Notes

Abstract
Low waste collection efficiency and financial constraints along with
poor planning and lack of study on changing complexities of municipal
waste lead to worsening of municipal solid waste related problem,
which results in masking the goal of sustainable management of
municipal solid waste (MSW). An integrated planning and capacity
building is required backed by financial support to control the
situation. Life cycle assessment, categorisation, recycling and
reduction in all types of wastes and proper landfilling are required.

Intro
Disposal of solid waste is a growing environmental problem. Municipal solid waste (MSW)
includes degradable (paper, textiles, food waste, straw and yard waste), partially
degradable (wood, disposable napkins and sludge, sanitary residues) and non-
degradable materials (leather, plastics, rubbers, metals, glass, ash from fuel burning like
coal, briquettes or woods, dust and electronic waste).
MSW management is a complex issue due to changing lifestyle of people, rapid
urbanization, and under-estimated contributors and stakeholders. Municipal bodies in
low-income group of cities dispose MSW in low lying areas in the outskirt of the city and
fill these areas one after the other haphazardly due to limited knowledge and awareness
regarding contamination, waste reduction techniques and other aspects of MSW
management.
We have attempted in this article to examine traditional practices of MSW management,
constraints towards achieving sustainable MSW management in low-income group of
cities and their remedial measures.

Municipal solid waste management

MSW management encompasses planning, engineering, organization, administration,
financial and legal aspects of activities associated with generation, growth, storage,
collection, transport, processing and disposal in an environmentally compatible manner
adopting principles of economy, aesthetics, energy and conservation. Although
population growth and waste generation are global challenges, the condition of low-
income cities is of particular concern. Cities having less than $2000, $2000- $15000 and
higher than $15000 per capita income are categorized as low-income, middle income and
high-income cities. Although MSW generation rate is high in cities of the developed world,
they are well equipped and have well-surveyed mass and material flow data from cradle
to crest (Table 1), which are unavailable for low-income cities of the developing
countries.
In low-income group of cities, the existing practices of MSW management and their
planning are based on projection of population and per capita waste generation based
on sample survey. Comprehensive survey in winter, summer and rainy seasons for each
generation source is unavailable. The seasonal variation in MSW generation is due to the
fact that more biomass is burnt in winter, more scattering of MSW takes place in summer
and more water soluble organic matters find way in gutters during rainy season. MSW
generation also rises during festive seasons that require temporary control measures.
Stakeholders of MSW generation and management need to be considered on case-to-
case basis as MSW management issues are specific and localized. The first group of
stakeholders is MSW generators like households, institutional areas, different groups of
businesses; floating populations; health care services; etc. Second group of stake-
holders are informal rag pickers and their vendors as well as the people who collect food
wastes for their animals from households or the animals roaming around the city roads
for waste food materials. Third group of stakeholders are organized bodies including
municipal authorities, formal sorting activities, processors of degradable and non-
degradable materials and the disposal management bodies.

INDIAN PROBLEMS
India produces about 36.5 million tonnes of municipal waste every year. Municipal bodies
spend approximately Rs. 500 to Rs. 1500 (US $ 12- 36) per ton for solid waste
management. About 60 - 70 % of this amount is spent on collection, 20 - 30 % on
transportation and less than 5 % on final disposal.
Larger funds are diverted to larger cities perhaps due to quantum of waste clubbed with
prosperity. Within a city, the most sufferers are low income group people as municipal
authorities allocate their limited resources to the richer areas of higher tax yields.
Generally, wealthy residents use part of their income to avoid direct exposure to the
environmental problems close to their home and working place. Thus environmental
problems at the household or neighbourhood level may recede but citywide
environmental degradation either remains the same or increases. Streets are usually
dirty especially near commercial centres, because the shops open in day time after street
sweeping and put their sweepings on streets especially along the road.

Criteria indicators
Criteria Indicators are the elements, which identify and analyze even those elements
which do not have individual direct influence on MSW. Criteria indicators of MSW
management need to be identified and addressed in each city in areas such as public
health, environmental scenario, cost to the society, social aspects relating to poor
residents, etc. (Table 2). These elements help to assess and identify gray areas of
present MSW management practices and formulate future measures to combat
challenges and to achieve sustainable solid waste management.
Elements of MSW management system
Traditional system evolved to manage rural and dispersed populations have been applied
to urban MSW management in low-income countries and. This system is insufficient to
tackle densely populated areas and requires better infrastructure and skill and
incorporation of all major steps of management. Primary collection of MSW and its
transfer to community bin or self disposal, care of transfer station, secondary collection
and transport to the waste disposal site; waste reduction and disposal in designated
dumping grounds is a generalized approach. Quantum and complexity of MSW
management in urban area in post economic boom period, after the year 1990, are
changed however, municipalities have not been strengthened correspondingly. A dearth
of well-defined study exists leading to primary data inadequacy. MSW records of different
sources also have data mismatch and larger uncertainties, emphasizing the need of
comprehensive survey with precision. Therefore, improvement is required in
demarcating elements of MSW system and their influence potential.

MSW generation and storage.

A large number of developing countries and their cities depend on nationally projected
data for formulating MSW management strategy. For example, the future management
strategy in Patna is based on projected data from sample survey. The quantity of waste
is projected based mainly on number of trips of vehicles used to transport waste or their
fuel consumption. Quantitative and qualitative data seem misleading and add large
uncertainties at country level and under-estimation of impacts in and around the cities.
Sometimes even in a single year different sources reported broadly same composition
having different quantum. This is due to uneven distribution of survey area, statistical
limitations and studies based on previous reported data due to poor records with local
bodies.
It is estimated that solid waste generated in small, medium and large cities and towns in
India is about 0.1 kg, 0.3 - 0.4 kg and 0.5 kg capita-1 day-1, respectively. The per capita
generation even reaches to 1.0 kg capita-1 day-1 in high income households in metros of
developing countries especially India (World Bank 1999).
According to a World Bank report, urban Asia produced about 760,000 tonnes or 2.7
million m3 MSW per day in the year 1998-1999, and in 2025 this will increase to 1.8 million
tonnes or 5.2 million m3 per day (World Bank 1999). These estimates are somewhat
conservative and the real values may be more than double of this amount. Pressure on
landfills is going to be very high in future and recycling and reuse is now the need of MSW
management strategy.

Collection efficiency of wastes is a tool for knowing the MSW management

status. Generally collection points are open and unattended for a day or more and are
clubbed with poor collection efficiency which is even less than 50 % in low income cities.
Besides vectors, stray animals pass contamination to human chain via milk and meat.
Spray of disinfectants and daily collection in covered tippers and dumpers are required.
Source sorting of recyclables and two covered compartments are needed at collection
points for recyclable and compostable waste in case of failure of prompt waste removal.
Bio-degradable fraction is high in MSW of low-income areas due to the lifestyle of
inhabitants. High biodegradable fraction in tropical climatic condition warrants frequent
collection and removal of refuse from the collection point as most of the low income cities
fall within this climatic regime of Asia and Africa.

Reuse and recycling at the source

Sorting and recycling at generation source initiated at various places are encouraging
activity (Elango et al. 2009; Ziadat & Henry 2005). However, this is mainly done for
valuable materials. Most recycling in low-income countries is by informal sectors for
livelihood and import of material for recycling. However, in high-income countries,
recycling technology is intensive and organized for long term market interest (Lavee
2007). Informal rag picking is prominent and is not only limited to rag pickers but also at
source by lowest grade municipal workers for extra income (Zia & Devdas 2008;
Vidanaarachchi et al. 2006). Sorting at collection points should be discouraged to avoid
litter and contamination spread. Moreover waste picking is born out of desperation and
has low social acceptance and hence cannot be a sustainable solution.
Two bin systems can support the formal way of sorting of materials and
commercialization rather than fugitive rag picking where wastes are even burnt to get
easy detection of metals, polluting thus the environment. Rag pickers should be
organized and either diverted to dumping ground or to transfer station till alternate
income option is worked out. Flow of recyclable materials to market should be regulated
with fixed pricing to encourage adequate sorting as opportunity in recycling is high.
For example, in India, the plastic demand growth is about 22 % per annum having present
consumption rate of about 2 kg capita-1 yr-1 against Asian average of about 10 kg. India
recycles about 29 % of its waste paper against global average of 36 %. The recovery rate
is about 14 % against global average of 37 %. Waste recycling rate is 10 - 15 % of apparent
consumption in low-income countries against 30 to 75 % in OECD countries. Composting
is a feasible option when degradable and non-degradable wastes are handled
separately. High biogedradable fraction in low and medium income group countries and
cities specifically from households, temples, vegetable market, etc. make composting
viable. In low income countries, composting is rarely done whereas in developed
countries it is a popular tool at backyard and large facilities. The biodegradable materials
are source of methane and hence harnessing of energy at landfill is also possible.
Electronic waste is increasing that requires proper dismantling, resource recovery and
sanitary landfilling due to hazardous constituents.

Disposal/ dumping
MSW disposal sites are generally selected on the basis of their closeness to the collection
areas. In India, Dozers are generally used for MSW leveling and not compaction
excepting megacities similar to other low-income countries. Majority of MSW disposal
sites in developing countries especially in Asia and Africa are open dumping ground
where insufficient or no cover soil is provided.
In India, 70 - 90 % of landfilling is open dumping and several of Class II and Class III cities
have only option of illegal dumping in the absence of facility. Such dumping grounds have
poor or no foundation, liners, leveling, cover soil, leachate management, leak detection,
gas collection and treatment facility and designated lifetime of dumping ground.
These types of dumping ground are not sustainable landfills. In high income society of
low income group of cities the lifestyle and resource use is comparable to the developed
countries, which indicates that quantity and complexity of MSW will continue to increase
in future. Waste disposal methods, incineration or landfilling have advantages and
disadvantages from waste management perspective, but the choice of management
methods have important implication on public, environment and climate.

Sustainable MSW management (IMP)

Sustainable MSW management requires rich understanding of waste streams, material
balance and flow along with the proper knowledge and willingness of the stakeholders.
Some of the concepts that need incorporation are discussed below: Life cycle
assessment Life cycle assessment (LCA) is an objective process to evaluate the
environmental burdens associated with a product, process or activity, by identifying and
quantifying energy and materials used and waste released to the environment, and to
evaluate and implement opportunities to effect environmental improvements. LCA
covers full "cradle to grave" impacts of a product or service.
It consists of four stages these are:
(1) Goal definition and scoping,
(2) Inventory of the materials and energy used during all stages in the life of a product or
process and inventory of environmental overburden throughout the product life cycle,
(3) Impact assessment to examine potential and actual ill-effects related to the use of
resources and environmental releases, and
(4) Assessment of the change that is needed to bring about environmental improvements
in the product or processes.
LCA methodology could be applied to assist decision makers in waste management. This
requires waste management activities to be defined as generic unit operations
independent of the specific characteristics of the waste processed which can be used to
find material flow and material balance of the specific system to identify the burdens
independent of the waste (Barton et al. 1996). LCA can be helpful in identifying options
for waste reduction and resource recovery in all types of waste.

Characterization of waste stream

Characterization of waste stream can help to find out the suitable strategy for waste
recycling, reduction, elemental flow, waste to energy plan, composting, volume
reduction, required void space, etc. Chemical and physical properties at generation
source, transfer stations and disposal sites can significantly change due to poor
management practices (IPCC 2006).
Material balance may identify where material gets detached from the main stream. This
is relatively smaller option than life cycle assessment but can identify the gap areas in
various steps.

Capacity building
Capacity building is enabling the stakeholders with awareness, skill, education and
research to tackle any crisis in the target area (World Bank 1999). Institutional
framework involving municipal authorities, administration, corporate bodies,
nongovernment organizations (NGO) and educational institutes, is necessary.
Government and administration should pay attention to environmentally sustainable
landfilling, skilled nodal agency and supportive functionaries (World Bank 2000),
awareness, polluters pay principle, practice of waste minimization, prevention of
malfunctioning and investigating the gap areas. Corporate bodies may contribute in
recycling, waste to energy plan and advancement of existing MSW management. Private
party participation can ensure better services, efficient operation and maintenance for
better management of prevailing condition but need involvement in waste stream
management beyond collection and disposal contracts.
NGOs and educational institutes should be involved in awareness, knowledge sharing,
options for waste management and prevention of pollution along with quality
improvement and review of the functioning. Techno-economic feasible program is
needed to monitor the impacts of MSW disposal and to provide local decision-makers
with the options to implement environmentally sustainable waste management.

Bridging the gap between problem areas

There is large gap between existing conditions and administrative perception. Existing
conditions are generally depicted based on older data, however, complexity of problem
unfolds by increasing urbanization, changing lifestyle of people, changing waste
composition, etc. . In many cases, MSW problems are recognized but gap between
demand and supply of funds, manpower and proper methods become a limitation. It is
believed that income has direct relation with waste generation but in many low funded
cities income is also related to MSW collection rate. The real cost of waste disposal
should be implemented in complete landfill budget to sustain the better management
practices. Key success factors should be identified and incorporated in management
strategy for bridging the gap.

Conclusions
There are wide variations in magnitude of MSW management problems between cities
with similar income levels. A well-managed city with medium or low income may be
significantly different from a similar city with poor urban MSW management. Waste
stream analysis, material balance and lifecycle assessment may be helpful in sustainable
landfill management. Sustainable landfill management may not be possible in absence of
complete understanding and required capacity enhancement along with financial
support. Efforts should also be made to break the linkage of prosperity to waste
generation.