Swm Report5

7/28/2019 Swm Report5

1/48

Municipal Solid Waste

Management in UrbanCenters

Dr. Sanjeev AgrawalCentral Pollution Control Board,Delhi


2/48

What is Solid Waste

In a nutshell Solid waste can be regarded as refuse orwaste from any kind of source. But any refuse or waste

can be economic resource to others.

BMW

HW

Mining

Fly Ash

Agriculture:

o Dairy

o Agriculture residues

And Municipal Solid Waste-State of concern


3/48

Present Status of Management

Estimated waste generation is 1,00,000 MT/day

Per capita waste generation ranges between

0.20 to 0.60 kg.

Waste collection efficiency in bigger sized cities

ranges from 70 to 90% and in small sizedtowns it is up to 50-60%.

Local authorities spend less 5% of their budget

on waste disposal and maximum cost is

incurred on street sweeping and collection and

transportation of waste.


4/48

MSW GENERATION - NATIONAL

SCENARIO

MAJOR DEFICIENCIES

Littering of garbage due to unorganized primary

collection

Provision and operation of interim storagefacilities unsatisfactory

Irregular garbage lifting

Transportation system not synchronize withstorage facilities

Processing/ treatment of MSW not practiced

Final disposal through dumping and not SLF


5/48

CITIES / TOWNS CLASS I CLASS II

No. of Cities 299 345

Total Population 1281138655 22375588

Waste Generation

(MT/d)

48134 1454

Mode of collection

Manually 50% 78 %

Trucks 49 % 21 %

Others 1 % 1 %

Disposal

Dumping 94 % 93 %

Composting 5 % 6 %

Others 1 % 1 %

Status of Solid Waste Management in Class I Cities

and Class II Towns


6/48

Composition of Municipal Solid Waste

Description Percent by

weight

Vegetable, leaves 40.15

Grass 3.80

Paper 0.81

Plastic 0.62

Glass/ceramics 0.44

Metal 0.64

Stones/ashes 41.81

Miscellaneous 11.73


7/48

Quantity of Municipal Solid Wastes Generation in Metro Cities

S.No City Municipal solid Waste (TPD) Per capita waste

(Kg/day)

1. Ahmadabad 1,683 0.585

2. Bangalore 2,000 0.484

3. Bhopal 546 0.514

4. Bombay 5,355 0.436

5. Calcutta 3,692 0.383

6. Coimbatore 350 0.429

7. Delhi 4,000 0.475

8. Hyderabad 1,566 0.382

9. Indore 350 0.321

10 Jaipur 580 0.398

11 Kanpur 1,200 0.640

12 Kochi 347 0.518

13 Lucknow 1,010 0.623

14 Ludhiana 400 0.384

15 Madras 3,124 0.657

16 Madurai 370 0.392

17 Nagpur 443 0.273

18 Patna 330 0.360

19 Pune 700 0.312

20 Surat 900 0.600

21 Vadodara 400 0.389

22 Varanasi 412 0.400

23 Visakhapatnam 300 0.400


8/48

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES

(MANAGEMENT & HANDLING) RULES,

2000


9/48

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK

EnforcementImplementation and

development of

infrastructure

Monitoring

compliance of

prescribed

standards

Dept. of

Urban

Development

District

Magistrate

Metro-

cities

Other

cities and

towns

Municipal

Authorities

RESPONSIBILITIES

State Pollution

Control Boards/

Pollution Control

Committees

Submission of

Annual Reports

Grant of

Authorization forwaste processing/

disposal facilities

Annual Reports on status

of implementation

Central Pollution

Control Board


10/48

Regulatory frame work

Enacted Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and

Handling) Rules, 2000

Rules lay emphasis on seeking participation of citizens in

waste segregation, prohibiting littering of garbage,

proper storage of waste and efficient transportation ofwaste for its processing and final disposal.

Specifications to be followed for land filling to protect

environmental pollution and adoption of appropriate

waste processing technologies has been emphasized. The Rules are applicable to each town irrespective of its

population.


11/48

Management of Solid Waste

Schedule I- Time Target

Schedule II- Procedures for collections, segregation,

storage, transport processing & disposal of SW

ScheduleIII- specifications for land fill sites.

Schedule IV- Standards for composting, Leachates &

incineration


12/48

The Municipal Solid Wastes

(Management & Handling) Rules, 2000

Applicable to all Municipal Authorities

Obtain authorization- through Form-I from SPCB

Comply the provisions as per schedule I

Annual Report in Form-II to:

- Secretary State Deptt. of Urban Development andDM with a copy to SPCB


13/48

SCHEDULE - I

IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE

No. Compliance Criteria Schedule1.

2.

3.

4.

Setting up of waste processing/

disposal facilities

Monitoring performance ofabove facilities

Improvement of existing landfill

sites as per the Rules

Identification of landfill sites for

future use and developing the

sites for operation

By 31.12.2003

Once in 6months

By 31.12.2001

By 31.12.2002


14/48

Violation of the provisions

Improvement in landfill site as per Rules

(Schedule I) is not being done

Identification of new site as required under

Schedule I

Submission of annual report as required

under Section 4a


15/48

RESPONSIBILTIES OF

MUNICIPAL AUTHORITIES

Implementation of Schedule I and other

provisions of the Rules

Infrastructure development for collection,

storage, segregation, transportation anddisposal of MSW as per Schedule II

Obtaining authorization for setting up waste

processing and disposal facilities from SPCBs/PCCs

Furnishing annual report and accident reporting

to Secretary (UD)/ District Magistrate


16/48

RESPONSIBILITIES OF

SPCBs/ PCCs

Monitoring compliance of standards

regarding groundwater, ambient air,

incineration, leachate and compost quality

(Schedule II, III and IV) Grant of authorization to municipal

authorities for setting up waste

processing/ disposal facilities (within 45

days of application)

Furnishing annual report on status of

implementation to CPCB


17/48

Responsibility:

- Secretary,State Urban Deptt. and DM are

responsible for implementation

- SPCB - Monitor the compliance w.r.t.

-Groundwater quality

- Leachate-Ambient Air

- Compost

- Incinerator- issue authorization

-CPCB coordinate & review the standards


18/48

RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE/

UT GOVERNMENTS

Overall enforcement in metro-cities in the

State/ UT Secretary-in-charge, Dept. of

Urban Development

Overall enforcement in other large cities

and towns District Magistrate/ Deputy

Commissioner of the concerned districts


19/48

Gaps and Constraints in Implementation

Lack of adequate financial resources to implementspecified provisions of the rule.

Slow progress in ensuring segregation of waste.

In adequate infrastructure to meet the requirements for

collection, storage and transportation of waste. Local bodies not conversant and exposed with intricacies

of application of appropriate waste processing

technologies.

Comprehensive specification on landfills are difficult tomeet due to high cost of construction and operation

including non-existence of adequate number of

indigenous firms to undertake the jobs.


20/48

CONSTRAINTS IN IMPLEMENTATION

Overburden on local authorities due to

uncontrolled urbanization that strains the system

Fragmented management approach where more

than one department is involved and lack of inter-

departmental coordination

Inadequate financial resources of municipal

authorities to undertake improvement programs as

required under Schedule II, III and IV Lack of trained manpower at all levels

Lack of technical assistance for selection of

appropriate technologies


21/48

STATUS OFMUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

IN

MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI

COLLECTION AND STORAGE


22/48


Inspection

round

Nos.

inspected

Nos. properly

maintained

Percentage

14th

15th16th

17th

18th19th

20th

21st

639

736761

813

855828

807

826

141

183199

260

334269

186

273

22

2526

32

3933

23

33

Status of maintenance of waste receptacles in

MCD


23/48

COLLECTION AND STORAGE (contd)

MAIN OBSERVATIONS :

More than 40% of the receptacles in poor

physical conditions (broken walls, roofs,

doors)

20 - 25% of the receptacles are hotspots Substantial no. of dhalaos in good physical

conditions converted and used as office

space

Low garbage lifting frequency

Dhalao design and the machinery used for

lifting garbage not matching. In most cases,

the machinery responsible for damaged

dhalaos


24/48


MAIN OBSERVATIONS: Dumping of biomedical wastes in dhalaos

near hospitals (LNJP, GB Pant)

Lot of open garbage collection sites

Zones with major problems are:

- Shahdara (North)

- Sadar-Paharganj

- Karolbagh

- West and Najafgarh

- Shahdara (South)


25/48

TRANSPORTATION

One-third of the collection trucks observed

on road do not cover garbage during

transport

The cover (jute or plastic) used in most ofthe vehicles is often in bad shape

At any given time, a high 30% of collection

vehicles are not in working conditions,depleting the already lean fleet

Vehicles are too high for manual lifting and

filling of garbage from dhalaos


26/48

WASTE PROCESSING (COMPOSTING)

Started operating from late 1999; Now,

almost defunct Processing less than 20 MT/day against 500

MT/day

Composition of waste received mainproblem

Irregular power and water supply

Good compost quality

BHALSWA PLANT:


27/48

WASTE PROCESSING (COMPOSTING)(Contd..)

Installed in 1981; plant in poor physical

condition; outdated technology

Processing less than 30 MT/day against

capacity of 250 MT/day

Only 5-7% of garbage received is convertedinto compost

Poor quality of compost; no market demand

Needs complete renovation or replacement

OKHLA PLANT:


28/48

DISPOSAL

Quantity dumped during the last 12 months:

Ghazipur - 6,21,695 MT

Bhalswa - 6,03,376 MT

Okhla - 3,41,184 MT

Weighing platforms installed in all the 3 landfill

sites

Only at the Okhla site, garbage is covered with

soil

All the sites exhausted their capacity/life span

Urgent need to develop and operate newlandfill sites


29/48

Observation on MSW Management

Case of MSW in Delhi Deterioration trend was observed;

No. of hot spots increasing;

Increase in physically broken receptacles;

Problem of stray animals and rag pickers;

Dustbins and door-to-door collection is not effectively used;

Dhalaos are used as office;

Shortage of loaders and trucks, old vehicle, covering during transport;

Receptacles are over-flowing, and promoting vectors, flies, rodents,pathogens, odour etc.

All the three compost plant operating under capacity.

St t f W t R t l i D lhi


30/48

Zone/Area No. of

receptacles

inspected

Condition of waste receptacles

Unsanitary

condition

Physically

dilapidated

condition

Stray animals

seen

Rag pickers

seen

Properly

Maintained

MCD Zone

Central Zone 61 41 33 17 16 18

City Zone 42 12 12 10 96 23

Civil Lines 61 13 44 45 11 07

Karolbagh 47 17 10 12 10 09

Najafgarh 98 46 27 29 13 38

Narela 29 15 05 25 03 01

Rohini 68 20 24 17 13 38

Sadar-Paharganj 48 17 25 19 05 16

Shahdara (North) 93 51 51 38 22 62

Shahdara (South) 94 57 56 61 42 -

South Zone 151 37 61 48 38 132

West Zone 85 38 54 42 29 67

MCD subtotal 877 364 402 363 208 382

NDMC

North Circle 91 14 09 04 04 53

South Circle 59 09 17 15 05 02

Subtotal NDMC 150 23 26 19 09 55

Delhi Canntt. 64 11 07 13 07 37

Grand Total 1091 398 435 395 224 474

Status of Waste Receptacles in Delhi


31/48

Hotspots identified in MCD areas

Sl.No

.

Zone Current (24rd ) Round ofInspection

23ndt Round of Inspection Percentage of Hot Spots

No. of

Waste

Receptacle

No. of Hot

Spots

No. of

Waste

Receptacle

No. of

Hot Spots

Current

24th

Round

23rd

Round

1. Central 61 8 60 35 13 58

2. City 42 7 34 06 17 18

3. Civil Lines 57 10 79 17 18 22

4. Karol Bagh 34 11 40 03 32 08

5. Nazafgarh 52 4 60 04 8 07

6. Narela 51 4 30 10 8 33

7. Rohini 76 72 98 28 95 20

8. Sadar-Paharganj 39 14 40 11 36 28

9. Shahdara (N) 63 21 63 19 33 30

10. Shahdara (S) 63 9 73 41 14 56

11. South 139 46 108 24 33 22

12. West Zone 67 17 70 06 25 09

Total 744 223 755 204 30 % 27 %


32/48

STATUS OFMUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

IN

NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL



33/48


Inspectio

n round

Nos.

inspected

Nos.

properlymaintained

Percent

properlymaintained

14th

15th16th

17th

18th

19th

20th

21st

87

93111

117

174142

153

185

71

7779

63

153129

128

145

82

8371

54

8891

84

78

Status of maintenance of waste receptacles by

NDMC


34/48


MAIN OBSERVATIONS :

About 15% of the receptacles in poor physical

conditions (broken walls, roofs, doors)

Horticultural wastes collection and lifting needsimprovement

Garbage stations in general, are working

satisfactorily; however, segregated wastes

observed to be mixed again at the time ofcollection in these stations

Rag pickers up lifting project in association

with NGO a positive step worth emulation


35/48

TRANSPORTATION

Most of the trucks used for transport of

garbage is fitted with permanent covers

Garbage lifting crew provided with brooms

and lime powder to sweep and disinfect in

and around the dustbin after lifting - a

practice worth emulation


36/48

WASTE PROCESSING (COMPOSTING)

Estimated generation of wastes: 300 MT/day Okhla compost plant started operation in 1985;

poor physical condition; obsolete technology

Applied for authorization from DPCC

Processing less than 70 MT/day against 200

MT/day

Only around 10% of wastes converted intocompost

Good quality compost and regular sale of

product


37/48

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

Adopt of professional approach for MSWmanagement

Prepare of MSW Management Master Plan

Identify measurable indicators for self -monitoring implementation of the Plan

Set short, medium and long-term waste

reduction targets and programs to

implement

Renovate compost plant for full-conversion

of garbage generated area into compost


38/48

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS (Contd)

For interim improvements, survey and

inventory physical conditions of waste

receptacles and prepare a time-bound

improvement plan

Match the design of waste receptacles andthe machinery used for garbage lifting

Avoid/ban use of open-sites for waste

storage

Keep the doors of waste receptacles closed,

when not in use

Apply for authorization from SPCBs for


39/48

PUBLIC INTEREST LITEGATIONS

Ms. Almitra H. Patel, Vs Union of India

Gujarat Epidemics in Surat due to MSW

Dr. B.L. Wadhera Vs Union of IndiaProblem of MSW in Delhi

Shri. M. C. Mehta Vs Union of India

Taj Trapezium / Taj Corridor, Agra


40/48

Orders of Honble Supreme

court of India

Directed CPCB to regularly monitor the

management of Solid Waste - 01.03.1996

CPCB filed 11 reports to the Apex Court ofIndia

Directed CPCB to file reports to Honble

High Court of Delhi23.01.1998

CPCB filed 24 reports till date

Recommendations by Apex Court


41/48

Recommendations by Apex Court

The recommendations made by the Indian Supreme CourtCommittee on Solid Waste Management for improvement

of the situation in India is as Follows :

All Food and biodegradable waste should be composted;recyclable waste should be past on to the recyclingindustry; and only rejects should be land filled in a scientific

manner;

Decentralized composting with public and NGOs/CBOsparticipation should be encouraged wherever possible;

Caution against using unproven technologies should beobserved. Local Bodies are advised not to adopt expensivetechnologies of Power generation, fuel pelletization,incineration etc. until they are proven sound under Indianconditions.

P t hi M d l f C it B d S lid W t


42/48

DONOR

MC & PWD

MoEF

PUBLIC

NGO /Public Sector

Fertilizer Companies

Communities

PRIVATE COMMUNITY

Providing

Fund

NGO/Public sector

provides technical support

and facilitation for

community based SWM

and composting

Providing land

and otherlogistics

Communities

participate in Door-to-

Door waste collection

programme andcontribute towards its

Cost. Also produce

Compost and sell to

private Sector

Coordinating the

programme

NGO Ensures the

quality of compost

Partnership Model of Community Based Solid Waste

Management

Wh t h ld b th l f NGO


43/48

What should be the role of an NGOs

The following roles are suggested:Public awareness;

Model Preparation/Experimental/

Research;

Bridging between Govt. & Society,organizing residence as pressure groups;

Acting as a buffer zone between thecommunity and the municipal authorities.

What should be done by NGOs


44/48

What should be done by NGOs

The following suggestions are offered in the hope thatsome of them may be of some benefit:

Do keep away from political activity;Do consider carefully what can be done with availableresources;

Do try to evolve a system of self help rather thandepending on the municipal corporation;

Do aim at cooperation rather than confrontation with themunicipalities;

Do keep in contact with other NGOs in the area to avoid toduplication of work;

Do encourage the target groups to focus more on theirduties and less on their eights;

Dont arouse too many expectations otherwise failure tofulfill them all may lead to withdrawal are disappointment.

F t f ti


45/48

Future course of action

Cities having population > 1 million targeted for

ensuring compliance with the rules. Set up reasonable number of demonstration facilities

with Government financial support for the benefit ofother local bodies.

Re-set the simplified specifications on land fillingparticularly for smaller local bodies with due regardto prevention of pollution

Creating awareness on adoption of appropriate

technologies for waste processing consideringquality and composition of waste.

Encourage private entrepreneurship in setting up ofwaste processing and disposal facilities.

Involvement of NGOs and Public Sector in


46/48

managing MSWNGOs can play an important role in segregation of waste, itscollection and handling over to local authorities.They can also

help in bringing up the awareness and consciousness for goodsanitation. Through such programmes, NGOs and Public sectorcan help in:

Creating mass awareness, ensuring public participation insegregation of recyclable material and storage of waste at source;

Ensuring public participation in community based primarycollection system;

Organizing rag-pickers for collection of recyclable materials atthe community level;

Providing health education to the rag-pickers and suggesting toolsfor safety;

Providing employment through organizing door to door collectionof waste; and

Encouraging minimization of waste through in house backyardcomposting, Vermiculture and biogas generation etc.

Key issues in managing Municipal Solid Waste


47/48

Key issues in managing Municipal Solid Waste

Phenomenal growth in urban population is

creating solid waste disposal problems; Alternative service delivery is required?

Community based initiatives;

What is needed to nurture community based

initiatives; The need for research;

Is service delivery by NGOs/Public sector/CBOs-All good?

Need for Networking;

Innovations:

e.g.Preventing spillage of garbage, Vermiculture,

drain cleaning street sweeping etc.


48/48

Thankyou

Swm Report5

Documents

Transcript of Swm Report5