Thursday, March 28, 2024
 - 
Afrikaans
 - 
af
Albanian
 - 
sq
Amharic
 - 
am
Arabic
 - 
ar
Armenian
 - 
hy
Azerbaijani
 - 
az
Basque
 - 
eu
Belarusian
 - 
be
Bengali
 - 
bn
Bosnian
 - 
bs
Bulgarian
 - 
bg
Catalan
 - 
ca
Cebuano
 - 
ceb
Chichewa
 - 
ny
Chinese (Simplified)
 - 
zh-CN
Chinese (Traditional)
 - 
zh-TW
Corsican
 - 
co
Croatian
 - 
hr
Czech
 - 
cs
Danish
 - 
da
Dutch
 - 
nl
English
 - 
en
Esperanto
 - 
eo
Estonian
 - 
et
Filipino
 - 
tl
Finnish
 - 
fi
French
 - 
fr
Frisian
 - 
fy
Galician
 - 
gl
Georgian
 - 
ka
German
 - 
de
Greek
 - 
el
Gujarati
 - 
gu
Haitian Creole
 - 
ht
Hausa
 - 
ha
Hawaiian
 - 
haw
Hebrew
 - 
iw
Hindi
 - 
hi
Hmong
 - 
hmn
Hungarian
 - 
hu
Icelandic
 - 
is
Igbo
 - 
ig
Indonesian
 - 
id
Irish
 - 
ga
Italian
 - 
it
Japanese
 - 
ja
Javanese
 - 
jw
Kannada
 - 
kn
Kazakh
 - 
kk
Khmer
 - 
km
Korean
 - 
ko
Kurdish (Kurmanji)
 - 
ku
Kyrgyz
 - 
ky
Lao
 - 
lo
Latin
 - 
la
Latvian
 - 
lv
Lithuanian
 - 
lt
Luxembourgish
 - 
lb
Macedonian
 - 
mk
Malagasy
 - 
mg
Malay
 - 
ms
Malayalam
 - 
ml
Maltese
 - 
mt
Maori
 - 
mi
Marathi
 - 
mr
Mongolian
 - 
mn
Myanmar (Burmese)
 - 
my
Nepali
 - 
ne
Norwegian
 - 
no
Pashto
 - 
ps
Persian
 - 
fa
Polish
 - 
pl
Portuguese
 - 
pt
Punjabi
 - 
pa
Romanian
 - 
ro
Russian
 - 
ru
Samoan
 - 
sm
Scots Gaelic
 - 
gd
Serbian
 - 
sr
Sesotho
 - 
st
Shona
 - 
sn
Sindhi
 - 
sd
Sinhala
 - 
si
Slovak
 - 
sk
Slovenian
 - 
sl
Somali
 - 
so
Spanish
 - 
es
Sundanese
 - 
su
Swahili
 - 
sw
Swedish
 - 
sv
Tajik
 - 
tg
Tamil
 - 
ta
Telugu
 - 
te
Thai
 - 
th
Turkish
 - 
tr
Ukrainian
 - 
uk
Urdu
 - 
ur
Uzbek
 - 
uz
Vietnamese
 - 
vi
Welsh
 - 
cy
Xhosa
 - 
xh
Yiddish
 - 
yi
Yoruba
 - 
yo
Zulu
 - 
zu
Subscriber Login

Sustainability issues in Solid Waste Management

by Admin
0 comment

These examples throw various ‘sustainability’ issues with regard to waste management in the country. Though waste processing technologies in general, and selection of appropriate technology, in particular, can be termed as serious issues in this regard, to my mind ‘right financial model’ for such projects is the main issue upon which sustainability of any SWM project is critically based. This may seem to be a much generalised statement, as it is true about any long term project or for that matter any project, but this has to be highlighted here as ‘the critical factor’ due to the following reasons:

  • Waste management projects (long term), as said earlier, are in their initial phases, and there is no successful long standing project in the country worthy of replication.
  • There are so many domestic players/operators/agencies entering this sector without much experience.
  • There are so many foreign players/agencies knocking at our doors with their technologies. These technologies are yet to be tried in Indian conditions with our nature of garbage and hence city administrators are reluctant to go ahead in many cases, where they are fully justified.
  • There are agencies, which in order to take up new projects, are prepared to quote unrealistic prices or even ready to pay royalty to urban local bodies, like in Kolhapur. Whether the Chennai project (Box) is viable in the long run, is yet to be seen. Our experience of Kolhapur, however shows otherwise.
  • In our country implementation of environmental laws are one of the last priorities and generally, short cuts are adopted by industries, as strict monitoring is absent at every level.
  • For policy makers at the local level, spending for garbage is still a taboo. They are ready to make large allocations, for example, for roads and gardens, which are more visible aspects of development, but not much willing to allocate required budget for processing of waste and creation of sanitary landfill in their city backyard.

The Committee constituted by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in 1999 had suggested composting as the main technology of MSW processing in the country. However, in India, compost is not yet accepted as a fertilizer on a large scale. The agro policy framework still foresees massive subsidies for chemical fertilizers. Banks also consider composting, a venture which entails high risk due to its lack of long term success and hence, the collateral securities are unreasonably higher. ‘Enterprises/agencies also depend on the availability of cheap municipal leaseholds, whereby securities for long term use are often only partially granted’ (Christian Zurbugg, et al 20042). The same study points out that due to high operating and transport costs and the poorly developed market for compost, the expected profits could not be realised as planned. Composting of mixed waste also had a negative effect on compost quality and thus on its acceptance by farmers. In such a situation, if some operators are offering free processing services or even royalty to urban bodies, the whole scenario gets confused. On the one hand, its success in future is doubtful, if we go by earlier experiences and real financial calculations and on the other hand, it confuses administrators and decision makers in other urban bodies about the actual cost of waste processing.

The small but successful example of Nashik Municipal Corporation shows that municipal bodies have to spend for sanitary landfill and also have to pay for the difference between the sale proceeds of compost and cost of processing and land filling to make it sustainable on a long term basis. This, converted into per ton basis, is termed as ‘tipping fee’ or ‘gate fee’. Unfortunately, in our country the concept of tipping fee or gate fee is still not popular. It is so probably because our general psyche is against spending for something like waste and on the other side, it is so because there are agencies which are promising ‘gold from waste’ to the urban local bodies. I would like to quote from one study: “If there are financial profits from composting activities, they are very small. Currently, it is not possible to achieve “gold from waste”, as is sometimes stated.” (28th WEDC Conference, India, 20023). The tipping fee based waste processing and land-filling model is the universally accepted and successful model all over the world. Few examples of tipping fee paid elsewhere are as follows:

Prevailing tipping fee

 

 

 

 

 

Note:-

Exchange Rate • INR = 47.05 USD, 1 INR = 65.28 EURO

• INR = 32.25 SGD

Countries in Europe and South East Asia have shown that whatever is the technology, there is no ‘free’ waste processing model which is ‘sustainable’ also. As urban administrator, we have to be guarded of false promises and must be looking into the actual financials of the company, including funding arrangements, its projects, the operating cost, the source of revenue, etc. One must go into details of operations and close the agreements with minutest details before awarding the work, as agencies may promise something and finally deliver something else. Sincere and quality implementation of environmental laws has substantial costs involved.

The benefits are also many and long term, which cannot be ignored. Hence, municipal bodies should be ready to pay for the viability gap to make the project sustainable. This attitude will help urban bodies from falling prey to unrealistic projects and in choosing the right kind of SWM projects on a long term sustainable basis.

 

You may also like

Leave a Comment

Clean India Journal, remains unrivalled as India’s only magazine dedicated to cleaning & hygiene from the last 17 years.
It remains unrivalled as the leading trade publication reaching professionals across sectors who are involved with industrial, commercial, and institutional cleaning.

The magazine covers the latest industry news, insights, opinions and technologies with in-depth feature articles, case studies and relevant issues prevelant in the cleaning and hygiene sector.

Top Stories

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Copyright © 2005 Clean India Journal All rights reserved.

Subscribe For Download Our Media Kit

Get notified about new articles