Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1
Water Supply and Sanitation Survey
The results of the survey are given in Tables 6.3 and 6.4.
Table 6.3. Water supply by ward, Epworth; sample
size as per Table 6.2.
Ward
Indoor Tap
Outdoor Tap
Unprotected Well
Communal Tap
River/Dam
1
6%
46%
48%
0%
0%
2
3%
66%
31%
0%
0%
3
0%
0%
43%
56%
1%
4
10%
52%
38%
0%
0%
5
2%
20%
78%
0%
0%
6
4%
77%
19%
0%
0%
Table 6.4. Sanitation type by ward, Epworth;
sample size as per Table 6.2.
Ward Flush Toilet
Ventilated improved pit latrine (Blair toilet)
Standard pit latrine
1
5%
53%
42%
2
0%
35%
65%
3
3%
56%
41%
4
13%
45%
42%
5
0%
38%
62%
6
25%
32%
43%
Almost half of all respondents use unprotected wells for water supply and over 90%
use “Blair” ventilated improved pit toilets or ordinary pit toilets. In Ward 1, the oldest
part of Epworth, only a small minority have either indoor taps or flush toilets. Most of the
residents depend on shallow groundwater for both domestic water supply (via shallow
wells) and sanitation (via pit latrines) - this often leads to a dangerous proximity of
latrines to wells, as illustrated in Figure 6.5. The water is also used for urban agriculture,
and for livestock watering by richer households.
In Ward 2 (Makomo Extension) all residents use Blair toilets or pit toilets, though only
around 30% use unprotected wells for water supply. In Ward 3 (Dombowamwari) the
majority are supplied with water by communal taps but over 90% use Blair toilets or pit
toilets. Ward 4 (Chinamano) has a slightly lower pit toilet usage (over 80%) and lower
