MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

TSSM’s
Bhivarabai Sawant College of Engineering and Research (Polytechnic),
Narhe

Academic year: 2020-21

MICRO PROJECT

ON

Solid Waste Management

Program: code: CE6I

Course:- Solid Waste Management

Course code:22605

1
 MAHARASHTRA STATEBOARD OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Abhay Munnalal Vishwakarma Roll No-14 of 6th Semester of
Diploma in Civil Engineering of Institute, TSSM’s BSCOER POLYTECHNIC (Code:1606)
has completed the Micro Project satisfactorily in Subject –( Solid Waste Management)
for the academic year 2023-24 as prescribed in the curriculum.

Place:Narhe,Pune Enrollment No: 2116060313

Date: 25/03/2024 Exam. Seat No:258020

Subject Teacher Head of the Department Principal

2
 GROUP DETAILS

Sr.No Name of member Roll No Enrollment No Seat No

1 Abhay Munnalal Vishwakarma 14 2116060313 258020

2 Asolkar Suhani K. 15 2116060314 258019

Name of Guide

Prof A.A. Kashid

3
  INDEX

SR.NO. CONTENTS PAGE NO.

1 ABSTRACT 5

2 INTRODUCTION 6

3 Abstract 7

4 Case Study 8

5 Conclusion 10

4
1. Introduction
 Overview of solid waste management (SWM) and its importance
 Need for efficient SWM practices in urban areas
 Purpose of the report: To analyze and evaluate SWM practices in specific cities
of [Country]
2. Methodology
 Selection criteria for cities
 Data collection methods (interviews, surveys, literature review)
 Analysis framework (SWOT analysis, comparative analysis)
3. Case Studies
3.1. City A - Demographic and geographic overview - Current SWM practices -
Challenges faced (e.g., inadequate infrastructure, population growth) - Success
stories or innovative approaches - Stakeholder involvement and community
participation - Future plans and initiatives
3.2. City B - Similar breakdown of information as City A - Comparative analysis with
City A or other cities if applicable - Lessons learned and best practices
3.3. City C - Repeat the structure from City A and B
4. Comparative Analysis
 Common challenges across cities
 Notable differences in SWM practices
 Key success factors
5. Lessons Learned and Recommendations
 Strategies for overcoming common challenges
 Policy recommendations for improved SWM
 Importance of public awareness and education
6. Conclusion
 Summary of findings
 Importance of implementing efficient SWM practices
 Future directions for research and action
7. References
 Citations for all sources used in the report
8. Appendix
 Additional data and information
 Maps, charts, and tables for visual representation if applicable

Note: Each case study should provide detailed insights into the SWM practices of the
respective city, including challenges, successes, stakeholder involvement, and future
plans. Comparative analysis should highlight similarities and differences among the
cities studied. Recommendations should be practical and actionable for policymakers
and stakeholders involved in SWM.
Title: Case Studies on Solid Waste Management Practices in Selected Cities of
[Country]

5
1. Introduction

Solid waste management (SWM) is a critical issue in urban areas, with rapid
population growth and industrialization leading to increased waste generation.
Effective SWM practices are essential to protect public health, the environment, and
promote sustainable development. This report examines the SWM practices in
specific cities of [Country], aiming to identify challenges, successes, and lessons
learned to inform future strategies.

2. Methodology

For this study, cities were selected based on criteria such as population size,
geographic location, and diversity of SWM approaches. Data collection methods
included interviews with local authorities, surveys of residents, and a comprehensive
review of existing literature and reports on SWM practices. Analysis was conducted
using a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) framework to assess
the internal and external factors impacting SWM in each city.

3. Case Studies

3.1. City A:

City A, located in the [Region] of [Country], is home to [Population] residents and

experiences significant challenges in SWM due to rapid urbanization and limited
infrastructure. The current SWM system relies heavily on landfilling, leading to
environmental degradation and health risks for nearby communities. However, recent
initiatives, such as waste segregation at source and community-based recycling
programs, have shown promise in reducing waste sent to landfills. Challenges persist,
including inadequate waste collection coverage and limited public awareness.
Nevertheless, City A's commitment to sustainable development and stakeholder
engagement provides opportunities for improvement.

3.2. City B:

City B, situated in [Region], faces similar SWM challenges but has adopted innovative
approaches to address them. With a population of [Population], City B has
implemented a comprehensive waste management system that includes waste-to-
energy facilities, decentralized composting, and extensive public education
campaigns. These initiatives have significantly reduced landfill waste and greenhouse
gas emissions while promoting a circular economy. However, City B also grapples
with issues such as illegal dumping and informal waste picking, highlighting the need
for targeted interventions and enforcement measures.

3.3. City C:

6
 City C, located in [Region], exemplifies successful community-driven SWM practices.
Despite its smaller population of [Population], City C has achieved high rates of waste
diversion through partnerships with local businesses, schools, and residents. By
incentivizing waste reduction and recycling, City C has minimized its environmental
footprint and created economic opportunities for marginalized communities.
However, ongoing challenges include limited funding for infrastructure upgrades and
the need for sustained public engagement.

4. Comparative Analysis

A comparative analysis of the SWM practices in City A, City B, and City C reveals
common challenges, such as inadequate infrastructure, limited resources, and the
prevalence of informal waste management activities. However, each city's unique
approach highlights the importance of context-specific solutions. City A's emphasis
on community participation and waste segregation offers valuable lessons for cities
grappling with similar issues. City B's investment in technology and innovation
demonstrates the potential for sustainable waste management solutions. Meanwhile,
City C's grassroots initiatives underscore the importance of social inclusion and
empowerment in SWM efforts.

5. Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Based on the findings from the case studies, several lessons and recommendations
emerge:

 Community Engagement: Engage stakeholders at all levels, including residents,

businesses, and local organizations, to foster ownership and accountability in SWM
initiatives.
 Infrastructure Investment: Prioritize investments in waste collection, processing,
and disposal infrastructure to enhance efficiency and capacity.
 Policy Support: Enact and enforce legislation to promote waste reduction, recycling,
and proper disposal practices, while also addressing the informal waste sector.
 Education and Awareness: Implement public education campaigns to raise
awareness about the importance of SWM and encourage behavior change.
 Innovation and Technology: Embrace innovative technologies, such as waste-to-
energy and smart waste management systems, to improve efficiency and reduce
environmental impact.

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, the case studies highlight the diverse approaches to SWM adopted by
cities in [Country]. While each city faces unique challenges, they also offer valuable
insights and best practices for addressing common issues. By learning from these

7
experiences and implementing targeted strategies, [Country] can move towards
more sustainable and resilient urban environments.

7. References

[List of citations for all sources referenced in the report]

8. Appendix

[Additional data, charts, and tables]

Table 1: Management units of the pilot project SmartWaste Municipalities Inhabitants Area
(km2 ) Vehicles Light packaging waste (Tn) Paper waste (Tn) CARE 173 164 918 4 964.09 7
2 523.2 3 892 Logroño 1 150 876 80.91 10 2 308.4 3 560.6 La Palma 14 86 528 708.3 15 822
1 604.3 MARE 84 245 926 5 321 41 2 403.4 3 997.5 Total 275 648 248 11 074.3 73 8 057 13
054.4 Source: Minsait SmartWaste is operated by monitoring technologies such as:6 Fill-level
sensors, installed in the waste containers, these facilitate the optimisation of waste collection
routes in real time, so avoiding situations in which containers are empty. The result is greater
service efficiency, cost reductions and lower emissions from vehicles. Container weighing
systems are also being installed in garbage trucks to calculate the contribution of a specific
area. This information is combined with the fill level measured by the sensor in the container,
and thus the density of the waste can be calculated. By combining with historical data and
calculating possible deviations, it would be possible to know if the contents of a container are
of the appropriate quality (whether the container contains inappropriate material that does not
correspond with the waste type in question). RFID tags7 installed on containers that enable
collection service traceability, providing information related to the time of collection,
movement or cleaning of a container. In this way, local councils and/ or service operators can
compare the service provided with the planned service, detecting possible deviations. The
vehicles are also equipped with devices that facilitate the collection, sending information about
the driving and determining patterns to make it more efficient. They are also fitted with
cameras, which can record the status of a container before and after collection in order to
monitor the process. A centralised IoT open platform provided by Indra and tested in multiple
Smart City projects, analyses the collected data in real time from sensors in containers and
vehicles for waste collection. Being cloudbased, these centralised services do not require the
installation of an infrastructure in the management units and the connectivity to the platform is
carried out through APIs and/or web services, facilitating the entry of data from any type of

8
device, and integration with other information systems. The IoT platform also relies on a
Geographic Information System (GIS) and Big Data techniques to analyse the causes of the
performance and impact of recycling and waste management in cities and territories.

References • ‘La plataforma SmartWaste lleva IoT y Big Data a la gestión de la recogida y al
reciclaje de los residuos’. Smartcity.es, June 2018 at
https://www.esmartcity.es/2018/03/16/plataforma-smart -waste-lleva-iot-big-data-gestion-
recogida-reciclaje-residuos • Planelles, M. ‘Why Spain gets a failing grade when it comes to
recycling’. El Pais, Marz 2018 at
https://elpais.com/elpais/2018/02/28/inenglish/1519836799_117305.html • TheCircularLab at
https://www.thecircularlab.com/ • Minsait at https://www.minsait.com/en/home • Sanz, F.
‘SmartWaste: a a step forward the society of the future’. FuturEnviro. October 2017 at
https://futurenviro.es/smartwaste-un-paso-hacia-la-sociedad-del-futuro/ • ‘El Pago por
Generación, el aliado de la economía verde’. Corresponsables, December 2017 at http://
www.corresponsables.com/actualidad/pago-geneneracion-aliado-economia-verde-ecoembes

9
 2. Methodology

The methodology employed in this study aimed to provide a comprehensive

understanding of solid waste management practices in selected cities of [Country].
The following steps were undertaken:

 City Selection Criteria: Cities were chosen based on various factors, including
population size, geographic location, urbanization rate, and diversity of waste
management approaches. This ensured a representative sample of urban contexts
within [Country].
 Data Collection Methods:
 Interviews: Key stakeholders, including municipal authorities, waste
management agencies, community leaders, and environmental experts, were
interviewed to gather firsthand information about SWM practices, challenges,
and initiatives.
 Surveys: Surveys were conducted among residents to assess their awareness,
attitudes, and behaviors related to waste management.
 Literature Review: Existing reports, academic studies, government documents,
and media articles related to SWM in the selected cities were reviewed to
supplement primary data collection.
 Analysis Framework:
 SWOT Analysis: A SWOT analysis was conducted for each city to identify its
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in terms of SWM. This
framework provided a structured approach to assess internal and external
factors influencing waste management in each context.

3. Case Studies

3.1. City A:

Demographic and Geographic Overview: City A, located in the [Region] of [Country], is

characterized by [brief description of demographics and geography]. With a
population of [Population], it is one of the largest urban centers in the region.

Current SWM Practices: City A's SWM system primarily relies on [brief overview of
current practices, including waste collection, transportation, disposal, and recycling
initiatives]. The city operates [number] landfill sites, which receive [quantity] of waste
annually.

Challenges Faced: Despite its efforts, City A faces several challenges in SWM,
including [list of challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, illegal dumping,
insufficient funding, lack of public awareness, etc.].

10
 Success Stories or Innovative Approaches: Despite challenges, City A has implemented
several successful initiatives, such as [examples of successful programs or projects,
e.g., waste-to-energy plants, community composting, public-private partnerships,
etc.].

Stakeholder Involvement and Community Participation: City A actively engages

stakeholders and communities in SWM efforts through [description of stakeholder
engagement strategies, community-based initiatives, public consultations, etc.].

Future Plans and Initiatives: To address existing challenges and improve SWM, City A
has outlined several future plans, including [brief overview of future initiatives,
infrastructure upgrades, policy reforms, etc.].

3.2. City B:

[Repeat the structure from City A, providing detailed information on demographics,

current SWM practices, challenges, success stories, stakeholder involvement, and
future plans for City B.]

3.3. City C:

[Repeat the structure from City A and B, providing detailed insights into SWM
practices in City C.]

4. Comparative Analysis

The comparative analysis of SWM practices across City A, City B, and City C revealed
several key findings:

 Common Challenges: All cities face similar challenges such as inadequate

infrastructure, insufficient funding, illegal dumping, and limited public awareness.
 Diverse Approaches: Despite common challenges, each city has adopted unique
approaches to SWM, reflecting its specific socioeconomic, cultural, and geographic
context.
 Lessons Learned: Comparative analysis identified lessons learned from each city's
experiences, highlighting successful strategies and areas for improvement.

5. Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Based on the case studies and comparative analysis, the following lessons and
recommendations were derived:

11
 Community Engagement: Active involvement of stakeholders and communities is
crucial for the success of SWM initiatives. Cities should prioritize participatory
approaches that empower residents and foster a sense of ownership.
 Infrastructure Development: Investments in waste management infrastructure,
including collection, transportation, treatment, and disposal facilities, are essential to
improve SWM efficiency and effectiveness.
 Policy Support: Strong legislation and enforcement mechanisms are needed to
regulate waste management practices, promote recycling and resource recovery, and
deter illegal dumping.
 Education and Awareness: Public education campaigns and outreach programs play a
vital role in promoting waste reduction, segregation, and recycling behaviors among
residents.
 Innovation and Technology: Cities should explore innovative technologies and
solutions, such as waste-to-energy, smart waste management systems, and
decentralized composting, to optimize resource utilization and minimize
environmental impacts.

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, the case studies of SWM practices in selected cities of [Country]

provide valuable insights into the diverse approaches, challenges, and successes in
urban waste management. By learning from these experiences and implementing
targeted strategies, cities can enhance their SWM systems, promote environmental
sustainability, and improve the quality of life for residents.

7. References

[List of citations for all sources referenced in the report]

8. Appendix

[Additional data, charts, and tables]

This expanded report offers a detailed examination of SWM practices in selected

cities, providing valuable insights and recommendations for policymakers,
practitioners, and stakeholders involved in urban waste management efforts.

12
WEEKLY PROGRESS REPORT

SR.NO. WEEK ACTIVITY PERFORMED SIGN OF DATE

GUIDE

1. 1st Discussion and finalization of topic

2. 2nd Preparation and submission of Abstract

3. 3rd Collection of Data

4. 4th Discussion and outline of Content

5. 5th Formulation of Content

6. 6th Editing and proof Reading ofContent

7. 7th Compilation of Report and Presentation

8. 8th Seminar / Viva voce

9. 9th Final submission of Micro Project

Sign of the student Sign of the faculty

13
 ANEEXURE II

Evaluation Sheet for the Micro Project

Academic Year: 2023-24 Name of the Faculty: -Prof A.A. Kashid

Course: Solid Waste Management Course code: 22605

Semester: 6

CO’s addressed by the Micro Project:

C414.1 : configure various networking devices

Major Learning outcomes achieved by students by doing the Project:

(a)Practical Outcome
Pro-1:Configure peer-to peer Network with at least three hosts.

Pro-10:Configure client to file server and use file services.

(b)Unit Outcomes in cognitive Domain
1.d. Classify computer networks on the specified parameter.
5a. Identify function and feautures of the given layers of OSI Refrence model.
5b.Compare the specified service on the given parameters
1.c. Explain the process of data
for the given situation with justification.

(c)Outcomes in affective Domain

1.a.Describe role of the given component in the process of data communication
1e.Select network architecture for the given situation with justification

14
 Marks out of 6 marks out of
Roll Student Name for performance 4for Total out of
No in group activity performance in 10
(D5 Col.8) oral/
presentation
(D5 Col.9)
14 Abhay Munnalal
Vishwakarma

(Signature of Faculty)
Prof.A.A. Kashid

15