however,
calibration may be necessary. The method is based
on the fact that ammonium dissolved in the fertilizer
reacts with an additive to form gaseous ammonia.
The tool measures the gas pressure that results, and
indicates a rough figure for the content of ammonia
nitrogen in the fertilizer (See www.agros.se).
Sampling of urine should be carried out with stringency.
Urine should be well mixed because phosphorus-rich
subsances in urine tend to sediment in a container
during storage of urine.
A comment on the content of P and K in urine is
relevant. In many countries, the K content is expressed
as K2O, and the P content as P2O5. Table 6 below gives
conversion factors for use when needed in order to
convert the formulas.
Table 6: Conversion factors for major nutrients
To Convert To Multiply by
K K2O 1.2
K2O K 0.83
P P2O5 2.29
P2O5 P 0.436
4
Chemical pollutants
Practical guidance:
Source separation of urine results in one of the
safest and cleanest fertilizers available to the
agricultural community. Pharmaceuticals and
hormones are excreted with urine, but the risk of
negative effects to plants or human beings is low.
When excreta is processed in a sweage treatment
plant contaminants from industries, traffic and
grey water are added resulting in a product of
much lower quality. The following text gives some
answers to frequently posed questions regarding
chemical pollutants in urine. However, it needs to
be noted that the risk when using urine is far lower
than when using wastewater treatment sludge,
and also lower than when using farmyard manure.
The information in this section is mostly based on
Winker (2009). The publication of Larsen and Lienert
(2007) is also recommended.
Hormones and pharmaceuticals2
Hormones and pharmaceutical residues are two
types of micro-pollutants which occur in urine
(concentration levels are available in Winker,
2009), as human beings excrete them with their
urine and faeces (as a rule of thumb: two thirds of
pharmaceutical residue substances are excreted with
the urine, one third with faeces, although the figures
can vary widely for individual substances).
There is the possibility that if urine is reused in
agriculture, these micro-pollutants would be taken up
by plants and thereby enter the human food chain.
This is a risk, but a small one: a full evaluation of the
potential toxic effects of pharmaceuticals ingested by
humans with crops is very difficult and has not yet
been done. The risks need to be put in perspective
compared to pharmaceutical residues contained in
animal manure, or the risks resulting from pesticide
use. In sewer-based sanitation systems, these micro-
pollutants are discharged from sewage treatment
plants into surface water bodies and can reach the
groundwater in the long run. For example, detected
concentrations of pharmaceutical residues in
groundwater lay in the range of 50 ng/l in Germany
(Heberer et al., 2000).
2 From von Münch and Winker (2009)

When comparing the two approaches (mixing urine
with water in conventional wastewater management
versus urine application to soil), it is likely to be safer
to discharge urine to soil, rather than to let it pass
the conventional system. The micro-pollutants can
be degraded better in the aerobic, biologically active
soil layers (high concentration of micro-organisms
per cubic centimetres) with long retention times than
in water bodies whose ecosystems are much more
sensitive. Soil is considered a more suitable medium
for natural degradation of pharmaceuticals than water
because:
• The oxygen levels, promoting biodegradation, are
around 50,000 times higher than in water
• Exposure to UV light also helps to degrade
pharmaceuticals, although this only applies to the
surface (1-2 cm soil depth) and crops can shade the
ground.
• Terrestrial systems are much better equipped to
degrade organic compounds than aquatic ones. The
high specific surface of soil particles maximises
the exposure of adsorbed chemicals, maximising
the kinetics of degradation such as oxidation,
reduction, enzymeenhanced diagenesis, etc.
• The wide biodiversity of the fungal and bacterial
flora of soil are also adapted to degrade various
sorts of organic molecules, both complex and
simple.
Ultimately, the potential risks from consuming
crops fertilised with urine need to be compared with
the risks related to pesticide use on crops, as well
as antibiotics and hormones given to farm animals
(poultry and cattle) which can be traced e.g. in
milk and eggs. The human use of pharmaceutical
substances is small compared to the amount of
pesticides (insecticides, fungicides, bactericides
and herbicides) used in agriculture, which are just
as biologically active as pharmaceutical substances.
Substance flow studies have confirmed that the dose
of natural and synthetic hormones and of many
pharmaceutical substances is larger when applying
manure than when applying human urine (Magid,
2006; Hammer & Clemens, 2007). Although it has
to be mentioned that the variety of pharmaceutical
residues applied via urine is higher than via animal
manure.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Urine is strongly toxic to earthworms as reported
from a PhD study (Muskolus, 2008). Urine
fertilization has been found to give a temporary
set-back to the population of earth worms, but the
effect is not permanent and after about 6 months,
the population had recovered (Muskolus, 2008). It
was investigated whether this response was related
to ammonia or pharmaceuticals in urine, however,
no such connections could be made. Soil microbial
enzyme activities were not influenced by urine used
as a fertilizer. (Muskolus, 2008)
Trace metals
Human faeces and to a small extent urine contain
trace metals. The amounts of harmful heavy metals in
urine are miniscule and much lower than wastewater
sludge or even farmyard manure (WHO, 2006). This
is a result of the biological uptake being small and
their excretion being even smaller (Vinnerås, 2002).
Essentially all the heavy metals in the excreta from
a normal population come from the food ingested
and a large proportion of these metals will have been
removed from the fields with the crop. Thus, it is
possible to recycle excreta fertilizers, provided that
they have not been polluted when handled, without
threatening the sustainability of the agricultural soil
(Jönsson et al., 2004).
Salinization
Practical guidance:
Urine use in areas where salinization is an issue
should be monitored. Urine is a solution of
salts, and salt stress can be a major constraint
to plant production in arid areas. When urine is
used in these areas, irrigation practices should
be adapted, the urine should be watered down,
and application of urine should regularly be
interchanged with applications of water only.
The concentration of soluble salts in urine depends on
the amount of salts excreted as well as the amount of
liquid that passes through the body. A figure reported
in Ganrot 2007 gives at hand that human urine
contains approximately 150 mM of NaCl (sodium
chloride), corresponding to a concentration of 8.8 g
per litre (Ganrot et al., 2007). Salt stress from sodium
chloride can be a major constraint in crop production,
especially in arid conditions. Salt sensitivity varies
5
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Table 7: The relative tolerance of common plants to salinity.  Brady and Weil, 1999

Tolerant Moderately tolerant Moderately sensitive Sensitive

Barley (grain) Ash (white) Alfalfa Almond

Bermuda grass Aspen Broad bean Apple
Black cherry Barley (forage) Cauliflower Apricot
Cotton Beet (garden) Cabbage Bean
Date Broccoli Celery Blackberry
Olive Cow pea Clover Boysenberry
Rosemary Fescue (tall) Corn Carrot
Fig Cucumber Celery
Harding grass Grape Grapefruit
Kale Lettuce Lemon
Orchard grass Pea Onion
Oats Peanut Orange
Pomegranate Radish Peach
Rye (hay) Rice (paddy) Pear
Ryegrass (perennial) Squash Pineapple
Safflower Sugar cane Potato
Sorghum Sweet clover Raspberry
Soybean Sweet potato Strawberry
Squash (zucchini) Turnip Tomato
Wheat

with factors such as plant species and temperature.
Bernal et al., (1974) reported growth depression of
10 to 50 per cent grain yield of wheat when treated
with a solution of 50 mM NaCl. Salt-affected soils
are distributed all over the world but most of them are
found in arid and semi-arid regions
Fertilizers are to a large extent soluble salts and if
they are not managed properly they can contribute
to or cause salinization. For example, a study made
to investigate salinity and nitrogen rate effects on
the growth and yield of chile pepper plants by Villa-
Castorena et al., (2003) showed that high amounts of
nitrogen application, 140 kg ha-1 and more, increased
soil salinity and in turn decreased plant growth and
yield.
In a South African study on the evaluation of human
urine as a source of nutrients for vegetables by Mnkeni
et al., (2005) it was found that under South African
conditions, very high rates of urine application
lowered yields. This was due to increased salinity of
the soil that led to high levels of sodium in plant tissue.
However the rates of N-application in the study were
extreme: 1600 kg N/ha, which increased the electrical
conductivity of the soil, resulting to classification of
the soil as a very strong saline soil after harvest. The
use of this level of application is never recommended.
It was also suggested that the salinity status of soils
fertilized with urine should be monitored in order to
detect possible salt-build up, which is reasonable.
Monitoring in arid regions would be advisable in order
to get long-term data on possible salt build-up in soils
and/or to keep rates of urine fertilization at a level that
is well adapted to the climate and crop. Plants vary in
their ability to tolerate salinity and a good selection of
crop is therefore an important part of optimizing the
crop yield in arid areas (table 7).

6

Economic value of urine
Practical guidance:
The value of the nutrients in urine can be calculated
by comparing the quantity of plant nutrients in
urine to the price of the same nutrients in chemical
fertilizers on the local market. Depending on the
current local fertilizer prices, the value of the urine
produced by one person per year will usually
be within the range of 4-7 Euros. To illustrate
the potential of the urine use this figure can be
multiplied by the number of household or village
members, or even by the entire population.
A ssessing the economic value of urine has many
dimensions. The value of reusing urine in crop
production is often much higher than the mere value
of the nutrients contained in urine. The yield increase
that can be attributed to the application of nutrient
rich urine compared to no fertilizer application
at all makes a strong case for the resource reuse
in agriculture and sustainable sanitation systems.
Monetary arguments are helpful when creating
awareness of the potential of productive sanitation.
Health and environment benefits are quite difficult
to evaluate in monetary terms, while the economic
value of excreta in chemical fertilizer equivalents is
easier. This can be done by comparing the quantity
of the plant nutrients in excreta to the price of the
same nutrients in chemical fertilizers such as urea,
phosphate and different NPK fertilizers.
Dimensions on the economic and financial value of soil
nutrients have been explored by for example Drechsel
et al (2004). The two main models used in developing
countries focus on either the value of introduced
fertilizers, which will be further developed in the text
to follow; and the value of products from the studied
farming systems. Both methods have limitations and
potential, and the choice should be based on a decision
regarding target group, quality of in-data and desired
result.
A study on the marketing of urine and faeces from
residential areas in Kampala, Uganda, was carried out
by GTZ (Schroeder, 2010). Among the conclusions
were:
• the larger the systems are designed, the higher is
the economical profit;
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
• the profit of the systems can be influenced
significantly by a variety of factors. Among them
transport distance, project lifetime and nutrient/fuel
prices showed the largest effects;
• the distance between residential and agricultural
area should be minimised;
• economic tools are likely to help change people’s
perceptions and behaviours sustainably and present
an option to increase the implementation efficiency
of the proposed systems;
• a fertilizer will not be purchased and used by
farmers if it is not competitive in terms of nutrient
content and plant availability, handling/managing
effort/costs and product price.
The text in box 1 (pages 8 and 9) describes a method
developed by CREPA using the monetary argument to
promote productive sanitation in Burkina Faso and Niger.
Cost/Benefit analyses
Carrying out a cost/benefit analysis can provide support
for planning a sanitation system including the recycling
of urine and faeces to agricultural land. One such
analysis has been made in a project in South Africa
(CSIR, 2008) where costs and benefits of using urine as
a fertilizer were compared to costs and benefits of using
no fertilizer at all or using mineral fertilizer. The analysis
was based on interviews with subsistence farmers in
rural areas. Despite the higher installation construction
cost of a urine diverting toilet, this technology option
had a greater economic benefit irrespective of the
manner of management of the contents of the vaults.
This implies that the urine diverting toilet technology is
a better option for subsistence farming areas which are
attempting to improve soil fertility.
Another cost/benefit analysis was carried out in Niger
(Dagerskog, personal communication), where the cost
of constructing a toilet was compared to the value of the
fertilizer generated in the toilet. This small comparison
of figures showed that the family using the urine as
fertilizers could, if they sold it on a market at slightly
less than the nutrient value in the liquid, get back the
money they paid to build the toilet in less than two
years.
7
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Box 1: Calculating the economic value of urine - experiences from Burkina Faso

How much nutrient is there in human excreta

per year? For Burkina Faso with 13.5 million inhabitants, the
annual amount of plant nutrients in excreta is in the
The amount of nitrogen and phosphorus in excreta same order of magnitude as the annual amount in
is calculated using the FAO statistics for food sup- imported fertilizer (table 9)
ply (equations 1 and 2). Due to the uncertainty of
FAO’s statistics for individual countries, the data in
figure 4 is based on the average for the ten West
African countries.
The excreta generated by a family represent a sub-
stantial quantity of fertilizers. The average family
in the Aguié province in Niger has nine members.
Urea and NPK (15:15:15; %N: %P2O5 : %K2O)
are the common fertilizers. Interestingly, the annual
amount of plant nutrients in the excreta from one
family is roughly equal to the quantity in one 50 kg
bag of urea and one 50 kg bag of NPK.

Table 8: Annual amounts of nutrients in Figure 5: The family in Niger produces as

excreta compared with mineral fertilizers. much nutrients in urine and faeces as there
Excreta Excreta Urea (50kg) + are in the two bags of mineral fertilizers.
Nutrient Kg per Kg per NPK15:15:15
person family (9) (50kg) Table 9: Amount of plant nutrients per year
N 2.8 25 27 in imported fertilizers compared to the
P 0.45 4 3.2 amount in excreta for Burkina Faso.

(K) (1.3) (11.7) (6.2) N (tons/ P (tons/ K (tons/

year) year) year)

Most families cannot afford two bags of fertilizers. Fertilizer imported* 22 632 8 801 14 801
No surprise then that the message “one family pro-
Excreta produced 38 024 5 780 19 265
duces the equivalent to two bags of fertilizer” has
been met with great interest by the populations in Ratio excreta/
1.68 0.66 1.30
rural Niger. Locally, two bags of chemical fertilizer fertilizer
cost roughly 80 $. *FAO statistics 2005

Figure 4: The nutrient content in the excreta from an average person in West Africa (based
on FAO data on food intake from 10 countries).

8
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

How much is it worth?

The incentive to use a fertilizer is primarily that
Calculating the market price for the different nutri- the value of the extra crop produced will exceed
ents can be straightforward. the cost of the fertilizer. The following calculation
can show this: Maize needs around 60 kg of N/ha
Table 10: The price of different nutrients in which is possible to provide with the excreta from
Burkina Faso. ~ 20 persons. A well fertilized field (60 kg N/ha)
can yield 3 tons/ha, compared to 0.5 tons for the
Kg traditional field. A surplus of 2.5 tons due to the
Price for Price / kg
nutrient application of excreta from 20 people, or 125 extra
Nutrient Fertilizer 50 kg nutrient
per 50 kg of maize for each of these 20 persons. 125 kg
(CFA) (CFA)
kg of maize is worth around 50 $ US on the market
in Burkina Faso. This can be compared with the
N Urea 20000 23 870 nutrient value of the excreta (10 $ US) and with the
average annual income in Burkina Faso.
P TSP 20500 9.86 2079
What is the value of a specific quantity of
urine?
K KCl 22500 24.8 907
In Burkina Faso the most common container for
urine storage is the 20 litre jerry can. The fertilizer
However, this kg-price is based on single nutrient value of the urine can be estimated to 120 CFA or
fertilizers. Using this kg-price for the formula of the 0.25 $ US. It should be remembered that for cor-
most common NPK fertilizer, shows that buying the rect analysis of the nutrient content of urine, the
nutrients individually is around 10% more expen- urine and its sediment has to be well mixed, and
sive than buying them as complex NPK fertilizer. care has to be taken so that ammonia is not lost
To take this fact into account, the excreta value is from the urine.
reduced by 10 % in table 11.
Table 12: The value of nutrients in one
Table 11: The annual value of nutrients from jerrycan of urine.
one person in Burkina Faso.
Kg/jerry Price/ Value/jerry
Nutrient N P K TOTAL Nutrient g/l
can kg can

kg/person/year 2.8 0.43 1.3   N 5 0.1 870 87

Price/kg 870 2079 907   P 0.5 0.01 2079 21

K 1.5 0.03 907 27

Value (CFA) 2400 900 1300 4600

TOTAL       136
Value - 10 % 4100 (~10 $)
TOTAL -
  ~ 120 FCFA
10 %
For Burkina Faso with 13.5 million people, the hu-
man fertilizer value corresponds to 135 million $ per The content of secondary macronutrients such as
year. In many countries chemical fertilizers are heav- sulphur, magnesium and calcium, and micronutri-
ily subsidized. A discussion based on the figures in ents are seldom calculated, however, they contrib-
this text could be initiated to investigate the potential ute to the value of the urine since they make the
of subsidizing toilets instead of chemical fertilizers. urine a full fertilizer.

9
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Crop fertilization with urine – research results and
practical experiences
R esearch on urine as a fertilizer is carried out all over
the world, in settings ranging from very applied
demonstration trials to rigorous scientific studies.
The following text describes some of the ongoing or
concluded activities. The examples are intended to give
a broad picture of results and research setup, and to
inspire future work in this area.
The yield achieved when fertilizing with urine varies
depending on many factors. One important aspect is
the soil condition. The effect of urine, just as that of
chemical fertilizers, is probably somewhat lower on a
soil with a low content of organic substances than on
a soil with a high organic content. Experience shows
that it is beneficial for soil fertility to use both urine and
faeces or other organic fertilizers on the soil, but they
can be used in different years and for different crops.
Human urine has been used frequently as fertilizer in
small scale gardening, though mostly not documented
(figure 6).
Figure 6: Small scale gardening using urine in
Niger.  Photo: Linus Dagerskog
10
Cereals in Northern Europe
Urine was tested as a fertilizer to barley in Sweden
during 1997 to 1999 (Johanssson et al., 2001; Rodhe
et al., 2004). Results showed that the N effect of urine
corresponded to about 90 per cent of that of equal
amounts of ammonium nitrate mineral fertilizers,
which is estimated to correspond to about 100 per
cent of equal amounts of ammonium fertilizers, after
accounting for the N lost in the form of ammonia from
the urine.
Urine has been tested as a fertilizer to barley and ley in
both greenhouse and field trials in Germany (Simons
and Clemens, 2004). The urine in some treatments was
acidified in order to reduce ammonia emissions and
microbial contamination. The results from field trials
showed that the fertilizing effect of urine was higher
than that of mineral fertilizer in production of barley.
There was no difference in yield between plots fertilized
with acidified urine and untreated urine (Simons and
Clemens, 2004).
Figure 7: Spreading of urine to barley.
Photo: Ebba af Petersens, WRS Uppsala
Cereals in India
Field experiments were conducted in farmers fields at
Nagasandra village, Doddaballapura Tq, Bangalore
district in India for one year to study the response of
maize to human urine when applied to meet the nitrogen
requirement (Sridevi, 2009). The treatments were

control, recommended dose of fertilizers, recommended
dose of nitrogen through human urine with and without
gypsum and fertilizer applied to soil and different
combinations of human urine and fertilizers. The results
of the field experiment revealed that recommended
dose of nitrogen through human urine in 6 split doses
with irrigation water + gypsum increased the grain
(8.10 t ha-1) and stover (33.88 t ha-1) yield of maize.
Significant increase in the nitrogen, phosphorus and
potassium content of plant samples was observed in
the crops. The outcome of the investigation revealed
that urine diverting toilet systems help to provide better
sanitation, help farmers to save the cost on fertilizers
without negatively affecting the crop yields and thus
help to achieve food security.
Vegetables in South Africa
Pot trials were conducted in South Africa where the
use of human urine on cabbage, spinach, maize and
tomato was studied (Mkeni et al., 2006). Yield, nutrient
content in soil and leaves as well as soil electrical
conductivity was monitored. The urine was diluted
1:3 (urine:water). The treatments were replicated four
times and arranged in a randomized complete block
design. Diluted human urine was found to be a good
source of nutrients, especially nitrogen, for cabbage and
spinach. Maize responded more or less equally to urea
and urine. Added N up to 200kg/ha in the form of urea
or urine resulted in significant increase in biomass dry
matter yield. However, above 200 kg N/ha there was
little or no significant increase in yield. As observed for
maize, tomato growth responded more or less equally to
added urea and human urine. The application strategy
is important, however, as risk of elevated salinity was
identified in the research. Results showed that urine is
Table 13: Average yields (grams fresh weight) in plant trials with urine as a fertilizer to
vegetables in Zimbabwe. 
Unfertilized
Plant, growth period and
plants
number of repetitions (n)
(g)
Lettuce, 30 days (n = 3) 230
Lettuce, 33 days (n = 3) 120
Spinach, 30 days (n = 3) 52
Covo, 8 weeks (n = 3) 135
Tomato, 4 months (n = 9) 1680
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
to be considered as effective agronomically as urea or
ammonium sources of nitrogen.
Vegetables in Western Africa
A research project was carried out in Ghana during
2004 and 2005 to investigate the nutrient efficiency of
urine in comparison with mineral fertilizer and compost
and to estimate the value of cereal fertilization under
local conditions (Germer et al., 2006). The trials were
carried out north-east of Accra within Ghana’s coastal
savannah zone. Urine treatment was compared with
unfertilized control and compound fertilizer, compound
fertilizer plus water (same amount as supplied by
urine) as well as compost treatment on the performance
of cereals. The nutrient supply was based on the
application of 667<kg ha-1 NPK 15:15:15 compound
fertilizer (100<kg N, 44<kg P and 83<kg<K). Urine
and compost were adjusted by the addition of TSP, KCl
and Urea to provide the same amount of N, P and K. In
both years the yield of the urine and compost treatment
were significantly higher than in the control (p<0.05). It
is concluded that the fertilization with P and K enriched
urine increases the yield of sorghum about 3.5 times
under the given conditions. Therefore, as a nutrient
source the efficiency of urine is at least comparable to
mineral fertilizer. The additional sorghum grain yield of
1.4 t ha-1 has locally a current market value of 1.000€
and sets off manifold the equivalent NPK fertilizer cost
of 100€ (200€ without subsidies).
Vegetables in Eastern Africa
Plant trials with urine have been carried out with
various vegetables in Zimbabwe (Morgan, 2003 and
Morgan, 2003
Fertilized, 3:1 water/urine
Relative yield
application 3x per week
fertilized to unfertilized
(g)
500 2.2
345 2.9
350 6.7
545 4.0
6084 3.6
11
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
2008). The following text reports one of the manyfold
trials that have been carried out. Plants were grown
in 10-litre cement basins and fed with 0.5 litres of a
3:1 water/urine mix three times per week. Unfertilized
plants were cultivated as a comparison. The increase
in production was large but no statistical analysis was
performed.
Figure 8: The spinach to the right was
unfertilized. The spinach to the left was
fertilized with urine diluted with 3 parts of
water to one part of urine applied two times
per week.  Photo: Peter Morgan, Aquamor
Vegetables in Northern Europe
Human urine was used in trilas carried out in Finland
as a fertilizer in cabbage cultivation in comparison
with industrial fertilizer and nonfertilizer treatments
(Pradhan et al., 2007). The main objectives of the
study were to evaluate the use of urine fertilizer
on (1) growth and pest-resistance of a crop plant,
(2) chemical and microbial quality of the crop,
and (3) flavor quality of a vegetable food product
prepared with natural lactic acid fermentation.
Urine achieved equal fertilizer value to industrial
fertilizer when both were used at a dose of 180
kg N/ha. Growth, biomass, and levels of chloride
were slightly higher in urine-fertilized cabbage
than with industrial-fertilized cabbage but clearly
differed from nonfertilized. Insect damage was
lower in urine-fertilized than in industrial-fertilized
plots but more extensive than in nonfertilized
plots. Microbiological quality of urine-fertilized
cabbage and sauerkraut made from the cabbage
was similar to that in the other fertilized cabbages.
Furthermore, the level of glucosinolates and the
12
taste of sauerkrauts were similar in cabbages from
all three fertilization treatments. The results show
Figure 9: Cabbage from field trials in Finland.
Photo: Helvi Heinonen Tanski
that human urine could be used as a fertilizer for
cabbage and does not pose any significant hygienic
threats or leave any distinctive flavor in food
products.
In a field trial in Sweden in 2002, different
application strategies for urine as a fertilizer to
leeks were tested (Båth, 2003). Fertilizing with
urine gave a three-fold yield increase. Neither yield
nor nutrient uptake were significantly affected by
whether the same total amount of urine was applied
in two doses or whether it was divided into smaller
doses applied every 14 days. The N efficiency (i.e.
(N yield – N yield in unfertilized plots)/added N),
when using human urine was high, ranging from 47
per cent to 66 per cent. This is on the same level
as when mineral fertilizers are used. N efficiency
for most other organic fertilizers, e.g. compost, is
normally between 5 and 30 per cent.
Human urine obtained from separating toilets was
tested as a fertilizer for cultivation of outdoor cucumber
(Cucumis sativus L.) in a Nordic climate (Heinonen-
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Table 14: Results of a field trial using human ha for the three treatments. Soil sampling showed no
urine as a fertilizer for leeks. There was no differences between treatments regarding physical or
statistically significant difference between chemical characteristics.
treatments A, B and C.  After Båth, 2003

Treatment N rate Yield N yield Fruit in India

kg/ha* ton/ha** kg/ha *
At Musiri near Trichy, Tamil Nadu, the organization
A Urine every 14 days 150 54 111 SCOPE established urine diverting toilets and the
National Research Centre for Banana started its
B Urine twice 150 51 110
research experiments, using collected human urine as
C
Urine every 14 days
150 55 115 fertilizer through a drip irrigation system (Jeyabaskaran,
+ extra potassium 2010). More information can be found at http://www.
D Unfertilized 0 17 24 scopetrichy.com/banana_research.asp .In the study,
Poovan banana was grown with 30, 40, 50 and 60 litre/
* kg/ha= gram/10 m2
plant of human urine applied with irrigation water (1:10)
along with graded levels of commercial potassium
Tanski et al., 2007). The urine used contained high fertilizers. Yield (number of bunches and bunch weight)
amounts of nitrogen with some phosphorus and was studied, as well as nutrient content in leaves, height
potassium, but numbers of enteric microorganisms of plants and total amount of soluble solids in banana.
were low even though urine had not been preserved
before sampling. The cucumber yield after urine The number of fruits per bunch varied significantly
fertilization was similar or slightly better than the yield with application of graded levels of urine along with
obtained from control rows fertilized with commercial different levels potassium Urine application at the rate
mineral fertilizer. None of the cucumbers contained of 50 litres/plant recorded the highest average number
any enteric microorganisms (coliforms, enterococci, of fruits per bunch (185) and the control (without urine
coliphages and clostridia). In the taste assessment, 11 application) recorded 110.3 fruits per bunch. Among
out of 20 persons could recognize which cucumber of the treatment combinations, application of 50 litres of
three cucumbers was different but they did not prefer urine/plant along with 75 per cent recommended dose
one over the other cucumber samples, since all of them of potassium recorded the highest number of fruits per
were assessed as equally good.

Vegetables in Central America

Urine has been tested as a fertilizer to greenhouse-

grown lettuce in Mexico (Guadarrama et al., 2002).
There were treatments comparing urine with compost,
a urine-compost mixture, and no fertilizer at all. The
application rate was 150 kg of total N per hectare in
all treatments, except for the unfertilized control. Urine
gave the best yield of lettuce, due to its high availability
of N.

Urine has been tested as a fertilizer to amaranth in

Mexico (Clark, personal communication). Results show
that a combination of urine and poultry manure gave the
highest yield, 2 350 kg/ha. Chicken manure alone gave
a yield of 1 900 kg/ha. Human urine alone gave a yield
Figure 10: Bananas from field trials in Trichy.
of 1 500 kg/ha and the unfertilized control gave a yield Source: www.scopetrichy.com
of 875 kg/ha. The amount of N applied was 150 kg N/

13
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
bunch (223.4), which was 47.7 per cent more than that
applied with mineral fertilizer.
Application of 50 litres of human urine per plant with
75 per cent of recommended dose of potassium was
superior by recording 32.1 per cent more plant height,
25.6 per cent more pseudostem girth, 71.5 per cent
more number of leaves and 68.8 per cent more leaf
area, 25 per cent more leaf nitrogen concentration, 52.6
per cent more phosphorus concentration and 6.5 per
cent more leaf potassium than normally grown banana
plants without urine application (control).
Application of 50 litres of urine per plant along with 75
per cent recommended dose of potassium alone could
give an additional net profit of Rs. 45,175/- per hectare
when compared to mineral fertilizer alone, ie., normally
grown Poovan banana without urine application.
Field experiments were also conducted in farmers’ fields
at Nagasandra village, Doddaballapura Tq, Bangalore
district for one year to study the source separated human
urine as a source of nutrients for banana cultivation
14
(Musa paradisica) to meet the nitrogen requirement of
this crop (Sridevi et al., 2009). The treatments were
absolute control, recommended dose of fertilizers,
recommended dose of nitrogen through human urine
with and without gypsum and fertilizer applied to
soil and different combinations of human urine and
fertilizers. The results of the field experiment revealed
that the highest bunch yield (30.0 t ha-1) of banana was
recorded in the treatment which received RDN through
human urine (After 30 days of planting) + Gypsum
applied to soil when compared to control, and other
treatment combinations. The available nutrient content
of harvest soil viz., N, P and K had significant influence
on it. Significant increase in the nitrogen, phosphorus
and potassium content of plant samples was observed
in the crop. The highest total soluble solids (25.85 per
cent), reducing sugars (20.93 per cent) and total sugars
(23.87 per cent) were recorded in banana grown using
human urine. The outcome of the present investigation
revealed that ecosan system helps to provide better
sanitation, help farmers to save the cost on fertilizers
without affecting the crop yields and thus help to
achieve food security.
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Application strategies

Practical guidance:
The urine from one person during one year
suffices to fertilize 300-400 m2 of crop to a level of
about 50-100 kg N/ha. Urine should be handled
in closed tanks and containers and should be
spread directly onto the soil, not on the plant, in N
doses equivalent to what is recommended for urea
and ammonium fertilizers. Air contact should be
minimized and the urine should be incorporated
into the soil as quickly as possible.

W hen fertilizing plants, the yield first increases

up to a certain application rate, and then
decreases if the application rate is increased. If
the optimal application rate is not known, then the
application of the urine from one person during a
full day per square metre (approx 1.5 litres of urine/
m2, corresponding to 40-110 kg N/ha) and cropping
season can be used as a rule of thumb. If there is
a restriction in plot size, it is usually possible to
increase the fertilization up to three or four times
without any negative effects on crops or environment
and even larger amounts can beneficially be applied
if there is no or low risk of salinization. However,
both the quantity and the quality of the yield are
important and high rates of available N can affect the
quality, positively and negatively. For example, the
quality of wheat is generally improved by a high N
dose, while the quality of for example Irish potatoes
may decrease since the tubers can become watery.
The timing of the application is also important here
since the nutrient uptake by most crops decreases
after the crop enters the generative phase, such as
ear setting in maize.
The practical application strategies are a part of
the safe barrier approach introduced in the chapter
on safe handling of urine. The following sections
present different ways to apply urine in crop
production.
Figure 11: Urine fertilized sorghum to the left.
Photo: Linus Dagerskog
Application time
Practical guidance:
Urine should be applied according to the needs
of the plants. Good availability of nutrients is
important in the early stages of cultivation, though
once the crop enters its reproductive stage nutrient
uptake diminishes. From a health perspective this is
good since increased time between application and
harvest decreases risk of pathogen transmission. A
waiting period of one month between fertilization
and harvest should always be observed. In regions
where there is heavy rainfall during the cropping
season, repeated applications of urine may be an
insurance against losing all the nutrients in one
rainfall event.
In the early stages of cultivation, good availability of all
nutrients is important to enhance growth. If fertilizer is
applied only once, this should normally be carried out so
that nutrients in urine are available during the first half
of the time between sowing and harvest. If the crop is
fertilized twice, the second fertilization can be performed
after approximately 1/4 of the time between sowing and
harvest, but depending on the needs of the crop. The
crop can also be continuously fertilized, e.g. if the urine
is collected in smaller containers and used more or less
directly. However, once the crop enters its reproductive
stage most crops do not take up substantial amounts of
nutrients. An example is maize; fertilizer applied until

15
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
the plants are setting ears is well utilised, but after this
stage the uptake of nutrients from the soil declines.
After this stage the nutrients are mainly relocated within
the plant (Marschner, 1995). This is fully appreciated in
recommendations on use of chemical fertilizers. E.g.
in Zimbabwe, where maize is harvested 3-5 months
after planting, the recommendation is to fertilize it
three times, but no later than 2 months after planting.
As a rule of thumb, fertilization should stop after 2/3 to
3/4 of the time between sowing and harvest. Crops not
entering the generative stage, e.g. lettuce, spinach, as
well as roots and tubers, e.g. Irish potatoes and sweet
potatoes continue to take up nutrients throughout their
growth period. However, a waiting period of 1 month
between fertilization and harvest is recommended
from a hygiene point of view for all crops eaten raw
(Schönning and Stenström, 2004; WHO, 2006).
Figure 12: Application of diluted urine in early
stages of cultivation.  Photo: Linus Dagerskog
An often stressed aspect is the risk of leaching of
nutrients. In regions where there is heavy rainfall during
the cropping season, repeated applications of urine may
be an insurance against losing all the nutrients in one
rainfall event. However, from a eutrophication point of
view, it should be remembered that the leaching after
fertilization is small compared to the leaching from a pit
latrine or from just letting diverted urine leach into the
ground close to the toilet.
The total applied amount of urine and whether it should
preferably be applied once or several times also depends
on the N need of the plant and its root size. Root size
varies widely between different crops. Plants with
inefficient or small root systems, e.g. carrots, onions and
16
lettuce, can benefit from repeated applications of urine
throughout the cultivation time (Thorup-Kristensen,
2001).
Application rate
A starting point for the estimation of suitable urine
application is the local recommendations for use of
commercial mineral N fertilizers, especially of urea or
ammonium fertilizers. If such recommendations are not
available, another starting point can be to estimate the
amounts of nutrients removed by the crop, where the
removal of nutrients has to be adjusted for the expected
yield level. Urine can be recommended for most crops.
The productive area (e.g. grass, flower beds, vegetable
garden, trees) necessary per person for use of all the
urine on household level depends on several factors:
• the nitrogen demand and tolerance of the crop;
• the concentration of nitrogen in the collected urine;
• the ammonia loss when applying the urine;
• how many harvests that can be taken per year;
• whether the soil already is saline or has a high risk
of becoming saline.
Rules of thumbs are useful when the exact figures
for the above factors are unknown. The nitrogen
demand for common crops varies between 100 – 200
kg/ha, depending on type of crop and the yield. The
Box 2: I have a flower bed the size of 1 m2,
how much urine do I need to fertilize it?
The flower bed really only needs about 1.5 litres
of urine for one season, but this amount can be
increased by up to four times as needed, depend-
ing on the type of flower. Summer flowers (annu-
als) demand a good soil structure and quite a
good nutrient status in the soil. Roses need low
amounts of nutrients in the autumn in order to
survive the winter. A good strategy would be to
apply urine on a few occasions during the flow-
er season, for example with 2-3 decilitres each
time, and to water down the urine afterwards.
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Box 3: Calculation of necessary productive area in garden to maximize nutrient use in urine.
A family of five has a plot size of 300 m2 on which
they want to use the urine they collect in their urine
diversion toilet. The family lives in a climate allow-
ing for two yearly crops. If we assume that they ap-
ply 4 l per m2 for the first crop, and 2 l per m2 for
the following crops, how many m2 do they need to
use their urine in their garden?
Answer:
Since they live in an area where two crops can
be taken per year and 6 l/m2 can be applied
yearly. Each person excretes about 550 l, but as-
suming that some of the time is spent outside the
home, about 300 l per person is collected yearly.
The result is 1,500 l of urine from a family of
five. This will fertilize 250 m2 since each m2 will
receive 6 l m2/ on a yearly basis, giving a quite
high level of nitrogen fertilization. Thus, the plot
size would be more than sufficient to productively
use the collected urine.

concentration of nitrogen in urine depends on diet.

Undiluted urine will usually contain between 3 – 7 g
N/l. A person excretes about 300-550 l urine per year,
depending on liquid intake, climate etc. The excreted
amount of N per person per year with urine varies
between about 1.6 kg – 3.8 kg. If the nitrogen demand
of the crop is 100 kg/ha and the N concentration in the
urine is 7 g/l the urine from one person can fertilize
Box 4: My 20 litre container for urine is full.
How do I use it in the garden?
Twenty litres of urine is sufficient for 4-13 square
metres of cropping area, depending on how
much nitrogen is needed or beneficially toler-
ated.

Table 15: Application levels and intervals for specified crops in Burkina Faso.
 Source : Moussa Bonzi, CREPA, Burkina Faso
Days (weeks)
after planting Sor-
or emergence Eggplant Tomato Onion/carrot Lettuce Pepper ghum/ Corn
of first plant millet
from seedling
14 (2) 0.5 0.4 litres 1 litre /m2 0.5 litre 0.5 0.6 litre
litres per plant (assuming 20 / plant litre per
per (when plants per and plant
plant the plant dilution: 1part before
starts to urine to 1 part seeding
flower) water)
21 (3) 1 litre of urine per m2
(assuming 50 plants
per m2 and 1 part
urine to 1 part water)
28 (4) 0.4 litre 1 litre /m2 0.6 litre
per plant (assuming 20 per plant
plants per m2 (when
and dilution: first fruits
1part urine to appear)
1 part water)
35 (5) 0.5 litre 0.5 0.6
per plant litre per litre per
plant plant
42 (6) 1 litre of urine per m2 0.5 litre
(assuming 50 plants per plant
per m2 and 1 part
urine to 1 part water)
56 (8) 0.5 litre
per plant

17
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
385  m2 (1.5 l of urine per m2), if one single crop is
taken per year. If there is a restriction in plot size, it
is usually possible to increase the fertilization up to
three - four times, thus using up to 6 l per m2 without
any negative effects on crop or environment and even
larger amounts can beneficially be applied, if there is no
or low risk of salinization. Such large applications of
urine can be beneficial for the crop yield, if excessive
ammonia is lost in the application and especially on
phosphorus deficient soils as the phosphorus application
is increased. However, care should be taken on soils and
in regions prone to eutrophication of watercourses to
use nutrients in urine in the most efficient manner.
Dilution
Practical guidance:
Urine can be applied neat or diluted with water.
There is no standard recommendation for dilution/
non-dilution and the existing recommendations
vary depending on the local conditions. Levels
of dilution can vary between 1:1 (1 part urine to
1 part water) and 1:15 (one part urine to fifteen
parts water). Most common dilution ratios are 1:3
or 1:5. However urine should always be applied at
the rate corresponding to the desired application
rate of N, while additional water should be applied
according to the water needs of the plants.
Urine can be applied neat (without dilution) or diluted
with water, which is practised in many places. The level
of dilution varies between approximately 1:1 (1 part
water to 1 part urine) to 1:15 (one part urine to fifteen
parts water ), and 1:3 seems common. Dilution involves
increasing the volume to be spread and thus the labour,
the equipment needed, the energy use and the risk for
soil compaction are all increased.
Dilution has the advantage of decreasing, or
eliminating, the risk of applying urine at such high
rates that it becomes toxic to the crop. However,
irrespective of whether the urine is applied diluted or
neat, urine is a fertilizer and should, just as the much
more concentrated chemical fertilizers, be applied at the
rate corresponding to the desired application rate of N,
while additional water should be applied according to
the needs of the plants. Thus, urine can be applied neat,
or even concentrated to the soil, which then is irrigated
according to crop water requirements. The urine can
also be diluted into the irrigation water at a rate that
depends on the need for nutrients and water by the crop.
18
The application of a water/urine mix normally needs to
be interspersed with irrigation with water only.
Diluted urine should be handled in the same way as urine.
In order to avoid smells, loss of ammonia, generation of
aerosols, burns and possible contamination on plants by
remaining pathogens, urine should be applied close to,
on or incorporated into the soil. Foliar fertilization is
not recommended due to odour, loss of N, risk of plant
toxicity and hygiene risks.
Concentrated urine has a higher pH, and consequently,
dilution means that the effect of storage on pathogen
content in urine will be lowered. Keep the urine
concentrated during storage, and if dilution is chosen
as a strategy, this should be carried out as close to
application as posssible. It has been observed that if
diluted urine is stored in open containers (which is not
recommended), this may become a breeding site for
mosquitoes that can act as disease vectors. This has
never been seen in concentrated urine.
Storage techniques
Practical guidance:
Storage of urine should always take place in
a closed container in order to avoid ammonia
emissions.
Urine needs to be stored in order to achieve proper
hygienization, especially if collected from many
households. There is also need of storage if urine is
collected when there is no cropping season. One thing
that all storage systems have in common is the fact that
urine must be stored in closed containers in order to
avoid ammonia losses.This section presents different
techniques for storage of urine. There is a need to
develop low-cost storage methods for small and large
scale collection of urine.
Jerry cans are the most common way of collecting
urine, and a very good way to store urine for a short
period. A good example was introduced by CREPA
Burkina, where the jerry cans used for collection of
urine were yellow, and jerry cans used for transportation
of hygienized urine from storage to field were green, see
figure 14.
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

One cubic metre tanks are also quite common in small

and medium scale collection systems, figure 13. The
advantage is that the tanks are also readily available,
they can easily be filled and emptied, and they are
durable.

For large scale storage, slurry tanks can be used

(figure 16). However, these seldom have a cover that
minimizes ammonia losses, and such a cover needs to
be built. Ready-made tanks can also be bought for large
scale storage of urine, as has been shown in Sweden
(figures 15 and 17).

Figure 15: Ready-made large scale storage of

urine in Bornsjön, Sweden.
Photo: Ebba af Petersens, WRS Uppsala

Figure 13: Storage of urine in one cubic metre Figure 16: Slurry tank in wintertime, Sweden.
tank.  Photo: Anna Richert This slurry tank will be used for human
urine, and it will be equipped with a cover to
minimize ammonia losses.
Photo: Lennart Qvarnstrzöm

Figure 14: Yellow container for fresh urine,

green container for stored urine to be sold to
farmers. Photo: Linus Dagerskog, CREPA/SEI
Figure 17: Storage tank during construction of
housing area in Kullön, Sweden. Each tank is
12 m3.  Photo: Mats Johansson, VERNA

19
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Storage in soil
Practical guidance:
Practical guidance: For best fertilizing effect and to avoid ammonia
Urine can be stored in the soil if storage capacity losses, urine should be incorporated into the soil
is lacking. Storage in soil is carried out by applying as soon as possible after application, instantly if
urine where is will be used during a dry inter- possible. This also limits potential health risks of
cultivation period. direct exposure A shallow incorporation is enough,
and different methods are possible. One is to
apply urine in small furrows that are covered after
Storage of urine may be a constraint in settings application. When spreading urine, it should not
be applied on leaves or other parts of the plants,
where low-cost options are a neccessity. Therefore
as this can cause foliar burning. Spraying urine
different methods to avoid storage containers have in the air should also be avoided due to the risk
been developed. In regions where the inter-cultivation of nitrogen loss through gaseous emissions of
periods are dry, storage of urine nutrients in soil is an ammonia and the hygiene risk through aerosols.
alternative for extending the storage capacity and also Drip irrigation with urine is another possible
the labor intensive fertilization period. This is carried application technique. However, when this
out by applying and incorporating the urine into the technique is used, measures must be taken to
avoid clogging of emitters. In the larger scale,
soil during the dry inter-cultivation period, followed by
equipment for spreading of animal slurry is used.
normal cultivation of the already fertilized soil during
the cropping season. The idea is that the main portion
of the nutrients remain in the soil and will be available
for the plants during the growing season. Further
investigations are needed to determine the loss and
availability of nutrients, especially N and P, to crops
during and after such storage. Results from SUDEA
in Ethiopia (Terrefe, personal communication), as
well as from an ongoing project in Niger (Dagerskog,
personal communication) indicate that the method
is an interesting alternative where storing the urine
in containers until the cropping season is impossible,
even though the N loss might be fairly high. During
one measurement where the urine nutrients were stored
28 days in the soil, the loss of mineral N was found
to be 37 per cent (Sundin, 1999). There is also a risk
that some P might be bound in forms that are less plant-
available during the storage, but K and S should remain
fully available. An additional advantage of soil storage
is that the labour of applying the urine is carried out
during the dry season, which is normally less labour-
intensive than the cropping season.

Application techniques

Manual application techniques

The choice of application technique varies for different
types of crops. For crops that are grown in rows, urine
can be spread in a trench right next to the crop row. For
crops that are planted in rows, with spacing between
the plants, urine can be applied in a dug hole next to Figure 18: Different application techniques for
the crop. For trees, urine shoud be spread in a circle urine.  Photos: Linus Dagerskog

20
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

around the tree that corresponds to the circumference

of the branches. All these application recommendations
are also beneficial from a health perspective since they
avoid direct contact of urine with the planted crops.

For best fertilizing effect and to lower ammonia losses

and odour, the urine should be incorporated into the
soil as soon as possible after the application, instantly if
possible (Rodhe et al., 2004). A shallow incorporation
is enough, and different methods are possible. One is
to apply urine in small furrows that are covered after
application. Washing the nutrients into the soil with
subsequent application of water is another option.
Figure 19: Large scale application of urine on
agricultural land.
When spreading urine, it should not be applied on
Photo: Ebba af Petersens, WRS Uppsala
leaves or other parts of the plants, as this can cause
foliar burning due to high concentrations of ammonia
and salts when drying as well as hygiene considerations. drip irrigation, it might be a good idea, instead of
Spraying urine in the air should also be avoided due mixing urine and water, to apply the neat and filtered
to the risk of N loss through gaseous emissions of (desludged) urine for some time and then for the rest of
ammonia (Johanssson et al., 2001; Rodhe et al., 2004), the time to apply only water
odour and the hygiene risk through aerosols.
Drip irrigation of rice, vegetables and yam has been
Some crops, e.g. tomatoes, are sensitive to having all tested by CREPA, Ivory Coast (Comoe, personal
their roots exposed to urine, at least when plants are communication). Polyethylene piping, with 30 cm
small, while on many crops no negative effect at all between the holes, is tested on a field of 500 m2. The
is seen. Therefore, before the sensitivity of a crop is urine flows with gravity fom a tank, through a filter,
known, it is wise not to simultaneously expose all the and directly to the crop. No blocking of pipes has
roots of the plant to urine, be it neat or diluted. Instead, been reported. The piping is rinsed with water after
urine can be applied either prior to sowing/planting or each urine application. Urine application is carried out
at such a distance from the plants that the nutrients are during rainfall to facilitate urine introduction into the
within reach of the roots, but not all of them are soaked. soil.
For annual plants this distance may be about 10 cm.

Large scale application techniques

Urine application in the larger scale is best done with
equipment ordinarily used for farmyard slurry. In areas
where soil compaction is an issue, care must be taken to
keep the urine as concentrated as possible. No dilution
with water is receommended here, and application is
best done just before light rainfall.

Drip irrigation
Drip irrigation using urine as a fertilizer is another
possible application technique. However, when this
technique is used, measures must be taken to avoid Figure 20: Drip irrigation of cassava in Cote
blockages due to precipitation of salts forming sludge d´Ivoire.
as the total amount of precipitation often increases Source: Bernard Comoe 2009, CREPA Cote d´Ivoire 2009
after dilution, since the dilution water normally
contains magnesium and calcium. Thus, when using

21
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Odour when using urine as a
fertilizer
Practical guidance:
Urine has a distinctive smell. However, this is seldom
a problem if urine is stored in closed containers
and spread according to the information in this
text.
Bad odour is culturally associated with pathogens.
However, smell may also signal that urine contains
nutrients since ammonia smells strongly. Experience
shows that if the urine is spread close to and directly onto
the soil and watered down there is little smell. Handling
of urine is naturally a smelly activity and procedures
minimizing air exposure, e.g. by using closed containers,
application close to soil and immediate incorporation
or irrigation, are strongly recommended. All of these
measures will also contribute to minimizing ammonia
losses and protecting health.
22
Combined application of urine and
organic fertilizers
The combined use of urine and organic fertilizers
such as faeces, compost, farmyard manure or slurry is
beneficial, especially in cases where the soil is depleted
and deficient in nutrients and organic matter. Organic
fertilizers improve the structure of the soil, and increase
microbial activity. This in itself will facilitate the
uptake of nutrients inte the plant since microorganisms
participate in transforming nitrogen into forms that are
taken up by the plant.
When faecal matter is used, care should always be
taken to follow guidelines for safe use of faeces in
order to render the food chain safe and minimize the
risk emanating from pathogens in the faeces. Faeces
should be properly treated and hygienized.

Treatment and sanitization
U rine is essentially sterile when it leaves the body.
The main issue for urine use in agriculture is how
to avoid faecal cross-contamination. In addition, there
are diseases that in some regions in the world are spread
with urine. The following section gives hints on how to
handle urine in order to minimize the risk of using urine
as a fertilizer. It should be noted that the advantages
of using urine for food production outweighs the risk
of disease transmission by far. There are a number of
easily undertaken activities that will render the use of
urine safe, so read on.
Health risks
Practical guidance:
Health risks associated with the use of human
urine in plant production are generally low if there
is no or little faecal cross-contamination. Storage
of urine in closed containers will lower health risks
substantially.
Health risks associated with the use of human urine
in crop production are generally low. However
during source separation in the toilet faecal cross-
contamination of urine can occur. The amount of
faecal cross-contamination is directly proportional to
the health risks. If faecal matter enters urine, the urine
will contain different types of enteric pathogens that
can represent a potential health risk. Their presence is
naturally dependent on whether the users are infected
or carriers of the organisms in question. In the case
of diarrhoea the risk of faecal cross-contamination is
higher.
In addition a few organisms of health concern may be
excreted with the urine. One example is Salmonella
typhi/paratyphi. These bacteria have a short survival in
stored urine, there is reduction of the risk of pathogen
transmission by at least 1000 times after a week of
storage. Therefore never use unstored urine when
typhoid/paratyphoid cases are suspected. Another
example is Schistosomiasis Haematobium, which is a
parasite found only in Africa. However, in order to pose
a risk, the eggs need to reach a watercourse and find
a suitable snail-host. Use of urine in agriculture with
spreading techniques recommended in this book greatly
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
diminishes this risk. Again, a storage time for a week or
longer will substantially reduce the risk, the longer the
better. More information on storage times is found in
the sections below. Groups that are potentially at risk
comprise collection personnel and field workers, local
communities and product consumers. Here the handling
and application practices in the field is of importance.
As regards other contaminating substances in human
urine (heavy metals, hormones and pharmaceuticals)
there are many indications that possible health risks
are far smaller than those associated with the common
sanitation system and that it is reasonable to believe that
the risk for negative effect on the quantity and quality of
the crops is negligible.
Multi barrier concept
Practical guidance:
The WHO guidelines for safe use of excreta in
agriculture (2006) promote a flexible multi-barrier
approach for managing the health risks associated
with the use of excreta in agriculture. This multi-
barrier concept contains a series of measures/
barriers along the entire sanitation system from
‘toilet to table’. Each of the barriers has a certain
potential to reduce health risks associated with the
excreta use and it is recommended by WHO to put
in place several of these barriers in order to reduce
the health risk to an acceptable minimum.
The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for
safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater (2006)
recognize the potential of using excreta in agriculture
and promote a flexible multi-barrier approach for
managing the health risks associated with the use of
excreta in agriculture. This multi-barrier concept is
comprised of a series of measures/barriers along the
entire sanitation system from ‘toilet to table’. Each of
the barriers has a certain potential to reduce health risks
associated with the excreta use and it is recommended
by WHO to put in place several of these barriers if
needed in order to reduce the health risk to an acceptable
minimum. The reduction from each of the barriers can
be added together, which then give both enhanced total
risk reduction and also ensure that variabilities and
insecurities in each step are balanced in the long run.
Thus even insufficiently treated excreta can be reused
23
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Figure 21: The Multi Barrier Approach. 
as long as the emanating risks can be managed with
subsequent barriers. Effective barriers for safe use of
urine in agriculture can be found in the graphic below.
For more information visit the WHO website: http://
www.who.int/water_sanitation_health.
Source Separation
Source separation is an efficient barrier to reduce the
risks compared to a combined wastewater system. A
key objective of urine collection is to minimize faecal
cross-contamination. Urine diverting toilets should be
designed in a way to minimize the cross-contamination.
If urine is collected from urinals, the risk of cross-
Box 5: Example of risk assessment and should have a tight-fitting lid.
ablution water.
In a school in Tanzania a very well designed san-
itation system was implemented with separate
collection of faecal material and urine to be used
in an agricultural plot within the school. Howev-
er, from a risk reduction point of view there were
still substantial problems since the ablution wa-
ter was lead untreated to an area that was used
for the pupils to play in (direct contamination as
transmission) and to a part of the agricultural
plot (transmission from the produce). The ablu-
tion water normally constitutes a minor volume
(100 – 500 ml/washing). If this water instead
had been lead through a pipe directly into the
ground to a small soak-pit the risk for ground-
water contamination would have been very small
due to the small volume.
24
Figure by Robert Gensch
contamination is negligible. The ablution water for
washers should also be considered. If this water is
combined with the urine the risk of cross-contamination
is increased, especially if the users have diarrhea.
The mode of collection, transport and emptying of the
urine may also create situations where an exposure to
humans can occur. If the urine collection chamber is
flowing over, the cross-contaminated urine will be on
the ground where direct contact may occur to playing
children (design – have an overflow with a soak
away). The containers for urine should not be used
for other purposes such as fetching water or brewing
beer. Transport to the field or to a secondary storage
container should avoid spill. Containers for transport
Storage and Treatment
It is recommended that prior to application urine should
be treated in order to sanitize the urine and reduce
microbial health risks. Storage at ambient temperature is
considered a viable treatment option. The storage times
should be based on temperature and the likelihood of
faecal cross- contamination as well as the vulnerability
of the exposed population. A single family will most
probably transmit disease between each other through
direct routes and not through the use of collected urine.
Thus in a family, when the urine is used in a local garden
and the produce is used for family purpose only, a less
strict storage regime can be applied. A less strict storage
(1-2 weeks) can also be applied for urinals where the
faecal cross-contamination is excluded. When urine is
collected from many different users as well as when the
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

produce is sold/transferred to a third party, the microbial When hygienization is finished, the liquid is tapped into
risk increases substantially. In these situations a longer green jerry cans, figure 14, and sold to farmers under
storage time should be used, rendering the used the name Birg Koom which means liquid fertilizer in
urine safer and increasing the reduction of potential the local language. The same concept is being used in
pathogens present. Recommended storage times vary Niger in a similar project. This is one way to demystify
depending on the system type (large-scale systems: urine as a fertilizer and to signal that the product is safe
1-6 months, households/urinals: 0-1 month). If cross- to use in agriculture.
contamination is likely to occur the storage time can
be adjusted upwards, exceeding 1 month. This also
applies for cold climates since the temperature is also
a governing factor in the die-off. As a rule: The longer
the storage the better.

Urine should be stored in sealed containers in order to

prevent direct contact with the urine for humans and
animals. Urine should not be diluted while stored, to
provide a harsher environment for microorganisms
and increase die-off rate of pathogens. Examples exist
where the washing water of the toilet room has been
mixed with the urine, resulting in a high dilution. This
again has resulted in mosquito breeding in the highly
diluted urine with open lids as well as a lowered Figure 22: Collection of urine from
pathogen reduction. households in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
Photo: Linus Dagerskog
An interesting example of the introduction of new
fertilizers to the agricultural community comes from The storage intervals stated in table 16 are for urine
Burkina Faso. Urine from over 1 000 households in the collected in toilet systems where there is a risk of
capital Ouagadougou is collected in yellow jerry cans faecal contamination. If urine is collected from urinals,
(see figure 22). The urine is taken to a treatment station shorter storage intervals (1-2 weeks, see above) are
where it is stored in tanks for a specified amount of time. recommended due to lower risk.

Table 16: Recommended storage times for urinea based on estimated pathogen contentb and
recommended crop for larger systemsc. WHO, 2006

Possible pathogens in the

Storage temperature Storage time Recommended crops
urine mixture after storage
Food and fodder crops that are to be proc-
4°C >1 month Viruses, protozoa
essed
Food crops that are to be processed, fod-
4°C >6 months Viruses
der cropsd
Food crops that are to be processed, fod-
20°C >1 month Viruses
der cropsd

20°C >6 months Probably none All cropse

a Urine or urine and water. When diluted it is assumed that the urine mixture has at least pH 8.8 and a nitrogen concentration of
at least 1 g/l.
b
Gram-positive bacteria and spore-forming bacteria are not included in the underlying risk assessments, but are not normally
recognised for causing any of the human infections of concern.
c
A larger system in this case is a system where the urine mixture is used to fertilize crops that will be consumed by individuals
other than members of the household from which the urine was collected.
d
Not grasslands for production of fodder.
e
For food crops that are consumed raw it is recommended that the urine be applied at least one month before harvesting and
that it be incorporated into the ground if the edible parts grow above the soil surface.

25
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Crop restrictions
When treated urine is used no particular crop restrictions
need to be applied. However, as an additional
precautionary measure the urine use may be restricted
to non-food crops (e.g. cotton), crops that are processed
(e.g. wheat) or cooked before consumption (e.g. potato)
as well as crops/trees that allow for a distance between
soil and harvested part of the crop. In general it can
be stated that the longer the time between application
and harvest – the less risky. Thus for crops with short
rotation times, like spinach, salad crops and radish the
risk will be higher, and pretreatment is recommended,
i.e. storage is required, but in the case of pineapples,
for example, (rotation time 1-2 years) the risk is non-
existent from the urine if it is spread at amounts and
timing corresponding to the needs of the plants,
consequently minimum 3 months before harvest.
One goal when constructing systems for the use of
urine in crop production should be to reach a reasonable
level of risk reduction for persons involved in the use
of the system, such as field workers, households or
consumers. The following matrix suggests strategies
for crop choice and fertilization in order to minimize
risk and maximize utilization of nutrients.

Table 17: Risk levels in relation to crop and handling strategy.

Inherent People exposed Urine
Crop Example Application time****
risk to risk storage***
No storage
Slow growing crops Pineapple Low Workers In early stages
needed
Ornamental flowers, garden Up until one month No storage
Low Workers
plants before harvest needed

High growing crops not picked Up until one month No storage

Banana. Low Workers
off the ground and with “cover” before harvest needed

Millet, Rice,
Grain crops processed before Up until one month No storage
Sorgum, Low Workers
eating before harvest needed
Maize
Hanging plants not in direct con-
Consumers and Up until one month Storage
tact with the ground and usually Egg plant Medium
workers before harvest needed
not eaten raw
Mango,
Fruits likely picked from the Outside the fruiting sea- No storage
passion Low Workers
ground and eaten directly* son** needed
fruit, orange
Hanging plants partly or fully in
Consumers and Up until one month Storage
contact with the soil and eaten Tomatoes High
workers before harvest needed
raw
Cassava, Protection of Up until one month No storage
Root crops processed/cooked Low
potatoes workers before harvest needed
Consumers and Up until one month Storage
Root crops eaten raw Carrots High
workers before harvest needed
Leafy crops on the ground that Up until one month No storage
Spinach Low Workers
are cooked before harvest needed
Lettuce, Consumers and Up until one month Storage
Leafy crops eaten raw High
cabbage workers before harvest needed
Cotton, oil Up until one month No storage
Energy or fibre crops Low Workers
crops before harvest needed

* If vegetables are grown under fruit trees then the measures of precaution or barriers for vegetables need to be observed.
** If fertilization takes place close to the fruiting season, then precautionary measures or barriers need to be observed such as
storage of urine.
*** The storage time for urine is not indicated, since this also depends on local factors such as temperature or design of collection
system (degree of faecal contamination).
****Urine application should take place considering crop needs and common practice in the region. Continuous application can
take place where so noted, from a barrier point of view. A waiting period of one month should always be observed.

26
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Withholding period

Practical guidance:
The time between urine application and harvest
should be at least one month.

A withholding period between the last urine application

and the harvest is a barrier that provides time for
pathogen die-off. Risk calculations have shown that a
1 month withholding period results in substantial risk
level reduction and combined with the other barriers in
the multiple barrier approach the result will be a risk far
below 10-6 DALY for pathogenic bacteria, viruses and
parasitic protozoa (WHO 2006). Therefore, a withholding
period of 1 month between last urine fertilization and
harvest is always recommended. The withholding time is
based on the die-off of organisms due to external factors
like drying, temperature and UV-light on the surface of
leafy plants. The die-off may be lower in the soil. This
does not contradict the recommendation to apply the
urine in the soil. For root-crops that are eaten raw (radish,
carrots, onions etc), the post-harvest handling is of
importance. However, it needs to be strongly stated that
in these situations use of urine still constitutes a lower
risk than sludge, manure, wastewater or irrigation with Figure 23: Application of urine using
contaminated surface water. protective equipment. Photo: Linus Dagerskog

Application techniques
Practical guidance:
Urine application close to the ground is
recommended in order to reduce contact with edible
parts and minimize spreading of urine drops.
Urine application close to the ground is recommended.
This reduces the direct contact with the edible parts
of the plants. For example – do not apply urine with a
watering can on the edible or foliar parts of vegetables).
The urine should be incorporated into the soil either
mechanically or by subsequent irrigation with water.
If urine is applied before or during sowing/planting
a further die-off will occur of potential remaining
pathogens (see with-holding period) and thereby the
risk will be reduced.
Protective Equipment
Although there is little risk associated with treated
urine it is recommended if possible that agricultural
fieldworkers wear appropriate protective clothing
(shoes and gloves) as an effective barrier to reduce
potential health risks. This is of importance when
heavy faecal cross-contamination has occurred and
is of less concern for urine than wastewater or sludge
application. A heavy faecal load can lead to exposure
through bare skin by hook-worms and during direct
contact and subsequent contact with the mouth (the
faecal-oral route) while touching the face, eating and
smoking. In these situations gloves reduce the risk.
Protective clothing is of concern not just for the workers
but also so that contaminants are not transported to the
households/families.
Handwashing with soap after urine handling
Washing hands with soap after urine handling can be
considered an additional barrier in the system. Self-
evidently basic recommended health and hygiene
practices like hand washing after toilet use and prior to
meals should always be observed.

27
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Food handling and cooking
Harvested crops should always be washed before
consumption. Cooking or peeling of fruits/vegetables
is another effective measure to considerably reduce
the associated health risks since pathogen reduction
between 2-6 log units can be achieved.
Health and hygiene promotion
Effective hygiene education and promotion should
be conducted in order to inform local growers and
food handlers in markets, restaurants, home and
food kiosks how and why they should wash produce
fertilized with urine.
28
Microbial treatment of urine
Microbial treatment of urine has been introduced in
order to lower smell and increase the nutrient value of
urine. This has been studied in Mexico since the 1990´s
(Arroyo, 2005), and in ongoing (2010) projects in the
Philippines (Terra Preta Sanitation, Xavier University).
The concept is to introduce microorganisms into the
urine at storage. Microbial inoculation liquid or ordinary
compost/vermicompost is added to the urine container
prior to storage. The fermentation prevents the bacterial
urease process that hydrolyses urea into ammonia
and bicarbonate, which usually happens during urine
storage. Added benefits may be less volatile ammonia
and lower smell.

Handling system for use of urine as fertilizer
T he following section describes the handling chain
for urine from toilet to field, for different settings.
Regarding the household, a handling system is easy
to construct and major points of consideration have
already been covered in the text. A good example of
small scale use of urine as a fertilizer and the handling
system is from the Phillipines where an allotment
garden manual has been compiled (PUVeP, 2008).
But for large scale settings there are few functioning
examples and many see the need to explore this subject
in order to move urine diversion systems into full scale
and mainstream function. The text below presents two
major such systems, both functioning, but with their
respective drawbacks. Further development in this area
is neccessary.
Larger scale systems
This section presents two cases to demonstrate the
complexity of handling systems for urine. One case
is from Sweden, where urine is collected from 250
households for use in agriculture, and one case is from
Burkina Faso where more than 1 000 toilets have been
built in urban Ouagadougou and urine is used in crop
production.
Important aspects to consider when planning
transportation of urine are choice of technique,
entrepreneur, hygiene and documentation.
Municipalities usually have companies that are
contracted to transport waste fractions generated within
the municipality, see figure 24. An interesting alternative
is to contract the farmer who will be using the urine
for transportation services. This way the farmer can
generate some additional income from handling the
urine. The hygiene aspect must be considered, and the
entrepreneur must have information about measures
such as proper hand hygiene after handling of urine.
A mouth cover is not necessary, more important is to
eleminate spill and to maintain good hand hygiene. All
transport should be documented as a part of a quality
control system.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Figure 24: A conventional “Honey-sucker”,
collecting sludge from on-site waste-water
systems.  Photo: Västerviks Municipality, Sweden
An important challenge for the sustainability of large
scale urine handling systems is to minimize the costs
of the system towards the goal that no subsidies would
be needed. Experience from Sweden and Burkina Faso
show that the fertilizer value of urine, when valued as
chemical fertilizer, is not sufficient to pay for additional
costs in the handling system such as transportation or
storage, and thus an emptying fee is probably needed
from the household and/or a subsidy by the municipality
to pay for the handling system. The cost of handling
and applying the urine as a fertilizer is in many cases
lower than the cost of flushing the urine to a wastewater
treatment plant where the N and P are removed.
Box 6: Quality control and certification
One need for the farmers is to insure that the
company buying the crops does not have objec-
tions to the choice of human fertilizers. Recent
development has seen quality control systems
for crop production evolving, and this is appli-
cable for the fertilizers as well. In Sweden, certi-
fication schemes have been developed for sew-
age sludge, as well as digested and composted
household waste, supporting the use of these fer-
tilizers in agriculture. A similar setup for source
separated urine is proposed, which would sim-
plify more widespread use of urine in Swedish
agriculture.
29
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Case one: reuse of urine in Vaxholm, Sweden
Kullön is located on an island in the municipality of
Vaxholm, not far from Stockholm. 250 households
have one or two urine diverting double flushing
toilets installed. Urine is collected in groups of 10-
20 m2 tanks that serve from 5 to 40 houses each. The
system has been described in ESR report 2006:1 by
Kvarnström et al; http://www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/
Urine_Diversion_2006-1.pdf
Two times a year urine is collected by lorry, on
commission by the household owners organised in a
collective. This is a service that the household owners
pay for outside their normal taxes for waste and
wastewater collection which has caused conflicts in the
area.
Figure 25: Inhabitants of Kullön inspecting the
urine tanks. Photo: Anna Richert
The urine is taken to a farmer where it is stored for
more than 6 months. The farmer is paid for the storage
and treatment by the housing collective at Kullön,
and has entered this project as a part of the business
diversification of his agricultural enterprise.
The stability of the system is at stake since the
municipality, who has the responsibility for collection
and treatment of household waste, has not fully taken
the responsibility for this. Increased costs in the system
have been imposed on the households, whereas the
households do not see why their sanitation system
which has been proved more environmentally friendly,
should cost them more.
The farmer using the urine needs to show a certificate
to the buyers of his products in order to guarantee the
quality and traceability of the used fertilizers. This
30
demands documentation and analyes of the urine in
initial stages.
Overall the system has taken much much work to initiate
and an overlying conclusion is that the handling system
from an institutional point of view was not fully taken
into account when the housing area was planned, which
has caused problems. However, a functional system for
the use of urine in agriculture exists, and the farmer is
quite content with the business that he is running.
Figure 26: The slurry spreader comes to fill up
urine for application to winter sown wheat in
spring. Photo: Anna Richert.
Case 2: Urine collection and use in urban
Ouagadougou
During 2006 to 2009, a project was implemented in
Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, with financing from the
EU, GTZ and CREPA (Coulibaly, 2009). Through a
broad range of activities the project aimed to support
1,000 households in obtaining appropriate and
affordable closed-loop sanitation. A key point in this
urban project is that it established an urban supply chain
for urine and faeces from urine diverting dry toilets
(UDDT). The project has so far:
• built 1000 UDDT;
• supported the establishment of two supply chains
for the collection, transport and distribution of the
raw and the treated excreta;
• trained 1,000 gardeners to use these products as
fertilizers;
• supported 20 SMEs (small to medium enterprises)
who are now involved in system operation;

• trained 100 artisans (masons etc.) to provide
the necessary infrastructure, in particular the
construction of the toilets.
The physical infrastructure of the ecosan system
consists of:
• UDDTs at household level and at public places in
four sectors of Ouagadougou;
• four treatment sites called eco-stations for urine
and faeces in the same four sectors, each run by a
separate association;
• collection, transport and delivery of urine, dried
faeces, sanitised urine and of sanitised dried faeces;
• the use of sanitised urine and faeces in peri-urban
gardening.
The vaults are emptied by the collection service workers
and urine and faeces are brought to an eco-station for a
further drying/storage period and for final packaging.
For the transport to the eco-stations, urine is collected
in 20 L yellow jerricans, and faeces are transported
in plastic bags. Every full 20-L jerrican collected is
replaced by an empty one. A central point of the urban
Figure 27: Components of urine collection system in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
ecosan system is the treatment site, or eco-station,
which connects the households with the gardeners/
smallscale farmer. Two of the four ecostations are built
near the sites of market-gardening. The eco-stations
are equipped with the sanitizing equipment required
(plastic tanks for urine and storage pits for faeces) and
accompanying infrastructure such as a hangar for the
working material, space for the donkeys which pull
trolleys of urine jerricans and a storage room for the
finished fertilizer products. The number of plastic urine
tanks varies from 6 (in small sectors 19 and 27) to
12 (large sectors 17 and 30). For sanitisation, urine is
transferred to the eco-stations and stored for one month
in closed 1 m3 plastic tanks, while faeces from double
vault UDDTs are stored and kept dry in chambers (total
volume: 6 m3) for two months.
To facilitate the collection in the households, the sectors
are divided into smaller areas. Each team of collectors
has to visit all latrines within 2 weeks. The collectors
may have to cover distances of up to 12 km (the daily
work time is estimated to 5-6 hours). In total, the four
associations operate with approx. 28 people, 10 donkeys
and 10 donkey carts.
At the beginning of the project, the technical team
and facilitators informed the households and farmers
Photos: CREPA
31
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
about the benefits of using ecosan products for crop
production. To raise acceptance among the users
(gardeners, farmers and consumers), it was decided
to rename the urine and faeces. Thus, sanitised urine
is sold in green 20-L cans labelled “birg-koom” in the
local language which means liquid fertilizer, while
sanitised dried faeces are sold in bags labelled “birg-
koenga” meaning solid fertilizer.
One important aspect of the project was to ensure the
quality and the safety of the ecosan products which
are to be sold to the farmers. The gardeners and
small-scale farmers were trained to use the treated
urine and faeces on different vegetables (e.g. Tomato,
cabbage, cucumber, zucchini, carrot, salad, aubergine,
strawberry, etc.). Moreover, samples of sanitised urine
und dried faeces are sometimes taken and analysed by
the National Water Laboratory (Laboratoire National
des Eaux) for N, P and K values, and for pathogens
32
such as E. coli. Results shown that sanitized urine is
safe (without pathogens) and, used as fertilizer, has no
negative impact on the environment and the health.
One important question has been the economic
stability of the supply chain. As established, the costs
for running the collection system are higher than the
finances that are generated in the system, through a fee
to the household and through selling urine and faeces at
market prices. The fee for households was $US 0.60 per
month and the urine was sold to the farmers from the
eco station at $US 0.20 per jerry can of 20 litres, faeces
at $US 0.10 per kg. This means that there is a need to
cut costs without risking the safety of the reuse system.
The project is described in the SuSanA case study
format: http://www.susana.org/images/documents/06-
case-studies/en-susana-cs-burkina-faso-ouagadougou-
uddt-2010.pdf

Gender aspects
Practical guidance:
In order to achieve sustainable use of urine in crop
production the gender perspective needs to be
included in implementation. This can for example
mean to consider the different roles of men and
women regarding the production of cash crops
and food for the household.
T he process to integrate a gender perspective
in institutions and operations is called gender
mainstreaming, a process to insure that intervention
effects on women and men are anticipated and
deliberate. Well planned, this should lead to additional
benefits that go beyond good water and sanitation
performance, such as economical gain, empowerment
of women, increased equality and benefits to children
(African Development Bank, 1998).
The gender aspect of ecological sanitation has been
described in Dankelmann (2009) and in SuSanA 2009,
Working Group 12. However, regarding the specific
question of how use of urine in crop production
influences the gender question, very little has been done.
There are important gender perspectives in agriculture
linked to ecological sanitation, and further research and
documentation would be valuable.
Women are responsible for basic household food
security in many countries in the world. With agriculture
based on ecological sanitation, families could save
money by growing their own fruit and vegetables and/
or selling some of the produce. This, however, has to be
weighed against the significant time constraints faced
by many women, particularly those who are the main
or sole income- earners for their households. Moreover,
women are often constrained by lower access to
formal education and training, relative to men, and
are often confined to the informal sector. Small scale
agriculture, as a means of ensuring greater food security
and potential supplementary income, is particularly
attractive to women as it allows them to work close
to their homes and facilitates the carrying out of other
traditionally important roles, such as care of children,
the elderly and the sick. The importance of ensuring
that women as well as men are involved in planning
and decision-making on agricultural initiatives, and
have equitable access to training and extension services
needs, however, to be emphasized.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Figure 28: Harvest of urine fertilized tomatoes.
Photo: Linus Dagerskog, CREPA/SEI
Both women and men need access to cash incomes and
would be assumed to welcome the potential economic
benefits of ecological sanitation, if the opportunities
for small-scale entrepreneurship in construction and
operation of latrines and collection systems as well as
starting small market gardens are made available to both
women and men. It has not yet been documented, but
a potential conflict between household food production
and the production of cash crops may arise as the
knowledge increases of urine as a fertilizer. How this
would affect the gender balance is unclear but in many
situations, the household garden with implications for
food security is the responsibility of the woman, and the
cash crop production is the responsibility of the men in
the family. There is also a question relating to the value
of the urine. If urine is sold as a fertilizer, who in the
family will access this financial input? Traditionally,
women take responsibility for waste products in the
household, but if they have a value, will this change?
With regard to the issue of waste handling, to what
extent will reuse of urine affect the traditional roles in
this area? To what extent will the labor involved increase
the women’s, men’s or children’s work burden? How
are such issues affected by whether there is a market
for urine or not? Further documentation and research is
recommended.
Specific attention is also needed for the hygienic needs
of women and girls. During a menstrual cycle, blood
will enter the urine and faeces chambers when women
use a urine diverting toilet. Usually, the amount of
33
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

menstrual blood is small in comparison to the amount

of urine in a container. The urine may be slightly more
reddish in color, but its properties are unchanged by
the addition of menstrual blood and there is no threat
to the sanitizing or composting process or to its future
use as agricultural fertilizer. A more pressing issue is
most likely the impression of the urine when it contains
menstrual blood, which is closely linked to the issue of
dignity and well-being of those using the system and
handling the urine.

34
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Institutional aspects of agricultural use of urine

U se of human excreta often falls outside existing

regulatory frameworks. This is increasingly
evident for agricultural application, where the new
fertilizers are often not defined in the legislatory or
advisory texts of many countries. The weak legal and
institutional framework in many countries makes it
difficult to implement and scale up innovative sanitation
solutions. The following text gives some support in the
work to establish an institutional setup for use of urine
in crop production.

Key aspects for establishing an institutional setup for

the use of urine in agriculture
Figure 29: Small scale entrepreneur using
Practical guidance: urine as a fertilizer.
Photo:Linus Dagerskog, CREPA/SEI
The following activities can help to establish an
institutional setup for urine use in agriculture.
- Stakeholder analysis: Identify stakeholders and
clarify drivers and restrictions for each one in Include the farmers in the initial planning
relation to the implementation of urine use in When sanitation systems are planned, farmers are
crop production frequently not involved from the start. If farmers
- Include and target the farmers in the initial are allowed to influence the implementation of
planning sustainable sanitation systems from the start,
- Organize an arena for feed-back and
problems can be avoided that would otherwise lead to
interaction between stakeholders
- Organize local communities so that there is a sub-optimization and economic problems. If farmers
structure for implementation and a structure for are involved from the beginning, then for example the
monitoring implementation of storage and collection systems can
be adapted to the possibilities and constraints of the
farming community.
Institutional aspects include how to organize a system.
This organization is done by defining roles, setting up
a legal framework, policies and institutions to manage
the system. The following points suggest activities that
are of importance when implementing an institutional
setup for use of urine.

Identify stakeholders and clarify drivers and

restrictions for each stakeholder.
There are many stakeholders in a recycling sanitation
system and it is important that the drivers and restrictions
of each stakeholder are understood. This is especially
important for farmers as they are key stakeholders.
Farmers are businessmen and the recycling system can
often become more sustainable if the farmers are also
used as entrepreneurs for the collection and handling of
the products, as this can give benefits corresponding to Figure 30: Information about productive
their business potential. sanitation in Niger. Photo:Linus Dagerskog

35
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Organize an arena for feed-back and interaction
It is also important that there is an arena where
the different stakeholders of the system meet and
communicate. This is especially so, since the systems
are new and thus their improvement potential is
large. An arena where agriculture stakeholders can
meet stakeholders within the domains of sanitation,
environment, planning, technical implementation, etc,
is of vital importance.
Organize local communities so that there is a
structure for implementation and a structure for
monitoring.
Local government has a key role as facilitator and
regulator, finding ways to promote innovation while
Box 7: Case study regulatory aspects of urine
use in agriculture in Sweden
The Swedish legislation embraces the idea of nutri-
ent reuse and includes sustainability and protection
of the environment in different pieces of legisla-
tion and policies. The Environmental Code (http://
www.naturvardsverket.se/en/In-English/Menu/
Legislation-and-other-policy-instruments/The-En-
vironmental-Code ), dating from 1999, contains
several opportunities for the implementation of
closed nutrient loop oriented sanitation technolo-
gies for on-site sanitation in Sweden. Recycling
and efficient use of natural resources are integral
objectives of the Code as is the precautionary prin-
ciple; the polluter pays principle and the concept
of “Best Available Technology”. These principles
are, however, not always used by the local envi-
ronmental authorities when specifying the require-
ments for on-site sanitation system. In accordance
with the Environmental Code, urine is considered a
household waste fraction and the responsibility for
collection and treatment falls on the municipality.
This fact has made the municipal departments (of-
ten the technical departments) responsible for solid
waste in Sweden look closer into their responsibility
for urine and the implications of urine collection
and reuse. The Planning and Building Act gives the
municipalities the ability to single-handedly decide
on the spatial planning and infrastructure develop-
ment in the local situation but this has never been
used to enable closed-loop approaches for waste-
water systems.
In parallel to the Environmental Code, National
Environmental Quality Standards were estab-
36
holding service providers accountable and achieving a
degree of protection to the environment and health
Regulatory framework
The regulatory framework is often not well developed
regaring the implementation of systems for recycling
of nutrients from sanitation systems. The question may
often be whether there is anything that specifically
prohibits the use of urine in crop production, such as
there is in Germany, or if the use is simply unregulated
and therefore possible. Ideally, a regulatory framework
facilitates the recirculation of nutrients from sanitation
systems, and sets targets for environment or health that
use of urine in crop production can help in meeting.
lished in 1999 (http://www.naturvardsverket.se/
en/In-English/Menu/Legislation-and-other-policy-
instruments/Environmental-quality-standards ).
Sweden’s Environment Policy is based on sixteen
environmental quality standards for different are-
as. These describe what quality and state of the en-
vironment should be to be sustainable in the long
term. Recirculation of natural resources (including
nutrients) is included and one of the targets states
that by 2015 at least 60% of phosphorus com-
pounds present in wastewater should be recovered
for use on productive land, out of which half should
be returned to arable land1. Another example of
the mainstreaming of nutrient recycling is the re-
vision of the agricultural use of sludge statutes ,
issued by the Swedish Environmental Protection
Agency in 1995, which also will regulate the use of
human urine in agriculture as well as other waste-
water fractions. The proposal is expected to be de-
cided on in 2010. The background to the statutes
proposal and also the background to the target of
60% P recovery are described in Kvarnström et al
(2002).
The conclusion is that there is a relatively enabling
legislative environment for recycling and reuse of
nutrients from sanitation systems in Sweden. What
is missing are economic incentives that could un-
leash the on-site sanitation market, and the inte-
gration of reuse aspects in the strategic municipal
planning.
1 http://www.miljomal.nu/Environmental-Objectives-
Portal/
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Practical guidance: The International Federation of Organic Agriculture

Key activities to establish a regulatory framework
that enables and facilitates use of urine in crop
production:
- establish use of excreta in local, regional and
national legislative texts for health, sanitation,
environment and agriculture
- establish correct terminology on use of excreta
in regulatory texts
- invite legislators on local, regional and national
level to discuss the question of reuse of excreta
from toilet systems
- start work in setting up policy and targets
regarding use of excreta at local, regional and
national level.
Movements, IFOAM, indicates that source
separated human excreta which is monitored for
contamination is not to be directly applied on edible
parts of plants. In addition, there is a restriction
in the use of human excreta on food crops, but
exceptions may be made where detailed sanitation
requirements are established by the standard-
setting organization to prevent the transmission
of pathogens (http://www.ifoam.org/about_ifoam/
standards/norms/norm_documents_library/Norms_
ENG_V4_20090113.pdf ).

Urine use in organic agriculture

Urine is a perfect fertilizer for organic production,

where synthetic mineral fertilizers are not allowed.
However, there are certain barriers to the use of urine
in production systems when labelling for organic
production is used. These barriers are expressed
for example in regulations by the European Union.
Organic agriculture is governed by the European
Union regulation (EEG) 2092/91 which applies
to all certified European organic agriculture. This
regulation regulates among other things the inputs
allowed in organic agriculture. Human urine is at
present not included as a fertilizer in the EU regulation
which makes it difficult for organic farmers in Europe
or exporting to a European market to use human
urine. The Swedish Organic Agriculture Certifying
Organization (KRAV) has achieved an exemption
for one farmer, who has a closed loop system where
nutrients are recycled and food delivered in the same
community, resting on the assumption that if there is a
proximity between the community and the farmer, the
risk of contamination or unsustainble practices will
be diminished.

37
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Crop experiments using urine as a fertilizer

Practical guidance:
Crop experiments should be started on local
level in order to establish the use of urine as a
fertilizer in the local agricultural community. The
level of experimentation can range from simple
demonstration trials to scientifically rigorous
research. In any case, demonstration trials should
be started in a place that is easily accessible to
farmers and househols owners.

W hen planning a crop fertilization experiment Figure 31: Spinach (Swiss Chard) fertilized
the first and most important question is to with urine (left) and without fertilizer (right).
Photo: Peter Morgan
define the objective of the experiment. The answer
to this question has a decisive influence on how
the experiment should be planned, its costs and
complexity. If the answer is that the desired result
is increased knowledge among local population,
a simple demonstration trial showing yields with
urine, with mineral fertilizer and without fertilizer
can be used. If the answer is increased knowledge
in the farming community and for extension
professionals, a more extensive experiment
allowing statistical analysis is needed. The
following sections describe different strategies to
increase knowledge about cropping systems where
urine is used as a fertilizer.
Figure 32: Field trials from Niger. Urine
fertilized millet to the right. Photo: Linus Dagerskog
Demonstration experiments

Demonstration experiments are very useful and
flexible tools as they are cheap, quick and easy to
set up. They can be small pot experiments or large
field experiment. A good idea is often to set up small
demonstration trials just outside the entrance doors
to the extension office, in schools or other places in
the centre of the society where many persons can be
reached. There is no need for repetition and the need
for documentation is small. But it is good if the results
are clearly visible and therefore the fertilization level
should preferably be large and the water factor well
controlled. The photos below show pot experiments
by Peter Morgan Zimbabwe and field experiments in
Rwanda.
Controlled experiments to test the
fertilizing potential
In this type of experiments, as many factors as possible
should be controlled e.g. the amount of water , weeds,
insects and fungi, and maybe even climate, and the
crop should be established in the optimal way. These
experiments can be done on a very small scale, pot
or lab scale, and they often yield good, repeatable
and reliable results. Due to this small scale, this type
of experiment is actually the cheapest one for getting
repeatable and reliable results. To get statistically
significant and conclusive results several repetitions
should be done, which due to the small scale often is
fairly easy and cheap.

38

The advantage of this type of well controlled
experiment is that the variation between years is small
even if it is performed outdoors. This means that after
just one experimental season the result can be fairly
representative. Another advantage that this type of
experiment shows the full fertilizing potential of urine
to the crop in question. One disadvantage however,
is that this full potential might not at all show the
fertilizing effect that a farmer will experience in a real
situation.
Controlled experiments to test the
real life fertilizing effect
This type of experiment is much more realistic, as the
same crop management procedures are followed for
the experimental plots as are usually followed by the
farmers. This means that if the year is very dry and
the crop is not irrigated, then the crop might suffer
severely and the fertilizing effect might be negligible
as it is the water factor that decides the yield. Likewise,
other years it might be weeds, fungi or insects, that has
decisive influence on the crop yield. These experiments
are often participatory and carried out on farms.
Repetitions in order to carry out statistical analysis
increase the possibility of drawing conclusions from
this type of research, but it is often a challenge to ensure
that the treatment actually is the same on the different
farms involved. .
This type of experiment has the clear advantage that
its results are much more realistic and more easily
transferred to, and scaled up by the farmers than the
fully controlled experiments previously described. It,
however, also has the clear disadvantage that the yield
results are very much influenced by the weather and
season, which vary between years. This means that to
be fairly sure to get any type of representative results
normally at least 3 years and preferably 4-5 years of
crop experiments are needed.
Farm and crop rotation experiments
This is the most complex, realistic and most difficult
and expensive type of experiment. While the two
previous types of experiments normally are confined to
one crop at a time, in this type of experiment, the full
range of crops normally grown by a farmer each year
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
is included in the experiment, and the effect on farm
economy of fertilizing these crops is evaluated. This is
a highly relevant type of experiment, especially under
marginal farming conditions, but these experiments are
very resource demanding, as they include several crops
and need to be repeated at least 3-5 years.
Statistical considerations
For all types of controlled crop experiments (not
including demonstration trials), the experimental
plots should be as even as possible, but even so, the
comparison between the treatments should be repeated
several times, if possible 3-5 times in the same field.
The order of the treatments should be randomized
within each repetion.
Table 18: Example of experimental layout.
Repetition 1 T4 T3 T2 T5 T1
Repetition 2 T4 T1 T2 T3 T5
Repetition 3 T2 T1 T3 T5 T4
Repetition 4 T1 T5 T4 T2 T3
In table 18, 4 repetitions with 5 treatments (T1-T5)
in randomized order in each repetition are shown in
a simplified experimental layout. While the whole
blocks should be treated according to the plan, it is
only the harvest of the central area that should be
measured and allowed to influence the results, in
order to minimize the edge effects of the small plots.
Dissemination of results
The volume of published results from projects where
urine has been introduced as a fertilizer is rapidly
increasing. However, there are numerous knowledge
gaps, and therefore it is important to capitalize on
experimentation that is done by publishing results
in fora that reach as many professionals as possible.
It is quite important to reach not only agricultural
professionals, but also professionals within sanitation,
sociology, environment, etc. as well as the general
public and local target groups.
39
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Web-based tools for calculation
A simple excel-based tool has been developed
for calculation of collected amounts as well as
nutrient content and value. The tool is available at
http://www.sanergy-net.de/calculator.php. Similar tools
can well be developed for the extension level in order to
get a view of the potential for nutrient reuse when urine
is used as a fertilizer.
A simple calculator has been created (2010) to provide
information on crop productivity increases from using
treated urine (Takin Ruwa) as fertilizer compared to
unfertilized, for millet growing in Niger. http://www.
Figure 33: A sample page from the Aguie calculator for providing information on crop
productivity increases from using treated urine. 
40
ecosanres.org/aguie/model.htm The model is built
in Excel. The model requires two input variables to
function. The input variables are a combination of
number of people, amount of urine, cropping area and
application rate. Using these input variables, the model
calculates the potential crop productivity for millet. The
output is given in two groupings, one for millet without
fertilizer and one for millet with Takin Ruwa fertilizer.
Both the crop productivity and the yield are given,
including a range that is based on the standard deviation
for the source data.
AP-Aguie 2009

PART 2 · How to develop local guidelines
I
n order to be implementable in a local context the
wealth of information given in this book so far needs
to be further translated or adapted to respective local
site conditions. The following chapter provides some
recommendations on how local guidelines can be
developed and structured and it summarizes the most
important factors that directly or indirectly influence
farming activities related to urine use. Not all of the
listed aspects necessarily need to find their way into
the final guideline version at a local level and it is very
much up to local experts to finally decide on what needs
to be included. However the listed aspects set the frame
of what generally needs to be considered for successful
local adaptation. Examples of local guidelines for urine
use in crop production are presented in annexes.
The main aim of a local guideline as presented in this
text is to be a national, regional or local support tool
that is clearly targeted at agricultural extension workers
and not the farmers. For farmer level frequently more
simplification is needed, which can be done by the
extension workers on the basis of the local guidelines
developed using these instructions.
The productive sanitation approach
A general understanding of the concept of reuse-
oriented productive sanitation is a prerequisite for
successful local implementation. If the concept is well
known no further explanation is necessary. Otherwise
a brief introduction on the reuse-oriented sustainable
sanitation approach, the link between sanitation
and agriculture, the global limitations in synthetic
fertilizer production, the resource value of urine and
its productive potential should be included prior to the
more practical oriented recommendations.
Links to more information:
- SuSanA WG 05 fact sheet (food security) ® http://
www.susana.org/images/documents/05-working-
groups/wg05/en-wg5-factsheet-2008-05-28.pdf
SuSanA vision document I (‘towards more sustainable
sanitation solutions’) ® http://www.susana.org/
images/documents/04-meetings/side-events/2009-
singapore/01-en-panesar-introduction-susana-wts-
singapore-2009.pdf
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Food Urine + faeces
PEOPLE
SOIL
Crops Safe fertiliser
Figure 34: Closing the loop.
Local site conditions
Although people working in agriculture usually know
quite well how their respective local climate, soil and
water conditions are it might be relevant to include a
chapter that specifically focuses on how this impacts
on urine use.
Climatic conditions
Information on climatic region, temperature, rainfall
pattern, humidity and seasonal specifics. For example,
in arid regions with low rainfall and high temperature
evaporation might be very high or in tropical areas with
high rainfall it should be recommended to apply urine
more often in smaller doses.
Water situation
General information on availability, sources and
potential contamination of water that is used for
plant irrigation. If data is locally not available
the water situation should be at least described
qualitatively.
Soil conditions
Basic information on soil quality and general soil
conditions that influence the foreseen agricultural
activity. This includes soil type and texture (e.g. if
soil is more sandy then more frequent fertilization
is needed) soil ph (acidity/alkalinity that affects the
availability of nutrients in the soil), as well as organic
matter content (fertilizing effect of urine lower on soils
with low organic matter content) and salinity (e.g.
if soil is saline organic material should be added as a
buffer or more water needs to be added). In many cases
this information is locally available. In any case good
agricultural practises should be observed in order to
maintain the soil fertility.
41
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Plant requirements and nutrient Table 19: Food supply (crops primary
content in urine equivalent) in different countries in 2000.
FAO 2003
This section of the local guideline gives instructions on
type of crops, nutrient requirements, need for urine as Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
a fertilizer and the benefits of using urine as a fertilizer. (kg/cap/a) (kg/cap/a) (kg/cap/a)
The section on benefits is especially important, and can
be used as an advocacy text not only for agricultural China 3.5 0.4 1.3
extension personnel.
Haiti 1.9 0.2 0.9

Type of crops India 2.3 0.3 1.1

The type of crop(s) determines the farming system, soil
requirements as well as amount of nutrients and water
South Africa 3.0 0.3 1.2
required for optimal plant growth. If only urine will be
used as a fertilizer it is recommended to give priority to
Uganda 2.2 0.3 1.0
crops that have high value and respond well to N (e.g.
maize, spinach). Sweden 4.0 0.4 1.0

Plant nutrient requirements

Demand of primary macronutrients (N,P,K) that are
required for optimal plant growth and harvesting results.
It will determine the amount of urine (depending on
its respective local nutrients content) that needs to be
applied during the planting season.
Plant density and distance
Recommended number of plants per area and distance
between crops that affects area productivity and
determines the degree of competition between the
plants.
Amount of urine produced
The estimated total amount of urine that can be used
for crop production should be presented since it
directly affects the area size that can be fertilized
and the potential value for the farmers. Depending
on the amount of water consumed and on the climate
conditions one adult person produces around 1 - 1.5
litre of urine per day. It should be kept in mind that in
some cases only part of this amount can be collected
(e.g. other sorts of toilets or no toilets are used during
the day, local habits of peeing in the shower etc.)
Nutrient content in urine
Content of macro- and micronutrients in human urine
that determine the amount of urine to be applied to
plants. If local data is not available the following
average amounts of primary macronutrients can be
assumed for the following countries:
Value of urine as a fertilizer
The monetary value of the nutrients in urine can be
calculated by determining the synthetic fertilizer
equivalent of the basic macronutrients (N,P,K) in
urine times the current local synthetic fertilizer prices.
To make it more demonstrative and more impressive
illustrate the potential of the urine use this figure can be
multiplied with the number of household members or
even with the entire population.
Value of yield increase that can be attributed
to urine use
The value of reusing urine in crop production is much
higher than the mere value of the nutrients contained
in urine. The yield increase that can be attributed to
the application of nutrient rich urine compared to no
fertilizer application can make a case for the resource
reuse in agriculture. Data based on local field trials if
there are any such available.
Application recommendations
Application rate
Amount of urine that should be applied per cropping
season. Because of its high nitrogen content urine
should be applied at a rate corresponding to the
desired N requirements of the plant. A starting
point for estimating the urine application are local
recommendations for use of commercial mineral
N fertilizers (Urea or Ammonium fertilizers). If
these crop and region specific recommendations

42

are available the amount of urine needed can then be
calculated by using the data of the respective local urine
nutrient content. Another option is to back-calculate
the amount of urine needed from the estimated amount
of nutrients removed by the crops at harvest. However,
a lot of this information might not be available
particularly on small-scale household level. In this
case it is recommended to conduct experiments prior to
the actual implementation to gain first experiences on
appropriate application levels. Most farmers anyway
will soon get a feel for the right amount of urine that is
needed for optimal plant growth.
Dilution
Urine can be applied neat or diluted with water
and advice should be given on appropriate dilution
ratios (or non-dilution respectively) depending
on the local conditions. There is no standard
recommendation for dilution/non-dilution and the
existing recommendations vary widely depending on
the local conditions. Dilution increases the volume
to be spread and thus also increases labour, transport
expense, equipment needed etc. particularly in larger-
scale systems. Advantages of dilution include a
noticeable odour reduction and a decreased risk of
over-application, in order not to be toxic to the plants.
Pros and cons should be properly weighed. Levels
of dilution can vary between 1:15 (1 part urine to 15
parts water) and 1:1. Most common dilution ratios are
1:3 or 1:5. However urine should always be applied
at the rate corresponding to the desired application
rate of N, while additional water should be applied
according to the water needs of the plants.
Application time
Recommendations on when and how often the urine
should be applied should ideally be given in an easy
to understand schedule. Good availability of nutrients
is particularly important in early stages of cultivation.
Once the crop enters its reproductive stage it hardly
takes up any more nutrients. As a rule of thumb,
fertilization should stop after between 2/3 and 3/4
of the time between sowing and harvest. A waiting
period of one month between fertilization and harvest
should always be observed. As regards the risk of
nutrients leaching particularly in regions where there
is heavy rainfall during the cropping season, repeated
applications of urine may be an insurance against
losing all the nutrients in one rainfall event. The
total applied amount of urine and whether it should
preferably be applied once or several times also
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
depends on the nitrogen need of the plant and its root
size. Root size varies widely between different crops
and plants with inefficient or small root systems (e.g.
carrots, onions and lettuce) can benefit from repeated
applications of urine.
Application technique
Detailed recommendations on how the urine should be
applied should be given. For best fertilizing effect and
to avoid ammonia losses, urine should be incorporated
into the soil as soon as possible after application,
instantly if possible. A shallow incorporation is
enough, and different methods are possible. One is
to apply urine in small furrows that are covered after
application. Washing the nutrients into the soil with
subsequent application of water is another option.
When spreading urine, it should not be applied on
leaves or other parts of the plants, as this can cause
foliar burning. Spraying urine in the air should also
be avoided due to the risk of nitrogen loss through
gaseous emissions of ammonia and the hygiene risk
through aerosols. Drip irrigation with urine is another
possible application technique. However, when this
technique is used, measures must be taken to avoid
clogging of emitters. Some plants (e.g. tomatoes) in
their early stages are sensitive to having their roots
exposed to urine, while on many crops no negative
effect is seen at all. Therefore, before the sensitivity
of a crop is known, it is wise not to simultaneously
expose all the roots of the plant to urine, be it neat or
diluted. Instead, urine can be applied either prior to
sowing/planting or at such a distance from the plants
that the nutrients are within reach of the roots. For
annual plants this distance may be about 10 cm.
Combined application
Urine is a valuable nutrient source (particularly for
N) but due to its comparably high N and low organic
matter content it is often recommended to complement
urine application with other nutrient and organic
matter sources. The most obvious source that can be
recommended would be, of course, source-separated
faeces due to its high organic matter content and the
high P and K concentrations given that it is acceptable
for the users and associated health risks can be
properly managed. Another organic matter source
would be humus/compost that could be applied prior
to planting time. If the P and K demand of the plant
cannot be met with urine alone other P- and K-rich
mineral fertilizers might be a good complementary
solution.
43
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Risk management
Health risks
Health risks associated with the use of human urine in
plant production are generally low. The objective of a
section on health risks is to present credible information
on how to minimize the health risks when using urine as
a fertilizer. Groups that are potentially at risk comprise
collection personnel and field workers, households,
local communities and product consumers. As regards
other contaminating substances in human urine (heavy
metals, hormones and pharmaceuticals) possible health
risks are far smaller than those associated with the
common sanitation system and the risk for negative
effect on the quantity and quality of the crops is
negligible.
WHO Multi-barrier approach
In local guidelines it can be relevant to mention that the
WHO has presented international guidelines on the use
of urine in agriculture. The ‘WHO guidelines for the
safe use of wastewater, excreta and greywater use in
agriculture and aquaculture (2006) promote a flexible
multi-barrier approach for managing the health risks
associated with the use of excreta in agriculture. This
concept comprises a series of measures/barriers from
‘toilet to table’. Each of the barriers has the potential
to reduce health risks associated with the excreta use
and it is recommended by WHO to put in place several
of these barriers if needed in order to reduce the health
risk to an acceptable minimum. The local guidelines
should then present barriers that are relevant to the local
context, see section in Part 1 of this book. For more
Figure 35: Barrier concept for safe use of urine as a fertilizer.
44
information visit the WHO website: http://www.who.
int/water_sanitation_health.
Barrier I: Source separation
Source separation is an efficient barrier for reducing
the risks compared to a combined wastewater system.
A key objective of urine collection is to minimize faecal
cross-contamination.
Barrier II: Storage and treatment
It is recommended that prior to application urine should
be treated in order to sanitize the urine and reduce
microbial health risks. Storage at ambient temperature
is considered a viable treatment option. Recommended
storage times vary depending on the system type. This
also applies for cold climates since the temperature is
also a governing factor in the die-off. As a rule: The
longer storage, the better.
Urine should be stored in sealed containers in order to
prevent direct contact with the urine for humans and
animals . Urine should not be diluted while stored, to
provide a harsher environment for microorganisms and
increase die-off rate of pathogens.
Barrier III: Application techniques
Urine application close to the ground should always
be recommended. This reduces the direct contact with
the edible parts of the plants. For example – do not
apply urine with a water can on the edible or foliar
parts of vegetables. The urine should be incorporated
into the soil either mechanically or by subsequent
irrigation with water. If urine is applied before or during

sowing/planting a further die-off will occur of potential
remaining pathogens and thereby the risk.
Barrier IV: Crop restriction
When treated urine is used no particular crop restrictions
need to be applied. However as an additional safety
feature the urine use may be restricted to non-food
crops (e.g. cotton), crops that are processed (e.g. wheat)
or cooked before consumption (e.g. potato) as well as
crops/trees that allow for a minimum distance between
soil and harvested part of the crop. In general it can
be stated that the longer the time between application
and harvest – the less risky. Thus for crops with short
rotation times, like spinach, salad crops and radish the
risk will be higher, and the pretreatment should be better,
but in the case of for example pineapples (rotation time
1-2 years) the risk from urine is nonexistent.
Barrier V: Withholding period
A withholding period of one month between the
last urine application and the harvest is a barrier that
provides time for pathogen die-off, and is always be
recommended.
Barrer VI: Protective equipment
Although there is no high risk associated with treated
urine it is recommended if possible that agricultural
fieldworkers wear appropriate protective clothing
(shoes and gloves) as an additional effective barrier to
reduce potential health risks.
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
Barrier VII: Handwashing with soap after urine
handling
Washimg hands with soap after urine handling can be
considered an additional barrier in the system. Self-
evidently basic recommended health and hygiene
practices like hand washing after toilet use and prior to
meals should always be observed.
Barrier VIII: Food handling and cooking
Harvested crops should always be washed before
consumption. Cooking or peeling of fruits/vegetables
is another effective measure to considerably reduce the
associated health risks (pathogen reduction between 2-6
log units)
Barrier IX: Health and hygiene promotion
Effective hygiene education and promotion should be
conducted in order to inform local growers and food
handlers (in markets, restaurants, home and food kiosks)
how and why they should wash produce fertilized with
urine.
Handling systems
Information should be given here on the specifics of
the locally used collection, treatment and transport
components of the sanitation system.
Demonstration experiments and
dissemination strategy
Information should be taken and summarized from
local experimentation and the generic chapter.
45
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

PART 3 - Example of a local guideline

Guideline for application of sanitized urine (Takin Ruwa)

in the agricultural conditions of Niger

April 2010

SUMMARY

1 Introduction Foreword
2 Aim This guide was put together within the project
3 The potential of human urine as a fertilizer “Productive Sanitation – Aguié” which was executed
3.1 The quantity of fertlizers excreted by humans from October 2008 to February 2010. The project was
3.2 The charcteristics of urine as a fertilizer mainly financed by IFAD. CREPA, PPILDA and SEI
4 Urine collection have been project partners during the implementation
5 Mode of Takin Ruwa (sanitized urine) phase.
application
5.1 Application material This guide was put together by professor Moussa
5.2 Application to crops with space between the Baragé, independant consultant, in collaboration with
plants the SEI. It is destined towards agriculture extention
5.3 Application to crops planted densely officers as well as other persons and organizations
5.4 Fruit trees interested in the possibilities of reuse of human urine as
6 Application of sanitized urine (takin Ruwa) - a fertilizer the Niger context.
recommended periods and doses for different
crops
7 Security measures
8 Bibliography

Figure 36: Urinals.

Different simple urinals that allow for urine collection. The three photos to the left show the “bidur“ (jerry can with urine ). It is
made of a jerry can, funnel and a light bulb that avoids odors and nitrogen losses. The urinal can be off the ground or dug down
according to preference.

46
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Figure 37: Latrines.

During defecation, only the urine is canalized towards the recipient (jerry can) outside the toilet. The separation facilitates the
treatment and reduces problems with odors and flies in the toilets.

Excerpts from the guideline

Urine collection
Urine is easy to collecte either from urinals (figure 36) or from latrines (figure 37) that allow for separation of urine
and faeces.

Method for Takin Ruwa (sanitized urine) application

Application technique
Takin Ruwa can be applied with a watering can, bucket or directly from the jerry can. Metal easily rusts in contact
with urine, and should be well washed after use. Use a recipient of known volume to facilitate the application of the
recommended dose

Application using a Application with bucket Direct application using

watering can and cup the jerry-can

47
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Application to crops with space between the plants

To apply to single plants, make a furrow beside or around the plant or just a hole around 10 cm from the plant. Apply
the Takin Ruwa, and close the furrow or hole. The application is followed by watering to avoid toxicity effects
(option 1). The alternative is to apply the Takin Ruwa after a good rain (option 2)

Option 1: Application of Takin Ruwa followed by generous watering

Makea furrow or hole Apply the Takin Ruwa Close the Water down using generous
10cm from the plant in the furrow/hole furrow/hole amounts of water

Option 2: Apply the Takin Ruwa after a good rainfall

For crops grown during the rainy season (millet, sorghum etc…) the applications can be done after a good rainfall
of at least 15 mm.

Wait for a rainfall of Makea furrow or hole Apply the Takin Ruwa Close the
at least 15mm 10cm from the plant in the furrow/hole furrow/hole

48
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

Application to crops planted densely

If possible make furrows in a quadratic fashion with
a hoe, and apply the Takin Ruwa before closing the
furrows. If the crops are very dense, dilute the Takin
Ruwa at least 200 per cent (at least two volumes of
water for every volume of Takin Ruwa), and apply in
a uniform manner immediately followed by abundant
watering of the leaves (see drawings).

Dilute the Takin Apply the dilution Water the plants

Ruwa with water to the plants immediately after the
Takin Ruwa application

Fruit trees
For fruit trees, make a furrow 5-10
cm deep around the tree starting
from the distance of the canope
line. The width of the furrow can
be half the canope width, measured
from the edge towards the centre.
The application of Takin Ruwa
should be combined with compost
or manure application to supply
enough oligo elements.

The roots generally Make a furrow Apply Takin Ruwa in Cover the Takin Ruwa Water abundantly in
have the same length around the tree pro- the furrow all around with some soil. the furrow.
as the branches. portional to the line the tree.
of the canopy. The
furrow should not
reach the trunk.

49
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n

Application of sanitized urine (Takin Ruwa)
– recommended periods and doses for
different crops
The different doses and franctions presented in the table
on this page is based on the reults obtained from two
stations as well as the recommendations for nitrogen
fertilization in Niger, the nitrogen concentration of
Takin Ruwa being around 4.5 gN/l (the content of P,
K and oligoelements is lower) and finally the plants
nitrogen need. Bear in mind however that Takin Ruwa
is mainly a fast acting N-fertliizer and should be
complemented by the addition of P and K or an organic
base fertilizer. These Takin Ruwa recommendations
are also preliminary ; ongoing research will enrich this
technical guideline.

Table 20: Periods and doses of sanitized urine for different crops.

Melon
Applica- Auber- Onion, Cucum-
Tomato Pepper Potatos Lettuce Gombo /mar-
tion period gine garlic ber
row
Two weeks Sandy soil:
after sow- 0.5 litre 0.5 litre 0.6 2.5 litres / 1 litre / m2 1 litre / 0.5 0.5 0.5 litre /
ing or / plant / plant litre / m2 Clayey soil: m2 litre / litre / plant
planting plant 0.7 litre / plant plant
m2
Start of 2.5 litres / Sandy soil: 1.5 litres
the flow- 0.5 litre 0.7 litre 0.7 m2 applied 1 litre / m2 / m2 (at 0.7 1 0.7 litre /
ering (3 / plant / plant litre / at the start Clayey soil: the start of litre / litre / plant
weeks plant of the of 0.7 litre / the bulb plant plant
after the tuberiza- m2 forming,
first appli- tion (around (2 weeks around
cation) 4 weeks after the first 4 weeks
after the first application) after the
application) first appli-
cation)
During
fructifica- 0.3 litre 0.3 litre 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.3 litre /
tion (3 / plant / plant litre / litre / litre / plant
weeks plant plant plant
after the
2nd appli-
cation)

50
 s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e

(Table 20 cont…) Periods and doses of sanitized urine for different crops.

Appli-
Cab-
cation Carrot Millet Sorghum Mango Orange Goyava Papaya Banana
bage
period
Two
weeks 2 1 0.8 0.7 litre* Growth fer- Growth Growth fer- 3 litres 3 litres /
after litres litres litre* / plant tilizer (tree fertilizer tilizer (tree / tree 1 pied en
sow- / m2 / m2 / (start of aged 0-4 (tree aged aged 0-2 month couronne
ing or plant tillering) years): apply 0-4 years): years): apply after sow- 1 mois
plant- (start 2 litres/tree apply 1.5 1 litres/tree ing après
ing of 4 times per litres/tree 4 times per plantation
tiller- year. (start of 4 times per year. (start of
ing) rainy season, year. (start rainy season,
during the of rainy sea- during the
rainy season, son, during rainy season,
start of cold the rainy start of cold
season and season, season and
during the start of cold during the
cold season). season and cold season).
during the
cold sea-
son).
Start
of the 2 1.25 0.7 0.7 litre* Produc- Produc- Produc- 4 litres / 4 litres /
flower- litres litres litre* / plant tion ferti- tion ferti- tion ferti- tree 1.5 tree 1.5
ing (3 / m2 / m2 / (Fin lizer (trees lizer (trees lizer (trees months months
weeks plant mon- aged > aged > aged > after the after the
after (Fin taison 4 years) : 4 years) : 2 years) : 1st appli- 1st appli-
the first mon- – début Apply 6 litres Apply 5 Apply 4 litres cation cation
appli- tai- épiai- per tree, 4 litres per per tree, 4
cation) son son, times per tree, 4 times times per (NB: make (NB: make
soit 4 year (start of per year year (start of the same the same
rainy season, ((start of rainy season, application applica-
during the rainy sea- during the for the next tion for
rainy season, son, during rainy season, production the next
start of cold the rainy start of cold cycle) produc-
season and season, season and tion cycle)
during the start of cold during the
cold season). season and cold season).
during the
cold sea-
son).
At the 4 litres / 3 litres /
start tree 1.5 tree 1.5
of the months months
fructifi- after the after the
cation 2nd appli- second
cation applica-
tion
*The recommended doses for millet and surghum, are based on the results from the first tests in Torodi. In Aguié the dose has
been 0.5 litres, fractioned into 0.25 litres per application. This is aligned with the local recommendations for urea as a source of
nitrogen.

51
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
References
ADB (1998) Gender Guidelines in Water Supply and
Sanitation. Checklist. Asian Development Bank,
Manila.
Arroyo (2005) Organoponics - the Use of Human Urine
in Composting. RUAF Urban Agriculture Magazine
10 - Appropriate (Micro) Technologies for Urban
Agriculture. http://www.ruaf.org/sites/default/files/
Organoponics.pdf.
Bernal, C.T., Bingham, F.T. and Orehi, J. (1974) Salt
tolerance of Mexican wheat. ll. Relation of Variable
Sodium chloride and length of growing season. Proc.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am., 38: 777-780.
Brady, Nyle C., Weil, Ray R. (1999) The nature and
properties of soils: twelfth edition. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Båth, B. (2003) Field trials using human urine
as fertilizer to leeks (In Swedish). Manuscript,
Department of Ecology and Plant Production
Science, Swedish University of Agricultural
Sciences. Uppsala, Sweden.
Clark, G.A. (2003) A test of the production of organically
fertilised amaranth in Tehuixtla, Morelos, Mexico.
Manuscript available from esac@laneta.apc.org.
Coulibaly, Chiaka. (2009) Management of EcoSan
System in Urban Areas: “EcoSan_UE Project
Case Study’’ in four sectors of Ouagadougou, BF.
Presentation to the West Africa Regional Sanitation
and Hygiene Symposium, Accra, Ghana, 10-12
November 2009.
CSIR (2008) Human Excreta and Food Security in
South Africa. Project report Nr 59P1039, Submitted
to L Austin, CSIR – Built Environment, PO Box 395,
Pretoria, South Africa, 0001.
Dankelman, I. (2009). Making Sustainable Sanitation
Work for Women and Men. Integrating a Gender
Perspective into Sanitation Initiatives, eds. J.
Muylwijk, C. Wendland and M. Samwel. Utrecht,
Annemasse and Munich: WECF, Women in Europe
for a Common Future).
52
Drechsel, P., Giordano, M., Gyiele, L. (2004) Valuing
Nutrients in Soil and Water: Concepts and
Techniques with Examples from IWMI Studies in the
Developing World. IWMI Research Report nr 82.
International Water Management Institute, P O Box
2075, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
FAO (2003) FAOSTAT Nutrition data – Food Supply –
Crops Primary Equivalent. http://apps.fao.org/page/
collections?subset=nutrition , visited 2003-02-28.
Ganrot, Z., Dave, G., Nilsson, E. (2007) Recovery
of N and P from human urine by freezing, struvite
precipitation and adsorption to zeolite and active
carbon. Bioresource Technology 98, 3112-3121.
Gao, X. Zh., Shen, T., Zheng, Y., Sun, X., Huang, S.,
Ren, Q., Zhang, X., Tian, Y. and Luan, G. (2002)
Practical manure handbook. (In Chinese). Chinese
Agriculture Publishing House. Beijing, China.
Germer, J., Sauerborn, J., (2006) Exploring the Potential
for Recycling Nutrients from Waste Water to Enhance
Agricultural Productivity - the Example of Valley
View University in Accra, Ghana. Presentation at the
Tropentag 2006 - International Research on Food
Security, Natural Resource Management and Rural
Development. University of Bonn, October 11-13.
Guadarrama, R. O., Pichardo, N. A., Morales-Oliver,
E. (2001) Urine and Compost Efficiency Applied to
Lettuce under Greenhouse Conditions in Temixco,
Morales, Mexico. In Abstract Volume, First
International Conference on Ecological Sanitation
5-8 November 2001, Nanning, China.
Hammer, M. and Clemens, J. (2007) A tool to evaluate
the fertilizer value and the environmental impact
ofsubstrates from wastewater treatment. Water
Science and Technology 56 (5): 201-209.
Heberer, Th., Fuhrmann, B., Schmidt-Bäumler,
K., Tsipi, D., Koutsuba, V., Hiskia, A. (2000)
Occurrence of Pharmaceutical Residues in Sewage,
River, Ground and Drinking Water in Greece
and Germany. In Symposia Papers: Issues in the
Analysis of Environmental Endocriine Disruptors.

American Chemical Society, San Francisco March
26-30, 2000.
Heinonen-Tanski, H., Sjöblom, A., Fabritius, H.,
Karinen, P. (2007) Pure human urine is a good
fertilizer for cucumbers. Bioresource Technology,
Volume 98, Issue 1, January 2007, Pages 214-217.
Jeyabaskaran, K.J. (2010) Utilization of human urine
as liquid organic manure in banana cultivation.
National Research Centre for Banana, Tiruchirapalli
– 620 102 Tamil Nadu, India.
Johansson, M., Jönsson, H., Höglund, C., Richert
Stintzing, A. and Rodhe, L. (2001) Urine separation
– closing the nutrient cycle. Stockholm Water
Company. Stockholm, Sweden. Available at: http://
www.swedenviro.se/gemensamma_se/documents/
Urinsep_eng.pdf.
Jönsson, H. and Vinnerås, B. (2004) Adapting the
nutrient content of urine and faeces in different
countries using FAO and Swedish data. In: Ecosan –
Closing the loop. Proceedings of the 2nd international
symposium on ecological sanitation, incorporating
the 1st IWA specialist group conference on
sustainable sanitation, 7th-11th April 2003, Lübeck,
Germany. Pp 623-626.
Kirchmann, H. and Pettersson, S. (1995) Human urine
– chemical composition and fertilizer efficiency.
Fertilizer Research 40:149-154.
Kvarnström, E., Emilsson, K., Richert Stintzing,
A., Johansson, M., Jönsson, H., af Petersens, E.,
Schönning, C., Christensen, J., Hellström, D.,
Qvarnström, L., Ridderstolpe, P. and Drangert, J.-
O. (2006) Urine Diversion - One Step Towards
Sustainable Sanitation. Report 2006-1, EcoSanRes
Programme, Stockholm Environment Institute,
Stockholm, Sweden, http://www.ecosanres.org/pdf_
files/Urine_Diversion_2006-1.pdf.
Larsen, T. A. and Lienert, J. (2007) Novaquatis final
report. NoMix – A new approach to urban water
management. Eawag, Dübendorf, Switzerland,
www.novaquatis.eawag.ch/ publikationen/final_
report_E.
Magid, J. (2006) Estrogen in the Environment. In:
Blackwater systems – Nordic Inventory. Full report
s to c k h o l m e n v i r o n m e n t i n s t i t u t e
in Swedish, English summary in Appendix 2. www.
nmr.org.
Marschner, H. (1995) Mineral nutrition of higher
plants. Academic Press, Second Edition.
Mkeni, P; Jimenez Cisneros, B; Pasha, M; Austin, L.
(2006) Use of Human Excreta from Urine Diversion
Toilets in Food Gardens. Agronomical and Health
Aspects. Volume 3, Report to the Water Research
Commission. WRC Report No 1439/3/06.
Morgan, P. (2003) Experiments using urine and humus
derived from ecological toilets as a source of
nutrients for growing crops. Paper presented at 3rd
World Water Forum 16-23 March 2003. Available at:
http://aquamor.tripod.com/KYOTO.htm.
Morgan, Peter. (2008) Toilets that make compost. http://
www.ecosanres.org/toilets_that_make_compost.htm
SEI 2008.
von Münch and Winker (2009) Technology Review
- Urine diversion components: Overview of urine
diversion components such as waterless urinals,
urine diversion toilets, urine storage and reuse
systems. Available at: http://www.gtz.de/en/
dokumente/gtz2009-en-technology-review-urine-
diversion.pdf.
Muskolus, A. (2008) Anthropogenic plant
nutrients as fertilizer. PhD thesis, Institut
für Pflanzenbauwissenschaften, Humboldt-
Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany. URL:
http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/dissertationen/muskolus-
andreas-2008-04-18/PDF/muskolus.pdf.
PUVeP (2008) Philippine allotment garden manual with
an introduction to ecological sanitation. Periurban
Vegetable Project (PUVeP), Xavier University
College of Agriculture, Cagayan de Oro City,
Philippines, http://puvep.xu.edu.ph/publications.htm
or http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/en-
philippine-allotment-garden-manual-2008.pdf.
Pradhan, K.S., Nerg, A., Sjöblom, A., Holopainen, J.,
Heinonen-Tanski, H. (2007) Use of Human Urine
Fertilizer in Cultivation of Cabbage (Brassica
oleracea)––Impacts on Chemical, Microbial, and
Flavor Quality J. Agric. Food Chem., 55 (21), 8657-
8663• DOI: 10.1021/jf0717891.
53
p r ac t i c a l g u i da n c e o n t h e u s e o f u r i n e i n c r o p p r o d u c t i o n
Rodhe L., Richert Stintzing A. and Steineck S., (2004)
‘Ammonia emissions after application of human
urine to clay soil for barley growth’. Nutrient Cycling
in Agroecosystems, 68:191-198.
Schouw, N.L., Danteravanich, S., Mosbaeck, H., Tjell,
J.C. (2002) Composition of human excreta—a case
study from Southern Thailand. The Science of the
Total Environment 286, 155–166.
Schroeder, E. (2010) Marketing human excreta, a study
of possible ways to dispose of urine and faeces
from slum settlements in Kampala, Uganda. GTZ,
Eschborn, Germany.
Schönning, C. and Stenström, T.-A. (2004) Guidelines
for the safe use of urine and faeces in ecological
sanitation systems. EcoSanRes Publications Series,
Report 2004-1, www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/ESR_
Publications_2004/ESR1web.pdf.
Simons J. and Clemens J. (2004) The use of separated
human urine as mineral fertilizer, 595-600; in (eds.)
Werner et al.: ecosan-closing the loop, 7.-11. April,
2003, Lübeck, Germany, ISBN 3-00-012791-7.
Sridevi, G., Srinivasamurthy, C.A., Bhaskar, C.,
Viswanath, S. (2009) Evaluation of Source Separated
Human Urine (ALW) as a Source of Nutrients for
Banana Cultivation and Impact on Quality Parameter.
Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science Vol.
4, No. 5, September 2009 ISSN 1990-6145 ARPN.
Sridevi, G., Srinivasamurthy, C. A., Bhaskar, S. and
Viswanath, S. Studies on the effect of anthropogenic
liquid waste (human urine) on soil properties,
growth and yield of maize. Crop Res. 38 (1, 2 and
3) : 11-14 (2009). Department of Soil Sciences and
Agricultural Chemistry University of Agricultural
Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore (Karnataka), India.
Sundin, A. (1999) Humane urine improves the growth
of Swiss chard and soil fertility in Ethiopian urban
agriculture. Thesis and Seminar projects No 112,
Department of Soil Science, Swedish University of
Agricultural Sciences.
SuSanA (2009) Working Group 12 Draft Fact Sheet:
Integrating a gender perspective in sustainable
sanitation, http://www.susana.org/images/
documents/05-working-groups/wg12/en-fact-sheet-
wg12-gender-first-draft-2009-01-20.pdf.
54
Thorup-Kristensen, K. (2001) Root growth and soil
nitrogen depletion by onion, lettuce, early cabbage
and carrot. Acta Horticulturae. 563: 201-206.
Tilley, et al., (2008) Compendium of Sanitation
Systems and Technologies. http://www.eawag.ch/
organisation/abteilungen/sandec/publikationen/
compendium_e/index_EN.
WHO (2006) Guidelines for the safe use of wastewater,
excreta and greywater use in agriculture and
aquaculture. Socio cultural, environmental and
economic Aspects.3 (7). World Health Organisation
(Online access 2006-10-26). www.who.int/sites.
Villa-Castorena, M., Ulery, A.L., Catalán-Valencia,
E.A., Remmenga, M.D. (2003) Salinity and Nitrogen
Rate Effects on the Growth and Yield of Cile Pepper
Plants. Soil Science Society of America Journal
67:1781-1789. Soil Science Society of America.
Winker, M. (2009) Pharmaceutical residues in urine
and potential risks related to usage as fertilizer
in agriculture. PhD thesis, Technical University
of Hamburg-Harburg, Institute of Wastewater
Management and Water Protection, Germany, http://
doku.b.tu-harburg.de/volltexte/2009/557.
Vinnerås, B. and Jönsson, H. (2002) The potential of
faecal separation and urine diversion to recycle plant
nutrients in household waste water. Bioresource
Technology 84:3, 275-283.
Vinnerås, B., Palmquist, H., Balmer, P. and Jönsson, H.
(2006) The characteristics of household wastewater
and biodegradable solid waste—A proposal for new
Swedish design values. Urban Water, 3(1): 3-11.
SEI - Africa
Institute of Resource Assessment
University of Dar es Salaam
P.O. Box 35097, Dar es Salaam
Tanzania
Tel: +255-(0)766079061

SEI - Asia
15th Floor Witthyakit Building
254 Chulalongkorn University
Chulalongkorn Soi 64
Phyathai Road Pathumwan
Bangkok 10330
Thailand
Tel: +(66) 22514415

SEI - Oxford
Suite 193
266 Banbury Road,
Oxford, OX2 7DL
UK
Tel: +44 1865 426316

SEI - Stockholm
Kräftriket 2B
SE -106 91 Stockholm
Sweden
Tel: +46 8 674 7070

SEI - Tallinn
Lai 34, Box 160
EE -10502, Tallinn
Estonia
Tel: +372 6 276 100

SEI - U.S.
11 Curtis Avenue
Somerville, MA 02144
USA
Tel: +1 617 627-3786

SEI - York
University of York
Heslington
York YO10 5DD
UK
Tel: +44 1904 43 2897

The Stockholm Environment Institute

SEI is an independent, international research institute. It has been
engaged in environment and development issues at local, national,
regional and global policy levels for more than a quarter of a century.
SEI supports decision making for sustainable development by
bridging science and policy.

sei-international.org

ISBN 978-91-86125-21-9
Practical Guidance on the Use of Urine in Crop Production Richert, Gensch, Jönsson, Stenström and Dagerskog SEI
 Toepassingsmogelijkheden voor urine in de landbouw
in Friesland

In opdracht van provincie Fryslân zijn de potenties van urine

voor de landbouw in beeld gebracht






  
     
 
  
  
 


 

 

   

 
 !"##$






 


! +   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -

" ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, $

% .   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !#

' /0   10


  
   1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !"
',! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !"
'," 2  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !"
',% 3 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !%
',' 4  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !'
',',! 3 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !'
','," +  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !'
',* 40    
  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !*
',*,! 5  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !*
',- 3
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',-,! 3 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',-," +  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',) (   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',),! 6 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',)," 5  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !-
',$ 7     0
008"9, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !)
',$,! 3 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !)
',$," +  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !)
',: ;  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !$
',!# < !,+  3 + ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, !:

* (
      ,,,,,,,,,,, "!
*,! 
0   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "!
*," =  0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ""
*,%   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "%
*,' > ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "%
*,* 6000  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "'
*,-  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "*
*,) <
  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "*
*,$ > 
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "*
*,: 3
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "*
*,!# 7  
&  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "-
*,!! 
0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "-
*,!" /0  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "-
*,!% ?
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, "-
*,!' 40,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ")
*,!* .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ")

#%&''"$
 (  % )*

 

  



- 0   @

 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ":
-,! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ":
-," 6
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ":
-,% 6@
2  A ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %#
-,'       @
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %#
-,*    
00 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %!
-,- 6    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %!
-,) ?
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %"
-,$ <,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %"

) <00   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %%

),! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %%
)," .    0   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %%
),%      
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %'
),' 7    07  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %*
),* ?

      ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %*
),- 7  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %*
),) (  
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %-
),$ 4  0A
  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %-
),: 7     ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %)
),!# 6 
   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %)
),!! =    0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %$
),!" 0  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %$

$ =  

  
 0
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %:
$,! 3
  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %:
$," =   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, %:
$,% <  
   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '#
$,' 
0B ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '!
$,* =   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '!
$,- ;  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '!
$,) < ! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '"

: C 
 0

  0 0 

 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ''
:,! 6
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ''
:,"  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ''
:,% 6

  

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '*
:,%,! 5 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '*
:,%,"  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '-
:,%,% ?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ')
:,' 6

   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '$

:,',! 5 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '$
:,'," 5 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '$
:,* 6

   D   

1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '$
:,- =    0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ':
:,) E 1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ':
:,$ 0  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *#
:,: < !,  (  @F ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *!
:,!# < "6

  G@F ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *%

:,!! < %.
   H>
 CI

01J,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *'
:,!!,! 5  D ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *'
:,!!," 5  1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *-



#%&''"$
(  ' )*

 

  



!# 00    

 1 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *)
!#,! 
 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *)
!#," .   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *)
!#,",! = ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *)
!#,"," 6 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *$
!#,",% 6, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, *:
!#,",' 6

 , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -#

!#,% +
K, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -#

!! 5  G 0   

  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -"
!!,! +   ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -"
!!," <4 4 
CL<44CM ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -"
!!,% >0,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -$
!!,' .,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -$
!!,* < A6     0
 "### ,,, )#

!" + ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, )!

!",! ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, )!
!"," 7 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, )'
!",% ?
G  ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, )'




#%&''"$
(  * )*




  


+    0    

0,E
 
,      0
00   ,
 

  

     A
0
  , 0
N
=400+  +L4++M+ 
 ,"##$0   
,
E  
   
 0
  000  0, 

    (=0  ,3
 0  ,

         ,4
0  
 / 

    ,40 
00  0      0
    
,  

 I   /3.&(. /  E A
;  /0 ;74  
 +   ,
0  O 0  ,4
   

00    
  ,

    D
!, /0   0A
0 10
  
  
 1
", E0 1/ 0  
A 1
%, / 06@
1
', / 00 L
M0
1;?6
 
,
*, /00 00 L
 M1
-, /0 
 0  0  
 1
), 00    
 1
6  O   +  
  
,

  ,  
0  
  I   ,+0P6
  0000  00,  0
 ,E  0 ,C 
 0  0 
     ,

3LM    A
,20   ,C  0   A

#%&''"$
 (  - )*

  



0  ,20   000A

0  0B ,? 
?      
 0
 0,
2   
   
,E


0  0  00
  
 ,

30 
   0,7


0,40 
 00
 

,

    

3 
 00  0 
0,(        0  A
,< ,
400,0 00 

0 0
0   ,
00     ,

>  00 
  

    
 
   00 ,6 00 

 /0 ;74 / E  0
  ,<000 0 0 0
0A
 + /3.&(.,
E  
 D
2     
   
 0 00  
   00
 0,
E 0   

00  
000
    A
L @
M,

0     
0D
•   0LM
  
LM,2
0 
 00 =
 > E ,
• + ;74  0 L
M 
  ,E0  0
A
= <  ,
•   L & M A
00 
 L  0  


 &  
B 
M,     
0 
0   ,
 0;74 (.
 0 ,
• (4A  00   A  
A  0   0
      0 ,
 0  0
3 / 
 + ,

<     

0A
 =4++0A

 0=&+ ,

400
N  

  
00  
,



#%&''"$
 (  ) )*




  


4   

   !:0 A
00,E 00
   A
   0 0  
     ,70
0     ,/ A
 
   0K 
,
,

+0
      
,+  A
  ,
 I   
 
 ,   0

 
   



,

 
0 

  


0   ,2  
D
• E   
    0  
 
   
,
• < 
 0  ? ? 0 0
     0 
 
    
 ,C  (L M  A
   0,
•  0 
 ?4" A
0   0 
Q   0 
          
 ,

+      0     
0    
0,E 

,      00A
0   ,   


  

     0A

  , 0
N
=400+  +L4++M+  
,"##$0   
,
E  
   
 0
  000  0, 
 
    (=0  ,

3      0  0 
 ,3 
!R         $*R
 '$R  (O    ,<0 0A
      
 0 

,  

 


     0 ,


#%&''"$
 (  $ )*

    



 0D

• 6
 CD0  
,
• / 
 0 ./ CD 
A
,
• / 5D0  ,
• +
 +D0   

,
• / 6D0    
 ,
• E = E D0   L A
M,
• C  6D0 0  
 ,
• 3   >D0 00 

  ,
C   + L, ,M,

E0      
? ?  
   
,/ 
 
PE
0,7
00 , 
 0A B,
L0M 0 
0     ,C 1E
    0   ,E
0  15B00
 10   1/ 0


0  12 
S 1E 
    
     


,

4 0       00A
 +     
/ 

    ,40
 00  0      A
0    
,
A
 I   /3.&(. /  
E A;  /0 ;74  
 +  
 ,
0  O 0  ,4
   

00    
  ,


#%&''"$
 (  : )*




  
 

3
I0  )      
  D

         
  
    
  
 
      
 
  
 0   D
• /0  1
• 0 0 L 
M   1
• /  L   0M L   M
0 1
• 400& 
0
1
• 0
   L   00  
  @

,M1

! "    

      

 # 



 0   D
• /000
0 1
• 0 0 L 
M   1
• 400& 
0
1
• 0
   L   00  
  @

,M1
• / 0    1

$"% 
%  &'
 0   D
• / 00   @
1
• /  
 0 1
• C0 
01

(    
   
  ")  
*&      
 0   D
• /00&
 
  
0 01
• /0 
L;?6M 1
• /     0    
  1
• 0 
 1
• 0  
 1





#%&''"$
 (  !# )*

  



+      

    "%  % 
 0   D
• / 0      ,%01
• / 0 L M  0& 1
• /    1
• / 
0B L
  
  
  M1

,   % 
 
  "%     
 
  
 0   D
• E  
 0   1
•  
 0  
  1
• 

  
L0M1
• E0 
1
• 0  0 0 ?"?L   M1
• /0 
 00 01

-  
  " 
     


 
 0   D
• /0
 0LM
12 1
• 0

 1
• /00 01
• /0 !
1

>     0

0,< 
 + 
  
   
   
A
,00   ,40 

  
0
 ,
/     O 0
 ,


#%&''"$
 (  !! )*




      

 
!
" 
#   #

 "

*  . 
 /01%   2  
)%
! 
% 334


(  

0  0  0    
   
  L M  
     ,E 
 
L3 + M   
0A
   
 ,   A  A
LM 0    ,7 

  
 0  
   
 ,

(  5   
>         A

0 ,/  0 0   
  
    ,
    ,

,


L+0M 2T  0


 ,+00
  
,<0 

(LM 2   0 0
   ,7 
 00,
=L= M < 0 
   ,7 
 ,

6! +0 =   0  ,






#%&''"$
 (  !" )*

     

    
 



0 00Q0   

LKM0 
,>     
       ,2 
0     
     ,

40 
  
 #
  
,40   0  
  
  ,0  
  ,
<0 
        
  
0    ,

4 0 0 
  
 
 "% 

   


C%"% / 6 "     

 ,7 A


    ,40 
  
   0L   
   
,M 0A
    0,

($ 7    
    

5 
C0  0 0 K8!9,  
0  !,K 
0 
   K0 

0
8"9,+0   ,  
0     08'9,


    L ( =M0 L
 !M,0

     
  
,%
)&,3   0    0A


  (&=&  0  A
,>  0    
0 A
 0 ,

C0   
A 
0     

0 8'9,
3     
K 8!9,0 
   0  008'9,

5     
,E0I
     
8'9,
   0  


AK
   08"9,4  0

0  0  


,20  ,20 D
•  0  0   0Q
•   L MQ
•  L M,

< , ,     
8"9,    


,
/   00 
 0 
    
0, 0    
  K

OL M8"9,


#%&''"$
 (  !% )*

     

    
 



  0   

  
0 0,>  

   (= 
 00 ,7 0 A
0,


(( 8  
    

',',! 3 
3    002  5A
 8:9,3  0
   
 ,
   !,3     
3 0
   L <% !M,  
 0  

  0   0  ,
  
  
K  
 ,

3 5 

   A
,<   ,
   
   3  

 

  (=    0   
    0 ,

','," + 
30 +  I  ,+ 
 0       
L M,  K  + A
  !L <'M,3 0 +  00  
  ,


 UCE'(4',-E"4 C A6A( LC6(M



KL 0M

  8-9,
+   
 ,,3  0  
    
 0,
(  (+  

K8!"9,
0+ 00    0 
,0    +  0 
0   ,4
  
   8-9,

<
 TT '- 0  L 

M
8$9,



#%&''"$
 (  !' )*

     

    
 



. 
  

7905!9:!5;)5*8#<     


% 1%!..9! #

  %     %
  =  
/    "  #


 /  "% 
 /% " 
  / 

    %&;<. >
09.8

6" 7 +   



(+ 8 "  
 
    
  
   

',*,! 5 
30   ,> 0  A
A   0 0  0,0
   0  B8"9,

3 0 L0 MCI
, LM
  0   ,
5,3 0 0
 
 :#R  0   A0,   
    8"9,

 0 0 ,< 
 0  

K
   0,
 
  
 
 08"9,

E   L2KM 0 0 0
LC M    LCI
M L5M    L5 M8"9,  
 0,8"9,< 
   
LM,

C  0 KL  0M 
0 L560 M,L @M 0 
@0     ,20
   B 8%9,

 0000LM  ,EA
0  0 00 ,
20
 
A 00 ,40
 
 0    08'9,

 0    00 ,
      0 0
 0,   0
  
 0 0,  
 
   0 ,0


 0 0 0 0   

K
     0 8!9,


#%&''"$
 (  !* )*

     

    
 



C0   

     
  
8!%9,

(, 7   
',-,! 3 
E0<
 L<<;M
0L5 M


  3  0   B, 3 A

0  ,2
  0 0
 0, 
 0  0  
3    
,

',-," + 
+ 0 L0M      

8!#9,40  0A
0  8-9,
2         

  8)9,402    
L  M 
0,< ?0
    8$9,

!
(- <   
 ;    

',),! 6
<  0  ,4 A
0 , ,
    0LK  A
  0 M,20  0  0 
    0,2    
       ,  0
A ,

3
0  0      A
0 
L  M,> 
0
 &      ,2     
K
0   ,

 
      
A  ,B
  
    ,
<       

   8!!9
> 0
  & 

00,>
 00 
A
    
0 8!!9,

',)," 5 
5     L0  0 M,
  K 
   (&
=&  0 ,  K 
0 K,>  

 0    A
 0  ,

!
00 000    
 ,
    0 

 00
 0,>0  0A
A 000
0  ,0 
0    0  
,  0
   A
0
  ,    0
 
 0,

#%&''"$
 (  !- )*

     

    
 



7     

 0  0

,

  
 0 ,CA
00 
   0 0
 ,4

0 L   
AM 0,7  
  
 0 0,

6 0   0
  0   0     ,/A
0 (&=& ,

0L 

0 M,
3 0,C0 0
 00  , 0 0A
 L    M,6 
 
   0 L  M,











6% + 0 
   

(4 9       "   "% 
     
  
  " ? @
• K
  ,
• < 
0,
• 2

   ,

',$,! 3 
3     ,E0 00
 0,

00 
  0 
 00 
0 , 
 


0 L
 M,


   0  
L     
,M

',$," + 
+ 0 00  ,  
 
    V0  
 8!!9,

00 
  0 
 00 
0 ,
E

0   K  
0 
0,> 0 LM 
  
   
 ,
6 0 
0  0  A
  L
  M ,


#%&''"$
 (  !) )*

     

    
 



(A * 


8!9 6
?
+
L"##) 4
$M,!7 &&= / B  
C " CC ,+

 . C ,

8"9 )   7 7 C   < EW0 XN
+3 6
 +

G+;3 6 .
+>2.62
A
 
<N>W +3 6
 +

G+;3 2 + A
7+6
  2  2LX7M +
0A
2 +
0 + "##',

8%9 7 !5B 7 #D 9 C) D6

E 6
 .!'%:&%&#- X"##- D&&,,&
 & 
"##$,

8'9 ! B    E EA7 0 Y ? /0A
+  2  +

 3 = (,4,<I!-") 
A)#"!!=   .?  /  +  ? (,4,<I
"$-: "-#!?/ 7  .
 "*+"##%Q

""4
A
"##%,

8*9 D&&, @ ,  ,
 "##$,

8-9 <%   
     6 
% "##$,

8)9, +?4(2-:  "##) ,
A ,

8$9 +?4(2)#  "##$ ,
A ,

8:9 C "  *E 2  -% C 
"##) D&&,  ,


8!#9 !
      
  )"##) 
D&&, , ,&

8!!9 9 

%    ;<F#     4 
6,?  ( 000( Z4  +
6> (
 ,
!!"*"'- X  "##",

8!"9 =  A.  =, 5  , ; , *      
   
     D / 3  
6
>
  +
C
  
  
   !"#$%"  
""& '
()**+,/  "### ,**A$#,

8!%9 6 "##!,1  %  %
   
 ,
6 
  ":,

8!'9 9       "  X,+ ,+

X,? (  3 < /  
 
S / 
 EA// /    D&&,, 
"##$,

8!*9 7     D&&,,0&
&
& "##$,

8!-9 =    E    


  2,= ,X, C,7   %#
"##$,

#%&''"$
 (  !$ )*

     

    
 



(3 G%
=  
 /7  = 

7 <! ; 0
 L M 8!*9

7  " *&
6 " "&
7  # !)&
(  ! "&
+ # !%&
? # %#&
C   * "[&
C  # $"&


7 <" + 08!-9,




 







#%&''"$
 (  !: )*

     

    
 



7 <% + 3  8:9,

























7 <'   K   8-9,
<   5   G
  <  
 )   # <  




 R   $" 
 R -#  A 
     
- .     
0A=  &0 %$ ' % $R -' - 'R
LM
   &0 "#% "# %R %%: %% :R
L("4*M
0 L=M &0 ' )# # *R ) :# # $R
 LCM &0 !!: !! :R !:$ ' !: $R
     
/      
  &0   \# * 
 &0   ! ' 

 &0   \# *# 

 &0   \!# 

0 &0   \!# 
00 &0   \# " 
00 &0   " * 
 &0   \* 
50 &0   *: 



#%&''"$
 (  "# )*




$ %#   

! &  

!  G 

<0   G.



4% 334

+ )    
E   0   0   
( =L7 !M,  K  00      
 ,L50  ,M]
KO 
    ,C0A 0
A   0,40
  
 0 Q 0  A
00A
    
 0 0 ,3  00   

 
,
   
 0 0A

,=  0    O:#   +
 A
K ,= 0AI =
 (L!::*M
,  A0L
 
  A
 M  
$#R,  A     0 )R
0   0,  
 ="E(4',2  2@ ,L!::$M 
A0 -$R ,+
0 ,L!:::M 
A0  ,. L"##'M   0 
0
 A0 0

,>]OA 
0  EA7 0 ,L"##)M
00,5  00
0   A0
 00 
 L 
0M,5 


 0 00,EK
 


 D
  ,

 
         

    
7 L AM 7 ( 7 = 
& & &
",*L","M #,!) !," 2= + "##! +
%,)L%,'M #,%# !,# 2@ ,!::$,
)A:    !:$-L M
!,):A",-! #,"#A#,"! #,:A!,! =
 Z(!::*
!#,% #,-: !,*-  
  / !::%EA
7 0"##*




#%&''"$
 (  "! )*

 0    -  


6 L"###M    L 0M

 G00   A  0
A   ,<  0 
    A0  0  A  (=

,
20   

0 
 B   
 
0
 
 000 0,7
A     
I

L  M 00A 


 A

00   0,>
      0 
  
K
L5M,

4 0000
   
  0  
    0 0
 00    
K  0
 ,  
^^0 0A
A
0  ,> 
  0 A  0  
   ,  0 ,
   0L=  ; ? !:-)M,4

 _    0  
^^0  
   ,

+  F    
 00      0  

 
    ,
0A G  
0, 00 
       
 A

 0,= L
 (=Q 

   Q
Q  M   00AA
 0  0 ,
0  A0   
A 0L Q
M A0
00  ,   0
'-#0A
0 "$$000,> L("4*M
!-%
L0M'$L0M0L?<++ "##-M,+ 
 0 0  !*  0
L 
=
 ( !::*M ",'A',%0!,-A",%0 L#,)G!,#0(MA
  
 0%-A-*0"'A%'0 ,/ 
0;    0
*A:R  0  !!A!-R  0 (
   ,40   0LA
00  M0
   

,        0
]  O   LA0Q(A0Q
00     0M,2
 ]0O   , 
0   00  `!#`"*%,

0 A0
(A000
,E
   0, ( 
LA

 M0  (A0
    A
0
,   A A
0,40  A  00 
 000  
]
0O
0 0, 000  
  ( = G  0   G 0
 
,
20  P

#%&''"$
 (  "" )*

 0    -  


00
 000   
  
L  
 
M  @ A
 L   M,6   

 00    
0A
A]
O,<   

0 00A0  
 A
,20 00,>  
G 0 G 0 0 0 
L23 M ]0  O 
 
]00O
 ,    000
A 0   0   ,


 0    ,
E

  0
0  
A0 

     
00(0
 0    0 
0 
0  ,L  


    0 ,M 
 
 
 00  
    A
 
  00 


0 
 ,5 0
 0
 

 00
 00,

+$ )
     
   0
 
    ,4 0 00 A
 00  K 0     
    0 0L C M 

0    A 
0 , 
 0          
 
,7
   
0    
A
 

   ,

0A


K0   
    0 

   
O,<   A
  0G   
   A

  A   000 ,
2] O     00  0 
000   000  ]  O 
,C     

  ,E    A

 00 
,C0  0
0  0 
 ,E 
0  
 L  M   A
0 0,2  0  L M0 
0
 ,4L MA   !,###0& 
 
   "  *##%
,

+( .

   
   , 00 

   ]
 O,, ,0 
 ,  

   

 ,+ 
 0 ,5
KL A
0]OM   
 
0   A
  0   ,

#%&''"$
 (  "% )*

 0    -  


>  0 
  L  

 0M, 00   00 
     0,
(  K0   0 
  
 0,< 
 

 0,0  

  00  ,E 0  
A
0    0   
  ]
 O,7
   0 
A
0Q    
 A
,C A


O0  0


 0, 0   A


 

0 
 A
 ,2 00

   
0L](A
OM 
00
0 00,40    ] O 
  0 00    
  ,+  000,
<  
0       A

  
     
,
.
06,;,+L(.M 
K  
 ,]O
0  0   
 0A

  
0
0 0A

  


0
 00,5
   
 0 0,>  
  0
0      ,
6  00
G 00A
A  0 ,

++ &     %
    000 A
 0
    0 
 ,40 

 0
0
 ,K  
 0

0 0,4A
 0       0
    0
,40 00
K 0 
] 0O,

    ;  A
00,
   00  
0


Q0 000 ,  0
     
Q  000   
  
L M0 0 LI 0 M,>
00 0 0 0 ,
400
 
0
0L]
A
OM0Q 000 
 0]O    
L A
M0,E0  ,> 
  

0,5
 
  
,2  
  00A
G 0A 0    A

  ,6    
      ,
   0     
      
0,> 00
  0 000   ,

#%&''"$
 (  "' )*

 0    -  



+, C 
E0 A
0 A,>

  , ,
 ,4  0
A   0 A  
 A
 000

 , 7 A   0 A
   
K ,> 0 A
 0
 A ,< A
0

     A
0,40 ,,,
0 A
 
O 0Q0  

000,

+- G
 
6      0   A

 ,E0    ,  
, 
0   ,3  
0  
 
 0,70

0
  ,
5 
    
0  0] 
O
,6 
  

 
 0
 ,

+4 . 


    00  
A     0  
, 0 
 00,; 0 
 0D
B

  0,
0    0,7TT 
  0 
 L. , "##'M,
2 0 
  0L 
 
 M 0  
 
 0 0,E0 =  ; ?L!:-)M 

 > CL"##-M   0  
     0 ,> A 
GA0 G00  

      A
0L=  ; ? !:-)M,>  
,

+A 7 %  

20    
 
A

,E0  L& M  A
    ?D 
,<   


  
,2   00A
 0  ,2  
 0 00,E   
 
,,, ,? 0  A

 0,0  
 
 0L  ,
 M     
, 
]
O  0000,







#%&''"$
 (  "* )*

 0    -  


+3 9 

  
:
7      C40

L; , "###M,4 ]0  
 0A
0O( 0    ,L 
0  
,M
0 
,40 0

,C  ,L"##%M ;?60  (
  0A
K
 0
,E00 
L
!#M 
K  0%*CX0 0A
A
,0-  ,
ENX L!:::M 
 0  
    ,
  0B 000
0
    ,
=    A  
TO


  0 0 
 00  0 0,
40, ,
K    0 
,

E ?L"##)M000   
 A
0  00 


 I     
  
    

  
  ,50;?6&C
7 0 L"##)M  0 
,

+ ;      
4 
 ]
0O 00

   ,2     
   K 0
 
,
00 0
,5  0 0A
0     00 0 

K 
 0  0 
L  M^^0,

+    %      
 L3 CM 0    
    A
,>   ,2 A
   
L> 0  "##$M
3 C,>
    I  A
    00 ]   O
L   ,, (=M,0   L%"M 


 ,>  

 

0   00A 

 0

,

+$  
E 

0 
0  

   0 


 0,>0 
0 

  0   

  

  L ,C  , "##%M 0 
 0L   M 0 A
, 00I 0 0 
 
  
   0
  
00,2     

0A
L0    I

 
,M,


#%&''"$
 (  "- )*

 0    -  


E  0   0  0

 
  a
 
,7 0 ,

+( 8 " 

>  00      

       

 0 0,40
G
0    G  
  ,
       &   

    LA

0AQM,


++ 0    
  
6  C,(  

  L+
A

 M  0L    M  L;

M,L"###M
2


 2 !-L"M ,"'%A"*',
< X, 6  2,   E, AE X, 
6, 5 X, 4 
.,(
  
  

L"##"M/ +


7
 '-L-A)M ,%'!A%'-,
2@ E, ;,. +,+
0 <,;T C,< !::$,E  
  G
    A
 
     0    !::),+6
 2A
 X7 3  ,C7,
E  C, ? X,6      

    L"##)M/ +

 7
 *-L*M ,
"#!A"#:,
EA7 0 E, > /0A+ ?,E I
  
,L"##*M<A

7
 :-L'M ,'#%A'!!,
EA7 0 E, +‫ ޠ‬6,   E, =  (,(  A


,L"##)M<
7
 :$L!M ,"!'A"!),
E‫ ޠ‬, X  2,+I
  L!:::M/ A
< *!L!!M ,"-A":,
=
  E, +,( !::*,E G


 
 

,. 
'#L*M !*)A!-",
= ,X,;,?,, ; ?,+   0,
!:-),> 5, / ,!$$,
=2,D&&,,0&0 &
&"##!&$)A):''A%:-A-,
; <,A<, <  5, <T +,
   
  
     L"###M<
7
 )%L"M ,
!-:A!)',
C  C, +
 (, ;  7,6,D2
 
  

 L"##%M/ +

 7
 '$L!M ,%)A'-,
CE,,  "##-,.
 
       ,
b ;    
, +

.?.67?A

b;=*A?7A"##!A)#'":,( . 
  '!*,
. ;, + 6,., +
0 +,6   
 

  L"##'M?
6
 -$L"M ,!:!A!:$,
+
0+, .,+ ;,. E,2@ ?,X
 !:::,(  
 ,3
  
 ,(
,4X ,":"  
"%A"* !::$,6
,.,? 0  ,6+.( (
!% X
!::: "  !"*A!%#,

#%&''"$
 (  ") )*

 0    -  


7 ‫ޡ‬0 (, C  <, X‫ ޠ‬E,2  

 
 
  A 
 L"##)MX ? (
 !*L!M 
,*"A-",
> 07,6, X,X,C, (,6,,2 (,E,E C,E,C,C,C +,,( 
4,4 "##$,(
C >!,!,/47 A
ZC0
$*,
/  C,!::%,.  ,4 0 0,?E< 3  ,L+M,



#%&''"$
 (  "$ )*




' (
      
)#

5 2;%  *  .  

)%
D 
2 334

,  

    DH/ 0  
6@ A
1J,E  
   DH/ 
@ A
 
1J>    
00  @
2  A ,   
0   
00   @
,2  
    @
,>  A

00A    A 
  0
 ,

,  & 

/  @
 
14 @
  
00  @ 
    0 0

    
  ,E
 00    ,L3D6@
5A
 D 
  ( 
5 M,0 0    
,
>
00  @
0 ,7
 0   0  ,E A
 00     ,6@
0    0 
 ,E    0 ,2
 @
 A0 ,2  
00    VV  0 Q  
  
K,
7 ,0 
0  ,2 0 0 0  A
  0,<   A

,0  @



  
0  ,

7 0  
 ,

 $A!#R ,>    ,E
 00   
,"##) 
 00
  0   0 0 ,
 
  00
 A
00  @
,L3DH;>? > 0  1J"!
"##$M,





#%&''"$
 (  ": )*

 
 '  1 


,$ &'5 /;   ;#;  

 @
 0!:R   
 23,7
"#%#  @
   
  ,L3D
C 
? 2?M, 
]57O  


 00  @
, 
5 00  
  G  
 A
   G
0 L3D6@
5 D   ( 
5 M,
E
V5V
  00  
00 A ,E
   0
0D 
    0  
     
 ,2  
   Q  0  ,5 
,
 ]57O0 
A

  0 @
Q O

  
    ,



6@
5 



< /L ; E M
  @
,>
   
 /
4C 
    @



  ,  0   ,7
    ,7 A
  
 
 E +  ,7
  ,6 ;  2
0
,

,( D 
   '
5  
   @

 , 00  @
 0
 ,
 0
0   

 ,6@
 0 0,C
@
 0 0 0,E0 0A
,= 0
   00,

#%&''"$
 (  %# )*

 
 '  1 


< 0 0,E     0A

,E  0    
 
,

,+ D  
       
20   @

00,5 
  @
,>
00 ,
+
 ]O      
,6
 
  
,A
  @
   
    ,30 K0  K
  ,

E5 0  0 
00       LM,
E0   000  A
,>00   !##% '$ ,L3DH
0  00J "##)M,05  0 

TT ,>0  
00  
 000  
0,   
,
5 L  M 00 

 0L%##%  M,  0 
   
,4      00,
  00         0
,< 0
0  0  
 
   ,2
  
  
; ,E
0 
  0    
 @
,40  0

    
 
   ( 
  ,





 >     6  

,, &   
  
5    0 00  ,
<   
000 0  ,
E0  

   O  A
      ,>  

 0 
      0A

 0L 
M ,

#%&''"$
 (  %! )*

 
 '  1 


4
 0   0

A
  
 ,< 

 0,<  0,70  
 

 
      
,5

 A0

  0,E   0 0 ,6
0   0   ,< 0 
0G 
 G 
,

,-  
00  @
 0 
    ,E   
0  0,2  0 
 A
0 
,E   0

 0   @
 0,  

 
 000 
 ,>  00  


0   
,

,4 G 

. D
• 6@
5 D   ( 
5 
• ;>? H> 0  1J"!"##$
• ?,X,<X,E,X  H0  00  0
0JL"##)M

7

0  D
• ,X,C  6@ 
• ,<,= 
• ,2,X,  
• ,,+  
• C,,0  6@ 


#%&''"$
 (  %" )*




* + 

 
  
!

  G  &1 /

* &C 

7  



2 334


-  

   
   
  
A A   0G ,
0 
G

 G 0  


 L0M,

  
0 0 
     
0 L
M,E    00
&
 
  0 0
 0 ,E 00L0   0   M
   A 
   ,

E  0 0 0 0
   
   ,
0     0 ,E

I    
 /0
 / ;74A /3.&6  E ,

-  0  
  
 00
   
A0 , 0  0,<
0 
 0 K
    ,


 
 - LEN   !::$M,
7  A  E  :
L 
M,E  00
 0 0,

-A   0  
0  ,
   
0L M0A

     

   
, 0  

     A
 000 ,2     -A 
K0  0   0 ,>
  K   0 0  A

 0 LM0  

,

20
 0  0   

    0,>   0 
         
0 ,




#%&''"$
 (  %% )*

 2
 
  '
   


-$ " 

  
      
30  0A0  A
 
  0,>  0  

    0 0 0 ,E

0  L !R  0  A
 M0       ,
    LM  
0,

 0
   0 5,
!  
  0( 
0 +
0
 0  0 %#%,
5     0 0
  0,> A  0
 +
0> 00 !R
   )*L+
0>  "##!M,



!,7  
  
I+
0 5  
%
  0 %# 


  00 00 !R0   A
   !##0,
6  0 I 0
,

3 
  L, ,.   "##$M0   00
0    CI
,
 00 A

 
  0  
 TT  0,E   00   000
0 
    0   
  0 0 , 0   , 
 0  0
L 0 A

IM  0 0,





#%&''"$
 (  %' )*

 2
 
  '
   




-( 9   
 
 9  
>   00     0
L  M,       ,
E  00    0 
,

 - I %#%,

-+         
  
E    L
  
K  M 0  
 ,4
  

0 

 0A
00,7 !  
,
E 
S 00
0 
 ,E0 
0
     A
 0 ,E0 '##CX% ,

2]3 E   
O 00
 5 ;6,   

0 0   A
 A ,E 
0 0 , 
   0  
 0  
0  0

,<0 
.Z

A 
 +74/6 00,

2 00

  
  00   L0M,E I
LC4M  ,40  

I   ,40
 0 
 
 A
,
7 !,C 

 

> A
2 0
 +    .,
LCX&%M
LR  M
 
S <
0 *R '##
C 
3  ;   "*R !!##
, "##-
40 ;   "#R*#  !%##
3    
 ;   
5A
L    A 00A \!#R 
 
  M 
(
 C4
<
0    
 LCAEA(4'M

-, 9   

2
      
 0
0 
  
0 A
,5        
0 0  L; Z !::-M, 

    0
 ,0
 0 A
 0, 
5 0 
  ,    A
   0  ,
20  0    0
,   0 
  
0,
20 00     
0  0 0L M,

#%&''"$
 (  %* )*

 2
 
  '
   


2 
K    A
  -  0  ,6LM  

   0,E 
 
   
,

-- <   
 
E  
      
    A
 00 ,2 
0 D

3   4 

K  
 000 

 A

,4  0
 0 
0 0 

KLA
276M,
?
 A

    
  A
,C
 
  
  

0        
0 0,

-4 8  # 
   

E   0      

0  ,
    0   0 

 0,E0 0  0  
  ,2  0  
 HA
J,     0
   0L"M,
  0

    0       *A!#c,
>
 
00;
 A
  00 0L"##%M,  


  0  0 
 
,2 0
  
  
0
 0,


",   L/0 M

#%&''"$
 (  %- )*

 2
 
  '
   



-A 9    
 

2 0      0
 0 00  ,40!
0("-A!'   '#%,3  
 0  *#CX0 
 00
L;0  , "##$M 0 # -*CXA0    A
  0  0 
 !("-A!'0
   0 0   ,
  0  ,E 0
*##0,<     
0
  0    ,2

 00      ,
 0,




%,2 0 
 !("-A!'0   A
   L0A M,


-3 &      
  
 
   CI
0  
    0 0 A
 O,
  D
• > 0 
 0,
• C  ,
• .O 0 0   &   O     
,
• .O0,


#%&''"$
 (  %) )*

 2
 
  '
   


20  
  I   0 
 
      D
• <   0 I 
  0  ,
• 4 0 0  
   0      L0       M 
 A,
• 

 0              
  00,
• 7        0         0 
    0 , E     0    0 
 0  ,

- F /

  
  
E      0L M
 ,   0  
, I       0 
 
 0 *##0,2

 00      ,
 0,



 0  0  ,
 
S 
0  ,
2 A 
03 E   
 0 0  A
    0,

6         ,
E 0 0  
0 , 

0  
0,/  0 00A
       0    

     ,

-  )   
 ;L"##%M+  
 
,C  7 -L!!MD''A'$

EN?, +7,6, XE, +6,L!::$M2   

  

 A   ,/ +

 7

%$L-MD!)A"*L:M

;  7,6, /,L!::-M+     

L M,/ +

 7
%'L%A'MD$)A:'

;0 6,X, E,+,d  >,< ,7,/  ,2
0 7,= ,= (,
7
 .,=
 =,,?  ,"##$,<2++D<2++ Q;A?

2 26 C?A2 <, ,"##$,%,#,
,,,,3  0 A;
,

C  C (0/, ; 7,6,L"##-M7 

A  ,
/ . 
'#L!)MD%!*!A%!--

. X,E, 2,= C,= 6,<A < 6,C (,(0 .,
L"##$M,C   D I   ,(

?
]+  ? O !:A"#,

+
0> L"##!M,3  G
 

,

#%&''"$
 (  %$ )*




, -    

#  ./

   # 
 
 

2  0
)%
D G
2 334

4 7  
;    

     
  
     00  
"##*
 
 ,
  K 
0
 
  
0
 
B A
 

  !"#B ,
  
  "##:   


 L/5 !"#M  
 0 
L/ 
 .ZX":M 0LC 0
<I

*#M,6"##$ 0  A

 ,<     0 A

 0,2 
 0   A
< !,

2  0A    

  0 
 ,0  
 0
0  0  
  ,0    A
   E ;
> L+74A
/6 "##"M 0C
  0L "##*M
 0 / L&;6 "##)
"##$M,
  
 0  A
  
@ 0 , 
  0  
   / L.   "##$M,

4  F " 
 
        00
,2     0 A
 ,0@  
0   
  
 0,E  
  
  A
  ,0 0`%##A*## 
 
  
I 0   LI 
  M,  0 0  
0 ,


#%&''"$
 (  %: )*

 5
  6 
   
   



!,>
 


 
K  L  ]O
  M  L

  0  0M  0 0 ,
    -*R0 ,00
  `*# ##  
 `* ##  
 
 0
,(  " *0# ")0(  

L   " * e 
  %# %(Q $*RM,4
  0    0 0`"A
`"#0,

0      0   
 A
 `" ##f    
  !f&
,<0  0   
0 ,6 00    0
0 K`! ##`* ##f,

4$ G 
  " 
 
  
K       
A
  0   ,6 0  0

  ,  
 
L0M   ,<0 0 A
   ,E 0  0
 
 "# L !*   %*
 
 M 0 )f 0 A
0 ,4  *#f 0 

0 !*R  ,

 0 L`! *f0  `!# *# M 
 
0 0,>
 
  0 # *# )*0/&f0   0 0A
  0 ,

E 0         A

 0 , 
 
 O  
  ,
>    0   I *#R 
,40      
0    0
   
  0 
 ,

6 0  0    0 
0 0   TT 

`!# ##L 
 
 M,


#%&''"$
 (  '# )*

 5
  6 
   
   


70 

   0 0  A
  0 
 AA
  , 
L 
    M   ,
 
   0 0,

4( C    H  
7   
0L M 

  0 B ,E
 0  D
• 6  
 Q
  0
Q
    00 ,
• +
 Q
0    
  ,C
  00  
 000  # *A!
f&  *,###A!#,###,
• >0 0 0 L   M

0  
  ,7  
0  ,6 
   A


   
  0 A
,
• 4  
    
A
   0 
0 ,A
0   0  0 00  A
 
0 000

 0,

4+ F  


7  0  1 
A
 LM0,( 
  0 0  
       00,  

 
    00 A
0,

400   LM
  0  
 0&0  0  
0,

6       00   
00 0   I  

,E    00  

   ,E 00 
   0,

2 000   0 
A
 0 L M00,b  
00 ,0 
 
    0,TT
A<  L+43.A
?2M/ 
 6 C  
 0
0  0 0,E
0     0A
,0  
  A
0,

4, * 
L"##*M,2

    0Q

  
 ./,
&;6L"##)M,   < Q30 
 
&;6L"##$M,6  X" QC0 
  
. X,E, = 2, = X,C, <A < 6,E,C, C 6,., <
 
,6,2, (0 (,  .,L"##$M,C   D I 

#%&''"$
 (  '! )*

 5
  6 
   
   


  ,0 
  3 
78*(49*9::),
 
%&*;4
 
   ;3%()
+74/6L"##"M,+  

  G    
  
 ,+74/6"##!A%: 3
  "##",




4- G%


(
D750 
; D 
+D"##*
4 D 0 %##A
0*-

"*   ,



(
D+ ? ;
; D40
+D"##'
4 D$$  

  
A
,


(
D=N  
; D5
+D"##"
4 D"*#  



#%&''"$
 (  '" )*

 5
  6 
   
   


(
DE(

; D5
+D!::$
4 D%"  




(
D( 
0 
; D5
+D!::-
4 D*!   




(
D200N
; D5
+D!::-
4 D!$   



(
D3N
; D5
+D!::*
4 D''   








#%&''"$
 (  '% )*




0 1# ## 

/
    ! 
 

&1 /

* &C 

7  



2 334

A & 

200 ]( O 

   
 ,> 
 
(    0 LKA
 
 M   0  00 
,2 
 
   0  A
   ,  00 CI0 0 
   0,    2= A

/ ,


 0 0   0 
 0  ,E0  0,
          
0 0,>
  
 
0,

30 
 ,300  

  0   

000,    
  0       

K   ,

30 0
 ,2 .Z 
0
0L M,
 0 000  
 
00,

A    
  0 0  ] 
 O
0 0  

,E  

   0  ^0  
 
A
0T 

,
20 0  5 5,  
  
 @F,4     0

   00,

E  0 0 0 0
   
   ,
0     0 ,E

I    
 /0A
 / ;74A /3.&6  E ,

#%&''"$
 (  '' )*

 7 ' 
  '    


A$ &     

  
:,%,! 5 
E526/6 0  

  CI

5  0  ,2T0
]
O  '' ,
0
B  00  
   00, 5A
0      B CI


   0 
,

E  
 CI
A
C $#R   
 
)%R  0,700 
     I 0 
 ,40   

0
 ,

+0 

):R !'R )R
CI 1

5   
$'R "R !'R
CI1

5CI01 *!R *R ''R

5 0 

)%R 'R "%R
1

#R "#R '#R -#R $#R !##R


! 6

  CI''  5 L( /

  "##%M,D QD&QD,

0 26/6@F*#!0 
0; ,6/
O0  CI,
7   0  ,
  0  ,
    0     
 
&   ,

30 26/60 0 0

B 

 CI
,@F
'$# 


2  LCI
M  H+0 CI J,> A
   ,  
 00  CI,E 0
  0  
0,
=     ;1B 

  '!R '!R !$R

  )'R !-R !#R

#R "#R '#R -#R $#R !##R


" ? 

  CIB0 CI


 L;  ;   "##-M, '$#    

 
  2    0 A
   ,D QD&QD,

#%&''"$
 (  '* )*

 7 ' 
  '    



:,%,"  
  0
 

  


,    0 

  L    0G  
M,E     ( 
L< !M     L< "M,
 @F !-  ":-% ,
>    -%R %)R ,

4   H 

L0TM
1J  !-,

    
0  0



0
0 

0, 
     
,     %,E
 
 
L  0M0 

   

,/0 

   

  

L   M
0 L)#A:#RM
0
0L:#A!##R,7

 A

LM   ,
!##R
:#R
$#R
)#R
-#R
*#R
'#R
%#R
"#R
!#R
#R
+ < 6 < 

&  %    
 

!##R
:#R
$#R
)#R
-#R
*#R
'#R
%#R
"#R
!#R
#R
+ < 6 < 

&  % #
   

% (  
    D H    

   0    
0
 0

1J!-0   
 

    H>
 CI
01
/ 1J,L!!M      
0 0,4  0 
L0M
  0 ]O
L)M,>
 
    L"M,20  
CI


 0  ,

#%&''"$
 (  '- )*

 7 ' 
  '    


6 a  D  

  
 
0LH JM      0 A

,

    0L< + +  M
@F  ,E !#$ 
 L$#R "#R M,> $#R A


 ,

'    0



,>0

 
  0,>  

 -!)*R   

 


0 ,

  A 

LM
$"$$R,
!##R
:#R
$#R
)#R
-#R
*#R
'#R
%#R
"#R
!#R
#R
+ <  <  
 0


&  %    
 

!##R
:#R
$#R
)#R
-#R
*#R
'#R
%#R
"#R
!#R
#R
+ <  <  
 0


&  % #
   

' (  
    D H    

   0    
0
 0

1J!#$ 

  H>
 CI
01/ 1J
  
 0 A
0,< % 
  ,
 
:,%,% ?

550 0  

  
   
,
7 A 
 0 Lg$#R

 M,>



  0L-#G$#RM  0  

 0     D
A
   

Q
A 
Q
A  
 0  
  ,




#%&''"$
 (  ') )*

 7 ' 
  '    


A( &     

  
:,',! 5 
26/600  

   A

 @F'-)5  ,
 

 ,E !")L*)RM

    ,'"R BA
 
  0
, 0    
  
 
D%#R  
    
A
0 ,

+0 

  *)R !#R %%R
1

5 
'"R *$R
 
 1

#R "#R '#R -#R $#R !##R


* C 5   0  A
 L;    "##%M, 2@F    '-)       !"),
D QD&QD,

:,'," 5
35  ,  
  ,+       
  ,40    3  
    
 CI  0
  00 0L7W0ZXN "##)M,

0 ,5 00
A
  0   0  A
 L    
M,
  A      


  ,  
      000 0,

2T B 0
B  A

 0 ,

   
0  
  0      0, 0

   
 K 0L5
    M,

A+ &    I     
<  
L0ML 
M 0
 00 
 0 0 D
A  
L0  0M
A 0L 00   0M
A 0  L  0M

>
 
  0TTA
  ,4 

    

 
 0,  

 0   

0,> 0
   

    ,E0  
 
  
    0
,

#%&''"$
 (  '$ )*

 7 ' 
  '    


< 0
 
   
  


  0   0 A


 0  ,

A, F /

  
  
2 0  


  

  ,>A 
   ,
E0    0 L M
 BL M  0A
,3  0 00 0 A
 
K, 0   0
0 
 0
 0 0 

 0   
^
,

> 
  
I,


  
 
    ,>A
 0

 )#A)*R  


-!A)%R   L  @F!#$
M,    

 0


,

2       0 

0

, 0G 
     
 A 
0 00 0,

200 
K   
 

,4 


  
   0 ,2   
  
0
 0,0  0 L 
 A 
8 
8 8  
,M,0  0

  001  A

 000  0   1

20 0 
]
A
 O,<  
 A
,>
  0 A A
  ,30      A
,200 23   
0  0
  
L XN "##)M,2  0 
  ,

400  0 0 A
  0 0 
O  


,35 0  0 
  000  A 00
  0  0,

A- !   
2 00 
   
K    ,20 
0   
000

, 00 A 
     CIG0 0 
  0  ,2  0  
 0 ,


#%&''"$
 (  ': )*

 7 ' 
  '    


A4 )   

;X, E C, <6, + 
C, ; 7,6,L"##%MDE + 

 

 
LM,/ +

 
7
'$L!M ')G*-,

; X, 7,6,; L"##-M?     A

D6
CI,2  +

Z7

'#L!-MD'$%$A'$'',

; X, =,7  .,=  AE  7,6,; L"##-Md

CI
G @  
   
+ ,
/ +

 7
*'L!!A!"MD'#%A'!",

( A/ ?, 6,+
N ,/ X,C
0 7,6,; L"##%M  

 
  ,/ +

 7
'$L!MD
*)A-*,

( 7W0ZEW0 XNL"##)M,4 


   

  ,

#%&''"$
 (  *# )*

 7 ' 
  '    


AA G%
  ;  < 
   'J 



E( 

200 ]( O 

   
 ,3
]CIO
       0  L"M,A
 0A0   
  0 A
 0    
    00,

C0 0  0 LM0 A
 L!M,400 

    

,3  !R   0
  ,   0  

 ,     0 
    0  ,4 
  CI  0 

 /?O,E 0!#!*  ,


+0L!%&&M L"&&M = L'&&M
:R !#R

"!R
!!R

"#R

*%R

"-R )#R
3

 $#R
 

!, <  0   

E( 005,E !#,###CI A
0
,   /A
I
C"##*,2 0 
CI,C 
   
( 00 L, ,7 X6 M, 
+ 0 
00
0 0,

> 
 (    0
L
 M   0  00 

,4 )#A:#R 
  
,
.    0     
,EC 0<I/ 
 6 C "##)
  C A   
A
  ,E 
 0 A0A
        0 0 

C 
0,2   
  
 0     ,  00 
CI0 0    0,
   2= 
/ ,





#%&''"$
 (  *! )*

 7 ' 
  '    


5
 0   
0  0  ,E0  0,A
        
 0 0,>
  

 0,

      0 A
     
K  A
 ,/ 3 0  A   
 ,300  
 A
 0   
 0
00,20 .Z 

00,



 
", CI/ 6LD6 CM  

  
I+
0 5



#%&''"$
 (  *" )*

 7 ' 
  '    


A3 G%
 &    K 'J 


@F    0

 

 
,

!, <  1
4>  
4C   

", / 1

%, 5 

L0TM A
1
4X 
4

E0 0 
 0 0,

', 5 

  
0 0
 0

1
L 0M
4+ 
4<
46
4<
4

*, 5 

 0 
 01L 0M
4+ 
4<
46
4<
4

-, >
 CI
01/ 1

 hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

G     



#%&''"$
 (  *% )*

 7 ' 
  '    


A G%
$0      )%  
L. 
;1B 
  
    M


:,!!,! 5  D
• 6

0 L,, ,  M   
0 0  ,4, ,6 

  ,
• 6,
• 6  00 
    
0,
• 6
   ,6 
,E0
 
 
1
• 60  1P5  i(
 
i,
• 6 000 0 
@  
0   1
• < ,
•  00,(0
 

   
0,  

,
• 
0 0 
 0
L
M  ,
•  0  0  
  0

,
•    ,
• 
K   
• 2   0 0Q 


  
,E 
  

 ,, ,
,, ,
0
,
•   0,
• 
   ,
• E 0     0A0,6 A
   ,
• E    0    
,
• E
0 00
,
• E0  V0V0,
• E00 ,C 0 
    0,7
    
 0  0,
• 00   0       A
,0
00   A
  0

,
• 00
K0    ,6

 
0  
 0
,0 0
  ,
•  0,
• X  0 0    0&0  

0 0 0   
   
• X     
  0 ,
• X    0  A

 ,     0 
    0  ,
• X 
 

LM,
• X    V
  
,


#%&''"$
 (  *' )*

 7 ' 
  '    


• X     ,4


  
& 0   0,;0
0,
• X  00   ,/0 
  L
 0M 

 
• X  
    0 

• X   & &  
& 
0I
0  0,
• X     ,2 
  
     ,
• X 0 0
   , 

 ,4     
  
  CI 
 ,
• X 0    00 ,,
• X 0 00,
• X  
 ,  
0A
0,/  ,, ,   000
 ,X 0   

,
•    ,.  
• X  0      

     L0AM,
• X  0 0   ,i(i 
 
0   0,5   
   ,
• X  0    ,
• X   0    
,@,A

, 0 i i ,
• X 
 0   
 
V0   ,
• X  

K00 0 0
00  00L 
,,M
• C 
  

     i 

i 
 ,6  
L

M    00,
• C  0  ,
•  0  0 0 0 


A
 0,
• 4 K 0   

   
  00A
  ,
• (   D0  L

 0 M
K  
 
• +
  ,
• +
 
0   0,
• > 
  

K 
,,
• >,
• /   0,70   0
,
• / 0  
,
• / 0     0 
0  0 
  ,
• / 
 A 
 0







#%&''"$
 (  ** )*

 7 ' 
  '    


:,!!," 5  1

• 6

 0  ,

• 6  
,E0 
     
0   00 ,EA
00   01
• 6  

 0
 0,
•    0   0  0 ,
0   0  ,
• 2
   ,,  A
0)#A:#R 
 

• 2 0 0
 0   
 0
0 0   0
 ,2A
,
• 0 0   0
 ,
• E0     
L
  

M
 
010
 
&00,
•      
 

, 
 0  
0
 ,( >2+P
• C V V,
•     
 0  0,
•      

   

  0,
•  00  ,E  
   00,
•  0 ,
• CI 
   00 
L0 M 
0,0 
   00,
• 4      ,2 
     
 0 ,
• 4   00  A
  0  ,4   

   
  ,
• (
,
• 7       A
L
M,
• 7 i i
,
• >     ,
• 5 0    0  
,2
DL
M0
A

01
• 50 1




#%&''"$
 (  *- )*




2  

 

 
   
  "

5*% % G%=

)%
D 
2 334

3  
E 0  0
0 ,> 
      

 0  0 ,7
0

   0   0,
     
 

A
  ,0   ,+0
 0  00   ,6
  

    0  0,

C   0 
  
 
 ,/ 
    1  ,

3  0 
   00  
  ,>  A
  
 0D
!,    0,
", > ,
%, > ,
', C 
 0

 

!#,",! =
= 
0 0,20   /> E A
;   000 +  ,5 00
 04++,60 ? 
 0L 

   00M0E

;  0000 +  ,
00 00
 TT
 , 0

 /3.73
 0       
0  ,  

    
0  ,








#%&''"$
 (  *) )*

  
 

    



 0 !,






 F5;;=



=








!,0

!#,"," 6 
4 
 , 
0  0       
 
0 0   L   M 
L  M,       0,E
 0      A

,<
 A
0 ,E0 0  
0 
0
   00 A

  ,
   
,   
0      0   
  ,6       
  0 ,5 6;  
 O'% ,

", 

 



 &&;G8D




g-#
 



 < 



+ &

 




 2  



.
  0




, 50



4 L605A
 
E M



#%&''"$
 (  *$ )*

  
 

    




400 0
  000
   0

   A
0 0, 0 !##00O
# ""*% ,3  0  0% 
 ,20 !## 0O!%
 ,

"     0
 ,

20 0 , 
 
 L+00M    0 A
   ,
C    0 
   A
 0 0 0     A
L2
A&IM,30  0A
 ,L  0E  0'G-%A
 M

!#,",% 6,
.0 L
M
   0D
•    L   
A ,
•  L &
 M,
• 6@
,
• <
 ,

 

 &CN59

  6  

  6@



   


%, 






% 


 
0   0 0,
50   0      0,

% 0      @
 A
,
<
     ,
0    0 Q A
   
  0,
    ,

#%&''"$
 (  *: )*

  
 

    



!#,",' 6

 ,
ET  0

  +  , 


  
 ,<00  
   0     ,
5
   0  A
0,


40 0   
  
? ? 0 

     ,


  ?  "  
  ,

'
 
+   ? OA
 ,

 &5<9&95
 ? 

 (
+  


 
?  
 
 
 +   
 (
 
 
 
 



'D

 

3$ =     6  
  

0E G; GE ,
00    
     ,
 0
 00  


0
00 ,C  
@
0  ,   0
0  L 
  
M0,; 0   

  
0
,
+  A
 ,6  0 / /A
0 00
+0,

+0
+0   ,5  
 00  +  A
,
? E I  0   000  
 00 A +0,40+00
0   
,  0
     
 A
0    00  ,

#%&''"$
 (  -# )*

  
 

    


  +0   0  ,    
   ,










 
 = 0A
 









*,(K
















#%&''"$
 (  -! )*




 3  !! 4

 /

   . &/
 
!! 

&1 * &C/  G * &C G%=)%
&  334

 = 

     

  
  
     0,E 
  <44CL<4 4 
CM
,3   0 L0 

 0M L M,2 A
0 0 
    


  
    ,EA
   , 0 
+74/6;6,

 0 0 
0  
   L     M 0
,E0 0   I 
 0K
    
 I       <44C,

3 00     A
 
,E0   
<44C  ,4  00 0

,0  A 0

   
  L  00M 
,
400   00    Q 
 
 
 
,7     
A
,

  G 8 
8
 1  G881
>   
 0  
<44CL<4 4 
CM,2


       00,
2
 
 <44C  
!  !::%0 ,E00<44CA!::$    
  
  23,5 I  
    0  0   .
A
  <44CA 
 A  ,

7 " I      

  23
$-&")$<44C,7 0 0<44CA 

 ,

#%&''"$
 (  -" )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



2  0

   L M
0
  23, 

  0  0
 ,
40    2
  A
,

7 "G2  
    
L4+M  I 
    L&0+M 23
<44CA,

 23
$-&")$ <44C <44C <44C
 5  5  ? 5


4+ A *#R + "#R + "#R +
? "#A'# ! "* ! # )
? A )* *# *#
? !###A!)*# )* -# "*
E !-A"* # )* # % # "
 %##A'## %# "# !#
( )*#A!"## !## !## -*
5 "*##A'### %## "## )*
6 A !* !* *

N     


   <44C 
0 0  
   
   O A

  ,

N 

7 %A?
   (      "##!A
"##*L?<+ "##)M   0  LC< "##-M,

 ?<+ C<A  

 C&0+ &0 &0( &0+ &0 &0(
? ! * %# -- ! - %$ '"
? '" $ $)# !$$* *" # !"%" !%*$
? %$: ' ):!* !)!*' *$' * !%$*! !*"-!
E ! ! "" '$ ! " ") %#
 ": ) -#' !%#$ %% * ):' $)*
( !%' " ")"$ *:!" !"* * ":)' %"))
5 ::% $ "#!:: '%)$# !!*! # ")")* %##*"
6 : # !$% %:- : % "!: "'"

)    %  /   
% 

7 'A(
      
  0LE<
0 
"##"M,

 3LRM 
LRM  LRM
? # - * ' :' !
? # % # ) :: #
? ! ' !* % $% %
E % # '- ! *! #
 # % % - :- !
( # #- # -- :: "$
5 # ! "' ' )* *
6 A A A


#%&''"$
 (  -% )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



7 *A?
   
 0LE<
0 "##"M,

 3 

 C&0+ &0 &0( &0+ &0 &0(
? # #" # ! ! # # " - $ "# "
? # " # : !# ! # ' !% % %: :
? ! ) : " !#! ' "" % )%% - "!:)
E # #" # ! ! ' # ' !% : '! *
 # ! # - ) ! ! * ': % !') *
( # #% # " ! : # ' !% % '#
5 # ) ' # '% $ "!: )!:% "!*'!
6 A A A A A A

7 -A?
     

   
0 $#Y5L( @XN "##%M,

 3e  

e   
 C&0 &0( &0 &0( &0 &0(
? # #" # %! $ ! "% !# - ")
? # #' # -- -: !:- ":" )%:
? ' * -$ - $$: "*%# '*-- !!**#
E # #' # -* ' - !% " ! * %
 ! ! !- - !!) %%# '-" !!)#
( ! ! !- : !: *' !-$ '"*
5 "$ '"- "'YY -))##YY '$:! !"%)#
6 A A A A A A
Y(

  5,
YY

 0 
0 
   ,

N 
7 )A?
         
    


L+0  !:::Q+ < "##!Q=  "##*M,

 &0 &0(
? ! !G' " - $G"$ -
? !# 'G%' ) !##G"%$
? !!%G)#! )")G'$!#
E \G# ) \G' )
 !$ $G%! : !*#G"!:
( !* #G*# # !!'G%'%
5 )*%A"'%$ )-$*G!-)!'
6 A A

D %  

7 $A?
   0 &0+L   , "##%M,

 ? ? ? E  ( 5 6

C0 / # "! $ # '" # #' !! # !' # !-- A
> 0L M # %! !' # %$! # #% "" # !$ # -!: A
;  # "# - " -! # #" : ) !! ' %:' A




#%&''"$
 (  -' )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



7 :A?
   0    ,"##*L M = ,"##-LM
C
<+ "##!L
M,

 C&0L, M &0(L ("4*ML, M &0(L,

M
 . > 0 . > 0 .
? * - * % %" ) !: ! "*
? !:'  !!'* A *)%
? "''' *!!' !'%:) !$*'- !)%!#
E A A A A " *
 "*# A !')" A ::-
( !!$ A -:* A ")'
5 ''#- !%!"' "*:') ')*:% "%)$-
6 A A A A !-"

5
7  !# A ?
      
 L
  , "##- L M      ,  "##% LM  >0 
!::$L
MM,

 ? ? ? E  ( 5 .,

!
?L&0M  #,) *# "* #," !# -* )* L M
A
L&0M # "- : : !: ! # #): ' - %) # !#% - LM
A
L&0+M # $ !- %* A : $* !%' L
M
? L&0M # !% ' $ : : # #!- ! # ' " '$ # LM
4 
L&0,,M" # '' !* ' "! $ # !%$ !# " '' " !"" ' LM
!
6  D'#R+
"
<       ,
7 !!A   A

  A(A  

L      , "##%Q (=E M,

 A
 ? 
 &0 &0(L("4*M &0 &0(L("4*M
? %# - !-! "" ' :% #
? !!-* -!"$ $"$ %'%*
? ""') !!$"% !)#) )#$-
E : % '$ : " $ !! *
 *'! "$') !)" )!-
( '%*% "":#% )"' %##-
5 !"!$$ -'!": $")- %'%**
6 A A A A

7 !"A>
  
  "###L   , "##%M,

 6 >
L!###0M
 0 ? ? 5 ( E ? 
A
 %#: # #$# * :# %" # !! '" # #"' % #- ! '%
?  -## # #)) * :* "$ $ " *# # #!# " $$ # *$
4 
 !*# # #-- % ") !$ ' - -% # #"! " %! ! *%
7 
  # "" !* ! ): " "# * # #* $ " % *


#%&''"$
 (  -* )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



= 
7 !%A?
    L; "##)M,

 &0+ [&0 [&0(

? #," #,##" #,##!
? ",) #,#"* #,#!)
? :,* #,#:# #,#-!
E \#,#* A A
 !,* #,#!' #,##:
( #,$ #,##$ #,##*
5 )-,* #,)": #,':'
6 \! A A

F 
7  !' A 7
        
  0 L.  .   "##-M 
 TT L( @XN "##%M,

 ? ? ? E  ( 5 6

AL&0M - # )) : "- # # ! "# : *' : "#% : %
(AL&0("4*M %: * *'% :# * # % $$ % -) # $%: !' *
(AL&0(M :# * !"'* "#) # ) "#" !*' !:"% %% "
=AL&0="4M # ! * $ ' $ # # " * # $ - " # !
=AL&0=M # " !# * $ ) # ! ' * ! * !! % # "
= 0L&0? 4M # * !' ) !' - # ! !# * : ) -- : # !
= 0L&0? M # ) "# - "# ' # ! !' ) !% - :% - # !
(=A+"!A'A)L&0M # " %) # - : # # "" # " # )- # A
(=A+"!A'A)L&0(M # ! !" # " % # # ) # # ) "* # A

. "   

  D"#*0  -*0(
  , 0 
     (0,
6    
       ,

 5  C<A   
<0    (  (
? - % ' % ) $ " )
? !)$ !"% "*% $$
? !-"% !!!* "$%: ::"
E ' - % ! * - " #
 !"' $* !-% *)
( **: %$' -!# "!%
5 '!'! "$'- **:! !:*%
6 %$ "- '* !-













#%&''"$
 (  -- )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 




 3 

<0    (  (
? # #! # #' ! *% ! '#
? # !# # %* $ '' ) -)
? ! '# * *% !-- % !*% -
E # #! # #) ! :# ! ))
 # !) # )) !) #* !* *"
( # !% # -! % %! % #-
5 % "$ !* ") )%: $ ":##
 5  
<0    (
? # ""G# $* # ''G! $-
? " !'G) !" - *#G!* *
? "% %G!'% $ ') %G%!%
E #G# !* #G# %#
 % $'G- ** : )*G!' "
( % #$G!# "* ) %:G"" %
5 !*'G*## *##A!#$-

 + L 
[& , M
<0    (
? #,' #,!
? *," !,!
? !$,* ',#
E \ \
 ",$ #,-
( !,- #,%
5 !':,' %",!

 A0 (A0 =(=A+"!A'A)
<0    (  (
? ! "% - # #* # #!
? !- # $! ) *: # )$
? * %% !% ! '! # !*
E # #!' # #'* # ##$ # ##!
 ' "$ !% ' *! # '-
( !! % !# # '! # #*
5 '! - !"* !* - ! -%
6 ! :! " " A A

  (("4* (
 . > 0 . > 0 .
? ! !' ! #$ " !% ! "' ! -"
? %: : A )' ' A %) "
? *#! !#'$ :%- !"#* !!"*
E A A A A # !-
 *! % A :* ) A -' $
( "' " A '* " A !) $
5 :#% "-:# !-$) %#:' !*'-
6 A A A A !# *



#%&''"$
 (  -) )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



 A
 ? 
<0    (  (
? - % !# * ' - - #
? "%: %:$ !)# ""%
? '-! )-$ %*# '-!
E ! : % " # - # )
 !!! !$* %* ')
( $:" !'$: !'$ !:*
5 "':: '!-$ !-:) ""%%
6 A A A A

$ . 
%

  0 0 0  
  
  -*0(      0 

,L<D
  
,M

0     
 
,E0   <44C
    
 
  ,4    
   
  00 A
,40  00   

 
    
 
,2A


 
,


. "   % 

,+

<: %
5 
6
.
=L(AM
5 

3
(



E

?

?

?

#,#! #,!# !,## !#,## !##,## !###,## !####,##

>
L& ,M

( 0    
?<+ ? <  + 0 +  >&E"##)A!!A%#

  ., (,=,,  2C,C,  E0=,/, 4?,+,C,L"##%M
2      ,2  ,? 
<  + 0 >&E,

 E,X,?, E  C,?, < 0=,L"##*M2
0 
A
  ( 00. . -$

C<+ 0L"##-MX   "##-,


#%&''"$
 (  -$ )*

 /  ;
 ' 
 6 - 



E6, <

06,L"##"M4     CW
WCj k00  ,"%,Cj,

=6,  (6,E,X,  +
 ,?,L"##-MC 0/A
,(
 / <IC,

=<,E X,L"##-M<
20 PC B  
0P( 000( Z4 ,

=  =,L"##*M6 
 

   2+6.

,
+74/6 "##*A!',

; 2,L"##)M         ,

C
<C,<, +,L"##!M7


   
?(AC+ ?
++

 ( 6  %"D! !%:A!*-,


,6, ++,., 6 <,X, ? A+?, ? <,X,L"##-Mb 
   
 2  / ,/  2 X 
"# $)A:*,

( @ E, XN E,L"##%M3  
       
 i "  +2

+   )A!!6 ;S
0 
 ,

.?, . 6,L"##-M2

      

;
?
6,7

3 l< 2  7
 A
 / b ?,  0* 
H+ A
 ?
+  7 3  
  JL+?+7M,

+0 4,X,L!:::M6 A +.

4 
/  <,#
 ,
"

,-$D%)%A%$",

+ +,2, <6,L"##!M6  
0    
 D
4A+/  7  (
  +   
+ ?+ + !!A!'C 
"##! / 7I  3+6,,*')A**%,

/E4L"##-M    I
   ,>'D
2I
    
,



















#%&''"$
 (  -: )*

 


+ G%
#& "        % 333

  L&0M 6 >
L!###0M
 ? ? 5 ( E ?  0 ? ? 5 ( E ? 
+0L M"M        "$*       
0 0   # %) ! ) - $ " ) # %)# * - %: $ "*! # #:% # '") ! )! # -)$ # #:%# ! '# !# ##
0   # :# % ' !% - * : # ### ) % ) % !) # #!- # #*: # "% # !#" # #### # !% # !%
 0 # :# % ' !% - * : # '!# !*: : %%! * !) # #!* # #*) # "% # #:$ # ##-$ " -- * *"
7 0         # !"% # *'" " !) # $)$ # #::$ ' !$ !* -'
L ("4*M        -"       
  -! %# )* " !%-% # ') # ! '*# *!* # :* # ! # #$- # !#- ! :" # #-- # ##"# # )% # !%
  *$ !# -- # !"!- # !! ) # #') ':# # :# # - # %%* # %$# ) #! # #-) # ###% " $" # *"
  00 % "# "!- # )!# # "%- * # !*% !*":# # $$ # # # ### # ### # ## # ### # #### # ## # ##
 (=A (A(=A "' "# *' # ')! # '- * # '"' ")! # -' # '' ! #)' " %:) "# :! " #-' # #!$$ !" #% " $'
  !* !# *" # %!! # * * # #'' "-% # '$ # !! # !-! # *** % %" # #*: # ###* " $! # *!
7          ! -*) % '%: %% !- " "*) # ##"* !$ %: ' #!
= L ="4M%M        %"       
0  # '* # % "$ * "# # # ### * : # # # # ### # ### # #! # ##$ # #### # ## # ##
0 
'# # '# # % -# # !! # # ### % ) ) ' " # ##! # ### # !# # #!$ # #### # #! # #!
0 
-# # !% # % $ ' ! " # ### # ! % : !$ # ##" # ##* # !* # #"" # #### # ## # #)
 0  # #% # % # % ! $ # ### # * ! " - # ### # ##" # ## # #!! # #### # ## # #!
 0  # !% # % $ ' ! " # $!# ) ' '* " - # ##! # ##" # #* # ##) # ##'* # #' # "*
7 0          # ##' # ##: # %! # #-* # ##'* # #* # %'
= 0L ,,,M'M        !)!       

  ! -* '* # !): # !! % # #!* %" * * # :" # !*" ' !'# !- ') ! #%* # ##!' " :: # '-
0 0 0e0 0 # !: - $ !* # ! ' # ##* # $ ! ) %# # ##- # "#* # '* # #'! # ###" # #" # #*
0  0 0 # %- ' ! *) % !! : # ##* ! # % " %$ # #!' # !*$ " "# # '*- # ###" # #' # !"
  0 0 # #' # # "! ! !# " # #!# # $ # - $ # ### # ### # !- # #)$ # ###! # #! # ##
 0 0 ! %* '' # !%' # !$ % # ### ) % '$ # ! # ##" # #** # !) # #"% # #### # #! # #-
 0 0 ! "* !# # "%) # %: # # ##* %" * * # " # ##" # #!' # %' # #** # #### # #* # #!
7 0 0         # !)* ' *) !: )$ ! -$$ # ##!$ % !! # )!
<D   ,

#%&''"$
(  )# )*





 6 

   


<00 0  L0  
H6 0   J+ "##$M 000  
0   0 0,> 
   
K&,3 0     
 K,>
0



0    0,E
  
  0 
 , 0  


 ,

>  
 0   K 
 00,20   
0 0
0

, O   
    O 0     A

 ,5
    
 ,> 
0   

    
   ,
 O
    0    000 0 
  00 

  0,7  0 
   
,
 
  
@0   ,
   
 0

  0

0&     ,

  ,  
0  
  I   ,+0P6
  0000  00,  0
 ,E  0 ,C 
 0  0 
     ,

3LM    A
,20   ,C  0   A
0  ,C     
   0 

000  L    
0   M 0 L  
 B
M0 
  L 

 0 M,
0  0   0
   00,4 00 00,

<0 0 00 
  
I    H0J,3
  0  , 0  
00  
  00

0,


#%&''"$
 (  )! )*

 8


 00  00    A
 0 , 
A
 
 

K,  E
<  I (    0


 0*A:R!!A!-R,2     
B(      A
0
  
  
0
,

20   0000  
0B ,
• 20   0,
0 ? ? L?"?M   ,6 U
>      

0,C   0?"?

A
  0    

0 00,
•  L  0M
00 
         0,
6 
 
    
0   ,7  L 
 M0 0  00
0, 0

00 
  ,
•   00 
 
  
 
A  
0L M,X  A
000 ,

7
0  ,A
       
0   0   
,4
0   A
  A  0   
0       0 
,

2
0  0 
 0 @ A

, 0

 
L 
   +  00  
A  ,

K  @
000,
2   0   
  A
,00  
0  @

0,   0 ,

7
   0
  0   A
,5;0>    
 0   
0   
L0M,3
 0 0  
    ,7
  H 0J 0A

 0     ,0 

  
 0   ,

2   
   
,
4 
 0   0 


    0
  , A
,0   

 
 
0,  

0   00   A
0,

#%&''"$
 (  )" )*

 8


E    0  A

,  
0
0 

  ,+
,4  

 
0     
 
 0 ,7/6
6 
+  
L "##)M  0    

7

  

'##G*##&  0
  
0

# ##"&,
E

0  0
 00  
 ,

3  0 
   0 
    0  0 0 ,3
!-   0   
0  ,  

 L    0  M0 0

  00
0

,2  6 C ,<

   
  
K ,
 
  

 
0 
A
,45 E
/0 
    0X< 
6      A 0,
0,  L A
& M 00 
 
 LB 0  

 &  
B 
M,  
     0 
0   ,

  00000A  
 0,   0 0

0 ,
7 0 0I A
0,3 0 0  0
  00A  ,6 00   
0I  
   0Q  0 
    0  0, 
LM0,C 0

 
 0
 
 0 , &?"?&
0&  0&  ?4"
 

 ,0 0  A 0 

0 ,7 D
• 0 

 
 0 
    <6O ,C

 
   L 0  M
 0 <6O,0
  0 0,
•   0   ./5A
00   
  A
  ./50 ,
A
    

 0L
 
0 
M,
E
  0
0 
K0
 ,50 
    00A
0

 ,

C 0  
K0   0A
   
 0
   
 0,



#%&''"$
 (  )% )*

 8


40C  L)*RM 


   ,40  
    
 0   ,
  6 C   0 
 0  ,3    0
   0   0 0 ,
> 0     
 0   

,L4  0 0
00  00     A
0 ,M

   9
?  D
•  0 0   
•   0L00M 
•   
0

 000 
•  
 0 0 
  0 
000
 0 ,
3  0    0 
0   00
0 
0L0

M 
 0   0 0,
> 00
D
• 0E G; GE   00  A
 @
    
,6  
  
; ,>0
0 
; L/ E M,>  0,
• +0    
L227M    
00,<0   0  
 0   0 A
,E
 3  / /Q


0 0 ,40+0 0
 
 ,

   + H64 E06  J
 000    00      

 0   00, 
0   0?"?  00   
 0  , 0  0 
 000 
 ,

 
      
 000  
,5
  00,
40  
    LM 0Q
 00    
K,

 $  K  

3 
 00  0 
0,(        0  A
,< ,
400,0 00 

0 0
0   ,
00     ,

>  00 
  

    
 
   00 ,


#%&''"$
 (  )' )*

 8


6 00 

 /0 ;74 /
E  0  ,<000 0 0
0
0 + /3.&(.,
E  
 D
2     
   
 0 00  
   00
 0,
E 0   

00  
000
    A
L @
M,

0     
0D

•   0LM
  
LM,2
0 
 00 =
 > E ,

• + ;74  0 L
M 
  ,E0  0

= <  ,

•   L & M 
00 
 L  0  


 &  
B 
M,    
0 
0   ,
 0
;74 (. 0 ,

• (4A  00   A 
A  0   A
0       0 
, 0  0
3 / A

 + ,

<     

0A
 =4++0A

 0=&+ ,

400
N  

  
00  
,




#%&''"$
 (  )* )*

www.grontmij.nl

Grontmij
Zonnedauw 2
9202 PA Drachten
Postbus 91
9200 AB Drachten
T (0512) 33 52 33
F (0512) 51 02 00
noord@grontmij.nl
Verwijdering van medicijnresten en
hormoonverstorende stoffen uit urine
Quick-scan technieken

Definitief

STOWA-koepelgroep Ontwikkeling Nieuwe Sanitatie Systemen (ONNS)

Grontmij Nederland bv
De Bilt, 17 juni 2005

@ Grontmij , rev.
Verantwoording

Titel : Verwijdering van medicijnresten en hormoonversto-

rende stoffen uit urine
Projectnummer : 178603

Documentnummer :

Revisie :

Datum : 17 juni 2005

Auteur(s) : dr.ir. J.H. Roorda (Jelle)

e-mail adres : jelle.roorda@grontmij.nl

Gecontroleerd : ir. N.C. Wortel (Nico)

Paraaf gecontroleerd :

Goedgekeurd : ir. P. Roeleveld (Paul)

Paraaf goedgekeurd :

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 2 van
Inhoudsopgave

1 Inleiding.........................................................................................4

2 Overzicht technieken ......................................................................5

2.1 Biologische technieken ...................................................................5
2.2 Oxidatieve technieken ....................................................................6
2.3 Fysisch-chemische technieken ........................................................6
2.4 Membraanfiltratie ..........................................................................6
2.5 Adsorptieve technieken ..................................................................7

3 Conclusies en aanbevelingen ..........................................................8

3.1 Conclusies ......................................................................................8
3.2 Aanbevelingen................................................................................8

Literatuur....................................................................................................10

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 3 van
1 Inleiding

Bij de gescheiden behandeling van urine kunnen de nutriënten Stikstof en

Fosfaat op efficiënte wijze verwijderd of omgezet worden in bruikbare mest-
stoffen. In STOWA (2005) worden een aantal zuiveringsconcepten beschre-
ven die daarvoor in aanmerking komen. Naast de genoemde stoffen bevinden
zich ook andere milieuvreemde stoffen in de urine. Daarbij nemen de genees-
middelen en hormonen een belangrijke rol in.

Na opname of omzetting in het lichaam, worden geneesmiddelen en afbraak-

producten van geneesmiddelen uitgescheiden. Het grootste deel hiervan ver-
laat via de urine het lichaam. Hierover zijn slechts in nauwelijks harde gege-
vens bekend, maar diverse auteurs die zich bezighouden met gescheiden in-
zameling en verwerking van urine geven aan dat in de urine het grootste deel
van de geneesmiddelen te vinden moet zijn. (Larsen et al., 2004; Pronk et al.,
2004). Von Wolffersdorf (2004) heeft wel gemeten in urine en vindt genees-
middelen in concentratieranges van tientallen tot honderden µg per liter urine.
In afvalwater is de range waarin deze gevonden wordt een factor 100 tot 1000
lager (Grontmij, 2005).

STOWA heeft Grontmij opdracht gegeven een quick-scan uit te voeren naar
technieken die de medicijnen, medicijnresten, (natuurlijke en synthetisceh )
hormonen en hormoonverstorende stoffen in het ingezamelde (verdunde)
urine vergaand kunnen reduceren. Daartoe is een globale scan gemaakt van
de beschikbare literatuur. In onderhavige rapportage is hiervan het resultaat
gegeven. Als gesproken wordt over medicijnresten worden daarmee ook de
andere hierboven genoemde stoffen bedoeld. Waar specifiek wordt ingegaan
op de andere stofgroepen wordt dat vermeld.

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 4 van
2 Overzicht technieken

2.1 Biologische technieken

Biologische afbraak
Over de verwijdering van medicijnresten door biologische afbraak van de
urine is zeer weinig bekend (Larsen et al., 2004). Uit eerste onderzoek blijkt de
halfwaarde tijd van natuurlijke hormonen in een biologische reactor 15 minu-
ten is. Het is onduidelijk wat dit in het (biologisch afbreekbare urine, oa
ureum) betekend. Uit ervaringen met huishoudelijk afvalwater (100 maal
verdunde urine) blijkt dat de helft van de geneesmiddelen ongewijzigd door
een rwzi heen gaan en in het effluent terechtkomen (Ternes, 2005).

Bij de toepassing van technieken voor de behandeling van urine, zoals voor-
gesteld in STOWA (2005), lijkt de verwijdering van de medicijnresten een
goede nageschakelde stap te kunnen zijn. In STOWA (2005) is een overzicht
gegeven van:
- Struviet precipitatie (niet biologisch). Daarbij komt een vaste stof vrij,
die vrij is van medicijnresten. In de vrijkomende waterstroom bevin-
den zich de medicijnresten. Er wordt geen afbraak van medicijnresten
verwacht.
- Biologische N verwijdering. Daarbij wordt ammonium en ni-
traat/nitriet omgezet in stikstofgas wat vervluchtigd. In de overblij-
vende waterstroom bevinden zich de medicijnresten. Deze worden
door de korte verblijftijden in het systeem naar verwachting nauwe-
lijks afgebroken. Wel vindt verwijdering plaats door adsorptie aan het
slib.

Adsorptie aan slib

De retentie van slib in biologische systemen om urine af te breken is vele ma-
len hoger dan in rioolwaterzuiveringsinstallaties (Larsen et al., 2004; STO-
WA, 2005). Medicijnresten die aan het slib geadsorbeerd zijn, worden met het
afgevoerde slib (de hoeveelheid is dus beperkt) verwerkt middels indikking,
(vergisting,) ontwatering en verbranding.

Biologische afbraak in de bodem

Kästner et al. (2004) heeft onderzocht wat de afbraak van nonylphenol en
bisphenol A. Deze hormoonverstorende stoffen (die overigens niet in urine
voorkomen) breken binnen 5-7 dagen tot bijna 90% af tijdens een gesimuleer-
de bodempassage. Voor andere hormoonverstorende stoffen en ook medicij-
nen wordt op grond van vergelijkbare chemische eigenschappen een dergelijke
afbraak verwacht. Uit groot EU-project POSEIDON is gebleken dat ruim
80% van de geneesmiddelen uit rwzi-effluent voor meer dan 90% afbreken en
adsorberen aan de bodem. Desondanks worden een aantal belangrijke ge-
neesmiddelen (carbamazepine en sulfamethoxazole) niet verwijderd en daar-
om teruggevonden in het grondwater (Ternes, 2005).

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 5 van
 Overzicht technieken

2.2 Oxidatieve technieken

Chlorering
Dosering van chloor is onvoldoende effectief om alle medicijnen en hormonen
volledig te oxideren (Ternes, 2005).

Ozonbehandeling
Ozon is selectief voor medicijnresten en wordt in gedoseerde vorm toegepast.
Een verwijdering tot 60% is aangetoond (Pronk et al., 2004), waarbij de ande-
re organische stoffen (ureum) slechts deels werden afgebroken. Als nabehan-
deling van een biologische methode wordt verwacht dat ozonisatie nog effec-
tiever is (Larsen et al., 2004). In effluent wordt een vergaande reductie van een
deel van de stoffen gevonden bij ozonbehandeling (Joss, 2004).

UV-behandeling
Met UV-behandeling is veel ervaring als methode voor desinfectie. Als refe-
rentie voor afvalwaterbehandeling is literatuur beschikbaar, voor urine is nog
geen ervaring opgedaan.

AOP
Onder geavanceerde oxidatie (AOP) wordt verstaan een combinatie zoals
UV/H2O2, Ozon/UV, Ozon/H2O2. Het voordeel van deze technologiecombi-
natie is dat bij een juist ontwerp geen schadelijke bijproducten ontstaan. Er is
geen ervaring met AOP voor verwijdering van medicijnresten uit urine. Bij
rwzi’s is een verwijdering van meer dan 90% gemeten voor medicijnen (Ter-
nes, 2005).

2.3 Fysisch-chemische technieken

Strippen
Vluchtige medicijnresten zouden door middel van strippen verwijderd kunnen
worden. Vooralsnog wordt dit niet realistisch geacht voor de behandeling van
urine.

2.4 Membraanfiltratie
Membraanfiltratie is een scheidingsmethode op grond van deeltjesgrootte
(micro- en ultrafiltratie) en op grond van molecuulgewicht (nanofiltratie en
reverse osmosis). Geneesmiddelen zullen door micro- en ultrafiltratie niet
worden tegengehouden. Nanofiltratie en reverse osmosis zijn wel in staat om
een groot gedeelte van de medicijnresten tegen te houden. Bijzondere vormen
van membraanfiltratie zijn bijvoorbeeld electrodialyse, waarbij scheiden
plaats vindt op basis van lading van moleculen.

Nanofiltratie
Pronk et al. (2004, 2004a) beschrijft onderzoek naar de verwijdering van aan
urine gedoseerde ethinylestradiol, propranolol, ibuprofen, diclofenac en car-
bamezapin. Van deze stoffen werd 92%-98% door het membraan tegenge-
houden. Ureum werd volledig door het membraan doorgelaten, ammonium
voor meer dan 50% en fosfaat werd tegengehouden. Hierbij blijven twee
stromen over:
1. Geconcentreerde stroom met fosfaat en medicijnresten. Fosfaat kan ver-
wijderd worden door struviet te vormen, waarbij geneesmiddelen niet in
de struvietmatrix worden opgenomen.
2. Stikstofrijke waterstroom waaruit de stikstof geconcentreerd kan worden
tot meststof.

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 6 van
 Overzicht technieken

Electrodialyse
In dit proces worden geladen componenten uit de urine gebonden aan het
geladen membraan. Daarbij wordt de urine opgeconcentreerd. Het concen-
traat kan biologisch verwerkt worden, in combinatie met struvietvorming
voor P-verwijdering. De medicijnresten zullen in het restproduct overblijven
(Pronk et al., 2004). Het lijkt erop dat de zouten in oplossing blijven (concen-
traat) en de medicijnresten adsorberen aan de electrodialyse membranen.

2.5 Adsorptieve technieken

Actief Kool filtratie
Adsorptie aan actief kool kan door dosering van poederkool of doorstromen
van een korrelkool reactor (Granular Activated Carbon, GAC). Voor medi-
cijnresten kan een vergaande reductie worden behaald (Joss, 2004). Uit rwzi-
effluent tot meer dan 90% (Ternes, 2005). Voor zover bekend, is er met de
behandeling van urine geen ervaring opgedaan.

2.6 Combinatie van technieken

Een combinatie van technieken kan waarschijnlijk zeer effectief zijn. Daarbij
wordt gedacht aan combinaties als AOP en actief kool, of actief kool en na-
nofiltratie (ANF, Roorda et al., 2004).

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 7 van
3 Conclusies en aanbevelingen

3.1 Conclusies
Vanuit verschillende studies is naar voren gekomen dat medicijnen, medicijn-
resten, hormonen en hormoonverstorende stoffen in RWZI’s afkomstig zijn
van de menselijke urine. Een klein deel wordt ook in de feces gevonden. Ge-
scheiden inzameling en behandeling van urine kan de emissie van deze stoffen
naar het oppervlaktewater vergaand reduceren.

Voor de verwijdering van medicijnen, medicijnresten, hormonen en hor-

moonverstorende stoffen die zich in de urine van mensen bevinden, is een
breed scala aan technieken beschikbaar en in de praktijk toepasbaar. Deze
technieken zijn over het algemeen kostbaar, maar voor de behandeling van
geconcentreerde stromen lijken ze goed toepasbaar. Het kostenaspect speelt
dan een minder belangrijke rol (dan bijvoorbeeld bij de vergaande behande-
ling van communaal afvalwater, wat zeer verdund is ten opzichte van urine).

De technieken voor vergaande reductie van medicijnresten kunnen worden

ingezet in het proces als voorbehandeling van de urine, maar ook als nabe-
handeling van de biologisch behandelde of struviet geprecipiteerde urine. Op
dit moment kan nog geen voorkeur worden uitgesproken en is afhankelijk
van de zuiveringsstappen.

De ervaring met deze technieken is voor de behandeling van urine beperkt.

Op een aantal onderzoeksinstellingen wordt onderzoek verricht op lab-schaal,
voorzover bekend is op praktijkschaal geen voorbeeld bekend. De hier gepre-
senteerde informatie is daarom beperkt en vraagt om meer uitwerking.

De kosten van de beschikbare technieken zijn bekend voor verdunde water-

stromen, voor de behandeling van relatief geconcentreerde urine kan op
grond daarvan een globale inschatting gemaakt worden van de kosten. Dit
voert voor deze quick-scan te ver.

Een combinatie van technieken zou een effectieve optie kunnen zijn.

3.2 Aanbevelingen
Over de verwijdering van medicijnen, medicijnresten, hormonen en hor-
moonverstorende stoffen die zich in de urine bevinden is weinig bruikbare
informatie beschikbaar. De beschikbare informatie is versnipperd aanwezig
en tot op heden niet samengebracht in een goed overzicht. Gezien de moge-
lijkheden om met behandeling van gescheiden ingezamelde urine de reductie
van medicijnen, medicijnresten, hormonen en hormoonverstorende stoffen
afkomstig van huishoudens vergaand te reduceren, wordt aanbevolen om een
goed overzicht van de beschikbare kennis op te stellen. Daarbij zal aansluiting
gezocht moeten worden bij enige grote projecten die in Zwitserland, Zweden
en Duitsland op dit moment worden uitgevoerd.

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 8 van
 Conclusies en aanbevelingen

De concentraties aan medicijnen, medicijnresten, hormonen en hormoonver-

storende stoffen in urine zijn slechts enkele malen bepaald. Om een goede
inschatting te kunnen maken van de mogelijkheden van technieken voor re-
ductie van deze stoffen, dient de gemiddelde samenstelling van urine te wor-
den bepaald.

De kosten van de beschikbare technieken zijn bekend voor verdunde water-

stromen, voor de behandeling van relatief geconcentreerde urine kan op
grond daarvan een globale inschatting gemaakt worden van de kosten. Een
realistische inschatting van de kosten moet gemaakt worden.

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 9 van
Literatuur

Grontmij (2005). Ketenanalyse humane en veterinaire geneesmiddelen in het

watermilieu - indicatieve kwantitatieve analyse en mogelijkheden voor
reductie van belasting van het watermilieu. Rapport opgesteld voor het
Ministerie van VROM, onder begeleiding van de LBOW-werkgroep
‘(dier)geneesmiddelen en watermilieu’. Auteurs: A. Derksen en J.H.
Roorda. Mei 2005.

Joss, A. (2004). Arzneimittel in Wasser und Abwasser Schlussfolgerungen

von POSEIDON. Kooperationsforum Innovation der
Wasserwirtschaftsinitiative NRW und der WEDECO AG
„Arzneimittelrückstände und endokrin wirksame Stoffe in Trink- und
Abwasser - Herausforderungen, Lösungen und Kosten - “ Dienstag, 30.
März 2004.

Kärstner, M., Müller, J., Kappelmeyer, U., Richnow, H.H. en Kuschk, P.

(2004). Analyse des mikrobiellen Abbaus von organischen
Spurenstoffen in Anlagen zur Abwasserbehandlung – Schicksal
hormonell wirksamer Substanzen in bewachsenen Bodenfiltern.
Proceedings Bremer Colloquium Produktionsintegrierte Wasser-/
Abwassertechnik 2004, ’Pharmazeutische Reststoffe in Abwässern –
Vorkommen – Gefährdungspotenzial – Techniken zur Eliminierung’.
13.-14. September 2004.

Larsen, T.A., Lienert, A.J. en H. Siegrist (2004). How to avoid pharmaceuti-

cals in the aquatic environment. Journal of Biotechnology 113: 295–
304.

Pronk, W., Biebow, M. en Boller, M. (2004). Assessment of processing alter-

natives for source-separated urine. Proceedings World Water Congress
and Exhibition, Marrakech, September 2004.

Pronk, W., Palmquist, H., Biebow, M. en Boller, M. (2004a). The separation

of pharmaceuticals from nutrients in source-separated urine. Envi-
ronmental Science & Technology (submitted September 2004)

Roorda, J.H., Wortel, N.C., Koreman, E. en Dalen, R. van (2004). ANF,

doorbraak in technologie van effluentfiltratie. H2O 37(11), p. 33-35

STOWA (2005). Separate collection and treatment of urine and new poten-
tials for wastewater treatment. Auteur: J. Wilsenach, TUDelft. (con-
cept, druk in voorbereiding)

Ternes, T. (2005). Assessment of technologies for the removal of pharmaceuti-

cals and personal care products (PPCP) in sewage and drinking water
facilities to improve the indirect potable water reuse. Detailed report re-

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 10 van
 lated to the overall project duration: January 1st, 2001 to June 30th,
2004 of the EU-project POSEIDON. August 2004, version January
18th 2005. www.eu-poseidon.com (17 juni 2005).

Wolffersdorf, S. von (2004). Untersuchungen zu Sortiertoiletten unter

besonderer Berücksichtigung der Urinverwertung. Diplomarbeit.
Universität Rostock – Agrar- und Umweltwissenschaftlichen
Fakultät – Institut für Umweltingenieurswesen. 1. Juli 2004, Rostock.

@ Grontmij , rev.
blad 11 van
 Nuttige inzet van urine als meststof voor energiegewassen

Praktijkproef toepassing urine

zorglocatie Anderen



3UDNWLMNSURHIWRHSDVVLQJXULQH
]RUJORFDWLH$QGHUHQ
 1XWWLJHLQ]HWYDQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRIYRRUHQHUJLHJHZDVVHQ

 'HILQLWLHI

 2SGUDFKWJHYHUV
672:$:DWHUVFKDS+XQ]HHQ$DV3URYLQFLH'UHQWKH:DWHUEHGULMI*UR
QLQJHQHQ:DWHUOHLGLQJPDDWVFKDSSLM'UHQWKH

 *URQWPLM1HGHUODQG%9
 +RXWHQRNWREHU

-G:UHYLVLH'





,QKRXGVRSJDYH

6DPHQYDWWLQJ 

 ,QOHLGLQJ 
 $FKWHUJURQGYDQKHWSURMHFW 
 'RHOVWHOOLQJLQWHJUDDOSURMHFW 
 'RHOVWHOOLQJHQRQGHU]RHNVYUDJHQIDVHGHSUDNWLMNSURHI 
 %HJHOHLGLQJVJURHS  
 /HHVZLM]HU  

 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI  

 ,QOHLGLQJ 
 3URHIORNDWLH  
 6FKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQHQRSVODJXULQH  
 3URHIYHOG  
 *HZDVNHX]H  
 3URHIRS]HW 
 %HPHVWLQJ  
 *HZDVRSEUHQJVW 
 2QGHU]RHNXLWVSRHOLQJPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQ 
 8LWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHYHOGZHUN]DDPKHGHQ 
 *HXURQGHU]RHN  
 &RPPXQLFDWLHHQYHUVODJOHJJLQJ 

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI  

 ,QOHLGLQJ 
 1XWULsQWHQJHKDOWHLQGHXULQH 
 %HPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXURSSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQXULQH  
 *HZDVJURHLHQRSEUHQJVW 
 0RQLWRULQJJHZDV 
 *HZDVRSEUHQJVW 
 *HXU  
 *HXUKLQGHUVWDNHKROGHUV 
 *HXURQGHU]RHNODERUDWRULXP 
 *HQHHVPLGGHOHQ 
 ,QILOWUDWLHSURHYHQPHWRSYDQJEDNNHQ 
 *HQHHVPLGGHOHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVLQGHXULQHWDQNV 
 9HUGXQQLQJVIDFWRU 
 2YHULJHUHVXOWDWHQ 
 $DQOHJJHVFKHLGHQVDQLWDWLHV\VWHHP  
 7RLOHWJHGUDJHQYHUGXQQLQJ  
 8LWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHZHUN]DDPKHGHQHQFRPPXQLFDWLH  
 4XLFNVFDQOLWHUDWXXU  

 6DPHQYDWWLQJFRQFOXVLHVHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQ 
 ,QOHLGLQJ 
 6DPHQYDWWLQJHQFRQFOXVLHV  
 $DQEHYHOLQJHQ  

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 
,QKRXGVRSJDYHYHUYROJ





%LMODJH ,QIRUPDWLHSURHIYHOG

%LMODJH .DUDNWHULVWLHNHQRSVODJWDQNXULQH

%LMODJH ,QGHOLQJSURHIYHOGHQLQIRUPDWLHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJ

%LMODJH 0HGLFLMQHQ

%LMODJH %HPHVWLQJ

%LMODJH $JUDULVFKHZHUN]DDPKHGHQ

%LMODJH *HXURQGHU]RHN

%LMODJH *HZDVRQWZLNNHOLQJ

%LMODJH 4XLFNVFDQOLWHUDWXXU

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ




6DPHQYDWWLQJ

'RHOSUDNWLMNSURHI
2SGH]RUJORFDWLH1LMHQGWH$QGHUHQ'UHQWKHLVLQHQHHQSUDNWLMNSURHIJHKRX
GHQZDDUELMRSGHORFDWLHYHU]DPHOGHKXPDQHXULQHDOVPHVWVWRILVWRHJHSDVWRSHHQQDDVWJH
OHJHQJHFUHsHUGSURHIYHOG'RHOYDQGHSURHIZDVRPLQGHSUDNWLMNHUYDULQJRSWHGRHQPHWGH
WRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRILQGHODQGERXZHQRPGHLQYORHGYDQXULQHEHPHVWLQJRSGH
RQWZLNNHOLQJHQRSEUHQJVWYDQKHWJHZDVWHRQGHU]RHNHQ(HQQHYHQGRHOYDQGHSURHIZDVRP
LQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQUHVWHQHQQXWULsQWHQ

2QGHU]RHNVORFDWLH
2SGHRQGHU]RHNVORFDWLHEHYLQGHQ]LFKHHQ]RUJERHUGHULMHHQNDQWRRUJHERXZHQHHQZHUN
SODDWV'HJHERXZHQRSGHORFDWLHYDQ]LMQYRRU]LHQYDQVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQHQGHXULQHZRUGW
LQWZHHRQGHUJURQGVHWDQNVLQKRXGLHGHUPRSJHYDQJHQ1DDVWGHJHERXZHQEHYLQGW]LFK
HHQSURHIYHOGGDWYRRUKHHQLQJHEUXLNZDVDOVVFKDSHQZHLGH'HXULQHXLWGHRQGHUJURQGVH
WDQNVLVDOVPHVWVWRIWRHJHSDVWRSKHWSURHIYHOG


,QZDVGHSURHIJHULFKWRSGHSUDNWLVFKHDVSHFWHQGLHUHOHYDQW]LMQELMGHWRHSDVVLQJYDQ
XULQHDOVPHVWVWRIELMGHWHHOWYDQHHQODQGERXZJHZDVQDPHOLMNGHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXU
JHXUJHZDVRSEUHQJVWHQDOVQHYHQDVSHFWRRNGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQ
+LHUWRHLVKHWSURHIYHOGLQWZHHGHOHQYHUGHHOGZDDUELMppQGHHOLVEHPHVWPHWXULQHHQppQ
GHHOWUDGLWLRQHHOLVEHPHVWPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW$OVJHZDVLVHQHUJLHPDwVYHUERXZG9RRUDI
DDQGHEHPHVWLQJLVHHQEHPHVWLQJVSODQRSJHVWHOGZDDUELMRQGHUDQGHUHGHXULQHXLWGHSXWWHQ
LVEHPRQVWHUGHQJHDQDO\VHHUGHQGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHGDDUYDQLVEHSDDOG(HQORRQZHUNHU
XLWGHRPJHYLQJKHHIWGHEHQRGLJGHYHOGZHUN]DDPKHGHQXLWJHYRHUG
,QKHWSURHIYHOGLVHHQPHHWRSVWHOOLQJDDQJHEUDFKWRPKHWLQILOWUDWLHZDWHUWHNXQQHQRSYDQJHQ
HQDDQYXOOHQGWHEHPRQVWHUHQWHQHLQGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQHQQXWULsQWHQQDDUKHW
JURQGZDWHUWHNXQQHQQDJDDQ9DQZHJHKHWQLHWIXQFWLRQHUHQYDQGH]HPHHWRSVWHOOLQJKHHIWGLW
SURMHFWRQGHUGHHOQLHWJHOHLGWRWEUXLNEDUHPHHWUHVXOWDWHQ


9DQZHJHGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSURHILQLVGHSURHIRS]HWYRRUHQLJV]LQVJHZLM]LJG'H
JHXUZDDUQHPLQJHQLQZDUHQDDQOHLGLQJKHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUVWDQNRYHUODVWLQWHLQ
WHQVLYHUHQ2PPHHULQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHPDWHYDQJHXUKLQGHULVHHQPRQVWHUYDQXULQHJH
QRPHQZDDURSHHQJHXURQGHU]RHNLVXLWJHYRHUGLQHHQSURIHVVLRQHHOJHXUODERUDWRULXP2RNLV
LQLQGHSURHIHHQPHQJVHOYDQKXPDQHXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWRQGHU]RFKWRPGDWGLW
TXDQXWULsQWHQVDPHQVWHOOLQJPRJHOLMNYRRUGHODQGERXZSUDNWLMNHHQLQWHUHVVDQWHPHVWVWRINDQ
]LMQ'HJHXUKLQGHULVHYHQHHQVRQGHU]RFKWDDQGHKDQGYDQHHQHHQYRXGLJHHQTXrWH'HJH
FRQVWDWHHUGHVWHUNHPDWHYDQYHUGXQQLQJYDQGHXULQHLQKHHIWWRWGHEHVOLVVLQJJHOHLGLQ
KHWDVSHFWµEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHHQJHZDVRSEUHQVW¶DFKWHUZHJHWHODWHQ

5HVXOWDWHQ
%LMGHXLWYRHULQJYDQGHSURHILQHQ]LMQGLYHUVHSUDNWLMNHUYDULQJHQRSJHGDDQ*H
FRQFOXGHHUGZRUGWGDWKHWWHFKQLVFKPRJHOLMNLVXULQHWRHWHSDVVHQPDDUGDDUQDDVW]LMQHURRN
HQNHOHSUDNWLVFKHNQHOSXQWHQHQDDQGDFKWVSXQWHQDDQKHWOLFKWJHNRPHQ2SEDVLVYDQGHEH
YLQGLQJHQXLWGHWZHHMDULJHSUDNWLMNSURHI]LMQGHYROJHQGH]DNHQJHFRQFOXGHHUG
• %HPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXU+HWLVWHFKQLVFKPRJHOLMNPHWJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXUXULQH
RSWHSRPSHQHQRSKHWODQGDDQWHZHQGHQ,QGLHQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRILQGHODQGERXZZRUGW

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 6DPHQYDWWLQJ


WRHJHSDVWLVHULQGHSUDNWLMNDSSDUDWXXUYRRUKDQGHQHQ]LMQHUGXVJHHQH[WUDLQYHVWHULQ

JHQLQRIRQWZLNNHOLQJYDQPDFKLQHVHQDSSDUDWXXUQRGLJ
• 9HUGXQQLQJHQSUDNWLVFKHFRQVHTXHQWLHV'HXULQHXLWGHSXWWHQYDQGH]RUJORFDWLHEOLMNWFLU
FDWRWPDDOYHUGXQGWH]LMQWRY]XLYHUHXULQH+HWJURWHUHYROXPHGDWPRHWZRUGHQRS
JHSRPSWHQDDQJHEUDFKWWRYEHPHVWLQJPHWYDUNHQVPHVWRPGH]HOIGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDU
GHWHYHUNULMJHQEUHQJWH[WUDPDFKLQHHQDUEHLGVNRVWHQPHW]LFKPHHKHWOHLGWWRWSODVYRU
PLQJRSKHWSHUFHHOHQYHUKRRJWZDDUVFKLMQOLMNGHDPPRQLDNHPLVVLH
• 9HUGXQQLQJHQEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGH'HQXWULsQWHQJHKDOWHQLQGHXULQH]LMQYDQZHJHGHKR
JHYHUGXQQLQJVIDFWRUHUJODDJQDPHOLMNYRRUZDWEHWUHIWVWLNVWRIDFKWNHHUODJHUGDQYDQGH
JHEUXLNWHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW'HXULQHYDQGH]HORFDWLHLVYDQZHJHGH]HEHSHUNWHEHPHVWHQ
GHZDDUGHQLHWDDQWUHNNHOLMNYRRUODQGERXZNXQGLJHWRHSDVVLQJ
• *HZDVJURHLHQJHZDVRSEUHQJVW%LMWRHSDVVLQJYDQGHYHUGXQGHXULQHRSGHORFDWLHLQGH
WHHOWYDQHQHUJLHPDwV]LMQYLVXHHOJHHQELM]RQGHUKHGHQDDQKHWJHZDVJHFRQVWDWHHUG
0HWGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSURHINDQYDQZHJHGHNRUWHGRRUORRSWLMGYDQGHSURHIJHHQXLW
VSUDDNZRUGHQJHGDDQRYHUGHYHUVFKLOOHQLQGHJHZDVRSEUHQJVWYDQKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWH
GHHOHQKHWPHWYDUNHQVPHVWEHPHVWHGHHO
• *HXUKLQGHU'HYHUZDFKWLQJLVQLHWGDWJHXUKLQGHUSUDNWLMNWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHLQGHODQG
ERXZLQGHZHJ]DOVWDDQ,QKHWHHUVWHMDDUZDVHUVSUDNHYDQJHXUKLQGHUWLMGHQV
RSSRPSHQHQXLWULMGHQYDQGHXULQH'LWDVSHFWLVLQQDGHURQGHU]RFKW,QGLHQGHYHU
GXQGHXULQHYDQGH]RUJORFDWLHHQNHOHPDDQGHQWRWLQHHQSXWZRUGWRSJHVODJHQHQ
QDGLHQZRUGWRSJHSRPSWHQDDQJHZHQGRSHHQODQGERXZSHUFHHOLVGHJHXUKLQGHUWLMGHQV
RSSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQPLQLPDDO'HJHXUKLQGHULVELMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQYHUGXQGH
XULQHRIHHQPHQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWPHWXULQHPRJHOLMNLHWVJURWHUWHQRS]LFKWHYDQ
EHPHVWLQJPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW+HWYHUVFKLOLVNOHLQ
• +HWRQGHU]RHNQDDUYHUVSUHLGLQJYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQQDDUKHWJURQGZDWHULVYDQZHJH
SUDNWLVFKHRQYRONRPHQKHGHQYDQGHSURHIRSVWHOOLQJJHVWDDNW

'RRUKHWXLWYRHUHQYDQGHSURHI]LMQQDDVWERYHQJHQRHPGHDVSHFWHQRRNDQGHUHRQYHUZDFKWH
]DNHQQDDUYRUHQJHNRPHQ]RDOVFRPPXQLFDWLHSUREOHPHQELMGHDDQOHJYDQKHWVDQLWDWLHV\V
WHHPHQELMGHEHPHVWLQJGRRUGHORRQZHUNHUPRJHOLMNHRRU]DNHQYDQGHJURWHPDWHYDQYHU
GXQQLQJ]RDOVH[WUDYDDNGRRUVSRHOHQYDQZHJHKHWDFKWHUEOLMYHQYDQGHµJURWHERRGVFKDS¶LQ
GHWRLOHWWHQHQKHWQLHWDOWLMG]LWWHQGSODVVHQ'H]HSUDNWLMNSURHIKHHIWGDDURPJHOHLGWRWGLYHUVH
QLHXZHLQ]LFKWHQZDDUPHHPHQELMµQLHXZHVDQLWDWLH¶SURMHFWHQQDGUXNNHOLMNUHNHQLQJGLHQWWH
KRXGHQ


-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ




 ,QOHLGLQJ

 $FKWHUJURQGYDQKHWSURMHFW
'HLQ]DPHOLQJHQEHKDQGHOLQJYDQKXLVKRXGHOLMNDIYDOZDWHULVGHODDWVWHGHFHQQLDYRRUDOJHULFKW
JHZHHVWRSGHDDQOHJYDQJURRWVFKDOLJHULRROV\VWHPHQHQGHHQGRISLSH]XLYHULQJYDQKHWYHU
]DPHOGHDIYDOZDWHULQULRROZDWHU]XLYHULQJVLQVWDOODWLHV5:=,¶V'HODDWVWHMDUHQZRUGWVWHHGV
PHHUJHGDFKWDDQDQGHUHPRJHOLMNKHGHQ]RDOVLQ]DPHOLQJHQYHUZHUNLQJYDQJHVFKHLGHQGHHO
VWURPHQ
'HDDQGDFKWJDDWGDDUELMRQGHUDQGHUHXLWQDDUKHWDSDUWLQ]DPHOHQHQYHUZHUNHQYDQKXPDQH
XULQHYDQGHVWLNVWRIHQYDQKHWIRVIDDWGLHELMGH]XLYHULQJHQDDQNRPHQ]LMQDINRP
VWLJYDQXULQH(HQPRJHOLMNKHLGRPXULQHQDLQ]DPHOLQJWHYHUZHUNHQLVGHWRHSDVVLQJYDQGH
DSDUWLQJH]DPHOGHXULQHDOVPHVWVWRI(HQGHUJHOLMNHWRHSDVVLQJGLHQWGDQHHQGXEEHOGRHOQO
RQWWUHNNLQJYDQVWLNVWRIHQIRVIDDWDDQGH]XLYHULQJ]RGDWGHQRRG]DNHOLMNHYHUZLMGHULQJYDQ
GH]HFRPSRQHQWHQELMGH]XLYHULQJJHUHGXFHHUGZRUGWHQKHUJHEUXLNYDQGHQXWWLJHFRPSRQHQ
WHQVWLNVWRIHQIRVIDDWDOVPHVWVWRI

2PPHHULQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHPRJHOLMNKHLGHQZHQVHOLMNKHLGYDQJURRWVFKDOLJHWRHSDVVLQJ
YDQXULQHVFKHLGLQJLQ1HGHUODQGLVRQGHU]RHNQRGLJRDQDDUGHWRHSDVVLQJDOVPHVWVWRI'H
PRJHOLMNKHLGRPGLWRQGHU]RHNLQWHYXOOHQGHHG]LFKYRRULQRSGHORFDWLH³1DWXXUZHUN
SODDWV$QGHUHQ´ZDDUPHQYRRUQHPHQVZDVDFKWZRRQHHQKHGHQYRRUJHHVWHOLMNJHKDQGLFDS
WHQLQHHQ]RUJERHUGHULMHQHHQNDQWRRUUXLPWHHQZHUNSODDWVWHUHDOLVHUHQ1DDVWGHEHERXZLQJ
EHYLQGW]LFKHHQSHUFHHOZDDUKHWWHOHQYDQJHZDVVHQPRJHOLMNLV

'H]RUJERHUGHULMLVRQWZLNNHOGGRRU9DQERHLMHQHHQRUJDQLVDWLHGLH]LFKLQ]HWRP]RUJRSPDDW
WHELHGHQDDQYHUVWDQGHOLMNJHKDQGLFDSWHQ9DQERHLMHQKDGUHHGVHUYDULQJRSJHGDDQPHWGH
JHVFKHLGHQLQ]DPHOLQJYDQXULQHPHWGULHXULQHVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQLQKHW$PEDFKWVKX\VLQ0HS
SHOHHQGDJRSYDQJYRRUYHUVWDQGHOLMNJHKDQGLFDSWHQHQZDVEHUHLGPHHWHZHUNHQDDQGH
RSVFKDOLQJYDQGHJHVFKHLGHQLQ]DPHOLQJHQGHSUDNWLVFKHWRHSDVVLQJYDQGHXULQH

 'RHOVWHOOLQJLQWHJUDDOSURMHFW
,QGHFHPEHULVKHWSURMHFWSODQYDQKHWSURMHFW³1XWWLJHLQ]HWYDQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRIYRRU
HQHUJLHJHZDVVHQ´YDVWJHVWHOGGRRUGHGHHOQHPHQGHSDUWLMHQ]LHSDUDJUDDI+RRIGGRHO
YDQKHWSURMHFWLVGHKDDOEDDUKHLGYDQKHWJHEUXLNYDQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRIRQGHU]RHNHQHQWH
GHPRQVWUHUHQ'LWSURMHFWEHVWDDWXLWWZHHIDVHQ
 2QGHU]RHNQDDUGHJHYROJHQYRRUKHWERGHPPLOLHXHQGHJURQGZDWHUNZDOLWHLWELMGHWRH
SDVVLQJYDQGHXULQHYDQGHORFDWLH$QGHUHQDOVPHVWVWRIYRRUKHWYHUERXZHQYDQJHZDV
VHQRQGHU]RHNVIDVH
 3UDNWLMNHUYDULQJRSGRHQPHWGHWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHLQGHWHHOWYDQHHQHQHUJLHJHZDV
SUDNWLMNIDVH

,QGHRQGHU]RHNVIDVHIDVH]LMQGHRQGHU]RHNVYUDJHQEHDQWZRRUGGRRUGHXLWYRHULQJYDQ
HHQODERUDWRULXPRQGHU]RHNZDDUELMDGVRUSWLHHQDIEUDDNSDUDPHWHUV]LMQYDVWJHVWHOGYRRUHHQ
DFKWWDOJHVHOHFWHHUGHPHGLFLMQHQ
2SEDVLVYDQGHDIEUDDNSDUDPHWHUV]LMQLQKHWRQGHU]RHNGHPLOLHXULVLFR¶VEHUHNHQG'HUHVXO
WDWHQ]LMQVHSDUDDWJHUDSSRUWHHUG






-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 ,QOHLGLQJ


2SKRRIGOLMQHQ]LMQGHFRQFOXVLHVXLWKHWRQGHU]RHNDOVYROJW
• KHWULVLFRYRRUFRQWDPLQDWLHYDQKHWJURQGZDWHUGRRUppQYDQGHJHVHOHFWHHUGHJHQHHVPLG
GHOHQGRRUEHPHVWLQJPHWXULQHRSGHORFDWLH$QGHUHQLVODDJELMHHQNRUWGXUHQGHWRHSDV
VLQJHQNHOHMDUHQ
• RSODQJHUHWHUPLMQNXQQHQFDUEDPD]HSLQHEH]DILEUDDWFORILEULQH]XXUHQLEXSURIHQHHQULVL
FRYRUPHQ(UGLHQHQDDQYXOOHQGHH[SHULPHQWHQXLWJHYRHUGWHZRUGHQRPQDWHJDDQRIGLW
GDDGZHUNHOLMNKHWJHYDOLV

'HXLWNRPVWHQYDQGLWODERUDWRULXPRQGHU]RHNUHVXOWHHUGHLQYROGRHQGHGUDDJYODNELQQHQGH
EHJHOHLGLQJVFRPPLVVLHRPJHGXUHQGHWZHHMDDUXULQHRSKHWSURHIYHOGDDQWHEUHQJHQHQGH
SUDNWLMNIDVHDDQWHYDQJHQ
2QGHUKDYLJHUDSSRUWDJHEHWUHIWGHUDSSRUWDJHYDQGHSUDNWLMNIDVHIDVH

 'RHOVWHOOLQJHQRQGHU]RHNVYUDJHQIDVHGHSUDNWLMNSURHI
+HWEHODQJULMNVWHGRHOYDQGHSUDNWLMNIDVHLVKHWRSGRHQYDQSUDNWLMNHUYDULQJPHWGHWRHSDVVLQJ
YDQXULQHLQGHWHHOWYDQHHQHQHUJLHJHZDV1HYHQGRHOVWHOOLQJLQGH]HIDVHLVGHXLWYRHULQJYDQ
HHQYRXGLJHPHWLQJHQWHQDDQ]LHQYDQGHYHUVSUHLGLQJYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQQDDUGHRQGHU
JURQG

3ULPDLUHGRHOVWHOOLQJSUDNWLMNSURHI
'HSULPDLUHGRHOVWHOOLQJYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHILVKHWEHVFKRXZHQYDQGHYROJHQGHDVSHFWHQ
• :DDUORRSMHLQGHSUDNWLMNWHJHQDDQELMKHWWRHSDVVHQYDQXULQHLQGHODQGERXZWDY
° 'HWRHSDVEDDUKHLGYDQJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXURSSRPSHQGRVHUHQHQYHU
VSUHLGHQ
° *HXUKLQGHU
° $FFHSWDWLHYDQVWDNHKROGHUVHQRPZRQHQGHQ
• :DWLVGHLQYORHGYDQEHPHVWLQJPHWXULQHRSGHRQWZLNNHOLQJHQRSEUHQJVWYDQKHWJHZDV
WHQRS]LFKWHYDQUHJXOLHUHEHPHVWLQJELMJHOLMNEHPHVWLQJVQLYHDX"

1HYHQGRHOVWHOOLQJHHQYRXGLJHPHWLQJHQWDYYHUVSUHLGLQJQDDURQGHUJURQG
'HSUDNWLMNSURHIKHHIWQLHWDOVGRHORPGHLQKHWODERUDWRULXPRSJHGDQHNHQQLVWDYKHWJHGUDJ
YDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQLQGHSUDNWLMNWHWRHWVHQYHULILFDWLHLQKHWYHOGYDQGHUHVXOWDWHQRQGHU
]RHNVYUDDJ'HVRQGDQNVLVJHGXUHQGHKHWSURMHFWEHVORWHQRPWLMGHQVGHSUDNWLMNSURHIWRFK
HQNHOHHHQYRXGLJHPHWLQJHQWHYHUULFKWHQLQUHODWLHWRWKHWPRJHOLMNHYHUVSUHLGLQJVULVLFRYDQ
JHQHHVPLGGHOHQHQRRNQXWULsQWHQQDDUGHRQGHUJURQG

'HRQGHU]RHNVYUDJHQWHQEHKRHYHYDQGLWQHYHQGRHO]LMQ
• ZDW]LMQGHVDPHQVWHOOLQJHQEHODVWLQJYDQKHWLQILOWUHUHQGHJURQGZDWHURSHHQGLHSWHYDQ
FPHQFPPHWPHGLFLMQHQ"
• NXQQHQGH]HVDPHQVWHOOLQJHQEHODVWLQJYHUNODDUGZRUGHQXLWGHVDPHQVWHOOLQJYDQGHRS
JHEUDFKWHXULQHGHKRHYHHOKHLGQHHUVODJRYHUVFKRWGHVDPHQVWHOOLQJYDQGHERGHPHQGH
DIEUDDNHQDGVRUSWLHSDUDPHWHUVGLHLQKHWODERUDWRULXPRQGHU]RHN]LMQDIJHOHLG"
• PRHWHQGHFRQFOXVLHVWDYGHYHUVSUHLGLQJYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQQDDUKHWGLHSHUHJURQGZD
WHUGLHRSEDVLVYDQKHWODERUDWRULXPRQGHU]RHN]LMQJHIRUPXOHHUGELMJHVWHOGZRUGHQRSED
VLVYDQGHYHOGPHWLQJHQ"
• ZDWLVGHEHODVWLQJPHWQXWULsQWHQYDQKHWLQILOWUHUHQGHZDWHURSGH]HGLHSWHQYDQFPHQ
FPHQLQKRHYHUUHYHUVFKLOWGH]HEHODVWLQJWHQRS]LFKWHYDQUHJXOLHUHEHPHVWLQJ"

9DQZHJHKHWQLHWIXQFWLRQHUHQYDQGHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJKHHIWGLWSURMHFWRQGHUGHHOQLHWJHOHLGWRW
EUXLNEDUHPHHWUHVXOWDWHQHQGLWSURMHFWRQGHUGHHOLVLQGHORRSYDQKHWSURMHFWGDQRRNYHUZLM
GHUG

 %HJHOHLGLQJVJURHS
'HSUDNWLMNSURHILVXLWJHYRHUGLQRSGUDFKWYDQ672:$:DWHUVFKDS+XQ]HHQ$DV3URYLQFLH
'UHQWKH:DWHUEHGULMI*URQLQJHQHQ:DWHUOHLGLQJPDDWVFKDSSLM'UHQWKH'HEHJHOHLGLQJVJURHS
EHVWRQGXLWGHYROJHQGHSHUVRQHQ
• %MDUWXU6ZDUW672:$

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 ,QOHLGLQJ


• -DQ(JEHUWV(OHYHOG2WWR.OXLYLQJ:DWHUVFKDS+XQ]HHQ$DV
• 5HLQ%RXZHUSURYLQFLH'UHQWKH
• 3HWHUYDQGHU0DDV:DWHUODERUDWRULXP1RRUGYHUWHJHQZRRUGLJHUYDQ:DWHUEHGULMI*URQLQ
JHQHQ:DWHUOHLGLQJPDDWVFKDSSLM'UHQWKH
• +DQV-DQVHQ9DQERHLMHQ
• %HUW'XNHU:RRQFRQFHSW

 /HHVZLM]HU
,QKRRIGVWXNZRUGWGHRQGHU]RHNVRS]HWYDQGHSURHIXLWHHQJH]HW,QKRRIGVWXNZRUGHQKHW
YHUORRSHQGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHIEHVSURNHQ,QKRRIGVWXNZRUGHQGHUHVXOWDWHQ
YDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHIVDPHQJHYDWZRUGHQFRQFOXVLHVJHWURNNHQHQZRUGHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQYRRU
YHUYROJJHGDDQ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ




 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI

 ,QOHLGLQJ
'HSUDNWLMNSURHI³1XWWLJHLQ]HWYDQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRIYRRUHQHUJLHJHZDVVHQ´LVXLWJHYRHUGJH
GXUHQGHWZHHJURHLVHL]RHQHQQOLQHQ'LWKRRIGVWXNEHVFKULMIWGHRS]HWYDQGH
SUDNWLMNSURHI$FKWHUHHQYROJHQV]LMQGHORNDWLHGHXULQHRSVODJWDQNVKHWEHVFKLNEDUHSURHIYHOG
GHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJWEYYHUVSUHLGLQJPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQQDDUGHRQGHUJURQGGHJHZDV
NHX]HKHWEHPHVWLQJVSODQKHWJHXURQGHU]RHNHQGHRSKHWSURHIYHOGXLWJHYRHUGHZHUN]DDP
KHGHQEHVFKUHYHQ

 3URHIORNDWLH
'HORNDWLHZDDUGHSUDNWLMNSURHILVXLWJHYRHUGEHYLQGW]LFKWHUSODDWVHYDQ1LMHQGWH$QGHUHQ
SURYLQFLH'UHQWKHOLJJLQJORFDWLH]LHELMODJH
2SGHORFDWLHEHYLQGHQ]LFKGH]RUJERHUGHULMYDQ9DQERHLMHQPHWQHJHQHHQKHGHQYRRUEHZR
QLQJGRRUYHUVWDQGHOLMNJHKDQGLFDSWHQ]LHILJXXUKHWNDQWRRUYDQ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU
'UHQWKH]LHILJXXUHQHHQZHUNSODDWVYDQ9DQERHLMHQ
*HGXUHQGHZHUNGDJHQPDNHQFLUFDSHUVRQHQYDQGHODDWVWHWZHHDFFRPPRGDWLHVJHEUXLN
(UEHYLQGHQ]LFKXULQHVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQRSGHORFDWLH


)LJXXU=RUJERHUGHULM9DQERHLMHQWH$QGHUHQ


 6FKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQHQRSVODJXULQH
2SGHSURHIORFDWLHZRUGWGHXULQHGRRUGHDDQZH]LJHVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQJHVFKHLGHQRSJHYDQ
JHQ(HQYRRUEHHOGYDQKHWWRHJHSDVWHW\SHVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWLVWH]LHQLQILJXXU:DQQHHU
]LWWHQGJHSODVWZRUGWNRPWGHXULQHLQKHWYRRUVWHGHHOYDQKHWWRLOHWWHUHFKW'H]HXULQHZRUGW
YLDHHQJHVFKHLGHQOHLGLQJVVWHOVHODSDUWDIJHYRHUGQDDUHHQYHU]DPHOWDQN+HWWRLOHWKHHIWHHQ
VSRHONQRSYRRUHHQVSRHOLQJYDQRIOLWHUYDQKHWVSRHOYROXPHOSHUVSRHOLQJ
YHUGZLMQWGRRUGHXULQHDIYRHUHQNRPWVDPHQPHWGHXULQHLQGHYHU]DPHOWDQNWHUHFKW
+HWJURRWVWHGHHOYDQKHWVSRHOZDWHUVWURRPWRYHUQDDUKHWDFKWHUVWHGHHOYDQKHWWRLOHWHQGLW
ZRUGWDIJHYRHUGYLDKHWKRRIGULRRO

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI


'HXULQHHQHHQNOHLQGHHOYDQKHWVSRHOZDWHUZRUGWYHU]DPHOGLQWZHHRQGHUJURQGVHWDQNVPHW
EHLGHHHQLQKRXGYDQP,QIRUPDWLHRYHUGHRQGHUJURQGVHWDQNLVZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH
,QKHWEHVWHNYDQGHDDQOHJYDQGHRQGHUJURQGVHWDQNVLVDDQJHJHYHQGDWGHWDQNVRQGHUOLQJ
DIVOXLWEDDUPRHWHQ]LMQ,PPHUVYRRUWRHSDVVLQJDOVPHVWVWRIGLHQWGHXULQHHHQKDOIMDDURSJH
VODJHQWH]LMQRPSDWKRJHQHQFRQWDPLQDWLHXLWWHVOXLWHQ'HWDQNVEHYLQGHQ]LFKLQKHWJD]RQHQ
KHJWXVVHQGH]RUJLQVWHOOLQJHQKHWJHERXZYDQ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU]LHILJXXU%HUHNHQGLV
GDWFLUFDPRQYHUGXQGHXULQHSHUMDDUJHSURGXFHHUGZRUGWRSGHORFDWLHYRRUEHUHNHQLQJ]LH
ELMODJH


*HERXZ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKH

3XWGHNVHOVXULQHWDQNV

)LJXXU/RFDWLHVYDQGHRSVODJWDQNVYRRUXULQHRSGHSURMHFWORFDWLH1LMHQGWH$QGHUHQ








)LJXXU7RLOHWSRWYRRUJHVFKHLGHQRSYDQJYDQXULQHYRRUVWHGHHOHQIHFHVDFKWHUVWHGHHO'LWW\SH
WRLOHWSRW1RUGLFYDQGHILUPD*XVWDYVEHUJKHHIWHHQXULQHDIYRHUOHLGLQJEXLWHQGHSRW





-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI


 3URHIYHOG
7HQEHKRHYHYDQGHXLWYRHULQJYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHILVHHQJUDVYHOGQDDVWGH]RUJORFDWLHJH
EUXLNW+HWSHUFHHOKHHIWHHQRSSHUYODNWHYDQRQJHYHHUP+HWYHOGZHUGYRRUKHHQPHW
VFKDSHQEHZHLG9RRUDIJDDQGHDDQKHWJHEUXLNDOVSURHISHUFHHOLVKHWSURHIYHOGYLVXHHOJHwQ
VSHFWHHUGHQERGHPNXQGLJRQGHU]RFKWPHWEHKXOSYDQERULQJHQ'HDDQYXOOHQGHLQIRUPDWLH
RYHUKHWSURHIYHOGRSEDVLVYDQGH]HLQYHQWDULVDWLHLVZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH7HQEHKRHYH
YDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHILVKHWDFKWHUVWHGHHOYDQDIGHZHJHQKHWSDUNHHUWHUUHLQYDQGLWWHUUHLQ
JHEUXLNW'LWEHWUHIWKHWPHHVWZHVWHOLMNJHOHJHQGHHOYDQKHWJUDVYHOG9RRUHHQLPSUHVVLHYDQ
KHWSURHIYHOGYRRUDIJDDQGHDDQKHWJHEUXLNZRUGWYHUZH]HQQDDUILJXXU

)LJXXU,PSUHVVLHYDQKHWSURHIYHOG


 *HZDVNHX]H
%LMGHSUDNWLMNSURHILVJHNR]HQYRRUGHWHHOWYDQHHQHQHUJLHJHZDVRPGDWWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQH
LQGHWHHOWYDQHHQFRQVXPSWLHJHZDVPRJHOLMNRSSV\FKRORJLVFKHEH]ZDUHQ]RXNXQQHQVWXLWHQ
%LMWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHLQQLHWYRHGVHOJHZDVVHQHQHUJLHJHZDVVHQJHZDVVHQYRRULQGXVWULsOH
YHUZHUNLQJRIYHHYRHGHUJHZDVVHQLVGLWEH]ZDDUNOHLQHURIDIZH]LJ
0DwVLVHHQYULMHHQYRXGLJWHWHOHQJHZDVHQGHWHHOWNDQJHKHHODDQHHQORRQZHUNHUZRUGHQ
XLWEHVWHHG2RNLVKHWHHQ]HHUJHVFKLNWWRHWVJHZDVRPGHODQGERXZNXQGLJHZDDUGHYDQ
PHVWVWRIIHQWHEHSURHYHQ$DQYXOOHQGLQIRUPDWLHRYHUGHJHZDVNHX]HLVRSJHQRPHQLQ
ELMODJH

 3URHIRS]HW

 %HPHVWLQJ
2PLQ]LFKWWHYHUNULMJHQLQGHYHUVFKLOOHQWXVVHQWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHHQJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJ
GULMIPHVWLQGHPDwVWHHOWLVKHWSURHIYHOGLQWZHHJHOLMNHVWXNNHQRSJHGHHOG]LHELMODJH,Q
LVHHQEHPHVWLQJVSODQRSJHVWHOGRPGHEHQRGLJGHEHPHVWLQJWHEHSDOHQHQHHQRYHU
HHQNRPVWLJHEHPHVWLQJVVLWXDWLHLQEHLGHSURHIYHOGHQWHEHZHUNVWHOOLJHQ'HEDVLVYDQKHWEH
PHVWLQJVSODQZRUGWJHYRUPGGRRUGHRRUVSURQNHOLMNHYRHGLQJVWRHVWDQGYDQKHWSURHISHUFHHO
GHVDPHQVWHOOLQJYDQGHDDQWHEUHQJHQKXPDQHXULQHYDQGH]RUJORFDWLHHQGHDDQWHEUHQJHQ
YDUNHQVGULMIPHVW'DDUQDDVWGLHQWPHWKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHPHVWDDQGHJHEUXLNVQRUPHQ
ZHWWHOLMNPD[LPDDOWRHJHVWDQHJLIWYRRUVWLNVWRIHQIRVIDDWWHZRUGHQYROGDDQ

'RRU%/**%HGULMIV/DERUDWRULXPYRRU*URQGHQ*HZDVRQGHU]RHNLVHHQEHPRQVWHULQJXLW
JHYRHUGRPLQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHYRHGLQJVWRHVWDQGYDQGHERGHP,QKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ
%/**LVKHWPRQVWHUJHDQDO\VHHUG'HUHVXOWDWHQYDQGH]HODERUDWRULXPDQDO\VH]LMQRSJHQR
PHQLQELMODJH1DDVWGHDQDO\VHUHVXOWDWHQLVGRRU%/**WHYHQVHHQEHPHVWLQJVDGYLHVYRRU
PDwVRSJHVWHOGHQELMKHWRQGHU]RHNVUDSSRUWELMJHYRHJG

,QPDDUWLVHHQPRQVWHUYDQGHXULQHJHQRPHQRPLQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHKRHYHHOKHLG
QXWULsQWHQGLHDDQZH]LJ]LMQLQGHKXPDQHXULQHYDQGHSXWWHQRSGH]RUJORFDWLHWEYKHWRS
VWHOOHQYDQKHWEHPHVWLQJVSODQ'LWPRQVWHULVGRRU%/**JHDQDO\VHHUGRSGH%HPHVWHQGH
ZDDUGH'HRQGHU]RHNVUHVXOWDWHQ]LMQRSJHQRPHQLQELMODJH

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI



2SEDVLVYDQGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHEHPRQVWHULQJYDQGHERGHPYDQKHWSURHIYHOGHQYDQGH
KXPDQHXULQHLVLQVDPHQZHUNLQJPHW3UDNWLMNRQGHU]RHN3ODQWHQ2PJHYLQJGKU:&$YDQ
*HHOHHQH[SHUWRSKHWJHELHGYDQEHPHVWLQJERGHPHQSURHIRS]HWWHQHHQEHPHVWLQJVSODQ
RSJHVWHOG,QELMODJHLVKHWRSJHVWHOGHEHPHVWLQJVSODQZHHUJHJHYHQ9RRUKHWEHPHVWLQJV
SODQLVGHVWLNVWRIZHUNLQJYDQKXPDQHXULQHRSJHVWHOGHQGLHYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWRS
XLWJDDQGHYDQERXZODQGLQMHFWLHZDDUELMGHPHVWFPGLHSLQGHJURQGZRUGWJH
EUDFKW

2SEDVLVYDQGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSURHILQLVGHSURHIRS]HWLQJHZLM]LJGWRY
]LHKRRIGVWXN+HWZDVYDQZHJHGH]HZLM]LJLQJQLHWQRRG]DNHOLMNYRRUGHSURHIYDQ
YRRUDIJDDQGDDQGHEHPHVWLQJHHQEHPHVWLQJVSODQRSWHVWHOOHQ,QKHHIWGHSURHI]LFK
JHULFKWRSGHPDWHYDQJHXUKLQGHUHQLVHHQPHQJVHOYDQXULQHPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWDDQJH
EUDFKW7RHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHGDWHHQYHHOKRJHUHVWLNVWRIIRVIDDWYHUKRXGLQJKHHIWGDQYDU
NHQVPHVWLVLQGHSUDNWLMNQDPHOLMNPRJHOLMNLQWHUHVVDQWRPWHFRPELQHUHQPHWYDUNHQVPHVWWHU
DDQYXOOLQJYDQKHWVWLNVWRIWHNRUWLQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW1DGHUHLQIRUPDWLHRYHUGHRS]HWYDQGH
EHPHVWLQJYDQKHWSURHIYHOGLQLVZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH

,Q]RZHODOVLVGRRUGHORRQZHUNHUQDDVWGHXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWWHYHQVHHQ
DDQYXOOHQGHNXQVWPHVWJLIWDDQJHEUDFKW

 *HZDVRSEUHQJVW
2PGHYHUVFKLOOHQLQJHZDVRSEUHQJVWKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHGHHOWRYKHWJDQJEDDUEHPHVWH
GHHOWHEHSDOHQLVLQGHPDwVRSEUHQJVWPHWEHKXOSYDQHHQZHHJEUXJYDQGHORRQZHU
NHUYDQEHLGHSURHIYHOGHQEHSDDOG

 2QGHU]RHNXLWVSRHOLQJPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQ
7HQEHKRHYHYDQKHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQQDDUGHRQ
GHUJURQGLVGRRU*URQWPLMHHQPHHWRSVWHOOLQJDDQJHEUDFKWYRRUKHWRSYDQJHQHQEHPRQVWHUHQ
YDQKHWLQILOWUDWLHZDWHURSGHWZHHYHUVFKLOOHQGEHPHVWHGHOHQYDQKHWSURHISHUFHHO(HQVFKH
PDWLVFKHZHHUJDYHYDQKHWRQWZHUSYDQGHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJLVZHHUJHJHYHQLQILJXXU(HQ
XLWJHEUHLGHEHVFKULMYLQJYDQGHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJHQGHDDQOHJLVZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH+HW
RQWZHUSEHVWDDWXLWYLHUNXQVWVWRIRSYDQJEDNNHQLQJHJUDYHQRSHHQGLHSWHYDQHQP
PLQXVPDDLYHOGZDDUYDQWZHHRSKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHGHHOHQWZHHRSKHWUHJXOLHUPHWYDU
NHQVPHVWEHPHVWHGHHO'H]HRSYDQJEDNNHQ]LMQLHGHUYRRU]LHQYDQHHQVODQJGLHLVYHUERQ
GHQPHWGHELMEHKRUHQGHEHPRQVWHULQJVORFDWLHYLHURSYDQJEXL]HQYDQ39&7HQEHKRHYHYDQ
KHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQUHVWHQHQQXWULsQWHQLVHHQEHPRQVWHULQJVSODQ
RSJHVWHOG


)LJXXU6FKHPDWLVFK]LMDDQ]LFKWPHHWRSVWHOOLQJRSYDQJHQEHPRQVWHULQJLQILOWUDWLHZDWHUSHUSURHISHU
FHHO5HFKWVIRWRYDQGHDDQOHJYDQGHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 2QGHU]RHNVRS]HWSUDNWLMNSURHI


,QHQLVYRRUDIJDDQGDDQGHEHPHVWLQJHHQPRQVWHUYDQGHXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNV
JHQRPHQRPLQ]LFKWWHNULMJHQLQGHDDQZH]LJHPHGLFLMQHQLQGHRSJHYDQJHQXULQH'HPHGL
FLMQFRQFHQWUDWLHV]LMQLQKHWODERUDWRULXPEHSDDOG,QKHHIWGHDQDO\VHSODDWVJHYRQGHQLQ
KHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ2PHJDPLQ$PVWHUGDPHQLQLQKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ9LWHQVLQ
/HHXZDUGHQ'HDQDO\VHUHVXOWDWHQ]LMQZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH

 8LWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHYHOGZHUN]DDPKHGHQ
7HQEHKRHYHYDQKHWXLWYRHUHQYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHI]LMQYHUVFKLOOHQGHODQGERXZNXQGLJHZHUN
]DDPKHGHQXLWJHYRHUGRDKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHEHPHVWLQJJURQGEHZHUNLQJLQ]DDLHQHQ
RRJVWHQ0DDWVFKDS+DUWOLHI/DPPHUVHHQEHGULMIGLHRDORRQZHUNDFWLYLWHLWHQXLWYRHUWXLW
'RQGHUHQKHHIWGHEHQRGLJGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQLQHQXLWJHYRHUG9RRUDIJDDQGDDQ
GHXLWYRHULQJYDQGHYHUVFKLOOHQGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQ]LMQGH]H]RZHOLQDOVLQPHWGH
ORRQZHUNHUDIJHVWHPG,QELMODJH]LMQIRWR¶VYDQYHUVFKLOOHQGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQRSJHQRPHQ

 *HXURQGHU]RHN
,QLVJHXUKLQGHUELMKHWRSSRPSHQYDQGHXULQHHQELMKHWXLWULMGHQYDQGHXULQHRQGHU]RFKW
GRRUKHWHQTXrWHUHQYDQHQNHOHSHUVRQHQ2SEDVLVYDQGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQHUZDVVSUDNH
YDQJHXUKLQGHUKHHIWLQHHQXLWJHEUHLGHHQTXrWHULQJSODDWVJHYRQGHQ2RNLVLQHHQ
ODERUDWRULXPRQGHU]RHNGRRU35$2GRXUQHWXLWJHYRHUG
7HQEHKRHYHYDQGLWJHXURQGHU]RHNLVHHQPRQVWHUYDQGHXULQHXLWppQYDQGHRSVODJWDQNV
JHQRPHQGHWDQNZDDULQGHXULQHPLQLPDDOHHQKDOIMDDURSJHVODJHQLVJHZHHVW+HWPRQVWHU
LVDDQHHQSDQHOYRRUJHOHJGHQEHRRUGHHOGRSJHXUGUHPSHOHQKHGRQLVFKHZDDUGH2PGH
JHXUWHNXQQHQYHUJHOLMNHQPHWGHJHXUYDQJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJLVLQGLWRQGHU]RHNRRNGH
JHXUYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWRQGHU]RFKW2RNLVGHJHXUYDQHHQPHQJVHOYDQXULQHHQYDUNHQV
GULMIPHVWRQGHU]RFKW(HQXLWJHEUHLGHEHVFKULMYLQJYDQGHHQTXrWHVHQGHSULQFLSHVYDQHHQ
SURIHVVLRQHHOJHXURQGHU]RHN]LMQZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH

 &RPPXQLFDWLHHQYHUVODJOHJJLQJ
'HSUDNWLMNSURHILVLQHQGRRU*URQWPLMJHFR|UGLQHHUG*HGXUHQGHGHSURHI]LMQHQ
NHOHPDOHQGHWXVVHQUHVXOWDWHQHQNQHOSXQWHQPHWGHEHJHOHLGLQJVJURHSEHVSURNHQHQ]LMQGH
YRRUJHQRPHQZHUN]DDPKHGHQYRRUGHYRRUWJDQJYDQKHWSURMHFWDDQJHSDVW
*HGXUHQGHGHSUDNWLMNSURHILQLVGRRU/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKHHHQORJERHNELMJHKRX
GHQ7HYHQV]LMQIRWR¶VYDQGHYHUVFKLOOHQGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQJHPDDNWHQ]LMQRSUHJHOPDWLJH
WLMGHQIRWR¶VYDQKHWSURHIYHOGJHPDDNW
,QLVGHSURHIJHYROJGGRRU*URQWPLM'DDUELMLVHYHQHHQVGHJHZDVJURHLJHYROJGHQ]LMQ
HUIRWR¶VYDQGHYHUVFKLOOHQGHGRRUGHORRQZHUNHUXLWJHYRHUGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQJHPDDNW


-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ




 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI

 ,QOHLGLQJ
,QGLWKRRIGVWXNZRUGHQGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHILQHQEHVFKUHYHQ$FKWHU
HHQYROJHQVZRUGWLQJHJDDQRSGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQXULQHGHHUYDULQJHQPHWGHJH
EUXLNWHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXUGHJHZDVJURHLHQRSEUHQJVWGHJHXUHUYDULQJHQHQGHXLWVSRH
OLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWULsQWHQ7RWVORWZRUGWLQJHJDDQRSRYHULJHNQHOSXQWHQGLHHUYDUHQ
]LMQELMGHXLWYRHULQJYDQGHSUDNWLMNSURHI]RDOVFRPPXQLFDWLHPHWGHUGHQHQKHWWRLOHWJHEUXLN

 1XWULsQWHQJHKDOWHLQGHXULQH
'HFRQFHQWUDWLHVQXWULsQWHQLQGHXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNVHQGHDDQJHEUDFKWHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW
LQHQ]LMQZHHUJHJHYHQLQWDEHO]LHRRNELMODJH

'HXULQHLVLQWZHHPDDOJHDQDO\VHHUGGRRU%/**%HGULMIV/DERUDWRULXPYRRU*URQGHQ
*HZDVRQGHU]RHN,QPDDUWLVHHQPRQVWHUJHDQDO\VHHUGWEYKHWRSVWHOOHQYDQKHWEH
PHVWLQJVSODQHQLQMXQLLVGHXULQHEHPRQVWHUGGLHRSJHEUDFKWLV9DQGHYDUNHQVPHVWLV
LQDOOHHQHHQPRQVWHUJHDQDO\VHHUGYDQGHGDDGZHUNHOLMNRSJHEUDFKWHYDUNHQVPHVW

,QLVHHQPRQVWHUYDQGHXULQHGLHRSJHEUDFKWLVJHDQDO\VHHUGGRRUKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ
9LWHQVLQ/HHXZDUGHQ'HYDUNHQVPHVWLVWRHQQLHWJHDQDO\VHHUG]LHRRNELMODJH

7DEHO1XWULsQWHQLQGHXULQHHQGHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWLQHQ
 8ULQHPDDUWMXQL 8ULQHMXQL 9DUNHQVGULMIPHVWMXQL
6WLNVWRI J1NJ J1NJ J1NJ
)RVIDDW J32NJ J3NJ J32NJ
J3NJ J3NJ
.DOL J.2NJ  J.2NJ


2SEDVLVYDQOLWHUDWXXUJHJHYHQVEHYDW]XLYHUHXULQHFLUFD
jJ1NJHQjJ3NJ'HDQDO\VHVYDQGHXULQH
RSGHSURHIORFDWLHODWHQHHQYHHOODJHUQXWULsQWHQJHKDOWH
]LHQ'HQXWULsQWHQJHKDOWHQLQGHXULQH]LMQHUJODDJYRRU
ZDWEHWUHIWVWLNVWRINHHUODJHUGDQYDQGHJHEUXLNWHYDU
NHQVGULMIPHVW'LWEHWHNHQWGDWELMHHQJHOLMNHEHPHVWHQGH
ZDDUGHVWLNVWRIHUDFKWPDDO]RYHHOYHUGXQGHXULQHRS
JHEUDFKWPRHWZRUGHQWHQRS]LFKWHYDQLQGH]HSURHIRS
JHEUDFKWHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW

9HUGXQQLQJVIDFWRU )LJXXU8ULQHLQGHRSYDQJSXW
2SEDVLVYDQGHDQDO\VHJHJHYHQVYDQVWLNVWRIEOLMNWGDWGH
EHPRQVWHUGHXULQHLQGHWDQNRSJHEUDFKWHXULQHHHQIDF
WRUWRWNHHUPRHW]LMQYHUGXQG'LWLVPHHUGDQYHUZDFKWRSEDVLVYDQKHWW\SHWRLOHWYHU
ZDFKWLQJFLUFDWRWPDDO,QSDUDJUDDIZRUGWQDGHULQJHJDDQRSPRJHOLMNHRRU]DNHQ
YDQGH]HYHUGXQQLQJ





*URQWPLM7RHSDVVLQJVPRJHOLMNKHGHQYRRUXULQHLQGHODQGERXZLQ)ULHVODQG'UDFKWHQ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


 %HPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXURSSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQXULQH
3URHI
,QKHWJURHLVHL]RHQYDQLVGHKHOIWYDQKHWSHUFHHOEHPHVWPHWYDUNHQVPHVWHQGHDQGHUH
KHOIWPHWXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNV
'HXULQHLVPHWJHEUXLNYDQHHQFRQYHQWLRQHOH]RGHEHPHVWHURSJHSRPSWHQDDQJHEUDFKW7LM
GHQVKHWSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQKHEEHQ]LFKJHHQWHFKQLVFKHSUREOHPHQELMGHPDFKLQHYRRU
JHGDDQ

9DQZHJHGHODJHVWLNVWRIFRQFHQWUDWLHLQGHXULQHLVLQHHQKRJHGRVHULQJJURRWYROXPH
DDQJHKRXGHQRPWHYROGRHQDDQGH]HOIGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHDOVGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQ
GHYDUNHQVPHVWRSKHWQDEXULJHSHUFHHO'HGRVHULQJEHGURHJFLUFDWRWPSHUKHFWDUH
*DQJEDUHGRVHULQJHQYRRUKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGLHUOLMNHPHVWYDULsUHQLQGHSUDNWLMNYDQWRW
PSHUKHFWDUH9DQZHJHGH]HKRJHGRVHULQJWUDGGHXULQHGHHOVXLWGHVOHXIMHVHQHUZDV
KHUHQGHUVSUDNHYDQSODVYRUPLQJ
%LMXLWWUHGLQJXLWGHVOHXIMHVZDDUELMSODVYRUPLQJRSWUDG]DOHHQUHODWLHIKRJHDPPRQLDNYHU
YOXFKWLJLQJ]LMQRSJHWUHGHQZDDUGRRUVWLNVWRIYRRUKHWJHZDVYHUORUHQLVJHJDDQ

2SEDVLVYDQGH]HUHVXOWDWHQLVEHVORWHQELMGHSUDNWLMNSURHILQQLHWPHHUWHIRFXVVHQRS
GHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQGHXULQHHQGHJHZDVRSEUHQJVWPDDUKHWRQGHU]RHNWHFRQFHQWUH
UHQRSJHXURYHUODVW]LHRRNSDUDJUDDI

)LJXXU2SSRPSHQXULQHXLWGHSXWOLQNVHQDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHPHWGH]RGHEHPHVWHUUHFKWV



3URHI
,Q]LMQWZHHSHUFHOHQYHUVFKLOOHQGEHPHVWQOppQSHUFHHOPHWYHUGXQGHXULQHXLWGHRS
VODJWDQNHQppQSHUFHHOPHWHHQPHQJVHOYDQXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNHQYDUNHQVPHVW(ULV
JHNR]HQYRRUHHQPHQJVHOYDQXULQHPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWDDQJH]LHQGLWRRNLQGHSUDNWLMNHHQ
PRJHOLMNHRSWLH]RXNXQQHQ]LMQ8ULQH]RXQDPHOLMNJHEUXLNWNXQQHQZRUGHQRPGHVWLNVWRIJH
EUXLNVQRUPRSWHYXOOHQELMEHPHVWLQJPHWYDUNHQVPHVW]LHELMODJH%RYHQGLHQ]RXGRRUKHW
PHQJHQYDQGHKXPDQHXULQHPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWGHXULQHVWDQNPRJHOLMNNXQQHQZRUGHQ
ZHJJHQRPHQ

0HWGH]RGHEHPHVWHUEOHHNKHWPRJHOLMNGHXULQHPHWGHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWWHPHQJHQ+HWDDQ
EUHQJHQYDQKHWPHQJVHOOHYHUGHJHHQWHFKQLVFKHSUREOHPHQRS
,QZHUGQLHWPHHUJHIRFXVWRSJHOLMNHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQGHRSWHEUHQJHQPHVWRS
EHLGHSHUFHOHQPDDUVWRQGKHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUGHJHXURYHUODVWFHQWUDDO2SEHLGHSHUFHOHQ
ZHUGHHQ]HOIGHKRHYHHOKHLGPHVWPHQJVHODDQJHEUDFKW+LHUELMZHUGHHQGRVHULQJYDQFLUFD
jPXULQHPHQJVHOSHUKHFWDUHDDQJHKRXGHQ'H]HGRVHULQJKHHIWQLHWWRWSODVYRUPLQJ
JHOHLG'HXULQHEOHHIYULMZHOYROOHGLJLQGHGRRUGH]RGHEHPHVWHUJHPDDNWHVOHXYHQ



-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


)LJXXU$DQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHRSKHWSURHIYHOGLQ

$OVXULQH]RXZRUGHQWRHJHODWHQDOVPHVWVWRILQGHODQGERXZ]XOOHQYRRUGHWRHGLHQLQJVZLM]H
ZDDUVFKLMQOLMNGH]HOIGHUHJHOVJHOGHQDOVYRRUGLHUOLMNHPHVW9RRUGHWRHGLHQLQJYDQGLHUOLMNH
PHVWJHOGWHHQZHWWHOLMNHLQZHUNSOLFKWRPGHDPPRQLDNHPLVVLHXLWGHPHVWWHPLQLPDOLVHUHQ
9ORHLEDUHPHVWPRHWGDDUWRHLQGHJURQGZRUGHQJHEUDFKWRILQWHQVLHIPHWGHJURQGZRUGHQ
JHPHQJG]RGDQLJGDWKHWQLHWPHHU]LFKWEDDURSKHWJURQGRSSHUYODNOLJW7RHGLHQLQJPHWHHQ
]RGHEHPHVWHUZDDUELMGHPHVWLQVOHXIMHVERYHQLQGHJURQGZRUGWDDQJHEUDFKWPDJPLWVGH
PHVWQLHWXLWGHVOHXIMHVWUHHGW

%LMWRHGLHQLQJPHWHHQ]RGHEHPHVWHUWUHHGWPHHUDPPRQLDNYHUYOXFKWLJLQJVYHUOLHVRSGDQELM
HHQERXZODQGLQMHFWHXUHQLVGHVWLNVWRIZHUNLQJELM]RZHOKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHDOVGH
YDUNHQVGULMIPHVWODJHU

 *HZDVJURHLHQRSEUHQJVW

 0RQLWRULQJJHZDV
*HGXUHQGHGHSURHILVKHWSURHIYHOGUHJHOPDWLJEH]RFKWGRRU/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKHLQ
HQ*URQWPLMLQ7LMGHQVGH]HEH]RHNHQ]LMQJHHQELM]RQGHUKHGHQJHFRQVWDWHHUG,Q
ILJ]LMQHQNHOHDIEHHOGLQJHQZHHUJHJHYHQ0HHUIRWR¶VYDQGHJHZDVRQWZLNNHOLQJ]LMQRS
JHQRPHQLQELMODJH9LVXHHOZDUHQHULQJHHQRSYDOOHQGHYHUVFKLOOHQWHFRQVWDWHUHQWXV
VHQGHJHZDVJURHLRSKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHSHUFHHOHQKHWPHWYDUNHQVPHVWEHPHVWHSHUFHHO
'LW]HOIGHZDVKHWJHYDOLQYRRUKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHSHUFHHOHQKHWPHWKHWPHQJVHO
YDUNHQVPHVWXULQHEHPHVWHSHUFHHO


)LJXXU0DwVRSMXQLMXOLHQDXJXVWXV

 *HZDVRSEUHQJVW

3URHI
2SRNWREHULVGHPDwVYDQKHWSURHIYHOGJHRRJVW2SEDVLVYDQRSEUHQJVWPHWLQJHQ
GRRUGHORRQZHUNHUEHGURHJGHRSEUHQJVWWHUSODDWVHYDQKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHGHHOLQWRWDDO
NJHQKHWPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWEHPHVWHGHHOLQWRWDDONJPDwV'HRSSHUYODNWHYDQ
EHLGHSHUFHOHQZDVJHOLMN
2SEDVLVYDQGH]HRSEUHQJVWEHSDOLQJNDQQLHWHHQGXLGLJZRUGHQJHFRQFOXGHHUGGDWXULQHPLQ
GHUJHVFKLNWLVDOVPHVWVWRIYRRUKHWWHOHQYDQHQHUJLHPDwVGDQYDUNHQVPHVW,PPHUVHU]LMQ
QRJPHHUYDULDEHOHQDDQZH]LJGDQDOOHHQKHWYHUVFKLOLQW\SHEHPHVWLQJXULQHHQYDUNHQV

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


PHVW=RLVKHWSHUFHHOYHUUHYDQKRPRJHHQ]LHELMODJHGHEHPHVWLQJVKLVWRULHRQEHNHQGHQ

LVGRRUGHVWHUNHPDWHYDQYHUGXQQLQJYDQGHXULQHHQPRJHOLMNHDPPRQLDNYHUYOXFKWLJLQJQLHW
RSWLPDDOJHEUXLNJHPDDNWYDQGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQXULQH

3URHI
,QLVLQGHSURHIJHHQJHZDVRSEUHQJVWEHSDDOGRPGDWGLWJHHQGRHOZDVYDQGHSURHILQ
IRFXVRSJHXUKLQGHUPHGHRPGDWGHEHPHVWLQJVJUDDGYDQEHLGHSHUFHOHQRQJHOLMNZDV


)LJXXU2RJVWSURHIYHOGLQ

'HJHRRJVWHPDwVLVGRRUGHORRQZHUNHUYHUJLVWLQGHRSKHWORRQEHGULMIDDQZH]LJHYHUJLVWLQJV
LQVWDOODWLH0HWGHRRJVWYDQKHWSURHIYHOGVGXVELRJDVJHSURGXFHHUG

 *HXU

 *HXUKLQGHUVWDNHKROGHUV
,QKHWQDYROJHQGHZRUGWRQGHUVFKHLGJHPDDNWWXVVHQJHXUZDDUQHPLQJHQELMKHWRSSRPSHQYDQ
GHXULQHHQELMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQH

3URHI
• 2SSRPSHQ
'HORRQZHUNHUJDILQDDQGDWELMKHWRSSRPSHQYDQGHXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNVSUDNHZDV
YDQVWDQNRSKHWPRPHQWGDWGHRSSRPSVODQJLQGHXULQHZHUGJHVWRNHQGXVQLHWELMKHWRSH
QHQYDQGHSXW

• $DQEUHQJHQ
%LMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHLQJDIGHORRQZHUNHUDDQGDWHUHYHQHHQVVSUDNHZDV
YDQHHQYHUVFKULNNHOLMNHVWDQN'HVWDQNYDQGHXULQHZDVYRRUGHORRQZHUNHUQLHWWHKDUGHQ
OHWWHUOLMNµGHMRQJHQVJLQJHQELMQDRYHUKXQQHN¶'HJHXUZHUGDOV]HHUVWHUNHUYDUHQRQGDQNV
KHWIHLWGDWGHORRQZHUNHUUHJHOPDWLJPHWPHVWZHUNW
'HPHQVHQGLHZHUN]DDP]LMQRSGHORFDWLHELM6WLFKWLQJ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKHKDGGHQLQ
HYHQHHQVWLMGHQVKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHODVWYDQVWDQN'HZDDUJHQRPHQJHXUGLH
WLMGHQVKHWRSSRPSHQORVNRPWHQ]LFKYHUVSUHLGGRRUKHWJHERXZJHGXUHQGHKHWXLWULMGHQZHUG
DOVYUHVHOLMNSHQHWUDQWHQZHHwJRPVFKUHYHQ'HJHXUYDQGHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWZHUGQLHW]R]HHU
DOVVWRUHQGHUYDUHQ

'HJHXUZDDUQHPLQJHQLQZDUHQDDQOHLGLQJKHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUVWDQNRYHUODVWLQWH
LQWHQVLYHUHQ%HVORWHQZHUGQLHWDOOHHQGHJHXUWHODWHQEHRRUGHOHQGRRUVWDNHKROGHUVPDDU
WHYHQVHHQSURIHVVLRQHHOJHXURQGHU]RHNWHODWHQXLWYRHUHQ

3URHI
7HQEHKRHYHYDQKHWJHXURQGHU]RHNLVEHVORWHQGHHQHKHOIWYDQKHWSHUFHHOWHEHPHVWHQPHW
DOOHHQXULQHHQHQNHOHGDJHQODWHUYRRUHHQDSDUWHEHRRUGHOLQJPHWHHQPHQJVHOYDQXULQHHQ
YDUNHQVGULMIPHVW


-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


• 2SSRPSHQ
2SKHWWHUUHLQ]LMQWZHHRSVODJWDQNVDDQZH]LJGLHRQGHUOLQJDIJHVORWHQNXQQHQZRUGHQ7HQ
EHKRHYHYDQGHEHPHVWLQJVSURHIPHLZHUGDOOHHQGHXULQHJHEUXLNWXLWGHRSVODJWDQN
ZDDULQGHXULQHDOHHQKDOIMDDURSJHVODJHQLVJHZHHVW,QDSULOZDUHQEHLGHWDQNVYRORRNGH
WDQNZDDULQGHXULQHWRWGDWPRPHQWZDVDDQJHYXOG'H]HPHHVWYHUVHXULQHLVLQDSULO
RSJHSRPSWHQDIJHYRHUGQDDUHHQ5:=,RPGDWHUDQGHUVJHHQWDQNPHHUEHVFKLNEDDU]RX]LMQ
YRRUQLHXZDDQWHYRHUHQXULQH
(HQPHGHZHUNHUYDQ:RRQFRQFHSWLVLQDSULODDQZH]LJJHZHHVWELMKHWRSSRPSHQHQDI
YRHUHQRPHYHQWXHOHJHXUKLQGHUZDDUWHQHPHQ'HPHGHZHUNHUYDQ:RRQFRQFHSWKHHIWJH
FRQVWDWHHUGGDWHU]RZHORQJHURHUGDOVQDLQWHQVLHIURHUHQYDQGHXULQHJHHQJHXUZDVZDDUWH
QHPHQXLWGHJHRSHQGHSXWPHWYHUVHXULQH2RNHHQPHGHZHUNHUYDQ9DQERHLMHQKHHIWJH
URNHQHQVWHOGHYDVWGDWHUJHHQRQZHOULHNHQGHJHXUZDDUWHQHPHQZDV

7LMGHQVKHWRSSRPSHQYDQGHXULQHXLWGHWDQNZDDULQGHXULQHHHQKDOIMDDURSJHVODJHQLVJH
ZHHVWWHQEHKRHYHYDQGHEHPHVWLQJVURHIPHWXULQHZDVHHQPHGHZHUNHUYDQ*URQWPLMDDQ
ZH]LJ=LMQEHYLQGLQJHQZDUHQGDWHUWLMGHQVKHWRSSRPSHQYDQGHXULQHVSUDNHZDVYDQHHQ
OLFKWHJHXU

• $DQEUHQJHQ
2PGHJHXUHUYDULQJHQWLMGHQVKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQXULQHHQKHWPHQJVHOYDQXULQHHQYDUNHQV
PHVWWHRQGHU]RHNHQ]LMQGHPHGHZHUNHUVYDQ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKHJHsQTXrWHHUG'H
YRRUJHOHJGHHQTXrWHV]LMQRSJHQRPHQLQELMODJH

,Q]LMQGRRUDFKWYHUVFKLOOHQGHPHQVHQHQTXrWHVLQJHYXOGRSGHGDJGDWGHXULQHLVDDQ
JHEUDFKW8LWGHUHVXOWDWHQYDOWRSWHPDNHQGDWGHUHDFWLHVXLWHHQORSHQ=REOLMNHQHQNHOHSHU
VRQHQQLHWVWHKHEEHQJHPHUNWHQHU]LMQSHUVRQHQGLHGHJHXUDOVLQGULQJHQGKHEEHQHUYDUHQ
'HPHHUGHUKHLGSHUVRQHQKHHIWQLHWVJHPHUNW2SYDOOHQGLVGDWppQSHUVRRQVSUHHNWRYHU
HHQ]XULJHGULMIPHVWJHXU

(U]LMQLQYLMIHQTXrWHVLQJHYXOGRSGHGDJGDWKHWPHQJVHOYDQGHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQ
XULQHLVDDQJHEUDFKW'HUHVXOWDWHQYDQGH]HHQTXrWH]LMQHHQGXLGLJHU2SGHGDJYDQDDQ
EUHQJHQLVGRRUDOOHJHsQTXrWHHUGHQKLQGHUELQQHQKHWJHERXZHQEXLWHQRQGHUYRQGHQ'H
JHXUZRUGWDOVVFKHUSHQSHQHWUDQWRPVFKUHYHQHQGHPDWHYDQKLQGHUPHWHHQZDDUGHYDQ
WRWRSHHQVFKDDOYDQWRWJHNDUDNWHULVHHUG0HQKHHIWHQNHOHXUHQWRWHHQKDOYHGDJ
KLQGHURQGHUYRQGHQ

7LMGHQVKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQ]RZHOGHXULQHDOVKHWPHQJVHOYDQXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWZDV
HHQPHGHZHUNHUYDQ*URQWPLMDDQZH]LJ=LMQEHYLQGLQJHQZDUHQGDWHUWLMGHQVKHWDDQEUHQJHQ
YDQXULQHQDXZHOLMNVVSUDNHZDVYDQVWDQN'HORRQZHUNHUFRQVWDWHHUGHGDWHULQZHO
VSUDNHZDVYDQJHXUPDDUGDWGHVWDQNLQYHHOHUJHUZDV2RNPHUNWHKLMRSGDWGHYDU
NHQVGULMIPHVWYHHOPHHUVWRQN'LWZHUGRRNEHYHVWLJGGRRUGHPHGHZHUNHUYDQ*URQWPLM

 *HXURQGHU]RHNODERUDWRULXP
'RRU35$2GRXUQHWEYLVJHXURQGHU]RHNLQKHWODERUDWRULXPXLWJHYRHUGWHQEHKRHYHYDQGH
YHUJHOLMNLQJYDQGHYROJHQGHGULHPHVWVRRUWHQ
• 9HUGXQGHKXPDQHXULQHXLWGH]HOIGHWDQNGLHYRRUGHEHPHVWLQJYDQGHHQHKHOIWYDQKHW
SHUFHHOLVJHEUXLNW
• 9DUNHQVGULMIPHVW
• (HQPHQJVHOYDQYHUGXQGHKXPDQHXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWKHW]HOIGHPHQJVHODOVYRRU
GHEHPHVWLQJYDQGHWZHHGHKHOIWYDQKHWSHUFHHOLVJHEUXLNW

'HSULQFLSHVYDQHHQSURIHVVLRQHHOJHXURQGHU]RHN]LMQZHHUJHJHYHQLQELMODJH

*HXUZRUGWEHRRUGHHOGRSJHXUVWHUNWHJHXUFRQFHQWUDWLHHQRSJHXUHUYDULQJKHGRQLVFKH
ZDDUGH
8LWKHWJHXURQGHU]RHN]LMQGRRU35$2GRXUQHWGHYROJHQGHFRQFOXVLHVJHWURNNHQ
• 'HYROJHQGHJHXUFRQFHQWUDWLHV]LMQJHPHWHQ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


° 9DUNHQVGULMIPHVWRX(P
° 0HQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKXPDQHXULQHRX(P
° 9HUGXQGHKXPDQHXULQHRX(P
• 'HJHXUFRQFHQWUDWLHYDQGHPRQVWHUVYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWLVRQJHYHHUHHQIDFWRUKRJHU
GDQGHJHXUFRQFHQWUDWLHYDQGHPRQVWHUVYDQYHUGXQGHKXPDQHXULQH
• (HQPHQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKXPDQHXULQHJHHIWHHQJHXUFRQFHQWUDWLHGLHWXVVHQ
GHZDDUGHQYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKXPDQHXULQHLQOLJW
• 8LWGHKHGRQLVFKHPHWLQJHQNRPWQDDUYRUHQGDWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWDOVPLQGHURQDDQJHQDDP
ZRUGWEHRRUGHHOGGDQKXPDQHXULQHRIHHQPHQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKXPDQHXULQH
• +HWPHQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKXPDQHXULQHUHVXOWHHUWLQGHODDJVWHKHGRQLVFKH
ZDDUGHQ'LWPHQJVHOLVDOVKHWPHHVWRQDDQJHQDDPEHRRUGHHOGGRRUKHWSDQHO'HYHU
VFKLOOHQ]LMQJHULQJ
• 'HJHXUYDQGHPRQVWHUVLVLQYHUKRXGLQJWRWDQGHUHJHXUHQDOVUHODWLHIRQDDQJHQDDPEH
RRUGHHOG

+HWYROOHGLJHRQGHU]RHNVUDSSRUWYDQ35$2GRXUQHWLVRSJHQRPHQLQELMODJH

 *HQHHVPLGGHOHQ

 ,QILOWUDWLHSURHYHQPHWRSYDQJEDNNHQ
(ULVHHQSURHIRSVWHOOLQJDDQJHOHJGRPGHLQILOWUDWLHYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQQDDUKHWZDWHUYRH
UHQGSDNNHWWHNXQQHQPHWHQ]LHELMODJH
9DQZHJHGHVLWXDWLHWHUSODDWVHYDQKHWSURHIYHOGLQGH]RPHUYDQLVGHEHPRQVWHULQJYDQ
KHWLQILOWUDWLHZDWHUWHQEHKRHYHYDQKHWRQGHU]RHNQDDUGHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQHQQXWUL
HQWHQQLHWPHHU]LQYROJHDFKWHQGDDURPVWRSJH]HW'HUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHJHSODQGHEHPRQVWH
ULQJ]RXGHQ]HNHUQLHWUHSUHVHQWDWLHI]LMQ(QNHOHRRU]DNHQYDQGHVWRS]HWWLQJZDUHQ]LHRRN
ELMODJH
• ,QGHRSYDQJSXWWHQLVYHHOPHHUZDWHUJHPHWHQGDQPRJHOLMNZDVRSEDVLVYDQGHQHHUVODJ
KRHYHHOKHLG(UNXQQHQKLHUYRRUYHUVFKLOOHQGHRRU]DNHQ]LMQ+HWXLW]RHNHQYDQGHGDDGZHUNH
OLMNHRRU]DDNLVDOVWHFRPSOH[HQWHGXXUEHRRUGHHOGPHGHRPGDWGLWRQGHUGHHOHHQQHYHQ
GRHOYDQKHWSURHISURMHFWEHWUHIW
• 'HORRQZHUNHUKDGKHWSURHISHUFHHOQLHWRYHUGZDUVPDDURYHUODQJVLQWZHHsQJHGHHOGHQ
KDGERYHQGLHQQLHWEHPHVWWHUSODDWVHYDQGHRSYDQJEDNNHQ+HWZDVKLHUGRRUQLHWPRJHOLMN
LQILOWUDWLHYDQXULQHPHWJHQHHVPLGGHOHQWHPHWHQHQERYHQGLHQZDVKHWPHWHQYDQKHWYHUVFKLO
LQEHODVWLQJGRRUXULQHHQYDUNHQVPHVWQLHWPRJHOLMN

 *HQHHVPLGGHOHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVLQGHXULQHWDQNV

9ROXPHXULQHLQGHWDQNVHQYHUGXQQLQJVIDFWRU
,QMXQLFLUFDMDDUQDRSHQLQJYDQGHORFDWLHLVGHXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNVEHPRQVWHUG
HQJHDQDO\VHHUG7HQWLMGHYDQGHPRQVWHUQDPHEHYRQG]LFKFLUFDPYHUGXQGHXULQHLQGH
WDQNV(ULVEHUHNHQGGDWSHUMDDURSGHORFDWLHFLUFDPXULQHJHSURGXFHHUGZRUGW]LHELMODJH
2SEDVLVYDQGHDDQJHWURIIHQKRHYHHOKHLGYDQPYHUGXQGHXULQHHQGHEHUHNHQGHKRH
YHHOKHLGYDQP]XLYHUHXULQHZRUGWHHQYHUGXQQLQJYDQFLUFDPDDODIJHOHLG

*HQHHVPLGGHOHQJHEUXLN
,QELMODJHLVKHWJHQHHVPLGGHOHQJHEUXLNLQGH]RUJERHUGHULMLQ$QGHUHQYROJHQVRSJDYHLQGH
]RPHUYDQHQYROJHQVRSJDYHLQMDQXDULZHHUJHJHYHQ,QGH]HELMODJHLVWHYHQVGH
EHUHNHQLQJZHHUJHJHYHQYDQGHWHYHUZDFKWHQFRQFHQWUDWLHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQLQGHXULQHWDQNV
LQMXQLWHQWLMGHYDQGHPRQVWHUQDPH%LMGH]HFRQFHQWUDWLHEHUHNHQLQJLVGHYUDFKWJH
QHHVPLGGHOHQEHUHNHQGGLHYROJHQVYHUZDFKWLQJLQGHYRRUDIJDDQGHSHULRGHLQGHWDQNWHUHFKW
LVJHNRPHQHQLVGHFRQFHQWUDWLHEHUHNHQGXLWJDDQGHYDQHHQYROXPHYDQPXULQHLQGH
WDQNVWHQWLMGHYDQGHEHPRQVWHULQJ

$QDO\VHUHVXOWDWHQ
'HXULQHXLWGHRSVODJWDQNLVLQRSJHQHHVPLGGHOHQJHDQDO\VHHUGLQKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ
2PHJDPLQ$PVWHUGDPHQLQLQKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ9LWHQVLQ/HHXZDUGHQEHLGHMDUHQ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


PRQVWHUQDPHYRRUDIJDDQGHDDQWRHGLHQLQJRSKHWSHUFHHO'HDQDO\VHUHVXOWDWHQ]LMQZHHUJH
JHYHQLQELMODJH9DQGHWRHJHGLHQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQ]LMQELMKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ2PHJDP
DOOHHQFDUEDPD]HSLQHHQOLWKLXPJHDQDO\VHHUGHQELMKHWODERUDWRULXPYDQ9LWHQVDOOHHQFDUED
PD]HSLQH

,QWDEHO]LMQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVLQHQDOOHHQYDQGLHSDUDPHWHUV
GLHJHPHWHQ]LMQLQJHKDOWHQERYHQGHUDSSRUWDJHJUHQVZHHUJHJHYHQ$OOHHQFDUEDPD]HSLQH
HQOLWKLXPNRPHQYRRURSGHDDQJHOHYHUGHOLMVWHQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQGLHGRRUGHFOLsQWHQYDQGH
]RUJERHUGHULMZRUGHQLQJHQRPHQ'HRYHULJHDDQJHWURIIHQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQ]LMQUHJXOLHUHJH
QHHVPLGGHOHQGLHLQJHQRPHQNXQQHQ]LMQGRRUDQGHUHJHEUXLNHUVYDQGHORFDWLH0HWURSROROHQ
VRWDORO]LMQELMYRRUEHHOGJDQJEDUHEqWDEORNNHUVHQQDSUR[HQHQGLFORIHQDF]LMQ]HHUUHJXOLHUJH
EUXLNWHSLMQVWLOOHUVRQWVWHNLQJVUHPPHUV

7DEHO*HQHHVPLGGHOHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVYDQXULQHPRQVWHUVXLWRSVODJWDQNORNDWLH$QGHUHQDOOHHQ
YDQGHSDUDPHWHUVGLHDDQJHWURIIHQ]LMQLQJHKDOWHQERYHQGHUDSSRUWDJHJUHQV
3DUDPHWHU *HPHWHQFRQFHQWUDWLH *HPHWHQFRQFHQWUDWLH
ÔJO ÔJO
&DUEDPD]HSLQH  
&RIIHLQH  
0HWURSRORO  
/LWKLXP  
QDSUR[HQ  
VRWDORO  
SDUDFHWDPRO  
GLFORIHQDF  

,QWDEHOLVYRRUGHEHPRQVWHULQJYDQQDDVWGHSDUDPHWHUVPHWJHKDOWHQERYHQGH
UDSSRUWDJHJUHQVZHHUJHJHYHQZDWYROJHQVGHEHUHNHQLQJHQ]LHELMODJHGHFRQFHQWUDWLHLQ
GHRSVODJWDQNV]RXPRHWHQ]LMQ'HEHUHNHQGHFRQFHQWUDWLHLVJOREDDOHHQIDFWRUKRJHUGDQ
GHJHPHWHQFRQFHQWUDWLH'LWEHWHNHQWGDWGHJHPHWHQFRQFHQWUDWLHLQGHRSVODJWDQNVFLUFDQH
JHQPDDOODJHULVGDQEHUHNHQGLVYRRU]XLYHUHXULQH

+HWYHUVFKLOLQJHPHWHQHQEHUHNHQGHFRQFHQWUDWLHNDQYHUVFKLOOHQGHRRU]DNHQKHEEHQ(QNHOH
KLHUYDQ]LMQ
• (UZRUGWGRRUGHEHZRQHUVPLQGHUYDQGHXULQHVFKHLGLQJVWRLOHWWHQJHEUXLNJHPDDNWGDQ
YHUZDFKW
• +HWVFKHLGLQJVSHUFHQWDJHYDQGHWRLOHWWHQLVODJHUGDQGHZDDUYDQXLWLVJHJDDQ
• (UZRUGHQGRRUGHEHZRQHUVPLQGHUJHQHHVPLGGHOHQLQJHQRPHQGDQYHUZDFKW
• 'HXLWVFKHLGLQJVSHUFHQWDJHVYDQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQGRRUGHPHQV]LMQODJHUGDQGHSHU
FHQWDJHVGLHLQGHOLWHUDWXXUYHUPHOGZRUGHQ
• HHQGHHOYDQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQEUHNHQDIWLMGHQVRSVODJGLWNDQQLHWKHWJHYDO]LMQELM
OLWKLXPHHQHOHPHQW

7DEHO9HUJHOLMNLQJDQDO\VHUHVXOWDWHQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQLQXULQHXLWGHWDQNDOOHHQJH
QHHVPLGGHOHQERYHQGHWHFWLHJUHQV]LMQZHHUJHJHYHQHQEHUHNHQGHFRQFHQWUDWLHVRSEDVLVYDQ
LQQDPHJHJHYHQVHQXLWVFKHLGLQJVSHUFHQWDJHVXLWVFKHLGLQJ LQQDPH XLWVFKHLGLQJVSHUFHQWDJH
3DUDPHWHU *HPHWHQFRQFHQWUDWLH 9HUZDFKWHFRQFHQWUDWLH )DFWRU%HUH
 YROJHQVEHUHNHQLQJHQ NHQGJHPHWHQ
ÔJO ÔJO
&DUEDPD]HSLQH   
&RIIHLQH   
0HWURSRORO   
/LWKLXP   

 9HUGXQQLQJVIDFWRU
2SEDVLVYDQHHQFRPELQDWLHYDQ]RZHOGHQXWULsQWHQJHKDOWHQDOVGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQJHKDOWHQ
OLMNWKHWKHWPHHVWYRRUGHKDQGOLJJHQGGDWHULQGHWDQNPLQGHUXULQHWHUHFKWNRPWGDQYHU

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI


ZDFKWHQOLMNWGHYHUGXQQLQJVIDFWRUGLFKWHULQGHEXXUWYDQGHWHOLJJHQGDQYDQGHGLHZDV
DIJHOHLGRSEDVLVYDQGHYHUZDFKWHKRHYHHOKHGHQXULQH

 2YHULJHUHVXOWDWHQ
1DDVWGHUHVXOWDWHQWHQDDQ]LHQYDQGHRQGHU]RHNVYUDJHQ]LMQHUJHGXUHQGHGHSURHIRRNDQ
GHUHEHYLQGLQJHQJHGDDQ'H]H]LMQLQGH]HSDUDJUDDIEHVFKRXZG

 $DQOHJJHVFKHLGHQVDQLWDWLHV\VWHHP
,QKHW3URJUDPPDYDQ(LVHQHQKHWEHVWHNWHQEHKRHYHYDQGHDDQOHJYDQGHRSVODJWDQNVZDV
RSJHQRPHQGDWGHYHUELQGLQJWXVVHQGHRSVODJWDQNVDIJHVORWHQPRHWNXQQHQZRUGHQ7RFK
ZDUHQGHRSVODJWDQNVYRRUXULQHLQHHUVWHLQVWDQWLHDDQGHERYHQNDQWPHWHHQOHLGLQJPHWHO
NDDUYHUERQGHQ'LWEHWHNHQGHGDWLQGLHQGHHQHWDQNYROLVGHXULQHQDDUGHDQGHUHWDQNNRQ
VWURPHQ&RQVHTXHQWLHKLHUYDQLVGDWLQEHLGHWDQNVVWHHGVYHUVHXULQHWHUHFKWNRQNRPHQHQ
HHQWDQNQLHWDI]RQGHUOLMNNRQZRUGHQDIJHVORWHQ%LMGHDDQOHJLVGXVDIJHZHNHQYDQKHW3UR
JUDPPDYDQ(LVHQ
:RRQFRQFHSWKHHIWHUYRRUJH]RUJGGDWGHDIVOXLWNOHSRSMDQXDULDOVQRJLVJHSODDWVW
'RRUGH]HNOHSLVKHWPRJHOLMNGHWDQNVYDQHONDDUDIWHVOXLWHQHQGHXULQHHQNHOHPDDQGHQ
VHSDUDDWRSWHVODDQ]LHILJXXU


)LJXXU$DQJHEUDFKWHDIVOXLWHUOLQNVHQXULQHWUDQVSRUWOHLGLQJHQUHFKWV


,QGLHQGHWDQNVYRO]LMQJHORSHQLVHUJHHQDXWRPDWLVFKHRYHUORRSQDDUGHULROHULQJ(UZDVQLHW
GXLGHOLMNDIJHVSURNHQZLHGHLQKRXGKRHYHHOKHLGLQGHWDQNVFRQWUROHHUW,QPLGGHOV]LMQKLHU
RYHUDIVSUDNHQJHPDDNW

%LMHHQLQVSHFWLHLQGHFHPEHULVJHFRQVWDWHHUGGDWRSGHWDQNVDOOHHQGHXULQHWRHYRHUOHL
GLQJHQDDQJHVORWHQ]LMQHQJHHQDQGHUHOHLGLQJHQ(UZHUGQDPHOLMNRSJURQGYDQGHJURWHPD
WHYDQYHUGXQQLQJYDQGHXULQHPHWGHPRJHOLMNKHLGUHNHQLQJJHKRXGHQGDWHURRNDQGHUHOHL
GLQJHQRSDDQJHVORWHQNRQGHQ]LMQ%LMGH]HLQVSHFWLHLVZHOJHEOHNHQGDWGHDDQZH]LJHOHLGLQ
JHQQLHWDOOHPDDOLQ3(3RO\HWKHHQZDUHQXLWJHYRHUG]RDOVYRRUJHVFKUHYHQPDDUHHQGHHOLQ
39&+HWGHHOLQ39&LVGRRUDDQQHPHUYHUYDQJHQGRRU3(

(ULVJHFRQVWDWHHUGGDWLQKHWEXLWHQODQGZRUGWJHZHUNWPHWSODVWLFWDQNVWHUZLMOLQ$QGHUHQEH
WRQQHQWDQNV]LMQJHSODDWVW,QGLHQGH]HJRHGDDQJHOHJG]LMQKRHIWGLWJHHQSUREOHHPWH]LMQ
'HDDQVOXLWLQJYDQGHWDQNGHNVHOVQDDUGHWDQN]LMQRSJHPHWVHOG+LHUGRRU]LMQGHWDQNVPRJH
OLMNQLHWYROOHGLJZDWHUGLFKW*H]LHQGHJURQGZDWHUVWDQGHQGHKRRJWHOLJJLQJZRUGWDDQJHQRPHQ
GDWGLWRSGH]HORFDWLHJHHQSUREOHHPRS]DOOHYHUHQ0HWXLW]RQGHULQJYDQGHRSJHPHWVHOGH
UDQGLVKHWJHKHOHV\VWHHPWKDQVWHFKQLVFKLQRUGH


 7RLOHWJHGUDJHQYHUGXQQLQJ
8LWGHQXWULsQWHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVHQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQFRQFHQWUDWLHVYDQGHXULQHXLWGHRSVODJ
WDQNVZHUGHHQYHUGXQQLQJYDQWRWPDDODIJHOHLG'LWLVPHHUGDQYHUZDFKWRSJURQGYDQ
KHWWRLOHWW\SHWRWPDDO(QNHOHPRJHOLMNKHGHQYDQGH]HUHODWLHIVWHUNHYHUGXQQLQJ]LMQRQ
GHU]RFKW

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 5HVXOWDWHQSUDNWLMNSURHI



8LWHHQJHVSUHNYDQGHSURMHFWOHLGHUYDQ:RRQFRQFHSWPHWPHQVHQYDQ9DQERHLMHQHQHHQ
FOLsQWLVJHEOHNHQGDWHUJURWHKRHYHHOKHGHQZDWHUGRRUGHWRLOHWWHQJDDQELMVFKRRQPDDNZHUN
]DDPKHGHQ+LHUELMZRUGWGULIWLJJHEUXLNJHPDDNWYDQDOOHVRRUWHQVFKRRQPDDNPLGGHOHQRD
EOHHNPLGGHOHQ
,QGHWRLOHWWHQYLQGWXULQHVFKHLGLQJZDQQHHU]LWWHQGJHSODVWZRUGWRRNGRRUPDQQHOLMNHJHEUXL
NHUV9DQERHLMHQKHHIWDDQJHJHYHQGDWGLYHUVHEHZRQHUVQRJVWHHGVVWDDQGSODVVHQHYHQDOV
GHPDQQHOLMNHZHUNQHPHUVELM/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU'UHQWKH'DDUQDDVWZHUGELM/DQGVFKDSVEH
KHHU'UHQWKHDDQJHJHYHQGDWHUUHJHOPDWLJQDHHQJURWHERRGVFKDSHQNHOHNHUHQQDJHVSRHOG
GLHQWWHZRUGHQRPYROGRHQGHZHJVSRHOHIIHFWWHYHUNULMJHQ,HGHUHNHHUGDWHUVSRHOZDWHUJH
EUXLNWZRUGWNRPWHHQGHHOYDQKHWVSRHOZDWHUFLUFDLQGHXULQHWDQNVWHUHFKW2YHUPDWLJH
VSRHOLQJ]RQGHUWRHYRHJLQJYDQXULQHQDDUGHWDQNVOHLGWWRWHHQJURWHUHYHUGXQQLQJYDQGHXUL
QHLQGHRSVODJWDQNVGDQYHUZDFKW

 8LWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHZHUN]DDPKHGHQHQFRPPXQLFDWLH
2QGDQNVFRQFUHWHDIVSUDNHQPHWGHORRQZHUNHUEOLMNWLQGHSUDNWLMNGDWGHORRQZHUNHURSVRP
PLJHPRPHQWHQ]LMQHLJHQSODQWUHNWRYHULJHQVPHWGHEHVWHEHGRHOLQJHQ=RLVKHWSHUFHHOLQ
GRRUGHORRQZHUNHULQGHOHQJWHULFKWLQJLQWZHHsQJHGHHOGHQQLHWLQGHEUHHGWH]RDOV
DDQJHJHYHQZDVRPGDWGLWPLQGHUGUDDLEHZHJLQJHQPHW]LFKPHHEUHQJWHQGHORRQZHUNHUYDQ
PHQLQJZDVGDWHUWZHHPHHUJHOLMNZDDUGLJHSHUFHOHQ]RXGHQRQWVWDDQ'HORRQZHUNHUKHHIW
QLHWEHVHIWGDWGHRSYDQJEDNNHQYRRUGHLQILOWUDWLHSURHYHQ]LFKKLHUGRRUQLHWPHHURSYHUVFKLO
OHQGHSHUFHOHQEHYRQGHQ

 4XLFNVFDQOLWHUDWXXU
'HEHYLQGLQJHQXLWGHWZHHMDULJHSUDNWLMNSURHI]LMQPLGGHOVHHQTXLFNVFDQJHWRHWVWDDQOLWHUD
WXXU'HNRUWHZHHUJDYHYDQGHUHVXOWDWHQKLHUYDQLVRSJHQRPHQLQELMODJH


-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ



 6DPHQYDWWLQJFRQFOXVLHVHQDDQEHYHOLQ
JHQ

 ,QOHLGLQJ
'RRUKHWXLWYRHUHQYDQGHSURHI]LMQLQHQGLYHUVHSUDNWLMNHUYDULQJHQRSJHGDDQ
ZDDUGRRUYHUVFKLOOHQGHNQHOSXQWHQHQDDQGDFKWVSXQWHQDDQKHWOLFKW]LMQJHNRPHQ
3HURQGHU]RHNVDVSHFWZRUGHQLQGLWKRRIGVWXNNRUWGHUHVXOWDWHQVDPHQJHYDW'DDUQDDVWZRU
GHQSHUDVSHFWGHFRQFOXVLHVZHHUJHJHYHQ7RWVORWZRUGHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQJHGDDQ

 6DPHQYDWWLQJHQFRQFOXVLHV

%HPHVWHQGHZDDUGH
• 'HXULQHLQGHRSVODJWDQNVZDVjPDDOYHUGXQGWRY]XLYHUHXULQH
• 'HQXWULsQWHQJHKDOWHQLQGHXULQH]LMQHUJODDJYRRUZDWEHWUHIWVWLNVWRINHHUODJHUGDQYDQ
GHJHEUXLNWHYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW
• 'HFRQFHQWUDWLHVWLNVWRIYDQGHJHEUXLNWHYHUGXQGHXULQHZDVFD[ODJHUGDQYDQ]XLYH
UHXULQH
• 2PYROGRHQGHVWLNVWRIDDQWHEUHQJHQRPHQHUJLHPDwVRSKHWSURHIYHOGWHWHOHQLVHHQ]HHU
JURWHGRVHULQJQRGLJ

&RQFOXVLHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGH
$OVJHYROJYDQYHUGXQQLQJLVGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQGHXULQHRSGH]RUJORFDWLHHUJODDJ
'LWPDDNWGHYHUGXQGHXULQHYDQGH]HORFDWLHQLHWDDQWUHNNHOLMNYRRUODQGERXZNXQGLJHWRH
SDVVLQJ(UPRHWQDPHOLMNHHQJURWHUHKRHYHHOKHLGZRUGHQRSJHSRPSWHQDDQJHEUDFKWZDWH[
WUDPDFKLQHHQDUEHLGVNRVWHQPHW]LFKPHHEUHQJW

%HPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXURSSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQXULQH
• +HWLVPRJHOLMNGHYHUGXQGHXULQHXLWRSVODJWDQNVRSWHSRPSHQHQRSKHWSURHIYHOGDDQWH
EUHQJHQPHWGH]RGHEHPHVWHUGLHLQGH]HSURHIJHEUXLNWLV
• +HWLVWHFKQLVFKPRJHOLMNXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWLQGHWDQNWHPHQJHQHQRSKHWSURHIYHOG
DDQWHEUHQJHQPHWGH]RGHEHPHVWHUGLHLQGH]HSURHIJHEUXLNWLV
• %LMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQWRWPDDOYHUGXQGHXULQHPHWHHQ]RGHEHPHVWHULQHHQKRHYHHO
KHLGGLHGH]HOIGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHZDWEHWUHIWVWLNVWRIKHHIWDOVYDUNHQVPHVWWUDGGH
YHUGXQGHXULQHXLWGHVOHXIMHVHQWUDGSODVYRUPLQJRS9HUPRHGHOLMNKHHIWGLWWRWHHQKRJH
DPPRQLDNHPLVVLHJHOHLG
• %LMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQYHUGXQGHXULQHLQHHQ]HOIGHKRHYHHOKHLGDOVJHEUXLNHOLMNLVYRRUYDU
NHQVPHVWFDPKDWUDGJHHQSODVYRUPLQJRS

&RQFOXVLHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXU
'H]RGHEHPHVWHUGLHLQGH]HSURHILVJHEUXLNWLVJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJVDSSDUDWXXULQGHSUDN
WLMN2SEDVLVKLHUYDQNDQZRUGHQJHFRQFOXGHHUGGDWLQGHSUDNWLMNDSSDUDWXXUYRRUKDQGHQLV
LQGLHQXULQHDOVPHVWVWRILQGHODQGERXZZRUGWWRHJHSDVW(U]LMQGXVJHHQH[WUDLQYHVWHULQJHQ
LQRIRQWZLNNHOLQJYDQPDFKLQHVHQDSSDUDWXXUQRGLJ

*HZDVJURHLHQRSEUHQJVW
• 9LVXHHO]LMQHUJHHQELM]RQGHUKHGHQRIRSYDOOHQGHYHUVFKLOOHQLQJHZDVJURHLZDDUJHQRPHQ
WXVVHQKHWSHUFHHOGDWPHWXULQHLVEHPHVWHQKHWSHUFHHOGDWPHWYDUNHQVPHVWLVEHPHVW

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 6DPHQYDWWLQJFRQFOXVLHVHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQ


• 'HJHZDVRSEUHQJVWYDQKHWPHWYDUNHQVPHVWEHPHVWHGHHOZDVHHQIDFWRUNHHUKRJHU
WHQRS]LFKWHYDQGHJHZDVRSEUHQJVWYDQKHWPHWXULQHEHPHVWHGHHOLQ
• 'HRRU]DDNYDQGLWYHUVFKLOLQRSEUHQJVWLVQLHWHHQGXLGLJDDQKHWYHUVFKLOLQPHVWVRRUWWRH
WHVFKULMYHQYDQZHJHGHLQYORHGYDQYHUVFKLOOHQGHIDFWRUHQDOVGHYODNWHOLJLJQJYDQKHW
SURHIYHOGGHLQKRPRJHQLWHLWYDQGHERGHPGHK\GURORJLVFKHVLWXDWLHHQPRJHOLMNHDPPR
QLDNHPLVVLH

&RQFOXVLHJHZDVJURHLHQRSEUHQJVW
%LMWRHSDVVLQJYDQGHYHUGXQGHXULQHRSGHORFDWLHLQGHWHHOWYDQHQHUJLHPDwV]LMQYLVXHHOJHHQ
ELM]RQGHUKHGHQDDQKHWJHZDVJHFRQVWDWHHUG0HWGHUHVXOWDWHQYDQGHSURHINDQJHHQXLW
VSUDDNZRUGHQJHGDDQRYHUGHYHUVFKLOOHQLQGHRSEUHQJVWYDQHQHUJLHPDwVELMWRHSDVVLQJYDQ
XULQHRSGH]RUJORFDWLHYHUJHOHNHQPHWJDQJEDUHEHPHVWLQJELMGHWHHOWYDQHQHUJLHPDwVLQGH
SUDNWLMN

*HXU
• %LMKHWRSSRPSHQHQDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHLQLVJHXUKLQGHURQGHUYRQGHQGRRUGH
ORRQZHUNHUHQGHPHGHZHUNHUVYDQ/DQGVFKDSVEHKHHU
• ,QZHUGGRRUGHORRQZHUNHUHQGRRUPHGHZHUNHUVYDQ9DQERHLMHQHQ/DQGVFKDSVEH
KHHUQDXZHOLMNVKLQGHURQGHUYRQGHQWLMGHQVKHWRSSRPSHQHQWLMGHQVHQQDKHWDDQEUHQJHQ
YDQGHXULQH
• 2SEDVLVYDQKHWJHXURQGHU]RHNLQKHWODERUDWRULXPLVGHJHXUYDQGHXULQHPLQGHUDDQJH
QDDPEHRRUGHHOGWHQRS]LFKWHYDQGHJHXUYDQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW'HJHXUYDQHHQPHQJVHO
YDQXULQHHQYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWLVKHWPLQVWDDQJHQDDP'HYHUVFKLOOHQWXVVHQGHUHVXOWDWHQ
YDQKHWXULQHPRQVWHUVKHWPRQVWHUYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWHQKHWPRQVWHUYDQKHWPHQJVHOYDQ
XULQHPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVWZDUHQHFKWHUNOHLQ

&RQFOXVLHJHXU
(ULVHHQYHUVFKLOLQJHXUZDDUQHPLQJWXVVHQGHEHZHUNLQJHQPHWXULQHLQHQ,QGH
XULQHGLHLQZHUGJHEUXLNWEHYRQG]LFKRRNYHUVHXULQH'HXULQHGLHLQZHUGJHEUXLNW
LVPLQLPDDOPDDQGHQRSJHVODJHQJHZHHVW0RJHOLMNLVGH]HRSVODJWLMGGHUHGHQYRRUHHQ
EHSHUNWHUHJHXUKLQGHU'LWNRPWRYHUHHQPHWGHEHYLQGLQJHQYDQ0-RKDQVVRQ'H]HKHHIW
JHFRQVWDWHHUGGDWGHJHXUYDQRSJHVODJHQXULQHPLQGHUZRUGWLQGHORRSYDQGHWLMG
'HJHXUKLQGHUNDQELMKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQYHUGXQGHXULQHRIHHQPHQJVHOYDQYDUNHQVGULMI
PHVWPHWXULQHPRJHOLMNLHWVJURWHU]LMQWHQRS]LFKWHYDQEHPHVWLQJPHWYDUNHQVGULMIPHVW+HW
YHUVFKLO]DOQDDUYHUZDFKWLQJNOHLQ]LMQ'HYHUZDFKWLQJLVQLHWGDWJHXUKLQGHUSUDNWLMNWRHSDVVLQJ
YDQXULQHLQGHODQGERXZLQGHZHJ]DOVWDDQ

8LWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQ
• +HWPHWHQYDQLQILOWUDWLHYDQPHGLFLMQHQQDDUGHRQGHUJURQGLVPLVOXNWYDQZHJHKHWQLHW
IXQFWLRQHUHQYDQGHPHHWRSVWHOOLQJ
• 9DQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQGLHGRRUGHEHZRQHUVYDQGH]RUJERHUGHULMZRUGHQLQJHQRPHQ
NRPHQDOOHHQOLWKLXPHQFDUEDPD]HSLQHYRRULQGHDQDO\VHSDNNHWWHQYDQGHODERUDWRULD
• /LWKLXPHQFDUEDPD]HSLQH]LMQDDQJHWURIIHQLQGHXULQHLQGHRSVODJWDQNVHFKWHUZHOLQFRQ
FHQWUDWLHVODJHUGDQYHUZDFKWRSEDVLVYDQGHLQQDPHJHJHYHQV'LWNDQGXLGHQRSHHQOD
JHUHWRHYRHUYDQXULQHGRRUGHEHZRQHUVQDDUGHXULQHRSVODJWDQNVYHHOEXLWHQRIVWDDQG
JHSODVW

&RQFOXVLHXLWVSRHOLQJYDQPHGLFLMQHQ
&DUEDPD]HSLQHHQOLWKLXPEHLGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQGLHLQGH]RUJLQVWHOOLQJZRUGHQLQJHQRPHQ
]LMQWHUXJJHYRQGHQLQGHXULQHRSVODJWDQNVRRNQDHHQKDOIMDDURSVODJYDQGHXULQH&DUED
PD]HSLQHLVppQYDQGHJHQHHVPLGGHOHQZDDUYDQLQKHWRQGHU]RHNGRRUGH:85LVJHEOHNHQ
GDWGLHRSODQJHWHUPLMQHHQULVLFRNXQQHQYRUPHQYRRUFRQWDPLQDWLHYDQJURQGZDWHU




3HUVRRQOLMNHPHGHGHOLQJ0DWV-RKDQVVRQ9(51$(FRORJ\6WRFNKROP

.XMDZD5RHOHYHOGHWDO

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 6DPHQYDWWLQJFRQFOXVLHVHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQ


*HVFKHLGHQDDQOHJVDQLWDWLHV\VWHHP
• 'HWDQNVZDUHQQLHWFRQIRUPEHVWHNDDQJHOHJG'HWDQNVZDUHQQLHWDI]RQGHUOLMNDIVOXLWEDDU
HQQLHWDOOHOHLGLQJHQZDUHQYDQ3(

&RQFOXVLHDDQOHJJHVFKHLGHQVDQLWDWLHV\VWHHP
'HDDQOHJYDQHHQGHUJHOLMNQLHXZV\VWHHPNDQQLHWDOOHHQRSEDVLVYDQHHQEHVWHNXLWJHYRHUG
ZRUGHQPDDUPRHW]RUJYXOGLJEHJHOHLGZRUGHQRPGDWHU]LFKNHX]HVYRRUGRHQYRRUGHDDQ
QHPHUGLHYRRUDIQLHWYRRU]LHQNXQQHQZRUGHQ+HWLVJHHQVWDQGDDUGZHUNHQGHFRPPXQLFDWLH
LVHHQEHODQJULMNRQGHUGHHOLQGH]H

7RLOHWJHGUDJ
• 9HHOPDQQHOLMNHEHZRQHUVYDQGH]RUJLQVWHOOLQJHQYDQGHRYHULJHJHERXZHQEOLMNHQVWDDQG
WHSODVVHQ
• %LMKHWVFKRRQPDNHQYDQGHWRLOHWWHQZRUGWUHJHOPDWLJYHHOZDWHUJHEUXLNWHQZRUGHQYHHO
FKHPLVFKHVFKRRQPDDNPLGGHOHQJHEUXLNW
• %LMKHWGRRUVSRHOHQYDQGHµJURWHERRGVFKDS¶ZRUGWYRRUHHQHIIHFWLHYHGRRUVSRHOLQJYDDN
GRRUJHVSRHOG

&RQFOXVLHWRLOHWJHGUDJ
'HZRRQJURHSLVHHQODVWLJHSRSXODWLHRP]LWWHQGSODVVHQDDQWHOHUHQ(HQPDDOVWDDQGSODV
VHQDDQJHOHHUGYHUDQGHUMHQLHW]RPDDU
(HQJRHGHYRRUOLFKWLQJRYHUKHWWRLOHWJHEUXLNHQKHWGRHOYDQGHJHVFKHLGHQXULQHRSYDQJLV
QRRG]DNHOLMNHQPRHWVWHHGVZRUGHQJHDFWXDOLVHHUG

8LWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHZHUN]DDPKHGHQ
• 'HORRQZHUNHUKHHIW]LFKQLHWDOWLMGDDQGHYRRUVFKULIWHQYRRUGHZHUN]DDPKHGHQJHKRXGHQ
YDDNPHWGHEHVWHEHGRHOLQJHQ

&RQFOXVLHXLWYRHULQJDJUDULVFKHZHUN]DDPKHGHQ
%HPHVWLQJPHWXULQHHQXLWYRHULQJYDQSUDNWLMNSURHYHQLVYRRUORRQZHUNHUVJHHQVWDQGDDUGZHUN
HQYHUHLVWHHQYRRUWGXUHQGHKHOGHUHFRPPXQLFDWLHHQVWUDNNHEHJHOHLGLQJYDQGHXLWWHYRHUHQ
ZHUN]DDPKHGHQ

8ULQHKRHYHHOKHGHQ
• ,QDSULOLVPXULQHYDQGHORFDWLHDIJHYRHUGRPGDWEHLGHWDQNVYROZDUHQHQVOHFKWV
ppQWDQNJHEUXLNWNRQZRUGHQYRRUEHPHVWLQJ

&RQFOXVLHVWDYPDQDJHPHQWYDQXULQHKRHYHHOKHGHQ
• 9DQZHJHGHUDQGYRRUZDDUGHGDWGHXULQHPLQLPDDOHHQKDOIMDDUVHSDUDDWPRHWZRUGHQRS
JHVODJHQNDQGHLQKRXGYDQppQWDQNLQKHWYRRUMDDUZRUGHQJHEUXLNWHQGHLQKRXGYDQGH
DQGHUHWDQNLQKHWQDMDDU$DQJH]LHQHULQKHWQDMDDUQRJHHQJHZDVDDQZH]LJLVRIHULV
LQPLGGHOVJHRRJVWNDQGHXULQHLQKHWQDMDDUQLHWPHHUZRUGHQJHEUXLNWYRRUGHPDwVWHHOW
'LWEHWHNHQWGDWHURSGHORFDWLHMDDUOLMNVFDPXULQHPRHWZRUGHQRSJHSRPSWHQDIJH
YRHUG
• 'HWRHSDVVLQJYDQGHXULQHLQGHODQGERXZYUDDJWHHQEHSDDOGPDQDJHPHQW'HXULQHPRHW
QDPHOLMNRSKHWMXLVWHWLMGVWLSEHVFKLNEDDUNRPHQYHHODOLQKHWYRRUMDDUYRRUGHLQ]DDLYDQ
HHQJHZDV,QGLHQHHQWDQNELMYRRUEHHOGLQPHLYROLVHQZRUGWDIJHVORWHQ]RGDWHUJHHQ
YHUVHXULQHPHHUELMNDQNDQGHXULQHSDVLQVHSWHPEHURNWREHUZRUGHQWRHJHSDVW,QGH]H
SHULRGHLVHUPRJHOLMNPLQGHUEHKRHIWHDDQVWLNVWRIPHVWVWRIIHQRIPDJKHWPRJHOLMNDOVJH
YROJYDQZHWJHYLQJQLHWPRJHQZRUGHQXLWJHUHGHQ

-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 6DPHQYDWWLQJFRQFOXVLHVHQDDQEHYHOLQJHQ


 $DQEHYHOLQJHQ
2SJURQGYDQGHEHYLQGLQJHQLQGH]HSUDNWLMNSURHIZRUGHQGHYROJHQGHDDQEHYHOLQJHQJHGDDQ
• 8LWGH]HSUDNWLMNSURHILVJHEOHNHQGDWKHWWHFKQLVFKZDWEHWUHIWJHEUXLNDSSDUDWXXUPRJHOLMN
LVXULQHWRHWHSDVVHQLQGHODQGERXZ9DQZHJHKHWRQFRQWUROHHUEDUHWRLOHWJHGUDJYDQGH
EHZRQHUVHQKHWKRJHUHJHEUXLNYDQJHQHHVPLGGHOHQGRRUGHFOLsQWHQYDQGH]RUJERHUGHULM
PHWQDPHFDUEDPD]HSLQHZRUGWDDQEHYROHQGHWRHSDVVLQJRSGH]RUJERHUGHULMQLHWODQJHU
YRRUWWH]HWWHQ
• %LMSUDNWLMNWRHSDVVLQJYDQXULQHLQKHWDOJHPHHQ]DOHHQKRJHUHFRQFHQWUDWLHQXWULsQWHQDDQ
ZH]LJPRHWHQ]LMQGDQELMGH]HSUDNWLMNSURHIKHWJHYDOLVJHZHHVW'LWEHWHNHQWGDWYHUGXQ
QLQJWRWHHQPLQLPXPGLHQWWHZRUGHQEHSHUNW+LHUELMNDQJHGDFKWZRUGHQDDQKHWDDQSDV
VHQYDQKHWWRLOHWV\VWHHPRDELMYRRUNHXUZDWHUOR]HXULQRLUVGRRUPDQQHOLMNHJHEUXLNHUV
HQRIPLQGHUVSRHOZDWHUHQHHQJRHGHYRRUOLFKWLQJDDQGHJHEUXLNHUV
• 2PDPPRQLDNHPLVVLHWHYRRUNRPHQGLHQWQDKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQGHXULQHGHXULQH]RVQHO
PRJHOLMNLQGHJURQGWHZRUGHQJHZHUNW
• 9RRUNRPHHQWHKRJHYROXPHGRVHULQJ
• %HSHUNJHXUKLQGHUHQDPPRQLDNHPLVVLHGRRUWRHSDVVLQJHHQERXZODQGLQMHFWHXURIPDFKL
QHVGLHYORHLEDUHPHVWNXQQHQLQMHFWHUHQ]RDOVELMYRRUEHHOGGHVSDDNZLHOEHPHVWHU]LHILJ

• +RXGWELMGHDDQOHJYDQGHDDQWDOOHQHQGHYROXPHVYDQXULQHRSVODJWDQNVUHNHQLQJPHWHHQ
IOH[LEHOEHPHVWLQJVUHJLHP
• =RUJYRRUHHQJRHGHFRPPXQLFDWLHHQHHQJRHGHEHJHOHLGLQJELMGHDDQOHJYDQV\VWHPHQ
HQGHXLWYRHULQJYDQGHEHPHVWLQJZDQQHHUGLWYRRUGHHHUVWHNHHUJHGDDQZRUGW



)LJXXU6SRUWYHOGYDULDQWVSDDNZLHOEHPHVWHUOLQNVEURQORRQEHGULMIWDPPLQJDQO/DQGERXZYDULDQW
VSDDNZLHOEHPHVWHUUHFKWVEURQZZZDJHUODQGQO

• 2QGHU]RHNGHEHPHVWHQGHZDDUGHYDQ]XLYHUHXULQHHQGHHIIHFWHQRSGHRSEUHQJVWHQ
HYHQWXHOHQHYHQHIIHFWHQRSSURHIYHOGHQGLHJHVFKLNW]LMQYRRUVHPLZHWHQVFKDSSHOLMNH
GRHOHLQGHQ
• 2QGHU]RHNGHHIIHFWHQYDQKHWDDQEUHQJHQYDQHHQPHQJVHOYDQ]XLYHUHXULQHHQYDUNHQV
GULMIPHVWRSSURHIYHOGHQGLHJHVFKLNW]LMQYRRUVHPLZHWHQVFKDSSHOLMNHGRHOHLQGHQ
• 2QGHU]RHNGHPHHVWNDQVULMNHDJUDULVFKHWRHSDVVLQJHQEYELRORJLVFKHODQGERXZDOJHQ
NZHHN
• 2QGHU]RHNGHEHSHUNLQJHQWHQJHYROJHYDQGHPHVWZHWJHYLQJHQGHQRRG]DNHOLMNHDDQSDV
VLQJHQKLHUYDQ
• 2QGHU]RHNKHWJHGUDJHQHIIHFWHQYDQPHGLFLMQHQYRRUKHWDTXDWLVFKPLOLHXHQERGHPRS
ODQJHWHUPLMQ






'HVSDDNZLHOEHPHVWHULVRQWZLNNHOGYRRUGHWRHGLHQLQJYDQYORHLEDUHNXQVWPHVWEHWUHIWYHHOODJHUHKRHYHHOKHGHQ
YORHLVWRISHUKHFWDUH


-G:UHYLVLH'
3DJLQDYDQ

 29.4.2010

Are pharmaceutical residues a problem for

urine reuse in agriculture?

Dr.-Ing. Martina Winker, M.Sc.

Sustainable Sanitation – ecosan program
German Technical Cooperation (GTZ) GmbH

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 1

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 2

1
 29.4.2010

What is a fertilizer?

 Fertilizers are substances which are determined to

be applied directly or indirectly towards agricultural
crops to support their growth, to enhance their
yields or to improve their quality;
 Excluded are substances which are determined to
protect plants from pests and diseases without
supporting plant nutrition, determining plant
nutrition, influencing life cycles in plants as well as
soil conditioners, culture media, plant additives,
carbon dioxide, peat and water.
(Düngemittelgesetz, 1977; BGBl. I S. 2134)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 3

Classification of Fertilizers

• Liquid ↔ Solid
• Mineral ↔ Organic
Fertilizer type
mineral organic
Nutrient concentration high low
> 8% < 1-5%
Nutrient availability high partially available
(Timing & Efficiency) N - hardly available
P - medium term like MF
K like MF
Soil structure - Improvement
CEC - Improvement
Hygiene - Treatment required
Price high Treatment required
(Clemens, 2005)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 4

2
 29.4.2010

Change of perspective

Matching of capabilities of existing fertiliser application

technologies:
 10 - 50 m3 ha-1 – liquid fertilisers
 ≤ 40 t DM ha-1 – solid fertilisers
 100 - 600 kg ha-1 – granulates

Folie 5
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain
29.4.2010

Properties of products

Folie 6
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain
29.4.2010

3
 29.4.2010

Urine

 High concentrations of N and P as

well as other nutrients Winker, 2007

 Low ammonia emission

 Comparable to liquid manure after
field application
 Multi-component fertiliser
Vinnerås

Muskolus, 2006

Folie 7
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain
29.4.2010

Nutrient compositions and crop requirements

N

Folie 8
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain
29.4.2010

4
 29.4.2010

Potassium Ammonium
Urine’s fertiliser products

Phosphate
 Mostly derived in high-tech solutions
 Achieved through a combination of Tettenborn, 2007
various treatment steps
 Limiting factor in production: energy
costs
 Different plant availability of different

Stercorit
Tettenborn, 2007
MAP products according to specific
crop (Simons, 2008)

Tettenborn, 2007

Folie 9
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain
29.4.2010

History – E. Wolff

(Emil Wolff, 1868)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 10

5
 29.4.2010

Barley Fertilizing Effect

Control c of Urine
Urine pH 4 u
Urine pH 4/Slurry us
Mineral fertilizer (CAN) m
a c c b
10
8
yield [t/ha]

6
4
2
0
c u u/s m (Clemens, 2005)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 11

Comparison with Manure

Nutrient equivalents

(Hammer & Clemens, 2007)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 12

6
 29.4.2010

Fertiliser demands worldwide

= Fertilizer prices = Fertilizer usage

= $/t = Mio. t

(FAZ.NET, 2008)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 13

Fertiliser demands worldwide

= Fertilizer usage = Fertilizer usage

= Mio. t = Mio. t

(FAZ.NET, 2008)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 14

7
 29.4.2010

Urine as fertiliser

 Consume of pharmaceuticals is common

in everyday life.
 Urine is a component in new sanitation
systems.

 Urine has a good potential as liquid

fertilizer.
 But: Urine might contain pharmaceutical
substances…

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 15

Pharmaceuticals

(Winker et al., 2008)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 16

8
 29.4.2010

Schematic Approach
PHASE I

Screening Pflanzen-
versuche
Feedback

PHASE II

First Results
Analysis Verified Results

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 17

Database

Sub-
Article Place
stance
Transformation

Media
products

Water, Wastewater, Soil, Plants

Degradation
e.g. Sorption, Biodegradation

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 18

9
 29.4.2010

Database

Sub-
Article Place stance
380 of 760 310 330

Transformation
Media

products
1670
Water, Wastewater, Soil, Plants
2050 1700 420 350

Degradation
e.g. Sorption, Biodegradation
490 330

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 19

Evaluation of Database

 Two aspects investigated regarding plants:

Uptake and Phytotoxicity

Uptake Phytotoxcity
Datasets 162 348
Substances 14 30
Plant species 25 30
Plant families 16 11

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 20

10
 29.4.2010

Evaluation of Database - Substances

Uptake Phytotoxicity

Mainly antibiotics investigated!

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 21

Evaluation of Database – Plant types

Uptake Phytotoxicity

Mainly cereals and umbellifers reg. uptake.

Mainly cereals and legumes reg. phytotoxicity.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 22

11
 29.4.2010

Evaluation of Database

Comparison of collected data with urine

Tests with liquid medium
- Urine-water mix assumed
- 112 DS - 12 pharmaceuticals
- Only two articles comparable reporting on uptake by
very old bioassays.
Tests with solid medium Hammer & Clemens. 2007. A tool to evaluate the

- Application of urine: 25 m3 ha-1 fertilizer value and the environmental impact of

substrates from wastewater treatment. Water Science &
Technology 56 (5), pp 201 – 209
- Infiltration of 0.5 m assumed
- 45 DS - 9 pharmaceuticals

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 23

Evaluation of Database

Factor
Substance Plant species Reported impacts
(DB/U)
Chloroquine soybean Phytotoxic: neg. on w, h, r, s, l 182
Chlorotetracycline spring wheat Phytotoxic: pos. on h, r 82
Chlorotetracycline pinto bean Phytotoxic: neg. on w, h, r, s, l 82
Bioaccumulation:
Chlorotetracycline green onion 51
0.013 ng kg-1 FW in stalk & leaves
Bioaccumulation:
Chlorotetracycline cabbage 51
0.01 ng kg-1 FW in stalk & leaves
Metronidazole soybean Phytotoxic: neg. on w, h, r, s, l 67
Oxytetracycline spring wheat Phytotoxic: pos. on h, r 2
Oxytetracycline pinto bean Phytotoxic: neg. on w, h, r, s, l 2

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 24

12
 29.4.2010

Evaluation of Database

 Pharmaceuticals found in guttation drops.

(Stokes, 1954; Brian et al., 1951;)

 Uptake via peel observed for carrots and potatoes.

(Dolliver et al., 2007; Boxall et al., 2006)

 Different behavior regarding pharmaceutical

substances by different plants.
(Batchelder, 1982)

 Uptake of oxytetracycline detected in barley grain.

(Jacobsen et al., 2004)
?
Applied amount are much higher then in
case of fertilization with urine.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 25

Design of Pot Experiments with Rye Grass

Winker et al. 2008. Fertilisation of rye grass using urine spiked

with carbamazepine, ibuprofen, and 17α-ethinylestradiol – a
greenhouse experiment. Handed in.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 26

13
 29.4.2010

Results of Pot Experiments

 Only Carbamazepine (CZ) found in soil.

 No effect on biomass production visible.
 Aside of well-known fertilizing effect of urine.
 No differences observed during course of the
vegetation period.
 Analytics: (Reich & Engel – Zentrallabor TUHH)
 EE2 not measurable (matrix effects)
 IBU only in roots (LOQ: 20 µg kg-1 TM)
 CZ – LOQ in roots: 30 µg kg-1 TM
– LOQ in aerial plant parts: 75 µg kg-1 TM

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 27

Plant Tests with Rye Grass

(Winker et al., 2008)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 28

14
 29.4.2010

Results of Pot Experiments

CZ fraction: CZ fraction:
0.2% of total 30% of total
amount amount

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 29

Results of Pot Experiments

Dairy Cow
(Weight: 600 kg / Milk production: 50 kg d-1)

Dry matter:
CZ uptake:
?
approx. 19 kg d-1 (DLG, 2005)
1.4 mg d-1
Human being: 0.8 - 2 g d -1 (Mutschler et al., 2001)

Kanton Solothurn, 2007

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 30

15
 29.4.2010

Results of Pot Experiments

?
19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 31

Pot experiments

 Biodegradation seems to be an important factor.

 Biomass production was not influenced in the
pharmaceutical concentrations applied via urine.
 CZ was found in roots and aerial plant parts of rye
grass.
 Assumption: Pharmaceutical substances persistent in
soil can be taken up by plants in higher
concentrations.

Only first results!!!

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 32

16
 29.4.2010

Germination Tests
 5 pharmaceuticals used
 At different concentration levels to identify analytical
Winker et al. 2008. Comparison of
and theoretical
pharmaceutical concentrations in
phytotoxicologic effects. human urine in Germany. Water
Research 42 (14), pp. 3633 -3640.

 Duration of test: 10 days

 Applied in a water-urine-mix
 Evaluated: successful germination and dry weight

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 33

Results and discussion

Roots of winter barley in contact with ibuprofen.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 34

17
 29.4.2010

Germination Tests

 The different types of cereals as well as cress react

differently.
 Application of urine had a much larger effect on
germination.
 It seemed that certain pharmaceutical substances
might even have a positive effect.
?
An effect on germination due to “naturally”
expected pharmaceutical concentrations in
urine is not expected.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 35

Conclusion I

 An evaluation of potential toxic effects for human beings

is not possible at the moment.
 If urine is reused in agriculture, some of the
pharmaceutical residues will enter the human food chain.
 Moreover, research carried out so far shows that the
expected concentrations of pharmaceutical residues in
average urine do not reach concentration levels which
affect plant growth and development.
 Load of hormones and antibiotics in human urine are
much lower than in animal manure which is already used
in agriculture.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 36

18
 29.4.2010

Conclusion II

Statement of Jörn Germer (cited in von Münch and Winker (2009))

“Drug residues in sustainable sanitation products
used to supply plant nutrients can hardly be a
serious issue in regions where malnutrition,
groundwater and surface water pollution due to
inappropriate sanitation and irrigation with
untreated wastewater is a reality”.

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 37

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 38

19
 29.4.2010

NH3-Emissions
25
cummulated NH 3 volatilization

20

15
[kg N ha -1]

slurry
urine/slurry
10 urine

0
0 20 40 60 80 100
hours after application [h]
(Clemens, 2005)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 39

Micro nutrients vs. Heavy Metals

(Hammer & Clemens, 2007)

19-22 April 2010 | S2Small 2010 - IWA Conference | Girona | Spain Folie 40

20
 Three years of operation of the urine-diversion system
in GTZ headquarters in Germany; user opinions and
maintenance challenges
S. Blume* and M. Winker*

*German Development Cooperation (GTZ) GmbH, Sustainable sanitation - ecosan program,

Postfach 5180, 65726 Eschborn, Germany.
(Email: steffen.blume@gtz.de; martina.winker@gtz.de)

ABSTRACT In the main office building of GTZ in Eschborn, Germany a resource-oriented

sanitation system containing urine-diversion toilets and waterless urinals is in operation since
2006. After 2.5 years of operating the system, a first overall evaluation of the system and its
acceptance amongst users and cleaning staff was conducted. The overall result is that most of
the users appreciate the resource oriented sanitation concept (recycling of nutrients and water
savings) but have problems with the technical design. Also, it is difficult to convince the
cleaning staff of the necessity of special cleaning routines. Hence, before such systems can be
widely spread, clear cleaning routines and maintenance documentations are required as well as
certain technical modification to ease optimise the separation in the toilet bowl as well as the
change of spare parts of the toilet.
Keywords acceptance, resource oriented sanitation system, source control, UD flush toilet,
urine diversion, waterless urinal

INTRODUCTION
The main building (“Building 1”) of the GTZ headquarters which consists of four
buildings and is located near Frankfurt, Germany, was renovated from 2004 to 2006
after being in use for 30 years. As part of this renovation, principles of
environmentally friendly construction for the water and energy management of the
building were included. This contained a urine separation system with 50 waterless
urinals, 25 source separating or urine-diversion (UD) flush toilets, and a urine storage
tank of 10 m³ to allow the separate collection of urine.

The background of this ecosan initiative is described in SuSanA (2009) and the
objectives were to demonstrate the implementation of such a resource-oriented
sanitation system, to reduce the amount of water used in the GTZ building, and to
research important aspects for Germany such as social acceptance and reuse of urine
in agriculture. This third objective started now within SANIRESCH, an
accompanying research project funded by the German ministry (since mid 2009) and
was initiated by the former head of GTZ’s ecosan program, Christine Werner.

Operation of the system started in 2006 and the experiences gained since then with
user behaviour, user acceptance, and with the technical components are described in
this paper.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Implemented technologies in Building 1 of GTZ headquaters
The urine separation system consists of:
- 50 water flushed urine-diversion toilets for the waterless collection of urine
(“NoMix Toilet” of Roediger Vacuum). The toilets have two compartments for
urine and feaces respectively. The urine is collected undiluted by means of a
 valve located under the toilet seat, triggered when the user
user sits down. This toilet
consumes about 1-2 l for the urine flush and 4-64 l for the solids flush (Figure
( 1).
v. Münch et al. (2009) describes this toilet type in more detail.
- 25 waterless urinals equipped with a patented “flat rubber tube” smell stop
system of the Centaurus model of the German company Keramag (Figure 1), for
further details on the mechanism see v. Münch and Dahm (2009).
- 4 x 2.5 m3 PE urine storage tanks located in the underground car park of
Building 1.

Figure 1: Left: UD flush toilet and its schematic side view; right:: waterless urinal.

The toilets and urinals are located in the core of the building in the restrooms closest
to the canteen and the large meeting rooms (Figure 2). In the wings in each floor
(aside the top floor) are bathroom equipped with conventional toilets and urinals
available. Hence, persons working in the building on a daily base have the choicechoic
between the two different options aside those in the top floor where bathrooms are
only located in the core section.
section The usage is that of typical office building which is
mainly frequented from Monday to Friday from 9 am to 5 pm. On average around
120 l of urine is collected per day.

Figure 2: Schematic design of the restroom locations at an average floor of the 10-
storey building which is double-Y
double shaped.
User surveys with questionnaires
uestionnaires
Two user surveys were undertaken since the operation started in 2006. 2006 The first one
was carried out in September 2008 to evaluate the general acceptance of the toilets by
the users. The second survey was performed in May 2009 and had a more specific
focus on toilet hygiene issues as a result of the earlier questionnaire.
Both surveys were conducted electronically (using the websites Surveygizmo and
Surveymonkay). In the first one, about 900 GTZ employees working in the
headquarters were contacted independently of their office location within the four
GTZ buildings at this site. All contacted employees were employed within the
Department of Planning and Development, which is GTZ’s department for the
worldwide technical support of its programs. The questionnaire took approx. 5 min to
complete. Apart from statistical parameters about the employees and the general
perception of reuse oriented sustainable sanitation systems, it covered topics of toilet
design, hygiene, odour, ease of use and reuse.

The second questionnaire (in May 2009) was focussed on hygienic aspects and an
improvement of the hygienic situation. This questionnaire was sent to only 50 GTZ
employees, whose offices are located close to the respective restrooms in the core of
Building 1 (Figure 2). This selection was done to focus on employees who use the UD
flush toilets and waterless urinals daily. It was designed so that it could be answered
within 3 min. Apart from statistical information such as distance to the toilets,
regularity of usage, age and gender, the questions tried to determine what measures
could encourage users to sit down on toilets in an office building.
Attitudes of cleaning and maintenance staff
The cleaning staff (employed by an external service provider) and GTZ facility
management staff were contacted regularly in connection with user feedback and
technical problems. As the waterless urinals and UD flush toilets were new, the
personnel had to find out how to maintain the system. In fact, it took some time to
discover the crucial aspects and to rectify technical problems.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Survey 1: Employees’ views
In the first survey 24% of the contacted employees responded (218 of 900 people).
53% of the people were within the age of 30-50 years, 30% were younger, and 20%
were older than 50 years. When comparing the UD flush toilet and the conventional
toilets regarding optical appearance, cleanliness, odour, and ease of use, results
showed that the majority of the participants felt that the cleanliness of the UD flush
toilets and odour of the urinals were worse (Table 1). The conventional toilets were
rated better in almost all parameters (Table 1). 52% or respondents mentioned that the
UD flush toilets have problems with flushing, and 48% stated that it needs two or
even more flushes after each use (12% of respondents).

Table 1: Parameters used for measuring of the users’ acceptance by comparing the
source separating with a conventional system. Numbers show percentages (%) of total
answers (218) for toilets and (88) answers of the male urinal users.
Perception UD flush toilets Waterless urinals Both
compared to Optical Clean- Optical Clean- Ease of
Odour Odour
conv. system appearance liness appearance liness use
Better 12 5 7 17 14 8 5
Same 76 45 61 77 52 32 57
Worse 12 51 32 6 34 60 39
When asked for their private decisions, almost
a 50% or respondents stated that they
would move to a flat with UD flush toilets whilst 27% are not sure and 25% would
not. 17% would even pay a higher price for buying such an apartment (40% maybe
and 43% not). Asked about the waterless urinals, 37% would support that other GTZ
offices
fices install waterless urinals, 41% had no opinion and 22% would not support such
measures.

Although the technical functionality and hence acceptance of the UD flush toilets is
not good, a remarkable 90% of the participants are positive towards the idea to collect
urine and faeces separately
ly from each other and to use them as fertiliser
er in agriculture.
71% would even buy crops which have been fertilised
fertili ed with human excreta according
to WHO guidelines (WHO, 2006). Even more people (82%) would buy none-edible none
products which have been fertilised
fertili with human excreta. When asked for their opinion
if urine shouldd be allowed as fertiliser for organic agriculture, 45% agreed
agree and 42%
might agree while 12% do not support this concept.
concept On a personal level, one
o third of
the participants would use and further 39% said they might use urinee for their own
balcony plants.

Figure 3: User opinions regarding the resource oriented sanitation in GTZ Building 1
according to Survey 1 (total of 218 participants).

The reactions for acceptance of food fertilised with urine is in line with other similar
investigations. Muskolus (2008) interviewed inhabitants in Berlin as well as people
with an agricultural background,
background and 62% % of both groups stated that they would buy
food produced with urine as fertiliser.
fert Also in Switzerland, 72% % of different user
groups (also partially users of UD flush toilets) consider these techniques as a good
idea and 86% would even move into a flat equipped with such a concept (Lienert et
al., 2006; Larsen and Lienert, 2006). This is a much higher percentage than
th found in
Survey 1 undertaken at GTZ and is most likely due to technical and maintenance
problems (see below).
Survey 2: User views regarding sitting on toilets
This survey investigated the enhancement of the hygienic perception by the users to
encourage them to sit on the toilet. Age distribution of the participants was similar to
Survey 1, and 40% of the respondents were female and 60% male. As only 25 people
responded (out of 50 approached) the survey results are not necessarily representative
but provide a general idea. 52% of respondents said that they used the UD flush toilets
on a regular basis.

They employees were asked which hygienic devices they would prefer to entice them
to sit on the toilet.. Sitting is necessary in order to activate the urine valve (otherwise
urine flows to the faeces section and mixes with the brownwater). Almost 50% of
respondents would prefer disinfection spray which is applied with toilet paper to clean
the toilet seat, 8% would favour
favo paper covers and 35% other devices. The respondents
stated that they would apply these hygienic devices either on a regular basis (26%),
only if the toilets were not clean (21%) or not at all (17%).

The participants were also asked if they would sit down on the toilet if the above
mentioned hygiene devices were available (results results summarised in Figure 4). The
question was a restatement of the earlier ones to receive more precise information of
users’ attitudes towards sitting on a public toilet.
toilet The results confirmed that most
users would prefer a disinfection spray (52%)(52 or a paper cover (48%)
%), and 35% of
users find it sufficient to use toilet paper used as cover (35%).. The willingness to sit is
52% of respondents if they had a disinfection spray spray available compared to only 17%
of respondents if no hygiene device was available.

Figure 4: Survey 2 results: Employees’ willingness to sit on the UD flush toilet if

certain hygienic devices were provided (at the moment, none of these are provided).
Total number of respondents was
w 25.
These results on attitudes regarding sitting on public toilets are interesting and should
be researched further since they relate to users’ (partly irrational) fears of “catching a
disease” when sitting on a public toilet
toile The findings from the small Survey 2 are in
contrast to earlier findings
indings in Switzerland where 72%
72% of the respondents stated that
they are willing to sit when it is required (Larsen and Lienert, 2007) – although there
is naturally a major difference between toilets at home and toilets outside of the home
environment. The monitoring of the system installed in the Eawag building (Zurich,
Switzerland) has not shown discrepancies to this statement so far (Goosse et al.,
2009). On the contrary, it seems that female users in that building tend to flush the
toilet while sitting which causes dilution of the urine with flush water.
Technical problems and solutions
Experiences with waterless urinals
In the beginning of the operation in mid 2006 it was found that urine accumulated on
the ground underneath the urinals. Further checks showed that the urinals had sunk
slightly down (only a few millimeters). As the discharge pipes were fixed in the wall,
this resulted in pressure on the joint where the urine pipe is connected with the urinal.
Due to this pressure a gap developed between the inlet and the urinal, and urine
leaked to the inner part of the urinal and down the outlet pipe. Bad odor occurred as a
result of this small vertical movement of the urinal (this might be a reason for the
worse perception of waterless urinals (stated by 60% of respondents, Table 1)
compared to conventional ones conducted in Survey 1). Hence, the screws need to be
checked regularly to prevent vertical movement of the urinal (it has not occurred
again since that initial event).

To avoid odor problems with the waterless urinals different cleaning agents were
tested. Best results were achieved with the “MB Aktivreiniger” of Urimat. This is an
environmentally friendly cleaning agent with microbiologically active ingredients.
Furthermore, a permanent deodorant air diffuser was installed in the toilet room in the
first floor.

There is quite a high turn-over of cleaning staff employed by an external company

who is responsible for the cleaning in the GTZ buildings in Eschborn. As a result, the
urinal sieves and smell stops in some of the restrooms were not cleaned for many
weeks or even months. This led to the accumulation of urine precipitates, well as
pubic hair and slime deposits which then caused odour problems. Thorough cleaning
staff instruction and supervision is crucial but difficult due to high staff turn-over.
Even for the (in Germany) quite widely spread waterless urinals, awareness raising
and training is still required for the cleaning staff when they are not familiar with such
urinals. Additionally, Keramag introduced an improved design for the smell stop in
2007 which has less dirt accumulation and is easier to clean.
Experience with the urine-diversion (UD) flush toilets
The installed type of UD flush toilet has two main weaknesses:
1. Design of the bowl: Toilet paper thrown into the front part of the bowl (urinal
section) is not flushed away with the small urine flush and hence more than one flush
becomes necessary – negating the possible water saving effect. And even for the
faeces sometimes 2-3 flushes are required. Similar findings were reported for the
installations at Eawag: in 17% of all cases a second flush was necessary (Goosse et
al., 2009).
2. Urine valve: The valve on the urine pipe can get blocked over time (Figure 5). In
this case, urine is no longer collected separately but flows to the faeces section of the
toilet. Or it can result in the fact that the valve does not close anymore, causing odour
problems in the restroom and dilution of the urine. Therefore, the cleaning staff needs
to carry out preventative maintenance which can be done by adding citric acid to the
valve once per month that remains there for 24 hours. Our experience showed that if
this maintenance is neglected, these valves stop working after approx. 2 years of use.

Figure 5: Left: Soft urine precipitations inside a urine valve. Right: the same valve
after cleaning soaking in citric acid for several days (source: L. Ulrich, 2009).
Low nitrogen content of the collected urine
Low nitrogen concentrations were observed in the urine collection tanks at GTZ: With
2,800 mg l-1 the measured nitrogen concentration for the stored urine is two thirds less
than typical literature values for pure urine of 8,000 mg l-1 (Meinzinger and
Oldenburg, 2009). The main reason for this is probably that nitrogen loss occurs in the
form of ammonia gas being emitted through the tank’s ventilation system, which has
also been reported at the Eawag building (Goosse et al., 2009). Urine tanks should not
be ventilated, only pressure equalized (v. Münch et al., 2009) but in this case, a
10 mm vent pipe from the urine tanks goes all the way to the top of Building 1,
causing more ventilation than desired. It is also possible that the urine is diluted with
flush water if users flush while being seated or if the urine valve is broken.
Recommendations for maintenance
Based on the three years of experience, now the following maintenance routines
(supervision that they are really being adhered to is crucial and not always easy) are
recommended:
• Every evening the waterless urinals have to be cleaned (wiped down manually).
• On highly frequented toilets (on ground floors close to canteens and meeting
rooms) additional cleaning on an hourly base is recommended using a wet cloth
and subsequently spraying the detergent containing fragrant substances as well.
• The smell stops (flat rubber tubes) have to be taken out daily and cleaned with
detergent and rinsed with water.
• As the rubber of the smell stops fatigues and then sticks together, the smell stops
have to be replaced about once per year.
• The daily cleaning routine for UD flush toilets is in principle the same as for
conventional ones although it is more time consuming to clean away faeces stains
due to the more complicated bowl design.
• For precipitation prevention the urine valve needs to be soaked once per month
with citric acid for a period of 24 hours. This is done by filling 200 ml of the citric
acid into the open valve (seat pressed down to open the valve).
• Annually, the functionality of the urine valves should be controlled and once per
year clogged valves should be cleaned or replaced.
CONCLUSIONS
The overall result from the user surveys is that the users appreciate the resource
oriented sanitation concept (recycling of nutrients and water savings) but are unhappy
with the inconveniences caused by the technical design of the UD flush toilets.
Furthermore, it was shown that a crucial point for users is perceived or actual toilet
hygiene: People’s willingness to sit down on the toilet could be raised significantly if
disinfection devices were available.
For a wider acceptance, further technical development of the UD flush toilets would
be necessary. A high turn-over in cleaning staff and communication difficulties makes
it difficult to communicate the necessary cleaning routines which take a little bit more
extra time and are new for the cleaning staff. Hence, before such urine-diversion flush
toilets can be widely spread, clear cleaning and maintenance routines are required.
On a positive note, this demonstration and research project has attracted wide
attention for the ecosan approach within GTZ (implementing development
cooperation projects worldwide) and outside of GTZ. Each year, many international
delegations and student groups take part in guided tours of the installations, which
raises their awareness about resource oriented sanitation systems.

ACKNOLWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank Christine Werner (AGIRE programme, GTZ, Morocco) for initiating the
project in her position as team leader of the GTZ Ecosan team, Lukas Ulrich (former GTZ intern; now:
ETH Zurich, Switzerland) for devising and conducting the second survey and Dr. Elisabeth von Münch
for critical review of this paper.

REFERENCES
Goosse P., Steiner M., Udert K. & Neuenschwander W. 2009. NoMix Toilettensysteme. Erste Monitoring
Ergebnisse im Forum Chrisbach. GWA 7, 567-574.
Larsen T. and Lienert J. 2007. Novaquatis final report. NoMix - A New Approach to Urban Water Management.
Eawag, Dübendorf, Switzerland. URL: http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/oe44/ecosan/de-Nomix-Toilettensystem-
erste-Monitoringergebnisse.pdf.
Lienert J. & Larsen T.. 2006. Considering user attitude in early development of environmentally friendly
technology: A case study of NoMix toilets. Environ. Sci.Technol. 40(16), 4838-4844.
Lienert J., Thiemann K., Kaufmann-Hayoz R. & Larsen T. 2006. Young users accept NoMix toilets - a
questionnaire survey on urine source separating toilets in a college in Switzerland. Wat. Sci. Technol. 54(11-12),
403-412.
Meinzinger F. & Oldenburg M. 2009. Characteristics of source-separated household wastewater flows - a
statistical assessment. Water Sci. Technol. 59(9), 1785-1791
SuSanA (2009). Case study of sustainable sanitation projects. Urine and brownwater separation at Eschborn,
Germany. Sustainable Sanitation Alliance. URL: http://www.susana.org/images/documents/06-case-studies/en-
susana-cs-germany-eschborn-house-1-2009.pdf.
v. Münch E.& Dahm P. 2009. Waterless Urinals. A Proposal to Save Water and Recover Urine Nutrients in Africa.
In: 34th WEDC International Conference, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. URL: http://www2.gtz.de/Dokumente/
oe44/ecosan/en-waterless-urinals-a-proposal-to-save-water-and-recover-urine-nutrients-in-africa-2009.pdf.
v. Münch E., Olt, C. and Winker M. 2009. Technology review | Urine diversion components. GTZ, Eschborn,
Germany. URL: http://www.gtz.de/en/dokumente/gtz2009-en-technology-review-urine-diversion.pdf.
WHO. 2006. WHO Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Greywater. Vol. IV, Excreta and
Greywater use in Agriculture, WHO/UNEP/FAO. URL: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/
wastewater/gsuww/en/index.html.