Environmental Survey in Iraq 2010 (water - sanitation...

Environmental Survey in Iraq 2010

(water - sanitation - municipal services)

Detailed Report

Ministry of Planning / Central Organization for Statistics and Information Technology (COSIT)

Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Ministry of Environment

Baghdad Municipality

Ministry of Planning / Statistics Office / Kurdistan Region

Ministry of Municipalities / Kurdistan Region

Ministry of Environment / Kurdistan Region

In cooperation with UNICEF

June 2011

Bism Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

"and all things We have enumerated in a clear

register"

Ya-Sin:12

i

Acknowledgment

The Ministry of Planning/Central Organization for Statistics and Information

Technology (COSIT) extends its gratitude to UNICEF/Iraq Office, Ministry of

Municipalities and Public Works, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Higher

Education and Scientific Research, Baghdad Municipality and their counterparts in

Kurdistan Region.

It praises the efforts exerted during the preparation, implementation and report

publication stages by the members of the Higher Committee, Technical Committee,

Administrative and Financial Committee, central and local supervisors as well as

fieldwork teams from COSIT staff, Baghdad Municipality, the Ministry of

Municipalities and Public Works in Baghdad and in the governorates and their

counterparts in Kurdistan Region.

It extends thanks to all exerted efforts by participating experts in the Survey from

UNICEF, Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works, Ministry of Environment,

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Baghdad Municipality and

their counterparts in Kurdistan Region for their active participation in the preparation,

creation and design stages of the questionnaire and giving lectures.

It also extends it thanks to all employees in municipal administration, water and

sanitation administrations in Baghdad and the governorates for their cooperation in

providing accurate information leading to the success of the environmental survey.

ii

Participating Technical and Administrative Teams in Survey Implementation

The Higher Committee

Dr. Huda Muhsein Al-Allaq - General Secretary - Head of COSIT

Serwan Mohammad Muhyee Ed-deen - Head of Statistics Office Kurdistan

Region

Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT

Sa'di Abdul Sattar - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Mohammad Salah Hashim - Baghdad Municipality

Sabah Mikha Omran - Ministry of Environment

Kawther Abbas Abdullah - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region

Mohammad Saber - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region

Samir Abdul Samad - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region

Laheeb Jaleel Aboud - COSIT

Technical Committee

Thana Abbas Salman - General Manager of Technical Affairs - COSIT


Dr. Jathwa Abdul Karim - Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific

Research

Sami Ali Abu Kateef - COSIT

Nada Hadi Zayer - COSIT

Samir Mohammad Sa'di - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region

Iyad Ahmad Mohammad - Irbil Statistics Directorate

Zozak Kamal Mohammad - Sulaimaniya Statistics Directorate

Kathim Ibraheem Abdul Rahman - Dahuk Statistics Directorate

Bushra Abdul Jawad - COSIT

Samia Nassir Hussein - Ministry of Environment

Taghreed Sadeq Ali - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Rheem Muhsein Ismail - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Osama Lateef Mohammad - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Julnar Abdul Saheb - Baghdad Municipality

Saif Kareem abdul Hussein - Baghdad Municipality

Ali Mahmoud Fadel - Baghdad Municipality

Shaima Adnan Abdul Aziz - COSIT

iii

Administrative and Financial Committee

Nisreen Sami Suwadi - General Manager of Administrative and Financial

Affairs - COSIT


Hadeel Nauman Aziz - COSIT

Sabah Nouri - COSIT

Mazin Abdul Hassan - COSIT

Suad Hassan Fadel - COSIT

Ali Kathem - COSIT

Nawal Jasim Mohammad - COSIT

Report Preparation Team

Dr. Huda Muhsein Al-Allaq - General Secretary - Head of COSIT


Iyad Jawad Hassan - Analysis Unit Manager - COSIT





UNICEF Coordinators

Dr. Ali Al-Khateeb - Head of Water, Sanitation and Environmental Sanitation

Unite/acting

Eng. Sabbar Aliwi - Senior Assistant Programme Manager

Central Supervisors


Hutham Mohammad Hasim - HR Manager - COSIT

Abdullah Hassan Mathi - Manager of Training and Statistical Research Center

- COSIT

Suhaila Najim Mohammad - COSIT





Shaima Fakher Ali - COSIT

iv

Shaima Fareed Lazim - COSIT

Hadeel Nauman Aziz - COSIT

Rami Yousif Yacoub - COSIT

Audi Zaidan Hassan - COSIT

Adnan Qusai Abdul Hussein - COSIT

Monadel Khalil Ismail - COSIT

Osama Lafeef Mohammad - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works

Zozak Kamal Mohammad - Sulaimaniya Statistics Directorate

Iyad Ahmad Mohammad - Irbil Statistics Directorate

Kathim Ibraheem Abdul Rahman - Dahuk Statistics Directorate

Local Supervisors

Nowfal Ismail Talab - Nineveh

Adna Rida Baba Adel - Kirkuk

Jasim Sa'id Hussein - Diala

Ala' Ad-Deen Mahmoud - Al-Anbar

Abdul Kareem Jasim - Baghdad

Sa'di Abdul Sattar - Baghdad municipalities

Abdul Amir Doboh Mohammad - Babil

Adeeb Mohammad Ali - Kerbala

Jasim Obeid Salman - Waset

Abdul Mortah Khair Allah - Salahuddin

Fayq Aziz Majeed - Al-Najaf

Fadel Abul Hur Abid - Qadisiya

Mani' Bahlose Atiya - Al-Muthana

Abbas Dawoud Shati - Thi-Qar

Khalaf Ali Abniya - Missan

Jasib Hassan Mhouder - Basrah

Jiyafan Abdul Razzak - Dahuk

Hussein Kamil - Irbil

Mahmoud Othman - Sulaimaniya

v

Fieldwork Teams in Governorates

Nineveh

Fahid Suleiman Ahmad -

Statistics

Iyad Tariq Yousif - Statistics

Abdullah Ali Aziz -

Municipalities

Omar Adnan Yahya -

Municipalities

Kirkuk

Diryah abdul Jalil Mohammad

- Statistics

Nermien Aba Baker -

Municipalities

Diala

Rasha rasheed Hussein -

Statistics

Adel Hassan Azim - Statistics

Mohammad Ibrahim Farman -

Municipalities

Hassan Khalil Ismail -

Municipalities

Al-Anbar

Zakariya Yahya Najeeb -

Statistics

Ayoub Sahab Matar - Statistics

Ra'ed Ali Mikhlif -

Municipalities

Akram Nouri Nourman -

Municipalities

Baghdad

Qasim Mohammad Sahib -

Statistics

Khalid Waleed - Statistics

Dawoud Salman Zeidan -

Satatistics

Mohammad Ali Abdul Wahid -

Municipalities

Ali Kathem Hilal -

Municipalities

Ali Mahmoud Fadel -

Municipalities

Babil

Hamid Gloub Mohammad -

Statistics

Majif Makki MAnthour -

Municipalities

Kerbala

Abdul amir Abbas Mohammad

- Statistics

Ra'ed Khalaf Abid -

Municipalities

Waset

Mahdi Sahyout Hussein -

Statistics

Ihsan Falih Hassan -

Municipalities

Sallahuddin

Abdul Mortah Khair Allah -

Statistics

Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim -

Statistics

Baseel Issa Ibrahim -

Municipalities

Osama Abdul Abbas Farhan -

Municipalities

Al-Najaf

Hussein Jabbar Abid - Statistics

Ahmad Furat Kathim -

Municipalities

vi

Qadisiya

Firas Mu'in abdul Rida -

Statistics

Osama Mohammad Kathim -

Municipalities

Al-Muthanna

Wahab Abduil Khadir Abdul

Hassan - Statistics

Bashar Ratib Abbas -

Municipalities

Thi-Qar

Muhannad Abdul Abbas Khalaf

- Statistics

Salam Kamil Kate'a - Statistics

Aqueel Abdullah Tahir -

Municipalities

Mohammad Adel Jasim -

Municipalities

Missan

Ali Iryan Salih - Statistics

Hassanein Shihab Ahmad -

Municipalities

Basrah

Ahmad Abdul Hafiz Salman -

Statistics

Shaheel Shaddad Faris -

Municipalities

Dahuk

Hakar Haji Nassar - Statistics

Hikmat Othman Rajab -

Statistics

Hassan Mohammad Sa'id -

Statistics

Mohammad Hasan Moustafa -

Municipalities

Nozad Ali Mohammad -

Municipalities

Sirbar Surur Sadeq -

Municipalities

Irbil

Mohammad Hamad Rasoul -

Statistics

Farhoud Saber Ibrahim -

Statistics

Sherko Abdul Kareem Yaseen -

Statistics

Sallahuddin Hidar Omar -

Statistics

Karwan Jabbar Hasan -

Municipalities

Tet Niya Jameel Ibrahim -

Municipalities

Sarteeb Qader Hamad -

Municipalities

Khalil Taha Ibrahim -

Municipalities

Sulaimaniya

Fraydon Mohammad Mahmoud

- Statistics

Danish Abdul Rahman Ahmad

- Statistics

Shiraz Najib Kareem -

Statistics

Ribwar Ali Faraj - Statistics

Naram Abdullah Qader -

Municipalities

Souran Jamal Moustafa -

Municipalities

Bet Yara wa Baizeed Hasan -

Municipalities

Diyar Aziz Ahmad -

Municipalities

vii

Table of Content

Survey methodology

1. Forward 1

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Survey objectives 1

1.3 Results and expected benefits of the survey 2

2. Work methodology and survey implementation 2

2.1 Level of representation 2

2.2 Survey questionnaire 3

2.2.1 Water sector questionnaire 3

2.2.2 Sanitation sector questionnaire 4

2.2.3 Municipal services questionnaire 4

2.3 Timeframe 5

2.4 Training 7

2.5 Data processing and checking 8

2.5.1 Programmes 8

2.5.2 SPSS for producing output tables and statistical analysis 8

2.6 Fieldwork 8

2.7 Desktop work 9

3. Analysis of results 10

3.1 Water sector 10

3.2 Sanitation sector 17

3.3 Municipal services sector 25

Detailed tables 35

Annex -1: Concepts and terminology 153

Annex -2: Survey questionnaire 161

viii

List of Detailed tables

1. Water Sector 36

Table-1: number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network

by environment in Iraq for 2010

37

Table-2: percentage of crude water sources used in water production stations by type in Iraq for

2010

37

Table-3: number and percentage of water production stations, total designed capacity, output of

produced water and percentage from designed capacity by type in Iraq for 2010

38

Table-4: number and percentage of water production stations by status and type in Iraq for 2010 38

Table-5: percentages of governorates' need for new water production stations, availability of

alternative energy for stations working on solar energy and availability of water meters in

governorates in Iraq for 2010

39

Table-6: number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network

by environment and governorate for 2010

40

Table-7: number and percentage of water production stations by type and governorate for 2010 41

Table-8a: number and percentage of operational water production stations by type and

governorate for 2010

42

Table 8b: number and percentage of partially operational water production stations by type and


43

Table 8c: number and percentage of non-operational water production stations by type and


44

Table-9: rate of crude water drawn from source to water production stations by type and


45

Table-10: percentage distribution of the rate of crude water drawn from source to water

production stations by type and governorate for 2010

46

Table-11: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and governorate

2010

47

Table-12: percentage distribution of the rate of drinking water produced in water production

stations by type and governorate for 2010

48

Table-13: rate and percentage of water loss in water distribution network serving the population

from water production stations and assessment of amounts of drinking water needed by

environment and governorate for 2010

49

Table-14: individual's average share of drinking water serving the population by governorate for

2010

50

Table-15: number and percentage of projects, rate of crude water drawn from surface water and

its total design capacity, rate of available capacity, amount of water produced and percentage

from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

51

ix

Table-16: number and percentage of projects by status and governorate for 2010 52

Table-17: number and percentage of water collections and rate of amount of crude water drawn

from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of water produced and

percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

53

Table-18: number and percentage water collections by status and governorate for 2010 54

Table-19: number and percentage of wells and water production stations mounted on wells

(excluding desalination stations), total design and available capacity, rate of water produced and


55

Table-20: rate of water drawn from wells and used as crude water source in water production

stations (excluding desalination stations) and distributed to the population without treatment by


56

Table-21: number and percentage of water production stations mounted on wells (excluding

desalination stations) by status and governorate for 2010

57

Table-22: number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO) total design and available

capacity, rate of water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

58

Table-23: number of desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination

stations and their percentage distribution by source of crude water used and governorate for

2010

59

Table-24: number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO) by status and governorate

for 2010

60

Table-25: number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy, rate of amount of crude

water drawn from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of water

produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

61

Table-26: number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy by status and governorate

for 2010

62

Table-27: number of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and

water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010

63

Table-28: percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production

stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010

64

Table-29: number of samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at

production stations and water distribution networks in the month preceding the survey by type

and governorate for 2010

65

Table-30: percentage distribution of the samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and

produced water at production stations and water distribution networks in the month preceding

the survey by type and governorate for 2010

66

Table-31: percentage of availability instances of produced water reaching consumers through

distribution networks for 2010

67

Table-32: percentage distribution of produced water by sector and governorate for 2010 68

Table-33: number of units with water standards (budget) out of units covered by the Public

Water Directorate in the governorate or Baghdad Municipality, number and percentage of units

with water meters by status and governorate for 2010

69

Table-34: percentage of main problems faced by the water sector for 2010 70

x

Table-35: number and percentage of water production stations under construction by type and


71

Table-36: number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post

and governorate for 2010

72

2. Sanitation Sector 75

Table-37: summery of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010 76

Table-38: number and percentage of population connected to sanitation networks and shared-

networks and percentage of served areas by network type, rate of produced wastewater for

central treatment stations and small treatment stations, polluting activities and under

construction sanitation networks projects by governorate for 2010

78

Table-39: percentage of type and status of network, cases of wastewater spillage and spillage at

rain fall for 2010

79

Table-40: number of central treatment stations by type, status and governorate for 2010 80

Table-41: number of central treatment stations, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity

and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

81

Table-42: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks connected to central

treatment stations and amount of wastewater produced (treated and untreated), BOD

concentration in treated water discharged from central treatment stations by governorate for

2010

82

Table-43: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater from central treatment

stations by type and stations absorption capacity of wastewater produced for 2010

83

Table-44: number of small treatment units total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and


84

Table-45: number of small treatment units in served and un-served areas, polluting activities,

total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by


85

Table-46: number of small treatment units in areas not served by sanitation networks by status,

amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced and percentage of treated wastewater to

that produced by governorate for 2010

86

Table-47: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater from small treatment

stations in areas not served by sanitation networks for 2010

87

Table-48: number of small wastewater treatment units (in served areas/hospitals, residence

compounds, hotels…etc.) by type, status and governorate for 2010

88

Table-49: amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced in areas served by small

treatment units and percentage of treated wastewater by governorate for 2010

89

Table-50: number of small treatment units for polluting activities (health institutions, industrial

establishments, carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses, agricultural activities, other) by

type and governorate for 2010

90

Table-51: rate of liquid waste produced and treated at small treatment units from polluting

activities and percentage of liquid waste treated to produced by governorate for 2010

91

xi

Table-52: percentage of existence of polluting activities and discharge destination of treated and

untreated liquid waste for 2010

92

Table-53: number of sewage water pumping stations by type and governorate for 2010 93

Table-54: number and percentage of pumping stations by status and governorate for 2010 94

Table-55: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for pumping stations for 2010 95

Table-56: percentage of main problems faced by sewage networks and treatment stations by


96

Table-57: number and percentage of population trespassing on rainwater networks by


97

Table-58: percentage of discharge destinations of water from rainwater networks by type for

2010

98

Table-59: number and percentage of population connected to independent treatment system

(septic tank) by governorate for 2010

99

Table-60: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic

tanks by destination for 2010

100

Table-61: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater (households not connected to

sewage networks and septic tanks) by discharge destination for 2010

101

Table-62: amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation water and

percentage of disposal destinations of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation

water by governorate for 2010

102

Table-63: number of working, idle and broken machinery in sanitation sector by governorate for

2010

103

Table-64: number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010 105

3. Municipal Services Sector 108

Table-65a: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 109

Table-65b: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 110

Table-65c: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 111

Table-66: number of municipalities by category and governorate for 2010 112

Table-67: number of population served by garbage collection, amount of lifted garbage per day

by governorate for 2010

113

Table-68: rate of garbage collected and lifted per day under municipal jurisdiction and

percentage distribution by area and governorate for 2010

114

Table-69: rate of hazardous waste collected per day and percentage of municipalities hazardous

waste is collected from by source and governorate for 2010

115

xii

Table-70: rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and


116

Table-71: percentage of allocated containers present for garbage collection distributed across

areas and their numbers by governorate for 2010

118

Table-72: percentage of number of containers distributed across areas by governorate for 2010 119

Table-73: percentage distribution of container use distributed across areas, number of discharge

times per week and percentage of garbage separation on households' level by governorate for

2010

120

Table-74: percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of

machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010

121

Table-75: number of municipalities owning machinery, number and percentage of

municipalities with sufficient machinery , average number of garbage collection times from

households by machinery and press machinery per week by governorate for 2010

131

Table-76: percentage of municipalities contracting companies or garbage collection contractors,

number of machinery owned by the companies or contractors working within the jurisdiction of

the municipality and rate of collection per week by companies or contractors by governorate for

2010

132

Table-77: percentage distribution of city cleaning by the municipality and rate of cleaning per

week by area and governorate for 2010

133

Table-78: percentage distribution of city cleaning by companies or contractors and rate of

cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010

134

Table-79: number and percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of

war problems by area and governorate for 2010

135

Table-80: percentage of the presence of regular transforming stations, temporary irregular

collection sites within municipal borders and their numbers and total area by governorate for

2010

136

Table-81: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval

and their percentage and areas by governorate for 2010

137

Table-82: number of garbage burial sites according to initial municipal design, rate of

groundwater depth at these sites by governorate for 2010

138

Table-83: number of burial sites granted environmental approval and percentage of their type by


139

Table-84: percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for

2010

140

Table-85: number of burial machinery and equipment and percentage distribution by status

(working, idle and broken) for 2010

142

Table-86: number of burial sites with no environmental approval and percentage distribution of

their type by governorate for 2010

143

Table-87: number of employees at burial sites by post for 2010 144

xiii

Table-88: percentage of garbage treatment method by governorate for 2010 145

Table-89: percentage of main problems faced by municipal services sector in garbage collection


146

Table-90: percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by municipal staff

during the year preceding the survey, number of programmes, number of participants and

percentage of benefit from preparing environmental awareness programmes by governorate for

2010

147

Table-91: number and percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by

bodies or organisations and number and percentage of governorates where programmes were

implemented for 2010

148

Table-92: number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010 149

Table-93: indicators on rubble crushing plants in Baghdad Municipality for 2010 152

xiv

List of Graphs

Graph-1: percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by

environment for 2010

10

Graph-2: number of water production stations by type for 2010 11

Graph-3: percentage distribution of water production stations by status for 2010 11

Graph-4: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type for 2010 12

Graph-5: percentage rate of produced water to designed capacity of water projects for 2010 13

Graph-6: number of water complexes by status for 2010 14

Graph-7: percentage distribution of produced water by sector for 2010 15

Gragh-8: percentage of main problems faced by water sector for 2010 16

Graph-9: number of water production stations under construction by type for 2010 16

Graph-10: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared-networks and

septic tanks and percentage of unconnected population for 2010

17

Graph-11: rate of produced wastewater from central treatment stations and small treatment units

and polluting activities by governorate for 2010

17

Graph-12: percentage of areas by type of network for 2010 18

Graph-13: percentage distribution of networks status in governorates for 2010 18

Graph-14: total designed capacity and rate of actual capacity at central treatment stations by


19

Graph-15: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater at central treatment stations

by type of destination for 2010

20

Graph-16: number of small treatment units by area in Iraq for 2010 20

Graph-17: percentage of discharge destinations of liquid waste of polluting activities with no

small treatment units for 2010

21

Graph-18: number of pumping stations in Iraq by type for 2010 22

Graph-19: percentage of main problems faced by sanitation sector for 2010 22

Graph-20: percentage of water discharge destinations for households connected to septic tanks in

Iraq for 2010

23

Graph-21: percentage of water discharge destinations for households not connected to sanitation

networks and septic tanks by destination for 2010

24

Graph-22: percentage of disposal destination of produced sludge from wastewater treatment

process by type of destination for 2010

24

Graph-23: percentage distribution of types of municipalities for 2010 25

xv

Graph-24: percentage of population connected to garbage collection service for 2010 26

Graph-25: amount of lifted garbage (ton/day) for 2010 27

Graph-26: percentage distribution of amount of garbage collected and lifted per day by areas for

2010

27

Graph-27: percentage distribution of treatment method of hazardous waste for 2010 28

Graph-28: number of working, idle, broken down and rented machinery for 2010 29

Graph-29: percentage of city cleaning by municipalities, companies and contractors for 2010 30

Graph-30: percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems

by area for 2010

30

Graph-31: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval

for 2010

31

Graph-32: percentage distribution of type of burial sites granted environmental approval for 2010 31

Graph-33: percentage distribution of type of burial sites not granted environmental approval for

2010

32

Graph-34: percentage of treatment methods of garbage for 2010 33

Graph-35: percentage of main problems facing the municipal sector in garbage collection for

2010

33

1

Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)

1. Forward

1.1 Introduction

The ecosystem is characterised by the balance between its different elements such as

water, air and earth. It can adapt to changes within certain limits, however, the

development in life, technological advancement, the use of machinery and radioactive

chemicals, the great pressure on natural resources as well as pollutants produced by

human activities have all led to huge a imbalance. Hence, the environment and its

protection are considered one of the main tasks facing governments in general. In our

country, Iraq, this has gained an exceptional importance particularly owing to what

the country has through during over two decades of continuous destructive wars and

the deep environmental deterioration they inflected on all its elements; soil, water and

air.

Environmental protection and improvement must, therefore, be taken seriously and be

of priority concern for the state and citizen. Of utmost importance to consider is the

provision of accurate and updated information and data on the different environmental

elements compatible with international standards and criteria, which is considered

essential for international comparisons or comparing the scale of change in the

country over time. It also facilitates for decision and policy makers the adoption of

successful ways to develop and improve the environmental reality.

As a contribution by the Central Organization for Statistics and Information

Technology (COSIT) and the Statistics Office/Kurdistan Region in the active

participation in caring for the environment of Iraq and diagnosing its problems,

numerous surveys were implemented partially targeting the environment as well as

implementing a number of specialized environmental surveys, most important of

which:

1. Environmental Survey in Iraq for the year 2005 (water - sanitation - municipal

services); and

2. Environmental Survey of Medical Services Activities in Iraq for the year

2008.

The technical staff at COSIT has also implemented in cooperation with the staff of the

Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works, Baghdad Municipality, and the

Statistical Office and counterpart bodies in the Kurdistan Region with the support of

UNICEF the Environmental Survey in Iraq for the year 2010 (water - sanitation -

municipal services), hoping that the data in this report would achieve the set

objectives.

1.2 Survey objectives

The objective of the survey is to provide a database on all aspects related to the status

of institutions related to the water, sanitation and municipal services sectors through

the following indicators:

2


1. Provide data on water services and percentages of those served on urban, rural

and governorate levels;

2. Provide data on sanitation services and percentages of those served on

governorate level; and

3. Provide numeral indicators on municipal services and percentages of those

served, amount of garbage and methods of treatment on governorate level.

Through the provision of such data environmental policy makers in relevant

governmental institutions will be able to draw the right strategies for both

environmental and social protection from all harms.

1.3 Results and expected benefits of the survey

1. Identify the percentages of those served by clean drinking water to take into

consideration covering the whole of Iraq with clean drinking water networks

while preparing future plans;

2. Identify the percentages of those served with sanitation networks and degree

to which these networks and treatment stations adhere to environmental

conditions;

3. Identify the percentages of those served by municipal services in order to work

on developing and expanding delivered services to society;

4. Develop environmental awareness by broadcasting available information and

data from the survey through the media;

5. Identify the size of environmental problems in order to address them by all

means possible;

6. Good future planning to address pollution after identifying the quantity and

type of pollutants produced and the level of their hazard on the environment;

and

7. Identify future plans and projects on services provision to society.

2. Work methodology and survey implementation

2.1 level of representation

The survey covered all governorates in Iraq including the governorates of the

Kurdistan Region. Data was collected and presented for the water and sanitation

sectors on governorate levels. Jurisdiction on the water sector is divided in the

Governorate of Baghdad, Baghdad Municipality and the governorates in the

Kurdistan Region, therefore, data was collected on the levels of the governorate centre

and periphery while data on the sanitation sector was collected on governorate level

except for Baghdad.

3


As for the municipal services sector, it was on municipal level while results were

provided on governorate level. There are a few shared municipalities between the

governorates of Irbil and Nineveh, as well as Dahuk and Nineveh. According to the

Administrative Units Guide published by COSIT these shared municipalities are

under the governorate of Nineveh, but the data of the Kurdistan Region was adopted.

The table below shows the number of municipalities for each governorate in Iraq

included in the survey.

SN Governorate Municipalities (no.) SN Governorate Municipalities (no.)

1 Nineveh 27 11 Al-Najaf 9

2 Kirkuk 14 12 Qadisiya 15

3 Diala 21 13 Al-Muthana 11

4 Al-Anbar 20 14 Thi Qar 20

5 Baghdad Municipality 14 15 Missan 15

6 Baghdad Periphery 15 16 Basrah 15

7 Babil 16 17 Sulaimaniya 68

8 Kerbala 7 18 Irbil 61

9 Waset 17 19 Dahuk 43

10 Salahuddin 17 Total 425

2.2 Survey questionnaire

Three types of questionnaires were prepared for the Environmental Survey in Iraq for

2010 (water – sanitation – municipal services). The survey questionnaire was awarded

the utmost care for the importance of the subject. Therefore, the questionnaire of the

Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2005 was studied and thoroughly discussed by

members of the higher and technical committees at COSIT and the ministries

(Municipalities and Public Works, Environment, Higher Education and Scientific

Research and Baghdad Municipality).

The questionnaire was also discussed with the Statistics Office/Kurdistan Region and

members of Municipal and Environment ministries in the Region, and presented to

technical experts at UNICEF to review. As a result, a number of important paragraphs

were added to the questionnaire arriving at the following form:

2.2.1 Water sector questionnaire

The water sector questionnaire included indicators on number of population

connected to clean drinking distribution networks, amount of prepared water, the

estimated need for clean drinking water in the governorate as well as the number of

water projects, complexes, well stations, solar energy and desalination stations

(Reverse Osmosis) showing their design capacity and amounts of water produced.

4


The water sector questionnaire also included the type and number of tests carried out

on clean drinking water at water production stations (water projects, complexes, well

stations, solar energy and desalination stations) and distribution networks. In addition

to type and number of tests carried out on crude water and governorates need for

water projects, complexes, well stations, desalination stations or solar powered

stations. It also considered the main problems faced by the drinking water sector in

the governorate and data on the directorate staff by specialisations.

2.2.2 Sanitation sector questionnaire

The sanitation sector questionnaire included indicators on the number of population

connected to sanitation and rain networks, shared networks, number of population

connected to septic tanks in the governorate, amounts of wastewater produced and

that treated indicating the number of central treatment stations and small treatment

units, their design and actual capacities as well as type of polluting activities (treated

and untreated) dumped into the sanitation network. It also considered the main

problems related to sanitation networks in the governorate and data on the directorate

staff by specialisations.

2.2.3 Municipal services sector questionnaire

The municipal services sector included three types of questionnaires where

questionnaires were designed according to the differences in jurisdictions between

municipal directorates in the governorates and municipal directorates in Baghdad

Municipality as follows:

1. Questionnaire (3-A): its data was collected from municipal directorates in the

governorates included Baghdad governorate.

The municipal services sector questionnaire included indicators ion the number and

percentages of population included in the garbage collection service under the

jurisdiction of the municipality, amount of normal and hazardous garbage collected

and lifted per day, their sources, methods of treatment and disposal.

The questionnaire also included data on the number of distributed containers by area,

number of times emptied by municipal directorates and number of available

machinery.

The questionnaire also included data on transforming stations (regular and irregular),

the area, burial sites (granted and not granted environmental approval) and adherence

to environmental standards and conditions, main problems facing municipal

directorates in garbage collection, implementing environmental awareness

programmes to directorate's staff and number of participants as well as data on

municipal staff by specialisation.

5


2. Questionnaire (3-B): its data was collected from municipal directorates under

Baghdad Municipality.

The questionnaire included indicators from questionnaire (3-A) excluding those on

burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval, their area, type as well as

regular and irregular transforming stations.

3. Questionnaire (3-C): its data was collected from the Environment and Solid Waste

Directorate at Baghdad Municipality.

The questionnaire included data on stations' management, temporary irregular

collection sites, regular and irregular burial sites as the Environment and Solid Waste

Directorate at Baghdad Municipality is responsible for managing these stations and

sites, therefore, questions related to these indicators were separated into a special

questionnaire. In addition to the above, questionnaire (3-C) included data on rubble

crushing plants under Baghdad Municipality, number of machinery, rubble sources

and amounts as well as data on separation and recycling sites under Baghdad

Municipality.

2.3 Timeframe

To ensure that all survey sages are subject to a clear methodology and to assure

controlling all its different activities, a detailed time schedule was prepared for the

different stages of the survey and generally adhered to, as shown in the table below.

The survey was implemented between 2/1 – 30/1/2010 in all the governorates of Iraq.

6


Time schedule of the Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010

SN Activity Timeframe

First Preparation stage

- Forming the committees 1-4/8/2010

- Preparing output tables 1-4/8/2010

- Design of questionnaires and preparing the instructions 1-4/8/2010

- Discussing the questionnaire with experts 8/8/2010

- Conduct pre-test and pilot questionnaire 15/8/2010

- Adopting final draft of questionnaires 18/8/2010

- Preparing data checking and coding instructions 19/8/2010

- Preparing computerised data entry, output tables and reporting

programmes 22/8-23/9/2010

- Preparing for fieldwork 29-31/8/2010

- Identify and prepare requirements for courses and fieldwork (printing +

requirements + transport) 5-9/12/2010

Training courses

- First training course: for central supervisors and field researchers in

Baghdad 27-29/12/2010

- Second training course: for central supervisors, field researchers and

checking staff - in Irbil 3-5/1/2011

- Third training course: for data entry staff - in Baghdad 13-14/2/2011

- Fourth training course: for data entry staff - in Irbil 21-22/2/2011

Second Fieldwork stage

- Fieldwork 2-30/1/2011

Third Desktop work stage

- Checking and coding 1-15/2/2011

Forth Data entry and computing stage

- Computerising the questionnaire 16/2-6/3/2011

- Checking of final results 6/3-10/4/2011

Fifth Preparing and publishing reports stage

- Preparing report first draft stage 11/4-2/5/2001

- Evaluating first draft report (workshop) in Baghdad 8/5/2011

- Evaluating first draft report (workshop) in Irbil 23-25/5/2011

- Preparing report's final draft 29/5-5/6/2011

- Publication of final report 3/7/2011

- Launching workshop of survey results in Kurdistan Region 28/7/2011

7


2.4 Training

Training technical staff of all levels received great attention. Training was not limited

to technical staff but included committees' members, central supervisors, desktop

checking and data entry staff. Training courses included pilot field visits where a pre-

test was implemented for the water and sanitation questionnaires in the governorates

of Irbil, Dahuk and Basrah. The municipal services questionnaire was pre-tested in a

number of municipalities in Irbil and Basrah followed by a pilot survey in a number

of municipalities in Baghdad.

Training activities for the Environmental Survey fro 2010

Can be summed up as follows:

1. The total number of implemented training course was (4); two training courses

for (3) days targeting central supervisors and field researchers, the first course

was implemented in Baghdad between 27-29/12/2010 and the second in Irbil

between 3-5/1/2011, two course for data entry staff for two days in Baghdad

between 13-14/2001 and in Irbil between 21-22/2/2011. Desktop checking

staff were selected from members of the committees and central supervisors.

2. The number of participants was (179) distributed as follows:

Higher Committee 10

Technical Committee 20

Administrative and Financial Committee 8

Central Supervisors 19

Local supervisors 19

Field researchers 66

Desktop Checking Staff and Checking Supervisors 15

Systems and Programmes 4

Data Entry and Entry Supervisors 18

Total 179

8


2.5 Data processing and checking

2.5.1 Programmes

CSPro was used for data entry and processing. Checking rules were introduced on

most fields of the questionnaire to control and validate the data achieving the

following objectives:

Ensure data entry accuracy;

Check that instructions and special rules for filling the questionnaire were

adhered to correctly; and

Enable the diagnosis, monitoring and correction of cases of data inconsistency.

2.5.2 The use of SPSS to produce output tables and data analysis

2.6 Fieldwork

A detailed work plan was prepared to implement fieldwork that can be summarised as

follows:

1. The total number of central supervisors was (19) distributed across

governorates, one supervisor for each governorate, except for the Governorate

of Baghdad that had two central supervisors.

2. The total number of local supervisors was (19) represented by the statistics

manager in each governorate.

3. The total number of field researchers was (66) from statistics and municipal

directorates in all governorates. The number of researchers from statistics

directorates was (33) and another (33) researchers form municipal directorates

as shown in the table below:

SN Governorate Researchers (no.) SN Governorate Researchers (no.)

1 Nineveh 4 10 Al-Najaf 2

2 Kirkuk 2 11 Qadisiya 2

3 Diala 4 12 Al-Muthana 2

4 Al-Anbar 4 13 Thi Qar 4

5 Baghdad 6 14 Missan 2

6 Babil 2 11

5 Basrah 2

7 Kerbala 2 16 Sulaimaniya 8

8 Waset 2 17 Irbil 8

9 Salahuddin 4 18 Dahuk 6

Total 66

9


Fieldwork continued for (20) days. To ensure efficient and effective implementation,

a means of transport was provided for each central supervisor and field researcher,

which researchers used for the duration of fieldwork .

2.7 Desktop work

1. After the completion of fieldwork and to ensure accuracy of collected data

from the directorates, the completed questionnaires underwent the following

series of checking process by:

The field researcher: the researcher checks all questions in the questionnaire

and by reviewing all sections responsible for completing the relevant data;

Local supervisor: the local supervisors checks all questions in the survey

questionnaire;

Central supervisor: the central supervisor checks the survey questionnaire in

the field and at the office in the governorate; and

Central auditor: the central auditor checks and codes the questionnaire at the

office and in case there are any notes or questions he contacts the persons in

charge of completing the questionnaire to correct the data;

2. After the completion of the training course of data entry staff, a sample of the

survey questionnaire was selected for the three sectors (water – sanitation –

municipal services) for a pilot data entry the heck the survey data entry

programmes and adjust them in light of questionnaires' data.

3. The questionnaires are checked by experts for the ministries of Municipalities

and Public Works and from Higher Education and Scientific Research.

4. After completing the central checking process, the data were automatically

entered using CSPro. To ensure accuracy and to avoid any mistakes, the data

were re-entered once again and the two entry processes were compared after

which corrections and data cleaning were made.

It should be noted that data entry and checking were conducted in two centres one

at COSIT HQ in Baghdad and the other at the Statistic Office/Kurdistan Region at

Irbil.

10


3. Analysis of results

The Environmental Survey of Municipal Services Sector in Iraq for 2010 is the

second specialised survey implemented in Iraq on the provision of services to Iraqi

citizens. An Environmental Survey of Municipal Services Sector in Iraq for 2005 was

previously implemented by the Environmental Statistics Directorate that included all

governorates in Iraq except for the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil.

The present survey included all governorates in Iraq including the governorates of the

Kurdistan Region. Baghdad Municipality and the Ministry of Municipalities and

Public Works/Baghdad Periphery were considered the sources for statistical data

collection since the responsibility for the services falls on them separately.

Below are the main indicators on the level of Iraq:

3.1 Water sector

The results of the environmental survey in Iraq for 2010 (table-1) showed that

the percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution networks

in all of Iraq was 78.7%. in urban areas the percentage was 86.1% and 62.1% in

rural areas as in graph-1. In 2005 the percentage of population connected was

73.7%; 79.9% in urban areas and 61.6% in rural areas.

By comparing the environmental surveys of 2005 and 2010, and after excluding

the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil that were not included in the 2005 survey, it

is noted that the percentage of those connected reaches 78.2%; 85.4% in Urban

areas and 62.8% in rural areas.

When comparing with neighbouring countries; it is noted that the percentage of

population connected to drinking water networks in Jordan is 98% for 2006 and

82% for Turkey in 2008.

0

20

40

60

80

100

urbanruraltotal

86.1

62.1

78.7

Graph-1: percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment for 2010

11


Survey results in table-2 showed that the number of water production stations

reached (5578) divided into (water projects, water complexes, stations mounted

on wells, RO water desalination stations and solar powered stations) where their

numbers reached (321, 2796, 2022, 160 and 279) respectively as in ghraph-2.

Survey results also showed that that total design capacity of stations is 16.2 million

m3/day and produced water is 11.6 million m

3/day, i.e. the percentage of produced

water to design capacity was 71.8% as shown in graph-3. The percentage of

working stations reached 86.3%, partially working 8.4% and idle 5.3% as shown in

table-4 and graph-3.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

projectswatercomplexes

wellsdeslinationstations

solarpoweredstations

321

2796

2022

160 279

Graph-2: number of water production stations by type for 2010

86.3

8.4 5.3

Graph-3: percentage distribution of water production stations by status for 2010

working

partailly working

idel

12


Survey results in table-5 shows that all governorates need new water projects,

except for Baghdad Municipality, and they also need RO water desalination

stations, except for the governorates of the Kurdistan Region and Baghdad

Municipality. They also show that the number of governorates with water

meters are three; Nineveh, Kirkuk and Baghdad Municipality.

Table-11 shows that the total rate of produced drinking water reached 11.6

million m3/day and that the highest quantity produced was in Baghdad

Municipality at 2.5 million m3/day and the lowest in the governorate of

Dahuk/central at 101 thousand m3/day. The majority of produced water was

from water projects as it reached 7.7 million m3/day with a percentage of 66.5%

as shown in table-12 and graph-4.

Table-13 shows the percentage distribution of the rate of water prepared in

urban and rural areas as it reached 70.4% and 29.6% respectively. It is noted

that the highest percentage of water loss in the water distribution network was

40% in the governorates of Nineveh and Baghdad Municipality owing to

trespasses on the networks, pipe cracks and leaks as well as the lack of water

meters. The table also shows that the total estimated need for clean drinking

water has reached 14.7 million m3/day for all governorates.

The average individual share of prepared water for those connected in the

governorates reached 0.37 m3/day, equalling 370 litre/person/day. The average

individual share to the total population in the governorates reached 0.29 m3/day

equalling 290 litre/person/day [after exchanging cubic meter to litre] as shown

in table-14.

010000002000000300000040000005000000600000070000008000000


wellsdeslinationstations

solarpoweredstations

7721862

3303905

573134 13934 5713

Graph-4: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type for 2010

13


The total number of water projects in Iraq reached 321 in 2010 with a total

design capacity of 10.1 million m3/day and actual capacity of 7.7 million

m3/day. The percentage of produced water to design capacity reached 76.6%.

The governorate of Nineveh had the highest percentage of produced water from

projects to design capacity at 106.8% owing to the insufficiency in the amount

of water produced from central projects to meet the governorate's needs and

hence resorted to operating back-up pumps in addition to operating pumps to

increase production. This has led to the increase in actual production capacity

for some projects to the design capacity in the governorate as shown in table-15

and graph-5.

It should be noted that the percentage of working projects was 93.1%, partially

working 5.6% and idle 1.2% as shown in table-16.

Survey results also showed (table-17) that the number of water complexes

reached 2796 concentrated mostly in Al-Anbar governorate (366) complexes

followed by the governorate of Basrah (300), with a total design capacity of

4.9 million m3/day. The amount of produced water was 3.3 million m

3/day,

hence, the percentage of produced amounts to design capacity reached 66.6%.

the highest amount produced was in the governorate of Basrah at 625.7

million m3/day. The number of idle water complexes was 172 the highest

number of which was in the governorate of Salahuddin (65 water complexes)


75

90 82.6

91.2

62 69

46

83.3

96

80 80 77.5 69.2

61.4

38.1

74.9 71

91.6

68.2

106.8

87.5

39.9

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Graph-5: percentage rate of produced water to designed capacity of water projects for 2010

14


Table-19 shows that the number of water production stations mounted on

wells reached 2022 the majority of which are in the governorates of the

Kurdistan Region and Kirkuk with a total design capacity of 1.1 million

m3/day and a total actual capacity of 558.7 million m

3/day, which means that

the percentage of produced water to design capacity reached 53%, noting that

water drawn from wells and distributed without treatment to the population

reached 445.7 million m3/day as shown in table-20.

Table-22 shows that the number of RO water distillation stations reached 160

most of them were concentrated in the governorates of Basrah and Thi Qar

reaching 49 and 48 respectively, with a design capacity of 78 thousand m3/day

while desalinated produced water reached 13.9 thousand m3/day, hence the

percentage of produced desalinated water to design capacity was 17.9%.

behind the decrease in this percentage is the increase in the percentage of idle

stations as they represented 38.8% as shown in table-24.

Results in table-23 showed that the number of governorates producing

desalinated water reached 10 governorates and that the majority of water

sources used in desalination stations was form water projects and water

complexes reaching 89.7% while the other source was ground water at 10.3%.

Table-25 shows that the number of working water production stations using

solar energy was 279 with a total design capacity of 8.3 thousand m3/day and a

total actual production rate of 5.7 thousand m3/day, making the percentage of

produced amounts to design capacity at 69.2%. the majority of them were

concentrated in the governorate of Diala with 34 stations, followed by the

governorate of Nineveh with 10 stations. The governorates of the Region,

Baghdad Municipality, Al-Najaf and Thi Qar have no such stations although

the governorates of Al-Najaf and Thi Qar n=have stations under construction.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

workingpartially workingidle

2227

397 172

Graph-6: number of water complexes by status for 2010

15


Table-33 shows that 22.7% of governorates consume good quantities of water

reaching 300-400 litre/person/day and 4.5% of governorates consume below

average quantities at 100-200 litre/person/day.

Table-32 shows the percentage distribution of produced water by sectors

where the highest percentage of produced water went to household use at 87%

and the lowest went to the governmental sector at 5.7% as in graph-7.

Results show that the main problems facing the water sector in all

governorates are the weakness and instability of electrical power needed for

operating and lack of citizens' awareness on conservation at a percentage of

100%, followed by citizens trespasses on the network and not enough of

technical and administrative staff at a percentage of 90.9% and finally age of

the network (old) and its weakness at 86.4% of all governorates as shown in

table-34 and graph-8.

87

5.7 7.3

Graph-7: percentage distribution of produced water by sector for 2010

household

governmental

other

16


Table-35 shows the number of water production stations under construction

that reached 504. Water complexes come in first place with 192 complexes

followed by solar powered stations at 122, well-mounted stations at 69 and

then water projects at 61. The majority of water projects and desalination

stations are in the governorate of Kirkuk as shown in graph-9.

Table-36 shows the number of employees in public water directorates in all

governorates and Baghdad Municipality that reached 46178, full-time staff

were 34497, part-time staff 4946 and day labourers 6735.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


well-mounteddesalinationstations

solar poweredstations

61

192

69 60

122

Graph-9: number of water production stations under construction by type for 2010

40.9

68.2

36.4

86.4

72.7

22.7

72.7

90.9

31.8

100

90.9

100

22.7

020406080100120

inefficiency of project

scarcity of crude water at water source

pollution of water source

network age and weakness

project production insufficient

weak maintenance & lack of sustainabilit

scarcity of spare parts and raw materials

lack of technical and administrative staff

inefficiency of technical staff

scarcity and instability of electrical power for operating

citizens trespassing on the network

citizens lack of awareness and conservation

other

Gragh-8: percentage of main problems faced by water sector

for 2010

17


3.2 Sanitation sector

The results of the Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 showed that 23.8% of

the population of Iraq are connected to sanitation networks and shared-

networks, and that 59.5% are connected to septic tanks. As for the population

neither connected to sanitation networks nor to septic tanks they represented

16.7% of the population of Iraq as shown in table-37 and graph-10.

Compared to neighbouring countries, population connected to the sanitation

networks in Jordan were 61% in 2006 and 73% in Turkey in 2008.

Survey results showed that the rate of wastewater produced for central treatment

stations and small treatment units and polluting activities reached 107 million

m3/day, the highest of which was in Baghdad Municipality were it reached 1.2

million m3/day as shown in table-38 and graph-11.

23.8

59.5

16.7

Graph-10: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared-networks and septic tanks and percentage of

unconnected population for 2010

populatiopn connected tosanitation networks and share-networks

population connected to septictanks

population not connected tonetworks or septic tanks

0

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

70000 70000 93600

0 40405 25100 8125 0

67000 12000 0

1200000

47006 0 0 1248 0 15150 0

Graph-11: rate of produced wastewater from central treatment stations and small treatment units and polluting activities by governorate for 2010

18


Survey results show that 12.5% of areas are connected to sanitation networks,

30.2% connected to rainwater networks and 7.6% connected to shred-networks

as in graph-12.

Table-39 shows that 73.7% of governorates the status of the three types of

networks (sanitation, rainwater and shared) was average, 21.1% was good and

5.3% was bad. The table also shows that 89.5% of governorates suffer from

sludge in sewage water after it rains as in graph-13.

12.5

30.2

7.6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

sanitation networksrainwater networksshared-networks

Graph-12: percentage of areas by type of network for 2010

21.1

73.7

5.3

Graph-13: percentage distribution of networks status in governorates for 2010

good

average

bad

19


Table-40 shows that the total number of central treatment stations reached 21 in

all of Iraq distributed by type to preliminary, elementary, secondary and tertiary.

The number of secondary stations was 20 with the governorate of Salahuddin

having the largest number (4). Elementary stations numbered one in the

governorate of Qadisiya, while the governorates of Dahuk, Nineveh,

Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Dial, Baghdad Periphery, Waset ad Al-Muthana

have no central treatment stations. The table also shows that the number of

working stations reached 15.

Table-41 shows that the total design capacity of central treatment stations was

1.3 million m3/day the majority of which were in Baghdad Municipality, while

the actual capacity rate was 1.5 million m3/day, which represents a 15.7%

increase from its design capacity. This is owing to the load on central treatment

stations that is above their design capacity as it was evident in Baghdad

Municipality and the governorate of Qadisiya as shown in graph-14.

Table-42 indicates the percentage of the population connected to sanitation

networks connected to central treatment stations reached 29.5% and that the

amount of wastewater produced reached 1.6 million m3/day and that 44.7% of it

was treated.

Table-43 shows that 36.8% of governorates discharge wastewater into the river,

15.8% is discharged into sewage lagoons and 5.3% into neighbouring land. The

Majority of governorates discharge wastewater to more than one destination as

in graph-15.

Average design capacity of central

treatment station (m3/day)

Average actual production of

central treatment station (m3/day)

Basr

a

Missa

n

Th

i-Qar

Mu

than

na

Qad

issiya

Naja

f

Sala

h-A

l-Din

Wassit

Karb

ala

Bab

il

Bagh

dad

(sub

urb

s)

Bagh

dad

Mu

nicip

ality

An

bar

Diy

ala

Erb

il

Kir

ku

k

Su

laym

an

iya

Nin

ew

a

Doh

uk

Graph 14: average total design capacities and average actual production capacity of

central treatement stations by governorate for 2010

20


The table also showed that 26.3% of governorates have central treatment stations

that can absorb the produced wastewater and an equal percentage of governorates

cannot. The remaining 47.4% of governorates do not have central treatment

stations.

Table-45 shows that the number of small treatment units reached 29, 4 of them

for areas unconnected, 19 in connected areas and 6 units for polluting activities.

The percentage of the actual capacity to the design capacity reached 89.3% in

unconnected areas, 59.2% in connected areas and 27.9% for polluting activities

as in graph-16.

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

treatmentplant

riverneighbouringland

other

15.80%

36.80%

5.30% 5.30%

Graph-15: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater at central treatment stations by type of destination

for 2010

0

5

10

15

20

unconnectedareas

connected areaspolluting activities

4

19

6

Graph-16: number of small treatment units by area in Iraq for 2010

21


Table-46 shows that the amount of wastewater produced for small treatment

units in the unconnected areas reached 32 thousand m3/day and the treated

amount was 25 thousand m3/day and the percentage of the amount of treated

wastewater to the produced was 78.1%.

Tabkes-48 and 49 show the number of small treatment units in the connected

areas (hospitals, residential areas, hotels...etc.) reached 19 the majority of them

in the governorate of Nineveh (7) units, followed by the governorates of Kirkuk

and Qadisiya (3) unites each. The amount of wastewater produced in connected

areas reached 32.9 thousand m3/day where 50% of it is treated.

Table-50 shows that the number of small treatment units for polluting activities

was 6 all partially working and their treatment type is secondary.

Table-51 shows that the amount of wastewater produced (liquid waste for

polluting activities) reached 3.3 thousand m3/day and that 2.97 thousand

m3/day of produced wastewater was treated equalling 0.1%.

Table-52 shows that 52.6% of governorates that do not have treatment units

discharge liquid waste from polluting activities into the sanitation network and

47.4% into sewage lagoons and another 47.4% into the river. There are more

than one discharge destination for each governorate as in graph-17.

52.6

47.4 47.4

26.3

21.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

sanitation networktreatment plantriverneighbouring landother

Graph-17: percentage of discharge destinations of liquid waste of polluting activities with no small treatment units for 2010

22


The survey results revealed that the number of pumping stations reached 891

divided into four types: (rainwater pumping station, wastewater pumping

station, shared stations and submersible pumping station) numbering 458, 213,

116 and 104 respectively as shown in graph-18. The majority of them are

concentrated in Baghdad Municipality that has 251 stations. The least number

of stations was in the governorate of Kirkuk at (4) while there are no stations in

the governorates of Dahuk, Sulaimaniya and Irbil as shown in table-53.

The percentage of good pumping stations reached 39.3%, average to 57.6% and

bad 3.1% as shown in table-54.

It is noted from thable-56 that the main problems facing the sanitation sector are

trespasses on the sanitation and rainwater networks, lack of awareness and

misuse of sanitation networks with a percentage of 89.5% for each of all

governorates followed by scarcity and instability of electrical power needed for

operating treatment and pumping stations at 78.9% of governorates as in graph-

19.

458

213

116

104

Graph-18: number of pumping stations in Iraq by type for 2010

rainwater pumping stations

wastewater pumping station

shared pumping station

submersible pumping station

57.9

21.1

63.2

68.4

52.6

42.1

78.9

89.5 89.5

26.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

inefficiency of networks

weak maintenance and sustainability

lack of technical and administrative staff

lack of machines

age, consumption and broken pumps

age of treatment station

scarcity and instability of electricity

trespasses

lack of awareness

othe

Graph-19: percentage of main problems faced by sanitation sector for 2010

23


Tables-57 and 58 show that 27.6% of the population of Iraq trespass on the

rainwater networks with the biggest percentage in the governorate of Waset at

85%, followed by the governorate of Al-Anbar at 80%. 44% of governorates

discharge rainwater directly into the river and 34.9% into sewage lagoons.

Table-59 shows that 59.5% of the population of Iraq are connected to an

independent treatment system (septic tanks) with the highest percentage in the

governorates of Dahuk and Diala at 99% and the lowest in the governorate of

Missan at 11%.

Table-60 shows the discharge destination of wastewater for households

connected to septic tanks where the highest percentage was discharging into

neighbouring (adjacent) lands at a percentage of 39.5% followed by sewage

lagoons at 26.6% as in graph-20.

It is noted from table-61 that 52.6% of Iraqi governorates discharge wastewater

of households unconnected to sanitation networks or septic tanks into

neighbouring lands followed by rainwater networks at 42.1% then sewage

lagoons at 36.8% as shown in graph-21.

5

26.6

4.1

39.5

24.8

Graph-20: percentage of water discharge destinations for households connected to septic tanks in Iraq for 2010

transfered to central treatmentstations by trcuks

sewage lagoons

river

neighbouring land

other

24


Survey results showed that the amount of sludge produced by central treatment

stations reached 32.4 thousand tons/year with the highest amount in Baghdad

Municipality at 15 thousand tons/year while the lowest amount was in the

governorate of Al-Anbar at 240 tons/year. No sludge is produced in 10

governorates. The disposal of sludge produced goes largely to agriculture 61.7%


Table-64 shows that the number of employees in the sanitation sector has

reached 12576 the majority of them are full-time (11489), part-time (110) and

day labourers (977).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

transfered tocentral treatmentstations by trcuks

rainwaternetworks

sewage lagoonsriverneighbouring landsother

10.5

42.1

36.8

10.5

52.6

26.3

Graph-21: percentage of water discharge destinations for households not connected to sanitation networks and septic tanks by destination for 2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

agricultureindustrymunicipalitieshygienic burial

61.7

0

16.1 22.2

Graph-22: percentage of disposal destination of produced sludge from wastewater treatment process by type of

destination for 2010

25


3.3 Municipal services sector

Table-65A gives a summary of most important indicators related to the

municipal services sector for 2010. The total number of municipalities included

in the survey is 425 across all governorates of Iraq. The table also shows that

802% of burial sites were granted environmental approval and the percentage of

burial in them was 8.2%.

The amount of lifted garbage (including garbage and construction and scrap

rubble) by municipal directorates reached 17.6 million tons/year while the

amount of hazardous waste was at 15.5 thousand tons/year.

Table-65B shows the number of municipalities divided by type in accordance

with the Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works categorisation (excellent

grade, grade one, grade two, grade three and grade four) based on special

standards adopted by the Ministry that includes the number of population served

under the jurisdiction of the municipality. Most municipalities are given grade

four totalling 132 with a percentage of 31.1% of remaining grades as shown in

graph-23.

Survey results indicate in table-65C that 96.7% of municipalities own

machinery to cover municipal services as working machinery reached 66.5%,

noting that they are insufficient for municipal needs with a percentage of 91.5%.

municipalities contracting companies and contractors to cover municipal

services were 5.2%.

Table-67 shows that the percentage of the population covered by garbage

collection and lifting services per day was 65.7% with 91.3% in urban areas and

7.5% in rural areas, noting that municipalities are not responsible for the

provision of services in villages and rural areas outside municipal boundaries in

accordance with the amended Municipal Administration Law number 165 for

1964, which led to lowering the percentage of covered population in rural areas.

5.6

11.8

24 27.5

31.1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

excellentonetwothreefour

Graph-23: percentage distribution of types of municipalities for 2010

26


However, there are many campaigns that are implemented in rural areas for the

lifting of garbage, filling swamps and maintaining roads even though they are

beyond municipal tasks. It is noted from the table that the highest percentage of

covered population is in Baghdad Municipality (100%) where the percentage of

population covered by garbage collection by the municipalities in Baghdad

Municipality was 100% in urban areas and 1.4% in rural areas.

The 100% coverage in Baghdad Municipality means that the whole population

is covered by the services but that the efficiency of the service is 100%.

Performance efficiency varies between areas. The least covered population are

in the governorate of Qadisiya at a percentage of 38.2%.

The table also shows that the amount of garbage lifted has reached 48.1

thousand tons/day, the highest lifted was at the Baghdad Municipality reaching

12.2 thousand tons/year and the lowest in the governorate of Qadisiya at 674

tons/day as in graph-25.

72.4

62.2

51.8

44.1 38.2

70.3

45.8 51.3

62.6

43.2 41

100

46.2 42.6

81.1

56.5

83.6

66.8

77.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Graph-24: percentage of population connected to garbage collection service for 2010

27


The amount of lifted garbage per day was divided according to area

(agricultural, industrial, residential, economic activity, lifted rubble and scrap).

The average amount of collected and lifted garbage per day within municipal

jurisdiction reached 48.1 thousand tons/day. Lifted garbage from residential

areas was the highest at 20.5 thousand tons/day with a percentage of 42.6% of

total garbage, followed by lifted rubble where the rate of lifted amount was 19.1

thousand tons/day at a percentage of 39.7% of total garbage as shown in table-

68 and graph-26.

4535

845

5072

3005

674

2716

1739 1199 1149 955 1269

12245

1022 947

2772

1340

3648

1729 1168

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

Graph-25: amount of lifted garbage (ton/day) for 2010

0.9 3.1

42.6

13

39.7

0.8

Graph-26: percentage distribution of amount of garbage collected and lifted per day by areas for 2010

agricultural areas

idustrial areas

residential arreas

economic activity

lifted rubble

scrap

28


Table-65 shows that the average amount of hazardous waste collected per day

by municipal directorates reached 42.6 thousand kg/day, the highest lifted was 8

thousand kg/day by the municipalities of Baghdad Municipality and lowest

lifted amount was 63 kg/day by the municipalities of Baghdad periphery. No

hazardous waste was collected by the municipalities of Al-Najaf, Al-Muthana

and Basrah. Most municipalities lifted hazardous waste from health institutions

(41.2%). It worth noting that municipal directorates are not responsible for

lifting hazardous waste but forced to do so by the governorate council.

When studying the amount of hazardous waste, the existence of large amounts

is noted. This is owing to; mixing hazardous waste with normal garbage turning

the later to hazardous waste particularly by health institutions, and the

unavailability of modern large capacity incinerators at hospitals used for

incinerating medical waste.

The most commonly used treatment method of hazardous waste is burial at sites

specially allocated for the burial of medical waste at a percentage of 62.4%,

followed by collection in temporary allocated sites at 22.8% as shown in table-

70 and graph-27.

Survey results in tables-71 and 72 showed that the percentage of available

containers distributed across the areas (residential, commercial, government

institutions, public parks and public streets) has reached 79.5%, totalling

(997753) containers. Residential areas had the largest percentage of distributed

containers (94%). In comparison with the results of the 2005 environmental

survey, the total number of containers was 3565, showing a rise in the number

of containers owing to including the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil in the

2010 environmental survey as well as including plastic containers distributed

across areas and households in addition to large containers.

22.8

62.4

12

2.6 0.2

Graph-27: percentage distribution of treatment method of hazardous waste for 2010

collection in temporaryallocated sites

burial in medical wastesites

thown into empty lots

burning

other

29


The use of containers by households reached 86.4% as shown in table-73. The

rate of emptying small containers (1m3) and containers of different sizes was the

highest reaching 4 times/week. Survey results also showed that no garbage

isolation or separation is done on household level.

Table-74 shows that the percentage of available machinery to cover municipal

services has reached 96.7% and the number of machinery municipalities had

was 13882. Baghdad Municipality had the highest number (3072) out of which

1578 were working and 1294 rented. The governorate with the lowest number

of machinery is Al-Muthana (262), out of which 201 were working as shown in

ghraph-28.

Table-75 notes that the number of municipalities that have machinery was 411

out of the 425 municipalities in Iraq, and that only 8.5% of them had the needed

machinery to cover their services. This requires providing more support to

municipal directorates to develop the services they offer to citizens. Survey

results in table-76 also showed that the lack of machinery had led some

municipal directorates to contract companies and contractors to provide the

services and cover the shortage in machinery. The percentage of contracting

municipalities reached 5.2% and the number of machinery they had was 778.

Date in tables-77 and 78 indicated the percentages for cleaning per week of

streets, middle islands, squares and marketplaces by municipal directorate,

companies or contractors. The percentage for cleaning streets and middle

islands reached 94.4%, squares 76.5% and marketplaces 89.6% by municipal

directorates compare to 100%, 77.3% and 95.5% respectively by companies and

contractors as in graph-29.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

workingidlebrokenrented

9229

483 1614

2556

Graph-28: number of working, idle, broken down and rented machinery for 2010

30


Table-79 shows that 24.9% of municipalities face the problem of increasing

rubble and remnants of war in residential areas followed by streets at 15.1%

then commercial areas at 12.2 as in ghraph-30.

Survey results in table-80 that the number of regular transforming stations

within municipal limits reached 10 with a total area of 146500 m2. The highest

number of stations was in the governorate of Al-Najaf (5 stations), while there

were none in 15 governorates. The number of irregular temporary collection

sites reached 123 with a total area of 1128608 m2. The highest number of these

sites was in the governorate of Dahuk (34 sites).

89.6

76.5

94.4

95.5

77.3

100

020406080100120

marketpalces

squares

streets and middle islands

companies and contractors

municipalities

Graph-29: percentage of city cleaning by municipalities, companies and contractors for 2010

24.9

12.2

7.5

5.4

15.1

Graph-30: percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems by area for 2010

residential areas

commercial areas

government institutions

public parks

public streets

31


Survey results in tables 81 and 82 indicate that the number of burial sites

granted environmental approval reached 32, only one within the original design

of the municipality. It is worth noting that burial site with environmental

approval do not apply environmental conditions. The Baghdad Municipality

could not establish a medical waste burial site that could adhere to

environmental conditions because it faced difficulty in finding a suitable piece

of land. The number of medical waste burial sites not granted environmental

approval reached 357 as shown in graph-31.

Survey results in table-83 showed that the highest percentage for the type of

garbage burial sites with environmental approval went to open land at 40.6%,

followed by valleys at 31.3% as in graph-32.

389

357

32

Graph-31: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval for 2010

total no. of medical burial sites

site not granted approval

site granted approval

15.6

40.6

9.4

31.3

3.1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

regular medicalwaste site

open landquarriesvalleysother

Graph-32: percentage distribution of type of burial sites granted environmental approval for 2010

32


Table-84 shows that burial sites granted environmental approval and have the

necessary requirements. The percentage of those with fences was 45.2% and for

those that have suitable roads to deliver garbage to site 74.2%. The weakness in

providing needed requirements at burial sites granted environmental approval

was evident as the percentage of sites with a collection system for seeping water

from garbage and sites with high density polyethylene padding was 3.2%, while

none of the site had scales at entrances to weigh garbage nor gas collection

system produced by garbage such as CH4.

Table-85 shows the number of burial machinery and equipment at burial site

granted environmental approval which reached 52; 84.6% were working, 15.4%

broken down and no idle machinery.

Survey results given in thable-86 indicated that the highest percentage for type

of garbage burial sites not granted approval was for valleys at 40.4%, followed

by open land at 31.9% as shown in graph-33.

Table-87 shows that the number of employees at garbage burial sites was 1565 in

Iraq; 51.7% of them were full-time, 34.8% part time and 13.5% day labourors.

Survey results in table-88 showed the percentages of garbage treatment methods. It

showed that the highest percentage for garbage disposal was by burial at sites not

granted environmental approval at 76.9%, which was close to garbage disposal by

burning or dumping into empty lots (27.3% and 24.2% respectively). Methods such as

recycling, reuse, turned to fertiliser or to energy were not used at all in garbage

treatment and disposal as shown in graph-34.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

open landquarriesvalleysother

31.9

26.8

40.4

0.8

Graph-33: percentage distribution of type of burial sites not granted environmental approval for 2010

33


Table-89 shows the percentage of most important problems faced by municipal

services sector in garbage collection that have reduced service provision:

citizens lack of environmental awareness represented 90.4% followed by few

machinery, pressers…etc. at 87.5% then low wages at 83.8% as shown in

graph-35.

8.2

76.9

24.2 27.3

0.2 3.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

burial at sitewith approval

burial at siteswith no

approval

thrown intoempty lots

burningsale touncertifiedcontractors

other

Graph-34: percentage of treatment methods of garbage for 2010

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

10087.5

3.5

25.9

31.8

70.4

80.2 83.8

70.4

90.4

9.9

few machinery (pressers…etc.)

lack of machinery

weak maintenance andsustainability

scarcity of spare parts

low financial allocations

lack of staff

low wages

low avialability of garbagecollection requirements

lack of environmentalawareness

other

Graph-35: percentage of main problems facing the municipal sector in

garbage collection for 2010

34


Survey results indicate that the percentage of implementing environmental

awareness programmes reached 18.6%, where the number of implemented

programmes was 266. The Baghdad Municipality ranked highest in programme

implementation at 92.9% followed by Baghdad Periphery at 73.3%. the

percentage of benefit from preparing such programmes reached 96.3%. It is

noted that no environmental awareness programmes were implemented in 5

governorates: Dahuk, Al-Anbar, Babil, Kerbal and Missan as shown in table-90.

Table-91 shows the number of environmental awareness programmes

implemented by bodies or organisations which reached a total of 125

programmes the majority of which were implemented by the Ministry of

Municipalities (37), a percentage of 29.6%, implemented in 5 governorates.

Municipal directorates implemented the largest number of environmental

awareness programmes in governorates, implementing 34 programmes in 9

governorates, i.e. in 47.4% of Iraq's governorates.

Table-92 indicates that the number of employees in the municipal sector

(engineers, supervisors, technicians, administrators, unskilled labour, drivers

and other posts) reached a total of 106241 across all governorates. The number

of full-time employees was 40950, part time employees 8844 and 56447 day

laborers. Baghdad Municipality had the largest number of employees at 25836,

followed by the governorate of Basrah at 11610 and Sulaimaniya at 9158.

Survey results, given in table-93, show that the number of rubble crushing

plants, under the Baghdad Municipality, reached (3). They are new plants that

reached the country that works on crushing rubble which has greatly increased

during the past years owing to reconstruction projects. None of these plants is

granted environmental approval, they contain 7 working machines. The source

of received rubble was from demolition and construction. The table also notes

that the amount of received rubble at the site reached 188m3/day and delivered

rubble after crushing was 168m3/day.

One of the important activities to reduce garbage and hence reduce the cost of

treatment and disposal is separation and recycling plants that would lead to greatly

benefiting from the different types of waste. Hence, Baghdad Municipality is

currently working on building 2 such plants that are under construction.

Detailed

Tables

1. Water Sector

Percentage of population connected to drinking water networks by governorate for 2010

% of connected population

Governorate boarder

Iraqi boarders

73

Table (1)

Number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment in Iraq for 2010

Percentage of connected % Number of population

connected Environment

86.1 18703135 Urban

62.1 5958239 Countryside

78.1 24661374 Total

Table (2)

Percentage of crude water sources used in water production stations by type in Iraq for 2010

Water production stations:

Solar powered

stations Desalination stations Well stations Water complex Projects

Crude water

resource

% No.

governorates %

No.

governorates %

No.

governorates %

No.

governorates %

No.

governorates

61.9 13 0.0 0 0.0 0 81.8 18 100.0 22 Surface water

22.7 5 50.0 11 Groundwater/

well water

0.0 0 22.7 5 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0

Project and

compound

water*

Total

* Water project and complexes are used as sources for desalination stations only.

** Dahuk, Irbil, Sulaimaniya and Baghdad are divided to central and periphery in all the tables.

Note: well mounted represent projects and water complexes that are based on wells only.

73

Table (3)

Number and percentage of water production stations, total designed capacity, output of produced water and

percentage from designed capacity by type in Iraq for 2010.

*Desalination stations draw water from projects, water complexes and ground water.

Table (4)

Number and percentage of water production stations by status and type in Iraq for 2010.

Idle working partially Working

%

No. %

No. %

No. Total No.

Water production stations

1.2 4 5.6 18 93.1 299 321 Projects

6.2 172 14.2 397 79.6 2227 2796 Water compounds

2.3 47 2.3 46 95.4 1929 2022 Well stations

38.8 62 0.0 0 61.3 98 98 160 Desalination stations

3.9 11 2.3 7 93.5 261 279 Solar powered stations

5.3 296 8.4 468 86.3 4814 5578 Total

Percentage from

designed

capacity

Output of

produced

water(M³/day)

Total designed

Capacity (M³ /day)

Percent% Number Water production station

76.6 7721682 10077658 50.1 321 Projects

66.6 3303905 4960608 50.1 2796 Water complex

54.4 573134 1053116 36.2 2022 Well mounted

17.9 13934 78042 2.9 160 *Desalination stations

69.2 5713 8251 5.0 279 Solar powered stations

71.8 11618368 16177675 100.0 5578 Total

73

Table (5)

Percentages of governorates' need for new water production stations, availability of alternative energy for stations

working on solar power and availability of water meters in governorates in Iraq for 2010.

Details

No. of

governorates

%

Governorate name

Percentages of

governorates'

need

for new water

production

stations

by type

Water projects

21 95.5 All governorates except Baghdad

municipality.

Water compounds

19 86.4 All governorates except central Dahuk,

central Sulaimaniya and Baghdad periphery.

Well stations


central Sulaimaniya, Al-Anbar,

Baghdad municipality,

Missan and Basrah.

Desalination stations


periphery Dahuk, central Sulimaniya,

periphery sulaimaniya, central Irbil,

periphery Irbil and Baghdad municipality.

Solar energy operating

stations


Nineveh, central sulaimaniye,

Diala, Al-Anbar, Baghdad municipality,

Missan and Basrah.

Percentage for alternative energy for

stations working on solar power

0 0.0 0

Percentage of water meters in

governorates

3 14.3 Nineveh, Kirkuk, Baghdad Municipality.

04

Table (6)

Number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. population connected to drinking water % of population connected to drinking water

Urban Country Total Urban % Country % Total %

Dahuk / central 238766 9371 248137 80.0 65.0 79.3

Dahuk/ periphery 399097 202323 601420 94.0 90.0 92.6

Nineveh 1426798 720677 2147475 80.0 70.0 76.3

Sulaimaniya / central 678299 29105 707404 100.0 50.0 96.0

Sulaimaniya/periphery 635395 127907 763302 75.0 60.0 71.6

Kirkuk 951022 187889 1138911 100.0 50.0 85.8

Irbil / central 695958 0 695958 95.0 0.0 87.5

Irbil /periphery 532000 38400 570400 55.0 43.0 76.3

Diala 223962 471202 695164 34.0 66.0 50.6

AL-Anbar 590497 596885 1187382 82.0 78.0 79.9

Baghdad/municipality 5159991 0 515991 100.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad periphery 528183 465003 993186 75.0 55.0 64.1

Babil 654365 548572 1202937 80.0 60.0 69.4

Kerbala 652814 272279 925093 96.0 80.0 90.7

Waset 600588 333949 934537 90.0 69.0 81.2

Salahuddin 427290 284428 711718 72.0 38.0 53.0

AL-Najaf 783581 265303 1048884 90.0 75.0 85.7

Qadisiya 487980 305038 793018 80.0 65.0 73.5

AL-Muthana 240080 230765 470845 80.0 60.0 68.8

Thi Qar 878817 388634 1267451 80.0 60.0 72.6

Missan 568696 191079 759775 85.0 75.0 82.2

Basrah 1348956 289430 1638386 70.0 60.0 68.0

Total 18703135 5958239 24661374 86.1 62.1 78.7

04

Table (7)

Number and percentage of water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.


Governorate No. of

water

stations

Projects Water

complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

stations

Solar powered

stations

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Dahuk / central 4 3 75.0 0 0.0 1 25.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 484 2 0.4 3 0.6 479 99.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Nineveh 148 33 22.3 90 60.8 15 10.1 0 0.0 10 6.8

Sulaimaniya / central 3 3 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/periphery 57 51 89.5 5 8.8 1 1.8 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 248 16 6.5 98 39.5 104 41.9 11 4.4 19 7.7

Irbil / central 428 3 0.7 0 0.0 425 99.3 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 976 8 0.8 0 0.0 968 99.2 0 0.0 0 0.0

Diala 236 25 10.6 176 74.6 0 0.0 1 0.4 34 14.4

AL-Anbar 408 21 5.1 366 89.7 0 0.0 2 0.5 19 4.7

Baghdad/municipality 45 9 20.0 36 80.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Baghdad periphery 210 10 4.8 180 85.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 20 9.5

Babil 313 18 5.8 272 86.9 0 0.0 1 0.3 22 7.0

Kerbala 145 7 4.8 120 82.8 0 0.0 2 1.4 16 11.0

Waset 285 21 7.4 202 70.9 19 6.7 19 6.7 24 8.4

Salahuddin 218 19 8.7 171 78.4 6 2.8 0 0.0 22 10.1

AL-Najaf 132 13 9.8 116 87.9 1 0.8 2 1.5 0 0.0

Qadisiya 231 15 6.5 195 84.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 21 9.1

AL-Muthana 102 4 3.9 54 52.9 3 2.9 13 12.7 28 27.5

Thi Qar 223 15 6.7 160 71.7 0 0.0 48 21.5 0 0.0

Missan 299 13 4.3 252 84.3 0 0.0 12 4.0 22 7.4

Basrah 383 12 3.1 300 78.3 0 0.0 49 12.8 22 5.7

Total 5578 321 5.8 2796 50.1 2022 36.2 160 2.9 279 5.0

04

Table (8a)

Number and percentage of operational water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.


Governorate Projects Water

complexes

Well mounted Desalination

stations

Solar powered

stations

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 2 100.0 2 66.7 460 96.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Nineveh 33 100.0 86 95.6 15 100.0 0 0.0 9 90.0

Sulaimaniya / central 2 66.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 100.0 5 100.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 16 100.0 44 44.9 68.0 65.4 11 100.0 19 100.0

Irbil / central 3 100.0 0 0.0 400 94.1 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 8 100.0 0 0.0 960 99.2 0 0.0 0 0.0

Diala 24 96.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 100.0 34 100.0

AL-Anbar 20 95.2 366 100.0 0 0.0 2 100.0 19 100.0

Baghdad / municipality 9 100.0 36 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 8 80.0 150 83.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 20 100.0

Babil 12 66.7 182 66.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 22 100.0

Kerbala 7 100.0 120 100.0 0 0.0 2 100.0 16 100.0

Waset 21 100.0 202 100.0 19 100.0 19 100.0 22 91.7

Salahuddin 11 57.9 55 32.2 3 50.0 0 0.0 22 100.0

AL-Najaf 13 100.0 112 96.6 1 100.0 2 100.0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 15 100.0 150 76.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 21 100.0

AL-Muthana 4 100.0 34 63.0 2 66.7 13 100.0 15 53.6

Thi Qar 15 100.0 136 85.0 0 0.0 43 89.6 0 0.0

Missan 12 92.3 247 98.0 0 0.0 3 25.0 20 90.9

Basrah 12 100.0 300 100.0 0 0.0 2 4.1 22 100.0

Total 299 93.1 2227 79.6 1929 95.4 98 61.3 261 93.5

07

Table (8b)

Number and percentage of partially operational water production stations by type governorate for 2010.



complexes


stations

Solar powered

stations

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 1 33.3 19 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0



Kirkuk 0 0.0 51 52.0 24 23.1 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Diala 0 0.0 140 79.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 1 4.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0



Babil 6 33.3 82 30.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Waset 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Salahuddin 8 42.1 51 29.8 3 50.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 40 20.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0 0.0 17 31.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 25.0

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Missan 1 7.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Total 18 6.7 397 14.2 46 2.3 0 0.0 7 2.5

00

Table (8c)

Number and percentage of non-operational water production stations by type and governorate for 2010



complexes


stations

Solar powered stations

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0.0 4 4.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 10.0



Kirkuk 0 0.0 3 3.1 12 11.5 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0.0 25 5.9 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 8 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0

Diala 1 4.0 36 20.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0



Babil 0 0.0 8 2.9 0 0.0 1 100.0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Waset 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 8.3

Salahuddin 0 0.0 65 38.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 0.0 4 3.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 5 2.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0 0.0 3 5.6 1 33.3 0 0.0 6 21.4

Thi Qar 0 0.0 24 15.0 0 0.0 5 10.4 0 0.0

Missan 0 0.0 5 2.0 0 0.0 9 75.0 2 9.1

Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 47 95.9 0 0.0

Total 4 1.5 172 6.2 47 2.3 62 38.8 11 3.9

04

Table (9)

Rate of crude water drawn from sources to water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.

(m³ /day)

Rate of crude water drawn from sources


complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

Stations *

Solar powered

Stations

Total

Dahuk / central 168400 0 0 0 0 168400

Dahuk/ periphery 90000 730 129270 0 0 220000

Nineveh 1121920 117412 14880 0 152 1254364

Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 0 0 0 0 216000

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 205801 2700 14860 0 0 223361

Kirkuk 575062 218453 147206 366 1571 942658

Irbil / central 228360 0 150000 0 0 378360

Irbil /periphery 50000 0 192000 0 0 242000

Diala 561860 55130 0 8 88 617086

AL-Anbar 291060 294000 0 700 236 585996

Baghdad municipality 2430689 229882 0 0 0 2660571

Baghdad / periphery 350000 200000 0 0 30 550030

Babil 289808 239871 0 0 503 530182

Kerbala 342982 155869 0 1210 404 500465

Waset 250000 260000 500 500 500 511500

Salahuddin 172013 69564 17600 0 682 259859

AL-Najaf 438910 154752 300 468 0 594430

Qadisiya 299000 95737 0 0 450 395187

AL-Muthana 195360 109984 1670 7800 275 315089

Thi Qar 314310 359612 0 5268 0 679190

Missan 88000 531652 0 2640 1500 623792

Basrah 293700 764775 0 936 1400 1060811

Total 8973235 3860123 668286 19896 7791 13529331

*Drawn water for desalination stations in Kirkuk, Diala, AL-Anbar, Waset and AL-Najaf governorates are ground water,

as to the rest governorates the crude water are from projects and water complexes.

04

Table (10)

Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to water production stations by type and

governorate for 2010.

Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to :


complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

Stations *

Solar powered

Stations

Total

Dahuk / central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 40.9 0.3 58.8 0.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 89.4 9.4 1.2 0.0 (.) 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 92.1 1.2 6.7 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kirkuk 61.0 23.2 15.6 (.) 0.2 100.0

Irbil / central 60.4 0.0 39.6 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil /periphery 20.7 0.0 79.3 0.0 0.0 100.0

Diala 91.4 8.6 0.0 (.) (.) 100.0

AL-Anbar 49.7 50.2 0.0 0.1 (.) 100.0

Baghdad municipality 91.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 63.6 36.4 0.0 0.0 (.) 100.0

Babil 54.7 45.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0

Kerbala 68.5 31.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 100.0

Waset 48.9 50.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 100.0

Salahuddin 66.2 26.8 6.8 0.0 0.3 100.0

AL-Najaf 73.8 26.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 100.0

Qadisiya 75.7 24.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0

AL-Muthana 62.0 34.9 0.5 2.5 0.1 100.0

Thi Qar 46.3 52.9 0.0 0.8 0.0 100.0

Missan 14.1 85.2 0.0 0.4 0.2 100.0

Basrah 27.7 72.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 100.0

Total 66.3 28.5 4.9 0.2 0.1 100.0

(.) Represents water produced from well mounted and distributed to population without processing.

03

Table (11)

Rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and governorate for 2010



complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

Stations *

Solar powered

Stations

Total

Dahuk / central 101520 0 0 0 0 101520

Dahuk/ periphery 840000 690 105300 0 0 189990

Nineveh 1019927 106739 14880 0 138 1141684

Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 0 0 0 0 216000

Sulaimaniya/ periphery* 201933 2500 14860 0 0 219293

Kirkuk 396248 144153 95798 238 1022 637459

Irbil / central 182680 0 138000 0 0 320680

Irbil /periphery 42000 0 186240 0 0 228240

Diala 344809 49602 0 8 49 394468

AL-Anbar 277200 280000 0 700 236 558136

Baghdad municipality 2314924 218936 0 0 0 2533860


Babil 245280 230277 0 0 402 475959

Kerbala 327560 145412 0 1100 308 474380

Waset 183200 200826 416 416 408 385266

Salahuddin 162005 67440 16000 0 620 246065

AL-Najaf 366050 128960 250 390 0 495650

Qadisiya 216900 92240 0 0 250 309390

AL-Muthana 161410 48480 1390 5568 250 217098

Thi Qar 285736 326920 0 2634 0 615290

Missan 72000 434988 0 2160 800 509948

Basrah 240300 625742 0 720 1200 867962

Total 7721682 3303905 573134 13934 5713 11618368

*Represents water produced from well mounted and distributed to population without processing.

03

Table (12)

Percentage distribution of the rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and

governorate for 2010.

(.) The value greater than zero but small enough to become zero when rounding to the number of displayed decimal mattresses



Complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

Stations

Solar powered

Stations

Total

Dahuk / central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 44.2 0.4 55.4 0.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 89.3 9.3 1.3 0.0 (.) 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 92.1 1.1 6.8 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kirkuk 62.2 22.6 15.0 (.) 0.2 100.0

Irbil / central 57.0 0.0 43.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil /periphery 18.4 0.0 81.6 0.0 0.0 100.0

Diala 87.4 12.6 0.0 (.) (.) 100.0

AL-Anbar 49.7 50.2 0.0 0.1 (.) 100.0

Baghdad municipality 91.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 58.3 41.7 0.0 0.0 (.) 100.0

Babil 51.5 48.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0

Kerbala 69.1 30.7 0.0 0.2 0.1 100.0

Waset 47.6 52.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 100.0

Salahuddin 65.8 27.4 6.5 0.0 0.3 100.0

AL-Najaf 73.9 26.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 100.0

Qadisiya 70.1 29.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0

AL-Muthana 74.3 22.3 0.6 2.6 0.1 100.0

Thi Qar 46.4 53.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 100.0

Missan 14.1 85.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 100.0

Basrah 27.7 72.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 100.0

Total 66.5 28.4 4.9 0.1 (.) 100.0

03

Table (13)

Rate and percentage of water loss in water distribution network serving the population from water production stations and assessment

of amounts of drinking water needed by environment and governorate for 2010.

Governorate Rate of

Produced

water from

water stations

Rate of

water loss

in water

distribution

networks

water

loss in water

distribution

networks

%

Rate of water served

to population

Percentage of water

served to population

Estimated

need for the

amount of

drinking

water in the

governorate

Urban Country

Side

Total Urban Country

side

Total

Dahuk / central 101520 32000 31.5 89320 8200 97520 91.6 8.4 100.0 119000

Dahuk/ periphery 189990 20000 10.5 90000 80000 170000 52.9 47.1 100.0 200000

Nineveh 1141684 456673 40.0 513758 171253 685011 75.0 25.0 100.0 1729600

Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 23753 11.0 184000 8247 192247 95.7 4.3 100.0 277200

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 219293 4467 2.0 182212 36681 218893 83.2 16.8 100.0 303266

Kirkuk 637459 63108 9.9 347970.3 273225 621195.3 56.0 44.0 100.0 782911

Irbil / central 320680 57672 18.0 320680 0 320680 100.0 0.0 100.0 378352

Irbil /periphery 228240 14860 6.5 125532 98143 223675 56.1 43.9 100.0 295675

Diala 394468 39446 10.0 120705 234310 355015 34.0 66.0 100.0 502829

AL-Anbar 558136 79664 14.3 198000 280236 478236 41.4 58.6 100.0 5920000

Baghdad/municipality 2533860 1013551 40.0 1520326 0 1520326 100.0 0.0 100.0 3250000

Baghdad / periphery 480030 135000 28.1 275000 125000 400000 68.8 31.3 100.0 650000

Babil 475959 56151 11.8 190223 285334 475557 40.0 60.0 100.0 650000

Kerbala 474380 95469 20.1 272024 105787 377811 72.0 28.0 100.0 480000

Waset 385266 17285 4.5 228413 94587 323000 70.7 29.3 100.0 531941

Salahuddin 246065 68834 28.0 102087 58524 160611 63.6 36.4 100.0 342197

AL-Najaf 495650 95494 19.3 381250 73984 455234 83.7 16.3 100.0 546280

Qadisiya 309390 92817 30.0 121210 95293 216503 56.0 44.0 100.0 418631

AL-Muthana 217098 67570 31.1 126918 84612 211530 60.0 40.0 100.0 300000

Thi Qar 615290 177671 28.9 260991 173994 434985 60.0 40.0 100.0 785271

Missan 509948 96891 19.0 231822 181235 413057 56.1 43.9 100.0 550000

Basrah 867962 104069 12.0 534221 228951 763172 70.0 30.0 100.0 1100000

Total 11618368 2812445 24.2 6416662 2697596 9114258 70.4 29.6 100.0 14747250

44

Table (14)

Individual's average share of drinking water serving the population by governorate for 2010.

(m³ /day)

Governorate Rate of drinking water to

the population

Population connected to

drinking water networks

Individual's average share of

drinking water serving

connected population

Individual's average share of

drinking water serving

the total population

Urban Country Total Urban Country Total

Dahuk / central 89320 8200 97520 238766 9371 248137 0.39 0.31

Dahuk/ periphery 90000 80000 170000 399097 202323 601420 0.28 0.26

Nineveh 513758 171253 685011 1426798 720677 2147475 0.32 0.24

Sulaimaniya/ central 184000 8247 192247 678299 29105 707404 0.27 0.26

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 182212 36681 218893 635395 127907 763302 0.29 0.21

Kirkuk 347970 273225 621195 951022 187889 1138911 0.55 0.47

Irbil / central 320680 0 320680 695958 0 695958 0.46 0.40

Irbil /periphery 125532 98143 223675 532000 38400 570400 0.39 0.30

Diala 120705 234310 355015 223962 471202 695164 0.51 0.26

AL-Anbar 198000 280236 478236 590497 596885 1187382 0.40 0.32

Baghdad/municipality 1520326 0 1520326 5159991 0 5159991 0.29 0.29

Baghdad / periphery 275000 125000 400000 528183 465003 993186 0.40 0.32

Babil 190223 285334 475557 654365 548572 1202937 0.40 0.27

Kerbala 272024 105787 377811 652814 272279 925093 0.41 0.37

Waset 228413 94587 323000 600588 333949 934537 0.35 0.28

Salahuddin 102087 58524 160611 427290 284428 711718 0.23 0.12

AL-Najaf 381250 73984 455234 783581 265303 1048884 0.43 0.37

Qadisiya 121210 95293 216503 487980 305038 793018 0.27 0.20

AL-Muthana 126918 84612 211530 240080 230765 470845 0.45 0.31

Thi Qar 260991 173994 434985 878817 388634 1267451 0.34 0.25

Missan 231822 181235 413057 568696 191079 759775 0.54 0.45

Basrah 534221 228951 763127 1348956 289430 1638386 0.47 0.32

Total 6416662 2697596 9114258 18703135 5958239 24661374 0.37 0.29

44

Table (15)

Number and percentage of projects, rate of crude water drawn from surface water and its total design capacity, rate of available capacity, amount of water

produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.

Governorate Projects % rate of crude water drawn

from surface water

(M³ /day)

total design capacity

(M³ /day)

rate of available

capacity

(M³ /day)

Amount of water

Produced

(M³ /day)

amount of water produced

and percentage from

designed capacity

Dahuk / central 3 0.9 168400 254400 233000 101520 39.9

Dahuk/ periphery 2 0.6 90000 96000 150000 84000 87.5

Nineveh * 33 10.3 1121920 955387 859848 1019927 106.8

Sulaimaniya/ central 3 0.9 216000 316800 230000 216000 68.2

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 15.9 205801 220000 210000 201933 91.8

Kirkuk 16 5.0 575062 558096 497263 396248 71.0

Irbil / central 3 0.9 228360 243760 228360 182680 74.9

Irbil /periphery 8 2.5 50000 110200 51100 42000 38.1

Diala 25 7.8 561860 561860 444797 344809 61.4

AL-Anbar 21 6.5 291060 400840 325820 2314924 69.2

Baghdad/municipality 9 2.8 2430689 2986849 2900000 2314924 77.5

Baghdad / periphery 10 3.1 35000 35000 245000 280000 80.0

Babil 18 5.6 289808 306600 260610 245280 80.0

Kerbala 7 2.2 342982 341280 327628 327560 96.0

Waset 21 6.5 250000 219840 219840 183200 83.3

Salahuddin 19 5.9 172013 351880 308800 162005 46.0

AL-Najaf 13 4.0 438910 530400 461448 366050 69.0

Qadisiya 15 4.7 299000 350000 300000 216900 62.0

AL-Muthana 4 1.2 195360 177050 167785 161410 91.2

Thi Qar 15 4.7 314310 346016 300023 285736 82.6

Missan 13 4.0 88000 80000 76000 72000 90.0

Basrah 12 3.7 293700 320400 267000 240300 75.0

Total 321 100.0 8973235 10077658 9064322 7721682 76.6

*Note: the actual capacity is larger than the design capacity due to operating projects to more than their energy to cover the needs of the governorate.

44

Table (16)

Number and percentage of projects by status and governorate for 2010.

Governorate

Projects by status : Percentage of projects by status:

Working Partially

working Idle Total Working

Partially

working Idle Total

Dahuk / central 1 1 1 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 33 0 0 33 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 2 1 0 3 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 0 0 51 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kirkuk 16 0 0 16 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil / central 3 0 0 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil /periphery 8 0 0 8 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Diala 24 0 1 25 96.0 0.0 4.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 20 1 0 21 95.2 4.8 0.0 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 9 0 0 9 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 8 0 2 10 80.0 0.0 20.0 100.0

Babil 12 6 0 18 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0

Kerbala 7 0 0 7 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 21 0 0 21 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Salahuddin 11 8 0 19 57.9 42.1 0.0 100.0

AL-Najaf 13 0 0 13 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Qadisiya 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Muthana 4 0 0 4 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Thi Qar 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Missan 12 1 0 13 92.3 7.7 0.0 100.0

Basrah 12 0 0 12 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 299 18 4 321 93.1 5.6 1.2 100.0

47

Table (17)

Number and percentage of water collections and rate of amount of crude water drawn from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of

water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.

Governorate Number of

water collections

% Rate of crude water drawn

from Surface water (M³ /day)

Total design

capacity (M³ /day)

Rate of available

Capacity (M³ /day)

Rate of water

Produced (M³ /day)

%

Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 3 0.1 730 1840 920 690 37.5

Nineveh 90 3.2 117412 129558 123080 106739 82.4



Kirkuk 98 3.0 218453 200232 178407 144153 72.0

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 176 6.3 55130 276408 11526 49602 17.9

AL-Anbar 366 13.1 294000 322000 280000 280000 87.0



Babil 272 9.7 239871 287846 244669 230277 80.0

Kerbala 120 4.3 155869 306576 293802 145412 47.4

Waset 202 7.2 260000 240992 240992 200826 83.3

Salahuddin 171 6.1 69564 252956 126260 67440 26.7

AL-Najaf 116 4.1 154752 314640 131100 128960 41.0

Qadisiya 195 7.0 95737 110000 90000 92240 83.9

AL-Muthana 54 1.9 109984 133320 75000 48480 36.4

Thi Qar 160 5.7 359612 343920 330189 326920 95.1

Missan 252 9.0 531652 483320 459154 434988 90.0

Basrah 300 10.7 764755 834600 695250 625742 75.0

Total 2796 100.0 3860123 4960608 3723678 3303905 66.6

40

Table (18)

Number and percentage of water collections by status and governorate for 2010.

Governorate Water collections by status : Percentage of water collections by status:

Working Partially working Idle Total Working Partially working Idle Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 2 1 0 3 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 86 0 4 90 95.6 0.0 4.4 100.0



Kirkuk 44 51 3 98 44.9 52.0 3.1 100.0

Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 0 140 36 176 0.0 79.5 20.5 100.0

AL-Anbar 366 0 0 366 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0



Babil 182 82 8 272 66.9 30.1 2.9 100.0

Kerbala 120 0 0 120 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 202 0 0 202 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Salahuddin 55 51 65 171 32.2 29.8 38.0 100.0

AL-Najaf 112 0 4 116 96.6 0.0 3.4 100.0

Qadisiya 150 40 5 195 76.9 20.5 2.6 100.0

AL-Muthana 34 17 3 54 63.0 31.5 5.6 100.0

Thi Qar 136 0 24 160 85.0 0.0 15.0 100.0

Missan 247 0 5 252 98.0 0.0 2.0 100.0

Basrah 300 0 0 300 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 2227 397 172 2796 79.6 14.2 6.2 100.0

44

Table (19)

Number and percentage of wells and water production stations mounted on wells (excluding desalination stations), total design and availability capacity, rate of

water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

Governorate No. of

wells

% No. water production

stations mounted on

wells

Percent of water

production stations

mounted on wells

Total design

capacity

(M³ /day)

Total design

availability

(M³ /day)

Rate of water

produced

(M³ /day)

Rate of water produced

and percentage from

designed

Dahuk / central 127 5.4 1 (.) 0 0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 716 22.5 479 23.7 120000 105300 105300 87.8

Nineveh 124 3.9 15 0.7 14880 14880 14880 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 483 15.2 1 (.) 460 420 400 87.0

Kirkuk 226 7.1 104 5.1 134928 120220 95798 71.0

Irbil / central 425 13.4 425 21.0 220000 150000 138000 62.7

Irbil /periphery 968 30.4 968 47.9 528000 192000 186240 35.3

Diala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Waset 19 0.6 19 0.9 1248 1248 416 33.3

Salahuddin 45 1.4 6 0.3 28750 16000 16000 55.7

AL-Najaf 2 0.1 1 (.) 1200 500 250 20.8

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 3 0.1 3 0.1 3650 3015 1390 38.1

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Total 3183 100.0 2022 100.0 1053116 603583 558674 53.0

(.) The value greater than zero but small enough to become zero when rounding to the number of displayed decimal mattresses

44

Table (20)

Rate of water drawn from wells and used as crude water sources in water production stations (excluding desalination stations) and distributed to the population

without treatment by governorate for 2010.

Governorate Rate of water drawn from wells and

used as crude water sources in

water production stations (M³ /day)

Percentage of water drawn from

wells and used as crude water sources

in water production stations (M³ /day)

Rate of water drawn from wells

And distributed to the population

Without treatment(M³ /day)

% of water drawn from wells

and distributed to the

population without

treatment(M³ /day)

Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 129270 19.8 107000 24.0

Nineveh 14880 2.3 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 400 0.1 14460 3.2

Kirkuk 147206 22.5 0 0.0

Irbil / central 150000 22.9 138000 31.0

Irbil /periphery 192000 29.4 186240 41.8

Diala 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0

Babil 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0

Waset 500 0.1 0 0.0

Salahuddin 17600 2.7 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 300 0.0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 1670 0.3 0 0.0

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0

Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0

Total 653826 100.0 445700 100.0

43

Table (21)

Number and percentage of water production stations mounted on wells (excluding desalination stations) by status and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. of water production stations mounted on wells by status: % of water production stations mounted on wells by status:

Working Partially working Idle Total Working Partially working Idle Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 1 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 460 19 0 479 96.0 4.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0



Kirkuk 68 24 12 104 65.4 23.1 11.5 100.0

Irbil / central 400 0 25 425 94.1 0.0 5.9 100.0

Irbil /periphery 960 0 8 968 99.2 0.0 0.8 100.0

Diala 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



Babil 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Salahuddin 3 3 0 6 50.0 50.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Najaf 1 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 2 0 1 3 66.7 0.0 33.3 100.0

Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 1929 46 47 2022 95.4 2.3 2.3 100.0

43

Table (22)

Number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO), total design and available capacity, rate of water produced and percentage

from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

Governorate No. of water

Desalination

stations (RO)

% Total design capacity

(M³ /day)

Rate of available

capacity (M³ /day)

Rate of produced

water from desalination

stations (M³ /day)

%

Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 11 6.9 336 299 238 70.8

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 1 0.6 8 8 8 100.0

AL-Anbar 2 1.3 700 700 700 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 1 0.6 180 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 2 1.3 1200 1150 1100 91.7

Waset 19 11.9 1248 1248 416 33.3

Salahuddin 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 2 1.3 1440 600 390 27.1

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 13 8.1 15312 10000 5568 36.4

Thi Qar 48 30.0 3306 2660 2634 79.7

Missan 12 7.5 2400 2280 2160 90.0

Basrah 49 30.6 51912 800 720 1.4

Total 160 100.0 78042 19745 13934 17.9

43

Table (23)

Number of desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination stations and their percentage distribution by source of crude water

used and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. of desalination

stations (RO)

Rate of crude water used in desalination

stations (RO) by source (M³ /day)

% of crude water used in desalination

stations (RO) by source

Project and

complexes water

Surface

water

Ground

water

Total Project and

complexes water

Surface

water

Ground

water

Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 11 0 0 366 366 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 1 0 0 8 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 2 0 0 700 700 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 2 1210 0 0 1210 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 19 0 0 500 500 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 2 0 0 468 468 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 13 7800 0 0 7800 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Thi Qar 48 5268 0 0 5268 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Missan 12 2640 0 0 2640 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Basrah 49 936 0 0 936 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 160 17854 0 2042 19896 89.7 0.0 10.3 100.0

44

Table (24)

Number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination stations and their percentage distribution

by source of crude water used and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. of water desalination stations (RO) by status : % of water desalination stations (RO) by status :

Working Partially

working Idle Total Working

Partially

working Idle Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0



Kirkuk 11 0 0 11 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 1 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0



Babil 0 0 1 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0

Kerbala 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 13 0 0 13 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Thi Qar 43 0 5 45 89.6 0.0 10.4 100.0

Missan 3 0 9 12 25.0 0.0 75.0 100.0

Basrah 2 0 47 49 4.1 0.0 95.9 100.0

Total 98 0 62 160 61.3 0.0 38.8 100.0

44

Table (25)

Number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy, rate of amount of crude water drawn from surface water, total design capacity,

rate of available capacity, rate of water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.

Governorate

No. of stations

powered by

solar energy

%

Rate of crude water

drawn

from surface water

(m³ /day)

Total design

capacity

(m³ /day)

Rate of

design

availability

(m³ /day)

Rate of water

Produced

(m³ /day)

Rate of water

produced

and % from designed

capacity

Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 10 3.6 152 230 219 138 60.0



Kirkuk 19 6.8 1571 1440 1283 1022 71.0

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 34 12.2 88 98 88 49 50.0

AL-Anbar 19 6.8 236 236 236 236 100.0



Babil 22 7.9 503 402 402 402 100.0

Kerbala 16 5.7 404 336 322 308 91.7

Waset 24 8.6 500 816 816 408 50.0

Salahuddin 22 7.9 682 1240 620 620 50.0

AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 21 7.5 450 252 250 250 99.2

AL-Muthana 28 10.0 275 400 300 250 62.5

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Missan 22 7.9 1500 1250 1200 800 64.0

Basrah 22 7.9 1400 1488 1364 1200 80.6

Total 3183 100.0 7791 8251 7130 5713 69.2

44

Table (26)

Number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy by status and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. stations powered by solar energy by status : % stations powered by solar energy by status :

Working Partially

working Idle

Total Working

Partially

working

Idle Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 9 0 1 10 90.0 0.0 10.0 100.0



Kirkuk 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 34 0 0 34 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0



Babil 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kerbala 16 0 0 16 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 22 0 2 24 91.7 0.0 8.3 100.0

Salahuddin 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 21 0 0 21 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Muthana 15 7 6 28 53.6 25.0 21.4 100.0

Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 20 0 2 22 90.9 0.0 9.1 100.0

Basrah 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 261 0 11 160 93.5 2.5 3.9 100.0

47

Table (27)

Number of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate foe 2010

Governorate No. of tests conducted on crude water by type : No. of tests conducted on produced water by type :

Biological test Physiochemical test Total Biological test Physiochemical/except

Chlorine test

Chlorine test Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 1 13 1 15

Dahuk/ periphery 2 12 14 2 12 1 15

Nineveh 0 15 15 3 15 1 19

Sulaimaniya/ central 3 14 17 3 13 1 17

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 2 12 14 2 13 1 16

Kirkuk 0 14 14 3 15 1 19

Irbil / central 2 8 10 2 11 1 14

Irbil /periphery 2 8 10 2 11 1 14

Diala 0 14 14 3 15 1 19

AL-Anbar 0 16 16 3 16 1 20

Baghdad/municipality 6 32 38 2 31 1 34

Baghdad / periphery 0 11 11 3 12 1 16

Babil 0 16 16 3 16 1 20

Kerbala 1 16 17 4 16 1 21

Waset 0 15 15 4 17 1 22

Salahuddin 0 14 14 3 14 1 18

AL-Najaf 0 14 14 3 16 1 20

Qadisiya 0 15 15 3 15 1 19

AL-Muthana 0 14 14 3 15 1 19

Thi Qar 0 13 13 3 11 1 15

Missan 2 14 16 2 13 1 16

Basrah 0 14 14 3 14 1 18

Total

40

Table (28)

Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010

Governorate Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude

water by type :

Percentage distribution of tests on produced water by type :


Chlorine test

Chlorine test Total

Dahuk / central 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 14.3 85.7 100.0 13.3 80.0 6.7 100.0

Nineveh 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 17.0 82.4 100.0 17.6 76.5 5.8 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 14.3 85.7 100.0 12.5 81.2 6.3 100.0

Kirkuk 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0

Irbil / central 20.0 80.0 100.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 100.0

Irbil /periphery 20.0 80.0 100.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 100.0

Diala 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 15.8 84.2 100.0 5.9 91.2 2.9 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 100.0 18.8 75.0 6.3 100.0

Babil 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0

Kerbala 5.9 94.1 100.0 19.0 76.2 4.8 100.0

Waset 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0

Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 100.0 16.7 77.8 5.6 100.0

AL-Najaf 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0

Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0

AL-Muthana 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0

Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 100.0 20.0 73.3 6.7 100.0

Missan 12.5 87.5 100.0 12.5 81.3 6.3 100.0

Basrah 0.0 100.0 100.0 16.7 77.8 5.6 100.0

Total

44

Table (29)

Number of samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks durin the month preceding the

survey by type and governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. of samples drawn for tests on crude water by type /

in the month preceding the survey :

No. of samples drawn for tests on produced water in water stations by type/

In the month preceding the survey :


Chlorine test

Chlorine test Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 55 18 150 223

Dahuk/ periphery 45 45 90 45 45 45 135

Nineveh 0 37 37 211 43 211 465

Sulaimaniya/ central 300 80 380 300 80 200 580

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 75 20 95 65 20 50 135

Kirkuk 0 10 10 160 62 126 348

Irbil / central 60 60 120 60 60 150 270

Irbil /periphery 60 60 120 60 60 150 270

Diala 0 55 55 223 59 223 505

AL-Anbar 0 25 25 150 45 1500 1695

Baghdad/municipality 37 849 886 1001 4040 3523 8564

Baghdad / periphery 0 10 10 127 27 200 354

Babil 0 71 71 144 71 71 286

Kerbala 6 640 646 289 640 782 1711

Waset 0 70 70 150 70 150 370

Salahuddin 0 70 70 150 70 150 370

AL-Najaf 0 27 27 330 38 330 698

Qadisiya 0 70 70 150 70 100 320

AL-Muthana 0 60 60 150 60 150 360

Thi Qar 0 25 25 115 25 115 255

Missan 75 35 110 114 66 150 330

Basrah 0 32 32 304 304 304 912

Total 658 2351 3009 4353 5973 8830 19156

44

Table (30)

Percentage distribution of the samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks in the

month preceding the survey by type and governorate for 2010.

Governorate Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude

water by type :

Percentage distribution of tests on produced water by type :


Chlorine test

Chlorine test Total

Dahuk / central 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.7 8.1 67.3 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 50.0 50.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0

Nineveh 0.0 100.0 100.0 45.4 9.2 45.5 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 78.9 21.1 100.0 51.7 13.8 34.5 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 78.9 21.1 100.0 48.2 14.8 37.0 100.0

Kirkuk 0.0 100.0 100.0 46.0 17.8 36.2 100.0

Irbil / central 50.0 50.0 100.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 100.0

Irbil /periphery 50.0 50.0 100.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 100.0

Diala 0.0 100.0 100.0 44.2 11.7 44.2 100.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 100.0 100.0 8.8 2.7 88.5 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 4.2 95.8 100.0 11.7 47.2 41.1 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 100.0 35.9 7.6 56.5 100.0

Babil 0.0 100.0 100.0 50.3 24.8 24.8 100.0

Kerbala 0.9 99.1 100.0 16.9 37.4 45.7 100.0

Waset 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0

Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0

AL-Najaf 0.0 100.0 100.0 47.3 5.4 47.3 100.0

Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 100.0 46.9 21.9 31.3 100.0

AL-Muthana 0.0 100.0 100.0 41.7 16.7 41.7 100.0

Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 100.0 45.1 9.8 45.1 100.0

Missan 68.2 31.8 100.0 34.5 20.0 45.5 100.0

Basrah 0.0 100.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0

Total 21.9 78.1 100.0 22.7 31.2 46.1 100.0

43

Table (31)

Percentage of availability instances of produced water reaching consumers through distribution networks for 2010.

Availability instances of produced water reaching

consumers through distribution networks

No. governorate % Governorate

1 good (300-400) liters / person / day

5

22.7

Kirkuk, central Irbil, AL-Anbar, Waset, Missan

2 medium (200-300) liters/ person / day

16

72.7

Central Dahuk, periphery Dahuk, Nineveh,

central

Sulaimaniya, prephery Sulaimaniya,

prephery Irbil, central Irbil, municipality

Baghdad,

prephery Baghdad, Babil, Kerbala, AL-Najaf,

Qadisiya, AL-Muthana, Thi Qar, Basrah

3 below average (100-200) liters / person /day

1

4.5

Salahuddin

4 low ( 100- and below ) liters / person / day

0

0.0

Total 22 100.0

43

Table (32)

Percentage distribution of produced water by sector and governorate for 2010

Governorate Total amount of produced water (M³ /day)

Sectors

Domestic Governmental Other Total

Dahuk / central 101520 90.0 5.0 5.0 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 189990 95.0 5.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 1141684 70.0 5.0 25.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 92.4 1.1 6.5 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 219293 85.0 10.0 5.0 100.0

Kirkuk 637459 92.0 7.0 1.0 100.0

Irbil / central 320680 75.0 15.0 10.0 100.0

Irbil /periphery 228240 80.0 10.0 10.0 100.0

Diala 2719311 95.8 1.0 3.2 100.0

AL-Anbar 558136 95.0 1.0 4.0 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 2533860 86.2 0.8 13.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 480030 85.0 15.0 0.0 100.0

Babil 475959 95.0 3.0 2.0 100.0

Kerbala 474380 70.0 2.0 28.0 100.0

Waset 385266 94.4 1.4 4.2 100.0

Salahuddin 246065 93.3 1.5 2.2 100.0

AL-Najaf 495650 94.4 0.6 5.0 100.0

Qadisiya 309390 75.0 15.0 10.0 100.0

AL-Muthana 217098 95.9 1.5 2.6 100.0

Thi Qar 615290 80.0 15.0 5.0 100.0

Missan 509948 85.0 9.0 6.0 100.0

Basrah 867962 85.0 5.0 10.0 100.0

Total 13943211 87.0 5.7 7.3 100.0

43

Table (33)

Number of units with water standards (budget) out of units covered by the Public Water Directorate in the governorate or Baghdad Municipality,

Number and percentage of units with water meters by status and governorate for 2010.

Governorate Number of units with water meters % of units with water meters % of water standards by status :

working Idle Total

Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 89705 41.4 100.0 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 65 0.0 70.0 30.0 100.0

Irbil / central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 127032 58.6 75.0 25.0 100.0


Babil 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 216802 100.0 81.7 18.3 100.0

34

Table (34)

Percentage of main problems faced by the water sector for 2010

SN Main problems No. of

governorates % Name of governorate

1 Inefficiency of project 9 40.9 Nineveh, Sulaimaniya central, Sulaimaniya periphery, Al-ANbar,

Babil, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan

2 Scarcity of crude water at water source 15 68.2 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Irbil central, Irbil periphery,

Baghdad Municipality, Waset, Missan

3 Pollution of water source 8 36.4 Sulaimaniya periphery, Nineveh, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery,

Babil, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar

4 Network's age and weakness 19 86.4 All governorates excluding Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Al-Najaf

5 Insufficient project production 16 72.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk central, Dahuk periphery, Irbil

central, Irbil periphery, Qadisiya, Basrah

6 Weak unsustainable maintenance 5 22.7 Sulaimaniya periphery, Nineveh, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar

7 Scarcity of spare parts and raw material 16 72.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk central, Dahuk periphery, Kirkuk,

Diala, Al-Najaf, Al-Muthana

8 Lack of technical and administrative staff 20 90.9 All governorates excluding Kerbala, Al-Muthana

9 Inefficiency of technical staff 7 31.8 Nineveh, Sulaimaniya central, Sulaimaniya periphery, Salahuddin, Al-

Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar

10 Scarcity and instability of electricity 22 100.0 All governorates

11 Citizens trespassing on network 20 90.9 All governorates excluding Al-Anbar

12 Lack of citizens awareness on conservation 22 100.0 All governorates

13 Other 5 22.7 Baghdad Municipality, Baghdad periphery, Babil, Al-Muthana, Missan

34

Table (35)

Number and percentage of water production stations under construction by type and governorate foe 2010.

Governorate Rate of crude water used in desalination

stations (RO) by source (M³ /day)

% of crude water used in desalination

stations (RO) by source

Projects Water

complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

stations

Solar powered

stations

Total Projects Water

complexes

Well

mounted

Desalination

Stations

Solar powered

stations

Total

Dahuk / central 1 0 0 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Dahuk/ periphery 0 1 5 0 0 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 0.0 100.0

Nineveh 2 16 24 1 0 43 4.7 37.2 55.8 2.3 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ central 3 0 0 0 0 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 1 1 0 0 0 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kirkuk 14 5 0 1 5 25 65.0 20.0 0.0 4.0 20.0 100.0

Irbil / central 1 0 8 0 0 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 0.0 100.0

Irbil /periphery 2 0 0 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Diala 0 4 0 7 0 11 0.0 36.4 0.0 63.6 0.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 2 18 0 0 0 20 10.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad/municipality 5 1 0 0 0 6 83.3 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 1 25 0 0 5 31 3.2 80.6 0.0 0.0 16.1 100.0

Babil 7 35 31 10 22 105 6.7 33.3 29.5 9.5 21.0 100.0

Kerbala 3 1 0 19 0 23 13.0 4.3 0.0 82.6 0.0 100.0

Waset 5 16 0 0 0 21 23.8 76.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Salahuddin 1 20 1 4 22 48 2.1 41.7 2.1 8.3 45.8 100.0

AL-Najaf 2 4 0 0 26 32 6.3 12.5 0.0 0.0 81.3 100.0

Qadisiya 4 4 0 0 0 8 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

AL-Muthana 1 6 0 13 0 20 5.0 30.0 0.0 65.0 0.0 100.0

Thi Qar 3 17 0 5 15 40 7.5 42.5 0.0 12.5 37.5 100.0

Missan 3 8 0 0 27 38 7.9 21.1 0.0 0.0 71.1 100.0

Basrah 0 10 0 0 0 10 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Total 61 192 69 60 122 504 12.1 38.1 13.7 11.9 24.2 100.0

34

Table (36)

Number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post and governorate for 2010.

Governorate Engineer Supervisor Technician

Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total

Dahuk / central 33 1 0 34 140 216 0 356 73 3 0 76

Dahuk/ periphery 77 2 0 79 39 5 0 44 392 613 0 1005

Nineveh 115 0 8 123 865 0 465 1330 182 0 0 182

Sulaimaniya/ central 77 1 0 78 267 58 0 325 373 0 0 373

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 80 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 148 210 0 358

Kirkuk 70 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 138

Irbil / central 51 0 0 51 9 0 0 9 62 1 0 63

Irbil /periphery 105 0 0 105 12 0 0 12 115 0 0 115

Diala 68 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 921 75 156 1152

AL-Anbar 95 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 175 0 0 175

Baghdad/municipality 216 14 0 230 0 0 0 0 1113 90 544 1747

Baghdad / periphery 92 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 719 0 285 1004

Babil 99 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 1171 0 1208 2379

Kerbala 91 3 0 94 0 0 0 0 992 10 0 1002

Waset 59 5 2 66 0 0 0 0 150 161 123 434

Salahuddin 51 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 76

AL-Najaf 97 0 0 97 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 142

Qadisiya 61 0 6 67 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 137

AL-Muthana 44 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 514 15 62 591

Thi Qar 89 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 1045 0 0 1045

Missan 42 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 107 70 0 177

Basrah 86 0 0 86 0 0 0 0 188 0 0 188

Total 1798 26 16 1840 1332 279 465 2076 8933 1248 2378 12559

37

Table (36)/cont.


Governorate Manager Worker Driver

Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total

Dahuk / central 37 8 0 45 173 17 0 190 29 2 0 31

Dahuk/ periphery 79 19 0 98 516 89 0 605 72 27 0 99

Nineveh 128 0 3 131 244 0 94 338 145 0 2 156

Sulaimaniya/ central 122 0 0 122 171 0 0 171 73 0 0 73

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 298 130 0 428 1510 230 0 1740 109 0 0 109

Kirkuk 149 0 0 149 204 0 211 415 115 0 0 115

Irbil / central 204 0 0 204 419 0 0 419 39 0 0 39

Irbil /periphery 355 2 0 357 180 0 0 180 200 5 0 205

Diala 114 0 0 114 31 4 0 35 171 3 0 174

AL-Anbar 201 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 83

Baghdad/municipality 625 24 25 674 1420 5 85 1510 79 0 0 79


Babil 116 0 0 116 112 0 0 112 165 0 0 165

Kerbala 263 4 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Waset 96 2 3 101 0 0 0 0 144 5 0 149

Salahuddin 87 0 0 78 734 0 128 862 92 0 0 92

AL-Najaf 104 0 0 104 642 0 0 642 127 0 0 127

Qadisiya 205 10 27 242 0 447 160 607 101 0 0 101

AL-Muthana 101 0 1 102 0 0 0 0 90 7 0 97

Thi Qar 265 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 88 0 0 88

Missan 148 0 0 148 817 62 194 1073 120 0 0 120

Basrah 293 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 95

Total 4283 199 63 4545 7173 854 872 8899 2277 49 2 2328

30

Table (36)/cont.


Governorate Other Total

Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total

Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 485 247 0 732

Dahuk/ periphery 20 19 0 39 1195 774 0 1969

Nineveh 174 0 0 174 1862 0 572 2434

Sulaimaniya/ central 130 0 0 130 1213 59 0 1272

Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 2145 570 0 2715

Kirkuk 529 0 0 529 1205 0 211 1416

Irbil / central 0 424 0 424 784 425 0 1209

Irbil /periphery 2565 913 0 3478 3532 920 0 4452

Diala 253 105 104 462 1558 187 260 2005

AL-Anbar 869 36 747 1652 1423 36 717 2206

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 29 29 3453 133 683 4269

Baghdad / periphery 117 0 247 364 1361 0 536 1897

Babil 130 0 0 130 1793 0 1208 3001

Kerbala 228 500 0 728 1574 517 0 2091

Waset 805 93 110 1100 1254 266 238 1758

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 1031 0 128 1159

AL-Najaf 239 34 79 352 1351 34 79 1464

Qadisiya 781 0 0 781 1285 457 193 1935

AL-Muthana 114 17 0 131 863 39 63 965

Thi Qar 441 0 511 952 1928 0 511 2439

Missan 0 0 0 0 1234 132 194 1560

Basrah 1306 150 1112 2568 1968 150 1112 3230

Total 8701 2291 2939 13931 34497 4946 6735 46178

2. Sanitation Sector

Governorate boarder

Iraqi boarders

tanks by governorate for 2010 Percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared networks and septic

Population connected to septic tanks

Population connected to sanitation and shared networks

34

Table (37)

Summary of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010.

Details Data

Sanitation network exists

Number of population connected to sanitation

networks and shared networks

7461386

Percent of population connected to sanitation

networks and shared networks

23.8 %

Independent treatment system (septic tank) exists

Number of population connected to Independent

treatment system (septic tank)

18654754

Percent of population connected to Independent

treatment system (septic tank)

59.5%

No Sanitation network or Independent treatment

system (septic tank)

Number of population not connected to sanitation

networks and Independent treatment system

(septic tank)

5212561

Percent of population not connected to sanitation

networks and Independent treatment system

(septic tank)

16.7%

33

Table (37)/cont.

Summary of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010

Details No. of governorate % Governorate name

Percent of existing central treatment stations

10

52.6

AL-Anbar, Baghdad/municipality, Babil, Kerbala, Salahuddin,

AL-Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan, Basrah

Percent of existing small processing units for sanitation for

Served areas (hospitals, residence compounds, hotels,… etc.)

7

36.8

Nineveh, Kirkuk, Irbil, Babil, AL-Najaf, Qadisiya

Thi Qar

Percent of existing small processing units for sanitation for

un-served areas

3

15.8

Kirkuk, Kerbala, Al-Muthna

Percent of existing for polluting activities (industrial

Facilities, garages, butchery, agricultural activities, other.)

That drain into sanitation networks

19

100.0

All governorates

Percent of existing small processing unit for polluting

activities

2

10.5

Kirkuk, Thi Qar

Percent of existing for pumping stations

16

84.2

All governorates except Kurdistan region

33

Table (38)

Number and percentage of population connected to sanitation networks and shared networks and percentage of served areas

By network type, rate of produced wastewater for central treatment stations and small treatment stations, polluting activities

And under construction sanitation networks projects by governorate for 2010

Governorate No. of population

connected to sanitation

networks and shared

networks

% of population

connected to sanitation

networks and shared

networks

% of served areas by network

type

Rate of produced wastewater

For central treatment stations

& small treatment stations &

Polluting activities

Under construction

Sanitation networks*

Sanitation Rain fall Shared

Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 36.4 0.0 0 **12

Nineveh 112521 4.0 4.0 39.0 0.0 15150 0

Sulaimaniya 1147800 63.7 0.0 0.0 26.6 0 **47

Kirkuk 26536 2.0 0.0 28.0 2.0 1284 0

Irbil 0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0 **18

Diala 0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0 1

AL-Anbar 35649 2.4 13.0 50.0 0.0 47006 0

Baghdad/municipality 4231193 82.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 1200000 83

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0 0

Babil 60628 3.5 3.5 20.0 0.0 12000 0

Kerbala 288763 28.3 29.0 56.0 0.0 67000 2

Waset 0 0.0 0.0 55.0 0.0 0 2

Salahuddin 241552 18.0 23.0 35.0 0.0 27000 0

AL-Najaf 159170 13.0 13.0 25.0 0.0 25100 1

Qadisiya 118719 11.0 30.0 39.0 0.0 40405 1

AL-Muthana 6847 1.0 1.0 20.0 0.0 10000 1

Thi Qar 349249 20.0 48.0 42.0 10.0 98100 0

Missan 369530 40.0 40.0 40.0 45.0 70000 0

Basrah 313230 13.0 13.0 13.0 0.0 70000 1

Total 7461386 23.8 12.5 30.2 7.6 1683045 169

*source: ministry of municipalities and public works/ the general decorate of stream – Baghdad municipality / Baghdad department of streams.

** source : Regional statistics of Kurdistan / including projects under construction and subjected in Kurdistan.

33

Table (39)

Percentage of type and status of network, cases of wastewater spillage and spillage at rain fall for 2010.

Details No. of governorates % Governorate

Sanitation

Network type Rain fall

Shared

11

18

5

57.9

94.7

26.3

All governorate except Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala, Baghdad prephery,

Waset and AL-Muthana

All governorates except Sulaimaniya

Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Baghdad municipality, Thi Qar and Missan.

Good

Status of network Medium

Fair

4

14

1

21.1

73.7

5.3

Sulaimaniya, Waset, Thi Qar and Basrah

All governorates except Sulaimaniya, Waset, Thi Qar, Basrah, and AL-Muthana

AL-Muthana

Most areas

cases of wastewater spillage Some areas

No spillage

3

14

2

15.8

73.7

10.5

Irbil, Baghdad municipality and AL-Muthana

All governorates except Waset, Thi Qar, Baghdad prephery, AL-Muthana and Irbil

Waset and Missan

Spillage

spillage at rain fall

No spillage

17

2

89.5

10.5

All governorates except Dahuk and Sulaimaniya

Dahuk and Sulaimaniya

34

Table (40)

Number of central treatment stations by type, status and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Number of central

treatment stations

Number of central treatment stations by type Number of central treatment stations by status

preliminary Primary Binary Ternary working working partially

Idle

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kirkuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Al-Anbar 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0

Baghdad/ municipality

3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1

Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Babil 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

Kerbala 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Salahuddin 4 0 0 4 0 3 0 1

Al-Najaf 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

Qadisiyah 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0

Al-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thi Qar 3 0 0 3 0 1 1 1

Missan 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0

Basrah 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

Total 21 0 1 20 0 15 3 3

34

Table (41)

Number of central treatment stations, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Number of central treatment stations

Total designed capacity (M³ /day)

Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day)

Percentage from designed capacity

Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 0 0 0 0.0

Irbil 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 0 0 0 0.0

Al-Anbar 3 73600 6624 9.0

Baghdad/ municipality 3 680000 1200000 176.5

Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 1 12000 12000 100.0

Kerbala 1 50000 48000 96.0

Waset 0 0 0 0.0

Salahuddin 4 48500 11000 22.7

Al-Najaf 1 35000 25000 71.4

Qadisiyah 2 15750 39705 252.1

Al-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0

Thi Qar 3 35000 25000 71.4

Missan 2 45000 45000 100.0

Basrah 1 286000 70000 24.5

Total 21 1280850 1482329 115.7

Note: the central treatment stations in Baghdad (municipality) and Qadisiyah afford more than there actual capacity, therefore the percentage is more than 100%

34

Table (42)

Percentage of population connected to sanitation networks connected to central treatment station and amount of wastewater produced (treated and untreated), BOD

concentration in treated water discharged from central treatment stations by governorate for 2010

Governorate

central treatment stations

BOD concentration in treated water discharged from

central treatment stations mg/liter (Ppm)

Percentage of population

connected to sanitation networks connected to central treatment stations

amount of wastewater

produced (M³ /day)

amount of wastewater produced/

treated (M³ /day)

amount of wastewater produced/ untreated (M³ /day)

Percentage from amount of wastewater

produced

designed capacity

actual capacity

Dahuk 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Anbar 7.0 47006 6624 40382 14.1 20.0 0.0


70.0 1200000 475000 725000 39.6 40.0 40.0

Baghdad/ periphery

0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 3.5 12000 12000 0 100.0 25.0 37.2

Kerbala 29.0 45000 45000 0 100.0 40.0 35.0

Waset 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 37.0 27000 11000 16000 40.7 40.0 0.0

Al-Najaf 13.0 25000 25000 0 100.0 16.0 27.0

Qadisiyah 20.0 39705 13705 26000 34.5 30.0 40.0

Al-Muthana 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Thi Qar 10.0 93600 25000 68600 26.7 40.0 30.0

Missan 30.0 70000 45000 25000 64.3 30.0 30.0

Basrah 75.0 70000 69800 200 99.7 40.0 50.0

Total 29.0 1629311 728129 901182 44.7

37

Table (43)

Percentage of discharge destination of treated wastewater from central treatment stations by type and stations absorption

capacity of wastewater produced for 2010.

Type of discharge destination

of treated wastewater

No. of governorate % Governorate name

Trocar

3

15.8

Kerbala, Babil, Thi Qar

River

7

36.8

AL-Anbar, Baghdad/municipality, Salahuddin, AL-Najaf

Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan

Near land

1

5.3

Basrah

Other

1

5.3

Al- Anbar

Percent stations absorption

capacity of wastewater

produced

Has capacity for wastewater

produced

5

26.3

Babil, Kerbala, salahuddin, Al-Najaf and Basrah

Has no capacity for wastewater

produced

5

26.3

Al- Anbar, Baghdad/ muncipality, Qadisiya, thi Qar, Missan

No central treatment stations

9

47.4

Dahuk, Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala,

Baghdad/ periphery, Waset and Al-Muthana

30

Table (44)

Number of small treatment units, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Number of small treatment units

Total designed capacity (M³ /day)

Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day)

Percentage from designed capacity

Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 7 23000 15150 65.9


Kirkuk 9 8180 45.9 0.6

Irbil 1 200 150 75.0

Diala 0 0 0 0.0

Al-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/ municipality 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 1 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 2 25000 25000 100.0

Waset 0 0 0 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0.0

Al-Najaf 2 200 100 50.0

Qadisiyah 3 814 700 86.0

Al-Muthana 1 5000 5000 100.0

Thi Qar 3 10100 3500 34.7

Missan 0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0.0

Total 29 72494 49645.9 68.5

34

Table (45)

Number of small treatment units in served and un-served areas, polluting activities, total design capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage

from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.

Governorate No. of small treatment units Total design capacity (M³ /day) Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day) %

Un-served Served Polluting

activity

Total Un-served Served Polluting

activity


activity


activity

Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 0 7 0 7 0 23000 0 23000 0 15150 0 15150 0.0 65.9 0.0 65.9

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 1 3 5 9 3600 3390 1190 8180 0 34 11.9 45.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.6

Irbil 0 1 0 1 0 200 0 200 0 150 0 150 0.0 75.0 0.0 75.0

Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 2 0 0 2 25000 0 0 25000 25000 0 0 25000 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 2 0 2 0 200 0 200 0 100 0 100 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0

Qadisiya 0 3 0 3 0 814 0 814 0 700 0 700 0.0 86.0 0.0 86.0

AL-Muthana 1 0 0 1 5000 0 0 5000 5000 0 0 5000 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Thi Qar 0 2 1 3 0 500 9600 10100 0 500 3000 3500 0.0 100.0 31.3 34.7

Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 4 19 6 29 33600 28104 10790 72494 30000 16634 3011.9 49645.9 89.3 59.2 27.9 68.5

34

Table (46)

Number of small treatment units in areas not served by sanitation networks by status, amount of treated and untreated wastewater

Produced and percentage of treated wastewater to that produced by governorate for 2010.

Governorate

Small treatment units in

areas not served

Amount of

produced

Wastewater

(M³ /day)

Amount of

treated

Wastewater

(M³ /day)

Amount of

untreated

Wastewater

(M³ /day)

% treated

wastewater

to

produced

wastewater

Working Partially

Working

Idle Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0.0

Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 2 0 0 2 22000 20000 2000 90.0

Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 1 0 0 1 10000 5000 5000 50.0

Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0

Total 3 0 1 4 32000 25000 7000 78.1

33

Table (47)

Percentage of destinations of treated wastewater from small treatment stations in areas not served by sanitation networks for 2010

Destinations of treated wastewater from

small treatment stations

No. of governorates % Governorate

Trocar

2

10.5

Kerbala and AL-Muthana

River

0

0.0

0

Near land

0

0.0

0

Other

1

5.3

Kirkuk

33

Table (48)

Number of small wastewater treatment unit (in served areas/ hospitals, residence compounds, hotels, etc.)

by type, status and governorate for 2010

Governorate No. of small wastewater treatment units by type No. of small wastewater treatment units by status

preliminary Binary Tertiary Total Working Partially working Idle Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 0 7 0 7 5 2 0 7


Kirkuk 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3

Irbil 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1

Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Babil 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1

Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Najaf 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2

Qadisiya 2 1 0 3 2 1 0 3

AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Thi Qar 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 2

Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 3 16 0 19 8 9 2 19

33

Table (49)

Amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced in areas served by small treatment units

and percentage of treated wastewater by governorate for 2010.

Governorate Amount of untreated wastewater produced in

areas served by small

treatment units

(M³ /day)

Amount of treated wastewater

produced in areas served

by small treatment units

(M³ /day)

Amount of

untreated Wastewater

in small treatment unit

(M³ /day)

% treated wastewater

to

produced wastewater

Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 15150 15150 0 100.0


Kirkuk 15000 34 14966 0.2

Irbil 500 500 0 100.0

Diala 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 0 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0 0 0.0

Waset 0 0 0 0.0


AL-Najaf 100 100 0 100.0

Qadisiya 700 700 0 100.0

AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0

Thi Qar 1500 0 1500 0.0

Missan 0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0.0

Total 32950 16484 16466 50.0

34

Table (50)

Number of small treatment units for polluting activities (health institutions, industrial establishments, carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses, agricultural

activities, other) by type and governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. of small treatment units of polluting activities by type No. of small treatment units of polluting activities by status

Elementary Secondary Tertiary Total Working Partially

working Idle Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Kirkuk 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5

Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Baghdad/Municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Babil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ThiQar 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6

34

Table (51)

Rate of liquid waste produced and treated at small treatment units from polluting activities and percentage of liquid waste treated to produced by governorate for

2010

Governorate Average amount of liquid waste

produced by polluting activities

(m3/day)

Average amount of liquid waste

treated at small treatment units for

polluting activities (m3/day)

Average amount of liquid waster not

treated at small treatment units for

polluting activities (m3/day)

% of treated liquid waste to

untreated

Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0 0 0.0


Kirkuk 297.5 2.97 294.5 1.0

Irbil 0 0 0 0.0

Diala 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0.0

Babil 0 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0 0 0.0

Waset 0 0 0 0.0


AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0

ThiQar 3000 0 3000 0.0

Missan 0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0 0 0.0

Total 3297.5 2.97 3294.5 0.1

34

Table (52)

Percentage of existence of polluting activities and discharge destination of treated and untreated liquid waste for 2010

Description Discharge destinations Number of governorates % Name of governorate

Percentage of polluting activities

presence in the governorate 19 100.0 All governorates

Percentage of discharge

destination of treated liquid

waste from polluting activities

Sanitation network 0 0.0

Sewage lagoon 1 5.3 Kirkuk

River 2 10.5 Kirkuk & Thi Qar

Neighbouring land 1 5.3 Kirkuk

Other 0 0.0

Percentage of discharge

destination of treated liquid

waste from polluting activities

that do not have small treatment

units

Sanitation network 11 52.6

Dahuk, Nineveh, Sualimaniya, Al-Anbar, Baghdad

Municipality, Babil, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf,

Thi Qar, Missan

Sewage lagoon 10 47.4

Kirkuk, Diala, Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality,

Baghdad periphery, Babil, Waset, Qadisiya, Al-

Muthana, Thi Qar

River 10 47.4

Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Al-Anbar, Baghdad

Municipality, Babil, Waset, Al-Muthana, Thi Qar,

Basrah

Neighbouring land 6 26.3 Kirkuk, Baghdad Municipality, Babil, Al-Muthana,

Thi Qar Basrah

Other 4 21.1 Nineveh, Irbil, Kerbala, Al-Muthana

37

Table (53)

Number of sewage water pumping stations by type and governorate for 2010

Governorate Rainwater pumping

station

Wastewater

pumping station

Shared pumping

station Submerged station Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 6 5 0 0 11

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0

Kirkuk 3 0 1 0 4

Irbil 0 0 0 0 0

Diala 16 1 1 0 18

AL-Anbar 25 4 0 0 29

Baghdad/Municipality 34 41 72 401 251

Baghdad / periphery 26 0 0 0 26

Babil 25 12 0 0 37

Kerbala 15 5 0 0 20

Waset 80 0 0 0 80

Salahuddin 11 19 0 0 30

AL-Najaf 8 4 0 0 12

Qadisiya 19 25 0 0 44

AL-Muthana 39 1 4 0 44

ThiQar 53 0 7 0 60

Missan 8 14 31 0 53

Basrah 90 82 0 0 172

Total 458 213 116 401 891

30

Table (54)

Number and percentage of pumping stations by status and governorate for 2010

Governorate No. pumping

stations

No. pumping stations by status % of status

Good Average Bad Good Average Bad

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 11 0 11 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00

Kirkuk 4 0 4 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Irbil 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 18 18 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 29 10 14 5 34.5 48.3 17.2

Baghdad/Municipality 251 0 251 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 26 2 23 1 7.7 88.5 3.8

Babil 37 0 31 6 0.0 83.8 16.2

Kerbala 20 0 20 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Waset 80 40 40 0 50.0 50.0 0.0

Salahuddin 30 18 10 2 60.0 33.3 6.7

AL-Najaf 12 0 12 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Qadisiya 44 44 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 44 0 44 0 0.0 100.0 0.0

ThiQar 60 60 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 53 50 3 0 94.3 5.7 0.0

Basrah 172 142 20 10 82.6 11.6 5.8

Total 891 350 513 28 39.3 57.6 3.1

34

Table (55)

Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for pumping stations for 2010

Discharge destination of wastewater from

pumping stations

No. of


Central treatment stations 9 47.4 Baghdad Municipality, Babil, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar,

Missan Basrah

Sewage lagoon 14 73.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk,

Irbil

River 11 57.9 All governorates excluding Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Diala, Baghdad

periphery, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Basrah

Neighbouring land 2 10.5 Nineveh, Missan

Other 1 5.3 Nineveh

34

Table (56)

Percentage of main problems faced by sewage networks and treatment stations by governorate for 2010

Main problems No. of


Inefficiency of networks 11 57.9 Ninevehm Irbil, Diala, Baghdad Municipality, Baghda periphery,

Babil, Kerbala, Waset, Al-Jajaf, Qadisiya, Basrah

Weak unsustainable maintenance 4 21.1 Irbil, Baghdad Municipality, Qadisiya, Basrah

Lack of technical and administrative staff 12 63.2 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Baghdad

periphery, Babil, Kerbala, Missan

Not enough machinery 13 68.4 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Baghdad

periphery, Salahuddin, Al-Muthana

Problems related to pumping station (age,

consumption, broken) 10 52.6

Nineveh, Kirkuk, Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Waset,

Salahuddin, Al-Najaf, Thi Qar, Basrah

Stations old and inefficient 8 42.1 Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf,

Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan

Scarcity and instability of electricity 15 78.9 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Kerbala

Trespasses in linking sanitation and rainwater

networks 17 89.5 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya

Lack of awareness on networks use 17 89.5 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya

Other 5 26.3 Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala, Al-Anbar, Al-Muthana

33

Table (57)

Number and percentage of population trespassing on rainwater networks by governorate for 2010

Governorate Number of population trespassing on rainwater network Percentage of population trespassing on rainwater network

Dahuk 60000 10.0

Nineveh 1426796 80.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0.0

Kirkuk 464380 35.0

Irbil 36540 5.0

Diala 260804 19.0

AL-Anbar 576094 80.0

Baghdad/Municipality 2961835 70.0

Baghdad / periphery 174342 75.0

Babil 658251 38.0

Kerbala 132830 46.0

Waset 313154 85.0

Salahuddin 29672 5.0

AL-Najaf 43532 8.0

Qadisiya 134908 25.0

AL-Muthana 116400 17.0

ThiQar 659112 60.0

Missan 28638 5.0

Basrah 578123 30.0

Total 8655414 27.6

33

Table (58)

Percentage of discharge destinations of water from rainwater networks by type for 2010

Governorate Percentage of rainwater by discharge destination

Sewage lagoon River Neighbouring land Other

Dahuk 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Nineveh 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0

Sulaimaniya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 2.0 98.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Diala 99.0 1.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 10.0 80.0 0.0 10.0

Baghdad/Municipality 30.0 50.0 0.0 20.0

Baghdad / periphery 90.0 10.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 85.0 15.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 30.0 70.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 10.0 90.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 42.0 47.0 11.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 40.0 60.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 34.90.0 44.0 11.1 4.7

33

Table (59)

Number and percentage of population connected to independent treatment system (septic tank) by governorate for 2010

Governorate Number of population connected to septic tank Percentage of population connected to septic tank

Dahuk 952626 99.0

Nineveh 2700513 96.0

Sulaimaniya 450471 25.0

Kirkuk 1286996 97.0

Irbil 1234630 80.0

Diala 1358926 99.0

AL-Anbar 1381380 93.0

Baghdad/Municipality 928798 18.0

Baghdad / periphery 1084792 70.0

Babil 1385793 80.0

Kerbala 469367 46.0

Waset 805911 70.0

Salahuddin 1100401 82.0

AL-Najaf 857067 70.0

Qadisiya 539631 50.0

AL-Muthana 136941 20.0

ThiQar 1396994 80.0

Missan 101621 11.0

Basrah 481892 20.0

Total 18654754 59.5

444

Table (60)

Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic tanks by destination and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic tanks by destination

Transferred to treatment

Stations by septic tanks

Trocar

River Near land Other

Dahuk 0.0 10.0 0.0 90.0 0.0

Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0

Sulaimaniya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Kirkuk 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.0 1.0

Irbil 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Diala 0.0 80.0 0.0 20.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0

Baghdad/municipality 20.0 60.0 3.0 17.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0

Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0

Salahuddin 10.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 70.0

AL-Najaf 5.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0

Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 60.0 30.0 0.0 10.0 0.0

Total 5.0 26.6 4.1 39.5 24.8

444

Table (61)

Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater (households not connected to sewage networks and septic tanks) by

Discharge destination for 2010

Discharge destinations of wastewater

(households not connected to sewage

networks and septic tanks)

No. of governorates % Governorate

Transferred to discharge destination by septic

tanks

2

10.5

Salahuddin and Basrah.

Rain fall networks

8

42.1

Nineveh, Irbil, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery, Kerbala, Salahuddin,

Qadisiya and Basrah.

Trocars

7

36.8

Diala, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan

And Basrah.

River

2

10.5

AL-Najaf and Basrah.

Near land

10

52.6

Dahuk, Kirkuk, Diala, Baghdad municipality, Babil, Salahuddin,

AL-Najaf, Qadisiya, AL-Muthana and Missan.

Other

5

26.3

Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Waset, AL-Muthana.

444

Table (62)

Amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation water and percentage of disposal destination of

sludge produced by treatment operations sanitation water by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation

water (ton/year)

percentage of disposal destination of sludge produced by treatment operations sanitation water

agricultural industrial municipal landfill Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Anbar 240 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/ municipality 15000 95.0 0.0 5.0 0.0

Baghdad/periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 337 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0

Kerbala 360 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Waset 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 610 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Najaf 1500 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiyah 1500 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Thi Qar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 500 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0

Basrah 12337 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0

Total 32384 61.7 0.0 16.1 22.2

447

Table (63)

Number of working, idle and broken machines in sanitation sector by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Cutting macnine Excavator Basin

Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 8 0 0 8

Nineveh 12 1 3 16 7 3 0 10 13 8 1 22

Sulaimaniya 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2

Kirkuk 6 0 0 6 1 1 0 2 14 2 0 16

Irbil 4 0 1 5 3 0 0 3 1 1 0 2

Diala 11 0 0 11 7 0 0 7 23 0 1 24

Al-Anbar 10 0 2 12 16 0 3 19 36 1 7 44

Baghdad/ municipality 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Baghdad/periphery 24 0 0 24 4 0 0 4 16 0 0 16

Babil 22 1 3 26 2 0 0 3 35 2 4 41

Kerbala 21 0 5 26 3 0 2 5 34 0 5 39

Waset 11 5 0 16 7 2 1 10 24 10 0 34

Salahuddin 17 0 6 23 3 0 2 5 1 0 1 2

Al-Najaf 7 2 7 16 3 1 3 7 19 2 6 27

Qadisiyah 17 0 6 23 2 0 3 5 34 0 11 45

Al-Muthana 6 0 1 7 6 0 1 7 19 0 4 23

Thi Qar 16 3 4 23 8 3 7 18 45 11 4 60

Missan 15 0 2 17 6 0 0 6 22 0 1 23

Basrah 24 0 4 28 6 0 0 6 28 0 2 30

Total 225 12 44 281 90 10 22 122 374 37 47 458

440

Table (63)/cont.

Number of working, idle and broken machines in sanitation sector by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Aspirator Multi-purpose Others

Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 2 0 0 2 52 11 1 64 0 0 0 0

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4

Kirkuk 1 2 0 3 2 2 0 4 7 1 0 8

Irbil 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 19 0 0 0 0

Diala 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 67 0 9 76

Al-Anbar 3 0 1 4 5 0 1 6 38 2 6 46



Babil 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 4 42 3 9 54

Kerbala 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 23 0 9 32

Waset 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 3 6 1 0 7

Salahuddin 23 0 5 28 3 0 0 3 61 0 11 72

Al-Najaf 5 1 0 6 4 4 0 8 54 4 3 61

Qadisiyah 5 0 1 6 7 0 1 8 48 0 23 71

Al-Muthana 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 9

Thi Qar 3 0 0 3 13 1 6 20 43 0 19 62

Missan 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Basrah 32 0 9 41 6 0 0 6 18 0 0 18

Total 92 3 16 111 126 19 9 154 449 11 93 553

444

Table (64)

Number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Engineer Supervisor Technician

Permanent Contract Daily wedges

Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges


Total

Dahuk 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nineveh 49 2 3 54 22 0 0 22 68 0 3 71

Sulaimaniya 35 0 0 35 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 5

Kirkuk 42 0 1 43 0 0 0 0 65 0 1 66

Irbil 35 0 0 35 2 0 0 2 25 0 0 25

Diala 33 0 24 57 0 0 0 0 284 0 35 319

Al-Anbar 90 0 3 93 74 0 2 76 396 0 40 436



Babil 83 0 25 108 0 0 0 0 291 0 8 299

Kerbala 89 0 4 93 0 0 0 0 62 0 3 65

Waset 58 0 8 66 426 0 128 554 69 0 16 85

Salahuddin 45 0 8 53 56 0 0 56 139 0 10 149

Al-Najaf 66 0 2 68 0 0 0 0 77 0 3 80

Qadisiyah 47 0 6 53 0 0 0 0 41 0 4 45

Al-Muthana 31 0 0 31 90 0 0 90 17 0 2 19

Thi Qar 53 0 2 55 0 0 0 0 79 0 6 85

Missan 25 0 2 27 0 0 0 0 47 0 6 53

Basrah 53 0 3 56 0 0 10 10 79 0 35 114

Total 997 5 99 1101 680 0 140 820 2156 6 180 2342

444

Table (64)/cont.


Governorate

Administrator Unskilled worker Driver




Total

Dahuk 3 0 0 3 7 0 0 7 10 4 0 14

Nineveh 93 0 3 96 122 0 2 124 65 0 0 65

Sulaimaniya 15 0 0 15 22 11 0 33 6 38 0 44

Kirkuk 51 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 65

Irbil 39 7 0 46 37 27 0 64 14 7 0 21

Diala 61 0 10 71 72 0 0 72 63 0 0 63

Al-Anbar 163 0 0 163 107 0 20 127 65 0 0 65



Babil 309 0 16 325 123 0 111 234 63 0 0 63

Kerbala 115 0 2 117 300 0 42 342 91 0 0 91

Waset 78 0 15 93 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 74

Salahuddin 50 0 6 56 265 0 17 282 44 0 4 48

Al-Najaf 40 0 1 41 58 0 8 66 70 0 0 70

Qadisiyah 60 0 4 64 249 0 36 285 75 0 0 75

Al-Muthana 59 0 0 59 154 0 10 164 39 0 0 39

Thi Qar 117 0 12 129 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 102

Missan 53 0 2 55 553 0 70 623 85 0 1 56

Basrah 106 0 14 120 204 0 7 211 244 0 0 244

Total 1580 12 87 1679 2273 38 323 2634 1254 49 5 1308

443

Table (64)/cont.


Governorate

Others Total



Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 25 4 0 29

Nineveh 179 0 5 184 598 2 16 616

Sulaimaniya 1 0 0 1 89 49 0 138

Kirkuk 217 0 1 218 440 0 3 443

Irbil 5 0 0 5 157 41 0 198

Diala 0 0 0 0 513 0 69 582

Al-Anbar 11 0 0 11 906 0 65 971

Baghdad/ municipality 0 0 0 0 402 14 0 416

Baghdad/periphery 121 0 22 143 541 0 40 581

Babil 0 0 0 0 869 0 160 1029

Kerbala 226 0 1 227 883 0 52 935

Waset 49 0 0 49 754 0 167 921

Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 599 0 45 644

Al-Najaf 241 0 26 267 552 0 40 592

Qadisiyah 131 0 0 131 603 0 50 653

Al-Muthana 30 0 4 34 420 0 16 436

Thi Qar 828 0 84 912 1179 0 104 1283

Missan 71 0 0 71 834 0 81 915

Basrah 439 0 0 439 1125 0 69 1194

Total 2549 0 143 2692 11489 110 977 12576

3. Municipal Services

Sector

Percentage of population covered by garbage collection services by governorate for 2010

% of covered population

Governorate boarder

Iraqi boarders

443

Table (65 a)

Summary of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010.

Indicator Value

Number of municipalities 425

Percent of transformiong stations (regular) 2.4

Percent of temporary collection sites (irregular) 28.9

Percent of burial sites with environmental approval 8.2

Percent of burial sites without environmental approval 91.8

Percent of burial at sites with environmental approval 8.2

Percent of burial at sites without environmental approval 76.9

Percent of garbage disposal by burning 27.3

Percent of garbage disposal by dumping into empty lots 24.2

Amount of lifted garbage (garbage, rubble, scrap) (ton/day) 48085

Amount of lifted garbage (garbage, rubble, scrap) (ton/year) 17550864

Amount of hazardous waste (ton/year) 15546

444

Table (65 b)

Summary of main indicators of municipal service sector for 2010

Types of municipalities Number Percentage % Excellent 24 5.6

First 50 11.8

Second 102 24.0

Third 117 27.5

Fourth 132 31.1

Total 425 100.0

444

Table (65 c)

Summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010

Index Percentage % Percentage of the existence of machines to cover municipal services 96.7

Percentage of working machines 66.5

Percentage of idle machines 3.5

Percentage of broken machines 11.6

Percentage of rented machines 18.4

Percentage of municipalities which have enough machines 8.5

Percentage of municipalities which don’t have enough machines 91.5

Percentage of municipalities contracting with companies or contractors 5.2

444

Table (66)

Number of municipalities by category and governorate for 2010

governorate Number of municipalities

Type of municipal

Excellent First Second Third Fourth

Dahuk 43 0 3 9 15 16

Nineveh 27 1 4 8 9 5

Sulaimaniya 68 1 12 10 9 36

Kirkuk 14 1 1 2 5 5

Irbil 61 1 7 10 11 32

Diala 21 0 3 6 8 4

Al-Anbar 20 1 2 5 7 5

Baghdad / municipality 14 14 0 0 0 0


Babil 16 1 0 6 6 3

Kerbala 7 1 0 3 3 0

Waset 17 0 1 5 5 6

Salahuddin 17 0 3 5 7 2

Al-Najaf 9 1 1 2 2 3

Qadisiyah 15 0 1 6 5 3

Al-Muthana 11 0 1 2 1 7

Thi Qar 20 1 1 8 9 1

Missan 15 0 1 2 11 1

Basrah 15 1 3 8 2 1

Total 425 24 50 102 117 132

447

Table (67)

Number of population served by garbage collection, amount of lifted garbage per day by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Number of population served by garbage collection

Percentage of population served by garbage collection

amount of lifted garbage (ton/day)

Urban Country side Total Urban Country side Total

Dahuk 718824 25035 743859 99.4 10.5 77.3 1168

Nineveh 1750469 128120 187590 98.1 12.4 66.8 1729

Sulaimaniya 1471001 35232 1506233 96.1 13.0 83.6 3648

Kirkuk 747911 1342 749253 78.6 0.4 56.5 1340

Irbil 1229068 22666 1251734 95.8 8.7 81.1 2772

Diala 576529 8499 585028 87.5 1.2 42.6 947

Al-Anbar 669710 16070 685780 93.0 2.1 46.2 1022

Baghdad / municipality 5159991 4460 5164451 100.0 1.4 100.0 12245

Baghdad / periphery 553001 81935 634936 67.7 16.3 41.0 1269

Babil 695263 53143 748405 85.0 5.8 43.2 955

Kerbala 638243 0 638243 93.9 0.0 62.6 1149

Waset 590774 0 590774 88.5 0.0 51.3 1199

Salahuddin 562040 52835 614875 94.7 7.1 45.8 1793

Al-Najaf 838721 21617 860339 96.3 6.1 70.3 2716

Qadisiyah 412749 0 412749 67.7 0.0 38.2 674

Al-Muthana 294643 6993 301636 98.2 1.8 44.1 3005

Thi Qar 888154 16193 904347 80.9 2.5 51.8 5072

Missan 573155 1189 574344 85.7 0.5 62.2 845

Basrah 1650864 92939 1743803 85.7 19.3 72.4 4535

Total 20021110 568268 20589377 91.3 7.5 65.7 48085

Note: amount of lifted garbage includes garbage, destruction (Construction waste) and scrap

440

Table (68)

Rate of garbage collected and lifted per day under municipal jurisdiction and percentage distribution by area and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Agricultural areas Industrial areas Residential areas Economic activities

Lifted destruction Scrap Total

Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

% Amount (Ton /day)

%

Dahuk 49 10.8 67 4.5 650 3.2 171 2.7 222 1.2 10 2.6 1168 2.4

Nineveh 10 2.3 29 1.9 1132 5.5 260 4.2 298 1.6 0 0.0 1729 3.6

Sulaimaniya 175 38.9 118 8.0 2105 10.3 293 4.7 923 4.8 33 8.9 3648 7.6

Kirkuk 6 1.2 16 1.1 776 3.8 195 3.1 341 1.8 6 1.5 1340 2.8

Irbil 42 9.3 73 4.9 2064 10.1 258 4.1 331 1.7 5 1.4 2772 5.8

Diala 7 1.4 54 3.6 430 2.1 249 4.0 204 1.1 5 1.4 947 2.0

Al-Anbar 3 0.7 14 1.0 272 1.3 83 1.3 641 3.4 9 2.4 1022 2.1


43 9.5 578 39.1 5370 26.2 2330 37.4 3819 20.0 105 28.6 12245 25.5

Baghdad/ periphery

5 1.0 7 0.4 529 2.6 128 2.1 598 3.1 2 0.6 1269 2.6

Babil 18 4.0 34 2.3 375 1.8 185 3.0 336 1.8 8 2.1 955 2.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 29 2.0 746 3.6 147 2.4 225 1.2 2 0.6 1149 2.4

Waset 7 1.6 41 2.8 501 2.4 165 2.6 452 2.4 34 9.1 1199 2.5

Salahuddin 27 6.1 37 2.5 629 3.1 88 1.4 1010 5.3 3 0.8 1793 3.7

Al-Najaf 2 0.4 93 6.3 809 3.9 226 3.6 1520 8.0 67 18.2 2716 5.6

Qadisiyah 10 2.3 46 3.1 183 0.9 71 1.1 355 1.9 9 2.4 674 1.4

Al-Muthana 0 0.1 20 1.4 359 1.8 180 2.9 2437 12.8 10 2.8 3005 6.3

Thi Qar 1 0.1 158 10.7 801 3.9 281 4.5 3830 20.1 1 0.3 5072 10.5

Missan 0 0.0 21 1.4 505 2.5 63 1.0 204 1.1 52 14.1 845 1.8

Basrah 47 10.5 46 3.1 2243 11.0 860 13.8 1331 7.0 8 2.3 4535 9.4

Total 450 0.9 1479 3.1 20479 42.6 6231 13.0 19078 39.7 367 0.8 48085 100.0

444

Table (69)

Rate of hazardous waste collected per day and percentage of municipalities' hazardous waste is collected from by source and governorate for 2010.

Governorate

Rate of hazardous waste (kg/day)

Percentage of municipalities

Health institutions Industrial institutions

Agricultural institutions

others

Dahuk 814 93.0 0.0 2.3 0.0

Nineveh 6113 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 2381 77.9 8.8 29.4 0.0

Kirkuk 426 50.0 7.1 7.1 7.1

Irbil 6057 34.4 13.1 1.6 0.0

Diala 1120 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Anbar 5019 35.0 5.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/ municipality 8000 14.3 7.1 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/periphery 63 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 930 25.0 0.0 0.0 12.5

Kerbala 2250 28.6 14.3 0.0 0.0

Waset 7005 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 81 17.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Al-Najaf 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiyah 2000 6.7 6.7 0.0 6.7

Al-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Thi Qar 137 45.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 195 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 42591 41.2 4.5 5.4 0.9

444

Table (70)

Rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Collection in temporary

allocated sites

Burial in allocated

medical burial sites Dumping in empty lots Recycling Turned into fertiliser

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Dahuk 0 0.0 40 4.9 105 13.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Nineveh 0 0.0 6088 99.6 25 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 250 10.6 1368 58.2 562 23.9 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kirkuk 0 0.0 376 88.3 30 7.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Irbil 0 0.0 5238 86.5 767 12.7 0 0.0 0 0.0

Diala 0 0.0 120 10.7 1000 89.3 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0 0.0 4509 89.8 510 10.2 0 0.0 0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 0 0.0 8000 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0


Babil 330 35.5 500 53.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Kerbala 2000 88.9 250 11.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Waset 7000 99.9 5 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Salahuddin 50 61.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0 2000 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

ThiQar 5 3.6 20 14.6 102 74.5 0 0.0 0 0.0

Missan 0 0.0 45 23.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Total 9698 22.8 26559 62.4 5101 12.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

443

Table (70)/cont.

Rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Burning Dumped into rivers

and sewage lagoons

Sold to uncertified

contractors Turned to energy Other Total

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Amount

(kg/day) %

Dahuk 667.0 81.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2.0 0.2 814.0 100.0

Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6113.0 100.0

Sulaimaniya 189.0 7.9 12.0 0.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2381.0 100.0

Kirkuk 20.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 426.0 100.0

Irbil 52.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6057.0 100.0

Diala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1120.0 100.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5019.0 100.0

Baghdad/Municipality 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8000.0 100.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.0 100.0

Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 100.0 10.8 930.0 100.0

Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2250.0 100.0

Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7005.0 100.0

Salahuddin 31.0 38.3 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 81.0 100.0

AL-Najaf 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2000.0 100.0

AL-Muthana 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 10.0 7.3 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 137.0 100.0

Missan 150.0 76.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 195.0 100.0

Basrah 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 1119.0 2.6 12.0 (.) 0 0.0 0 0.0 102.0 0.2 42591.0 100.0

443

Table (71)

Percentage of allocated containers present for garbage collection distributed across areas and their numbers by governorate for 2010

Governorate Number of

municipalities

Percentage of

containers

available

Number of distributed containers across areas

Total Residential Commercial Governmental

Public

parks

Public

streets

Dahuk 43 95.3 74642 2134 1299 233 243 78551

Nineveh 27 70.4 546 173 72 78 4 873

Sulaimaniya 68 48.5 160 526 1025 268 726 2705

Kirkuk 14 42.9 2155 530 840 250 10 3785

Irbil 61 59.0 15958 2046 771 414 356 19545

Diala 21 90.5 2632 870 237 36 273 4048

AL-Anbar 20 70.0 9294 966 652 270 495 11677

Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 381490 341 1064 250 728 383873

Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 35083 1787 1300 69 1107 39346

Babil 16 100.0 79250 1051 924 457 1047 82729

Kerbala 7 100.0 100925 8690 1585 7469 1223 119892

Waset 17 100.0 21579 195 376 16 1078 23244

Salahuddin 17 100.0 15360 2809 1159 142 1297 20767

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 11360 983 482 242 857 13944

Qadisiya 15 100.0 663 273 95 74 104 1209

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 665 167 164 45 134 1175

ThiQar 20 100.0 46134 1227 189 139 422 78111

Missan 15 93.3 21826 96 69 5 307 22303

Basrah 15 100.0 117911 745 657 239 424 119976

Total 425 79.5 937653 25609 12960 10696 10835 997753

443

Table (72)

Percentage of number of containers distributed across areas by governorate for 2010

Governorate percentage of distributed containers across areas

% Residential Commercial Governmental Public parks Public streets

Dahuk 8.0 8.3 10.0 2.2 2.2 7.9

Nineveh 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.1

Sulaimaniya 0.0 2.1 7.9 2.5 6.7 0.3

Kirkuk 0.2 2.1 6.5 2.3 0.1 0.4

Irbil 1.7 8.0 5.9 3.9 3.3 2.0

Diala 0.3 3.4 1.8 0.3 2.5 0.4

AL-Anbar 1.0 3.8 5.0 2.5 4.6 1.2

Baghdad/Municipality 40.7 1.3 8.2 2.3 6.7 38.5

Baghdad / periphery 3.7 7.0 10.0 0.6 10.2 3.9

Babil 8.5 4.1 7.1 4.3 9.7 8.3

Kerbala 10.8 33.9 12.2 69.8 11.3 12.0

Waset 2.3 0.8 2.9 0.1 9.9 2.3

Salahuddin 1.6 11.0 8.9 1.3 12.0 2.1

AL-Najaf 1.2 3.8 3.7 2.3 7.9 1.4

Qadisiya 0.1 1.1 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.1

AL-Muthana 001 0.7 1.3 0.4 1.2 0.1

ThiQar 4.9 4.8 1.5 1.3 3.9 4.8

Missan 2.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 2.8 2.2

Basrah 12.6 2.9 2.1 2.2 3.9 12.0

Total 94.0 2.6 1.3 1.1 1.1 100.0

444

Table (73)

Percentage distribution of container use distributed across areas, number of discharge times per week and percentage of garbage separation on households' level


Governorate Percentage of container use Average number of emptying containers / week by type % of garbage

separation on

household level Yes Sometimes No Total Large

containers (8m3)

Medium

containers (6m3)

Small

containers (1m3)

Different size

containers

Dahuk 85.4 14.6 0.0 100.0 0 0 0 5 0.0

Nineveh 78.9 21.1 0.0 100.0 1 0 1 1 0.0

Sulaimaniya 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 6 2 0.0

Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 3 4 0.0

Irbil 94.4 2.8 2.8 100.0 1 1 5 4 0.0

Diala 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 5 3 0.0

AL-Anbar 71.4 21.4 7.1 100.0 2 1 2 1 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 4 1 7 5 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 40.0 60.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 4 5 0.0

Babil 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 2 1 6 5 0.0

Kerbala 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 0 0 6 7 7

Waset 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 6 5 5

Salahuddin 52.9 47.1 0.0 100.0 0 1 4 5 5

AL-Najaf 88.9 11.1 0.0 100.0 1 0 5 7 7

Qadisiya 80.0 20.0 0.0 100.0 0 2 9 6 6

AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 5 9 9

ThiQar 90.0 10.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 7 5 5

Missan 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 0 0 7 5 5

Basrah 86.7 13.3 0.0 100.0 1 1 5 3 3

Total 86.4 13.0 0.6 100.0 1 1 4 4 0.0

444

Table (74)

Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Garbage pressers 6m3 capacity Garbage pressers 8m

3 capacity

Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total

Dahuk 43 93.0 75 2 6 0 83 10 0 0 0 10

Nineveh 27 100.0 19 2 0 0 21 169 4 23 0 196

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 123 1 4 0 128 25 1 0 0 26

Kirkuk 14 100.0 20 0 8 0 28 29 1 21 0 51

Irbil 61 85.2 86 0 3 0 89 44 0 10 0 54

Diala 21 100.0 55 7 10 0 72 28 4 27 0 59

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 70 0 3 0 73 17 0 8 0 25

Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 71 0 2 6 79 153 18 8 9 188

Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 28 5 7 0 40 17 3 4 0 24

Babil 16 100.0 85 0 14 0 99 14 0 1 0 15

Kerbala 7 100.0 20 0 0 0 20 37 0 1 0 38

Waset 17 100.0 46 0 0 0 46 23 2 0 0 25

Salahuddin 17 100.0 44 0 1 0 45 25 1 31 0 57

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 44 1 0 0 45 31 1 2 0 34

Qadisiya 15 100.0 25 0 6 0 31 19 0 6 0 25

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 18 0 0 0 18 17 3 1 0 21

ThiQar 20 100.0 41 1 3 0 45 25 0 4 0 29

Missan 15 100.0 26 1 0 0 27 47 0 1 0 48

Basrah 15 100.0 42 0 5 0 47 25 0 4 0 29

Total 425 96.7 938 20 72 6 1036 755 38 152 9 954

444

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Garbage pressers 16m3 capacity Garbage pressers different capacities


Dahuk 43 93.0 7 0 1 0 8 17 0 1 0 18

Nineveh 27 100.0 49 4 4 0 57 17 0 1 0 18

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 13 0 1 0 14 96 1 2 0 99

Kirkuk 14 100.0 12 4 0 0 16 29 1 3 0 33

Irbil 61 85.2 6 1 1 0 8 12 0 1 0 13

Diala 21 100.0 7 5 20 0 32 11 0 8 0 19

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 20 0 2 0 22 36 0 3 0 39



Babil 16 100.0 23 2 5 0 30 4 0 0 0 4

Kerbala 7 100.0 22 12 3 0 37 26 0 0 0 26

Waset 17 100.0 11 1 5 0 17 26 0 0 2 28

Salahuddin 17 100.0 7 1 4 0 12 6 0 3 0 9

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 35 3 11 0 49 22 0 4 0 26

Qadisiya 15 100.0 19 0 7 0 26 29 0 4 0 33

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 28 3 7 0 38 2 0 0 0 2

ThiQar 20 100.0 20 5 10 0 35 68 1 19 0 88

Missan 15 100.0 27 5 1 0 33 9 0 3 0 12

Basrah 15 100.0 78 1 14 3 96 99 4 12 0 155

Total 425 96.7 542 56 127 3 728 699 9 79 8 795

447

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Farm tractor Dunbar


Dahuk 43 93.0 59 4 3 0 66 7 2 1 0 10

Nineveh 27 100.0 151 2 15 1 169 15 6 8 0 29

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 156 2 1 14 173 41 3 11 0 55

Kirkuk 14 100.0 37 1 6 9 53 4 1 2 0 7

Irbil 61 85.2 89 1 11 1 102 10 0 6 0 16

Diala 21 100.0 46 11 4 44 105 30 8 7 0 45

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 38 3 11 0 52 18 2 4 0 24



Babil 16 100.0 39 1 7 66 113 20 5 8 0 33

Kerbala 7 100.0 31 0 12 211 254 1 1 8 0 10

Waset 17 100.0 48 0 4 96 148 19 1 2 0 22

Salahuddin 17 100.0 54 2 19 106 181 11 0 5 0 16

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 35 4 7 324 370 16 7 8 0 31

Qadisiya 15 100.0 38 2 4 6 50 7 0 5 0 12

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 12 0 6 0 18 8 0 6 0 14

ThiQar 20 100.0 44 12 19 0 75 23 2 14 0 39

Missan 15 100.0 43 1 3 100 147 9 3 5 0 17

Basrah 15 100.0 39 2 5 27 73 27 0 6 0 33

Total 425 96.7 1124 56 166 1229 2575 303 52 134 8 497

440

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Shovel Grader


Dahuk 43 93.0 18 0 2 0 20 12 0 0 0 12

Nineveh 27 100.0 45 5 14 0 64 32 2 7 0 41

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 59 0 3 3 65 27 1 1 0 29

Kirkuk 14 100.0 28 11 4 3 46 16 7 6 4 30

Irbil 61 85.2 17 0 5 0 22 9 0 1 0 10

Diala 21 100.0 27 2 16 0 45 14 3 8 0 25

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 30 0 2 0 32 26 2 7 0 35



Babil 16 100.0 21 7 12 0 40 23 5 2 0 30

Kerbala 7 100.0 29 2 12 0 43 20 5 6 0 31

Waset 17 100.0 27 0 7 1 35 20 0 2 0 22

Salahuddin 17 100.0 26 1 12 17 56 24 0 11 2 37

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 38 5 6 3 52 25 5 6 0 36

Qadisiya 15 100.0 38 1 7 0 46 23 1 3 0 27

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 25 3 5 0 33 6 1 3 0 10

ThiQar 20 100.0 40 5 13 0 58 29 7 12 0 48

Missan 15 100.0 27 1 5 0 33 18 1 2 0 21

Basrah 15 100.0 52 2 14 14 82 31 0 9 2 42

Total 425 96.7 623 54 165 156 1007 369 42 23 22 531

444

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Bulldozer Lorry


Dahuk 43 93.0 6 0 0 0 6 15 1 0 0 16

Nineveh 27 100.0 7 0 2 0 9 73 4 3 0 80

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 6 0 0 0 6 94 0 6 4 101

Kirkuk 14 100.0 9 0 2 0 11 29 0 6 41 49

Irbil 61 85.2 1 0 2 0 3 27 0 3 0 30

Diala 21 100.0 3 2 4 0 9 44 2 6 0 52

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 8 1 5 0 14 47 0 4 0 51



Babil 16 100.0 9 0 1 0 10 54 2 2 0 58

Kerbala 7 100.0 6 0 4 0 10 45 2 2 0 49

Waset 17 100.0 9 1 2 0 12 54 1 2 0 57

Salahuddin 17 100.0 5 1 9 1 16 48 0 7 12 97

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 10 2 1 0 13 54 0 1 0 55

Qadisiya 15 100.0 7 0 3 0 10 89 0 4 0 93

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 1 2 2 0 5 31 0 3 0 34

ThiQar 20 100.0 5 1 4 0 10 69 3 5 0 77

Missan 15 100.0 3 0 3 0 6 48 0 2 0 50

Basrah 15 100.0 10 0 5 0 15 100 4 7 0 111

Total 425 96.7 108 11 53 19 191 1141 22 81 124 1679

444

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Cutting machine Suction machine


Dahuk 43 93.0 1 0 0 0 1 8 2 0 0 10

Nineveh 27 100.0 1 0 1 0 2 5 1 0 0 6

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

Kirkuk 14 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 5

Irbil 61 85.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Diala 21 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1



Babil 16 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2

Kerbala 7 100.0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0

Waset 17 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Salahuddin 17 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 8

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Qadisiya 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1

ThiQar 20 100.0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 2

Missan 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 7

Basrah 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 1 0 9

Total 425 96.7 97 3 18 1 119 181 8 25 46 230

443

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Trucks Container crane


Dahuk 43 93.0 101 1 0 0 102 5 1 0 0 6

Nineveh 27 100.0 8 1 3 0 12 16 2 4 0 22

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 77 0 0 1 78 11 1 1 0 13

Kirkuk 14 100.0 18 0 0 50 68 14 2 5 0 21

Irbil 61 85.2 34 0 0 4 38 11 0 1 0 12

Diala 21 100.0 43 0 5 0 48 5 1 9 0 15

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 4 0 1 0 5 6 0 2 0 8



Babil 16 100.0 15 0 0 0 15 11 2 3 0 16

Kerbala 7 100.0 9 0 2 0 11 2 1 2 0 5

Waset 17 100.0 8 0 0 0 8 6 1 0 0 7

Salahuddin 17 100.0 24 0 3 14 41 8 0 10 0 18

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 18 0 0 0 18 11 1 4 0 16

Qadisiya 15 100.0 35 0 3 0 38 3 0 2 0 5

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 7 0 1 0 8 10 2 3 0 125

ThiQar 20 100.0 16 1 5 0 22 7 1 8 0 16

Missan 15 100.0 8 0 0 0 8 2 2 1 0 5

Basrah 15 100.0 152 0 13 25 190 9 4 2 0 15

Total 425 96.7 663 12 42 371 1088 178 23 67 0 268

443

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Rollers Excavators / PC


Dahuk 43 93.0 15 0 0 0 15 10 0 0 0 10

Nineveh 27 100.0 25 8 8 0 41 0 1 0 0 1

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 17 0 1 0 18 5 0 1 0 6

Kirkuk 14 100.0 12 7 4 1 24 0 0 1 0 1

Irbil 61 85.2 7 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 2

Diala 21 100.0 4 5 10 0 19 1 0 1 0 2

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 22 1 8 0 31 1 0 0 0 1



Babil 16 100.0 14 0 1 0 15 2 2 0 0 4

Kerbala 7 100.0 8 1 9 0 18 0 0 0 0 0

Waset 17 100.0 17 0 1 0 18 0 0 0 1 1

Salahuddin 17 100.0 17 0 25 0 42 1 0 2 4 4

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 14 3 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0

Qadisiya 15 100.0 45 0 7 0 52 1 0 0 0 1

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 6 0 5 0 11 1 0 1 0 2

ThiQar 20 100.0 10 9 16 0 35 4 0 5 4 10

Missan 15 100.0 0 1 3 0 4 1 0 1 0 2

Basrah 15 100.0 8 1 3 0 12 9 0 1 4 11

Total 425 96.7 260 40 118 4 422 65 3 22 48 108

443

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Tanker Street sweeper


Dahuk 43 93.0 40 1 3 0 44 1 0 0 0 1

Nineveh 27 100.0 34 2 1 0 37 15 1 4 1 24

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 20 0 1 0 21 8 0 2 0 10

Kirkuk 14 100.0 28 0 5 0 33 5 1 0 0 6

Irbil 61 85.2 30 0 2 0 32 13 1 7 0 21

Diala 21 100.0 24 0 14 0 38 9 0 5 0 14

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 37 0 2 0 38 9 0 5 0 14



Babil 16 100.0 38 2 5 0 45 5 0 1 0 6

Kerbala 7 100.0 28 0 3 0 31 9 0 1 0 10

Waset 17 100.0 24 0 1 1 26 2 1 1 0 4

Salahuddin 17 100.0 23 1 16 4 44 6 0 12 0 20

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 28 1 3 0 32 10 2 3 0 15

Qadisiya 15 100.0 35 0 7 0 42 12 0 1 0 16

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 20 0 3 0 23 5 0 0 0 5

ThiQar 20 100.0 45 3 3 0 51 5 0 1 0 6

Missan 15 100.0 31 1 4 0 36 5 0 0 0 5

Basrah 15 100.0 43 1 3 0 47 11 0 0 0 11

Total 425 96.7 671 13 91 53 828 178 7 50 1 239

474

Table (74)/cont.


Governorate

Municipalities

(no.)

% machines

to cover

services

Other Total


Dahuk 43 93.0 4 1 0 4 9 411 15 17 4 447

Nineveh 27 100.0 2 0 0 0 2 683 45 98 4 831

Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 38 0 3 0 41 821 10 38 49 888

Kirkuk 14 100.0 13 0 0 1 14 307 36 74 79 496

Irbil 61 85.2 26 0 6 0 32 424 3 61 4 493

Diala 21 100.0 16 10 3 0 26 364 60 158 11 626

AL-Anbar 20 100.0 19 0 3 0 22 410 9 70 0 489



Babil 16 100.0 24 0 2 0 26 403 28 64 66 561

Kerbala 7 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 298 24 65 244 598

Waset 17 100.0 10 0 4 0 14 350 8 61 101 490

Salahuddin 17 100.0 54 0 19 0 73 386 7 196 487 776

AL-Najaf 9 100.0 0 0 0 14 14 392 35 56 214 825

Qadisiya 15 100.0 24 0 4 0 28 449 4 73 6 532

AL-Muthana 11 100.0 4 0 0 0 4 201 14 47 0 262

ThiQar 20 100.0 8 1 0 4 13 459 53 143 4 660

Missan 15 100.0 2 0 1 0 3 312 17 35 400 464

Basrah 15 100.0 5 0 0 0 5 748 19 104 72 943

Total 425 96.7 325 14 55 193 587 9229 483 1614 2446 13882

474

Table (75)

Number of municipalities owning machinery, number and percentage of municipalities with sufficient machinery , average number of garbage collection times

from households by machinery and press machinery per week by governorate for 2010

Governorate No. Municipalities

having machinery

No. Municipalities

not having

machinery

Total

Number and percentage of municipalities with sufficient

machinery to cover its services Average rate of garbage

collection per week from

houses using machinery With sufficient

machinery %

With insufficient

machinery %

Dahuk 40 3 43 6 15.0 34 85.0 5

Nineveh 27 0 27 0 0.0 27 100.0 5

Sulaimaniya 66 2 68 9 13.6 57 86.4 6

Kirkuk 14 0 14 1 7.1 13 92.9 4

Irbil 52 9 61 6 11.5 46 88.5 5

Diala 21 0 21 1 4.8 20 95.2 5

AL-Anbar 20 0 20 0 0.0 20 100.0 3

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 14 0 14 2 14.3 12 85.7 8

Baghdad / periphery 15 0 15 2 13.3 13 86.7 5

Babil 16 0 16 0 0.0 16 100.0 5

Kerbala 7 0 7 1 14.3 6 85.7 7

Waset 17 0 17 3 17.6 14 82.4 6

Salahuddin 17 0 17 1 5.9 16 94.1 5

AL-Najaf 9 0 9 0 0.0 9 100.0 7

Qadisiya 15 0 15 0 0.0 15 100.0 9

AL-Muthana 11 0 11 0 0.0 11 100.0 7

ThiQar 20 0 20 2 10.0 18 90.0 7

Missan 15 0 15 1 60.7 14 93.0 7

Basrah 15 0 15 0 0.0 15 100.0 6

Total 411 14 425 35 8.5 376 91.5 6

474

Table (76)

Percentage of municipalities contracting companies or garbage collection contractors, number of machinery owned by the companies or contractors working

within the jurisdiction of the municipality and rate of collection per week by companies or contractors by governorate for 2010

Governorate

% of municipalities

contracting companies and

contractors

Number of machinery of

companies and contractors

Average number of garbage

collection by companies and

contractors

Dahuk 16.3 216 6

Nineveh 0.0 0 0

Sulaimaniya 1.5 102 7

Kirkuk 7.1 97 3

Irbil 18.0 153 6

Diala 0.0 0 0

AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 7.1 28 7

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0 0

Babil 0.0 0 0

Kerbala 0.0 0 0

Waset 0.0 0 0

Salahuddin 0.0 0 0

AL-Najaf 0.0 0 0

Qadisiya 0.0 0 0

AL-Muthana 0.0 0 0

ThiQar 0.0 0 0

Missan 0.0 0 0

Basrah 9.7 182 5

Total 5.2 778 6

477

Table (77)

Percentage distribution of city cleaning by the municipality and rate of cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Percentage distribution of city cleaning Average number of

cleaning/week Streets and middle islands Squares Markets

Yes No Total Yea No Total Yes No Total Streets Square Markets

Dahuk 81.4 18.6 100.0 62.8 37.2 100.0 81.4 18.6 100.0 5 4 5

Nineveh 100.0 0.0 100.0 96.3 3.7 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 5 2 6

Sulaimaniya 92.6 7.4 100.0 52.9 47.1 100.0 80.9 19.1 100.0 4 2 6

Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.7 14.3 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 4 2 5

Irbil 82.0 18.0 100.0 45.9 54.1 100.0 68.9 3.1 100.0 5 2 6

Diala 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.7 14.3 100.0 95.2 4.8 100.0 5 4 6

AL-Anbar 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.0 15.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 4 2 5

Baghdad/Municipality 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 11 8 11

Baghdad / periphery 100.0 0.0 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 5 1 6

Babil 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 1 8

Kerbala 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 9 7 10

Waset 100.0 0.0 100.0 82.4 17.6 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 5 7

Salahuddin 100.0 0.0 100.0 94.1 5.9 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 1 7

AL-Najaf 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7 6 12

Qadisiya 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 9 7 12

AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 100.0 90.9 9.1 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 8 8 8

ThiQar 100.0 0.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 7 6 7

Missan 100.0 0.0 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 7 6 10

Basrah 100.0 0.0 100.0 86.7 13.3 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 4 7

Total 94.4 5.6 100.0 76.5 23.5 100.0 89.6 10.4 100.0 6 1 7

470

Table (78)

Percentage distribution of city cleaning by companies or contractors and rate of cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Percentage distribution of city cleaning Average number of

cleaning/week Streets and middle islands Squares Markets

Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Streets Square Markets

Dahuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.1 4.7 6.0

Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.0 2.0 14.0

Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6.0 4.0 12.0

Irbil 100.0 0.0 100.0 54.5 45.5 100.0 90.9 9.1 100.0 5.6 1.2 5.7

Diala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.0 7.0 7.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 2.0 6.0

Total 100.0 0.0 100.0 77.3 22.7 100.0 95.5 4.5 100.0 6.2 1.2 6.6

474

Table(79)

Number and percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems by area and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Residential areas Commercial areas Government institutions Public parks Public streets

Municipalities

(no.) %

Municipalities

(no.) %

Municipalities

(no.) %

Municipalities

(no.) %

Municipalities

(no.) %

Dahuk 9 20.9 2 4.7 2 4.7 4 9.3 5 11.6

Nineveh 5 18.5 3 11.1 3 11.1 1 3.7 2 11.1

Sulaimaniya 2 2.9 2 2.9 1 1.5 2 2.9 0 0.0

Kirkuk 7 50.5 4 28.6 5 35.7 1 7.1 4 35.7

Irbil 14 23.0 7 11.5 4 6.6 3 4.9 7 11.5

Diala 0 0.0 1 4.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

AL-Anbar 4 20.0 2 10.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 2 10.0

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 8 57.1 3 21.4 4 28.6 2 14.3 4 35.7


Babil 14 87.5 9 56.3 2 12.5 1 6.3 44 68.8

Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Waset 4 23.5 2 11.8 1 5.9 0 0.0 1 5.9

Salahuddin 9 52.9 5 29.4 3 17.6 3 17.6 7 41.2

AL-Najaf 1 11.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 11.1

Qadisiya 6 40.0 2 13.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 13.3

AL-Muthana 2 18.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 9.1 0 0.0

ThiQar 11 55.0 6 30.0 1 5.0 2 10.0 9 45.0

Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Basrah 7 46.7 3 20.0 4 26.7 2 13.3 6 40.0

Total 106 24.9 52 12.2 32 7.5 23 5.4 61 15.1

474

Table (80)

Percentage of the presence of regular transforming stations, temporary irregular collection sites within municipal borders and their numbers and total area by


Governorate % of existence of

regular transforming

stations

Number of regular

transforming stations

Total area of regular

transforming station

(m2)

% of existence of

irregular transforming

stations

Number of irregular

transforming stations

Total area of irregular

transforming station

(m2)

Dahuk 0.0 0 0 79.1 34 5308

Nineveh 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0

Sulaimaniya 0.0 0 0 10.3 7 6900

Kirkuk 14.3 2 100000 35.7 4 15000

Irbil 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0

Diala 4.8 1 5000 28.6 6 55500

AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0 30.0 6 99000

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 0.0 0 0 92.9 42 25000

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0 0 80.0 42 132750

Babil 12.5 2 10000 43.8 7 64000

Kerbala 0.0 0 0 57.1 1 327500

Waset 0.0 0 0 47.1 8 337000

Salahuddin 0.0 0 0 23.5 1 30000

AL-Najaf 55.6 5 31500 11.1 4 100

Qadisiya 0.0 0 0 60.0 9 13950

AL-Muthana 0.0 0 0 9.1 4 1000

ThiQar 0.0 0 0 10.0 2 3000

Missan 0.0 0 0 6.7 4 1800

Basrah 0.0 0 0 20.0 2 10800

Total 2.4 10 146500 28.9 4 1128608

473

Table (81)

Number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval and their percentage and areas by governorate for 2010

Governorate No. Of medical burial

sites with and without

environmental approval

Number of site with environmental approval Number of site without environmental approval

No. % Area/donom No. % Area/donom

Dahuk 51 0 0.0 0 51 100.0 156

Nineveh 29 2 6.9 336 27 92.4 402

Sulaimaniya 62 0 0.0 0 62 400.0 334

Kirkuk 14 3 21.4 444 44 78.6 61

Irbil 54 8 14.8 38 16 84.2 276

Diala 18 1 5.6 10 47 91.1 795

AL-Anbar 21 2 9.5 120 49 90.4 504

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 3 0 0.0 0 2 400.0 341

Baghdad / periphery 7 0 0.0 0 7 400.0 58

Babil 18 4 22.2 96 41 77.8 803

Kerbala 4 0 0.0 0 1 400.0 327

Waset 17 7 41.2 482 10 58.8 161

Salahuddin 19 0 0.0 0 49 400.0 401

AL-Najaf 7 1 14.3 30 6 84.7 894

Qadisiya 15 0 0.0 0 44 400.0 129

AL-Muthana 7 1 14.3 25 6 84.7 18

ThiQar 12 2 16.7 416 40 82.2 752

Missan 17 1 5.9 100 46 91.4 77

Basrah 14 0 0.0 0 41 400.0 631

Total 389 32 8.2 2097 247 94.8 6819

473

Table(82)

Number of garbage burial sites according to initial municipal design, rate of groundwater depth at these sites by governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. Of burial sites

with environmental

approval

Location as to original municipal design Average depth of

groundwater at sit

(m) Within limits Outside limits

Dahuk 0 0 0 (-)

Nineveh 2 0 2 19

Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 (-)

Kirkuk 3 0 3 72

Irbil 8 1 7 141

Diala 1 0 1 20

AL-Anbar 2 0 2 33

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 0 0 0 (-)

Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 (-)

Babil 4 0 4 2

Kerbala 0 0 0 (-)

Waset 7 0 7 8

Salahuddin 0 0 0 (-)

AL-Najaf 1 0 1 15

Qadisiya 0 0 0 (-)

AL-Muthana 1 0 1 3

ThiQar 2 0 2 6

Missan 1 0 1 3

Basrah 0 0 0 (-)

Total 32 1 31

404

Table (83)

Number of burial sites granted environmental approval and percentage of their type by governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. Of burial sites

with environmental

approval

Percentage distribution of type of garbage burial site

Medical site (regular) Open land Quarries Valleys Other/excavation and

garbage burial

Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 2 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil 8 0.0 25.0 0.0 74.0 0.0

Diala 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 400.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 50.0

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 4 0.0 75.0 24.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 7 0.0 71.4 14.3 14.3 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 32 15.6 40.6 9.1 24.2 3.1

404

Table (84)

Percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. Of burial sites

with environmental

approval

Percentage of burial sites having

Fence Suitable roads/garbage

delivery to site

Admin and guard

rooms and toilets

Scales at entrance to

weigh garbage

Garbage seep water

collection system

Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 2 0.0 50.0 40.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 3 66.7 100.0 66.7 0.0 33.3

Irbil 8 37.5 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Diala 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 2 0.0 50.0 40.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Babil 4 33.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 7 71.4 85.7 0.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 1 100.0 100.0 400.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 2 50.0 50.0 400.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 1 100.0 100.0 400.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 32 45.2 74.2 24.8 0.0 3.2

404

Table (84)/cont.

Percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. Of burial sites

with environmental

approval

Percentage of burial sites having

Gas collection system

e.g. CH4

Site padded with

polyethylene HDPA

density

Place final layer of soil

after rolling

Machinery and

equipment for burial

Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 2 0.0 0.0 40.0 50.0

Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 3 0.0 33.3 400.0 33.3

Irbil 8 0.0 0.0 27.4 37.5

Diala 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0

Baghdad/Municipalit

y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0


Babil 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3

Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 28.6

Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Najaf 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 100.0

Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

ThiQar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0

Missan 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 100.0

Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 32 0.0 3.2 14.9 38.7

407

Table (85)

Number of burial machinery and equipment and percentage distribution by status (working, idle and broken) for 2010

Machinery Working Idle Broken Total

Excavator PC 1 0 0 1

Shovel 11 0 1 12

Grader 5 0 0 5

Bulldozer 10 0 5 15

Lorry 6 0 0 6

Rollers for medical

burial sites 7 0 2 9

Other 4 0 0 4

Total 44 0 8 52

Percentage of

machinery status 84.6 0.0 15.4 100.0

400

Table (86)

Number of burial sites with no environmental approval and percentage distribution of their type by governorate for 2010

Governorate

No. Of burial sites

without

environmental

approval

Percentage of burial sites by type

Open land Quarries Valleys Other

Dahuk 51 11.8 17.6 70.6 0.0

Nineveh 27 3.7 11.1 84.2 0.0

Sulaimaniya 62 38.7 12.9 18.1 0.0

Kirkuk 11 36.4 18.1 26.1 9.1

Irbil 46 17.4 15.2 67.1 0.0

Diala 17 47.1 23.5 29.1 0.0

AL-Anbar 19 26.3 47.4 44.8 10.5

Baghdad/Municipality 3 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0


Babil 14 71.4 28.6 0.0 0.0

Kerbala 4 75.0 25.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 10 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0

Salahuddin 19 26.3 31.6 12.4 0.0

AL-Najaf 6 33.3 66.7 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 15 73.3 26.7 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 6 66.7 0.0 22.2 0.0

ThiQar 10 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 16 14.3 78.6 7.4 0.0

Basrah 14 42.9 57.1 0.0 0.0

Total 357 31.9 26.8 10.1 0.8

404

Table (87)

Number of employees at burial sites by post for 2010

Post Number of employees

Fulltime Contract Day labour Other

Engineer 27 8 2 37

Work supervisor 125 152 53 330

Technician 35 11 4 50

Administrator 6 16 7 29

Unskilled labour 145 189 106 440

Driver 468 162 23 653

Other 3 6 17 26

Total 809 544 212 1565

% 51.7 34.8 13.5 100.0

404

Table (88)

Percentage of garbage treatment method by governorate for 2010

Governorate

Burial at

sites with

environment

al approval

Burial at

sites without

environment

al approval

Dumping in

empty lots

Recycling

or reuse Burning

Turn to

fertiliser

Turn to

energy

Sold to

uncertified

contractors

Other

Dahuk 0.0 86.0 20.9 0.0 65.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Nineveh 3.7 96.3 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Sulaimaniya 1.5 80.9 60.3 0.0 44.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Kirkuk 42.9 57.1 14.3 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Irbil 14.8 52.5 9.8 0.0 65.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2

Diala 4.8 71.4 23.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Anbar 10.0 90.0 10.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0

Baghdad/Municipality 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Baghdad / periphery 0.0 60.0 26.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0

Babil 18.8 81.3 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2

Kerbala 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Waset 29.4 52.9 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.8

Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.4

AL-Najaf 22.2 66.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

AL-Muthana 9.1 72.7 54.5 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4

ThiQar 15.0 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Missan 6.7 86.7 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Basrah 0.0 80.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Total 8.2 76.9 24.4 0.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2

403

Table (89)

Percentage of main problems faced by municipal services sector in garbage collection by governorate for 2010

Governorate Not enough

of machinery

No

machinery

Weak

maintenance

unsustainable

Scarcity of

spare parts

Lack of

financial

allocations

Not enough

employees Low wages

Lack of

needed

requirements

for garbage

collection

Lack of

environment

awareness

Other

Dahuk 76.7 2.3 18.6 32.6 69.8 83.7 74.4 81.4 97.7 2.3

Nineveh 100.0 0.0 55.6 66.7 100.0 92.6 100.0 96.3 96.3 7.1

Sulaimaniya 88.2 1.5 14.7 14.7 38.2 83.8 75.0 82.4 63.2 44.8

Kirkuk 92.9 0.0 7.1 7.1 92.9 100.0 92.9 92.9 100.0 24.1

Irbil 80.3 13.1 49.2 45.9 72.1 75.4 91.8 59.0 88.5 4.6

Diala 76.2 4.8 4.8 0.0 90.5 90.5 100.0 71.4 95.2 0.0

AL-Anbar 100.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 75.0 95.0 80.0 95.0 80.0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 92.9 0.0 21.4 28.6 85.7 35.7 71.4 28.6 100.0 7.4

Baghdad / periphery 86.7 0.0 26.7 33.3 80.0 80.0 66.7 86.7 100.0 26.7

Babil 93.8 6.3 6.3 18.8 50.0 43.8 62.5 18.8 100.0 6.2

Kerbala 85.7 0.0 28.6 14.3 71.4 85.7 42.9 14.3 100.0 0.0

Waset 70.6 11.8 5.9 29.4 35.3 58.8 70.6 70.6 100.0 0.0

Salahuddin 94.1 0.0 41.2 52.9 82.4 82.4 100.0 58.8 100.0 42.9

AL-Najaf 77.8 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 88.9 77.8 55.6 100.0 22.2

Qadisiya 93.3 6.7 20.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.3 100.0 26.7

AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 63.6 90.9 100.0 63.6 90.9 9.4

ThiQar 90.0 0.0 55.0 60.0 100.0 95.0 95.0 65.0 100.0 4.0

Missan 93.3 0.0 0.0 6.7 80.0 66.7 80.0 20.0 93.3 0.0

Basrah 100.0 0.0 40.0 66.7 60.0 60.0 93.3 93.3 100.0 26.7

Total 87.5 3.5 25.9 31.8 70.4 80.2 83.8 70.4 90.4 9.9

403

Table (90)

Percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by municipal staff during the year preceding the survey, number of programmes, number of

participants and percentage of benefit from preparing environmental awareness programmes by governorate for 2010

Governorate % of implementing

environmental

awareness programmes

Number of

implemented

programmes

Total no. Of

participants

% of benefit from

preparing programmes

Dahuk 0.0 0 0 0.0

Nineveh 55.6 42 1636 92.2

Sulaimaniya 1.5 2 145 400.0

Kirkuk 14.3 5 121 400.0

Irbil 13.1 15 4500 400.0

Diala 14.3 4 245 400.0

AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0 0.0

Baghdad/Municipality 92.9 100 6128 400.0

Baghdad / periphery 73.3 34 125 90.9

Babil 0.0 0 0 0.0

Kerbala 0.0 0 0 0.0

Waset 23.5 9 130 100.0

Salahuddin 23.5 18 151 400.0

AL-Najaf 11.1 3 9 400.0

Qadisiya 13.3 3 80 400.0

AL-Muthana 45.5 10 450 400.0

ThiQar 10.0 3 110 400.0

Missan 0.0 0 0 0.0

Basrah 53.3 15 31 87.4

Total 18.6 266 13861 96.2

403

Table (91)

Number and percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by bodies or organisations and number and percentage of governorates where

programmes were implemented for 2010

Implementing body or

organisation

No. of

implementing

programmes

% of implemented

programmes

No. Of

governorates

programmes

implemented

% of governorates

programme

implemented

Ministry of Municipalities 37 29.6 5 26.3

UNICEF 4 3.2 1 4.2

Universities and institutions 2 1.6 2 40.4

Local council 1 0.8 1 4.2

Municipal departments 34 27.2 9 17.1

Directorates of areas and

districts 6 4.8 6 24.6

Municipal council 6 4.8 4 24.4

PRT 7 5.6 1 4.2

Baghdad Municipality 10 8.0 1 4.2

Baghdad Health

Department 4 3.2 4 24.4

Mercy Core 1 0.8 1 4.2

Environment Directorates 2 1.6 2 10.5

KOICA 1 0.8 1 4.2

IRD 1 0.8 1 4.2

UN 1 0.8 1 4.2

Jarakhan Rafiq 1 0.8 1 4.2

Cultural centres 3 2.4 1 4.2

VOGA 4 3.2 1 4.2

Total 125 100.0

444

Table (92)

Number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010

Governorate

Engineer Work supervisor Technician

Fulltime Contract Day

labour Total Fulltime Contract

Day


Day

labour Total

Dahuk 242 29 4 275 145 71 12 228 260 57 25 342

Nineveh 202 4 3 209 20 13 264 297 132 2 2 136

Sulaimaniya 336 23 0 359 441 23 0 646 875 59 0 934

Kirkuk 125 0 7 132 16 0 46 62 155 0 42 167

Irbil 377 7 0 384 238 142 0 380 485 29 0 514

Diala 142 0 0 142 77 0 0 77 67 0 0 67

AL-Anbar 246 0 3 249 252 1 5 258 187 1 0 188

Baghdad/Municipality 649 77 270 996 245 27 134 406 1020 83 486 1689


Babil 184 0 5 189 55 0 309 364 204 0 8 212

Kerbala 178 0 1 179 98 4 6 108 123 0 0 123

Waset 72 3 1 76 42 0 137 179 116 2 0 118

Salahuddin 149 0 2 151 19 0 91 110 122 0 0 122

AL-Najaf 159 1 0 160 47 0 271 318 118 2 0 120

Qadisiya 155 0 37 192 76 0 58 134 76 0 24 107

AL-Muthana 88 0 2 90 23 1 13 37 75 0 40 85

ThiQar 209 0 5 214 50 0 86 136 200 0 22 223

Missan 53 0 0 53 96 5 8 109 92 0 0 92

Basrah 263 0 4 267 31 0 91 122 376 0 8 384

Total 3961 153 345 4459 1980 290 1532 3802 4823 235 704 5763

444

Table (92)/cont.


Governorate

Administrator Unskilled labour Driver

Fulltime Contract Day


Day


Day

labour Total

Dahuk 622 108 6 736 697 904 96 1697 395 144 35 574

Nineveh 304 4 0 308 52 927 3561 4540 354 554 3 911

Sulaimaniya 1108 126 0 1234 2798 2309 0 5107 712 263 0 975

Kirkuk 459 4 48 511 72 22 460 554 293 42 22 357

Irbil 1115 265 0 1380 889 1047 15 1951 364 172 0 536

Diala 577 0 0 577 139 31 1218 1388 268 7 7 282

AL-Anbar 438 0 8 446 399 258 292 949 359 52 0 411

Baghdad/Municipality 1246 184 34 1464 813 84 17855 18752 1327 1 47 1375


Babil 675 0 43 718 140 0 3098 3238 427 0 203 630

Kerbala 212 0 0 212 163 0 3300 3463 266 0 0 266

Waset 140 2 2 144 214 0 1587 1801 239 0 63 302

Salahuddin 249 2 0 215 168 0 1708 1976 319 0 64 380

AL-Najaf 257 4 7 268 552 0 2649 3201 416 5 34 455

Qadisiya 320 0 87 407 568 0 1346 1914 394 0 176 570

AL-Muthana 108 0 14 122 156 0 1243 1399 192 0 5 197

ThiQar 370 0 62 432 276 0 1977 2253 463 0 65 528

Missan 320 3 0 323 570 89 2067 2726 375 0 40 415

Basrah 525 0 8 533 308 0 8731 9039 1192 4 14 1210

Total 9292 702 319 10313 8997 5688 51493 66178 8616 1248 781 10645

447

Table (92)/cont.


Governorate

Other Total

Fulltime Contract Day labour Total Fulltime Contract Day labour Total

Dahuk 0 0 0 0 2361 1313 178 3852

Nineveh 574 111 16 701 1638 1615 3849 7102

Sulaimaniya 54 31 0 85 6324 2834 0 9158

Kirkuk 31 2 148 181 1511 70 743 1964

Irbil 98 52 0 150 3566 1714 15 5295

Diala 138 0 0 138 1408 38 1225 2671

AL-Anbar 109 5 6 120 1990 317 314 2621

Baghdad/Municipality 684 256 214 1154 5984 712 19140 25836


Babil 160 0 6 166 1845 0 3672 5517

Kerbala 176 0 0 176 1216 4 3307 4527

Waset 211 67 293 571 1034 74 2083 3191

Salahuddin 51 0 2 53 1074 2 1867 2943

AL-Najaf 188 0 152 304 1737 12 3113 4862

Qadisiya 403 0 333 736 1992 0 2068 4060

AL-Muthana 11 0 11 22 653 1 1298 1952

ThiQar 224 4 91 319 1792 4 2309 4105

Missan 4 0 0 4 1510 97 2115 3722

Basrah 55 0 0 55 2750 4 8856 11610

Total 3281 528 1272 5081 40950 8844 56447 106241

440

Table(93)

Indicators on rubble crushing plants in Baghdad Municipality for 2010

Indicator Number % Notes

Number of rubble crushing plants 3 100.0 Not granted environmental

approval

Plant with fence 3 100.0

Plant with suitable roads to deliver rubble 3 100.0

Plant with admin and guard rooms 3 100.0

Plant with machinery and equipment 3 100.0

Number of working machinery 7 100.0

Sources of received rubble - 100.0 Demolition and construction

Type of rubble crushing sites - 100.0 Regular sites

Amount of crushed rubble

242 m3/day - Received

188 m3/day - Crushed

168 m3/day - Delivered

Number of separation and recycling sites

0 - Currently working

2 - Under construction

Annex (1)

Concepts and Terminology

440


Concepts and Terminology

The environment survey for the services sector in Iraq for 2010 was designed and

implemented based on the concepts and terminology of the Ministry of Municipalities

and Public Works and Baghdad Municipality as well as on international concepts and

terminology from the UNSD and UNEP taking into consideration the particular

circumstances of Iraqi society. Below is a list of most important concepts used in the

survey.

Water sector

Population connected to drinking water distribution networks: ate the population

receiving clean drinking water from distribution networks of produced water solely

from governmental water directorates responsible for the preparation.

Urban population: population within municipal boundaries.

Rural population: population outside municipal boundaries.

Water loss: the amount of water lost owing to leaks in transport from point of

extraction to point of use or owing to trespasses on the network by citizens or the

existence of cracks in network pipes transporting the water.

Estimated need of the amount of drinking water: is the amount of clean drinking

water that to be provided to meet the water needs of population.

Water project: is a group of connected stations that starts from drawing water from

different sources (river, lake, well, collection basin) through the distillation and

sterilisation stages and then pumping water directly to large cities through

strengthening stations.

Water complex: are small distillation units, part of a water project's stages of

galvanised steel structure for quick set up and are usually less efficient that projects

and used in villages and relatively small areas.

Well stations: are drinking water production stations mounted on wells and includes

water projects and complexes as well as solar powered stations.

Well water: is ground water 10 meters deep or more.

Water desalination stations (RO): are small stations that remove totally dissolved

salts, hardness salts and sulfurs from drinking water to be within acceptable

environmental levels.

444


Solar powered stations: are solar powered water distillation and sterilisation stations

without the addition of potassium sulfate or chlorine.

Design capacity: is the capacity on which basis the project, water complex, well

stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are designed, their

unit of measurement is m3/hour or m

3/day.

Available capacity: is the capacity that could be produced at the project, water

complex, well stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are

designed, their unit of measurement is m3/hour or m

3/day.

Actual capacity: is the current production capacity of the project, water complex,

well stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are designed,

their unit of measurement is m3/hour or m

3/day.

Biological tests: are tests of harmful organisms such as:

T. E. Coli/100ml;

T. coliform/100ml

T. Plate count/1ml

These tests are carried out on crude water and water prepared for drinking or house

use so as not to posses any harmful elements transmitted by water. Every 100 ml

sample of drinking water not to include Escherichia Coli in addition to tests for

viruses and parasites carried out on drinking water.

Physiological tests: are the physiological characteristics of water that includes colour,

clarity, taste, smell and PH.

Chemical tests: are the concentration amount of organic and inorganic substances in

crude and drinking water that includes totally dissolved salts, sodium, potassium,

cadmium, Hexavalent chromium, fluoride, nitrate, aluminum, chlorines, brass,

brackish water, iron, sulfates, nickel…etc.

444


Chlorine test: chlorine test is part of chemical tests but singled out in as a special

category owing to its importance, noting that it is not carried out in solar powered

stations.

Distribution of produced water by sector: includes the household, governmental

and other sectors.

Household sector: includes water prepared for residences.

Governmental sector: includes all institutions of the government.

Other: includes all private sector economical activities.

443


Sanitation sector

Sanitation networks (sewage networks): are all extensions and preparations used to

collect, transport and deliver of sewage wastewater to treatment sites or discharge

including pipes, collection tanks, pumping stations, manholes, ventilation valves and

others.

Rainwater networks: are sanitation networks that collect, transports and discharge

rainwater from streets, rooftops and the like.

Produced wastewater: is all types of wastewater produced by different human

activity (home, economic, industrial) sometimes called sewage water or sanitation

water because it is generally transported through the general sanitation network.

Central treatment stations: are establishments in selected sites for oxidising organic

material and separation of solid impurities from sewage water to enable its discharge

without health hazards or its reuse.

Preliminary treatment: is the removal of suspended material in wastewater such as

rags, paper, tree branches, gravel, oils and grease to prevent damage to treatment

units.

Elementary treatment: includes the removal of proteins, suspended material and

organic material.

Secondary treatment: is the removal of biologically degraded organic material (in a

solution or suspended) and suspended solid material. This stage could include

sterilisation.

Tertiary treatment: is a group of operations following secondary treatment to ensure

a more efficient treatment such as removing organic load, turbidity, nitrogen,

phosphor and metals. These are physiochemical operations such as coagulation,

filtration, organic material adsorption using carbon catalyst, reverse osmoses, and

technologically advanced sterilisation.

Discharge destination: is any outpour for discharging rainwater or sewage water

(treated or untreated) to flow into a water stream, sewage lagoon, lake, direct use or

any other means.

443


Treated wastewater: is the water that comes out of sewage water treatment stations

after being correctly treated in accordance with the standards of sewage water

treatment by use or disposal purposes.

BOD5 concentration: is the biochemical oxygen demand. It is the amount of oxygen

needed by organisms to break down organic matter in water. This measurement gives

information on the degree of organic matter pollution of water.

Small treatment units: are small unites designed for treating sewage water in small

residential areas and liquid waste from polluting medical and industrial activities.

Polluting activities: are all industrial, medical and agricultural activities that produce

polluting waste harmful to humans and the environment.

Produced liquid waste: is the discharged waste from residential, medical, industrial

and agricultural compounds containing a wide range of pollutants caused by waste

mixture from different sources.

Treated liquid waste: is the produced water from treatment processes in treatment

stations or units clear from harmful pollutants.

Pumping stations: are all stations used to support rainwater thrust to water source

and wastewater to central treatment stations and includes thrusting, pulling and

submerged stations.

Septic tanks: are underground tanks that collect wastewater from residential units not

connected to sanitation networks for transporting it to treatment stations or other

sources.

Sludge: is the amount of accumulating solid waste as a result of wastewater treatment

operations when purifying wastewater as it is separated from wastewater during

treatment.

443


Municipal services sector:

Hazardous waste: is waste containing toxic material or high concentration of

inflammable, explosive, reactive or erosive material affect human, animal, plan or

environmental health either alone or after contact with other material.

Working machinery: are machinery currently used to provide municipal services.

Idle machinery: are machinery in working condition but not currently used in

providing municipal services.

Broken-down machinery: are damaged machinery not currently used in service

provision.

Rented machinery: are machinery rented by the municipality for direct use.

Regular transforming stations: are intermediate places for solid waste collection

that includes scales for weighing collected waste, pressing and emptying into special

large size trucks for transportation to burial sites.

Irregular transforming stations: are temporary collection sites of open spaces

where garbage is temporarily collected for transportation to burial sites. They are

usually irregular as they do not have environmental requirements.

Waste burial sites granted environmental approval: are sites of cheap land and

considered the cheapest most suitable way of solid waste disposal and most common

worldwide. The burial site is divided into a number of cells for waste collection, each

cell is covered by sand after it is filled with waste and the adjoining cell is opened.

The cell is insulated with a piping system for collecting waste seepage. Seeping liquid

is of two types:

Rainwater entering the site from upper surface layers through the waste; and

Water resulting from aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation of trapped garbage

underground.

They are leveled well then covered by a thin layer of sand at the end of a working day.

When the site is completely filled with layers of solid waste, it is covered by a final

thick layer of sand then disposal is moved to another site and the process starts all

over again.

444


Waste burial sites not granted environmental approval: are open lands or

depressions where waste is dumped irregularly and uncontrollably and hence, does

not follow any environmental requirements.

Environmental awareness programmes: are pregrammes implemented by

international organisations or relevant official bodies with the objective of raising

environmental and health awareness on the hazards and effects of waste on the

environment and society.

Percentages: the total of percentages to a question does not equal 100% because

answers to questions are multiple allowing the selections of more than one answer.

Percentage distribution: the total of percentages for the cases of a question equals

100% (i.e. there is only one answer to the question).

Annex (2)

Survey Questionnaires

Governorate …………………...............

Directorate ……………………………

Address ……………………………

Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..email …………….

Mobile number …………………………..

Manager's name …………………………. Signeture……………………….

Name: central supervisor Signature Date

Name: local supervisor Signature Date

Name: field researcher Signature Date


Name: desktop checking

person Signature Date

Name: data entry person Signature Date

The Government of Iraq

Ministry of Planning

Central Statistic Office

Environmental Statistics Directorate

Questionnaire (1)

The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010

Water Sector

Kindly note the following:

1. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;

2. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;

3. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and

4. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.

4

Q: 1

Percentage of population connected to drinking

water distribution networks produced by the

governorate

1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 2 number of population connected to drinking water

distribution networks by the governorate

1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q:3

Total rate of amount of crude water drawn from

source for drinking water production in projects,

water complexes, well stations and solar powered

in the governorate

m3/day

Q: 4

Total rate of amount of produced water in

projects, water complexes, well stations and solar

powered in the governorate

m3/day

Q: 5

Average amount of lost water from produced

water during transportation in water distribution

network

m3/day

Q: 6

Total rate of amount of prepared water for the

population from projects, water complexes, well

stations and solar powered in the governorate

1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 7 Estimated need for drinking water in the

governorate

m3/day

Water Projects

Q: 8 Total number of projects in the governorate

Project

Q: 9 Total design capacity of projects

m3/day

Q: 10 Total rate of available capacity of projects m3/day

Q: 11 Total rate of amounts of produced water from

projects (actual capacity)

m3/day

4

Q: 12 Crude water sources used for projects

(can indicate more than one answer)

1 Surface water

2 Ground water / excluding wells

Q: 13 Total rate of amount of crude water drawn by

source for projects

1 Surface water m3/day

2 Ground water / excluding wells m3/day

Q: 14 Number of projects by status

1 Working Project

2 Partially working Project

3 Idle Project

Water Complexes

Q: 15 Total number of water complexes in the

governorate Water complex

Q: 16 Total of design capacity of complexes m3/day

Q: 17 Total rate of available capacity of complexes m3/day

Q: 18 Total rate of amounts of produced water from

complexes (actual capacity) m3/day

Q: 19 Crude water sources used for projects


1 Surface water

2 Ground water / excluding wells

Q: 20 Total rate of amount of crude water drawn by

source for complexes


2 Ground water / excluding wells m3/day

Q: 21 Number of water complexes by status

1 Working Complex

2 Partially working Complex

3 Idle Complex

7

Well stations/excluding desalination stations

Q: 22 Are there feeding wells for water production

stations in governorate?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 31

Q:23 Total number of wells in governorate Well

Q: 24 Number of water production stations mounted on

wells Station

Q: 25 Total design capacity of water production stations

mounted on wells m3/day

Q: 26 Total rate of available capacity of water

production stations mounted on wells

m3/day

Q: 27

Total rate of amounts of produced water from

water production stations mounted on wells

(actual capacity)

m3/day

Q: 28 Total rate of amounts of drawn water from wells

distributed to population untreated m3/day

Q: 29 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn form

wells m3/day

Q: 30 Number of water production stations mounted on

wells by status

1 Working Station

2 Partially working Station 3 Idle Station

Water desalination stations (RO)

Q: 31 Are there water desalination stations in

governorate

1 Yes

2 No Q: 39

Q: 32 Total number of desalination stations in

governorate Station

Q: 33 Total design capacity of water desalination

stations m3/day

Q: 34 Total rate of available capacity of water

desalination stations m3/day

Q: 35 Total rate of amounts of desalinated water

produced by desalination stations (actual capacity) m3/day

0

Q: 36

Crude water sources used in water desalination

stations


1 Water projects and complexes

2 Surface water

3 Ground water

Q: 37 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn to

desalination stations by source

1 Water projects and complexes m3/day


3 Ground water m3/day

Q: 38 Number of water desalination stations by status

1 Working Station


Q: 39 Does governorate need water desalination station 1 Yes

2 No

Solar powered stations

Q: 40 Are there solar powered water production stations

in governorate

1 Yes

2 No Q: 49

Q: 41 Number of solar powered stations in governorate

Station

Q: 42 Total design capacity of solar powered stations in

governorate

m3/day

Q: 43 Total rate of available capacity of solar powered

stations

m3/day

Q: 44 Total rate of amounts of produced water by solar

powered stations (actual capacity)

m3/day

Q: 45

Crude water sources used in solar powered

stations


m3/day

Q: 46 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn to

solar powered stations by source


2 Ground water/excluding wells m3/day

4

Q: 47 Number of solar powered stations by status

1 Working Station


Q: 48 Are there powered alternatives at solar powered

stations

1 Yes Indicate……….

2 No

Q: 49

Number of tests carried out on crude water by

type in water projects, complexes, well stations

and solar powered stations

1 Biological tests Test

2 Physiochemical tests Test

Q: 50

Number of crude water samples drawn by type in

water projects, complexes, well stations and solar

powered stations

1 Biological tests Sample

2 Physiochemical tests Sample

Q: 51

Number of tests carried out on produced water by




A2 Physiochemical

tests/excluding chlorine test Test

B2 Chlorine concentration test Test

Q: 52

Number of produced water samples drawn by




A2 Physiochemical

tests/excluding chlorine test Test

B2 Chlorine concentration test Test

Q: 53

Amount of produced water reaching consumer

through distribution networks

(one answer only)

1 Good (300 - 400) liter/person/day

2 Average (200 - 300) liter/person/day

3 Below average (100 - 200) liter/person/day

4 Little (100 and less) liter/person/day

4

Q: 54 Produced water by sector

1 household %

2 Governmental %

3 Other %

Q: 55

Does the governorate need new water projects,

complexes, well stations or solar powered

stations?

1 Projects 1 Yes

2 No reason………………

2 Complexes 1 Yes


3 Well stations 1 Yes


4 Solar powered

stations

1 Yes


Water meters

Q: 56

Are there water meters available at units covered

by the Public Water Directorate of Baghdad

Municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 59

Q: 57 Number of unites with water meters Unit

Q: 58 Status of water meters and percentage of working

and idle

1 Working %

2 Idle %

Q: 59 Main problems faced by water sector in the

governorate

1 Inefficiency of project

2 Scarcity of crude water at water source

3 Pollution of water source

4 Age and weakness of network

5 Insufficiency of project's production

6 Weak and sporadic maintenance

7 Scarcity of spare parts and raw material

8 Not enough technical and administrative staff

9 Inefficiency of technical staff

10 Scarcity and instability of electricity

11 Citizens trespasses on network

12 Lack of citizens awareness on conservation

13 Other/state…………………………….

3

Q: 60

Number of under construction water projects,

complexes, well stations and solar powered

stations in governorate

1 Water projects

2 Water complexes

3 Well stations

4 Desalination stations

5 Solar powered stations

Q: 61 Employees at the Public Water Directorate

Post

Number of employees

Fulltime Contract Day labour Total

1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator

5 Unskilled labouror

6 Driver

7 Other / specify……….

8 Total

Governorate …………………...............


Address ……………………………

Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..email …………….

Mobile number …………………………..

Manager's name …………………………. Signeture……………………….








The Government of Iraq Ministry of Planning

Central Statistic Office Environmental Statistics Directorate

Questionnaire (2)


Sanitation Sector






4

Q: 1 Are there sanitation, rainwater, shared networks in

governorate

1 Yes

2 No Q: 23

Q: 2 Percentage of population connected to networks

in governorate %

Q: 3 Number of population connected to networks in

governorate People

Q: 4 Type of network


1 Sanitation network %

2 Rainwater network %

3 Shared network %

Q: 5 Status of network

1 Good

2 Average

3 Bad

Q: 6 Does governorate suffer sewage overflow in areas

connected to network

1 In most connected areas

2 In some connected areas

3 No

Q: 7 Are there overflow cases of sewage water after

rain fall

1 Yes

2 No

4

Q: 8

Average amount of produced wastewater for

central treatment stations and small treatment

units (connected and unconnected areas) and

polluting activities

M3/day

Central treatment stations

Q: 9 Are there central treatment stations 1 Yes

2 No Q: 23

Q: 10 Do these stations have the capacity to receive

produced wastewater?

1 Yes

2 No

Q: 11 Number of central treatment stations Station

Q: 12 Number of central treatment stations by type


1 Preliminary Station

2 Elementary Station

3 Secondary Station

4 Tertiary Station

7

Q: 13 Total design capacity of central treatment stations m3/day

Q: 14 Average actual capacity of central treatment

stations m3/day

Q: 15 Average amount of treated wastewater m3/day

Q: 16

Number of central treatment stations by status

(can indicate more than one answer if there were

more than one station)

1 Working Station

2 Partially working Station

3 Idle Station

Q: 17 Percentage of population connected to sanitation

networks connected to central treatment stations %

Q: 18 Number of population connected to sanitation

networks connected to central treatment stations People

Q: 19 Average amount of untreated wastewater

discharged to water sources m3/day

Q: 20 Discharge destination of treated wastewater

1 Sewage lagoon %

2 River %

3 Neighboring land %

4 Other (specify)………………. %

Q: 21 BOD concentration in treated water discharged

from treatment station according to design mg/liter (part in a million)

0

Q: 22 The actual BOD concentration in treated water

discharged from treatment station Mg/liter

Small treatment units/unconnected areas

Q: 23 Are there small treatment units in areas

unconnected to sanitation networks

1 Yes

2 No Q: 31

Q: 24 Number of small treatment units Unit

Q: 25 Total design capacity of small treatment units m3/day

Q: 26 Average actual capacity of small treatment units m3/day

Q: 27 Average amount of produced wastewater by small

treatment units m3/day

Q: 28 Total rates of treated wastewater by small


Q: 29 Discharge destination of treated wastewater from

small treatment units

1 sewage lagoon %

2 River %

3 neighboring land %

4 Other (specify)………. %

Q: 30

Number of small treatment units by status


1 Working Station

2 Partially working Station

3 Idle Station

4

Small treatment units/connected areas

Q: 31

Are there small treatment units (hospitals,

residential compounds or hotels etc.) in the

governorate?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 39

Q: 32 Number of small treatment units (hospitals,

residential compounds or hotels etc.) Unit

Q: 33

Number of small treatment units in connected

areas by type


1 Elementary Unit

2 Secondary Unit

3 Tertiary Unit

Q: 34 Total design capacity of small treatment units

(hospitals, residential compounds or hotels etc.) m3/day

Q: 35 Total actual capacity of small treatment units

(hospitals, residential compounds or hotels etc.) m3/day

Q: 36 Average amount of produced wastewater by small


Q: 37 Average amount of treated wastewater at small


Q: 38

Number of small treatment units (hospitals,

residential compounds or hotels etc.) by status


1 Working Unit

2 Partially working Unit

3 Idle Unit

4

Small treatment units/polluting activities

Q: 39

Are there polluting activities (industrial

establishments, carwash and greasing garages,

slaughter houses, agricultural activities, other)

discharged into sanitation network?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 50

Q: 40

Are there small treatment units for polluting

activities (medical or industrial establishments,

carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses,

agricultural activities, other)?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 49

Q: 41 Number of small treatment units for polluting

activities Unit

Q: 42

Number of small treatment units for polluting

activities by type


1 Elementary Unit

2 Secondary Unit

3 Tertiary Unit

Q: 43 Total design capacity of small treatment units for

polluting activities m3/day

Q: 44 Total actual capacity of small treatment units for


Q: 45 Average amount of liquid waste produced by


Q: 46 Average amount of liquid waste treated by small

treatment units for polluting activities m3/day

3

Q: 47

Number of small treatment units for polluting

activities by status


1 Working Unit

2 Partially working Unit

3 Idle Unit

Q: 48 Discharge destinations of treated liquid waste of

polluting activities

1 Sanitation network %

2 Sewage lagoon %

3 river % Q: 50


5 Other (specify)…... %

Q: 49

Discharge destinations of untreated liquid waste

of polluting activities that do not have treatment

units

1 Sanitation network

2 Sewage lagoon

3 river

4 Neighboring land

5 Other (specify)…...

Pumping stations

Q: 50 Are there pumping stations in the governorate? 1 Yes

2 No Q: 55

Q: 51 Type and number of pumping stations in the

governorate

1 Rainwater Station

2 Wastewater Station

3 Shared Station

4 Submerged Station

Total Station

Q: 52 Number of pumping stations by status

1 Good Station

2 Average Station

3 Bad Station

3

Q: 53 Discharge destination of pumping stations

1 Central treatment station

2 Sewage lagoon

3 River

4 Neighboring land

5 Other (specify)………………..

Q: 54 Main problems facing sanitation networks and

treatment stations

1 Inefficiency of networks

2 Weak and sporadic maintenance

3 Not enough technical and administrative staff

4 Not enough machinery

5 Problems relating to pumping stations (age,

consumption, broken pumps)

6 Age and inefficiency of water treatment stations

7 Scarcity and instability of electricity

8 Trespasses in connecting sanitation and rainwater

networks

9 Lack of awareness and misuse of sanitation network

10 Other / specify…………………………………

Rainwater networks

Q: 55 Percentage of population trespassing on rainwater

network %

Q: 56 Number of population trespassing on rainwater

network %

Q: 57

Discharge destination of rainwater networks


1 Sewage lagoon %

2 River %


4 Other (specify)……... %

3

Septic tank

Q: 58 Percentage of population connected to septic tank %

Q: 59 Number of population connected to septic tank %

Q: 60

Discharge destination of wastewater of

households connected to septic tank


1 Transported by tankers

to treatment stations %

2 sewage lagoon %

3 River %



Q: 61

Discharge destination of wastewater of

households not connected to sanitation networks

and septic tank


1 Transported by tankers to treatment stations

%

2 sewage lagoon %

3 River %



Q: 62 Amount of sludge produced by treatment of

wastewater %

Q: 63

Disposal destination of sludge produced by

wastewater treatment process


1 Agriculture %

2 Industry %

3 Municipalities %

4 Other (specify)……… %

44

Q: 64 Number of working, idle and broken machinery in the sanitation sector

Type of machinery

Status

Working Idle Broken Total

1 Cutting machine

2 Excavator

3 Tanker

4 Suction machine

5 Multipurpose machine

6 Other / specify…………..

7 Total

Q: 65 Employees at the Governorate Sanitation Directorate

Post

Number of employees


1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator


6 Driver


8 Total

Governorate ………………….....District..................Area…….


Address ……………………………

Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..

Mobile number ………………………….. email …………………

Name of Manager of Municipality.………………. Signeture……

Number of municipality:








The Government of Iraq

Ministry of Planning Central Statistic Office



Sanitation Sector/Municipalities of Iraq governorates






Questionnaire (3a)

4

Q: 1 Percentage of population covered by municipal

garbage collection service

1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 2 Number of population covered by municipal


1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 3 Average amounts of garbage collected and lifted

per day under municipal jurisdiction

1 Agricultural areas kg/day

2 Industrial areas kg/day

3 Residential areas kg/day

4

Economic activities

(commercial,

marketplaces…etc.)

kg/day

5 Amount of lifted rubble

from construction m3/day

6 Scrap kg/day

7 Total / excluding item 5 kg/day

Q: 4 Average amount of hazardous waste collected

per day

1 kg/day

2 No Q: 7

Q: 5 Sources of hazardous waste

1 Medical institutions

2 Industrial establishments

3 Agricultural establishments

4 Other (specify)……………….

Q: 6 Treatment methods of hazardous waste and

average amounts treated

1 Collection in temporary allocated

sites kg/day

2 Burail in allocated sites for medical

burial kg/day

3 Dumped into empty lots kg/day

4 Recucling kg/day

4

Q: 6

Treatment methods of hazardous waste and

average amounts treated/cont.


5 Turned to fertiliser kg/day

6 Burning kg/day

7 Dumped into rivers and

sewage lagoons kg/day

8 Sold to uncertified contractors kg/day

9 Turned to energy kg/day

10 Other (specity)………….. kg/day

11 total kg/day

Q: 7 Are there containers allocated for garbage

collection distributed across areas?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 11

Q: 8 Number of containers allocated for garbage

collection distributed across areas

1 Residential container

2 Commercail container

3 Government institutions container

4 Public parks container

5 Public streets container

6 Total container

Q: 9 Are distributed containers used?

1 Yes

2 Sometimes

3 No Q: 11

Q:10 How many times garbage containers emptied by

municipality per week?

1 Large containers 8 m3 Times

2 Medium size containers 6 m3 Times

3 Small containers 1 m3 Times

4 Differnet size container Times

5 Never

7

Q: 11 Is garbage separated on household level?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 13

Q: 12 Composition of garbage collected and

percentage per day

1 Types of paper %

2 Fibers %

3 Plastics %

4 Glass %

5 Metal %

6 Other inorganic material %

7 Organic material %

8 Foods and garden waste %

Q: 13 Are there machinery (pressers, tractors…etc.)

for garbage collection at municipality?

Yes

No Q: 17

Q:14 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at municipality in the month preceeding the survey

Type of machine

Status

Working Idle Broken Rented Total

1 Garbag presser/6m3



4 Garbag presser/different sizes

5 Agricultural tractors

6 Dunber

7 Shovel

8 Grader

9 Bulldozer

0

Q:14 Cont.

Type of machine

Status


10 Lorry

11 Cutting machine

12 Suction machine

13 Truck

14 Container crane

15 Rollers

16 Excavator PC

17 Tanker

18 Street sweeper

19 Other (specify).........

20 Total

Q: 15 Are pressers and machinery sufficient for

municipal services?

1 Yes

2 No

Q: 16

How many times garbage is collected by

municipality from houses using municipal

machinery and pressers per week

1

2 Never

Q: 17 Dose the municipality contract companies or

contractors to cllect garbage?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 21

Q:18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at belonging to companies or contractors in the

month preceeding the survey

SN Type of machine Number SN Type of machine Number

1 Garbag presser/6m3 4 Garbag presser/different sizes

2 Garbag presser/8m3 5 Agricultural tractors

3 Garbag presser/16m3 6 Dunber

4

Q:18 Cont.


7 Shovel 14 Container crane

8 Grader 15 Rollers

9 Bulldozer 16 Excavator PC

10 Lorry 17 Tanker

11 Cutting machine 18 Street sweeper

12 Suction machine


13 Truck

20 Total

Q: 19




1

2 Occasainally

Q: 20 Are these areas cleaned by companies or

contractors during the week?

1 Streets and middle

islands

Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

2 Square Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

3 Markets Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

4

Q: 21

Are these areas cleaned by companies or


(answer all choices)


islands

Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

2 Square Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

3 Markets Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

Q: 22 Does the municipality suffer from increased

rubble and war remnants in these areas?


1 Resedintail Yes

No

1

2

2 Commercial Yes

No

1

2

3 Government

instituions

Yes

No

1

2

4 Public parks Yes

No

1

2

5 Public streets Yes

No

1

2

Q: 23 Are there transforming stations (regular) within

municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 25

Q: 24 Number of trasforming stations (regular) and

size within municipality No. Size m2

Q: 25 Are ther temporary collections site (irregular)

within municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 27

Q: 26 Number of temporary collection sites (irregular)

and size within municipality No. Size m2

3

Q: 27 Are there garbage burial sites with

environmental approval within municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 34

Q: 28 Number and size of garbage burial sites with

environmental approval No. Size m2

Q: 29 Location of burial site according to original

design of municipality

1 Within design

2 Outside design

Q: 30 Depth of grooundwater at site m

Q: 31 Type of garbage burial site

(can indicate mor than one aswer)

1 Medical site (regular)

2 Open land

3 Quarries

4 Valleys

5 Other (specify)…….

Q: 32 Do garbage burial sites have :


1 Fences Yes

No

1

2

2 Suitable roads for garbage delivery Yes

No

1

2

3 Admin and guard rooms Yes

No

1

2

4 Scale at entrance to weigh garbage

trucks

Yes

No

1

2

5 Garbage seep water collection

system

Yes

No

1

2

3

Q: 32 Cont.

6 Garbage produced gas collection

system such as CH4

Yes

No

1

2

7 Site padded with polyeghelen density

HPDA

Yes

No

1

2

8 Placing final layer of soil after

rolling

Yes

No

1

2

9 Burial machinery and equipment Yes

No

1

2

Q: 33 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery solely at burial site:

Type of machine

Status


1 Excavator

2 Shovel

3 Grader

4 Bulldozer

5 Lorry

6 Rollers special for burial sites

7 Other (specify)...........

8 Total

Q: 34 Employees at garbage burial sites

Post

Number of employees


1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator


6 Driver


8 Total

3

Q: 35 Are there garbage burial sites without


1 Yes

2 No Q: 38

Q: 36 Number and size of garbage burial sites without



(can indicate more than one aswer)

1 Open land

2 Quarries

3 Valleys


Q: 38 Treatment method of garbage


1 Burial at sites with environmetal approval

2 Burial at sites without environmetal approval

3 Dumping in empty lots

4 Recycling and resuse

5 Burning

6 Turned to fertiliser

7 Turned to energy

8 Sold to unliesenced contractors

9 Other (specify)…………

Q: 39

Main garbage collection problems



2 Lack of machinery

3 Weak and unsustained maintenance

4 Scarcity of spare parts

5 Scarcity of financial allocation

6 Not enough staff

7 Low wages

8 Not enough allocated containers and bags for

grabage collection

9 Lack of environmental awareness


44

Q: 40

Has awareness programmes been implemented

by municipality for municipa staff in the year

preceeding the survey?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 45

Q: 41 Number of implemented programmes programme

Q: 42 Name of body or organisation that implemented

the programme

(can indicate more than one body or

organisation)

1

2

3

4

5

Q: 43 Total number of participants in implemented

programmes person

Q: 44 Is there any benefit from preparing these

programmes

1 Yes

2 No

Q: 34 Employees at the municipality

Post

Number of employees


1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator


6 Driver


8 Total

Governorate ………………….....District..................Area…….


Address ……………………………













Central Statistic Office Environmental Statistics Directorate


Sanitation Sector/Municipalities of Baghdad Municipality






Questionnaire (3b)

4

Q: 1 Percentage of population covered by municipal


1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 2 Number of population covered by municipal


1 Urban %

2 Rural %

Q: 3 Average amounts of garbage collected and lifted

per day under municipal jurisdiction

1 Agricultural areas kg/day

2 Industrial areas kg/day

3 Residential areas kg/day

4

Economic activities

(commercial,

marketplaces…etc.)

kg/day

5 Amount of lifted rubble

from construction m3/day

6 Scrap kg/day

7 Total / excluding item 5 kg/day

Q: 4 Average amount of hazardous waste collected

per day

1 kg/day

2 No Q: 7

Q: 5 Sources of hazardous waste

1 Medical institutions

2 Industrial establishments

3 Agricultural establishments


Q: 6 Treatment methods of hazardous waste and

average amounts treated

1 Collection in temporary allocated

sites kg/day

2 Burail in allocated sites for medical

burial kg/day

3 Dumped into empty lots kg/day

4 Recucling kg/day

4

Q: 6

Treatment methods of hazardous waste and

average amounts treated/cont.


5 Turned to fertiliser kg/day

6 Burning kg/day

7 Dumped into rivers and

sewage lagoons kg/day

8 Sold to uncertified contractors kg/day

9 Turned to energy kg/day

10 Other (specity)………….. kg/day

11 total kg/day

Q: 7 Are there containers allocated for garbage

collection distributed across areas?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 11

Q: 8 Number of containers allocated for garbage

collection distributed across areas

1 Residential container

2 Commercail container

3 Government institutions container

4 Public parks container

5 Public streets container

6 Total container

Q: 9 Are distributed containers used?

1 Yes

2 Sometimes

3 No Q: 11

Q:10 How many times garbage containers emptied by

municipality per week?

1 Large containers 8 m3 Times

2 Medium size containers 6 m3 Times

3 Small containers 1 m3 Times

4 Differnet size container Times

5 Never

7

Q: 11 Is garbage separated on household level?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 13

Q: 12 Composition of garbage collected and

percentage per day

1 Types of paper %

2 Fibers %

3 Plastics %

4 Glass %

5 Metal %

6 Other inorganic material %

7 Organic material %

8 Foods and garden waste %

Q: 13 Are there machinery (pressers, tractors…etc.)

for garbage collection at municipality?

Yes

No Q: 17

Q:14 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at municipality in the month preceeding the survey

Type of machine

Status





4 Garbag presser/different sizes

5 Agricultural tractors

6 Dunber

7 Shovel

8 Grader

9 Bulldozer

0

Q:14 Cont.

Type of machine

Status


10 Lorry

11 Cutting machine

12 Suction machine

13 Truck

14 Container crane

15 Rollers

16 Excavator PC

17 Tanker

18 Street sweeper


20 Total

Q: 15 Are pressers and machinery sufficient for

municipal services?

1 Yes

2 No

Q: 16




1

2 Never

Q: 17 Dose the municipality contract companies or

contractors to cllect garbage?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 21

Q:18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at belonging to companies or contractors in the

month preceeding the survey


1 Garbag presser/6m3 4 Garbag presser/different sizes

2 Garbag presser/8m3 5 Agricultural tractors

3 Garbag presser/16m3 6 Dunber

4

Q:18 Cont.


7 Shovel 14 Container crane

8 Grader 15 Rollers

9 Bulldozer 16 Excavator PC

10 Lorry 17 Tanker

11 Cutting machine 18 Street sweeper

12 Suction machine


13 Truck

20 Total

Q: 19




1

2 Occasainally

Q: 20 Are these areas cleaned by companies or



islands

Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

2 Square Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

3 Markets Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

4

Q: 21

Are these areas cleaned by companies or




islands

Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

2 Square Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

3 Markets Yes

No

1

2

No. of times

Q: 22 Does the municipality suffer from increased

rubble and war remnants in these areas?


1 Resedintail Yes

No

1

2

2 Commercial Yes

No

1

2

3 Government

instituions

Yes

No

1

2

4 Public parks Yes

No

1

2

5 Public streets Yes

No

1

2

Q: 23 Treatment method of garbage


1 Burial at sites with environmetal approval

2 Burial at sites without environmetal approval

3 Dumping in empty lots

4 Recycling and resuse

5 Burning

6 Turned to fertiliser

7 Turned to energy

8 Sold to unliesenced contractors

9 Other (specify)…………

Q: 24

Main garbage collection problems



2 Lack of machinery

3 Weak and unsustained maintenance

4 Scarcity of spare parts

5 Scarcity of financial allocation

6 Not enough staff

7 Low wages

8 Not enough allocated containers and bags for

grabage collection

9 Lack of environmental awareness


3

Q: 25

Has awareness programmes been implemented

by municipality for municipa staff in the year

preceeding the survey?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 45

Q: 26 Number of implemented programmes programme

Q: 27 Name of body or organisation that implemented

the programme

(can indicate more than one body or

organisation)

1

2

3

4

5

Q: 28 Total number of participants in implemented

programmes person

Q: 29 Is there any benefit from preparing these

programmes

1 Yes

2 No

Q: 30 Employees at the municipality

Post

Number of employees


1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator


6 Driver


8 Total

Governorate ………………….....District..................Area……


Address ……………………………













Central Statistic Office



Sanitation Sector/Solid Waste and Environment Directorate






Questionnaire (3c)

4

Q: 1 Are there transforming stations (regular) within

Baghdad Municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 25

Q: 2 Number of trasforming stations (regular) and

size within Baghdad Municipality No. Size m2

Q: 3 Are ther temporary collections site (irregular)

within Baghdad Municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 27

Q: 4 Number of temporary collection sites (irregular)

and size within Baghdad Municipality No. Size m2

Q: 5

Are there garbage burial sites with

environmental approval within Baghdad

Municipality?

1 Yes

2 No Q: 34

Q: 6 Number and size of garbage burial sites with


Q: 7 Location of burial site according to original

design of Baghdad Municipality

1 Within design

2 Outside design

Q: 8 Depth of grooundwater at site m


(can indicate mor than one aswer)

1 Medical site (regular)

2 Open land

3 Quarries

4 Valleys


Q: 10 Do garbage burial sites have :


1 Fences Yes

No

1

2

2 Suitable roads for garbage delivery Yes

No

1

2


No

1

2

4 Scale at entrance to weigh garbage

trucks

Yes

No

1

2

5 Garbage seep water collection

system

Yes

No

1

2

4

Q: 10 Cont.

6 Garbage produced gas collection

system such as CH4

Yes

No

1

2

7 Site padded with polyeghelen density

HPDA

Yes

No

1

2

8 Placing final layer of soil after

rolling

Yes

No

1

2

9 Burial machinery and equipment Yes

No

1

2

Q: 11 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery solely at burial site:

Type of machine

Status


1 Excavator

2 Shovel

3 Grader

4 Bulldozer

5 Lorry

6 Rollers special for burial sites


8 Total

Q: 12 Employees at garbage burial sites

Post

Number of employees


1 Engineer

2 Work supervisor

3 Technician

4 Administrator


6 Driver


8 Total

7

Q: 13 Are there garbage burial sites without


1 Yes

2 No Q: 38

Q: 14 Number and size of garbage burial sites without




1 Open land

2 Quarries

3 Valleys


Q: 16 Number of rubble crushing plants in Baghdad

Municipality Plant

Q: 17 Do rubble crushing plants have :


1 Fences Yes

No

1

2

2 Suitable roads for waste delivery Yes

No

1

2


No

1

2

4 Machinery and equipment Yes

No

1

2 19

Q: 18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at rubble crushing plants:

Type of machine

Status


1 Excavator

2 Shovel

3 Grader

4 Bulldozer

5 Lorry

6 Rollers


8 Total

Q: 19 Source of received rubble


1 Dimolition and construction

2 Military activities


Q: 20

Type of rubble crushing sites


1 Regular site

2 Open land

3 Quarries

4 Valleys

5 Other / specify……………………….

0

Q: 21 Amount of crushed rubble: 1 Received

m3/day

2 Crushed

m3/day

3 Delivered

m3/day

Q: 22 Amount of crushed rubble: 1 Yes

2 No

Q: 23 Number of separation and recycling sites of

Baghdad Municipality Currently working Under construction

Environmental Survey in Iraq 2010 (water - sanitation...

Documents

Transcript of Environmental Survey in Iraq 2010 (water - sanitation...