array(3 items)
   publications => '22544' (5 chars)
   libraryUrl => '' (0 chars)
   layout => '0' (1 chars)

array(1 item)
   0 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=22544, pid=124)
      originalId => protected22544 (integer)
      authors => protected'Dössegger, L.; Tournefier, A.; Germann, L.; Gärtner, N
         .; Huonder, T.; Etenu, C.; Wanyama, K.; Ouma, H.; Meierh
         ofer, R.' (165 chars)
      title => protected'Assessment of low-cost, non-electrically powered chlorination devices for gr
         avity-driven membrane water kiosks in eastern Uganda' (128 chars)
      journal => protected'Waterlines' (10 chars)
      year => protected2021 (integer)
      volume => protected40 (integer)
      issue => protected'2' (1 chars)
      startpage => protected'92' (2 chars)
      otherpage => protected'106' (3 chars)
      categories => protected'point-of-collection chlorination; water treatment; recontamination; GDM wate
         r kiosk; low-income country' (103 chars)
      description => protected'Recontamination during transport and storage is a common challenge of water 
         supply in low-income settings, especially if water is collected manually. Ch
         lorination is a strategy to reduce recontamination. We assessed seven low-co
         st, non-electrically powered chlorination devices in gravity-driven membrane
          filtration (GDM) kiosks in eastern Uganda: one floater, two in-line dosers,
          three end-line dosers (tap-attached), and one manual dispenser. The evaluat
         ion criteria were dosing consistency, user-friendliness, ease of maintenance
         , local supply chain, and cost. Achieving an adequate chlorine dosage (∼2 
         mg/L at the tap and ≥ 0.2 mg/L after 24 h of storage in a container) was c
         hallenging. The T-chlorinator was the most promising option for GDM kiosks: 
         it achieved correct dosage (CD, 1.5-2.5 mg/L) with a probability of 90 per c
         ent, was easy to use and maintain, economical, and can be made from locally 
         available materials. The other in-line option, the chlorine-dosing bucket (4
         0 per cent CD) still needs design improvements. The end-line options AkvoTur
          (67 per cent CD) and AquatabsFlo® (57 per cent CD) are easy to install and
          operate at the tap, but can be easily damaged in the GDM set-up. The Ventur
         i doser (52 per cent CD) did not perform satisfactorily with flow rates >
          6 L/min. The chlorine dispenser (52 per cent CD) was robust and user-friend
         ly, but can only be recommended if users comply with chlorinating the water 
         themselves. Establishing a sustainable supply chain for chlorine products wa
         s challenging. Where solid chlorine tablets were locally rarely available, t
         he costs of liquid chlorine options were high (27-162 per cent of the water 
         price).' (1679 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'0262-8104' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'10.3362/1756-3488.20-00014' (26 chars)
      uid => protected22544 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected22544 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected22544 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)