SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Instructor: SUDHA GOEL

Course: ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
[EV20001]

1
Contents
• Regulations
• Importance
• SW generation and MSW generation
• Municipal solid waste management -
activities
• Sources of MSW
• Generation rates, composition and factors
affecting them
• Integrated solid waste management
2
Environmental Regulations
Year of Amend
Regulations notice ment
Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1974 1988
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act 1981 1987
Environment Protection Act 1986 1991
Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 1989
Biomedical Waste Handling Rules 1998
Flyash Rules 1999
Recycled Plastics Usage Rules 1999 2003
Municipal Solid Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2000
Batteries (Management and Handling) Rules 2001
Draft E-waste (Management and Handling) Rules 2010

http://www.moef.nic.in/ 3
Importance of SWM: Hazards of open dumping

Air pollution:

Released into air due to scattering by wind, volatilization

Potential for explosions due to methane buildup

Water pollution: surface water (SW) and ground water (GW)

Clogging of natural and engineered drainage systems

Short-
Short-term and long-
long-term contamination of non-
non-renewable
resources

Soil pollution:

Sequestering of contaminants in soil leads to soil toxicity and
decreased soil productivity

Health hazard:

Release of pathogens in any environmental media

Attracts growth of flies, rodents, and other pest species
 Contributed to spread of plague in Surat

Attracts stray animals and contributes to bad traffic conditions
and higher accident potential

Aesthetic nuisance, loss of civic health and pride, low property4
values
 Generation of Solid waste

5
TTV
 Generation of solid waste in India (2002; based on
Pappu et al 2007)

industrial w aste,
128.3, 28% CCRs, 112, 25%

hazardous w aste,
4.5, 1%

groundnut shell,
11, 2%
MSW, 48, 11%
rice w heat straw ,
rice husk, 20, 4%
12, 3% baggase, 90, 20%
construction
w aste, 14.5, 3% jute fibre, 14.5, 3%

6
 Solid waste generation
• Global generation of solid waste in 2002 -12 billion tons/y
– 1.6 billion tons/y is MSW
– Asia generates 277.4 million tons/y of MSW
• Total waste production in India – 454.8 million tons/y (Pappu et al
2007)
– Hazardous waste generation – 7.2 million tons/y (2001
estimate)
• Major waste producing sectors in India
– Agricultural and allied waste – 35.6% (162 million tons/y)
– Industrial waste – 28% (128.3 million tons/y)
– Thermal power plants – 25% (112 million tons/y)
• MSW is a minor fraction of the total waste produced
– 11% or 48 million tons/y
– Compare: 1.5% of the total solid waste in the US is MSW

7
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

Separation (source or later)

Generation • Sorting Recycling
• Storage

Collection

Transfer and Transformation or Recycling

transport processing of waste

Disposal

Activities in red are the purview of a city municipality 8

Industrial

World Bank – IBRD - 1999

 SW Generation rates
Not enough data for India!
Compare developed (US) vs developing (India ) countries

10

USEPA, 2005
 USEPA, 2005

MSW composition in cities with >5 million

population

Paper, Rubber
Glass
Leather & 0%
1%
Synthetics
6%
Other Metal
7% 1%

Total
Compostabl
e matter
31%
NEERI, 1996
Inert
11
Material
54%
 Textiles
3%
Polythene bags Plastic
8% 1% Glass
0% Metals
Paper 0%
8%

Mixed residue
80%

MSW composition - Kharagpur 2008-2009

Naresh K. Katakam, and Goel S [2009] Characterization of Municipal Solid

Waste (MSW) and a proposed management plan for Kharagpur, West 12

Bengal, India. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53(3):166-174.

 Factors affecting MSW generation rates and
composition
• Extent of resource consumption (degree of development
or economic conditions)
• Extent of materials recovery and conservation measures
(the 4 Rs)
– Education and public awareness
– Economic incentives
– Legislation
• Location
– Population size (total SW gen rate not per capita)
– Geographic conditions and infrastructure development
– Socio-political conditions
• Collection frequency
• Seasonal variations
– Winter vs. summer (North) or monsoon vs. other (Kgp)
– Transient populations at certain locations:
• Tourist or pilgrimage locations: peak vs. low season
• Educational institutions (vacations vs. rest of the year) 13
 Waste generation rates and population in India and US
Population versus waste generation Per capita waste generation rates for different Indian cities

6,000 0.7

Per capita waste generation rate, kg/cap-

y = 439.46x + 49.184 0.6
5,000
total w aste generated (tons/d)

2
R = 0.9498
0.5
4,000

0.4
3,000

d
0.3
2,000
y = 0.002x + 0.4443
0.2 2
R = 0.0032
1,000
0.1

0
0
0.000 2.000 4.000 6.000 8.000 10.000 12.000 14.000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
population, millions
Population, m illions

Data for 23 metros,

ERM India, 1995

14

VWR 2002
GNP/cap versus per capita urban SW generation rates for
different countries

GN P ver sus ur b an M SW g ener at io n

1 .8

1 .6
y = 0 .1 7 5 9 x 0 . 2 0 4 2
1 .4
R 2 = 0 .7 5 6 2
1 .2

1
0.8

0.6
0.4

0.2

0
1 00 1 000 1 0000 1 00000

GN P pe r c a pi t a

15

Based on IBRD-WB, 1999

 Population growth
 World population = 6.86 billion (US Census Bureau)
 India’s population = 1.186 billion (Wikipedia)
 West Bengal’s population = 90 million
 Kharagpur’s population = 2.07 lakhs
 India’s current annual growth rate = 1.34% (World
Bank, 2008)

If data from 1921 to 2001 are used

Average annual total population growth rate = 1.8%

Average annual urban population growth rate = 3.0%

Problem: Use the exponential equation to predict population for a

future time; based on a constant or exponentially increasing per
capita waste generation rate – determine MSW generation in the
future.

16

All figures for 15 Aug 2010

 Population growth in India
1.000E+10
Total Population
y = 2E-07e0.018x
Urban population
R² = 0.985
Expon. (Total Population)
log Population, persons

1.000E+09 Expon. (Urban population)

1.000E+08
1910

1920

1930

1940

1950

1960

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010
y = 2E-18e0.03x
R² = 0.995 17
1.000E+07
Time, years
 Resource consumption

18

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/India/Full.html
 Generation rates
• Total MSW generation rates are dependent on
– Population size
• C&D and industrial waste contribution increases as
city size increases
– Recycling programs/activities – degree of waste
diversion
– Collection frequency: higher frequency leads to
reduced waste diversion
– Seasonal variations
• Per capita MSW generation rates are dependent on
– Income levels
– Population density: city-wise and dwelling-wise
19
Seasonal or annual variation in waste collection
rates

20
SW generation rates and composition
• For Asia, per capita SW generation rates range from 0.45
kg/cap-
kg/cap-d (Myanmar) to 5.0 kg/cap-
kg/cap-d (Hong Kong)

• As population increases, total SW (tons/d) increases

• Income levels
– As per capita GNP increases so does per capita SW
generation rate
– Waste composition also changes significantly;
– As income levels increase,
• Paper and paper products form a larger fraction of the
total MSW
• Food fraction (highly biodegradable) and inert
(soil, ash, dust – non-biodegradable) decreases

21
 For Indian cities,….
• Per capita SW generation rate varies from 0.27 to 0.66 kg/cap-d
– State-wise: 0.16 (Meghalaya) to 0.48 kg/cap-d in Delhi (Sharholy
et al, 2008)
– City-wise: 0.27 (Nagpur) to 0.66 (Madras) kg/cap-d
• Density of waste varies from 280 to 660 kg/m3
• Moisture content of waste varies from 18 to 50%
– High moisture content makes the waste generally unsuitable for
incineration
– Good for composting if organic content is high
• Organic matter constitutes 16 to 41%
• Calorific value on a dry wt basis ranges from 600 to 1500 kcal/kg
• C/N ratio ranges from 21 to 30 (Sharholy et al, 2008)

22

Desai, 2000
 23
IBRD-WB, 1999
 Collection of waste
Generation Collection Treatment Disposal

Solid Waste Management (SWM) is a major activity for any town

or city municipality anywhere in the world

In India, a significant part of a city’s budget goes towards
SWM - 5 to 25% [Kumar 2005]
 Kolkata spends 13.75% of its annual budget on SWM;
other cities range from Varanasi (27.8%) to Asansol
(44.7%) [Hazra, 2008]

0.78 to 1.3% of the per capita GNP is spent on SWM in India

Other countries spend less – 0.16% to 0.8% of the per capita
GNP (IBRD, 1999)

A municipality’s responsibilities begin with collection

50 to 70% of SWM budget spent on collection

Labor and equipment are used intensively

Bulk of SWM problems for most cities are due to inefficiencies
in collection
24
Phases in collection

25
VWR 2002
Transfer station

26
GMM 1998
Integrated Solid Waste Management

Integrated
Solid Waste
Management

27
Waste Management Hierarchy

28
The 4 Rs - Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Recover
• Reduce
– Reduce amount of material required to deliver one unit product
without sacrificing utility or quality
• Examples: refills vs. new containers (food packaging); spray
painting vs. brush or roller painting of surfaces; rechargeable
batteries vs. disposable batteries; paper cartons vs. plastic tubes
(for toiletries)
– Increasing lifetime of product
• Plastic vs. cheap wood furniture; synthetic fabrics vs. natural
fabrics
– Eliminate or reduce need for product
• Electronic vs. print media; gas pipelines vs. cylinders
Use of disposables is often necessary for quality and convenience, but
results in enormous increase in resource consumption and waste
generation
• Reuse
– Use of plastic, metal, glass containers for storage in homes
– Use of paper in India for serving food (not healthy, but its reuse!
Traditional leaf dishes are better and healthy disposables)
29

VWR 2002
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and Recover
• Recycle
– Components are separated and reprocessed into new
products
– Plastics, paper, steel and aluminum cans, glass bottles, yard
waste (composting)
• Recover
– Where refuse is unsegregated and desired materials are
separated at a central facility

30
 Source Reduction – Green design
• Extended product life
– As development increases, durability or lifetime of product decreases
– Consumer goods are the best examples: computers, clothing, electrical
and electronic appliances, motor vehicles, ………
– Few disincentives for extending product life
• Resource and energy consumption is reduced
• Overall env’ impacts are reduced
• Short-term company profits may be reduced as volumes of sales
drop……and that’s where the problem is!
– Electrical and electronic goods are best examples of this
– Disposable pens, batteries, cartridges …..where refills can be
made and marketed but company profit margins are at stake!
• Material life extension
– Recyclable materials usage to be encouraged
– At the end of product life, materials can be extracted and recycled
– Best examples: paper and plastics; reuse of these materials in product
design

31
 Source Reduction – Green design
• Material selection
– Substitution of a material based not always on cost criteria but
environmental impacts
– Examples:
• use of alloys and plastics instead of metals
• lead in solder has been eliminated
• plastic pipes instead of CI, biodegradable plastics and
packaging material
• Communication: fiber-optic cables instead of copper cables –
wireless is next level of improvement
• Reduce/ replace use of toxic materials like Hg
(thermometers, tubelights), lead (solder, batteries) that are
likely to enter waste streams

32
 Source Reduction

Reduce material usage

Improved car batteries contain less lead

Household batteries contain less Hg

Table 9.7 shows reduction in glass, plastic usage

Process management

Improved efficiency, heat recovery, make a process cost-effective and
environmentally less expensive

Efficient distribution

Transportation and packaging options can be improved
 Pipelines better than shipping by road, rail or water
 Reduced packaging requirements

Policy options

Manufacturer’s buy back policies are beneficial in terms of recycling or
remanufacturing of consumer items
 Printer cartridges, mobile phones, electronic appliances, car
batteries, ……..

Labeling

Consumers will often opt for more expensive but more environmentally
friendly options

Labeling has to be standardized and consistent
33
Waste diversion

• Use of food waste grinders

– Food waste is ground up and
discharged to sewers
– Common in developed countries like
US, Canada and UK
• SW home compactors
– No longer used in developed countries

34
 Waste disposal options in different countries
• population density
• land area available

35

GM (1998)
 Waste destinations (disposal options), 2003 (US)

36
USEPA 2005
Waste disposal – landfills (US)

37
Waste – to – energy (WTE) conversion

WASTE PROCESSING
FOR ENERGY

CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL
PROCESSING PROCESSING

AEROBIC
COMBUSTION COMPOSTING

ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
GASIFICATION [BIOFUELS]

PYROLYSIS 38
 BIOFUELS

Sources of biofuels are crops

like
• Sugarcane [Brazil]
• Cassava, jatropha [India]
• Corn [US]

Waste materials can also be

used
• Wastewater [industrial or
agricultural]
• Solid waste [agricultural] for
WTE 39

http://keetsa.com/blog/eco-friendly/biofuels-answer-fuel-issues-what-about-food/
Other issues that need to be
addressed
• Electronic waste, white goods
• Ecological footprint or carbon footprint
• Household hazardous waste
– Banning of certain products from MSW like
thermometers, paint cans, pesticides, .…….
• Plastics and their biodegradability
• Recycling industry and public awareness

40
References
• Slides (compiled from different sources)
• Vesilind PA, Worrell W, and Reinhart D
(2002). Solid Waste Engineering.
Thomson Learning Inc., Singapore.
• Masters GM [1998] Chapter
9, Introduction to Environmental
Engineering and Science, Prentice
Hall, US.
41
42