Accepted Manuscript

Qualitative determination of energy potential and methane generation from

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in Dhanbad (India)

Drake Mboowa, Shireen Quereshi, Chiranjit Bhattacharjee, Kukeera Tonny,

Suman Dutta

PII: S0360-5442(17)30183-4

DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.009

Reference: EGY 10302

To appear in: Energy

Received Date: 19 August 2016

Revised Date: 06 January 2017

Accepted Date: 02 February 2017

Please cite this article as: Drake Mboowa, Shireen Quereshi, Chiranjit Bhattacharjee, Kukeera
Tonny, Suman Dutta, Qualitative determination of energy potential and methane generation from
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in Dhanbad (India), Energy (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.energy.
2017.02.009

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form.
Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 characterization of municipal solid waste (MSW) of Dhanbad city is done

 methane gas generation from landfill sites at Dhanbad city is estimated

 energy recovery potential from MSW is studied

 ANOVA study is done for composition of municipal solid waste at Dhanbad city
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1 Qualitative determination of energy potential and methane generation from Municipal Solid

2 Waste (MSW) in Dhanbad (India)

3 Drake Mboowaa, Shireen Quereshib, Chiranjit Bhattacharjeeb, Kukeera Tonnya, Suman Duttab*

4 a Makerere University, Department of Agricultural and Bio-Systems Engineering, P. O. Box 7062,

5 Kampala, Uganda.

6 b Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad, India

8 Abstract

9 Methane generation from waste landfills is one of the biggest contributors to global warming. The

10 purpose of this study was twofold: (i) to investigate methane concentration from Municipal Solid

11 Waste (MSW) at three landfills in Dhanbad city, India and (ii) to evaluate the amount of energy

12 that could be recovered based on the MSW characteristics if it were to be incinerated. The waste

13 samples were collected and analysed for composition, energy content, and methane concentration.

14 Results from MSW characterisation revealed that the main component of Dhanbad MSW is

15 organic waste, which made up to 75% of the waste by weight. Methane concentration and

16 moisture content from Railway station (site 1) and Memco-more (site 2 and site 3) measured as

17 140.53, 18.18 and 20.28 ppm methane/g waste and 25.49, 3.40 and 2.96% dry weight respectively.

18 The calorific value for the waste samples ranged between 10.7 to 13.0 MJ/kg. These findings

19 confirm that the methane generated at the sites can be used for energy recovery. Additionally, the

20 energy content of the MSW suggests that it is a suitable feedstock that can be utilized for electricity

21 generation through combustion.

22

23 Key words: Dhanbad city; Municipal solid waste; Waste landfills; Methane generation; Energy

24 content

25 *Corresponding author e-mail: ss.dutta@hotmail.com (Suman Dutta)

1
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

26 1. Introduction

27 Global warming has been and is still a global concern whose reduction has been a subject of debate

28 for the past decades. Globally, municipal solid waste (MSW), is one of the biggest contributors to

29 global warming, with recent estimates at 16 % greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [1]. Among other

30 ways, reduction of GHG emissions and hence global warming is through, quantification of methane

31 emission from landfills. Various studies show that methane can be used as green energy source.

32 Hydrogen is produced via steam reforming of methane (SRM) and high temperature water gas shift

33 reaction [2]. Abánades et al. [3] mentioned three state-of-the-art methane pyrolysis processes such

34 as direct thermal cracking, catalysed methane cracking, combined thermal and electrochemistry

35 methods. In this study, accurate assessment of MSW composition, estimation of methane emissions

36 by laboratory scale anaerobic digestion of organic waste as well as energy content of MSW were

37 investigated in Dhanbad city, India.

38

39 Dhanbad city, located in the eastern part of India has a population of 2.68 million people [4], and

40 this population is estimated at 3.9% growth rate per annum. Such a growth rate has resulted in an

41 increase in the amount of waste generated. Municipal solid waste (MSW) generation, collection,

42 treatment, and disposal activities pose an environmental problem to the city. Currently, 440 tons of

43 MSW are generated daily in the Municipal Corporation jurisdiction and the responsible agencies

44 collect about 165 tons [5]. This represents approximately 37% of the total waste generated. The

45 remaining uncollected waste is normally disposed of in unauthorized sites, leading to health and

46 environmental problems. This calls for city authorities to develop an integrated approach for solid

47 waste management through frequent waste collection, recycling and combustion in order to recover

48 energy from this waste. Power generation from MSW is possible using an incineration plant [6].

49 Regrettably, for such approaches to work, basic data on the characteristics of the waste produced is

50 central.

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

51 The landfills in Dhanbad are mainly non-engineered low-lying open dumps that have neither

52 bottom liners nor leachate collection and treatment systems. Compaction and leveling of waste and

53 final covering by earth are not done, and these sites lack a landfill gas monitoring and collection

54 equipment [7,8]. Such a waste management system is a threat as it results in higher methane

55 emissions if the gas is not flared or recovered [9]. It also gives rise to serious environmental

56 degradation accruing from air pollution, surface, and underground water pollution [10].

57

58 Since methane gas liberated from landfills account for the anthropogenic sources in the world,

59 therefore, estimation of methane gas generation is vital to provide a basis for evaluation and

60 formulation of energy recovery counter measures. This way, reduction in the atmospheric

61 concentration of methane can be reduced. International procedures based on models such as First

62 order model [11], Mass balance model [12], LandGEM [13], EPER model France (ADEME) etc.

63 have already been put into place by the United Nations to ensure qualitative estimation of methane

64 emission from landfills. These models require harmonization since they provide results with huge

65 differences, hence doubting their accuracy [14]. The amount (mass) and rates of methane

66 generation depend on many factors that are difficult to quantify and these vary from site to site [9].

67 Onsite measurement tools that quantify methane gas generation are expensive and scarce in

68 developing countries. Most studies use models based on the available data and provide erroneous

69 results. Hence, the objectives of this study is to qualitatively determine the methane gas generation

70 from selected waste landfills in Dhanbad City using a gas chromatography equipped with a Flame

71 Ionization Detector (GC-FID) method and to evaluate the amount of energy that could be

72 recovered from MSW based on the local characteristics if it were to be combusted..

73

74 2. Materials and methodology

75 2.1 Study area

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

76 Dhanbad is the largest city in Jharkhand state and covers a total area of 2041.62 km2. It is bounded

77 by latitude 86°07´ and 86°50´ E and longitude 24°37´ and 24°02´N (Fig. 1). The area experiences

78 five climate seasons namely spring, summer, monsoon, autumn, and winter season. The

79 temperatures normally range from 2°C to 40°C but can stretch to 47°C in summer and −4°C in

80 winter. The city lacks a defined landfill site and hence waste is dumped in non-engineered low-

81 lying landfills. There are no scavenger activities at these sites and they lack a leachate treatment

82 plant.

83

84 This study was conducted on three main landfill sites, with two sites located in Memco-more, a

85 suburb of Dhanbad city, and another site at Dhanbad railway station (Fig. 2). The site at the railway

86 station mainly comprised of organic waste since it was next to a very busy market, while sites in

87 Memco-more mainly comprised of inorganic materials since most of the waste disposed of at those

88 sites was mainly from residential areas.

89

90 2.2 Determining the physical composition of the waste

91 This consisted of sample collection, sorting of various materials and laboratory analysis to

92 determine MSW composition. The method of sampling was based on ASTM D5231 [15] and

93 followed a procedure as described by Abdalqader & Hamad [16].

94

95 We collected 10 waste samples from site 1 (Railway station), site 2 and site 3 (Memco-more) were

96 randomly in summer (September to October) and autumn season (November to December) when

97 the average temperature was 35-30°C. For each sample, sorting was done and waste was separated

98 into organics, hard plastics, metals, papers, soft plastics (polythene), glass, textiles & leather and

99 others. It was then weighted and the amount of different waste fractions were recorded. The

100 organic fraction was then thoroughly mixed and spread out by hand on a 5 by 2 m grid, from which

101 10 samples of 1 kg each were randomly picked per grid. These 10 samples were then thoroughly

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

102 mixed and a final 1 kg sample was drawn and taken to the laboratory for anaerobic digestion,

103 proximate and ultimate analysis. This exercise was repeated for all the 30 randomly collected

104 samples from sites 1,2 and 3 on each sampling day and average values were taken.

105

106 For energy analysis, 500 g of unsorted MSW was collected and taken to the laboratory. This

107 procedure was done in triplicates for all the landfills that are described in this study and was

108 repeated once a week for four months. Therefore, for all the sampling day 16 samples were

109 collected for energy analysis per site.

110

111 2.3 Formation of methane in anaerobic condition

112 From each of the three landfills, 10 organic waste samples were prepared to produce gas at

113 anaerobic conditions. About 30 g of organic waste sample from each of the three sites were

114 transferred into 250 ml plastic bottles (digester), 50 ml of distilled water gently added and the

115 bottle tightly capped. The samples were left to stand at room temperature (32°C ± 3°C) and

116 analyzed after 10 days of digestion. Gas samples of 10 µl were collected from the digester using a

117 syringe and immediately injected to Gas chromatography (GC) analyser for composition analysis.

118 This experiment was done in triplicates for each sample and average values noted.

119

120 2.4 Methane estimation by Gas Chromatography (GC) method

121 The gas produced by anaerobic digestion was analyzed for methane gas using Varian CP-3800

122 Gas chromatography (GC) equipped with a Flame Ionization Detector (FID). The column was

123 WCOT fused silica (50 m x 0.25 mm ID). Coating CP-SIL 8CB (5% phenyl; 95% di-methyl

124 polysiloxane), D.F 0.12. The carrier and make up gas was high purity gas nitrogen at 1 ml/min.

125 The column oven was programmed at an initial temperature of 50°C held at 3 minutes, then

126 50°C to 200°C at a rate of 20°C/min. The oven was then held at 200°C for 3 minutes. The

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

127 injector was set at 200°C; split ratio of 1:10. The FID detector was set at 240°C at a range of

128 10. The flow rate was set at 1 ml/min.

129

130 The GC was calibrated with the known concentration of pure methane. The methane gas peaks

131 were formed and the area under their graphs noted. A calibration curve was plotted as the

132 concentration of methane (ppm) vs. area under the curve (mV.s). The actual amounts of methane

133 gas emitted by the organic waste samples were measured using this calibration curve.

134

135 2.5 Proximate analysis and ultimate analysis of organic waste

136 Proximate analysis was done on the organic waste samples to determine the gross component of

137 moisture, volatile matter, fixed carbon, and ash content. The moisture content was determined in

138 accordance with ASTM E1756-08 standard [17]. Organic waste sample of 5 g was placed in an

139 oven at 105°C for 2 hours. The sample was then cooled in a desiccator and reweighed. The

140 difference in weight difference denoted the moisture content expressed as a percentage. The

141 volatile matter was determined following the ASTM standard E-872 [18]. The aforementioned

142 organic sample used for moisture determination was covered in a crucible and heated in a furnace

143 for 2 hours. The crucible was later taken out of the furnace and cooled in a desiccator and

144 reweighed. The weight difference was taken as volatile matter. Ash content was determined by

145 placing the remaining organic sample from volatile matter calculations in the furnace at 575°C for

146 an hour for combustion following a procedure as described by ASTM D1102, 2013 [19]. All

147 carbon was burnt, and the sample was cooled in a desiccator and then reweighed. The weight

148 difference was taken as the ash content. Fixed carbon in fuel was determined by the subtraction 100

149 from the moisture, volatile matter, and ash contents. Proximate analysis was done in triplicates and

150 the average value was taken.

151 FC= 100 - M - VM - ASH

152 Where: FC - Fixed carbon, M - Moisture, VM -Volatile matter and ASH – remaining ash

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

153 Ultimate analysis was done on a using the CHNS analyser (type: Vario micro cube) which employs

154 classic oxidation, decomposition, and reduction technique. Organic sample of 0.5 g was dried at

155 105°C for 3 hours, cooled in the desiccators, and then grounded to powder form by using pestle and

156 mortal and later formed into pellets. The pellets were then put in the CHNS analyser to determine

157 the percentage composition of C, H, N and S. Oxygen (O) was calculated by difference from C, H,

158 N and S as described by Lee and Hauffman [20].

159

160 2.6 Calorific value determination

161 The calorific value of the MSW was determined using GallenKamp autobomb. An amount of 100 g

162 MSW was collected from each landfill site, dried and ground into small particles. 1 g of these

163 particles was weighed, sieved and compressed formed into pellets. The pellets were placed in the

164 sample pan of the bomb calorimeter one at a time and the energy content of the sample was

165 determined following the procedure by Jesup in 1960 [21]. This experiment was done in triplicates

166 for each landfill site and average values were taken.

167

168 3. Results and discussion

169 The results obtained through this study are given in Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4. The collected data was

170 analyzed using R statistical software. Two-way ANOVA and Tukey tests were used at 95%

171 confidence interval to check whether there was any statistical difference in the results obtained

172 from the three landfills.

173

174 3.1 Physical composition of waste

175 The mean percentage of waste composition (by weight) for the Dhanbad city as obtained from

176 three landfills (Table 1) revealed that the most dominant waste fraction is the organic waste

177 (75%). The other fractions weighed as, hard plastics (7.7%), metals (0.3%), papers (0.6%), soft

178 plastics (13%), glass (0.5%), textiles and leather (2.4%) and others (0.5%). These results are far

7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

179 different from those reported for other Indian cities like Kolkata [22], Varanasi city [23] and

180 Aurangabad City [24]. Therefore, studies that assume average values of waste composition for

181 Indian cities may result into erroneous results. This is because waste composition depends on a

182 wide range of factors such as food habits, cultural traditions, lifestyles, climate, and income, etc.

183 [8].

184

185 Two-way ANOVA showed a significant difference (P<0.001) in organics, hard and soft

186 plastics among the different sites whereas no significant difference (P>0.05) between sites 2 &

187 3 was showed. Tukey test revealed that organic fraction of site 1 was significantly greater

188 (P<0.001) than that of site 2 & 3, while site 2 and 3 was significantly greater (P<0.001) in hard

189 and soft plastics as compared to site1. Two-way ANOVA revealed that there was no significant

190 difference (P>0.005) in metals, others, and glass; however, a significant difference (P<0.05)

191 was showed for textiles and leather. Further analysis with the Tukey test revealed that site 2

192 had more leather and textiles followed by site 3 and lastly site 1.

193

194 Railway station, site 1 had more organics (92%) followed by Memco-more, site 3 (69%) and then

195 Memco-more, site 2 (64%). This can be attributed to the food consumption and social activity at

196 the railway station. For example, there are many restaurants where the majority of the people and

197 workers have their meals and refreshments. There is also a big market where agricultural products

198 are sold, and these contribute to the high percentage of organic waste. This is contrary to Memco-

199 more site 2 and 3 which are situated in areas which are sparsely populated and there are little

200 activities that contribute to organic waste. Metals, papers, glass, textiles & leather and others had

201 the small fractions.

202

203 Site 2 and 3 had more plastics, metal, paper, textiles & leather, and others as compared to site 1.

204 The high percentage of plastic can be explained by increasing the number of packaging factories

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

205 in Dhanbad city and the cost of packaging with plastics being cheaper than with paper, textiles of

206 organic materials. The high percentage of recyclable materials at the landfill sites 2 and 3

207 revealed that there is a need to set up recycling facilities at these landfill sites. The recovery

208 process can be considered as one of the suitable methods to handle and reduce the high volume

209 of plastic and other recyclable materials [25]. There is not much difference between the amount

210 of paper waste in site 2 and site 3, but the percentage is higher than that of site 1. This may be

211 attributed to the increase in the number of schools, offices, and commercial areas that are

212 neighboring those sites. The large variation in the amount of textiles & leather with site 2 having

213 a higher percentage followed by site 3 and then site 1, is largely due to the growing population

214 around site 2. As the population increases, more textile & leather materials will be on demand for

215 wearing and other purposes related to human nature.

216

217 3.2 Proximate and ultimate analyses of organic waste

218 Two-way ANOVA indicated a significant difference (P<0.001) in MC, ASH, VM, and FC

219 obtained from the three landfill sites. Tukey test showed that MC from site 1 (Table 2) was

220 significantly greater (P<0.001) than that of site 2 & 3. However, there was no significant

221 difference (P>0.05) in MC, ASH, VM, and FC obtained from site 2&3.

222

223 Moisture content on a dry basis for the three landfill sites was approximately 10% dry weight. The

224 results were low as the study was carried out in summer and early autumn when the temperatures

225 (40 – 45°C) were high. This observation was similar in other studies as reported by some other

226 researchers [26-28]. Moisture content was high at Railway station, site 1 as compared to Memco-

227 more, site 2 and 3. This is attributed to the presence of a higher percentage of agricultural and food

228 waste and presence of a stream of water that passes through it at Railway station, site 1.

229 Municipal solid waste of site 2 and 3 presented high volatile solids of 54.82% dry weight, fixed

230 carbon of 11.69% dry weight and ash content of 30.31% dry weight, as compared to site 1 with

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

231 volatile solids of 45.28% dry weight, fixed carbon of 4.53% dry weight and ash content of 24.71%

232 dry weight. This high volatile matter from the landfill sites showed that the amount of organic

233 matters was high since it ranged from 69 to 92% of the total waste from the three landfill sites. This

234 high volatile solid is an indicator that high heat energy can be produced from such waste. Site 2 and

235 3 had more fixed carbon as compared to site 1 and this implied that fuels from site 2 and 3 require

236 longer retention time in the combustion chamber for complete combustion as compared with fuel

237 from site 1 [29].

238

239 The volatile matter ranged between 56.22 and 45.28 for the three sites wt. % dry basis, while

240 Ash ranged between 24.71 to 31.69 wt. % dry basis and the fixed carbon ranged between 4.53 to

241 11.89 wt. % dry basis. Site 1 had higher moisture content because it is located next to a drainage

242 channel and one of the streams contributing to the flow of that channel passes through it, as

243 opposed to site 2 and 3 which are located on a dry free land. Usually, the low moisture content is

244 expected during summer, and it is the season in which this study was carried out.

245

246 The ash content from the three landfill sites ranged between 24-29 wt.% dry basis. In comparison

247 with the standard ash content (5-15 wt.% dry basis) as reported by US.EPA [30] recommended for

248 incineration, this was quite high. High ash content was attributed to the high amount of inert

249 materials found in the municipal solid waste sample.

250

251 The ultimate analysis results showed no significant difference (P>0.05) in the elemental

252 composition of organic waste in all landfills (Table 3). The average carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen,

253 sulphur and oxygen of the municipal solid waste constituted approximately 31.3, 3.9, 1.2, 0.2 and

254 24.3%, respectively. The hydrogen, sulphur, and nitrogen amounts were low while there was little

255 high oxygen and carbon amounts. The high carbon was attributed to a large amount of organic

256 matter in the organic waste. These results and findings are in agreement and comparison with those

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

257 from other sources as reported by some researcher [31,32] at Phetchaburi province in Thailand and

258 Panjab (India). However, they were also quite different from those reported by Chiang Mai Green

259 Energy Co., Ltd. at Chiang Mai University in 2012 [33] (Table 3).

260

261 3.3 Calorific Value of MSW

262 Based on laboratory analysis result, the calorific value on the dry basis was found to be of highest

263 value approximately 13.0 MJ/kg at site 3 followed by site 2 (12.2 MJ/kg), and lastly, site 1 (10.7

264 MJ/kg). According to GIZ and PCD (2011) [34], solid waste with a calorific value of 11-17 MJ/kg

265 or more is highly recommended for use as refuse-derived fuel (RDF). Therefore, waste from all the

266 landfill sites qualify to be used as fuel. The calorific value was relatively high because of the

267 presence of less amount of inert materials in the municipal solid waste. Such calorific value result

268 also compares with the value of 11MJ/Kg, obtained from UK municipal solid waste [35].

269

270 3.4 Methane gas estimation

271 Methane concentration for the three landfill sites was analyzed by Gas Chromatograph in Parts

272 per million (ppm). The average methane concentration values were observed highest at site 1 as

273 140.53 ppm methane/g waste while site 2 and site 3 measured 18.18 ppm methane/g waste and

274 20.28 ppm methane/g waste respectively. These values are sufficient for utilisation in electricity

275 production through combustion processes that use the Organic Rankine Cycle or through the use of

276 a biogas generator [36]. Two-way ANOVA indicated a significant difference (P<0.001) in

277 methane concentration obtained from the three landfill sites. Further analysis of this difference

278 using the Tukey test revealed that the methane concentration from site 1 was significantly

279 greater (P<0.001) than that of site 2 & 3. However, there was no significant difference (P>0.05)

280 in the methane quantities from site 2&3 (Table 4).

281

11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

282 This was attributed to a high percentage of moisture content and organic materials observed at site

283 1 as compared to site 2 and site 3. Gurijala and Suflita [37] also reported that higher methane

284 emission was quantified at higher moisture contents in landfill areas, while Kazuyuki & Katsuyuki

285 [38] reported that organic matter application had an effect on methane emission from some

286 Japanese paddy fields, with high organic matter application producing more methane gas and vice

287 versa. However, the methane quantities concentration is also affected by ash content. Site 1 with

288 lower fractions of ash content, has the highest values of methane concentration and vice versa for

289 site 2 & 3. This observation agrees with many studies of biochar and charcoal [39,40].

290

291 4. Conclusions

292 The analysis of the physical composition of municipal solid waste generated in Dhanbad city

293 showed that on average it mostly comprises of organic waste. Based on the results, there is a

294 correlation between moisture content, composition of the organic waste and the quantity of

295 methane gas emissions. The more the moisture content and organic waste composition and less the

296 ash content, the higher the methane gas produced, hence Railway station site 1 produced more

297 methane concentration than Memco-more site 2 & 3. Since methane gas is one of the major

298 contributors to global warming, mitigation steps must be undertaken to trap it and be used a source

299 of green energy. The concentration of methane at tall the three sites suggest that the landfills can be

300 utilized for energy production; however, more research needs to be carried out concerning techno-

301 economic evaluation. The low moisture content indicated that the sampled waste was suitable for

302 combustion, other than composting and other biological waste management methods, hence

303 suitable for energy production. The average energy content in municipal solid waste from the three

304 landfills was approximately 11.97 MJ/kg. This compares to about 69.4% of energy from pure

305 biomass and about 31.3% of the energy of bituminous coal. An integrated solid waste management

306 scheme for Dhanbad city is recommended so as to harness energy from solid waste as a

307 supplementary energy to the existing national grid and natural gas industry. This can help to reduce

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

308 the over-dependence on fossil fuel and also the production of clean energy which is healthier to the

309 environment as well as providing jobs to the local who will be engaged in collection, sorting,

310 recycling and composting of the municipal solid waste. Further studies are recommended for the

311 same study during the winter, monsoon, spring and fall seasons to come up with a general

312 conclusion on the viability of such a project. More research and data is required so as to design and

313 construct engineered landfill site for Dhanbad city as a way of managing the waste generated in the

314 city.

315

316 5. Acknowledgement

317 The authors thank Centre for Science and Technology of the Non-Aligned and Other Developing

318 Countries (NAM S&T Centre) for initiating the collaboration and sponsoring the research. They

319 also thank the Department of Chemical Engineering, India Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad

320 for the provision of laboratory services.

321

322 6. References

323 [1] Edenhofer O. et al. Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the

324 Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge

325 University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY; 2014.

326 [2] LeValley TL, Richard AR, Fan M. Development of catalysts for hydrogen production through

327 the integration of steam reforming of methane and high temperature water gas shift. Energy

328 2015; 90:748-58

329 [3] Abánades A, Rubbia C, Salmieri D. Technological challenges for industrial development of

330 hydrogen production based on methane cracking. Energy 2012; 46: 359-63

331 [4] Census 2011, India, http://www.censusindia.gov.in.

332 [5] City Development Plan, Dhanbad, 2007, Final report by Dhanbad Municipal Corporation.

13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

333 [6] Tsai W-T, Kuo K-C. An analysis of power generation from municipal solid waste (MSW)

334 incineration plants in Taiwan. Energy 2010; 35:4824-30

335 [7] Bhide AD, Shekdar AV. Solid waste management in Indian urban centers. International Solid

336 Waste Association Times (ISWA) 1998; 1:26–8.

337 [8] Gupta S, Krishna M, Prasad RK, Gupta S, Kansal A. Solid waste management in India: options

338 and opportunities, Resource, Conservation and Recycling 1998; 24:137–54.

339 [9] Nakibuuka MM, Tashobya D, Banadda N, Ayaa F, Nhapi I, Wali GU, Kimwaga R. New

340 method for qualitative determination of Methane Gas at selected sites in Kampala City,

341 Uganda. Open Environ Eng J 2012; 5:50-5.

342 [10] Sharholy M, Ahmed K, Mahmood G, Trivedi RC. Municipal solid waste management in

343 Indian cities – A review. Waste Management 2008; 28: 459-67.

344 [11] Oonk J. & Boom A. Landfill gas formation, recovery and emissions . TNO Inst. of

345 Environmetal and Energy Technology; 1995, p. 95-203.

346 [12] IPCC. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventions: Reference Manual, National

347 Physical Laboratory, New Delhi, India; 2006, p. 6-15.

348 [13] Landfill Gas Emissions Model (LandGEM) Version 3.02 User’s Guide, EPA-600/R-05/047.

349 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/landgem-v302-guide.pdf>, USA.

350 [14] Scharff H, Jacobs J. Applying guidance for methane emission estimation for landfills. Waste

351 Management 2006; 26:417-29.

352 [15] ASTM D5231-92: Standard Test Method for Determination of the Composition of

353 Unprocessed Municipal Solid Waste, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.

354 [16] Abdalqader A, Hamad J. Municipal solid waste composition determination supporting the

355 integrated solid waste management in Gaza strip. Int J Environ Sci Dev 2012; 3(2): 172-77.

356 [17] ASTM E1756-08: Standard Test Method for Determination of Total Solids in Biomass,

357 ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2015.

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

358 [18] ASTM E872-82: Standard Test Method for Volatile Matter in the Analysis of Particulate

359 Wood Fuels, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2013.

360 [19] ASTM D. 1102-84: Standard test method for ash in wood. American Society for Testing and

361 Materials, West Conshohocken. 2013.

362 [20] Lee CC, Hauffman GL. Solid Waste Calculations: Thermodynamics used in Environmental

363 Engineering. Handbook of Incineration. 2001; 2(2.47).

364 [21] Jessup, R.S.1960. Precise measurement of heat of combustion with a bomb calorimeter.

365 http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc13253/m2/1/high_res_d/NBS%20Monograph

366 %207.pdf. [accessed 04.02.2016]

367 [22] Das S, Bhattacharyya BK. Municipal Solid Waste Characteristics and Management in

368 Kolkata, India. Int J Emer Tech & Adv Eng 2013; 3:147-52.

369 [23] Srivastava R, Krishna V, Sonkar I. Characterization and management of municipal solid

370 waste: a case study of Varanasi city, India. Int Journal of Cur Res & Acad Rev 2014; 2:10-6.

371 [24] Late A, Mule MB. Composition and Characterization Study of Solid Waste from Aurangabad

372 City. Universal Journal of Environmental Research and Technology 2011; 1: 55-60.

373 [25] Kalanatarifard A, Yang, GS. Identification of the Municipal Solid Waste Characteristics and

374 Potential of Plastic Recovery at Bakri Landfill, Muar, Malaysia. J Sus Dev 2012; 5(7): 11-7.

375 [26] Pockman WT, Small, EE. The influence of spatial patterns of soil moisture on the grass and

376 shrub responses to a summer rainstorm in a Chihuahuan Desert ecotone. Ecosystems 2010;

377 13: 511-25.

378 [27] West AG, Hultine KR, Burtch KG., Ehleringer JR. Seasonal variations in moisture use in a

379 pinon-juniper woodland. Oecologia 2007; 153:787-98.

380 [28] Dong-Wook K. Modeling air-drying of douglas-fir and hybrid poplar biomass in Oregon. PhD

381 diss., Oregon State University, 2012.

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

382 [29] Pichtel J. Waste Management Practices: Municipal, Hazardous, and Industrial. (2nd ed.).

383 Florida: CRC Press; 2014.

384 [30] United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.EPA)., 2014. Municipal Solid Waste:

385 Ash Generated from the MSW Combustion Process.

386 http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/wte/basic.htm. [accessed 15.02.2016]

387 [31] Suthapanich W. “Characterization and assessment of municipal solid waste for energy

388 recovery options in Phetchaburi, Thailand.” PhD diss., Asian Institute of Technology, 2014.

389 [32] Sethi S, Kothiyal NC, Nema AK, Kaushik MK. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in

390 Jalandhar City, Panjab, India. J Hazard Toxic Radioact Waste 2009; 1:97-106.

391 [33] Chiang Mai University. Waste Separation and Analysis. Chiang Mai Green Energy Co. Ltd;

392 2012.

393 [34] www.giz.de

394 [35] Nasserzadeh V, Swithenbank J, Scott D, Jones B. Design optimization of a large municipal

395 solid waste incinerator," Waste Management, vol. 11 (1991) pp. 249-61.

396 [36] Lee TH, Huang SR, Chen CH. The experimental study on biogas power generation enhanced

397 by using waste heat to preheat inlet gases. Renewable Energy 2013; 50:342-47.

398 [37] Gurijala KR, Suflita JM. Environmental factors influencing methanogenesis from refuse in

399 landfill samples, samples, Environ Sc & Tech 1993; 27: 1176–81.

400 [38] Kazuyuki Y, Katsuyuki M. Effect of organic matter application on methane emission from

401 some Japanese paddy fields. Soil Sc & Plant Nutr 2012; 36: 599-10.

402 [39] Spokas KA. Review of the stability of biochar in soils. Carbon Manage 2010; 1: 289–303.

403 [40] Lee JW, Kidder M, Evans BR, Paik S, Buchanan III AC, Garten CT, Brown RC.

404 Characterization of biochars produced from cornstovers for soil amendment. Environ Sci

405 Technol 2010; 44(20): 7970–74.

406

407 List of Figures:

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

408 Fig.1: Location of Dhanbad city (Google map)

409 Fig. 2: Location of three sites and our institute (Google map)

410 Fig. 3: Calorific Value of MSW collected from three different sites

411

412 List of Tables:

413 Table 1: Composition of MSW from Dhanbad by percentage weight (Mean ± standard deviation)

414 Table 2: Results of proximate analysis of different waste samples (organic fractions) from three

415 landfill sites

416 Table 3: Results of ultimate analysis of municipal solid waste (Mean ± Standard deviation)

417 Table 4: Methane generation from solid waste collected from three different sites

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 1: Composition of MSW from Dhanbad by percentage weight (Mean ± standard

deviation)

Area Organic Hard Metals Papers Soft Glass Textiles Other

% Plastics % % plastics % & %
% % Leather
%
Railway 92.0 ± 0.9 ± 0.1 ± 0.3 ± 5.1 ± 0.4 ± 0.9 ± 0.3 ±
station, 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.7
site 1
Memco- 64.0 ± 10.6 ± 0.5 ± 0.7 ± 19.1 ± 0.3 ± 4.1 ± 0.6 ±
more, 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.8
site 2
Memco 69.1 ± 11.5 ± 0.3 ± 0.7 ± 14.9 ± 0.7 ± 2.3 ± 0.5 ±
more, 0.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.5 1.1 0.8 0.8
site 3
Average 75 7.7 0.3 0.6 13 0.5 2.4 0.5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2: Results of proximate analysis of different waste samples (organic fractions) from three

landfill sites

Moisture content Ash Volatile matter Fixed carbon

Area (wt % DB) (wt % DB) (wt % DB) (wt % DB)

Railway station, site 1 25.49 24.71 45.28 4.53

Memco more, site 2 3.40 31.69 53.41 11.49

Memco more, site 3 2.96 28.92 56.22 11.89

DB – Dry basis.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 3: Results of ultimate analysis of municipal solid waste (Mean ± Standard deviation)

Area N (%, DB) C (%, DB) H (%, DB) S (%, DB) O (%, DB)

Railway station, site 1 1.4 ± 0.1 27.1 ± 0.4 3.4 ± 0.3 0.3 ± 0.0 17.6 ± 0.0

Memco-more, site 2 1.1 ± 0.1 32.2 ± 0.0 3.8 ± 0.8 0.1 ± 0.0 27.7 ± 0.0

Memco-more, site 3 1.2 ± 0.0 34.6 ± 1.8 4.6 ± 0.1 0.2 ± 0.0 27.5 ± 0.0

Suthapanich W., 2014 [31] 0.92 47.94 6.9 0.16 26.77

Sethi et al., 2009 [32] 1.16 28.2 3.77 0.63 18.4

Chiang Mai University, 2012 0.58 55.35 8.13 0.43 18.19

[33]

DB – Dry basis.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 4: Methane generation from solid waste collected from three different sites

Concetration

Area (ppm methane/g waste)

Railway station (site 1) 140.53

Memco more (site 2) 18.18

Memco more (site 3) 20.28