Estudo de caso para a viabilidade de implementação de sistema de tratamento de esgoto compacto na região metropolitana de Goiânia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2236130810964Keywords:
Submerged aerated biofilter, ETE compact, UASBAbstract
The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of a system of ETE compact rather than a conventional system of sewage treatment plants already established in the country in the treatment of sewage, considering its cost, efficiency and demand space. Systems compared in this analysis are: ETE Goianira, conventional system; ETE Gold Fields, compact system. The station Gold Fields has not reached the efficiency of the conventional system, but the results are in accordance with what is established by environmental legislation. The ETE is more compact deployment cost and maintenance, but the difference does not make it unfeasible due to return in the occupation of space, which is substantially favorable compared to conventional stabilization ponds ETE Goianira.
Downloads
References
FUNASA. Saneamento para promoção da saúde. [S.l.], 2011. Disponível em: http://www.funasa.gov.br/internet/SanPromSau.asp. Acesso em: 29 abril 2011.
IBGE. Pesquisa nacional de saneamento básico: Tabela 46 - Distritos, total e sem rede coletora de
esgoto, por principal solução alternativa, segundo as Grandes Regiões, Unidades da Federação, Regiões Metropolitanas e Municípios das Capitais. [S.l.], 2000. Disponível em: http://www.ibge.gov.br/home/estatistica/populacao/condicaodevida/pnsb/esgotamento_sanitario/esg_sanitario46.shtm. Acesso em: 13 maio 2011.
SANEAGO. O esgoto em Goiânia. [S.l.], 2004. Disponível em: http://www.saneago.com.br/novasan/index.php?id=esgoto6&tit=esgoto. Acesso em: 29 abril 2011.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Ethical guidelines for journal publication
The REMOA is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
