Solid Waste Management Strategies to Achieve Sustainable

Greening of AIT Campus

by

Phyoe Thet Khaing

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Sciences in

Environmental Engineering and Management

Examination Committee: Prof. Chettiyappan Visvanathan (Chairperson)

Prof. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh

Dr. Vilas Nitivattananon

Nationality: Myanmar

Previous Degree: Bachelor of Science in Botany

University of Mawlamyaine

Myanmar

Scholarship Donor: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway

Asian Institute of Technology

School of Environment, Resources and Development

Thailand

May 2015

ii

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis advisor, Prof. C. Visvanathan for

his consistent guidance, precious suggestions, and constant encouragement throughout the

study. I would not have achieved this far and this thesis would not have been completed

without all the support that I have always received from him.

I am grateful to my thesis committee, Prof. Nguyen Thi Kim Oanh and Dr. Vilas

Nitivattananon for their kindness support and recommendations.

My special thanks go to the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affair (NMFA) Scholarship that

supported me to complete the master program at Asian Institute of Technology, and for my

thesis research work. My acknowledgement goes to Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) for

providing me the opportunity to study in the Environmental Engineering and Management

(EEM) Field of Study.

I would also like to express sincere gratitude to Miss. Prakriti Kashyap, Mr. Paul Jacob, Mr.

Thusitha Dilruwan, and Miss Siwapron Tangwanichagapong for their valuable guidance and

suggestions throughout the thesis.

I wish to express my profound gratitude to all EEM faculty members, secretaries and staffs,

Ms. Suchitra, Ms. Salaya, Mr. Chaiyaporn, Ms. Chanya, for their excellent suggestions and

encouragement for my thesis undergo smoothly.

This research would not have completed without sincere cooperation and contribution from

respondents and AIT authorities’ support with data and information, especially the Office of

Facilities and Asset Management (OFAM), Mr. Teerachart Jatninlapant and Ms. Bantu

Sireesha, Student Union Office, AIT Campus Sustainability Club (AIT CSC), AIT

International School (AITIS) and cleaning and waste collection staffs from Pro-Maid. Their

hospitality and support is truly appreciated.

My acknowledgement goes to all the group members of Prof. C. Visvanathan’s research

team. They provided with kind support, suggestions, and friendship during the preparation

of this thesis, field work and helpful peer review and suggestions.

Finally, I would like to express my deepest thankfulness to my parents and my sister, for all

their love and support throughout my life, and encouragement during the period of this thesis

in AIT.

iii

Abstract

Solid Waste Management is one of most important pillars for achieving sustainability in

higher education institutions, along with waste and wastewater, and energy management. As

AIT campus is also planning to become a green campus, a detailed study about AIT’s waste

generation, composition and characteristics, existing good and bad practices was conducted.

The objective of the study was to provide a baseline data related to solid waste in AIT

campus and also to suggest 3R strategies for achieving a clean and green AIT campus.

Waste audit conducted in AIT showed that on an annual basis the institution generates 528.6

tonnes of solid waste, which is nearly 0.5kg/day/person. Food waste is the highest

composition (52.5%), followed by packaging waste (42.3%). MSW had lower moisture

content (43.5%) and lower C/N ratio (14:1), volatile solids (83-85%), and 4 % of low ash

content. The gross calorific value observed as dry basis ranged was 5800 kcal/kg. Waste

segregation is almost negligible in AIT, and mixed waste is binned in garbage bins and

collected, temporarily stored at the material recovery facility and finally send to local Tha

Khlong Municipality for final disposal. The overall waste recycling rate is 13.36%, out of

which 9% is food waste recycling as animal feed and nearly 4.36% of dry recyclable waste

collection and trading to junk shops. The three pilot project conducted on dry and wet waste

segregation and household level, kitchen organic waste composting at individual scale, and

recyclable packaging waste segregation at community scale had comparatively low

participation and low success rate, except for cage bin collection of recyclable packaging

wastes. A total of 821.6 kg recyclable packaging waste was collected from these bins,

earning around 6,000 THB additional income to the waste collection staffs within the seven

month. This study however shows that there is a scope for increasing the overall waste

recovery rate by motivating people to practice sustainable solid waste management by

providing information, appropriate facilities, and regulations on 3R principles.

iv

Table of Contents

Chapter Title Page

Title Page i

Acknowledgement ii

Abstract iii

Table of Contents iv

List of Tables vi

List of Figures vii

List of Abbreviations ix

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Overview 1

1.2 Statement of the Problems 2

1.3 Objectives of the Study 3

1.4 Scope of the Study 3

2 Literature Review 4

2.1 Overview 4

2.2 Sustainable Development 5

2.3 Eco-Campus 6

2.3.1 Institution sustainability 7

2.3.2 Case study of successful story of waste management 8

2.4 Urbanization and Sustainable Development 8

2.4.1 Interaction between urbanization and waste generation 9

2.4.2 Solid waste generation in Asia 10

2.5 Solid Waste 10

2.5.1 Definition of solid waste and function 10

2.5.2 Types of solid waste 12

2.5.3 Municipal solid waste quantification 14

2.5.4 Municipal solid waste characterization 14

2.6 Impact of Waste and Waste Disposal 17

2.6.1 Health and environmental impact 17

2.6.2 Types of environment and health hazard 17

2.6.3 Environmental management plan 18

2.7 Integrated Solid Waste Management System 19

2.7.1 Solid waste management systems 20

2.8 Role of the Informal and Formal Sectors in Municipal Solid

Waste Management

24

2.8.1 Involvement of private sectors 25

2.8.2 Consumers/peoples' attitude and attribute towards waste

management

27

2.8.3 Role and participation of stakeholder in the solid waste

management

28

2.9 Municipal Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries 29

2.9.1 MSW management practices in Thailand 30

2.9.2 MSW collection and transportation 31

2.9.3 MSW disposal 31

2.10 Solid Waste Sorting and Waste Segregation 32

2.10.1 Waste sorting 32

v

2.10.2 Waste segregation 33

2.11 Organic Waste Composting 35

2.11.1 Manure composting manual 36

2.11.2 Composting process 37

2.11.3 Factors affecting the composting process 38

2.12 Research Gap 38

3 Methodology 39

3.1 Overall Research Methodology 39

3.2 Study Areas 40

3.3 Detailed Methodology 42

3.3.1 Existing waste handling practices in AIT 42

3.3.2 Waste audit and waste characterization 42

3.3.3 Pilot projects 47

3.3.4 People’s attitude and behavior towards waste management 51

3.4 Summary of Data Collection Method 51

4 Results and Discussions 53

4.1 Existing Situation of Solid Waste Management in AIT 53

4.1.1 Solid waste generation 53

4.1.2 Physical composition of solid waste 55

4.1.3 Chemical characteristics of MSW 64

4.1.4 Waste collection, handling and disposal system 67

4.1.5 Unsustainable and littering activity 68

4.2 Existing Good Practices of Waste Management in AIT 69

4.2.1 Food waste management 69

4.2.2 Yard waste management 71

4.2.3 Cash-for-Trash activity 72

4.2.4 Construction and demolition (C&D) waste management 74

4.2.5 Office paper waste management 74

4.2.6 Reducing single-use plastic 75

4.2.7 Comparison of waste recovery in AIT between 2007 and

2014

76

4.3 Performance of 3R Pilot Project Activities in AIT 79

4.3.1 Dry and wet waste source segregation at household level 79

4.3.2 Organic kitchen waste composting 87

4.3.3 Packaging waste recycling at community level 91

5 Conclusions and Recommendations 94

5.1 Conclusion 94

5.2 Recommendations for Future Works 96

References 97

Appendices 102

vi

Lists of Tables

Table Title Page

2.1 Sources of Solid Waste 13

2.2 Types of Environmental & Health Hazards 18

2.3 Overview of Participation Problems 28

2.4 Key Actors and Their Roles for Environmental Protection 29

2.5 Operations of Fully Constructed Municipal Waste Treatment Plants 31

2.6 Different Type of Waste Segregation in the Household Level 35

2.7 Advantages and Disadvantages of Manual Composter 37

2.8 Factors Affecting the Composting Process and Acceptable Ranges 38

3.1 Overall Data Collection Method 52

4.1 Trends of Waste Generation in AIT 54

4.2 Comparison of Waste Generation in 2014 and 2007 60

4.3 Proximate Analysis of MSW in AIT Campus 64

4.4 Sources of Paper Waste Recycling in the Campus 75

4.5 Record for Monthly Condition of Data from Composters 88

4.6 Monthly Collection of Recyclable Waste from Cage Bins 91

vii

Lists of Figures

Figure Title Page

2.1 Impact of municipal solid waste on environmental health 18

2.2 Structure of solid waste generation by sources 19

2.3 Functional of solid waste management system 21

2.4 Material flows for the conventional composting process 38

3.1 Overall research methodology 39

3.2 Study areas and selected sampling sites from different zones 41

3.3 Waste audit zones 42

3.4 Quartering sampling method 44

3.5 Pilot demonstration project 48

3.6 Black and white bag for wet and dry waste segregation 49

3.7 Front view, side view and top view of composter and steps of things

needed to put

50

4.1 Solid waste generation in AIT in two different seasons 54

4.2 Average (%) wet weight composition of waste in AIT campus 56

4.3 Combustible and non-combustible wastes in AIT 57

4.4 Physical composition of solid waste from commercial sectors (%) by

wet weight

58

4.5 Physical composition of solid waste from residential sectors (%) by

wet weight

58

4.6 Physical composition of solid waste from academic sectors (%) by

wet weight

59

4.7 Seasonal variation of waste generation in AIT campus 61

4.8 Monthly variation of plastic bottle, glass bottle and metal can 62

4.9 Monthly variation of recyclable paper waste 63

4.10 Monthly variation of food waste generation 63

4.11 Municipal solid waste bin system in AIT campus 67

4.12 Waste collection process in AIT campus 67

4.13 AIT transfer staion and material recover facility 68

4.14 Tha Klong municipal truck collected the waste from AIT 69

4.15 Unsustainable and littering activities

4.16 Leftover food waste from cafeteria and AIT CC recycling as pig feed 70

4.17 Leftover food waste recycling from Vietnamese and lake side

Restaurants

70

4.18 Yard waste management in campus 71

4.19 Use of decomposed yard waste as compost in AIT nursery 72

4.20 Cash-for-Trash recycling activity in campus 72

4.21 Total amount of recycle waste from Cash-for-Trash activity (average

kg/month)

73

4.22 Major recyclable waste collection by the Cash-for-Trash Activity

(average kg/month)

73

4.23 C&D waste management 74

4.24 Office paper waste from the academic areas and recycling a Cash-

for-Trash activity

75

4.25 Awareness activities and posters for cloth bag campaign 76

4.26 Overall waste generation flow in AIT 78

4.27 Weighing of dry and wet waste binned in appropriate garbage bins 79

viii

4.28 Overall (%) of dry waste from yellow bins and wet waste from green

bins

80

4.29 Average (%) level of dry and wet waste segregation at during the

project implementation and post-project periods

81

4.30 Percentage (%) of dry waste from yellow bins at SV-3 and ST 6-7 areas 81

4.31 Percentage (%) of wet waste from green bins at SV-3 and ST 6-7 areas 82

4.32 Participation level for dry and wet waste segregation activity 84

4.33 Level of participating staff and student groups 84

4.34 Peoples’ preference on information sharing 86

4.35 Recommendations for improving solid waste management system 86

4.36 Monitoring the composters’ performance at Dorm (J), SV (40) and

House No. (9)

87

4.37 Monthly average variation of temperature in different composters 89

4.38 Monthly condition of compost harvested from 3 composters 90

4.39 Location of cage bins at a) 108 Lawson, b) SERD Building, c) ITServ

Building, and d) AIT International School

91

4.40 Different categories of packaging waste collection 92

4.41 Monthly performance of cage bins from different locations 93

ix

List of Abbreviations

3R Reduce, Reuse and Recycle

AIT Asian Institute of Technology

AIT CC Asian Institute of Technology Conference Centre

AIT CSC Asian Institute of Technology Campus Sustainability Club

AITIS Asian Institute of Technology International School

ASO Sub-district Administrative Organization

BMA Bangkok Metropolitan Administration

C& D Waste Construction and Demolition Waste

C/N Carbon and Nitrogen Ratio

CMO Contract Management Office

EEM Environmental Engineering and Management

ESD Education for Sustainable Development

FC Fixed Carbon

FEE Foundation for Environmental Education

HCS Hauled Container Systems

HCV High Calorific Value

HDPE High-density Polyethylene

HESI Higher Education Sustainability Initiative

HHV High Heating Value

IS Integrated System

ISWM Integrated Solid Waste Management

LCV Lower Calorific Value

LTR Leather, Textile and Rubber

MC Moisture Content

MRF Material Recovery Facility

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

MSWM Municipal Solid Waste Management

NGO Non-Government Organization

OFAM Office of Facilities and Asset Management

PCD Pollution Control Department

PET Polyethylene Terephthalate

SCS Stationary Container Systems

SERD School of Environment, Resources, and Development

SET School of Engineering Technologies

SHE Sustainability in Higher Education

SOM School of Management

SOM School of Management

SSWM Sustainable Solid Waste Management

SWM Solid Waste Management

TKN Total Kjehadal Nitrogen

TOC Total Organic Carbon

VIT Vellore Institute of Technology

VS Volatile Solid

WEEE Electrical Waste and Electronic Equipment

WGR Waste Generation Rate

1

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Overview

Every aspect of development has an effect on natural environment. Solid waste arises as a

direct consequence of human activities. Solid waste management (SWM) has thus become

an essential part of every human society. Solid waste is one of the greatest barriers of the

sustainable urbanization and globalization (de Vega et al., 2008). In Asia, the problem of

solid waste management is increasing as the continent is urbanizing. Currently, waste

generation in Asia is around 3.5 million tons per day, however, it is estimated to almost

double by 2025 (World Bank, 2012).

Solid waste management is a major issue not only at government and state levels but also at

the institutional level. Educational institutions are the place where people gather knowledge

and hence has a scope for practicing those knowledge in attaining institutional sustainability.

Addressing the need for educational institutions to practice sustainability, the United Nations

had announced a decade of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD). The ESD aims

to acquire the values, skills and knowledge necessary to contribute to building a more

sustainable society for everyone. Moreover, the aim of education for sustainable

development is to promote and develop sustainable public society through the education

system in different level (UNESCO, 2004). Since Higher Education Institutions educate and

train decision makers, they play a key role in building more sustainable societies and creating

new paradigms. Understanding this important role, the Higher Education Sustainability

Initiative (HESI) for Rio+20 was established in 2012 by a group of UN partners. In this

conference, the international academic community was called to commit to the development

of sustainable practices for Higher Education Institution by signing the voluntary

declaration. As of June 2013, a total of 272 organizations in 47 countries have made

commitments to the HESI (UNDESA, 2012).

Development of environmental sustainability at educational institutions can be infused

through many ways; by introducing sustainability issues in the courses, curriculum, and

research, by participating in sustainability practices on campus, outreach, and partnership

program (Velazque et al., 2005). In the higher educational institutions, greening their own

campuses is the best way which can train and express the principles of awareness and

stewardship of the natural world, as well as increasing the chances of clean and pleasant

local and global environments for the future (Dahle, and Neumayer, 2001). One of the

declaration in the Higher Education Sustainability Initiative for Rio+20 is about ‘green

campus’, which encourages the signatory higher education institutions to work for

transforming their institutions into ‘Green Campus’ via: i) reducing environmental footprint

through energy, water and material resource efficiencies in our buildings and facilities; ii)

adopting sustainable procurement practices in supply chains and catering services; iii)

providing sustainable mobility options for students and faculty; iv) adopting effective

programmes for waste minimization, recycling and reuse, and v) encouraging more

sustainable lifestyles (UNDESA, 2012).

Many universities, especially in Europe, the United State and some Asian countries are

trying to transform the green practices to reduce carbon-footprint within their campus. With

the education institutions transformed to green campus, will have competitive advantages

and the institutional operations would sustain. Furthermore, the higher education institutions

2

may effectively link not only internal and external activities but also assess the current

strategies in recreation of a new course towards building sustainable value. Transforming an

educational intuition to green institution requires commitment and cooperation from the top

level of administration, cooperation within community such as student, staffs and others

third party service providers from the campus.

Among many thematic areas for greening opportunities (wastewater, energy use,

institutional purchasing etc.), waste management is critical for campus sustainability

programs. In a typical educational institution, apart from the office wastes, there are other

kinds of wastes generated- food waste from cafeterias and residential colonies, yard wastes,

and occasional construction and demolition waste, and even hazardous waste from research

laboratory facilities. This makes waste generated in education institution almost similar to

municipal solid waste (MSW) from a city. Hence, the institution’s waste management

strategies is vital aspects of overall green campus policy. A sound waste management policy

addressing the issues of waste minimization, waste segregation, reuse and recycling and

proper treatment and disposal is necessary to achieve green campus status.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) has long been a renowned name in developing highly

qualified and committed professionals by promoting technological change and sustainable

development in the Asian-Pacific region through higher education, research and outreach.

The institution incorporates many sustainability related course works and engages in

regional researches on environmental sustainability projects.

Form institutional sustainability perspectives, AIT has also showed its commitment towards

institutional sustainability by signing the UN Declaration on Higher Education Sustainability

Initiative for Rio+20. AIT is also working on a roadmap for campus sustainability through

‘AIT: A Sustainability Laboratory’ Initiative. This sustainability initiative proposes a

journey towards Green AIT campus through low carbon pathways such as energy

management, waste management and 3R (reduce, reuse, recycle), water management,

wastewater treatment and reuse, sustainable transportation, natural resources preservation

and sustainable/green procurement. Sustainable solid waste management is one of the

essential themes of campus sustainability. Although both knowledge technology and

resources are improved in AIT; the visionary leadership on the institutional waste recovery

is still poor. For instance, the institution still practices commingled waste collection, waste

reduce, reuse and recycling is very negligible, and maximum quantity of wastes generated

in the campus is sent for disposal via local municipality.

AIT campus has an academic, residential, and commercial facilities, and hence is similar to

a mini-city. Wastes generated from these sectors are typical to municipal solid waste from

any city. In the year 2006, 2007, AIT with 3,800 population generated around 2 tons per

day of solid waste (Soulalay, 2006 & Dev, 2007). The institute pays to the local Tha Kong

Municipality as solid waste disposal fee around 98,000 THB. Waste recovery and recycling

is at very small scale, which is done voluntarily by handful of campus residents, with hardly

any economic benefits (Pietikainen, 2008). At present, food waste from cafeteria is sent as

animal feed, yard waste is dumped in a pit, and once a month a third-party junk dealer buys

recyclables from residents as ‘cash-for-trash’ event.

3

As the institution is working to transform the campus into Green Campus, there is a dire

need and a scope to work on sustainable ways of solid waste management. This study

therefore aims to conduct a detail review of the existing waste generation rate, composition,

and characterization of waste generated, explore existing management practices, and finally

recommend suitable 3R strategies for sustainable waste management to transform the AIT

into a clean and green campus.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The objectives of the study are indicated as follows:

1. To perform waste audit, composition analysis and characteristics of solid waste

generated in AIT campus.

2. To evaluate existing waste management systems and identify both good and

unsustainable practices of waste handling in AIT.

3. To conduct pilot demonstration activities on household composting of organic waste

and packaging waste segregation schemes, and propose sustainable solid waste

management strategies to facilitate Green AIT Campus initiative.

1.4 Scope of the Study

The scope of the study includes:

1. This study has a limited geographical scope, as it studies waste management in AIT

campus only

2. Selected few parameters of proximate and ultimate analysis were studied such as;

physical characteristics- moisture content, volatile solid, fixed carbon, ash content

and bulk density, chemical characteristics- C and N, Energy Content (Gross

Calorific value)

3. Amongst all waste types, post-consumption packaging waste and organic waste were

studied in detail

4. Pilot projects were limited in numbers (i.e., 3 compost bins, 4 curbside packaging

waste collection bins, and household dry and wet waste segregation scheme in only

3 housing units)

4

Chapter 2

Literature Review

2.1 Overview

Everywhere around the world, institutions of higher learning are awakening to the urgent

challenges of sustainability. This is a recent development. Twenty years ago environmental

stewardship, in higher education, was largely limited to regulatory compliance and often

informal recycling programs. Today, formal recycling programs are commonplace, and

some higher educational institutions are beginning to adopt the systematic, holistic

approaches to sustainability management characteristic of many companies in the private

sector. Sustainability in higher education (SHE) has burgeoned and increased in momentum

over the past decade. In the area of the sustainable development, solid waste is the crucial

problem. As the amount of waste generated depends on the population of the society,

everyone in the society needs to give attention on this.

To be sustainable, there are three different sectors. These sectors are social, environmental

and economic. If these factors are not fully addressed the program it will not sustainable.

The social sector seeks public participation, the public good, the population, the condition

of slums and productivities. From the environmental sectors, include scarcity, pollution,

climate change and life cycle assessment. In the economic sectors, water cost, environmental

demand cost and supply and demand policies are included. If all of these three main factors

are combined, sustainability will be achieved.

Although all these three sectors are necessary the environmental sector is the most important

factor in the developing world. Developing and changing lifestyles in growing cities have

changed waste composition as an especial case. For example, nowadays, the number of

people are consuming fast food is much higher than in the past. Therefore, in waste

composition, the amount of waste generation has changed from mainly organic waste to

mainly plastics, paper, and packaging materials that are complex in nature. Storage and

collection systems are becoming more sophisticated and costly as the type of waste changes.

Many cities in developing Asian countries face serious problems in managing solid waste.

As an effect of globalization and urbanization, the rate of annual waste generation has

increased in proportion to the rises in population. Asian countries with greater rural

populations produce more organic waste, such as kitchen wastes, food waste and inorganic

waste such as waste for packaging and hazardous waste. Therefore, solid waste management

is still one of the significant factors in the developing countries. The primary target of

MSWM is to protect the health of the population, promote environmental quality, develop

sustainability, and provide support to economic productivity.

According to the UN-HABITANT (2010), in most developing and transitional economies

municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is considered to be one of the most immediate

and serious problems confronting urban government. To meet these goals, sustainable solid

5

waste management systems must be embraced fully by local authorities in collaboration with

both the public and private sectors. Thus, this study will focus on solid waste management,

which is the main pollution problem on the environment at the higher education level to be

sustainable development on university through the community.

2.2 Sustainable Development

The growth of policies and legislation that affect global, regional, national and local levels

of environmental law have been had major impact on Sustainable Development. Sustainable

Development has been defined as development which congregates the needs of the present

without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (WCED,

1987). It is usually presented as the intersection between environment, society and economy,

which are conceived of as separate although connected entities. The conception of

sustainable development is a challenge to bring together increasing anxiety about a range of

environmental concerns with socio-economic concerns (Hopwood et al., 2005).

The concept of sustainability and sustainable development has its origins as far back as 1798,

when economists argued that planet earth would not be able to sustain life if population

growth and attendant consumption was allowed to go unchecked (Carter and Rogers, 2008).

Moreover, all the required aspects, such as financial, social, institutional, political, legal, and

environmental aspects that assesses the feasibility of the management need to be addressed

in a sustainable way.

Thus, major demand now is how waste management can be sustainable. With knowledge of

sustainability concepts becoming increasingly included in institution-wide learning

objectives there is a growing demand for a way to measure progress in this area. This study

will be developed as an assessment tool to measure knowledge of sustainability, and will be

tested and refined with a wide range in the nation’s largest public universities. It is believed

that education will be enhanced by ensuring sustainable development education programs

are included in the curriculums of schools and universities and from this sustainable

development practices will pass on to the communities. Sustainable development is one of

the Millennium Development Goals

A university selecting the path of sustainable development generally exemplifies the

following principles (Wright, 2002):

Clear articulation and integration of social, ethical and environmental responsibility

in the vision, mission and governance of institution;

Integration of social, economic and environmental sustainability across the

curriculum, commitment to critical systems thinking and interdisciplinary,

sustainability literacy expressed as a universal graduate attribute;

Campus planning, design and development structured and managed for achieving

zero net carbon and waste and to become a regenerative organization within the

context of the local bio-region;

6

Physical operations and maintenance focused on supporting and enabling “beyond

zero” environmental goals, including effective monitoring, reporting and continual

improvement,

Policies and practices fostering equity, diversity and quality of life for students, and

staff,

Involvement of students in environmental learning to transform the learning

environment,

Celebration of cultural difference and application of cultural inclusivity; and

frameworks to support cooperation among universities both nationally and globally.

Research on sustainability topics and consideration of “quadruple bottom line”

sustainability aspects in another research;

Outreach and service to the wider community which includes partnerships with

schools, government, non-profit organizations and industry.

2.3 Eco-Campus

Colleges and universities are increasingly focusing on campus sustainability. On many

campuses, a wide range of efforts from transportation and recycling to energy efficiency and

water conservation are underway. In the national environmental management system, eco-

campus is one of the main factors. In the process of identifying, evaluating, managing and

improving universities’ sustainability and environmental practices, eco-campus award

schemes for the advanced and more enabling. Eco-Campus is an evolution of Eco-Schools

which is a programme developed by the Foundation for Environmental Education (FEE).

Nowadays the eco-campus has become very popular within universities. The major purpose

of an eco-campus is to empower students to be the change agents in sustainable world needs

by engaging them in fun, action-orientated learning. As Universities are the learning grounds

for current and future leaders, universities have huge spending power, and transfers in

university operations offer many opportunities to improve human and ecosystem wellbeing,

locally and globally so to be an eco-campus is really important in the universities. They have

the potential to offer innovative solutions to some of our greatest global challenges through

their research activities.

The Eco-campus is the main concept that has been developed in efforts to achieve

environmental sustainability all over the world. Eco-campus is the best practice for the

sustainable development in universities and this practices came from Canadian, and global,

campus sustainability activists (Cole, 2003). There are four main phases: planning,

implementing, operating and checking and correcting in the eco-campus. All of these phases

are very important in achieving the process of eco-campus.

Sustainability poses a great opportunity for institutes of higher education to realize their role,

and responsibility, as community leaders. It is meant to provide a research framework and

some boundaries for defining and assessing a “sustainable campus,” while being constantly

7

responsive of the somewhat limited ability of models and indicators of sustainability to

create a true representation of reality.

2.3.1 Institutional sustainability

Institutional sustainability is the definitions and frameworks for sustainability in higher

education by examining a set of major national and international declarations and

institutional policies related to environmental sustainability in universities (Wright, 2002).

It identifies emerging matter and priorities, and discusses how these declarations and policies

are affecting various institutions in how they frame the central task of becoming sustainable

and how they perceive their own commitment to sustainability.

Sustainability is a moving target and continues to change as the natural environment evolves.

The same holds true for institutions of higher education and analyses recent efforts to

measure sustainability in higher education across institutions. The benefits of cross-

institutional assessments include: identifying and benchmarking leaders and best practices;

communicating common goals, experiences, and methods; and providing a directional tool

to measure progress toward the concept of a “sustainable campus”. Ideal assessment tools

identify the most important attributes of a sustainable campus, are calculable and

comparable, measure more than eco-efficiency, assess processes and motivations and are

comprehensible to multiple stakeholders.

The cross-institutional assessment tools reviewed vary in terms of stage of development and

closeness to the “ideal tool”. These tools reveal (through their structure and content) the

following critical parameters to achieving sustainability in higher education: decreasing

throughput; pursuing incremental and systemic change simultaneously; including

sustainability education as a central part of curricula; and engaging in cross-functional and

cross-institutional efforts.

The international academic community is called to commit to the sustainable development

practices for Higher Education Institutions by signing the declaration (UNCSD, 2012). They

are strongly motivated to the following general information for the Declaration; it can be

done with the aim to enhance scientific understanding through sharing of scientific and

technological knowledge, improving the development, adaptation, diffusion and transfer of

knowledge, including new and innovative technologies.

Encouraging research on sustainable development issues, improvement in scientific

understanding and technological knowledge, enhancing the development, adaptation,

distribution and relocation of knowledge, including new and innovative technologies.

Supporting research on sustainable development issues, improvement in scientific

understanding and technological knowledge, enhancing the development, adaptation,

distribution and relocation of knowledge, including new and innovative technologies.

Engaging with and sharing results through international frameworks in order to change

knowledge and experiences and to report regularly on progress and challenges.

8

2.3.2 Case study of successful story of waste management

Successful Story of Solid Waste Management in Vellore Institute of Technology, India

Vellore Institute of Technology is arranged in India and it has been established in 1984. The

range of the Campus is too wide. And after that, up to 9,300 of the populace is keeping

focused Campus. The solid waste create standard day is around 500kg. In the event that it

is contrasted and the Asian Institute of Technology, their waste generation is considerably

less. Prior, all the solid waste created in VIT was copied intermittently and the fluid waste

released into open channels and inevitably into a neighborhood water body, dirtying air, soil

and ground water.

Since 2003, the organization has verified that it expected to actualize proper waste

management practices and it has turned into the first instructive foundation in India to attain

to an incorporated waste administration arrangement. In the solid waste administration

framework, Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) hones that three most critical waste

minimization exercises, for example, Recycling and Reuse, Biomethantion, and

Composting. The whole waste delivered on the VIT campus is being overseen by these three

elements.

In recycling and reusing, not only paper, hardboards but also a segment of plastics all things

considered yet Thermocouple (polystyrene) and non-recyclable plastics are recycled. Non-

recyclable plastic is changed over from pyrolysis to styrene and after that it is been reused.

In addition, VIT Campus likewise reuses the natural waste. The eggshells gathered at the

chaos and bottle are squashed and utilized for blooming plants around the Campus in light

of the fact that eggshells can deliver calcium rich supplement. Organic product peels that are

not agreeable to fertilizing the soil because of their acidic nature are dried and beat to yield

a powder that is utilized for cleaning purposes at the containers and wreckage. These days

reusing and reuse exercises are extremely effective on the VIT Campus.

Biomethanation, has been created from calves. Vegetable and nourishment squanders are

utilized as food for male calves. The discharge from these calves is utilized as substrate as a

part of 2m3 biogas plants constructed subterranean. The biogas created from these plants is

utilized to light up the calve-shed and bubble water. The processed slurry is utilized as a seed

as a part of fertilizer pits.

For fertilizing the soil process of composting, the significant piece of waste from the Campus

utilized for manure is natural waste and it is kept for a time of 40 days consecutively of pits

of 4 tons limit capacity each in the bioprocessing plant to create both normal fertilizer and

vermin-fertilizer which is utilized as compost for keeping up the greenery on the Campus.

Waste accumulation and transfer exercises are done inside the Campus. Due to these waste

minimization exercises, the organization of VIT productively deals with its solid waste,

produces valuable bundled items from waste and proposes to overhaul its current waste

administration hones.

9

2.4 Urbanization and Sustainable Development

Sustainable development indicates attaining a balance between environmental protection

and human economic development and between present and future needs. Urbanization is

the growth of population in urban areas. The observation noticed that the population in urban

area has been increasing too rapidly in the last decades. Mostly people are moving to urban

areas from rural areas. As the excess of everything is bad, the large movement of people

from rural to urban areas is creating lots of problems. Because of urbanization, there are

many problems in the community and the environment can be affected negatively (Dixit et

al., 2000).

Urbanization is the growth of population in urban areas, and the problem of urbanization is

arises when the population of urban areas grows too rapidly and this is a big question for all.

As all people want to have a more comfortable life, higher salary, a better educational

environment and better career opportunities so there are more and more people moving to

cities to achieve their different goals. The rapid urbanization leads to a lot of different

problems for example, housing problems, traffic and pollution problems.

Today, many organizations and experts claim that sustainable development is the best way

to solve these problems. Other problems emerging because of urbanization are: traffic,

housing and environmental problem. Among these the environmental problem is the most

serious. Urbanization also caused other problems related to the environment, such as noise,

water and air pollution, soil pollution and so on which all cause danger health problems.

People who live in cities need electricity so more coal will be burnt to generate electricity.

This results in increased pollution. Both air pollution and climate change are now very

serious and dangerous world problems. As more and more people move to the city these

problems will becoming more and more serious.

2.4.1 Interaction between urbanization and waste generation

The high rates of population growth, fewer opportunities in rural areas and a shift from the

low paying agriculture sector to higher paying urban occupations are the major contributors

to urbanization. Such incident growths of every sector result in the increase of solid waste

generation and the diversification of the type of waste. Because of accelerated services,

infrastructure and employment potential in cities are showing tell-tale signs of saturation.

This results in overcrowding, inadequate water supply and sanitation, urban poverty and

environmental degradation. It poses a challenge to urban planners and citizens alike.

The unexpected immigration causes the rapid increase of slums, and the growth of squatter

camps and informal housing all around the rapidly expanding cities of the developing world.

In many cities, the rapid population growth has overwhelmed the capacity of the municipal

authorities to provide basic services such as shelter, water, nutrition, sanitation, health and

education.

Thus urban poverty becomes a feature of urbanization in the twentieth century. Cities are

harnessing the environmental resources at a furious pace, taking their ecological footprints

far beyond their geographical limits. Pollution of all sorts leads to deep degradation of the

urban environment. Sustainability of the cities in the developing countries with all the above

constraints has rightly been placed at the focal point of the millennium agenda.

10

Urbanization contributes in a direct way to waste generation, and the handling of waste in

an unscientific way induces health hazards to public and urban environment degradation.

The overall waste generation is based on the population. If the population is increased

dramatically, the amount of waste generation is increased because of human activities such

as domestic waste and others waste from the others sectors.

Keeping the balance between developmental needs and the limitation of the natural resource

base will be a key to survival. This will be most particularly felt in water supply, sanitation,

air quality and solid waste management. Several instances of rapidly depleting assets can be

found such as depletion of ground-water, collapse of fisheries, accumulation of CO2 in the

atmosphere, and deforestation. It takes time to understand our basic dependence on resources

and the sustainability of life that would be determine our very existence. This leads to

concept of “Sustainable Development”.

2.4.3 Solid waste generation in Asia

Solid waste generation is dependent upon the following factors: the economic growth,

density of population, size of the urban habitation and the consumption rate of commercial

goods. Therefore, the developing countries in Asia have created serious problems of waste

disposal due to uncontrolled and unmonitored urbanization because of rapid economic

growth. Because of result of the economic growth, the solid waste generation in Asian cities

per capita ranges from 0.2 to 1.7 kg/day due to economic disparity (Visvanathan and

Trickler, 2003).

This is mainly due to economic disparity among the population, especially China with a wide

range based on the economic status and population density. The urban populations in

developing countries have increased. The urban population is over 38 percent and waste

generation has been increasing year after year (World Bank, 2012). The urban population of

India is 28% though the figure for waste generated is based on estimates from the volume.

In Sri Lanka, the higher level of waste generation is the result of increased consumption

patterns as well as the migration of the people from the rural to urban areas. On the other

hand in Thailand over 23% of the population reside in urban areas and its higher rate of

economic growth causes the increase in waste generation per capita per day.. The waste

generated is primarily biodegradable when it is dumped on barren land or non-engineered

landfill.

2.5 Solid Waste

2.5.1 Definition of solid waste and function

“Waste” is material discharged and discarded as unnecessary from each stage of daily human

life activities, which leads to adverse impacts on human health and the environment. The

meaning of “waste” refers to useless, unused, unwanted, or discarded materials. Waste is a

by-product that only differs from useful production by its lack of value. Municipal solid

waste (MSW) is all the waste generated from the residential, commercial, institutional,

construction and demolition, municipal services.

Solid waste means any garbage, refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water

supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded materials

11

including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material, resulting from industrial,

commercial, mining and agricultural operations, and from community activities and

municipal incinerators, but it does not include solid or dissolved materials in domestic

sewage, or solid or dissolved materials in irrigation return flows or industrial discharge. The

waste from the industrial processing waste and agricultural waste however, are not included

in the municipal solid waste.

According to the properties, municipal solid waste compositions can be divided into three

types: organic wastes (combustible wastes, plastic, wood, paper, textile, leather, rubber,

etc.), inorganic wastes (non-combustible wastes, ferrous material, non-ferrous material,

glass, stone, ceramic, bones, shells, etc.) and miscellaneous wastes. Municipal solid waste

can be divided into two main sub-categories such as recyclable and non-recyclable

wastes. The compositions and properties of municipal solid waste are based on the location,

season, economic condition and social life styles of a particular place.

The environmental management is the protection of interaction on impact of human societies

on the environment. Environmental resources management aims to ensure that ecosystem

services are protected and maintained for future human generations, and also maintain the

ecosystem integrity through considering ethical, economic, and scientific (ecological)

variables. Waste management is the "generation, prevention, characterization, monitoring,

treatment, handling, reuse and residual disposition of solid wastes. It is thus linked to

environmental protection and sustainability. Because of waste management practice, the

capital cost will be minimized. There are many different categories of the waste that can be

described as follows.

2.5.1.1 Domestic/residential solid waste

All by-products resulting from food marketing, preparation, and consumption in relation to

residential units are called garbage. It mainly arises from the animal, fruit or vegetable

residues, containing organic material which requires special consideration due to its nature

of attracting vermin (rats and flies) and of producing very strong odours which attracts

mosquitoes.

Besides, there is a difference between garbage and rubbish. Rubbish can also be divided into

combustible and non-combustible solid waste. Combustible waste consists mostly of paper

and paper products, plastics, cans, bottles, glass, metals, ceramics, dirt, dust, yard and garden

wastes, and non-combustible solid waste consists of glass, tin and cans, aluminium cans,

ferrous and nonferrous metals and others construction materials.

Ash is the residue from processes of combustion resulting from household activities. It is a

kind of waste and mostly produced from the rural areas. It is normally composed of fine,

powdery material, and small amounts of burned and partially burned materials. Bulking

wastes include furniture, appliances, mattresses, and springs, and similar large items.

2.5.1.2 Commercial and institutional solid waste

This consists of the waste coming from offices, restaurants, markets, schools, hospitals,

medical facilities and so on. Moreover, there are two other kinds namely construction and

demolition wastes, and special wastes. The former includes the materials associated with the

12

demolition of old and the construction of new buildings. The latter is the waste generated by

special facilities such as hospitals and research laboratory.

2.5.1.3 Municipal solid waste

Municipal solid waste as defined includes the solid residues, which results from the

municipal functions and services such as the street refuse, dead animals, abandoned vehicles,

water and sewage plant residues, park and beach refuse, and landscape waste. Households

generate small quantities of hazardous wastes such as oil-based paints, paint thinners, wood

preservatives, pesticides, insecticides, household cleaners, used motor oil, antifreeze, and

batteries.

2.5.1.4 Industrial solid waste

There are two sources of refuse generated in industrial sites: (1) the commercial/institutional

part of the plant and (2) the manufacturing process. The quantity and characteristics of the

wastes from these two sources are considerably different.

2.5.1.5 Agricultural residues

This residue will be indicated only in the problem of the rural areas because agriculture poses

significant and unique problems. The wastes are from confined animal feeding and crop

residues.

2.5.2 Types of solid waste

As a basis for consequent discussions it will be helpful to define the various types of solid

wastes that are generated. It is important to be aware that the definitions of solid waste terms

and the classifications vary greatly both in the literature and in the profession. MSW is

defined as unwanted materials and /or substances generated in a city or municipal area and

the components of which generally include food/organic waste, infectious waste, hazardous

waste, electrical waste and electronic equipment (WEEE), and packaging waste. The source

of typical waste is shown in Table 2.1.

Of these, packaging and organic waste is very common these days. One of the best ways to

maintain the environment and also to get economic benefit is to reduce this type of

waste. Normally, MSW can be classified by the source or origin of the waste from where

the municipalities or other local authorities collect the waste, such as residences, households,

schools, hospitals, offices, shops, markets.

13

Table 2.1 Sources of Solid Wastes

Sources Typical Activities where

Waste Generated Type of Solid waste

Waste generated from sources that mention in the table below are Municipal Solid

Waste

Residential Single family and multifamily

detached dwellings, low,

medium and high rise

apartments, etc.

Food wastes, paper, cardboard, plastic,

textile, leather, yard waste, wood,

glass, tin cans, aluminum, other metals,

ashes, including bulky items, consumer

electronics, white goods, yard wastes

collected separately, batteries, oil and

tires, rubber, household hazardous

wastes

Commercial Stores, restaurants, markets,

offices, buildings, hotel, print

shops, service stations, auto

repair shops, etc.

Paper, cardboard, plastic, wood, food

waste, glass, metals, hazardous wastes,

etc.

Institutional Schools, restaurants, markets,

offices, buildings, hotel, print

shops, service stations, auto

repair shops, etc.

Paper, cardboard, plastic, wood, food

waste, glass, metals, hazardous wastes,

etc.

Construction

and

Demolition

Schools, hospitals, prison,

government centers, etc.

Wood, steel, concrete, dirt, plastic, etc

Municipal

services and

Open Areas

(excluding

treatment

facilities)

Street Cleaning, alleys,

Landscaping, Parks, Beaches,

others recreational areas

Special wastes, rubbish, street

sweepings, landscapes, and tree

trimmings, catch basin debris, general

waste from parks, beaches and

recreational areas

Wastes generated sources from below are not included in the Municipal Solid Waste

Industrial

wastes

Construction, fabrication,

light and heavy manufacturing

refineries, chemical plants,

power plants, demolition, etc

Industrial process wastes, scrap

materials, etc. Non-industrial wastes

including food wastes, rubbish, ashes,

demolition and construction wastes,

and hazardous wastes

Agricultural

Waste

Animals feeding, Harvesting

waste, comprise crop residues,

horticulture and forestry waste.

Agricultural process; mostly all the

waste produced from those process are

hazardous and toxic.

14

2.5.3 Municipal solid waste quantification

The MSW generation rate and MSW composition varies from country to country depending

on the population growth, economic situation, industrial structure, waste management

regulations, cultural, popularity, and life style (IPCC, 2006). The source of MSW relates to

land use and zoning such as residential areas, commercial areas, agricultural areas,

institutional areas. Municipal service is also relative. The quantity of MSW generation can

be identified by waste collecting from many locations for a representative of these waste

streams.

The heterogeneous mixture of MSW is collected from common collection points and open

dumps at residential areas, commercial areas, institutional areas and recreation areas for

analysis. There are many factors affecting waste generation rates such as standard of living,

geographic and physical factors, seasons, waste collection frequency, source

reduction/reuse/recycling, public attitudes, and legislation. Waste generation rate means

waste generation rate per unit time per population such as 1.5 kg of waste per capita per day.

Waste generation rate calculates from load-count analysis using the number of vehicle trips,

the type of vehicle by weighing or measuring volume of the vehicle or using the following

equation 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 below (Suttibak, 2008).

1) Waste Generation Rate (WGR)

WGR (kg

c/d) =

Average weight of solid waste (kg/d)

Amount of population using collection service (c) (2.1)

2) Volume of solid waste

Volume (𝑚3

d⁄ ) =Area of waste pile (m2) × Height of waste pile (m)

duration (d) (2.2)

3) Weight of solid waste

Weight (t/d) = Volume of Solid Waste (m3/d) × Density (t

m3) (2.3)

2.5.4 Municipal solid waste characterization

Physical characteristics are significant for evaluating disposal design, material recovery and

energy recovery from MSW. Physical and chemical properties of MSW are used to describe

the individual components in waste stream, usually based on percentage by weight. For

example, 100 kg of MSW consists of 68% of organic waste. Thus, the physical and chemical

properties of MSW are important in assessing what type of appropriate disposal method is

to be carried out (Dev, 2007).

Waste characterization, including physical composition and chemical properties, is

performed using both methods – hand sorting and visual observation. Hand sorting is

employed for segregating different types of MSW in heterogeneous MSW. The major

physical properties measured in MSW are described below:

15

2.5.4.1 Specific weight (Bulk Density)

Specific weight is normal density defined as the mass per unit volume of any substance (e.g.

kg/m3, lb/ft3) and usually it refers to un-compacted waste. It varies with location, season, and

duration in storage. Density is useful to assess the volume of the transportation vehicle and

size of the disposal facility and this data is often required to obtain the mass and volume of

waste that must be managed. Municipal solid wastes delivered in the compaction vehicles

usually vary from 120 to 280 kg/m3. The density of solid waste is determined for

transportation and other purposes. It should be noted that density values are different

between compacted and un-compacted refuse.

2.5.4.2 Moisture content

The amount of water in MSW is divided into two phases which are inherent water and

attached water. About half or two third of total water in MSW is called inherent water.

Attached water comes mostly, from rainwater. Moisture content is expressed as a percentage

of the wet weight of the MSW material. Moisture content is essential for leachate estimation

and composting (Chandrappa and Das, 2012). Moisture content is usually expressed as the

percentage weight of moisture per unit weight of wet or dry material. The moisture content

will vary from 15 to 40% depending on the composition of the wastes, season of the year,

humidity and weather conditions, particularly rain in most municipal solid wastes. MC is

important because it affects the stability of the combustion process and combustion

efficiency during cold starts of an incinerator as well as for composting and other processes.

For composting processes, the moisture content is maintained between 50 to 60% throughout

the process for desirable results.

2.5.4.3 Particle size and distribution

The size and distribution of the components of MSW are an important factor for the recovery

of materials, especially when some mechanical machines such as trommel screens and

magnetic separators are used. These machines separate ferrous materials which may be too

heavy to be separated by a magnetic belt or drum system. Particle size is one of the most

important physical properties of solids is used in many fields of human activity, such as

construction, waste management, metallurgy, fuel fabrication, etc. Waste sand is a solid

waste product from a water purification process. Particle size distribution analysis can be

expressed in different forms, according to the particle diameter indicated by nominal mesh

sizes, or by particle size distribution, in grams, in percentage by weight of each fraction.

2.5.4.4 Waste composition

Waste composition is one of the main factors influencing MSW management, as different

waste types contain different amount of materials. According to the Pollution Control

Department in Thailand, several categories of MSW can be classified. The major MSW types

are food waste, paper, wood, textiles, rubber and leather, plastics, metal, glass, stone, and

others (e.g., ash, dirt, dust, soil, electronic waste).

The chemical properties of MSW are very important in evaluating alternative processing and

recovery options of MSW. The chemical properties can be classified into four major

16

parameters: proximate analysis, ultimate analysis, energy content, heavy metal analysis. The

chemical properties analysed in MSW are described as below follows:

2.5.4.5 Proximate analysis:

Moisture content: moisture content can change the physical and chemical properties

as well.

Volatile solids: amount of volatile combustible material refers to approximate

percentage of organic matter presented in the material.

Ash content: the percentage of ash or residue after burning is 100 minus percent

solids. This value is important to determine the percent in volume reduction and ash

content for incinerator design and to evaluate the efficiency of the incinerator.

Fixed carbon: remainder after removing the mass of volatile matters from the original

mass of the sample.

2.5.4.6 Ultimate analysis

Ultimate analysis is analysis of the percentage of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen,

sulphur, and ash found in the gaseous products of its complete combustion, the determination

of sulphur, nitrogen, and ash in the material as a whole, and the estimation of oxygen by

difference. The carbon determination includes that present in the organic coal substance and

any originally present as mineral carbonate. The hydrogen determination includes that in the

organic materials in coal and in all water associated with the coal. All nitrogen determined

is assumed to be part of the organic materials in coal. For practical reasons, sulphur is

assumed to occur in three forms in coal: as organic sulphur compounds, as inorganic

sulphides, which are mostly the iron sulphides pyrite and marcasite, and as inorganic

sulphates. The total sulphur value is used for ultimate analysis.

2.5.4.7 Energy content (Calorific Value)

Heating value is released from MSW combustion. MSW consists of water and hydrogen

and when the MSW is burnt using latent heat while combusting, hence heating value, known

as Lower Calorific Value (LCV), decreases. It is useful for considering the suitability of

MSW disposal by incineration. If a heating value of MSW is less than 800 kcal per kg, the

other fuel will be used. The term “heat of combustion or calorific value” refers to the amount

of heat liberated per unit of the substance burned or a measure of the energy available from

the fuel in a standard condition. This process involves enthalpy or heat content (H) of the

system. The heat of combustion is expressed for this study in calories per gram of sample.

The heat content of various solid waste materials is important in the volume reduction

process used to dispose of the waste. For example, measuring the energy balance and

analysing heat content of the solid waste before and after incineration is essential for

incinerator design and disposal of the waste.

2.5.4.8 Heavy metals

Heavy metal from MSW such as Irons (FE), Arsenic (As), Cadmium (Cd), Copper(Cu),

Chromium (Cr), Lead (Pb), Nikel (Ni), Zinc (Zn), Titanium (Ti), Antimony (Sd),

Molybdenum (Mo), Manganese (Mn), Calcium (Ca), and Mercury (Hg) are determined

using ashing acid digestion. Heavy metal is analysed for contamination in the waste stream.

17

2.6 Impact of Waste and Waste Disposal

Because of the improper disposal of the waste, there are various environmental impacts and

which can be cause serious problems to humans, animals, plants and society at large scale.

Consequently, the waste generated from the human activities especially household and other

stream of the waste need to be removed from in order to avoid rubbish and pollution that can

pose risks to public health. On the other hand, effective management of waste can contribute

to the socio economic development and sound environment to living things in general.

2.6.1 Health and environmental impact

As the improper handling of solid waste creates negative effects on human health, this issue

is really important to society. Due to this impact, the majority group affected by these

problems is general workers working in and people living in the area who need to be

educated to the risks. Waste disposed on land waste becomes toxic and infectious material

dangerous to human health. The main infectious diseases which affect humans are skin

diseases and blood infection, eye and respiratory infection as well as different diseases that

result from the vector drone disease.

Besides this, there are many other environmental problems due to ineffective municipal

management. Ineffective management of municipal waste leads to pollution of ground water

and air due to inefficient burning of wastes, either in the open air, or in plants that lack

effective treatment facilities for the gaseous effluents.

Thus, municipal solid waste management system activities are used to make proper

arrangement for storage, collection, transportation and disposal of waste believed to have an

adverse impact on land, water and air and on human and environmental health, aesthetics

and quality of life.

2.6.2 Types of environment and health hazard

Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) activities which contribute significantly to air,

water and noise pollution are part of the health hazards which have a potential to cause

disease or infirmity to human beings. There are five categories which are divided by

environmental and heath associated with solid waste. Improper collection, storage,

transportation and disposal can cause environmental pollution, communicable and non-

communicable diseases, injury and occupational health risks. The details of these categories

are shown in the Table 2.2 and the impact of the MSW on environmental health will be

shown in the Figure 2.1.

18

Table 2.2 Types of Environmental & Health Hazards (Ministry of Urban

Development Government of India, 2012)

IS No. Environmental & Health

Hazards

Examples and Causes

1 Environmental Pollution Air quality, waste quality and soil quality, land

use, noise.

2 Communicable disease Diarrhea, respiratory infection, skin diseases,

Jaundice, Trachoma, Eosinophilia etc.

3 Non- Communicable

disease

Poisoning, hearing defects/ loss, dust

4 Injury Occupational injury by sharps, needles, glasses,

metals, woods, violence etc.

5 Aesthetics Odor, visibility, dusts etc.

Figure 2.1 Impact of municipal solid waste on environmental health

2.6.3 Environmental management plan

The main purpose of the environmental management plan is to reduce the adverse effects

which are caused by the different activities in solid waste management on the environment.

In the management plan, there are some of the preventative measures needed to be adapted

for the period of waste collection and disposal... Those measures are 1) closed containers

and bins should be used in order to prevent the exposure of waste and the spread diseases

Domestic and Human

Municipal Solid Waste

Environmental and Health Impact

a) Air Pollution

b) Water Pollution

c) Soil Pollution

d) Increasing Disease Vectors

Exposure - External

Exposure

Effects- Morbidity and

Mortality

Commercial Institution

19

through insects such as flies and mosquitoes. 2) The disposal site is also important. To

prevent the breeding of disease vectors and the escape of gases of decomposition, minimize

leaching, the suppression of foul odours, and provision of better aesthetics and the proper

covering of the land site. 3) The emission of climate forcer gases such as Carbon dioxide,

methane, and hydrogen sulphide are regularly monitored and checked. Moreover, open

burning is strictly prohibited. 4) Provision the needed facilities to the worker is one of

measures. If the workers do not have the appropriate clothes or others facilities, the rate of

infection is increased. Before all these measures can come about, government, stakeholder

and public environmental management groups have to collaborate at all levels (Ministry of

Urban Development Government of India, 2012).

2.7 Integrated Solid Waste Management System

In the specific component of the waste stream, the approach may combine several different

technologies that are designed to process. The combination of different techniques to combat

the solid waste management problem is called integrated solid waste management (ISWM).

In the process of integrated solid waste management, it requires consideration of the

technical, environmental, managerial, legal, economic and financial aspects. Therefore,

integrated solid waste management (ISWM) is the term referred to the forms of all the

activities related with the management of society’s waste.

The main purpose of integrated solid waste management is to manage the society’s waste in

a manner that meets public health and environmental concerns and to promote the public’s

desire to reuse and recycle waste materials. According to Tchobanoglouss et al. (1993), a

classical simplified diagram was shown the inter-relationship of these functional elements

in a solid waste management system. The linkages of all elements are shown in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2 Structure of solid waste generation by sources

Solid Waste

Food waste, wood,

paper, cardboard, yard

waste

Paper, food waste,

cardboard, etc.

Paper, cardboard,

food waste, etc

Rubbish, street waste.

Tree trimming waste,

catch basin debris,

treatment plant waste, etc

Hazardous Waste

Residential Areas

Industrial Waste

Municipal Services Institution Areas Commercial Areas

Agricultural Waste Municipal Solid Waste

Metal, glasses,

plastics, batteries,

Glass, plastics,

electronic goods, dry

cells, batteries,

Metal, glasses,

plastics, etc

Organic

Waste

Inorganic

Waste

20

In general, the Waste the responsibility of the municipality can be defined from various

perspectives and “Waste” is described as something that is useless or unwanted where many

wealth are underlying. The municipality is responsible for the collection and the disposal of

solid wastes. Open dumping system which does not need to invest in engineering designs,

construction facilities or in technical operations is the basic MSW disposal practice for many

municipalities. This system requires a large scope of land area for dumping MSW in order

to degrade solid wastes under natural conditions.

This open dump system can impact on the environment in various forms such as the pollution

of surface and ground waters, gas emission in the land (eg. CH4 and CO2) and breeding of

disease vectors. Some open dumps can also cause air pollution from the effects of burning

the waste for saving more land area for MSW. Therefore, it is better to adapt the 3R: reuse,

reduce and recycle some of the materials for long term benefits in costs where can contribute

economically as well as the environment and this can also be called as “a wealth from waste”.

2.7.1 Solid waste management systems

Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is a major accountability of local governments

because it is stated that in the developing country, up to 20 to 50 percent of the budgets have

been spent in the waste management (Schubeler et al., 1996). Therefore it is said that waste

management is the typically consuming of municipal budgets in developing countries. Three

primary sources of (MSW) are classified as residential area, institutional and commercial

waste. The two main factors that effect on type and quantity of waste are culture and society

consumption patterns. In the management process, there are six functional elements that

constitute the SWM system, which are listed as follows:

Waste generation

Storage

Collection

Transfer and transport

Reduce, reuse, recycling and recovery

Disposal

Besides, Joseph (2006) pointed that the thrust areas that require action pertaining to

municipal SWM in the most of the developing countries include:

Littering of street waste needs to prohibit.

Waste segregation system is needed to promote in the community

House to house waste collection/organized scavenging method is systematized

To public and to promote public participation, it is needed to conducting awareness

programmes to disseminate information.

Providing adequate community storage facilities is also needed.

Vehicles to Transport of wastes in covered must be improved.

It is needed to adopt an appropriate combination of composting and anaerobic

digestion process of waste.

Improvement of the existing dump sites and disposal of inert wastes in sanitary

landfills.

21

Figure 2.3 Functional of solid waste management system

2.7.1.1 Waste generation

The activities that materials are identified as no valuable, discarded as worthless materials

and gather for disposal are called as waste generation. Waste generation can depends on the

factors shown:

Geographic location

Season of the year

Frequency of collection

Characteristic of population

Extent of salvage and recycling

Legislation

Public attitudes

Solid wastes discarded from the residential area varies based on the economic status, social

habits, ethnic composition and the area where people are reside, eg. Disposal of waste in the

river and waste burning in the backyard etc. The quantities also varies based on the rainfall,

seasons, the type of land, climate, customer’s choice and people’s habit and availability of

the consumer good in the area, eg. People eat, drink and package materials they buy due to

the seasonal availability.

Plastic bags emerge in the market with the emerging of civilization. Plastic bags are used in

many parts of the world in various forms such as packing materials and mean of carrying

products. Due to the advantages, plastic bags become unavoidable in daily life of the people

compared to other products such as paper, rubber, metals and leaves, etc. As the

consequences, plastic bags become one of the new generation of solid waste naming “plastic

waste”.

Collection

Waste Generation

Waste Handling,

Separation, Storage and

Processing the Source

Disposal

Separation processing and

transformation of Solid

waste

Transfer and

Transport

22

2.7.1.2 Storage

The type of solid waste storage facilities may be categorized as secondary (or communal)

and primary (or individual) storage facilities. In developing countries, it is necessary that

storage facilities should be as far as possible from, insect proof, animal proof, and weather

proof, waste able and strong enough to meet the demands of normal use. Haan (1998)

suggested that in Asian countries, the various communal storage options like enclosures,

depots, concrete pipe sections, fixed store bins, and 200 liter drums; under the management

of the local authorities the 200 liter drums are commonly used with some success.

The following factors are considered in the on-site storage of solid waste such as:

Type of container to be used

Container location

Public health and aesthetics

Collection methods to be used

The capacities and the type of containers used largely depend on the availability of the space

for container placement. The type of containers such as metal container, plastic container,

concrete container and rubber container can be varied however the usual form of container

for household and residential waste containers is plastic container and the plastic bags are

used for lining for the container.

2.7.1.3 Collection

The solid waste collection includes colleting/picking up wastes from the sources,

transporting the waste to the directed location and till the waste is distributed to the disposal

site and the collected vehicles are emptied. According to the operation type the collection

system can be specified into two categories: Stationary Container Systems (SCS) and

Hauled Container Systems (HCS).

The HCS is the system in which the containers used for storage of waste are hauled to the

disposal site, emptied and returned to either their original location. The SCS is the system in

which the containers used for storage of waste remain at the point of generation, except for

occasional short trips to the collection vehicle. Moreover, short-range transfer stations may

be added which divides the waste collection into two phases, primary and secondary

collection. In the primary collection, house-to-house collection is performed by a small non-

motorized vehicle, such as a hand cart or an animal cart. When full, the primary collection

vehicle is emptied directly into a large motor vehicle.

Besides in the collection method, three arrangements that may be useful in this study area

are: door-to-door collection (waste collectors approach residences and ask for their waste,

or ring a bell to notify residents to bring out their wastes); set-out collection (residents leave

their waste outside their houses by the road for collection); and collection from multiple

drop-off sites. A drawback of the door-to-door collection system is that waste is not collected

if residents are not at home when the collectors come by. Set-out collection addresses this

limitation, but a problem with this system is that animals and pests are attracted to waste left

out in the open.

23

The frequency of waste collection varies based on the characteristics of climate, waste,

activities of people and container size, etc. During collecting the waste, the plastic bags can

cause some problems. Since the plastic bags are too light to float in the air, they can be

carried by the wind. As a consequence, the plastic bags are left in the streets and in the

environment while the household or other solid wastes are transferring or collecting.

2.7.1.4 Transfer and transportation

Transfer and Transportation is defined as the facilities, the means and the appurtenances that

are used to affect the wastes transfer from small vehicles to the large vehicles, and transport

the wastes through the distances to the disposal site or to the processing centers. Transfer

system is feasible to any type of collection system and can be used successfully with any of

them.

On the other hand, the transport system of collected solid waste is a major concern in

developing countries. Due to traffic congestion, small payload and road conditions, higher

vehicle operation time is spent on transporting waste to the disposal sites. In order to

overcome this concern, transfer system should be introduced and this adaptation of transfer

system will have positive impact on the economy, reduction of the total cost of collection,

direct transportation and disposal of waste.

2.7.1.5 Reduce, reuse, recycling and recovery

Different researchers have highlighted the importance of reuse and recycling. Recovery or

resource recovery is the extraction of economically usable material or energy from solid

wastes. . The definition refers to the reduction of either toxicity, volume, or weight of a

material used in a product, the increase in the lifetime of a product, the substitution of

reusable products for single use ones or the reduction in the overall consumption of goods

(Lober, 1996). Reuse is the claim of material in form and its subsequent use in the same

form, for e.g. returnable bottles.

Recycling” is defined by Haan (1998) as a process of transforming recovered and sorted

material into intermediate materials. Recycling is more possible in developed countries,

where settleable constituents comprise a higher fraction of collected wastes; wages are often

too high to permit recovery, sorting and processing of these materials to be carried out

profitably. In this case, private scavenging of solid wastes plays a vital role in the recycling

process. Fudery (1990) defined that resource recovery/recycling is different between

developed and developing countries. . Each of the processes will directly or indirectly affect

the volume, weight, composition, and economy of solid waste

In developed countries, resource recovery is done mechanically and is institutionalized by

the government, while in the developing countries, recycling operations are done by waste

pickers or scavengers, with junk dealers, even without the encouragement and support by

the government. It is noted also that most of the refuse scavenged for recycling, except paper,

are non-biodegradable wastes such as plastics, glass, metal, bone, non-ferrous, ferrous

materials etc. Like reusing and recycling other materials, reusing and recycling of plastic

materials also has benefits such as resource recovery and improvement of aesthetic qualities.

There are many ways of defining the meaning of reuse and recycling according to the

practices and perceptions. The following are the concepts by Sykes (1978) and Lund (2001):

24

a) Reuse of a product, without alteration, to serve the purpose for which it was initially

intended (e.g. refilling soft drink bottles).

b) Reuse of a product, without alteration, to serve a purpose other than that for which it

was initially intended (e.g. using old clothes as rags).

c) Reprocessing of materials incorporated in a product to produce new products of the

same type (e.g. using crushed glass bottles to manufacture new glass bottles).

d) Reprocessing of materials incorporated in a product to produce new products of a

different type (e.g., using worn out rubber tires in the production of road surfacing

material).

2.7.1.6 Processing and treatment

Processing and treatment is technically referred to the action to improve the SWM systems

and to recover the waste resources to the useable materials or to the energy. Incineration and

composting methods are widely used among the treatment methods. Incineration method can

reduce the volume of waste to be disposed, while, composting method can recover organic

soil substitutes. It is easier to manage for disposal of food and other non-hazardous waste. It

is more complicated in the final disposal of waste in MSW systems due to non-biodegradable

wastes especially plastics.

2.7.1.7 Disposal-sanitary landfill method

A landfill is an unsophisticated biological reactor, in which the wastes decompose over time.

A landfill method is the most cheapest and significant for final disposal of municipal waste.

This method is very simple to operate and waste can be used for fill low lands. The main

method used in most of the developing countries is disposed in the landfills. Landfills are

the most efficient method to dispose final solid waste, but, due to non-biodegradable waste

like plastics, it may take very long time to be degraded. In this waste degrading system, other

waste can be decomposed over time but plastic may remain unchanged.

A municipal solid waste (MSW) landfill system includes a leachate collection system

installed in a layer of MSW in a preexisting landfill. The layer of MSW is covered with a

layer of waste ash produced by incinerated MSW. The ash is gas impermeable and serves as

a methane gas containment layer above the MSW cell. A plurality of columns of crushed

stone pass through the ash layer to provide a leachate collection path to the leachate

collection system. Alternate layers of ash and MSW fill the landfill with leachate collection

columns in each ash layer to collect the leachate from each MSW cell layer. At least one, or

as conditions may require, a number of gas wells are installed in each MSW cell for

removing methane gas from the cell. The gas wells may be interconnected to collect the gas

and supply it to a utilization system or for burn off.

2.8 Role of the Informal and Formal Sectors in Municipal Solid Waste Management

According to Amin and Parera (1996) the formal sectors are the enterprises, which enjoy

official protection, official recognition and support. Informal sectors operate in unregulated,

unregistered or casual activities, including family and individual enterprises. “Private sector,

25

private enterprise or private firm” can be defined for both formal and informal sectors. Amin

(2005) defined that three approaches can be used to define the informal sector in which

noticeable are: (a) people, (b) activities or (c) habitats.

As mentioned by Amin (2005), the informal sector is involved in the following manners:

a) Through the role of mobile hawkers (good buying door-to-door)

b) Through the small sector manufacturing shops

c) Through the small sector manufacturing enterprises

d) Through the waste pickers

e) By improving casual labour to the junk-dealers in collecting, handling, sorting

f) By providing labour to the local governments for its own share of garbage collection

and disposal

Poerbo (1996) stated that in the informal sector approach, urban waste is viewed as an

economic resource, which has multiple results such as:

a) Reduction of waste

b) Reduction in public expenditures for waste management

c) Employment generation

Haan et al., (1998) pointed out that not only the large-scale private sector actively involves

in processing of waste products into intermediate products/materials but also various small-

scale enterprises are involving in recycling and processing the waste materials into products.

Small-scale entrepreneur has two groups:

a) Individuals and families, performing activities which provide them with just enough

income to live on and

b) Micro-scale enterprises, operating in much the same way as their larger counterparts,

but not always officially registered.

According to Amin and Sinha (2000) informal sector is actively participating in the SWM

in recycling, resource recovery and reducing the amount of waste to finally be disposed. The

private sector involve in this process due to self-interests come from the income earning

motivation. Therefore, the performance is based on market driven activities and unstable.

However the informal sector is still working with the formal private sector and the public.

Due to economic constraints and employment shortage the informal sectors

(individual/family) are driven to collect wastes. The registered and fully legalized formal

sector is involved in collecting regular waste business. In Thailand, the amount of waste

collected by the individual waste collectors is about 286 tons, 5 percent of the waste collected

from the cities. The waste scavengers sell the segregated waste in the small scale recycling

shops near the disposal site. In total the weight of the waste sold to those shops varies from

1 tons to 6 tons per day (Muttamara et al., 1994).

2.8.1 Involvement of private sectors

Since throughout the most recent decade, natural issue has turned into one of the best

difficulties on the general public. The utilization of material assets which inevitably get to

be waste is relied on upon human presence. The more the accomplishment more prominent

26

financial prosperity in creating nations, the more noteworthy waste every capita is

acknowledged and more basic is the requirement for compelling and productive SWM

frameworks. Execution of such frameworks relies on upon the significant support of people,

groups and organizations, makers, NGOs and governments.

Community participation has an immediate bearing on successful MSW management.

Examination on group disposition, observation and eagerness towards strong waste

administration was done. More noteworthy level of group engagement in decrease of waste

at the source through battles in a logical way is required. The householders, the road

scroungers, the waste authorities, the landfill site foragers and the center men, for example,

various social gatherings can include in the waste reusing methodology. Those individuals

can assume a basic part in the strong waste administration in the creating nations. Living

space (1992) expressed that countless populace in Thailand (up to 1 percent to 2 percent of

the populace) bring home the bacon from the reusing methodology.

Community participation has a direct bearing on effective solid waste management.

Investigation on community attitude, perception and willingness towards solid waste

management was carried out. Greater level of community engagement in reduction of waste

at the source through campaigns in a scientific manner is needed. The householders, the

street scavengers, the waste collectors, the dump site scavengers and the middle men such

as many different social groups can involve in the waste recycling process. Those people can

play a vital role in the solid waste management in the developing countries. HABITAT

(1992) stated that tens of thousands of population in Thailand (up to 1 percent to 2 percent

of the population) make a living from the recycling process.

Besides, public participation in environmentally sound management of waste was

highlighted as a major environmental issue in Agenda 21 that was adopted at the Rio

Conference which re-affirmed the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on Human

Environment that was adopted in Stockholm in June 1992. According to the Principle 10 of

the Rio Declaration, it was stated that all of the citizens must concern on the environmental

issues and everyone must participate in the handled of waste management in relevant level.

Because of this results, it has been increased in the access of information concerning which

is provided by the public enforced, including information on hazardous materials and

activities in their communities, and the opportunity to participate in decision-making

processes.

In developing countries, scavengers perform very actively and efficiently as soon as the

waste collectors empty their loads at the disposal site. Scavenging is being practiced at a

high level in the developing countries for their economic purposes. The recyclable waste

materials are collected by waste collectors and other workers, and then the collected

materials are sold to the middlemen.

The rationale of effective public participation is clearly based on the fact that everyone

generates waste and can be affected directly and indirectly if waste is not well managed.

Solid waste (SW) can be hazardous to man and the environment if not appropriately

managed. Apart from the threat to poor air quality, inadequate SWM increases risk of

morbidity

27

Lohani (1984) indicated that existing scavenging practices provide employment for new

arrivals and household incomes ranging from base survival in materials recovery. The trader

who buys secondary materials from scavengers and sells to the wholesaler is known as the

middleman, who further sells it to the manufacturer. The middlemen make large profits from

the scavengers. If the system is controlled to avoid middlemen cheating these hard workers,

organized scavenging would be a very prosperous livelihood for many people, an economic

gain for the city and an achievement in the field of solid waste management.

With regard to separation of wastes at the source, taking into account the needs of the

scavengers at the lowest level, would mean more employment for scavengers, reduction of

costs for collection and disposal, an additional source of income to households, reduction of

import of expensive raw materials from abroad, better living conditions for scavengers and

elimination of illegal street scavenging. Solid waste disposal operations currently absorb 30

to 50% of municipal operating budgets and the services provided may only cover the

collection of a fraction of the wastes generated.

2.8.2 Consumers/peoples' attitude and attribute towards waste management

Participation by the whole community for the municipal solid waste management program

is essential to bring about changes in the management with respect to source segregation,

recovery of reusable and recyclables and storage of the garbage prior to collection.

Consequently, public participation is national in scope and would involve everyone in the

country. A problem created by mankind due to inconsiderate act of consumerism (Seth et

al., 2010). Community participation is one of the direct behavior on efficient solid waste

management. Therefore, it is said that the public (households) form the largest category of

stakeholders in waste management (Joseph, 2006).

In the public attitude, they have a multilayered relationship to waste management activities:

as waste generators, waste service clients, receivers of information and participants in

mobilization for waste management and urban sanitation. Thus, in the waste management

system, peoples’ attitude and behaviors is very important. In the past decades, the times are

witness to the rapid economic growth through increasing consumers’ consumption

worldwide. This is the result causes environmental deterioration through over-consumption

and utilization of natural resources.

The consequences of environmental degradation are global warming, depletion of

stratospheric ozone layer, pollution of sea and rivers, noise and light pollution, acid rain and

desertification. About 40% of environmental degradation has been brought about by the

consumption activities of private households. As the environment continues to worsen, it has

become a persistent public concern in developed countries (White et al., 1999). Furthermore

it has also awakens developing countries to the green movement for preservation of the

environment.

Today the most important subject that affects and worries mankind is the issues concerned

with waste management. Waste management practices especially the municipal solid waste

can differ for developed and developing nations, for urban and rural areas, and for

residential, commercial and industrial producers. Waste collection methods vary widely

among different countries and regions. Domestic waste collection services are often

provided by local government authorities, or by private companies in the urban cities.

28

Countries and experts alike spend lot of time and resources to come out with a solution to

the problem of environmental degradation and climate change. Hence public participation is

one of the most important to be address on the solid waste management. In many developed

countries started to be more socially responsive in addressing pollution and waste disposal

by developing environmentally friendly packaging and putting in numerous efforts to keep

in-step with the environmental movement.

Table 2.3 Overview of Participation Problems (NEMA, 2004)

Problems Solutions Effects

Low

community

priority for

solid waste

management

Education

provision of appropriate

incentives

consultation with the

community

give community a role in

planning

community need

assessment study

on its own inadequate to

change priorities and needs

more appropriate system,

based on real priorities

and needs

Low

willingness to

participate

in collection

and recycling

household and city

competitions

pay households for their

participation

give proceeds of

recyclables to servants

education

effective

effective

effective

on its own inadequate to

change behavior

Low

willingness to

keep

public spaces

clean

periodical clean-ups

education and make site

valued

integrate street sweepers in

solid waste management

system

guard at transfer station

shared care taking systems

effective

Low

willingness to

pay

change way of payment

education

way of payment with

water bills-success

Unknown with electricity

bills—failed as a lump

sum-successful

on its own inadequate to

change willingness to pay

2.8.3 Role and participation of stakeholder in the solid waste management

Stakeholder is one of the main organization in the waste minimization system and waste

management system. National, state and local governments, research institutions and the

academic, the public, NGOs, the private sector and funding agencies will all have a role to

play to support priority actions. Stakeholders are people and organizations having an interest

29

in good waste management, and participating in activities that make that possible. They

include enterprises, organizations, households and all others who are engaged in some waste

management activity.

Stakeholders may generate waste, function as service providers or participate as state or local

government departments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other organizations

concerned with certain aspects of waste management. In rural areas, community

management is increasingly common but in urban settings formal relationships with

communities are rare and such initiatives are lacking. Identification of the stakeholders and

their interests is important in coordinating their participation and involvement in various

waste management activities.

Table 2.4 Key actors and their roles for environmental protection (Joseph, 2006)

SI.

No

Actor Role/Concern

1 Environmental

regulators

It is set about environmental regulations and standards,

monitoring and enforcement

2 Planning agency It is planned for integration of environment in developmental

planning

3 Politicians It aims to set the policy guidance with long term view in

allocating resources

4 Sector agencies It perform for the cross-sectoral organization and integration

of environmental concerns in projects

5 Public Public is the main influence because it performs participation

in decision-making, implementation and monitoring

6 NGOS Organizing community participation, voicing local concern

are performed by NGOS

7 Private sector It is also important for examining and implementing

appropriate actions

8 Media It is one of the essential factors for environmental awareness,

focus on real local priorities

9 Scientific

community

Focus on needs of vulnerable population and communication

to wider audience including policy makers, planners and

managers

10 Financial

institutions

The significant factors for supporting environmentally sound

developments

2.9 Municipal Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries

Integrated waste management systems are one of the most challenging for sustainable

development. Due to the growing volume of the solid waste generation at the local, regional

and global level, waste management is facing many problems. Solid wastes are the discarded

materials from their first user by various social activities considered as having lost their

value. Solid wastes include both organic and inorganic materials.

The functions of the solid waste management can include financial, legal, planning,

administration and engineering. In solving SWM problem in developing countries,

developed countries have provided technical assistance regarding the waste management

problem in the developing countries which can be solved by mechanization.

30

The living style and living standard of the developed and developing countries differ. In

developed countries, magazines, package food and disposable materials are used in greater

quantities. In the case of developing countries, the daily major consumption is fresh

vegetables, packaged food which has much higher moisture and density and most of the

discarded wastes are reusable.

The whole set of activities related to generation, source reduction, storage, handling,

collection, treatment and disposal of solid wastes is termed the waste management system.

The technical, environmental, financial, legal and social aspects of these elements need to

be balanced to attain sustainable waste management. The public plays an important role in

sustainable SWM for which awareness on waste reduction, segregation and recycling needs

to be enhanced.

2.9.1 MSW management practices in Thailand

Collection, separation, transfer, recycling, resource recovery, biological treatment and

disposal of solid waste are included in the MSW management. In Thailand MAW

management is practiced throughout the countries and can be categorized under four

boundaries: Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) Pattaya City Municipal Waste Management Sub-district Administrative Organization (ASO)

The following paragraphs explain the details of each of the boundaries of the waste

management system.

2.9.2 MSW collection and transportation

Bangkok Metropolitan Administration

According to the last section, in 2013, BMA collected 11,000 tonnes of waste daily. BMA

granted a contract to the private sector to manage the disposal. In 2011, 60% of the total

waste was dumped in the Kampaeng Saen District, Nakhon Pathom province landfill. The

other 40% of waste was transported to On-Nut waste transferring station, 5% of which wase

turned into fertilizer and 35% was sent for disposal at landfill, Panom Sarakham district,

Chachoengsao province.

Pattaya City

Pattaya City hired private sectors to collect and dispose waste at the, Khao Mai Kaew,

Banglamung District, Chonburi province landfill.

Municipal Waste Management

In the municipalities, there are 25,046 tonnes of waste produced. In 2012, there were 135

systems of fully constructed municipal waste treatment plants, of which 116 systems were

in operation in Thailand. Waste disposal systems consist of Landfill System (LF), Integrated

31

Systems (IS) and Incinerator Systems (InS). In 2013, there were 136 systems of fully

constructed municipal waste treatment plants. Table 2.3 presents operations of fully

constructed municipal waste treatment plants (PCD, 2013).

Sub district Administrative Organizations (SAO)

SAO generated 31,105 tonnes of waste per day which decreased from 2012. Waste collection

and disposal were conducted by PAO and SAO. Most of waste management practice is open

burning or dumping waste in isolated spaces. Only 11% of the total wastes generated in 2011

was properly managed. Since 2008 the waste has been properly disposed of more and more

resulted from promoting effective municipal waste management to Local Administrative

Organizations with collaboration of the Pollution Control Department, the Regional

Environment Office and Provincial Office of Natural Resources and Environment. There are

50 municipalities which met all waste management criteria including: 1) waste management

plan; 2) waste reduction, classification and utilization activity; 3) waste transferring service

covering the service area; 4) centralized waste management or sharing of waste disposals

with nearby Local Administrative Organizations; 5) increased efficiency of waste disposal;

and 6) earning from waste management

2.9.3 MSW disposal

In Thailand there are various forms of MSW management such as composting, sanitary

landfill, incineration, open dumping and others. In present, open dump system is the highest

fraction of MSW with 13.62 million tonnes of total MSW (Table 2.3). Compared to others

Thailand is one of the countries practicing a high proportion of open dump waste treatment.

The current practices of waste disposal in Thailand are listed below.

Table 2.5 Operations of Fully Constructed Municipal Waste Treatment Plants (PCD,

2013)

Type of waste

disposal

Operation status of fully constructed

municipal waste treatment plants (number)

In operation Operation

halted

Never in

operation Total

Landfill system )LF( 100 11 7 118

Integrated system )IS( 14 1 0 15

Incinerator system )InS( 3 0 0 3

Total 117 12 7 136

a) Open dumping Open dumping is a waste disposal method which has been widely used for a long time. It is

the most popular MSW management method in Thailand in which a large amount of MSW

can be disposed. Open dumping is a simple method and invests at low cost but it can also

cause visual pollution, and odours. In addition, open dumping can probably pollute the soil

and groundwater. The important issue is that this method needs a large area. Currently, the

area for dumping is not easy to find and is costly, thus, it is unsuitable for waste disposal.

Moreover, the MSW takes a long time to decompose.

32

b) Landfill

This method also uses a large area and is not environmentally friendly. Direct landfilling of

such waste causes a nuisance such as highly concentrated leachate, and extreme waste

settlement in landfill. Landfills are usually located far from sources, resulting in increased

transfer costs and additional investments for infrastructure. However, it is a better method

than open dumping. It is still necessary to decrease the amount of open dumping and open

burning of waste (Kaosol, 2009). 11 landfill systems were closed due to overload of solid

waste and complaints. Another seven landfill systems were not able to operate the systems

because Local Administrative Organizations were not ready or local people opposed them.

c) Incineration

Sanitary landfill is not enough for disposed MSW, thus incineration is used in the especially

huge municipality. Currently there are 3 incinerations for communities’ wastes: Phuket

province (250ton/day), Samui Island (75 ton/day), and Lamphun province (10 ton/day).

Even though incineration can rapidly reduce the amount of waste, it can cause air pollution

concerns especially in the tourist areas.

d) Integrated System (IS)

This method has waste recycling and recovery units. This integrated system includes a

combination of waste pre-treatment and waste to energy (WTE) technologies as in sorting,

anaerobic digestion, gasification/pyrolysis, stoker Incineration, landfill gas capture, and

sanitary landfill.

e) Composting

The majority of waste composition is suitable for composting as a method for the recovery

of organic wastes. Moreover composting generates a valuable fertilizer or a soil conditioner

for agricultural and horticultural uses. However, composting is not well practiced in

Thailand due to the lack of knowledge and the high cost in maintenance. This method needs

waste separation.

2.10 Solid Waste Sorting and Waste Segregation

Automated sorting and segregation provide significant improvements in terms of efficiency

and consistency in the process of waste sorting and segregation. In the case of macro sorting

and segregation, which is the most common type of automated sorting. The efficiency of the

process is determined by the mechanical details of the material handling system as well as

the detection system. To minimize waste generation and improve recovery and recycling

activities, solid waste sorting and waste segregation is the best approach. Therefore, it is said

that waste minimization starts from waste sorting and segregation.

2.10.1 Waste sorting

Waste Sorting is one of the critical strategies for waste administration framework. Waste

sorting is the procedure by which waste is divided into diverse components and distinctive

qualities. It is a sort of physical portrayal of waste. Waste sorting can happen physically at

the family and gathered through control side accumulation plans, or naturally divided in

33

material recuperation offices or mechanical organic treatment frameworks. Hand sorting was

the first technique utilized as a part of the historical backdrop of waste sorting.

Differentiating the diverse components found in waste streams is fundamental for

empowering the recuperation of helpful materials, minimizing the measure of material sent

to landfill and permitting recyclable materials to locate another incarnation. Sorting

frameworks recognize and sort grain sizes from 10 to 500mm, differentiated by size reaches.

They additionally give complete future adaptability, through the capacity to respond rapidly

and cost-viably to changes, for example, new regulation and adjustments in material

information streams. In the sorting framework, there are three primary routines, for example,

manual sorting, versatile sorting and minimized sorting.

Manual sorting is the strategy for utilizing men energy to sort the waste. For the situation,

the main huge things of the waste can be effortlessly sorted. Manual sorting frameworks are

for the most part one of two sorts - positive or negative sort frameworks (Wahab et al., 2006).

In a positive sort framework, PET containers and compartments are expelled from a flood

of plastic holders being extended a transport framework. In a negative sort framework, PET

jugs and holders are left on the transport framework and undesirable materials or

contaminants are expelled from the transport line.

Moreover, mechanized sorting frameworks utilize a location framework or a blend of

recognition frameworks to recognize the diverse sorts of plastic recyclable. As it is relied on

upon the men power, there can be some feeble focuses. To enhance the efficiencies of

manual sorting, is more than simply legitimate preparing of the workforce and giving a

protected and agreeable workplace for the sorters.

In the portable sorting, the reusing society, sorting is definitely situated to build these days.

Not all organizations can transport the waste to their own particular plants keeping in mind

the end goal to be divided it now and again this work needs to be done on location. Versatile

sorting machines are in this manner an unquestionable requirement, and one organization

that is driving the route in this field in waste screening is Doppstadt with its SM arrangement

of portable sorters. There are four distinct machines to look over relying upon the sort and

size of waste to be sorted, and each of them incorporates highlights intended to make them

simple to keep up, keep clean and transport.

Reduced Sorting: Mostly conservative sorting is being utilized as a part of the abnormal state

of variety in waste streams. Tt ordinarily takes a mix of advances to particular it all

effectively and the stream might likewise require more than one gone through the sifting

machine. Inside nowadays, the majority of the waste administration framework in created

nations are devouring this strategy.

2.10.2 Waste segregation

Waste Segregation and waste sorting is truly diverse in the importance. Waste isolation

means separating waste into dry waste and wet waste. Essentially, wet and dry waste

isolation is begun from the family unit level. Dry waste incorporates wood and related items,

metals, glass, plastic item and bundling waste. Wet waste, regularly alludes to natural waste

34

generally produced by eating foundations and are overwhelming in weight because of

clamminess. Basically Waste can likewise be isolated on premise of biodegradable or non-

biodegradable waste.

Typically, squander Segregation is likewise called source division. Source partition of MSW

into different parts is an imperative choice towards attaining to a supportable and coordinated

strong waste administration framework. It is likewise demonstrated that detachment of

natural waste from the MSW stream speaks to a chance to lessen the amount of waste

entering landfills in creating nations by up to 50% by weight (MaDougall et al., 2001). As

indicated by the UNEP 2005, it is additionally characterized that source detachment of strong

waste as the putting aside of compostable and recyclable material from the waste stream

before they are gathered with other MSW, to encourage reuse, reusing, and treating the soil.

In any case, this practice, absolutely missing in the strong waste administration practice of

most creating nations has long been a piece of the incorporated strong waste administration

arrangement of created nations. Particularly, natural and inorganic squanders has been

separated in the waste isolation process. Isolation is an imperative system for taking care of

civil strong waste. Isolation at source can be seen plainly by schematic representation. It is

the most ideal approach to decrease the measure of waste to send to the landfill. On the off

chance that the squanders are isolated wet and dry, it is truly effectives from the landfill as

well as in the financial.

During the time spent waste isolation, there are various classifications. Family unit waste

ought to be differentiated day by day into diverse packs for the distinctive classifications of

waste, for example, wet and dry waste, which ought to be discarded independently. One

ought to additionally keep a canister for harmful squanders, for example, medications,

batteries, dried paint, old knobs, and dried shoe shine. Wet waste, which comprises of

remaining foodstuff, vegetable peels, and so forth. Ought to be placed in a manure pit and

the fertilizer could be utilized as excrement as a part of the patio nursery. Dry waste

comprising of jars, aluminum foils, plastics, metal, glass, and paper could be reused.

The primary issue emerges because of non-isolation of wet and dry waste. At the point when

wet are dry are kept in the open dumping because of rot methodology smell begins spot gets

to be messy and waste can't be arranged off 100% as there are dry which is non-degradable

in nature. The fundamental issue is the way to gather or isolate the waste wet and dry waste

for the sources in a house. There are numerous issues related with the trash both society and

environment.

a) Effects of garbage on society

Open dumping and Burning of the waste

Leading to major health problem

The unhygienic condition the vehicles carrying waste

The odor created as the waste is transported in open

The health issues of municipal workers who handles the waste

Drainage choke environment hazards all the others ill effects

35

b) Effects of garbage in the environment

Pollution in atmosphere

Pushed into rivers, lakes etc.

Pollution of ground waste

Solid waste produces foul smell, breed insects or organism besides aesthetic value of

land.

Table 2.6 Different Type of Waste Segregation in the Household Level

Segregation

No Categories Sub Categories Example

1 Biodegradable

Waste Organic Waste

Food waste Vegetables, Leaves, Fruits,

Paper

2

Non-

Biodegradable

Waste

Inorganic Waste

Packaging Waste Paper packaging waste, Plastic packaging

Recyclable Waste Plastics, Paper, Glass Metals, Cans

Toxic Waste

Battery, old medicines, paints, chemicals,

bulbs, spray cans, fertilizer and pesticide

container

On the other hands, there have lots of advantages when the waste has been segregated. Some

point of waste segregation can be seen.

Advantages of segregation

As wet and dry waste is separated at sources, there will be minimum odor and clean during

transportation of waste

Raise up better health and hygiene conditions of people

Organic waste can be directly dumped composted landfill used for power generation

(energy recovery options)

Due to segregation there will be cleaned in the waste stream.

Dry waste can further be processed as per the requirements

Various alternatives can be designed for disposal.

If all the waste is segregated, it is really affected on the landfill. If the wet and dry wastes

are separated, the amount of leached are reduced and get more space in the landfill.

2.11 Organic Waste Composting

Compost is organic matter that has been decomposed and recycled as a fertilizer and soil

amendment. Compost is a main ingredient in organic farming. The process of composting

simply requires making a heap of wetted organic matter known as green waste (leaves, food

waste) and waiting for the materials to break down into humus after a period of weeks or

months. Modern, methodical composting is a multi-step, closely monitored process with

measured inputs of water, air, and carbon- and nitrogen-rich materials (USEPA, 1993).

Using compost made from recycling, such as organic wastes, is considered environmentally

sustainable (WRAP, 2003). Compost can be produced on a small scale, for example an

individual household, or on a large industrial scale for market purposes.

36

The decomposition process is aided by chopping the plant matter, adding water and ensuring

proper aeration by regularly turning the mixture. Worms and fungi further break up the

material. Aerobic bacteria and fungi manage the chemical process by converting the inputs

into heat, carbon dioxide and ammonium. The ammonium is the form of nitrogen (NH4) used

by plants. When available ammonium is not used by plants it is further converted by bacteria

into nitrates (NO3) through the process of nitrification.

Compost can be rich in nutrients. It is used in gardens, landscaping, horticulture, and

agriculture. The compost itself is beneficial for the land in many ways, including as a soil

conditioner, a fertilizer, addition of vital humus or humic acids, and as a natural pesticide for

soil. In ecosystems, compost is useful for erosion control, land and stream reclamation,

wetland construction, and as landfill cover. Organic ingredients intended for composting can

alternatively be used to generate biogas through anaerobic digestion. Anaerobic digestion is

fast overtaking composting in some parts of the world (especially central Europe) as a

primary means of down cycling waste organic matter.

Compost is generally recommended as an additive to soil, or other matrices such as coir and

peat, as a tilth improver, supplying humus and nutrients. It provides a rich growing medium,

or a porous, absorbent material that holds moisture and soluble minerals, providing the

support and nutrients in which plants can flourish, although it is rarely used alone, being

primarily mixed with soil, sand, grit, bark chips, vermiculite, perlite, or clay granules to

produce loam. Compost can be tilled directly into the soil or growing medium to boost the

level of organic matter and the overall fertility of the soil. Compost that is ready to be used

as an additive is dark brown or even black with an earthy smell.

Generally, direct seeding into compost is not recommended due to the speed with which it

may dry and the possible presence of phytotoxins that may inhibit germination, and the

possible tie up of nitrogen by incompletely decomposed lignin. It is very common to see

blends of 20–30% compost used for transplanting seedlings at cotyledon stage or later.

The composting process requires organic waste, such as leaves, grass, fruit and vegetable

scraps, soil (which contains microorganisms), water and oxygen. The microorganisms eat

the organic waste, breaking it down into its simplest components. The humus (finished

compost) they produce is rich with fiber and inorganic nutrients, such as phosphorus,

potassium and nitrogen, and it makes a natural fertilizer that is beneficial to the environment.

In order to produce this humus, the microorganisms need water, as do all living things, and

oxygen for aerobic respiration. The microorganisms access this oxygen when you turn over

the compost every day or two. In the respiration process they give off heat and carbon

dioxide. If it is regularly water and turn the compost in your compost bin or pile, the compost

can completely decompose in just two to three weeks. Otherwise it can take months to

decompose (USEPA, 1993).

Aside from regular turning and watering, the compost needs enough soil and the right ratio

of carbon to nitrogen (about 30:1). The smaller the pieces in your compost bin, the faster

they will break down. The food web or organization of organisms, within your compost pile

helps to increase the efficiency of the decomposing process. The food web includes fungi

and bacteria that break down the organic matter in your trash; protozoa, nematodes (small

worms) and mites that feed on the fungi and bacteria; and invertebrates, such as beetles, sow

bugs and millipedes that feed on the protozoa, nematodes and mites.

37

2.11.1 Manure composting manual

Ideally, composting will enhance the usefulness of organic by-products as fertilizers,

privately and commercially. Composting is receiving increased attention as an alternative

manure management practice due to increased pressures from society to reduce the impact

on the environment. The producer may see alternative benefits to the reduction in volume of

manure due to composting. Land base required to apply manure compost may stay the same

but the producer can economically haul compost further than manure. The advantages and

disadvantages of manual composter are shown in Table 2.7.

Table 2.7 Advantages and Disadvantages of Manual Composter (Alberta Agriculture,

Food and Rural Development, 2005)

Advantages Disadvantages

1. Reduces mass and volume lower

hauling costs

2. Reduces odor

3. Pathogens are destroyed

4. Kills weed seeds

5. Improves transportability

6. Soil conditioner

7. Improves nutrient qualities- the

nutrients from compost are

released slowly and steadily

8. Decreases pollutants - stabilizes the

volatile nitrogen into large protein

particles, reducing losses

9. Land application when convenient

10. Saleable product

11. Increases water retention of soil

1. Loss of ammonia (N)

2. Time and labor involved

3. Cost of equipment (initial and

operating)

4. Land required for composting

5. Marketing required for sale

2.11.2 Composting process

Composting is the term used for the decomposition process that occurs naturally in the

environment, in the presence of atmospheric oxygen. Composting is accomplished in two

main stages under controlled conditions: an active stage and a curing stage. In the active

composting stage, microorganisms consume oxygen (O2) while feeding on organic matter in

manure and produce heat, carbon dioxide (CO2) and water vapor. Most of the degradable

organic matter is decomposed during this stage. A management plan is needed to maintain

proper temperature, oxygen and moisture for the organisms.

Testing temperature, moisture content, and oxygen levels can help make decisions on

composting activities, such as turning, aerating, or adding moisture. In the curing phase,

microbial activity slows down and as the process nears completion, the material approaches

ambient air temperature. Finished compost takes on many of the characteristics of humus,

the organic fraction of soil. The material will have been reduced in volume by 20 to 60%,

the moisture content by 40% and the weight by up to 50%. One of the main challenges in

38

composting is to preserve as much nitrogen as possible. The process of composting is shown

in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4 Material flows for the conventional composting process

2.11.3 Factors Affecting the Composting Process

Controlling the process factors can accelerate the natural composting process. Each of these

factors has the potential to significantly affect the composting process. Some of the

important factors in the composting process are shown in Table 2.8 with their acceptable

ranges.

Table 2.8 Factors Affecting the Composting Process and Acceptable Ranges

No. Factor Acceptable Range

1 Temperature 54 - 60°C

2 Carbon to Nitrogen ratio (C:N) 25:1 - 30:1

3 Aeration, percent oxygen > 5%

4 Moisture content 50 - 60%

5 Porosity 30 - 36

6 pH 6.5 - 7.5

2.12 Research Gap

Solid Waste is one of the main burdens for the sustainable development of the green campus.

There are a few previous studied related with this research. However most all the books are

based on 3R principles and waste management system. This study would like to fill the gap

on household waste minimization by testing pilot demonstration of household waste

composting and household wet and dry waste segregation, and packaging waste segregation

in the community level which did not do in the previous research. This study would like to

fulfill the gap of what is the good practice and unsustainable practice in the campus

sustainability during the time gap between 2007 to until now. Thus by testing six months

analysis, this study can be filled the entire gap.

Raw Product:

Carbon, Nitrogen,

Organic, Water,

Microorganisms,

Pathogens,

Weeds, Other

organic waste

Mixing Composting

Pile Curin

End Product

Organic Matter,

Inorganic

Microorganisms

Water Vapor, Heat, CO2, NOx,

Other Gases

Oxygen

Composting Process

39

Chapter 3

Methodology

3.1 Overall Research Methodology

This study aimed at investigating the waste quantity and characteristics, as well as exploring

the existing waste management practices in AIT. The outcome of the study was to propose

suitable 3R strategies for sustainable solid waste management for transforming the

institution into green campus. To address these research objectives, following research

methodology was adopted (Figure 3.1).

Figure 3.1 Overall research methodology

This study was divided into four major parts. The first part was the detailed study of the

existing waste handling practices in AIT. This involved careful and regular observation of

the waste handling practices and review of past data and information. Second part was waste

audit, where primary data on solid waste generation and composition of various waste types

2. Waste Audit

and

Characterization

Ultimate Analysis

(% Carbon and

Nitrogen)

Solid Waste Management in AIT

3. 3R Pilot

Projects

4. People’s behavior

towards waste management

(Survey and Interview)

1. Existing waste

Handling Practice in AIT

(Observation and Literature

Review)

Solid Waste

Generation

Waste Composition

Analysis

Waste Flow in AIT

Recommended 3R Strategies for Sustainable Solid

Waste Management in AIT Campus

Proximate Analysis

(Moisture Content,

Volatile Solids, Ash

Content)

Chemical

Characterization

Curbside Packaging Waste

Segregation

Kitchen Waste

Composting

Household Dry and Wet

Waste Segregation

Energy Content

(Gross Calorific

Value)

40

was conducted through waste sampling technique, and waste characterization (proximate

and ultimate analysis, Energy content) were measured in laboratory. Third component of the

study was to demonstrate pilot activities, namely; household dry and wet waste segregation,

kitchen waste composting, and packaging waste segregation for recycling. Finally,

consumers’ behavior on in-campus waste management and their views on pilot projects were

evaluated through survey. Based on these information, the study proposed implementable

3R strategies for sustainable solid waste management in AIT campus.

3.2 Study Area

AIT campus is the study area for this study. AIT campus is stretched over square meter of

surface area. The campus has academic areas, residential areas and commercial areas,

representing as similar as a small township (Figure 3.2). AIT has a total of 118 buildings;

36 dormitories, three student villages, 68 houses, 19 academic buildings, and around 12

buildings for commercial set up- cafeteria, grocery, and other shopping arcades. The campus

also has many sports facilities.

The institution generates organic wastes and other dry recyclable wastes, which is similar to

any MSW. From waste management angle, the institution has basic facilities in place for

waste collection, transportation, and temporary storage. Each housing and academic units

are provided with a dustbin, and each building has a minimum of two garbage bins. Wastes

from these bins are collection every day and wastes are stored temporary at a transfer station,

located at the North East corner of the campus. Finally, the wastes are transported off for

disposal by local Tha-Khlong Municipal trucks. Though basic facilities for waste

management are available, the institution’s waste segregation and recovery is almost

negligible.

41

Figure 3.2 Study areas and selected sampling sites from different zones

Residential Zones Commercial Zones

Academic Zones Transfer Station

Legend

Selected areas from

academic zones

Selected areas from

Commercial zones

Selected areas from

residential zones

AIT Transfer Station

42

3.3 Detailed Methodology

Each component of the study was conducted using both primary data collection (through

field sampling, observations, and surveys), as well as reviewing secondary data. This section

explains the detailed tools and techniques used to conduct this study.

3.3.1 Existing waste handling practices in AIT

The study began with collection and review of past studies and secondary data on the solid

waste management in AIT. Major part of the methodology was review of past thesis on this

subject matter, followed by careful observation of the waste handling activities by the Office

of Facilities and Assets Management (OFAM). Information on garbage bins, waste

collection staffs, waste collection routes and timing, waste transfer station and waste disposal

were collected at this stage. Similarly, existing good practices such as recycling of food

waste for animal feed, segregation, and sell of recyclables at AIT campus were also

observed. To accomplish this, this study was used not only observation but also interviewing

to the stakeholder. The data sheet for the questionnaire is shown in the Appendix A.

3.3.2 Waste audit and waste characterization

Waste auditing is one of the best methods for quantifying the waste generated and

understanding the flows. Waste Audit consisted of measuring the waste generation rate, as

well as find the physical components of various waste types. Waste audit activities were

followed by laboratory assessment of the chemical characteristics of the waste types.

Waste Auditing was conducted once a month for a period of 7 months from August 2008 to

February 2015. As mentioned earlier, AIT campus represents a small town with residential,

commercial, and academic building, each sector generating different types of waste, thus for

waste sampling the campus was divided into various waste audit zones, as shown in Figure

3.3 below.

Figure 3.3 Waste audit zones

43

As shown in Figure 3.3, a bagful of waste from six buildings from each sector were collected

and mixed well for waste sampling and composition analysis. The waste sampling activity

was conducted at the AIT waste transfer station which is situated in the North of the AIT

campus. In additions, the detail information for the sampling frequency and sampling sites

are shown in the Appendix B-1.

3.3.2.1 Waste generation

Waste generation is one of the major parameter of waste audit. It is very important to know

how much of waste is generated, which then will help planning the proper waste

management. Waste generation in the campus was conducted twice; once in August and then

in December 2014. This was done to compare per capita waste generation in peak and off-

peak (i.e., academic semester start and semester-break) period.

Total waste generated in the campus was measured using two approaches. First, the waste

collection truck from Tha-Khlong Municipality was weighed, hence calculating the total

waste generated in a day. The second approach used was; all garbage bins spread across the

AIT campus was weighed. After finding the waste generated in a day, per capita waste

generation in AIT was calculated as below:

Per Capita Waste Generation rate ((kg/capita)/day) =Quatity of Solid Waste (

kgday

)

Population (Capita)

(3.1)

3.3.2.2 Waste composition analysis

Quartering and coning technique was used for the physical composition analysis of solid

waste generated in AIT. Waste sampling was conducted once a month for a period of August

2014 to March 2015 to observe any pattern of variation of the waste composition.

Waste composition samplings were conducted following the American Society for Testing

and Materials (ASTM International) Standard Test Method for Determination of the

Composition of Unprocessed Municipal Solid Waste [ASTM D5231-92(2003)]. Physical

composition analysis were carried out with coning, quartering, and manual sorting of waste

components.

Mixed wastes from 3 sectors in AIT were homogenously mixed and spread over the waste

sampling canvass at transfer station. After mixing it well, the waste load was divided into

four quarters, and the 2 diagonally opposite quarters were removed. This quartering was

until the final waste load reach between 91-136 kg, for manual sorting into different waste

components (Figure 3.4).

44

200-300 kg of MSW: side view

Divide into four equal sections: top view

Combine the opposite two sections (A & D) and mix

91-131 kg of MSW

1

2

3

4

A B

C D

A B

C D

Figure 3.4 Quartering sampling method

For waste composition analysis, the waste was manually sorted into following different

components;

o Plastic Packaging: bottles, bags, Styrofoam

o Paper Packaging: cardboard, beverage cartons, corrugated boards

o Office paper, newspaper

o Glass bottles

o Metals: Steel, Aluminum cans

o Food waste

o Yard waste

o Leather

o Rubber

o Textile

o Tissues paper

o Nappies

o Household hazardous waste: batteries, medicines

o Electronic and Electrical waste

o Others

The component-wise analysis were conducted with hand sorting. Each material category was

sorted, weighed and registered in data sheet (Appendix B-2). The percentage weight fraction

of each component in the sorting sample was calculated using Equation 3-2:

45

C =(Wi×100)

W (3-2)

Where, C: Percentage of each waste composition

Wi: Weight of the component/material in waste

W: Weight of the mixed waste

Appendix C presents a detailed list of schedule, tools, equipment, and detailed sampling

procedure.

Bulk density of the waste was also measured every time waste composition analysis was

conducted. Bulk density is an indicator of compaction. It was calculated by filling the bucket

of 200L until it is overflowing and the loaded bucket was lifted up to about 6 cm from the

ground and dropped repeatedly three times to top up the waste. Then the loaded bucket was

weighed. Bulk density was hence calculated by subtracting the bucked loaded with waste

from the weight of the empty bucket, and divided by the volume of the waste bucket, as

shown in equation 3-3 below.

Bulk Density =W1 − W2

V

Where, W1: Weight of Solid Waste and Container

W2: Weight of Container

V: Volume of the Container

3.3.2.3 Chemical characterization

Chemical/thermal properties of MSW are very important in evaluating the alternative

processing and recovery options. The three most important properties 1) proximate analysis

2) ultimate analysis 3) energy content were measured in laboratory. One kg of mixed waste

sample was brought, and was ground using blending machine and the following parameters

were measured.

a) Proximate analysis

The determination of percentage of moisture content, ash content, volatile matter content

and the calculation of percentage of fixed carbon were conducted according to using the

Gravimetric Analysis method.

Moisture content (drying at 105 °C for 1 h)

The percent moisture of the MSW samples was determined by weighing of samples before

and after drying in an oven at 105°C to a constant weight. Firstly, 1 gram (g) of wet grinded

sample was taken on evaporation dish. The sample was then put into the 105°C oven for one

hour. Finally, after one hour, the sample was taken off from the oven and put into the

desiccator to cool off. After cooling off, weight of the oven-dried sample was weight. The

percent moisture content (MC) was calculated as a percentage loss in weight before and after

drying.

(3.3)

46

%Moisture Content =Wet Weight − Dry Weight

Wet Weight× 100%

Volatile solid (ignition at 950 °C in the absence of oxygen)

The amount of matter that volatilizes when heated is defined as a volatile solid. The volatile

solid content is determined by the method of ignition of the sample at 950°C. The triplicate

samples of MSW material which were used in the moisture content determination were

weighed and placed in a muffle furnace for 7 minutes at 950°C. After combustion within 7

minutes, the samples were put in desiccator again to cool down. After around 1 hour, samples

were weighed to determine the ash dry weight, with volatile solids being the difference

between the dried solids and the ash.

% Volatile Solid = Dry Sample Weight − Ash Weight

Dry Sample Weight x 100

Ash content (ignition at 750 °C for 1 hours)

Ash content indicates the mass of incombustible material remaining after burning a given

waste sample as a percentage of the original mass of the waste sample. Samples used for

moisture content and volatile solid determination were directly used for ash content

determination. Weigh of samples were recorded first, and samples were then burned and

transferred to furnace operated at 750˚C for one hour. The remaining ash was allowed to

cool down in the desiccator before the recording of ash weight.

% Ash Content (AC) = Ash Weight

Dry Sample Weight× 100%

b) Ultimate/elemental analyses

Under ultimate analysis, % content in Carbon (C), and Nitrogen (N) were measured, using.

Gravimetric method.

Carbon determination

Carbon content is one of the main factors in the solid waste management system. Gravimetric

Analysis method was used to measure the total organic carbon. 0.1 g of sample was taken in

a conical flask which was then added with 10 ml of 0.1 N K2Cr2O7. With another 10 ml of

conc: H2SO4 added, the sample mixture was mixed for 10-20 minutes and left for sample 1-

2 hours at room temperature. After 2 hours, 50 ml of distilled water and 5 drops of indicator

were added and titrated with 0.5 N Ammonium Ferrous Sulphate 0.5Fe(NH4)2(SO4)2.6H2O.

Once the sample color matched to the color of the indicator, the reading was noted. The total

organic Carbon was then calculated using the Equation 3.7.

% Total Organic Carbon = 10 × (B − S) × 100 × 3 × 100 × N

B × 77 × 1000 × W

(3-4)

(3-6)

(3-7)

(3-5)

47

B= Volume of the FAS for Blank (ml),

S= Volume of the FAS for Sample

W= Weight of the Sample (g)

N= Concentration of K2Cr2O7

Nitrogen determination

Nitrogen is one of the main important parameters for municipal solid waste management

system, because C: N ration determines suitable waste treatment procedures. In this study,

total organic nitrogen was tested by using the Semi-Micro-Kjeldahl Digesting method which

is one of the best method using for Nitrogen determination. Determination procedure was

shown is the Appendix-C. The calculation of the nitrogen was shown in the Equation 3-8

NH3 − N(mg

g) =

(A − B)x280

(g)of Dry wt Sample

Where A = volume of H2SO4 titrated for sample, ml

B = volume of H2SO4 titrated for blank, ml

c) Energy content

Heating value is exothermal to water per weight of ignited MSW. The temperature of water

will increase and can read from thermometer. The Heating value’s unit is MJ/kg, BTU/lb,

kcal/kg or cal/g. The higher the calorific value of the waste the more energy can be extracted.

Bomb Calorie Meter was used to determine the energy content of the sample.

1 g of dry solid sample was put into the bomb calorimeter and heated for 10 -15 minutes.

Once the explosive sound was heard, High-heating value (HHV) for the sample was noted.

Low heating value can be calculating, if Hydrogen, Sulfur, Oxygen contents are kwon. But

this study was only focused on HHV.

3.3.3 Pilot projects

After careful observation, and initial studies on waste composition analysis, three projects

were designed and tested as pilot demonstration. The objectives of these pilot project

demonstration was to evaluate their performance and recommend the successful project(s)

as suitable 3R strategies for achieving sustainable solid waste management in AIT campus.

The selected areas for the pilot demonstration projects are shown in the Figure 3.5.

(3-8)

48

Figure 3.5 Pilot demonstration project areas

Pilot project areas for

packaging waste segregation

Pilot project areas for

Household waste segregation Pilot project areas for

Kitchen waste composter

Legend:

Selected areas for packaging

waste segregation

Selected areas for household

waste segregation

Selected areas for organic

waste composter

49

3.3.3.1 Household dry and wet waste segregation

Waste segregation at source is an important aspects of waste recovery. A pocket of

residential colonies (ST6, ST7 and Student Village 3- with cooking facility) was selected as

the pilot location for household waste segregation. Each household was provided with 1

black and 1 white bin bag per week to segregate dry and wet wastes. Black bag is for wet

waste (food waste and leftovers and fruit and vegetable scraps etc.), and white bag for dry

wastes (paper, plastic, metal, glass etc.). The residents were requested to bin black bag in

green garbage bin, and white bag into yellow bins located at each building.

Figure 3.6 Black and white bag for wet and dry waste segregation

The green and yellow bins were checked once in every week to check if the resident are

segregating dry and wet waste correctly. The record data sheet for household wet and dry

waste segregation activities is shown in the Appendix D. The recyclables segregated in

white bags were recovered by the institute’s cleaning staffs for selling. Promotional

materials such as flyer and brochure/stickers were distributed to each household for

facilitating proper waste segregation, which are presented in Appendix D-1.

This project was pilot for a month of three months from Aug- Oct 2014. A survey was

conducted to the participating residents just before and after this pilot project to gather their

views on the project. After the post project period, black and white bags were not provided

to residents, to see if residents are continuing the dryad n wet waste segregation on their

own. The survey questionnaires are presented in Appendix D-2 and D-3.

White Plastic

Bag – Dry waste Black Plastic Bag

– Wet waste

50

3.3.3.2 Organic waste composter

Like a typical MSW composition of a developing country, organic waste is almost half of

the total solid waste generated in campus. Among organic wasted, food wastes and waste

from kitchen are significantly larger. Hence, managing kitchen waste through composting

was chosen as a second pilot project.

An aerated in-vessel composter of 200L Plastic barrel (Figure 3.7) was fabricated and

distributed to three participants for composting their kitchen waste. The compost bin is

suitable for using in urban houses with less space. The base of the compost was layered with

20-40cm of gravel, 20 cm of mature compost for leachate flow as well as accelerating the

composting activities of freshly added waste. Each week the compost parameters (moisture,

C, N, odor, etc.) were observed closely, and necessary amendments were done to facilitate

proper composting.

Figure 3.7 Front view, side view and top view of composter

The composters were distributed on August 2014 and are expected to produce mature

compost within 6 months’ time, which the residents can use in gardens as soil amendments.

The survey data sheet for managing composter is shown in Appendix E- 1.

3.3.3.3 Curbside packaging waste segregation

Along with organic waste, packaging waste is another waste types of concern in AIT. To

segregate plastic bottles, glass bottles and metal cans 3 cage bins were placed in public space

(at the premises of 108 Lawson, EEM Block SERD Building, ITServe Building, and AIT

International School) to segregate these dry recyclables, which are then emptied once a

week by cleaning staffs are sold to local junk dealer. This project is promoting self-

sustainability by supporting extra income to the cleaning staffs. Data of each type of

recyclables collected from these curbside cage bins are recorded in the data sheets as shown

in Appendix E-2.

0.85 m.0.42 m.

Front View

0.18 m.

0.33 m.

0.51 m.

0.0

4 m

.

0.19 m.

0.05 m.

0.07 m.

0.85 m.

Side View

0.18 m.

0.16 m.

0.19 m.

Top View

Ø 0.51 m

0.0

4 m

.

51

3.3.4 People’s attitude and behavior towards waste management

People’s attitude and behavior are one of the main parameter for any sustainable solid waste

management policy and program to work. AIT is a home to a community of people from

mixed nationalities. To understand AIT residents’ attitude and viewpoints on the institute’s

solid waste management situation, a detailed questionnaire survey was conducted. A random

sampling was done to survey 400 respondents, however, care was given to include

representatives from different nationalities, and educational background etc., also both AIT

residents and non-residents were included in the survey. The survey questionnaire is

presented in Appendix F. The questionnaire was distributed to the community and filled

questionnaires were collected after a week. The main objective of the questionnaire was to

gauge the knowledge on 3R activities and their willingness to participate in sustainable solid

waste management activities inside AIT campus.

3.4 Summary of Data Collection Method

Both primary and secondary data collection tools and techniques were used in the study.

Table 3.1 below summarizes the data collection and analysis method to achieve the set

objectives of this study.

52

Table 3.1 Overall Data Collection Method

Objectives Data Collection Output Sources

Objectives

(1)

Waste Audit

Primary Data

- Waste Sampling,

- Quartering

Method,

- Observation

- Organic waste

- Inorganic waste

- Packaging waste

- Recyclable waste

- Non-recyclable

waste

AIT campus

waste

Secondary Data

- Literature Review

- Interview testing

- The amount of

waste generated

per day and

management

system

Previous

theses,

OFAM,

CMO

Objectives (2)

Compare

waste

management

situation

Primary Data

- Interview Survey

to the residents

from different

sectors

- People’s

behaviors

- Practice of

Awareness on

Environment

Residents

(Staff,

Faculty and

Student)

Secondary Data

- Literature Review

- Interview testing

- The existing

practice SWM

Previous

theses,

OFAM,

CMO

Objectives (3)

Performance

of the pilot

projects

Primary Data

- Distribution

Composter

- Regular

Monitoring

- Benchmarking

- Regular

management

- Introducing to the

community the

best way of waste

minimization

technique.

Organic

waste

generated

from the

AIT campus

Secondary Data

- Literature Review

- Questionnaire

survey.

- General

information of

composting

method.

Internet

websites,

Books

Both quantitative and qualitative data from the survey and field measurements were analyzed

by using Microsoft Excel and SPSS.

53

Chapter 4

Results and Discussions

This study is a detailed work of walk-through inspection, primary data collection and review

of secondary data on solid waste management in AIT Campus. This chapter, in its first

section, presents the results of existing MSW management and handling practices in AIT

then, it is also presented solid waste generation, composition, and characterization. The

second section deals with the situation of existing good practices of MSWM in AIT. The

performance of 3R pilot projects are presented in third section. This chapter concludes with

the analysis of people’s attitude and behavior on in-campus waste management and overall

waste generation flow in the AIT Campus.

4.1 Existing Situation of Solid Waste Management in AIT

This section presents results of solid waste generation rate, physical composition and

chemical characteristics of wastes, and the current practice of waste handling – garbage bin

allocation, waste collection and transportation, and disposal system in AIT.

4.1.1 Solid waste generation

Estimation of solid waste generation is one of the critical information for solid waste

management planning and implementation. MSW generation models not only estimate

current status but also helps projection of waste generation in future. Therefore solid waste

generation is one of the important character in waste management in every country, city or

an institution.

Solid waste generation in AIT campus was measured by manually weighing the waste from

entire campus for a day at the final stage, i.e., MRF, as well as by weighing the municipal

waste collection truck that transports and disposes AIT’s waste. To get the representative

result, three times of waste measurement were done. Such measurements were carried once

in September 2014 which is semester starts period and in December 2014 which is semester

off period and in April 2015 which is the Mid-period of a semester. The results showed that

daily waste generation during September was 1.18 tonnes/day, 1.07 tonnes/day in December

2014, and 1.68 tonnes/day in April as shown in Figure 4.1.

54

Figure 4.1 Solid waste generation in AIT in three different periods

There is not much of difference in daily waste generation during these two months. However,

the slight decrease in waste during December is because of the semester break for extended

holiday season. Another probable reason for only slightest decrease might be the family

members visiting AIT during that period. Looking at the past trend, in 2007/2008 AIT

generated nearly 2 tonnes of waste per day as compared to 1.18 tonnes/ day in 2014. This

makes the annual waste generation in AIT decline from 700 tonnes between 2006 till 2008

to 478 tonnes in the year 2014 gone to the final disposal stage to the AIT transfer station

MRF. However, in AIT, recycling activities happen before those recyclables reach to this

final point- MRF. Therefore, the annual total waste generation in AIT is around 528.6 tonnes

in the current year 2104-2015.

This decline in annual waste generation is however not necessarily because of the waste

reduction activities but the lesser number of AIT population. In 2006/2008 AIT population

was around 3,800 as compared to 2,943 in 2014. Table 4.1 below presents the daily, annual

and per capita waste generation in AIT.

Table 4.1 Trends of Waste Generation in AIT

No Year Population

Generation

Rate

(tonnes/day)

Per Capita

(kg/person/day) Source

1 2007 3,800 2 0.53 Dev, 2007

2 2008 3,800 2 0.53 Pietikainen, 2008

3 2014 2,943 1.5 0.5 Current study,

2014

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Semester Break

Semester Peak

Semester Mid

Waste Generation at the MRF (tonne/day)

Dif

fere

nt

Tim

e P

erio

d

55

According to Thailand State of Pollution Report 2013, the average rate of solid waste

generation in Thailand is 1.15 kg per person per day for Town Municipalities, and 0.85

kg/person/day for Pathumthani Province (PCD, 2013). The current per capita waste

generation in AIT (0.5 kg/person/day), is in fact more than times lesser that the national

average, and nearly half the Provincial average.

4.1.2 Physical composition of solid waste

Like waste quantity, waste composition is also an equally important aspect of setting waste

management goals, tracking progress of those goals, and selecting the suitable waste

recycling, recovery and sound disposal technologies. Physical composition analysis of solid

waste in AIT was carried out once a month for 8 months from August 2014 to March 2015.

Individual components that typically make up most of the municipal solid wastes were

categorized into 10 categories: food waste, yard waste, plastic, paper, leather/textile/rubber

(LTR), glass, metal and aluminum (can), hazardous waste (medicine, dry batteries, and

household electronic and electronic device waste), sanitary napkins, and others. These main

components were further segregated up to 21 sub-categories.

Paper was divided into 6 sub-categories such as Office paper, Paper bags, Beverage Cartons,

Corrugated Box, Single-use paper cup, and Toilet paper; plastics into 3 sub-categories such

as plastic bottle (PET, HDPE, and Mixed Plastic), plastic bags, and single-use plastic cups.

Monthly waste composition data for each of the identified 21 components is presented in

Appendix F.1. However, in this discussion, for paper, it is discussed as four different

components such as non-recyclable mixed paper which includes paper bag, beverage cartons

and single use paper cusps, toilet paper, recyclable paper and office paper then, plastic into

recyclable plastic which includes PET bottle, HDPE bottle and others mixed plastic bottle

and non-recyclable plastic included plastic bags and single use plastic waste.

The Figure 4.2 below presents the average value (% wet weight basis) of each of the

identified waste components from mixed solid waste generated inside AIT campus. The

percentage wet weight composition value in the figure is an average of the 8 months waste

composition data, and the overall representation of waste composition from AIT. The

detailed process of waste auditing for physical composition analysis are shown in Appendix

(F-2).

56

Figure 4.2 Average (%) wet weight composition of waste in AIT campus

The top three waste components were identified as; Food waste (52.5%), non-recyclable

plastic (20.2%; 18% was the single-use grocery bags), and non-recyclable mixed paper

(6.8%; 3.3% of which was the used toilet paper). Other recyclable items accounted for nearly

15% of the total waste; glass bottle (6.7%), plastic bottle (3.6%), recyclable paper (3.5%),

and Metal cans (1.5%). Emerging wastes like baby nappies and sanitary napkins is almost

2% of the total waste composition.

According to the analysis data, it has been significantly seen that although AIT is higher

education institution, the office paper waste generation in AIT is only 1.4% of the total waste.

It is because of the result of recycling activities in the campus. According to the observation,

Office Paper is recycled by cash-for-trash recycling activities and by the cleaning staff. Then,

as mostly people are using toilet paper, the amount of toilet paper waste generation in the

campus was 3.3% of the total waste, which was significantly higher than LTR and household

electronic and electronic device waste. According to the observation result, the number of

female residents are higher than male, therefore, in the waste stream, the amount of sanitary

napkins are up to 1.8% of the total waste.

The waste components were further categorized into combustible and non-combustibles.

Combustible wastes here included food, plastic, paper, yard waste and LTR. Non-

combustible waste included glass, metal and aluminum, household hazardous waste, sanitary

napkin, and other wastes. The above classification of categorizing is based on the finding

from Denison and Ruston (1990), Krieth (1994) and Zerbock (2003). Such categorization of

waste is usually important from the point of view of energy recovery from wastes using

Food Waste (52.5)

Non-Recyclable Plastic (20.2)

Toilet Paper (3.3)

Non-Recyclable Paper (3.5)

Office Paper (1.4)

Corrugated, Cardbord and

Folding Box (2.1)

Recyclalbe Plastic (3.6)

Glass Bottle (6.7)

Metal Can (1.5)

Sanitary Napkins (1.8)LTR (2.2) Household Electronic and Electronic Device

(0.5)

Yard Waste (0.8)

57

thermal technologies. The Figure 4.3 shows the difference in these waste types in the year

2007 and current year (2014).

Figure 4.3 Combustible and non-combustible wastes in AIT

According to Dev 2007, the percentage of combustible waste generation in AIT is nearly

95% of the total waste but currently it is only nearly 90%. This small decline in combustible

waste is due to decreased food waste (from 61% to 52.5%), and plastic waste (from 25.12%

to 23.2%). Non-combustible wastes in 2014 is almost double than it used to be in 2007.

Waste components adding to non-combustible wastes are beverage cartons, glass bottles and

metal cans.

To conclude that in 2007, waste generation in AIT was high % of organic waste in the waste

stream and the rate of beverage cartons was not much high. But in 2014, although the rate

of organic waste is a little bit declined, the rate of packaging waste and usage of glass bottle

and metal can is much climbed up. Thus, the result showed that AIT residents are seem to

use generate more packaging waste than 2007.

4.1.2.1 Physical composition of solid waste from three different sectors

AIT is a closed community with three Zones; commercial areas, residential areas and

academic areas. This study made a comparison of physical characteristics of solid waste

generated from these different areas, which can be seen in Figure 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6. The raw

date sheet of waste generation from three different sectors are shown in Appendix (F.3a)

Figure 4.4 is the physical composition of waste from commercial areas. Commercial areas

here include grocery shops, AIT arcade areas, Homkurm coffee shop and cafeteria.

94.6

5.4

89.5

10.4

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Combustible Non-Combustible

% o

f th

e W

aste

by W

et B

asis

2007 2014

58

Figure 4.4 Physical composition of solid waste from commercial sectors (%) by wet

weight

As these commercial areas included cafeteria and other restaurants inside the campus, only

three quarter of waste generated from commercial sector was food waste. Other wastes from

this sector included; plastic wastes, glass bottles, metal cans and paper packaging materials.

Waste composition from residential area is presented in Figure 4.5. Waste composition from

residential sector is in the similar line with commercial sector wastes. However, three more

categories of wastes- toilet paper, sanitary napkins and LTR were the additional waste

components from residential sectors.

Figure 4.5 Physical composition of solid waste from residential sectors (%) by wet

weight

Food waste still makes the largest proportion (56.2%) of waste from residential sector. This

is obvious because most of the residential colonies have kitchen. Plastic waste accounted

for 26.5%. Styrofoam boxes were notably larger proportion among plastic waste- these

Food Waste

(74.5)

Non -reryclable

Plastic (13)

Non-Recyclable Paper (1.6)

Recyclable Plastic (5.2)

Glass Bottle (3.2)

Metal Can (2.5)

Food Waste (56.2)

Non-Recyclable Plastic (23)

Non-recyclable Paper (2.5)

Toilet Paper (1.4)

Recyclable Plastic (3.3)

Recyclable Paper (1.6)

Glass Bottle (8.2)

Metal Can (3.0)Sanitary Napkins (0.3)

LTR (0.5)

59

boxes are used for take-away food. Other waste components were; glass bottle 8.2%, paper

waste 5.2%, and metal can around 3%. Sanitary napkins and LTR were the smallest

additions, 0.3% and 0.5% respectively.

Figure 4.6 is the representation of waste composition from academic/office areas. In the

academic areas, almost all the components wastes are seen.

Figure 4.6 Physical composition of solid waste from academic sectors (%) by wet

weight

In academic areas too, food waste is the largest proportion of waste, however the value is

only 41% as compared to 75% from commercial and 56% from residential areas. The second

largest amount of waste from this area was plastic which was 35.8%, and followed by paper

wastes at 9%, with toilet paper being 2.6%. There is also a lot of food wastes found from

almost all sections of AIT, as many people consume food within the academic and administrative

buildings.

Besides, in the academic areas, although there is no kitchen facilities, the amount of food

waste is the highest among the others waste due to the result of most of the students and

faculty members bring the lunch box and eat in those areas. Sanitary napkins waste

generation from the academic waste around 2.2% of the total waste from those sectors and

it was the highest if it compared three different sectors. It is because of both staff and student

spend more time in the academic areas. Moreover, it can be pointed out that the ratio of

female staff is much higher than the male.

In conclusion, food waste and packaging wastes were the top waste components for all three

sectors. In addition, physical composition of solid waste from three different sectors are

compared with the past data. According to 2007 data, it was mainly compared with two main

types of waste which are organic and inorganic waste (Dev, 2007). Organic waste here

includes food waste, yard waste and LTR and inorganic waste includes plastic, glass,

hazardous waste, nappies and sanitary napkins. Table 4.2 shows the comparison of organic

and inorganic waste generation in 2007 and 2014.

Food Waste (41)

Non-recyclable Plastic (30.6)

Non-recyclable Paper (4.5)

Toilet Paper 2.6

Yard Waste (1.1)

Recyclable Plastic (5.2)

Office Paper (0.4)

Recyclable Paper (1.5)

Glass Bottle (6.0)

Metal Can (1.5)

Sanitary Napkins (2.2)Household Electronic and Electronic Device (2.2)

LTR (1.1)

60

Table 4.2 Comparison of Waste Generation in 2014 and 2007 (Field Survey 2014 and

Dev, 2007)

No Sources

2014-2015 (%) by Weight 2007 (%) by Weight

Organic

Waste

Inorganic

Waste

Organic

Waste

Inorganic

Waste

1 Commercial

Sectors

76.1 23.9 85.4 14.6

2 Residential Sectors 62.2 37.8 64.4 35.6

3 Academic Sectors 52.2 47.8 26.7 73.3

In the year of 2007, organic waste generation from commercial was higher than current

situation. Organic waste from residential sector is more or less constant, however, there has

been a significant hike in organic waste in Academic sector in 2014.

According to observation, the main organic waste from the academic sectors are food waste

and toilet paper waste and yard waste. Thus, within these years, the rate of eating in the

academic building is increased and the amount of using toilet paper is parallel increased.

Consequently, the rate of organic waste generation in the academic areas is increased.

4.1.2.2 Seasonal variation of waste generation in the AIT campus

Thailand’s weather can be broadly classified as Wet Season (August-October), and Dry

season (November- March). In the Figure 4.7, seasonal variation of waste generation in the

AIT campus is shown, however, this figure is only showed the significant variation

components. The detail result of each components is shown in Appendix (G-3b).

There is no certain trend of variation of waste according to season. Nevertheless, paper,

plastic and glass waste generation was higher in dry season, while food waste, sanitary

napkins and LTR were higher in wet season. Although, food waste in wet season was around

59% of the total waste, it was only 50% of the total waste in the dry season. On the other

hand, packaging waste generation was less in the wet season. The packing waste glass bottles

and plastic bottles to be higher in dry season can be related to the higher consumption of

cold drinks during summer/dry seasons.

61

Figure 4.7 Seasonal variation of waste generation in AIT campus

4.1.2.3 Monthly variation in the composition of the selected waste components

This section describes the monthly variation in the composition of selected few waste types

found in AIT’s waste. Variation in the composition of all 21 sub-components of wastes from

August 2014 to March 2015 is presented in Appendix F.3. The section describes in detail

the variation of chosen waste components, namely- Organic waste (food waste), and dry

recyclables (glass, metal, plastic and paper).

Plastic, glass, and metal can

Figure 4.8 shows the monthly variation of the recyclable wastes (plastic, glass, and metal)

in the AIT waste stream from August 2014 to March 2015.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Food Waste

Non Recyclable Plastic

Non Recyclable Paper

Recyclable Plastic (Plastic Bottle)

Recyclable Paper

Glass Bottle

Metal Can

% of the Waste by Weight

Com

ponen

ts

Dry Season Wet Season

62

Figure 4.8 Monthly variation of plastic bottle, glass bottle and metal can

The graph shows that the lowest proportion of plastic bottles was measured in the month of

August, and the highest in the month of October 2014. In terms of glass bottles, the highest

proportion was observed in March 2015. Metal cans were also more in November. In

conclusion, none of the dry recyclables showed any specific pattern of variation. According

to the result, it has been pointed out that although there are some of the recyclable activities

in the AIT Campus since August 2014, the rate of recyclable waste in the waste stream at

the disposal stage in the MRF is still higher. This shows a grim picture of lack of waste

segregation activities by the residents.

Recyclable paper waste

Recyclables paper here included office paper and corrugated box. The figure 4.9 below

shows the variation of recyclable paper waste composition in the AIT campus for 8 sampling

months.

Figure 4.9 Monthly variation of recyclable paper waste

August September October November December January February March

Plastic Bottle 1.4 3.5 5.4 4.0 3.1 4.4 3.4 3.4

Glass Bottle 1.4 7.1 3.8 7.5 7.4 9.0 8.1 9.7

Aluminum Steel Can 1.7 1.0 2.0 1.9 1.2 1.5 0.8 1.8

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

% o

f W

aste

by W

et W

eigh

t

Plastic Bottle Glass Bottle Aluminum Steel Can

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

August September October November December January February March

% o

f W

aste

by W

et B

asis

Office Paper Corrugated Box

63

Office paper composition showed an increase every month, with sharp increase till February.

However, the office paper sharply declined for March. Corrugated boxes on the other hand

showed monthly fluctuation, but shows the increasing trend in March. Office paper waste

was significantly high in the month of August, December and January.

Food waste

In the AIT campus, average proportion of food waste accounts for nearly half of the entire

waste composition. As seen in the Figure 4.10 below, food waste composition has fluctuating

trend, with the proportion lowering in August, November, and March, and at higher

proportion in the months of September, October, and December.

There has two possible situations why food waste generation is fluctuated. One reason is

weather condition and another one is number of people staying in the campus. Generally

September and October are the peak season of the semester and all the student are staying in

the campus because of this issue the amount of food waste generation was high. Besides,

September and October are wet season of the year. Because of the weather condition, waste

from the garbage bin absorb moisture and water from the rain and atmosphere. Because of

these reasons, the rate of food waste can became high.

Figure 4.10 Monthly variation of food waste generation

Higher proportion of food waste in December can be related to the festive season and

Graduation party in the campus.

4.1.3 Chemical characteristics of MSW

Chemical composition of solid waste is one of the critical factors in the solid waste

management system to identify suitable waste recovery options. Basic proximate and

ultimate analysis were conducted for the mixed solid waste from AIT campus.

Proximate analysis was conducted according to the ASTM standards D7582-12 including

determination of % moisture content, % volatile matter content, % ash content, and the

calculation of % fixed carbon. The ultimate analysis, it has some limitation because in this

study it was analyzed only C and N by using Gravimetric analysis methods which are total

48.5

60.7 60.9

48.7

60.1

52.5

46.9

41.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

August September October November December January February March

% o

f W

ast

e b

y W

et W

eig

ht

64

organic carbon determination method for Carbon and total Kajehal method for Nitrogen (N).

The gross calorific value was analyzed by using bomb calorie meter.

4.1.3.1 Proximate analysis

The main purpose of proximate analysis was carried out in the estimation capability of MSW

as a fuel. In the study, the percentage of moisture content in AIT is expressed by based on

wet weight although the percentage of volatile matter, ash, and fixed carbon are expressed

by dry based weight, as in the Table 4.3.

Table 4.3 Proximate Analysis of MSW in AIT Campus

No Sample Moisture

Content (%)

Volatile Solid

(%)

Ash Content

(%)

Fixed Carbon

(%)

1 Solid waste in AIT 43.5 83.85 4 12.15

2 Thailand Standard 50-60 50-80 5-15 -

Moisture content (%)

Average moisture content of solid waste in AIT was 43.5%. According to the (PCD, 2004),

the moisture content in Thailand is around 50-60%. Therefore, the average moisture content

in AIT is lower than the national standard. The amount of moisture content is much depended

on the composition of waste generation. Currently, in AIT, although the amount of organic

waste such as food waste generation in AIT is the highest as a portion, it is not as high as the

past time.

Volatile solid, fixed carbon and ash content (%)

MSW of AIT was contributed the average high volatile solids of 83.85%, fixed carbon of

12.15% and ash content of 4% as dry basis as presented in Table 4.3. When the result of

volatile solid from AIT was compared with standard volatile solid matter, it is set that volatile

matter is approximately 50-80% in Thailand.

Ash content in AIT waste was only 4%. The standard ash content is normally in the range of

5-15% )USEPA, 2014(. If the ash content is high, it was caused by the amount of inerts

found in the MSW sample. But, the ash content in MSW from AIT was low because there is

no inerts found in the MSW. The ash content is also an indicator of how good the quality of

the MSW is for use as fuels.

In typical municipal solid wastes, the ash content is generally around 5-10% for organic

wastes. Inorganic wastes generally have an ash content as high as 20-30% (Tchobanoglous,

1993). As the ash content is AIT campus is less than 5, which meant that the amount of waste

in AIT has large amount of organic waste. Furthermore, the average fixed carbon content of

AIT was low because of a small amount of inert. MSW in AIT, fixed carbon was only

12.15%. According to Verma )2002(, waste characterized by high volatile solid and low non-

biodegradable matter is best suited to anaerobic digestion treatment. The composition of

wastes affects both the yield and biogas quality as well as the compost quality.

65

4.1.3.2 Ultimate analysis and calorific value

The main purpose of ultimate analysis is to know the chemical element concentration in the

solid waste. In this analysis, total element analysis of MSW is analyzed to characterize the

chemical composition of organic fraction of MSW. Such determination is essential for

assessing suitability of the MSW as a fuel and predicting emissions from combustion.

Furthermore, it is used to define the proper mix of MSW materials to achieve suitable

nutrient ratios such as C/N for biological conversion process. This study was only focused

on carbon and nitrogen element.

Nitrogen in the form of ammonium can be absorbed onto the surfaces of clay particles in the

soil. As C/N ratio is really important in the every sectors such as biogas process, which is

waste to energy and waste minimization activities such as organic waste composter.

Therefore, it is needed to define the proper mix of MSW materials to achieve suitable

nutrient ratios.

The concentration of carbon and nitrogen determine the performance of the anaerobic,

digestion process, as one or the other usually constitutes the limiting factor. Whereas carbon

constitutes the energy source for the microorganisms, nitrogen serves to enhance microbial

growth. If the amount of nitrogen is limiting, microbial populations will remain small and it

will take longer to decompose the available carbon. Excess nitrogen, beyond the microbial

requirement, is often lost from the process as ammonia gas.

In the production of biogas from organic waste, it is needed the range of C/N ratio 8-30, but

for anaerobic digestion, the optimum range of C/N ratio of organic waste is 23 to 1. Some

study the C/N ratio is 25 to 1. Nevertheless, optimum C/N ratios in anaerobic digesters

ranges from 20 to 30. A high C/N ratio is an indication of rapid consumption of nitrogen by

methanogens for supplement the protein itself and results in lower biogas production. On the

other hand, a lower C/N ratio causes ammonia accumulation because of produced nitrogen.

Moreover, the C/N ratio is beyond the range of 8-30, other gases are more produced such as

high carbon dioxide. Optimum C/N ratios of materials can be achieved by mixing materials

of high and low C/N ratios, such as organic solid waste mixed with sewage or animal manure

(Verna, 2002(.

Besides, in the biogas process, the optimum range of C/N ratio of organic waste can produce

biogas is 8-30 but in the organic waste composter, the range of C/N ratio for the good pile is

30:1.

The C: N ratio of waste in AIT was only 14:1. This rate is significantly lower not only for

composting but also for other digestion process. It was compared with past situation, C/N in

2007 was 2:1 (Dev, 2007). Thus, the current composition of C/N ratio in solid waste is much

better than the past.

Calorific value

Gross Calorific Value is the most important indicator for the process of thermal energy of

the waste. In the waste if the value of the calorific value is high, it is good condition for the

66

thermal process however, if the calorific value is less than 800 kcal/kg, it requires additional

fuel in the combustion of the waste. Besides, it is said that if the calorific value of the solid

waste is higher than and equal to in the range of 7-11 MJ/kg, it is very good in used for

refuse-derive-fuel. According to the European Commission (2003), if the solid waste has a

calorific value of 15 MJ/kg or more, it is highly recommended for use as refuse-derived fuel

(RDF). However, according GIZ and PCD (2003), if the solid waste has a calorific value of

11-17 MJ/kg or more, it is highly recommended for use as refuse-derived fuel (RDF).

According to the analysis of the laboratory result by using Bomb Calorie Meter, the calorific

value of waste in AIT was 5801.1kcal/kg, i.e., 24.29MJ. This showed that the MSW might

be of great value in thermal process in order to obtain high energy. If it is compared with the

average standard of Thailand calorific value, this value is significantly higher than Thailand

rate of Gross Calorific Value.

4.1.3.3 Bulk density

To know the compaction of the MSW in AIT, the bulk density was tested. The average bulk

density of mixed waste of AIT Campus is 130 kg/m3. The monthly bulk density ranged from

100-350 kg/m3 in 8 months. However, the average bulk density of the solid wastes found in

2007 was about 341 kg/m3. Hence, the current bulk density of solid waste 130 kg/m3 has

decreased than 2007. It is because of the result of packaging waste and plastic waste

containing in the waste in higher than the past.

Low bulk density in AIT’s waste can once again be related to packaging wastes like plastic,

which are loosely packed - hence the mass per volume unit is low. If the density of MSW

is low, it is shown that open non-compacting trucks are not suitable for the collection of

municipal solid waste. It also indicates that if the waste is simply dumped in the landfills

without compaction, the life of the landfills would be significantly reduced.

4.1.4 Waste collection, handling and disposal system

Waste collection system is the first and most important stages of overall waste management

system. In AIT, the Office of Facilities and Asset Management (OFAM) is responsible for

handling waste collection and overall management. Waste collection and janitorial services

is sub-contracted to Pro-Maid Company. OFAM supplies waste collections facilities such as

bin systems, collection staffs, and material recovery facility (MRF) for temporary storage of

the collected waste until the local municipality takes away the waste for final disposal.

Allocation of garbage bins, collection schedule

AIT has a total of 197 community bins of three different colors, with each specific colored

bin for a specific waste types. Each bin is of 120 L capacity. Green bin (149) is for

biodegradable wastes, blue bin (19) for non-biodegradable waste, and yellow bin (29) for

recyclable waste. The capacity of all the bins is 120 L. These bins are usually located in

each of the office and residential building in the campus.

67

Figure 4.11 Municipal solid waste bin system in AIT campus

As it can be observed that yellow and blue bins are lesser than green bins, hence not every

building/location has a set of three colored bins. AIT residents usually have one dustbin

given for each room, and with single colored bins in place, residents mix all kinds of waste

together in the available garbage bin. Source segregation of waste in AIT is hence non-

existence.

Three staffs are responsible for waste collection from entire campus. Waste from entire

campus is collected daily once in the morning and once in the afternoon in the tricycle.

Figure 4.12 Waste collection process in AIT campus

Temporary storage of collected waste until final disposal

Once the waste is collected daily from campus locations, wastes are temporarily stored in

Material Recovery Facility (MRF), located at the Northern corner of the campus. The MRF

established in 2007 for the purpose of recyclables segregation after the collection and before

the final disposal hardly works as intended, but is used merely as a temporary storage. Along

the walls there are five big net cages where the waste collectors keep the recyclables in

different bags and buckets. During the study, as a part of pilot project, the waste collection

staffs were encourage to use this MRF facility to segregate plastic bottles, metal cans and

glass bottles.

68

Figure 4.13 AIT transfer staion and material recover facility

Once the wastes are stored for 3-4 days, the local Tha Klong municipality truck arrives twice

a week (Tuesday and Friday) in early morning to take-away the waste for final disposal.

Figure 4.14 Tha Klong municipal truck collected the waste from AIT

AIT pays a flat disposal fees of 8000 THB per month, i.e., 1000 THB/trip. These trucks

sometimes do not follow a specific schedule hence causing the collected wastes to be stored

in the MRF for days. Finally, the municipality takes the waste to nearby Tha Klong

Integrated Waste Treatment Plant. This municipal is around 13km far from AIT. It was

started to build as an integrated power plant since 2007 and it generate electric power at

December 2009. In the plant, there are around 40 workers doing in the waste separation and

collection system. There are around 100 tonnes of municipals waste can be treated one day.

Municipal solid waste from the household that produced from this province is covered by

the Tha Klong Municipal. There is no environmental and societal complaints related with

this Power Plant. Thus, it is said that this plant is good at management system.

4.1.5 Littering and unsustainable activity

In the AIT Campus, waste management system is not much improved, if it is compared with

others universities but it has the same level of macro community as Bangkok. Moreover,

there are some of the littering activities happened in the campus. Although, the garbage bins

are provided in everywhere, people used to their garbage on the smoking areas. Besides, it

was observed that additional events that happened in the campus are also a problem of the

waste management. For example, Food fair activity, most of the people went there, ate there

and throw their waste on the ground under tree and near the lake. From those days, the

amount of waste generation much higher than the others day especially Styrofoam waste. In

the Figure 4.15 shows some of the littering and unsustainable practice happened in the

Campus.

69

Figure 4.15 Unsustainable and littering activities

According to the field experiment result, around 60kg of Styrofoam and 12 kg of single use

plastic waste are more produced than the others day.

4.2 Existing Good Practices of Waste Management in AIT

AIT campus has its own waste handling activities up to intermediary stage. Even though,

majority of waste in AIT is send off for disposal without source segregation and recovery

through the local Municipality, but there are some good practices of waste recovery inside

the campus. These good practices include examples of organic waste management (food

waste and yard waste), and dry recyclable waste recovery (Cash-for-Trash) for recycling,

and demolition waste management. Such activities are scattered at individual capacity, and

does not cover the entire campus. Hence, it gives a big scope for increasing waste recovery

rate from AIT Campus.

4.2.1 Food waste management

Food wastage is one of the important waste stream in today’s over-consumptive world. Food

wastage includes both food losses, and food waste. Food loss usually occurs at the at the

production, post-harvest and processing stages, while food waste is the left-over or discarded

or lost uneaten food, which arises at the retail and consumption stages, i.e., the throwing

away of food. According to the FAO (2013), an estimated one third of the food that have

been produced for the human are lost as a waste. Food wastage is one of the main problem

of to secure in the global food security. In 2007, the amount of food wastage cost 750 billion

USD globally (FAO, 2013). The most preferred solution is to prevent food wastage from

occurring in the first place. Other popular recovery options include feeding animal,

composting, biogas generation from Anaerobic Digestion etc.

Food waste in AIT includes both food loss and food wastage- the uneaten/leftover food as

well as the waste from preparation of food for cooking such as peels and parts of vegetables

and fruits. Food waste basically is generated from all three sector- commercial, residential,

and academic areas. Among these areas, food waste generation from commercial sector is

relatively higher (74.5 % of the sectoral waste composition) due to all the cafeteria and

restaurants located in this area. There are basically seven places that sell cooked food;

AIT Conference Centre (AITCC) hotel

AIT Cafeteria

SU Snack Bar

Pond Side Thai Restaurant

Vietnamese Restaurant

Rice and Noodle Shop at Arcade

70

Filipino Restaurant

Apart from these main places, there are few other café’s in most of the academic buildings.

As most of the residential facilities have kitchen/cooking facility, it is the second largest

source of food waste (56.2%). Food waste from academic area is in the smallest proportion

with 41%. Food waste from academic sector is mostly the leftover or uneaten food, and no

food preparation wastage.

As observed from the overall waste composition of AIT, food waste is one of the biggest

proportion (52.5 % by wet weight at the final disposal stage). This means out of the 1.31

tonnes of waste generated in a day, 688 kg is estimated to be food waste at AIT transfer

station. But the total food waste generated from entire campus is 815 kg. This is because,

some food waste from commercial sector is recovered as animal feed and does not end up at

the transfer station. However, food waste from residential units are disposed without

recovery. Most of the commercial food vendors recycle their food waste as animal feed.

Food waste from AIT cafeteria, SU Snack Bar and AITCC hotel are collected by a pig farm

owner from Khlong Luang. Similarly, other food vendors also have their own arrangement

to recycle the food waste as animal feed. The process of food waste recycling from these

vendors are shown in the Figure 4.16 and 4.17 below.

Figure 4.16 Leftover food waste from cafeteria and AITCC recycled as pig feed

Figure 4.17 Leftover food waste recycling from Vietnamese and Lake Side

restaurants

71

On an average, 50-70 kg of food waste in weekdays and 80-90 kg in weekend from AIT

cafeteria is collected and utilized as animal feed. Similarly, 20-30 kg/day of food waste from

AIT CC hotel is also recovered. Additional 15-30 kg of food waste from private food vendors

are also recycled as animal feed daily. Hence, on an average around 126 kg of food waste is

recovered daily from AIT.

Considering the total food waste generation in AIT, almost 15.5% is being recycled as animal

feed. A negligible 1% of food waste from selected residential units are being recycled into

composting since December 2014- as a part of pilot project. Similarly, after the OFAM took

management of SU snack bar (another popular cafeteria), food waste from here is also being

recovered. Food waste recycling rate has increased since 2006-2007, when only 2% of food

waste used to be recovered. Nevertheless, food waste recovery can further be increased if

food waste from residential areas were also to be recovered. Also, at present only food waste,

i.e., uneaten or leftover food is utilized as animal feed, however, the other food wastage

especially the food preparatory and processing waste (such as peels, rotten vegetables etc.)

are sent to disposal without recovery, which could potentially be used for composting or

anaerobic digestion.

4.2.2 Yard waste management

AIT campus with large green space and vegetation produces considerable amount of yard

waste. Yard waste typically includes waste from landscape management- trimming,

gardening, grass cutting etc. Yard waste is not mixed with other general waste and is handled

separately. There are 8 workers in the landscape management department. Around 60 kg of

yard waste is generated from garden management activities, which are collected separately

and dumped in 3 pits. The process of yard waste management is depicted in Figure 4.18

below.

Figure 4.18 Yard waste management in campus

72

Such open pit dumping of yard waste cause nuisance such as bad aesthetic, bad order and

leachate problems. After the complaints from AIT residents and SOM faculty, a pit near

SOM was closed down recently and been moved to the far-end corner of the campus.

When these yard waste degrade, it is used as composting in AIT nursery (Figure 4.19)

located near the Pulp and Paper Building (PPB).

Figure 4.19 Use of decomposed yard waste as compost in AIT Nursery

However, not entire yard waste is composted properly. A careful planning of composting

can utilize these yard wastes properly.

4.2.3 Cash- for -Trash activity

“Cash-for-Trash” activity is the only continued recycling activity in AIT campus. Cash for

trash is a campaign launched since September 2007. A local junk shop buys recyclables from

AIT residents once a month. The junk dealer comes once a month on first Saturday of every

month with a pick-up truck and buys various categories of dry recyclable wastes- such as-

glass and plastic bottles, newspaper, office paper, scrap paper, corrugated box, tin cans,

metal can, electronic devices etc. A very small group of staff and faculty members

participate in this activity regularly, while students’ participation is less. Other enthusiast

participants of this activity are the cleaning/housekeeping staffs, who collectively collect

paper waste, and plastic bottles from offices and residences and share the income. Figure

4.20 below shows the cash-for-trash activity in the campus.

Figure 4.20 Cash-for-Trash recycling activity in campus

On an annual basis, slightly more than 2 tonnes of recyclables are sold via cash-for-trash

activity. In 2014, a total of 2041.5 kg of dry recyclables was sold to this event, 2,484 kg in

2013 and 2,264 kg in 2012. The detail data for different years are shown in the Appendix

73

(F.4). Figure 4.21 below shows the average monthly sell of recyclables in cash-for-trash

event.

Figure 4.21 Total amount of recycle waste from Cash for Trash activity (Average

kg/month)

Form the above figure it can be seen that monthly collection of dry recyclables was at the

highest in 2012 with 251.5 kg/month, which decreased up to 207 kg and 185.6 kg in 2013

and 2014 respectively. In 2011 October, AIT was flooded and lots of things were damaged.

The student also had to move to another place and after February 2012, they came back to

the campus. Because of this issue, the amount of waste from the Cash-for-Trash activity was

increased than the others years. Figure 4.22 below further dissects various types of

recyclable items collection by this event.

Figure 4.22 Major recyclable waste collection by the Cash-for-Trash activity

(Average kg/month)

Among the four main categories of recyclables sold in cash-for-trash, paper, metal cans, and

glass bottles are in increasing trend, while plastic items are also increasing yet stable between

2012 and 2014. Plastic items bought under this event include PET, HDPE and Mixed plastic

251.5

207185.6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2012 2013 2014

kg/m

onth

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Paper Plastic Metal Can Glass Bottle

Aver

age

kg/m

oth

2012 2013 2014

74

bottles. A variety of paper such as office paper, newspaper, cardboard, corrugated box and

mixed paper is traded under this activity. Aluminum and steel cans, and metal scraps are

other popular recyclable items sold. Quantity of paper sold is the highest, and metal cans at

the lowest.

From the above figures, it can be noted that the overall recyclable collection from cash-for-

trash event has declined over the years. This declining trend is because of the lack of

awareness among AITians about the cash-for trash event. One of the observed reason being-

the discontinuation of the reminder email from OFAM to AITians about the arrival of cash-

for-trash truck. As every semester new students come, such email notification is important

to let students know about this recycling opportunities in the campus. Similarly, this is a

monthly event and people do not have a proper space for the storage of recyclables until 1

month. Also, the pickup truck goes only through few of the staff quarters hence students do

not remember to participate much. This activity can be revived more rigorously with

OFAM’s sending regular announcement, arranging more frequent visits of the pickup truck,

and arranging a temporary storage point, either in each building or a centralized storage point

in the MRF.

4.2.4 Construction and demolition (C&D) waste management

After the 2011 flood, AIT campus in undergoing demolition of the damaged infrastructure

and renovating them. The demolition and renovation process generates bulky waste such as

damaged door and window panels, furniture, bricks and concrete, and other construction

inerts. Interestingly, these C&D waste are being utilized, as shown in Figure 4.23.

Figure 4.23 C&D waste management

The concrete inerts are used in raising the dyke surrounding AIT campus compound as a part

of flood protection measures. Some furniture items are renovated and repaired for reuse.

Metal scraps are sold as recyclables.

4.2.5 Office paper waste management

As AIT is an academic institution, one of the major types of waste is office paper waste.

However, office paper waste at the MRF is only 1.4% of the total waste composition. This

is because, the office paper waste from the AIT campus are segregated and sent for recycling.

Cleaning staffs collect office paper waste and sells collectively at the Cash-for-Trash event.

On an average, these cleaning staffs collect 1kg of office Paper waste every day. Also, some

75

residents participating in the Cash-for-Trash activity sells office paper along with other dry

recyclables (as shown in Figure 4.24).

Figure 4.24 Office paper waste from the academic areas sold at Cash-for-Trash

activity

Moreover, apart from the Cash-for-Trash activity, office paper waste is being recycled by

the waste collectors who collect the waste the whole campus. Approximately, around 60kg

of the office paper waste are recycled by the waste collectors in every month during the

semester on period. But, in the semester off and semester end period, like December, the

amount of office paper waste recycling by the waste collectors is much higher than the

others. In 2014 December, the amount of office paper waste recycling by the waste collectors

was around 400kg which was collected from different sources. This is because of the result

of graduated student left at that time and threw the office paper waste. Thus, the recycling

activity on office paper is much improved.

Table 4.4 Sources of Paper Waste Recycling in the Campus

No Sources of Recycling Estimated kg/month

1 Cleaning Staff in the Building/ Cash for Trash 33

2 Waste Collecting Staff (At Recycling Shop) 60

Total 93

In addition, the waste collector also collect and recycled others recyclable waste to the

recycling shop. Mostly, they segregate the waste before sent to municipal and stored in the

MRF. It is estimated that the total amount of waste recycled by the waste collector is around

3% of the total waste.

4.2.6 Reducing single-use plastic

Single use plastic bag is one of the highest proportion of plastic waste generated in AIT.

Considering this, the AIT Campus organized a campaign to curb single use plastic bags. In

2008, all vendors inside AIT were requested to use paper or canvas bag. However, this

activity was not successful (Pietikainen 2008).

Sustainability Club (AIT CSC) in February 2014, once again started a campaign to create

awareness on reducing plastic grocery bags inside the campus. The club announced for

76

voluntary donation of cloth bags, which were then put at grocery stores inside AIT campus

for people to use-and-return it (Figure 4.25).

Figure 4.25 Awareness activities and posters for cloth bag campaign

However, this campaign also could not meet with success. There was lack of participation

and bags were not returned after use. Such activities need proper planning, continuous

monitoring, and some positive or negative incentives for people to use plastic bags

appropriately or use the available alternative bags.

4.2.7 Overall waste generation flow in AIT

AIT has, to some extent, improved its solid waste management. With the AIT Sustainability,

A Living Laboratory Plan in action, AIT is leading towards becoming a Green Campus.

However, there needs a lot of careful planning, policies and participation from AIT

administration and residents towards attaining a sustainable solid waste management. Waste

flow shows the waste generation, handling, recovery, and disposal in a simple graphical

form. Figure 4.26 captures AIT’s waste flow by accounting the potential waste recovery

through various waste recovery practices in campus. This waste flow is based on the actual

waste being recovered in 2014, and average monthly value is used to calculate the annual

waste flow.

On an annual basis, AIT generates 478 tonnes of wastes that reaches the final stage of

disposal at the MRF, and another 50.6 tonnes/year are recovered for various recycling

activities, even before reaching the MRF. Therefore, the total waste generation is AIT

campus is estimated to be 528.6 tonnes/year. Out of these wastes, roughly 13% of waste is

recovered (8.66 % of food waste recovery as animal feed and composting, and 4.2 % of dry

recyclable waste trading to junk shops) from various 3R activities. Remaining nearly 87%

77

of the total waste generated in campus is sent-off for disposal to local municipality. Trading

of dry recyclables like plastic and glass bottles, metal cans and office paper happens at

individual level by residents participating in Cash-for-Trash event, or as a group by cleaning

staffs collectively selling them, and also at the final stage when waste collection staffs partly

sort recyclables (20 tonnes/year) at the transfer station before sending wastes to local

municipal service.

Apart from these municipal solid waste, around 5% of yard waste is recycled as pit

composting. These waste flows show that with proper 3R practices in a place, AIT can

recover much more of waste and increase its overall waste recycling rate, transforming the

institution into a green and sustainable campus.

To conclude, as mentioned above, some good practices of waste management has been

attempted (and some still in continuation) in AIT campus, however, discontinuation and lack

of participation from AITians is of the concern. The waste audit (composition,

characteristics) results show a great scope for many waste recovery and recycling

opportunities in AIT campus, to transform into a Green Campus.

78

Figure 4.26 Overall waste flow in AIT campus

Recycling

Factory

AIT Campus

Total Waste

Generation (528.6

tonnes/year)

AIT Transfer

Station,

(MRF)

Recycling

Factory

Pig Farm

1.3 tonnes/year as a Kitchen

waste Composting (0.25) %

Composter

46 tonnes/year of food waste Recycling for

animals feeding (8.7) %

Send for final disposal to Tha

Khlong Municipality

tonnes/year (458 tonnes/year)

(86.7%)

1.3 tonnes/year as a Packaging

waste Recycling (Cage Bin)

(0.25) %

Cash for Trash activity

2 tonnes/year (0.38) %

By Waste Collectors

(20) tonnes/year

(3.78) %

478 tonnes/years

Municipal

Truck

Mixed Waste Go to MRF

79

4.3 Performance of 3R Pilot Project Activities in AIT

In the past, AIT had initiated some good waste management pilot activities in the campus.

However, those activities were scattered and discontinued with time. As part of this

research, three specific 3R activities were piloted, namely; i) dry and wet waste segregation

at household level, ii) kitchen organic waste composting, and iii) packaging waste recycling

at community level.

These pilot activities were to encourage AIT community for practicing responsible waste

management. Another objective of these activities was to test which of these three activities

will work better in the context of AIT campus, and hence recommend these for continuing

the 3R momentum to achieve sustainable waste management in campus.

4.3.1 Dry and wet waste source segregation at household level

Source segregation is the most significant feature of any waste handling, management, and

recovery strategies. Source separation comprises of separating waste components, and this

can be done in many ways. One of the simple way is to segregate waste into dry waste and

wet waste. Wet wastes generally include organic waste which are wet, such as leftover food

waste, food processing waste etc. Dry wastes, on the other hand, include reusable packaging

waste plastic bottle, glass bottle, metal can, dry paper, dry plastic etc. Such waste segregation

activity is also useful in making consumers realize the quantity and types of waste they

produce on a daily basis.

As mentioned earlier, AIT practices mixed waste collection and handling, and source

segregation is almost negligible. Therefore, the household level dry and wet waste

segregation activity was piloted in the selected three pockets of residential colonies (ST6,

ST7 and Student Village 3) in the campus. Each of the participating household was provided

with information flyer on how to segregate dry and wet wastes. Two sets of bin bag per

week, black bag for wet waste and white bag for dry waste segregation was provided for free

from mid-August till October 2014. The black bag with wet waste was binned in green

garbage bin and white bag with dry waste into the yellow garbage bin. The objective of this

activity was to recover recyclables from the white bag with dry waste by the waste collection

staffs (Figure 4.27). The green and yellow bins were weighed to observe and quantify how

much of dry and wet wastes were segregated properly by the residents. Such weighing was

done for August, September, October (project implementation phase), and in November and

December (post project phase).

Figure 4.27 Weighing of dry and wet waste binned in appropriate garbage bins

The pilot project provided free bin bags for residents to practice waste segregation till

October 2014, however, after the 3 months of the project, free distribution of the bags was

80

stopped to see if people will continue to segregate waste on their own, or free plastic bags

were the motivation factor for their participation. An initial survey was conducted with

around 94 residents on September 2014 to find out if they are practicing the waste

segregation activity. Similarly, another random survey was conducted in November 2014 to

analyze the post-project performance of the dry and wet waste segregation project.

The results of dry and wet waste segregation participation and performance are presented

below.

4.3.1.1 Level of successful segregation of dry and wet waste by field measurement

To observe the correct segregation and binning of household dry and wet waste, regular field

measurement was conducted. The measurement involved weighing of the black bags with

wet wastes in green bin and white bags with dry waste in yellow bins. Such weighing was

done once a month across five months, from August till December 2014.

The Figure 4.28 below shows that on an average between 30 to 40% of dry and wet wastes

were segregated and binned correctly both in project and post-project phase. No significant

improvement in the habit of waste segregation was observed in those 5 months. It stayed

about 35% on an average throughout, except in October, when the wet waste segregation

and binning was significantly high at 71.5%.

Figure 4.28 Overall (%) of dry waste from yellow bins and wet waste from green bins

The noticeable point here is, even after the project implementation phase, the segregation

did not drop but remained at same level. As people were not provided with free black and

white bags, they still segregated dry and wet waste separately and binned in appropriate

green and yellow bin, using different color grocery bags as bin liners. Figure 4.29, below is

the comparison of waste segregation level during the project and post-project phase.

36.3 34.4

27.6

38.637.5

36.2

37.1

71.5

34.332.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

August September October November December

Aver

ag

e (%

) of

Wast

e b

y W

eig

ht

% of Dry Waste in Yellow Bin % of Wet Waste in Green Bin

81

Figure 4.29 Average (%) level of dry and wet waste segregation during project

implementation and post-project period

The figure shows an increase in proper segregation of dry wastes, which increased from 32

to 38%. Although the overall waste segregation was even below 50% in both periods, but it

can be noticed that residents, if trained properly, and provided with facilities, they might

continue to participate in source segregation activity.

4.3.1.2 Comparison of participation level between staffs and students

The pilot activity chose ST6 and ST7 as residential units for staffs and SV3 as students’

residence. This was done purposefully to compare how these two groups (staffs and students)

behave towards waste management activities. The performance between these groups are

compared separately for ‘dry waste segregation’, and ‘wet waste segregation.’

The performance of proper dry waste segregation by these groups are represented in the

Figure 4.30 below.

Figure 4.30 Percentage (%) of dry waste segregation from yellow bins at SV-3 and ST

6-7 areas

32.8

38.1

48.3

33.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

During Project Period Post Project PeriodAver

age

(%)

of

Was

te b

y W

eight

Average (%) of Dry Waste Average (%) of Wet Waste

42.3

38.1

30.6

36.033.3

30.3 30.7

24.6

41.2 41.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

August September October November December

% o

f D

ry W

aste

by W

eight

% of Dry Waste in Yellow Bin from SV-3 % of Dry Waste in Yellow Bin from ST-6-7

82

During the project implementation period (August to October), the student group performed

better as compared to the staffs. The level of student participation in this period ranged from

30.6- 42.3 %, and the level of staff participating was only in the range of 24.6-41.6%.

However, this scenario changed completely in the post-project phase, when the segregation

of dry waste by staffs was better than student group. Such comparison also showed that, the

source segregation from student groups kept declining from the month of project initiation,

while the staff group’s performance increased in the due time. This may be due to the fact

that for student group, it is the provision of free black and white plastic bags was the

motivation for waste segregation. Also, some senior students graduate in December, hence

the performance of waste segregation may have decreased.

Similar comparison for wet waste segregation by staff and student groups is presented in

Figure 4.31 below.

Figure 4.31 Percentage (%) of wet waste from green bins at SV-3 and ST 6-7 areas

The results do not show any specific trend of wet waste segregation, however, staffs

segregating wet waste increased in each month during project implementation, while it

decreased in post project period. For students, there was no specific trend of segregating wet

wastes over the period of five months.

Overall, the average percentage participation level of both dry and wet waste segregation by

both the groups was below 50% in both project implementation and post-project period. This

low level of segregation is also because of some reasons.

1. Some participants even though segregated dry and wet waste separately in white and

black bags correctly, but they binned the bags in incorrect bins. It can be understood

that people with correct bin bags when came to throw it in green and yellow bins

they may have confused and binned in incorrect bins

2. Second issue is related with cleaning staff. Although the residents separated dry and

wet waste in their room, the maid or the cleaning lady are not aware on that and put

all the waste together and dump in one bag.

32.3

24.6

81.5

41.5

31.5

40.2

49.5

61.5

27.132.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

August September October November December

% o

f W

et W

aste

by W

eight

% of Wet Waste in Green Bin from SV-3 % of Wet Waste in Green Bin from ST 6-7

83

3. Another one is even though some participants segregated in the room willing to throw

into right bags and right bins. But when throwing, the bins were overflowed cannot

throw right bags in right bins.

As the value in above figures are the right bags in the correct bin, it did not count bags in

incorrect bins. All in all, this pilot activity can be rated as a ‘moderate’ success. The

segregation rate may increase if there are regular communication with residents and the

accommodation and janitorial services provide separate bin bags regularly, and each of the

buildings have correct numbers of green and yellow bins. Sometimes, because of the lack of

yellow bins, people even though segregated dry waste, have to bin it in green bins. As seen

in previous section, that AIT has (149) green bins and only (29) yellow bins. To increase

resident’s participation in source segregation, it is also useful to share what happens after

they segregate dry and wet waste, for example, sharing the overall recovery of recyclable

wastes from campus through campus bulletin, websites etc. Also, for successful source

segregation, the entire waste handling in AIT has to change from mixed/commingled waste

to segregated waste handling.

4.3.1.3 Survey results on the dry and wet waste segregation activity

To know peoples’ attitude, behaviors, and views on the waste segregation systems, two sets

of survey was conducted. The first set of survey included 94 respondents from ST6, ST7

and SV3. The number of staff respondents was 51 and the remaining 43 were students. These

respondents were approached with a structured questionnaire for door-to-door survey.

Similarly, the second set of survey was conducted on a randomly selected 20 participants

which were 10 staff and 10 students from these residential units after the project period was

completed. The objective of the second survey was to monitor the continuity of the waste

segregation activity after stopping the free distribution of black and white bags.

The initial survey showed that 83.8 % of the respondent population were aware of the pilot

waste segregation activity. Almost 46.2 % of staffs and 37.6% of students responded in

positive when asked about if they know about the pilot activity in their residents.

In response to the follow up question on how many of the respondents were actually

participating in the dry and wet waste segregation activity, 78% out of 94 respondents

answered in positive (Figure 4.32). Remaining 22% of the respondents said they are not

participating in the pilot activity. The reasons cited for their non-participation were; have no

idea that such waste segregation project has started (3%), have no time for waste segregation

(6%), do not have space for keeping segregated waste (2%), 5% of the respondent simply

stated that they are not interested to segregate waste, and 7% of respondents cited the lack

of appropriate facilities for waste segregation.

84

Figure 4.32 Participation level for dry and wet waste segregation activity

Even though the survey showed that 78.5% are aware and are participating (34.4 %

segregating waste ‘very often’, and 44.1 % segregating ‘sometimes’) in segregation activity,

less than 50% of waste was being segregated properly as identified by measuring the waste

in correct bins, as seen in above figures. This shows that even though people were

participating, they finally did not throw the black bag in green bin and white bag in yellow

bins. Some random check of the bags in these bins showed that most bin bags had mixed dry

and wet wastes. This also reflect that being aware and educated does not necessarily translate

that knowledge into practice.

The overall participation level was further divided into staff and student groups as shown in

Figure 4.33.

Figure 4.33 Level of participating staff and student groups

Out of 51 staffs, 88% said they are participating in the waste segregation activity. While, out

of 43 students, 67% said they are participating. This result once again shows that staffs are

more willing to participate in waste segregation activities than students.

% of Yes

(Very Often)

(34.4)

% of Yes

(Sometimes)

(44.1)

% of No

(21.5)

88.2

67.4

11.832.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Staff Student

% o

f R

esp

ond

ent

Participating Non-participating

85

In response to the question ‘what do you do with dry recyclable waste,’ 29 % of the

respondents said they ‘throw’ as it as a mixed garbage, while 17.2% said that they keep those

waste for reuse, and around 7.5% said they keep those recyclable waste for trade. In

additions, around 51.6% of total population said that they are separating as dry and wet

waste. Some of the respondents practiced more than one options of handling dry recyclable

waste.

Regarding the ‘Knowledge and Comfort’ about segregating dry and wet waste correctly,

89% of respondents said they clearly know about dry and wet waste segregation and they

do not have difficulties, however remaining 9.3% of total respondents reported they have

difficulties on dry and wet waste segregation. And, further information sharing on dry and

wet waste categories and segregation process is required for better participation from their

side.

During the initial survey during project implementation, around 75% of population said that

‘will continue’ dry and wet waste segregation even after the project period will be over, and

remaining 23% of population said that they are ‘not sure’ to continue for this activity and

only 2% of population said they will ‘not continue’. However, the second round of survey

conducted among 20 randomly selected participants in the post project period showed only

64% would like to ‘continue’ waste segregation. This proportion in reality was even smaller,

because the waste segregation as measured in the green and yellow bins was only 38.1% for

wet waste and 32.8% for dry waste as shown in Figure 4.29 in the above section.

4.3.1.4 Survey results on peoples’ suggestions and recommendations related to pilot

3R activities

The survey also intended to gather suggestions on promoting 3R activities in AIT. Those

suggestions included ideas from building mass awareness on 3R to provision of appropriate

waste handling facilities.

Majority of respondents focused on providing information about on-campus 3R activities

through various channels of communication (Figure 4.34).

86

Figure 4.34 Peoples’ preference on information sharing

As shown in Figure 4.34, maximum percentage of respondents said posters, stickers and

information pamphlets at public space is a good way of passing information to residents,

followed by internet based communication through campus webpages, emails, and Facebook

page. Sharing of information from colleagues and friends and door-to-door information

campaign were among the other ideas shared.

Regarding the recommendations for improving the solid waste handling and management

system in AIT Campus, the respondents provided various suggestions, which are

represented in Figure 4.35 below.

Figure 4.35 Recommendations for improving solid waste management system

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Internet Webpage & e-mails, facebook

Posters, Stickers & Campaign telling to Separate Waste

Visible Recycle Bins with Informing Text and Facilities

Communication Colleagues and friends

Door to door information

Others

% of Total Respondent

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Campaign and

Awareness

Provide 3R Knowledge Waste Collection

System, Providing Bin,

other facilites

Promote and continue

Pilot Projects

% o

f T

ota

l R

esp

on

den

t

87

The responses ranged from running awareness campaign to improvise waste collection

system and also continuing the pilot projects for a longer duration. One of the highest

concern raised was distribution of color coed bin at each residential units, for people to

segregate wastes.

4.3.2 Organic kitchen waste composting

As observed from the waste composition analysis of AIT Campus, it was found out that food

waste makes up to 52.5% of the total waste. Hence, a composting project was designed and

piloted in the campus since August 2014. Three aerated in-vessel barrel composters were

designed, fabricated, and distributed to residents who showed interest in participating. The

location and conditions of the composters are shown in Figure 4.36. Composting guideline

posters were placed at these locations and the participants were given clear information and

instruction about the composting process. The performance of these composters were

monitored regularly (once a week) by measuring parameters such as moisture, temperature,

pH, odor, and presence of vermin and flies.

Figure 4.36 Monitoring the composters’ performance at dorm (J), SV (40) and house

No. (9)

Initial observation showed incorrect waste (non-degradable) wastes put in one of the

composters. However, this issue was resolved after meeting with participant and discussing

the correct waste types to be put in the vessel. Another issue observed was incorrect C/N

ratio. This was caused by residents putting either Carbon rich or Nitrogen rich wastes in the

vessel. Similarly, high moisture content and low temperature in the composter also slowed

down degradation and composting. Also, overall lack of enthusiastic participation was

visible when some composters did not meet the minimum waste addition input for weeks.

Table 4.4 shows that the recorded results of these parameters of the 3 composters.

88

Table 4.5 Record for Monthly Condition of Data from Composters

No Month Composter Parameters

Temperature (ºC) Moisture (%) pH

1 September

Dorm-J 29.4

> 65

8

SV-40 32.2 8

No.9 37.8 8

2 October

Dorm-J 32.2 45 5

SV-40 35 55 6

No.9 37.8 > 65 6

3 November

Dorm-J 26.7

> 65

5

SV-40 27.8 6

No.9 32.2 6

4 December

Dorm-J 29.4

> 65

6

SV-40 27.8 5

No.9 32.2 5

5 January

Dorm-J 24

> 65

5

SV-40 25 5

No.9 35 6

6 February

Dorm-J 24

> 65

6

SV-40 26 6

No.9 32 6

7 March

Dorm-J 24

> 65

5

SV-40 26 6

No.9 32 6

The results show high moisture content and low temperature in these composters, which

affected the overall composting performance. In general, moisture content within the range

of 30%-70% and temperature of 57-70 ºC range is considered ideal for composting (Laing

et.al, 2003). Moisture content was between 40% to more than 90%. One of the composter at

house no (9) had leachate overflow and maximum moisture, which was basically due to

overload of fresh and moist garden wastes such as banana trunk and watermelon peels.

In the composting process, temperature is one of the most important factors and it is directly

proportional to the biological activity within the composting system therefore affecting the

composting efficiency. Ideally, the temperature in composting increases in few weeks and

ranges from 57-70 ºC. The temperature for maximum degradation rate in composting is

normally near 55 °C, and the degradation rate is much lower at 70 °C (Miller, 1993).

However, the temperature range in three composters was between 24-40 ºC. The monthly

temperature range is plotted in Figure 4.37.

89

Figure 4.37 Monthly average variation of temperature in different composters

Among 3 composters, the composter located at House No. 9 showed a positive temperature

trend, and comparatively this composter performed better than the other two. The low

temperature range could also be because of moist waste added in the vessel.

Another parameter measured was the pH condition in all 3 composters. During successful

composting, the acids are decomposed and the pH increases. Composting of food waste may

have initial acidic phase, and lack of proper aeration also results in a larger acid production

and a slower break-down of acids (Beck-Friis et al., 2003) hence resulting in low degradation

rate. All the 3 composters had acidic condition for the entire period, except for the first month

when pH was 8. The low pH and low temperature caused slow degradation. However, the

pH level from all the composters were such a certain level because the best composting

process also takes place at the range of 6 to 8 and not under 4 (Darlington, 2001).

Another issue for slowing the composting process was low C/N. Composting

microorganisms, require the correct proportion of Carbon for energy and Nitrogen for

protein production. The ideal C/N ratio for composting is identified as 25-30:1 (Manaloy,

2014). If the C: N ratio is too high (excess Carbon), decomposition slows down. If the C: N

ratio is too low (excess nitrogen) it stinks. Wastes input in those 3 composters were rich in

Nitrogen content, as fresh and moist green wastes such as vegetable and fruit peels were

added. To adjust the C:N ratio, and even the issue of high moisture content, brown carbon

rich wastes such as coconut straw, dry leaves, and shredded newspaper were added. Also, to

speed up the composting rate, matured compost was added.

The 3 composters suffered acidic condition, low C: N ratio, high moisture, inefficient

aeration, hence the composting process was delayed. The matured compost was ready only

on the 7th month. Figure 4.38 below shows the compost produced at 3rd, 6th and 7th month.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

September October November Deccember January February March

Aver

age

Tem

per

atu

re/

Mo

nth

('C

)

Dorm-J SV-40 No.9

90

Figure 4.38 Monthly condition of compost harvested from 3 composters

The compost at 3rd month (after 90 days) was wet and smelly, which is probably due to high

nitrogen green wastes, and acidic condition. However, the compost was matured after 6th

month of operation. Compost harvested on the 7th month was of good quality that could be

used directly as soil conditioner.

In conclusion, the composting project was not very successful, one of the reasons being the

lack of participation. Composter at House No (9) performed better, because the participant

was a faculty member and was keenly involved in adding waste inputs. However, the

composter at J-Dorm, handled by a single student had the low waste input. This was because

of the participating student could not add enough waste for 200 L barrel and was away from

campus for research work. Another composter at Student Village 2 (SV40) performed

moderately, because it was a shared house for 3 students, and the waste was added in the

barrel regularly even in absence of one or two participating students. Therefore, it was

Compost at the 3rd Month

Compost at the 6th month

Compost at the 7th month

91

observed that more than a decentralized composter for an individual, a community based

composter for the entire residential unit might work better. Also, to increase the food waste

recycling from the Campus, if left-over food can be separated at each building, it can be used

as animal feed by the people who collect food waste from commercial cafeterias and

restaurants. There might not be a need for composting activity. Nevertheless, for increasing

organic waste recycling from AIT Campus, the first and foremost important thing is the

source segregation of kitchen organic waste by its residents.

4.3.3 Packaging waste recycling at community level

Packaging waste is one of the most common waste types in today’s modern lifestyle. In AIT,

recyclable packaging wastes including glass, metal, paper and cardboard, and plastics add

up to 15.3 % of the total waste composition. Recovering these recyclable packaging waste

through community scale cage bins was piloted in AIT since August 2014. As part of this

pilot activity, 4 cage bins have been placed across the campus for the collection of plastic

bottles, glass bottles, and metal cans (Figure 4.39).

Figure 4.39 Location of cage bins at a) 108 Lawson, b) SERD Building- EEM Block,

c) ITServ Building, and d) AIT International School

These locations were deliberately chosen which could be seen and used by maximum

number of people in the Campus. Instead of a covered bin system, a cage bin was designed

for people to see easily which wastes to be put inside. As these were for dry recyclable waste

collection, covered bins were not necessary. Two waste collection staffs are responsible for

emptying and collecting recyclable wastes once a week from all 4 cage bins. Those collected

wastes are collected and sold by the waste collection staffs and earn extra income.

4.3.3.1 Overall performance of community cage bins

The first cage bin placed at 108 Lawson premise was well received by people and recyclable

wastes were dropped-in. However, despite a separate compartment for plastic bottles, glass

bottles and metal cans, people did not strictly follow the segregation. Also, wastes other than

specified bottles and cans (such as plastic grocery bags, plastic and paper cups etc.) are

binned regularly. Other cage bins also suffer the same issues. Nevertheless, every month, a

significant quantity of plastic bottles, glass bottles and metal cans are collected via these

cage bins, as shown in Table 4.5 below.

92

Table 4.6 Monthly Collection of Recyclable Waste from Cage Bins

No Months 2014 2015

Total Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

1 Total Recyclable

Waste ( in kg)

89.6

132.1

136.3

117.1

80.2

103.6

97.2

821.6

2 Total Estimated

Income (Baht)

684.3

930.6

1069.8

955.8

681.9

769.8

821.3

5913.5

*** (Note: Each waste type have different price, hence the revenue generated is not a direct

reflection of the total waste generated in kg)

It is observed that recyclable collection from August till October is increasing. This shows

that as the time passed by, more and more people were aware of these bins and hence were

using it. It is also because of the fact that in August only one cage bin at 108 Lawson was in

operation, and other three bins were subsequently added. In August alone, one cage bin was

able to collect around 90 kg of recyclables, earning almost 685 THB of income to the waste

collection staffs. The highest collection so-far has been in the month of October with 136 kg

recyclables of worth above 1,000 Baht. In November and December the recyclable

packaging waste collection plunged a bit, which may be due to students moving out from

Campus for their data collection/thesis work, and also December has two-week Holiday

period. The collection then peaked in January, as the new Semester started with new students

joining the campus. February, however, saw a drop in collection.

This study also compared different categories of packaging wastes (HDPE, PET, Mixed

Plastic, Glass, Aluminum, and Steel cans) collected in these bins. The results are shown in

Figure 4.40 below.

Figure 4.40 Different categories of packaging waste collection

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

August September October November December January February

Wei

ght

kg/m

onth

Plastic Glass Metal Can

93

There was no particular trend observed for any of the packaging waste types. The collection

of these waste types fluctuated every month.

Performance of individual cage bin placed at 4 location within the campus is presented in

Figure 4.41 below.

Figure 4.41 Monthly performance of cage bins from different locations

As seen in the Figure 4.41 above, there was a fluctuating trend in recyclable packaging

waste collection at these 4 cage bins. The detailed values of these six types of recyclables

collected every month from 4 different cage bins are presented in Appendix F-5.

All in all, the community scale packaging waste collection activity can be considered as the

most successful of the three pilot activities conducted. In seven months, a total of 821.6 kg

recyclable packaging waste was collected from these bins, earning around 6,000 THB

additional income to the waste collection staffs. This implies on an average, 108kg/month

of plastic and glass bottles and metal cans were recovered from being disposed. The success

of this pilot activity can be attributed to the fact that dry recyclable wastes are easy to handle,

and as these cage bins are placed in various locations, many people can use it. Similarly, the

opportunity to generate extra income has gathered interest from the two waste collection

staffs to handle wastes from these bins regularly. Looking at the success, it is recommended

to provide such community cage bins at various locations, especially to residential areas of

the campus.

1

10

100

1000

August September October November December January February

Tota

l A

mou

nt

of

Rec

ycl

ab

le W

ast

e

(kg

/mon

th)

108 Cage Bin SERD Building, EEM Block

IT Serv Building AIT IS Cage Bin

94

Chapter 5

Conclusions and Recommendations

Transforming AIT into a Green campus requires its solid waste management to be

sustainable, by practicing reduce, reuse, and recycle (3R) principles. For making sustainable

solid waste management plans, the baseline information on its waste generation,

composition, and characteristics is necessary. This study investigated those information

through waste audit and also evaluated the current practices of waste management in the AIT

campus. Furthermore, this study also piloted some 3R activities in the campus. Some of the

important conclusions drawn from the study are presented below. In addition,

recommendations for further studies are also presented.

5.1 Conclusions

1. Waste statistics of AIT campus in 2014 was; 1.45 tonnes/day which is 1.31

tonnes/day at the final stage and around 0.14 tonnes/day recycling before reaching to

final disposal of the 0.5 kg per capita; and 528.6 tonnes per year. The per capita waste

is lower than the Thailand’s national per capita average of 1 kg/person.

2. Organic waste composition is in is higher than inorganic waste. Waste composition

in terms of combustibles and non-combustibles are 90 % and 10 % respectively.

3. Food waste (both leftover food and food preparation loss) in AIT campus is the

highest up to 52.5% of the total waste. Packaging waste is the second highest

composition, which is 42.3% of the total waste generation from AIT. Plastic

packaging wastes alone accounted for 23.8% of the total solid waste generated.

4. Chemical characteristics (proximate and ultimate analysis) of mixed solid waste in

AIT are; 43.5% of moisture content (less than Thailand Standard MSW moisture

content range of 50-60 %); Bulk Density of 130 kg/m3, volatile solid is in the range

of 83-85% (higher than the standard 50-80 %); and ash content at 4%, (slightly lower

than the standard ash content of 5-15 %).The C/N ratio was only 14:1, lower than the

standard ratio of 30:1, which is suitable for composting.

5. Gross Calorific value, i.e, energy content was as high as 5800 kcal/kg or 24.29MJ.

This higher value shows the potential of thermal energy recovery, as the calorific

value in the range of 7 –11 MJ is considered suitable for refuse derive fuel (RDF)

6. AIT’s waste collection system practices mixed waste collection, minimum recovery

of recyclable materials, and final disposal by the local Tha Khlong Municipality with

a waste tipping fee of 8,000 Baht per month.

7. Existing waste recycling in the campus includes; left-over food waste recycling as

animal feed by local pig farm owner (collects about 125 kg of food waste/day);

trading of dry recyclable wastes such as paperboard and office paper, plastic and

glass bottles, metal can etc. in the monthly Cash-for-Trash event (around 2 tons of

waste traded in 2014), and waste collection and cleaning staffs selling such

95

recyclables to local junk shops separately. Around 100 kg of office paper per month

is collected and sold by these waste collection and cleaning staffs.

8. One of the 3R pilot activity involving household waste segregation into dry waste

and wet wastes below 50%. Public participation for such activity can be increased by

providing information on proper waste segregation information and facilities, and

also sharing the overall waste recovery from campus through campus bulletin,

websites etc. Such orientation can be provided to students when join AIT, and

through other information and awareness raising activities.

9. Kitchen/ organic waste composting at 3 individual aerated in-vessel composters was

able to recycle about 1 kg each/day of kitchen organic waste. However, the

composting project was not very successful, one of the reasons being the lack of

participation, lack of minimum waste input in the composters when the participating

students were away from campus for research work. From this experience it can be

said that, more than a decentralized composter for an individual, a community based

composter for the entire residential unit might work better. Also, to increase the food

waste recycling from the Campus, if left-over food can be separated at each building,

it can be used as animal feed by the people who collect food waste from commercial

cafeterias and restaurants.

10. Recyclable packaging waste segregation through 4 community cage bins in 7 months

was able to collect 821.6 kg of plastic and glass bottles and metal cans and raise

6,000 baht additional income to waste collection staffs. This implies on an average,

108kg/month of packaging wastes were recovered from being disposed-off.

11. AIT being a higher education institution, knowledge on 3R was not a lacking factor,

however, this knowledge did not necessarily transform into better waste management

practices in reality. Many respondents shared that provided with clear guidance and

with appropriate facilities they would participate. One of the concerns raised was the

equal distribution of color coded bin (Green for organic waste, Yellow for

recyclables, and Blue for non-recyclables) at each residential units. The campus has

149 green bins, (19) for blue bins and 29 for yellow bins, hence not every units have

bins for segregation. Even though basic awareness is not lacking, people shared that

information sharing via posters, stickers pamphlets at public space will motivate to

practice 3Rs and other greener activities in campus.

12. The overall solid waste recycling rate of AIT campus was at around 13.36 % in 2014;

9 % of food waste recycling, around 4.36 % of dry recyclable waste recovery (3.6 %

is from individual waste collectors and cleaning staffs; around 0.38 % from the Cash-

for-Trash activity, and 0.25% from cage bins). As big as 86.64% of total waste

generated in AIT is disposed in the Tha Khong Integrated Waste Treatment Plant.

Apart from this, 5% is yard waste is recycled separately in open pit composting.

These yard wastes are collected and handled separately than other domestic solid

waste.

13. If AIT is to meet Thailand’s national target of recovering 30% of its MSW by 2016,

the waste recovery activities in AIT needs to be at least doubled. This could be

96

achieved by encouraging left-over food waste segregation from residential areas like

commercial cafeterias and used as animal feed (which is a no-cost addition option),

and increase the dry recyclable collections by adding more cage bins at residential

areas, as well as making people aware and motivated for participating in the existing

Cash-for-Trash activity.

5.2 Recommendation for future work

1. Food waste management and recycling activity in the campus can be another detailed

study, because the amount of food waste generation is one of the highest.

2. As the MSW composition analysis showed plastic packaging is around 23.8%, it is

suggested to conduct a plastic footprint study for the campus.

3. Similarly, study can be conducted to audit other emerging waste streams in AIT,

such as sanitary products (napkins and diapers), household hazardous wastes

(batteries, fluorescent tubes, electrical and electronic wastes etc.).

4. Various behavioral studies involving regulatory, economic instruments, and

voluntary activities can be conducted to behave consumers’ psychology, attitude

towards waste reduction, reuse, recycling.

97

References

Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. (2005). Manure Composting Manual.

Alberta, Canada: Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development.

Amin, A.T.M.N. and Parera, L. (1996). Accommodating the Informal Sector: A Strategy for

Urban Environmental Management. Environmental Management, 46, 3-15.

Amin, A.T.M.N. (2005). Enriching Planning Education with Economic and Financial

Insights: A Personal Account of an Economist Working in the Urban Planning and

Environmental Management Field. 8th International Conference of Asian Planning

Schools Association, 11th-14th September 2005.

Beck-Friis, B., Smårs, S., Jönsson, H., Eklind, Y. and Kirchmann, H. (2003). Composting

of source-separated household organics at different oxygen levels: Gaining an

understanding of the emission dynamics. Compost Science & Utilization 11, 41-50.

Carter, C. R., and Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain

management: moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical

Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360-387. Retrieved January 12 2015

from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/09600030810882816

Chandrappa, R. and Das, D. B. (2012). Solid Waste Management Principal and Practice.

Environmental Science and Engineering. ISBN: 978-3-642-28680-3.

Cole, L., and Wright, T. (2003). Assessing sustainability on Canadian University Campuses:

Development of a Campus Sustainability Assessment Framework. Unpublished

master’s thesis, Royal Roads University, Victoria, BC.

Darlington, W. (2001). Compost—A guide for evaluating and using compost materials as

soil amendments, vol 714. Soil and Plant Laboratory. Inc, Orange Office, California,

282-8777.

de Vega, C. A., Benítez, S. O., and Barreto, M. E. R. (2008). Solid waste characterization

and recycling potential for a university campus. Waste management, 28, S21-S26.

Retrieved June 15, 2014 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/

S0956053 X08001451?np=y

Denison, R., and Ruston, J. (1990). Recycling and Incineration: Evaluating the Choices.

Island Press.

Dev, S.B. (2007). Application of 3R Principles to Solid Waste Management on the Asian

Institute of Technology (AIT) Campus. (Master thesis No. EV-07- 46, Asian Institute

of Technology, 2007). Bangkok: Asian Institute of Technology

Dixit, S., Jain, S. K., Gupta, A., and Jain A. (2000). Urbanization and Sustainable

Development.

98

Dyson, B., and Chang, N. B. (2005). Forecasting Municipal Solid Waste Generation in a

Fast-Growing Urban Region with System Dynamics Modeling. Waste

management, 25(7), 669-679. Retrieved February 12, 2015 from http://www.sc

iencedirect.com/scienceicl e/pii/S0956053X04001850

Fudery, C. (1990). Social Experts of Solid Recovery in Asian Cities. BKK Environmental

Sanitation Information Centre, AIT.

Haan, C.H., Coad, A. and Lardinois, I. (1998). Municipal Solid Waste Management:

Involving Micro- and Small Scale Enterprises, Guideline for Municipal Managers.

International Training Centre of the ILO, SKAT, WASTE.

HABITAT (1992). Promotion of Waste Recycling and Reuse in Developing Countries.

Seminar organized by HABITAT, Bangkok, 3rd September, 1992.

Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., and O’Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable Development: Mapping

Different Approaches. Sustainable development, 13(1), 38-52. Retrieved from

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sd.244/pdf (accessed 26 June2014)

International Panel on Climate Change )IPCC(. )2006(. Guidelines for National Greenhouse

Gas Inventories: Chapter 2 Waste Generation, Composition and Management Data.

Retrieved from July 25, 2015

http://www.ipccnggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/pdf/5_Volume5/V5_2_Ch2_Waste_

Data.pdf

Joseph, K. (2006). Stakeholder Participation for Sustainable Waste Wanagement. Habitat

International, 30(4), 863-871. Retrieved from http://ac.els cdn.com/S0197397

505000524/1-s2.0-S0197397505000524 main.pdf?_tid=c21feefc-b6e0-11e4-9a73

00000aab0f26&acdnat=1424203897_f217a656bcba5b9a581ab2197b9cd75a

(accessed 09 January 2015)

Kaosol, T. )2009(. Sustainable Solutions for Municipal Solid Waste Management in

Thailand, World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 36, 12-27.

Kreith, F., and Tchobanoglous, G. (1994). Handbook of Solid Waste Management. New

York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Liang, C., Das, K. C., and McClendon, R. W. (2003). The Influence of Temperature and

Moisture Content Regimes on the Aerobic Microbial Activity of a Bio Solids

Composting Blend. Bio Resource Technology, 86(2), 131-137.

Lober, D.J. (1996). Municipal Solid Waste Policy and Public Participation in Household

Source Reduction. Waste Management and Research, 14, 125-143.

Lohani, B.N. (1984). Recycling Potentials of Solid Waste in Asia through Organized

Scavenging. Conservation and Recycling, 7, 181-190.

Lund, H.F. (2001). Recycling Handbook. McGraw Hill Inc., 2001. ISBN: 0-02-60329-4.

99

Manaloy, I. (2014). Lecture 5: Soil Fertility and Organic Fertilizers in Organic Farming

(Doctoral Dissertation), Agricultural University of Tirana.

McDougall, F. R., White, P. R., Franke, M., & Hindle, P. (2008). Integrated Solid Waste

Management: A Life Cycle Inventory. John Wiley & Sons.

Muttamara, S., Visvanathan, C. & Alwis, K.U. (1994). Solid Waste Recycling and Reuse in

Bangkok. Waste Management and Research, 12, 151-163.

National Environmental Management Authority. (NEMA). 2004. Proper Waste

Management: Our Health, Our Wealth. A News Letter by National Environment

Management Authority of Uganda on World Environment Day, 5th June 2004.

Pichtel, J. (2014). Waste Management Practices: Municipal, Hazardous, and Industrial.

)2nd ed.(. Florida: CRC Press. ISBN: 978-1-4665-8518-8.

Pietikainen, V. (2008). Look beyond the bin!: Solid Waste Management and Recycling at

the Asain Institute of Technology (AIT) Campus. Master of Science in

Environmental Science, Spring Semester, Department of Life Science, Sodertorn

University College.

Poerbo, H. (1996). Urban Solid Waste Management in Bandung: Towards an Integrated

Resource Recovery Systems. Environment and Urbanization, 12, 60-69.

Pollution Control Department (PCD). )2004(. Project of Surveying and Evaluation of

Physical Compositions of Municipal Solid Waste throughout the Country. ISBN: 974

-9669-23-1

Pollution Control Department. (PCD). (2013). Thailand State of Pollution Report 2012.

Retrieved January 14, 2014, from http://infofile.pcd.go.th/mgt/Report_Thai

2555.pdf?CFID=19009443&CFTOKEN=73592498.

Schübeler, P., Christen, J., and Wehrle, K. (1996). Conceptual framework for municipal

solid waste management in low-income countries (Vol. 9). SKAT (Swiss Center for

Development Cooperation). Retrieved from http://www.worldbank.org/urban/solid

_wm/erm/CWG%20folder/conceptualframework.pdf (accessed 12 December 2014)

Seth, K., Cobbina, S. J., Asare, W., and Duwiejuah, A. B. (2014). Household Demand and

Willingness to Pay for Solid Waste Management Service in Tuobodom in the

Techiman-North District, Ghana. American Journal of Environmental Protection,

2(4), 74-78.

Soulalay, V. (2006). Development of Environmental Sustainability Concepts for the Asian

Institute of Technology (AIT) Campus. (Master thesis No. EV- 06- 39, 2006).

Bangkok. Asian Institute of Technology.

Sundberg, C. (2005). Improving Compost Process Efficiency by Controlling Aeration,

Temperature and pH (Vol. 2005, No. 103).

100

Suttibak, S. )2013(. Solid Waste Generation, Kasetsart University. Retrieved from Kasetsart

University website: http://spe.csc.ku.ac.th/News/2.Overview%20and

%20waste%20generation.pdf (accessed 20 July 2014).

Sykes, G.N. (1978). Recycling: Two Alberta Case Studies. A Master’s Degree Project,

University of Calgary, Alberta, United States of America, August 1978.

Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., and Vigil, S.A. (1993). Integrated Solid Waste

Management:Engineering Principles and Management Issues. McGraw-Hill Inc.,

Singapore. ISBN: 0-07-112865-4.

The Ministry of Urban Development Government of India. (2012). The Ministry of Urban

Development Government of India. Retrieved June 20, 2014 from

http://urbanindia.nic.in/publicinfo/swm/chap22.pdf

Un-Habitat, and United Nations Human Settlements Programme. (2010). Solid waste

management in the world's cities: water and sanitation in the world's cities 2010.

Earthscan. ISBN: 978-1-84971-169-2.

United Nation Conference on Human Environment (UNCHE). (1992). The Declaration on

Environment Development the Rio Conference of the United Nations Conference on

Human Environment, Stockholm, June (1992). Retrievd January 15, 2015 from

https://www.google.co.th/books?hl=th&lr=&id=OmWvBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=

PA79&dq=+Rio+Conference++Principle+10+of+the+Rio+Declaration+states:&ots

=vmgzY020uT&sig=sOBnzZhoYNhAc3aLYCvg6E8ZZEA&redir_esc=y#v=onep

age&q&f=false

United Nation Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD). (2012). Commitment to

Sustainable Practics of Higher Education Institutions on the Occasion of the United

Nations Conrefernce on Sustainable Debelopment, 20-22 June 2012, Rio de Janerio.

Retrieved June 30, 2014 from http://rio20.euromed-management.com/Declaration-

for-HEI.pdf

United Nation Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA). (2012). Higher

education sustainability initiatives: Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform.

Retrived June 15, 2014 from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?me

nu=1

United Nation Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organizatin (UNESCO). (2004). UN

Decade for Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014). UNESCO.

Retrieved June 30, 2014 from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/ 0014/001416/

141629e.pdf

United Nation Environmental Program. (UNEP). (2005). Solid Waste Management 2005.

Retrieved June 06, 2014 from http://www.unep.org/ietc/Portals/136/SWM-Vol1-

Part1-Chapters1to3.pdf. ISBN: 92-807-2676-5

USEPA. (1993). Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge. Federal Register 58:

9248–9415. Washington, DC.

101

Velazquez, L., Munguia, N., and Sanchez, M. (2005). Deterring sustainability in higher

education institutions: An appraisal of the factors which influence sustainability in

higher education institutions. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher

Education, 6(4), 383-391.

Verma, S. )2002(. Anaerobic Digestion of Biodegradable Organics in Municipal Solid

Wastes. (Master Thesis, Columbia University, 2002). New York: Columbia

University.

Visvanathan, C., and Trankler, J. (2003, December). Municipal solid waste management in

Asia: a comparative analysis. In Workshop on Sustainable Landfill Management (pp.

3-5).

Wahab, D. A., Hussain, A., Scavino, E., Mustafa, M. M., & Basri, H. (2006). Development

of a prototype automated sorting system for plastic recycling. American Journal of

Applied Sciences, 3(7), 1924. ISSN: 1546-9239

White, P. R., Franke, M., and Hindle, P. (1995). Integrated Solid Waste Management: A

Lifecycle Inventory: A Lifecycle Inventory. Gaithersburg, Maryland: An Aspen

Publication .Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN: 0-8342-1311-7

World Bank. (2012). What a Waste. A Global Review of Solid Waste Management, Urban

Development Series. Retrieved June 29, 2014from http://siteresources.worldbank .

org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resources/3363871334852610766/What - _a_

Waste2012_Final.pdf

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). (1987). Our Common

Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Environment: Science and Policy for

Sustainable Development, 29(5), 25-29.

Wright, T. S. (2002). Definitions and Frameworks for Environmental Sustainability in

Higher Education. Higher Education Policy, 15(2), 105-120.

Zerbock, O. (2003). Urban solid waste management: waste reduction in developing nations.

Written for the Requirements of CE, 5993.

102

Appendix A

Questionnaire Survey form for OFAM

103

Demolition Waste

It had been seen that there are renovation process in AIT in Dorm.

1. How are these wastes managed?

2. Are the contractors supposed to manage these or AIT?

3. Do you see any waste segregation activities done in the AIT transfer Station?

4. Do you have any idea about to get better situation for the landscape of the AIT

transfer Station?

5. Do you have any planned to plant flowers or some plants can be relaxed people

mind?

6. Is the exterior of transfer station painted?

7. How regular is the pest control in transfer station (mouse trap, sprays etc.)

For the Yard Waste

1. How many time cut down the grass and others gardening waste per month?

2. How many disposal areas for the gardening waste/ yard waste?

3. How many workers are doing for the yard waste?

4. What is management system for yard waste?

5. Are there any ideas for composting it? AIT has a huge garden/green space-

compost can be used here itself.

6. From where do we buy compost now? Tentatively how much is spent on buying

compost?

General Information of Waste Collection System

1. How many bins are there in AIT?

2. How many staffs dedicated for waste collection?

3. How many collection points? (Each building???)

4. How many times do these collectors make a round per day?

5. How many time and which day and time does the Tha Klong Municipality truck

come to AIT? Is it sufficient or there are waste stored for long time in transfer

station?

6. Waste fees paid to the municipality?

7. What and how many waste collection equipment are there (tricycle, bins….)

8. How many garbage bin (of what capacity…is it 120 L or 200 L) are there?

9. Is there record of Green, Blue and yellow bins?

10. Can a set of 3 bins (a green (food waste), blue (non-recyclable) and yellow bin (for

recyclables) be located in each building? For source segregation if waste?

11. AIT’s main issue is mixed waste system- for you agree that source separation of

waste can help waste management? How can we promote waste segregation at

source/household? Are there any plans on this line?

104

Food Waste

While researching, I found few commercial food vendors do not manage their food waste

properly. Can all food vendors be asked (in the contract) to manage food waste?

Similarly, how can we manage food waste from residential sector be managed – almost 50-

60% of waste in transfer station is food wastage.

The pig farm owner is ready to take more food waste, if it is segregated well, have you

thought to utilize this opportunity to manage food waste from AIT?

Cash for trash

Are you aware of this activity?

It is not known to many residents. How do you plan to notify AIT residents about such 3R

good practice they can participate in?

Can AIT achieve 30% waste recovery by 2016- Thai National Target? What mechanisms

need to be placed to achieve this target?

What kind of support do you expect from?

• AIT administration

• AIT residents

• Cleaning staffs

• Others

105

Appendix-B

Data Sheet for Waste Auditing

106

Table B-1 Sample Location and Frequency of Waste sampling

No Location

No. of

Samples

Frequency

Total

Lab test

1 Bins from Commercial Areas:

1.(a) 108 Shop 8 1 time/month 8 Once a month

1.(b) Grocery 8 1 time/month 8

1.(c) Hom Krum 8 1 time/month 8

1.(d) Arcade Shop

Areas (UFM) 8 1time/month 8

1.(e) Cafeteria 8 1time/month 8

1.(f) SU Snack Bar 8 1time/month

2 Bins from Academic/ Administrative Areas: Once a month

2.(a) SOM 8 1 time/month 8

2.(b) AIT IS 8 1 time/month 8

2.(c) Admin Building 8 1 time/month 8

2.(d) SET 8 1 time/month 8

2.(e) SERD 8 1 time/month 8

2.(f) Energy Building 8 1 time/month 8

3 Bins from Residential Areas: Once a month

3.(a) Staff

Accommodation

(ST 6) or Dorm Y 8 1 time/month 8

3.(b) SV 1 8 1 time/month 8

3.(c) SV 2 8 1 time/month 8

3.(d) Dorm (J-K side

one dorm) 8 1 time/month 8

3.(e) Dorm (A-F side

one dorm) 8 1 time/month 8

3.(f) Dorm (Q-L side

one building) 8 1 time/month 8

107

Table B-2 Field Work Data Sheet for Waste Sorting

Date:

Time:

Site Name:

Field note recorded by:

Contact Person/ Position:

Note:

Total Weight Taken:

Observation note:

Final Weight after Quartering

Items

Weight (kg) Remarks

Plastic

Packaging

Bottle PET Bottle

HDPE Bottle

Mixed Plastic Bottle

Bag Styrofoam

Poly Styrene Paper Bag

Laminated Multi-layer Bag

Others Plastics ( Non- Packaging)

Paper Packaging Cardboard/ Corrugated

Box

Beverage Cartons

Coffee Cups,

A4 Paper, Office Paper, Magazine

Glass Bottle Packaging

Non-Packaging

Metal Steel Can

Aluminum Can

Food Waste

Yard Waste

Leather and rubber

Textile

Nappies

Batteries and Hazardous Waste

Electronic Waste

Others

108

Table B-3 Sampling Procedure for Waste Auditing

No Tasks Activities Conducted

1 Procedure 1. Labeling waste collection bag, waste composition

analysis using quartering method.

2. Waste sampling site was AIT transfer station

3. Taking waste for waste sampling from three zones

2

Sample sizes

8 samples

3 Schedule for waste

sampling

Sampling 1: on 30 August, 2014

Sampling 2: on 17 Sep, 2014

Sampling 3: on 20 Oct, 2014

Sampling 4: on 28 Nov, 2014

Sampling 5: on 25 Dec, 2014

Sampling 6: on 31 Jan, 2015

Sampling 7: on 27 Feb 2015

Sampling 8: on 6 March 2015

4 Remarks To compare two seasons, (semester opening and during the

inter-semester brake) waste sampling was started since July.

Besides, as acquire that during dry season and wet season,

the waste sampling duration was set 8 months.

109

Appendix- C

Chemical Procedure

110

Procedure Determination of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (Organic Nitrogen)

1. 0.1 g of solid samples were taken and each them were diluted up to 50 ml with distilled

waste by using graduated cylinder

2. The diluted samples were transferred to conical flask of 250 ml

3. 25 ml of digestion reagent (light blue color) is added to each conical flask containing the

diluted samples

4. Transferred the solution to 300ml TKN tubes

5. Added 5 grains pf glass beads into each TKN tubes.

6. Put the TKN tubes to digestion units carefully

7. Connected the cooling water tube to water pipe and turn on the H2O Knob of hood

8. Turn on the hood

9. Set the heating to 4 for 1 hours and then turn no the Knob to 6 for remaining time

10. The white fumes starts to appear inside the tube. Let the tube continue the heating process

after the appearances of white fumes in the test tube for 30 minutes.

11. Switched off the digestion unite and let it cool at room temperature

12. Removed the TKN tubes for the digestion units very carefully. The remaining in the

tubes is white or yellow solid or oil like solution.

13. Added 100 ml of distilled water to each tube and shake it well. The oil or solid should

dissolve completely. It may need couples of hours to dissolve in case of solid formation.

14. After complete dissolve of the solutions add 25 ml of sodium hydroxide thiosulphate.

The color of tube may be converted into green with flocs or dark blue color without flocs.

15. Put the TKN tubes with the solution and glass beads to the distillation unit.

16. Put 25 ml of Borate Buffer Solution into 250 ml conical flask and keep that flask to the

distillation unit.

17. Do the distillation process for 4 minutes.

18. Do the sample process for the blank sample

19. During distillation process, if the sample contain ammonia then the sample convert to

green color

20. After distillation process titrate the solution contained in the conical flask with

0.02NH2SO4.

111

Appendix- D

Promotion Materials for Household Dry and Wet Waste Segregation and Data Sheets and

Questionnaire Survey for Household

112

Figure D-1 Facility providing for household wet and dry waste segregation

113

Figure D-2 Poster and banner for household wet and dry waste segregation

114

ตารางบนทกรายละเอยดขยะหอพก ท ST6, ST 7และ SV3

Record data sheet

Table D-1 Source Segregation of Waste at Household (@ ST6, ST7 and SV3)

Date (วนท) Recorded by (ผบนทก)

Details (รายละเอยด) ST6 ST7 SV3 รวม

Total

จ านวนหอง Number of rooms

44 55 110 209

จ านวนถงขยะสขาวทรวบรวมได (ถง) Amount of white bags collected (bags)

น าหนก เปนกโลกรมของถงสขาว Waste Weight (White bags)

น าหนก เปนกโลกรมของถงสด า Waste Weight (Black bags)

น าหนกของขยะบรรจภณฑจากครวเรอน

Total weight of packaging waste

generated by household

หมายเหต: จ ำนวนหองขอเชคจำกแมบำนปอกอกท

ST 6 แมบำนท ำควำมสะอำดทกวนองคำร (every Tuesday cleaning)

ST7 แมบำนท ำควำมสะอำดทกวนจนทร (every Monday cleaning)

SV3 แมบำนท ำควำมสะอำดทกวนศกร (every Friday cleaning)

115

แบบฟอรบนทกน าหนกขยะจากครวเรอน แยกประเภทยอยทบอขยะ Record data sheet

Table D-2 Source Segregation of Waste at Household (To be recorded @AIT Transfer station)

Date (วนท) Recorded by (ผบนทก)

Waste from (ถงขยะรวบรวมจาก) ST6 ST7 SV3

Total waste weight (น าหนกรวมขยะทงหมด)______________ กโลกรม (Kg)

Waste Specific type

ประเภทขยะ จ านวน

Kg

(กโลกรม)

ขายได

Baht

(บาท)

พลาสตก Plastic

ขวดน าดม น าผลไม (PET bottle)

ขวดสบ แชมพ ยาสระผม (HDPE Plastic bottle)

พลาสตกรวม ประเภทอนๆ (Mixed plastic)

ถงพลาสตก Plastic carry bag

ถาดพลาสตก โฟม

Plastic tray, foam

กระดาษ

Paper

Corrugated box

กระดาษลง

Fold box

กลองกระดาษธรรมดา

Beverage carton

กลองเครองดม

กระดาษส านกงาน

(A4 paper)

กระดาษรวม (จบจว) (Mixed paper)

แกว Glass

ขวดแกว บรรจเครองดม/น าผลไม สใสJuice/beer bottle

-ขวดแกวเครองส าอาง สขน

Mixed Glass

กระปอง Tin Can

Aluminum can

กระปองอลมเนยม เชน ไอซท โคก

Metal can

กระปองเหลก (เชน กระปองนม, ปลากระปอง )

Record Data Sheet for Household Wet and Dry waste Segregation

116

Interview questions for ST6 ST7 and SV

Purpose: As a part of Master and Ph.D. thesis, this questionnaire survey aims to gauge

respondent’s practice especially on how they manage with waste generated, post-consumer

packaging material and opinion on 3R in AIT campus

Instructions: please complete the following questions by a check () based on what applies to

you.

Sex: Male Female

Age ………year

School: SERD SET SOM

Household size Single Family

Residence: ST6 ST7 SV-III

Nationality ……………………………………..

1. Are you aware of the resource depletion issue? Yes No

2. Are you aware of waste-related problems, e.g. from single –use packaging? Yes No

3. Do you always receive white and black color bags for waste segregation given by

house cleaning staff?

Yes, every week Yes, sometime No

4. Do you know that AIT has started household solid waste segregation activities in

AIT? Yes No

5. Do you already separate recyclable waste before the solid waste separation project

started? Yes No

6. Do you practice household waste segregation into dry and wet waste?

Yes, very often (please go to question 7)

Yes, sometimes (please go to question 7)

No (please go to question 8)

7. What encourages you to practice source segregation? (can be more than 1 choice)

Information on project activity (letter and waste segregation stickers)

Waste facilities provided (plastic bin bags)

The decreased distance between my place and specific bins

Specific bins allocation (into wet and dry waste)

I am aware of waste problem and environmental issue

Others...............................................................

8. What discourages you to practice source segregation?(can be more than 1 choice)

No idea

No time

No sufficient facility (please specify………………………)

No interest

Not aware

No space

117

Other………………………

9. How often do you go to the bins to dispose of generated waste at your apartments?

Everyday

1-2 times/week

3-5 times/week

Never, I let the housekeepers do it

10. What do you do with the recyclable packaging waste e.g. Plastic bottle, Glass bottle?

Throw away as waste (mix with general waste)

Collect for reuse

Collect for trade

Separate into dry waste bag

Others……………………………………………………

11. Will you continue segregating waste when the pilot project is over?

Yes No Not sure

(Optional) Please specify if any opinion or suggestion toward household waste

segregation ……………………………………………………………………………..

12. What is the appropriate waste separation system that encourages you to separate

waste for recycling?

Wet and dry waste

Specific waste collection bin (glass, paper, plastic bottle, food waste etc.)

Recycle and non-recyclable

Others…………………………

13. Do you have any difficulties to define what dry or wet waste is?

Yes ……………………………. No

14. Do you think detailed information on how to separate waste I necessary for you to

practice waste segregation?

Yes, please specify………………… No

15. In which way do you get information about 3R practices and solid waste related

campaign in AIT?

The internet webpage and e-mails

Posters, Public announcement/Stickers telling to separate waste

Visible recycle bins with informing text and facilities

Communication with colleagues, friends

Facebook page by……………………………………............................................

Door to door information

Others……………………………………………………………………………

16. What do you think how AIT can practice sustainable waste management?

Suggestion/recommendation……………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………

…….

Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire

118

Questionnaire survey for Post Project Areas

General Information

Sex: Male Female

School: SERD SET SOM

Age:

Occupation: Staff Student Faculty

Place SV 3 ST 6 ST 7

1. Were you aware of the dry and wet waste segregation activity in your

accommodation unit?

Yes No

2. Do you use to separate wet waste and dry waste in the given black and white bag?

Yes No

3. If YES, how often

Every week Only for the first month Up to two months until I got the

free black and white bin bags

4. Did you notice that, the free black and white big bag distribution has stopped from

October end?

Yes No

5. After the discontinuation of free black and white bin bag distribution, do you still

separate wet and dry wasted from your room?

Yes No

If YES, got go question # 6 and 7,

If NO, go to Question No. 8 directly

6. If YES, how do you separate dry and wastes now?

As before; dry waste in white bag and wet waste in black bag

In the same color but in 2 different bags

In 2 different bags but color of the bags vary each time

7. If you use different color bags other than black and white, or the same color bag, how

do you throw these separated bin bags in the green and yellow bin?

I read the bin label and throw the dry waste (no matter which color plastic bag)

into the YELLOW Bins, and Wet wastes in GREEN bins

I DO NOT read the label in the garbage bin and randomly throw the segregated

waste bins in either Green or Yellow bin

I want to put the separated wastes in the correct garbage bins, HOWEVER, if the

correct bin is FULL already, I have to put wastes in incorrect bin ( Because I do not

have the choice)

119

I leave the segregated dry and wet waste bags in my room for the cleaning

ladies/housemaids to clean it

8. If you have discontinued to segregate dry and wet wastes after free bin bags

distribution has stopped, will you continue to segregate wastes ONLY IF

I am provided with free black and white bags like before

I will still NOT segregate wastes anymore even if I am provided with free bin bags

9. What are your observations of the dry and wet waste segregation activities for past

three months (Aug-Oct 2014)?

I do not know about others, but I am satisfied that I did correct by segregating

wastes and help clean the environment

Nothing good happened, because even if I did separate dry and wet wastes other

people did not- because the green and yellow bins had incorrect wastes put inside

them by others

I did separate dry and wet wastes, BUT I really do not know what benefit did AIT

have from such actions- I do not know what happened to those segregated wastes-

whether they were sent for recycling or ultimately mixed with other wastes for final

disposal?

Such pilot activities for few days and months do not help achieve anything. People

will continue to go back to their normal habits of mixing wastes after the pilot project

is over

10. Please provide us your suggestions for practicing sustainable solid waste

management System in AIT.

I do not have any suggestions

I do not care – it does not affect me- as I am here only for few years

I would like to suggest _________________________________________

Continue providing free black and white bin bags

Make sure enough green and blue garbage bins are provided for each

building/residential unit

Expand these activities to entire AIT

Provide the waste segregation suggestions/information to students in each

semester through SU/OFAM

Inform residents about what ultimately happens to the segregated wastes

Make a mandatory and strict rule for waste segregation

Motivate residents to practice waste segregation as a voluntary practice.

120

Appendix- E

Data Sheet for Composting Testing and Packaging Waste Recycling

121

Table E-1 Field Work Data Sheet for Composter

No.

Parameter Checked

Condition Remarks

Yes No

1. Moisture Content (%)

2. Temperature (C·)

3. Level of garbage

(Inches)

4. Volume (kg)

5. Acidic Smell

Septic Smell

6. Paper

Paper Cover with Wax

7. Plastic

8. Fly

9. Ant

10. Worms

11. Watering

Too much

122

For packaging waste segregation at community scale

(@Lawson)

บนทกน าหนกขยะโดยรวมทลอวสน(data record form)

Table E-2 Field Work Survey for Packaging Waste

Date (วน/เดอน/ป)

Time (เวลา) Recorded by (บนทกโดย) Observation note (บนทกผลการคดแยกขยะ)

No

ประเภทขยะ Waste type

Total weight (kg)

(น าหนก หนวย: กโลกรม) Remarks

1 พลาสตก Plastic

2 แกว Glass

3 กระปอง Tin can

4 กระดาษ

Paper

5 อนๆ Others

123

ฟอรมบนทกน าหนกขยะตามประเภททลอวสน (specific packaging data record form)

Record data sheet

Table E-3 Packaging Waste Segregation at Community Scale (@Lawson and SV3)

Date (วน/เดอน/ป) Time (เวลา) Recorded by (บนทกโดย)

Waste Specific type ขายได (sellable) ขายไมได

(unsellable) Kg

(กโลกรม)

Baht

(บาท)

พลาสตก Plastic

ขวดน าดม น าผลไม (PET bottle)

ขวดสบ แชมพ ยาสระผม (HDPE Plastic

bottle)

พลาสตกรวม ประเภทอนๆ (Mixed plastic)

ถงพลาสตก Plastic carry bag

ถาดพลาสตก โฟม

Plastic tray, foam

กระดาษ

Paper

Corrugated box

กระดาษลง

Fold box

กลองกระดาษธรรมดา

Beverage carton

กลองเครองดม

กระดาษส านกงาน

(A4 paper)

กระดาษรวม (จบจว) (Mixed paper)

แกว Glass

ขวดแกวใส ขวดแกวบรรจเครองดม/น าผลไม

สใสJuice/beer bottle

ขวดแกวเครองส าอาง สขน

Mixed Glass

กระปอง Tin Can

Aluminum can

กระปองอลมเนยม เชน ไอซท โคก

Metal can

กระปองเหลก (เชน กระปองนม, ปลากระปอง )

124

Appendix F

Analyzing Part of Result Data

125

Table F-1.1 Physical Characteristic of Municipal Solid Waste in AIT from August 2014 to March 2015 (%) by Wet Weight

No Items August September October November December January February March Average (%)

1 Plastic (PET Bottle) 0.9 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.2 2.0 1.4 1.6 1.5

2 Plastic (HDPE Bottle) 0.5 0.4 2.2 1.6 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.3 0.9

3 Mixed Plastic 0.0 1.4 1.6 0.7 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.1

4 Plastic Bag 16.6 17.9 16.2 27.8 13.5 15.4 10.9 25.0 17.9 5 Single use coffee cups

(plastic) 0.0 0.0 1.3 1.2 1.7 1.2 3.1 2.7 1.4

6 Office Paper 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.2 3.5 5.5 0.7 1.4 7 Styrofoam 0.5 0.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.3 1.5 0.9 8 Single use coffee cups

(paper) 0.0 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.2 2.4 1.6 2.5 1.5

9 Paper Bag 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 2.1 2.7 0.8 10 Cardboard, Corrugated,

Folding box 4.7 2.1 1.1 0.6 2.5 2.6 0.3 3.0 2.1

11 Beverage Cartons 1.3 1.1 0.9 0.6 0.7 1.2 1.4 1.8 1.1 12 Tissue paper 6.0 0.5 0.6 2.7 3.2 3.8 6.3 3.1 3.3 13 Glass Bottle 1.4 7.1 3.8 7.5 7.4 9.0 8.1 9.7 6.7 14 Steel Can 0.0 0.9 1.2 1.7 0.7 1.0 0.5 1.5 0.9 15 Aluminum, Can 1.7 0.2 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 16 Food Waste 48.7 60.7 60.9 48.7 60.1 52.5 46.9 41.6 52.5 17 Nappies 4 2.5 1.8 0.2 2.5 0.1 1.7 1.5 1.8 18 Textile 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.3 19 Yard Waste 0.0 0.5 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.8 20 Hazardous Waste 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.5 21 Others Waste (Rubber) 13.7 0.4 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.1 1.9 22 Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

126

Waste Sampling

Waste sampling at AIT was done with eight months duration from August 2014 to March

2014 which can refer to two different seasons (wet and dry). Every times waste sampling

was done at AIT transfer station once a month.

Figure F-1 Labeling Designated Bins for Waste Sampling

Figure F-2 The Process of Weighting the Garbage Bags before Quartering

Figure F-3 Doing Quartering for the Total Waste

127

Figure F-4 Plastic Bottle (PET, HDPE, Mixed Plastic Bottle)

Figure F-5 Glass Bottle, Steel Can and Aluminum Can

Figure F-6 Cardboard, Folding Box, Corrugated Box, Beverage Carton and Office

Paper

128

Figure F-7 Food Waste, Tissue Paper and Paper Bag

Figure F-8 Styrofoam, Single Used Paper and Single Used Plastic

Figure F-9 Plastic Bags and Nappies

Sanitary

Napkins

129

Table F-3a Physical Composition of Solid Waste from Three Different Sectors

No Components

% of Waste

Generation from

Commercial

Sectors

% of Waste

Generation from

Residential

Sectors

% of Waste

Generation

from

Academic

Sectors

1 Food Waste 74.5 56.2 41.0

2 Non-Recyclable

Plastic

13.0 23.0 30.6

3 Non-Recyclable Paper 1.6 2.5 4.5

4 Toilet Paper 0.0 1.4 2.6

5 Yard Waste 0.0 0.0 1.1

6 Recyclable Plastic

(Plastic Bottle)

5.2 3.3 5.2

7 Office Paper 0.0 0.0 0.4

8 Recyclable Paper

(Cardboard,

Corrugated Box)

0.0 1.6 1.5

9 Glass Bottle 3.2 8.2 6.0

10 Metal Can 2.5 3.0 1.5

11 Sanitary Napkins 0.0 0.3 2.2

12 Hazardous Waste 0.0 0.0 2.2

13 LTR 0.0 0.5 1.1

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Table F-3b Seasonal Variation of Waste Generation in AIT Campus

No Components % of Waste in Wet

Season (by Wet Weight)

% of Waste in Dry

Season (by Wet

Weight)

1 Food Waste 58.9 50.3

2 Non-Recyclable Plastic 18.1 21.9

3 Non-Recyclable Paper 4.0 7.7

4 Recyclable Plastic

(Plastic Bottle)

4.0 3.7

5 Recyclable Paper 2.1 3.9

6 Glass Bottle 4.8 8.2

7 Metal Can 1.6 1.5

8 Sanitary Napkins 2.4 1.1

9 Yard Waste 0.6 0.9

10 Household Electronic

and Electronic Device

0.8 0.4

11 LTR 2.7 0.4

Total 100.0 100.0

130

Table F-3c Month Varitaion of Waste Generation from AIT Campus During August 2014 to March 2015

No Items August September October November December January February March Average

(%)

1 Plastic Bottle 1.4 3.5 5.4 4.0 3.1 4.4 3.4 3.4 3.6

2 Non-Recyclable

Plastic

17.1 18.1 18.5 29.9 16.2 17.3 15.3 29.1 20.2

3 Office Paper 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.2 3.5 5.5 0.7 1.4

4 Paper Waste 6.1 5.0 3.8 4.1 4.4 6.1 6.4 8.9 5.6

5 Glass Bottle 1.4 7.1 3.8 7.5 7.4 9.0 8.1 9.7 6.7

6 Metal Can 1.7 1.0 2.0 1.9 1.2 1.5 0.8 1.8 1.5

7 Food Waste 48.4 60.7 60.9 48.7 60.1 52.5 46.9 41.6 52.5

8 Nappies 4.0 2.5 1.8 0.2 2.5 0.1 1.7 1.5 1.8

9 Tissues Paper 6.0 0.5 0.6 2.7 3.2 3.8 6.3 3.1 3.3

10 Hazardous Waste 0.0 0.0 1.8 0.1 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.5

11 Textile/Yard/Rubber

Mixed

13.9 1.5 1.3 0.5 0.7 0.5 5.2 0.1 3.0

Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Remarks

Plastic Bottle – PET+HDPE+ Mixed Plastic Bottle

131

Recyclable Waste from Cash-for-Trash Activity

Table F-4a Total amount of Waste Recycling in 2014

No Components Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Average

1 Office Paper 20.0 63.0 30.0 35.0 40.0 25.0 No

Data

35.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 20.0 358.0 32.5

2 Paper 67.0 108.0 55.0 93.0 63.0 57.0 52.0 50.0 45.0 50.0 40.0 680.0 61.8

3 Plastic 55.0 49.0 55.0 35.0 45.0 37.0 45.0 35.0 62.0 60.0 52.0 530.0 48.2

4 Metal Can 25.7 8.3 11.0 5.3 10.8 10.8 35.6 10.5 6.5 7.5 12.5 144.5 13.1

5 Glass 35 56 50 22 30 23 28 25 20 20 20 329.0 29.9

Total 203 284 201 190 189 153 196 151 164 168 145 2041.5 185.6

Table F-4b Total amount of Waste Recycling in 2013

No Components Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Average

1 Office Paper 35.0 36.0 20.0 10.0 32.0 60.0 20.0 55.0 108.0 20.0 13.0 52.0 461.0 38.4

2 Paper 105.0 109.0 55.0 45.0 42.0 50.0 37.0 68.0 132.0 70.0 82.0 107.0 902.0 75.2

3 Plastic 27.0 44.0 45.0 55.0 35.0 45.0 35.0 44.0 35.0 30.0 67.0 45.0 507.0 42.3

4 Metal Can 8.5 37.6 10.3 15.6 8.4 10.8 10.5 9.0 27.4 25.6 1.3 18.0 182.9 15.2

5 Glass 10 47 30 70 40 40 40 15 47 27 44 21 431 35.9

Total 186 274 160 196 157 206 143 191 349 173 207 243 2484 207.0

132

Table F-4c Total amount of Waste Recycling in 2012

No Components Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Average

1 Office Paper No

Data

No

Data

No

Data

10.0 33.0 120.0 95.0 10.0 55.0 22.0 20.0 130.0 495.0 55.0

2 Paper 50.0 92.0 122.0 213.0 55.0 75.0 42.0 50.0 86.0 785.0 87.2

3 Plastic 20.0 35.0 32.0 78.0 45.0 57.0 40.0 27.0 41.0 375.0 41.7

4 Metal Can 0.2 44.3 0.4 51.4 12.3 48.0 31.6 8.3 43.1 239.6 26.6

Glass 22.0 85.0 102.0 30.0 20.0 35.0 30.0 15.0 30.0 369.0 41.0

Total 102 289 376 467 142 270 166 120 330 2263.6 251.5

133

Table F-5a Total Recyclable Waste Cage Bin from Lawson (108)

No Categories

2014 2015 Total

Weight by

(kg)

Estimated

Price

(Baht) /kg

Estimated

income

(Baht)

Total

Weight

by (%) Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

1 PET Bottle 17.2 8.8 15.1 12.0 9.3 9.7 7.5 79.6 15.0 1193.7 12.1

2 Mixed Plastic Bottle 1.7 10.4 4.5 7.4 6.5 2.7 5.1 38.3 10.0 382.8 5.8

3 HDPE Bottle 4.9 3.0 4.8 9.0 3.5 2.3 9.7 37.2 19.0 706.8 5.7

4 Glass Bottle 58.8 80.7 74.0 64.0 42.0 66.5 51.0 437.0 2.5 1092.5 66.7

5 Aluminum Can 4.1 3.7 4.6 4.0 5.1 5.2 3.4 30.1 38.0 1143.4 4.6

6 Steel Can 2.9 5.4 3.0 5.0 6.8 4.3 5.5 32.8 5.0 164.2 5.0

Total Recyclable Waste

Lawson (108) Cage Bin

89.6 111.9 106.0 101.4 73.2 90.7 82.2 655.0 4683.4 100.0

Table F-5b Total Recyclable Waste Cage Bin from SERD Building (EEM Block)

No Categories

2014 2015 Total

Weight by

(kg)

Estimated

Price

(Baht)/kg

Estimated

income

(Baht)

Total

Weight

by (%) Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

1 PET Bottle 2.2 2.4 1.1 0.6 1.6 0.8 8.7 15.0 130.7 30.01

2 Mixed Plastic Bottle 0.7 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.2 4.2 10.0 42.2 14.54

3 HDPE Bottle 1.1 1.7 0.6 0.1 0.7 1.3 5.5 19.0 105.1 19.06

4 Glass Bottle 1.2 1.4 0.3 0.3 0.1 1.1 4.4 2.5 11.0 15.16

5 Aluminum Can 1.7 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.3 3.4 38.0 127.7 11.58

6 Steel Can 1.2 0.1 1.0 0.0 0.2 0.3 2.8 5.0 14.0 9.65

Total (SERD) Building,

EEM Block Cage Bin

8.1 6.9 4.1 1.5 3.4 5.0 29.0 430.6 100.00

134

Table F-5c Total Recyclable Waste Cage Bin from ITServ Building Cage Bin

No Categories

2014 2015 Total

Weight

by (kg)

Estimated

Price

(Baht)/kg

Estimated

income

(Baht)

Total

Weight

by (%) Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

1 PET Bottle 1.5 2.2 1.8 0.9 2.3 1.7 10.4 15.0 155.4 22.44

2 Mixed Plastic Bottle 8.1 1.9 1.5 0.4 0.2 1.1 13.2 10.0 132.2 28.64

3 HDPE Bottle 1.5 1.9 1.7 0.0 0.4 1.7 7.2 19.0 136.4 15.55

4 Glass Bottle 1.0 5.8 1.6 2.4 0.0 1.8 12.6 2.5 31.5 27.30

5 Aluminum Can 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.7 38.0 64.6 3.68

6 Steel Can 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.1 1.1 5.0 5.5 2.38

Total Recyclable Waste

ITServ Building Cage

Bin

12.1 13.6 6.9 3.9 3.1 6.6 46.2 525.6 100.00

Table F-5d Total Recyclable Waste Cage Bin from AIT International School

No Categories

2014 2015 Total

Weight

by (kg)

Estimated

Price

(Baht)/kg

Estimated

income

(Baht)

Total

Weight

by (%) Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

1 PET Bottle 3.2 1.1 1.1 1.4 0.6 7.4 15.0 110.7 28.52

2 Mixed Plastic Bottle 0.9 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.9 3.0 10.0 30.2 11.67

3 HDPE Bottle 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.8 2.7 19.0 50.9 10.36

4 Glass Bottle 4.2 2.3 0.0 1.5 0.7 8.7 2.5 21.8 33.62

5 Aluminum Can 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.2 38.0 45.6 4.64

6 Steel Can 0.4 0.1 0.0 2.2 0.2 2.9 5.0 14.5 11.21

Total Recyclable Waste

AIT IS Cage Bin

9.8 4.7 1.6 6.4 3.4 25.9 273.7 100.00