Feasibility of Decentralized

Solid Waste Management

System.
Study and Prototype
Development
- Presented by
- Nisarg Shah (13BME 100)
- Harshil Solanki (13BME 108)
- Pradip Bariya (13BME 010)

‫־‬ Guide : Dr. Anurag Mudgal

Objective

To understand
Develop and
and study Solid
study the
Waste
feasibility of
Management
the
Models that
decentralised
are currently in
SWM Model.
use.

Selecting
Find the
equipment and
parameters for
designing of
the most
Vibrating
efficient system
Screen.
Methodology
Literature Study.

Visit to Centre of Environmental Education

(Government Organisation

Visit to NEPRA (Solid waste Segregation

Plant).

Feasibility Study

Design development
Future Scope

Designing equipment.

Developing Generalised Feasibility Solution

Functional Elements of Waste Management

To implement proper waste management, various aspects hav

e to be considered such as
– source reduction
– onsite storage
– collection and transfer
– processing techniques
– disposal
 Waste
Generation

Storage

Collection

Transfer and Processing

Transport and Recovery

Disposal
Decentralised SWM
Segregation Processes
• 2D and 3D objects are manually fed into a Vibratoscope which is a device that segregates di
mensional and dimensional objects.
• The design of the device is similar to a piston crank mechanism of an engine. Here the lateral
motion of the piston movement is converted into a rotary motion through fulcrum.
• The 3D objects are pulled over by the movement of the blocks.
• The 2D objects are flown away by the upward movement of the blocks.
Vibrating Screen

• The vibrating screen is used to separate the

sand particles and smaller particulate to
bottom of the screen and rest matter is carried
forward to the conveyer belt for manual
segregation.
Manual Segregation
• The Manual segregation process consists
of an oval shaped conveyor system
where workers are arranged on the
periphery.
• These workers are divided into a group
of three in a line and are given a specific
matter to pick from the conveyor belt
and collect it in a bag or the fill it in the
blue box that form a ballet of a
particular item.
Hydraulic Press

• The press shown here is a two

container Hydraulic Press.
• When one container is pressed the
other is filled up manually by the
workers hence increasing efficiency
and saving time.
Feasibility of DSWM
percentage of percentage of
Waste waste output price per unit total revenue revenue

green waste(fertilizer) 38.6 0.75 3 86.85 22.93947518

green waste(biogas) 38.6 0.25 9.5 91.675 24.21389047

paper 5.6 1 7 39.2 10.35379881

plastic 6 1 8 48 12.678121

RDF(refuse derived fuel) 6.6 1 1.5 9.9 2.614862456

metals 0.2 1 15 3 0.792382562

C&D (construction and demolition) 25 1 0.3 7.5 1.980956406

non recyclable materials 13 1 0 0 0

Fish market/Caracas + Hotel Restaurant

and Kitchen Waste 5 0.6 25 75 19.80956406

fish market/Caracas 1 0.4 9.5 3.8 1.003684579

hotel restaurant and Kitchen waste 4 0.36 9.5 13.68 3.613264484

Total 100 378.605 100

 Breakup of Municipal solid waste

green waste(biogas)

paper
1 4
5
plastic
13
38.6 rdf(refuse derived fuel)

metals

C&D (construction and demolition)

non recyclable materials

25
Fish market/Caracas+Hotel Restaurant
5.6 and Kictchen Waste
0.2 6.6 6
fish market/Caracas

hotel restaurant and Kitchen waste

 Breakup of revenue
green waste(fertiliser)

green waste(biogas)

paper

75 86.85 plastic

rdf(refuse derived fuel)

3.8 13.68
metals

7.5 3 C&D (construction and

demolition)
9.9
non recyclable materials

Fish market/Caracas+Hotel
91.68
39.2 Restaurant and Kictchen Waste
48

fish market/Caracas

hotel restaurant and Kitchen

waste
 Percentage breakup of revenue
green waste(fertiliser)

green waste(biogas)

22.94
19.81 paper

plastic
1 3.61
rdf(refuse derived fuel)

1.98 0.79 metals

C&D (construction and demolition)

2.61
non recyclable materials

24.21 Fish market/Caracas+Hotel Restaurant and

12.68 10.35 Kictchen Waste

fish market/Caracas

hotel restaurant and Kitchen waste

Calculations
Assumptions taken for calculations

 The waste collected in all cities is similar to the waste breakup found in Ahmedabad.
 The land value is not taken into consideration as it depends on the city as well as it varies fro
m area to area. The land required by segregation plants is assumed to be the same as the sa
ving in land required by landfill sites.
 The value of 3.8 Rs. Per Kg is derived for the case of Ahmedabad based on current price tren
ds of obtained components
 Each collector truck goes for one trip a day and has a capacity of 2 Tonnes
 Each Dumper truck has a carrying capacity of 12 Tonnes and goes for 3 trips a day
 The cost of collector vehicle is 600000 Rs.
 The cost of Dumper truck is 2000000 Rs.
 Maintenance and depreciation is kept at 2% per month or 24% per year in line with industry st
andards
• Compound interest is taken into consideration for payback period
• Total capital costs for segregation plants is taken from sources and interpolated linearly
• The salaries of workers and the number of workers required are taken from the AMC models a
nd NEPRA plants.
• The cost of segregation plant varies linearly with its size for a plant of sufficient size.
• The waste segregation takes place at the source where green waste, recyclable materials and
non recyclable materials go in different bins
• Operating cost of collector vehicles is kept at Rs. 8 per Km
• Operating costs of Dumper vehicles is kept at Rs. 30 per Km
• The collector vehicles are assumed to travel every road of the city and the total distance travel
led by them is equal to the total road length of the city
1. Domestic use purpose biogas plant

Amount of waste required to feed in plant – 6 kg/day.

Requirement: Per person 400 gm/day feed of waste required.
Daily feed = 6kg = No. of people400gm. = 15400 = 6kg
No. of people required for daily feed = 15
• Total cost
Capital investment: 15000 = 30000 Rs.
2000 Rs. No. of person (15) = 30000 Rs.
Maintenance cost per year = 1000 Rs.

• Revenue
Green waste Fertilizer: 86.85 Rs.
Green waste Biogas: 91.675 Rs.
Total: 178 Rs. per 43kg
Daily Revenue per 6 kg = 25 Rs.
Monthly Revenue: 3025 = 750Rs.
• Break-even point
Considering capital investment break-even including compound interest @ 10%
E = A . r(1+r)n / ((1+r)n - 1)
Where,
A = Amount borrowed
E = EMI or Monthly payment
r = interest rate in % divided by 12
n = total number of months
Break-even point =57 months
2. For medium scale SWM plant

• Factors taken into consideration

municipal solid waste generation per month
cost of collection
cost of transportation
cost of disposal

• Cost of collection
waste generated per day
waste that can be collected by each worker per day
salary of each worker per day
collection cost per day
number of bins used for collection
cost of each bin
total cost of bins
• Cost of transportation

length of travel per truck per year

cost of travel per truck per tonne in a month
number of trucks required
travel cost per tonne
total cost of transport

• Cost of disposal

cost of maintenance of disposal sites

• Capacity = 12 ton daily waste processing.
Requirement: Per person 400 gm/day feed of waste required.
Daily feed = 12000kg = No. of people400gm.
= 30,000400gm.
No. of people required for daily feed = 30,000
• Revenue
Selling of waste per kg. = 3.8 Rs.
Considering 12 ton
Total revenue = 1210003.8
= 45600 Rs. per day
Total revenue per month = 4560030
=13, 68000 Rs. per month

Total capital cost

Capital investment for biogas plant= 40 lakhs
• Capital cost of Dustbins
Dustbin Cost: 2 Dustbin provided for the segregation of the dry and wet waste per 4 people (Cons
idering the 4 people in one family).(2 dustbins for dry and wet waste)
Cost of dustbin = 500 Rs.
Total cost = = 75 lakhs

• Capital Cost of Machinery and segregation plant = 40 lakhs

Total capital costs=4000000+4000000+7500000

=15500000

• Total working costs

Collection cost = 850 Rs. per ton

=85012 = 10200 Rs. per day
=306000 Rs. Per month
• Segregation cost
Staff required = 14 labor1 supervisor
Monthly salary for labor = 6000 Rs.
Monthly salary for Supervisor = 16000 Rs.
Total Segregation cost = 600014 160001
= 100000

• Cost of land used: Data on land requirement for composting ton of waste per day is collected f
rom city.

Required land = 1000 sq mt

Rent for the land = 50Rs per sq mt
Total cost = 50000 Rs. per month
• Cost of Biogas plant man power:
Required staff = 15 plant worker +1 Manager
Monthly salary for plant worker = 7000 Rs. per month
Monthly salary for Manager = 15000 Rs. per month
Total cost = 157000 + 115000
= 120000

Electricity cost per month = 10000 Rs.

Maintenance costs = 40000 (1% of the machinery cost)

• Cost of disposal of non recyclable waste

=12*.13*250*30=11700 per month approx 12000

Monthly revenues neglecting capital cost = 1368000-306000-100000-50000-120000-10000-4000

0-12000
=730000
3. Break-even point

• Considering capital investment break-even including compound interest @ 10%

E = A . r(1+r)n / ((1+r)n - 1)
Where,
A = Amount borrowed
E = EMI or Monthly payment
r = interest rate in % divided by 12
n = total number of months
Break-even point =23 months

(This does not include the value of land saved by not dumping the waste.)
MATLAB coding for large scale plants
Result and Conclusion

• Thus the distance travelled is kept such that the door to door pickup truck can gather
the waste and deliver it to the waste processing and segregation plant.
• Amount of waste collected by one door to door pickup truck -2 tonnes=5000 people
considering a population density of 5000 people/Km 2 this truck is expected to cover an
area of 0.5 Km2 covering a total distance of 5-6 Km in the process
• A solid waste management system for 30000 people is the most efficient because it has
a better breakeven period than domestic waste management system due to material
recovery
• While considering the population density for more than 30000 people if the plant is
made, the cost of collection and disposal is the same per tonne while the cost of
transportation increases as the waste has to collected at a dumping site by the door to
door collectors .this waste has to be transported to a processing plant by a different
truck and hence the cost adds up.
Software Design of Vibrating Screen
 Results and Discussion

1. Profit V/S number of segregation plants

Graph of Profit vs Number of Plants

Discussion

It is clear from the previous graph that as the number of plants increase the
profit increases marginally.
This is due to the fact that transportation distance decreases which saves fu
el cost. Also more throughput can be obtained in the same time
2. Profit V/S Landfill Ratio

Graph of Profit vs Landfill ratio

Discussion

A linear trend is observed in the Profit V/S landfill ratio.

The profit decreases with a constant negative slope.
This is due to the fact that while the transportation cost remains same the re
venue generated decreases.
However the capital investment decreases as both the biogas plant and the
segregation plant have decreased capacities
3. Payback period V/S landfill ratio

Graph of Payback period(Months) vs Landfill ratio

Discussion

Also due to the decreased profitability the payback period increases. For line
ar decrease in profit an exponential increase in payback time is observed.
This is due to compounding of interest.
For a factor of landfill ratio of greater than 0.5 the payback period is infinite
meaning that the business is unsustainable.
Conclusion

The feasibility analysis of DSWM as used in our mat lab analysis fall in line
with the current budget of AMC. It is observed that after a landfill ratio of mor
e than 50% to the total waste, the business is unprofitable.
It is also seen that as the number of waste segregation centers increase, the
profitability increases as expected. This is because of the fact that collector
trucks have to travel shorter distance saving on fuel cost.
It is seen that almost 60-70% of the revenue comes from green waste conve
rsion into biogas and fertilizer while 30-40% revenue comes from segregatio
n of waste.
Bibliography
Zurbrugg, C. (2002). Urban solid waste management in low-income countries of Asia: How to cop
e with the garbage crisis. Presented for: Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (S
COPE) Urban Solid Waste Management Review Session, Durban, South Africa, 1-13.

Zia, H., & Devadas, V. (2008). Urban solid waste management in Kanpur: Opportunities and pers
pectives. Habitat International, 32(1), 58-73.

Talyan, V., Dahiya, R. P., & Sreekrishnan, T. R. (2008). State of municipal solid waste manageme
nt in Delhi, the capital of India. Waste Management, 28(7), 1276-1287.

Yedla, S., & Kansal, S. (2003). Economic insight into municipal solid waste management in Mumb
ai: a critical analysis. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 19(5), 516-527.

Srivastava, P. K., Kulshreshtha, K., Mohanty, C. S., Pushpangadan, P., & Singh, A. (2005). Stakeh
older-based SWOT analysis for successful municipal solid waste management in Lucknow, India.
Waste management, 25(5), 531-537.
Rathi, S. (2007). Optimization model for integrated municipal solid waste management in Mumbai,
India. Environment and development economics, 12(01), 105-121.

Subramani, T., Umarani, R., & Devi, S. B. (2014). Sustainable Decentralized Model For Solid Was
te Management In Urban India. International Journal of engineering Research and Applications, 1
(4), 264-269.

Hokkanen, J., & Salminen, P. (1997). Choosing a solid waste management system using multicrit
eria decision analysis. European journal of operational research, 98(1), 19-36.

Arena, U., Mastellone, M. L., & Perugini, F. (2003). The environmental performance of alternative
solid waste management options: a life cycle assessment study. Chemical Engineering Journal, 9
6(1), 207-222.

www.ceeindia.org/

www.teriin.org/