1.

INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
 Solid waste is any leftover solid product that is not of use for people, that can be in the form of food,
Building material, used cloths and leather etc.
 Solid waste can be reused in most cases.

WASTE GENERATION AND MANAGMENT

Wastes are generated through different means and are treated in different ways as per their
properties and behavior.
Waste generating sources are;
 Residential
 Institutional
 Municipal services
 Industrial
 Co-Agricultural
 Construction and demolition
 Treatment plant sites
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
Municipal Solid Waste includes all the wastes generated in a small controlled area, that can be
Any type of waste in that area.

ISSUES IN MANAGING WASTES

There are some common issues regarding management of wastes that needs to be concentrated
while keeping the streets clean.
 Lack of quality data
 Increasing waste quantities
 Wastes not reported in the national MSW totals
 Need for clear roles and leadership in federal, state, and local government
 Need for even and predictable enforcement regulations and standards,
 Lack of clear definitions for solid waste management terms and functions
 Resolution of intercounty and
WASTE MANAGEMENT
The processes to control and reuse the wasts generated in a municipal, through different means
And techniques. Which are mentioned as below;
 Waste generation
 Waste handling
 separation,
 storage, and
 processing at source
 Collection
 Transfer and
 Transport
 Separation,
 processing and transformation of solid waste
 Disposal and Recycling.
INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT
It is the process of management of wastes through different technological sources, in which
Cooperation of NGOs and other intellectuals are involved to spread awareness and provide
appropriate ideas to manage wastes. This helps in;
 Source reduction
 Recycling and composting
 Combustion (waste-to-energy facilities)
 Using Landfills

TYPICAL COSTS FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT OPTION

 Capital Costs
 Operational & Maintenance ( O&M) Costs
CAPITAL COSTS
 MaxCosts Source-separated Material recovery and source-separated composting_10,000-
20,000$.
 . costs Comingled waste collection 100,000-140,000 $/track
 Mini.
OPERATIONAL & MAINTENANCE (O&M)
Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are important in making an analysis of IWM.
 Max. costs Landfilling of comingled waste 10-120 $/ton.
 Mini. costs Source-separated Material recovery and source-separated Composting 20-40$/ton.
PLANNING FOR MSW
Following techniques must be applied while achieving a productive MSW;
 Environmental Concern
 Social concerns
 Economic Constraints

KEY FACTORS FOR SUCCESS

 CredibStrategy ility for Decision Makers
 Efficient Implementation Mechanisms Including Market Incentives
 Significant Attention on Recycling Markets
 Public Involvement
 Continuous Commitment to High-Quality Operations for All Facilities
 Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Chosen
 2. Federal role in municipal solid waste management

There are some special law have been implemented by central Gov,t of some countries which help
save human lives from hazardous effects of
SW that are controlled by gov,t or any non govt department.
some of them are;
 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
 Clean Air Act (CAA)
 Clean Water Act (CWA)
 Federal Aviation Administration FAA guidelines
 Flow Control implications.
 Solid Waste Legislation:
• Since 1960 solid waste management laws have been improved. Countries are looking for better plan
disposing , reducing and managing solid waste.

Trends in Municipal Waste Generation and Management:

• Case Study of U.S by U.S Environmental Protection Agency

• 217 million tons of SW generated in 1997
• 195 million tons of solid waste generated in 1990
• This increase reflects a steady increase in MSW since 1960
• By terms od per capita:
 In 1990 2.7 lb per person per day of MSW
 In 1997 4.4 lb per person per day
 By 2020 rate was increased to 4.5 lb per person per day
 The table shows waste generation per year ,
disposal of waste and methods of disposal of
different countries
 Landfill is the way most of the MSW is
managed.
 Landfilling rate is declining with time and use
of alternatives such as recycling and
incineration are more preferred
The Waste Reduction Legislation Movement:
 Number of landfills in the country started to decline. Therefore waste reduction legislation
movement was adopted
 Another factor stimulating waste reduction legislation has been the escalation of disposal prices.
 Due to increase in tipping fee in different areas of different countries, the countries decided to adopt
waste reduction legislation movement.

The Effect of Legislation:

 In 1998 30 states reduced their solid waste by 25% or more

 Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, South
Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin all estimated their waste
reduction rates at 30 percent or more.
 As a result of this legislation many solid waste management projects have been developed in U.S
STATE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE LEGISLATION:

 The approach to municipal solid waste management legislation varies significantly from state to
state.
 Some states, such as Minnesota and Illinois, pass MSW-related legislation annually.
 In some cases, several laws are passed each year.
 For instance, in 1991, 94 solid-waste-related bills were introduced in the Illinois legislature.
 At least 15 of those bills became law, including ones that dealt with procurement of recycled
products, household hazardous waste collection, and establishment of a tire recycling fund

STATE PLANNING PROVISIONS:

 MSW management-planning provisions in legislation generally direct that planning should be

conducted on two levels.
 Numerous laws, including those in Alabama, Minnesota, Montana, and Washington, direct the
responsible state agency to develop a state solid waste management plan.
 That law required that a comprehensive and integrated solid waste management plan for the state
to be developed by December 31, 1991.
 The plan had to rank management techniques, placing source reduction and recycling first,
environmentally safe transformation second, and landfilling third.
 The basis for developing the plan was information provided by each county and municipality.
PERMITTING AND REGULATION REQUIREMENTS:
 Laws vary from state to state
 At most fundamental level law directs that a state agency develops a means of permitting and regulating
municipal waste management activities.

WASTE REDUCTION LEGISLATION:

 Changes in solid waste management laws should be termed as revolutionary rather that evolutionary.
 The approaches certain states have taken are not uniform. Some states, like Pennsylvania and New Jersey,
have opted for laws that ultimately require waste generators to participate. Others, like Arizona and
Washington, require only that recycling programs be made available to citizens, while other methods, like
those used in Florida and Iowa, require local governments to reach a certain goal (U.S. EPA, 1999).
 The strategies do not stop with the various ways of developing waste reduction programs.
 Most states have banned outright the disposal of some materials such as yard waste, oil, and white goods,
and are taxing disposal of items such as tires.
 Increasingly states are requiring manufacturers and retailers to take responsibility for disposal of their
products.
Establishing the Waste Reduction Goals:
• Fundamental provisions are made in solid waste legislation for waste reduction goals which establish statewide.
• 42 states put some types of waste reduction goals on book in 1996.
• At start there is a recycling goal establish by the states.
• New Jersey has waste reduction goals of 65% which includes material that is composted.
• In Florida and North Carolina even less then half of the waste reduction goals are met by the yard waste for compositing.
• In South Carolina 25% recycling goals can be met by the yard.
Since this is the first implementation so there focus changed from recycling and yard waste to overall waste reduction.
• In South Caroline the goals are reduced by 30% the amount of solid waste at MSW landfills and incinerations.
• In West Virginia 50% of MSW disposal is reduced.
• As the goals expanded the amount of the waste expected to be divert.
• There is order for the states having lower goals that they have to achieve higher goals from 1991-1996. deadlines for 50-70% goals
usually stretch from the year 2000.
The 11 states met there goals by 20-30% and the other between 40-50%.
Legislating Local Government Responsibilities:
In 1980s and 1990s recycling program is developed. There are two approaches in one case generators are used for recycling and in
some case compostables are further processed.
Mandatory Recycling Laws:
• imposed by 6 states (Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania and West Virginia)
• 4 states have municipal waste generators for recycle certain material.
• The other two require extensive list of recyclables.
• To pass the ordinance the laws compel them to establish recycling programs that meet the certain criteria.
• These programs must have comprehensive public information and education element.
Opportunity to Recycle Laws:
• “opportunity to Recycle” Act was pass in the country Oregon. In this municipalities are provided with recycling program but the law
is not passed by participating with waste generators.
• In first law curbside recycling programs are put according to population and MSW has authority to drop-off program.
• The improvements and updates are required for weekly collection.
• 12 other states have also passed this program
• 6 of these states are charged with responsibilities.
Required Goals:
• 10of the 13 states have this law and it also require local government to reach the goals.
• Every countries goals was revised after 1995 to assure that Oregon would meet its statewide goal of 50% by 2000.
Disposal Ban:
• For waste reduction we have to ban specific type of disposal
• 47 additional states have ban one or more waste material.
• Lawmakers focused on material coming from vehicles like batteries, tires and oil.
• 38 states ban tires
• Some allow landfill operators to use rubber chips for landfill covers.
• The ban which has the greatest effect is the ban on yard waste.
• Another ban that has significant effect on disposal amount is the ban on white goods.
• Another target of ban is dry cell batteries.
• Many states ban many disposals like batteries yard waste office papers glass containers newspapers etc.
Making Producers and Retailers Responsible for Waste:
Some states shifter there burden to manufacturers of products.
Beverage Containers Deposits:
• In 1970 responsible products are manufactured.
• The main focus of law are on soft drinks and beer containers
• The extensive list include glass steel aluminum and plastic containers.
• California’s law is different they distribute pay either 2 or 4 % per container.
• These laws also require retailers.
Take Back Provisions:
• requirement is that retailers are more than wholesalers to take back the product.
• Pennsylvania passes Take-back provisions
Mandating Manufacturer Responsibility:
• In 1991 new law developed that manufacturer should be responsible of product.
• Batteries having mercuric oxide silver oxide nickel cadmium as electrode should be collected properly and
processed.
Advanced Disposals Fees:
• ADF where the cost of the disposal is considered in the variety of products and packages.
• 28 states have ADF legislation.
• In Rhode island 50 cent fee for tires 5 cent for motor oil 10 cents for anti-freezers.
• In 21 states the fees on tires collected at retail level.
• It is popular because it provide a substantial funding source.
• They have an effective ways of finance on tires and on white goods.
Special Waste Legislation:
Beyond waste reduction we have to increase the awareness about certain products.
Tires:
• It is vexing problem from years. They cause operational problem at landfill.
• Its disposal in banned in some states.
• In Washington tire haulers be licences and pay 250dollar per year.
• 500 tires are allowed to be stored for 30 days in Missouri.
• Management provoke the grants to perform a variety of task.
Used Oil:
• There is no proper accumulation of used oil around the country.
• This legislation name ‘do-it-yourselfers’ they provide sufficient collection.
Household Hazardous Waste:
• It was managed first time in Florida. It provide temporary collection throughout the state.
• It also include the department of Environmental Resources.
Market Development Initiatives:
• There should be more recycling program.
• market hold the sustain growth in recycling.
• Oregon started the series of tax credits in 1970
• The first state was New Jersey who incorporate a full range financial incentives
• Montana put tax legislation in 1991.
Minimum Content Standards:
• The development of the market is to directly intervene in the market.
• 11 states have passed newsprint ‘minimum content’ legislation. To increase the purchase.
• Newsprints are hold on al over the country so lawmakers start to tackle other products.
• Oregon have some standards for recycling of plastic and glass containers.
Procurement Provisions:
• purchasing power is another developing tool.
• The legislation was passed in which the government was encouraged to purchase the things from recycled
material.
• It focused on certain things recycled products , price preferences, paper and paper product.
• But this is going far beyond the paper.
State Funding:
• The majority of funds come from the legislature.
• the other popular source of funds is landfill-tipping surcharge.
Flow Control Legislation: Interstate Movement of Unprocessed and Processed Solid
Waste:
• Many states are concerned about landfill capacity.
• The states are fighting vigorously over solid waste disposal rights.
• The supreme court decisions are: controlling waste flow, serve a legitimate purpose and alternatives
means to promote this local purpose.
• Supreme court ruling on solid waste since 1990s.
Chapter:4
PLANNING FOR MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS:
Planning is very important as the complexities of management needs to expands.
State Solid Waste Management Planning:
• For planning Solid Waste Disposal Act was made in 1965.
• The plans under the federal legislation were designed to show U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Historic Perspective : State Planning:
Ten factors to be considered are:
• Geologic, hydrologic, and climatic circumstances, and the protection of ground and surface waters
• Collection, storage, processing, and disposal methods
• Methods for closing dumps
• Transportation
• Profile of industries
• Waste composition and quantity
• Political, economic, organizational, financial, and management issues
• Regulatory powers
• Types of waste management systems
• Markets for recovered materials and energy
The factors proved by EPA are:
1. Identify state, local, and regional authorities responsible for plan implementation.
2. Prohibit the establishment of new dumps.
3. Provide for the closing or upgrading of existing dumps.
4. Provide for the establishment of state regulatory powers.
5. Allow for long-term contracts to be entered into for the supply of solid waste to resource
recovery facilities.
6. Provide for resource conservation or recovery and for disposal of solid waste in environmentally sound facilities such as sanitary
landfills.
State-initiated Solid Waste Management planning:
the reasons that why state do planning are:
• To meet the requirement.
• To invent the facilities and procedures to determine future need.
• To provide guidance to the local government and private factors.
• To set policies of state and strategy.
Emergence of a New Model for State Solid Waste Management Planning:
Each strategy have certain aspects they are:
• Solid waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and composting
• Waste processing and disposal
• Illegal disposal of solid waste
• Education and technical assistance
• Planning and reporting
• Resources
The priorities were set on thses criteria for goals and actions:
• Protection of public health and environment
• Waste reduction
• Promotion of integrated solid waste management
• Formalization of organizational arrangements and responsibilities
Revising and Updating State Solid Waste Management Plans:
• The plan should be comprehensive in nature
• Plans should be more strategic and targeted towards specific concerns.
• It is difficult to categorize planning in different regions of state.
Local and Regional Solid Waste Management Planning:
it has the wide variety of programs, facilities, procedures and practices. There are certain guidelines for preparation
of local plans. Now There is a greater understanding to reduce waste stream.
Historic Perspective: Local and Regional Planning:
The elements of integration by EPA are:
• Protection of public health and environment
• Waste reduction
• Promotion of integrated solid waste management
• Formalization of organizational arrangements and responsibilities
Planning Responsibilities:
• Understanding needs
• Commitment of solid waste management
• Leadership
• Public involvement
The Planning Process:
• Goals and objectives
• Inventory and assessments
• Identifying needs
• Evaluating management options
• Defining the recommended management system
• Developing an implementation strategy
Regionalization:
Development of the regional system include:
• Examining the geographic pattern of waste generation
• Identify areas for planning
• Identify available resources
• Evaluating alternative strategies for allocating responsibilities
The other factors are:
• Geographic pattern of need compared to the location and capacity of proposed services
• Level and consistency of service provided
• Availability and condition of transportation routes
• Presence of physical and natural barriers
• Presence of a population center
• Need for new facilities versus the ability to utilize existing facilities
• Institutional/legislative/regulatory requirements and time frame
• Consistency with short- and long-term management objectives, individually and collectively
Privatization:
It has two key issues:
• the decision to privatize depend heavily on community.
• It does not eliminate the ultimate responsibility of the local government.
Plan Implementation:
An annual program of monitoring and evaluation should be established. Once the plan is implemented the problems seems to
grow.
Elements of the system are developed probably over the period of years. natural evolutions of the management will increase the
importance of annual updates.
Chapter: 5
SOLID WASTE STREAM CHARACTERISTICS:
Municipal Solid Waste Defined:
The type of the solid waste included: Type of the waste excluded:
• Residential • Municipal sludges
• Construction and demolition
• Commercial • Combustion ash
waste
• Institutional • Nonhazardous industrial process
• Automobile bodies
• Industrial wastes
Methods of Characterizing Municipal Solid Waste:
Each method have merits and demerits are shown:
Material Flows
• Characterizes residential, commercial, institutional
• Characterizes wastes received at the, and some industrial wastes sampling facility
• Characterizes MSW nationwide
• Characterizes MSW generation
• Characterizes MSW on an as-generated Provides data on long-term trends
• Characterizes MSW on an annual basis Does not account for regional differences
5.3 MATERIALS IN
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE
BY WEIGHT

 Generation of MSW in the United States has

grown from about 88 million tons in 1960 to
about 220 million tons in 1998.* Generation
is projected to grow to 240 million tons in
the year 2005.

 The materials generated in municipal solid

waste over a nearly 40-year period (1960
through 1998) are shown in Table 5.1 (by
weight),Table 5.2 (by percentage), and in
Figs. 5.1 and 5.2. Projections are shown for
the year 2005
 Data on the most prominent materials in
MSW are summarized in the following
sections.
• Paper and Paperboard:For the entire historical period documented, paper and paperboard
have been the largest component of the municipal solid waste stream, always comprising
more than one-third of total generation.
• Glass: .Glass containers were 5 percent of total MSW generation in 1998,with the total
contribution of glass at less than 6 percent.
• Ferrous Metals: Overall, ferrous metals (steel and iron) made up 5.6 percent of MSW
generation in 1998
• Aluminum:Most aluminum in MSW is found in containers and packaging, primarily in
beverage cans (Table 5.5). Some aluminum is also found in durable and nondurable goods.
Overall, aluminum amounted to an estimated 1.4 percent of MSW generation in 1998.
• Other Nonferrous Metals: The major source of nonferrous metals in MSW is lead in
automotive batteries.In 1998,this lead amounted to an estimated 0.4 percent of all MSW
generated
• Plastics:plastics comprised over 10 percent of MSW generation.Use of plastics has grown
rapidly, with plastics in MSW increasing from less than 1 percent in 1960.This growth is
projected to continue,with plastics making up about 11 percent of MSW in 2005.
• Other Materials in Products:
• Rubber and Leather: In 1998,rubber and leather made up an estimated 3.1 percent of
MSW generation
• Textiles: Textiles comprised almost 4 percent of MSW generation in 1998
• Wood: Wood is a surprisingly important component of MSW,amounting to over 5 percent
of MSW generation in 1998
• Other Materials in Products:
• Rubber and Leather: In 1998,rubber and leather made up an estimated 3.1 percent of
MSW generation
• Textiles: Textiles comprised almost 4 percent of MSW generation in 1998
• Wood: Wood is a surprisingly important component of MSW,amounting to over 5 percent
of MSW generation in 1998
• Other Materials: Most of the materials in this category are associated with disposable
diapers,including the fluff (wood) pulp used in the diapers as well as the feces and urine
that are disposed along with the diapers.The electrolyte in automotive batteries is also
included in this category

• Food Wastes: in MSW include uneaten food and food preparation wastes from residences,
commercial establishments (e.g., restaurants), institutions (e.g., schools and hospitals), and
some industrial sources .In 1998,food wastes made up an estimated 10 percent of MSW
generation
• Yard Trimmings:About 17 percent of MSW generation was yard trimmings in 1990. ,the
percentage of yard trimmings in 1998 was estimated to have decreased to 12.6 percent of
total MSW generationA
Miscellaneous Inorganic Wastes:This relatively
small category,which includes soil,bits of stone and
concrete,and the like,was estimated to be 1.5
percent of MSW generation in 1998
Municipal Solid Waste Generation on a Per
Capita Basis: 5.1 is converted to a per capita basis
in Table 5.7.This table reveals some interesting
trends. Overall, MSW generation per person
increased over the 30 years for which historical
data are available. Generation grew from 2.7 lb per
person per day in 1960 to about 4.5 lb per person
per day in 1998,with a projected increase to 4.6 lb
per person per day in 2005
 5.4 PRODUCTS IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY
WEIGHT
• The materials in municipal solid waste are found in
products that are used and discarded. These products can
be classified as durable goods, nondurable goods, and
containers and packaging
• Durable Goods:Durable goods are generally defined as
products having lifetimes of 3 years or more.This
category includes major appliances,small
appliances,furniture and furnishings,carpets and rugs,
rubber tires, lead-acid automotive batteries

Nondurable Goods:
• Nondurable goods are generally defined as those having
lifetimes of less than 3 years.The majority of these
products are, however, discarded the same year they are
manufactured. Paper products account for a large portion
of nondurables,with plastics and textiles accounting for
most of the remainder
Containers and
Packaging:

Containers and Packaging:

 The containers and packaging category
includes both primary packaging (the
containers that directly hold
food,beverages,toiletries,and a host of other
products)
 By far the dominant material in this category
is paper and paperboard, which accounted for
about 63 percent of the weight of containers
and packaging generated in 1998.Corrugated
boxes,at nearly 30 million tons generated in
1998,are the single largest product line item in
MSW.
  Once municipal solid waste is generated,it must be managed somehow.In the
United States, the usual management alternatives are recovery for recycling or
composting,combustion,or landfilling.
 Recovery for Recycling and Composting:
 Materials Recovery: Of all materials recovered from MSW (Table 5.16),paper
and paperboard comprise by far the largest tonnage—35 million tons out of a total
of 62.2 million tons recovered in 1998.Yard trimmings represented the second
highest tonnage recovered,at 12.6 million tons,with ferrous metals third at 4.3
5.5 MUNICIPAL 
million tons.
Durable Goods Recovery: .Recovery of lead from lead-acid automotive batteries
SOLID WASTE was estimated to be at nearly a 97 percent level in 1998,the highest recovery rate
of all products in MSW.The other significant recovery in this category is ferrous

MANAGEMENT
metals from major appliances.The estimated ferrous recovery was estimated to be
about 53 percent of the total weight of the appliances.Rubber was also recovered
from rubber tires—about 23.5 percent of their weight in 1998.
 Nondurable Goods Recovery: Newspapers have a long history of recovery, and
they were recovered at an estimated rate of over 56 percent of generation in 1998
(7.7 million tons recovered).High-grade office papers were recovered at an
estimated rate of over 50 percent, with other paper products recovered at lower
 Containers and Packaging Recovery: Recovery of containers and packaging (29
million tons in 1998) comprised about 47 percent of all MSW recovery in that
year, largely due to recovery of corrugated boxes at over 70 percent,or nearly 21
million tons.
 Combustion:In 1998 about 37 million tons of MSW were combusted, with most
of that amount sent to energy recovery facilities
Landfilling: Over 140 million tons of MSW were
landfilled in 1990, according to the EPA datasource
(Franklin Associates,1999).This was over 68 percent of
MSW generated,or about 82 percent of MSW discarded
after recovery.
Trends in MSW Management:
• Generation of MSW has increased steadily over the
entire period except for some recession years
• .In 1960 an estimated 30 percent of MSW generated
in the U.S.was combusted
• With combustion declining in the 1960s and recycling
still at relatively low levels,discards of MSW to
landfills grew rapidly in the 1970s and 1980s. These
discards appeared to peak around 1985 at over 136
million tons landfilled,or about 83 percent of
generation that year
5.6 DISCARDS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BY VOLUME
• MSW is most often quantified in tons.Also,the material flows methodology for characterizing weight
nationwide relies on data that are most often expressed in tons

• .In the real world,the materials in a landfill are mixed together before they are compacted,with the
effect that air spaces are filled by small objects
• Four materials have ratios of approximately 2.0 or higher: plastics, rubber and leather, textiles, and
aluminum.

5.7 THE VARIABILITY OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION

• Commercial vs. Residential Waste:
• people are most conscious of the wastes coming from their own homes,whether single-family residences,
apartment buildings, or other residential options
• .The range of residential wastes is estimated to be between 55 and 65 percent of MSW generation, with
commercial wastes estimated to range between 35 and 45 percent of generation.(MSW from multifamily
residences was classified as residential,not commercial.)

Local/Regional Variability
• Yard trimmings. yard trimmings often are not hauled to landfills or compost facilities,
• while in suburban and urban areas,they usually are handled off-site.In addition,
• some states have banned landfilling of yard trimmings,which forces more on-site management by
householders plus more community composting projects.
• Food wastes.Discards of food wastes in MSW will vary according to the
prevalence of food disposers,which put the food wastes into the
wastewater treatment system.
Use of food disposers may not be allowed (e.g.,in New York City)

• Newspapers. annual per capita generation of daily newspapers varies

from about 120 lb per person in states like California,Massachusetts,and
Florida,to 30 or 40 lb per person in less densely populated states like
Wyoming and South Dakota.

• Seasonal Variations: in municipal waste management is seasonal

variations in waste generation.Yard trimmings are generally the
important variable
 Municipal solid waste generation has increased in the United
States, both in tonnage and in per capita generation.
 Some factors tending to increase MSW generation are:-
 Increasing population.
Changes over  Increasing levels of affluence

Time
 Changes in lifestyles.
 Changes in work patterns
 New products
 Redesign of products
 Materials substitution.
 Trends in MSW generation are thus quite complex and difficult
to quantify.Planners need to look at what is happening in their
communities and nationwide when making projections
affecting waste management facilities.
  According to the U.S. EPA (1999a), per capita
waste generation rates in the United States have
risen from 2.68 lb per person per day in 1960 to
4.44 lb per person per day in 1997.
 While the waste generation rate continues to
increase, the recycling rate has increased to about
30 percent.
 Without some government intervention, it is
unlikely that recycling rates will get much higher
 In recent years source reduction,also known as
6A.1 waste prevention,has been gaining more attention
in the United States and around the world

INTRODUCTION  In general,the primary routes of source reduction

are:
 Decreasing or eliminating the amount or toxicity
of material used in the manufacture and packaging
of products
 Redesigning products for increased life
span,reusability,and repairability
 Changing purchasing decisions to favor those
products that have minimized residual toxicity and
waste associated with them
 Modifying patterns of consumption and material
use in a way that reduces the amount and toxicity
of waste generated
 6A.2
EFFECTS OF SOURCE
REDUCTION
 Economic .Source reduction can reduce
6A.2 EFFECTS the costs of solid waste management in
several ways,primarily by reducing the
OF SOURCE quantity of waste

REDUCTION  a 9 percent reduction in the solid waste

stream would save an estimated $90
million in collection and disposal costs
annually,along with other environmental
benefits such as:
Environmental
• Many environmental benefits are associated with waste and
toxicity reduction
• Greenhouse gas emissions are also increased when trees are
cut down to make paper
• Activities such as deposit and refund systems for beverage
containers have been shown to reduce litter and increase the
recovery rate for these materials to more than 80 percent

Waste Composition:
• As consumption habits change, the quantity and composition of solid waste
generated will also change
• Processes such as switching to a packaging material that is lighter or more
efficient, will also affect the characteristics of waste generated.
• the EPA considers products that serve a similar purpose together in functional
product groupings.For example,beverage containers might consist of aluminum
cans and PET bottles.If PET is then used to package some beverages that were
previously packaged with aluminum,it will appear that there is less aluminum in
the waste stream.
  Federal,state,and local governments have the ability
to implement measures that will reduce the amount
of waste generated,including:
 Restrictions on packaging and products
 Establishing procurement guidelines
 Bans on the disposal of certain materials and
6A.3 products
 Legislation requiring manufacturers to meet certain

INVOLVEMENT packaging and product guidelines

 Taxes proportional to material use and waste fraction

BY
of a product
 Outreach and education programs

GOVERNMENT  Information clearinghouses

 Requiring waste audits and the development of
source reduction plans
National:
 The federal government supports source reduction
practices by providing technical and financial
assistance programs, making policies, conducting
studies, and distributing information.
Policy.
• It is expected that as problems associated with solid waste become more severe,the federal
government will increase support of waste prevention policies.
• Food waste accounted for 21.9 million tons of the municipal waste stream in 1997
• .Food donations can help reduce the amount of food that becomes waste as well as provide food
to those who need it
• .In 1996,Congress passed and the President signed into law the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan
Food Donation Act
• .The bill protects businesses,organizations, and individuals that donate food in good faith

Studies and Information Dissemination.

• .The EPA also provides publications for training and program implementation manuals to assist
states,communities,institutions,business,industry,and consumers participate in waste prevention.
• The EPA has also published several other reports on source reduction activity
• Since 1986, the EPA has published the Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United
States report to estimate the generation,recovery,and disposal of MSW in the United States.

State
• A study by the EPA (1998b) found that 47 U.S. states currently participate in one or more source
reduction programs.
Assistance.
• State assistance programs generally consist of supporting local governments and businesses with financial
and technical support
• The state of Minnesota conducts workshops to educate school administrators and personnel on source
reduction in the school environment
• In 1999, the state of Vermont awarded $50,000 in grants to waste prevention projects.
Bans and Restrictions
• Materials and items that are compostable,recyclable,repairable,or large in quantity and toxicity can be
banned or restricted to keep them out of waste disposal systems.
• Massachusetts has banned television and computer monitors from landfills because of the lead contained
in cathode ray tubes
• .The sale of thermometers containing mercury and the landfilling of any mercury-containing component
of MSW has been banned in Minnesota
• .Illinois has banned the landfilling of the toxic components of appliances
• Other materials that have been banned from landfills include leaves,grass clippings,whitegoods,yard
waste,lead-acid batteries,tires,office and computer paper,newsprint,corrugated
cardboard,paperboard,glass,plastic,aluminum,and steel containers
• Deposit and Refund Systems.
• The principle of the deposit and refund system is that,at the time of purchase,the consumer pays a fee
supplemental to the cost of the product
• This fee is refunded when the package or product is returned to the manufacturer
• Deposit and refund systems have been implemented in 10 states and in several cities to increase recycling
and to reduce litter
Exchange,Donation,and Sale:
• Exchange,donation,and sale of unwanted items and materials will not only prevent their
disposal,but may also avoid the purchase
• Material exchanges are programs by which organizations can buy,sell,or donate unwanted or
excess material that would otherwise end up in a disposal system
• Mandates
• State-imposed mandates include restrictions on products and packaging entering and being
manufactured within the state
• Oregon requires unit-based pricing systems,and that all rigid plastic containers be reusable 5
times and contain recycled material or meet 10 percent source reduction in 5 years.
• Wisconsin and Iowa require unit-based pricing for communities that do not reach a 25 percent
recycling goal.
• Pennsylvania businesses that generate MSW must prepare a source reduction plan,reporting
what types of waste they generate and identifying strategies for source reduction.
• Taxes:
• Taxes that are applied to excessive packaged items,disposable or single-use items,or products
that contain hazardous compounds, encourage source reduction
• The objective of the tax can be to influence consumer purchasing decision
• these taxes are generally used to fund recovery and management operations
 CHAPTER 6:LOCAL GOVERNMENT
 Can provide funding for projects that encourage source reduction
 Free or subsidized compost bins
 Educational or consumer programs
 Establishing of reuse and repair industries

CONSUMER AND STUDENT EDUCATION

 To educate about local laws governing waste disposal practices, backyard, worm composting,
 Grass cycling and green shopping strategies
 Program funded in Eureka, California
 In San Francisco funded by local government and CIWMB

REUSE/ REPAIR INDUSTRIES

 represent a way to keep products and materials from disposal through refurbishing and redistribution.
 Unlike recycling, the items and materials generally require little or no processing
 reducing pollution and waste generation
UNIT PRICING FOR WASTE REDUCTION:
The more people throw away the waste ,more collectors are needed hence more should be the landfilling tipping fee,Systems that
encourage people to reduce waste generation and increase waste recycling are known as unit pricing, variable rates and pay as you
throw system. Types are as follows
 Can systems
 Bag systems
 Two tier
 Weight based systems

WASTE AUDITS AND SOURCE REDUCTION PLANS

 First step towards waste reduction
 Analysis shows nature of waste and where waste prevention steps should be directed
 Waste audits helpful in determining the amount of waste generated

YARD WASTE PROGRAMS

Grasscycling is the practice of leaving grass clippings on the lawn after cutting. Because grass clippings make up a relatively
large fraction of MSW, grasscycling has the potential to substantially reduce the amount of waste being sent to landfills.
Composting and grasscycling are supported through workshops and training programs educational brochures, demonstration
sites, and by providing subsidized compost bins to residents
 DEVELOPING A SOURCE REDUCTION PLAN

SOURCE REDUCTION POLICY Select unit of measurement

 Developing a clear statement of policy • Weight
• Volume
 Specify goals • Weight & volume
 Measured methodology
Methodology
GOALS & METHODOLOGIES • Waste audits
 To establish source reduction goal separate • Sampling
 from recycling goal with specification of • Surveys
• purchases
o The baseline year
INFORMATION NEEDED
o The target year
• Communities need to collect data on
o Type of reduction to be measured • Amount of residential waste
• Amount of commercial waste
• Residential population
 Determining separate goals desired for • Total employment
 Generating sectors • Projections of population change
• Index of economic activity
 Materials
STRATEGIES FOR SOURCE REDUCTION
•
•
Redesigning products or packaging
Reusing existing materials, packaging and products REDUCTION OF
HOUSEHOLD MSW
• Reducing the amount of products or packaging
• Lengthening the life of products or packaging
• Using packaging that reduces amount of damage
• Managing organic wastes
 BACKYARD COMPOSTING, GRASSCYCLING AND XERISCAPING
 Backyard composting usually consists of the collection and biological transformation of food and yard wastes
 Xeriscaping is a form of landscaping that reduces water use and the generation of yard-related wastes

 OPERATIONS
 Using e-mail instead of paper for communications
 Eliminating fax cover sheets
 Editing and careful proofreading on the computer before printing
 Storing files on computer disks and printing only when necessary
 Loading laser printer paper trays with paper used on one side for drafts
 Reducing mailings by targeting audiences as narrowly as possible
 Using scrap pieces of paper for short memos
CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION
Construction and demolition activities contribute 136 million tons, or 2.8 lb per person per day,to waste disposed of in
landfills in the United States. Demolition waste can be reduced through deconstruction efforts. Deconstruction is the careful
dismantling of structures before or instead of demolition to maximize the recovery of materials. electrical circuits and
plumbing fixtures are recovered for reuse, metals and lumber are reused or recycled, wood flooring is remilled, and doors and
windows are refinished for use in new construction

 SPECIAL EVENTS
 Strategies to prevent and reduce waste have included:
 Use of biodegradable utensils and can liners
 Separate collection of compost
 Promotion of foods that do not require utensils
 Serving foods such as pizza with a napkin instead of a plate
 Educational booths to inform people about composting
 Signs with sayings such as “bring your own fork
 Use of durable items (plates,utensile,etc.)
 Reward program for food vendors utilizing innovative waste prevention programs
 Not allowing the use of materials that would require disposal
CHAPTER 6
PART 6B: QUANTITY AND TOXICITY
 HOW TOXIC IS TRASH ?
 The toxicity of trash can be estimated using two basic approaches: sampling or modeling. Sampling involves drawing
samples of various waste streams, sorting each waste stream into its specific components, and weighing the components
 The modeling approach requires estimating the material flows through each waste stream. These material flows are
calculated from materials production data and adjusted for imports and exports ,materials recovery, energy conversions
,and losses during production or use.The remaining volumes are then assumed to enter the solid waste stream.

REDUCING THE TOXICITY

 Reducing
 Changing the material constituents
 Change the process of industrial production

WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY

 Toxic waste disposal bans
 Toxic waste collection
 Total waste recycling
 PRODUCT MANAGEMENT POLICY
A second general approach to detoxifying trash focuses on the toxic materials contained in products. Instead of focusing on better
management of the toxic materials in waste, this approach seeks to reduce the toxicity of the waste stream by reducing the toxic
constituents of the products thrown out as waste
 Life cycle analysis
 Product bans
 PRODUCTION MANAGEMENT
 Packaging policies
POLICY
 Product labelling • Clean production
 Targeted product procurement • Design for the environment
• Toxics use reduction
 Extended producer responsibilities • Integrated pest management
 Product substitutes  SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY
 CHAP 7: COLLECTION OF SOLID WASTE
 THE LOGISTICS OF SOLID WASTE COLLECTION
 TYPES OF WASTE COLLECTION SERVICES
 Unseparated waste
 Source separated waste

From low-rise detached dwellings:

 Types of residential collection services
 (1) curb,
 (2) alley,
 (3) setout-setback,
 (4) setout
 (5) backyard carry
 From low and medium rise apartments:
 Curbside collection

 From high- rise apartments:

 Wastes are picked up by building maintenance personnel from the various floors and taken to the basement or service
area.
 Wastes are taken to the basement or service area by tenants.
 Wastes ,usually bagged,are placed by the tenants in a waste chute system ,which is used for the collection of
commingled waste at a centralized service location
TYPES OF COLLECTION SYSTEMS,
EQUIPMENTS & REQUIREMENTS
 TYPES OF COLLECTION SYSTEMS
 EQUIPMENT FOR HAULED CONTAINER SYSTEM
Hoist truck 2. Tilt-frame container 3. Trash trailer

 EQUIPMENT FOR STATIONERY CONTAINER SYSTEM

 1. Systems in which mechanically loaded collection
 vehicles are used
 2. Systems in which manually loaded collection
 vehicles are used

LAYOUT OF COLLECTION ROUTES

 1. Preparation of location maps showing pertinent data
 and information concerning the waste generation sources
 2. Data analysis and,as required ,preparation
 of information summary tables
 3. Preliminary layout of route
 4. Evaluation of the preliminary routes and the
 development of balanced routes by successive trials
MANAGEMENT OF COLLECTION SYSTEMS

 Private entity operations

 Public entity operations

 COLLECTION SYSTEM ECONOMY

 Labor requirements
 Collection costs
 COLLECTION OF SOLID WASTE
 COLLECTION OF WASTE SEPARATED AT THE SOURCE

Waste separated at the source are separated for recovery and reuse.
The three principal methods are now used for the collection of recyclable materials from
residential sources include:
 Curbside collection using conventional and specially designed collection vehicles.
 Incidental curbside collection by charitable organization
 Delivery by residents to drop off and buy back centers

 COLLECTION FROM LOW AND MEDIUM RISE APARTMENTS

The two principles are used;
 Curbside collection using conventional and specially designed mechanized collection
vehicles
 Collection from designed storage areas with mechanized collection vehicles
In low and medium rise apartments large waste storage containers for recyclable material are
located outdoors in special enclosers.in some apartments ,waste storage containers located
at the basement
 FROM HIGH RISE APARTMENTS
In high rise apartment buildings, the most common methods of handling
commingled and source separated wastes involves;
 Recyclable and commingled wastes are picked up by building maintenance
personnel from the various floors and taken to the basement or service area and
placed in separate containers.
 Recyclable and commingled wastes are taken to the basement or service area by
tenants and places in separate containers.
 Recyclable wastes are taken to the basement or service area by tenants or building
maintenance personnel and placed in separate containers, and where available,
other commingled waste is placed by the tenants is specially designed waste chutes.
As with commingled waste, source separated wastes are collected in large
containers, which are emptied mechanically.
 MANAGEMENT OF COLLECTION SYSTEM
Solid waste management systems are managed in various ways to provide
generators with services. Management can be;
 Private entities
 Public entities
 PRIVATE ENTITY OPERATIONS
Private entities have significant role in providing collection services.
 ADVANTAGE
 Unrestricted access to capital for equipment purchase
 Flexible use of workers on collection routes
 Private operations are available directly between the generator and the
entity
 And indirectly through a public agency that authorizes the service under a
franchise
 PUBLIC ENTITY OPERATIONS
Have significant role in providing collection services.

 ADVANTAGE
 The advantage of public operations include control of the waste management system for public
health considerations. In some communities both public and private operations are used.
 Such management system is good for keeping a competitive business environment between the
entities.
 CHAPTER 8

RECYCLING

 RECYCLING PROGRAM

There are many ways to implement a recycling program.

The program can be either voluntary or mandatory.
Recycling program alternatives include the following:
 Return of bottle bill containers
 Drop boxes, drop-off centers,
 Curbside collection of homeowner-separated materials
 Curbside separation of homeowner-commingled recyclables
 Materials recovery facilities (MRFs) for the separation of commingled
recyclables (collected at curbside, collected in drop boxes, or
collected in special blue bags) .
 Mechanically assisted hand separation of recyclables from raw waste
(front-end processing or mixed-waste processing)
 Fully automated separation of recyclables from raw waste
  RECOVEREY OF RECYCLEABLE MATERIAL FROM SOLID WASTE
There are three main methods that can be used to recover recyclable
materials from MSW:
1. Collection of source-separated recyclable materials.
2. Commingled recyclables collection with processing at centralized
materials recovery facilities (MRFs)
3. Mixed MSW collection with processing for recovery of the
recyclable materials from the waste stream at mixed-waste
processing.

 Collection of Mixed MSW

• There is no segregation of recyclables from other waste materials. Mixed wastes are set out
at curbside as would be done for landfilling or incineration.
One collection vehicle is required for collection of the mixed waste—normally, the familiar
packer truck. A vehicle with a mechanical pickup mechanism for the collection of commingled
recyclables.
• The mixed waste is then transported to a central processing facility, which employs a high
degree of mechanization, including separation equipment such as shredders, trammels,
magnets, and air classifiers to recover the recyclables.
• Mixed-waste processing of recyclables is also known as front-end processing or refuse-derived
fuel .
 Scenarios for the quantification of recyclables may
include the following:
All of the materials collected at curbside
● Those materials actually sold to market
● All recyclables collected and processed at an MRF
● Only those recyclables that are sold to market after
separation and processing, with the residues that are generated
at the MRF subtracted from the total

 Measures of Recycling Performance

1. Capture rate
2. Participation rate
3. Recycling rate
4. Diversion rate

 Capture Rate
 The term capture rate denotes the weight percent of an eligible material in the total
solid waste stream actually separated out for recycling.
 Capture rate applies to a single material,
 not recyclables in general
 Participation Rate.
The term participation rate denotes the percent of households
(or businesses) that regularly set out recyclables

 Recycling Rate.
The term recycling rate is sometimes used to denote the
quantity of recyclables collected per household per unit
of time

 Diversion Rate
. Another performance factor in gauging the success of a
recycling program is the diversion rate, which represents the
weight of total solid waste that is not landfilled (or not
incinerated).

 COLLECTIONS OF RECYCLABLE FROM HOMES

● Provide weekly collection
● Distribute household material storage container(s)
● Pick up recyclables on the same day as other wastes are
collected
● Promote the program vigorously
  Technical Considerations in the Planning and Design of MRFs;
The technical planning and design of MRFs involves three basic steps:
1. Feasibility analysis 2. Preliminary design 3. Final design

 Feasibility Analysis.
The purpose of the feasibility analysis is to decide whether the
MRF should be built
A typical feasibility analysis may contain
● Functions of the MRF ● Conceptual design ● Siting ● Economics ● Ownership and operation

 Preliminary Design.
Preliminary design considerations for an MRF include development of the following:
● Process flow diagrams
● Prediction of materials recovery rates
● Development of materials mass balances and loading rates for the unit operations which make up the
MRF
● Selection of processing equipment
● Facility layout and design
● Staffing needs
● Environmental issues
● Health and safety issues The cost estimate developed in the feasibility study is usually refined in the
preliminary design report, using actual price quotes from vendors.
 Final Design.
Final design includes the following:
● Preparation of final plans and specifications that will be used
for construction
● Preparation of environmental documents
● Preparation of detailed cost estimates
● Preparation of the procurement documents

 Functions of an MRF and Materials to Be

Recovered;
The functions of an MRF will depend directly on the following:
● The role that the MRF is to serve in the waste management
system
● The types of material to be recovered
● The form in which the materials to be recovered will be
delivered to the MRF
● The containerization and storage of processed materials for
the buyer
Recovery of individual components by typical methods

 MANUAL SORTING
 SIZE REDUCTION
 MAGNETIC FIELD SEPARATION
 DENSIFICATION(COMPACTION)
 MATERIAL HANDLING
 AUTOMATED SORTING

Materials Recovery Rates

To predict the materials flow to the MRF, it is necessary to estimate the
effectiveness or performance of the recycling program.
Component capture rate at the point of collection
= [participation factor] [composition factor] [source recovery factor]
Recovery factor
Component recovery factor at the MRF
= [participation factor] [composition factor]
× [source recovery factor] [MRF recovery factor]
MATERIALS BALANCES AND LOADING RATES
1. SYSTEM BOUNDRIES
2. MATERIAL FLOW
3. APPLICATION OF MATERIAL BALANCE CONCEPT
4. DEVELOP MATERIALS LOADING RATES FOR THE INDIVIDUAL OPERATIONS
 Layout and Design of MRFs
● Consideration of the methods and means by which the wastes will be delivered to the facility
● Estimation of materials delivery rates
● Definition of the materials loading rates
● Development of materials flow and handling patterns within the MRF facility
● Development of performance criteria for the selection of equipment and facilities
● Careful consideration of space requirements for maintenance and repair
The principal unit operations and equipment employed in processing materials at MRFs,
as reported in Table 8.10, include the following:
● Manual sorting facilities
● Equipment and facilities for materials transport
● Equipment for size reduction
● Equipment for component separation
● Equipment for densification
● Weighing facilities
● Movable equipment
● Storage facilities
 Manual sorting systems

Solid waste sorted in manual way

and than it is used for recycling
Equipment and Facilities for Material Transport
 Conveyor system (wide chain driven belts )
Equipment for Size Reduction
 High-Speed Impact Equipment.
 High-Torque Shear Equipment.
Equipment for Component Separation
 ● Size
 ● Magnetism
 ● Density
 ● Electrical conductivity
 ● Color
Magnetic Separation.
. The physical relationship between the feed conveyor and the discharge conveyor and
whether the magnetic product is to be conveyed in-line or at 90° to the infeed material
2. The width of the feed conveyor and the size, weight, and cost of the magnet required to
effectively cover the entire conveyor width with an adequate magnetic field strength
3. The largest size of materials on the belt and/or the tendency of the feed conveyor to
encounter piling and surges of flow that could affect the physical mounting arrangement
and the distance of the magnet from the feed conveyor
4. The amount of contamination and the shape of contaminants, which are intermixed with
the magnetic product
5. Operating requirements such as electrical consumption, space requirements, structural support
requirements, conveyor speeds, conveyor widths, type of magnetic cooling systems
required, magnetic strength, materials of construction, maintenance, and physical access.