Nurjanah, Iin Safaati (2019) Evaluasi Kinerja IPAL Komunal Di Kabupaten Gresik. Other thesis, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember.
Preview |
Text
03211540000068-Undergraduate_Theses.pdf Download (5MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Pencapaian target MDGs Indonesia sebesar 55% kurang menunjukkan kemajuan yang berarti. Buruknya sanitasi menyebabkan timbulnya berbagai penyakit seperti disentri, kolera, tipus, diare, hepatitis, demam berdarah, dan berbagai macam penyakit lainnya. Sehingga diperlukan fasilitas seperti IPAL komunal untuk memperbaiki kondisi sanitasi di Indonesia. Kabupaten Gresik merupakan Kabupaten yang memiliki IPAL terbanyak di Jawa Timur yaitu sebanyak 105 unit. Namun, hanya 21 unit IPAL yang beroperasi sesuai dengan perencanaan pembangunan. Sehingga diperlukan evaluasi aspek teknis dan aspek non-teknis. Evaluasi yang dilakukan bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi kinerja IPAL komunal di Kabupaten Gresik dan menentukan strategi peningkatan kinerja IPAL. Data kualitas air limbah, kuisioner, dan hasil observasi lapangan digunakan untuk mengevaluasi kinerja IPAL. Observasi lapangan digunakan untuk mengetahui kesesuaian bangunan dengan kriteria perencanaan. Pengukuran kualitas air limbah digunakan untuk mengetahui efektifitas removal masing-masing IPAL. Perbandingan kondisi eksisting dengan kriteria desain dinilai mulai dari skala 1 sampai 4. Data kuisioner digunakan sebagai bahan evaluasi aspek non-teknis dan pembobotan. Penentuan pembobotan skala prioritas permasalahan menggunakan metode Analitic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Data kualitatif yang berupa pendapat responden (key player) akan diolah menggunakan software expert choice dan akan menghasilkan bobot penilaian. Skor hasil evaluasi dikalikan dengan bobot masing-masing indikator sehingga diperoleh nilai akhir. IPAL yang memiliki nilai akhir kecil akan menjadi prioritas dalam evaluasi IPAL dan digunakan sebagai acuan perumusan strategi optimasi. Berdasarkan hasil evaluasi teknis dan non teknis, IPAL Peganden Sehat memiliki nilai tertinggi sebesar 3,4. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa kinerja dan kesesuaian desain IPAL Peganden Sehat sangat baik. IPAL Higienis 2, IPAL Siwalan Wonokitri, dan IPAL Sri Rejeki XI memiliki nilai evaluasi sebesar 3,3. IPAL Jati memiliki nilai evaluasi sebesar 2,9. IPAL Kauman Sehat memiliki nilai evaluasi sebesar 2,8. IPAL Telaga Abadi memiliki nilai evaluasi sebesar 2,7. IPAL Kramat Rahayu merupakan IPAL yang memiliki nilai evaluasi terendah yaitu 2,1. Sehingga dalam upaya peningkatan kinerja IPAL komunal, IPAL Kramat Rahayu menjadi prioritas dibandingkan dengan IPAL lainnya. Secara umum, permasalahan IPAL pada aspek teknis adalah parameter amonia yang tidak memenuhi baku mutu dan pengurasan yang dilakukan secara tidak teratur. Pengurasan IPAL yang dilakukan secara tidak teratur menyebabkan menurunnya efektivitas IPAL karena menumpuknya biomassa (lumpur) pada kompartemen. Berdasarkan hasil analisis, waktu pengurasan IPAL sebaiknya dilakukan 1-3 tahun sekali. IPAL ditambahkan diffuser dan kompressor untuk mendegradasi kandungan amonia dalam air limbah melalui proses nitrifikasi. Permasalahan IPAL pada aspek non-teknis adalah rendahnya koordinasi dan wawasan masyarakat, KPP, dan DPUTR. Wawasan tentang IPAL dapat ditingkatkan melalui poster dan sosialisasi. IPAL memerlukan SOP dan forum koordinasi agar koordinasi antara masyarakat, KPP, dan dinas menjadi lebih baik. =================================================================================================================================
The achievement of Indonesia's MDGs target of 55% is less significant. Poor sanitation causes various diseases such as dysentery, cholera, typhus, diarrhea, hepatitis, dengue fever, and various other diseases. So that facility such as communal WWTP is needed to improve sanitation conditions in Indonesia. Gresik Regency is the district that has the most IPAL in East Java, which is 105 units. However, only 21 units of WWTP operate in accordance with development planning. So that the evaluation of technical aspects and non-technical aspects is needed. The evaluation was aimed at evaluating the performance of communal WWTP in the Gresik Regency and determining the strategy for improving IPAL performance. Data on wastewater quality, questionnaires, and field observations were used to evaluate the performance of WWTPs. Field observations were used to determine the suitability of buildings with planning criteria. The measurement of wastewater quality is used to determine the effectiveness of the removal of each WWTP. A comparison of existing conditions with design criteria is assessed starting on a scale of 1 to 4. Questionnaire data are used as material for evaluating non-technical aspects and weighting. Determining the weighting of priority scale problems using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method. Qualitative data in the form of respondents' opinions (key players) will be processed using expert choice software and will produce the weight of the assessment. The evaluation score is multiplied by the weight of each indicator to obtain the final score. WWTP which has a small final value will be a priority in the evaluation of WWTP and is used as a reference for the formulation of optimization strategies. Based on the results of technical and non-technical evaluations, the WWTP Peganden Sehat has the highest value of 3.4. This shows that the performance and suitability of the Peganden Sehat WWTP design are very good. Higienis 2 WWTP, Siwalan Wonokitri WWTP, and Sri Rejeki XI WWTP have an evaluation value of 3.3. Jati WWTP has an evaluation value of 2.9. Kauman Sehat WWTP has an evaluation value of 2.8. Telaga Abadi WWTP has an evaluation value of 2.7. Kramat Rahayu WWTP is a WWTP that has the lowest evaluation value of 2.1. So that in an effort to improve the performance of communal WWTPs, Kramat Rahayu WWTP is a priority compared to other WWTPs. In general, IPAL problems in the technical aspects are ammonia parameters that don't meet the quality standards and drains which are carried out irregularly. Drainage of WWTP which is done irregularly causes a decrease in the effectiveness of WWTP because of the accumulation of biomass (mud) in the compartment. Based on the results of the analysis, the drainage time of WWTP should be done once a year. WWTP is added a diffuser and compressor to degrade ammonia content in wastewater through the nitrification process. The problem of WWTPs in the non-technical aspects is the low coordination and insights of the community, KPP, and DPUTR. Insights about WWTP can be improved through posters and socialization. WWTP requires an SOP and a coordination forum so that coordination between the community, KPP, and the agency becomes better.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Other) |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | RSL 628.36 Nur e-1 2019 |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Analitic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Evaluasi, IPAL, Kabupaten Gresik, Limbah cair. |
| Subjects: | T Technology > TD Environmental technology. Sanitary engineering > TD433 Water treatment plants |
| Divisions: | Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning > Environment Engineering > 25201-(S1) Undergraduate Thesis |
| Depositing User: | Iin Safaati Nurjanah |
| Date Deposited: | 02 Apr 2024 04:15 |
| Last Modified: | 02 Apr 2024 04:15 |
| URI: | http://repository.its.ac.id/id/eprint/66135 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |