CHAPTER 111

THE PROCESS AND MACHANISMS OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT

SERVICES

Municipal solid waste management is an essential part of the urban environment

management in cities of India. Management of solid waste service is a discipline
associated with the control of generation, storage, collection, transfer, transport,
processing and disposal of solid wastes in a manner that is in accordance with best
principles of public health economics, engineering conservation, aesthetics and their
environmental consideration. Hence, this system is complied with the provisions of
Municipal Solid Waste, i.e. Management and Handling Rules, 2000. In its scope, solid
waste management includes all administrative, financial, legal planning and
engineering functions involved in the whole spectrum of solutions to problems of
solid wastes thrust upon the community by its inhabitants. The present nature of
mechanisms of SWM in a growing corporation city like Mangalore is undergoing
wider changes due the increase in the waste generation, nature of economic activities
and consumption patterns.
At the present situation, protection of environment from different types of pollution
is considered as a part of social development policies. Thus, promoting human health
and trying to reduce the economic losses due to improper and ineffective management
of solid waste is considered an important aspect of human resource development.
Presently, effective management of urban waste is required but urban local
governments in many of the Indian cities are constrained by limited finance and
inadequate managerial staff. However, although most of the Indian Urban Local
Bodies spending 30 to 50% of their total budget on solid waste management (SWM)
services, they are unable to provide satisfactory services; they are faced with a few
common problems like: inadequate coverage of low settlement areas, frequent waste
removal, contamination of surface and ground water by leach ate, air pollution due to
burning of open dumps, flooding due to clogged drains and non-availability of
adequate staff vehicles and suitable dumping sites.
The management of MSW in developing countries like India generally looked at
from a different perspective. Though India has its own set of experiences by adopting
methods and using technologies from developed nations, still it is groaning under the
problems of high volumes of wastes, the rising cost towards its disposal, and lack of

42
technology available and its impact on the local environment. Average per capita
generation of wastes in large cities in India is about 0.5 kg per day which means that a
city of 4 million would generate about 2000 tones per day of domestic solid waste.
These wastes are collected, transported and disposed in an environmentally sound
manner; otherwise these wastes leads in the spread of communicable diseases which
in turn cause obnoxious conditions and spoils the biosphere as a whole.
FIGURE HI.1: SCHEMATIC OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE IN
INDIA

,T R.kPoO-T
Source:
The present system of MSWM in India is depicted in the above Figure 1. Waste
generated at households is generally accumulated in small containers (often plastic
buckets) until such time, that there is sufficient quantity to warrant disposal into
community bins. Containers used for household storage of solid wastes are of many
shapes and sizes, and are fabricated from a variety of materials. The type of the
container generally reflects the economic status of its user (i.e., the waste generator).
Waste segregation at source is not practiced.
The community storage system is usually practiced in India. Individuals deposit
their waste in bins located at street comers and at specific intervals. The containers
generally are constmcted of metal, concrete, or a combination of the two. Community
storage system reduces the cost of waste collection, and also minimises problems
associated with lack of on site storage space. However, these community storage
arrangements are to be conveniently located otherwise householders tend to throw

43
their wastes into the roadside gutters for clearance by street sweeping crews. Even
where storage arrangements are conveniently located, wastes tend to be strewn around
the storage area, partly due to indiscipline and partly as a result of scavenging of the
wastes by rag-pickers and stray animals.
To improve conservancy operations, authorities feel that the lack of civic awareness
among city residents is proving to be a major hurdle to maintain the city clean. The
problem is most acute in slums and low and middle income group areas. It will be
nearly impossible for the civic body to provide better surroundings if residents do not
take efforts to deposit the waste into the bins and stop the practice of throwing
garbage on to the road. A conservancy worker has to cover a certain area by a specific
time. If public are going to distribute garbage all along the road, the conservancy
worker cannot cover the complete area assigned for him and some areas may not be
covered on some days. Because of these poor conditions for temporary storage of
wastes, in some areas NGOs have become involved in making arrangements for waste
collection from households leading to improvement in local street cleanliness
Different types of vehicles, varying from bullock carts to compactors, are used for
waste transportation. However, the general-purpose open body trucks Of 5 to 9 tones
capacity are in common use. In smaller towns, tractor-trailers are used despite being
noisy and inefficient. In a few cities, compactor vehicles are also being used. The
waste is transported mostly by municipal vehicles; though, in some large towns,
private vehicles are also hired to augment the fleet size. The maintenance of the
vehicles is carried out in the general municipal workshop along with other municipal.
The larger proportion of organic matter in MSW indicates the desirability of
biological processing of waste. Though Composting was a prevalent biological
processing practice in India, in the past due to non-availability of adequate space in
the urban centers and poor segregation of wastes, composting has been discontinued
as a practice. Recently efforts are being taken to popularise waste segregation and
Composting. Characteristics of the Indian MSW bring out the fact that a self
sustaining combustion reaction cannot be obtained in a majority of Indian MSW and
auxiliary fuel will be required to aid waste combustion.
Nature and the Status of Solid wastes in the study area
Waste generated by households, commercial establishments and the industry is
discharged into street bins. Only a few households have door to door collection
services through the informal or formal sector. The garbage in bins usually ends up

44
scattered over pavements and roads. Municipal trucks collect the garbage and finally
drop it at disposal sites. Rag pickers sort out the garbage and retrieve valuable
material is sorted out by the material type. Sometimes cleaned and then solid to waste
dealers or wholesalers who latter supply it to other industries.

The formal sector in SWM does not recycle or retrieve materials from waste and it
is here that unorganized sector steps in Rag pickers in the informal sector collect
waste from house to house in certain suburbs and from all public area in the city.
They retrieve valuable materials from street waste even before the formal sector
begins the work and reduce garbage to organize waste. This places fewer burdens on
the formal sector and also brings down the volume of uncontrolled waste, extending
the life of landfills. Rag pickers receive only half the price of which the wholesalers
sell the materials for in the market or to all-scale industries.

MSWM in India falls under the public health and sanitation and hence as per the
Indian Constitution is a State responsibility. This service has always been within the
public domain until very recently, that the waste management services started being
privatised. The activity being local in nature has been given to local municipal
authorities that provide this service with its own staff, equipment and funds. In the
study area it has been observed that the households, commercial sectors and other
kinds of activities generate the solid wastes. Commercial activities like sugarcane
juice making, tender coconut, and food-processing mutton stall wastes etc., generate
solid wastes, which were properly treated and utilized. People involved in these
activities were intervened and information and data were collected through structured
questionnaires. The information was gathered through meeting the households and
respective Residential Organizations in the study area.

45
Table.m.1: Estimation of wastes generated per day in the city (in Tones)

Types Numbers Quantity of wastes Total waste

generated (kg/day) generated
Medium & High income 55419 1.00 55.419
Households*

Low-income Households 28192 1.00 28.192

Slum Households 4104 1.00 4.104
Shops (Small) 11689 0.30 3.5067
Shops (Large) 5623 0.50 2.812
Garages 711 . 2.00 1.422
Hostels 116 10.00 1.160
Boarding and Lodging 90 5.00 0.450
Commercial Complexes 121 12.00 1.452
(Medium & Big)
Commercial 121 04.00 0.484
Complexes(small)
Major Choultaries and 61 150.00 9.150
Temples
Small Choultaries and 30 40.00 1.200
Temples
Major institutions 151 5.00 0.755
Hotels(Big) 15 20.00 0.300
Hotels(Medium) 276 10.00 2.760
Hotels(Small) 530 03.00 1.590
Markets (Big) 01 6000.00 6.00
Markets (Medium) 04 2000.00 8.00
Markets (Small) 10 400.00 4.00
Slaughter houses 02 900.00 1.800
Meat shops 139 2.00 0.2750
. Construction debris — — 1.00
Street Sweeping Waste - — 27.266
Total — — 163.0977
Additional 5 % ™ - 8.155
Total Quantity (in ““ 171.25 ~
Tonne’s) 175.00
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
* 5 Members per each household

46
 The present scenario of SWM in Mangalore City is discussed below and the Major
components of Solid Waste Management Services found in the study area were:

1 Type of waste generated

1. Source Segregation
2. Primary Collection
3. Secondary Storage
4. Secondary Transportation
5. Processing and Disposal
In the year of 1999 there were 4, 05,426 household populations in Mangalore City,
and it generated 225 tones of solid waste per day. In 2008 the total population of the
study area was 5, 97,112 and the per capita waste generated were 590 tones. In 1999
there were 16,698 slum populations in the city which generated 18 tones of solid
waste per day and the slum population increased to 20,837 in 2008 which generated
22 tones of solid waste per day. In the year of 1999 there were 51 hospitals (including
nursing homes) which generated 7 tonnes of solid waste per day and in 2008 there
were 72 hospitals which generated waste approximately 19 tones of solid waste per
day. In the year of 1999 there were 198 Industrial units which generated 15 tones of
solid waste per day and in 2008 there were 329 industrial units which generated 35
tones of solid waste per day. The following table III.2 provides a clear status of solid
waste generation in the study area.
TabIe.III.2: Estimates of Waste generation in the MCC area
Year Population Waste in tons/ day
2001 398745 140
2005 440247 162
2010 486068 189
2015 536658 219
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
The Supreme Court committee suggested that the per capita waste generation for the
cities of population less than 0.5 million could be 220 grams and 350 grams for
population between 0.5 to 1 million. However, in case of the study area, the status
was quite interesting and it was observed that although the present population of
Mangalore is less than 0.5 million, the high education levels and the forward looking
lifestyle experiences revealed a high rate of waste generation of 350 grams per capita;

47
hence the waste generation rate for Mangalore City Corporation was about 140 tons
per day as per the Supreme Court suggested estimation. At present the area coming
under the jurisdiction of Mangalore City Corporation produces an average of 175
tones of waste per day including construction debris and street sweeping wastes. Out
of which, Mangalore sub-division area generates an average of 146.20 TPD of wastes
and Surathkal sub-division area generates wastes of about 28.80 TPD. An excess of 5
percentage of waste has been calculated to the total amount of waste generated in the
corporation limits as a cushion to absorb the future fluctuations.
The Health Department under the MCC undertakes the assignment of solid waste
management. Waste, which has not collected by MCC, is illegally dumped in the
streets and drains and also disposed in near by areas to the waste generation sector.
The Mangalore Corporation area is having three dump sites for waste disposal among
these three, Moodushedde dump site is 10 km away from the city, all types of waste
including hospital, industrial, and slaughter house etc, both hazards and non-
hazardous waste disposed in this dumping site. No measures have been taken over the
years so far to protect the householders and environment from its hazardous effects.

In order to find out the process and mechanisms of solid waste management
services and also to have an outcome on the economic analysis of various aspects of
this service provisions provided in the growing cities like MCC area, with a well
defined questionnaire, households, commercial units, industrial units were contacted
to generate primary level information, which are explained as below:

In the below Table III. 3 the various demographic characteristics of the respondents
were presented and this reveals that in the small family households 52.87 percent
were male and 47.13 percent were females. In the case of medium family 47.74
percent of the household respondents were male and 52.26 percent belongs to female
and among the big family the representation of male and female respondents were
48.94 percent and 51.06 percent respectively. Thus it is evident that, as far as gender
ratio were concerned; there is only a smaller difference in the respondents groups.
Similarly, age wise details also reveal that in almost all family size categories, the idle
aged numbers dominated.

48
TableIII.3: Detailed Demographic Characteristics of the respondents
Demographic Characteristics/
Variables Below 3 3-4 Above 4 Total
Male 52.87 47.74 48.94 49
Gender Female 47.13 52.26 51.06 51
Total 1.00.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Below 30 14.94 12.78 14.89 13.5
30-40 31.03 33.46 25.53 32
40-50 25.29 34.59 23.4 31.25
Age
50-60 17.24 13.91 12.77 14.5
Above60 11.49 5.26 23.4 8.75
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Hindu 88.51 96.99 76.6 92.75
Christian 4.6 0.75 23.4 4.25
Religion Muslim 4.6 2.26 0 2,5 ■
Others 2.3 0 0 0.5
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Nuclear 75.86 66.92 38.3 65.5
Type of Joint 11.49 28.57 61.7 28.75

family Uni-member 12.64 4.51 0 5.75

Total 100,00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Illiterate 2.3 0 6.38 1.25
Primary 16.09 13.91 4.26 13.25
Secondary 33.33 30.83 31.91 31.5
Education
Higher secondary 37.93 27.07 27.66 29.5
Higher level 10.34 28.2 29.79 24.5
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Govt, employ 6.9 4.51 12.77 6
Private sector 49.43 30.08 40.43 35.5
Self employed 10.34 21.8 17.02 18.75
Employment
Others 33.33 43.61 25.53 39.25
Unemployed 0 0 4.26 0.5
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
Married 83.91 90.6 78.72 87.75
Marital status Unmarried 16.09 9.4 21.28 12.25
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

Source: Primary Survey

49
 TableIII.4: Category of house
Family size Own Rented Lease Relatives Total
60 24 3 0 87
Below 3 68.97 27.59 3.45 0.00 100.00
215 46 0 5 266
3-4 80.83 17.29 0.00 1.88 100.00
33 14 0 0 47
Above 4 70.21 29.79 0.00 0.00 100.00
308 84 3 5 400
Total 77.00 21.00 0.75 1.25 100.00
Source: Primary Survey
The above table III.4 gives the pattern of the respondents dwelling place in the study
area. Among the household respondents 77.00 percent have their own house, 21.00
percent were having rented houses and the remaining 2 percent of the respondents
were staying in leased house or staying with relatives.
TableIII.5: Responsibility of disposing waste
Family House
Family size Group Owner member labour Total
50 3 31 3 87
Below 3 57.47 3.45 35.63 3.45 100.00
158 6 91 11 266
3-4 59.40 2.26 34.21 4.14 100.00
37 0 10 0 47
Above 4 78.72 0.00 21.28 0.00 100.00
245 9 132 14 400
Total 61.25 2.25 33.00 3.50 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 8.51797, df=6, p=.202595
Source: Primary Survey
The table III.5 shows that, irrespective of the size of the family the residential
associations (in group) were bearing the responsibility of the disposal of the waste
(61.2 percent). Among the total households 33.00 percent were taken the
responsibility of waste disposal by themselves. A negligible percentage of the
household respondents were disposing waste by themselves, 2.25 percent.

50
 Table 111.6: Food habits of household respondents- Famil y size wise
Family size Vegetarian Non Vegetarian Mixed Total

13 16 58 87
Below 3 (14.94) (18.39) (66.67) (100.00)

37 51 178 266
3-4 (13.91) (19.17) (66.92) (100.00)

2 3 42 47
Above 4 (4.26) (6.38) (89.36) (100.00)

52 70 278 400
Total (13.00) (17.50) (69.50) (100.00)

Pearson Chi-square: 9.99417, df=4, p=.040547

Source: Primary Survey
The above table III.6 reveals that majority of the respondents irrespective of their
family size have the mixed food habit. There exists significant difference in the food
habit with respect to their family size.
Table. III.7 Quantity of food intake (in kgs)
Quantity of food intake
Family Below
size 2—3 Above3 0.5-1 1-2 0.5 Total
9 6 56 14 2 87
Below 3 10.34 6.90 64.37 16.09 2.30 100.00
18 12 156 58 22 266
3-4 6.77 4.51 58.65 21.80 8.27 100.00
12 0 22 13 0 47
Above 4 25.53 0.00 46.81 27.66 O.O0 100.00
39 18 234 85 24 400
Total 9.75 4.50 58.50 21.25 6.00 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 28.4309, dfi=8, p=.000400
Source: Primary Survey
The quantity of food intake level by the respondents is presented in the above table
III.7. This reveals that among the 400 respondents, 6.00 percent of the households
consume below 500 gms of food per day and 58.50 percent of the house holds take

51
0.5 to 1 kg. The percentage of households consumes 1 to 2 kg and, 2 to 3 kg of food
is 21.25 percent and 9.75 percent respectively. Only 4.5 percent of the households
consumes above 3 kg of food.
Table III.8: Average food intake based on family size
Average
Family size Number food intake SD F p-level
Below 3 87 2.5172 0.7449
3-4 266 2.5301 0.7275 4.381356 0.013119
Above 4 47 2.8511 0.4653
Total 400 2.5650 0.7121

Source: Primary Survey

The table III. 8 analyses the reveals the average food intake based on family size that
the average food intake of the small family is 2.5172 kg with standard deviation
0.7449. Food consumption of medium and big family is 2.5301 kg with standard
deviation 0.7275 and 2.8511 kg with standard deviation 0.4653 respectively.
Table III.9: Quantity of food waste generated per day (in grams)
Quantity of food waste generates
Family size Below 200 200-500 Above 500 Total
19 66 2 87
Below 3 21.84 75.86 2.30 100.00
106 140 20 266
3-4 39.85 52.63 7.52 100.00
14 31 2 47
Above 4 29.79 65.96 4.26 100.00
139 237 24 400
Total 34.75 59.25 6.00 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 16.1200, df=4, p=.O02867
Source: Primary Survey
The above table III. 9 shows that in the case of small family 21.84 percent
households generates below 200 gms of food waste and 75.86 percent of the
households generates between 200 to 500 gms of food waste, where as in the case of
medium family 39.85 percent households generates below 200 gms of food waste and
52.63 percent of the households generates between 200 to 500 gms of food waste and

52
in the case of big family 34.75 percent households generates below 200 gms of food
waste and 59.25 percent of the households generates between 200 to 500 gms of food
waste. The percentage of households generates above 500 gm food waste among
small, medium and big family are 2.3, 7.52 and 4.26 respectively. There is a
significant difference in the quantity of waste generation among the families, since the
p value (0.002867) is less than 0.05.
Table III.10: Attitude on using plastic bags
No
Family size Yes No response Total
0 85 2 87
Below 3 0.00 97.70 2.30 100.00
4 252 10 266
3-4 1.50 94.74 3.76 100.00
2 45 0 47
Above 4 4.26 95.74 0.00 100.00
6 382 12 400
Total 1.50 95.50 3.00 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 5.80833, clf=4, p=.213954
Source: Primary Survey
The above table 111.10 analyses the attitude on using plastic bags. From this
it is observed that 95.50 percent of (majority) respondents are not favouring the use of
plastic bags irrespective of their family size. Hence, it is very clear that the
households were opposing the use of plastics so as to minimise the effect of plastic
wastes on the environment.
The below table III. 11 presented explains the use of household waste as fuel. The
study reveals that 31.25 percent of the households are using the waste as a fuel.
Among the users of the waste a fuel, small family is prominent. Hence, this analysis
brings out very useful information that, the small family is able to substitute dried
wastes as a source of energy in the study area.

53
 TableIII.ll: Using waste as fuel
Family size Yes No No response Total
40 47 0 87
Below 3 45.98 54.02 0.00 100.00
68 196 2 266
3-4 25.56 73.68 0.75 100.00
17 30 0 47
Above 4 36.17 63.83 0.00 100.00
125 273 2 400
Total 31.25 68.25 0.50 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 14.0274, dlM, p=.007216
Source: Primary Survey

The below table III. 12 provides the information on the attitude of the respondents
on open throws method of disposing of household wastes. It is observed from this
table that among the household respondents in all categories, majority (96.25 percent)
of them does not preferred open throw method. This reveals that majority of the
households accustomed to dispose the wastes at the particular waste disposing site
only.
Table III. 12: Attitude on open throws method
Family size Yes No Total
6 81 87
Below 3 6.90 93.10 100.00
4 262 266
3-4 1.50 98.50 . 100.00
5 42 47
Above 4 10.64 89.36 100.00
15 385 400
Total 3.75 96.25 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 12.2835, df=2, p=.002154
Source: Primary Survey

54
 D ogc<?
Table III.13: Knowledge about segregation methods - family size wise

Not
Family size Yes No responding Total
8 57 22 87
Below 3
(9.20) (65.52) (25.29) (100.00)
13 159 94 266
3-4
(4.89) (59.77) (35.34) (100.00)
0 27 20 47
Above 4
(0.00) (57.45) (42.55) (100.00)
21 243 136 400
Total
(5.25) (60.75) (34.00) (100.00)
Pearson Chi-square: 9.11021, dl =6, p=. 167514, Values in parent leses are
indicate the percentage Pfl'D
Source: Primary Survey -j ^ /cQPlA
Tablelll. 13 given above discloses that 65.52 percent of the small family, 59.77
percent of the medium family and 57.45 percent of the big family have no knowledge
about the segregation method. Only 9.2 percent of the small family and 4.89 percent
ot the medium family have the knowledge of segregation methods adopted. No single
respondents from the big family know the segregation methods adopted. There is no
significant difference between the family size and the knowledge of segregation
methods adopted, since the p value (0.167514) is greater than 0.05. Thus, it is clear
from the above table analysis that, majority of the family respondents has no
knowledge of segregation methods.
From the below table 111.14, it is observed that 62.07 percent of small family, 67.7
medium family and 87.23 percent of the big family are not segregating non-dryable
waste in the initial stage. However, 37.93 percent of the small families and 32.33
percent of the medium families were segregating non-dryable wastes in the initial
stage. But only 12.77 percent of the big family is segregating non-dryable waste in
the initial stage. There is significant difference in the segregation of the non-dryable
waste in the initial stage with respect to the size of the family since p value is less than
0.05. Majority of the families (68.75 percent) are not segregating non-dryable waste
in the initial stage.

55
 Table III.14: Segregate non-dryable waste in the initial stage
Response
Family size Yes No Total
33 54 87
Below 3 37.93 62.07 100.00
86 180 266
3-4 32.33 67.67 100.00
6 41 47
Above 4 12.77 87.23 100.00
125 275 400
Total 31.25 68.75 100.00
Pearson C li-square: 9.42643, df=2, p=.008982
Source: Primary Survey

Table III. 15: Segregating person

Family Person who Rag Corporation
size collect pickers workers Total
8 9 41 58
Below 3 13.79 15.52 70.69 100.00
34 16 149 199
3-4 17.09 8.04 74.87 100.00
6 0 35 41
Above 4 14.63 0.00 85.37 100.00
48 25 225 298
. Total 16.11 8.39 75.50 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 8.064107, df=4, p=.089287
Source: Primary Survey
The above Table III. 15 reveals the role of the agency for segregating the waste in
the area. From the total sample 16.11 percent opinioned that the waste segregation is
done by the person who collects the waste, 8.39 percent opined that it is done by the
rag pickers and majority (75.50 percent) opined that it is done by the corporation

56
workers. It is observed that Corporation workers are the main segregating agency of
the waste.
Table III.16: Distance from home to dumping site
Distance
Family size Below 0.5 0.5-1 1-2 Above 2 Total
16 54 15 2 87
Below 3 18.39 62.07 17.24 2.30 100.00
58 170 32 6 266
3-4 21.80 63.91 12.03 2.26 100.00
2 37 5 3 47
Above 4 4.26 78.72 10.64 6.38 100.00
76 261 52 11 400
Total 19.00 65.25 13.00 2.75 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 12.1664, clf=6, p=.058391
Source: Primary Survey
From the above Table III. 16 it is clear that the distance from home to dumping site.
Among the total households, 19.00 percent have the access to dumping place below .5
KM, majority of the households (65.25 percent) have the access to dumping place
between 0.5 and 1 KM. 13 percent of the households have the access in between 1 to
2 Km. Majority of the households (84.25 percent) have the access to dumping place
below, one Km.
Table HI.17: Knowledge about the waste disposal mechanism
Family size Yes No No response Total
9 70 8 87
Below 3 10.34 80.46 9.20 100.00
17 218 31 266
3-4 6.39 81.95 11.65 100.00
3 40 4 47
Above 4 6.38 85.11 8.51 100.00
29 328 43 400
Total 7.25 82.00 10.75 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 2.16649, clf=4, p-705171
Source: Primary Survey

57
 Very interesting useful information is available in the above table III. 17. From this
table data, it is very evident that a negligible proportion of household respondents
were familiar with the waste disposal mechanisms in the study area. Hence, only 7.25
percent had the knowledge of the waste disposal mechanism existed in the study area.

TableIII.18: Awareness about the dangers of waste

No bad
Family size response smell Pollution Mosquito Disease Total
19 4 32 0 32 87
Below 3 21.84 4.60 36.78 0.00 36.78 100.00
80 8 80 4 94 266
3-4 30.08 3.01 30.08 1.50 35.34 100.00
31 0 10 0 6 47
Above 4 65.96 0.00 21.28 0.00 12.77 100.00
130 12 122 4 132 400
Total 32.50 3.00 30.50 1.00 33.00 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 32.9784, clf=8, p=.000063
Source: Primary Survey
The above given table III. 18 reveals that awareness about the dangers of the waste in
detail. From the total respondents 33.00 percent are of the opinion that solid waste
will create the disease and 30.50 percent are the opinion that it makes pollution. A
negligible 3 percent is of the opinion that the waste creates bad smell and it will
spread the mosquitoes (1.00 percent). Among the total sample 32.50 percent are not
responded to this question. Majority of the respondents are aware that the major
problem of waste generation is Disease and pollution.
The below table III. 19 reveals that from the small family 5.75 percent households
house labour is disposing the waste, 74.71 percent household men is disposing the
waste and 19.54 percent households corporation workers disposing it. In the case of
medium family 15.79 percent households house labour is disposing the waste, 69.55
percent household men is disposing the waste and 14.66 percent households
corporation workers disposing it. Majority of the households, 71.75 percent are
disposing the waste by themselves.

58
 Table III.19: Details of disposal of waste
Corporation
Family size House labour Self workers Total
5 65 17 87
Below 3 5.75 74.71 19.54 100.00
42 185 39 266
3-4 15.79 69.55 14.66 100.00
2 37 8 47
Above 4 4.26 78.72 17.02 100.00
49 287 64 400
Total 12.25 71.75 16.00 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 9.79035, df=M ,p=.044133
Source: Primary Survey

Table III.20: Regularity in waste disposal

Daily Twice in a Once in
Family size basis day two days Total
66 2 19 87
Below 3 75.86 2.30 21.84 100.00
207 14 45 266
3-4 77.82 5.26 16.92 100.00
34 2 11 47
Above 4 72.34 4.26 23.40 100.00
307 18 75 400
Total 76.75 4.50 18.75 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 2.91716, df=4, p=.571790
Source: Primary Survey

The above table III.20 reveals that majority of the (76.75 percent) households
have the habit of disposing the waste on daily basis and only 4.5 percent of the
households have the habit of disposing the waste twice in a day. Thus, it was observed
in the study area that regular waste disposal at the household level were lacking. This
was either due to lack of labour or pay for the labourers

59
 Table III.21: Disposal of waste in to trees
Family size Yes No Total
56 31 87
Below 3 64.37 35.63 100.00
126 140 266
3-4 47.37 52.63 100.00
33 14 47
Above 4 70.21 29.79 1O0.OO
215 185 400
Total 53.75 46.25 100.00
Pearson Chi-square: 13.4271, df=2, p=.001216
Source: Primary Survey
It is observed from above table-III.21 that, the habit of disposing the waste into the
tree in small family and large family is 64.34 percent and 70.21 percent respectively.
But in the case of medium-family only 47.37 percent have the habit of disposing
waste into the tree and 52.63 percent is not disposing the waste into the trees. There
exist significant variations in respect of the disposing waste into the trees among the
families, since the p-value is less than 0.05. The table concludes that small family and
big family have the habit of disposing the waste into the tree.

Table III.22: Population growth rate of Mangalore city

Growth (in per
Year Population centage)
1981 201000 -

1991 323304 60.85

2001 419306 29.69
2005 443122 5.68
2010 467936 5.60
2015 494140 5.60
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
The table III.22 reveals that population growth in Mangalore city from 1981 to 1991
is 60.8 percent and in the next decade it was 29.69 percent. It shows that there is a
decline in the population growth. Population growth in Mangalore city from 1981 to

60
1991 and the projected growth for the next decades are graphically presented in
Figure III.2

Figure 111.2. Population Growth

Total waste generated

Total sector-wise waste generated in the study area is presented in Table III.20.
Table III.23: Total waste generated (Tons Per Day)
Total waste generated (TPD)
Households 87.715
Shops 6.318
Hotel 4.65
Market 20.075
Street sweeping 27.266
Choultaries and Temples 10.35
Boarding and Lodging 1.61
Commercial complex 1.936
Others 3.177
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
The above given table 111.23 reveals that the major share of the waste generates
from household sector (87.71 TPD) and the major share of waste generated from

61
Street sweeping (27.26 TPD) and Market (20.07 TPD). Percentage of waste
generated per day in various sectors is graphically represented in Figure III .3.

Figure 111.3. Total waste generated (TPD)

Commercial
Boarding andc°™P*ex
Lodging Others
Choultaries and 1°/° 2%
Temples
6%

Street
sweepi
17%

Households
54%

Marke
12%
Hotel
3%
Shops
4%

Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

Composition of Wastes
The composition of waste generated in the city is presented in the
following Table III.24
Table 111.24: Composition of Wastes generated in the study area
Type of waste Percentage
Organic 75.00
Inorganic 25.00
Total 100.00
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
It discloses that the major portion of the waste generated in the Mangalore city is
organic and it comes to 75 percent of the total waste. And the inorganic waste is 25

62
percent of the total waste. Graphical representation of composition of waste generated
in the city presented in Figure III.4.

Figure 111.4
Composition of Wastes generated in the city

Inorganic

75%

Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

The area coming under the jurisdiction of Mangalore city corporation produces an
average of 175 Tonne’s of waste per day including construction debris and street
sweeping wastes. Out of which, Mangalore sub-division area generates an average of
146.20 TPD of wastes and Surathkal sub-division area generates wastes of about
28.80 TPD. An excess of 5 % of waste has been calculated to the total amount of
waste generated in the corporation limits as a cushion to absorb the future
fluctuations.

Mechanisms of Solid Waste Management Services in the study area

Different processes have been involved in the process of the solid waste
management services in the city area of the study area. The major steps are as
discussed below:
The Health Department under the MCC undertakes the assignment of solid waste
management. Waste, which has not collected by MCC, is illegally dumped in the
streets and drains and also disposed in near by areas to the waste generation sector.

63
The Mangalore Corporation area is having three dump sites for waste disposal among
these three, Moodushedde dump site is 10 km away from the city, all types of waste
including hospital, industrial, and slaughter house etc, both hazards and non-
hazardous waste disposed in this dumping site.
For the collection of waste from; street sweeping 1084 bottomless RCC bins have
been provided in the city, which clejaned once a day in the busy commercial areas and
in other places once in two days. Pourakarmikas brings the street sweeping in more
than 110 handcrafts, to deposit it in;the RCC bins. The waste from the household and
other premises brought by the users and deposited in the pins. The hospital wastes
from 64 hospitals and nursing homes covering about 4000 beds are also deposited in
the dustbins.
For the transportation of wastes 14 trucks have been deployed each carrying about
3.5 tones. The vehicle makes usually two trips per day to the disposal sites. In
addition to that 3 dumper places are engaged for carrying 51 metal containers to the
dumping site. Further some of the hotels and factories transport their wastes directly
to the disposal site in their own vehicles. The loading and unloading is done manually.
The solid wastes finally disposed off at the dumping site, which is 15 kms away
from the city and located at Moodushede. There is walled protection for the dumping
site only from the main road side, but for this, the site does not away protection wall
all round. Because of this there is encroachment of site by the locals. Further the
Government has allotted some area for the beggar home and a school for dumb and
deaf etc. As a result in initial land holding about 900 acres, it has come down to 50
acres. Infectious hospital waste is also disposed off at the same site. The rag pickers
also come to the dumping site and collect paper, metal, plastic, glass etc. The
vermiculture process of composing of organic waste by a private agency is already
functioning at the duping site since few years.
There is no house to house collection and segregation of waste except in Gandhi
Nagar and end our is made to house to house collection Mallikatta area and it is also
proposed to extend to other areas depending, upon the peoples’ participation through
the involvement of elected representatives. There is low out put and indiscipline
among the Paurakarmikas, the Government policies also do not favour to increase the
manpower. Thus it would be appropriate to consider doing additional work of
collection of waste by contracting out services.

64
 Primary collection:
As per MSW Rules 2000, the waste should be collected from Door to Door in
residential areas. Waste from bulk generators should be collected separately. In
accordance with the State Policy on ISWM, primary collection of solid wastes from
Table III.25: Classification of waste generators and mode of primary collection.
Sl.No Waste generator Primary waste collection
1 Residential house holds
High income non-slum Proposed SHGs/RWAs to collect the waste, the
households boundaries are demarcated. Total 67 auto tippers, 39
Low income house holds Tricycles and 74 pushcarts are required.
Collections by ULB workers - 30 workers are
Slum households
deployed.
2 Small waste generators ,
Shops, Institutions and Small Collection through SHGs.
hotels
3 Bulk generators
a) Choultries, a) Collection by the SHGs excluding the wastes from
Hotels and Restaurants b) markets, slaughter houses and construction debris.
Markets and b) Wastes from Markets and Slaughter Houses will be
Slaughter Houses managed by ULB
4 Road side waste generators
Street Sweeping, Drain 670 Km road length is proposed to be outsourced.
Cleaning and Open area 36 Km road length will be managed by ULB
cleaning
Dead animals Managed by ULB through Task-force team
5 Waste generators (waste not collected by the ULB)
Some hospitals are using incinerators for bio medical
waste disposal and for some hospitals the wastes are
Hospitals collected by M/s Medicare Incinerators Pvt Ltd,
KIADB industrial area, Mulky wherein the wastes are
treated in common biomedical waste treatment facility.
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
the residents are proposed by ensuring the following steps.
Street sweeping:
Both the drain cleaning, and street sweeping activity are treated as a single
component. Biomedical Wastes should not get mixed with the municipal wastes,
processing and disposal of bio-medical wastes should be done as per Bio Medical
Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998. The scopes of work involved in
Street sweeping components are:
• Roadside drain cleaning
• Cleaning of road Medians
• Removal of road side and drain side vegetation
• Cleaning of foot path

65
 • Cleaning of silt from drains and roads
• Clearance of litterbins
Open area cleaning
The areas are divided into 3 zones. The scope of work involved in street sweeping is
as follows:
• Street sweeping
• Road side drain cleaning
• Cleaning of road Medians
• Removal of road side and drain side vegetation
• Cleaning of silt from drains and roads
• Clearance of litter bins
• Open area cleaning
• Transportation of the swept wastes to the landfill site
Zone 1: This zone consists of highly populated areas, traffic areas, Commercial and
industrial areas, slums and tourist places. This zone is proposed to be swept seven
days in a week.
Zone2: This zone comprises of residential areas having very low commercial
activities and traffic. This zone is proposed to be swept twice a week.
Zone 3: This zone is delineated of sparsely populated areas with very less number of
households. This zone is proposed to be swept once a week.
Table III.26: Zone Wise Street sweeping and roadside drain cleaning
frequency as per the State Policy

Street Days
Zones
Sweeping frequency
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

I Daily sweeping i i i i V V
2 Weekly twice sweeping V {

3 Weekly Once sweeping i

Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

66
Door to Door Collection
Table III. 27: Door to Door Waste Collection from households
Zones Number of households
Zone 1 62172
(Non-slum areas where door to door waste
collection can be done through Auto Tipper)
Zone 2 21439
(Non-slum areas where door to door waste
collection can be done through pushcart and tri
cycles)
Zone 3 4104
(slum area using pushcarts)
Total 87,715

Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

Non-slum Households waste management

A) Auto tippers
The door-to-door waste collection of segregated waste from residents is proposed in
the following way. Auto tipper is proposed for door to door collection. One Auto
tipper can serve 750 to 1,000 households. Auto tipper is designed in such a way that it
can mechanically tip the waste directly into the secondary storage container. The
specifications for the vehicles are as per the manual prepared by DMA & KUIDFC,
GOK.
No. of households to be served by Auto tippers : 83,611 x 0.75
: 62,708.25 ~ 62,709
No. of auto tippers required: 62709/1000 : 62.71 ~ 63* No’s.

*According to the calculation 63 Auto Tippers are required, but as per the field
conditions (hilly terrains) 67 Auto Tippers are required to serve 62,172 households.

B) Tricycles
One Tricycle can serve 240 households per day. A tricycle can cover 80
households per trip. One worker is proposed per tricycle.
No. of Non slum house to be served by tricycles : 9,274
No. of tricycles: 9274/240 : 38.64 ~ 39 No’s.

67
 C) Pushcart
Pushcart is preferred in the areas where roads are very narrow, congested and highly
undulated. One pushcart has 4 buckets of 40 Kg carrying capacity, which can serve
160 households/ day. Pushcarts can cover 40 households per trip. One worker is
proposed per pushcart.
No. of households to be served by pushcarts : 12,165
No. of pushcarts: 12165/160 :76.03~76 No’s.
As per the calculation 76 pushcarts are required. But owing to the field conditions
the process can be managed with 74 pushcarts.
Vehicles requirements for primary collection:
Auto tipper : 67
Tricycle : 39
Pushcart : 74
ULB will manage the primary collection at slum areas having a household of 4,104
No’s, using Pourakarmikas. Bulk generators include shops, hotels & restaurants,
commercial complexes, meat shop, etc.
Slum Households Waste Management:
Number of households to be served under Door-Door collection system: 4,104
Table III 28: Waste collection groups for slum areas
Place of
, No. of
SI Ward House No. of Workers Deliverance to
Name of the slum Pushcarts
no no holds Required Secondary
Required
Containers*
Idya 314 2 2 660L and
1 4
1100L(No. 5)
2 14 Krishnanagara 207 2 2' C12
3 18 Sujikal 191 1 1 C13
4 18 Anandanagar 186 1 1 C9, Cl3
" 5 18 Mullakadu 130 1 1 C13, C17
6 21 Sanjayanagara 286 2 2 C23, C33
7 21 Shakthinagara 303 2 2 C33, C34
8 21 Ashrya Colony 212 2 • 2 C34

68
9 21 Yeyadi Gundalike 229 2 2 C33
10 22 Gandakadu 319 2 2 C23
11 ' 24 Nekkilagudda 208 2 2 C20
12 26 Sunkadakatte 192 1 1 C19
13 26 Bapujinagara 198 1 1 C19
14 26 Adarshanagara 209 2 2 C27, C29
15 29 Vivekanagar 232 2 2 C37, C38
Kadri 286 2 2 C40
16 31
Darkasgudde
Jeppu 189 1 1 C69
17 57
Arakarebailu
18 59 Jeppu bappal 213 2 2 C57, C72
Total 4104 30 30
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

Management Plan
Waste collection from the slum households will be carried out by the City
Corporation workers using door to door collection in slum areas by 30 pourakarmikas.
Table III 29: Door to Door waste collection plan for residential houses
SI Details of collection activity in Auto tipper Tricycle Pushcart
no residential areas in morning time
for 6 hours
1 Total time available per day 360 Min 360 min 360 min
including one hour break i.e. 6
2 Number of houses to be covered in 1000 240 160
a day
3 Carrying capacity of the collection 500-600kgs 80-100 kgs 40-50 kgs
vehicle per trip
4 Number of houses that can be 500 houses 80 houses 40 houses
covered per trip
5 Number of trips per day per 2 trips 3 trips 4 trips
vehicle
6 Time required per trip for up and 15 min 20 min 25 min

69
 down of collection vehicle to
transfer the waste
7 Total time needed for transferring 30 min 60 min 100 min
the waste in a day
8 Time required for door to door 300 min 270 min 230 min
collection in day
9 Time required for collection of 3 min forlO 9 min for 10 14 min
waste from each household households households for 10
households
10 Time required for each trip 2 hr 45 min lhr 35 min 1 hour
including up and down to the
secondary storage container
11 Workers required per vehicle 1 worker 1 worker 1 worker
SHGs will collect wet waste from 8.00 am to 2.00 pm daily and dry waste from 12.00
pm to 2.00 pm from residential area weekly once using door to door collection.
Afternoon from 1.00 pm to 6.00 pm, SHGs will collect the waste from the bulk
generators excluding Markets and Slaughter houses.
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
30 pushcarts will be provided for the each worker at the distinguished areas, so that
they will be able to collect the waste from the source. The waste thus collected from
the slum will be delivered by the pourakarmikas to the secondary containers as
mentioned in the above table.
Collection plan
Wet waste will be collected daily from the residential areas in the morning hours, as
they are prone to decay. The wet waste generated by the bulk generators will be
collected by the primary collection vehicles only in the afternoon hours. On the other,
dry waste is proposed to be collected once in a week in the residential area by the
respective SHGs between 12.00 pm to 2.00 pm. Each day the collection vehicle will
collect dry waste from one area on an alternate basis, there by covering the whole
command area. Retrievers will segregate recyclables out of dry waste after its
collection.

70
Waste Collection from bulk generators
Waste collection from bulk generators will be done by SHG’s at their particular
SWM area allotted to them, excluding markets and slaughter houses. The user charges
as approved through council resolution for the bulk generators will be collected by the
SHG’s/ The bulk generators viz., Markets and Slaughter houses will be managed by
the ULB. ' ■'
Disposal of construction debris and dead animals
The collection and transportation of the dead animals will be carried out by ULB.
One vehicle will be'allotted by ULB for this purpose. The owner of the building
const rue te a/demol islied will be held responsible for clearance of construction debris
generated
Secondary storage
In the Secondary collection action plan Waste is stored at two levels i.e.l) Source
level 2) Community level
Storage at source
At source level, individuals are expected to maintain two dust bins one for wet and
another for dry waste. The hazardous waste can be stored in cover. It should be given
to the collection vehicle, It is the responsibility of every individual to store the waste
generated by them separately and deliver the same to the collection vehicles.
Storage at Community Level
At community level, it is proposed to have container system, which can be carried
off to disposal site with the help of secondary transportation vehicles. Secondary
storage points can be classified based on the type of area. Each storage location will
have one container for wet waste. These containers are placed on a P.C.C platform
with proper drainage facility, to avoid any leachate seepages. PCC slab and containers
are designed as per the standard specifications provided by DMA. Collection vehicle
will tip the waste into respective containers placed in that area.
Secondary Containers Requirement
(a) Mangalore sub-division:
Total wastes generated 96.37 TPD*
No. of bins required 96.37x 1.25/ 1.5 = 80.3
3 m3 Containers 80.3/2 = 40.1 ~ 40 No’s.
4.5 m3 Containers 80.3/2 = 40.1 ~ 40 No’s.
For festival occasions

71
 3 nr Containers : 3 No’s.
4.5 m3 Containers : 3 No’s.
O 7

Number of Twin container dumper placers (with each carrying 3 m and 4.5 m
containers) required with each vehicle making 5 trips, say, 8 no’s. Therefore no of
replacement Containers required:
3 nr Containers 8 No’s.
4.5 m Containers 8 No’s.
Total number of containers required
3 m3 Containers : 51 No’s.
4.5 m3 Containers : 51 No’s.
(b) Surathkal sub-division:
Total wastes generated : 19.00 TPD
No. of bins required 1100 L (400kg capacity) : 30 No’s x 400kg = 12.0 TPD
No. of bins required 660 L (240 kg capacity) : 20 No’s x 240kg = 4.8 TPD
Total number of bins of 1100 L : 30 No’s.
Total number of bins of 660 L : 20 No’s.
Additional containers required for tourist spots and airport
1100 L: 02 No’s
660 L: 16 No’s
Total Containers required for Surathkal Area:
1100 L: 38 No’s.
660 L : 36 No’s.
Existing bins with ULB under KUDCEMP plan:
1100 L: 50 No’s
660 L : 60 No’s.
The 40 no’s, of 3 m and 40 No’s, of 4.5m containers cover’s only the area of
Mangalore sub-division. A total of 20 no’s, of 660 L and 36 No’s, of 1100 L
containers are required at Surathkal sub-division. About 16 No’s, of 660 L and 2
No’s, of 1100. L containers are required at the tourist spots, therefore a total of 36
No’s, of 660 L and 38 No’s, of 1100 L containers are required..
Placement of litter bins
The tilting and carrying types of litterbins are proposed and would be located in and
around the temple area, market area, commercial areas, bus stop areas, busy streets
and public places. Litterbins will be located at an appropriate distance depending

72
upon the field conditions. The 100 L capacity litterbins would be located at a distance
of 25 to 500 m as per normative standard. 200 litter bins are required and as on the
regular basis
Table III. 30: Details of location and quantity of Litterbins
No. of Litter bins Distance
Clearance
Locations of 100 litre between the
Method
Capacity Litter Bins
Temples,
During Street
Churches and 20
Sweeping
Mosques
Shopping During Street
35
Complexes Sweeping
Commercial During Street Litterbins will
45
or busy streets Sweeping be located at
During Street an appropriate
Tourist places 30
Sweeping distance
During Street depending
Bus stops 20
Sweeping upon the field
Schools, conditions.
Colleges and During Street
18
Government Sweeping
Institutions
Markets, During Street
32
Public places Sweeping
Total 200
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
The litter bins will be cleared during street sweeping. The clearance of the litter bins
should be done at the time of street sweeping.
Collection Methods
House to house collection is practices in about 30 areas under the auspicious of
Nirmalya Samiti, each of then typically collects wastes from about 150-300 houses.
One ward is fully covered for door to door collection with auto tripper and start up
costs provided by the KUDCEMP project, about 1000 houses are c9overed. All the

73
other waste generators transfer the wastes directly to the bins. The waste form the
generator, house to house collection and street sweeping gets disposed off to
community bins. About 1600 RCC bins of 0.8 cum capacity, 64 numbers of 780 litter
plastic containers, 54 numbers of 1190 litter metal containers and 62 containers of 4.5
cum capacity are there. The dumper placer containers are also used for primary
collection of wastes. The total volume of storage is about 1960 cum. The storage
volume is about 4 times the estimate of total volume of waste generated per day in
Mangalore.
Sweeping pattern
Sweeping of roads is also done in about 450 km out length of road in residential,
markets and commercial areas. The sweeping is done in a single shift from 7 a.m. to 2
p.m. Out of this 50 percent is in the central business district, is covered by the contract
systems of operations. The staff absenteeism among the sweepers is about 10 per cent.
The standards for sweeping and collection are 0.5 km for high-density roads and 1km
for low-density roads. The drain cleaning, clearing of vegetation from open areas is
also the responsibility of the sweeping staff but this activity is not done daily. It is
done before the rainy season or on receipt of complaints. Cleaning of the drainage
system is handled by a separate set of contracts workers. The scope of work involved
in Street sweeping components is:
• Street sweeping
• Roadside drain cleaning
• Cleaning of road Medians
• Removal of road side and drain side vegetation
• Cleaning of foot path
• Cleaning of silt from drains and roads
• Clearance of litterbins
• Open area cleaning
Conducting awareness programme
Regular awareness programmes are essential for effective implementation of the
proposed action plan and topics on which awareness campaigns are to be
conducted are:

74
SI No. Target groups Subject

1. Residents, PKs / Workers Awareness on segregation of waste

Institutions and bulk generators into wet and dry.
2. SHGs Proper handling of waste during primarj
collection
3. General community Waste minimization, reduction, reuse
and recycle concept.
4. Residents and waste retrievers SWM system adopted in the
City
Corporation.

Source: Office of the Mangalore City Corporation

Segregation of Waste
The waste has to be segregated into two types:
Wet wastes : Food waste, Paper, & other decomposable /
organic wastes
Dry wastes : Plastics, metal and other non-decomposable/
inorganic waste, House hold hazardous wastes
will be collected separately while collecting
dry wastes and dumped safely in the area allotted in
the land- fill
Segregation of wastes acts as the base for the whole SWM action plan, most of the
SWM system fails at this step only. As per MSW Rules 2000, waste should be
segregated into organic and inorganic including recyclables. SHGs will be responsible
for collection of segregated wastes in their command areas. RWAs should motivate
the residents to segregate their waste into Wet Waste (i.e. organic - mainly kitchen
and other decomposable wastes), and Dry Waste including Recyclables (i.e. metal,
plastic covers, dust from sweeping etc) and household hazardous waste (used battery,
paint bottles, house-hold medical and chemical wastes, etc.)
Waste reduction can be done effectively by implementing 3R’s principle i.e.
REDUCE, REUSE and RECYCLE. City Corporation involving, SHGs and NGOs
should educate residents about waste minimization using 3R’s principle.
SHG’s/RWA’s will be responsible to enforce segregation in their command areas.

75
They should hand. oVer the waste to the coliection vehicle, m separate Dins stonng
organic waste, inorganic waste and recyclables.
Regular awareness program should be conducted for the residents educating them-of
the importance of scientific solid waste management and reminding them of their
roles in it (like segregation, wiling to pay service charges, etc). As segregation was
not in practice from past years, it requires great efforts ,to change the attitude of the
citizens,' which is a slow and gradual process. The retrievers will segregate dry waste
into recyclables, Which will be sold in the market. The remaining refuse will be
transported for landfill. The segregation of wastes should'be carried-out in a phase-
wise manner. "
Step wise programmes to attain Segregation of wastes:
Step 1:
® Conducting awareness campaigis every month for. general public, commercial
establishments, institutes, schools and colleges. Awareness should be created
regarding the effects of hazardous waste: and its proper handling.
• Familiarizing people about the solid waste management system adopted in
their ULB. Educating people to be careful while purchasing the goods and
other products.
• Training program for retrievers regarding segregation, proper handling,, of
waste and its hazards due to improper handling.
Step 2:
• The waste collector should inform the supervisor incase, if any household
personals are not following the process of waste segregation. The retriever
should inform the residents to hand over the wastes in segregated form only.
• The committee members should approach such residents explaining them of
the importance of waste segregation and should encourage them to segregate
and deliver it to retrievers only.
Step 3:
• Levy fine on defaulters who do not follow the process of waste segregation.
• Household personals shall be levied fine for throwing the waste/littering in
open area.

76
Processing of waste
Wastes are segregated into organic, recyclable and refuse. As per MSW Rules 2000,
waste has to be inertized before disposing it. The processing of the segregated waste
is explained below.
Organic Waste / Wet Waste
The best way of processing organic waste is by composting. Composting is a
biological process of decomposition carried out under controlled conditions of
ventilation, temperature, moisture with the help of micro - organisms in the waste that
converts wastes into humus - like material by acting on the organic portion of the
solid waste. Vermi-compost is another type of composting where earthworms are
used. The castings of the Earthworms are the final product i.e. vermi-compost, which
are rich in micronutrients, enzymes, etc. A common site has been identified near
Pachanady for compost unit and landfill, located at an average distance of 12 Km
from MCC.
Inorganic Waste/ Dry Waste including recyclables
The inorganic wastes will be transported to scientific landfill site identified at
Pachanady located at about an average distance of 12 Km from MCC. The waste
collector will deposit the recyclables at the identified spots from where the contractor
will pick up the useful material. Only the refuse will be transported to the landfill site
under the present clearance of the street sweeping system.
Table III 31: Various types of recyclables:
Glass Unbroken bottles
Metals Iron, Ferrous and non Ferrous components
Plastics Plastics sheet, piping and plastic bags, cans and bottles
Paper/cardboard Newspapers and packaging covers like milk covers and
cardboard
Rubber /leathers Old tyres and shoes
Wood ' ' Wooden logs, woody waste from garden
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
Management Plan
Treatment of wet waste is done by composting method. A compost plant is
developed under ADB assisted KUDCEM project.

77
Disposal of wastes
As per MSW Rules 2000, guidelines and specifications for development and
operation of landfill site is clearly mentioned. Only inert wastes are proposed for
disposal in the landfill site near Pachanady.
Disposal ways:
Wet Waste : Pachanady Sanitary landfill Site - (to & fro 24 Km distance from
MCC).
Dry Waste : Pachanady Sanitary landfill Site
(to & fro 24 Km distance from MCC).
Waste from Street Sweeping : Pachanady landfill Site 24 Km distance from MCC
Desilted waste : Low lying areas
Constructional
Debris/waste : Low lying areas and if required to the Pachanady landfill site as
cover material

78
 Figure III.5: Activity chart for SWM in a day

Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

79
 Institutional Arrangement for SWMS
TablelH. 32: Existing staff redeployment plan for ULB’s manpower as per
proposed SWM plan
SI. Cadre Total Number of Deployment

No. Number personals

deployed

12 Absentees (04%)

Slum work (door to door waste

30
collection)

Works allocated:

a. Emergency work
Permanent:2
b. Open area cleaning
84 06
Pourakarmi c. Removal of encroachments
1 +(95 Posts
kas d. Attending complaints
Vacant)
e. SWM Task force workers (3 No's)

13 Cleaners for vehicles

26 On task works

Malaria works (spraying and canalizing of

173
the drains)

24 For street sweeping in IInd division

2 For managing slum household collection

3 Malaria work and other works

14 2 Managing of sweeping, etc.

Sanitary
2 +(10 Posts 2 Secondary transportation
Masteries
V acant) 1 Bulk Generators waste collection
3 Door to Door collection

1 Landfill site and Compost site

02 Dumper placers
01 Task force vehicles
Drivers 01 Compactor
3 13
02 Side Packers
01 Hitachi Expo - 70
01 JCB

80
 Market waste collection vehicles along
05 with task force (2 No’s of Tipper + 2
No’s of Trucks+1 No’s of Mini Lorry)
Managing the solid waste management
Health system in their concerned wards and
4 12 12
inspector reporting the progress of SWM to AHO’s

Managing 20 Wards each and reporting

Asst. Health
5 3 3 the progress of SWM to Environmental
officer
Engineers
Managing 30 wards each for overall Solid
Waste Management and reporting the
Environmen
6 2 2 progress of SWM to Health Officer
tal Engineer
Managing Landfill site and Compost
Plant.
Health
7 1 1 Managing the overall system
officer
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
Transportation of the solid waste
The transport is done by a combination of vehicles of different types and capacities.
The waste is being dumped at the landfill site at Vamanjur. There are 5 trucks, 2
trippers, 3 dumper placer, 1 compactor and 2 side packers owned by the municipality.
In addition 8 tucks are hired on contract and the completely contracted out area has 16
trucks. The total Number of vehicles in use is 34 trucks, 3 dumper placer, 1 compactor
and 3 side packers. The dumper placer transfers the waste to large trucks trippers at
the Alake transfer station. Typically about 36 rips are made to the disposal site. Each
truck making one trip a day. The market wastes are transported in the night. A driver
and six loaders, officially, man the vehicles. The C.M.C does not have a workshop
and all its vehicles are maintained at private workshops. The following table depicts
the Transportation plan for MCC vehicles.

81
 Table III.33. Transportation plan for MCC SWM vehicles
Type of Vehicles Type of Waste carried No. of No of Place of Requirement
containers Trips work of Workers
cleared /Day allotment In Existing In
System Proposed
System

Twin container Dumper placer

Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2 2
A
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2 2
B
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2 2
C
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2
D
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2
E
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2
F
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2
G
Dumper Placer Wet waste 10 No’s. 5 2
H
Existing Vehicles deployment
Dumper Placer Standby
(KA19M
9770)
Dumper Placer Standby
(KA 19 M
9771)
Dumper Placer Standby
(KA 19 M 9472
Tipper Stand-by 2 2
(CNG4830)

82
Tipper Market waste ' Mangalor 2 2
(CNG4728) collection e
Truck Market waste 2 2
(MYG-8479) collection
Truck Market waste Mangalor 2 2
(CNG-4952) collection e
Mini Lorry Street sweeping waste 2 2
(KA 19 A 2501) collection
Mini Lorry Task Force Work 2
(KA 19 A 1034)
Compactor Collection of waste 20 No’s. 3 Surathkal 1 2
(KA 19 B 62) from 660 L and 1100 sub­
L containers division
Side Packer Collection of waste 18 No’s. 2 Surathkal 1 2
(KA 19 B 821) from 660 and 1100 L sub­
bins division
Side Packer Collection of waste 18 No’s. 2. Surathkal 1 2
(KA 19 B 834) from 660L and 1100 L sub­
bins division
Hitachi Used for leveling at Pachanad 2 2
EXPO-70 the landfill site, for y Landfill
Drain Cleaning and site
for other suitable
operations
JCB Used at the landfill Pachanad 2 2
site, Drain Cleaning y Landfill
and other operation site
Total Number of Drivers required : 19
Total number of Cleaners required : 19
Total number of Drivers present at ULB : 13
Total number of Cleaners present at ULB : 13
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka

83
Outer Service Contracts
The daily sweeping, collection from bins and transport to the dumpsite at Vamanjur
for 37 wards including the market areas is undertaken. The 37 wards are divided into
10 numbers of contracts. The total cost of contracting is Rs 8 lakhs per annum for the
city and contracts are renewed every year. The contract is expected to deploy 290
sweeping staffs and 16 Lorries. The quantity of wastes collected and transported by
the contractors per day estimated at 70 tons. The cost per ton of the service provided
is Rs 534 per ton of waste. In addition 8 Lorries with loading staff are taken on
contract at a price of Rs 1600 per day for use in area where the Mangalore
Municipality staff does the sweeping.
Disposal System
At present, the dumping site at Vamanjur is used for dumping all the Municipal
wastes and debris. The Vamanjur dumping site is on top a hill top and in use for over
thirty years. The dumping site has an extent of 15 Ha. The site is being upgraded and
compost plant and new landfill are also proposed. Two efforts at centrally processing
wastes were initiated in Mangalore M/s Canara Biotech and M/s Blossom bio-
cultural. Canara biotech is having a small operation where they are doing a
combination of landfill mining and wormy composting operation. Blossom bio­
culture has closed down. There are 2 decentralized composting units operational. All
together about 0.5 to 1 percent waste processed.
Problems associated with Mechanisms of SWMS
In recent years in India, most of the urban local bodies have been experiencing
huge expenditure on solid waste disposal with very poor efficiency, pollution due to
the burning of waste, unorganized and poorly co-coordinated transportation resulting
in excessive fuel usage and pollution generation, loss of reusable/recyclable material
due to un segregated collection, unhygienic condition leading to public health
problem and spread of disease to local as well as global air pollution due to the
uncollected and poorly disposed waste, dirty streets and cities failing to attract foreign
investments and markets, etc. In the light of these problems, the mechanisms and
managing the urban solid wastes have gaining importance; and various methods at
different stages have been tried in recent years. However the development of
infrastructure facilities and disposal methods has not kept pace with the rate of waste
generation, leading to increased pollution and environmental impacts. The increase in
the growth of the solid wastes and failure to mange it sustainable, worsened and act as

84
a major bottleneck for development in particular in a growing densely populated city
like Mangalore.
Waste generated by households, commercial establishments and the industry is
discharged into street bins and only a few households have door-to-door collection
services through the informal or formal sector. In fact, the garbage in bins usually
ends up scattered over pavements and roads. Although municipal trucks collect the
garbage and finally drop it at disposal sites, large number of rag pickers sort out the
garbage and the material type sorts out retrieve valuable material. Sometimes cleaned
and then solid to waste dealers or wholesalers who latter supply it to other industries
leading to generation of incomes to the people involved.
Although the formal sector in SWM does not recycle or retrieve materials from
waste; it is the unorganized sector steps in Rag pickers in the informal sector collect
waste from house to house in certain suburbs and from all public area in the city.
They retrieve valuable materials from street waste even before the formal sector
begins the work and reduce garbage to organize waste. But this places fewer burdens
on the formal sector and also brings down the volume Of uncontrolled waste,
extending the life of landfills. Rag pickers receive only half the price of which the
wholesalers sell the materials for in the market or to all-scale industries that in turn
benefit monetarily from such intermediary role. Thus, this also point out the amount
that the wholesalers acquire for materials and the material composition of the waste,
the economic value embodied in what is otherwise referred to as waste benefits. The
experiences in the study area show that there is a large difference between urban and
rural levels of waste generation, which reflects the economic extremes existing within
Indian society. Perhaps, this may be due to the fact that, the larger cities are centers of
major economic activity, which are, manifested consumerism among the residents
together with increased waste.
A briefly discussion of the various problems associated with the mechanisms of
SWM services followed in the corporation cities like the study area:

(1) Lack of adequate financial support and increasing Expenditure on SWM

An important issue in the municipal solid waste management is increasing
expenditure on solid waste management. The total cost of the SWM is not expected to
change but there would be reduction in contract costs for the Corporation and the
savings would be used for the management of the disposal. The door to door

85
collection would be incremental but would be collected from the users and
consequently does not find mention in the Corroboration cost of waste management.
It is evident from the following table.35 that the financial burden of MCC in
managing the solid waste services and this data presented here also indicate the rising
trends in the growth of expenditure, which will continued to grow even now.
TableIII.34: Estimated Annual Recurring Cost towards SWM
SI. No. Particulars Total amount( inRs)
Part A - 0 and M cost for collection and transportation of waste
1 Salaries of the SWM staff
A Pourakarmikas/workers 2,15,36,040.00
B Drivers and cleaners 14,10,972.00
C Supervisors/Sanitary Mastries (14 Mastries) 13,08,936.00
D Sanitary Inspectors (12 Inspectors) 18,94,188.00
E Assistant Health Officers (3 AHOs) 5,54,004.00
F Environmental Engineers (2 Engineers) 2,57,040.00
G Health Officer 2,14,656.00
Sub-Total 1 2,71,75,836.00
2 Maintenance cost of official vehicles of ULB 9,06,000.00
3 Maintenance cost of vehicles of SWM
A 0 & M of Existing vehicles1 18,30,640.00
B Pushcarts @ 10 % of the cost of equipment (30 35,100.00
+ 24)
C 0 & M of Secondary Transportation
a) Twin Container Dumper Placers (8 No’s.) 89,27,328.00
b) Side Packers (2 No’s.) 9,67,140.00
c) Compactor (1 No.) 7,46,330.04
Sub-Total 2 &3 1,34,12,538.04

4 Contracts
A Street Sweeping3 1,30,04,961.90

5' Purchase of phenols, bleaching powder etc. 2,15,000.00

6 Purchase of uniforms for pourakarmikas( apart 2,60,000.00

86
 from street sweepers)
Sub Total 4, 5 & 6 1,34,79,961.90

Part B - 0 & M cost for Processing and Disposal site

7 Tipping cost of the Sanitary Landfill @ Rs. 1,57,50,000.00
250.00 per Tonne’s4
Sub Total 7 1,57,50,000.00

Part C - Purchase of tools and equipments

8 Equipments required for Street Sweeping in 2nd Division (ULB managed
36 Km)
A Long handled Broom 15,840.00
B Metal Scraper 2,400.00
C Metal Tray 7,200.00
D Ghamela 7,200.00
E Hand Gloves 1,200.00
F Rain Coats 8,400.00
G Gum Boots 7,200.00
H Uniforms 24,000.00
I Face Masks 2,400.00
J Spades 2,400.00
k Pick Axe 2,880.00
Sub Total 8 81,120.00
Grand Total 6,98,99,455.94
Source: Office of the City Corporation, Mangalore, Karnataka
(2) Low Level of segregation of wastes at the door steps
There is a lack of door to door segregation of wastes at the household level in the
study area. This leads to the problem of collection of household waste generated
everyday and under the prevailing centralized mechanism naturally households are
compelled to throw their household wastes near by available dumping sites or open
throw way practices causing more health hazards and loosing the value of public
roads, properties etc..

87
(3) Lack of sufficient transport mode and manpower
Though both in source and outsource transport facilities are required to dispose the
solid wastes, in the study area the problem is in both, i.e. adequate transport vehicles
and labour. This is because, the city growth in the study area is not properly or
attained, it finds very difficult to exactly arrange the transport means as well required
waste clearing equipment due to lack of required technology development in this
regard. Similarly, since the wages paid to the labourers are very low and lack of skills
to process waste separation etc. there is delay in waste disposing process daily. Thus
in the midst of the participation of both public and private sectors in meeting the solid
waste clearing the waste generators more often confused with which one is better,
whether to depend on in source or outsource available disposal facilities.
(4) Pricing and Cost recovery towards the SWMs
There is a lack of efficient methods of recycling of sewage water which flows from
commercial /industrial units of the city. Obviously, the ULBs administration finds it
difficult to deliver the black water (contaminated dirty water) released from big
commercial and industrial establishments. On the other hand the question still emerge
whether the polluter has to pay or not and whether they have to pay the cess or fees
to clean the solid waste generated and thrown open to the streets by the households.
Further the effect of the disease like plague, malaria etc, also calls for the need to
spend a sizable amount of money on health care maintenance schemes including anti
malaria mosquito controlling devices. Thus in this regard, is the Municipality or city
administrators required to take care of such health hazard effects then the local
governments has to generate or has to get sufficient capital funds even from the state
governments to overcome the diseases like dihoria, plague etc which may even likely
to spread due to water contamination or polluted water used for drinking purposes by
the urban residence. Thus on the whole, the pricing of the solid waste services and
the recovery of the investment parts remains to be a practical investment burden for
the urban city administration in most of capital deficient municipalities.
(5) . Absence of proper laws on plastics uses
There should be a legal support for recycling of solid and liquid form of waste
generated by the households, commercial units, industrial units, and hospitals. If
wastes are thrown open to the street it results in spreading of viral diseases, causing
the households to spend more on health maintenances. The Mangalore City
Corporation needs efforts to make aware among the households the adverse impact of

88
open throwing of plastics and other plastic products in to the open road space and also
public places. In many times the wastes are mixed with different types of non
digestible components of wastes (plastics, bottles, needles etc) and because of this
nature of raw waste, it also difficult to convert such wastes into the compost manure.
Hospitals located in Mangalore City Corporation are not responsible enough when
they are disposing the sewerage and solid waste of hospitals. The wastes generated by
the hospitals are mixed with disposable needles, plastics, bottles, plasters, wrappers,
waste cotton etc. Further, some of them are also not digestible in the soil and without
separating such raw waste it is not possible to extract its economic value of use;
which calls for the need to create awareness among the waste generators. Hence, there
is a need of implementing proper technology to separate different types of solid waste
and liquid waste from raw waste and make it fit for use as compost manure. But there
is a complex engineering work and technological skill lie behind this process of
making waste into compost manure. Mangalore City Corporation is lacking such
technological skill and equipments and there for there is a need to put effort in such
directions. People living in Mangalore City Corporation also using low quality non-
digestible plastics and after the use of it they throw it where they like is not digestible
in the soil leads serious environmental problems. There is also a. high possibility of it
effecting negatively to the productivity of agriculture sector. The liquid waste
generated by the commercial/industrial units and hospitals, mixed with the fresh water
results in water bom diseases. Irresponsible delivery of liquid waste by the
commercial/industrial units and hospitals is responsible for environmental hazards
and serious negative impact on health. Thus, from the point of view of this there is a
need to build environmental awareness among the people of Mangalore City
Corporation to minimize the environmental hazards.
Urban governments in many developing countries are facing serious problems with
the management of solid waste. Thus, the major problems found in the management
of solid wastes in the study area were: a. absence of segregation of wastes at the door
steps, b. lack of sufficient transport mode, c. lack of recycling of sewage water and
poor cost recovery, d. lack of plastics-laws, e. replacement of location of containers, f.
primary transportation -auto tripper containers, g. secondary collection, transportation
and h. composition of centralized, localized land fill method-land filling on large scale
decomposition.

89