Category:

municipal solid waste management (mSWM) in kenya

3/22/2017

By Michael Jumba

Introduction

In early times, when the population was still small and the land available to assimilate the wastes was large, waste disposal did not pose a problem. But when man began to form groups, villages and communities, wastes became a consequence of life that needed to be taken care of (UNEP, 2005).

Unfortunately, epidemics like the bubonic plague and many more fatal events had to happen before man realized that he had to properly manage the wastes he produced. From careless open dumping practices to engineered sanitary landfills, proper and effective solid waste management has evolved into what it is today and continues to transform as society evolves (UNEP, 2005). Open dumping is still the most prevalent method of waste disposal for many countries, most particularly the less developed ones. The foremost reasons for this practice are lack of knowledge and financial constraints. Nonetheless, it should not require another epidemic, sickness, or contamination before national and local governments give proper solid waste management the priority and urgency it deserves (UNEP, 2005).

What is waste?

Waste can be loosely defined as any material that is considered to be of no further use to the owner and is, hence, discarded. However, most discarded waste can be reused or recycled, one of the principles of most waste management philosophies. What may be of no further use to one person and regarded as waste to be dumped, may be of use to the next person, and is the basis of the rag picking trade, the sifting through of refuse at landfills for recovery and resale, a very fundamental historical waste management practice still functioning in many countries, often conducted on a highly organised commercial basis.

Waste is generated universally and is a direct consequence of all human activities. Wastes are generally classified into solid, liquid and gaseous. Gaseous waste is normally vented to the atmosphere, either with or without treatment depending on composition and the specific regulations of the country involved. Liquid wastes are commonly discharged into sewers or rivers, which in many countries is subject to legislation governing treatment before discharge.

In many parts of the world such legislation either does not exist or is not sufficiently implemented, and liquid wastes are discharged into water bodies or allowed to infiltrate into the ground. Indiscriminate disposal of liquid wastes pose a major pollution threat to both surface and groundwater. In this article we will focus on Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).

So what is Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)?

Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is a type of non-hazardous solid wastes (with the exception of household hazardous waste) generated by households, businesses, institutions, and light industry (administrative, cafeteria, packaging, etc.), including ash from the combustion of MSW. Types of solid waste excluded from the definition of MSW are industrial process waste, construction and demolition debris, offal, sludges, tires, and ashes, except ashes from the combustion of MSW (National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 1995).

In another definition, Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), commonly called “trash” or “garbage,” includes wastes such as durable goods (e.g., tires, furniture), nondurable goods (e.g., newspapers, plastic plates/cups), containers and packaging (e.g., milk cartons, plastic wrap), and other wastes (e.g., yard waste, food). This category of waste generally refers to common household waste, as well as office and retail wastes, but excludes industrial, hazardous, and construction wastes (Center for Sustainable Systems, 2016). In many developing countries of which Kenya is a part, municipal solid waste disposal by open dumping is still under practice for reasons such as: ignorance of the health risks associated with dumping of wastes; acceptance of the status quo due to lack of financial resources to do anything better; lack of political determination to protect and improve public health and the environment; by traditions thus it is the oldest known way to handle MSW, just to fill a hole in the ground (Kurian et.al., Undated).

Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM)

Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) is an intricate process encompassing planning, engineering, organization, administration, financial and legal aspects of activities associated with generation, storage, collection, transfer and transport, processing and disposal of municipal solid waste (household garbage and rubbish, street sweepings, construction debris, sanitation residue etc.) (Shafqat et.al., 2014). Unfortunately, MSWM has not always been a high priority for local and national policy makers and planners, especially in developing countries. Other issues with more social and political urgency might take precedence and leave little budget for waste issues. Thus, in many cities around the world, effective, functioning policy measures have been elusive and the resources invested in the sector inadequate. National governments can make a critical contribution by making waste management a national priority (United Nations Environment Programme, 2013).

The collection of municipal solid waste is a public service that has important impacts on public health and the appearance of towns and cities. It is one of the important obligatory functions of any urban local authority. It refers to all activities pertaining to the control, collection, transportation, processing and disposal of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in accordance with the best principles of public health, economics, engineering, conservation, aesthetics and other environmental considerations (Munala and Moirongo, 2011). Unfortunately many urban administrations seem to be losing the battle of coping with the ever-increasing quantities of waste. The challenge is made greater by the diversity of materials in the waste, which is no longer mainly food waste and ash, but includes more and more plastic packaging, paper and discarded electronic equipment (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

In low-income countries as well as many middle-income countries, MSW is the largest single budget item for cities and one of the largest employers (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). However, the failure to consider important parameters of each particular location has led to many failed systems and the wastage of huge sums of money. In many cases, collection vehicles and containers have been purchased in large numbers but they have not been effective and have been operational for only short periods that are much less than their expected design lives. In some cases unsuitable equipment has been purchased because of corruption, but in many cases the fault lies with the assumption that the same type of waste collection equipment will work effectively in any situation (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

Solid waste management is one of the most difficult environmental problems in the urban centres of developing countries, where services are often grossly deficient, especially within low-income settlements. Often these settlements comprise a sizable proportion of the city’s area and population – as much as half in some cases. Rapid urban growth, accompanied by the increasing density of population, traffic congestion, air and water pollution, increasing per capita generation of solid waste and the lack of land conveniently situated for waste disposal, all point to a rapid further aggravation of the already acute problems of solid waste management. Future demands are certain to increase as cities’ residential, commercial and industrial sectors expand and as economies develop (Coffey & Coad, 2010).

The MSWM problem in Kenya

It is worth noting that Kenya as a country has some of the best legislations, regulations, strategy and policy in the world in-so-far-as environmental management and MSWM is concerned. Some of the legislations are: the Kenya Constitution (2010), the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA)1999, the national environment policy 2013, NEMA waste management regulations of 2006, the Kenya Vision 2030, the National Solid Waste Management Strategy, the Environmental Management and Coordination (Impact Assessment and Audit) Regulations 2003, the Public Health Act Chapter 242 of the Laws of Kenya (revised 2012), the Occupational Safety and Health Act 2007, the County Governments Act 2012, The urban areas and cities Act 2011, and Local government Act (Cap 265).

The Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA), 1999 is an Act of Parliament meant to provide for the establishment of an appropriate legal and institutional framework for the management of the environment matters.

Chapter four, part two section 42 of the Constitution of Kenya (2010) proclaims that every person has the right to a clean and healthy environment (Kenya, Republic, 2010). However, the situation on the ground is far from close to what is on paper. Municipal solid waste continues to be a major problem in our cities and rural towns.

According to the national environment policy 2013, 6.3.1 Inefficient production processes, low durability of goods and unsustainable consumption and production patterns lead to excessive waste generation. Despite efforts to encourage reuse, recycling and recovery, the amount of solid waste generated remains high and appears to be on the increase (Kenya, Republic, 2013).

The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) waste management regulations of 2006, are very explicit in matters waste generation, waste transportation, and waste disposal. For example, concerning responsibility of waste generators, no person shall dispose of any waste on a public highway, street, road, recreational area or in any public place except in a designated waste receptacle and any person whose activities generate waste shall collect, segregate and dispose or cause to be disposed off such waste in the manner provided for under the regulations. Concerning transportation of municipal solid waste, a person licensed to provide the service shall ensure that the collection and transportation of such waste is conducted in such a manner that does not cause scattering, escaping and/or flowing out of the waste and that they shall ensure that the vehicles and equipment for the transportation of waste are in such a state that shall not cause the scattering of, escaping of, or flowing out of the waste or emitting of noxious smells from the waste (National Environment Management Authority, 2006).

Despite the existence of laws and policies guiding waste management, weak implementation and poor practices have led to towns and cities being overwhelmed by their own waste, consequently affecting public health and the environment (NEMA, 2015). Evidence points to the direction that we are lacking in integrated municipal solid waste management.

What is integrated municipal solid waste management?

According to Kaluli, Mwangi and Sira (2011), Integrated solid waste management includes source reduction, source separation, recycling and reuse as well as materials recovery. The waste materials that remain should be safely disposed into a sanitary landfill.

Sanitary land filling is an important component of integrated waste management for safe disposal of the fractions of municipal solid waste (MSW) that cannot be reduced, recycled, composted, combusted or processed. However, about three-quarters of the countries and territories around the world use ‘open dumping’ method of disposal of MSW. It is a primitive stage of landfill development at which solid wastes are disposed of in a manner that does not protect the environment, susceptible to open burning, and exposed to disease vectors and scavengers. Lack of adequate waste treatment and disposal infrastructure, large volumes of waste involved in metropolitan cities, proximity of disposal sites to the water bodies and ever-burgeoning residential areas even in the proximity of waste disposal sites has given rise to significant environmental deterioration and health impairment in most of the cities (Kurian et.al., Undated).

Challenges facing MSWM in Kenya

Challenges of Unplanned Development.

Haphazard/unplanned rural and urban development has led to the following adverse effects and Inability to provide full MSWM coverage: Incompatibility e.g. the absence of zoning plans, non compliance with zoning regulations, piece-meal change of use and/or extension of use and contamination of the aquatic (ground water and rivers) environment by human activities due to the lack of sanitation facilities e.g. the informal settlements like Kibera slums and Industrial Area in Nairobi (NEMA, 2011). As a result the coverage of MSWM activities are hampered.

Population increase

Since independence, the urban population in Kenya has been on the increase. The urban population grew to 1 million in 1969, increasing at a rate of 7.1 percent per year. At the time of Kenya's first population census in 1948, there were 17 urban centres with an aggregate population of 285,000 people. The urban population was proportionately small (5.3 percent of the total population), with majority of the urban dwellers being non-African. Since then the number of urban centres, the urban population and the proportion of people living in urban centres have been increasing. The number of urban centres increased to 91 in 1979 and to 230 in 2009. The urban population increased from 2.3 million in 1979 and to 12 million in 2009. The proportion of people living in urban centres increased from 15.1 percent in 1979 and to 31.3 percent in 2009 (Kenya Republic, 2012).

This urbanization and increased affluence has led to increased waste generation and complexity of the waste streams. This trend is compounded by growing industrialization of the Kenyan economy. Despite the existence of laws and policies guiding waste management, weak implementation and poor practices have led to towns and cities being overwhelmed by their own waste, consequently affecting public health and the environment (NEMA, 2015).

Behaviour of generators

MSW generation rates depend on income levels, socio-cultural patterns and climatic factors (UNEP, 2015). In many cultures, Kenyans included, people walking along streets or driving along in their cars think it quite normal to discard unwanted items on the street or along country roads (UN-HABITAT, 2011). The design of storage and collection systems should take these attitudes and beliefs into consideration. It may be possible to change some attitudes with a concerted campaign of public education, but usually such changes take years rather than months and so it might be wise to design current systems for current attitudes (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

Inadequate infrastructure

Lack of adequate waste treatment and disposal infrastructure, large volumes of waste involved in metropolitan cities, proximity of disposal sites to the water bodies and ever-burgeoning residential areas even in the proximity of waste disposal sites has given rise to significant environmental deterioration and health impairment in most of the cities (Joshi and Nachiappan, 2007). A good example here is Dandora dumpsite which is next to a river and is surrounded by residential dwelling units.

Inadequate stakeholder involvement and engagement

A wide range of individuals, groups and organisations are concerned with MSWM as service users, service providers, intermediaries and/or regulators (Schubeler et.al., 1996). Residential households are mainly interested in receiving effective and dependable waste collection service at a reasonably low price. Disposal is not normally a priority demand of service users, so long as the quality of their own living environment is not affected by dump sites. Only as informed and aware citizens do people become concerned with the broader objective of environmentally sound waste disposal.

In low-income residential areas where most services are unsatisfactory, residents normally give priority to water supply, electricity, roads, drains and sanitary services. Solid waste is commonly dumped onto nearby open sites, along main roads or railroad tracks, or into drains and waterways. Pressure to improve solid waste collection arises as other services become available and awareness mounts regarding the environmental and health impacts of poor waste collection service.

Poorly served residents often form community-based organisations (CBO) to upgrade local environmental conditions, improve services and/or petition the government for service improvements. CBOs which may arise in middle and upper income neighbourhoods as well as in low-income areas may become valuable partners of the government in local waste management. When sufficiently organised, community groups have considerable potential for managing and financing local collection services and operating waste recovery and composting activities (Schubeler, Wehrle, & Christen, 1996).

At the moment in Kenya, the involvement and engagement of these valuable stakeholders is still inadequate.

Disposal facility siting

The disposal of solid wastes on land can be generally categorized into three types. It can either be an open dumpsite, a controlled dump, or a sanitary landfill. Open dumpsites entail the least development and operational cost requirement among the three types of land disposal, and thus, are the most prevalent type of disposal facilities in most developing countries. And among the three, they also pose the greatest threat to public health and the environment. Other negative issues of open dumpsites are: They are unplanned, particularly with respect to siting considerations, they are haphazardly operated, there are no controls over waste inputs, either in quantity or composition (or both) and there are no controls over emissions of pollutants released due to waste decomposition (UNEP, 2005). For example, take a look at the Dandora dumping site in Nairobi city. The dumpsite is surrounded by residential dwelling units and is also next to a river. The Chakaleri dumpsite in Taita Taveta County is also located in an inappropriate location-next to a river.

Transfer, treatment and disposal

Section 87(5) of the Environmental Management and Co-ordination Act (EMCA,) emphasizes the need to treat the waste that is generated by any source. The Act provides that every person whose activities generate wastes shall employ measures essential to minimize wastes through treatment, reclamation and recycling. The Act also has several provisions governing the disposal of solid waste. These provisions include: section 86(2) which stipulates the standards for waste disposal and states that the Standards and Enforcement Review Committee established under section 70 shall, in consultation with the relevant lead agencies, recommend to the Authority measures necessary to: prescribe standards for waste, their classification and analysis, and formulate and advise on standards of disposal methods and means for such wastes. However, this regulations are never adhered to in almost all disposal sites in Kenya (Kenya, Republic, 2015).

Financial management

Lack of money is commonly cited as a major problem in MSWM in Kenya. The shortage may restrict operational expenditure such as salaries, fuel and maintenance, or there may be a lack of capital for purchasing new equipment and vehicles. Problems may also be caused by the administrative procedures that are followed to approve expenditure on purchases of spare parts and other capital equipment (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

In addition to the problem, municipal decision makers do not give adequate priority to SWM. Instead, financial allocations go for staff salaries as the first priority, and what is left is spent on visible infrastructure projects. Very little is allotted to improving SWM services, varying between 1 percent and 30 percent of the total municipal budget depending on the size of the municipality (Zhu et.al, 2008).

Institutional arrangement

Successful solid waste management requires the integration of many organisations and groups into a partnership. National government often has a relatively minor role, but considerable influence. Local government is normally responsible for solid waste management, even if private sector contractors are engaged to provide services. Small family-based enterprises and informal sector rag pickers are often very involved with waste. NGOs and community- based organisations can have important impacts in organising local services, raising awareness and supporting vulnerable individuals. Householders are often asked to pay fees that enable the waste collection service. Individual citizens have an opportunity to improve or degrade the neighbourhood each time they have something in their hands that they no longer want. If all these different groups can work together in co-operation, the problem is solved. When there is a lack of shared concern and partnership, the task of keeping a city clean and healthy is a continuous struggle. These institutional aspects of solid waste management are often ignored in planning and managing MSW in Kenya (Coffey and Coad, 2010).

Use of unreliable vehicles and unsuitable vehicles

In selecting vehicles for waste collection two errors are commonly made. One is to choose sophisticated compactor trucks when they are not suited to the local conditions-in particular the type of waste, the financial capacity of the operator, the standards of maintenance and the access roads. The other common error is to use vehicles which are designed for materials that have a much higher density than solid waste, so that the load-carrying capacity is too small and the productivity is low (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

Vehicles may be unreliable because they are not suited to the work they have to do or the conditions they work in, because they are driven carelessly or misused in other ways, or because they are not properly maintained. The reliability of vehicles can be measured in terms of their availability, which is the proportion of the time that they are available for service (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

While the NEMA waste management regulations of 2006 are very clear on the type of vehicles that are to be used for MSWM in Kenya, open vehicles that spread waste as they are driven are currently being used on our roads posing both environmental and health risks.

Poor enforcement of laws and regulations

Despite Kenya having the necessary laws and regulations aimed at ensuring proper MSWM, the list of failures to comply with regulations and laws over the years is a long one indeed. These failures include deliberate unauthorized waste dumping, acceptance of non permitted waste streams at treatment or disposal facilities, inadvertent spills, illegal discharges, falsification of information, illegal waste transportations and acceptance thereof, and other criminal activities. Experience shows that credibility and transparency of enforcement is essential to promote compliance among waste handlers. This entails not only the prosecution of offenders but also application of a significant enough punishment that will have impact and provide effective deterrence to other potential offenders. Law enforcement officers and the courts are sometimes very reluctant to take effective action to prevent misuse of containers and careless dumping of waste (UN-HABITAT, 2011).

The Schubeler et.al., (1996) conceptual framework

The Schubeler et. al. (1996) conceptual framework provides brief definitions of the main concepts of MSWM and identifies the goals and principles that normally guide MSWM system development. The conceptual framework is structured along three principle dimensions, corresponding to the questions: What is the scope of waste management activities? Who are the actors and development partners in the field? and, How should strategic objectives and issues be addressed?.

According to the conceptual framework, the goals of MSWM are: to protect environmental health, to promote the quality of the urban environment, to support the efficiency and productivity of the economy and to generate employment and income. On the other hand, the principles of sustainable waste management strategies are: to minimize waste generation, to maximise waste recycling and reuse, and to ensure the safe and environmentally sound disposal of waste. Concerning the scope of waste management activities, Schubeler et.al. (1996) assert that within the overall framework of urban management, the scope of MSWM encompasses planning and management, waste generation and waste handling processes.

The conceptual framework describes the (Actors) in MSWM as a wide range of public and private sector stakeholders e.g. individuals, groups and organisations are concerned with MSWM as service users, service providers, intermediaries and/or regulators. Schubeler et.al. describe context as the prevailing political, socio-cultural, economic and environmental factors which determine the effectiveness and sustainability of MSWM systems.

Lastly, the conceptual framework discusses the strategic aspects of MSWM. These aspects may be understood as those portions of the context which are directly influenced and/or mobilised by waste management strategies. Development of sustainable MSWM systems implies that specific objectives be formulated and appropriate measures taken regarding a range of strategic aspects for example, enhancing technical capacity in MSWM.

Our Services

Kryptone Consulting Limited has staff with adequate capacity to offer solid waste management solutions. In our MSWM business undertakings, we have operationalized the Schubeler et.al. model and the UN waste management hierarchy model to fit our clients' needs. Our services here are:

Municipal Solid Waste Management system assessment for counties and municipalities (Using the Schubeler et. al. (1996) conceptual framework, UN standards and NEMA regulations)
Municipal Solid Waste Management transportation services (Using NEMA standards)
Municipal Solid Waste Disposal solutions (value addition solutions, land filling, composting among others)
Supply of Municipal Solid Waste incinerators
Supply of Municipal Solid Waste collection equipment (Dumpsters, Bins, Waste cans)
Integrated Municipal Solid Waste Management Solutions (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle and waste to energy solutions)
Decommissioning of open dumpsites (Using the UNEP and NEMA standards)
Dumpsite rehabilitation solutions
Controlled dumpsite operations management (Using UNEP and NEMA guidelines)
Trainings in integrated municipal solid waste management
Studies on Willingness To Pay (WTP) for MSW collection services
Conduct Masters and PhD level research projects in MSWM
We also seek to partner with like minded individuals in enhancing integrated municipal solid waste management in Africa.

REFERENCES

Center for Sustainable Systems. (2016). Municipal Solid Waste Factsheet. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Coffey, M., & Coad, A. (2010). Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.
Kaluli, W., Mwangi, H. M., & Sira, F. N. (2011). SUSTAINABLE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES IN JUJA, KENYA. JAGST.
Kenya, Republic. (2010). The Kenya Constitution 2010. Nairobi: Government of Kenya.
Kenya, Republic. (2013). NATIONAL ENVIRONMENT POLICY, 2013. Nairobi: MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, WATER AND NATURAL RESOURCES.
Kenya, Republic. (2015). THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND CO-ORDINATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2015. Nairobi: Government of Kenya.
Kurian, J., Nagendran, R., Thanasekaran, K., Visvanathan, C., & Hogland, W. (Undated). DUMPSITE REHABILITATION MANUAL. Chennai: Centre for Environmental Studies.
National Environment Management Authority. (2006). Waste Management Regulations, 2006. Nairobi: NEMA.
National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (1995). Integrated Munlljpal Solid Waste Management: Six Case Studies of System Cost and Energy Use: . Cole Boulevard: National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
NEMA. (2011). Integrated National Land use Guidelines: For Sustained Societal Attributes – Infrastructure, Environmental Resources And Public Safety. Nairobi: NEMA.
NEMA. (2015). THE NATIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY. Nairobi: NEMA.
Schubeler, P., Wehrle, K., & Christen, J. (1996). Conceptual Framework for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Low-Income Countries. St. Gallen: Swiss Centre for Development Cooperation in Technology and Management (SKAT).
UNEP. (2005). Training Module: Closing an Open Dumpsite and Shifting From Open Dumping to Controlled Dumping and Sanitary Land Filling. Nairobi: UNEP .
UNEP. (2005). Training Modules: Closing of an Open Dumpsite and Shifting from Open Dumping to Controlled Dumping and to Sanitary Landfilling. Nairobi: UNEP.
UNEP. (2015). Global Waste Management Outlook. Nairobi: UNEP.
UN-HABITAT. (2010). SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE WORLD’S CITIES: WATER AND SANITATION IN THE WORLD’S CITIES. London: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
UN-HABITAT. (2011). COLLECTION OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: Key issues for Decision-makers in Developing Countries. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT.

2 Comments

kryptone consulting ltd

municipal solid waste management (mSWM) in kenya

Solid Waste Management: Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

Introduction

The components

1. Safety Hats/Helmets

2. Ear Protection

3. Respirators and dust masks

4. Safety Coveralls

5. Safety footwear

6. Eye protection

7. Safety gloves

Waste Management: Process Flow Diagrams

ARTICLES

VISITORS

FLICKR IMAGES

Archives

Categories