Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567 www.elsevier.

com/locate/wasman

Report

The practice and challenges of solid waste management in Singapore

Renbi Bai*, Mardina Sutanto
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 119260, Singapore Received 23 August 2000; accepted 26 November 2001

Abstract This paper presents an overview of the current solid waste management situation in Singapore and provides a brief discussion of the future challenges. Singapore is a small island city-state with a large population, warm climate and high humidity. Over the past two to three decades, rapid industrialization and economic development have caused a tremendous increase in solid waste generation. The yearly disposed solid waste increased from 0.74 million tonnes in 1972 to 2.80 million tonnes in 2000. Solid waste management in Singapore has traditionally been undertaken by the Ministry of Environment (ENV), with the participation of some private sectors in recent years. The hierarchy of solid waste management in Singapore is waste minimization (reduce, reuse and recycle or so-called 3 Rs), followed by incineration and landll. As land is extremely scarce and only one newly constructed oshore landll site is available, solid waste incineration has been identied as the most preferred disposal method. Waste minimization, the utilization of incineration ashes, industrial waste management are regarded to be the major challenges in the future. # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction The Waste Management Hierarchy (minimization, recovery and transformation, and land disposal) has been adopted by most industrialized nations as the menu for developing solid waste management strategies. The extent to which any one option is used within a given country however varies, largely depending on a number of factors, such as topography, population density, transportation infrastructure, socioeconomic and environmental regulations (Sakai et al., 1996). Being a small and densely populated country with a hot and humid climate (land area of 659.9 km2; population of 3.89 million; average temperature of 24.7 $ 31.3  C, daily average humidity at 84.4%, and annual average rainfall of 2134 mm) (Department of Statistics, 2000a), Singapore is potentially vulnerable to the outbreak of any infectious diseases. At the same time, rapid economic and population growth continues to contribute to the burden of solid waste disposal. Solid waste management in Singapore has traditionally been undertaken by the Ministry of Environment (ENV). The statute dealing with solid waste management in Singapore is the Environmental Pollution
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +65-874-4532; fax: +65-779-1936. E-mail address: chebairb@nus.edu.sg (R. Bai).

Control Act (EPCA) which came into force on the rst of April 1999 and is a consolidation of existing legislations on the control of air, water and waste, including the Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA) and the regulations passed under EPHA, such as:  Environmental Public Health (Public Cleansing) Regulations;  Environmental Public Health (Toxic Industrial Waste) Regulations;  Environmental Public Health (General Waste Collection) Regulations;  Environmental Public Health (Corrective Work Order) Regulations. Under the EPHA, waste is dened as any substance or article which requires to be disposed of as being broken, worn out, contaminated or otherwise spoiled, and for the purpose of this Act anything which is discarded or otherwise dealt with as if it were waste shall be presumed to be waste unless the contrary is proved. . . (Ooi, 1995). Under the Public Cleansing and General Waste Collection Regulations, all generated solid waste has to be collected in Singapore. The Corrective Work Order also serves as a preventive measure for littering (under the Corrective Work Order, people who are caught littering

0956-053X/02/$ - see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S0956-053X(02)00014-4

558

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

may be ned and/or required to clean a public place, for example, picking up litter along public roads, in public parks or housing estates). Because of the very limited landll capacity for waste disposal and the need to conserve this limited capacity for the future, landlling of solid waste in Singapore has been opted as the least desirable disposal method. In order to achieve the maximum reduction of waste volume entering the landll, solid waste incineration, although much more expensive, has been given top priority over all other waste transformation options. In addition, waste minimization at source in all sectors of the community has been promoted for years. This paper discusses the various practices and challenges of solid waste management in Singapore.

hospitals, schools, recreational facilities and public development projects). Fig. 1 shows the actual amount of solid waste disposed of over the last two decades (Ministry of Environment, 1999a). It can be seen that the total solid waste in 1999 was three times that of 1980. Domestic solid waste has increased steadily over the years, from 640 thousand tonnes in 1980 to 1360 thousand tonnes in 1999, attributed to an increase in both population as well as per capita waste generation rate [the population was 2.41 million in 1980 and 3.89 million in 1999 (Department of Statistics, 2000b), therefore the average rate of domestic waste being disposed of was 0.73 kg/ day in 1980 and 0.96 kg/day in 1999 per capita, with an average yearly increasing rate of 1.15%]. With the rapid industrial and economic growth of Singapore, the output of industrial solid waste has also increased remarkably. The output of industrial solid waste was 207 thousand tonnes in 1980, compared to 1538 thousand tonnes in 1997, and it nally exceeded the output of domestic solid waste in 1995. There has been a decrease in the industrial solid waste output of 7.2% since 1997, due to the waste minimization program established by ENV. The quantity of institutional solid waste has been relatively small. From 1980 to 1987, the institutional solid waste increased from 94 thousand tonnes in 1980 to 292 thousand tonnes in 1987. Then, it decreased continuously to approximately 6 thousand tonnes in 1999, as a result of waste material recycling, especially waste papers. In view of about 1.8 million tonnes of

2. Solid waste generation and characteristics Solid waste in Singapore is broadly classied into three main categories (Low, 1990):  Domestic refuse (solid waste generated by households, markets, food centers and commercial premises such as hotels, restaurants, shops, etc.);  Industrial refuse (not including toxic and hazardous waste that requires special handling, treatment and disposal);  Institutional refuse (solid waste from various Government and Statutory Board installations,

Fig. 1. The amount of solid waste disposed of from dierent waste categories during the past two decades (Ministry of Environment, 1999a).

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

559

solid waste being recycled annually in the last few years (Ministry of Environment, 1999a, 2000a), the actual solid waste generation in Singapore has amounted to about 4.5 $ 4.8 million tonnes per year. This represents a gross per capita waste generation rate between 3.37 and 3.52 kg/day, similar to that of 3.38 kg/day in Canada in 1992 (Sawell et al., 1996). Table 1 shows the compositions and their typical percentage distribution of solid waste in Singapore from 1997 to 2000 (Ministry of Environment, 2000a). Solid waste compositions have been found to be relatively stable. Food waste always comprises the highest portion, followed by paper, wood and plastics. Although the comparison of national waste statistics may not be a simple task, due to the dierence in compositional classications and the manner in which the data were collected, solid waste composition in Singapore has been found to be quite similar to that in Sapporo, Japan, but very dierent from those in Yokohama and Osaka, Japan (Sakai, 1996) and those in the US (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996). In Singapore, food waste accounts for about 39% of the total waste streams and paper makes up 20.60%. Food and paper waste in Sapporo, Japan accounts for 46.6 and 25.2% of its total solid waste, respectively. There are about 40.0, 35.7 and 37.6% of paper waste in Yokohama, Osaka and the US, respectively, almost doubled the percentage in Singapore, and, on the other hand, food waste in Yokohama (9.8%), Osaka (6.5%) or the US (6.7%) is just about one fourth to one sixth of the percentage in Singapore. The dierences in solid waste composition can therefore have a great impact on the system of solid waste management in dierent countries. It was found that about 85% of the solid waste generated in Singapore is combustible, but the caloric values of the solid waste vary subTable 1 Solid waste composition in Singaporea Composition (%) Year 1997 Food waste Paper/cardboard Plastics Construction debris Wood/timber Horticultural waste Earth spoils Ferrous metals Non-ferrous metals Used slag Sludge Glass Textile/leather Scrap tyres Others Total
a

stantially, depending on the source and the period of the year (i.e. wet or dry season). The typical properties of the solid waste in Singapore are given in Table 2 (Ministry of Environment, 1999a). The moisture content of 48.6% is considerably higher than that of 20% in the US (Tchobanoglous, 1993).

3. Solid waste collection system Prior to 1996, waste collection came under the ambit of the Environmental Health Department (EHD) of ENV and the private waste collectors. EHD provided daily collection services to domestic households, trade and institutional premises, while the private waste collectors served mainly industrial premises, commercial buildings, shopping centers, construction sites, etc. Faced with an ageing workforce and the diculties in the recruitment of collection workers, ENV decided to corporatize the waste collection unit. Since 1 April 1996, SEMAC Pte Ltd, a private company and a wholly owned subsidiary of ENV Corporation, has taken over the waste collection service from EHD. As a private company, SEMAC had a greater exibility in its recruitment program. To introduce competition in the waste collection services and to improve the service standards, ENV started to liberalize the collection services in 1998. Domestic and trade premises were divided into nine geographical sectors, and the services for these sectors were planned to be tendered out progressively, at a rate of two or three a year. ENV conducted a prequalication exercise to select companies with the necessary expertise, experience and nancial capability to tender for the services. At present, there are three licensed domestic and trade waste collectors providing the service. The rst sector (the Pasir Ris-Tampines sector) was awarded to a German company, Altvater Jakob Pte Ltd, which has 50 years of experience in waste collection. They started operations on 1 July 1999. The second sector (the Bedok sector) was awarded to Colex Holdings Ltd, a local company with considerable experience in industrial waste collection. Colex started its operations on 1 November 1999. The other seven sectors continue to be served by SEMAC Pte Ltd. For institutional solid waste, SEMAC remains to be the main collector, while industrial solid waste is still collected by the licensed private waste contractors.
Table 2 Typical properties of solid waste in Singaporea Parameter Moisture content (%w/w) Net caloric value (kJ/kg) Incombustibles (%w/w)
a

1998 38.80 20.60 5.80 4.50 8.90 2.70 2.70 2.70 0.50 4.30 1.80 1.10 0.90 0.20 4.50 100

1999 38.80 20.60 5.80 4.50 8.90 2.70 2.70 2.70 0.50 4.30 1.80 1.10 0.90 0.20 4.50 100

2000 38.83 20.60 5.80 4.50 8.90 2.70 2.70 2.70 0.50 4.30 1.80 1.10 0.90 0.20 4.50 100

38.81 20.60 5.79 4.51 8.91 2.70 2.70 2.70 0.50 4.29 1.80 1.10 0.90 0.20 4.51 100

Range 3060 500013,000 7.522.5

Typical value 48.60 8000 15

Ministry of Environment (1997, 1998a, 1999a, 2000a).

Ministry of Environment (1999a).

560

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

There are about 350 licensed private waste collectors in Singapore, and they have their own eet of collection vehicles and parcels of collection services. ENV as the regulator sets guidelines on good practices under its Code of Practice for Licensed General Waste Collectors, a guideline that licensed waste collectors must adhere to. At the same time, ENV monitors the service level as well as decides on the fees proposed by the companies. Table 3 shows the waste collection fees currently charged in Singapore (Ministry of Environment, 1999a). For residential solid waste, the collection fee is charged per household, and, for non-residential solid waste, the collection fee is charged on the basis of waste volume. It is dicult to make a direct comparison of the collection fees in Singapore and in other countries (due to the lack of information), but the liberalization of waste collection service in Singapore has been found to promote competition and improve the service. Several waste collection methods have been adopted in Singapore. The direct collection method involves collecting waste directly from individual households and is primarily conned to private residential estates and shop houses. This method is very labor intensive and time consuming. There are two indirect collection methods in practice as well. The rst is the one used in older high-rise apartment blocks where waste is stored in substantial amounts in bulk containers on the basement of the apartments. These containers need to be transferred manually to the bin compounds and later be transported to the refuse disposal sites. The second indirect collection system is a centralized refuse-chute (CRC) system that has been introduced and implemented in newer ats since 1989 (Ooi, 1995). This system allows residential refuse to be discharged directly from individual ats through a common discharge chute to the central refuse container, and also allows a small vehicle to go directly up to the central refuse chute of each apartment block and transfer the central refuse container mechanically from the central refuse chute to
Table 3 Solid waste collection fee charged per month in Singaporea Type Residential Flats Landed Residential Non-residential Trade premises with average daily refuse output: <170 l per day 170<350 l per day 350<700 l per day 700<1000 l per day Each additional 1000 l or part thereof >1000 l per day Hawker/market stalls
a

the waste collection truck. Thus, the introduction of the CRC system has greatly improved the eciency of domestic waste collection, increased the control of smell and leakage of refuse during collection and transportation, as well as dramatically reduced the need for wastecollection workers. To further improve the services, a pilot project was embarked on in 1998 to test the eectiveness of an alternative solid waste handling system [i.e. the pneumatic-refuse-collection (PRC) system]. With this system, all the refuse from a cluster of apartment blocks is sucked through underground pipes to a central station and towed away subsequently by the waste collector. However, the pilot project indicated that the capital and operating costs of the PRC system amounted to $2000 per at and $13 per at per month. This is much higher than that of the CRC system, which only has a capital cost of $146 per at and an operating cost of $3 per at per month. If the PRC system is to be implemented, the service and conservancy charges paid by residents will have to be increased substantially. In view of this, the PRC system is not implemented at the present time (Swee, 2000). Most waste collection contractors employ two-shift operations, with the collections being undertaken mainly during o-peak trac hours. To improve the eciency and productivity of waste collection in the eastern part of Singapore, the collected waste was unloaded at a transfer station (Kim Chuan Transfer Station built in 1986) and later transported to the incineration plants in Tuas (in the western part of Singapore) and the Senoko incineration plant (in the northern part of Singapore). However, with improved road network, better accessibility to the incineration plants, and the use of larger capacity refuse trucks, waste collectors have found it more cost eective to transport their wastes directly to the incineration plants rather than pay for the haulage services at Kim Chuan Transfer Station. In view of the low demand, the Government has therefore decided to close Kim Chuan Transfer Station with eect from 1 July 2001. Contractors

Pasir Ris-Tampines Sector (Altvater Jakob Pte Ltd) ($) 8.63 23.93

Bedok Sector (Colex Holdings Ltd) ($) 6.23 22.95

Rest of Singapore (SEMAC Pte Ltd) ($) 8.70 23.45

42.66 108.68 277.60 426.34 447.35 31.58

40.23 101.53 253.30 370.62 378.14 41.80

41.06 104.17 258.57 379.10 388.01 31.58

Ministry of Environment (1999a).

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

561

are required by ENV to separate the collected waste into incinerable and non-incinerable components for disposal by incineration and landlling.

4. Solid waste incineration Solid waste incineration has been given a top priority over other waste disposal methods. The Engineering Services Department (ESD) of ENV is in charge of planning, developing, managing and operating the waste incineration facilities in Singapore. Four incineration plants are already in operation (Ulu Pandan, Tuas, Senoko and Tuas South). The fth incineration plant will be built adjacent to the Tuas South Incineration Plant by a private sector on a Design, Build, Own and Operation (DBOO) basis, and is scheduled for completion in 2004 and in service by 2006. The Ulu Pandan Incineration Plant, which has four incinerators, was commissioned in 1979 with a capacity of 1200 tonnes/day. The capacity was later expanded to the present level of 1600 tonnes/day in 1982. The Tuas Incineration Plant, with ve incineration units and a total capacity of 2000 tonnes/day, was put into operation in 1987. The Senoko Incineration Plant was commissioned in August 1992 at a capacity of 2400 tonnes/ day. The Tuas South Incineration Plant started its operation in November 2000, with six incineration units and a capacity of 3000 tonnes/day. The capacity for the fth incineration plant is designed at 3000 tonnes/day. Currently, the daily solid waste disposed of in Singapore is about 8000 tonnes/day and 73% of the waste is incinerated (5840 tonnes/day). Since 85% of the solid waste in Singapore is incinerable, this means that an incineration capacity of 6800 tonnes/day would be required. The four incineration plants currently in operation have a total capacity of 9000 tonnes/day. This capacity is expected to be sucient for waste incineration in Singapore until 2007 as an average annual increase of 5% is predicted for future solid waste generation (Ministry of Environment, 2000b). The fth incineration plant, run by the private sector, will therefore introduce competition into the waste incineration service in Singapore and would play an important role in the future. In moving towards the market model, ENV has also planed to privatize two of the four existing plants by the time the fth plant commences operation (Ministry of Environment, 2000b). ENV believes that incineration is the best option for waste treatment in Singapore. All the incinerable wastes that are not recovered are to be incinerated because incineration can reduce waste volume up to 90% (Ministry of Environment, 1999a), which will conserve the limited capacity of the sanitary landll in Singapore. This option was rst adopted in the late 1970s, although it costs six to seven times more than landll.

All the waste incineration plants are equipped with pollution control systems, electricity generation and scrap metal recovery facilities. The waste incineration consists of several steps. Firstly, waste from collection trucks is discharged into the refuse bunker, which stocks up the waste. There are large forced draught fans to suck the air from the bunker for use in waste combustion. The sucking action of the fans results in a subatmospheric pressure in the bunker. This helps to prevent the foul smell from escaping to the ambient environment. The creation of these air drafts also cause waste moisture to evaporate faster. The mixed, half-dry waste is then fed into the furnace by overhead grab cranes. Depending on the waste properties, oil auxiliary burners may be used to start up the combustion. Once the waste is ignited and the furnace temperature maintained, combustion is sustained without the need for auxiliary fuel. The burning waste is mixed, agitated and moved downward by the moving stoker grate. The superheated steam generated from the incineration is expanded in a backpressure turbine to generate electricity. The recovered energy is used to operate the plant, and extra energy is sold to the public utility network. Revenue from the sale of the electricity constitutes a major source of income to the plants. Food waste, in spite of its high moisture content, is all incinerated in Singapore due to the large quantity and the diculty in its separation. Bag lters, gas scrubbers and electrostatic precipitators are used to control air pollution from waste incineration. The air emission standards are specied by the Clean Air (Standards) Regulations which have been in force since 1978. The standards controls mainly the emission of solid particles, heavy metals and sulphur, nitrogen and carbon oxides, etc. The air emission standards have been revised and specied in the Environmental Pollution Control (Air Impurities) Regulations 2000 and will be in force on 1 January 2001. In addition to being more stringent for controlling the emission of solid particles, heavy metals and sulphur, nitrogen and carbon oxides, etc., the new standards also introduce control of new substances, such as dioxins and furans. Existing plants will be given a grace period of 3 years to ensure the air emission complying with the revised standards. New plants or new process introduced by existing plants will be required to comply with the standard from 1 January 2001 onwards. There are two generic ash streams discharged from the incinerators. Bottom ash is generally dened as the material collected o the incineration grates, whereas y ash is a collective term for the ner material captured downstream of the furnace (i.e. in the heat recovery and air pollution control system). In Japan (Sakai, 1996), Denmark (Hjelmar, 1996), and the Netherlands (van der Sloot, 1996), these two streams are managed dierently due to the signicant dierences in their physical,

562

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

chemical and leaching capacity. In the US (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996), bottom and y ashes are mixed together at most incineration facilities and are disposed of in landlls. In Singapore, the bottom ash is transported to the ash pit through vibrating conveyors. Ferrous metals are recovered from the ash by overhead electromagnetic separators and sold to the National Iron and Steel Mill (Natsteel). The remaining bottom ash, together with the y ash and non-incinerable waste, is all sent to the landll. The quantities of solid waste incinerated over the years are shown in Table 4 (Ministry of Environment, 1999a, 2000a). As can be seen, solid waste disposed of by incineration has increased from about 1.18 million tonnes in 1990 to about 2.44 million tonnes in 2000, up to 87% of the total waste disposed of in 2000. This percentage is even higher than that in Japan (74%) (Sakai, 1996), and is in contrast with a general incineration rate of 27% in the Netherlands (van der Sloot, 1996), 23% in Denmark (Hjelmar, 1996), 16% in the US (Sakai et al., 1996) and 5.48% in Canada (Sawell et al., 1996). The solid waste to be incinerated was usually distributed to the three incineration plants (Ulu Pandan, Tuas and Senoko) at a rate of 21% for Ulu Pandan Incineration Plant, 33% for Tuas Incineration Plant, and 46% for Senoko Incineration Plant, respectively (Tuas South Incineration Plant just started its operation.
Table 4 Solid waste disposed by incineration and landll in Singaporea Year 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
a

Information on the distribution of solid waste to the four incineration plants has not been available yet). There have been cases that the amount of waste received at some incineration plants exceeded capacity during peak hours of waste collection and transportation, due to the plants being geographically closer to most waste collection areas. To regulate the demand for waste disposal at these plants, a peak-hour-surcharge of $6 per tonne is levied between 7.30 am and 2.00 pm to divert the solid waste streams to other incineration plants.

5. Sanitary landll Landlling has the lowest priority in the management of solid waste in Singapore, although it plays the most important role in many other countries (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996; Muttamara et al., 1996; Sawell et al., 1996). Because of the land constraint, landll capacity in Singapore is principally reserved for waste that cannot be treated otherwise. Quantity of solid waste disposed of by landll since 1976 is also given in Table 4. As can be seen from the Table, landlling once was the sole method for solid waste disposal in Singapore before the 1970s. Then the percentage of solid waste for landll continuously decreased and was down to about 22% in 1993, as more and more solid waste was incinerated. From 1993 to

Waste disposed by landll (1000 tonnes) 731.4 732.9 777.1 581.5 656.1 744.8 807.9 879.9 1036.2 968.3 770.0 750.5 713.9 800.5 890.4 968.4 866.7 485.8 666.3 848.5 882.8 1051.3 958.1 756.2 357.0

Waste disposed by incineration (1000 tonnes) 8.3 9.6 17.2 360.9 335.9 337.7 375.7 494.9 473.0 530.2 825.7 1122.4 1120.9 1178.9 1188.7 1183.3 1390.8 1745.7 1758.6 1826.7 1872.8 1745.0 1884.1 2036.3 2440.2

Total refuse disposed (1000 tonnes) 739.7 742.6 794.3 875.7 941.4 1082.5 1183.7 1374.8 1509.2 1498.5 1595.7 1872.9 1834.8 1979.4 2079.1 2151.7 2257.5 2231.5 2424.9 2675.2 2755.6 2796.3 2842.2 2792.5 2797.2

Percentage of waste disposed by landll 98.9 98.7 97.8 66.4 69.7 68.8 68.3 64.0 68.7 64.6 48.3 40.1 38.9 40.4 42.8 45.0 38.4 21.8 27.5 31.7 32.0 37.6 33.7 27.1 12.8

Ministry of Environment (1998a, 1999a, 2000a).

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

563

1997, there was an increase in the percentage of solid waste landlled. This was attributed to the increase in total waste generation, and the existing incineration plants approaching their incineration capacity. From 1997, the amount of solid waste being landlled decreased again, as the Government became determined to incinerate all the incinerable waste; only non-incinerable waste and the incineration ashes are allowed to be disposed of in the landll. Singapore once had two landll sites on the mainland. The Lim Chu Kang dumping ground in the northwestern part of Singapore was lled in September 1992 and the Lorong Halus dumping ground in the northeastern part of Singapore reached its capacity in March 1999. Since there is no other site on the mainland suitable to develop a landll, ENV resorted to the more costly option of developing an oshore landllPulau Semakau. It is located 23 km away from the mainland in the southern part of Singapore. Waste is loaded in barges at the Tuas Marine Transfer Station for transport to the landll. The Pulau Semakau Landll covers a total area of 350 hectares. It has a landll capacity of 63 million cubic meters. Filling of this landll is divided into three phases. ENV predicts that phase 1 will be lled by 2019, phase 2 by 2027 and phase 3 by 2045 (Ministry of Environment, 1998a). However, the lifespan of Pulau Semakau will largely depend on solid waste generation and the disposal options. To create the required landll space, a 7-km perimeter sand bund was built to enclose a portion of the sea o Pulau Semakau island. The landll site was made impermeable to leakage by a clay barrier and geomembranes. Leachate generated within landll cells is collected. Before being discharged into the sea, the leachate is treated at a leachate treatment plant to the Euent Discharge Standards specied in the Environmental Pollution Control Act. In order to reduce its potency, landll gases, especially methane, are captured and burned by a aring system. The heat from aring is used to generate electricity for landll consumption, and to operate on-site equipment. Mangrove replanting program was also carried out as a living parameter to ensure that the water around the oshore landll is not polluted. As discussed above, solid waste disposal in Singapore is either by burning at the incineration plants or by burying in the landll. Waste disposal fees have been increased gradually to remove the subsidy on the cost of waste disposal. Subsidizing the waste disposal fee was found to inhibit the waste recovery and recycling industry, as waste generators may nd it cheaper to send their waste for disposal rather than for recycling. Table 5 shows the disposal fees charged at each incineration plant and other facilities since 1998 (Ministry of Environment, 1999a,b). The current waste disposal fee

Table 5 Disposal fee of solid waste charged in Singapore since 1998a Disposal facilities Waste disposal fee charged ($ per tonne) 1998 Ulu Pandan Incineration Plant 7:30 am $2:00 pm 2:00 pm$5:00 pm Tuas Incineration Plant Tuas South Incineration Plant Senoko Incineration Plant Tuas Marine Transfer station Kim Chuan Transfer Station Lorong Halus Dumping Ground
a

April 1999 50 77 57 57 57 57

May 2000 66 71 67 67 71 67 76

56 60 47 47 47 47

Ministry of Environment (1998a, 1999a).

of $67 $ 77/tonne appears to be higher than the fee of $47 $ 61/tonne (US$27$ 35/tonne) charged for incineration and lower than $84/tonne (US$48/tonne) charged for landll in Denmark (Hjelmar, 1996). In the US, the average fee charged for landll was reported to be $52.5/tonne (US$30/tonne) and for incineration to be $93/tonne (US$53/tonne) (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996).

6. Waste minimization Waste minimization has been placed at the top of solid waste management hierarchy. Waste minimization consists of two basic operations: source reduction and recycling (Hopper et al., 1993). Source reduction is most desirable to avoid waste generation, while recycling is useful to conserve resources and to prevent materials from entering the waste stream. In the early stages of Singapores economic development (during the 1960s and 1970s), waste was separated to recover the recyclable and reusable products. It was done more for economic than for environmental reasons. Along with the rapid industrialization and sustained economic progress was a higher standard of living for most citizens. This inevitably created a consumer society with its accompanying throwaway mentality (Ministry of Environment, 1998b). Products were made disposable and usually came with over packaging. Waste recycling became cumbersome and was mainly conned to industrial waste. High-rise public apartments made the waste separation at source more dicult since waste was thrown down through common chutes. The use of compaction vehicles and containers in waste collection also made it more dicult to retrieve valuable resources from domestic waste. Waste recycling at source, although diverting a fraction of waste stream from the ultimate disposal, had very limited impact on solid waste management in the past. With the problem of land scarcity and the rising cost of waste disposal, ENV has continued to encourage

564

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

waste minimization in all sectors of the community. Spaces have been provided to the private sector to operate recycling facilities (Ministry of Environment, 1997). Currently, there is a recycling plant that processes horticultural waste into soil conditioner and fertilizer. Another company operates a wastepaper recycling plant to produce cartons and other packing materials for the industry. There are also several companies collecting recyclable material, but mostly for the industrial sector. ENV also encourages Town Councils to set up systems for the collection of wastepaper for recycling. However, many recycling schemes have had diculties sustaining themselves due to the widely uctuating markets for waste materials. Moreover, the push to recycle higher percentages of the waste stream has resulted in problems with maintaining the quality of the recycled waste materials and hence the sustainability of subsequent secondary products manufacturing (Ooi, 1995). In 1992, ENV established the Waste Minimization Department (WMD). Its responsibilities are to develop, promote and direct the implementation of waste minimization programs on a nationwide basis. A free waste audit program was launched by WMD in August 1992 to help in the waste management of oce buildings through identifying the type and quantity of waste produced. WMD also advises on recycling measures to minimize waste output and works closely with industry, trade associations and business groups to promote and co-ordinate eorts on waste minimization. In 1993, Working Committees were formed with Singapore Retail Associations (SRA) to promote minimal packaging for consumer products and with the Singapore Hotel Association (SHA), Singapore Manufacturer Association (SMA), Jurong Town Corporation (JTC) and Singapore Fruit Association to initiate waste minimization projects in the respective industry areas. A successful example is the achievement by the Port Authority of Singapore, which has diverted 40% of the total waste generated from its warehouse for recycling (Ministry of Environment, 1997). However, there has not been a full assessment of the success or failure of the various waste minimization programs. A Green Labeling Scheme was also set up in Singapore in 1992 to promote green consumerism among consumers. On 15 June 1999, it handed over the administration of the scheme to the Singapore Environment Council. Products that use recycled materials or produce less waste are eligible to apply for the label. The purpose of the scheme is to inform and encourage customers to choose environmentally friendly products, and to help to create market incentives for manufacturers to develop environmentally friendly products. Approximately 661 products were awarded the Green Label in 1999 (Ministry of Environment, 1999a). In 1999, 1.88 million tonnes or 40.30% of the total 4.67 million tonnes of waste generated in the country

were recovered from the waste stream for recycling. Waste paper accounted for 388,800 tonnes of the recycled waste. In addition, 785,500 tonnes of ferrous scraps were pre-separated at source and collected by waste traders, and another 25,500 tonnes of ferrous scraps were recovered at the incineration plants for recycling. Details of the various categories of waste recycled in 1999 are given in Table 6 (Ministry of Environment, 1999a). A 40% of recycling rate appears to be higher than that reported in the US (< 21.7%) (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996) but lower than 50% achieved in Denmark (Hjelmar, 1996).

7. Future challenges Waste minimization will remain to be one of the major challenges and needs to be implemented more strictly. Currently, there is no limitation on the amount of solid waste that may be generated. While industrial and institutional solid waste may be more easily controlled, minimization of residential solid waste will continue to be dicult. Residential solid waste is currently charged at a xed rate of fee per household for the generation/collection, and has no limitation/control in the actual quantity or volume of solid waste generated. Even the regulation is revised and solid waste is to be charged on the basis of weight/volume (i.e. Pay-AsYou-Throw), the regulation can be dicult to implement. In Singapore, 80% of the residents live in high rising apartments, and solid waste generated from each household is discharged directly at home through a common discharge chute. The quantity of solid waste from each individual household is therefore hard to detect. The convenience of waste discarding, to a certain extent, is also responsible for more solid waste generation. People tend to throw out serviceable goods simply because they are old or outdated and there is no additional cost for their discard. It is therefore important to call for discipline and good social norms, and to boost public awareness and self-consciousness of the problems in solid waste management. Environmental protection campaigns should also be frequently launched, with the media always playing an important role. Recycling in Singapore has proven to be far more costly than originally anticipated. The two factors that interactively raise the costs are the categories of materials collected and their collection and handling. Collection and handling costs have always formed a large component for material recycling, and the quality of waste materials separated for recycling has frequently been inadequate for direct resale. As can be seen in Table 6, metal has been the only material successfully recycled ( > 85% recycle rate) so far due to its low recycling cost. The paper/cardboard recycling rate of 40.3% in 1999 was still much lower

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567 Table 6 Types of solid waste recycled in Singapore in 1999a Waste type Food waste Paper/cardboard Plastics Construction debris Wood/timber Horticultural waste Earth spoils Ferrous metals Non-ferrous metals Used slag Sludge (industry/PUB) Glass Textile/leather Scrap tyres Others Total
a

565

Total waste disposed (tonne) 1,083,500 575,300 162,000 125,700 248,500 75,400 75,400 75,400 14,000 120,100 50,300 30,700 25,100 5600 125,600 2,792,600

Total waste recycled (tonne) 25,000 388,800 29,900 288,500 33,100 45,000 811,000 76,200 177,000 3400 2300 1300 1,881,500

Total waste generated (tonne) 1,108,500 964,100 191,900 414,200 281,600 120,400 75,400 886,400 90,200 297,100 50,300 34,100 25,100 7900 126,900 4,674,100

Recycling rate (%) 2.3 40.3 15.6 69.7 11.8 37.4 91.5 84.5 59.6 10.0 29.1 1.0 40.3

Ministry of Environment (1999a).

than the 55% of recycling rate achieved in Japan (Sakai, 1996). Plastics, widely used in our daily activities, have not been recycled to any satisfactory levels (only 15.6%). Plastic bags and bottles have become one of the major solid waste streams. Disposal of these plastic products, by either landlling or incineration, has presented problems due to their slow decay in the natural environment or the release of toxic chemicals during combustion. Using waste plastics to manufacture polymer concrete and developing biodegradable plastics have received much attention in recent years. The urgency to solve the problem of plastic waste in Singapore therefore needs to be emphasized. So far, most of the recycling practice takes place in the industrial sector. There is certainly much scope for the households and commercial sector to participate more actively in recycling. To make it easier for every resident to be part of the recycling movement, all public waste collectors contracted by the ENV have been required to introduce recycling schemes by the end of 2001. Alvater Jakob and SEMAC have already started to distribute Green Bags to residential households for the recyclable wastes and do the door-to-door collection of the separated materials. However, there is a lack of incentives to promote individuals participation in greater roles in recycling wastes. Also, what to do with the separated materials is another challenge. To sustain the waste separation and recycling programs, Singapore may needs to set up its own waste recycling industry. In addition, the impact of waste recycling on the operation of the existing and future waste incineration facilities needs to be investigated. Although incineration has been given top priority and may continue to play a major role in the reduction of solid waste volume in the foreseeable future, Singapore

still faces a large quantity of solid waste to be landlled annually. In view of this, alternative ways to utilize the ashes from incineration plants, rather than landll, need to be promoted. In the Netherlands, more than 90% of the annual bottom ash from waste incineration is utilized in embankment and roadbase applications, and y ash is also utilized as admixture in the preparation of asphalt ller (van der Sloot, 1996). In Germany, 60% of the bottom ash from the municipal solid waste incineration is utilized in road construction (Vehlow, 1996). Incineration bottom ash is also used in the US as an aggregate substitute in road construction and in asphalt pavement (Eighmy and Kosson, 1996). In Singapore, recent research has shown that incineration ashes may be used as a partial substitute for cement in the manufacture of concrete products, such as paving blocks. However, the release of toxic substances in the air, soil and groundwater is of public concern. Salts and acids present in the ashes may also intensify the solubilization of heavy metals due to the high rainfall, humidity and temperature in Singapore. Little examination of the possibility for stabilizing the ashes in useable media has been taken. Research is needed to provide information on the long-term eects of these reusing programs as well as the post-reuse eect. In addition, other waste transformation techniques, such as pyrolysis and gasication, should also be investigated, although they are still expensive now. Biological treatment of organic solid wastes, such as composting and anaerobic digesting, has played an important role in many other countries. The success of these technologies relies on securing a stable market for the treated products. Singapore has one recycling park that produces compost and soil fertilizer. However, this practice has not been widely adopted in Singapore.

566

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567

Food waste, for example, accounted for about 39% of the total solid waste in Singapore but only 2.3% of it was recycled in 1999. Non-toxic contaminated food waste should therefore be separated for biological treatment. This will reduce the energy consumption and cost needed for the incineration of food waste which is high in moisture content. Food waste compost may also be used in planting and grassing in Singapore or exported. Toxic or hazardous waste is managed separately and does not strictly fall into the scope of solid waste management in Singapore. Hazardous waste is dened as waste which by their nature and quality may be potentially detrimental to human health and/or the environment and which require special treatment and disposal (Ministry of Environment, 2000c). This denition, although is general, does not list clearly all hazardous wastes to be controlled. In the context of solid waste management, some hazardous waste may still be handled as normal solid waste. For example, hazardous wastes, such as automotive batteries, nickel/cadmium batteries, automobile scraps, etc., are often found with the domestic solid wastes. A mechanism should therefore be established to prevent any toxic/hazardous wastes from entering and being treated as normal solid waste. Finally, another important fact is that the output of industrial solid waste has now exceeded municipal solid waste, and becomes the major solid waste stream in Singapore. Generally speaking, industrial solid waste still lacks a systematical management mechanism, as compared to the domestic solid waste. At the same time, new problems of industrial solid waste management are emerging as a result of new products and new processes introduced by foreign companies arriving to Singapore. Presently, most of these companies are responsible for their own solid waste disposal. Solid waste that is toxic and is buried in special landlls in other countries may have to nd alternative disposal methods in Singapore. Some of the newer companies may still have their wastes temporarily accumulated/buried within the companys own premises (relatively a small quantity). Waste containers from pharmaceutical or other chemical industries, for example, have become a problem. Many of the containers may be contaminated with toxic chemicals, but a system for their proper handling, reuse or disposal has yet to be established.

solid waste in Singapore has been opted as the least desirable disposal method. Solid waste incineration, although much more expensive, has been given top priority over all other waste transformation options. It has been planned to incinerate all incinerable solid waste, and to allow only non-incinerable solid waste and incineration ashes for landll. Waste minimization, including source reduction and recycling, has been promoted, which resulted in a reduction of industrial solid waste in the past 24 years. A program for domestic solid waste separation at source will be implemented in 2001 to promote material recycling. The services, such as waste collection and incineration, are now gradually privatized to introduce competition and improve service eciency. Future challenges are seen to include (1) a full evaluation of the success and failure of the existing waste minimization programs and the implementation of a more rigorous and eective waste minimization program; (2) alternative disposal and utilization of incineration ashes; (3) systematic industrial solid waste management; and (4) establishment of new regulations and/or change of existing regulations for a more eciently integrated waste management system.

References
Department of Statistics, 2000a. Singapore in Figures 2000. Department of Statistics, Singapore. Department of Statistics, 2000b. Selected Historical Data. Department of Statistics, Singapore. Eighmy, T.T., Kosson, D.S.U.S.A., 1996. National overview of waste management. Waste Management 16, 361. Hjelmar, O., 1996. Waste management in Denmark. Waste Management 16, 389. Hopper, J.R., Yaws, C.L., Ho, T.C., Vickhailak, M., 1993. Waste minimization by process modication. Waste Management 13, 3. Low, F.L., 1990. Solid Waste Management. Ministry of the Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 1997. Annual Report. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 1998a. Annual Report. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 1998b. Code of Practice for Waste Collectors. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 1999a. Annual Report. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 1999b. Revision of Refuse Disposal Fee. Press Release. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 2000a. Annual Report. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 2000b. News Release, No. 163. Ministry of Environment, Singapore. Ministry of Environment, 2000c. Management of Hazardous Wastes in Singapore. Ministry of Environment Singapores Web Page. Muttamara, S., Sales, C.L., Phunsiri, S., 1996. Solid waste recycling, disposal and management in Bangkok. J. Solid Waste Technol. Manage. 23, 226.

8. Conclusion Rapid industrialization and economic development has caused tremendous increase of solid waste generation in Singapore. The output of industrial solid waste has exceeded domestic solid waste and becomes the major solid waste stream. Because of the very limited landll capacity for waste disposal and the need to conserve this limited capacity for future, landlling of

R. Bai, M. Sutanto / Waste Management 22 (2002) 557567 Ooi, G.L., 1995. Environment and The CitySharing Singapores Experience and Future Challenges. Times Academic Press, Singapore. Sakai, S., 1996. Municipal solid waste management in Japan. Waste Management 16, 395. Sakai, S., Sawell, S.E., Chandler, A.J., Eighmy, T.T., Kosson, D.S., Vehlow, J., van der Sloot, H.A., Hartlen, J., Hjelmar, O., 1996. World trends in municipal solid waste management. Waste Management 16, 341. Sawell, S.E., Hetherington, S.A., Chandler, A.J., 1996. An overview of

567

municiple solid waste management in Canada. Waste Management 16, 351. Swee, M.K., 2000. High costs deter use of refuse system. The Strait Times, Singapore, 11 July. Tchobanoglous, G., 1993. Integrated Solid Waste Management Engineering Principles and Management Issues. McGraw-Hill. van der Sloot, H.A., 1996. Present status of waste management in the Netherlands. Waste Management 16, 375. Vehlow, J., 1996. Municiple solid waste management in Germany. Waste Management 16, 367.