CHAPTER 5: SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT IN MALAYSIA
 |
| http://image.slidesharecdn.com/solidandhazardouswaste-111205234347-phpapp02/95/solid-and-hazardous-waste-6-728.jpg?cb=1323129012 |
 |
| http://www.ab.ust.hk/hseo/dispchem/APPB04.JPG |
Waste management is a crucial area related to the economic status of a country and the lifestyle of its population. Solid waste management can be defined as a discipline associated with the control of generation, storage, collection, transfer and transport, processing and disposal of solid wastes (Tchobanoglous 1993) and in spite of the aggressive economic development in Malaysia, the solid waste management is relatively poor(MMHLG 1988;Nesadurai 1999).The main objective is to improve waste minimization strategy and control. Modern waste management is shifted to a more flexible waste hierarchy concept, also called as 3R (reduce, reuse, recycle) policies (Tanaka 1999; Wilson 2007). The developing Asia counts as the fastest and largest waste generator globally and a closer inspection reveals a mix of general and specific elements of policy dynamics in the evolution and adoption of waste management policies (UNCRD et al. 2009).
 |
| (source -http://eprints.uthm.edu.my/5381/1/FPTP_Paper.pdf) |
Landfill
is the most common method of solid waste disposal currently being used
in many parts of the world. The versatility and simplicity of it in
terms of technical requirements, environmental and socio-economic
aspects makes it popular than other known techniques, for examples
incineration and biological composting. Generally, two types of landfill
can be classified, namely the dry-tomb and the more recent bioreactor.
However, applying either these types of landfill directly without
comprehensive considerations of important underlying principles can be
costly in the long run. Therefore, the Government of Malaysia has geared
up for better solid waste disposals after experiencing badly managed
landfill sites or more appropriately known as dumping sites. More than
250 dumping grounds are identified nationally, and 150 of them are still
operating without proper countermeasures for environmental protection.
The Government has come up with the long-awaited Solid Waste and Public
Cleansing Management Bill 2007 and also Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Management Corporation Bill 2007, aimed at managing its solid waste
disposal by standardizing disposal practices. This paper will review the
current standards of landfill design, operation and leachate treatment
practices in Malaysia, its shortcomings and also propose further
improvements.
MYS100320081047
Landfill Common Method and Practices
of Solid Waste Disposal in Malaysia
M.I. Ab. Malek
1,2
and M.G. Shaaban
1
1
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, 50603
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Mara, 40450 Shah Alam,
Selangor, Malaysia.
Contact
Mohd. Izziuddin Ab. Malek
Universiti Malaya
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, 50603
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +6012-6791019
Facsimile: +603-79561378
Email: izziuddin@gmail.com, izziuddin@perdana.um.edu.my
Md. Ghazaly Shaaban
Universiti Malaya
Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Malaya, 50603
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +603-79675200
Facsimile: +603-79561378
Email: ghazaly@um.edu.my
Executive Summary
Landfill is the most common method of solid waste disposal currently being used in
many parts of the world. The versatility and simplicity of it in terms of technical
requirements, environmental and socio-economic aspects makes it popular than other
known techniques, for examples incineration and biological composting. Generally, two
types of landfill can be classified, namely the dry-tomb and the more recent bioreactor.
However, applying either these types of landfill directly without comprehensive
considerations of important underlying principles can be costly in the long run.
Therefore, the Government of Malaysia has geared up for better solid waste disposals
after experiencing badly managed landfill sites or more appropriately known as dumping
sites. More than 250 dumping grounds are identified nationally, and 150 of them are still
operating without proper countermeasures for environmental protection. The Government
has come up with the long-awaited Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Bill
2007 and also Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Corporation Bill 2007,
aimed at managing its solid waste disposal by standardizing disposal practices. This
Page 1
paper will review the current standards of landfill design, operation and leachate
treatment practices in Malaysia, its shortcomings and also propose further improvements.
Keywords: Landfill; Municipal solid waste; Bill; Disposal practice; Leachate; Malaysia.
Introduction
In many parts of the world, landfilling has been the most common method for solid waste
disposal. It has been known for its capability for safe disposing of solid waste without
jeopardizing environmental and socio-economic aspects. Unlike other methods such as
incineration and biological composting, landfilling can be considered as the cheapest
method to run. This is true because landfilling requires less high-technological equipment
and machineries to operate. However, in some countries, landfilling is expensive or
comparable to other methods due to government policy and availability of land. In
addition to this, the cost of landfill will be increased if thorough considerations of
underlying principles of constructing landfills are not carried out. Table 1 shows the
differences in processing cost of incineration and landfilling in various countries around
the world.
Table 1: Processing cost - Incineration versus Landfill (Yunus, 2000)
*1 Ecu = RM4.5
COUNTRY
TYPICAL
INCINERATION
COST [ecu/ton]
TYPICAL
LANDFILL COST
[ecu/ton]
REMARKS
Austria 156.4 156.4
Belgium NA 26.7-40
Denmark 18.7 23.1
Finland NA 16-33.8
France 22.2*-23.1 23.1-41.7 *No WTE
Germany [Old States] 56-320 61.3-64
Greece NA 8.9
Italy NA 0.9
Netherlands 62.2-111.1 30.2-81.8
Spain 16-27.6 2.7-11.6
Sweden 17.8-23.1 11.6-50.7
UK 17.8*-35.6 5.3-35.6 *No WTE
USA 61-106 41.8
Singapore 44.4** NA **Mass Burn Unit,
2000 t/d.
Malaysia 13.8#-44.4** 14 # Est. for TOP Unit,
2000 t/d.
Malaysia 26.7 19.3 Based on 1200 t/d
gasification plant,
Feasibility study
done by MHLG.
Page 2
*WTE = Waste to Energy
*TOP = Thermal Oxidation Plant
*MHLG = Ministry of Housing and Local Government
Generally, there are two basic concepts of landfill which are currently being
practiced. They are:
Dry-tomb landfill: This is the usual modern landfill design which prohibits water inflow.
The landfill has a good surface drainage system, caps and liners so that the waste material
stabilizes without additional moisture. The landfill can also be characterized by low
leachate production and methane gas production over long periods. With limited water
percolates into the landfill, stabilization of waste material takes a long time. High cost is
spent for liners, treatment of emissions and post-closure monitoring (Komilis et al.,
1999).
Bioreactor landfill: This type of landfill incorporates the addition of moisture into the
landfill to accelerate the stabilization of waste material. Normally, leachate is circulated
back into the landfill to maintain the moisture content of the waste for further degradation
process. There are also bioreactor landfills incorporates aeration which provide aerobic
degradation of the waste. With enhanced stabilization rate, the production of methane gas
is also increased. The shortened time of acidogenic phase results in reduced leachable
organic emissions, leachate treatment cost and benefits methane gas recovery which can
be utilized as power generation (Komilis et al., 1999). Due to high rate of waste
decomposition, the landfill space can be saved and accommodates more waste. High cost
is involved in pumping the leachate and air into the landfill and pipings should be
carefully done.
In Malaysia, landfilling is more preferable as compared to other waste disposal
method due to low cost, availability of land and environmental friendly. Although
landfilling is dominant in Malaysia, almost all of them are better known as dump sites. It
is known from statistics that more than 250 dumping grounds, and 150 of them still
operating and most of them are without sufficient environmental protection. 37 of the
landfills are known to be located near water catchment areas (Yahaya, 2007). Only 10 are
identified as sanitary landfill. All the sanitary landfills are dry-tomb type and neither
implementation of bioreactor landfill concept is being practiced.
This paper discusses the current implementation at disposal sites in term of the
design, operation and leachate treatment, the limitations and also recommendations for
further improvement. This paper also touches the Solid Waste and Public Cleansing
Management Bill 2007 and also Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management
Corporation Bill 2007 to overview the current situation of solid waste management in
Malaysia. On the other hand, safe closure of landfills is not discussed in this paper.
Municipal Solid Waste Management
The Solid Waste and Public Cleansing Management Bill 2007 and Solid Waste and
Public Cleansing Management Corporation Bill 2007 have been enacted last July which
are the answer for solid waste management in Malaysia. About more than 10 years of
drafting, the Bill finally regulates solid waste management that covers separation,
storage, collection, transportation, transfer, processing, treatment and disposal of waste.
With the newly formed Department of National Solid Waste Management, the
Page 3
Government aimed to achieve solid waste management system which is holistic,
integrated, cost-effective and implementing waste management hierarchy giving priority
in minimizing solid waste through 3R concept. The Department will control activities
such as the construction, operation of the facilities or providing collection and
transportation services through the approval and licensing procedure.
The overall management was previously performed by local authorities, is
subsequently transferred to the Corporation (private companies) which will enforce the
law and carry out monitoring activities under delegated power given by the Department.
The local authorities will then act as consultants and assistants to the Corporation in
managing the waste at their area.
Open dumps are quite heavily practiced in Malaysia due to lack of fund in
managing the solid waste disposal site. Before the Solid Waste Bill 2007 enacted, the
solid waste collection and disposal were handled by the Local Governments. The Local
Governments have limited budgets for municipal solid waste disposal, thus end up
disposing the waste to any vacant land available. The open dumps have no proper surface
water management, liners, leachate collection and treatment systems, therefore, they
pollutes the environment. However, the Federal Government has foresee this practice
which is lacking in environmental protection and unhealthy, soon will be reduced and
finally demolish it.
Landfill
The Malaysian Government had come up with an updated version guideline on August
2006 which was published by the Department of Local Government under Ministry of
Housing and Local Government. The Technical Guideline for Sanitary Landfill, Design
and Operation is intended to improve landfill sites in Malaysia with recommended
countermeasures that combine local and foreign technologies. In this guideline, lies the
semi-aerobic landfill system from Japan which is deemed to be suitable for application in
Malaysia. It is found that most of the design for the sanitary landfills which incorporated
USEPA standards also meets the guideline specifications.
As mentioned before, almost all (93%) of landfills which are still operating in
Malaysia are open dumps and only 7% are sanitary landfills. Among the sanitary landfills
are (Tuan Mat, 2007):
• Pulau Burung Sanitary Landfill (Pulau Pinang)
• Selong Sanitary Landfill (Johor)
• Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill (Selangor)
• Jeram Sanitary Landfill (Selangor)
• Sanitary Landfill in Kuching, Miri (Sarawak) and Kota Kinabalu (Sabah)
The Pulau Burung landfill located at northern region, Selong landfill at southern region,
both Bukit Tagar and Jeram landfill at central region while the last three are at East
Malaysia. From this point, chosen landfill which is the Bukit Tagar landfill will be
discussed to represent the current best landfilling practices in Malaysia. Selection of the
landfills in this paper also implies the effect of a proper landfill practices in area that has
high population.
Page 4
Design
One of the good examples of sanitary landfill is the Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill
(BTSL). Commenced in April 2005, BTSL which situated approximately 50 km from
Kuala Lumpur has the capacity of 120 million metric tones of air space capacity. It was
designed to resolve Kuala Lumpur’s solid waste disposal problem, which can cater for
over 40 years. The BTSL is designed to receive 3000 t/day and currently has reached an
average of 2500 t/d. HDPE liner is placed on top of 750 mm to 1000 mm of clay layer at
the sub-base of the landfill to prevent leachate contamination to the environment. The
BTSL is a level 4 class landfill which fulfills all the criteria according to the Malaysian
Technical Guideline.
Generally, the landfill design meets the requirements from both the USEPA
standards and the Malaysian Technical Guideline. The Malaysian Technical Guideline
categorizes landfills into four levels. The summary of the classification of the level and
the proposed facilities are shown in Table 2. Below are the general descriptions of
landfill according to level:
• Level 1- Controlled tipping
• Level 2- Sanitary landfill with a bund and daily cover
• Level 3- Sanitary landfill with leachate recirculation system
• Level 4- Sanitary landfill with leachate treatment facilities
Table 2: Levels of sanitary landfills (MHLG, 2006)
Facilities Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4
Soil Cover * ** ** **
Embankment ** ** **
Drainage facility ** ** **
Gas venting ** ** **
Leachate collection ** **
Leachate recirculation ** **
Leachate treatment **
Liners **
*To be provided periodically
*To be provided daily
Various locations of the landfills in Malaysia can be witnessed from hilly areas to
residential neighbourhood. The location of BTSL is a good example of a landfill which
the distance from residential and economic activities is far enough. The landfill is in hilly
area with 500 m buffer zone of oil-palm plantation which provides ample space from any
development/activity around the landfill. The space also attenuates smell and noise of the
working machineries at the landfill. However, the distance between the landfill and the
waste generator (Kuala Lumpur) can be considered far. Hauling waste by trucks for 50
km seems to be less economical and other modes of transportation might be considered.
Page 5
Siting of the landfill must be carried out appropriately to ensure a cost-effective
solid waste management. Landfill constructed nearer to the waste generation area is more
preferable and saves in transportation cost. This might be true but the Air Hitam Landfill
(AHL) in Puchong, Selangor which situated less than 200 m from residential areas causes
environmental and health problems to the residents whom concern about the foul stench,
diseases and pollution risks. The landfill which accommodated 1500 t/day of waste from
various areas in Selangor state had to be closed by the year of 2007 before it reached its
capacity. This scenario seems to indicate that inadequate justification of landfill siting is
the main factor for AHL to be closed but it was a false fact. The area was initially
occupied by landfill only then residential was developed. The landfill was commissioned
in 1995 in the middle of undeveloped area of Puchong and the trees around the landfill
were left untouched and act as buffer zone. Rapid development had been spotted around
the landfill in year 2000. The forested land was given out to developers resulting the
rising up of houses and apartments near the landfill (Figure 1). The original landfill size
also had been reduced from 58 hectares to 42 hectares. The landfill had to be closed
prematurely due to strains of complaints from the nearby residents.
Figure 1: Housing areas around the Air Hitam Landfill.
The AHL case is basically an example of mismanagement in town planning.
Originally the location of the landfill is perfect but due to current development of the
surrounding area, the landfill purpose was suppressed and proved to be unsuitable. The
town planners should plan comprehensively on zoning of an area to prevent unnecessary
made decisions. The AHL is a good landfill which had to be closed while it still can serve
the community. With the closure of the landfill, the waste has to be disposed at new
landfill sites in Kuala Selangor and Kuala Langat.
Operation
Standard operating procedure is carried out at most of the sanitary landfills in Malaysia.
The BTSL equipped with full range of trucks and compactors and earth moving plant for
its operation. Registered trucks carrying waste from Kuala Lumpur will undergo a
complete screening at security checkpoints. As the waste being disposed at the landfill,
compactors are used to achieve maximum air capacity followed by the application of
Page 6
150mm to 300mm soil cover to maintain sanitation, prevent odour and minimize the
working face of the landfill. Since odour problems are minimized, no vectors and birds
swarm the landfill area. As for the final cover 1m of soil is used. Deodorizing of the
working landfill area is also carried out for assurance of pest and vector control. Any
scavenging activity or illegal waste segregation is not permitted. The BTSL has a total of
45 staff working at the site with 24-hour security patrols.
Surface or storm water runoff is diverted away from active landfill phases and
directed to surface drains towards open water-courses, silt-traps and detention ponds.
Earth cover is applied daily over compacted waste to prevent infiltration of rain water
into the collection system and prevents formation of excess leachate. The leachate
containment bunds are also constructed which act as environment contingency measures
by preventing leachate spillage to the environment. Regular desilting of the silt traps is
carried out to maintain surface water quality.
Good operation practices at the landfill site are critical in determining the amount
of leachate produced. Previously, there has been a case where pressures from the
Government and environmental agencies to execute semi-aerobic landfill concept at the
Advance phase at BTSL. However, this execution fails due to incompatibility of landfill
design to the local environment. The original design was changed to allow high degree of
water infiltration to the landfill. Unfortunately, the new approach did not work
accordingly and disrupted normal leachate generation which had led to leachate treatment
system failures. Although the exact amount of leachate produced is not measured,
predictions have shown that the leachate amount could reach 1150 m
3
/day (Kortegast et
al., 2007). The semi-aerobic approach was soon halted. The BTSL is an anaerobic type
landfill or basically a dry-tomb type, (which prevents water ingress to landfill) therefore
the implementation of semi-aerobic concept causes significant negative impacts to overall
leachate management at BTSL.
Landfill gas management at the BTSL is still at infant stage. According to the
operators at the landfill site, with the current amount of waste being dumped into the
landfill, methane production is not sufficient enough for them to harness. However, it is
believed the methane gas recovery could be implemented soon. Pipings and gas vents
have been installed and ready to extract methane gas when the amount of methane gas is
sufficient.
Leachate treatment
Leachate treatment is a compulsory process to ensure leachate produced is safe to be
discharged to the environment without polluting it. Leachate can pose detrimental
environmental impacts and health hazards if it is not properly treated. In Malaysia, most
sanitary landfills have their own leachate treatment system and it can be said that aerobic
treatment is a dominant process. This segment will discuss the BTSL leachate treatment
plant and its competency, as a view of current leachate treatment practices in Malaysia.
The leachate treatment plant at the BTSL is designed to treat 1000 m
3
/day of raw
leachate. Currently, the leachate treatment plant caters 300 to 500 m
3
/day of leachate. The
Page 7
lagoons are operating in sequence of a 24-hour cycle with discharging of leachate
effluent every 6 hours by one lagoon. Overall, the method of treating landfill leachate at
BTSL is basically a Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) type with some additional process
to enhance the quality of final leachate. Process starts with leachate inflow to the lagoon
and then aeration occurs to supply oxygen. After a period of time, aeration will be
stopped and the leachate will be left for reaction period. Then the reacted leachate will be
decanted for polishing and to be discharged to the environment.
The leachate management in BTSL starts with leachate collection by leachate
pipings installed at the bottom of the landfill. All the collected leachate is then stored into
four leachate holding ponds totaling 180000 m
3
, which subsequently act as pretreatment
of the raw leachate. As for the treatment of leachate, four HDPE-lined sequencing batch
lagoons with a capacity of 5000 m
3
will conduct biological removal of biodegradable
COD and nitrification of ammoniacal-N. Six aerators are placed to each lagoon to
provide aeration and mixing of solids.
The effluent from the lagoons is passed through the Dissolved Air Flotation
(DAF) tank to remove all residual suspended solids and some colloidal COD material.
Optimization of the process is done by dosing with polyelectrolyte and flocculent
solution. Effluent from DAF is then polished by reed bed plants, the Phragmites, which is
known to be able to absorb remaining contaminants and heavy metals. There are four
reed beds totaling 1 hectare of area. Beneath the reed beds consists of HDPE liner with
600 mm of gravel on top of it. After treating with reed beds, the leachate is irrigated to oil
palm plantations around BTSL which are known to be the buffer zone of the landfill. It
has been noticed that no leachate recirculation practices are found at BTSL. The overall
view of BTSL leachate treatment facility is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Aerial view of BTSL leachate treatment facility.
The quality of leachate produced from BTSL leachate treatment system could
readily meets national wastewater discharged standard, which is the Standard B.
However, there are parameters that have exceed the limit of such as COD and nitrate
which has exceeds standard value of 100 mg/L (Malaysian Standard B) and 10.0mg/L
Page 8
(USEPA standard) respectively. Table 3 shows few parameters performance in the BTSL
leachate treatment system.
Table 3: Leachate quality in BTSL leachate treatment system (Kortegast et al., 2007)
Parameters RLBT TLBT Final effluent
pH 8.3 7 6.8
COD 4710 450 403
BOD
5
1922 32 24
Ammoniacal-N 1634 3.2 0.9
Alkalinity (CaCO
3
) 9755 136 178
Nitrate 27.4 1286 1336
Nitrite <0.1 0.1 0.2
*All units in mg/L except pH
*RLBT = Raw leachate balancing tank
*TLBT = Treated leachate balancing tank
Based on the data shown, the leachate treatment system at BTSL successfully
treats leachate although the amount of residual COD is quite high. Deliberately,
conventional leachate treatment method including aerobic digestion, membrane
technology and improved flocculation cannot remove the remaining COD. Additional
treatment using the reed bed polishing also seems unable to completely remove the
remaining COD, thus need to be tackled with other method. This residual COD (or
known as hard COD) is the non-biodegradable fraction which contains recalcitrant
organics and one of the viable ways of removing it by using activated carbon. The
activated carbon is capable of treating 1200 mg/L of residual COD to a significantly
reduced value (Carville and Robinson, 2005).
Conclusion
Malaysia is going to revolutionize its solid waste management and aim to abandon past
practices which neglect protection of the environment. With the Solid Waste and Public
Cleansing Management Bill 2007, it is hope that cleaner and more efficient solid waste
management established soon. The current execution at disposal sites in term of the
design, operation and leachate treatment is well implemented and shows sign of readiness
for the change. The design of the reviewed landfill meets local and international
standards while its operation follows accordingly to standard landfill practices. However,
some improvements can be made further especially in disposal site location and also
leachate treatment method.
Acknoledgements
The author wish to thank sponsorship from Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) for Ph.D
studies in Universiti Malaya and conference funding. Information of the Bukit Tagar
Sanitary Landfill was obtained with the help of KUB-Berjaya staff at the landfill site.
Page 9
References
Carville, M., and Robinson, H. (2005). Leachate Treatment. Waste Management World:
Technologies and Treatment. 2
nd
November 2005.
Komilis, D.P., Ham., R.K., and Stegmann, R. (1999). The Effect of Landfill Design and
Operation on Waste Degradation Behavior: A Review. Waste Management and
Research 1999:17:20-26.
Kortegast, A.P., Eldridge, S.F., Richards, B.A., Yong, S., Chock, E.T., Bryce, A.,
Robinson, H., and Carville, M. (2007). Leachate Generation and Treatment at the
Bukit Tagar Landfill, Malaysia. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, S. Magherita di Pula,
Cagliari, Italy.
Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MHLG), (2006). The Technical Guideline
for Sanitary Landfill, Design and Operation.
Tuan Mat, E.A., (2007). Integrating Waste Minimisation & Recycling in Solid Waste
Management in Malaysia. Proceedings Waste Management Conference and
Exhibition 2007. Sunway Pyramid, Malaysia.
Yahaya, N. (2007). Keynote Address. Waste Management Conference and Exhibition
2007. Department of National Solid Waste Management. Ministry of Housing and
Local Government. 7
th
August 2007.
Yunus, M.N.M. (2000). Waste Incineration-Challenges and Possible Application in
Malaysia. Malaysia Institute for Nuclear Technology Research (MINT), Bangi, Selangor.
