You are on page 1of 8

15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 1 of 8

Sustainable Municipal Solid Waste Management and GHG Abatement

in Malaysia

Dr. K.H. Chua
, Endang Jati Mat Sahid, Dr. Y. P. Leong

Principal Lecturer, Institution of Energy Policy and Research, UNITEN

One of the contributors in global green house gas (GHG) emission is from the waste sector which includes
municipal solid waste (MSW) and wastewater. In Malaysia, the contributions of GHG from waste sector
are 18.64% and 11.83% in year 1994 and 2000 respectively. The global waste sector contribution to GHG
is only 3% in year 2004. This disparity indicates that there are potential mitigation efforts to reduce the
GHG from waste sector for Malaysia. Integrated MSW management provides an avenue to achieve
sustainable development in Malaysia by allowing economic growth without jeopardizing the environment.
This paper looks into the potential mitigation efforts such as enhancing recycling of waste, promotion of
organic waste management either at macro or micro level and application of integrated solid waste
management through sanitary landfills. The recycling rate in Malaysia is reported as 5 %. This is low
compared to other countries such as Philippines which has 23% recycling rate in 2003. By promoting
recycling rate to 22%, it can reduce the GHG emission from waste sector by 25.5% in year 2020 This
paper also study the potential emission reduction from the promotion of organic waste treatment at source
such as composting, anaerobic digestion at shopping mall, hotels and canteens. The challenges are
changing public behavior and attitude towards recycling, generation of waste and sorting out of waste at
source. It is imperative for the government to implement the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Management Act 2007 in order to achieve GHG abatement in Malaysia.

Keywords: recycling, municipal solid waste , sanitary landfill, anaerobic digestion, composting,

1.0 Introduction

Urbanization and population growth has generally increased the standard of living in Malaysia but it also
increases the waste generation. Municipal solid waste consists of waste generated from residential,
commercial, institution and public parks. The Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007
defines solid waste as controlled solid wastes which includes commercial solid waste, household solids
waste, institutional solids wastes and public solid wastes (Act 672). Most of the municipal solid wastes are
disposed at landfill or dumpsite and only a small amount to incinerators. The main objectives for the proper
disposal of MSW are maintaining public cleanliness, prevention of environmental contamination,
transmission of diseases and for aesthetical reason. In recent years, the concern on global warming is
gaining prominence. It is found that disposal of solid waste into landfill produces one of the green house
gases GHG i.e methane CH
which is 21 times higher than carbon dioxide CO
. Hence a proper
management of MSW will not only provide public wellness but it also contributes to reduction of GHG

1.1 The generation and characteristics of Malaysian municipal solid waste

The generation of municipal solid waste by the public is a function of socio-economic background i.e the
buying power, cultural background, locality i.e urban or rural setting and the environment awareness.
According to Kathirvele et al (2003), the generation and the composition of solid wastes vary according to
income level. He also reported that the generation rate ranges from 0.5-0.8 kg/person/day to 1.7
kg/person/day in major cities. The 9
Malaysia plan reported that the average per capita generation has
increased from 0.67 kg/person/day in 2001 to 0.8 kg/person/day in 2005 [RMK9]. Nazeri [2002] stated that
the waste generation in peninsular Malaysia has increased from 16,200 tonnes per day to 19,100 tonnnes
per day. Assuming a 3.6 percent growth, in 2020 the amount is expected to be 31,000 tonnes/day [NSP
2005]. Some of the contributing factors to increasing Malaysian MSW generation rate are relatively due to
population growth, rapid urbanization, economic growth and its multicultural society that celebrates
various festivals.

15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 2 of 8

The characteristics or the composition of Malaysian MSW is different from other countries. Due to its
tropical climate with heavy rainfall, the Malaysian MSW contains high moisture content ranging from 52.6
% to 66.2 % (Hassan et al 2001). The composition of MSW changes with time as shown in Table 1. Another
salient characteristic is the high biodegradable or organic matter contents. Table 1 below shows the MSW
composition from various researchers. The first comprehensive study on MSW composition was conducted
in 2000 by Nazeri et al at Taman Beringin solid waste landfill.

Components 2001

Food waste &
68.4 32 56.3 37.4 49.3 45 47.5 42 43.5
Mix Plastic 11.8 16 13.1 18.9 9.7 24 - 24.7 25.2
Mix Paper 6.3 29.5 8.2 16.4 17.1 7 18.5 12.9 22.7
Textiles 1.5 3.4 1.3 3.4 - - 2.13 2.5 0.9
Rubber and
0.5 2 0.4 1.3 - - - 2.5 -
Wood 0.7 7 1.8 3.7 - - 4.41 5.7 -
Yard wastes 4.6 - 6.9 3.2 - - 2.72 - -
ferrous 2.7 3.7 2.1 2.7 2 6 - 5.3 2.1
Glass 1.4 5.5 1.5 2.6 3.7 3 - 1.8 2.6
pampers - - - 5.1 - - 3.81 - -
Other 2.1 1.9 8.4 5.3 18.2 15 21.93 2.6 1.8
Total 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Table 1: The composition of municipal solid waste from various studies and sites

1) Hassan et al Solid waste management in Southeast Asian countries with special attention to Malaysia, 8
international waste
management and landfill symposium 2001. A data taken from Kuala Lumpur
2) Wan Ramle Wan A. Kadir A comparative analysis of Malaysian and the UK waste policy and institutional framework by Waste
Management conference, 2001
3) Nazeri A.R a report on solid waste composition from a study conducted at Tamn Beringin landfill in 2000
3) S. Kathirvale et al Energy potential from municipal waste in Malaysia Journal of Renewal Energy, 2003 (data for kuala lumpur)
4) JICA The Study on National Waste Minimisation in Malaysia July 2004 June 2006
5) As published by Ministry of Housing and Local governments website based on 2005
6) Sampling by Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill 2005
7) Muhammad Abu Eusuf et al An overview on waste generation characteristic in some selected local authorities in Malaysia
proceedings of international Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management September 2007
8) Siti Rohana M. Yatim Household Solid Waste Characteristic and management in low cost apartment in petaling Jaya, Selangor,

1.2 The treatment of Malaysian municipal solid wastes

Malaysia government has been utilizing landfilling as one of the main disposal for MSW. It can be divided
into two broad categories i.e open dumpsite and engineered sanitary landfill. A sanitary landfill has
features consisting of liners, leachate collection and treatment, gas harvesting and daily and final covers. A
dumpsite is a MSW site without facilities such as liner or leachate collection/treatment. According to
Ministry of Housing and Local government website, (as of January 2011) there are 296 landfill/dumpsites
in Malaysia and 166 are still in operation which include 9 sanitary landfills. More sanitary landfills are been
planned in the future either to replace or to upgrade the current dumpsites. Landfilling solid waste is an
anaerobic process. It produces landfill gases that consist of CO
, CH
, H
and other traces of gas. It
can be harvested, treated and applied for electricity generation or direct heating if not being flared. Methane
is known to be one of the contributors to global warming. The generation is a function of the amount of
waste being deposited. Besides producing biogas, landfill requires huge land space and it also releases
unpleasant odour and leachate which require further treatment. Some of the sanitary landfills in Malaysia
are Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfills in Selangor and Seelong Sanitary Landfill in Johor.

Another option for MSW treatment is incineration. The ignition of MSW allows huge volume reduction for
both MSW and hazardous wastes. There are four incinerators owned by the government and one operated
by a private entity named Recycle Energy Sdn Bhd at Semenyih with a capacity of 1000 Metrics tones per
day. The other four incinerators are located in Pulau Pangkor, Pulau Langkawi, Pulau Tioman and Cameron
Highlands. Even though incineration does not produce GHG, but it produces harmful gas, particles and
15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 3 of 8

ashes. Incinerators are equipped with scrubbers and other prevention technology to remove those potential

Composting of municipal solid waste is another approach used by some in community level or individual
level. Some utilizes earthworm to decompose the solid waste especially food waste in a method referred as
vermin-composting. Some private companies utilize anaerobic digesters to treat their organic waste albeit
in a small scale.

1.3 The sustainable solid waste management

Historically, the management of solid waste in Malaysia is under the jurisdiction of Ministry of Housing
and Local Government (MHLG). At present, climate change concerns do not have major influence on
decisions concerning waste management and policies in Malaysia. But it is gaining more recognition and it
is gradually playing an important role in combating GHG emission through sustainable solid waste
management. The first comprehensive policy on waste management was published in 2005 entitled
National Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management in Malaysia ( NSP 2005).

The NSP 2005 proposes to have an integrated municipal solid waste management that practice waste
management hierarchy which prioritizes waste reduction through 3Rs i.e. reduce, reuse, recycle at both pre
and post consumer stage. In pre-consumer stage, producers should find ways to reduce the usage of
excessive packaging, applying take-back system and improving its manufacturing technology that
minimizes waste production. In the post consumer stage, a polluter-pay principle is applied. It aims to
achieve a 22% recycling rate by 2020. One of the milestones of NSP1005 is the enacting of Solid Waste and
Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 (Act 672). The Act empowers the Director General of the
Department of National Solid Waste Management to direct controlled solid waste to be separated, handled
and stored. Any person failing to comply with this direction is liable to a fine not exceeding RM1000.
Section 102 compels manufacturers to take back their products or goods after use by consumers at their own
cost. The Act is expected to be implemented on 1
September 2011 (STAR, July 2011) . In the initial stage,
the penalty for not separating solid waste is not mandatory. It allows the public to familiarize with the solid
waste separation practice. The Act also formally gives the three concessionaries: Alam Flora Sdn Bhd,
Environment Idaman Sdn Bhd and SWM Environment Sdn Bhd to manage solid waste in Peninsular

2.0 Greenhouse Gas

The greenhouse gas GHG emission from waste sectors waste are from landfills, domestic and commercial
wastewater treatment processes and industrial wastewater treatment processes. The main GHG gas from
waste sectors are methane CH
from landfill, methane and nitrous oxide N
O from wastewater and CO

from incineration of wastes that contain carbon. The intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC
2007 report states the contribution of waste sector is 3% to the total GHG emission (IPCC 2007). In
comparison, the waste sector contributed 12 % to the total GHG emission in year 2000 in Malaysia (NC2,

The impact of global warming towards Malaysia in temperature rise is estimated to be between 1.5

to 2.0
C in surface air temperature by 2050 based on medium range scenario (NC2, 2011). Certain regions in
Malaysia projected a reduction in average annual rainfall for the central region of Peninsular Malaysia and
eastern part of Sabah. Other regions are forecasted to have increase in average annual rainfall. Global
warming will affect Malaysia in few sectors including water resources, agriculture, forestry and
biodiversity, coastal and marine and public health.

2.1 The estimation of GHG from waste

The estimation of GHG is based on the guidelines provided by IPCC. The first guideline was published in
1996 and further revised. The second edition was published in 2006. The estimation of GHG from waste
sector includes GHG from landfills, domestic and industrial sewage and wastewater treatment systems. In
Malaysia, GHG from landfill contributed about 90% to the total GHG from waste sector in year 2005 (NC2,
2011). Landfill produces GHG in the form of CO
and CH
. CO
from landfill is biogenic in origin hence it
is not recorded. The estimation of methane based on IPCC 1996 guideline (IPCC, 1996) is given below:
15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 4 of 8

The total methane generated is a function of waste generation rate kg/cap/day and population served. The
fraction of MSW disposed at solid waste disposal sites is the residual of waste after recycling, incineration,
and other treatment options. IPCC guideline publishes the estimation of degradable organic carbon DOC
based on six waste components: paper/cardboard, food waste, wood, textile, rubber and leather, garden and
park waste and nappies. Methane correction factor MCF incorporates the types of solid waste disposal sites
i.e managed sites, deep (> 5m) unmanaged sites and shallow (<5 m) unmanaged sites. Fraction of DOC
simulated is the portion of DOC that will decompose. IPCC guideline provides default values of 0.77 for
. It also assumes the CH
fraction in landfill gas as 0.5. F is the fraction of methane gas that is
captured either for flaring or power generation. Oxidation factor takes into account of the oxidation
potential from the landfill cover. The 2006 IPCC guidelines enhanced the methane estimation by
considering wastes that has been deposited over the years. It assumes the decomposition of the waste
according to first order decay reaction. Most of the countries including Malaysia used the revised 1996
IPCC guideline for its GHG inventory exercise.

2.2 The GHG emission reduction potentials for waste sectors

Methane emission from landfills is the major contributor to GHG from waste sectors.. One possible option
for sustainable waste management for GHG reduction is through waste minimization. Another option is to
divert the waste from entering landfill via options such as recycling, in-situ waste treatment or thermal
treatment and changing waste composition. Mitigation technologies such as upgrading or construction of
new landfills, and effective landfill gas recovery are costly. Similarly thermal treatment options such as
incineration, gasification, pyrolysis of wastes are also costly. Anaerobic digester is another option but
again, it requires high capital and operational costs.

Waste generation rate is a function of the socio economics of the society. Recycling is one of the low
hanging fruit options for GHG emission. Recycling papers and textiles and diversion of food waste
entering landfill can be done at macro or micro level. This paper presents the potential GHG emission
reduction through recycling and promoting in-situ food waste treatment since Malaysia municipal waste
contains at least 50% of organic waste. In-situ treatment of food scraps through composting is another low
hanging fruits

3.0 Impact of Sustainable Management on GHG Emission

A simulation analysis was conducted to study the impact of waste recycling on GHG emission. The based
year wastaken as 2010 with the corresponding waste composition. The generation rate is assumed to grow
by 1% (Nazeri, 2002) based on 1.02 kg/cap/day for urban and 0.4 kg/cap/day for rural in year 2002. The
population for 2010 and 2020 are taken as 28.2 and 34.4 million respectively (NC2 and ETP 2010). The
urbanization rate for 2010 and 2020 assumed to be 63.8 % and 73.5 % respectively (NC2, 2011). The
estimation of methane for each year is subdivided into urban and rural setting landfills. For this simulation
exercise, it is assumed that most of the solid disposal sites in the rural areas are unmanaged and without gas
harvesting facilities. As for the urban landfills, it is assumed to have few sanitary landfills. The composition
of the waste is assumed to follow waste composition at Bukit Tagar Sanitary landfill sampling in 2005.
Based on the study by Nazeri (2002), with the growth rate of 1% and 1.05 kg/cap/day in year 2002 for urban
areas, the generation rate of 1.11 kg/day/cap is estimated for urban waste generation in 2010 and 1.22
kg/cap/day for 2020. Similarly, for rural area the estimated generation rate is 0.43 kg/day/cap for 2010 and
15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 5 of 8

0.48 kg/cap/day for 2020. The recycling rate is assumed to be the current situation of 5% recycling rate. The
two least cost approaches for GHG emission are studied: paper recycling and food waste diversion or
minimization. It only estimate GHG emission from landfills based on 1996 IPCC guideline.

3.1 The GHG emission reduction scenario analysis

Table 2 below shows the result of simulation on impacts of recycling on GHG emission for 2010 and 2020.
Papers recycling able to prevent waste paper being disposed at landfill but it also prevent tree cuttings.

Mil Tonnes CO
from urban areas
Mil Tonnes CO
from rural areas
Total, Mil
Mil Ton.
BAU 2010, 5% recycling rate 9.882 1.500 11.382
Year 2010, 10% recycling rate 7.399 1.059 8.458 2.924 25.70
Year 2010, 15% recycling rate 5.887 0.860 6.747 4.635 40.88
Year 2010, 20% recycling rate 4.991 0.727 5.718 5.664 49.76

BAU 2020, 5% recycling rate 15.263 1.495 16.758
Year 2020, 10% recycling rate 11.428 1.055 12.483 4.275 25.51
Year 2020, 15% recycling rate 9.093 0.857 9.950 6.809 40.63
Year 2020, 20% recycling rate 7.709 0.724 8.434 8.325 49.68

Table 2: GHG emission reduction based on recycling rate for 2010 and 2020

The simulation analysis shows that by increasing the paper recycling rate from current 5% to 20%, the
possible reduction in GHG ranges from 25.7 % to 49.76 % for year 2010 and 25.51 % to 49.68 % for year
2020. Paper recycling does not incur any cost to the government and more companies in Malaysia are now
incorporating recycling as part of their office practice or quality environment standard of procedures.
According to USEPA, paper recycling is able to provide between 0.73 million tones carbon equivalent
MTCE per short tons of paper (USEPA, 2005). Table 3 shows the impact of diverting food waste from
entering landfill sites.

Mil Tonnes CO
from urban areas
Mil Tonnes CO
from rural areas
Total, Mil
Mil Ton.
BAU 2010, 5 % recycling 9.882 1.500 11.382 - -
year 2010, 10% food waste diversion 8.684 1.294 9.978 1.404 12.34
year 2010, 15% food waste diversion 7.669 1.130 8.799 2.583 22.69
year 2010, 20% food waste diversion 6.964 1.010 7.974 3.408 29.94
year 2010, 25% food waste diversion 6.295 0.893 7.188 4.194 36.85
year 2010, 30% food waste diversion 5.500 0.703 6.202 5.180 45.51

BAU 2020, 5% recycling 15.263 1.495 16.758 - -
year 2020, 10% food waste diversion 13.413 1.290 14.703 3.787 12.26
year 2020, 15% food waste diversion 11.845 1.127 12.972 4.995 22.60
year 2020, 20% food waste diversion 10.756 1.007 11.764 6.145 29.80
year 2020, 25% food waste diversion 9.724 0.890 10.614 7.563 18.18
year 2020, 30% food waste diversion 8.495 0.701 9.195 1.393 29.11

Table 3. Impacts of food waste diversion on GHG emission reduction in 2010 and 2020

15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 6 of 8

The simulation analysis shows that by increasing the food waste diversion rate from 10 to 30%, it is
possible to reduce GHG emission from landfill ranges from 12.34 % to 45.52 % for year 2010 and 12.26 %
to 29.11 % for year 2020. According to news report, Malaysian disposed almost 930 tonnes of food waste
daily (The STAR, 2011). Minimisation of food waste requires changing the eating habit and lifestyle of
general public. Reducing wasteful food consumption and food purchasing habit needs to be inculcated to
general public. There are some food courts and restaurants operators are practicing in-situ food waste
treatment either by composting or using commercially available anaerobic digester. For example, Subang
Jaya Municipal council had done a case study for one food court located in its vicinity. Hotels such as
Hilton Kuala Lumpur have started a vermin-composting system to treat their food waste. In another study,
Japanese government had also introduced a Japanese composting system known as Takakura method to the
Sibu district council in Sarawak. It is to encourage individual household food waste composting practice.

Table 4 below shows the impact of implementing paper recycling and diversion of food scraps into

Mil Tonnes CO
from urban areas
Mil Tonnes CO
from rural areas
Total, Mil
, Mil Ton.
BAU 2010, 5 % recycling 9.882 1.500 11.382
Year 2010, 10% paper reduction and
10% food diversion
5.883 0.807 6.640 4.741 41.66
Year 2010, 15% paper recycling.
10% food diversion
4.620 0.757 5.377 6.005 52.76
Year 2010, 15% paper recycling.
15% food diversion
4.015 0.550 4.565 2.075 31.25
Year 2010, 15% paper recycling.
20% food diversion
3.388 0.464 3.851 7.531 66.16

BAU 2020, 5 % recycling 15.263 1.495 16.758
Year 2020, 10% paper reduction and
10% food diversion
9.010 0.929 9.938 7.901 40.70
Year 2020, 15% paper recycling.
10% food diversion
7.136 0.765 7.901 8.857 52.85
Year 2020, 15% paper recycling.
15% food diversion
6.202 0.714 6.916 9.842 58.73
Year 2020, 15% paper recycling.
20% food diversion
5.233 0.663 5.896 10.863 64.82
Table 4: GHG emission reduction by recycling and food waste reduction for 2010 and 2020

By promoting paper recycling and diversion of food waste from landfills, it is possible to achieve 66.16 %
and 64.82 % reduction for year 2010 and 2020 respectively based on BAU scenario. All the above analysis
is hypothetical. It shows the potential in GHG reduction if public practice recycling. Changing mindset of
public to practice recycling, waste minimization and re-use requires awareness campaign and education. In
India, there is hardly any food waste in their municipal solid waste composition and the recycling rate is
very high 56%.

In its second national communication to United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
Malaysian government has estimated that by increasing the recycling rate from 5% to 22%, its able to
reduce GHG emission from the waste sector by 25.5 % in 2020 (NC2, 2011) by having more material
recovery facilities and building more sanitary landfills. The impacts simulated above are hypothetical but it
indicates the potential reduction in GHG emission.

There are other mitigation technologies that able to reduce GHG from waste sector such as thermal
treatment i.e incineration, gasification and pyrolysis. However these technologies are costly. Recycling and
waste minimization are least cost approach and sustainable.

3.2 The 3R campaign

15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 7 of 8

Malaysian government had launched its first recycling campaign in 1980s. The impact is minimal as public
view municipal waste as unwanted and discarded materials. The awareness of recycling rate however is still
very minimum. The recycling campaign was re-launched in 2001. It resulted in improving the recycling
rate to the current 5% as reported in joint study by Japanese government and Malaysia Ministry of housing
and local government. One of the initiatives in Malaysias green policy is the promotion of green life style
through education. An environmental subject called Alam dan Manusia was incorporated in primary
school syllabus in 1982. It was then replaced by a subject called Kajian Tempatan. In the secondary school
level, environmental education that promoting recycling is included across subjects such as Science and
Geography and through co-curriculum activities and school clubs. It is however still not widely adopted by
all schools (Pudin et al, 2005)

A study by Agamuthu et al (2011) indicates that most of the stakeholders in solid waste focus group i.e local
authority, NGOs, government agencies and private sectors perceived that it is possible to achieve 22%
recycling rate by 2020. It also shows that the awareness on 3R policies in Malaysia ranges from moderate to
high. The stakeholders presented the view that recycling should be made compulsory and it is acceptable to
pay for better services. It also requires strong government enforcement.

This is encouraging as the government has recently announced the implementation of Solid Waste
Management and Public Cleansing Management Act 2007 which will be implemented on 1
2011for every states in peninsular Malaysia except Penang and Selangor (The STAR, July 2011). Each
household will be given a 120-litre rubbish bin. Each household is required to separate and recycle their
waste. Those who refused are liable to a penalty of not more than one thousand ringgit fine. The organic and
household wastes will be collected twice a week and bulk waste once a week.

Recycling and waste minimization are least cost approach to GHG emission reduction from landfills. In
Taiwan, the government introduced the pay-per-beg system in early 2000. It has a huge impact. The
generation rate had decreased from 1.14kg/day/person in 1997 to 0.52 kg/day/person in 2008. Its recycling
rate has increased from 10% in 1997 to 42 % in 2008. In its 2000 GHG inventory report, the contribution of
GHG from waste sector is only 3.22 % of total GHG emission (Taiwan, 2002). In South Korea, the
recycling rate in 2010 is reported to be 56% (Changkook, Ryu, 2010) . Only 26% of household wastes were
sent to landfills. Its waste sector GHG contribution stands at 2.95 % (NC2, Korea). In comparison,
Malaysia which has between 3 to 5 percent recycling rate, the waste sector contribution is 11.8 %.
Hopefully, by implementing sustainable waste management through recycling and waste minimization, it is
possible to reduce GHG emission from landfills.

4.0 Conclusion

By practicing sustainable municipal solid waste management, it is possible to reduce GHG emission by 12
% to 64 % from business-as-usual scenario based on the simulation analysis. However it requires extensive
public participation in its activities. It can be achieved if Malaysia can increase its recycling rate and
promote in-situ food waste composting. The introduction of the Act 672 is timely as it allows the
government to enforce municipal solid waste separation and recycling. Sustainable waste management
practices can provide multiple public health, safety and environmental co benefits beside concurrently
reduce GHG emission and improve quality of live.


Agamuthu et al (2007) Sustainable Waste Management Asian Perpectives Proceedings of the
International Conference on Sustainable Waste Management, 5 7 September 2007, India
Agamuthu et al (2011) 3R Related Policies for Sustainable Waste Management in Malaysia Innovation and
Sustainability Transition in Asia Conference January 2011
Changkook Ryu (2010) Potential of municipal solid waste for renewable energy production and reduction
of green house gas emissions in South Korea Journal of Air and Waste Management Association vol
60 february 2010
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories, module 6: WASTE 1996
15-ICIT 26-28/7/11 in Malaysia ST-4: Green & Energy Management Paper #: 04-02 P- 8 of 8

Junhee Cha & Youn Yeechang (2008) Paper Recycling of South Korea and its Effect on Greenhouse Gas
Emission Reduction and Forest Conservation Journal of Korean Forest Society, Vol 97, No.5 pp
Korea (2008), Second national communication of republic of Korea under the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change:
M.N. Hassan et al (2001) Solid Waste Management in Southeast Asian Contries with Special Attention to
Malaysia Proceedings 8
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Italy October
NC2, Malaysia Second National Communication to the UNFCCC, January 2011
NSP 2005, National Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management NSP, Ministry of Housing and Local
Government 2005.
Pudin et al (2005) Environmental Education in Malaysia and Japan: A comparative Assessment Education
for a Sustainable Future International conference, India, 2005.
Siti Rohana Mohd Yatim & Mohd Amir Arshad (2010) Household Solid Waste Characteristic and
Management in Low Cost Apartment in Petaling Jaya, Selangor Heakth and Environment Journal,
2010 Vol.1 No.2
Sivapalan Kathirvale et al (2003) Energy Potential from Municipal Solid Waste in Malaysia Journal of
Renewable Energy 29 (2003)
The Star online (2011) Three companies approved for solid waste management, Saturday, 2 July 2011
The Star online (2011) 930 tonnes of food being thrown away every day, Friday June 10 2011
USEPA, U.S. Waste Reduction Model WARM,
UNFCCC National Communication of the Taiwan, published by Environment Protection Administration
ROC (Taiwan) July 2002,
Zamali Tarmudi et al (2009) An Overview of Municipal Solid Wastes Generation in Malaysia Journal
Teknologi, 51(F), December 2009. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Zaini Sakawi (2011) Municipal Solid Waste Management in Malaysia: Solution for Sustainable Waste
Management Journal of Applied Sciences in Environment Sanitation, 6 (1): 29 38 Surabaya

Authors Background

Dr. K. H .Chua is principal lecturer in College of Engineering Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN ) and
assigned to Institute of Energy Policy and Research, UNITEN as Head of Unit for Energy and
Sustainability. He has been in academic field since 1990 as research engineer in University College
Dublin, Ireland. His current research interests are on waste management, environmental education,
energy and environment. He holds a PhD and Master Engineering Science in Water and wastewater
engineering from University College Dublin Ireland and B.Sc in Civil Engineering from University of
Glasgow, UK.

Ms. Endang Jati Mat Sahid is the Head of Unit for Energy Economics in the Institute of Energy Policy and
Research in UNITEN. She obtained her B.Eng (hons) in Chemical Process Engineering and Fuel
Technology is University of Sheffield, UK and her MBA in International Business in University Tsukuba,
Japan. Current research interests on Energy Policy; Energy Economics; Energy Security; Energy and

Dr. Leong Yow Peng is currently the Director of the Institute of Energy Policy and Research, UNITEN and
lectures at Universiti Tenaga Nasional (UNITEN). He has vast industry experience with the Utility
Company in Malaysia spanning more than 31 years within the realm of the Energy Industry, Utility
Business, Marketing and Customer Relationship Management. His current research interests are on
Energy Policy; Energy Economics; Energy Security; Energy and Environment. He holds a PhD (Industry
& Business Studies) from Warwick Business School, UK; MBA from University of Ohio-Athens and B.Sc in
Electrical Engineering from University of Missouri-Columbia, US. Professionally, he is a member of the
Board of Engineers Malaysia.