SOLID WASTE SEGREGATION AS A STRATEGY FOR IMPROVED WASTE MANAGEMENT
- Department: Environmental Science
- Project ID: EVS0002
- Access Fee: ₦5,000
- Pages: 100 Pages
- Chapters: 5 Chapters
- Methodology: Simple Percentage
- Reference: YES
- Format: Microsoft Word
- Views: 3,231
Get this Project Materials
SOLID WASTE SEGREGATION AS A STRATEGY FOR IMPROVED WASTE MANAGEMENT
Abstract
Solid
waste management is an established environmental health challenge in
most societies. The heterogeneousnature of municipal solid wastemakes
its management particularly complex. Waste segregation which is key to
proper solid waste management has not been adopted in the Nigerian
society. Improper waste segregation could result in diarrheal diseases.
The study was designed to assess solid waste segregation as a strategy
for improved waste management in Okaka Community, Bayelsa State.
A
quasi-experimental study was adopted and multistage sampling was used to
select (30) households. A semi-structured, self-administered
questionnaire comprising respondents‘ socio-demographic characteristics,
14-point knowledge scale and 14-point practice scale was used. The
knowledge and practice scores were rated as poor (≤4), fair (4-8) and
good (8).Jute sack bags without label or colour code were given to
households to collect solid waste for 1 week. Wastes collected were
characterised and weighed at pre-intervention. Thereafter,
labelledcolour coded jute sack bags (Black for degradable and White for
non-degradable waste) were provided and training on its use was
conducted for 2 weeks for the households. The questionnaire was
re-administered to the selected respondents‘ after intervention. Waste
from the households were collected and weighed for 1 week as
post-intervention SW segregation. Non-degradable waste was segregated,
characterised and its components were weighed. Data were analysed using
descriptive statistics, and t-test at p꞊0.05.
Respondents‘ age was
28.6±2.6 years. Educational status of respondents‘ was non-formal
(23.3%), primary (26.7%), secondary (20.0%) and tertiary (30.0%).
Pre-intervention knowledge score of respondents‘ was 2.7±0.2 while the
practice score was 2.2±0.1. Respondents‘ with poor and fair knowledge
were 73.3% and 26.7%, while those with poor and fair practice were 70.0%
and 30.0%, respectively. Pre-intervention SW segregated among the
households were heterogeneous waste (5.0±0.5kg), metals (0.7±0.1kg),
plastics (0.6±0.1kg), and glass (0.4±0.1kg). Respondents‘ score for good
knowledge was 9.4±0.2 while the practice score was 10.0±1.4 after
intervention. Respondents‘ knowledge score were good (64.3%) and poor
(7.1%) while practice scores were good (93.3%) and poor (2.4%) after
intervention. Respondents‘ scores were fair for knowledge (28.6%) and
practice (4.3%) after intervention. Knowledge and practice score were
significant at pre and post intervention. Waste segregated after
intervention was degradables (2.2±0.6kg) and non-degradables
(1.7±0.2kg). Components of non-degradable waste were nylon (0.4±0.1kg),
metal (0.5±0.1kg), paper(0.4±0.1kg), plastic (0.2±0.1kg), glass
(0.4±0.1kg), cloths(0.4±0.1kg), wood(0.5±0.1kg), shoes (0.6±0.1kg),
e-waste (0.2±0.1kg), tetra-pack (0.2±0.1kg) and others (0.5±0.1kg).
The
knowledge and practice of solid waste segregation were improved after
intervention. A lot of advocacy is needed to establish waste segregation
practice. Public enlightenment, creation of buy-back recycling centres,
community participation and training is highly recommended.
Keywords: Waste segregation; Non-degradable waste; Wastes characterization
Word count: 423
Table of Contents
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 Statement of the Problem
1.3 Justification of the Study
1.5 Research Hypotheses
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 What is Waste?
2.2 Solid Waste
2.3 Classification of Solid Waste
2.4 Health Impacts of Improper Handling of Solid Waste
2.4.1 Organic Domestic Waste
2.4.2 Exposure To Hazardous Waste
2.4.3 Waste From Agriculture and Industries
2.4.4 Disposal of Hospital and other Medical Waste
2.4.5 Waste Treatment and Disposal Sites
2.4.6Recycling
..................................................................................................................................
2.4.7Occupational Hazards Associated with Waste Handling ....................................................
2.5Solid
Waste Management
.......................................................................................................
2.6Objectives of Waste Management .........................................................................................
2.7The Waste Management Hierarchy ......................................................................................
2.7.1Basic Principles of Waste Management ................................................................................
2.8Integrated Sustainable Solid Waste Management (ISWM) ................................................
2.8.1Principles
of ISWM
.................................................................................................................
2.8.2Using the Principles of ISWM in Analysis and Assessment ................................................
2.8.3Measures to take to make Waste Management Systems more Sustainable and
Integrated…………………………………………………………………………………….
2.9Waste
Segregation
...................................................................................................................
2.10Definition
of a Household
.......................................................................................................
2.11.1Practice of Household Waste Segregation ............................................................................
2.12Characterization of Waste for Segregation at the Household.............................................
2.13The
Principles of Segregation
................................................................................................
2.14The
Planning of Segregation
..................................................................................................
2.15Colour Coding of the Segregated Waste ...............................................................................
2.16The Packaging of the Segregated Waste ...............................................................................
2.17The Labelling of the Segregated Waste .................................................................................
2.18Planning
of Segregation Points
..............................................................................................
2.19Information Needed for Planning Source Segregation ........................................................
2.20Modes of Separation at Source ..............................................................................................
2.20.1Customary
Practices
...............................................................................................................
2.20.2Collectively
Organized Systems
............................................................................................
2.20.2.1Reasons for Interventions under Organized Systems ...................................................
2.20.3Motivations at the Household Level .....................................................................................
2.20.4
Issues and Dilemmas
..............................................................................................................
2.20.5 Cost Concerns of Municipally-Organised Separate Collection
2.20.6 Municipally-Organised Collection vs. Existing Customary Operations
2.20.7 Special Problems of Organic Wastes
2.20.8 Incentives and Education
2.20.9 Overview of Separation at Source Case Studies
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Study Design and Scope
3.3 Study Population
3.4 Criteria for Selection
3.5 Sample Size Estimation
3.6 Sampling Procedure
3.7 Sampling Frame
3.8 Selection Criteria
3.8.1 Inclusion Criteria
3.8.2 Exclusion Criteria
3.8.3 Method(s) and Instrument(s) for Data Collection
3.8.4 Waste Segregation Materials
3.8.5 The Semi-structured Questionnaire
3.9 Validity and Reliability of Instruments
3.9.1 Validity
3.9.2 Reliability
3.10 Training of Field Assistants
3.11 Data Collection Process
3.11.1 Administration of Semi-structured Questionnaire
3.11.2 Pre-intervention Survey
3.11.3 Intervention
3.11.4 Post Intervention Evaluation
3.11.5 Waste Segregation (Assessment)
3.12 Field Supervision
3.13 Data Management and Analysis
3.14 Ethical Consideration
3.14.1 Informed Consent
3.14.2 Voluntariness
3.14.3 Confidentiality
3.14.4 Beneficence
3.14.5 Non-maleficence
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
4.1 Questionnaire Survey
4.1.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
4.1.2 Knowledge of Respondents on Solid Waste Segregation
4.1.3 Attitude of Respondents to Solid Waste Segregation
4.1.4 Practice of Solid Waste Segregation
4.2 Comparison of Knowledge Attitude and Practice of Waste Segregation at Pre-Intervention
4.3 Comparison of Knowledge, Attitude and Practice at Pre-Intervention and Post-Intervention
4.4 Waste Segregation
4.4.1 Nature and Amount of Waste Segregated at Pre-intervention
4.4.2 Comparison of the Nature and Amount of Waste Segregated at Pre and Post-
Intervention
DISCUSSION
CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
6.1 Conclusion
6.2 Recommendations
CHAPTER ONE
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Solid
waste management as a core environmental health function has
persistently cause challenges to many policy makers, professionals and
societies in developing countries. Several factors have been attributed
to this menace to public health importance and these include factors
such as inadequate involvement of trained professionals such as
environmental scientists, environmental health officers and
environmental engineers in the process,lack of proper planning,
urbanization and population growth, negative behaviour and attitudes of
humans to solid waste management, poor funding of solid waste management
programmes, inadequately trained personnel, lack of political will on
the part of policy makers and apathy of trained professionals(Amadi,
2011).
Improperly managed waste from the household and communities is
a serious health hazard which causes the spread of infectious diseases.
Waste unattended to attracts flies, rodents, and organisms that cause
prevalence ofdiseases (Amadi, 2009). Wet waste decomposes and releases
bad odour, resulting in unhygienic conditions of immense public health
risk e.g. the plague outbreak in Surat(Zamadar, 2010). Excessive Solid
waste generated should be handled with utmost care and professionalism
so as to ensure its efficient management (MSDU, 2006).
Municipal
solid waste is heterogeneous and this makes its management complex but
with a well-developed scientific systematic design, adequate public
enlightenment, community participation and appropriate legislation put
in place for solid waste segregation from the primary point of
generation (source), solid waste reduction, re-use, recycling and
recovery becomes a very easy task and the ―waste to wealth‖maxim
iseasily achieved with minimal cost.
The large streams of solid waste
generated in towns and cities could be re-used to generate substantial
financial, environmental and social gains through waste recycling and or
energy recovery(ICPE, 2004). But due to improper management plans and
conservation, non-
existence recycling practices and absence of
deliberate policies, potentially marketable solid waste materials are
disposed at insanitary landfills (ICPE, 2004).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The
waste around theOkaka Community in Yenagoa Local Government Area of
Bayelsa State and its environs, apart from being unsightly, destroys the
aesthetic value of the environment and constitutes nuisance such as
odour, traffic impediments, creates breeding ground for pests (rodents,
vermin, vectors, etc.) and air and water pollution. Therefore, the
urgent need for an efficient solid waste management strategy to address
this menace that has defied all strategies of policy makers cannot be
overemphasized. The issue becomes even more critical because an
important step in solid waste management which is waste segregation at
the source of generation has been overlooked. Waste segregation at the
source of generation is key to efficient solid waste management it is
the process that facilitates waste reduction and maximizes material
recovery in the community towards achieving zero waste status.
1.3 Justification of the Study
Before
the advent of man‘s technological advancement, waste disposal was not a
significant problem since population was small and nature‘s carrying
capacity to assimilate waste was high(Tchobanoglous et al.,1993; Ahmed
and Ali, 2004). However, with the rapid development of cities around the
world came an increase in the quantity of waste produced from human
activities; this has caused a major waste disposal challenge to both
developed and developing nations (WHO/UNAIDS, 2009). A United Nations
Development Programme Survey Report of 151 major cities from around the
world showed that inadequate solid waste disposal is the second most
challenging problem facing most residents of cities after unemployment
(Da Zhu et al., 2008). This situation is further aggravated as the
population of many nations continue to increase as cities become rapidly
urbanized, making it difficult for most municipal authorities to
provide most of the basic sanitation services (Ogbonna et al., 2002;
Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004). The United Nations Statistic Division stated
that Nigeria, with a population of about 140 million people and an
annual
urban growth of 3.8%, has persistent solid waste management problems
coupled with growing population (Walling et al., 2004). An average
Nigerian generates about 0.49 kg of solid waste per day with 90% of the
total burden of waste being generated by households and commercial
centres(Sridhar et al.,2010).
Indiscriminate disposal and dumping of
waste has become acommon practice in Nigerian cities. Municipal solid
waste heaps are found in several parts of major Nigerian cities like
Ibadan, Port Harcourt, Yenagoa, Warri, and even Okaka often blocking
roads, alleys and pavements (Ayotamuno and Gobo, 2004). Most of the
waste dumps are located close to residential areas, markets, farms,
roadsides and creeks; with many human activities close to the dump
sites, there is an increased threat to public health (Ogbonna et al.,
2002). Generally, the uncollected solid wastes are left to decay and
this produces foul odour that constitutes a source of environmental
nuisance (Ofomata and Eze, 2001). Uncontrolled burning of refuse is
another common method of waste disposal in Nigeria which has often led
to fire outbreaks. Smoke, arising from such fires can reduce visibility
and has been known to cause fatal vehicular accidents (Ofomata and Eze,
2001). The Okaka Community in Yenagoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa
State is not left out. Thus, the management of solid waste in our
cities, including Okaka, continues to pose serious challenges due to the
non-application of the appropriate and environmentally sustainable
waste management strategies and technologies as a result of financial
and technological constraints (Golit, 2001).
1.4 Research Questions
1 What is the knowledge, attitude, and practice of waste segregation at the pre-intervention stage?
1. What is the impact of training on the knowledge, attitude and practice of solid waste segregation?
2. What is the effect of the provision of bags on the practice of solid waste segregation at source?
3. What are the pre-intervention and the post- intervention variations in the nature, amount and management of solid waste?
1.5 Research Hypotheses
In
confirming the impact of the different knowledge, attitudes, practices,
trainings and provisions of bags and waste segregation practice at
pre-intervention and post-intervention on waste segregation at the
source of generation, the hypotheses to be tested and analysed using the
data collected are;
• there is no significant relationship between the knowledge, attitudes and practices and solid waste segregation at source;
•
there is no significant relationship between the training, knowledge,
and attitude; and practiceof solid waste segregation at source;
• there is no significant relationship between the provision of bags and solid waste segregation practices at source; and
•
there is no significant relationship between the pre-intervention and
post-intervention variation of the nature, amount and management of
solid waste.
1.6 Limitation of the Study
Most respondents were
reluctant to attend training sessions. This resulted in a series of
re-scheduled sessions for training that took time and resources.
1.7 Broad Objective of the Study
The
main objective of the study is; to assess solid waste segregation as a
strategy for improved waste management in theOkaka Community, of Bayelsa
State.
1.8 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of this work are to;
i. assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of waste segregation at source at pre-intervention;
ii. asses the effects of training on the knowledge, attitude and practice of waste segregation at source;
iii. assess the effect of the provision of labelled colour coded bags on the practice of waste segregation at source; and
iv.
evaluate the pre-intervention and post-intervention training variation
in the nature, amount and management of solid waste.
- Department: Environmental Science
- Project ID: EVS0002
- Access Fee: ₦5,000
- Pages: 100 Pages
- Chapters: 5 Chapters
- Methodology: Simple Percentage
- Reference: YES
- Format: Microsoft Word
- Views: 3,231
Get this Project Materials