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