Ben-Gurion University of the Negev The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research The Albert Katz International School for Desert Studies
Necessities, Obstacles, and Parameters of Decentralized Greywater Treatment in Informal Bedouin Villages
Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of or “Master of Science”
By: Amalia JM Inkeles
Date: October, 2018
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev The Jacob Blaustein Institutes for Desert Research The Albert Katz International School for Desert Studies
I Necessities, Obstacles, and Parameters of Decentralized Greywater Treatment in Informal Bedouin Villages
Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
By Amalia JM Inkeles
Under the Supervision of Dr. Yodan Rofe and Dr. Clive Lipchin
Department of Environmental Studies
Author's Signature …………….……………………… Date 18/10/18
Approved by the Supervisor…………….…………….. Date 23/10/18
Approved by the Supervisor…………….…………….. Date 14/10/18
Approved by the Director of the School …………… Date ………….…28/10/2018
II Abstract
Inadequate wastewater sanitation is an ongoing problem in informal Bedouin settlements of the Negev, and one which land disputes between the Bedouin community and the Israeli continues to perpetuate. In the meanwhile, unchecked open disposal, unlined cesspit use, and raw greywater irrigation leave the village and the greater Negev at risk for a number of environmental and health hazards, including antimicrobial resistant bacteria. In unrecognized villages, provisions by the State are unlikely for centralized sewerage and treatment, while the expectations for such recognized but still informal villages are seen as decades away. Decentralized wastewater management can provide a low cost, flexible, and quick solution to is problem. Coupling this with greywater reuse could also supplement the water supply for communities often deprived of clean water. However, the topic of wastewater disposal in Bedouin settlements has seen little research or discussion, which may shed light on the necessity or utility of decentralized treatment and greywater reuse.
This research thus sought to assess the feasibility of both decentralized treatment and greywater reuse in the informal village of Um Bat’in. This feasibility analysis integrated data from various disciplines. Geographic information analyses were conducted to find the settlement’s residential area, and by extension its population density and water consumption density. Waster consumption was extrapolated from meter readings. Additionally, blackwater and greywater samples were collected over the course of four weeks and tested for their solids, organic matter, and pathogen concentrations. Disposal site observations were made to better understand disposal behavior and pathways to exposure.
Not only were both greywater and blackwater, as expected, found to be contaminated to the point of necessitating water treatment, but antimicrobial resistant bacteria was detected in both types of wastewater, indicating a critical need for treatment. The present water consumption volume makes centralized collection uneconomic. Regarding decentralization, consumption density makes onsite treatment environmentally unsound in dense locations along the Hebron steam, though possible in less dense areas in the south of the village.
I In terms of energy, cost, maintenance, and land requirement, constructed wetlands are considered an appropriate technology. However, this research does not take it as this new wastewater paradigm as incontrovertibly acceptable. Though wastewater is treated as a waste product, there is little concern over greywater other than the damage detergents pose to soil. Wastewater is seen as a low priority, not dealt with in an ideal manner, but does not warrant further investment. Though this research recommends emphasizing the water saving elements of decentralized treatment and greywater reuse, net savings would need to be more explicitly quantified, new plumbing and constructed wetlands must be financed, and the installation of constructed wetlands must be accompanied with education that reaches all parts of the community.
II Acknowledgements
To properly thank every person who made this thesis possible would take more pages than the thesis itself. So, for the sake of brevity, I would like to thank those who whom without, this thesis would have never materialized.
Firstly, I would like to thank my advisors Yodan Rofe and Clive Lipchin for having the faith in me to guide me along on my research. Thank you to Professor Pnina Motzafi-Haller, Dr. Sarab
Abu Rabia Queder, Dr. Yaakov Garb, and Professor Amit Gross who provided me the tools to conduct my research to the best of my ability. Regards must go out to the Abu Kaf, Abu Assa, and
Abu Queder families for your time and insights. Thank you as well to Zubaida Ezery, Seema
Porob, Roi Ram, i ni Eli Sperling, and Nick Duppen, all of who got me through tight spots. I also cannot forget Ethan Levy, for without him I may have never applied.
Each and every one of my friends deserves a shout out for getting me through the past two years with my sanity (mostly) intact. There is no measuring how much each and every one of you contributed to my life. And though I appreciate you all, I must give my thanks to Yuri Keum,
Elizabeth Warburton, Lisa Talya Strover, Luther van der Mescht, Tural Hamidli, Ben Leyland, Ben
Swartout, Katya Novichkova, Mark Khenkin, Yaara Zohar, Capucine Baubin, Ido Frenkel, Claudia
Allegrini, Giorgos Arnaoutakis, Alex Masis, Yuting Fu, Mika Gvirtzman, Eilana and Boomie
Ben Sheleg, Hashem Sayed, Annette Penny, Tebo Kgosiemang, Or Eliezer, and Reut Vardi. The fact that I stand here today is through the support of all out you and more.
And of course, there is no thanking the world without giving special mention to my family.
Thank you mom, thank you dad, thank you Daniel, thank you Zach, thank you Jesse, and thank you
Robyn. For it is for the ones I love that compel me to strive the most.
III Table of Contents
Chapter Page
Abstract I
Acknowledgements III
Table of Contents IV
List of Figures and Tables______VII
Terms, Initialisms, and Organizations IX
Chapter I: Introduction and Literature Review 1 Section 1: Introduction Section 2: Water Supply and Disposal in Negev Bedouin Villages 3 -Limitations to Water Supply 3 -Informal Wastewater Disposal 4 -Potential Health and Environmental Impact______5 Section 3: History of the Negev Bedouin and Dynamics with Authorities 9 -The Negev Pre-1948 9 -Post 1948: Sequestration and Urbanization 10 Section 4: Informal Bedouin Village 12 -The Lay of the Land 12 -Grey Space in Informal Villages 14 Section 5: Discourse Surrounding Villages and Urbanization 16 -Rationale for Nonrecognition 16 -Counter Narratives 17 Section 6: Centralized and Decentralized Wastewater Management 19 -Centralization and Its Limitations 19 -Decentralization as an Alternative 21 -Considerations of Decentralization 22 Section 7: Treatment Technologies 24 -Overview of Technologies 24 -Constructed Wetlands 26 Section 8: Introducing Decentralized Waste Management 28 Section 9: Research Objectives 29 -Research Questions 29 -General Research Objective 30 -Specific Research Objectives 31
Chapter II: Methodology 32 -Overview 32 Section 1: Study Site – Um Bat’in 33 -Rationale 35 IV Section 2: Geographic Analysis 36 -Overview 36 -Population and Density 37 -Topographic Analysis 38 Section 3: Water Analysis 39 -Water Sampling 39 -Statistical Analysis 40 -Qualitative Analysis 41 -Water Volume 42 Section 4: Interviews 42 Synthesis 43
Chapter III: Results 44 Overview 44 Section 1: Geographic Analysis 45 -Population and Density 45 -Topography and Water Catchment 46 Section 2: Site Observations 48 -Site 1 48 -Site 2 50 -Site 3 51 Section 3: Water Quantity 52 Section 4: Water Quality Analysis 53 -Water Quality: Chemical Parameters 53 -Water Quality: Microbiology 62 -Summary 63 Section 5: Observations and Interviews 64 -Um Bat’in in the Context of Informal Villages 64 -Water as both Abundant and Limited 65 -Effluent as a Low Priority 67 -Sources of Concern 69 -Visions of Future Villages 70 Chapter Summary 72
Chapter IV: Discussion 74 -Overview 74 Section 1: Water Pollution and Wastewater Risk 74 -Contamination of Water 74 -Pathways of Contamination 77 -Pathways of Infection 78 -Sense of Risk 80 Section 2: Appropriate Technology and Management Scheme 82 -Feasibility of Conventional Sewerage 82 -Scale of Technology: The Case of Constructed Wetlands 83 -Onsite or Offsite Treatment 85 -Concerning Sewerage 87 -Communal Engagement 89 -Cost of Treatment 92 -The Future and Beyond Um Bat’in 93 Summary 95
V
Chapter V: Conclusion 96 Section 1: The Necessity for Water Treatment 96 Section 2: Obstacles for Wastewater Treatment 97 Section 3: Parameters of Wastewater Treatment 99 Section 4: Concluding Remarks 100 Limitations 103
Bibliography 104
Talks and Interviews 109
VI
List of Figures and Tables
Figures Page
Figure 1: Map of the Northern Negev 13
Figure 2: Location of Um Bat’in 33
Figure 3: Aerial Photo of Um Bat’in 33
Figure 4: Central Um Bat’in 38
Figure 5: Site 1 & Site 2 39
Figure 6: Site 3 39
Figure 7: Residential Area Map of Um Bat’in 46
Figure 8: Map of Um Bat’in Slope and Streams 47
Figure 9: Elevation Map of Um Bat’in and Direction of Water Flow 48
Figure 10: Site 1 49 a: Repaired Greywater Pipe b: Greywater Drainage
Figure 11: Site 2 50 a: Sheet Metal Covered Cesspit b: Blackwater Trench c: Olive Tree Irrigated by Greywater
Figure 12: Site 3 Manhole 51
Figure 13: TSS Concentrations Ranges by Sampling Site 56
Figure 14: TSS Concentration Ranges by Wastewater Contents 56
Figure 15: TSS Concentration Ranges by Time of Collection 57 a: Greywater b: Blackwater
Figure 16: BOD Concentration Ranges by Sampling Site 59
Figure 17: BOD Concentration Ranges by Wastewater Contents 59
Figure 18: BOD Concentration Ranges by Time of Collection 60
Figure 19: EC Ranges by Sampling Site 61
Figure 20: EC Ranges by Wastewater Contents 62
Figure 21: Hebron Stream 64
VII Figure 22: PVC Pipe in Um Bat’in over Pooled Water 64
Figure 23: Off-Road Water Node outside of Um Bat’in 66
Figure 24: Olive Trees at Site 1 Irrigated by Kitchen Greywater 69
Figure 25: Low- and high-density areas side by side in Um Bat'in 85
Figure 26: Level terrain in Um Bat'in 88 a. Homes near the Hebron stream b. Slope bearing west in eastern Um Bat’in
Figure 27: Converging slopes Um Bat'in 89 a. Slopes converging towards Rosh stream b. Slopes converging towards Gez stream
Figure 28: Homes from Abu Kaf and Abu Assa families 91
Tables Page
Table 1: Various Wastewater Contaminants and Their Effects 7
Table 2: Wastewater Quality Parameters according to the Inbar Committee 41
Table 3: Daily Water Consumption per Hectare Given Specific Conditions 53
Table 4: Samples Removed from the Data due to Anomalies 54
Table 5: TSS Morning Samples 54
Table 6: TSS Evening Samples 55
Table 7: TSS Total 55
Table 8: BOD Morning Samples 57
Table 9: BOD Evening Samples 58
Table 10: BOD Total 58
Table 11: EC Morning Samples 60
Table 12: EC Evening Samples 61
Table 13: EC Total 61
Table 14: E. Coli Microbiology Results (Week 1) 63
Table 15: ESBL and R2A Microbiology Results (Week 2) 63
VIII List of Terms, Initialisms and Organizations
Terms:
• Biochemical Oxygen Demand: Indicator for concentration of bioavailable organic matter
• Blackwater: Domestic wastewater which contains fecal matter
• Dunam: =1000 square meters=0.1 hectares=0.001 square kilometers
• Electroconductivity: Measure used as indicator for the concentration of ionic solutes
• Fecal Coliform: Subset of bacteria detected as an indicator for bacteria like E. coli
• Greywater: Domestic wastewater that contains neither fecal matter nor urine
• Informal Village: Settlement which lacks an implemented master plan
• Regional Council: Rural Israeli Municipal Zone
• Total Suspended Solids: Concentration of non-soluble matter in water
• Unrecognized Village: Settlement which is deemed illegal by the government
Initialisms
• AMR: Antimicrobial Resistance
• ARB: Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria
• BOD5: 5 Day Biochemical Oxygen Demand
• CFU: Colony Forming Unit
• EC: Electroconductivity
• FC: Fecal Coliforms
• GIS: Geographic Information System
• HFCW: Horizontal Flow Constructed Wetland
• MBR: Membrane Biorecator
• RBC: Rotating Biological Contactor
IX • SBR: Sequencing Batch Reactor
• TSS: Total Suspended Solids
• VFCW: Vertical Flow Constructed Wetland
• WWTP: Wastewater Treatment Plant
Organizations:
• Abu Basma Regional Council: Regional Council for all Recognized Bedouin Villages from
2003 to 2012
• Al Qasoom Regional Council: Regional Council formed from the division of the Abu
Basma Regional Council
• Adalah: Legal Organization advocating for Arab rights
• Bedouin Development Authority: Branch of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development involved in the development of Negev Bedouin Settlements
• Mekorot: National Water Company of Israel
• Neve Midbar Regional Council: Regional Council formed from the division of the Abu
Basma Regional Council
• Ramat Negev Regional Council: Regional Council extending across the Negev Highlands
• Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages of the Negev: NGO representing the interests
of the unrecognized villages
X Chapter I: Introduction and Literature Review
Section 1: Introduction
Compared to other localities throughout Israel, the Bedouin villages of the Negev stand out as distinct. They have no formal planning or construction. Paved roads and signs are absent, even those indicating the villages’ existence. Commercial zones are nonexistent. Litter is excessive, with piles of trash accumulating along stream beds and in people’s yards. PVC pipes can be seen stretching from the highway to homes, sometimes damaged with water dripping from them.
Flowing freely from houses is that very same water, since utilized, and now contaminated with food particles, detergents, and excreta.
In these villages, sewerage is absent. The only plumbing are conduits to unlined cesspits. In many cases, especially in villages, which remain unrecognized by the state, not even cesspits lie to provide a physical barrier between villagers and their waste. The health and environmental risks are potentially catastrophic to both Israel’s mountain aquifer and the health of all peoples in the Negev.
Though as easy as it is to cast blame on those who dispose their water, untreated into the open environment, the situation must be seen as systemic, the inevitable conclusion of political strife, poverty, and willful yet convenient ignorance. Regardless of the cause, the potential hazards of leaving raw sewage unchecked demands action. However, while the need to address this sanitation crisis supersedes politics, it will not be possible to address it in isolation of the political realities that perpetuate it.
This research thus seeks to address both matters, firstly by assessing the feasibility of various strategies to current water disposal patterns. This is accomplished through the quantification of water consumption in Bedouin villages, the characterization of quality of water, and the identification of potential points of risks. Secondly, the social and political factors that perpetuate such disposal patterns are explored in order to understand better not only which strategies ought to be considered, but also the social implications of implementing such strategies.
1 This thesis shall seek to lay out what is thus far known about wastewater disposal in Bedouin settlements and the potential impact of known practices. Following factors that have led to informal settlements shall be discussed, including the history or the region, conditions in Bedouin villages, and the way it is understood through academic and political discourse. With the crisis laid out, the thesis explores solutions, both conventional and unconventional, focusing on waste management and technology with specific regards to decentralized management and greywater treatment. Solutions are considered into the Bedouin context, and from this arise the research questions with regards to the feasibility of wastewater treatment options in informal Bedouin settlements.
This thesis will then detail the various tools and methods used to infer feasibility of decentralized management and greywater treatment. The centerpiece of this research is the village of
Um Bat’in in the northern Negev, which was selected for its accessibility and its relatively high population compared to other Bedouin villages. The first methods employed there are to run geographic analyses to find it population density in residential areas as well as how water should behave inside the village. Water use is and risk relies on ascertaining water consumption, extrapolated from water meters, and water quality, which is found by means of sampling and chemical/biological analyses. This information was integrated with observations of various sites where water is disposed as well as knowledge gained through interviews with locals. The results illustrate the findings of these.
Finally, the results of the research are synthesized in order to answer various questions about the feasibility of wastewater treatment in Bedouin villages. The issue of risk brought about by disposal are addressed. This being discussed, various options are evaluated, including whether treatment should be centralized or decentralized, and if decentralized if onsite or with satellite treatment. The feasibility of different management strategies is extrapolated via water quality, per capita and per hectare water consumption, and residential population density. The last part of this research considers the priorities, wants and perceptions of villages residents to contextualize the appropriateness of decentralized wastewater management by accounting for their needs and abilities.
2 Section 2: Water Supply and Disposal in Negev Bedouin Villages (Methods and Hazards)
Limitations to Water Supply
The methods by which the Bedouin of informal villages have adopted to supply themselves with and dispose of water have been documented by Almi and Abu Sbaieh (2003) and Almi (2006),
Rudnitzky and Abu Ras (2012), and Ezery (2016). A 2007 survey of all Negev Bedouin settlements indicates that only 12.9% of households in informal villages were connected to the public water supply, while 82.1% rely on private connections made with the national water company Mekorot
(Rudnitzky and Abu Ras, 2012). For half of those, the water is delivered from roadside water pipes via black surface PVC pipes. Though some bury their pipes, subsurface pipes are likely to be dug up and removed by the authorities (Ezery, 2016; Murthy, 2013). A single pipe, no more than an inch thick, might be the only water source for dozens of families. Because of their material and location aboveground, PVC pipes are prone to damage, lowering the pressure passing through them (Murthy,
2013).
The infrastructural problems of acquiring water from Mekorot are compounded by bureaucratic holdups. Any petition to the Israeli Water Authority for a private connection mandates that at least 10 families must sign on for a single connection. These petitions are often futile as only
15.7% of petitions filed between 1997 and 2010 were approved. In 2011 a mere 300 access nodes were serving over 73,000 residents ( , 2014).
As a result of this limited supply, Bedouin villages have regularly been in a state of water shortage. In 1994 the per capita consumption of water in unrecognized villages was only 24m3 per year, less than the 38m3 per year consumed in the Bedouin city of Rahat, and one-fifth of the 123m3 per year consumption in the affluent Jewish settlement of Lehavim. This put consumption at only
65L per day, 5L less than the average in developing countries at the time (Almi and Abu Sbaieh,
2003). This has risen subsequently with water use in the unrecognized village of Um al H'iran
3 measuring at 92L per day in 2006; however, this still was dwarfed by the 295L per day in Lehavim and even the 167L per day consumed in the township of Laqiye (Almi, 2006).
One obvious ramification of this water supply paradigm is the risk of dehydration, which has been an oft cited health concern within the villages. The state of the informal transport and storage infrastructure raises additional issues. In line with circumstances in developing areas of the global south, despite initial high-quality water from Mekorot, said quality potentially degrades during transport (Ersey et. al, 1991; Murthy, 2013). Being aboveground, pipes are vulnerable to damage, leaving them potentially exposed to contamination by algae and other contaminants (Almi and Abu
Sbaieh, 2003).
Informal Wastewater Disposal
Lack of infrastructure is more severe in terms of wastewater disposal. In 2007 only 0.4% of households in Bedouin villages were connected to a sewage network (Rudnitzky and Abu Ras, 2012).
This number is rising slowly. Initially only the village of Tirabin al S'ana' had sewerage, but as of
2017, households in Drijat were connected to sewer pipes. However, the sewer was yet to link up to the nearby wastewater treatment plant, and currently drains into a pond to keep effluent out of the nearby stream bed[1, 16]. Plans were underway to install sewage pipes in Al Sayyid. As of 2018 plans have yet to be implemented[1]. These examples only account for a small number of villages. The remaining recognized villages as well as all unrecognized ones must rely on onsite disposal methods.
Means of disposal are based on the water's initial use. In general, domestic wastewater is divided into two types, blackwater and greywater. Blackwater is any domestic wastewater that contains excrement (Langergrabera, 2004). Greywater is sourced from all other taps in a house, including the shower, wash basin, washing machine, and kitchen. Due to the high concentration of organic matter in kitchen and laundry water, these two streams are generally identified as dark greywater, compared to the light greywater of showers and washbasins (Gross et, al, 2005; 2007;
Wallach et. al, 2005). Once greywater comes into contact with blackwater, it becomes blackwater
(Gross, 2015).
4 Generally, the two streams are kept separate inside the houses, though to varying degrees based on the village. In a 2015 survey it was found that in the recognized village of Al Sayyid (n=27)
48% of houses disposed of greywater and blackwater in a single stream. On the other hand, in the unrecognized village of Wadi al Na'am (n=27), 100 of surveyed houses separated both streams from each other (Ezery, 2016).
As sewage networks are not available, two means of disposing blackwater are utilized. First is the use of cesspits for disposal, which accounted for 100% of surveyed houses in both Al Sayyid
(n=27) and Wadi al Na'am (n=27). In the recognized village of Um Bat'in (n=26), the percentage of households that utilized cesspits was only 85%. The remaining 15% let their blackwater drain into the nearby wadis of Nah'al Hebron. In the unrecognized village of Abda (n=20), 100% of surveyed houses let their blackwater drain into the open environment (ibid). Though greywater may also be sent to cesspits or disposed of openly, greywater may also be utilized for the purposes of domestic irrigation. In Wadi al Na’am, of the 52% of households that separate blackwater and greywater, 14% will utilize said greywater for domestic irrigation. In Al Sayyid, for the 85% of households using cesspits, 68% irrigate with greywater (ibid).
Potential Health and Environmental Impact
In theory cesspits are a reasonable solution for blackwater disposal in rural and off-grid localities such as Bedouin villages. When a system is well maintained, it is capable of removing from
70% to over 90% of pollutants from blackwater (Withers et. al, 2014). In practice, however, these cesspits are far from ecologically sound. While cesspits are reported to be covered, which blocks odors, their bottoms remained unlined, which potentially leaves groundwater vulnerable to leachate from the pits. The risks to groundwater quality posed by cesspits and septic tanks varies by site, depending on factors such as depth of water table and soil content, the leading factor in risk is density.
In the United States the Environmental Protection Agency deemed a density of more than 40 septic tanks per square mile (15.444 septic tanks per square kilometer) to be a groundwater contamination 5 risk (Yates, 1985). High densities also correspond to increased risk of infection by fecal bacteria
(Borchardt et al., 2003).
Though greywater has a lower pathogen concentration than blackwater, it too poses ecological and health risks. Pathogen levels are still higher than acceptable. Additionally, concentrations of organic matter, including particulates from food and xenobiotic compounds
(XOCs) from detergents, are high enough to encourage pathogen growth to blackwater concentrations within 24 hours (Erikkson et al., 2001; Carden, 2007). Surfactants, oils, and solutes provide additional risks to soils and plants and can be found in soils irrigated with greywater (Travis, 2010)). Fats, oils, and grease originating from food can clog soils. Meanwhile ionic solutes can reduce hydraulic conductivity of soil, thereby harming plants. The concentration of surfactants –organic substances with a hydrophilic head and hydrophobic tail– is generally higher in greywater than blackwater due to the presence of soaps and detergents from laundry, dishwashing, and the shower. These are capable of making soils hydrophobic and can draw in solutes (Erikkson et al., 2001; Shafran et al., 2005).
Greywater’s relatively lower pollutant concentrations allow it to contribute to the maximization of water resources. However, it is no surprise that there is concern over its use in raw form, including the possibility of soil degradation and spreading of disease. According to Malkawi and Mohammad (2003), fecal pathogens are capable of persisting within soils irrigated with greywater. Risk of surfactants and solutes have also been found, though their impact is dependent on environmental factors. Wiel-Shafran et al. (2005) found an increase in both electroconductivity and surfactant concentrations after irrigation with greywater that was not seen with freshwater irrigation.
This soil expressed hydrophobic properties, and while the scope of the research was not agriculture, brown spots were visible on lettuce grown in greywater irrigated soil. Travis et al. (2010) also found an increase in surfactant concentrations in soil irrigated with greywater. Whether there was an increase in soil repellency, however, was dependent on the soil, with loam becoming more repellant, but not loess. Regarding solutes, Misra and Sivongxay (2009) found that raw laundry greywater with elevated concentrations of sodium decreased hydraulic conductivity in soil. Gross et al. (2005) also found an increase in electroconductivity in soils irrigated with greywater over the course of three
6 years compared to freshwater. The increase, however, was not much more than that of plots irrigated with fertilized water and was not considered enough to negatively affect plants. This increase in sodium, however, relative to magnesium and calcium was seen as potentially detrimental to soil.
Despite some question as to the short- and long-term effects of greywater on irrigation, governments put standards on their reuse (Table 1). In Israel these standards include demands that effluent contains no more than 10mg/L for Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5) and 10 colony forming units (cfu) of fecal indicator bacteria
(FC) per 100mL. For disposal into watercourses, this rises to 200cfu/100mL (Inbar, 2007).
Table 1: Various Wastewater Contaminants and Their Effects
Parameter Measure Risks
pH Acidity or alkalinity Corrosive and toxic to plants and soil
Insoluble matter Total Suspended (suspended solids and Provides protection and shelter for pathogens Solids (TSS) colloids)
Biochemical Indicator of bioavailable Indicates matter for microorganisms (including Oxygen Demand organic matter pathogens) to consume (BOD5)
Chemical Oxygen Indicator of all organic Indicates matter for microorganisms to consume Demand (COD) matter and other oxidizable material
Electroconductivity Measure of all ions Salts reduce hydraulic conductivity in soil, (EC) present killing plants. Salinizes groundwater
Fat, oil and grease in Oil & Grease (Oil) Clogs soil water
In addition to these, the potential health risks in informal Bedouin villages may be exacerbated by the presence of antimicrobial resistant bacteria (ARB). Presently, conditions within villages can potentially encourage the growth of ARBs. One pathway is outsized rate of 7 hospitalization among Bedouin children, and subsequent rate of antibiotic treatment, which provides more opportunities for bacteria to develop resistance (O'Neill, 2016). There is, in fact, precedence to suggest the presence of ARBs given the detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae in Bedouin children and its association with the prescription of azithromycin (Greenber et al., 2008). The spread of pathogens is not be limited to contact with blackwater, as high pathogen concentrations can be found in greywater as well (Benami et al., 2016). If the pathogens detected in wastewater from
Beoduin villages are ARBs, then the implications could theoretically spread beyond the villages themselves. An epidemic could originate from a single household then spread through a village and potentially the entire northern Negev, given the proper transport mechanisms.
In some respects conditions have improved. Taking Um Bat’in as an example, at the time of its recognition, open latrines were often the method of disposal in the village. Once a latrine filled up, a new one would be dug in to replace it (Meallem, 2005). Ten years later residents had switched to cesspits, which were covered with cement in order to prevent odors or exposure (Ezery,
2016). However, there is a dearth of information in the literature as to what approaches are taken to prevent cesspit overflow, whether drainage or replacement. Neither is there any information on how disposal systems are designed in order to transport wastewater to the cesspits, as well as to stream beds, ditches, and olive trees. In order to improve sanitation conditions in Bedouin villages, more in-depth knowledge on water disposal in Bedouin villages must be ascertained. But to consider strategies to improve sanitation in the informal villages begs the question as to why informal settlements –both recognized and unrecognized— exist in Israel. Even as unsafe domestic effluent disposal is a health and environmental matter, that the practice exists in a country where nearly 99% of citizens are connected to some form of waste management system requires historical and political context in order to be fully understood.
8 Section 3: History of the Negev Bedouin and Dynamics with Authorities
The Negev Pre-1948
The Bedouin communities predate Ottoman control over the Negev, having inhabited the region since before the 14th century. Their presence was noted by Arab polymath Ibn Khaldun (1377).
Over the ensuing centuries the Bedouin tribes spread from Hebron and Gaza to the Gulf of 'Aqaba, as well as beyond the borders of the modern State of Israel. By and large they maintained a pastoral lifestyle (Nasasra, 2017).
The Negev was conquered by the Ottoman Turks in 1516, during which time they experienced antagonistic relations with the Bedouin, which only began to stabilize in 1900 with the establishment of Beer Sheva (Bir al Saba'). For most of that time, the Ottomans took minimal interest in the Negev, only becoming more involved following conflicts with Egypt in the 19th century.
Furthermore, conflict between and with the tribes posed a risk to trade routes, thus encouraging
Ottomans authorities to take greater interest in the region. Armed intervention, land seizures and abduction of tribal leaders were among the tactics utilized to subjugate the various tribes. Limited
Turkish presence, however, kept the balance of power on the side of the Bedouin tribes. After unsuccessfully trying to pacify the region through violence, the Ottomans attempted to assert control by means of appeasement (ibid).
With the establishment of Beer Sheva came the first instances of permanent settlement by
Bedouin in and around the city. During this time, a dramatic shift from pastoralism to agriculture had begun, with more permanent structures being built in the villages. Various services were brought to
Beer Sheva as well, which helped integrate the Bedouin community into the woodwork of the
Ottoman Empire. These included schools, markets, tribal and sharia' courts, and government offices.
While the dynamics between the Ottoman Turks and the Negev Bedouin were not entirely amicable, relatively speaking the voluntary settlement during this time stood in contrast to attempts in 1870 to forcibly relocate and settle Bedouin in Gaza, which ended in violence (Nasrasa, 2017).
9 Part of the bureaucratic integration of the Negev was land reform. In 1858 the Ottomans implemented a land law which categorized all land in their territory and required that landowners register their property. Many Bedouin refused to register their land in an effort to mitigate Ottoman control, particularly via taxation and conscription of men into the army. This was in addition to written records of property ownership being seen as redundant to claim one's right to their own land.
Much of what was Bedouin territory was hence categorized as dead (Mawat) by the Turkish authorities (Abu-Ras, 2006; Shmueli, 2011; Nasasra, 2017). This designation continued during the
British period. Upon the founding of the State of Israel, this law would have grave consequences.
With the fall of the Turks in the Levant and the beginning of the British Mandate, the dynamics between the Bedouin and the occupying regional power shifted, this time in the favor of the Bedouin. Rule was heavily indirect, with control mediated through seven tribal sheikhs, albeit those who had been appointed by the British. During this period the British did not interfere in tribal affairs, and tribal courts were established and respected in order to settle disputes. As well tribal land ownership codes were respected, which meant that the Bedouin were mandated to pay taxes. Despite this expectation, the tribes petitioned against taxation, and encounters with tax collectors were minimal (Nasasra, 2011).
Post 1948: Sequestration and Urbanization
Even before the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, there was already contention between the Bedouin tribes and the Yishuv (Zionist settlements), coming to a head during the Arab uprising of 1936-1939, during which Jewish immigration to the British Mandate was violently opposed. Conflict continued into the time of the Arab Israeli War, resulting in the expulsion and expropriation of the majority of Bedouin and their land. Only 11,000 of the 95,000 Bedouin previously living in the Negev remained within the borders of Israel (Abu Saad, 2008). Those remaining Bedouin were sequestered to an area of the Negev between Shoval, Beer Sheva, and
Dimona, which covered only 10% of the land previously occupied by the Bedouin. This region, referred to as the Siyag remained under military rule until 1966. During these first two decades of the
10 State’s existence, no plans were implemented to develop the Siyag through agricultural, residential or industrial projects. Additionally, all land previously owned by Bedouin was declared State land by consequence of the Ottoman land law which had declared much of the Negev to be Mawat (Abu Saad,
2008; Plonski, 2018).
Policy shifted once more following the end of the military control, when the State actively began to develop land within the Siyag. From the late 1960s until the early 1990s, seven townships
('Ayarot) were established to relocate the Bedouin. The first of these townships was Tel al Sabi', established in 1967, situated east of Beer Sheva. By all accounts, Tel al Sabi' was considered a failure due in no small part to poor planning. Despite Bedouin families typically having more children than
Jewish or other Palestinian Israelis, plots were undersized, so they lacked space to expand, provide storage or allow for gardens. Also, despite the gesture to design houses that mimic Bedouin tents, the planning involved no consultation with any Bedouin, so homes were unfit to house typically sizable families (Marx, 2000; Marx and Meir, 2005). One result of this absence of collaborative process is that tribal affiliation played no part in how neighborhoods were organized. An attempt to be mindful of tribal issues was a consideration during the construction of the next township, Rahat in 1972.
Neighborhoods were segmented based on bloodlines, plots were offered that allowed for building of houses to personal needs, and space was provided for family expansion. Ultimately, however, Rahat turned out no better than Tel al Sabi’ due in part to insufficient public services and a lack of industry
(Marx, 2000; Abu Saad, 2008; Rosner-Manor and Rofe, 2015).
Despite the promise of public services, many of these, including sewerage, were nonfunctional upon the arrival of families. Their introduction was frequently delayed. Representation was also absent in the townships, only being granted to local authorities in 2000 in all but Tel al Sabi' and Rahat (Abu Saad, 2008). Additionally, with poor schools and no industrial or major commercial centers, the townships reinforced the cycle of poverty in the community. Regret among those who moved to the townships was widespread, and emigration from them followed.
Though many people have been internally displaced within the State of Israel, the Negev
Bedouin population has not passively accepted the circumstances which the State has laid out for
11 them. Currently, approximately half of Bedouin in the Negev have refused settlement within formal townships and continue to live in one of the various villages that predate the State or have reestablished ones that had been previously uprooted due to government action.
Section 4: Informal Bedouin Villages, Both Recognized and Unrecognized
Alongside the seven Bedouin townships stand 45 villages, within which half the Negev
Bedouin population reside. Some of these villages, such as Um Bat'in or Al Zarnuq, are positioned on the same land that they had been prior to the establishment of the State{11, 14]. Others have moved due to tribes being uprooted from their original lands such as in Bir Hadaj or Qasr al Sir[9] (Rosner-
Manor et al., 2013). Since 2005 nine villages have been recognized and an additional two were constructed, forming the Abu Basma –now Al Qasoom and Neve Midbar— Regional Council.
Because 11 of these villages have government recognition, they shall be referred to as informal villages rather than unrecognized. However, this should not obscure the fact that while these villages are state-sanctioned settlements, virtually all land claims on them go unrecognized. Until 2004 none of these villages had any recognition from the State, despite their considerable collective population
(Dagan-Buzaglo et al., 2014).
The Lay of the Land
While both the informal villages and the townships house the Bedouin community, they vary in ways beyond the presence or absence of formal infrastructure. Firstly, there are some population differences. While residents of townships hail from all parts of the community, the early settlers in the townships came from lower rungs of society, the landless peasants known as Fellah'in and former slaves known as the 'Abid (Meir, 1988). Those who had a stake in their land through ownership were more likely to hold out for hopes of recognition or fair compensation (Marx and Meir, 2005).
Layout provides a second difference between the two types of settlements. For example, while formal settlement design is born from master plans in the townships, physical geography plays
12 an integral, though not singular, role in determining village organization. Borders between tribes are drawn by the natural landscape, particularly stream beds. Houses themselves are placed along sloped ground, which allows for natural drainage of runoff. Family and social ties also play a role, as roads correspond to existing social relations. Within tribal areas land is further divided into those of extended families and then to individual families, with those with close ties clustering together. The area within the land additionally creates an environment that separates public and private spheres
(Rosner-Manor et al, 2013; Rosner-Manor and Rofe, 2015).
Figure 1: Map of Norther Negev
Grey Space in Informal Villages
The status of many of these villages lies in what Yiftachel (2008) referred to as “gray space,” neither approved nor demolished. Rather, they hang in the limbo of being permitted to exist while in many respects, not being acknowledged. This has primarily meant two things: The first has been the
13 regular demolitions of homes, including the destruction of Um al H'iran in January of 2017. While demolition in many situations has been halted or stalled due to recognition of settlements or litigation, new construction remains illegal and moratoriums are enforced.
The second matter has been the lack of municipal services, which have left the villages without running water, electricity, or paved roads. Within the recognized villages, the only services being provided are primary/secondary schools and general health clinics. All other public infrastructure is either lacking or in the process of being constructed, such as sewerage in the villages of Al Sayyid and Bir Hadaj. This deprivation further entrenches the Bedouin population in a state of poverty. Without public transportation or local industrial zones, access to employment remains limited (Dagan Buzaglo et al., 2014). Water must be purchased privately and at exorbitant prices.
Electricity does not reach the villages. In addition to all of this is a near total lack of sanitation for both solid waste as well as sewage, as only the village of Tirabin at Sana has seen any considerable building up of infrastructure (ibid). The lack of a tax base also makes it impossible for the regional councils to collect funding for infrastructure construction or maintenance. Conditions in e unrecognized villages are more dire, as not only are no amenities being provided to them
e i e i i, but petitions for services get frequently rejected, such as in cases of water supply ( , 2014).
In the case of water supply, water is piped in from roadside water nodes and metered at the source. However, the water is not transported via subsurface metal or clay pipes from the nodes, but rather above the surface through narrow black PVC pipes. As these pipes risk being uprooted if they are placed underground, they are left exposed to the elements and are at risk of damage.
Not only does exposure compromise the potability of the water, but the decrease in pressure further decreases the rate of water flow in an already bottlenecked system. In some cases, a single meter can service an entire extended family or hundreds of individuals, meaning not only is water supply limited by the means by which it is transported, but also the need to divvy it up dozens, if not hundreds, of ways. With the tap not always being a reliable supply means, water is often collected in bulk by residents n e in n e e i n S ie ni n
14 Abu Ras, 2012; Murthy, 2013; 2014).
In conjunction with inadequate means of transport, water supply is limited by the high cost of purchasing water. Water in the informal villages remains unsubsidized, which means that residents are paying full prices for water. The results of these two conditions are staggering.
One private connection in Abu Tlul was found to be serving 280 individuals and 300 animals.
A single one servicing the village of Um al H'iran provided drinking water to 1,100 individuals and an unknown number of animals. Respectively, these connections provided 34 and 33.6 cubic meters of water per person per year. This was significantly lower than the 41.3 and 61.1 cubic meters in the recognized villages of H'ura and Laqiye respectively, which are already dwarfed by the 107.8 cubic meters of water consumed in the affluent town of Lehavim (Almi, 2006).
Low water supply makes dehydration a common risk in the informal villages, and the diminished quality from compromised transport and storage contributes to heightened rates of skin disease, E. coli, and dysentery (Murthy, 2013). The latter is an especial concern for Bedouin children, who, in terms of raw numbers in the 1990s, were admitted to Soroka Medical Center in
Beer Sheva three times more often for diarrhea than were Jewish children (Almi and Abu Sbaieh,
2003).
Wastewater is managed on a household-by-household basis. In recognized villages cesspits are the most common form of disposal. In Um Bat'in the reported percentage of people disposing in cesspits was 85% (n=26) with 100% in Al Sayyid (n=27). Based on surveys in the villages of Wadi
Al Na'am with 100% cesspit use (27), and 'Abda with 0% cesspit use (n=20), greater fluctuation appears to be seen in unrecognized villages (Ezery, 2016). Disposal practices for greywater appear to be inconsistent within and among villages, recognized or unrecognized, both whether the effluent is kept separate from blackwater or whether it is utilized for irrigation. Irrigation with greywater was reported at 58% and 14% in Um Bat'in and Al Sayyid respectively and 74% and 0% respectively in
Wadi Al Na'am and 'Abda (ibid). Rationale for why one may or may not have used greywater for irrigation was not reported.
15 Informal water disposal is only one of the sanitation issues in the villages and may not be seen as the most pressing. In Um Bat'in only 39% of respondents saw the current water disposal paradigm as an environmental hazard. In Wadi al Na'am, that percentage was 37% (ibid). There is a much more visible concern in the form of solid waste management. The accumulated waste in the dumping grounds in villages is often dealt with by means of burning. This situation can be attributed to the increase in use of non-biodegradable goods such as diapers and mosquito repellent (Meallem, 2006). In terms of the literature, this and water supply are often given focus, while discussion of wastewater disposal is left absent.
Section 5: Discourse Surrounding Villages and Urbanization
Rationale for Nonrecognition
Given the contentious history between the Bedouin community and the State of Israel, it is not possible to discuss the environmental paradigm of informal villages, without understanding the vocabulary used when one talks about wastewater disposal.
The circumstances in which the Bedouin villages find themselves is a common phenomenon amongst informal settlements across the world, whereby governments deny public services in order to discourage the growth of what they consider to be illegal squatter settlements. Simply put, the rationale for State inaction in Bedouin villages is a direct result of the nonrecognition of orally passed down ancestral land ownership. Since traditional land rights are disregarded, all construction is considered illegal, thus disqualified from receiving public sewerage (Yahel, 2006). In more recent years, as a result of the Goldberg Committee (Goldberg Commission, 2007), which recommended in favor of legalizing as many structures as possible, policy has shifted to start recognizing the villages.
However, specific policies, most notably the Begin-Prawer Plan, have attempted to uproot and transfer upwards of 30,000 village residents to the townships (Murthy, 2013). This suggests that it is in the State’s interest to minimize accommodations as much as possible. This raises the question of why, as well as what, motivated nonrecognition as an ongoing and formative state position.
16 The rationale for why the villages were not being recognized was and continues to be centered around them being scattered with dispersed populations within each village. The argument is made that it is economically impractical to link everyone to water, electricity, and sewerage. By extension, the argument is made that the needs of the Bedouin community can best be served by having them reside in densely populated towns that facilitate economies of scale (Soffer and Ben Gal,
1983; 1985; Almi and Abu Sbaieh, 2003; Marx and Meir, 2005; Rudnitzky and Abu Ras, 2012).
Further concerns are environmental, as the State seeks to minimize grazing and curb unauthorized agriculture (Falah, 1985).
Counter Narratives
Critics of State policy point to the contradictions in discussing Bedouin villages in such a decontextualized way. Inconsistencies in policy implementation are apparent when considering that informal villages are neither more spread out or less dense than are the Jewish regional councils.
Though some centralized services, particularly sewerage, were slow to reach kibbutzim and moshavim, installation has since taken place (Rudnitzky and Abu Ras, 2012). Cultural concerns are also approached differently with regards to Bedouin and Jewish settlements. Between 1968 and 2005 townships were the only permitted Bedouin settlement pattern. Agriculture and shepherding are unattainable in such a pattern, putting the design at odds with a lifestyle desired by many Bedouin.
Meanwhile, Jews are offered a multitude of settlement patterns not limited to urban areas. These include the agrarian and communal kibbutzim and moshavim that were founded on the agricultural principles of Zionism. More recently has been the establishment of community settlements, which cater towards specific populations, such as Orthodox Jews in Merhav Am and academics/educators in Midreshet Ben Gurion. In recent decades, there has been an uptick in the number of private farms being established in Israel, including in the Negev, approved by the government despite the land not being properly zoned for agriculture. In effect communal desires are not being respected for the
Bedouin community, which calls into question the line of reasoning used by the State, and seen in
17 non-critical academic discourse, suggesting other motivations for not providing services to the villages and expecting the Bedouin to settle in townships.
One argument forwarded by critics of the official narrative is that the principles guiding State policy are not purely Modernist, but rather ethno-nationalistic, obfuscating ambitions to bring Jews to the Negev behind regulations and bureaucracy (Yiftachel, 2003 Swirski, 2008). In some respects, this political ethos has been forwarded explicitly. Early Zionist discourse often discussed Eretz Israel as a “land without a people,” disregarding current inhabitants including the Bedouin of the Negev
(Abu Saad, 2008). This erasure of Bedouin history has persisted, with the Bedouin often positioned as invaders rather than as an indigenous group. In December 2000 then Minister Ariel Sharon stated,
“In the Negev we are facing an extremely difficult problem. Around 900,000 dunams
(10dunams=1hectare) of state land are not in our hands but rather in the hands of the Bedouin population.” He later goes on to say, “They are gnawing away at the country’s land reserves and no one is doing anything of consequence about it (Rudnitzky and Abu Ras, 2012).” In an oft referenced
Haaretz interview, then agriculture minister Moshe Dayan said:
We should transform the Bedouins into an urban proletariat—in industry, services, construction, and agriculture.
88 per cent of the Israeli populations are not farmers, let the Bedouins be like them. Indeed, this will be a radical move which means that the Bedouin would not live on his land with his herds, but would become an urban person who comes home in the afternoon and puts his slippers on. His children would be accustomed to a father who wears trousers, does not carry a Shabaria [the traditional Bedouin knife] and does not search for head lice in public. The children would go to school with their hair properly combed. This would be a revolution, but it may be fixed within two generations. Without coercion but with governmental direction . . . this phenomenon of the Bedouins will disappear (Abu Saad, 2008).
In spite of this apparent erasure, a significant portion the Bedouin community has been adamant about not leaving their lands, with around 50% still residing in informal villages, whether recognized or unrecognized. The discourse surrounding land and the importance of traditional ways
18 of life continues to be perpetuated within the community. Abu Rabia (2008) for example notes the ways in which parents will reinforce a sense of land ownership in their children through creating a sense of collective memory. In spite of legal nonrecognition, regular demolitions, and the attempted erasure of indigenous narratives, the State has seen little success in relocating the Bedouin community, nor has the community abandoned their sense of identity or place wholesale. With half of the community adamant about not relocating, the more pragmatic approach may be to provide services to as many villages as possible if not outright legalize them. While the concerns of this paper are in regard to health and the environment, it is not possible to grasp the topics without acknowledging the political and cultural undercurrents that influence the situation. In light of the problematic discourse surrounding the development of indigenous communities, including how it risks framing a portion of a nation's citizenry as foreign, the research will attempt to assess the environmental situation in the informal villages both as an immediate concern as well acknowledging residents as citizens of Israel, entitled to the same rights as all other citizens.
Section 6: Centralized and Decentralized Wastewater Management
Centralization and Its Limitations
Currently in Israel, the accepted form of wastewater management is centralization, where the totality of water from multiple settlements is collected via sewerage to be treated at a proximal wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). In the context of the recognized, though not unrecognized,
Bedouin villages, this is not only a potential option, but one which has seen some implementation thus far. Since its establishment, homes in Tirabin al S'ana have been equipped with sewerage that is sent for treatment. Drijat has since had its own network built and is in the process of being connected to Rahat, though is now being sent to a holding pool[1]. Concurrently, sewerage projects are being implemented as well in the villages of Al Sayyid and Bir Hadaj[3, 9]
That predominantly Jewish regional councils have constructed their own sewerage networks and treatment facilities –Sde Boker, Midreshet Ben Guirion, and Merhav Am to the same stabilization
19 pond for example— shows precedent for centralizations in the rural Negev. Considering this, as more villages have their infrastructure built up, it could be argued that the solution to unsafe effluent disposal is to wait until construction can be carried out in each village. This, however, does not provide an adequate solution short term and may not be preferable in the long term.
Regarding connecting a village, let alone multiple remote ones to a single treatment plant, the limiting factor is not the treatment itself, but rather the collection, which accounts for 90% of costs associated with centralized wastewater management. Another investment that would be required is the expansion of existing WWTPs and possibly the construction of new ones. As an example, the villages of Um Bat'in and Al Sayyid are within walking distance of the Shoqet WWTP.
This would mean that sewage would only have to flow a short distance to reach the plant. However, the plant is operating at full capacity as a result of quarry sludge from Hebron that gets treated there.
This accounts for 14,000m3 of incoming water, with an additional 2000m3 being received from Meitar,
Hura, and Laqiye. At present Shoqet is built to treat 12,000m3 of wastewater daily and can store an additional 6000m3. On any given day inflow fluctuates between 14000m3 to 20000m3 and often must discharge water before disinfection due to lack of capacity. That said, plans are in place to increase capacity to 30000m3 per day[4]. In the event of ARBs being detected in domestic effluent, limited tertiary treatment capacity could mean the dumping of hundreds of cubic meters of effluent, still contaminated with resistant bacteria into Israel's watercourses.
Centralization as an option to treat village water faces other potential challenges beyond
WWTP capacity. Management may also prove challenging. Among the reasons for the lack of infrastructure and services within the villages is a lack of a tax base that would be necessary to maintain sewerage. The Bedouin sector is the poorest in Israel with the townships ranking the lowest in the south in terms of socioeconomic development. It is thus doubtful whether long term maintenance of sewerage is feasible, especially in light of ownership of land, even in recognized villages, being deemed illegal. Since homes are not zoned into residential areas, there is an absence of property taxes (Arnona). A subsequent nonexistence of industrial or commercial zones means an absence of taxes collected from businesses either (Yahel, 2006).
20 A dearth of adequate funding has proven itself to be a hurdle to introducing formal services to the villages. An attempt to pilot solid waste collection in the villages of Um Bat'in, Qasr al Sir, and
Al Mad'bah' was put into motion by the Regional Council for Unrecognized Villages (RCUVN) in
2001. Ultimately this failed due to a lack of funding with many families unable or unwilling to pay the necessary 20NIS to keep the service going. Fee collection was one obstruction, as no system was in place to regularly collect them. The project was further hindered by insufficient communal engagement, with only one meeting of the men with the sheikhs. Thus, there was a disconnect between residents and the procedure regarding the bins. It should be noted that an insufficient number of garbage cans and difficult roads for collection trucks to navigate also discouraged participation by residents in this initiative (Almi and Abu Sbaieh, 2003; Meallem, 2006). The concern in this case is that the lack of substantial formal infrastructure and bureaucracy applied to the Bedouin villages could make upkeep of sewerage especially difficult.
Decentralization as an Alternative
The alternative to the conventional modern model is to manage water on a local or even onsite level, a paradigm known as decentralization. Both Parkinson and Tayler (2003) and Libralato (2012) have outlined the circumstances where decentralization of wastewater treatment and management may be preferable to centralization and vice versa. In terms of costs and maintenance, unlike in the case of centralization where 80%-90% of the cost is devoted to collection, the majority of resources for decentralized treatment are devoted to the treatment technology itself. This may be beneficial in low-density areas as well as those with large distances between homes where high collection costs would not be offset by economies of scale. In terms of raw numbers, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency compared the theoretical costs of a centralized system and a decentralized one for a rural area of 135 homes and 450 residents. In that same area capital costs in terms of 1995 dollars for a centralized system would be between $2,321,840 and $3,750,530 and have annual operation and maintenance costs between $29,740 and $40,260. By comparison capital costs for onsite systems
21 would be only $510,000 with operation and annual maintenance costs of $13,400 (Massoud et al.,
2008).
Decentralization can also encourage the use of more geographically and socially appropriate technologies in comparison to the general use of activated sludge and ponds utilized for centralized treatment. These technologies can target specific pollutants such as nutrients or xenobiotic chemicals, which activated sludge might not be able to deal with as efficiently. In terms of operation, decentralized technologies are often, though not always, less sophisticated than centralized technologies so can be run with little training. Additionally, decentralized treatment, at least of greywater, also provides an external benefit in the form of reclaimed water resources. With little exception water in Bedouin villages is purchased privately, and they do not receive reclaimed water for agriculture. By being able to utilize treated greywater for the for irrigation, it would be possible to save on water consumption in villages while also minimizing potential environmental harm
(Parkinson and Tayler, 2003; Libralato, 2012).
Considerations of Decentralization
Though it may be a beneficial option in rural and peri-urban areas, means of decentralization need to be carefully considered, so that it not become merely a buzzword. First is the matter of technology (see next section), with each option offering varying strengths and weaknesses in terms of efficiency, maintenance, cost, wattage, and land use. Second, there is the matter of scale.
Decentralized wastewater management covers all strategies from single household to whole neighborhoods. Implementing onsite water treatment assumes that there is adequate land area to install one, and that the quantity of water disposed/treated can be tolerated by the local environment.
Where wastewater density is high, water must to be collected and treated offsite, even if such a site is a small cluster of houses. This demands some sewerage design, conventional or simplified. In developing areas 200-300 persons per hectare –though only 50 in industrialized ones– are needed before conventional sewerage becomes economical (Hophmayer-Tokich, 2006). Even if simplified
22 sewerage still takes up the lion’s share of water treatment costs, which, for simplified sewers, only becomes less expensive than onsite treatment at densities over 160 persons per hectare (Mara, 1996).
Though it is difficult to generalize about what scale wastewater treatment should be, with specific regards to greywater treatment, Carden et al. (2007) made a number of recommendations as to whether disposal itself ought to be onsite or offsite. On the matter of greywater quantity, they recommend that for effluent volumes of 2500L per hectare per day, greywater ought to be disposed offsite. Even at quantities as low as 500L per hectare per day connection to some sort of offsite disposal is recommended. By the same token housing densities of 50 dwelling units or more per hectare ought to dispose greywater offsite, though it would be advantageous for people in densities as low as 10 dwelling units per hectare. In terms of treatment, Hophmayer-Tokich (2006) suggests that up to 10m3 of wastewater per hectare can be treated onsite. Other geographic matters must be considered as to whether water should be disposed offsite, such as whether slope grades exceed 30% or if the water table depth is lower than one meter deep (Carden, 2007). This research will look at water consumption, population density, and natural drainage to consider whether it is geographically feasible for Bedouin villages to manage their water in a decentralized manner, and whether onsite or offsite means are more appropriate if the latter
Beyond the technical details, however, management of wastewater at any level demands some level of human involvement. In centralized management schemes, this responsibility is placed on professionals, leaving sewage in a state of being out of sight, out of mind for households. This is less the case in decentralized schemes and is dependent on scale. Onsite systems put installation, operation and maintenance squarely on the household. For offsite decentralization, simplified condominial sewage networks operate under the expectation that each household can maintain its own plumbing. At these larger scales there is also a need for an individual or committee to oversee the network and system (Paterson et al., 2007).
Given these demands it is an understandable possibility that those living in Bedouin villages may have little interest in engaging with their waste or try to minimize their involvement. Morales et al. (2014) suggest, based on their research in Argentina, that even citizens without wastewater
23 treatment are unlikely to engage directly with managing their excreta. Through interviews they found that poor residents of Buenos Aires viewed wastewater as no longer their problem once it had left their vicinity through open sewers-- essentially out of sight, out of mind. Residents additionally conceptualized their citizenship in part as entitlement to the government managing their waste and would not do what was not asked of other, richer citizens. In the terms of the villages, Ezery (2016) reported that residents in Um Bat'in assuaged their concerns about wastewater disposal by constructing cesspits at what is deemed a reasonable distance and by covering them with concrete to prevent odors. Only 39% demonstrated awareness of the potential risks of untreated wastewater.
Given this it will be important to ascertain how residents in Bedouin villages view the current disposal paradigm, what their priorities are, and to what degree would they be willing to maintain a system's upkeep if locally or personally run.
Section 7: Treatment Technologies
Overview of Technologies
Wastewater treatment is a three-step process, referred to as primary, secondary, and tertiary treatment. The role of primary treatment is to remove solids, often through physical processes like filtration and sedimentation. Chemicals may be added during this step to encourage coagulation of smaller particles. Secondary treatment is generally the most resource-intensive aspect of the process, utilizing biological processes to metabolize nutrients, and organic matter into volatile substances like nitrogen, CO2, and methane. In centralized plants this is often accomplished by means of the activated sludge process, which is economically unfeasible at small scales. In decentralized treatment there are a diversity of designs for secondary treatment, discussed below, each one appropriate or inappropriate for certain contexts. The third step is tertiary treatment or disinfection. This step, performed most often with either chlorine or UV lights, is used to kill any remaining pathogens in the water (Gross,
2015).
24 Within the diversity of secondary treatment designs is a spectrum ranging from the inexpensive and simple to the expensive and complex (Li et al., 2009). Given this range it is important to consider what technology is appropriate for a given context. Membrane bioreactors (MBR), for example, are among the most effective technologies in terms of treatment efficiency, while also being one of the most expensive and sophisticated. Following primary treatment, the reactor works through a combination of ultrafiltration and anaerobic breakdown of organic matter by means of 1µm sized pores and a biofilm coat. In addition, pores of MBRs are so selective that not even pathogens can pass through them, eliminating the need for tertiary treatment (Gander et al. 2000; Ghaitidak, 2013).
However, the scale demanded to make them economic is staggering. Only once an MBR is servicing at the scale 88 households within an apartment does the price per cubic meter drip to below $2.00USD
(Gross, 2015).
At the other end of the cost spectrum are stabilization ponds, where pollutants in wastewater are broken down by the pond's microbiome as the water passes through it. Compared to the construction cost range of $60.00-$120.00 USD per inhabitant for conventional activated sludge, ponds, both aerobic and anaerobic, have a fractional cost at $10.00-$25.00 USD per inhabitant.
Decreased energy requirements and a BOD removal efficiency of 75%-90% makes ponds an oft utilized treatment option in rural areas (Kivaisi, 2001). However, while less intensive than MBRs, ponds are strikingly inappropriate for the Bedouin context. For one they are high in land use area, land being a resource that village residents cannot spare in large quantities. Secondly, the very nature of them being ponds means that bodies of still water will be in proximity to villages. Given that disease-carrying mosquitoes are a pressing concern in Bedouin villages, this would likely result in exacerbating a problem, rather than solving one (Almi and Abu Sbaieh, 2003; Meallem, 2006;
Lipchin, 2014; Ezery, 2016). The high expected evaporation also means that a potentially valuable resource in the form of reclaimed water would be wasted.
Among more sophisticated biological treatment technologies, though lower maintenance than MBR, are rotating biological contractors (RBC) and sequencing batch reactors (SBR). The design of RBCs induces aerobic breakdown of matter by using an immersed rotating disk that is
25 coated with biofilm. As the disk rotates, the wastewater is aerated, meanwhile the biofilm utilizes the oxygen in the water to metabolize organic material. In terms of efficiency, it is capable of removing
90%-99% of BOD in effluent, though closer to only 70% of TSS. They are considered more appropriate for light greywater (Gross, 2015). SBRs function similar to the activated sludge process of WWTPs, but treatment is performed in a single chamber. At removal of 85%-95% of BOD from effluent as well as 60%-90% removal of fecal coliforms, the efficiency of SBR matches that of activated sludge (Kivaisi, 2001).
While inexpensive RBCs still require moderately high economies of scale to be efficient.
Regarding economics, Gross (2015) calculated that an RBC servicing the greywater of 55 people
(3.3m3) would cost $2.65 with primary and secondary treatment included, which slightly exceeds the cost of potable water in Israel. Larger scales decrease the price significantly, but prices only drop below $2.00 when servicing approximately 88 families (Friedler and Hadari, 2006). As for SBRs, size and energy requirements may be limiting, as they match those of conventional activated sludge.
Also, while of lower cost than activated sludge, the minimum cost of $50.00 USD per user is not much lower than the $60.00 USD for activated sludge (Kivaisi, 2001).
Constructed Wetlands
In the context of Bedouin villages, the most likely candidates for greywater treatment are subsurface constructed wetlands (SSCW). Like other forms of biological treatment, SSCWs rely on biofilm to metabolize organic matter. In this case the biofilm is the micro-biome of soil substrate, gravel, and plants. The substrate additionally acts as a physical filter for removing particles. In contrast to SBR, RBC, or MBR, SSCWs require electricity only for pumps. This low energy cost can be advantageous in regions where power is limited, such as Bedouin villages where electricity is provided almost entirely by gasoline generators and PV cells (Al Krenawi, 2004). When properly constructed and of the proper dimensions, CWs are able to remove 99% of BOD5 and FC, as well as
70%-90% TSS depending on design (Gross, 2015). That said, the residual FC concentration is still
26 too high to be safely disposed or reused, thus necessitating disinfection by means of such methods as chlorination and UV radiation (Friedler and Gilboa, 2010).
What makes CWs stand out is that while their removal efficiency is comparable to their more sophisticated alternatives, they demand little maintenance, involving tasks such as plant removal and checking for clogs. In terms of maintenance, clogging is perhaps the greatest vulnerability for CWs, the consequence being pooling at the surface. Additionally, they are sensitive to temperature and precipitation fluctuations (Friedler, 2004; Gross, 2015).
The primary drawback of SSCWs is their size, which depending on design can demand one to five square meters per 60g of BOD5 per day (Vymazal et al., 2014). While this can be inconvenient in densely packed urban areas, in places as expansive as Bedouin settlements SSCWs may be the most effective solution when factoring in cost and maintenance. Size itself is also dependent on wetland function. The typology of SSCWs splits them into horizontal flow constructed wetlands
(HFCW) and vertical flow constructed wetlands (VFCW). As their names suggest, water in HFCWs enter and exit the substrate at the same depth, while water in VFCWs flows downward. Though
HFCWs historically have been the more common solution in poor and developing areas, VFCWs have been gaining traction (Sklarz et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2014). In terms of efficiency, assuming
3 a daily flow of 10m with a BOD5 of 150mg/L, the size demand of an HFCW would be approximately
250m2, while a VFCW would be approximately 50m2. Hydraulic retention time is likewise reduced in VFCWs compared to HFCWs (Gross, 2015). They are, however, susceptible to clogging if they are used continuously, and due to the way that water enters them, they require electricity for pumps.
This puts VFCWs at a slight disadvantage when considering them as an off-grid technology, meaning their feasibility is contingent on available electricity (Vymazal et al., 2010).
Other than treatment efficiency the two types of SSCWs differ in their removal of various pollutants, most notably nitrogenous compounds. Due to anaerobic conditions within the saturated substrate, HFCWs are more effective at denitrifying water, metabolizing nitrates into nitrogen.
However, since they are not oxygenated, they are less capable of converting ammonia into nitrate. In situations where water is to be reused for irrigation, however, denitrification may not be desirable as
27 the recycled greywater serves as both irrigation and fertilizer. Alongside expediting the breakdown of organic matter, presence of oxygen in VFCW substrate allows for nitrification of ammonia into nitrates. Given the relative advantages of both systems, HFCWs and VFCWs are increasingly being combined into hybrid systems (Kivaisi, 2001; Vymazal et al., 2010; Gross, 2015). In this research
CWs were the primary treatment technology considered due to their effectiveness, low cost and subsurface design.
Section 8: All Things Considered: Introducing Decentralized Waste
Management to Bedouin Villages
When considering appropriate technology and management strategy for the context of Israel and more specifically the context of Bedouin villages, a myriad of factors must be considered. First there needs to be an understanding of potential hazards that may arise or they must mitigate. This will require knowing the degree of contamination in various streams of effluent, its end point, and its conduit between the home and its end point. Within Bedouin villages a multitude of strategies can be assumed to be adopted given the current disposal methods. Though potential pathways of contamination and infection will be catalogued, quantifying these risks, however, remains outside the scope of this research and will require more robust research.
Second is the matter of whether centralization or decentralization is the most appropriate choice given the agrarian, yet peri-urban, nature of the informal villages. As mentioned one of the arguments against installing utilities in the Bedouin villages has been that they are too remote and scattered internally to be reasonably connected to the grid. Looking at village geography, particularly population density and location, will be needed to assess whether this is the case to determine whether decentralization is a more pragmatic option. This should consider both what is most feasible divorced from politics and what strategies have been adopted in similar circumstances in Israel. Both short- term and long-term realities also need to be discussed, as even if centralized wastewater management
28 is feasible, it is likely to take decades to reach the entirety of the Al Qasoom and Neve Midbar
Regional Councils, to say nothing of the 36 still-unrecognized villages. Therefore, interim decentralization strategies may also have to be part of a larger waste management paradigm.
Next is the matter of technology choice, which must consider the expected expertise of the population in being able to operate and maintain it. Cost of running a system cannot be ignored, and it is doubtful that any system would be considered acceptable if the annual cost of treating greywater exceeds the costs of purchasing potable water instead. This makes MBRs unrealistic for the Bedouin context as a system servicing 55 people would cost $6.02USD per cubic meter, primary and tertiary treatment included (Gross, 2015).
How much of a concern effluent quality is for Bedouin living in villages can also impact the likelihood of adoption of greywater treatment, given the ability to install systems. In situations in which well water is drawn for domestic use, reuse could contaminate the water table and would pose a clear health risk. However, in cases where the primary source of water comes from Mekorot, village residents might never come into contact with the contaminated water from below. Assuming that the community would take part in an initiative to improve effluent quality is also presumptuous. It positions the Bedouin of the Negev through the eyes of international development rather than as citizens of an OECD nation. Ultimately viewing this situation this way may prove to be a nonstarter as the Bedouin community exists as part of Israeli society, and that existence comes with expectations.
This entire discussion thus far is ignoring the legality surrounding reuse of greywater in Israel.
Despite Israel having the highest percentage of wastewater reuse in the world, as of 2018 reuse of greywater remains illegal. Greywater reuse would require some form of special dispensation from the Ministry of Health. To accept this, assuming greywater treatment is both useful and necessary, an argument would need to be made for its adoption. This argument would need to demonstrate that it is imperative that wastewater in Bedouin villages be treated immediately, and that reuse would be to everyone’s benefit. It will henceforth be the goal of this research to provide evidence in support of greywater treatment and reuse, if found.
29 Section 9: Research Objectives
This research seeks to assess various parameters, which need to be evaluated in order to install, manage, and maintain wastewater treatment in informal Bedouin settlements. Though both circumstances surrounding blackwater and greywater will be evaluated, discussion of the results will deal primarily with greywater.
Research Questions
• Is decentralized management of greywater a feasible and necessary strategy to manage
wastewater in informal Bedouin settlements?
In order to answer this question, the topic must be approached from various angles. The following questions reflect the breadth of knowledge needed begin answering this question:
• What are local attitudes among residents of the Bedouin villages with regards to the current
disposal paradigm? What are their expectations and concerns? What strategies are acceptable
to them?
• What means are employed by residents of Bedouin villages to remove effluent from their
homes?
• What is the quality and quantity of wastewater, both greywater and blackwater, disposed
from homes in Bedouin villages?
• What management strategies are permitted given the layout and geography of Bedouin
villages?
30 General Research Objective
To document the conditions and factors, which have led to and continue to perpetuate unsafe water disposal in Bedouin Villages, and to provide recommendations, based on the input of village residents, towards possible waste management options in informal Bedouin villages, with specific regards to greywater.
Specific Research Objectives
• To obtain geographic data in order to identify potential locations to collect and treat greywater, including: population density, topography, geomorphology, and depth of water table.
• To determine population, theoretical effluent volume, and effluent quality (greywater and blackwater).
• To survey target population in order to understand preferences and capabilities in managing wastewater and to understand the conditions that lead to unsafe disposal.
• To make recommendations as to whether decentralized greywater treatment is feasible in informal Bedouin villages as well as which treatment options may be most appropriate.
31 Chapter II: Methodology
Overview
This research followed a mixed methods model, seeking to integrate both qualitative and quantitative data. Taken as a whole the goal was to gain a better understanding how wastewater is disposed of in the village of Um Bat’in, the social and geographic factors that influence it, and the conditions of said water. To better understand what is being disposed of at the residential level, wastewater, both blackwater and greywater were collected from three sites in order to quantify their contamination. While solids, organic matter, and pathogens were to be expected, tests were also conducted on the presence of ARBs, which could pose risk in and beyond the village. In conjunction with this, qualitative observations of disposal and reuse methods helped identify potential points of risk where effluent can come in contact with humans, as well as pathways for it to contaminate soil and groundwater. Once knowing the contamination of effluent, it was then necessary to ascertain how much effluent was being disposed daily. This was estimated using water meter readings over time as an estimation of daily consumption per capita, and, by extension, disposal. This volume was extrapolated to the overall village disposal volume, relying on estimations of total population from
NGOs.
This data was further integrated with geographic data, whereby residential area of Um Bat’in was estimated. This data was used alongside both wastewater volume and population to consider at what scale would wastewater disposal and treatment environmentally sound and economic? In the event that offsite forms of disposal would be necessary, elevation and slope aspect were found in order to understand the natural drainage in the village.
Using all of this data it was considered as to whether wastewater could be safely disposed onsite in Um Bat’in, and if not, whether collection and treatment were more feasible at a centralized or decentralized scale, as well as the potential for greywater reuse. In order to assess feasibility,
32 population density, wastewater density, effluent flow, effluent quality, and technological parameters were all considered. This assessment also considered interviews from various residents of Um Bat’in.
Section 1: Study Site – Um Bat’in
The village of Um Bat'in lies along the Hebron and Gez streams, between the townships of
H'ura and Tel Sheva. To the north lies Highway 60, which leads to Hebron and Jerusalem. Located just west on Highway 60 is Omer, one of the richest settlements in the Negev. Despite Um Bat'in's proximity to Omer, the wealth of one locality has not seeped into the other.
Figure 2: Location of Um Bat'in Figure 3: Aerial Photo of Um Bat’in
The center of Um Bat'in is settled by the Abu 'Assa Tribe, while the north, east, and south are settled by the Abu Kaf Tribe. The northern contingent of the Abu Kaf Tribe reside along the
Hebron stream[11]. Nearly all plots of land are recognized internally as being owned by particular families with some internally disputed claims and others which are held by none[8]. However, from the perspective of the State, all of these claims are illegitimate in spite of the village currently belonging to the Al Qasoom Regional Council. As a result, no construction or agricultural plots are permitted under threat of demolition. Nonetheless, construction and expansion of the village has continued[8, 11].
33 The history of Um Bat'in predates the history of the state, stretching back to the Ottoman period with the purchase of 7000 dunam by members of the Abu Kaf tribe. Through its history, prior to the establishment of the state, the village stood as a winter settlement for its semi nomadic inhabitants. The first permanent structures began to be built there during the decades prior to the 1948
Arab Israeli War, (Meallem, 2006).
Lying within the Siyag region, the village survived the mass uprooting of Bedouin from their land in the Negev. Despite its age and uninterrupted existence, the village was only recognized in
2006, alongside the formation of the Abu Basma Regional Council. Prior to its recognition, Um Bat'in faced many threats of demolition and forced resettlement. Farmland within the village had likewise been subject to destruction, first by plowing, but later by means of crop spraying (Almi, 2003).
Among threats to the village included demolition for the purpose of establishing an industrial park on the land. Since its recognition, however, a number of permanent public structures have been constructed, including schools and a Clalit clinic (Meallmen, 2006). Private construction is still forbidden, and public infrastructure is still lacking with progress being slow.
As with other Bedouin villages, both recognized and unrecognized, statistical data on Um
Bat'in is limited. Population data, for example, grossly underestimates the actual number of villagers who reside there. Official reports from the Central Bureau of Statistics (2015) put the number at 3,080 residents. This, however, is noticeably smaller than the figure of 3,308 given by Levinson and Abu
Saad in the Statistical Yearbook of the Negev Bedouin for 2002 (2004). By 2006, the New Israeli
Fund estimated a number around 3,500 residents (NIF, 2006). Considering the rate of population growth among the Bedouin, this number has likely exceeded 4,000 residents by now, and by Adallah's estimation (2016), the number is closer to 5,000. Overall the lack of registered buildings, along with the high number of unregistered people –many women come from the West Bank and Gaza to be wives— make modern census taking an inadequate way of quantifying the population.
Exact figures on water supply and disposal are likewise lacking and made difficult by a lack of any centralized supply network. An appraisal of all privately purchased water would need to be performed in order to attain accurate data or the topic. Even were one to collect readings from every water meter 34 in Um Bat'in, the calculated volume would likely be conservative, if not a gross underestimation on account of the number of residents in the villages whose water supply comes from illegally tapping the supply network. Whether any residents are engaging in this practice is unknown. Purchases of water tankers is an additional unknown that would also be difficult to quantify.
Likewise, there are no official records regarding sewage, as all sewage is disposed through informal means. The only data on the subject comes from Ezery (2016), who found that 85% of surveyed villages make use of cesspits for water disposal, with the remained utilizing the Hebron
Stream. Of that 85%, 68% reuse their greywater for domestic irrigation. Rationale for different disposal strategies was not made note of, and thus an effort will be made in this research to understand people's decision making.
As with issues of supply and disposal, there are no current figures regarding health and environmental risks in Um Bat'in. Some possible concerns, however, can be noted, albeit not without reasonable doubt to their severity, if any. Though not quantified, the effluent from the village can be safely hypothesized to exceed standards for disposal. Given the finding that 15% of households dispose of effluent into the Hebron Stream, at least one conduit potentially exists for the spread of pathogens. Two additional points of risk lie in the northeast and northwest corners of the village, which lie in proximity of two water pumping boreholes. Within a protected radius of these boreholes, no disposal should occur. However, households exist within both radii (ibid).
Rationale
A number of factors were involved in selection of Um Bat'in as a study site. Accessibility was a key factor, as well as familiarity. At least two previous case studies pertaining to sanitation in
Bedouin villages were conducted there (Meallem, 2006; Ezery, 2016). There is thus an established background pertaining to the current village sanitation paradigm as well as its ramifications, especially with regards to current disposal practices. The village featuring in previous research means that there are established connections who can be called upon to gain access to study sites.
35 Additionally, as part of Al Qasoom Regional Council, it is not mired by all of the challenges of nonrecognition. This skirts some problematic elements of conducting research pertaining to public health in Bedouin villages, where a possible environment or health hazard could potentially be used as grounds for demolition.
Other factors which make Um Bat'in a location of interest are its population and location.
With a likely population of at least 5,000, Um Bat'in is one of the largest villages and as with other, is growing. This puts the village on a crossroads between its past as a small dispersed village and a densely populated town.
The village's position along the Hebron stream means it is both an influencer on the environmental status of the Besor watershed given the disposal of both domestic effluent and solid waste, as well as being influenced by the condition of the stream itself, whose flow has turned from ephemeral into perennial. Prior to crossing the Green Line, the stream is already heavily polluted as a consequence of the disposal of quarry waste from the Hebron Hills into the stream bed. The high turbidity of the water at 2500NTU demands physical treatment of the stream flow before leaving the
West Bank. More intensive biological treatment occurs before intersecting with Um Bat'in at the
Shoqet WWTP. The plant, however, does not have the means yet to treat all water it collects at peak flow, which can reach a deficit of 2000m3 per day[4]. Of interest during the research will be both views of residents on the health of the stream, as well as their impact on it.
Section 2: Geographic Analysis
Overview
The Geographic analysis includes two components. Firstly, is an estimation of population and residential density within Um Bat’in. This was used to calculate the population and wastewater density. Secondly was an analysis of village topography. This involved constructing models for
36 elevation, slope, and slope direction. These were used to find how water in the village flows due to natural drainage.
Population and Density
Geographic layers were acquired primarily from two sources, Mercaz Mipui Israel and the
Arava Institute for Environmental Studies. This data included the following: village legal boundaries
(blue lines), locations and area of built-up structures, topography, watercourses, soil contents, lithology, agricultural plots, olive groves, and water quality for the Hebron Stream. All data was analyzed using QGIS software.
Due to the lack of an executed master plan or accurate population data for Um Bat'in, population density had to be estimated, relying on a number of approximations about population and residential area. While the Central Bureau of Statistics (2015) lists Um Bat'in as having 3,080 individuals, this number is lower than the estimation of 3,500 residents in 2007 forwarded by the
Galilee Society (2012). Because of this, the figure of 5,000 residents, which was suggested both by residents and the legal organization Adallah, was used as an estimation. These numbers were divided by the area within the village blue lines to determine settlement density.
Because the greater majority of land in Um Bat'in is in theory agricultural – though in practice unused — residential density was also calculated by dividing the total number of residents by the area used for residential buildings, i.e. residential area (Alexander, 1993).
Residential area was likewise estimated. Using GIS software, a buffer area of 25 meters was placed around every building within the blue lines of Um Bat'in assumed to be a house. Nonresidential buildings such as schools, nurseries, shops, commercial areas, mosques, and any structure smaller than 30 square meters was excluded from the data. Buffer area that intersected with olive groves was likewise excluded. The buffer area was used as a rough estimation of residential area. Estimated population was divided by residential area in order to find the estimated residential density.
37 Topographic Analysis
Relying on triangular interpolation, digital elevation models were constructed using various height points across the village, as well as contour elevation and ground height of buildings. These models were used to visualize the slope of Um Bat'in's landform, as well as the aspect of said slopes.
Furthermore, a D8 algorithm was used to find location and shape of basins as well as catchment area for water. The elevation model constructed from this algorithm was further used to show the flow direction of water at every point on the map. This, along with catchment area and aspect data were used to locate where water from various houses collected.
In order to find the flow direction for house clusters, ten house clusters were selected. Slope aspect within each area was averaged and visualized along with slope. Gradient vectors from aspect were created using a SAGA “Gradient Vectors From Surface” algorithm. This data was used to find where wastewater within a house cluster will flow if sewered to an offsite location. Boundaries of house clusters were drawn out based on tribal lines as well as general cardinal direction of the flow.
Figure 4: Central Um Bat'in
38 Section 3: Water Analysis
Water Sampling
Wastewater samples were collected over the course of four weeks, from three houses belonging to members of the Abu 'Asa tribe. Though a more diverse array of housing sites would have been preferred, collection was based on established connections within the village, which limited potential sites.
Figure 5: Sites 1 &2 Figure 6: Site 3
Two collections per week were carried out, the first each Monday morning at 9:00 and the second each Tuesday evening at 18:00. Collection times were in attempt to be in conjunction with diurnal domestic water consumption. Water collection sites were limited by which water sources could be accessed, as disposal piping was in some cases subsurface and not possible to access.
Between 1.25L and 1.6L of water was collected from four sources, depending on needed quantity.
These included:
● Greywater from shower and laundry drains
● Greywater from a kitchen drain
● Blackwater sourced entirely from the toilet
● Blackwater that mixed all streams, both blackwater and greywater
39 Additionally, 2L to 3L of drinking water was collected, though only once a day as its quality was assumed to be consistent throughout the day.
Cultural sensitivities needed to be kept in mind when sampling. Contacts within the village were notified of our arrival prior to sampling. No additional supervision by residents was demanded when a man or married woman was present. However, being an ostensibly male outsider, when the only residents at home were unmarried women, it was necessary to wait for a male family member to arrive in order to supervise sampling. Though this agreement was in place, in practice there was never a case when it was necessary to wait for a man or to check if one was present, and all sampling occurred without delay or interference from residents.
Water Quality Testing
Each week nine samples were tested for four parameters: pH, Total Suspended Solids (TSS),
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5), and Electric Conductivity (EC). Fecal Coliforms were also tested weekly, however, only for the initial two weeks. All tests followed Standard Methods
(APHA, 1999; Boyd and Tucker, 1992; Eaton et. al, 2005). These tests are as follows:
• Field Testing using pH sticks
• Filtration of samples for TSS (APHA 2540)
• 5 Day BOD5 Test (APHA 5210 B)
• Analysis of EC using an Ormir EC-30 probe.
• Membrane Filtration for BOD using various agars (E. coli, ESBL, R2A)
Statistical Analysis
Three sets of statistical analyses per site were run for each parameter: two for morning and afternoon samples separately, and a third for the total variation over the course of a day. Prior to further statistics being run, outliers were removed (p<0.05). Where a sample test included two or three replicates, a Grubbs outlier test was first conducted. Following this, each week was collapsed, and once more outliers were tested for prior to running descriptive statistics. For each parameter,
40 calculations for mean, standard deviation, and standard error were conducted, followed by a one-way
ANOVA comparing the morning and evening sets. For the total variation throughout the day over the course of the four weeks, outliers were removed by the same means. Following this, range, mean, standard deviation, and standard error were calculated. Total day averages for each parameter were compared against the Inbar Standards for Wastewater Disposal and Reuse (Inbar, 2007). The standards for the tested parameters are as follows.
Table 2: Selected Wastewater Quality Parameters and Standards according to the Inbar Committee
Parameter Reuse Standards Effluent Standards
pH 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5
TSS (mg/L) 10 10
BOD5 (mg/L) 10 10
EC (dS/mol) 1.4 NA
FC (cfu/100mL) 10 100
COD (mg/L) 100 70
Total Nitrogen (mg/L) 25 10
Total Phosphorous (mg/L) 5 1.0
Anionic Detergent (mg/L 2 0.5
Qualitative Analysis
Notes were made about characteristics of both the samples as well as the collection sites themselves due to the likelihood that external factors would influence effluent quality. Characteristics of water included color, smell, content, and thickness. As for site conditions, pipe maintenance, end point/end use, barriers between water and environment, and the presence of humans or livestock exposed to wastewater were all noted.
41 Water Quantity
Water meter readings were provided by a volunteering resident of Um Bat'in. Meter readings were taken between the 19th of March and the 29th of April 2018. Further readings were halted due to concerns that readings would be impacted by Ramadan. The daily average was divided by the number of family members (n=7) in order to obtain a snapshot –though by no means a representative one— of per capita water consumption in the village.
Section 4: Interviews
Over the course of the research, six in depth, semi-structured interviews were performed, five with residents of Um Bat'in, one being the head of the Al Qasoom Regional Council, and an additional one with an activist hailing from the unrecognized village of Al Zarnuq. Two interviews were conducted with women and four with men. The five resident interviewees included two university students, a lawyer, a teacher, and a municipal official. Concerns about engaging with residents of
Bedouin villages as a non-Palestinian outsider led to interviews being set up through the assistance of third parties. Residents connected to university staff and colleagues were reached out to first. Upon request, interviewees provided contact details for further individuals who would be willing to converse. One side effect of this method meant that interviewees had all undergone tertiary education.
Each interview lasted approximately an hour in time and they were conducted in Hebrew with some minor use of English when necessary. Though the interviews were intended to supplement the question on the feasibility of decentralized wastewater treatment, interviews did not directly confront the topic so as not to frame the research as a development project. Though these were intended topics to discuss, the amount of time devoted to each was driven by what each interviewee deemed important.
42 Questions asked regarded the following:
● Water Supply: including cost, distribution, quality, infrastructure, and impact of paradigm
● Water disposal methods, rationale, and perception of environment/health impact
● General health concerns and their causes
● Current agricultural paradigm
● Life in the village and the importance of family structure and agriculture
● The relationship of those in villages vis-a-vis the state
● Views on sanitation projects, both state and NGO spearheaded
Synthesis
The data collected, though disparate, was done so with the intention of each component complementing one another. The first matter that the data was used for is that of need. The water quality analysis shows concentrations of contaminants and pathogens, while the site observations shows potential points of contact between effluent and people. Conducting interviews was done in part to shed light on whatever wastewater disposal practices are currently in use. Ascertaining population, residential area, and daily per capita water consumption were used to demonstrate whether the village as well as individual plots where area and population are known exceed disposal capacity.
This suggested whether there is a need for treatment and whether that treatment can be performed onsite or not. Population density and wastewater density data was needed to evaluate the feasibility of collecting wastewater in a centralized manner. In the case of offsite treatment, topographic data showed the pathways to collect effluent without having to rely on pumps as well as where pumps would be necessary. Lastly, in the case of decentralized treatment, having collected water quality and quantity data was used to calculate how much area would be needed in order to accommodate onsite treatment.
43 Chapter III: Results
Overview
As the methodology for this research was mixed methods, the results found cover a wide breadth of topics related to informal Bedouin settlements, both in general and with regards to issues of water management. Um Bat’in was characterized in terms of populations and residential area, both estimated as official population statistics on the village are under-representative and formal zoning is not practiced. Both were used to calculate an approximate population density. Furthermore, elevation and terrain models were constructed in order to visualize the behavior of water at various points in the village.
With specific regards to water, firstly water consumption was calculated using meter reading over a month and a half, readings which were halted due to Ramadan. Testimony from residents was also considered when constructing figures on water consumption. This was used in conjunction with population and area data to find the volume of water consumed in Um Bat’in, and by extension the volume of water being disposed. Disposal practices and the characteristics of homes where wastewater was collected were both described. Tests run on water quality quantified the TSS, BOD5, and FC concentrations, as well as EC and pH. Averages, standard error, and ranges were calculated for all.
Lastly, interviews conducted covered a number of topics, though generally interviewees primarily focused on specific matters such as inadequate water supply or the health of the Hebron
Stream. Interviewees further discussed both how they dispose of water and whether they find their methods adequate or acceptable. Village residents also talked about how they see themselves and their homes in the greater context of the State of Israel, what their expectations are, and what their own projections for the future are.
44 Section 1: Geographic Analysis
Population and Density
Using population data from the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics, based on a reported population of 3080 (CBS, 2015), residential density of Um Bat'in based on individuals registered to the settlement was 470 residents per square kilometer. However, this is an underestimation and was disregarded. The legal organization Adalah has put current figures at closer to 5000 residents (Basam,
2016) This number was expressed also by interviewees and will be used from hereon[11].
Based on the blue lines of Um Bat’in, population density would be only 762 residents per square kilometer. However, given that most area in the settlement is for agricultural purposes, this figure is not informative. Hence, residential density was calculated using existing structures to estimate residential area. In 2015, 2233 structures stood within the blue line of Um Bat'in. Of those,
32 were sheds, 5 were under construction, and 16 were destroyed structures. Of the remainder, 321 were designated as temporary structures. No distinction was made about building function. Because of this, it is uncertain how many buildings were occupied by families and how many were shigs and other types of buildings. Additional GIS data showed areas where buildings were designated as being agricultural in nature. Those indicated were removed. Public use and commercial buildings including schools, mosques, clinics, nurseries, flour mills, and shops that could be identified on government and public maps were removed from the building count as well. Further pruning included the removal of all structures smaller than 30m2, which could safely be assumed not to be residential. This brought the number of structures to 1201. This is undoubtedly still an overestimation.
45 Of the 6.651km2 of land within the blue line of
Um Bat'in, 1.934km2 were found to be used for residential purposes. This is not a cut and dried distinction, since while 4.514km2 of land in Um Bat'in was found to be utilized mainly for agricultural purposes, houses were found to have some agriculture.
Due to the manner by which residential area was measured, there was some overlap between these two land designations, with olive groves situated within the fences. Based on observations and interviews with residents, nonresidential agricultural areas were used for the grazing of sheep and goats. Thus, relying on
Adallah's estimation of 5000 residents (Basam, Figure 7: Residential Area Map of 2016), residential area is as high as 2585 residents Um Bat'in per square kilometer. (See Figure 1)
This population data can further be extrapolated in order to project future populations. As the data points of 3500 and 5000 residents are both estimations, the calculated annual growth rate of
3.936% per year (hereby 4%) can only be seen as an approximation itself. Nonetheless, if stable population growth is to be assumed, the population can be expected to be approximately 7400 residents in 2026, approximately 11,000 in 2036, and approximately 16,200 in 2046. Given that the residential population has and continues to expand, it is unlikely that population density will rise with it, so long as available land remains[8,11]. However, the ability to expand to the edges of the village is not universal, and some families have maxed out their available land[13].
46 Topography and Water Catchment
The highest point of Um Bat'in stands at 343 meters above sea level in the east, sloping downwards into two basins, northwest towards the Hebron Stream and southwest towards the Gez Stream. North of the Hebron Stream, slope is likewise southwest, and for south of the Gez, the slope is northwest. The slope itself varies throughout the village from 0˚ to 17.59˚, averaging at 1.71˚ (Standard Deviation:
1.37). Indicative of Due to Bedouin settlement practices, the majority of Figure 8: Um Bat'in Slope and Streams structures (885 of structures selected as residential) were situated on slopes with only 316 of structures selected as residential standing on level ground. One hundred fifty-one of these structures were on level ground that reached to the Hebron Stream and its tributaries, the Rosh, Shoqet, and
Likit streams (See Figure 2).
Of the three sites where effluent was analyzed and disposal was characterized, two lie along the southern end of the Hebron basin. Within an area containing both households and their neighbors, the mean slope of 2.51˚ on a bearing of 339˚. For the area of Site 1 in particular, that slope is 2.46˚ bearing 315˚. At Site 2, this 2.39˚ at 291˚. The catchment area of the water basin reflects this sloping.
Despite the northwest bearing slope, and by extension, water flow, cesspits at both sites are situated southwest, bearing 247˚ and 198˚ from their respective houses. It is likely that the digital elevation model cannot distinguish topographic changes at the household scale. Eyewitness observation showed that the southern area of Site 2 sloped downward, as visualized by the house's disposal conduit. (See figure 3 for slope angle and direction at various house clusters.)
47 Figure 9: Um Bat'in Elevation and Direction of Water Flow from Various Locations in the village
Section 2: Site Observations
Site 1
Though some overlap was to be found among study sites, all three demonstrated differences in disposal strategies as well as upkeep. Housing units themselves differed in construction. Site 1 was located on a plot of approximately four dunam that contained three houses. As a whole, these houses were 628m2 in area averaged 210m2 per dwelling unit. Two shigs were 94m2 overall, averaging 47m2.
Only water from one of the three houses, where the head of the family resided, was studied. While the other two houses included drainage pipes where kitchen greywater was disposed of –one which was proximal to a small number of olive trees— the vast majority of domestic water use, including laundry and cooking, was located in the house of the head-of-the-household. In one of the houses,
48 cooking was reportedly only an occasional activity, as was showering. The dweller of said explained that he showered primarily at work and used his own only on weekends. The outside area of the household was used for drying clothing, eating, and growing olive trees. In addition, the plot contained a garden of approximately 30m2 and several chickens.
While kitchen greywater drained out from one of the smaller houses to flood irrigate olive trees, this was not the case at the main house. From there all water, both black and grey, was disposed into an unlined
9.42m3 cement covered cesspit. This cesspit was located
31 meters away from the largest house and only 17 meters from the nearest house. Piping into the cesspit was almost entirely subsurface, with piping only exposed near the house. Blackwater was rooted directly into the subsurface conduit, while greywater from the Figure 10: Site 1 laundry and shower collected aboveground before a: Repaired Greywater Pipe descending underground via a tee pipe. Aboveground, b: Greywater Drainage one end of the piping exited into the environment, possibly in case of surcharged conditions.
During the first three weeks of sampling, water from Site 1, aboveground, piping was broken, resulting in wastewater accumulating in a ditch beside the house. During the morning collection, the soapy characteristics of the water indicated its origins from the washing machine or shower. During the afternoon collection, only a minuscule volume of greywater could be seen exiting the greywater pipes. Meanwhile the color, odor, and presence of fecal matter in the water indicated the presence of blackwater that exited through the exposed cesspit conduit. During the fourth week of sampling, this piping had been repaired. Leakage, however, did occur. Though the ditch was directly next to where
49 the family hung clothes to dry, no indication of human activity was ever seen directly adjacent to it.
The chickens, however, were seen on at least one occasion drinking from it.
Site 2
The characteristics of Site 2 were radically different from those at Site 1. Only a single, two story,
280m2 area house stood on a northwestwardly sloped plot of approximately 1.3 dunam. As with Site 1, a number of chickens were present. Disposal conditions, however, were considerably different with piping starting subsurface before being exposed to the environment. Black water exited directly into the environment, flowing down a trench. Prior to the sampling sessions, the black water entered a cesspit, which was covered only by a large piece of corrugated sheet metal. When sampling began in earnest, this cesspit had been covered by earth. By the fourth week, the trench had led to a ditch, where it met up with greywater from the kitchen. While the effluent was noisome with the smell of fecal matter as a constant, its turbidity changed considerably.
Though no livestock were seen in proximity to this trench, children were. During sampling, children Figure 11: Site 2 were seen crossing the ditch, both on foot and bicycle, a: Sheet Metal Covered Cesspit and also interacted with the water through actions such b: Blackwater Trench as throwing rocks into it. It is unclear, however, c: Olive Tree Irrigated by Greywater whether the children normally played in proximity to the ditch, or whether the novelty of the sampling
50 influenced their behavior. However, while they showed some disgust to the blackwater, they also appeared unconcerned about coming into contact with the water itself.
Greywater disposal at Site 2 evolved over time, though during all four sampling weeks, the open environment was exposed to it. During the first two weeks, kitchen greywater simply exited a pipe into the environment with no apparent purpose or destination. By the third week the pipe had been extended to reach an irrigation ditch around a single olive tree. By the fourth week, the ditch was connected to a second tree via a trench. This second ditch was connected via another trench to the ditch where blackwater accumulated. Greywater flowed with ease through the first half of the disposal pipe, made of hard PVC. Little residue settled in the pipe. However, for the second half of piping, made of soft PVC, effluent appeared to stagnate and leave much residue. The greywater that ultimately reached the irrigation ditch was visually highly turbid. Though this was not confirmed, it is possible the installation of this pipe was in response to the changing seasons.
Site 3
Site 3 defied expectations as to what to expect in an informal Bedouin village. Atop a concrete area of nearly 1.5 dunam stood a multistory, 240m2, limestone facade building with a pitched roof as well as a small, 62m2 guesthouse. Unlike Site 1 and Site 2, at Site 3, sewerage was entirely subsurface with no exposed pipes. Both streams were combined and sent via a single conduit to a cesspit, hence greywater is neither used nor usable for irrigation. As with that of Site 1, the cesspit was covered by concrete and was reported to be unlined. The only point of access to the wastewater was a small covered manhole adjacent to the house, from which when covered, no odor emanated.
Contents of multiple streams were visible in the water, including food scraps, fecal matter, and foam suggesting the presence of detergents. During the last Figure 12: Site 3: Manhole
51 week, a washing machine was installed outside. At the time the greywater it produced drained onto the concrete ground.
Section 3: Water Quantity
Water readings were received by self-report from Mahmoud, a resident and physical education teacher in Um Bat’in who had previously been interviewed for this research. Initial water readings on the 19th of March 2018 were 4646.454m3. On the 30th of March 2018, the meter reading had increased to 4656.585m3. The third reading on the 29th of April 2018 was 4685.744m3.
Following this, readings were halted as no opportunity arose to have the meter read before
Ramadan. Over this time the overall water consumption was 39.29m3. Accounting for the duration of days (n=41) and number of family members in the selected house (n=7), daily water consumption per capita was 136.89L. Between the first two dates, the daily consumption was
123.55L per capita, while it was 142.25L per capita per day between the second two readings. In addition to these empirical findings, one interview revealed efforts taken in one case to keep monthly water consumption below a minimum water quota of 3.5m3/per capita, which in a 31-day month would make daily consumption 112.9L per capita.
If the meter readings are assumed to be emblematic of all households in Um Bat’in, then an estimated 684.5m3 of water are consumed in the village daily. In terms of residential area, this would mean that daily water consumption would be 3.44m3/hectare. This consumption, however, is not uniform as population density in Um Bat’in is not uniform. At Site 1 where 15 people reside on a 4 dunam plot, daily consumption would be 5.14m3/hectare. On a 0.5 dunam plot with seven residents, the household would consume 19.18m3/hectare. At the extended family scale --
Mahmoud reported that approximately 100 residents live on 15 dunam of land—9.13m3/ hectares of water to be consumed.
52
Table 3: Daily water consumption per hectare given specific circumstances
133L/day per capita water Condition 113L/day per capita water supply supply* 4 dunam plot; 15 residents 45.14m3/hectare per day 4.24m3/hectare per day 0.5 dunam plot; 7 residents 19.18m3/hectare per day 15.82m3/hectare per day 15 dunam plot; 100 residents 9.13m3/hectare per day 7.53m3/hectare per day 1934 dunam plot; 5000 3.55m3/hectare per day residents 2.92m3/hectare per day * Figure derived from 3.5m3/per capita monthly, the minimum quota for water consumption[16]
Section 4: Water Quality Analysis
Water Quality: Chemical Parameters
Prior to testing the samples it was apparent that inconsistencies were going to arise. Issues with transportation during the third week of sampling resulted in arriving at collection sites two hours late. Additionally, the fourth week of sampling coincided with Ramadan. While neither of these necessarily altered the data significantly in certain circumstances, this data was thrown out when calculating averages. Because of how low the number of samples per site was over the course of the entire fieldwork (n=4), deciding which data to remove could not be accomplished statistically in most cases. During week 3, BOD5 results in Sites 1 and 2G were seemingly impacted by the late arrival. Compared to morning BOD5 averages of 102.04mg/L at Site 1 and 66.75mg/L at Site 2, concentrations at both sites increased to 3309mg/L and 3711mg/L respectively. Assumed to be a result of evaporation and infiltration, these concentrations were noted, but disregarded as being indicative of the typical range of effluent. Deviation of time also had an impact on TSS for blackwater sourced entirely from the toilet. Both the two-hour difference in Week 3, as well as possible changes to toilet habits as a result of Ramadan, resulted in blackwater whose fecal matter had likely settled or was decreased.
53
Table 4: Samples removed from the data due to anomalous findings/circumstances Sample Week/Time Analysis Rationale Site 1 1-Evening TSS Skewed Results; High fecal matter content Site 2G 3-Morning TSS Late Arrival; Significantly skewed results Site 2B 3-Morning TSS Late Arrival; skewed results Site 2B 4-Morning TSS Skewed Results; Possible effect of Ramadan Site 2B 4-Evening TSS Skewed Results; Possible effect of Ramadan Site 1 2-Morning BOD Possible depletion Site 1 3-Morning BOD Late Arrival; Significantly skewed results Site 2G 3-Morning BOD Late Arrival; Significantly skewed results Site 2B 4-Evening BOD Skewed Results; Possible effect of Ramadan Site 1 3-Morning EC Late Arrival Significantly Skewed Results Site 2B 1-Morning EC Significantly Skewed Results
As to be expected, drinking water over the course of all four weeks was consistently free of pollutants. TSS (n=4) and BOD5 (n=4), averaged at 3.87mg/L (σx̅ =2.42) and 1.03mg/L (σx̅ =0.322) respectively. Electroconductivity (n=5) measured at 0.849mS/mol (σx̅ =0.0621). PH (n=5) as well was a consistent 7. Fecal coliforms (n=2) were undetected.
As for effluent sources, differences could be found among all streams, though as expected, all TSS and BOD results exceeded standards as well as EC readings from three out of four sites. In the case of TSS, for example, ranges differed considerably among sites. Though the streams in both
Sites 2B and 3 contained blackwater, their solids concentrations differed by a factor of 101. While
TSS concentrations at Site 2B averaged at 22121mg/L, the average during Ramadan was only
2226.7mg/L. This concentration was even lower due to the two-hour delay during week 3 to only
1585.0mg/L.
Table 5: TSS Morning Samples (Red exceeds Inbar Reuse and Disposal Standards) Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 4 83 5040 3340 1127 S2G 3 153 1954 795.8 589.5 S2B 2 18665 19210 18938 6982 S3 4 119 4105 1468 902.4
54 Table 6: TSS Evening Samples Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 3 1053.08 4620 2810 1030 S2G 4 105.5 2890 1529 748.3 S2B 3 12670 34910 24243 8219.1 S3 4 674 3780 2108 545.4
Table 7: TSS Total Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 7 83 4635 3113 1127 S2G 7 105.5 2890 1215 479.7 S2B 5 12670 34910 22121 3758.1 S3 8 119 3780 1788 531.5 Drinking 4 0 10 3.87 2.42
When comparing total greywater concentrations to blackwater concentrations for TSS (as well as BOD5 and EC), results at Site 1 were split into morning and evening samples. Since visual observation showed that blackwater was present at Site 1 during the evening, samples collected from then were considered as blackwater. Regarding ranges, while the minimums for both greywater and blackwater were close, 83mg/L and 110mg/L, the maximum recorded greywater concentration was only 5040.0mg/L compared to 39410mg/L for blackwater. Despite this wide range for greywater, the third quartile only reached 15718mg/L. Additionally, it appears that the presence of greywater has a greater impact on TSS concentration than blackwater. When blackwater is grouped by blackwater only and blackwater combined with greywater, as was seen in the evening at S1 and all day at S3, the range for combined blackwater resembles the range for separated greywater.
55
Figure 13: TSS Concentration Ranges by Sampling Site
Figure 14: TSS Concentration Ranges by Wastewater Contents
56
Figure 15: TSS Concentration Ranges by Time of Collection a: Greywater b: Blackwater
Regarding BOD5, when assuming that evening samples at Site 1 were contaminated by blackwater, the difference between greywater and blackwater streams was more pronounced. Under that assumption, the concentration average at S1 (n=3) was 80.56mg/L (σx̅ ==22.64). At S2 (n=7) it was 108.21mg/L (σx̅ ==25.66)). The average at Site 1 (n=7) increased to 378.14mg/L (σx̅ =104.82) when including also evening samples. This average more closely resembled those of Site S2B (n=7) and S3 (n=8), which were 394.99mg/L (σx̅ =103.57) and 458.69mg/L (σx̅ =162.17) respectively.
Table 8: BOD Morning Samples Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 3 37.58 114.39 80.56 22.64 S2G 3 55.88 116.86 95.71 19.93 S2B 4 127.56 491.58 313.66 84.24 S3 4 120.58 1049.7 429.22 214.88
57 Table 9: BOD Evening Samples Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 4 331.19 741.1 516.19 91.60 S2G 3 53.83 223.85 120.70 52.32 S2B 3 162.82 928.28 503.43 224.95 S3 4 317.32 1218.66 897.36 200.07
Table 10: BOD Total Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 7 83 741.1 378.14 104.82 S2G 7 105.5 223.85 108.21 25.66 S2B 7 127.56 928.28 394.99 103.57 S3 8 120.58 1218.66 458.69 162.17 Drinking 4 0.2 1.72 1.03 0.32
Considering the presence of fecal matter at Site 1 during the evening, the BOD5 concentration range for Site 1 was disaggregated to show a visible difference between morning and evening samples there. With greywater and blackwater samples represented separately, a dramatic difference between morning and evening samples was seen, with no overlap between them. The morning samples at Site
1 (G) resembled most closely the BOD5 range at Site 2G, while the evening samples resembled more closely Site 2B. Compared to blackwater samples, samples containing only greywater (n=10) had a narrower range from 37.58 to 223.8mg/L and a lower average at 93.70mg/L. This compares to a
BOD5 range for blackwater samples (n=19) of 120.58 to 1218.66mg/L and an average of 533.5mg/L.
58
Figure 16: BOD Concentration Ranges by Site (Breakdown)
Figure 17: BOD Concentration Ranges by Wastewater Contents
59
Figure 18: BOD Concentration Ranges by Time of Collection
As noted, the mean and range for Site 1 (n=9) was misleading when morning and evening samples were aggregated. The morning samples (n=4) averaged at 1.05dS/mol (σx̅ =0.131) and had a narrower range from 0.795 to 1.41dS/mol. Meanwhile the evening samples (n=5) had an average of
2.13dS/mol (σx̅ =0.458) and had a much wider range from 1.198 to 3.79dS/mol. The former meets reuse standards, while the latter does not. The evening samples for S2G (n=5) also met reuse standards, averaging at 1.37dS/mol (σx̅ 0.224). The mean, however, only met standards by 0.03dS/mol.
Table 11: EC Morning Samples (Yellow Exceeds Inbar Reuse Standards) Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 4 0.795 1.41 1.05 0.131 S2G 4 0.717 2.88 1.67 0.537 S2B 4 1.97 2.48 2.31 0.116 S3 5 1.27 3.57 2.12 0.431
60
Table 12: EC Evening Samples Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 5 1.20 3.79 2.13 0.458 S2G 5 0.919 2.21 1.37 0.224 S2B 5 1.09 1.93 1.54 0.177 S3 5 0.912 3.57 1.96 0.501 Table 9: EC Morning Samples
Table 13: EC Total Site # Samples Min (mg/L) Max (mg/L) Mean (mg/L) St. Error S1 9 0.795 3.79 1.65 0.312 S2G 9 1.09 2.48 1.33 0.200 S2B 9 1.08 2.48 2.08 0.302 S3 10 0.912 3.57 2.04 0.319 Drinking 5 0.608 0.956 0.849 0.0621
As with BOD, disaggregating S1 (G) and S1 (B) revealed one narrower range and one wider one. However, it was not Site 1 (G) that resembled S2G, but Site 1 (B). Although the effluent stream at Site 2G (n=9) contained greywater, its range more closely resembled that of the blackwater streams between 0.717 and 2.88dS/mol, similar to S2B's range of 1.09 and 2.48dS/mol. The range at Site 1
(B) (n=5) most closely resembled Site 3, the latter which ranged from 0.912 and 3.57dS/mol. On the other hand, the range for S1 (G) resembled no other site.
Figure 19: EC Ranges by Site (Breakdown)
61 Figure 20: EC Ranges by Greywater Contents
As with drinking water, pH levels at all sites was within parameters for both reuse and disposal. At Sites 1 (n=8), 2B, (n=8) and 3 (n=8), pH averaged 7 with no variation. At Site 2 for both the morning (n=4) and the evening (n=4) averaged 7.25 (σx ̅ =0.25)
Water Quality: Microbiology
Over the course of two weeks, all four effluent streams tested positive for fecal coliforms considerably above the standard of 10cfu/100mL. Though not every coliform could be found at each site, the presence of both E. Coli as well as a potential array of antimicrobial resistant bacteria at all sites were demonstrated. Though pervasive, in two cases, the presence of coliforms was either stream or site specific. The presence of metallic blue extended spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) coliforms –a likely indicator of KEC bacteria— was found only in streams containing fecal matter. Meanwhile, coliforms indicating bacteia with resistance R2A Kanamycin were localized to a single household, Site 2, despite the blackwater and greywater streams being separate. Both were found at the same factor of 105 cfu/100mL.
62 Table 14: E. Coli Microbiology Results (Week 1) Media/Analysis Site 1* Site 2G Site 2B Site 3* (CFU/100mL)
E. Coli (Blue) 3.00x106 0.00 2.50x106 1.00x106
E. Coli (Total FC) 2.20x105 3.40x107 1.00x107 1.00x107 * Contains a mixture of blackwater and greywater
Table 15: ESBL and R2A Microbiology Results (Week 2) Media/Analysis Site 1 Site 2G Site 2B Site 3* (CFU/100mL)
ESBL (E. Coli)† 1.61x106 1.40x106 1.50x103 2.10x106
ESBL (KEC)†ⱡ 0.00 0.00 8.00x104 4.10x106
ESBL (Pseudonomas)†ⱡ 5.60x105 4.20x105 1.82x106 1.06x107
ESBL Cream 2.70x105 1.40x105 5.00x104 0.00
ESBL (Total) 2.46x106 1.98x106 2.10x106 1.68x107
R2A Kanamycinⱡ 2.37x107 2.80x106 4.67x106 5.00x107
R2A Ciprofloxacineⱡ 0.00 4.00x105 3.33x105 0.00
R2A (Total) 3.23x108 3.20x108 2.00x108 3.77x108
* Contains a mixture of blackwater and greywater † Likely bacteria detected ⱡ Antimicrobial resistance
Summary
As to be expected from both blackwater and greywater, the TSS, BOD5, and FC concentrations all exceeded both Israeli reuse and disposal standards for wastewater. Meanwhile, potable water remains in good quality even after passing through informal infrastructure. For both
TSS and BOD5, ranges for greywater were narrow and medians were low. Though the mixing of greywater and blackwater as in Site 3 increased the TSS concentration range, the median remained low. The same could not be said of BOD5 where the median and range of concentrations were
63 influenced primarily by blackwater as the mixing that occurred at Site 1 during the evening indicated.
Overall, greywater concentrations were more stable than blackwater over the course of the four weeks.
The only major cause for change being the late arrival during week 3.
Of note was the detection of multiple coliforms, which indicate the presence of ARBs from all four streams of wastewater that were sampled. Among these were the presence of ciprofloxacine resistant bacteria only at Site 2 and KEC coliforms only found in blackwater.
Section 5: Um Bat’in: Observations and Interviews
Um Bat'in in the Context of Informal Villages
Yiftachel's (2008) concept of greyspace is instantly apparent as one enters Um Bat'in. At the village entrance lies a properly paved road with a bridge crossing the Hebron Stream. Traffic calming is visible in the road’s design with road bumps being placed before and after sudden inclines. At the same time, lampposts line the road with no lamps installed. This is juxtaposed by the tension wires which also follow the road. The pavement does not appear to be in good condition, and beyond the road lie only uneven dirt paths that turn to mud after the rains. The very act of entering and exiting the village proves itself to be an ordeal of its own, unlike the neighboring settlement of Omer. Neither an onramp nor a traffic circle is in place to coordinate traffic, leading to long waits when making left turns. Accidents are reportedly frequent along the road and at entrance's T junction[11]. The current bridge over the Hebron Stream is a recent development.
Its prior absence necessitated that children cross the polluted stream in order to get to and from school[12].
Though two bus stops are in proximity to Um Bat'in, they are rife with their own problems as the only way to reach the one which returns to Beer Sheva is to run across the busy Highway 60 or walk over to the underpass, Figure 21: Hebron Stream where pooling water after rains turns the path to mud.
64
In contrast to unrecognized villages like Wadi al Na'am, where only homes of corrugated sheet metal and tarp stand or Um al Hiran, whose demolition led to violent conflict, not only does construction continue in Um Bat'in, but building materials include concrete, plaster, and stone, much like any other Arab-speaking settlement in Israel. This construction followed the recognition of the village[11]. However, while halted demolition means that buildings currently built are safe, new construction is still banned, resulting in crowded conditions[11, 12, 13]. Authorities still come to demolish new structures, and residents continue to resist. One account in January 2018 recalled that month a person performing self-immolation in protest of an upcoming demolition[11].
Water as Both Abundant and Limited
In the same line as the houses themselves, based only on observation, the households in the villages are equipped with utilities, though not serviced by the government. As noted by Ezery (2016), houses rely on PV panels for electricity and receive water privately from Mekorot. Much as how Almi (2006) described it, water is sourced from roadside pipes via PVC tubing that leaves water too hot when tapped at homes[16].
Black PVC pipes are visible throughout the village, some in locations where they are vulnerable to damage. In some places, pipes were punctured with droplets of water pooling Figure 22: PVC Pipe in Um Bat'in over pooled water below. Regular bursting of pipes was reported, with the line leading to the water collection center bursting once every two to three months[13]. If the main pipe that delivers water from the off-road node to the collection center bursts, the loss of water will impact at least 10 families, as that is the minimum number of families needed to petition for a water connection. When this happens, the families collectively pay for a replacement main pipe, which will cost around 20,000 shekels.
Concerning pricing, according to Mahmoud, the water from Mekorot is sourced to a central tank, into which individual houses tap[13]. Pricing for potable water was considerably higher than the
65
price in cities, starting at 8NIS per cubic meter[11,13]. Other numbers given for price included 10NIS per cubic meter and 12NIS per cubic meters after the first three cubic meters per resident[11, 12, 13].
These prices are reportedly due to the nature of purchasing, which is not only private, but also includes retail-like markup from 5NIS per cubic meter. This markup comes from the household that collects water from the off-road node and distributes it among the families[13].
Um Bat'in resident (Jaber), an official from the Al Qasoom Regional Council, contradicted these statements about purchasing water privately and higher prices by claiming that he receives his water from the company Mei 7 at similar prices to the rest of
Israeli residents. He did say that prices double after 3.5m3 of water per person per month. Due to this, he stated that he attempts to keep his own consumption below this, which would make the maximum theoretical per capita water consumption for his family between 112.9L and
125L per day[16]. Figure 23: Off Road Water Node outside Um Bat'in This may account for the discrepancy among people’s statements. The flat rate of 10NIS per cubic meter is in line with the rate paid by families who purchase water privately, 9.05NIS per cubic meter before taxes. As for the statement of 8NIS then 12NIS per cubic meter, the four-shekel difference matches the similar difference between
4.48NIS and 8.76NIS per cubic meter (Negev Coexistance Forum, 2014). The discrepancy between what interviewees claimed to pay and what regional council residents pay is likely the markup which was mentioned by Mahmoud. This would appear to be a new paradigm, however, given that Ezery
(2016) reported households purchasing from Mekorot, and has possibly not reached the entire village yet. It is also a possibility that this change is yet to be widespread knowledge in Um Bat’in.
Though dehydration from inadequate water was noted as a concern for children and the elderly, water supply was cited as being adequate for domestic purposes, i.e. cooking, cleaning, and drinking. The supply was enough so that rainwater harvesting was described as being more trouble than it is worth[12]. This is not the case in unrecognized villages, such as Al Sirra where harvesting is
66 still practiced[6]. Where water supply is lacking in Um Bat'in is for agriculture, even as many expressed their desire for it.
Concerning agriculture, contrary to findings suggesting that the majority of residents irrigate with greywater, this practice was not extensively reported among interviewees, who disposed of blackwater and greywater alike[11, 12, 13]. Though some interviewees mentioned using greywater for irrigation, none discussed its use as being more than a supplementary form of supply[15]. In this research's three water collection sites, only one of them had disposal conduits designed for regular irrigation of trees with greywater. This setup at Site 2 was not present during the months of November,
March, and April, and even when it occurred in May, only irrigated a single tree. It is unclear whether the eventual irrigation was in response to the changing of the season or a change in disposal behavior.
While one of the houses at Site 1 had a drainage pipe disposing water along a row of olive trees, the kitchen of said house was seldom used compared to that of the head house, suggesting it was not extensively utilized for irrigation there[7]. Though it may be the case that greywater is only utilized for supplementary irrigation in Um Bat'in, circumstances differ in the unrecognized villages. There, a higher percentage of greywater plays a role in households' irrigation schemes[15].
Effluent as a Low Priority
In line with findings by Ezery (2016), there does not appear to be much stated concern regarding the health and environmental risk posed by current wastewater disposal practices. Among five interviewees from Um Bat'in, four of them considered cesspits to be adequate in terms of health and environmental safety [11, 12, 13, 16]. Leaving cesspits unlined was motivated by the desire to keep them adequately drained, which lining would prevent. When asked whether there was a sense of risk to the groundwater, one response was that the water table was deep enough as not to be vulnerable[11].
How long a cesspit could be used varied from house to house from one year to up to five[11, 13. 16].
Once full, both drainage and digging anew were described as responses to pits filling up[13, 15, 16]. The need to drain was viewed negatively. At 500 shekels, truck hires for drainage were considered
67 expensive[13, 15]. The process was also described as laborious, needing to be performed manually by residents[15].
Only one interviewee talked about effluent as a potential health hazard. Amira, a university student from Um Bat'in was the only interviewee to consider the infiltration of effluent from cesspits to be of concern. Of all interviewees, she was the only one to say that the cesspit at her own home was lined along the bottom with cement. She posited that her worries were not unique to herself, and those who do have concerns make sure to cover and line pits before having any trees grown in proximity to them[15].
This sentiment was found beyond the recognized villages. Outside of Um Bat'in in the unrecognized village of Al Zarnuq, Hasan, an activist, treated the means of disposal as non-issues in and of themselves[14]. On the matter of disposing into the nearby stream bed, though he did express concerns, the ones he did were the presence of pests, including mosquitoes, and odors which can be smelled by people near the stream bed. “Despite the stink,” he said, “it's something relatively minor.
I don't feel it.” In some respects, he expressed more issues with cesspits, not due to their health and environmental impact, but rather on matters of safety and space. Cesspits, for example, can be haphazardly built, in many cases covered only with sheet metal, and susceptible to collapse. This makes their presence dangerous for children playing nearby. Jaber expressed this same concern in
Um Bat'in[16]. The second concern was a matter of space[14]. A cesspit that has reached his limit must be replaced by digging up a new one, which is concerning given the limited space on land plots in Al
Zarnuq.
One thing of note in Al Zarnuq is the way in which water is disposed to the nearby stream bed. The village descends stepwise towards the stream bed allowing for natural drainage, something which is not uncommon in Bedouin settlements. However, in addition to this, as wastewater flowed downhill, the pipes it flowed in would link up with those from other houses, meaning that a single exit point for effluent will have multiple source points. Even in the absence of government laid pipes, this shows willingness within the community to make use of collective sewerage, albeit in a simplified form[14].
68
In the context of agriculture and greywater, one aspect appeared to be in universal agreement among those who separated greywater. For the purposes of irrigation, light greywater was seen as unsuitable. The presence of soaps and detergents was cited as the reason for nonuse, which led to light greywater being combined with blackwater before entering the cesspit. By comparison, dark greywater from the kitchen was seen as acceptable. This view on light and dark greywater was shared in the unrecognized villages. Walid, a resident of the village Al Sirra, expressed that he used ecologically sensitive soaps and detergents in order to pipe light greywater for irrigation of olive trees. This however, was a practice that others did not bother pursuing or lacked the time and money to accomplish[6].
Sources of Concern Figure 24: Site 1: Kitchen Olive While the health and environmental risks of Trees Irrigated by Greywater improperly disposed effluent are not a high concern in Um Bat'in, there are very real concerns regarding wastewater. While water supply is adequate for domestic purposes, cost and means of supply make agricultural endeavors impossible[12]. In the absence of adequate water supply, olive trees are left to die, as the only time that they are irrigated is in winter. Those who engage in agriculture need to purchase water privately from tankers. For shepherds this expense which can be an upwards 1000 shekels per month[15]. Concerns over the water supply are even more pressing in unrecognized villages, which face greater hurdles in petitioning the government for water access[14].
In Um Bat'in specifically, the health of the Hebron Stream is discussed as a major source of unease. The river was described as being odiferous, a breeding ground for mosquitoes, and polluted from the Hebron Hills[12, 15]. This last one is in spite of the installation of the Shoqet WWTP. Drainage from the village, including wastewater is not seen as contributing greatly to the state of the stream[12,
14]. While the health of the Hebron Stream is an extreme and specific case, concern regarding the health of stream beds was cited in the context of other villages. In the recognized village of Drijat, which does have formalized plumbing, water is sent to a pond, in order to keep it out of the Drijat
69
Stream[16]. As for the unrecognized village of Al Zarnuq, while conditions of the nearby stream bed were still those of an ephemeral stream, similar issues were discussed with regards to odor and mosquito presence for those who lived close[14].
Visions of Future Villages
Concerning the current situation, its perpetuation is read as political by residents. Among residents in informal villages, there is a feeling that their needs and desires are not being represented[6,
9, 11, 14]. The issue of absent sanitation is thus linked to the same land conflict that currently stifles the development of recognized villages and leads to the demolition of unrecognized ones. A commonly cited criticism is the added barrier between the Bedouin Community and the State, the Bedouin
Development Authority[11, 14]. The Authority is responsible for the development of recognized
Bedouin settlements and makes decisions as to when and where services, such as schools and clinics are established. It is also involved in the construction of service infrastructure such as water pipes and sewerage. As the Al Qasoom and Neve Midbar Councils still both lack methods of tax collection, construction is financed by the Authority, reportedly until all necessary construction is completed[16].
Though there is communication between the Authority and the regional councils, there is strong discontent within the communities regarding how its existence throttles their ability to advocate to the government. Such an office in the Israeli government is unique only to the Bedouin community.
This means that while Jewish and other Palestinian Israelis are able to reach out to various government branches, residents of informal villages must have their issues channeled through the
Authority. The impression this has on the community is that their lives are at the mercy of an overpowered agency, and is one which further cements the sentiment that the State views the community as an enemy[11, 14, 15].
In spite of this, the residents of the informal villages talked about themselves as contributing citizens to the State, citing participating in the economy and in one case military service[9, 11]. The desire to remain in traditional settlement structures and maintain agriculture as a way of life does not preclude modernization. “I am a modernist,” Walid stated decisively[6]. Thus, there exists an
70 expectation of how water supply and water disposal ought to be handled. Even as the current water paradigm is seen as functional, it is by no means preferable, and the need for proper utilities was communicated. This said, when it comes to the future of the villages, even the most optimistic assessments acknowledge the timespan of decades that will be needed for the villages to have utilities[11, 16].
When it comes to introducing water treatment, two expressed viewpoints were the belief that the State ought to be involved in development and skepticism towards outside projects. Two sentiments expressed were that external projects fail to materialize and that they would be unlikely to survive long were they not to receive consent by the State[12, 15]. Hence, it is important that any project implemented to deal with sanitation and resource issues in Bedouin villages must be politically and financially viable[12]. In terms of willingness to pay, there is no resistance, however there needs to be a viable plan presented first. In the case of the recognized village, the first step of this is being implemented[12]. Surveying has reportedly begun on the villages in order to assess the size of plots, the first step towards being able to charge municipal taxes. This is in spite of yet-to-be- resolved land claims[16].
What stands as a challenge within the villages is the issue of awareness and buy-in by residents. In Um Bat'in, these barriers have been seen twice, first by the continued accumulation of solid waste as well as by the non-adoption of biogas. In the case of the later, implementation never appeared by residents to have gotten off the ground, and those in the village never took the project seriously[12]. Such an issue would appear to apply to decentralized greywater treatment, which, in order to work, would require communal investment, both in terms of finances and effort[12]. Though there is a willingness to pay if a service is available, pervasive knowledge and motivation is integral.
The response to the question of whether residents would treat their water was, “Who would tell people about the option to treat sewage[15]?”
71 Chapter Summary
Accurate data on Um Bat’in’s population and area is not possible to fix due to a lack of exact figures on informal settlements. However, estimations from NGOs and GIS models estimated the population density of village’s residential areas at approximately 2585 residents per square kilometer, half the density of townships like Tel al Sabi’, and around two thirds that of wealthy settlements like
Omer. This geographic area was integrated with figures on water consumption based on both testimony and meter readings to find how much water is consumed both per capita and per hectare in the village, and by extension, how much of it is disposed.
Further geographic data was found in the case that wastewater would need to be collected offsite from houses. The flow direction at various points in the village were found as well as where sloping of terrain can assist with collection and where it cannot.
Disposal of wastewater was characterized both qualitatively and quantitatively. A range of sophistication of disposal was found, with conventional albeit damaged plumbing at Site 1, open drainage and greywater reuse at Site 2, and entirely subsurface plumbing at Site 3. Additional observations at each household were noted.
At all sites, effluent exceeded Israeli standards for both disposal and reuse. TSS ranges were driven mainly by greywater presence over blackwater, which caused them to narrow. Ranges increased during the evening. The presence of blackwater played a more influential role in the range of BOD5, widening the range and raising the median. Due to plumbing damage at Site 1, it was not possible to assess greywater during the evening there as it was contaminated with greywater, meaning that impact from time of day could not be assessed. However, time appeared to influence BOD5 concentrations for blackwater. The median for EC was higher for blackwater and had a wider range.
Influence by time of day was not entirely clear. Lastly, all sites tested positive both for E. coli as well as various antibiotic resistant bacteria.
In talking with residents of Um Bat’in, it was clear that concern over wastewater disposal ended with it no longer being perceivable, and only matters like odors, pests, and cesspit collapse were causes for concern. Greater issues of unease were the pollution in the Hebron Stream, in which 72 wastewater disposal for Um Bat’in was seen as having a marginal impact. More discussion was devoted to water supply, which, while adequate in Um Bat’in for basic domestic needs, was expensive and did not meet needs for agriculture. Despite that only kitchen greywater was utilized for irrigation and only to supplement olive trees. Regarding water management, cooperation is vital for water supply and in disposal cases where water exits into stream beds. However, when it comes to the matter of introducing projects, there is skepticism about their efficacy and outreach. Ultimately modern utilities are seen as ideal, though their existence is seen as distant.
73 Chapter IV: Discussion
Overview
The synthesis of this research’s results will be in two parts. First, there is the matter of water contamination, and the risks it poses. Under consideration are the chemical and microbiological findings, as well as those of settlement patterns and physical geography. With contamination now identified, this section will seek to consider pathways of exposure for both humans and the environment. How residents of Negev Bedouin villages view the situation will also be a factor in understanding this risk. Though these conduits will be identified, further quantification will be needed to properly assess the risk on a larger scale.
The second component follows from the first, in that given the presence of contamination, strategies for disposing of and treating wastewater will be considered. Population, residential area, and water consumption rates will be used to determine whether onsite or offsite wastewater disposal feasible and which of the two is preferable. If offsite, it will also be put forward whether connecting the village to a centralized WWTP is the best option over local treatment. This component of the discussion will also include, in the case of decentralization over centralization, addressing the feasibility of decentralized greywater treatment and its potential for reuse. Caveats to the implementation of any strategy will be considered.
Section 1: Water Pollution and Wastewater Risk
Contamination of Water
In all wastewater quality tests for TSS and BOD5 and the majority for those EC in Um Bat'in, concentrations were found to be too high for either safe reuse and safe disposal. All things considered, this result is as expected given the ways in which each stream was utilized, whether for showering, food preparation, laundry, or elimination of feces. This said, there are limits as to what can be inferred from the data, especially in terms of statistical relevance given the short sampling period, and the 74 small number and diversity of sampling sites. Unlike with formalized settlements across Israel, in terms of disposal methods, all three sites differed from each other with no consistency of in terms of sewerage (2 systems), end use (2 paradigms), or risk management (3 levels). This quite possibly led to vastly different effluent characteristics. To add to this variability, the inputs of all four streams differed, with instances of both light and dark greywater seen, as well as blackwater entirely from a flush toilet and blackwater since mixed with greywater.
This variability of both effluent varieties and disposal means leads to the question of what can be said about wastewater in Um Bat'in as a whole, as well as of all Bedouin villages. However, though the data collected by this thesis is not robust enough to make any statements statistically about the quality of effluent in Bedouin villages, it does provide the first snapshot into the quality of both blackwater and greywater in informal Bedouin villages by providing an initial characterization of both. Further, even as data is too sparse for averages, this research did show the range of effluent quality under different conditions.
With regards to BOD5 the clearest pattern is the difference in greywater and blackwater streams, with ranges for greywater being narrower and with lower medians, while those for blackwater were wider and with higher medians. Though medians at both Site 1G (89.69mg/L) and
Site 2G (70.155mg/L) for greywater were similar, the upper limit at Site 2 was higher, possibly due to the presence of food particulates. The widest range was seen at Site 3. While the ranges at Site 2B
(127.56-928.28mg/L) and Site 3 (120.58-1218.66mg/L) are not significantly different (f=1.81; p=0.200), the distribution shows two different patterns. At Site 2B, concentrations between the first and third quartiles were between 177.27-473.49mg/L. Meanwhile concentrations at Site 3 between the first and third quartiles were between 351.48-1068.19mg/L. However, what is being seen here is not a wide range at Site 3, but rather bi-modality, with morning samples clustering around a median of 317.32mg/L and the evening around one of 1026.74mg/L. Such bi-modality was not seen for Site
2G or 2B.
What to these differences at Site 3 may be difficult to discuss as it was not possible from unobtrusive observation to characterize the setup of the plumbing. However, given that the increase
75 in BOD5 concentration was associated with time of day, it may be related to wastewater stagnating below the manhole. As with Sites 1 and 2G, BOD5 concentrations increased between the hours of
9AM and 11AM. However, Site 3 was the most resistant to change, possibly due to its isolation from the environment.
Meanwhile at Sites 1 and 2, there were visible ways by which environmental factors could have influenced the quality of the water. For one, the very act of arriving at 11AM during week three saw, as in Sites 1 and 2G, an elevated morning concentration, reaching 3909mg/L and 3711mg/L respectively. In terms of environmental factors, evaporation likely played a role in increasing concentrations by decreasing water volume. This elevated concentration at greywater sites was accompanied by a similar increase in TSS, which reached 31270mg/L at Site 2G. This was also seen with EC, as conductivity jumped to 2.83dS/mol and 2.88dS/mol at Sites 1 and 2 respectively. Effects by the passage of time were also seen at Site 2B as BOD5 concentrations dropped upon late arrival.
In this situation the settling of fecal matter may have played a role. That same week a 10-fold decrease in TSS was also seen. This drop was also seen during Ramadan, where toilet use may have been altered due to fasting.
Fecal coliforms were detected at concentrations exceeding reuse and effluent standards in all four streams. Additionally, the presence of E. coli was detected in three out of four in Week 1 and all four effluent streams during Week 2. This finding is largely unsurprising considering that water that has come in contact with human bodies contains some E. coli. What is of concern is that in some cases, no barriers exist between coliform detected effluent and present humans. The extreme case of this was Site 2, while Site 1 demonstrated that the issue could be management or mismanagement dependent.. This research also succeeded in finding indicators of ARBs in an informal Negev Bedouin settlement. Two different tests were run. While all coliforms tested for were detected, not all were present in all locations. Despite the small number of sites, a possible pattern appeared among effluent streams. KEC ESBL bacteria (klebsiella, enterobacter, or citrobacter) were indicated only in the blackwater streams. Meanwhile, while coliforms indicating kanamycin resistance were found in all wastewater streams, those indicating the presence of ciprofloxacin resistant bacteria were detected
76 only at Site 2, in both the blackwater and greywater streams, indicating a possible origin from that site.
Pathways of Contamination (Groundwater Risk)
Given the presence of contaminants and pathogens in both blackwater and greywater, the question arises as to what risks do this current circumstances pose? While wastewater standards are exceeded by effluent in Um Bat'in, stating definitively what poses a risk is difficult to say at this point.
The sense that those living in Um Bat'in and other villages do not feel the presence of disposed wastewater as a risk may not be entirely unfounded. For one, the nonuse of light greywater for irrigation means a lower likelihood of surfactants and solutes accumulating in soils. Also, while cesspits are unlined, there is a perception by some residents that the water table is low enough to prevent infiltration from contaminants[11, 13]. The water table itself is, in fact, deep. Geological data gathered in 1962 from a borehole north of Um Bat'in found the water table to be at an elevation of
284.10 meters. The elevation in the village averaged 328.98 meters, ranging from 310.00 to 345.17 meters. Assuming a similar and stable water table elevation within Um Bat'in, the depth of the water table relative to the surface would vary between 25.07 and 61.1 meters.
Though this depth is great enough to provide psychological security regarding groundwater conditions, whether it is sufficient given the increasingly growing population of Um Bat'in would require further testing of the groundwater to ascertain how much leachate is reaching the water table.
The likelihood of contamination should not be understated. As discussed by Kazemi (2011), a study of boreholes in and around Sharhrood, Iran showed groundwater deterioration due to elevated levels of solutes, boron, and nitrates within populated areas. In Iran cesspits account for 74% of all domestic disposal, and though the ones in Sharhrood were considerably larger than those in Um Bat'in -- 25 meters deep compared to 3 meters -- the average depth of the water table was 100, compared to the possible average depth of 44.88[11].
Where the borehole is located, the elevation was reported as only 302.30 meters, meaning a water table depth of only 18.2 meters. The State has set a radius where no effluent may be disposed
77 of legally around these boreholes,. Ezery (2016) showed that overlap exists between the radii of two of these boreholes and the village to the south. Within the area of these radii are 144 structures that are within the blue lines of Um Bat'in and 171 structures outside of it. These structures include residential compounds, which implies the presence of unlined cesspits within the radii. This means that wastewater is being allowed to infiltrate into the groundwater in a sensitive area, which is contrary to Israeli law. This is an even more pressing issue given the fact that cesspits within Um
Batin are unlined at the bottom, potentially allowing sewage to leach into the groundwater.
Pathways of Infection
Alongside the effect effluent disposal has on soil chemistry and groundwater, the potential for infection must also be considered. Not only are there cases of pooling and flowing effluent, pathogens from raw wastewater can accumulate in soils through prolonged use (Benami et. al, 2016).
The most direct paths for infection would be contact with skin and ingestion. According to the World
Health Organization (2006), those working and playing around soils irrigated with wastewater may ingest between 10-100mg of saturated soil per day. Though no agricultural work was seen during the sampling, children were seen playing at Site 2. Risk is likely greater in unrecognized villages where greywater irrigation is reportedly more prevalent[15]. Though there may be possible risk of accidental ingestion of soils, ingestion from eating crops is also likely to be minimized due to crop choices. Only olive trees were reported as being irrigated with greywater and only on an as needed basis. As the olives do not contact greywater, they pose no more hazards than eating olives from freshwater- irrigated trees.
Though no quantification has occurred, the likelihood of contact with effluent, blackwater or greywater contaminated with E. Coli or ARBs is unlikely to be consistent among households. Health risks at Site 3 from either blackwater or greywater streams, appear to be low, as unlike at Sites 1 and
2, there is no point of exposure due to all plumbing being covered from source to endpoint. Ultimately
Site 3 is not emblematic of disposal methods in Um Bat'in, which itself is not entirely emblematic of other informal villages, particularly the majority which are unrecognized. Site 1 and Site 2, however,
78 illustrate a potential spectrum of barriers between household residents and wastewater contact which range from inadequate to indeterminate adequacy.
It is possible to speculate that some ARBs are pervasive throughout the village, while others are still emerging or localized. Among all three sites, Site 2 was the one with the fewest barriers between residents and wastewater. There, blackwater flowed through an open, channel, and collected at a point either above ground or in a pit covered only by sheet metal. While greywater was channeled through a pipe, its end point still resulted in pooling of effluent that contained organic matter. This site also had the highest number of children present with approximately 10 boys between the ages of five and fifteen seen, some of whom played in proximity to the ditch during collection of samples.
The unperturbed demeanor of children at Site 2 to being exposed to blackwater, either through walking or splashed water, suggested that while there is an awareness of the water being dirty, there is less of one to it being a source of disease. Though the actions of children following sampling was not seen, it is possible that infection preventing measures such as hand washing did not follow contact.
These two realities in consort could suggest the development of AMR due to antibiotic use to combat diarrheal diseases caused by wastewater exposure. In terms of other environmental behavior, it should be noted that this is the one house where burning of solid waste was also witnessed.
By contrast, only one point in Site 1 allowed wastewater, either greywater or blackwater, to come into contact with humans or animals and otherwise remained subsurface and piped from the house to the cesspit. While some subsurface leakage is inevitable, the plumbing design would keep blackwater entirely within pipes before reaching the cesspit. Concerning greywater, the design was such that the streams would quickly combine with that of blackwater with minimal contact with the environment. During the fourth week, piping was set up so that surcharged greywater could drain into the grass and weeds. Some above surface leaking from surcharged blackwater flow was witnessed; however, it was unseen whether there was enough pressure and flow for blackwater to exit as greywater had.
The fact that any greywater pooled to the surface appeared to be related to DIY plumbing and unattended damage. When the collection pipe was damaged, greywater drained into the ditch
79 before entering the exposed plumbing below. Concurrently, when separated water surcharged through its pipe as it flushed, it too entered the ditch before returning to the pipe below, bringing toilet paper and fecal matter with it. With regards to awareness, one resident did not appear to be aware that fecal matter entered the ditch, despite the visible presence of both excreta and toilet paper. This he suggested had blown in with the wind[7]. However, it did not appear that individuals would come into contact with the wastewater ditch. Chickens, on the other hand, did by consuming standing water.
That said, action was taken between the third and fourth weeks, indicating an active effort to minimize contact with blackwater.
Ultimately, in order to assess the environmental and health risk posed by untreated water in
Bedouin villages, tests of soil, groundwater, and livestock would have to be run. Though risk within the villages, as well as a more robust characterization of disposal in the village are yet to be quantified, from a public policy standpoint, effluent quality does exceed effluent and reuse standards. Given this, wastewater treatment is not only recommended, but legally required, and continued State inaction is tantamount to complicity in the continuing situation.
Sense of Risk
Whether the unregulated and informal disposal of wastewater is a moderate or significant risk, it is apparent that water sanitation, while being addressed in less than ideal manner, is not a high priority for most inhabitants. Wastewater is not as visible an issue as solid waste accumulation, health of waterways, or –in the case of unrecognized villages— insufficient water supply for daily needs[15].
Where cesspits are present, there is no perceptible impact that is a cause for worry, providing enough psychological distance from effluent. Concerns regarding pits dealt with risk of exposure, which would either be due to overflow or collapse due to poor engineering[14].
Though there was little discussion in interviews about open disposal, evaporation was seen as an adequate means of removal. In Al Zernu the local streambed was described as dry, despite water from multiple home flush toilets being directed there[14]. This said, those who lived in proximity to the stream did take some issue. Even then concerns are not pathogens or pollution, but odors and
80 mosquitoes, neither of which can be ignored, and both of which have additional causes including waste burning for the former and polluted perennial streams like the Hebron for the latter (Almi,
2003; Lipchin, 2013).
For those in unrecognized villages who lack flush toilets, latrines and other spots for defecation are situated far from housing[15]. This is a pressing issue in that it intersects with women's issues, as modesty customs discourage Bedouin women from defecating until the cover of night, impacting safety and contributing the prevalence of urinary tract infections (Cwikel and Barak, 2002).
Even less concern was shown for greywater, both light and dark. As with openly disposed blackwater, evaporation is likely seen as an adequate means of removal. The design at Site 1 was such that surcharged greywater from the laundry would be ejected into the grasses directly next to the house. From a second house at Site 1, water flowing from the kitchen onto soil and crops was described as clean by one resident. When water from the kitchen was acknowledged as being not exactly clean, it was described as not being an issue[7]. Dark greywater at Site 2, was, as mentioned, made use of as a resource during the dry season, and its ejection seemingly ignored during the winter months. Even the location of the drainage pipe was not a fact that was instantly identifiable to those living in the house, as though it was disregarded during that season. Even while Site 3 had otherwise adequate barriers between residents and wastewater, during Week 4, a laundry machine was seen in use outside the house with its effluent being disposed of onto the concrete floor surrounding the house.
It is uncertain whether this machine was eventually connected to the house plumbing or if the water was left to evaporate. Additional lack of barriers such as these were seen in photographs taken during the research at Bir Hadaj as well as in photographs presented by Ezery (2016).
In all cases, as much distance as seen as needed is placed between residents and their wastewater. Beyond the point where its presence is perceptible, wastewater of both varieties becomes a nonissue. This lack of concern can be seen as potentially perpetuating health and environmental hazards. However, to expect more is to place greater expectations of environmental consciousness on residents of Bedouin villages than are placed on other Israeli citizens who are not expected to be concerned over their wastewater once it leaves their home.
81
Section 2: Appropriate Technology and Management Scheme within Um
Bat'in
Feasibility of Conventional Sewerage
If the water volume recorded from Mahmoud's household represents a snapshot of the village as a whole, 650m3 of potable water is consumed in Um Bat'in via piped water taps. Considering that the residential area of the village is approximately 193 persons per hectare, the total daily effluent volume would only be approximately 3.55m3/hectare. If behavior in the village more closely resembles that of Jaber, who claims not to exceed 3.5m3 of water per person monthly, then daily water consumption would be closer to 565m3/day, making daily wastewater density only approximately 2.9 m3/hectare. According to models by Mattholie (2011), conventional sewerage is only environmentally necessary at 10m3/hectare of wastewater per day and only feasible in terms of functionality at 7m3/hectare daily of wastewater. Taking the village of Um Bat'in as a whole, daily wastewater generation is probably too low to consider conventional sewerage for Um Bat'in at this time.
At this density even a fully centralized network making use of simplified sewerage designs would currently be unfeasible. This however, may change in the coming decades as the population of the village increases. Centralized sewerage would still fail to be economically feasible, given that currently residential density is only approximately 26 residents per hectare. By comparison,
Matthoile (2011) suggested population density to be a minimum of 150-200 residents per hectare for economic feasibility of conventional sewerage, while Hophmayer-Tokich suggested a minimum
50 residents per hectare for simplified sewerage in industrialized countries. From the standpoint of appropriate technology, centralized sewerage networks would not be the best fit for the village as a whole. This does not discount sewerage entirely, however, it would be in the context of decentralized or centralization in parts of the village, if and where it is necessitated.
82
Scale of Technology: The Case of Constructed Wetlands
If centralized treatment is yet to be a consideration for Bedouin villages like Um Bat'in due to insufficient wastewater, then any treatment would need to be conducted either onsite or within the settlement. Though this provides its own challenges in terms of planning, it also opens up the opportunity for more efficient and effective forms of treatment. For this to be the case though, black and greywater would need to be strictly separated from each other, given their difference in BOD5 ranges, and how much blackwater may drive it. Proper barriers to prevent exposure from and to the environment are also needed. As of now, none of the sites studied met both of these conditions. The design at Site 1 was such that blackwater could readily come into contact with greywater pipes under surcharged conditions even prior to the streams mixing. Quality of both water streams was likely also affected by the poor setup of the plumbing, which did not provide adequate protection of either the effluent or the soil. The separation of streams at Site 2 did nothing to prevent evaporation or leaching of wastewater, nor did it provide any protection for residents, especially children against the water's contaminants due to the lack of barriers. Though Site 3 was apparently the most well-constructed, it would require a redesign in order to keep streams separated.
In terms of treatment, means of disposing of or treating blackwater are outside the scope of this discussion, so focus shall be squarely on greywater. With secondary treatment being the most involved portion of the wastewater treatment process, that will be the focus of this section. When considering an appropriate treatment system, there will be tradeoffs in terms of land availability, cost, personal investment, and energy requirements. When introducing constructed wetlands for treatment in the West Bank, energy was the main limiting factor[2]. Though the Bedouin of the Negev are not a one-to-one parallel, the off-gird nature of the informal settlements lends itself to some similarities.
For this reason, constructed wetlands are being considered in this context due to being low cost, low maintenance, and their low energy requirement. The tradeoff is with regards to area, which is dependent both on inputs and design. Therefore, both horizontal and vertical flow designs will be considered at both the onsite and extended family scale. The following calculation will be utilized to estimate area (Gross, 2015).
83 As=Q*C/ALR
2 As: Cross sectional area (m )
Q: Content Discharge (m3/day)
C: Pollutant Concentration (g/m3) ALR: Loading Rate (g/m3 per day)
For horizontal flow, ALR will be assumed to be 6g/m3 per day. As for vertical flow, ALR will be assumed to be 60g/2m3 per day. In order to estimate the areas of both HFCWs and VFCWs, a number of assumptions will be made with regards to water quality and quantity (ibid). The assumption of these estimates will firstly be based on the water quantity data, considering both a family of seven and an extended family of 100, with both groups consuming 130L per capita each per day. Secondly, because there is no data on what percentage of domestic effluent in Bedouin villages is greywater, average Israeli domestic water use found by Friedler (2008) will be used. This assumes that 36% of domestic wastewater is blackwater and that of the 41% of total greywater is from the kitchen. For this the maximum BOD5 concentrations for Site 1 Morning and Site 2 Total will be used, being 103.39 and 223.85mg/L respectively. Finally, a BOD5 pretreatment removal efficiency of 30% will be used.
That said, combined BOD5 from the kitchen and all other sources would be 152.78mg/L.
Pretreatment will be conservatively assumed to be 35% (Kivaisi, 2000). After pretreatment, this would drop to 99.31mg/L. To treat this concentration, a HFCW with an area of 145.12m2 would be needed. Using additional assumptions laid out by Gross (2015), the dimensions would be a minimum width of approximately 5.9m and a maximum length with inlet and outlet zones of approximately 24.6m. A VFCW would need to measure only 29.0m2.
Though the HFCW measurement would be less than 1.5% of a 15 dunam land plot, given the crowded housing conditions, using a house-sized plot of land for the purposes of treating water may not be deemed an acceptable sacrifice. Though requiring more energy, a communal VFCW
8 4 would be more reasonable in terms of area, taking up only the space of a shig or shed. A regularly reported concern in Bedouin villages is that houses are overcrowded. As more space on land plots is needed for housing, the less space remains for other structures and land uses. Considering this, the smaller size of vertical flow would be more accommodating to the growing population of the village, which will continue to rise, whether or not Um Bat'in has public utilities.
At the household level, however, the size of a constructed wetland would drop considerably. Assuming a family of seven, the area of an HFCW basin would measure only 9.64m2.
Meanwhile the area of a VFCW would be even smaller at a mere 2.03m2. These areas may make onsite treatment a more attractive option, especially for landowners with large plots for whom sewerage would be more expensive.
These size considerations are also assuming that recorded TSS concentrations were affected by environmental factors and were initially lower. Otherwise, size requirements would increase considerably.
Onsite or Offsite Treatment
In terms of energy requirements, HFCWs are an appropriate choice. However, size requirements may not make this feasible in all circumstances. In this case available energy will need to be evaluated to determine whether VFCWs would be possible. In terms of size requirements, a stronger case can be made for them as they are less obtrusive. However, appropriate scale is also a matter of additional factors, which must be considered whether onsite treatment can be considered a possible reality.
Compared to recommendations of Carden et al. (2007), the village of Um Bat'in meets some criteria in favor of onsite treatment and some criteria in favor of offsite. The whole of Um
Bat'in lies at least 25 meters above the water table and has no slope grades greater than 10%, both of which suggest the possibility of onsite treatment given additional factors. The population density of 26 residents per hectare also makes onsite treatment more economic. Complicating matters is greywater
85 volume. In terms of individual households, onsite treatment in inadvisable. In the case of Mahmoud's house, where seven family members consume an average 130L of water per day each, assuming 64% of effluent is greywater, then 582.4L of greywater are disposed of daily. Atop a half dunam plot,
11648L/hectare of greywater is disposed of daily, above the recommended >2500L/hectare daily for onsite disposal. If similar consumption can be assumed for the rest of the extended family of approximately 100 residents, whose residential area approximates 15 dunam, then daily greywater disposal would still approximate 5500L/hectare.
It should be noted that for households with larger land areas, onsite treatment becomes feasible, if not preferable. Site 1, for example was a 4 dunam plot housing 15 family members. If blackwater and greywater were to be separated and treated onsite, assuming 130L/day per person of water consumed, then daily wastewater production would not exceed 4.88m3/hectare. Considering the aforementioned factors, in this case, onsite treatment would allow adequate treatment with the lowest investment in terms of cost and labor.
Figure 25: Low- and high-density areas side by side in Um Bat'in
Concerning Sewerage
Though sewage networks ought not be considered where it is not environmentally or spatially necessary, in the denser part of Um Bat'in, they may be an inescapable necessity. Recommendations discussed by Hophmayer-Tokich (2006) reflect those by Carden et al. (2007), with consideration for
86 treatment of disposed wastewater. Conventional sewerage requires >100L/day per capita in order to properly function, a condition apparently met in Um Bat'in. However, for offsite treatment to be necessary, at least 10m3 of water ought to be produced. This is certainly the case at the household level depending on land allotment. The above example of seven residents on a 0.5 dunam plot would be a case where neither wet nor dry sanitation would be possible. Taking the extended family as a whole, greywater production is approximately 5.5m3 per day. Given this, with regards to greywater treatment in Um Bat'in, some collection, either at the scale of the extended family or multiple extended families would be necessary. However, it is unclear whether density at the scale of multiple extended families is sufficient to make sewerage feasible.
While it may be necessary to treat and dispose of greywater offsite for environmental concerns, doing so may also hold advantages in dealing with blackwater, allowing it to be at a volume that is treatable onsite. Assuming similar blackwater/greywater ratio rates as the rest of Israel
(Friedler, 2008), daily blackwater disposal at Mahmoud’s household would be 46.8L. This would mean that among seven family members, a volume of 6.6m3/hectare would be disposed daily, a volume which would make wet onsite sanitation recommended and sewerage possible (Hophmayer-
Tokich, 2006). Onsite blackwater treatment is outside the scope of this research and will not be elaborated upon further.
While current densities in Um Bat'in are insufficient make conventional sewerage economic.
In so-called development countries, Hophmayer-Tokich (2006) recommended a minimum density of
50 people per hectare. With a current residential density of 26 residents per hectare, the village still does not reach that benchmark. Nevertheless, onsite household sanitation is not necessarily feasible given current volumes of effluent disposed. Given these circumstances, alternative simplified sewerage networks, with lax conservative design practices and which accommodate lower effluent volumes, are more appropriate (Paterson et. al, 2007). In simplified designs, pipes are smaller in diameter and are placed at a shallower depth. Even in the case of designs which rely mainly on gravity, they need not be at a uniform angle at all time, and pipes can inflect and have a negative or flat grade if need be for a portion of the pathway (Dias and Matos, 2001).
87 The slope of Um Bat'in would allow greywater to collect downslope. The obvious implication is that if water were to be reused, then it would require pumps in order to return water to households, increasing the cost of water reuse. However, the location of a considerable number of houses along the Hebron Stream may be incapable of using gravity sewers. For some, the aspect of their slope leads directly to the now perennial Hebron stream with little space to install a constructed wetland. There are also some homes situated on level ground. In the case of the former, greywater may have to be pumped in order to divert down a different catchment pathway. While the latter may require some pumping, it may be possible to make use of simplified sewerage's capability of having a variable grade.
Figure 26: Level terrain in Um Bat'in (shaded blue) c. Homes near the Hebron stream d. Slope bearing west in eastern Um Bat’in
88 Figure 27: Converging slopes Um Bat'in c. Slopes converging towards Rosh stream (inhabited area) d. Slopes converging towards Gez stream (uninhabited area)
Communal Engagement
Though constructed wetlands provide both sanitation and a means of water reclamation, the apparentness of utility should not be taken as a given. Greywater treatment would not be the first sanitation project to be conducted in Um Bat'in, as noted by Meallem (2006) concerning solid waste and Cwikel et al. (2014) concerning organic waste. Neither saw much, if any, success with both garbage cans and biogas digesters sitting unused[3]. Solid waste still accumulates along the banks of the Hebron stream; trash burning was witnessed at Site 2; at Site 1 a broken glass was thrown into the garden without a second thought. Meanwhile household biogas digesters did not find adopters, even from those with large flocks of sheep[3, 12]. Operation was overly complicated, and inputs were insufficient to harvest sufficient methane for cooking[3]. The project was seen as never truly getting off the ground and little effort was taken to get residents on board with the adopting biogas[12]. In both cases, the failing of these projects was a result of the lack of widespread and substantial communal engagement. Ultimately, however, there is no way of ameliorating sanitation conditions without communal involvement.
89 There is a subjective low priority assigned to wastewater as compared to insufficient water supply, solid waste accumulation, and in the case of Um Bat'in the health of the Hebron Stream. For this to change would demand widespread education initiatives regarding health and environmental risks surrounding unsafe wastewater disposal. Awareness of environmental and health risks ought to follow form further evaluations of the village and other Bedouin settlements.
Given the low concern about wastewater sanitation once there is sufficient distance, it may be more acceptable for any projects that introduce greywater treatment to Bedouin villages to be positioned as water saving measures. For example, in the case of Mahmoud, whose house held seven people, greywater treatment would give them a buffer of 582L of water daily before evapotransipration and leakage, and this is considering that daily water consumption is 910L/day.
That said, the only two likely uses for treated greywater would be either toilet flushing or irrigation of trees and ornamental plants. Though there would need to be some investment in additional plumbing and storage containers, nearly all water for toilet flushing could, theoretically, be replaced entirely.
Whether treated greywater provides sufficient irrigation to be considered worthwhile, however, is a more complicated matter to address. First is the matter of need, which may not be universal, though a desire for agriculture in villages was mentioned multiple times. While this could possibly supplement adequate water for a small number of olive trees, it may not be seen as making enough of a dent for those who tend multi-dunam groves. Additionally, though there is a vision of
Um Bat'in and other villages receiving recognition as special status agricultural settlements like kibbutzim or moshavim, currently agriculture is regularly destroyed by State authorities, limiting the scope of agriculture in the villages[11, 12, 15]. It is possible that given present circumstances in Bedouin settlements with regards to agriculture, the potential for supplemental irrigation may be in vain. In both cases, any assumptions on the utility of greywater treatment reuse rests on its cost compared to purchasing additional water.
In terms of simplified sewerage, proper management is contingent on cooperation among households, especially if sewer lines are managed via cooperatives rather than municipal authorities.
90
Greywater collection would occur below individual households, which each household would have to help maintain. Given the collection networks in Al Zarnuq for wastewater disposal, there is precedence for such cooperation when it comes to wastewater collection[14]. Water supply cooperatives are also indicative of the likelihood of cooperation, with designated bill collectors among the 10 or more families connected to the same pipe and the ability for communal pressure to guarantee that all households pay their share[15]. There is doubt as to whether this sort of cooperation would cross tribal lines[3]. There might be a higher degree of success if these sewage networks were to operate at the extended family level or that of family clusters. Any intertribal conflict should be avoidable.
Figure 28: Homes from Abu Kaf (red) and Abu Assa (green) families along south bearing slope
Another potential issue in terms of buy-in is the implication of relying on such self-managed simplified systems. Having pipes underneath one’s house is not simply a convenience, but also a symbol of power. Across the world, formal sewerage has served as a factor distinguishing upper and lower classes (Paterson et. al, 2007; Morales, 2016). To provide decentralized solutions to water sanitation for the Bedouin, while Jewish settlements receive traditional sewerage, serves to treat the
Bedouin population as an outsider in a land where they hold citizenship. As stated by Morales et al.
91
(2014), “It is problematic to expect that the poor should have to participate in water delivery, sanitation solutions, or management of other basic services while others (particularly the rich) are not expected to do so.” This rift in necessity speaks not only to the rift in expectations between the Jewish and Arab sectors, but also the need of Israel's wastewater paradigm to evolve in order to be more environmentally conscious. Given the direction of development within the recognized villages, decentralized wastewater management should be seen predominately as a transitory strategy in a village such as Um Bat'in but should not be seen as a substitute or excuse for delay by developmental authorities, unless they opt to officially embrace them as a green alternative and move to guarantee the economic and institutional sustainability of such systems.
Cost of Treatment
Hand in hand with the need for cooperative management is the need to pay for utilities. The thesis of wastewater treatment being worthwhile is also contingent on affordability and financial savings. Residents of Um Bat’in have expressed a willingness to pay for services were they to be available. Meanwhile the Al Qasoom Regional Council is in the process of surveying the land to be able to properly charge municipal taxes[12, 16]. Construction of utilities, however, is not within the regional councils' control. Rather their introduction is in the hands of the Bedouin Development
Authority and is being implemented at a glacial pace. Additionally, in unrecognized villages, no such collection institution exists. In the meantime the operation and maintenance of wastewater disposal and treatment, including purchasing infrastructure, would be an expense for residents who already consider what little is paid on disposal as excessive.
While simplified sewerage is less expensive to construct and maintain than conventional sewerage, the former being only 20-50% the cost of the latter, cost is still a factor (Dias and Matos,
2001; Hophmayer-Tokich, 2007). As with conventional sewerage, the economy of simplified sewerage is scale dependent, and only becomes less expensive than onsite sanitation at a density of
160 residents per hectare, while current density is only a fraction of that figure. While this makes simplified sewerage less expensive than conventional sewerage, it still leaves it as potentially more
92
expensive than current conditions in Um Bat'in, where residents themselves are already shouldering the cost. As reported, at 500NIS, the cost of draining cesspits is seen as a significant expense[13, 15].
Instead of hiring a truck, some drain their pits themselves manually, which is viewed as laborious[15].
In order to minimize the cost and labor, cesspits are generally unlined, a choice which potentially increases the risk of groundwater and soil contamination. Without cost savings from greywater treatment and reuse, to expect residents to cover the cost of systems and sewerage themselves could be construed as unreasonable, given that current household expenses for water utilities in informal settlements exceed those in formalized settlements.
However, ignoring all State action, to suggest that water sanitation ought to be installed and managed privately or by NGOs is in itself problematic. Despite the precedence for cooperative water purchasing and disposal, these practices are born out of necessity due to State inaction and glacial development. These practices also place the entire cost on the community. These supply cooperatives also come with a modicum of risk, because if one family fails to pay on time, all families within a cooperative are disconnected from the tap[15]. In the same vein, a sewerage network which expects an investment of both finances and labor is at risk of widespread failure if individual families fail to maintain their section. Without a body managing wastewater disposal and treatment as well as collecting dues for it, responsibility will lie squarely on the community, regardless of whether they have the funding, capability or drive to act.
The Future of and beyond Um Bat'in
When considering introducing utilities in Bedouin villages, whether formal or informal, centralized or decentralized, it is necessary to keep in mind the rapid growth of villages. Negev
Bedouin population growth is among the highest in the world, though it had once been asserted by
Meir (1984) that urbanization and modernization will lead to an eventual drop in birthrates for the
Bedouin population. However, even as those living in villages in 2018 consider themselves to be modernists, the population continues to rise rapidly[6, 11]. In Um Bat'in growth has been at approximately 4% annually, so the fact that the population there is rapidly growing raises an
93
additional concern regarding the future. Were the density to be maintained at 26 residents per hectare, land use would need to double as the population did as well. This ballooning of residential area has been a visible trend based on aerial photography since the late 1990s[8]. The construction of homes on previously undeveloped land would begin to encroach on the agricultural character of the village, which has also been stifled by State regulation.
The other option would mean the construction of more and taller multistory housing units in
Um Bat’in, increasing the density, while leaving land available for agriculture and grazing. With an estimated residential population density of 2585 residents per square kilometer in 2016, Um Bat'in's density is not far off from that of the wealthy Jewish settlements of Omer and Meitar, with estimated residential densities of 3917 and 3904 residents per square kilometer respectively, based on their respective residential areas (CBS, 2016). Brick roofed, multistory buildings have already become common in Um Bat’in, and could be utilized accommodate more families. Should this trend continue with little interference, then the settlement’s density would begin approach those of the aforementioned settlements.
Considering these potential futures, it ought no longer to be policy that a village like Um
Bat'in be treated as a remote rural settlement, whether agriculture is part of the settlement's future or not. The old line of logic forwarded by Soffer and Ben-Gal (1983; 1985) applies less and less with the passing decades. Ergo, any wastewater strategy in Um Bat'in must address the risks forwarded by the current paradigm and will eventually need to shift to accommodate the future character of the ever-growing village.
It should be kept in mind that what fits for Um Bat'in is not what fits for all Bedouin villages where the clustering of dwellings and population will vary considerably. The recognized village of
Bir Hadaj, for example has a comparable area to Um Bat'in at 6.5km2. It also has a higher overall population at 7000 individuals among 250 families[9]. Though this would mean a greater population density overall, the layout of the village means less clustering of houses. In these circumstances, onsite means of treating wastewater ought to be considered in the coming years.
94
Summary
As with any settlement which lacks safe disposal or water treatment, conditions in Um Bat’in and by extension all informal Bedouin villages (both recognized an unrecognized) demand the implementation strategy to improve sanitation conditions. The detection of ARBs makes this need even more pressing.
This said, conditions in villages prevent universal strategies from being embraced. Taking
Um Bat’in as an example, low per capita water consumption and large swaths of agricultural land make overall residential density too low to embrace centralized water disposal. This said, density throughout the village is highly variant, with area along the Hebron stream having high population density while the central and southern reaches of the village are more variant with areas of low density.
This makes both onsite sanitation as well as low cost, simplified sewerage both necessary depending on location. This is especially the case if low cost, high land demand technologies like constructed wetlands are ultimately utilized. An added benefit of decentralization is water reuse, which can allow treatment to be framed as a water saving measure.
This said, it is important to remember that the low water consumption in villages like Um
Bat’in is inseparably tied to the high cost of water in Bedouin villages, especially due to the private purchasing of pipes for water transport. To think of villages as places of low consumption, and by extension low waste, is to ignore that residents of Bedouin villages ultimately pay more for fewer resources. The lack of effective sanitation is born out of the same phenomenon. Public services are denied and hence decisions must be made as to which investments are worthwhile. While water supply is nonnegotiable, minimal required effort is spent on costly and laborious water sanitation.
While it is the case that many residents see stream bed disposal and unlined cesspits as adequate, so long as odors and pests are absent, poor water sanitation ought to be seen as an issue of insufficient resources and a failure of institutions upstream, rather than one of ignorance. To approach the matter otherwise only serves to divorce raw wastewater disposal from the political systems and legal disputes that perpetuate it.
95 Chapter V: Conclusion: Summary and Recommendations
This research sought to better understand the potential need and feasibility of decentralized greywater treatment in informal Bedouin settlements of the Negev using the village of Um Bat'in as a case study. Though this research was preliminary and purely exploratory, a number of insights were drawn concerning how to approach the still unaddressed matter of wastewater management in
Bedouin settlements.
Section 1: The Necessity for Water Treatment
Though the results were to be expected, this research has quantified the quality of wastewater in informal Bedouin settlements, which is disposed of and occasionally reused without any prior treatment. Physio-chemical parameters were tested for, two of which (TSS and BOD5) exceeded both
Israeli disposal and reuse standards. This was the case for both blackwater and greywater streams.
The fate of the effluent is left in the hands of village residents, who may or may not be able to put up the minimal amount of distance between them and their waste. In one of three disposal sites, the only barrier between residents and their blackwater was a sheet of corrugated metal, the pit below receiving water from an open trench.
More pressing, this research has detected the presence of antimicrobial resistant bacteria flowing from the waste streams of multiple households. Conditions are potentially deleterious to public health, soil, and groundwater. Health concerns are especially troubling as disposal conditions within the informal settlements increase the likelihood of contact with contaminated water, thus raising the chance of antimicrobial resistant pathogens spreading beyond individual households to areas throughout the northern Negev.
Additional risk assessment in villages will be required, however, unchanging behavior regarding water sanitation continues to make the informal villages vulnerable to the epidemics. This also makes State inaction, placing land politics above environmental and health concerns, a major factor in the facilitation of a potential public health crisis. The irony of this is that arguments against
96 village recognition were advanced in part in to protect the Negev's ecology. Though it is impossible to discuss the conditions in informal settlements without also discussing the politics surrounding their existence, i.e. settlement recognition, land rights, and expectations of citizenship, functional water sanitation must be introduced to all Bedouin settlements in a timely manner, and allowance for such must spread beyond the villages that have already been recognized.
Section 2: Obstacles for Water Treatment in Bedouin Settlements
For the current wastewater paradigm, four factors interact with each other that prevent its change. Firstly, are matters of economics and priorities. Currently, all money for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure is fronted entirely by residents of the informal settlements, and the expenses are deemed to be excessive. Though the monetary and labor cost of digging and draining cesspits is considered high, it would still be lower than installing even simplified sewerage networks below house clusters. For those in recognized villages, the provision of conventional sewerage is an eventual reality. At this point, the Bedouin Development Authority is fronting the necessary funds needed to construct sewer lines with the expectation that the regional councils will be able to maintain them through municipal taxes[16]. This is, however, seen as distant reality, in which the community has little input. Considering the ongoing poverty in Bedouin settlements, outside funding sources may be necessary, and ongoing maintenance would have to be both less expensive and less laborious than the default option of cesspits.
The second set of obstacles relates to community engagement. The current wastewater paradigm is not without stated concerns dealing with issues including cesspit collapse, limited space, odors, and pest infestation. However, it appears that the matter is not whether the wastewater is safe, but rather that the way it is dealt with by residents is safe enough. The earth on one resident’s land was described as a safe barrier between the upper soil/groundwater and one’s waste; open defecation is conducted at a distance from one’s house; effluent evaporates quickly in dry streambeds; and the only water used for irrigation is that free of fecal matter or soaps/detergents. Though there is a lack of common knowledge as to the kitchen greywater being a pathway for infection, the matter is less 97 that wastewater is not seen as a hazard and more that it is not seen as enough of a hazard to warrant further action. Inadequate potable water is a more critical issue, and solid waste accumulation is more tangible, and, like waster sanitation, lacks a solution.
Because of this lack of urgency surrounding wastewater disposal, being advantageous may not be enough to install local treatment, especially without any initiatives to educate entire communities about present health risks related to wastewater disposal. Even if sewerage pipes and constructed wetlands were established, if municipal or State authorities do not take charge of wastewater management, then the onus falls on residents. This would mean that residents of informal villages must manage their own utilities, a responsibility that is not expected of residents of formalized settlements across Israel. This in turn continues to single out the Bedouin community as a separate entity from the rest of the State and would do little to better strengthen village residents’ status as citizens. Neither should the prospect of reuse be seen as an inherently compelling reason to change disposal paradigms. Greywater from kitchens is already utilized by many households, especially in the unrecognized villages, and nonuse by others appears to be more closely related to lack of need rather than distrust of untreated kitchen effluent. End pipe water disposal is an accepted paradigm that is perceived to be modern, which reuse may not be considered to be. This too is something which reinforces the divide between the Bedouin community and the rest of Israel.
Thirdly there are the governmental roadblocks, specifically the nonrecognition of the land and laws against greywater reuse. Greywater reuse remains illegal under Israeli law. There is also a sense in the informal settlements that any infrastructure project not implemented by the Bedouin
Authority will inevitably face demolition. Therefore, any successful implementation may not be possible without special dispensation from the State. Inaction on the part of the government has been a common response to issues within the Bedouin community, and it is this inaction to avert a potential health crisis that puts the State squarely in the camp of being complicit in its eventuality.
98
Section 3: Parameters of Onsite Treatment in Bedouin Settlements
Low residential density relative to formal settlements and low water consumption –a consequence of poverty and inadequate infrastructure— continue to make centralized wastewater infrastructure unfeasible. As the presence of ARBs makes wastewater treatment essential due to the dangers they pose, the introduction of constructed wetlands should be considered. These systems demand little in terms of maintenance, cost, electricity, or area. In dense areas vertical flow or hybrid systems would limit land sacrifices for house clusters that cannot devote a house-sized plot of land to water treatment.
One other advantage of decentralized sanitation is its flexibility, which in this case is necessary. since population distribution in Bedouin settlements is not uniform. Strategies ought to be density dependent, with lower density areas treating water onsite, simplifying transportation of water, while environmental and land use issues make offsite, local, semi-centralized sanitation a necessity in areas with higher density. In low density areas the primary saving is cost, including that of water transport. In dense clusters, simplified sewerage eliminates the hardship of sacrificing limited land and makes onsite blackwater sanitation more environmentally sound, given a treatment strategy.
While advantageous, decentralized treatment would demand communal buy-in in order to maintain wetlands and sewerage where installed. As burying water in cesspits is seen as sufficient, even if undesirable, the argument that greywater treatment is more environmentally/health conscious would likely not be convincing enough for many residents to invest. The more pertinent advantage of greywater treatment is its ability to maximize water resources more than the current use of kitchen greywater for irrigation. Greywater treatment would make water sourced from showers, sinks, and laundry safe for irrigation and flushing. This maximization angle might be the most compelling argument to engage residents. However, it rests on two issues. Firstly, there is that of trust in the safety of the water, given that light greywater is normally disposed with blackwater. Knowledge of safety would need to disseminate throughout the whole community in order to mitigate any doubts regarding its reuse.
99 The second issue is one of utility, basically how much useful water would be saved when compared to any monetary or labor investment. When biogas reactors were introduced, their output, even for families with large sheep flocks, was inadequate to make their operation worthwhile, which led to abandonment of the scheme. A similar fate is not an impossibility in this case. A family of seven that doesn’t exceed their water quota would dispose an estimated 15.7m3 of greywater monthly.
Based on the water tanker cost of 15NIS per cubic meter, gross savings would be approximately 235NIS per month, not accounting for the operation and maintenance of water treatment ( , 2014).
The non-potable nature of recycled greywater would mean that families with large flocks paying 1000NIS per month for water tankers, would gain nothing, limiting the use to gardens and agriculture[15]. For those whose daily water requirements greatly exceed daily greywater disposal, then like biogas, there would be little gain to supplementing greywater for potable water for irrigation. The drop in potable water consumption would have to be subjectively enough to make treated water a valued resource.
For others, this additional water for irrigation may be unneeded. While olive groves are visible in all Bedouin villages including Um Bat’in, no interviewees expressed or study sites showed any substantial agriculture. While inadequate water played a role in this, so did limited land and legal restrictions, neither of which would be solved by marginal water savings. Thus, while there may be a desire for more agriculture, it should not be seen as making the operation and maintenance of constructed wetlands inherently appealing. For those who would not benefit from greywater reuse for agriculture, the remaining use of said water would be for flushing, which would require an investment in additional plumbing to implement.
100 Section 4: Concluding Remarks
This research sought to identify not only the need for wastewater treatment in informal Negev
Bedouin settlements, but lay out potential strategies as well. By Israeli wastewater standards, disposal conditions in villages are not acceptable. This issue is compounded by the detected presence of antimicrobial resistant bacteria, which pose a potentially dire health risk for both the Bedouin community and the northern Negev as a whole. Though this makes improved disposal methods and treatment necessary, this paper also casts doubt on conventional centralized sewerage and WWTPs being the solution. This doubt lies upon geographic issues such as the variable residential and water consumption density within and between villages as well as the immediate need for water treatment against the time needed for infrastructure to reach all villages. That most Bedouin villages remain unrecognized further makes conventional sanitation solutions attainable.
Though these cannot be deemed as more than stopgap measures in the long term, in order to address the current crisis, various decentralized options are theoretically appropriate for Negev
Bedouin villages. However, there is no uniform solution for all villages. Firstly, decentralized management must include both onsite schemes where both blackwater and greywater are treated in the local vicinity and offsite schemes, which collect greywater to be treated a minor distance from homes. Density of water consumption should play a role in determining the strategy, and drainage basins should be relied upon for collecting wastewater wherever possible in order to utilize gravity for transportation. Because of the potential immediacy of the health crisis, sewerage design ought to be simplified in order to install it in a more expedient manner. Disinfection is also critical, so secondary treatment will also be necessary.
Beyond the need for State consent, without which, any sanitation and reuse project is vulnerable to termination, perhaps the biggest hurdle to introducing new wastewater disposal strategies is making water sanitation a perceived higher priority within the community. As of now it is seen as less critical than water shortages and solid waste accumulation, an issue tied to the political forces which leave Bedouin villages without infrastructure. However, while public concern over water sanitation pales in comparison to that of water supply, the potential for greywater reuse through 101 decentralized treatment may be a motivating factor for its implementation. This must occur in consort with widespread education within the entire community on the health and safety of reclaimed water.
Ultimately, the findings of this research are preliminary and suggest the need for both further research into environmental and health risks posed by untreated wastewater as well as the spearheading of educational and sanitation initiatives within informal Negev Bedouin settlements.
The extent of pollution and disease risk in Bedouin villages must be further understood in order to confront it, and must be coupled with the installation of infrastructure to reverse present conditions.
However, while there is utility in both improved disposal and greywater reuse, without State recognition neither should be seen as replacements for the integration of Bedouin settlements into the greater Israeli framework.
102 Limitations
Though this research strived for accuracy and thoroughness given the tools available, circumstances limited both what could be accomplished and what interpretations could be made. Regarding the water collection, only eight samples, four blackwater and four greywater, were collected over the course of four weeks. In addition to this, conditions at sampling sites varied between days and even between morning and evening collections. This included changes is disposal design, changes in behavior, and in the case of week 3 morning, changes in site conditions due to evaporation. This limited the statistical strength of analyses.
The number of interviewees was also of limited number, with only six members of the community being given in depth interviews. Interviewees also had a higher level of education and the Bedouin, or even Israeli national, average. Additionally, while there was little difficultly in communication, as the language which interviews was conducted was the first language of neither parties, there were occasional, if brief, failures of communication. This left possible insights inaccessible.
Finally, the scope of the research mean that its implications can only extend so far.
Neither primary, tertiary, nor blackwater treatment were studies. Thus, they were not accounted for. Neither were water tankers discussed as they were not used in Um Bat’in for domestic purposes. Um Bat’in itself cannot be used to fully understand conditions in all
Bedouin villages on account of it variable density as well as the fact that unlike most villages, it has received recognition from the State. Further research on other villages of differing layouts, sizes, and legal status will be needed in order to paint a fuller picture.
103 Bibliography
Abu-Rabia, Safa. "Between memory and resistance, an identity shaped by space: The case of the Naqab Arab Bedouins1." Hagar 8, no. 2 (2008): 93.
Abu-Saad, Ismael. "Spatial transformation and indigenous resistance: The urbanization of the Palestinian Bedouin in southern Israel." American Behavioral Scientist 51, no. 12 (2008): 1713 1754.
Al-Krenawi, A. "Awareness and utilization of social, health/mental services among Bedouin-Arab women, differentiated by type of residence and type of marriage." Beersheba: The center for Bedouin Studies and development(2004).
Alexander, Ernest R. "Density measures: A review and analysis." Journal of Architectural and Planning Research (1993): 181-202.
Almi, Orly, and Ali Abu-Sbaieh. No man's land: health in the unrecognized villages in the Negev. Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, 2003.
Almi, Orly. Water discipline: water, the state and the unrecognized villages in the Negev. Physicians for Human Rights, 2006.
"Preparing Detailed Plan Outline for the Village of Um Bat'in (Hebrew)." Mahmoud Basam to Rahamim Yonah. May 15, 2016. In Adalah. Accessed January 17, 2018. https://www.adalah.org/uploads/Detailed_master_plan_letter_Iqra_May_2016.pdf.
Benami, Maya, Osnat Gillor, and Amit Gross. "Potential health and environmental risks associated with onsite greywater reuse: a review." Built Environment 42, no. 2 (2016): 212-229.
Boyd, Claude E., and Craig S. Tucker. "Water quality and pond soil analyses for aquaculture." Water quality and pond soil analyses for aquaculture.(1992).
Carden, Kirsty, Neil Armitage, Kevin Winter, Owen Sichone, Ulrike Rivett, and Justine Kahonde. "The use and disposal of greywater in the non-sewered areas of South Africa: Part 1– Quantifying the greywater generated and assessing its quality." Water SA 33, no. 4 (2007).
Cwikel, Julie, and Nurit Barak. "The health and welfare of Bedouin Arab women in the Negev." Negev, Israel: Center for Bedouin Studies and Development (2002).
Cwikel, J., I. Meallem, Y. Garb and M. Zoabi. Developing Integrated Waste Recycling Systems for Agricultural and Environmental Safety Using Biogas Digesters in Unrecognized Villages for the Health Promotion of Bedouin Women. Final Scientific Report, Center for Women’s Health Studies & Promotion, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva. 2010.
Dias, S. P., and J. S. Matos. "Small diameter gravity sewers: self-cleansing conditions and aspects of wastewater quality." Water science and technology 43, no. 5 (2001): 111-118.
Dagan Buzaglo, Noga. "The Abu Basma Villages A Decade of Underdevelopment." Adva Center. August 2014. Accessed May 21, 2017. https://adva.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/12/beduin- english1.pdf.
104 Eaton, A. D., Lenore S. Clesceri, Eugene W. Rice, Arnold E. Greenberg, and M. A. H. Franson. "APHA: standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater." Centennial Edition., APHA, AWWA, WEF, Washington, DC(2005).
Eriksson, Eva, Karina Auffarth, Mogens Henze, and Anna Ledin. "Characteristics of grey wastewater." Urban water 4, no. 1 (2002): 85-104.
Eriksson, Eva, Henrik R. Andersen, Toke S. Madsen, and Anna Ledin. "Greywater pollution variability and loadings." Ecological engineering 35, no. 5 (2009): 661-669.
Esrey, Steven A., James B. Potash, Leslie Roberts, and Clive Shiff. "Effects of improved water supply and sanitation on ascariasis, diarrhoea, dracunculiasis, hookworm infection, schistosomiasis, and trachoma." Bulletin of the World Health organization 69, no. 5 (1991): 609. Ezery, Zubaida. Inadequate Wastewater Infrastructure’s Effect on the Health and Environmental the Bedouin Population in the Negev. MA Thesis for Ben Gurion University of the Negev, 2016.
Friedler, E. "Quality of individual domestic greywater streams and its implication for on-site Treatment and reuse possibilities." Environmental technology 25, no. 9 (2004): 997-1008.
Friedler, E., and M. Hadari. "Economic feasibility of on-site greywater reuse in multi-storey buildings." Desalination 190, no. 1-3 (2006): 221-234.
Friedler, E. "The water saving potential and the socio-economic feasibility of greywater reuse within the urban sector–Israel as a case study." International Journal of Environmental Studies 65, no. 1 (2008): 57-69.
Friedler, Eran, and Yael Gilboa. "Performance of UV disinfection and the microbial quality of greywater effluent along a reuse system for toilet flushing." Science of the total environment 408, no. 9 (2010): 2109-2117.
Gander, M., B. Jefferson, and S. Judd. "Aerobic MBRs for domestic wastewater treatment: a review with cost considerations." Separation and purification Technology 18, no. 2 (2000): 119- 130.
Ghaitidak, Dilip M., and Kunwar D. Yadav. "Characteristics and treatment of greywater: a review." Environmental science and pollution research international 20, no. 5 (2013): 2795.
Gross, A., N. Azulai, G. Oron, Z. Ronen, M. Arnold, and A. Nejidat. "Environmental impact and health risks associated with greywater irrigation: a case study." Water science and technology 52, no. 8 (2005): 161-169.
Gross, A., O. Shmueli, Z. Ronen, and E. Raveh. "Recycled vertical flow constructed wetland (RVFCW)—a novel method of recycling greywater for irrigation in small communities and households." Chemosphere 66, no. 5 (2007): 916-923.
Gross, Amit, Adi Maimon, Yuval Alfiya, and Eran Friedler. Greywater Reuse. CRC Press, 2015.
Hophmayer-Tokich, Sharon. "Wastewater Management Strategy: centralized v. decentralized technologies for small communities." The Center for Clean Technology and Environmental Policy, University of Twente, at the Cartesius Institute: Leeuwarden, The Netherlands (2006).
105 Inbar, Yossi. "New standards for treated wastewater reuse in Israel." In Wastewater reuse–Risk assessment, decision-making and environmental security, pp. 291-296. Springer, Dordrecht, 2007.
Kazemi, Gholam A. "Impacts of urbanization on the groundwater resources in Shahrood, Northeastern Iran: Comparison with other Iranian and Asian cities." Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C 36, no. 5-6 (2011): 150-159.
Kivaisi, A. K. (2001). The potential for constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment and reuse in developing countries: a review. Ecological engineering, 16(4), 545-560.
Langergraber, Günter, and Elke Muellegger. "Ecological Sanitation—a way to solve global sanitation problems?." Environment international 31, no. 3 (2005): 433-444.
Li, Fangyue, Knut Wichmann, and Ralf Otterpohl. "Review of the technological approaches for grey water treatment and reuses." Science of the Total Environment 407, no. 11 (2009):3439-3449.
Libralato, Giovanni, Annamaria Volpi Ghirardini, and Francesco Avezzù. "To centralise or to decentralise: an overview of the most recent trends in wastewater treatment management." Journal of Environmental Management 94, no. 1 (2012): 61-68.
Lipchin, C. (2014). Transboundary Management of the Hebron/Besor Watershed in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. In G. H.-W. and T. S. Francesca de Châtel (Ed.), Water Scarcity, Security and democracy: a Mediterranean Mosaic. Global Water Partnership Mediterranean, Cornell University and the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future
Mara, Duncan, ed. Low-cost sewerage. John Wiley, 1996.
Marx, Emanuel, and Avinoam Meir. "Land, towns and planning: The Negev Bedouin and the State of Israel." In Geography Research Forum, vol. 25, pp. 43-61. 2016.
Machate, T., H. Noll, H. Behrens, and A. Kettrup. "Degradation of phenanthrene and hydraulic characteristics in a constructed wetland." Water Research 31, no. 3 (1997): 554-560.
Malkawi, Hanan I., and Munir J. Mohammad. "Survival and accumulation of microorganisms in soils irrigated with secondary treated wastewater." Journal of Basic Microbiology: An International Journal on Biochemistry, Physiology, Genetics, Morphology, and Ecology of Microorganisms 43, no. 1 (2003): 47-55.
Mattholie, Robert. "Sanitation: planning the transition to waterborne systems." Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers 164, no. 9 (2011): 453.
Massoud, May A., Akram Tarhini, and Joumana A. Nasr. "Decentralized approaches to wastewater treatment and management: Applicability in developing countries." Journal of environmental management 90, no. 1 (2009): 652-659.
Meallem, Ilana. “The management of solid waste in recognized and unrecognized Bedouin villages of the Negev: Social context, impacts and recommendations.” MA Thesis for Ben Gurion University of the Negev 2006.
Meir, Avinoam. "Demographic transition among the Negev Beduin in Israel and its planning implications." Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 18, no. 6 (1984): 399-409.
106
Meir, Avinoam. "Nomads and the state: The spatial dynamics of centrifugal and centripetal forces among the Israeli Negev Bedouin." Political Geography Quarterly 7, no. 3 (1988): 251- 270.
Misra, Rabindra K., and Amphone Sivongxay. "Reuse of laundry greywater as affected by its Interaction with saturated soil." Journal of hydrology 366, no. 1 (2009): 55-61.
Morales, Margaret del Carmen, Leila Harris, and Gunilla Öberg. "Citizenshit: the right to flush and the urban sanitation imaginary." Environment and Planning A 46, no. 12 (2014): 2816- 2833.
Morales, Margaret C. "My pipes say I am powerful: belonging and class as constructed through our sewers." Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water 3, no. 1 (2016): 63-73.
Nasasra, Mansour. "The Southern Palestine Bedouin Tribes and British Mandate Relations, 1917– 48: Resistance to Colonialism." The Arab World Geographer 14, no. 4 (2011): 305-335.
Nasasra, Mansour. Naqab Bedouins: A Century of Politics and Resistance. Columbia University Press, 2017.
O’Neill, Jim. Tackling Drug-Resistant Infections Globally: Final report and recommendations. Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, 2016.
Parkinson, Jonathan, and Kevin Tayler. "Decentralized wastewater management in peri-urban areas in low-income countries." Environment and Urbanization 15, no. 1 (2003): 75-90.
Paterson, Charlotte, Duncan Mara, and Tom Curtis. "Pro-poor sanitation technologies." Geoforum 38, no. 5 (2007): 901-907.
Rosner-Manor, Y., Y. Rofè, and S. Abu-Rabia-Queder. "The Unrecognized Bedouin Villages– Internal Spatial Order as a Basis for Development.” 2013.
Rosner-Manor, Yaara, and Yodan Rofè. "Combining systems A and B: Creating a pattern language for the unrecognized Bedouin villages in the Negev, Israel.” 2015.
Rudnitzky, Arik, and Thabet Abu Ras. The Bedouin population in the Negev. Abraham Fund Inititatives, 2012.
Shafran, A. W., A. Gross, Z. Ronen, N. Weisbrod, and E. Adar. "Effects of surfactants originating from reuse of greywater on capillary rise in the soil." Water Science and Technology 52, no. 10-11 (2005): 157-166.
Soffer, Arnon, and Y. Bar-Gal. "Planned Bedouin settlement in Israel—a critique." Geoforum 16, no. 4 (1985): 423-428.
Swirski, Shlomo. "Transparent citizens: Israeli government policy toward the Negev Bedouins1." Hagar 8, no. 2 (2008): 25.
Tarabulus, Ori. "Thirsty for (the right) to water." Negev Coexistence Forum. June 2014. Accessed April 3, 2018. https://www.dukium.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/water-2014-eng.pdf.
107 Vymazal, Jan. "Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: five decades of experience." Environmental science & technology 45, no. 1 (2010): 61-69.
Vymazal, Jan. "Constructed wetlands for treatment of industrial wastewaters: a review." Ecological Engineering 73 (2014): 724-751.
Wallach, R., O. Ben-Arie, and E. R. Graber. "Soil water repellency induced by long-term irrigation with treated sewage effluent." Journal of Environmental Quality 34, no. 5 (2005): 1910-1920.
Wiel-Shafran, A., Ronen, Z., Weisbrod, N., Adar, E., & Gross, A. (2006). Potential changes in soil properties following irrigation with surfactant-rich greywater. ecological engineering, 26(4), 348-354.
Yahel, Havatzelet. "Land disputes between the Negev Bedouin and Israel." Israel Studies (2006): 1- 22.
Yiftachel, Oren. "Bedouin-Arabs and the Israeli settler state: Land policies and indigenous resistance." The future of indigenous peoples: Strategies for survival and development(2003): 21-47.
Yiftachel, Oren. "Epilogue: Studying Naqab/Negev Bedouins–Toward a Colonial Paradigm?." HAGAR Studies in Culture, Polity and Identities 8, no. 2 (2008): 83-108.
Zhang, Dong Qing, K. B. S. N. Jinadasa, Richard M. Gersberg, Yu Liu, Wun Jern Ng, and Soon Keat Tan. "Application of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in developing countries–a review of recent developments (2000–2013)." Journal of environmental management 141 (2014): 116-131.
"List of localities, in Alphabetical order." Central Bureau of Statistics. December 31, 2015. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.cbs.gov.il/ishuvim/reshimalefishem.pdf.
108 Talks and Interviews
Note: Names of private citizens changed for anonymity. Pseudonyms in brackets
[1] Phone call with Omri Zilberman: Environmental Consultant for Al Qasoom Regional Council
[2] Lecture by Clive Lipchin at DDD Conference: Director at Arava Institute
[3] Chat with Zubaida Ezery: Student at Ben Gurion University of the Negev
[4] Talk with manager at Shoqet WWTP
[5] Talk by Ya'ara Rosner: Urban planner
[6] Talk by and chat with [Walid]: Resident of Al Sirra
[7] Brief chat with [Ahmed], resident of Um Bat’in
[8] Seminar by Noa Tal: Urban planner
[9] Talk by [Nasir]: Resident of Bir Hadaj and manager for the Neve Midbar Regional Council
[10] Phone call with Kheli Zakhariah: From engineering office for Al Qasoom Regional Council
[11] Interview with [Bahir]: Lawyer and resident of Um Bat’in
[12] Interview with [Wafa]: Student, and resident of Um Bat’in
[13] Interview with [Mahmoud]: PhysEd teacher and Um Bat’in Resident
[14] Interview with [Hasan]: Activist and resident of Al Zarnuq
[15] Interview with [Amira]: Student, activist, and Um Bat’in resident
[16] Inverview with Jaber Abu Kaf: Head of Al Qasoom Regional Council
109