Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 54

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

CChhaapptteerr 22

TTHHEEOORREETTIICCAALL FFRRAAMMEEWWOORRKK OOFF SSOOLLIIDD WWAASSTTEE MMAANNAAGGEEMMEENNTT

From time immemorial, humans and animals have used the resources of the earth to support life and dispose of wastes. In those days, the disposal of human and other wastes did not pose any spectacular problem as the population was limited and the area of land available for the assimilation of such waste was unlimited. However, today, utmost importance is being given across the globe to this burgeoning problem of solid wastes. Rapid population growth and uncontrolled industrial development are seriously degrading the urban and semi- urban environment in many of the world’s developing countries, placing enormous strain on natural resources and obstructing efficient and sustainable development.

Solid Waste

Solid waste can be defined as nonliquid material that no longer has any value to the person who is responsible for it. The words rubbish, garbage, trash, and refuse are often used as synonyms when talking about solid waste (Da Zhu et al.). Any solid material in the material flow pattern that is rejected by society is called solid waste. So, solid wastes are the organic or inorganic waste materials produced by various activities of the society, which have lost their value to the first user. It is generated by domestic, commercial, industrial, healthcare,

Chapter 2

agriculture and mineral extraction activities and accumulates in streets and public places.

Municipal Solid Waste

The term ‘municipal solid waste’ refers to solid waste from houses, streets and public places, shops, offices, and hospitals. The management of these types of waste is most often the responsibility of Municipal or other Governmental authorities. Although solid waste from industrial processes is generally not considered municipal waste, it nevertheless needs to be taken into account when dealing with solid waste, because it often ends up in the MSW stream. Street refuse, a major ingredient of MSW, contains a mixture of refuse from many sources, because streets are used as dumping grounds by all generators of waste. Where sanitation facilities are lacking and a large animal population roams the streets, street refuse contains a lot of human faecal matter and manure. Streets are also often used for extensive dumping of construction and demolition debris—attracting further dumping of solid waste. (Da Zhu et al.). Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), also called urban solid waste, is a waste type that includes predominantly household waste (domestic waste) with, sometimes, the addition of commercial wastes, construction and demolition debris, sanitation residue, and waste from streets collected by a Municipality within a given area. They are in either solid or semisolid form and generally exclude industrial hazardous wastes. So, any types of solid wastes generated in Municipal limits are municipal solid wastes.

Classification of Solid Wastes

Solid wastes are generally classified as the following on the basis of source of generation, as:

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

1. Residential

Residential waste refers to wastes from dwellings, apartments, etc., and consists of leftover food, vegetable peels, plastic, clothes, ashes, etc.

2. Commercial

Commercial wastes consist of leftover food, glasses, metals, ashes, etc., generated from stores, restaurants, markets, hotels, motels, auto repair shops, medical facilities, etc.

3. Institutional

Institutional waste consists of paper, plastic, glasses, etc., generated from educational administrative and public buildings such as schools, colleges, offices, prisons, etc.

4. Municipal

Municipal waste includes dust, leaf matter, building debris, treatment plant residual sludge, etc., generated from various municipal activities like construction and demolition, street cleaning, landscaping, etc.

5. Industrial

Industrial wastes mainly consist of process wastes, ashes, demolition and construction wastes, hazardous wastes, etc., due to industrial activities.

6. Agricultural

This mainly consists of spoiled food grains and vegetables, agricultural remains, litter, etc., generated from fields, farms and granaries. (Ramachandra, T. V.)

Chapter 2

Waste Classification 5% 3% Mining, Oil and Gas Production 10% Agricultural Waste 12% Industrial Waste
Waste Classification
5% 3%
Mining, Oil and Gas Production
10%
Agricultural Waste
12%
Industrial Waste
70%
Municipal Waste
Sewage Sludge

Figure 2.1 Estimated Global Waste Composition (EPA 1999)

The figure highlights the estimated global waste composition. It is seen that 5 per cent of the total waste generated globally is municipal waste.

Municipal Solid Waste Management

Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) means the control of waste generation, its storage, collection, transfer and transport, processing and disposal in a manner that is in accordance with the best principles of public health, economics, engineering, conservation, aesthetics, public attitude and other environmental considerations. Usually, the Urban Local Body (ULB) is responsible to manage the MSWs in a Municipality.

A Municipal Solid Waste Management System comprises a combination of various functional elements associated with the management of solid wastes. As a system, it should facilitate the collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of solid wastes in the community at minimal costs, with minimum harm to public health and environment. The functional elements that constitute the MSWM System are:

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

1. Waste Generation

A major part of MSW generated is contributed by households. The other major parties who generate wastes are shops, hotels, restaurants, institutions, markets, community halls, hospitals, slaughter houses and construction sites. What is important here, as far as Municipalities are concerned, is the identification of sources of waste. A general classification of sources of MSW is given below.

Domestic Waste

Domestic waste means household waste comprising wastes from kitchen, house cleaning, old papers, magazines, bottles, packaging items, garden trimmings and sweepings.

Commercial Waste

This is waste generated from business premises, shops, offices and markets.

Institutional Waste

Waste

generated

from

schools,

colleges,

hospitals,

labs,

hotels

and

restaurants, community halls and religious places.

Street Sweeping

Waste collected by street sweepings which are generated by littering, throwing away by pedestrians, public, shops, etc., to streets. It includes waste from road side tree leaves, drain cleanings, debris etc.

Industrial Waste

Wastes generated from industrial activities are generally denoted as industrial waste

Chapter 2

Construction and Demolition Debris

Waste generated from construction and demolition of buildings, roads,

bridges, etc. It consists of earth, stones, bricks, wood, iron bars, concrete, etc.

Quantities of MSW Generation and Collection in India

The following figure gives an idea of the per capita MSW generation of

India and three neighbouring countries, where India is having the lowest per

capita waste generation of 0.6 Kg.

1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 China India Srilanka Thailand
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
China
India
Srilanka
Thailand

Figure 2.2 Per capita generation of MSW in 2002 in four countries (Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand 2004)

The following Table presents the status of MSW generation in four

major cities of India. The per capita MSW generation is the maximum in

Chennai with 0.62 and the minimum in Mumbai with 0.45 Kg. Delhi generates

the highest quantity of MSW, which is 5922 tonnes/day and Kolkata records

the lowest figure of 2653 tonnes/day.

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

Table 2.1 Status of Municipal Solid Waste Management in Selected Metro Cities in India, 2004-05

Particulars

Kolkata

Chennai

Delhi

Mumbai

Area (Sq. Km)

187.33

174

1484.46

437.71

Population (Census 2001)

45,72,645

4343645

10303452

11978450

MSW generation(tonnes/day)

2653

3036

5922

5320

MSW generation rate(Kg/c/day)

0.58

0.62

0.57

0.45

Source: SOER,2009,MoEF Note: kg/c/day : kilogram per capita per day

1)

As per the report (May 2000) of Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD),

Government of India 1,00,000 MT of municipal solid waste was

generated daily in the country.

2)

During the year 2004-05, the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB)

through the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute

(NEERI), Nagpur, conducted a survey in 59 cities (35 Metro cities and

24 State Capitals) and estimated 39,031 tonnes per day MSW generation

in these 59 cities/towns.

3)

The survey conducted by the Central Institute of Plastics Engineering

and Technology (CIPET) at the instance of CPCB has reported

generation of 50,592 tonnes of MSW per day in the year 2010-11 in the

same 59 cities.

4)

As per information received from State Pollution Control Boards/

Pollution Control Committees (in the years 2009-12), 1,27,486 TPD

municipal solid waste was generated in the country during 2011-12. Out

of this, 89,334 TPD (70 per cent) of MSW was collected and 15,881

TPD (12.45 per cent) was processed or treated (CPCB)

Chapter 2

Table 2.2 Municipal Solid Waste Generation in Metro Cities / State Capitals

Serial

Name of the City

*Municipal Solid Waste (TPD)

 

Number

1999-2000 (a)

2004-2005 (b)

2010-2011 (c)

 

1. Agartala

--

77

102

2. Agra

 

--

654

520

 

3. Ahmedabad

1683

1302

2300

 

4. Aizwal

--

57

107

 

5. Allahabad

--

509

350

 

6. Amritsar

--

438

550

 

7. Asansol

--

207

210

 

8. Bangalore

2000

1669

3700

 

9. Bhopal

546

574

350

 

10. Bhubaneswar

--

234

400

 

11. Chandigar

--

326

264

 

12. Chennai

3124

3036

4500

 

13. Coimbatore

350

530

700

 

14. Daman

--

15

25

 

15. Dehradun

--

131

220

16. Delhi

 

4000

5922

6800

 

17. Dhanbad

--

77

150

 

18. Faridabad

--

448

700

 

19. Gandhinagar

--

44

97

 

20. Gangtok

--

13

26

 

21. Guwahati

--

166

204

 

22. Hyderabad

1566

2187

4200

 

23. Imphal

--

43

120

 

24. Indore

350

557

720

 

25. Itanagar

--

12

102

 

26. Jabalpur

--

216

400

 

27. Jaipur

580

904

310

 

28. Jammu

--

215

300

 

29. Jamshedpur

--

338

28

 

30. Kanpur

1200

1100

1600

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

31.

Kavarathi

--

3

2

32.

Kochi

347

400

150

33.

Kohima

--

13

45

34.

Kolkata

3692

2653

3670

35.

Lucknow

1010

475

1200

36.

Ludhiana

400

735

850

37.

Madurai

370

275

450

38.

Meerut

--

490

52

39.

Mumbai

5355

5320

6500

40.

Nagpur

443

504

650

41.

Nashik

--

200

350

42.

Panjim

--

32

25

43.

Patna

330

511

220

44.

Pondicherry

--

130

250

45.

Port Blair

--

76

45

46.

Pune

700

1175

1300

47.

Raipur

--

184

224

48.

Rajkot

--

207

230

49.

Ranchi

--

208

140

50.

Shillong

--

45

97

51.

Shimla

--

39

50

52.

Silvassa

--

16

35

53.

Srinagar

--

428

550

54.

Surat

900

1000

1200

55.

Thiruvananthapuram

--

171

250

56.

Vadodara

400

357

600

57.

Varanasi

412

425

450

58.

Vijayawada

--

374

600

59.

Vishakhapatnam

300

584

334

 

Total MSW

30058

39031

50592

Source: * Municipal Solid Waste Study conducted by CPCB through; (a) EPTRI (1999-2000) (b) NEERI-Nagpur (2004-2005) ( c) CIPET during 2010-11

Chapter 2

Table 2.3 Municipal Solid Waste Generation in India (State-wise)

   

(a) *MSW (MT/Day)

1999-2000

(b) MSW

Serial

Name of the State/ Union Territory

(M T/Day)

2009-2012

Number

Class I

Class II

   
 

Cities

Towns

Total

1.

Andaman & Nicobar

--

--

--

50

2.

Andhra Pradesh

3943

433

4376

11500

3.

Arunachal Pradesh

--

--

--

94

4.

Assam

196

89

285

1146

5.

Bihar

1479

340

1819

1670

6.

Chandigarh

200

--

200

380

7.

Chhattisgarh

--

--

--

1167

8.

Daman Diu & Dadra

--

--

--

41

9.

Delhi

4000

--

4000

7384

10.

Goa

--

--

--

193

11.

Gujarat

--

--

--

7379

12.

Haryana

3805

427

4232

537

13.

Himachal Pradesh

623

102

725

304

14.

Jammu & Kashmir

35

--

35

1792

15.

Jharkhand

--

--

--

1710

16.

Karnataka

3118

160

3278

6500

17.

Kerala

1220

78

1298

8338

18.

Lakshadweep

--

--

--

21

19.

Maharashtra

8589

510

9099

19204

20.

Manipur

40

--

40

113

21.

Meghalaya

35

--

35

285

22.

Mizoram

46

--

46

4742

23.

Madhya Pradesh

2286

398

2684

4500

24.

Nagaland

--

--

--

188

25.

Orissa

646

9

655

2239

26.

Puducherry

60

9

69

380

27.

Punjab

1001

265

1266

2794

28.

Rajasthan

1768

198

1966

5037

29.

Sikkim

--

--

--

40

30.

Tamil Nadu

5021

382

5403

12504

31.

Tripura

33

--

33

360

32.

Uttar Pradesh

5515

445

5960

11585

33.

Uttaranchal

--

--

--

752

34.

West Bengal

4475

146

4621

12557

 

Total

48134

3991

52125

127486

Source: * Based on CPCB’s study conducted through; (a) EPTRI (b) As reported by SPCBs / PCCs (during 2009-12).

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

Table 2.4 Municipal Solid Waste Generation in India (State-wise) (Updated as on 31 st July 2012)

Serial

Name of the State/ Union Territory

Quantity

Quantity

Quantity

Number

Generated

Collected

Treated

 

(TPD)

(TPD)

(TPD)

1.

Andaman & Nicobar

50

43

Nil

2.

Andhra Pradesh

11500

10655

3656

3.

Arunachal Pradesh

94

NA

Nil

4.

Assam

1146

807

73

5.

Bihar

1670

1670

Nil

6.

Chandigarh

380

370

300

7.

Chhattisgarh

1167

1069

250

8.

Daman Diu & Dadra

28+13=41

NA

Nil

9.

Delhi

7384

6796

1927

10.

Goa

193

NA

NA

11.

Gujarat

7379

6744

873

12.

Haryana

537

NA

Nil

13.

Himachal Pradesh

304

275

153

14.

Jammu & Kashmir

1792

1322

320

15.

Jharkhand

1710

869

50

16.

Karnataka

6500

2100

2100

17.

Kerala

8338

1739

1739

18.

Lakshadweep

21

21

4

19.

Maharashtra

19204

19204

2080

20.

Manipur

113

93

3

21.

Meghalaya

285

238

100

22.

Mizoram

4742

3122

Nil

23.

Madhya Pradesh

4500

2700

975

24.

Nagaland

188

140

Nil

25.

Orissa

2239

1837

33

26.

Puducherry

380

NA

Nil

27.

Punjab

2794

NA

Nil

28.

Rajasthan

5037

NA

Nil

29.

Sikkim

40

32

32

30.

Tamil Nadu

12504

11626

603

31.

Tripura

360

246

40

32.

Uttar Pradesh

11585

10563

Nil

33.

Uttarakhand

752

NA

Nil

34.

West Bengal

12557

5054

607

 

Total

127486

89334

15881

Source: * Based on CPCB’s study conducted through; (a) EPTRI (b) As reported by SPCBs / PCCs (during 2009-12).

Chapter 2

Table 2.5

Municipal Solid Waste Generation in Different Municipalities of Kerala

 

Name of

Municipality

Population

2001

MSW generation

tonnes/day

Sl. No

 

Name of

Municipality

Population

2001

MSW generation

tonnes/day

 

1 Alappuzha

177079

43

28

Iringalakuda

28873

7

 

2 Kottayam

60725

15

29

Kudungallur

33543

8

 

3 Chenganassery

51960

13

30

Shornur

42022

10

 

4 Aluva

24108

6

31

Malappuram

58490

14

 

5 Palakkad

130736

32

32

Manjeri

83704

20

 

6 Kannur

63795

15

33

Perinthalmanna

44613

11

 

7 Thalassery

99386

24

34

Kanchangad

65499

16

 

8 Thuruvalla

56828

14

35

Nedumangad

56138

14

 

9 Perumbavoor

26550

6

36

Varkala

42273

10

 

10 Thirur

53650

13

37

Paravur (South)

38649

9

 

11 Vadakara

75740

18

38

Adoor

28943

7

 

12 Kasaragod

52683

13

39

Mavelikkara

28440

7

 

13 Neyattinkata

69435

17

40

Chengannur

 

25391

6

 

14 Attingal

35648

9

41

Vikom

22637

5

 

15 Punallor

47226

11

42

Kalamassery

63176

15

 

16 Pathanamthitta

37802

9

43

Chavakkad

 

38138

9

 

17 Kayamkulam

65299

16

44

Guruvayoor

 

21187

5

 

18 Cherthala

45102

11

45

Cittoor-

31884

8

Thathamangalam

19 Pala

 

22640

5

46

Otapalam

 

49230

12

 

20 Thodupuzha

46226

11

47

Ponnani

87356

21

 

21 Kothamangalam

37169

9

48

Kalpatta

 

29602

7

 

22 Muvattupuzha

29230

7

49

Payannur

 

68711

17

 

23 Kunnamkulam

51585

12

50

Koothuparambu

29532

7

 

24 North Paravur

30056

7

51

Thaliparambu

67441

16

 

25 Thrippunithura

59881

14

52

Quilandy

 

68970

17

 

26 Angamaly

33424

8

53

Mattannur

 

44317

11

 

27 Chalakudy

48371

12

 

Total

2731093

661

Source: Ajayakumar Varma 2006

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

Table 2.5 explains the total MSW generated in the State of Kerala and the contribution of different Municipalities to the total. The total MSW generation in Kerala is 661 tonnes, and Alappuzha Municipality is responsible for generating the highest quantity of 43 tonnes per day.

Magnitude and Sources of MSW 4.1 3.2 Domestic 12.2 Commercial 19.6 Community Halls Hotels 9.5
Magnitude and Sources of MSW
4.1 3.2
Domestic
12.2
Commercial
19.6
Community Halls
Hotels
9.5
101 Markets
12.4
Institutions
Street
21.9
Hospitals
Slaughter House
22.8
2.4
Construction
Figure 2.3 Estimate of solid waste generation by different groups

In Kerala, the present minimum generation of MSW can be considered as around 0.242 kg/head/day. Accordingly, the daily MSW generation in the Municipalities of the State is given in Figure 2.3 (Ajayakumar Varma, R.).

The sources of solid waste in Kerala, and the percentage contribution from each source are given in Table 2.6. Out of the total wastes generated, household waste comes to 49 per cent and slaughter house and hospital waste forms the lowest quantity of 3 per cent.

Chapter 2

Table 2.6 Sources of Solid Waste and Percentage

Sl. No

Sources

Percentage

1

Household Waste

49

2

Hostels, Marriage Halls and Institutions

17

3

Shops and Markets

16

4

Street Sweepings

9

5

Construction

6

6

Slaughter Houses and Hospitals

3

Table 2.7 Waste Generation Scenario in Kerala in 2006

 

Population 2001

Per Capita Waste Generation (Grms)

Total Waste

Generation

(Tonnes/Day)

Projected

Population 2006

Projected Waste Generation (Grms)

Total Waste

Generation

2006

(Tonnes/Day)

5 Corporations

2456618

435

1069

 

2543812

465

 

1183

 

53 Municipalities

2731093

250

683

 

2828030

268

 

758

 

999 Panchayats

23574449

175

4126

 

24411200

187

4565

 

Total Waste Generation in Kerala

 

5878

     

6506

 

Source: Dr. R Ajayakumar Varma, Status of MSW Generation in Kerala and Their Characteristics

As per the above Table, the total daily waste generation in the State in the year 2001 is 5878 tonnes, of which 1069 tonnes are accounted by Corporations, 683 tonnes by Municipalities and the remaining 4126 tonnes by Grama Panchayaths.

Segregation of Waste

Waste segregation is most essential for the success of the MSWM. Unfortunately, among Municipalities in Kerala, efforts for the segregated

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

collection of wastes are very poor. The major reason for the failure is the lack of treatment facilities for non-biodegradable waste like plastic, paper, metal, etc. The waste recycling facilities in the ULBs in Kerala are at the infancy stage and the Government is trying to implement recycling facilities in different city centres of the State. Households, the major contributor of Municipal solid wastes in the State, have to practise segregation of waste at source. It will reduce the burden of the Municipalities in segregating waste after collection, which, in turn will attract serious health implications to the waste collection workers. Hence, it is high time to come up with immediate solutions to solve waste segregation issues and to find treatment and recycling facilities in each Municipality by the State Govt.

The households have to segregate the waste at source into biodegradable waste and non-biodegradable waste. The non-biodegradable waste will thereafter be segregated into recyclables, non-recyclables, and domestic hazardous waste. Each household will be provided with two bins in different colours for keeping the biodegradable waste and non-biodegradable wastes.

At the operational level, if waste segregation at source is not properly carried out, there is possibility of toxic material entering the municipal solid waste stream, making the waste unsuitable for composting. Enforcement of strict measures for segregation of waste at source in order to avoid mixing of undesirable waste streams will play a major role in making waste treatment effective. Currently, at the level of waste generation and collection, there is no source segregation of compostable waste from the other non-biodegradable and recyclable waste. Proper segregation would lead to better options and opportunities for scientific disposal of waste. Recyclables could be straightaway transported to recycling units which, in turn, would pay a certain amount to the Municipalities, thereby adding to their income.

Chapter 2

2. Waste Storage

Here, waste storage’ means primary storage of waste. Storage is a key functional element because collection of wastes never takes place at the source or at the time of their generation. A systematic waste storage at source ensures separation and storage of generated waste in specifically designed containers. In India, waste segregation has not yet been practised scientifically. As a result, ULBs have to collect waste in a mixed form which attracts a lot of environmental and health issues. Waste storage is an important component of the waste management system. Waste storage ensures the use of proper containers to store wastes and efficient transport of them without any spillage to transfer stations/disposal sites. Households generally use small containers, while shops, hotels, institutions and industries require large containers. Manual handling is sufficient for smaller containers, while larger ones require mechanical handling. Generally waste containers are of two types:

Stationary Containers

The contents of such containers have to be transferred to collection vehicles at the site of storage.

Hauled Containers

The contents are directly transferred to a processing plant, transfer station or disposal site for emptying before being returned to the storage site.

The features of a good container are low cost, size, weight, shape, resistance to corrosion, water tightness, strength and durability. It should not have rough or sharp edges and should have a handle and a wheel to facilitate mobility.

3. Waste Collection

This includes gathering of wastes and hauling them to the location where the collection vehicle is emptied, which may be a transfer station, a processing

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

plant, or a disposal site. Hauling is a complicated process because vehicles used for long distances may not be suitable or economic for house-to-house collection. In a broader sense, waste collection involves segregation, collection, storage, transfer and transportation of MSW for processing or ultimate disposal. The following are the major factors influencing waste collection:

Collection Points

The quantity of waste determines the waste collection points. The size of the crew and the cost of collection are determined by the number of collection points.

Collection Frequency

Climatic conditions, type of waste, waste quantity, size and type of the containers, and cost determine the frequency of collection.

Storage Containers

Size of the crew and speed of collection are based on the features of containers. Containers should be durable, easy to handle, economical and resistant to corrosion. The containers should be efficient, convenient, compatible and safe.

Collection Crew

The route characteristics, collection methods, labour and equipment costs, size and type of collection vehicles, space between the houses, waste generation rate, and collection frequency determine the crew size.

Collection Route

An efficient route selection for waste collection will decrease labour costs, working hours and vehicle fuel costs. Hence, optimum route scheduling is essential for the success of the waste collection system.

Chapter 2

Secondary Storage of Waste

Solid waste collected through the primary collection system has to be stored temporarily at intermediate bins for its onward transport to the processing or disposal site in a cost-effective manner. These bins are called secondary storage bins. The old type concrete cylindrical bins and missionary bins, which are inefficient and unhygienic have to be replaced with neat, mobile, covered containers. Large containers ranging from three cubic metres to seven cubic metres are placed for secondary storage of waste. The area and population of the city determine the number of containers required. Containers should be available within a radius of 250 metres because, a waste collector should not be expected to walk more than that. It means that a minimum of four containers per square kilometre need to be placed. In high-density areas, one container should be placed for every five thousand to ten thousand residents, depending on the size of the container. For a city with a population of five thousand, a three cubic metre container which can hold 1.25 to 1.50 metric tons of waste, is sufficient, whereas a container of seven cubic metre capacity can easily handle the waste of a population of ten thousand to twelve thousand. The containers could either be taken directly to the disposal site if the distance is shorter than fifteen kilometres or might be taken to a transfer station if the distance is longer. If waste is segregated at its source, two bins are needed: one for biodegradable waste and the other for recyclables and waste collected by street sweepers.

Easy access for primary waste collectors, easy further handling of containers, easy cleaning and prevention of water clogging, and coverage to protect from rain and animals, are essential prerequisites of a good secondary storage system (Da Zhu et al.).

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

Transfer Station

When the collection centre and disposal site are far distant, a transfer station is appropriate to be constructed. It is a centre where smaller vehicles transfer their loads to larger vehicles to haul the waste to disposal sites. On some occasions, transfer stations act as pre-processing points, where wastes are dewatered, scooped or compressed. If the treatment and disposal site is more than 15 kilometres away from the city, setting up of a transfer station is advisable. In such situations, transfer stations are required as it is uneconomical to transport waste in small vehicles. Waste is transferred from small vehicles into larger container trucks so that waste can be transported more efficiently over long distances. Normally, large vehicles having a capacity of 20 to 30 cubic metres are used for a long distance transport of waste for disposal or treatment. If more than one transfer station is set up, those should be decentralized within the city, allocated to an enclosed area, and situated in the general direction of the main landfill site. The timings of the transfer station should match with the timings of waste transport from the city so that direct transfer of waste from a small vehicle to a large vehicle is possible. This arrangement can be facilitated by a split-level transfer station, where a small vehicle can go over a ramp and directly tip into a large vehicle. However, if direct transfer of waste from a small vehicle to a large vehicle is inconvenient, the municipal authority could also plan a transfer station at which waste is initially deposited in a large bunker and later moved using special equipment such as a grabbing machine. The contents could then be lifted into a large vehicle at any time during the day. Such an arrangement necessitates multiple handling but has the flexibility to allow the transfer of waste at any time during the day. The principle “Do not handle waste twice!” must be followed (Da Zhu et al.).

Chapter 2

4. Waste Transfer and Transport

It involves the transfer of wastes from smaller collection vehicles to large ones and the subsequent transport of wastes to disposal sites. The transport of large quantities of waste to treatment sites or the final disposal site is really a complex affair requiring elaborate planning by experts, and it acts as a bottleneck of efficiency in most Indian cities. Lengthy loading time due to manual loading, and long distance to processing centre or disposal site are major blocking factors affecting the efficiency of transportation. The longer the distance to the landfill site, the more the volume to be transported with each load; on such occasions transfer stations are highly preferred. Vehicles should be selected according to capital costs, carrying capacity, life expectancy, loading speed, local spare part availability, speed, fuel consumption, and maintenance costs. Covered vehicles are essential so that waste littering can be avoided. Transportation can be outsourced to private operators for more productivity and for avoiding manual and multiple handling of waste. A two- shift working system reduces the requirement of new vehicles, and operation at night increases the efficiency of vehicles in terms of fuel and engine life. The dumper placer system has proved to be very suitable in the Indian context. An efficient waste transport system without interruption due to waste transfer requires a professional maintenance staff as well. Preventive maintenance and timely replacement of vehicles are primary considerations for an efficient waste transportation system (Da Zhu et al.).

5. Waste Processing

It is required to alter the physical and chemical characteristics of wastes, for energy and resource recovery and recycling. The important processing techniques include compaction, thermal volume reduction, and manual separation of waste components.

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

The main technological options available for processing/treatment of MSW are classified into two major categories. The first is the biological option comprising composting, vermi-composting, and anaerobic digestion /biomethanation. The second is the thermal option comprising incineration, gasification and pyrolysis, plasma pyrolysis and refuse-derived fuel (RDF)/ pellatization.

Composting

Composting is the decomposition of organic matter by micro-organism in warm, moist, aerobic and anaerobic environment. Any organic material that can be biologically decomposed is compostable. Compost is the end product of the composting process. The by-products of this process are carbon dioxide and water. Compost is peaty humus, dark in colour and has a crumbly texture, an earthy odour and resembles rich topsoil. Composts will not have any resemblance in the physical form to the original waste from which it was derived. Cured compost is relatively stable and resistant to further decomposition by micro-organisms. When mixed with soil, compost promotes a proper balance between air and water in the resulting mixture, helps reduce soil erosion and serves as a slow-release fertilizer (Ramachandra T V, 2006).

In MSWM, Composting is the most simple and cost effective technology for treating the organic fraction of MSW. Especially, in a country like India, where the moisture content of the MSW is very high, composting is assumed to be the best technology. Compost improves the soil texture, augments the micronutrient deficiencies, and moisture-holding capacity of the soil, and helps in maintaining the soil health. Because of its advantages, composting is the most popularly used waste processing technology in Indian cities and towns. It is an age-old proven concept, requiring little capital investment and its technology is

Chapter 2

scale-neutral. Compost made of MSW is a perfect soil conditioner but, because of poor marketing, its opportunities are not properly tapped. Composting is suitable for organic biodegradable fraction of MSW, yard (or garden) waste/waste containing high proportion of lignocelluloses materials, which do not readily degrade under anaerobic conditions, waste from slaughterhouse and dairy waste. As a method, it suffers from certain limitations also. Composting cannot be applied on wastes that are too wet, and during heavy rains open compost plants have to be stopped. Moreover, it requires relatively more land space. Also, issues of methane emission, odour, and flies from badly managed open compost plants remain. At the operational level, if waste segregation at source is not properly carried out, there is possibility of toxic material entering the stream of MSW. It is essential that compost produced should be safe for application. Standardization of compost quality is, therefore, necessary. The MSW (Management and Handling) Rules 2000 (MSW Rules 2000) have specified certain limits to acceptable percentage of heavy metals in compost produced from MSW, and a mechanism is put in place to ensure that the same are strictly implemented. Marketing of compost is a major concern for private operators. Lack of awareness among the farmers regarding the benefits of using compost is an impediment to its sale. Also, there is need to market the product near the compost site to minimize transportation cost (Asnani, P. U.).

Composting Technologies

There are mainly three methods of composting generally used:

Windrow Composting

This is the least expensive and the most common system. Windrows are regularly turned elongated piles, shaped like a haystack in cross section. Normally MSW windrows are 1.5 to 3 metres high and 3 to 6 metres wide.

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

The optimum size and shape of the windrow is determined by the particle size, moisture content, pore space and decomposition rate-all of which affect the movement of oxygen towards the centre of the pile. Turning the pile reintroduces air into the pile and increases porosity so that efficient passive aeration from atmospheric air continues at all times. Forced aeration can also be used. Windrows must be placed on a firm surface to turn the piles with ease. If high proportions of bio-solids are present in the feedstock, a very frequent turning is required; otherwise, turning once in a week is sufficient. When piles are turned, heat is released as steam to the atmosphere. If the inner portions of the pile have low levels of oxygen, odours may result when this portion of the pile is exposed to the atmosphere. Piles with initial moisture content within the optimum range have a reduced potential for producing leachate. Any leachate or runoff created must be collected and treated or added to a batch of incoming feedstock to increase the moisture content.

Aerated Static Pile Composting

This technology requires the composting mixture-a mixture of preprocessed materials and liquids to be placed in piles that are mechanically aerated. The piles are placed over a network of pipes connected to a blower which supplies the air for composting. Air can be supplied under positive or negative pressures; that is, the air supply blower either forces air into the pile or draws air out of it. The former generates a positive pressure system and the latter, a negative pressure. When the composting process is nearly complete, the piles are broken up for the first time after their construction. It takes a series of post processing steps to make the compost ready for use. The high temperature inside the static pile is enough to destroy the pathogens and weed seeds. As piles are not turned in the aerated static pile technology, the pathogens on the outer surface of the pile may not be destroyed. This problem can be overcome

Chapter 2

by placing a layer of finished compost over the compost pile. This technology can be applied under a roof or in the open. Six to twelve weeks’ time is required to produce compost using this technology. The land requirement for this method is lower than that for the windrow composting. The method suffers from the major limitation of odours from the exhaust air which can be controlled by using traps or filters.

In-vessel Composting System

Under this system, the feedstock is fed into a chamber or vessel that provides adequate mixing, aeration and moisture. Drums, digester bins and tunnels are some of the common in-vessel type systems. These vessels can be single or multi-compartment units. In some cases the vessel rotates, and in others it is stationary, and a mixing/agitating mechanism moves the material around. In- vessel composting may be continuous feed or batch mode system. All in-vessel systems require further curing after the material has been discharged from the vessel. Some of the commonly used in-vessel systems are vertical composting reactors, horizontal composting reactors, and rotating drums.

Vermi-Composting

Vermi-compost is the natural organic manure produced from the excreta of earthworms fed on scientifically semi-decomposed organic waste. A few vermi composting plants generally of small size have been set up in some cities and towns in India. Normally, vermi-composting is preferred to microbial composting in small towns as it requires less mechanization and it is easy to operate. It is, however, to be ensured that toxic material does not enter the chain which, if present, could kill the earthworms. Vermi-composting is normally done either in pits or in concrete tanks or wooden or plastic crates, according to the demands of the situation. If done in pits, it should be done in such a way as to prevent water stagnation in pits during rains.

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

The following are the precautions to be taken while producing vermicompost:

a) Sufficient provision for earthworms to live, feed, and breed has to be ensured and such provision should conform to the habits of the earthworm species used in the set-up.

b) Maintaining optimal moisture and almost neutral pH is essential.

c) Preventing the entry of insects and predators so that no harm is caused to earthworms.

d) Providing adequate facilities for periodic harvesting of vermicast and renewal of feed.

So, the factors which determine the success of vermi-composting are food, moisture, temperature, light, pH and protection from predators. Vermicast is a unique soil conditioner, it improves the water retention capability of the soil, it has better C/N ratio and pH and microbial population than normal compost. Vermicasts contain certain enzymes and hormones that stimulate plant growth and discourage pathogens.

Biogasification

Biogas, mainly a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide, originates from bacteria (methanogens) in the process of biodegradation of organic material under anaerobic (without air) conditions. Biogas is a source of renewable energy. Both methane and carbon dioxide are greenhouse gases, but methane is more dangerous in terms of harm to environment as it is twenty- one times more potent than carbon dioxide. Methane is the major gas generated, so this process is also called biomethanation. The uses of a biogas system are the production of energy, production of high quality fertilizer and reduction of pathogens through biological process of waste.

Chapter 2

Anaerobic Processing

It is a two-stage processing of organic material by fermenting large organic polymers into short chain volatile fatty acids. These acids are subsequently converted into methane and carbon dioxide. Both the organic polymers fermentation process and the acid conversion occur as a single-phase system. But, the separation of the acid producing (acidogenic) bacteria from the methane-producing bacteria (methanogenic) results in a two-phase system. Anaerobic biomethanation requires a totally enclosed process vessel. It requires less processing time and less space compared to composting. It will not release odour also. Based on the solid content of the material digested and the temperature at which the process operates, biogasification process may be dry anaerobic digestion or wet anaerobic digestion. Temperature, pH value, presence of toxins and nutrient concentration (C/N ratio) are some of the main factors affecting biogasification process.

Incineration

Incineration is a chemical reaction in which carbon, hydrogen and other elements in the waste mix with oxygen in the combustion zone and generates heat (Ramachandra, T. V.). Combustion of solid wastes requires a considerable amount of air. A ton of solid wastes burned approximately requires five thousand kilograms of air. As a process, it involves combustion of waste leading to volume reduction and recovery of heat to produce steam, which in turn, produces power through steam turbines. Basically, it is a furnace for burning waste and converts MSW into ash, gaseous and particulate emissions and heat energy (Ajayakumar Varma, R.). Moisture content and calorific values of the waste to be incinerated determine the success of the system. Air requirements differ with moisture content of waste, heating values and the type of combustion technology employed. A temperature range of 900 to 1100 degrees is used in

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

most of the incinerators which, in turn, offers a good combustion and elimination of odours. Dry waste does not require any auxiliary fuel except for start-up but when it is having a high moisture content, supplementary fuel may be needed for combustion of waste. The combustion process involves, essentially, drying, volatilization, and, ignition and desirably, elimination of odours, and combustion of unburned furnace gases and carbon suspended in the gases. The minimum temperature for burning carbonaceous wastes to avoid release of smoke and to prevent emissions of dioxins and furans is 850 o C. In order to ensure proper breakdown of organic toxins, this temperature should be maintained at least for 2 minutes. For steam generation and energy recovery, the combustion temperature should be 1400 o C. This will also ensure degradation of all organic compounds. Depending on the nature of wastes and the operating characteristics of the combustion reactor, the gaseous products derived from the combustion of MSW may include carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), water (H 2 O, flue gas), oxygen (O 2 ), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulphur dioxide (SO 2 ) and small amounts of hydrogen chloride, mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, dioxins and furans, and organic compounds. The combustion residues include bottom ash, fly ash and non-combusted organic and inorganic materials. There are various types of incinerator plant design: moving grate, fixed grate, rotary-kiln, fluidized bed. The typical incineration plant for municipal solid waste is a moving grate incinerator (Ajayakumar Varma, R.). Complete incineration of solid wastes produces an inert residue of ten per cent of the initial weight. The residue is generally landfilled. The major limitations of this method are the emission of air pollutants (fine particulate and toxic gases) and the problem with the disposal of residue ash in landfills because of the presence of heavy metals. The major advantages are volume reduction of waste, stabilization, energy recovery and sterilization of waste.

Chapter 2

The following are the criticisms raised against incineration by The United Kingdom’s most influential national environment campaigning organization, ‘Friends of the Earth’:

Sending Resources up in Smoke

If we build incinerators, we are not only quite literally sending resources up in smoke, but also accepting that we do not need to reduce waste. Because building an incinerator has such high capital costs, and incinerator operators typically require contracts with local authorities to supply them with a minimum amount of waste to burn over a long time: 25-30 years. In some cases, if the local authority does not supply the full amount of waste required, it has to pay the incinerator operators to compensate for their profit shortfall. This assurance of return on investment is a logical requirement from the incinerator operators' point of view, but once incineration is established as an area's mode of waste management, the incentive on the local authority will be to ensure that enough waste is produced, not to ensure that it is reduced.

Incineration ‘crowds out’ Recycling

The incineration industry and the Government argue that incineration and recycling can exist side by side. This is true only as long as the UK’s targets for reducing and recycling waste remain woefully unambitious. If paper and plastic waste were minimised and recycled as much as possible, in most areas there would not be enough left to make incineration financially viable. Small incinerators are not economical, because the costs of pollution abatement equipment tend to be the same irrespective of the size of the plant to which they are fitted. Similarly, although it might appear that incinerators would not affect recycling of metals and glass, in practice, there would be little incentive for separating out these materials, since they can go through the

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

incineration process. Regional data for household waste from Denmark in

2005 clearly show that regions with high incineration have lower recycling,

and regions with lower incineration do more recycling:

Table 2.8 Waste Processing in Different Regions

Region

Recycling

Incineration

Landfill

(in percentage)

(in percentage)

(in percentage)

Hovedstaden

21

77

2

Nordjyllnad

29

63

8

Sjælland

31

59

10

Midtjylland

40

53

7

Syddanmark

41

52

6

Source: Friends of the Earth, UK, 2007

It is worth noting that Denmark’s recycling rate is well behind levels

achieved by other regions of Europe. For example, Flanders in Belgium

recycles 71 per cent of municipal waste.

Incineration Worsens Climate Change

All forms of waste disposal contribute in some way towards climate

change, for example, through the release of methane from landfill sites, burning of

fossil-fuel-based plastics, or emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) from the transport

of waste. It is often claimed that incinerators produce renewable energy; so, they

are part of the solution to climate change. This is incorrect - incinerators burn a

mixture of fossil-fuel-derived materials (e.g. plastics) and biological materials.

A Waste of Energy

When waste is burnt in an incinerator, heat is produced which can be

used to produce electricity. This displaces the need for an equivalent amount

of electricity to be generated at a power station, saving the release of some

CO 2 , a greenhouse gas. In Europe, many incinerators capture more energy by

Chapter 2

providing heating through hot water to nearby offices or homes (combined heat and power or CHP), but this more efficient system is only used in three of the UK’s incinerators. Simplistic claims are often made that burning waste in incinerators will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In reality, most incinerators are not very efficient at capturing energy from the waste they burn, due to the fact that they are primarily designed to be a method of reducing the volume of waste, and because they have to have a lot of air pollution control equipment. The Government has admitted this shortcoming in the new Waste Strategy for England: “Where fossil fuel based products are incinerated (e.g. plastics) they tend to generate energy less efficiently than using fossil fuel directly, hence are associated with an overall carbon cost”. This means that incinerators release a large amount of CO 2 to produce a small amount of energy. A waste to electricity incinerator actually releases 33 per cent more fossil-fuel-derived CO 2 per unit energy produced than a gas-fired power station. If heat from the incinerator is used, then performance is similar to that of a gas-fired power station.

The Sustainable Alternative

Studies have clearly shown that incineration is not the best way to divert biodegradable waste from landfill. Pre-treatment of residual waste to remove recyclables and degrade biodegradable materials (mechanical biological treatment or MBT), followed by landfill of the end material, is better for the climate than incineration, with or without recovery of heat.

Recycling Saves Energy

Recycling also uses energy, much of it supplied by fossil fuel power generation. But, over all, it reduces climate emissions, as recycling a material uses far less energy than the extraction and processing of virgin materials. In addition, research shows that recycling is almost invariably better than incineration from the point of view of the climate. A study was recently carried

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

out for the government-funded Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP). It assessed the relative greenhouse gas savings associated with current UK levels of recycling for paper/cardboard, glass, plastics, aluminium and steel, and concluded:

“The UK’s current recycling of those materials saves between 10-15 million tonnes of CO 2 equivalents per year compared to applying the current mix of landfill and incineration with energy recovery to the same materials. This is equivalent to about 10 per cent of the annual CO 2 emissions from the transport sector, and equates to taking 3.5 million cars off UK roads.” Numerous other studies have shown that recycling saves far more energy than is captured by burning the materials. For instance, a Canadian study found the following figures for energy saved by recycling materials as opposed to burning them (see Table below). The savings still apply when the energy used to transport materials for recycling is taken into account, as this energy is relatively insignificant.

Table 2.9 Energy Saved by Recycling

Energy saved by recycling rather than burning waste material

Energy saved

Paper

3

times

Plastic

5

times

Textile

6

times

Food & Garden Waste

 

Nil

Source: Friends of the Earth, UK, 2007

Creating Jobs

Once they have been built, incinerators create few jobs compared with recycling (see Table below). The British Newsprint Manufacturers Association found that recycling of newspapers would create three times as many jobs as their incineration. In addition, a higher proportion of the jobs created by incineration were associated with building the incinerator; so, they were not permanent jobs (Friends of the Earth, UK, 2007).

Chapter 2

Table 2.10 Jobs per one million tons of waste processed

Type of waste disposal

Number of Jobs

Landfill

40 - 60

Incineration

100

- 290

Composting

200

- 300

Recycling

400

- 590

Source: Friends of the Earth, UK, 2007

Pyrolysis and Gasification

Pyrolysis is an exothermic reaction where the destructive distillation of a solid, carbonaceous material, in the presence of heat, and in the absence of stoichiometric oxygen, is conducted. It is a process that converts carbonaceous materials, such as biomass into carbon monoxide and hydrogen by reacting the raw material at high temperatures with a controlled amount of oxygen, resulting in the production of a gas mixture called synthesis gas or syngas, which is itself a fuel. Gasification is a method of extracting energy from different types of organic materials. The advantage of gasification is that using the syngas is more efficient than direct combustion of the original fuel, as it may be burned directly in internal combustion engines used to produce methanol and hydrogen, or converted into synthetic fuel. Gasification can also begin with materials that are not otherwise useful fuels, such as biomass or organic waste. In addition, the high-temperature combustion refines out corrosive ash elements such as chloride and potassium, allowing clean gas production from otherwise problematic fuels. Thus, it is an important technology for renewable energy. In particular, biomass gasification is carbon neutral. Gasification relies on chemical processes at elevated temperatures >700°C, which distinguishes it from biological processes, such as anaerobic digestion, that produce biogas. In essence, a limited amount of oxygen or air is introduced into the reactor to allow some of the organic material to be "burned" to produce carbon monoxide and energy, which drives a second reactor that converts further organic material to hydrogen and additional carbon dioxide (Ajayakumar

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

Varma, R.). The purpose of pyrolysis and gasification of waste is to minimize emissions and to maximize the gain and quality of recyclable products. Moreover, it sterilizes the hazardous components of the waste.

Plasma Pyrolysis

Unlike incinerators, here, waste is not combusted, but is made to decompose through gasification in an oxygen-starved environment to reach its basic molecular structure. Plasma pyrolysis or plasma gasification uses an electrical arc gasifier to produce electricity and temperature at very high levels to process waste. A device called plasma converter is used to break down waste into elemental gas and solid waste (slag). In this system, high-voltage, high-current electricity is passed between two electrodes, spaced apart, creating an electrical arc where temperatures as high as 13,871°C are reached. In such a high temperature most types of waste are broken into basic elemental components in a gaseous form, and complex molecules are atomized - separated into individual atoms. Plasma is considered a 4th state, and at this stage, it poses a considerable technological and budgetary challenge to construct a municipal waste disposal-sized plasma arc facility.

Pelletization/Production of Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF)

Refuse Derived Fuel refers to solid waste in any form that is used as fuel. Generally, the term is used to mean solid waste that has been mechanically processed to produce a storable, transportable and more homogeneous fuel for combustion. RDF production and RDF incineration are the two essential elements of an RDF system. Material separation, size reduction and pelletization come under RDF production facilities. So, the process offers an enriched fuel feed for thermal processes like incineration or for use in industrial furnaces. By shredding MSW, or by steam pressure treating in an autoclave, RDF is produced. Here, the

Chapter 2

municipal wastes such as plastics and biodegradable wastes, are compressed into pellets, bricks, or logs. Materials such as glass, metals etc. which are noncombustible are removed during the post-treatment processing cycle with an air knife or other mechanical separation processing.

6. Recovery and Recycling

Recovery involves the separation of valuable resources from the mixed solid wastes, delivered at transfer stations or processing plants. It also involves size reduction and density separation by air classifier, magnetic device for iron, and screens for glass. Recycling can be defined as a process by which materials meant for disposal are collected, reprocessed or remanufactured and are reused. So, it is the most widely recognized form of source reduction involving the process of separating, collecting, processing, marketing and ultimately using a material that would have otherwise been discarded. Normally, recycling materials include paper, cardboard, plastic, metal, wood, electrical and electronic equipment, IT and telephone equipment, fluorescent tube, printer cartridge, tyre, battery, glass, metal and the like. As a source reduction process, recycling reduces reliance on landfills and incinerators, removes harmful substances from the waste stream, and conserves natural resources by reducing the demand for raw materials. The significance of recycling is threefold, that is, economic, environmental, and health and social. It has an economic significance in the sense that it reduces the disposal cost of waste, creates employment opportunities for skilled and unskilled workforce, consumes less energy than the use of any other raw material, reduces health care cost by improving sanitary conditions in urban areas and reduces clogging of drains and pollution of water bodies. Its environmental significance is that it improves environmental sanitation and conserves natural resource. It has a social significance in the sense that a formal recycling arrangement will help promote the social esteem of waste workers and

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

facilitate their upward social mobility due to increased earning. Generally, a recycling programme includes the following elements:

Source Separation

It is the process of separating reusable and recyclable materials at the point of generation. Separate containers are used for dropping materials of different categories.

Drop-off/Buy-back

Here, the separated recyclable materials are brought to a specified drop- off or collection centre. When a drop-off programme provides monetary incentives to participate, it is called buy-back system.

Curbside programme

In this system, source-separated recyclables are collected separately from regular refuse.

Recycling requires a number of processing techniques demanding different types of equipment such as balers, can densifiers, glass crushers, magnetic separators, wood grinders and scales.

Material Recovery Facilities (MRF)

MRF is a largescale material recovery facility. MRF is a centralized facility that receives, separates, processes and markets recyclable material. MRF system processes materials uniformly by accessing it directly from Municipalities.

In India, recycling of inorganic materials from MSW is often well developed through the activities of the informal sector, although municipal authorities seldom recognize such activities. Some key factors that affect the potential for resource recovery are the cost of separating recyclable material and the separated material, its purity, its quantity, and its location. The costs of storage and transport are the major

Chapter 2

factors that determine the economic potential for resource recovery. Recycling is

often well established in the informal sector because it is done in a very labour-

intensive way and provides very low incomes (Da Zhu et al.).

Table 2.11 Physical Composition of Solid Waste in 1 Million Plus Cities and State Capitals in India (Average Percentage Value)

Serial Number

Name of the

City

Total

Compostable

Waste

Paper

Plastic

Glass

Metal

Inert Material

Rubber &

Leather

Rags

 

1. Bangalore

51.84

11.58

9.72

0.78

0.35

17.34

1.14

2.29

 

2. Ahmedabad

40.81

5.28

5.29

0.79

0.30

39.28

0.92

5.00

 

3. Nagpur

47.41

6.87

7.45

0.92

0.29

18.01

5.38

9.48

 

4. Lucknow

47.41

6.87

7.45

0.92

0.29

18.01

5.38

9.48

 

5. Indore

48.97

6.10

5.77

0.55

0.15

31.02

2.95

2.41

 

6. Bhopal

52.44

9.01

12.38

0.55

0.39

18.88

0.09

2.65

 

7. Agra

46.38

6.12

8.72

0.85

0.11

30.07

1.97

3.92

 

8. Vadodara

47.43

5.98

7.58

0.47

0.47

27.80

1.28

4.86

 

9. Ludhiana

49.80

9.65

8.27

1.03

0.37

17.57

1.01

11.50

 

10. Patna

51.96

4.78

4.14

2.00

1.66

25.44

1.17

4.17

 

11. Jabalpur

48.07

7.67

8.30

0.35

0.29

26.60

2.15

4.42

 

12. Ranchi

51.49

3.17

3.45

1.79

1.45

25.92

1.45

4.97

 

13. Bhuwaneswar

49.81

5.74

5.70

0.46

0.79

27.15

2.10

3.21

 

14. Nashik

39.52

9.69

12.58

1.30

1.54

27.12

1.11

2.53

 

15. Raipur

51.40

8.31

7.07

0.76

0.16

16.97

1.47

3.90

 

16. Allahabad

35.49

7.27

10.33

1.23

0.40

31.01

1.83

7.34

 

17. Faridabad

42.06

8.57

13.73

0.83

0.18

26.52

2.52

4.14

 

18. Visakhapatnam

45.96

14.46

9.24

0.35

0.15

20.77

0.47

2.41

 

19. Meerut

54.54

4.95

54.48

0.30

0.24

27.30

0.49

4.98

 

20. Asansol

50.33

10.66

2.78

0.77

0.00

25.49

0.48

3.05

 

21. Dehradun

51.37

9.56

8.58

1.40

0.03

22.89

0.23

5.60

 

22. Guwahati

53.69

11.63

10.04

1.30

0.31

17.66

0.16

2.18

 

23. Jamshedpur

43.36

10.24

5.27

0.06

0.13

30.93

2.51

2.99

 

24. Dhandabad

46.95

7.20

5.56

1.79

1.62

26.93

2.77

4.41

 

25. Gandhinagar

34.30

5.60

6.40

0.80

0.40

36.50

3.70

5.30

 

26. Daman

29.60

10.54

8.92

2.15

0.41

34.80

2.60

4.90

 

27. Agartala

58.87

8.11

4.43

0.98

0.16

20.57

0.76

2.17

 

28. Kohima

57.48

12.28

6.80

2.32

1.26

15.97

0.18

1.86

Source: Data from Central Pollution Control Board

Theoretical framework of Solid waste management

The rate of waste generation in India is growing very quickly owing to urbanization and higher incomes. The current composition of waste carries a high potential for recycling that is barely exploited. Generally, about 15 per cent of waste materials—which consist mainly of paper, plastic, metal, and glass—can be retrieved from the waste stream for further recycling. Another 35 to 55 per cent of waste material is organic waste, which can be converted into useful compost, leaving only 30 to 50 per cent that needs to go to landfills. In India, waste materials such as paper, plastic, metal, glass, rubber, leather, and rags are recycled mainly through private initiatives and the informal sector. Organic waste recycling is still neglected by private initiatives, because of its low value and the lack of a market for compost. Composting is underdeveloped and remains the domain of the hundreds of small- scale schemes run by private initiatives at the household or neighborhood level and a few large-scale municipal composting sites. Statistical data show that when per capita income increases, the organic content of solid waste decreases. Currently, the income level in India is still very low, and the organic content is much greater than in most industrial countries. These facts should be taken into consideration when urban local bodies make solid waste management (SWM) plans (Da Zhu et al.).

Chapter 2

Table 2.12 Chemical Characteristics of Municipal Solid Wastes (Average Values) of 1 million plus Cities and State Capitals.

Name of the City

Moisture

pH Range

Volatile Matter

Per cent

Per cent

Per cent as

2 O 5

Per cent as 2 O

C/N Ratio

Hcv Kcal/kg

C

N

P

P

K

K

Indore

30.87

6.37–9.73

38.02

21.99

0.82

0.61

0.71

29.30

1436.75

Bhopal

42.66

6.99–9.03

35.78

23.53

0.94

0.66

0.51