Evaluation form for Seminar on Separate Recycling Collection in Malaysia

Dear participants of seminar,

Kindly appraise this seminar on Separate Recycling Collection in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges for our improvement.

Thank you

Seminar on Separate Recycling Collection in Malaysia: Issues and Challenges

Subang Jaya: Thriving but filthy

Monday September 3, 2012

By TAN KARR WEI 

karrwei@thestar.com.my

Subang Jaya has come a long way since the township’s birth three decades ago. It comes under the Subang Jaya Municipal Council, which also oversees Bandar Sunway, Puchong and Serdang. Starting today, StarMetro will highlight news, issues and events from the areas under MPSJ’s jurisdiction in our Greater Subang column.

Subang Jaya was developed by Sime Darby on a former plantation in the 1980s. Starting out as a modest residential area, the township has matured into a thriving neighbourhood with busy commercial areas such as SS15 and USJ10, among others.

It was originally governed by the Petaling District Council before it was handed over to the Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) formed in the mid-1990s.

The SS15 commercial centre is a thriving commercial area in Subang Jaya with myriad food outlets, financial institutions, private colleges, businesses and even a wet market.

However, another thing that is quite hard to miss in SS15 are the random piles of garbage and bulk waste such as old mattresses and broken furniture left along the walkways in front of the shops.

Unsavoury sight: Bags of rubbish and bulk waste can be seen at several places along the pedestrian walkways in SS15.

With drains that are filled with rubbish and greasy stagnant water, rat-catching operations have been carried out frequently to control the rodent population.

SS15 Business Community member Datuk Samson Maman said compared to other commercial areas, SS15 posed a unique problem because many of the upper floors of the two- and three-storey shoplots had been converted into student hostels.

“The top floors do not command a high rental rate so it becomes more attractive to unit owners to partition their premises and rent them out to students.

“Whenever the students move out, it is more convenient for them to just throw out their old furniture on the sidewalk.

“It is quite difficult to nab the culprits because they do the dumping at night when there are not many people around,” he said.

Rubbish contractors appointed by the Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ) only collect a maximum of five bags or 240 litres of domestic waste (which includes waste from food outlets) six days a week from each lot in commercial areas, and most of the bulk rubbish are left in front of shops or at the backlanes.

Ideal usage: Keng with the association’s composting project.

As part of its licensing regulations, the council currently requires all business owners to pay any one of the 19 contractors on its panel to collect rubbish exceeding the limit at a price to be negotiated between the two parties.

“Most offices do not exceed five bags but the problem arises because the rubbish generated from the higher floors are all thrown at one area on the ground floor and the contractors would consider it as rubbish from just one unit.

“Most landlords do not provide bins for their tenants so the rubbish just end up wherever is convenient for them, either in someone else’s bin or in front of the shoplots,” said Samson.

On the requirement to pay for the collection of additional rubbish generated, he said most operators were reluctant to fork out the extra money because of an existing clause in the licence application which required restaurant owners to appoint a pest control company from MPSJ’s panel.

“They are paying about RM360 a year besides other fees, such as for putting tables and chairs outside their premises or to rent a parking bay.

“Most of them are also reluctant to pay because rubbish from either the residential units or businesses could end up in their bins,” Samson said.

He added that the council’s requirement for businesses to provide roller bins also posed other problems to operators.

“The 240litre roller bins are not cheap and can cost between RM200 and RM300 each.

“The bins usually go missing and many people are reluctant to replace them.

“Some of us will chain them to permanent structures but that poses another problem because it could be blocking the five-foot ways and it also makes it difficult for contractors to pick up garbage from the bins.

“We hope that MPSJ can look into providing community bins where the contractors have ownership of them.

“That way, they can chain the bins so that they do not go missing and have access to the keys to facilitate rubbish collection,” he said.

Waste management consultant Jaron Keng Zi Xiang said food waste made up for about 50% to 60% of rubbish that end up in the landfills.

“Even if people separate their recyclables, it will only reduce their waste by about 20%.

“Separating trash at its source and using biodegradable waste for composting is an option, but it is hardly carried out because it is time-consuming and not economical.

“Compost material cost a lot more than chicken dung fertiliser, so people are reluctant to buy it,” he said.

Keng is also the secretary of the Green and Blue Group — an environmental awareness association — which currently runs a composting project in Universiti Malaya.

An environmental engineering graduate who is currently pursuing his Master’s in public policy, Keng said the problem of rat infestation in SS15 would never be properly solved as long as people threw rubbish into drains and waste water runs through these drains.

“It is as much a behavioural problem as it is a structural one. Most people have the perception that drains are dirty so they do not think twice about throwing things in.

“Also, the drainage system in Malaysia is such that a lot of water from the sinks go straight into the drains instead of into the sewer system, especially in older townships.

“As such, wastewater is not treated before it flows into drains and rivers.

“Even with a grease trap, only solid waste is being filtered and the dirty water still ends up in the drains and rats are attracted to the dirty drains.

“To compound the problem, you will find people washing their dirty dishes by the drains behind many restaurants.

“Wet markets also add to the problem because the water from the washing goes directly into the drains,” he said.

Keng said there were structural and technological methods to counter these problem but those would only be rendered effective with proper guidelines and strict enforcement by the authorities.

Subang Jaya: Thriving but filthy

Jaron Keng Zi Xiang is Secretary of Malaysia Green and Blue Environmental Protection Society .

Time to re-boot: Towards a new environmentalism

With the IUCN Congress coming to an end, Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia argues that the environmental community needs to re-think its approach. "Faith in ‘business as usual’ to deliver the changes needed owes more to the hopes of those favoured by the current status quo (and fearful of the costs of any change of direction) than to a coherent analysis".

This quote from a 2008 IUCN Report was directed at those responsible for making policy decisions. It is time we also directed these words to ourselves - how we define environmentalism, what we are about and how we hope to achieve positive change.

Stalling or building on success?

The success of the environmental movement is undoubted. Awareness of environmental issues is high. Environmental concerns have started to become embedded in everyday parlance, values and social norms. Investment in alternative energy and species and ecosystem conservation has reached a scale that was unimaginable in the mid-1970s. The last quarter of the 20th century truly represented the golden age of conservation. Surely we should be able to build on that success. As we go through 2012, why does it feel like we might be stalling rather than moving forward with confidence?

There is no doubt that we have seen setbacks. The ink is not yet dry on the UN climate change convention signed in Durban but, since the Copenhagen fiasco, progress achieved in climate negotiations has been, at best, disappointing, at worst disastrous. Neither have we made the progress we had hoped for in other areas of conservation. We are living through difficult economic times. As a result, budgets have been slashed and conservation and environmental issues have been marginalized. They are seen as a potential further drag on growth prospects and money spent on conservation efforts can be re-directed to what are seen as investments with greater economic productivity.

Gaining the initiative 

The easy way out is to complain and blame the failure of progress on "short sighted politicians" who do not have the courage to make the changes that need to be made. This would be a self-serving abrogation of our responsibilities. If our message is not resonating, the first place to look is in the mirror. How can we re-think what we are about and be more effective at putting ourselves at the centre of the political debate? How can we regain the initiative?

The world has changed and continued success depends on our ability to change with it; to learn how to be effective in the new, fast moving, unstructured, freewheeling, post-modern world of the 21st century. The challenge for the environmental movement is to find ways to connect with, and remain relevant to, an urban, cyber-linked society that is disconnected from the natural world. People for whom conservation issues risk being seen as peripheral or downright damaging as economies become more strained, jobs more difficult to come by and social exclusion a reality. 

A new sustainable environmentalism

What I am proposing are the elements of a new environmentalism - one that can be successful in today’s world – and maybe sustainable in tomorrow’s.

1. Create a vision of a positive and tangible future: The first and most difficult task is to turn our attention away from continuously bombarding people with messages of doom and gloom and to set about the much tougher task of creating a vision of the sort of future that we are offering people. A future that can credibly promise that which people care about - jobs, security, social cohesion, improving living standards.

2. From activism to environmentalism: We are surrounded by environmental activists - people who see the world exclusively through the lens of environmental issues. This perspective is all too easily dismissed as the rantings of single-issue lobbyists. What we need is a new type of environmentalist - one that can work to incorporate environmental concerns into the real political, social and economic world. In other words, we need to stop looking at society through the lens of the environment and learn how to look at the environment through the lens of our societies.

3. Results before ideology: If we are to achieve results, we must leave zealotry and ideology behind. A small but vocal few still put ideology before results. Some may object to the globalized capitalist system - but it's the system we have and, if time is as short as we claim, then we have to learn to work with it and take advantage of all it has to offer. 

4. Offer solutions not problems: It’s not productive to tilt at windmills. Many argue that the increasing human population and the pursuit of economic growth are both incompatible with a sustainable future. Yet nobody has come up with practical, effective, credible and socially-acceptable alternatives. A no-growth economy is a zero sum game where, except in some utopian fantasy, resources will inevitably be seized by the powerful from the powerless. Let us focus our efforts and our rhetoric on those areas where we can offer credible and practicable long- and short-term solutions. We have many of those areas available and we don't need to be distracted by that about which we can complain but for which we have no answer.

5. Learn to work with others: Many in the environmental movement understand that the issues are so substantial and the routes to improvement so complex, costly and wide-ranging that we cannot achieve our aims without working closely with industry in all its forms. From resource extracting companies to the global financing companies that we will need to fund the necessary investments; from corporations that create the goods we all consume to those who have a deep understanding of people's behaviours and how to influence them. Without wholesale engagement with the business world we cannot achieve our aims - and a number of environmental organizations are already leading the way. 

6. There is no conservation - only development: “Conservation” has, sadly, come to be associated with people who try to hold things back; those who look to the past more than they look to the future. The reality is that starting from where we are today, we can only go forward. Having a biodiversity hotspot supported as such by eco-tourism is not just conservation it is development. It represents a conscious choice to develop that area in one particular way. All our “conservation” choices are (sustainable?) development choices and will be more productive if viewed and approached that way.

7. Earning our living: Governments are indebted and in dire financial trouble. Huge private wealth is not being created in the way it used to be a few short years ago. Environmental issues are too important to have to rely on charity, philanthropy and government handouts of taxpayers' money. If the environment is truly as valuable as we make it out to be then it should be a powerful economic force. It should generate wealth in its own right. It can be an “industry” that employs people and contributes to economic and other well-being. We talk about "the green economy" but too often it is an empty phrase used as an excuse for arguing for more subsidies, more taxpayer money, more giveaways from the wealthy. Sustainability can stand on its own two feet and contribute to vibrant, growing economies. A number of environmental organizations are already being successful in earning their living directly by bringing tangible value to people and organizations. We need more to follow their lead.

8. Focus on People Not "Nature": Finally, environmentalism is about people - not about nature.

Reblog from GoodPlanet

Extinction fears shadow global conservation forum

South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak © AFP/Pool/File Jung Yeon-Je

07/09/2012 9:23 am

JEJU - (AFP) - The world's largest conservation forum opened in South Korea Thursday with warnings that reckless development was ruining the planet's natural health, pushing thousands of species towards extinction.

"In order to save the earth, all nations must work together, recognizing that they are bound by a common destiny," South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak told the opening ceremony of the World Conservation Congress.

Lee said the state of the natural world had been "severely compromised", with unrestrained development reducing biodiversity and nearly 20,000 species facing extinction.

"Separated from nature, we cannot imagine ways to resolve climate change, poverty or shortages of water, food and energy resources," the president said.

More than 8,000 government officials, NGOs, scientists and business chiefs from 170 countries have gathered in the Korean resort island of Jeju for the 10-day congress focusing on the environment and biodiversity.

The quadrennial conference is held by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), whose president Ashok Khosla stressed the need for a holistic socio-economic approach to conservation efforts.

"Conservation policies and action cannot succeed for long unless nations and communities use their resources efficiently, distribute the benefits equitably and empower their citizens actively and inclusively," said Kosla.

The conference is taking place against a drumbeat of scientific warnings that a mass extinction looms, as species struggle to survive in a world of depleted habitat, hunting and climate change.

In a report issued at the Rio+20 world summit in June, the IUCN said that out of 63,837 species it had assessed, 19,817 run the risk of extinction.

At threat are 41 percent of amphibian species, 33 percent of reef-building corals, 25 percent of mammals, 20 percent of plants and 13 percent of birds, the update of the prestigious "Red List" said.

Many are essential for humans, providing food and work and a gene pool for better crops and new medicines, it said.

Experts say that only a fraction of Earth's millions of species, many of them microscopic, has been formally identified.

In recent years, biologists have found new species of frogs and birds in tropical forests -- proof that the planet's full biodiversity is only partly known.

"Of the species that we know about, hundreds of extinctions have occurred among birds and dozens among amphibians, and for invertebrates and insects we really do not know what we may have lost," Tim Blackburn, director of the Institute of Zoology at the Zoological Society of London, told AFP last month.

UN members pledged under the Millennium Development Goals to brake the rate of loss in species by 2010, but fell badly short of the mark.

After this failure, they set a "strategic plan for biodiversity" under which they vowed to prevent the extinction of "most known species."

With 11,000 volunteer scientists and more than 1,000 paid staff, the IUCN runs thousands of field projects around the globe to monitor and help manage natural environments.

© AFP

Visit more Environmental news from Good Planet Info. 

KL Eco Film Festival is Coming Soon

The 5th Kuala Lumpur Eco Film Festival

What is the 5th Kuala Lumpur Eco Film Festival?
The Kuala Lumpur Eco Film Festival (KLEFF) is the nation's first and biggest film festival on environmental films from all around the world. Started in 2008, the KLEFf has travelled to more than sevel states in Malaysia, including Sabah, offering Malaysians a unique chance to catch some of the best and award-winning local and international environmental-themed films in several official festival venues in the country. Apart from film screenings, the Festivalalso offers the public a unique chance to learn more about environmental issues, actions, solutions and efforts in which they (the public) can be part of. This comes in the form of exhibitions, on-site workshops, forums, talks and other activities. The weekend festival aims to inspire more Malaysians to adopt, practice and embrace sustainability in their daily lives. This year, the Festival will be held at the fairground of Dataran Tunku Canselor and the film screenings will be held at the Experimental Theatre.

There are several interesting workshops for youth, it is hoped that the Festival would attract more youth to participate in the sustainability-related talks and events.

1. Hijau Workshop for Youths                          

Saturday, 13th October 2012
 2.00pm- 5.00pm
Dewan Kuliah A, Pusat Asasi Sains (PASUM), UM


2. The Role of Youth in Sustainable Campus: Inspire & Be Inspired                                  
     Saturday, 13th October 2012 
     3.30pm- 4.30pm                                  
     Dewan Kuliah B, Pusat Asasi Sains (PASUM), UM

3. Making Underwater Documentaries:
    Saturday, 13 October 2012
    2.00pm- 5.30pm
    Dewan Perdana Siswa, UM

4.Sustainability For Kids Series Workshop         Sunday, 14 October 2012

• DIY Solar Cooker Workshop
  11:00 am - 1:00 pm
  Dewan Perdana 1, Blok D, Kompleks Perdana Siswa (KPS), UM.
• DIY Pinhole Camera Workshop
  2:00 pm - 4:00 pm
  Dewan Perdana 1, Blok D, Kompleks Perdana Siswa (KPS), UM.

5. The Hero's Journey in South East Asia: The Voyage of Alfred Russel Wallace as interpreted through the writing of Joseph Campbell

     Thursday, 11 Oct 2012

     9.00am - 10.30am

6. Communications For Good: How NGO Can Develop Effective Communication Campaigns 

     Friday & Saturday, 12-13 October 2012

     9.00am-4.30pm  

     Bilik Wawasan, Rumah Universiti, UM

For more information, you may visit www.ecofilmfest.my for seat reservation. It's free of charge! 

The Green and Blue Group would share more information on green events and seminars with you in the near future. Please share this page with your friends!

Amazonian deforestation may cut rainfall by a fifth: study

A federal police officer walks by planks at an illegal sawmill in Valdinei Ferreira Jango in northern Brazil © AFP/File Lunae Parracho

06/09/2012 9:29 am

PARIS - (AFP) - Deforestation may cause rainfall in the Amazonian basin to decline disastrously, British scientists said in a study published on Wednesday by the journal Nature.

Rainfall across the vast basin could lessen by 12 percent during wet seasons and 21 percent during dry seasons, potentially inflicting astronomical costs on farmers and reducing hydro-electricity output from receding river flows.

University of Leeds researcher Dominick Spracklen and colleagues put together a computer model based on satellite data of forest cover and rainfall patterns.

Air that passes over dense tropical vegetation carries at least twice as much rain as air that passes over land with sparse vegetation, they found.

The reason for this, they said, lies in a phenomenon called evapotranspiration.

Tropical forests are highly efficient at sucking water out of the soil, much of which is then delivered to the atmosphere as vapour through leaf pores.

This not only helps to keep the local humidity of the forest at a constant level -- it also charges the winds with droplets which are deposited further afield as rain.

Deforested land, though, is far less effective at recycling water this way, which means the air above it is less moist.

Factoring in logging trends in the early part of the century, which indicate 40 percent of the Amazon will be deforested by 2050, the team say the loss of rainfall across the river basin, from east to west, will be dramatic.

Luiz Aragao, an environmental scientist at the University of Exeter, said the change in rainfall would be especially worrying for eastern and southern Amazonia.

On the assumption endorsed by many climatologists that global temperatures will rise by some three degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) by century's end compared to pre-industrialisation levels, the impacts there "could be huge," he said in a commentary.

"Changes in regional climate could exacerbate drought-related tree mortality, which in turn would reduce carbon stocks, increase fire risks and lower biodiversity.

"Such changes might also directly threaten agriculture, which generates $15 billion (12 billion euros) in Amazonia, and the hydropower industry which supplies 65 percent of Brazil's electricity."

On the plus side, Aragao said the logging trends used in Spracklen's model could be pessimistic, as Brazil has pledged to limit historical deforestation rates by 80 percent by 2020.

© AFP

Extracted from Good Planet Info 6th Sept 2012.

Earth Song (On The Road)

This maybe is the funniest Earth Song music video you have watched! Please enjoy the show.

Happy Earth Day 2012!

Earth Day 2012: Mobilize the Earth

Our planet, our home is being neglected. Climate change continues unabated. It seems there's a new ecological disaster happening almost daily. This Earth Day it's time to mobilize the planet from the ground up to send a message that the Earth won't wait! 

for more resources, please visit www.earthday.org

One Day On Earth Global Screening

Dear green lovers, the Green and Blue Group cordially invites you to attend the "One Day On Earth" Global Screening on the Earth Day on 22nd April, 2012, 11am-1.30pm at Experimental Theatre, University Malaya.

We would like you to car-pool to the event location (Just nearby Dewan Tunku Canselor). Please bring your friends and family along!

Admission is FREE.

Besides that, there'll be a talk on "Recycling: An Idea of Zero Waste?" by our member, Mr. Ng Chee Guan at 10.00am to 10.30am. Please feel free to attend!

For more information, please contact Kimlee at 019-4489986.

Thank you very much. 

Earth Day: The History of a Movement

Each year, Earth Day -- April 22 -- marks the anniversary of what many consider the birth of the modern environmental movement in 1970.

The height of hippie and flower-child culture in the United States, 1970 brought the death of Jimi Hendrix, the last Beatles album, and Simon & Garfunkel’s “Bridge Over Troubled Water”. Protest was the order of the day, but saving the planet was not the cause. War raged in Vietnam, and students nationwide increasingly opposed it.

At the time, Americans were slurping leaded gas through massive V8 sedans. Industry belched out smoke and sludge with little fear of legal consequences or bad press. Air pollution was commonly accepted as the smell of prosperity. “Environment” was a word that appeared more often in spelling bees than on the evening news.  Although mainstream America remained oblivious to environmental concerns, the stage had been set for change by the publication of Rachel Carson's New York Times bestseller Silent Spring in 1962.  The book represented a watershed moment for the modern environmental movement, selling more than 500,000 copies in 24 countries and, up until that moment, more than any other person, Ms. Carson raised public awareness and concern for living organisms, the environment and public health.

Earth Day 1970 capitalized on the emerging consciousness, channeling the energy of the anti-war protest movement and putting environmental concerns front and center. 

The idea came to Earth Day founder Gaylord Nelson, then a U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, after witnessing the ravages of the 1969 massive oil spill in Santa Barbara, California. Inspired by the student anti-war movement, he realized that if he could infuse that energy with an emerging public consciousness about air and water pollution, it would force environmental protection onto the national political agenda. Senator Nelson announced the idea for a “national teach-in on the environment” to the national media; persuaded Pete McCloskey, a conservation-minded Republican Congressman, to serve as his co-chair; and recruited Denis Hayes as national coordinator. Hayes built a national staff of 85 to promote events across the land.

As a result, on the 22nd of April, 20 million Americans took to the streets, parks, and auditoriums to demonstrate for a healthy, sustainable environment in massive coast-to-coast rallies. Thousands of colleges and universities organized protests against the deterioration of the environment. Groups that had been fighting against oil spills, polluting factories and power plants, raw sewage, toxic dumps, pesticides, freeways, the loss of wilderness, and the extinction of wildlife suddenly realized they shared common values.

Earth Day 1970 achieved a rare political alignment, enlisting support from Republicans and Democrats, rich and poor, city slickers and farmers, tycoons and labor leaders. The first Earth Day led to the creation of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the passage of the Clean Air, Clean Water, andEndangered Species Acts. "It was a gamble," Gaylord recalled, "but it worked."

As 1990 approached, a group of environmental leaders asked Denis Hayes to organize another big campaign. This time, Earth Day went global, mobilizing 200 million people in 141 countries and lifting environmental issues onto the world stage. Earth Day 1990 gave a huge boost to recycling efforts worldwide and helped pave the way for the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. It also prompted President Bill Clinton to award Senator Nelson the Presidential Medal of Freedom (1995) -- the highest honor given to civilians in the United States -- for his role as Earth Day founder.

As the millennium approached, Hayes agreed to spearhead another campaign, this time focused on global warming and a push for clean energy. With 5,000 environmental groups in a record 184 countries reaching out to hundreds of millions of people, Earth Day 2000 combined the big-picture feistiness of the first Earth Day with the international grassroots activism of Earth Day 1990. It used the Internet to organize activists, but also featured a talking drum chain that traveled from village to village in Gabon, Africa, and hundreds of thousands of people gathered on the National Mall in Washington, DC. Earth Day 2000 sent world leaders the loud and clear message that citizens around the world wanted quick and decisive action on clean energy.

Much like 1970, Earth Day 2010 came at a time of great challenge for the environmental community. Climate change deniers, well-funded oil lobbyists, reticent politicians, a disinterested public, and a divided environmental community all contributed to a strong narrative that overshadowed the cause of progress and change. In spite of the challenge, for its 40th anniversary, Earth Day Network reestablished Earth Day as a powerful focal point around which people could demonstrate their commitment. Earth Day Network brought 225,000 people to the National Mall for a Climate Rally, amassed 40 million environmental service actions toward its 2012 goal of A Billion Acts of Green®, launched an international, 1-million tree planting initiative with Avatar director James Cameron and tripled its online base to over 900,000 community members.

The fight for a clean environment continues in a climate of increasing urgency, as the ravages of climate change become more manifest every day. We invite you to be a part of Earth Day and help write many more victories and successes into our history. Discover energy you didn't even know you had. Feel it rumble through the grassroots under your feet and the technology at your fingertips. Channel it into building a clean, healthy, diverse world for generations to come.

Resource: http://www.earthday.org/earth-day-history-movement

Green and Blue at NTV 7 Yuan Carnival Penang-14,15th April 2012

The Green and Blue Group had participated in the NTV 7 Yuan Carnival at Auto City Penang on last Saturday and Sunday! Here are some photos to share with you. 

                 Our exhibition was aimed at sharing information on waste generation in urban area and the concept of waste separation at source with the children and parents who visited our booth.

                    The kids participated in the making model exhibition too! Look, they put on various colours to our landscape here.

Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon officiated the Penang Yuan Carnival and paid a visit to our booth. He gave a 'Like' to us! 

Mr. Ng Chee Guan demonstrated the simple way to do Takakura Home Composting Method to the mothers. Yes, do you have any question, madam?

The Green and Blue Talk Time has come! 

Rather than throwing everything into one bin, we actually urged the audience to do waste separation and make use of the 3 colour bins to the fullest. Phoebe Lim and Kimlee Choy both had conducted a light and interactive opening talk with the audience. 

'Draw Something' interactive games with the parents and children, aimed at teaching the kids to learn new words about environment. 

You'll be surprised by their imagination and drawings! 

We are a team of Four! Thanks to the volunteers Ng Chee Guan (started from left), Kimlee Choy, Phoebe Lim and Jaron Keng who devoted their time at Penang. Also, special thanks to the NGO and president, Dr. Wong Ruen Yuan who supported our educational event within these 2 days. 

Empty Bottles Wanted

The Green&Blue Newsletter Vol. 2

Green and Blue Newsletter Volume 2

The Green&Blue Newsletter Vol. 1

The Green&Blue Newsletter Vol.1

Incinerator for Municipal Solid Waste in Kuala Lumpur

Recently, Minister of Housing and Local Government (MHLG), Dato’ Wira Chor Chee Heung, had made an official announcement that the federal government, through the National Solid Waste Management Department is embarking on a determined path to introduce the first ever mass-scale incinerator facility with capacity of 800-1000 ton of municipal solid waste (MSW) per day in Kuala Lumpur. The minister had called for an “international tender” for the project in June/July this year, citing a “critically needed” for such a waste disposal facility in KL. A three-week lab on the best incinerator was carried out from 26 March, gathering a group of experts from academic institutions, NGOs, etc to scrutinize on the best technology, financial model, location and mitigation measures. According to most media sources, the capital expenditure of the incinerator ranges from RM500 million to RM800 million and expected to be completed in 2015.

Presently, the generation of MSW in KL is about 3000 ton/day. About 2000 ton/day of MSW arise in KL is compacted at Taman Beringin Transfer Station (located at Jinjang) before disposed at Bukit Tagar Sanitary Landfill (BTSL) which located at Batang Berjuntai, 70km away from KL city centre. BTSL is the largest sanitary landfill in Malaysia, with a built-up area of 1700 acres, operating capacity of 2000 ton/day and lifespan of 40 years. It was commenced in 2005 with capital cost of about RM200 million and the tipping fees range from RM28 to RM49 per ton. BTSL is a certified CDM (Clean Development Mechanism) project by UNFCCC and it is claimed that generation capacity of 6 Megawatt of electricity is possible with of 3 Megawatt supplied to TNB.

Incineration or “mass burning” is the common MSW disposal method globally after landfill. It is one of the most expensive waste treatment facilities especially when equipped with energy recovery and advanced emission control technology. Besides incineration, other thermal treatment technology such as pyrolysis and gasification are typically operated in small scale plants. Incineration can reduce the mass of MSW to less than 10% and hence increase the lifespan of landfills. Compared to landfill, the advantages of incinerator (with energy recovery) are typically the environmental benefits such as lower carbon emission, avoidance of land contamination, higher energy recovery per ton, outputs of ashes in inert form, (chemically stable without odor) and requires a minimum area of land. Economically, the benefits are the location which can be near to city and land value with less depreciation unlike landfill. For a sanitary landfill, post-closure of at least 30 years is required after the operational phases. After that, the land can only be used as low value purposes such as recreational area or golf course as the soil structure is not suitable for building construction, especially high rise. 

However, the drawbacks of the financial economic of incinerator is much higher that its benefits. The capital and operational cost of incinerator is much higher than a sanitary landfill. The CapEx of an incinerator with same capacity with a sanitary landfill is at least 3 times more expensive while the OpEx is 10 times higher. For a case study, Pollution Engineering Sdn Bhd (PESB) had fabricated a 12 ton/day incinerator with capital expenditure (capex) of RM 9-10 million and operated for 2 years in Kuantan Municipal Council for R&D purpose in year 2004. It was found that it comsumed about 120 Litres (L) of diesel to incinerate 1 ton of MSW from Kuantan. Hence, the operational expenditure (opex) is easily more than RM 300/ton as the fuel (diesel) alone cost more than RM 200/ton with the current market price of diesel of RM 1.80/L.

5 units of small-scale incinerators of rotary kiln type were in erected in 5 tourism spots: Pulau Langkawi (100 ton/day), Pulau Labuan (60 ton/day), Cameron Highlands (40 ton/day), Pulau Pangkor (20 ton/day) and Pulau Tioman (10 ton/day). The incinerators use autogenous combustion technology (ACT), which involves the usage of a rotary kiln and an air-injection system to ensure continuous combustion. Recyclables will be removed from the waste prior to incineration. Emissions resulting from the combustion process will be treated by a combination of pollution control systems to remove dust particulates, acid gases, nitrogen oxides, heavy metals and dioxin. Solid waste leachate and wastewater from the plant and truck washings will be directed to a wastewater treatment plant prior to discharge. An end-of-pipe continuous emissions monitoring system will be installed to monitor compliance to DOE requirements.

Figure 1.0: Incinerator of 12 ton/day for Kuantan Municipal Council (Pollution Engineering Sdn Bhd, 2010)

These incinerators are designed and constructed by XCN Technology Sdn Bhd. The primary purpose of the introduction of incinerators at tourism spots is to divert waste from the landfill as the scarcity of land in island and highland area. However, all these incinerators are still in testing and commissioning phase by MHLG until today. The incinerator in Pulau Pangkor had begun operation on 19^th March 2012. According to the plant manager (whom I had managed to interview), the CapEx of the plant is RM24million and the OpEx is about RM220/ton with manpower of 20 personnel. The design capacity is 20 ton/day but the daily waste generation at the island is only 6-7 ton/day. So the operation only run for 3-4 days a week and the rest of days are sorting and recovering of recyclable materials. All the incinerators have no energy recovery except in Pulau Langkawi, capable of generating 1MW of electricity. The bottom/fly ashes are landfilled. From my observation at the incinerators at Pulau Pangkor and Cameron Highland, open dumps are located beside the incinerators. JPSPN (National Solid Waste Management Department) under MHLG, rehabilitates and upgrades the open dumps into sanitary landfills.

 Figure 2.0: Incinerator of 40 ton/day at Cameron Highland (March, 2012)

Figure 3.0: Open dumping beside incinerator at Cameron Highland (Blue Valley) 

 Figure 4.0: New sanitary landfill (upgraded) at another side near to the incinerator at Cameron Highland

According to Director-General of JPSPN, small incinerators had been built in Langkawi, Pangkor, Labuan, Tioman and Terengganu in the late 1990s. All had failed due to faulty design, poor maintenance, improper operation and high diesel usage. The new incinerators are tailor-made to suit local waste characteristics, such as high moisture content of 60% to 70%. In the past, waste incinerators failed as they were of European make and not suitable for our waste. The new incinerators will also have the cost-effective element inserted, including low operation cost. Pollutant such as dioxin is released if the burning temperature is low. If the burning capacity of the incinerator goes above 800°C, all dioxin will be burned off and destroyed.

The financing model for incineration is thus a very important aspect in the development of any high cost thermal treatment facility. Presently, all the OpEx of the five incinerators are borne by federal government. For the total capacity of 230 ton/day, the OpEx will be about RM18.5 million per annum. If the 1000 ton/day incinerator is included, the total cost will be RM80 million per annum which is sufficient to be the CapEx for two 300-400 ton/day composting plants. Incinerator is a proven technology and environmental beneficial, but definitely not cost-effective.  This is especially true for MSW in Malaysia with a high percentage of organic fraction i.e. high moisture content and low calorific value. Compared with sanitary landfill which OpEx is about RM20-30/ton, there is a shortfall of RM200/ton if incinerator is to be the alternative. The funding by federal government to bear the operational cost is not sustainable it will increase the operational expenditure of country’s budget. Unless the people is willing is to pay more for the disposal of waste (under assessment tax or direct billing). The willingness to pay (WTP) of residents for waste disposal has to be gauged and evaluated to enable to possibility of introduction of Pay-as-You-Throw (PAYT) charging system (by weight). One argument of the drawback of the system is low income group generate more food waste (by weight) and hence have to pay more. For example, the poor will purchase a coconut, watermelon, chicken, etc and the residues of these food wastes made up a huge amount of weight. One method to tackle this problem is by “Indifference Consumer Pay Principle”, a carrot and stick approach in which the consumers that practice segregation at source are not necessary to pay for the waste that is segregated. However, this system is complicated and requires substantial institutional arrangement for the implementation.

In the author’s opinion, the next most viable trajectory to head toward integrated MSW management in Malaysia is the mainstreaming of composting facility. By diverting the organic fraction of MSW for biological treatment, the rest of the waste (residual waste) has higher calorific value and the weight can be reduced by at least 40%. Hauling fee can be saved if the composting facility is located near to waste generation point or “on-site”. By diverting the organic fraction of MSW, we have double benefits of nutrient recovery (compost) and increased viability/efficiency of incineration, especially incinerator with energy recovery which surplus electricity generation can be sold to TNB with the Feed-in Tariff scheme by KeTTHA (Ministry of Water, Energy and Green Technology). Hence, MHLG should unlock the potential of biological treatment by promoting it with incentive and funding for capital cost while discourage landfill with taxes. MHLG has to acknowledge the imperative of composting as the key cornerstone toward integrated waste management model.  

Figure 5.0: Material flows from MSW toward integrated waste management model 

Prepared by:

Jaron Keng Zi Xiang

Secretary

Malaysia Green and Blue Environment Protection Society