Effective water treatment for rural communities in Suriname : a comparison of point-of-use ceramic filters and centralized treatment with sand filters

For countless communities around the world, acquiring access to safe drinking water is a daily challenge which many organizations endeavor to meet. The villages in the interior of Suriname have been the focus of many improved drinking water projects as most communities are without year-round access. Unfortunately, as many as 75% of the systems in Suriname fail within several years of implementation. These communities, scattered along the rivers and throughout the jungle, lack many of the resources required to sustain a centralized water treatment system. However, the centralized system in the village of Bendekonde on the Upper Suriname River has been operational for over 10 years and is often touted by other communities. The Bendekonde system is praised even though the technology does not differ significantly from other failed systems. Many of the water systems that fail in the interior fail due to a lack of resources available to the community to maintain the system. Typically, the more complex a system becomes, so does the demand for additional resources. Alternatives to centralized systems include technologies such as point-of-use water filters, which can greatly reduce the necessity for outside resources. In particular, ceramic point-of-use water filters offer a technology that can be reasonably managed in a low resource setting such as that in the interior of Suriname. This report investigates the appropriateness and effectiveness of ceramic filters constructed with local Suriname clay and compares the treatment effectiveness to that of the Bendekonde system. Results of this study showed that functional filters could be produced from Surinamese clay and that they were more effective, in a controlled laboratory setting, than the field performance of the Bendekonde system for removing total coliform. However, the Bendekonde system was more successful at removing E. coli. In a life-cycle assessment, ceramic water filters manufactured in Suriname and used in homes for a lifespan of 2 years were shown to have lower cumulative energy demand, as well as lower global warming potential than a centralized system similar to that used in Bendekonde.

EPA's Council for Regulatory Environmental Modeling : a case study of science policy implementation

As environmental problems became more complex, policy and regulatory decisions become far more difficult to make. The use of science has become an important practice in the decision making process of many federal agencies. Many different types of scientific information are used to make decisions within the EPA, with computer models becoming especially important. Environmental models are used throughout the EPA in a variety of contexts and their predictive capacity has become highly valued in decision making. The main focus of this research is to examine the EPA’s Council for Regulatory Modeling (CREM) as a case study in addressing science issues, particularly models, in government agencies. Specifically, the goal was to answer the following questions: What is the history of the CREM and how can this information shed light on the process of science policy implementation? What were the goals of implementing the CREM? Were these goals reached and how have they changed? What have been the impediments that the CREM has faced and why did these impediments occur? The three main sources of information for this research came from observations during summer employment with the CREM, document review and supplemental interviews with CREM participants and other members of the modeling community. Examining a history of modeling at the EPA, as well as a history of the CREM, provides insight into the many challenges that are faced when implementing science policy and science policy programs. After examining the many impediments that the CREM has faced in implementing modeling policies, it was clear that the impediments fall into two separate categories, classic and paradoxical. The classic impediments include the more standard impediments to science policy implementation that might be found in any regulatory environment, such as lack of resources and changes in administration. Paradoxical impediments are cyclical in nature, with no clear solution, such as balancing top-down versus bottom-up initiatives and coping with differing perceptions. These impediments, when not properly addressed, severely hinder the ability for organizations to successfully implement science policy.