Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Quantia typica
Nnaji Ch Received
In the presfinal disposand its phy0.39Kg/caphousehold splastics, 4%scavengers,from housesolid wasterecycling/redifferences The putrisccompostinga better sou Keywords IntroducThe criticdevelopinimpact ofIncreasinggrowth, cand consuless biodemunicipal2009). Macontrolledgone a stuse as enlow incomchallenge not uncomdecomposOpen dumenvironmoutbreak, contaminaAuthor’s DepartmentNsukka Email: chid
EnvironmentISSN 0972-3Abstracted an
Copyright by All rights of r
tative andal Nigerian
hidozie Cha
:26.11.2013
ent study solid sal site of Nigerysicochemical ppita/day. A highsize (n) for n ≥
% glass, 3% cl, the relative preholds to the fine generated caeuse while comin the composi
cible fractions g using the cleanurce of compost
s: clean index
ction cal and mostng countries af urban pollug waste generhanging lifes
umption of pregradable havl solid wasteany developed municipal tep further bynergy and mame countries
of municipammon to be csing solid wmping has beental and h
groundwaation, air pollAddress
t of Civil Eng
dozie.nnaji@unn
t Conservation Jou3099 (Print) 2278-5nd Indexed
ASEA reproduction in any
d physico-cn municip
arles
waste were colrian municipaliproperties. Durhly negative co≥ 4. The waste clothes/textiles, roportion of recnal dumpsite vian either be mposting is haition of solid wafrom householn index (CI) crit material than
x, dumpsite, h
t immediate pand their citieution (Momoration rates dstyles of peoproducts with mve all increasee managemened countries h
solid waste y putting theaterial recoveare still gra
al solid wasteconfronted w
waste dumps en implicated
health hazardater and lution, rodent
gineering, Univ
n.edu.ng
urnal 15(1 &2) 1235124 (Online)
y form reserved Environment
chemical cpality
Revise
Ab
llected from houity with a view ring the course orrelation (R2 =collected from 2% diapers ancyclables such aia open dumps, recycled (32%ardly practicedaste obtained frlds, curb sides iteria. It was fofreshly generat
eavy metals,
problems faces are the heaodu et al, 20due to populatple, developmmaterials that ed the burdennt (Asase et
have successfuand have ev
m to such goery while mappling with e. It is theref
with a miasmain many cit
d in a varietyds such as
surface wamultiplicatio
versity of Nig
3-133, 2014
123
t Conservation
characteri
d:28.04.2014
bstract useholds, bankto determiningof study avera
= 0.99) was obhouseholds connd 19% of othas plastic, glasswhile the other
%) or composted. The three om different soand the final d
ound that the finted household w
recycling, sca
cing alth 011. tion
ment are
n of al,
ully ven ood any the
fore a of ties. y of fire ater
on
eria,
and foenvironharbour(2006) as a reswith sudumpedenormothese wleachateto both developproductusually get rid their secreate (2008) resort tand lowthan coenvirondumpinlight o
n Journal
ization of
4
s, restaurants, g waste generatiage rate of solidbserved betweensisted of putrisher unclassifieds and metals der fractions incred (47%) howmost importan
ources are scavedisposal site wenal disposal site
waste (CI = 2.9)
avengers, soli
oul odour. Inment, these rage for diseareported an osult of consuurface water d upstream. ous amounts waste dumpses from open groundwater
ping countrtion and vectoset ablaze eiof unwanted
earch for recyspace for mobserved th
to open dumw cost. Howounteracted bnmental conseng. Open dumof inefficien
domestic
Acc
higher institutiion rate, relativd waste generaen per capita wscibles (47%) 1
d materials. Ducreased as wast
reased. It was fowever; only 12nt factors respenging, biodegrere assessed fore with a CI of 3and curb side w
id waste
In addition dumps prov
ase-causing voutbreak of dumption of v
contaminateDuring th
of leachatess. Septic tadumps pose
r and surface ries. Apart or harbouragither by scav
d materials in yclables; or remore waste. hat most dev
mping becauseever, this co
by the far reequences ass
mps are a necnt waste m
solid wast
cepted:02.05
ion, open dumpve waste compoation was foundwaste generatio11% water prooue to the activite materials traound that 79%
2% is recovereponsible for r
radation and lear their suitabil3.3 on a scale ofwaste (CI = 2.4)
to defacingide a comfoectors. Henry
diarrhoea in Kegetables irri
ed by solid he rainy ses are producank effluentsthe greatest thwater resourc
from leae, open dump
vengers in a b order to facesidents seekiNas and Ba
veloping coue of its simpost saving is aching healthociated with cessary evil i
management.
te in
.2014
p and a ositions d to be on and of, 6% ities of ansited of the ed for
relative aching. lity for f 5 was ).
g the rtable
y et al Kenya igated waste
eason, ced in s and hreats ces in achate ps are bid to ilitate ing to ayram untries plicity
more h and open
in the The
dynamics independedumps promust be rhome tomanagemand manpwhen thesdumping against managempoor wo(Adewole70%, or collected managemstudies inpotential; generationequipmenthermal pcomplianc2006; Liscountries,have the generationsuch dataindepende MaterialsThe methconsisted of solid wThe first manageminterviewsinvolved restaurantin order toIn the thirsecond distributedstorage. domestic of 48 houof 48 hpreviouslyThereafterLaboratorEngineeri
of open dument study. Hooliferation is id of; (ii) nob
o dispose oment authoritie
power to copse dumps ovein a new plthe efficien
ment are wastork attitudee, 2009). The
even much (Ogwueleka
ment through mnclude: (i) est
(ii) to idenn; (iii) to fac
nt; (iv) to estiproperties ofce with natiosa and Ander, waste manappropriate
n, characterisa exist, theyent studies by
s and Methodhodology emp
of four stagewaste were cophase was a
ment practices with scav
collection ts and educato determine thrd phase whiphase, blacd to randomlThey were waste in the
urs and to knoours. They y collected r, the bags wries of thing Universit
mps proliferaowever, the threefold: (i) body wants toof waste; aes do not hape with exiserflow, peoplace. Other fancy of mute disposal he, and inaresult of this less, of was
a, 2009). Emunicipal watimation of mntify sources cilitate desigimate chemicf waste; andonal laws (Gs, 2008). In m
nagement autstrategies to
stics and comy are usuallyy individual re
d ployed in thies during whiollected, sorte
preliminary s in the m
vengers. Theof waste
ional institutiheir relative cich ran concuck polythenly selected h
requested polythene b
ot the mouth were told
waste inwere retrievedhe Departmty of Niger
Environment
ation requirereason for opwaste genera
o travel far frand (iii) waave the facilisting dumps; le naturally sactors militatunicipal waabit, corrupti
adequate plais that only 5
ste generatedEffective waaste composit
material recovof compone
gn of processcal, physical d (v) to ensGidarakos et most developthorities do
estimate wamposition. Wh
y the result esearchers.
s research wich about 460ed and analyzsurvey of wa
municipality e second ph
from banion (Universicompositions.urrently with ne bags whomes for wa
to store thags for a perat the expiratnot to trans
nto the bad and sent to
ment of Cria, Nsukka
Nnaj
124 t Conservation
an pen ated rom aste ities
so start ting aste ion, ants 50 – d is aste tion very ents sing and sure
al, ping not
aste here
of
work 0Kg zed. aste and
hase nks, ity), . the
were aste heir riod tion sfer ags. the
Civil for
sorting bags wintendesurvey countryquantitydumps activitiedifficultand gendone by(2011) the prohousehonoted thfrom inaccurcompacscavengwastes the finaThe winstituticomponglass/boothers adetermiwere firweight the duweighintypes a(Figure
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Bulk
Densi
ty(K
g/m
3)
ji Chidozie Charl
n Journal
and subsequwere retrieved
d. This methwas deemed
y because of y and compis usually d
es of scavent to accuratelneration ratey Qu et al (20noted that th
oportion of old waste comhat the identcollection vate because
ction. In ordging on the were collect
al disposal sitewastes collecions were menents: metalsottles, clothesafter sorting, ined as a perrst weighed odivided by th
uration of stng, the wasteand their bu1).
Plastic Glass C
les
uent analysesd instead of thod of solid most suitabl
f the “scavenposition of wdrastically disngers so thatly determine wes using was009). Lebersorhe obvious opfood waste
mposition anatification of wvehicles waof the proce
der to ascertacomposition
ted from a cue. This was thted from berely sorted , plastics, fo
s/textiles, wattheir relative
centage. Theon a weighinhe 2 times houtorage was s were sorted
ulk densities
Clothes Paper WP
Solid Waste Frac
s. A total ofthe 150 orig
waste genere for a devel
nging” effectwaste at curstorted due tt it becomes waste compo
ste dumps asrger and Schnption to deter
is to condualysis. They fuwaste compoas difficult ess of mixingain the effecn of solid wurbside dumphe fourth phasbanks, restauinto the follo
ood waste, diter proof papee composition household w
ng balance anusehold size, two days.
d into their gewere determ
Water Proof
Metals Oth
ction
f 119 ginally ration loping . The rbside to the
very osition s was neider rmine uct a
further onents
and g and cts of waste, p and se. urants, owing iapers er and n was wastes nd the
since After
eneric mined
hers
Figure 1waste fraThe samefrom curbthe comphouseholdwere sepwas thoroFour replwere usedair oven aeach of ththen storoxidizablematter, nicadmium,replicates Using matime of wfinal dispo
Where R(days) befinal dumbin, V = householdVcv = capawork hourVw = is (m3/day), average lfinal dispmaximumbefore trasecond tewaste subbeing cartThe suitacompostincriteria (S
Where Sifraction f
: Bulk densactions e treatment wbside dump apostable fracds, curbside darately shred
oughly mixedlicates (one d for moistureat 105°C for he three wastred for sube carbon, totrogen and he, zinc, coppfor each anal
aterial balancwaste from thosal site can b
NVCFR =θ
Rθ is the aveetween waste
mpsite, C is theper capita ra
d size, Ncv = nacity of collers per day, F
the total vFcv is truc
length of timposal site. Th
m number of dansfer to the erm represenbsequently spted to the finaability of theng was determ
Saha et al, 201
=CI
i is the scorfrom each so
ity determin
was given to wand final disction of thedump and findded. After d, coned andsample from
e content dete24 hours. O
te sources wbsequent de
otal organic eavy metals (
per and nicklysis. ce, the maxihe point of gbe estimated a
trwcv
cvcv
TVFTVN
VF
+
erage waste e generation e capacity of hate of waste number of colction vehicle = waste bin u
volume of wk compaction
me per trip frhe first termdays waste recurbside or o
nts the numbpends at the al disposal site compostabmined using 10) as given b
∑
∑=
=
= 1
1
i
ni
i
nii
W
WS
re assigned ource based
Q
Environment
ned for vari
wastes collecsposal site. Ne wastes frnal disposal shredding, e
d then quarterm each quarermination in
One quarter frwas air dried etermination carbon, orga
(lead, chromiukel) using th
imum residegeneration to as
rip
T
residence ti
and disposalhousehold wageneration, Nllection vehice, T = numberutilization facwaste generan factor, Ttriprom curbside
m represents esides in the open dump. Tber of days curbside befe.
ble fractions the clean in
below
to the compon heavy m
Quantitative and p
125 t Conservation
ous
cted Next rom site
each red. rter) n an rom and
of anic um, hree
nce the
ime l at aste N = cles, r of ctor ated ip = e to the bin
The the
fore
for dex
post etal
concentassignephytoto ResultWaste GGeneralmunicipcollectiplayers are: houwaste disposaand themean raat 0.39k0.25Kgrange oThoughwere no(R2 = 0waste gshows tsolid househoAs housseven (drops tothat houby singnew copeople result igeneratthat 48%Howeveare forcan incrgeneratnegativfamily capita sthis defrom n implies generatithat a nsize andattribute
physico-chemical
n Journal
tration and d to each
oxicity and hu
s and DiscuGenerationlly, waste pality consion, disposal, at the variou
useholds– genmanagement
al; the informae industry – rate of solid wkg/capita/day/capita/day. Tf waste gener
h factors affecot the focus o0.84) was fogeneration anthat maximumwaste gene
olds of size bsehold size in7), rate of soo about 0.19useholds of ogle individualouples with
usually prefis a drastic ion at househ% of househer, as coupleced to start prrease in perion. Hence, ie correlationsize (rather
solid waste gduction, a p= 4) has bethat as family
ion decreases.egative correld rate of soled this to effec
l characterization
Wi is the h heavy muman ecotoxic
ussion
managemests of gensorting and r
us stages of wneration and tt authority al sector (scavrecycling. Frowaste generaty with a stanThis value is ration for lowcting solid waf this study, a
ound betweennd householdm rates (0.48eration werbetween threencreases beyoolid waste genKg/day. The
one or two pels, roommateno children. fer to eat atreduction in hold levels, a
hold solid waes begin to heparing their r capita rateit can be dedn (R2 = 0.99
than househgeneration. Inplot of famileen presentedy size increase Qu et al (200
lation existed lid waste genct of common
n
weighting metal basedcity potentials
ent in Nneration, trarecycling. Thwaste managetransfer; mun– collectionvengers) – soom this studytion was estimndard deviatiroughly with
w income counaste generatioa strong corren the rate of d size. Figu8Kg/capita/dare recorded e (3) and fouond these valuneration per c
reason for teople are occes or, at the
These grout restaurants.
per capita as Figure 3 saste is food whave children,
own food, cae of solid
duced that a s9) exists bet
hold size) ann order to buy size (begi
d (Figure 2b)es, per capita 09), who also between hous
neration per cconsumption.
factor d on s.
sukka ansfer, he key ement
nicipal n and orting; y, the mated on of
hin the ntries.
on rate lation
f solid ure 2a ay) of
for ur (4). ues to capita this is cupied most,
ups of . The waste shows waste. , they ausing waste strong tween
nd per uttress inning . This waste noted
sehold capita, .
Figure 2aFigure 2b Solid WaResults odepend omany devaltered asvia open activities open dumpattern ofdumps. Adevelopedfraction oshows thageneratedremotely (6%), plclothes/texother 19%sweepingsunclassifiwaste in man indicatthe patternalso showpractice omodern trfraction othe same previous s
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0
Average W
aste Generation
(Kg/capita/day)
a: Effect of hb: Effect of fa
aste Composiobtained fromn source of
veloping coun it leaves the
dumps. Thiof scavenger
mps. Hence, f material floAs in all dd countries, foof household at almost hal
d by householfollowed by
lastic, glass xtiles (3%) a
% constituteds, wood, haed materialsmunicipal soltion of living n of living. H
ws that peopleof food preparrend of consumof food waste
order of mastudies for cit
1 2
household sizamily size on
ition m waste com
the waste santries, compos home for finis can be ars and occasiit is crucial
ow from houdeveloping aood waste rep
waste in Nlf (47%) of tlds was food y water proo
and metaand then dia
d of a mixturair/wool and s. The propid waste is gestandards, bu
High proportioe still maintairation at homemption of pac
e obtained in agnitude as thties in other p
y = ‐0.0167x2 +R² =
3 4
Household SizFig 2a: Househo
Environment
e on per capn per capita w
mposition studamples used.sition of wastnal disposal sattributed to ional burningto ascertain
useholds to opand even mpresented a lasukka. Figurtotal solid wawaste. This w
of (11%), pals (4% eac
apers (2%). Tre of sand, y
a lot of otportion of foenerally takenut it also portron of food wain the traditioe, rather than ckaged food.Tthis study is
hose obtainedparts of the
+ 0.1082x + 0.2487= 0.8373
5 6
ze
Nn
old size
126 t Conservation
ita waste genwaste genera
dies . In te is ites the
g of the pen
most arge e 3 aste was aper ch), The yard ther
food n as rays aste onal
the The s in d in
world. 39.15%
Figure 3from ho Sha’atoNigeriafor Oniof foodQu et aproportresearchwaste.
7 80
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 1
naji Chidozie Cha
n Journal
neration ation (n > 3)
Gidarakos et% for the Islan
3: Compositioomes
o et al (2007) a; and Nwachitsha in Niger
d waste (69.3%al (2009). It nion of foodhers might deIn this study
2 3
Food Waste47%
Others19%
Diapers2%
Ho
arles
t al (2006) obd of Crete;
on of freshly c
obtained 49.2hukwu (2009ria. An even %) was obtainneeds to be pd waste obtaepend on theiry food wast
y =
4 5
Household Size
Plastic4%
G
C
omes
Fig 2b: Househ
btained a val
collected solid
2% for Maku9) obtained 4
higher proponed for Beijinointed out thained by var definition ofte was defin
= ‐0.0945x + 0.85R² = 0.9929
6 7
Glass4%
lothes3% Paper
6%
Wate1
Me4
hold size > 3
lue of
waste
urdi in 40.5% ortion ng by
hat the arious f food ed as
8
er Proof11%
etals4%
follows: preparatioof fruits. is as a packagingobserved increasingwaste. Figcurbside scavengermaterials from 4% resulted ifood wastsuch as wthe same to the scavwastes froThere wadiapers (3These frano recyclhence thefactors areproportionpreviouslyThe secoabsorbentdisposableweight ofduring thewere saexaggerat
Clothes, wools3%
Paper4%
Oth6
any putrescon of food, lefThe fairly hiresult of it
g material. Fthat packagin
gly importangure 4 showsopen dumps
rs, the relativsuch as plasteach to 2%, 1in increase inte and diaperswater proof abecause theyvengers. The om final dispoas a drastic 34%), water pactions in addling/reuse poeir abundancee responsible n on diapersy mentioned
ond factor ist particles me diaper canf water. Since rain, the diaaturated witing their weig
Diapers20%
hers%
Curbsi
cible materiaftover food angh proportionts indiscrimiFirdaus and ng materials ant componens the composis. Due to thve proportiontic, glass and1% and 3% ren the relatives. The proporand clothes/tey are of no co
relative comosal site is shincrease in proof (21%) dition to clothotential in the at the finalfor the drasti
s. The first – lack of rec that diaper
made from cen absorb 15 ce this studyapers found aith water, ghts.
Plastic2%
Food Wa50%
ide Dump
Qu
Environment
al used in nd remains/pen of water prinate use as
Ahmad (20are becoming
nt of municiition of wastehe activities ns of recyclad metals droppespectively. Te proportionsrtion of materextiles remainommercial va
mposition of soown in Figurethe fractionsand paper (7hes/textiles hhe municipall dumpsite. Tic increase in factor has b
cycling potents contain su
ellulose pulp.times its o
was conducat the dump s
thus gros
Glass1% W
P1Metals
3%
aste
uantitative and p
127 t Conservation
the eels roof s a
010) g an ipal e at
of able ped
This s of rials ned alue olid e 5.
s of %).
have lity,
Two the een tial.
uper . A own cted ites ssly
Figure 4dump
Figure 5 The drwaste scavengNsukkawaste househofinal duundergoThe finwater pgood rain Nsukstabilizacrops, composconcerndisease-the patcurbsidsecond waste ccapita wcolumncomponhousehoNegativproport
Water roof11%
hysico-chemical c
n Journal
4: Solid wast
5: Solid waste
astic reducti(21%) was
ging by dogsa, it can take to arrive t
olds. By the ump, the puone a reasonnal disposal proof, food waaw material fkka prefer toation pond efinstead of g
sting. This pran as the crop-causing vectttern of matee dumps and column wasomponent prowaste genera
ns represent nent relative polds to curbsive value impion of a com
Paper7%
Diapers34%
Slippers, shoes3%
Others3% Fin
characterization
e composition
composition a
on in the prdue to bi
s and other about two w
he final ditime the wa
utriscible fracnable degree
site is domiaste and papefor compost. o use animalffluent to enhagoing througactice represeps can get ctors. Table 1erial flow fro
then to final obtained byoportion (Figtion rate. Th
the percenproportion as ides and finallies a reduct
mponent, usua
Foo
C
nal Dumpsite
n at Curbside
at final dump
roportion of iodegradation
stray animaweeks or morsposal site astes arrive action would of decomposinated by diaer. Food wastHowever, fal dung and ance the grow
gh the rigouents a major hcontaminated is a summaom householl disposal sitey multiplyinggure 1) with thhe third and fntage changwaste moves
lly to disposaion in the really as a resu
Plastic2%
Glass4%
Water Pro21%
Meta2%d Waste
21%
Clothes, wools3%
e
e open
site
f food n and als. In re for from
at the have
sition. apers, te is a
armers waste
wth of urs of health
d with ary of lds to e. The g each he per fourth ge in s from al site. elative ult of
of
als%
scavenginglass/botthouseholdoccasionathat as wsite, thereproportionwas a genof recyclrecyclablefor marke
Solid WFract
PlasGlass/b
MetWater
Clothes/Pap
Food WDiapOthe
ng. The propoles were d and curbsidal burning of
waste flows fre was a genns of non-recneral decreasled materialse materials meting. Figure
Waste tion
Quaby
(Kg/stic bottles tals Proof
/Textile per Waste pers ers
Figur
ortions of plasfound to des can be aopen dumps.
from homes tneral increasecycled materise of the relas. Figure 6
manually sorte7 shows tha
Table 1: Ma
antity Generaty Households /per Capita/da
0.0156 0.0156 0.0156 0.0429 0.0117 0.0234 0.1833 0.0078 0.0741
re 6: Recycla
Environment
stics, metals decrease fr
attributed to It was observ
to final dispoe of the relatials, while th
ative proportishows piles
ed by scavengat about 79%
aterial flow f
ted
ay)
%Changeproportio
to Curb---
-
9
able material
Nnaji
128 t Conservation
and rom
househothe pro
the ved osal tive here ions
of gers
% of
waste composrecoverto the fihandlinup of dcan beespeciamanage
from homes t
e in componenon (Householdbside Dump)-47.78 -82.46 -29.83 -3.94 0.38
-30.07 2.82
906.31 -
ls recovered
i Chidozie Charle
n Journal
olds to final oportion of p
generated csted. Howevred for recyclinal disposal
ng unwieldy adumpsites. Th
initiated at lly in low i
ement is st
to final dispo
nt d
%Changeproportion
Final D---7
-16
and sorted b
es
disposal siteaper and wacan be eitver, only 1ling while thesite. This situand also resuhe process of the point of
income counttill at a ru
osal sites
e in componenn (Curbside toisposal Site) 34.56 -1.34 51.32 79.03 7.55 8.69 56.76 600.22
-
by scavenger
. The reductiater proof betther recycle12% is ace remaining iuation makes ults in rapid ff material rec
waste genertries where udimentary
nt o
RecyclinStatus
RecycleRecycleRecycle
Not recycNot recycNot recycNot recycNot recyc
-
rs
ion in tween d or tually s sent waste filling overy
ration, waste level.
ng s ed ed ed cled cled cled cled cled
Nnaji andrecovery waste binrecyclableand non-bcompostabetc. This maximizealso sougwaste froFigure 8 sby houseeducation
d Utsev (2011can be enhan
ns for differene and non-rebiodegradableble, (iv) combprocess will
e resource andght to ascertaom other soushows that moholds, follow
nal institutions
F
1) recommendnced by the nt categories ecyclable (iie (iii) compobustible and nsimplify was
d energy recoain the compurces apart frore food wast
wed by restaus.
Figure 8: Com
Environment
ded that mateuse of differof waste viz:) biodegrada
ostable and nnon-combustiste handling overy. This stuposition of sorom househotes are generaurants and th
mposition of
Quantitative an
129 t Conservation
erial rent : (i) able non-ible and udy olid lds.
ated hen Figure
solid waste f
C
O
nd physico-chemi
n Journal
7: Potentials
from differen
Compostable, 47%
Others, 21%
ical characterizat
s of material
nt sources
Recycla32%
tion
recovery
able, %
Paper congeneratedcurrency automatedfrom banconsisting(9%), plarecyclablebe collectresemblanwastes ainstitutionwaste is paper > domestic aluminiumultra lightcans are packagingpopulationstress oncomplicatpackagingincreasingmanagemcope withGidarakos
PropeMoistupH OxidizTotal OOrganNitrogC/N CoppeZinc NickelChromLead CadmiClean
At the pcontent in
nstitutes mord by banks.
wrappers, d teller machnks are comg of paper (54astic (7%) ane. This indicated separatelynce between tand those ons. The order as follows: fmetals > plsolid waste
m containers t weight, dispgradually re
g. Rapid rn explosion
n waste mated by the g technologygly difficul
ment authoritieh the amount s et al (2006)
Table
erties ure Content
zable Carbon Organic Carbo
nic Matter gen
er
l mium
ium Index (0<CI<
peak of the ncreases beyo
re than half These pap
tellers and hines. About mbustible an4%), glass (11nd synthetic ates that banky for easy hanthe compositiof restauranof compositi
food waste >lastic. The mconsist mostlof beverage
posable alumineplacing bottrate of urb
have placedanagement. T
introductiony; hence itlt for mues in developof waste theyobserved a 4
2: Chemical
Unit% - %
on % % % - mg/Kmg/Kmg/Kmg/Kmg/Kmg/K
<5) rainy seasonnd recommen
Environment
of solid wasers are mo
receipts fr70% of was
nd about 91%), water pr
fibre (7%) k wastes shondling.There ion of househnts and higion of restaur> water proometals foundly of disposaes. Due to thnium and platles in beverbanization d an enormThis is furt
n of disposat is becomunicipal waping countriesy have to hand40% decrease
l composition
t Househ62.47 9.86 31.3 41.76 71.99 4.49 9.3
Kg 67.01 Kg 16.77 Kg 29.89 Kg 12.69 Kg 74.00 Kg 54.65
1.5 n, the moistnded values fo
Nna
130 t Conservation
stes stly rom stes
90% roof are
ould is a
hold gher rant
of > d in able heir
astic rage and
mous ther able
ming aste s to dle. in
putrisciand paattributeconsumCharacComposolid wbiogas a very technolanyone.of munwaste ooutlinedpurposesourcescomposperformin Table53.97%househoThese vcontent should composdumpsitresult o
n of compost
hold Curb- 9.3735.4147.2781.442.4819.06243.831.3943.223.28148.2109.01.0
ture for
aerobic drastic
aji Chidozie Char
n Journal
ibles and a coaper over twed to the use
mption of packcterization of sting of biodeaste is a meaproduction frsimple proc
ogy and is . In order to nicipal solid obtained fromd in the mete of analyzin is to determi
st materials. med on these e 2. The mois
% for compoolds and finvalues fall we
required fbe noted t
stable wastete can be subf extreme we
able fraction
bside FinDu53.6.2
25.7 34.4 58.
3.96 8.789 49.9 7.3
21.8 10.23 32.07 44.
2.4composting;
reduction can
rles
orresponding iwo decades.
e of disposabkaged food. f Compostableegradable fra
ans of materiarom solid waess that requtherefore wiascertain the waste in N
m the three thodology weg putrescibleine the most
The resultsmaterials ha
sture contentsostable wastnal disposal ell within the for compostithat the moe obtained bject to wideather conditio
n of solid wasnal umpsite
AveValu
97 58.2
7 8.5
58 30.7
13 41.0
83 70.7
2 582
12.3
87 120
9 18.5
7 31.6
18 15.3
54 84.9
19 69.3
4
; while duringn lead to dryi
increase in plThis can alsble packaging
e Waste action of munal recovery. Uaste, compostuires no advithin the rea
compost potNsukka, putri
different soere analyzed
e waste from suitable sourc
s of the anaave been press were 62.47%te obtained site, respect range of moing. Howeve
oisture contenfrom the
e fluctuationsons.
ste erage ue
Clean Compos
22 - -
76 - 05 - 75 >20 .04 -
36 - .26 <25
52 <75 6 <0.2 36 <50 92 <65 30 <0.7
g the dry seaing. Table 2 s
lastics so be g and
nicipal Unlike ing is anced ch of tential scible
ources . The these
ce for alyses sented % and
from tively. oisture er, it nt of
final s as a
st
ason a shows
that the pHin the alkthe waste have redufor this dleaching. core of a mostly anlarge orgavolatile fapH declinmanifesteof compodumpsite.of the wa71.99% (h(final dumis that moremoved and runof
Table 3: (Saha et a
wastewateaccumulatbeyond mthat pose higher wminimal tscore valuranges of the Table index formethods, fraction ofound in household2.4). Howthese resu
Heavy M(mg/Kg dm Zn Cu Cd Pb Ni Cr
H of freshly kaline range o
reaches the fuced to 6.27. rastic declineThe mode ofwaste dump
naerobic decomanic moleculeatty acids, whne. The effeced in the declostable wast The percentastes from thhousehold), 8
mp site). The ost soluble saby the comb
ff.
Criteria for al, 2010)
er for irrition of heavy
maximum permserious thre
weighting factthreats were ues were assigheavy metal 3 below. Ba
rmula introdthe clean i
of solid wastethis order: f
d waste (CI =wever, in ordeults, the clean
Metal m)
ScoreValue5 <151 <51 <0.3 <51 <21 <51
generated houof 9.86.Howefinal dumpsitTwo factors
e in pH viz: pf bacterial deis a combinamposition. Thes results in t
hich subsequect of biodegine of organite obtained tage organic hree sources 81.44% (curbsecond reasoalts at the finbined proces
assigning we
gation can y metals in smissible limiteats to healthtors, while tassigned low
gned based onconcentration
ased on Tableduced under index (CI) fe from differfinal dumpsit= 2.9) > curbser to ascertainindices of th
e e (Si)
4 151-351-100.3-0.51-1021-4051-10
Q
Environment
usehold wastever by the tite, the pH wos are responsiputrefaction
egradation in ation aerobic he breakdownthe formationntly results in
gradation is aic matter contfrom the fimatter conteare as follo
bside) and 58n for pH decl
nal dumpsite sses of leach
eighting facto
lead to soils and plats. Heavy meh were assignthose that pwer values. Tn some specifn as presentede 3 and the cl
materials for compostarent sources wte (CI = 3.3side waste (Cn the validity
hese composta
3 300 301-500 101-2.6 0.7-1
00 101-10 41-8000 101-1
Quantitative and p
131 t Conservation
te is ime
ould ible and the and n of n of n a also tent
final ents ws:
8.83 line are
hing
The hea
order:
mg/Kg)
mg/Kg)mg/Kg)lower t(2008) within t(2006) differenhigh ccomposresultedbiomagand othUniversMasona
ors to heavy
the nts, tals ned
pose The fied d in lean and able was ) >
CI = y of able
fraction(range oquality A modfollows
Where value bvalue concenrcomposcompos
2 500 501-7200 201-4.0 1.1-2
150 151-20 81-12150 151-2
physico-chemical
n Journal
avy metal co
Cu(__
X = 120
) > Cd(__X =
) > Zn(__
X = ). The heavy than those ofor Gümüşh
the range of tfor Modena
nt cities of Indconcentrationstable fractiod from gnifications oher crops irrsity of Nigea et al (2011)
metals and s
ns were deteof values) speotained from
dified clean s:
=
∑
∑=
i
i
nCI
Si is a ratingased on its cof 1 is asration complist, while a vast standard is
1 700 701-9400 401-6.0 2.0-4
250 251-420 121-1250 251-3
l characterization
ntents were f
0.26mg/Kg)
= 69.3 mg/Kg
18.52 mg/Kgmetal conten
obtained by hane Provincthose obtaine, Italy, Sahadia and Flyhas of heavy
on of solid the bioacc
of heavy metrigated with eria waste sobserved tha
score values
ermined baseecified in the
m Veeken andformula ha
0,1
1
<
∑
∑=
=
i
ni
ii
X
XS
g score assignonformity wissigned if ties with the lue of 0 is asviolated. Xi is
0 900 >900600 >600
4.0 >4.0 400 >400160 >160350 >350
n
found to be i
> Pb(__X =
g) > Ni(__X =
g) > Cr(__X =
nts were genNas and Ba
ce of Turkeyd by Castaldi
a et al (2010ammar (1997)y metals in
waste may cumulation tals in vegeteffluent from
stabilization at the use of
to analytical
ed on the crDutch compo
d Hamelers (2as been give
1<iS
ned each analith the standathe heavy standard for
ssigned if the s the concentr
WeighFactor(Wi)
0 1 0 2
5 0 3 0 1 0 3
n this
84.92
= 31.6
15.36 nerally ayram y but i et al 0) for ). The n the
have and
tables m the pond.
l data
riteria osting 2002). en as
lytical ard. A metal clean clean ration
ting r
of each hfrom eachabove mostricter mcomparisoabsolute rather thphytotoxiaccountedin Table obtained previous aby a factdifferent follows: waste (CIorder remdump is followed waste. Gefrom thconcentraobtained from the lower coobtained result of la sanitarysuitable rainwater This leachdisposal svery long ConclusiMuniciparates are hsource andisposablegiven risecycle of increased stressing generatedusually materials matter. Hthe finalcompositi
heavy metal h of the sourodification is measures andon of compovalues of h
han a rangecity and ecot
d for by the c2. In order by this ap
approach, thetor of 5. Thesources are gfinal dumpsiI = 1.5) > cumains the sa
the best soby household
enerally the che curbsideations of heavfrom househofinal dispos
ncentration from the fineaching. Sinc
y landfill and materials, quickly mig
hing effect is site because thcompared to
ion l solid wasteheavily inflund family size items ande to a drasticmany domesrate of wasteof waste man
d batch of sladen with in addition toowever, as thl disposal sion is usually
in the comprces under innecessary bec
d also providostable fractioheavy metal e of valuestoxicity potenclean compos
to make thpproach come values have e clean indexgiven in Tablite (CI = 2.4
urbside waste ame, showingource of comd waste and compostable contained
vy metals, foolds and thensal site. The of heavy mnal dumpsitece the final di
the bottom icontaminant
grate throughvery pronou
he residence that at the cu
e compositionenced by solze respective
d disposable c reduction instic items. Te generation anagement facsolid waste
recyclable o a high propohe waste leavsite via opy grossly dist
Environment
postable fractnvestigation. Tcause it impodes a basis on based on
concentratios. The relatntials have bst standard givhe clean indi
mparable to been multipl
x values for le 2 and rank4) > househ(CI = 1.0). T
g that the fimpost materfinally, curbswastes obtain
the highllowed by thn those obtain
reason for metals in was
could be aisposal site is is not lined wts carried h the soil pounced at the fi
time of wasturbside.
n and generatid waste samely. The use
packaging n the useful
The result is and a subsequilities. A fresfrom homes
and reusaortion of orgaves the home pen dumps, torted due to
Nna
132 t Conservation
tion The oses
for the
ons, tive een ven ices the
lied the
k as hold The
final rial, side ned hest hose ned the
stes as a
not with
by res.
final e is
tion mple e of has life an
uent shly s is able anic for its
the
combinrunoff aamong restaurageneratpaper. municipanthropcriteria,dumpsitfraction RefereAdewole
deveInte
Asase, M
AmpwaststudGha
Castaldi,
heavcom1133
Firdaus,
wastJour
Flyhamm
in mEnv
Gidarako
solidintegCret
Henry, R
wastKen
Lebersorg
methwast– 19
Lisa, D.
com1112
Masona,
Assewate
aji Chidozie Char
n Journal
ned effects oand leaching.
solid wasteants and hied by banks sMoreover,
pal solid wapogenic activi, compostablte is more su
ns from the ot
ences , A. T. 2009. Welopment in Niernational NGO
M., Yanful, E. ponsah, S. 20te management
dy of the citiesana. Waste Mana
P., Santona, Lvy metals mob
mposting. Fresen3 – 1140.
G. and Ahmad, te pollution in rnal of Environ
mar, P. 1997. Estmunicipal solid wvironment. 198:
os, E. Havas, Gd waste compograted solid waste. Waste Manag
R., Yongsheng, Zte management
nyan case study.
ger, S. and Schhodology for dte composition s
933.
and Anders, L.mposition studie
2.
C., Mapfaire, Lessment of heavyer irrigated soil
rles
of scavenger. There is remes generatedigher institutstands out, cothe heavy m
aste is on thities. Based oe fraction ob
uitable for cother sources.
Waste managemeigeria: A case Journal 4 (4): 1
K., Mensah, 009. Comparisosystems in Canas of London, Oagement. 29: 27
L. and Melis, Pbility during mnius Environme
A. 2010. Manadeveloping co
mental Researc
timation of heavwaste. Science o
123 – 133.
G. and Ntzamilisosition determinste management gement. 26: 668
Z. and Jun, D. challenges in dWaste Managem
hneider, F. 201determining foodstudies. Waste M
. 2008. Methods. Waste Mana
., Mapurazi, S. ay metal aand uptake by m
s, biodegradmarkable simid by househtions, while onsisting mosmetal conten
he rise becauon the clean btained from omposting tha
ent towards sustastudy of Lagos173 – 179.
M. Stanford, on of municipaada and Ghana: Ontario, and K779 – 2786.
P. 2006. Evolutmunicipal solid ental Bulletin.
agement of urbaountries. Internach. 4 (4):795 – 80
vy metal transforof the
s, P. 2006. Munation supportinsystem in the is
8 – 679.
2006. Municipadeveloping counment. 26: 92 – 1
11. Discussion d waste in hou
Management. 31
s for householdagement. 28: 1
and Makanda, Raccumulation inmaize plants (Zea
dation, ilarity holds,
that stly of nt of
use of index final
an the
ainable s state.
J. and l solid A case
Kumasi,
tion of waste
15 (9):
an solid ational 06.
rmation Total
unicipal ng the land of
al solid ntries – 00.
on the usehold 1: 1924
d waste 1100 –
R. 2011. n waste a Mays
L) at Develo
Nas, S. ancharacWaste
Nnaji, C. C
waste Sustai
Nwachukwu
in a NMetroand S
Ogwueleka,
and Envir173 –
Firle Farm in opment. 4 (6): 13
nd Bayram, Acteristics and me Management.
C. and Utsev, T. management: A
inable Developm
u, M. U. 2009. SNigerian City: Anopolis. Journal Safety l (1):
, T. Ch. 2009. Mmanagement in
ronmental Healt180.
Harare. Journ32 – 137.
A. 2008. Munmanagement in G
28: 2435 – 2442
T. 2011. ClimaA balanced assement in Africa. 1
Solid waste genn empirical ana
of Environme180 – 191.
Municipal solid wn Nigeria. Irath, Science and
Q
Environment
nal of Sustain
nicipal solid wGümüşhane, Tur2.
ate change and sessment. Journa13: (7): 17 – 34.
eration and displysis in Oniental Managem
waste characterianian Journal
d Engineering 6
Quantitative and p
133 t Conservation
able MomoduMitiNige
waste rkey.
solid al of
posal itsha ment
stics l of
(3):
Qu, X., LSurwas262
Saha, J. K
of diffqua201
Sha’Ato,
G. andCen
Veeken,
Zn 300
physico-chemical
n Journal
u, N. S., Dimunigating the impaeria. Journal of
Li, Z., Xie, X., rvey of composistes in Beijing, C24.
K. Panwar, N. amunicipal solidferent cities of Iality control ind1.
R., Aboho, S. Yand Agwa, S. 2
d composition intral Nigeria. Wa
A and Hamelerin biowaste. Th
0: 87 – 98.
characterization
na, K. O. and act of solid wastf Human Ecolog
Sui, A, Yang, Lition and generaChina. Waste M
and Singh, M. Vd waste composIndia in the persdices. Waste Ma
Y., Oketunde, F. 2007. Survey of in a rapidly gr
Waste Manageme
s, B. 2002 Soure Science of th
Dimuna, J. E.tes in urban cen
gy 34 (2): 125 – 1
L., and Chen, Yation rate of hou
Management 29:
V. 2010. An assest quality produspective of deve
Management 30:
O., Eneji, I. S., solid waste genrowing urban aent 27: 352 – 358
rces of Cd, Cu, he Total Enviro
2011. ntres in 133.
. 2009. usehold 2618 –
essment uced in eloping
192 –
Unazi, neration area in 8.
Pb and onment