Comparison of environmental and health acceptability of squatting and sitting toilets: A review

IF 2.1 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI:10.1002/ep.14507
Hanyieh Salehfar, Asma Torkalipour, Seyydeh-Amene Karimi, Hossein Fayyazi, Mostafa Mahdavianpour
{"title":"Comparison of environmental and health acceptability of squatting and sitting toilets: A review","authors":"Hanyieh Salehfar,&nbsp;Asma Torkalipour,&nbsp;Seyydeh-Amene Karimi,&nbsp;Hossein Fayyazi,&nbsp;Mostafa Mahdavianpour","doi":"10.1002/ep.14507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In general, two types of sitting and squatting toilets are used by people in the world, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages from an environmental and health point of view. So far, no study has been done to compare these two types of toilets, precisely. Therefore, the precise comparison of these two types of toilets based on a simple literature review was the main purpose of this study. For this purpose, the amount of water consumption, toilet paper consumption, related diseases, ease of cleaning, odor problem, and the flexibility to equip with treatment and reuse systems in both types of toilets was compared. Squatting toilets is a better option in terms of water consumption, toilet paper consumption, ease of cleaning, and diseases related to body posture. In the case of infectious diseases, the sitting toilet has better conditions and in terms of flexibility to install the treatment and reuse systems, the conditions of both were almost similar. The odor problem in the sitting toilet is less than the squatting toilet. Since the advantages and disadvantages of both types of toilets are also complementary, the best option is to install both toilets together.</p>","PeriodicalId":11701,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy","volume":"43 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ep.14507","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CHEMICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In general, two types of sitting and squatting toilets are used by people in the world, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages from an environmental and health point of view. So far, no study has been done to compare these two types of toilets, precisely. Therefore, the precise comparison of these two types of toilets based on a simple literature review was the main purpose of this study. For this purpose, the amount of water consumption, toilet paper consumption, related diseases, ease of cleaning, odor problem, and the flexibility to equip with treatment and reuse systems in both types of toilets was compared. Squatting toilets is a better option in terms of water consumption, toilet paper consumption, ease of cleaning, and diseases related to body posture. In the case of infectious diseases, the sitting toilet has better conditions and in terms of flexibility to install the treatment and reuse systems, the conditions of both were almost similar. The odor problem in the sitting toilet is less than the squatting toilet. Since the advantages and disadvantages of both types of toilets are also complementary, the best option is to install both toilets together.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较蹲厕和坐厕在环境和健康方面的可接受性:综述
一般来说,世界上人们使用的厕所有坐式和蹲式两种,从环保和健康的角度来看,这两种厕所各有利弊。迄今为止,还没有研究对这两种厕所进行精确比较。因此,根据简单的文献综述对这两种厕所进行精确比较是本研究的主要目的。为此,我们比较了这两种类型厕所的耗水量、厕纸消耗量、相关疾病、清洁难易程度、异味问题以及配备处理和再利用系统的灵活性。从耗水量、厕纸消耗量、清洁难易程度以及与身体姿势有关的疾病等方面来看,蹲厕都是更好的选择。在传染病方面,坐式厕所的条件更好,而在安装处理和再利用系统的灵活性方面,两种厕所的条件几乎相似。坐式厕所的臭味问题比蹲式厕所小。由于两种厕所的优缺点也是互补的,最好的选择是同时安装两种厕所。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy
Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy 环境科学-工程:化工
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.60%
发文量
231
审稿时长
4.3 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Progress , a quarterly publication of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, reports on critical issues like remediation and treatment of solid or aqueous wastes, air pollution, sustainability, and sustainable energy. Each issue helps chemical engineers (and those in related fields) stay on top of technological advances in all areas associated with the environment through feature articles, updates, book and software reviews, and editorials.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information - Cover and Table of Contents Issue Information - Info for Authors Comparison of environmental and health acceptability of squatting and sitting toilets: A review Production and recycling of blast furnace slag: A life cycle assessment approach in India Incorporation of trace metals in Hanford waste boehmite mineral phases and dissolution rate impacts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1