JIMMA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES & TECHNOLOGY

VALORIZATION OF WASTE: ENERGY AND NUTRIENT RECOVERY FROM SOLID

WASTE IN JIMMA TOWN, ETHIOPIA

BY: YOHANNIS FETENE (BSc)

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, COLLEGE OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL
SCIENCES, JIMMA UNIVERSITY FOR PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE MASTER OF SCIENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE &
TECHNOLOGY.

September, 2014

Jimma, Ethiopia
 JIMMA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND MEDICAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMNETAL HEALTH SCIENCES & TECHNOLOGY

VALORIZATION OF WASTE: ENERGY AND NUTRIENT RECOVERY FROM SOLID

WASTE IN JIMMA TOWN, ETHIOPIA

By: YOHANNIS FETENE ASSEGU (BSc)

ADVISORS:

1. ABEBE BEYENE (PhD)

2. TAFERE ADDIS (MSc)

September, 2014

Jimma, Ethiopia

2
Declaration

I, the undersigned, declare that this research paper is my original work and has not been
presented for a degree in any other university and that all sources of materials used for
the research paper has been duly acknowledged.

Name: YOHANNIS FETENE ASSEGU

Signature: _________________________

Date of submission: _____________________________

This research paper has been submitted for examination with my approval as University advisor:

_________________________________

DR. ABEBE BEYENE (PhD, Ass. Prof.) (advisor)

_____________________________

Mr. TAFFERE ADDIS (MSc) (advisor)

_____________________________

Department Head

3
Abstract
Solid waste, which is a consequence of day-to-day activity of human kind, needs to be managed
properly. Jimma, like other towns in the country, faces problems associated with poorly
managed solid waste operation. This poor solid waste management and urban growth are posing
a threat on sustainable development, which results in human health problem and environmental
pollution. This study deals with evaluating the quantity, composition, energy potential and
nutrient value. A cross-sectional study design was used to assess the composition as well as the
physical and chemical properties of the residential solid waste. The daily solid waste generation
and composition of household solid wastes were determined following standard protocols.
Estimates of the energy content were made results using bomb calorimeter and models
developed on physical composition and proximate analysis. Physical characterization showed
that food, yard, textile, leather, rubber, wood, yard, metal, plastic and paper waste were
the constituents of all collected waste samples in the study area, but in varying proportions.
Proximate analysis showed household solid waste characteristics as: moisture, volatile matter,
fixed carbon, and ash content, being 49.38, 41.21, 6.10, and 3.31%, respectively. The total solid
waste generated daily from Jimma town household was estimated to be 77,364.46 kg, and the
average per capita generation rate was 0.50 ± 0.08 kg/capita/day. The energy content of
household solid waste was estimated to be 17.50 MJ/kg for gross heating value (HHV), and
9.54 MJ/kg for net heating value (LHV). Such difference between HHV and LHV is due to high
portion of water content of solid waste. Results from selected models showed higher heating
values, but still equivalent with the experimental value of 17.5 MJ/kg and fit the minimum level
of 7 MJ/Kg net heating value required for incineration projects. Further analysis showed that
biodegradable organic waste constituted 62.75% by weight with an average moisture content of
49.38% and good nutrient contents suggest the applicability of household solid waste stream for
implementing composting operations. In conclusion we suggest that the residential solid waste
can be used as a valuable resource for recycling in the form of organic fertilizer and energy
recovery. As such, an economic benefit can be obtained from this waste while avoiding the cost
of treatments and disposal. Further study is required with detail analysis of solid waste to
optimize its use for both nutrient and energy recovery.

4
Acknowledgment
I owe a special debt of gratitude to my advisors Dr. Abebe Beyene and Mr. Taffere Addis for
their support, guidance and valuable comment to bring this work for this stage.

I would like to extend my thanks to Jimma University for funding this research particularly to
Environmental Health Science and Technology department that gave the permission to use all
required equipment and the necessary materials to conduct and complete this thesis. I am also
very grateful to staffs of graduated laboratories, especially to Mr. Yared Getachew and soil
laboratory of JUAVM College, especially to Mr. Gebremedin & Mikias who assist me in the
laboratory.

My special acknowledgment also goes to my friends particularly Mr. Gashaw Adugna and Mr.
Derege Kitaba for their kindly contribution on data collection.

I have to appreciate the guidance given by other department staff as well as the panels especially
in my proposal and mock defense that has improved my thesis presentation skills thanks to their
comment and advices. Special thanks go to my classmate who helps me to assemble literatures,
procedures, and suggestions.

Furthermore, I would also like to acknowledge with much appreciation the crucial role of my
families, especially to my dearest sister Nigist Fetene and Mr. Kassahun Kebede (Jimma
University External Office) sponsored me, for their all rounded support, giving hope to be here.

Above all, thanks to the almighty God; without His will, nothing could have happened.

5
 Table of Contents

Contents Page
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................ i

Acknowledgment ........................................................................................................................ ii

Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... iii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... v

List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ vi

Abbreviation .............................................................................................................................. vii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Statements of the problems .................................................................................................. 3

1.3. Significance of the study ...................................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER TWO: LITRATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 7

2.1. Municipal Solid Waste (Source and Components) .............................................................. 7

2.2. Existing Solid Waste Management System in JimmaTown ................................................ 8

2.3. Effects and Impacts of Municipal Solid Waste ................................................................. 11

2.4. Source Reduction, Reuse and Recycle ............................................................................... 12

2.5. Energy Potential of Solid Waste ........................................................................................ 14

2.6. Parameters affecting Energy Recovery .............................................................................. 17

CHAPTER THREE: OBJECTIVE ............................................................................................... 21

2.1. General Objective ............................................................................................................... 21

2.2. Specific Objectives ............................................................................................................. 21

CHAPTER FOUR: METHODS AND MATERIALS .................................................................. 22

4.1. Study Area .......................................................................................................................... 22

4.2. Study Design and Period .................................................................................................... 22

6
 4.3. Sample Size Determination ................................................................................................ 23

4.4. Sampling Technique and Procedure ................................................................................... 23

4.5. Waste Collection and Sorting Procedure ........................................................................... 24

4.5.1. Quartering Method ...................................................................................................... 25

4.6. Proximate, Clorific Value and Elemental Analysis ........................................................... 25

4.6.1. Proximate Analysis ...................................................................................................... 26

4.6.2. Calorific Value ............................................................................................................ 27

4.6.3. Elemental Analysis ...................................................................................................... 28

4.7. Solid Waste Bio-Char Production and Characterization .................................................... 29

4.8. Instrument........................................................................................................................... 30

4.9. Operational Definition........................................................................................................ 30

4.10. Data Analysis ................................................................................................................... 31

4.11. Limitation od the Study .................................................................................................... 31

4.12. Quality Assurance ............................................................................................................ 31

4.13. Ethical Consideration ....................................................................................................... 32

4.14. Dissemination Plan........................................................................................................... 32

CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 33

5.1. Generation Rate and Waste Composition .......................................................................... 33

5.1.1. Waste Composition...................................................................................................... 33

5.1.2. Generation of Household Solid Waste ........................................................................ 34

5.1.3. Waste Density ............................................................................................................. 35

5.2. Analysis of Chemical Composition of the Waste ............................................................. 35

5.2.1. Proximate Analysis ...................................................................................................... 35

5.2.2. Elemental Analysis ...................................................................................................... 37

5.3. Calorific Value ................................................................................................................... 38

7
 5.3.1. Experimental Result Using Bomb Calorimeter ........................................................... 38

5.3.2. Mathematical Models Predicted Result ....................................................................... 38

5.4. Solid Waste Bio-char ......................................................................................................... 40

5.4.1. Solid Waste Bio-char Heating Value and Nutrient Determination ............................. 40

CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION ................................................................................................... 41

CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION .......................................... 49

7.1. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................... 49

7.2. Recommendation................................................................................................................ 50

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 51

ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................... 58

8
List of Tables
Table 1: The desirable range of important waste parameters for technical viability of
energy recovery through different treatment (Amanuel, 2011) ............................................. 19
Table 2: Some of the models available from literature review for the prediction of heating
value ........................................................................................................................................ 28
Table 3: Summary of parameters and their corresponding test methods .............................................. 29
Table 4: Average of household solid waste composition percentage by weight in Jimma town ...... 33
Table 5: Estimated household solid waste generation rates by weight and volume in a year in
Jimma town ............................................................................................................................. 35
Table 6: Density of household solid waste by components .................................................................. 35
Table 7: Representative proximate composition of household solid waste (dry basis) of Jimma
town......................................................................................................................................... 37
Table 8: Comparative Nutritional values and C/N ratio of solid waste and chemical fertilizer
samples.................................................................................................................................... 37
Table 9: Energy contents (HHV) of household solid waste ................................................................. 38
Table 10: Average chemical composition of household solid waste bio-char...................................... 40
Table 11: Typical calorific values for alternative fuels/raw Mterials. .................................................. 44

9
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual framework .......................................................................................................... 20
Figure 2: Variation of waste categories quantity during one week ...................................................... 34
Figure 3: Obtained results from proximate analysis (wet basis) of collected sample at Jimma
town residents ....................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 4: HHV values (MJ/kg) from model based on proximate analysis ........................................... 39
Figure 5: HHV values (MJ/kg) from model based on compositional analysis. .................................... 39

10
Abbreviation
AOAC Association of Official Analytical Chemist
APHA American Public Health Association
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BTU British Thermal Unit
C:N Carbon Nitrogen Ratio
CIWMB California Integrated Waste Manangement Board
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
Fo Percentage of food waste [%]

HHV Higher Heating Value [MJ/kg]

Km Kilo Meter
LHV Lowest Heat Value [MJ/kg]
M Moisture content, mass fraction decimal
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
MWhel Mega Watt hour of electric energy
Pa Percentage of paper/cardboard [%]

PIC Products of Incomplete Combustion

Pl Percentage of plastic [%]

PVC Polyvinyl chloride

Or Percentage of organic material (food, yard) [%]

SWM Solid Waste Management

RDF Refuse Derived Fuel
TWh Tone Watt-hour
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNEPA United Nations Environmental Protection Agency
VS Volatile Solid
W Moisture content [%]

Wt. Weight

11
 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
As the world hurtles toward its urban future, the amount of MSW, one of the most important by-
products of an urban lifestyle, is growing even faster than the rate of urbanization (Hoornweg
and Perinaz, 2012). The World Bank report in 2002 that there were 2.9 billion urban residents
who generated about 0.64 kg of MSW per person per day. This report estimates that in 2012
these amounts had increased to about 3 billion residents generating 1.2 kg per person per day
(Hoornweg and Perinaz, 2012). For these reason in developed nations, waste management
basically starts from source reduction and recycling, landfilling and combustion for energy in
modern incineration or gasification systems. In some countries, the organic fraction of the waste
is treated by anaerobic digestion to produce biogas for fuel consumption (Suberu et al., 2012).
But the problem of waste management is a primordial and present issue in developing countries
in Africa, particularly Sub-Saharan. Waste generation in Sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 62
million tons per year. Per capita waste generation is generally low in this region, but spans a
wide range, from 0.09 to 3.0 kg per person per day, with an average of 0.65 kg/capita/day
(Hoornweg and Perinaz, 2012). Transformation of the existing trends in MSW management is
necessary for ensuring sustainable environments and other objectives (Abila and Kantola, 2013).

In developed countries, the daily life of people can generate greater quantity of solid waste than
developing countries. However most parts of developed nations are efficient in handling waste
when compared to developing countries because of waste to energy technology, give emphasis
for waste management in urban planning, focus on product design, institutionally efficient etc.
And the capacity of developing countries to collect, process and dispose waste is limited due to
inadequate infrastructure, finance, inefficient institutional capacity and structure, and low level
of awareness systems (Yimer and Sahu, 2014; (Cheru, 2011). For example, Hoornweg and
Perinaz (2012) stated that regions in low-income countries tend to have low collection rates, only
46% of the solid waste generated is estimated to be collected compared to the highest collection
efficiency at 98% of high income countries (Hoornweg and Perinaz, 2012). The low collection
rate situations introduced numerous discomforts to communities and threaten humans’ health
through direct contact and contamination of water and soil.

12
In majority of Sub-Sahara African countries the collected waste is indiscriminately thrown away
at landfill sites which can pose great threats to water, soil and air environments as well as human
health. Moreover, as the existing dumping sites are filled quickly, finding other new sites
becomes more and more difficult. Hence, the cost of disposing solid waste increases. The
continuous haphazard disposal of solid waste is accelerating and is linked to poverty, poor
governance, poor standards of living, and low level of environmental awareness and inadequate
knowledge of environmental management (Suberu et al., 2012). Waste collection, transportation
and disposal play a very significant role in any complete waste management practice. Similarly,
the current condition of MSW management service in different towns of Ethiopia is also
becoming a challenge for municipalities. A controlled solid waste disposal system is practiced in
small coverage (Cheru, 2011). That means, small proportions of the urban dwellers are served
and a large quantity of solid waste left uncollected.

Among major towns of Ethiopia, Jimma is one of the major town of Ethiopia by which proper
provision of solid waste management services is still unsatisfactory and incomplete (Tegegn,
2008). Due to the ever greenness of the city, there are piles of rotting vegetables, fruits, fallen
leafs, and other wastes around streets, riverbanks, market areas, and open lots. The practice of
chewing khat is familiar in Jimma town, its by-product the so-called "Garaba" also contribute
waste quantity of the city. The study done in Jimma town indicated that 54% of wastes are
organic in nature (Getahun et al., 2012), that arises primarily from the preparation of food for
human consumption.

According to Tegegn (2008), in Jimma town illegal dumping of waste on open space, drainage
lines, street sides and, besides individual houses and market areas is considered as routine task
of residents. Study reveals that the municipal solid waste generated by the population of Jimma
town not properly collected and indiscriminately thrown away at the various dumping site on the
periphery of urban centers, in ditches, riverbank and in the residential and market area, or at a
number of so-called temporary sites. According to the data for 2012 households took the lion
share of solid waste generated in the city (Getahun et al., 2012). From the total solid waste
generated in the town, household took 87%, street 0.1%, institutions and commercial centers
13% (Getahun et al., 2012). Besides, solid waste collection and disposing practices the number,
distribution and sitting of waste storage containers are also another problems of solid waste

13
management of Jimma town. The containers are so few and unevenly distributed, irrespective of
the density and optimum travel distance of the beneficiaries. Therefore, peoples throw waste at
the vicinity of the city. And also due to containers pickup time not consistent and frequent it
became the center of disposal and collection of animals like goat, cat, dog, vulture etc. These
spoils the beauty of the town and it affects the health of the inhabitants and poor environmental
quality of town depriving citizens a good quality of life as it affects their health and
consequently, affect productivity and economic development adversely (Tegegn, 2008).

The efforts made by the municipality of Jimma town to change the situation in the town are also
insufficient as it compared to the extent of the problem. Therefore, in order to reduce this
situation and achieve efficient solid waste management system of the town, alternative ways of
solid waste management service are required. Power generation from solid waste is one of the
stringent measures adopted by international communities to prevent escalation of harsh
environmental conditions (Suberu et al., 2012). Application of bio-waste resources for electricity
and thermal heat has positive mitigation impact on atmospheric pollutions. On the other hand,
overdependence on fossil fuels combustion for energy raised serious concerns about the health of
living organisms and their immediate environment (Suberu et al., 2012).

Conversion of biomass to energy to replace traditional fuel and use of the biogas slurry as a
fertilizer is the current focus of the national biogas program of Ethiopia. Therefore, the
significance of using solid waste as a substrate for energy production is doubly laden that means
it is a win-win approach (waste to energy) of utilizing it. For instance, gasification/pyrolysis has
the tendency to reduce the mass of the waste by 70-80% and volume 80-90% while preserving
the land area for waste land filing (Suberu et al., 2012).

1.2. Statements of the problems

Solid waste is inextricably linked to urbanization and economic development. Duly the volume
of waste generated in the world today is enormous (Hoornweg and Perinaz 2012). As of 2011,
the world generated an estimated two billion tons of MSW, and this number is expected to grow
much higher (Amoo and Fagbenle, 2013). The actual per capita rates, however, are highly
variable, as there are considerable differences in waste generation rates across countries, between
cities, and even within cities (Hoornweg and Perinaz 2012).

14
Despite progress in solid waste management practices in the decade fundamental institutional,
financial, social, and environmental problems still exist. It is determined by the variation in
waste quantity and composition, which are due to difference in consumption pattern,
recycling/reuse at source, the standard of living, and culture in the city (Ramesha and Diganta,
2012). Conventional waste management focuses largely on waste collection and disposal
(landfills). Only limited attempts are made to adopt integrated waste management practices that
involve waste reduction at the source, resource recovery and recycling (Gupte and Saptarshi,
2012). As a consequence of these practices, many cities in developing countries are facing
environmental and health risks as well as losing economic opportunities in terms of the resource
value of the waste. From a sustainable development perspective, the focus is on reduction of
waste, followed by recycling, both of which are advantageous in terms of reducing waste volume
and GHGs emissions. Several analysis done using the USEPA models show that waste to energy
avoids 36 million tons of greenhouse gases yearly. However, not all wastes are recyclable, and as
such, an energy recovery method becomes essential (Amoo and Fagbenle, 2013).

In most cities and towns of developing world like Ethiopia, inappropriate handling and disposal
of MSW is the most visible cause of environmental degradation, such as air pollution, soil
contamination, surface and groundwater pollution, etc (Amare, 2010). Similar development
characterizes Jimma city which is a challenge in constructing operational and sustainable solid
waste management systems (Filaba, 2008).

Jimma, the largest city in southwestern Ethiopia lacks waste treatment systems. Its solid waste
management is poor. This is due to no source separation or sorting, the organization of
operations and management structure, collection and disposal systems are poorly organized. And
also in the town there is no properly engineered and structured landfilling site, energy recovery
and composting are not practiced as alternatives for waste recovery. For this reason there is high
risk to human health, and pollution of the environment (air, soil and water) is evident. According
to Getahun et al. (2011) open dumping was the major disposal techniques for 35% of residents of
the city where as 22% of the city residents were using open burning on any vacant space they
found. This implies that the municipal service only collects 25% of the waste generated. It is also
important to note that about 54% of the solid waste generated in Jimma town is biodegradable. It
means that, if appropriately employed, waste recycling options through composting would help

15
to significantly reduce the waste management burden of Jimma town. But to implement such
options nutrient value of the waste should be determined.

Few papers have discussed the trends of MSW management in Jimma town. For example, Faris
(1999) discussed the various practices and awareness of solid waste management. Tegegn (2008)
studied the household solid waste generation rate and physical composition analysis. Getahun et
al (2012) conducted MSW generation current practices and relation to socioeconomic factors.
While these studies have mainly focused on MSW quantity, generation rate and management
practices in Jimma city. But its full waste composition and characteristics analysis, suitability for
power generation has not yet been addressed.

Widespread method in the world for disposal of MSW is landfilling, eventhough it has capability
to control the wastes. However the method has several disadvantages, such as hazardous gas
emissions and leachate production. For these reasons, it is necessary to consider alternative
MSW management strategies like recovery of energy and composting. Yhdego (1993) has
reported that composting reduces the volume of waste send to a landfill, up to 50 - 60%. And
study conducted by Getahun et al. (2011) examined the effect of different turning frequencies in
composting biodegradable municipal solid waste and concluded that composting of municipal
solid waste can be the best strategy to manage solid waste and boost agricultural productivity.

On the other hand, a limited supply of natural resources combined with an ever growing demand
for energy and raw materials has promoted the development of recovering latent energy
resources from municipal solid waste (Amin, 2011). Study conducted by Rao et al. (2010)
indicated that the potential energy that could be produced from solid waste in India tops 905
kcal/kg (Rao et al., 2010).

Therefore, it would be of interest to study valorization of biomass for energy and nutrient
recovery of waste treatment to decrease the burden on the environment. Recently Gebrehiwot
(2011) studied the potential of biogas production using organic MSW. But this study focuses on
biogas (methane) estimation and their properties such as total solid, volatile solid and moisture
contents. In order to predict the potential use of solid waste as a source of energy, the most
relevant parameter to consider is the LHV, because it represents the energy actually available to
be converted into heat and/ or electricity (Gagliardi, 1982).

16
The base of successful planning for a solid waste management system is obtaining reliable
information about the generation rate, physical and chemical characteristics, nutrient value of
waste being generated. These obtained information determines the decisions for appropriate
management system. It is thus a prerequisite for solid waste program mangers to have detail
information about the solid waste to set appropriate management system or plan.

Thus, this research was conducted to characterize the different categories of household solid
waste, predict the energy potential and nutrient value of household solid waste. The result will
have paramount importance in providing relevant information basic to design appropriate solid
waste management system in the town of Jimma.

1.3. Significance of the study

This study could give clue about valorization particularly energy and nutrient recovery. This
laboratory based study could also initiate developments and implementation of eco-friendly
managements of solid waste. Further, the data can be used as a baseline for future investigation

17
 CHAPTER TWO: LITRATURE REVIEW
2.1. Municipal Solid Waste (Source and Components)
Solid wastes can be defined as all wastes in solid form which are discarded as useless or
unwanted and in general arise from human activities (Peavy et al., 1985). According to
Kazimbaya and Mwale (2001), solid wastes could be also defined as non-liquid and non-gaseous
products of human activities, regarded as being useless (Babayemi and Dauda, 2009). The
primary source of solid waste is the production of commodities and byproducts from solid
materials. The natural cycle of plant growth and decay is a secondary source of solid waste,
which is responsible for the portion of the waste stream referred to as yard waste or vegetative
waste (Liu and Liptak, 1997).

In terms of generation sites, the principal sources of municipal solid waste are homes,
businesses, and institutions (Tegegn, 2008). In developing countries, MSW also contains various
amounts of industrial wastes from small scale industries (Cheru, 2011). The majority of
substances composing it in developing countries include paper, kitchen waste, plastics, metals,
textiles, rubber, and glass (Getahun et al., 2011).

The most important parameter in solid waste management is the quantity to be managed. The
quantity determines the size and number of the facilities and equipment required to manage the
waste. Also important, the fee collected for each unit quantity of waste delivered to the facility
(the tipping fee) is based on the projected cost of operating a facility divided by the quantity of
waste the facility receives (Peavy et al., 1985).

The quantity of solid waste can be expressed in units of volume (typically cubic yards or cubic
meters) or in units of weight (kg, metric tons). The advantage of measuring quantity in terms of
weight rather than volume is that weight is fairly constant for a given set of discarded objects,
whereas volume is highly variable (Bailie et al., 1999). For this study both weight and volume
units are used to measure the quantity of the waste being generated.

Municipal solid waste management is the generation, separation, collection, transfer,

transportation and disposal of waste in a way that takes in to account public health, economics,
conservation, aesthetics, and the environment, and is responsive to public demands (Khan et
al., 2012; Tegegn, 2008). According to the Tegegn (2008), overall goal of solid waste

18
management should be to collect, treat and dispose of solid wastes generated by all population
groups in an environmentally and socially satisfactory manner using the most economical means
available. There is a need for a complete rethinking of “waste” to analyze if waste is waste. A
thinking that calls for waste to become wealth, refuse become resource, trash to become cash
(Tegegn, 2008). Managing solid waste is one of the most essential services which often fail due
to rapid urbanization along with drastic increase of the waste quantity and variety of the waste
composition. Waste management systems which may be successful at one place are difficult to
accept for other places due to waste quantity and composition which vary from country to
country.

In Ethiopia city councils and municipalities have insufficient means to solve the problems of
solid waste management. There is no clear cost recovery structure related to solid waste
management in Ethiopia, hence, there is an extremely low level of returns for efforts put into
dealing with solid waste. The solid waste management institutions not only lack funds, but their
capacity to work in partnership with the local communities is also limited (Amare, 2010).

According to Ethiopian Environmental Review, since the year 2001, most municipalities and city
councils in Ethiopia have become aware of the negative consequences of poor solid waste
management and have devised and implemented a system to collect and dispose of solid waste
that involves waste collection associations (Amare, 2010). A study conducted in 2004 by UNDP
in Bahir Dar, Mekele, Adama, and Hawassa showed that their municipalities collected and
disposed of 46, 48, 54, and 50 percent of the solid waste generated daily, respectively (Amare,
2010), (UNDP, 2004).

2.2. Existing Solid Waste Management System in Jimma Town

One of the most important problems of Jimma town is the solid waste management. The
problem extends up to the pollution of the environment, especially water bodies, living areas,
street and ditches. The pollution increases the health risks of the population and reduces
the value of the environment. The city has increasing solid waste generation. Currently, the
daily waste generation of the city is 88,000 kg and the per capita daily generation of municipal
solid waste is 0.55kg/cap/day (Getahun et al., 2012). The amount of solid waste produced in the
residential areas consists of mainly organic materials (54%) such as food, paper of all type,
textile, yard waste etc (Getahun et al., 2012). The implication is serious due to rapid urbanization

19
and rapid population growth and the wastes are not efficiently managed. The major accelerators
of Jimma city urbanization is the growth of institutions of learning particularly Jimma
University, natural increase of population, rural-urban migration, and government policies of
infrastructural development, inputs of nongovernmental organizations, marketing and
transportation, of all sorts that generate both domestic and commercial wastes.

Jimma due to its transportation center and junction point to other most towns of the western part
of the country and evergreen city in south western part of the country, the economic activity is
strong and serves large population that generates large volume of waste. Khat chewing is
popularly known and widely practiced in the town, which produces large amount of waste and
thus increasing the amount of waste generated in the town. According to Mossie (2000) study the
prevalence of khat chewer in Jimma town is 30.6% and among khat chewers, 57.8% were regular
daily khat chewers (Mossie, 2000).

Walking in the town of Jimma from any corner all public spaces like road sides and open spaces
attest eye catching piles of garbage, the use and discarding of plastic bags, commonly called
‘’festal’’ and fallen plant leafs, vegetation leftover and khat by product commonly called
"garaba" are observed everywhere in the town and the trend seems to be increasing. The
relationship between public health and importance of the more obvious way in which aesthetic
are abused in the drooping of litters in towns. Improper management of solid waste could well be
major factor contributing to litter problem, which regarding as a measure of citizens pride in his/
her surroundings (Tegegn, 2008).

But very recently, one small scale micro enterprise called “Abdi Jimma community based waste
management composting MSE" has started the preparation of compost in the area known as
"Becho bore". The enterprise is trying to change organic matter into compost and sell the
compost to those who want to use it as a fertilizer. They started the preparation of compost
very recently and it aims at creating the awareness for the urban population of the fact that
wastes are useful and a means of income.

On the other hand, the role of the informal activity is a good means in reducing the
cost of solid waste collection and disposal service. For example, no one has appreciated
the so-called "Koraliew" (those individuals who buy empty glasses, metals, tins, old shoes

20
etc) in a door-to-door service. These people, apart from collecting usable materials from
homes, they visit containers and disposal sites to gather different materials that they
need. Therefore, since this activity reduces the quantity of solid waste that would have
been collected by the government, their role in the management of solid waste collection and
disposal should be considered as an important informal means of waste management.

Town municipality carries out solid waste management in Jimma town (Abebe and Kebede,
1999). According to city municipality the solid waste management program is under the
department of sanitation, beautification and abattoir service. Two tipper lorry for waste
collection purpose and 54 metallic containers with a capacity of eight cubic meters are available
for waste storage. There are one private sector called "Abamilki" involved in solid waste
collection to help the department in this activity and around thirteen micro scale enterprises
involved in small-scale solid waste collection, transported the waste to the dumpsite. The
collection system in the city is currently based on the application of communal municipality
waste containers and door-to-door collection by the micro scale enterprises. Communal waste
collection is performed by means of containers placed randomly in overcrowded residential and
commercial areas (Getahun et al., 2012). It has showed that collection is undertaken for small
portion of the town, it is arbitrary, neither following a definite program basis nor prescribed
routes (Abebe and Kebede, 1999). As a result of this, the willingness of the population to
cooperate with waste collection operation and to pay for the service is low.

The existing 54 containers cannot serve the entire population of the city because it is believed
that waste is daily produced in each and every household (Asrat, 2006). Another problem that is
a challenge for solid waste management system in the city is the placing of containers.
Containers in each kebele are not evenly distributed. In addition, the filthy and shanty areas
where the containers have been placed have affected the public health and the beauty of the city
and aggravated the improper use of containers by the residents because the stinky smell of the
waste has forced the beneficiaries not to reach the containers and dispose the waste that they
have brought from their home near the containers.

Municipal Solid Waste management in Jimma town starts with collection by vehicles with a
loading capacity of eight cubic meters. Next stage is transportation to the existing dumping sites
which is not properly engineered and managed, pollutant that are released from the disposal sites

21
eventually causing direct and indirect impact to human’s life. The disposal site that is currently
in use for the total of Jimma town is open field located at a distance of about 5 km from the town
on Seka road the so-called kofe. This is an agricultural area where no extra preparation done to
make it proper disposal site (Tegegn, 2008).

2.3. Effects and Impacts of Municipal Solid Waste

Municipal solid waste is abundant, unsightly, and potentially odorous; contains numerous
potential pollutants; and supports both disease-causing organisms and disease-carrying
organisms. Because of these characteristics of municipal solid waste a prompt, effective, and
reliable system is required to isolate solid waste from people and the environment (Liu and
Liptak, 1997).

If there are no proper management of solid wastes it has many negative impacts that may
result. A good understanding about the effects and risks that may arise from improperly managed
solid wastes should have given more emphasis for the management work. Tegegn (2008) lists
the following as the most important effects associated with uncontrolled solid wastes.

 Uncollected wastes cause blockage of drains, which result in flooding and

unsanitary conditions,
 Flies and Mosquitoes breed in some constituents of solid wastes, and flies are
very effective vectors that spread disease,
 Waste dumps are good shelter for rats. Rats consume and spoil food, spread disease,
damage electrical cables and other materials,
 Uncollected wastes degrade the urban environment, discouraging efforts to keep
the streets and open places in a clean and attractive conditions,
 Dangerous items (such as broken glass, razor blades, needles and other healthcare
wastes, aerosol cans and potentially explosive containers) may pose risks of injury or
poisoning, particularly to children and people who sort through waste,
 Waste items that are recycled without being cleaned effectively or sterilized can transmit
infection to later users,
 Polluted water (leachate) flowing from waste dumps and disposal sites can cause serious
pollution of water supplies.

22
  Waste that is treated or disposed of in unsatisfactory ways can cause a severe aesthetic
nuisance in terms of smell and appearance.
 Fires on disposal sites can cause major air pollution, causing illness and reducing
visibility, making disposal sites dangerously unstable, causing explosions of cans,
and possibly spreading to adjacent property and etc.
Infestation of vermin and insects that often serve as potential reservoirs of disease are related to
public health. The practice of throwing wastes into unpaved streets, road ways and vacant land
led to the breeding of rats, with their attendant fleas carrying the germs of disease that result in
disease outbreak which is due to lack of plan for the management of solid (Tegegn, 2008).

When adequate attention is not given to the maintenance of sanitary conditions which is related
to aesthetic consideration there can be the production of odors and unsightly conditions.
Ecological impacts, such as water and air pollutions, also have been attributed to
improper management of solid wastes. For instance, leachate from dumps and poorly engineered
landfills contaminate surface waters and ground waters as it may contain toxic elements
(Ogwueleka and Ogwueleka, 2010).

2.4. Source Reduction, Reuse and Recycle of Solid Waste

Source Reduction means decreasing the amount or toxicity of the materials that we thrown away.
Effective source reduction promotes the use of products that generate the smallest environmental
impacts (USEPA, 2003). It includes:
 Purchasing of long lasting goods
 Seeking products and packaging which are as free of toxics as possible.
 Redesigning products to use fewer raw materials in production, have a longer life, or are
used again after its original use.
Reusing items- by repairing them, donating them to charity and community groups, or selling
them are recommended by international communities to reduce waste. Reusing products, when
possible, is even better than recycling because the item does not need to be reprocessed before it
can be used again. Whereas, recycling turns materials that would otherwise become waste
into valuable resources. In addition, it generates a host of environmental, financial, and social
benefits. Materials like glass, metal, plastics, and paper are collected, separated and sent to

23
facilities that can process them into new materials or products (Bailie et al., 1999; Tegegn,
2008).

Waste reduction is distinguished from recycling, which reduces the quantity of waste requiring
disposal but does not reduce the quantity of material to be managed. Based on the composition of
MSW each of the following measures would have a significant impact on the quantity of MSW
entering the solid waste management system according to (Peavy et al., 1985):
 Leaving grass clippings on the lawn
 Increasing backyard composting and mulching of leaves and other yard wastes
 Selling products in bulk rather than in packages, with the consumer providing the
containers
 Buying no more food than is eaten
 Substituting reusable glass containers for paper, plastic, and single-use glass containers
 Reusing shopping bags
 Placing refuse directly in refuse containers instead of using trash bags
 Using sponges and cloth hand towels in place of paper towels
 Continuing to use clothing and other products until they are worn out, rather than
discarding them when they no longer look new
 Prohibiting distribution of unsolicited printed advertising

Almost all solid waste materials can be recycled in some way if people are willing to devote
enough time and money to the recycling effort. Because time and money are always limited,
distinctions must be drawn between materials that are more and less difficult to recycle. Some
recyclable material becomes unmarketable through contamination during use. A significant
fraction of recyclable material cannot be recovered from the consumer. According to Teka
(2006) in Addis Ababa 10% of the total solid waste generated is composted and recycled. Very
little is done at the waste generating sources and community levels to reduce the volumes of
waste through efficient sorting, recycling and composting activities. Most of the sorting and
recycling of waste at the moment is done by the informal sector (Teka, 2006).

24
A portion of both recyclable and compostable material is lost during processing (sorting
recyclable materials or removing non recyclable and non compostable materials from the waste
stream). Some compostable material does not decompose enough to be included in the finished
compost product and is discarded with the process residue (Tchnobanoglous et al., 1993).

Practically, microbes like bacteria; fungi etc break down the organic matter found in the waste to
produce CO2, water, heat and a stable and nutrient-rich organic product useable for soil
amendment (Becidan, 2007). Many parameters are of importance to optimize the composting
process such as: C/N ratio, particle size/surface area exposed (the smaller the particle, the easier
for micro organisms to work), oxygen/aeration, moisture content, pH level, temperature
(Becidan, 2007). For the vast amount waste to be composted traditional windrow system and
large incubator in-vessel systems are exist as technical solutions. To ensure fast, efficient and
safe decomposition, recommends “active (or fast, hot) composting” operation is preferred to
passive composting where no maintenance is applied. Active composting requires the follow-up
and optimization of aeration, moisture and C/N ratio throughout the composting matter (Baum
and Parker, 1973).

2.5. Energy Potential of Solid Waste

The amount of energy production from the combustion of solid waste provides only a small
proportion of today's soaring power demands, but it is not negligible. There is a call for to supply
energy from other resources due to some fuel are approaching depletion (Ucuncu & Vesilind,
2006). Amanuel (2011) in his study stated that the benefits of energy recovery from municipal
solid wastes are largely unquestionable, both for the energy benefits itself and for the positive
environmental implications, mainly related to the saving of primary energy derived from fossil
fuel. However the waste-to-energy options can be several, leading to different strategies
based on the conversion plant itself and on the possible inclusion of waste pre-treatment units
(Amanuel, 2011).

The annual Swedish biogas production is around 1.3 TWh. Agriculture represents the greatest
potential resource to increase production of biogas in Sweden. This is especially the case for
cultivated crops, but also for waste products such as manure and more food waste could also be
used to produce biogas. The theoretical potential biogas production in Sweden has been

25
estimated to 14 TWh/year that is ten times greater than the current value (Linne and Bryant,
2004)

The annual production of municipal solid waste in Russia accounts for 35 million tons, 337 kg
per capita while around 40% of MSW consists of easily biodegradable food residues or bio-
waste. Annual generation of these in Russia accounts for 14 million tons (50% dry mass). Under
anaerobic digestion of bio-waste, one can obtain 2.1 billion m3 of biogas (70% methane, biogas
yield: 0.3 m3/kg Dry matter) and 2.3 million tons of high quality organo-mineral fertilizers
(Kalyuzhnyi, 2008).

In 2005, 42 million tons of MSW were landfilled in California, about 64% (by weight) of which
is of biological origin (CIWMB, 2007). To reduce the amount of waste destined for landfills, the
organics from MSW can be separated and treated through conversion technologies for volume
reduction and generation of valuable by products, such as biogas energy and compost. The
increasing energy prices make the anaerobic digestion appear to be a more attractive process for
achieving both waste reduction and energy recovery.

Africa is a continent with abundant, diverse and unexploited renewable energy resources that are
yet to be used for improving the livelihood of the vast majority of population (Mshandete &
Parawira, 2009). The same study explain that the production of biogas via anaerobic digestion of
large quantity of agricultural residues, MSW and industrial waste would benefit African society
by providing a clean fuel from renewable feedstock and help end energy poverty. There is a
consensus that achieving the millennium development goals in Africa will require a significant
expansion of access to modern and alternative renewable energy (Mshandete and Parawira,
2009).

According to assessment on potential for agro-industrial biogas in Kenya, the total potential
installed electric capacity of all sub-sectors MSW, sisel production, coffee production) ranges
from 29 to131 MWhel, generating 202 to 1045 GWhel, which is about 3.2 to 16.4% of the total
Kenyan electricity production of 6360 GWhel as of 2007/2008 (Agro-Industrial-Biogas-in-
Kenya, 2010).

Julius (2005) study, in Ghana, non-conventional energy exploitation through useful harnessing of
biomass energy locked up in urban solid waste into grid energy seems to be a more likely option

26
that has won both political and public debates on alternative energy sources. This option seems
to have found both public and political favor because of its potential dual ability to abate
environmental pollution problems through solid waste reduction and its capability to generate
substantial thermal energy through waste-to-energy conversion by incineration in mass burn or
refuse-derived fuel (Julius, 2005).

(Tay, 1988) discussed waste heat recovered from the boilers can be used to generate electricity:
155 KWh of electricity could be generated for every tone of refuse incinerated. The revenue
collected from the electricity and scrap iron recovered from the incineration plant could offset
the annual operating cost of the plant.

Fruergaard et al. (2010) stated that MSW incineration contributes with 20% of the heat supplied
to the more than 400 district heating networks in Denmark. In evaluation of the environmental
consequences of this heat production, the typical approach has been to assume that other (fossil)
fuels could be saved on a 1:1 basis. He also investigates the consequences of waste-based heat
substitution in two specific Danish district heating networks and the energy-associated
interactions between the plants connected to these networks. Despite almost equal electricity and
heat efficiencies at the waste incinerators connected to the two district heating networks, the
energy and CO2 accounts showed significantly different results: waste incineration in one
network caused a CO2 saving of 48 kg CO2/GJ energy input while in the other network a load of
43 kg CO/GJ.

According to the study by Amanuel (2011), the potential electricity that can be generated by
incineration from 22149497.13kg/year masses of wastes around 2.6MW of electricity could be
generated. This is equivalent to annual saving of 18,049,681birr where the electricity selling
price were 0.29 birr/KWh. And if such waste were landfilled with a valid assumption is made
the potential landfill gas that could be obtained was calculated as 120270.05 m3/year. Taking
this value as the annual potential landfill gas generation, he conclude that the electricity
production potential was around 548,063.94 KWh (Amanuel, 2011).

Gagliardi (1982) has studied the incineration of mixed paper waste with heat recovery and
examined the three alternatives of heating alone, both heating and cooling, and heating, electric
generation and cooling together. He believes that the economic analysis is more favorable for

27
larger systems. He also concludes that paper waste incineration is a disposal method in which
everybody benefits.
Giugliano et al. (2008) compared the process of gasification developed by TPS Termiska,
the process of Battelle gasification, the traditional combustion of MSW in a dedicated grate
combustor and the combustion of RDF in a dedicated grate combustor. He concluded that
gasification shows the best electrical conversion efficiency but has higher operating costs which
outweigh the lower capital costs, thus leading to higher total costs (Giugliano et al., 2008).

2.6. Parameters Affecting Energy Recovery

The main parameters which determine the potential of recovery of energy from wastes
(including MSW) (Das and Hoque, 2014; Charles et al., 1995) are:

 Quantity of waste, and

 Physical and chemical characteristics (quality) of the waste.

The actual production of energy will depend upon specific treatment process employed. The
important physical parameters requiring consideration include:

 Size of constituents
 Density
 Volume

Smaller size of the constituents aids in faster decomposition of the waste. Wastes of the high
density reflect a high proportion of biodegradable organic matter and moisture. Low density
wastes, on the other hand, indicate a high proportion of paper, plastics and other combustibles.
High moisture content causes biodegradable waste fractions to decompose more rapidly than in
dry conditions (Amanuel, 2011).

The important chemical parameters to be considered for determining the energy recovery
potential and the suitability of waste treatment through bio-chemical or thermo-chemical
conversion technologies include: -

 Volatile Solids
 Fixed Carbon content

28
  Moisture content
 Calorific Value
 C/N ratio (Carbon/Nitrogen ratio)

Based on the study of Amin (2011) determination of the heating value of municipal solid waste
samples can be done either experimentally or by using mathematical models. Experimental
determination by using a bomb calorimeter utilize a sample size of one gram which is inadequate
to account for the vast variance in municipal solid waste composition, thus requiring bigger
sample size. Furthermore, he explained the experimental method is tedious and also requires
technical skills in handling the equipment and the combustion by products. As for the
mathematical models, they were created to avoid over reliance on lengthy experimental
techniques (Amin, 2011).

Recently, Julius, (2005) studied the potential of municipal solid wastes for utilization in energy
production in Accra, Ghana, using bomb calorimeter to predict calorific content. And also Ojolo
et al. (2008) studied the potential of biogas production using MSW in Nigeria. This study
focuses on prediction of lower heating value of municipal solid waste in Nigeria. The same
author explained that, in order to predict the potential use of municipal solid waste as a fuel, the
most relevant parameter to consider is the LHV (Ojolo et al., 2008; Ogwueleka and Ogwueleka,
2010).

The Lowest Heating Value is defined as the energy content released from the combustion of the
organic component of MSW in an incinerator and can be used to represent the energy content of
MSW. The energy content of MSW can be determined by: using a full scale boiler as a
calorimeter, a laboratory bomb calorimeter, and calculation based on empirical models
(Ogwueleka and Ogwueleka, 2010).

However, the components of the wastes vary increasingly with the life style and
economic standards of the population. It is therefore necessary to know the exact composition of
wastes under study. According to Charles et al. (1995) the basic component materials in the
citywide waste stream can be classified as: food waste; yard waste; paper waste; plastics waste;
textile waste; rubber and leather waster; glass and ceramic waste; wood waste; metals and
miscellaneous wastes.

29
Regarding the empirical approaches, there are three types of models that are used to predict
calorific values based on the following analyses :
I. Physical composition
II. Ultimate analysis
III. Proximate analysis

Determination of the energy content of the MSW is not an easy task. This is because of
the equipment limitation and the complex nature of the wastes. Also, MSW composition
varies amongst communities and even within one community from year to year, but the
differences is not substantial.

In this study, amount of calorific value determined by using both experimental bomb calorimeter
and mathematical models based on (Abu-Qudais and Abu-Qdais, 2000; Kathiravale et al., 2003)
and (Uson et al., 2012) but due to equipment (Elemental Analyzer) limitation experimental
ultimate analysis has not been performed.

Table 1: The desirable range of important waste parameters for technical viability of
energy recovery through different treatment routes (Amanuel, 2011).

Important Waste Desirable

Waste Treatment Method Basic principle Parameters Range
Thermo-chemical Decomposition of Moisture content < 45 %
Conversion Organic Matter by Volatile matter > 40 %
 Incineration Action of heat Fixed Carbon < 15%
 Pyrolysis Total Inserts < 35%
 Gasification Calorific Value > 1200 kcal/Kg
Moisture content > 50 %
Bio-chemical conversion Decomposition of
Volatile matter > 40 %
Anaerobic Digestion/Bio- Organic Matter by
methanation Microbial Action C/N 25-30

30
 Conceptual Framework

Chemical
Composition
→ MC
→ VM
→ FC
→ AC
Energy
Calorific Prediction
Physical Value
HHs properties → LHV
MSW → Weight Compositio Resource
nal → HHV
Generati → Volume Recovery as
on → Density Analysis Management
Option
Elemental
Analysis
→ TN Nutrient
→ TOC Value
→ TK
→ TP
Mixed Waste → TS

Physical
Biochar
→ pH
Pyrolysis Production &
→ Density
Characterization

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

31
 CHAPTER THREE: OBJECTIVE
2.1. General objective
The objective of this study was to predict the energy potential and nutrient values
from solid waste of Jimma town.

2.2. Specific Objectives

1. To investigate the physicochemical characteristics of different solid waste
components
2. To examine potential energy content of solid waste components
3. To compare the reliability of models in predicting the energy recovery potentials
from different solid waste components
4. To evaluate the potential of using solid waste for energy recovery byproducts as
organic fertilizer or soil amendment

32
 CHAPTER FOUR: METHODS AND MATERIALS
4.1. Study Area
This study was conducted at Jimma town. Jimma is one of the cultural and historical towns in the
southern part of Ethiopia, which has been founded the late 1830s, is locally known as the town of
Aba Jiffar. Since then it has been the center of most of the regimes administration and
commercial activities. It is situated 346 kms from Addis Ababa on the high way of Mettu -
Gambella and Teppi - Mizzan.

The town has a total area of 46.23 square kilometers and is divided into 13 kebeles. The number
of households reported in the town are 27,757 with total population of 155,436 of them 77,267
(49.7%) are females and 78,169 (50.3%) are males (CSA, 2013). Geographically the town lies
between 7° 40' 42" latitude North and 36° 49' 24" longitude East. It is found in an area of
average altitude, of about 5400 ft (1780 m) above sea level. It lies in the climatic zone locally
known as Woyna Dega which is considered ideal for agriculture as well as human settlement.
From a climatic point of view, abundant rainfall makes this region one of the best watered of
Ethiopian part, conducive for agricultural production (Seifu, 2002).

Prior to the detailed data collection, preliminary field visit was made to major parts of the
town including residences and discussions were held with concerned officials and some residents
for preliminary investigation and assessment of the existing solid waste management system in
reference to the different functional elements. This includes the activities such as waste handling
at the source, collection, transportation, resource recovery mechanisms and disposal in the town.

Four kebeles which were considered in this study are Ginjo, Mendera Kochi, Becho Bore and
Hermata Mentina kebeles which were expected to represent all kebeles.

4.2. Study Design and Period

A cross-sectional study conducted from March to April/2014 to assess the physical and chemical
properties of the residential solid waste of Jimma town to predict the energy potential and
nutrient values.

33
4.3. Sample Size Determination
To determine sample size of households participating in the study, a sample size determination
formula developed by Cochran (1977) was used. Mathematical presentation of the formula is
given by Eq. (1 )

z ∗ (p) ∗ (1 − p)
n= (1)
c

Where:

n is sample Size (number of sample to be sorted)

Z is Z-value (95% confidence Interval = 1.96)

p is percentage of waste produced by households

c is confidence interval expressed by decimal (0.056)

According to data obtained from Getahun et al. (2012) the total solid waste generated in Jimma
town, about 87% (P) of the waste are generated from households, the rest 13% from institutions,
commercial centers, and street. Then the calculated sample size given as:

1.96 ∗ (0.87) ∗ (1 − 0.87)

= = 137
0.056

n = 137 was the minimum sample size of housing units for reliable results

4.4. Sampling Technique and Procedure

Jimma town has 27,757 housing unit. These households are stratified in to thirteen kebeles by
city administration. Because of the households in the towns are homogenous in living standards
in all kebeles, four kebeles were selected by simple random sampling technique using SPSS
version 16 random selection, which was applied for all kebeles to gave equal chance to be
selected. The required sample size was calculated using a standard formula (Cochran, 1977),
resulting in a calculated total sample size of 137 households. Then, the sample size of 137
determined above were allocated for the four selected study kebele households based on
population proportion: n1= 41, n2 = 34, n3 = 43 and n4= 19 households from Ginjo, Mendera
Kochi, Becho Bore and Hermata Mentina respectively.

34
Individual households that participated in the study was drawn by systematic random sampling
method. The interval used to select the households for waste collection was determined
depending on the number of total households as ki = Ni/ni for each selected kebeles. The first
house was randomly chosen from the selected kebele, and the subsequent units (households)
were chosen on the basis of N/n. If the selected housing units were not serving as a housing unit;
the next housing number was directly selected. The selected households were informed about the
purpose of the study that it was for scientific purpose and to generate baseline data for the solid
waste management of the town.

The samples were collected from four kebeles at households of the town. The determination of
the mean composition were based on the collection and manual sorting of a number of samples
of waste over a selected time period covering one week time period for each samples (Charles et
al., 1995; Gidarakos et al., 2005).

4.5. Waste Collection and Sorting Procedure

Direct sampling, sorting, weighting and quartering of wastes from the participating households
were conducted for eight consecutive days, but the first day data were discarded to be confident
enough, assuming that it was composite of waste stored for more than one day’s solid waste
generated. In order to have an average result of the whole days of the week, in case of
differences in waste generation between days, for each households were given a plastic bag,
having the same size, labeled with its house code. Next day during collection, another bag with
the same label were given for the next day collection, according to the work plan this process
were continued for a week. Wastes collected from the second to the eight days represent one
week’s solid waste production. Those plastic bags were collected and transported to the analysis
site using a pushcart and horse cart. The waste was collected each morning for sorting and
weighting at becho bore. The collected waste was first weighed to obtain the weight of waste for
each households. Weighing was carried out three times and an average value was taken. This
procedure has been followed throughout the study period.

Waste was sorted into 10 containers by predetermined components. Periodically, during the
analysis the 10 plastic containers were weighed and then emptied. The plastic containers were
weighed (three times as before) to record the amount of waste sorted in each predetermined
categories. Since solid waste density was needed as part of the study, the volume of the waste

35
was measured and recorded at this point just by lift and drop the plastic or wood bucket container
five times to allow the waste to settle. Finally 10 plastic containers were emptied into disposal
facilities provided and these processes were continued until all wastes analyzed.

Homogenized samples, with appropriate sample taking, handling and transportation mechanism,
were taken for proximate analysis to Jimma University Environmental Laboratory and Calorific
Value and Elemental analysis to Ethiopian geological survey laboratory and JIJE Analytical
Testing Service Laboratory.

4.5.1. Quartering Method

Quartering was evaluated for precision and efficiency in the analysis of household solid waste.
These were divided into four sections after cutting large pieces and mixing, and two diagonal
sections are again mixed. The procedures are shown in figure below and they are done several
times by four men. We repeat the procedures several times until solid waste weight is 10-15 kg.

Mixing & Cutting

A
A B D
HHS MSW
A
C D
C D
Sample Separation B Secondary

4.6. Proximate, Calorific Value and Elemental Analysis

Procedures used for analysis are summarized as follows. The laboratory sample consisted of five
sub-samples: food waste, yard waste, papers waste, plastics waste and textile waste. The quantity
of each fraction was based on the weight percentage composition. The inorganic components
including miscellaneous present in the sample (rock, sand, plaster, bones, ashes, paint strippers,
paint residues, other organic and inorganic materials, etc.) were removed from laboratory
analysis after sorting. Therefore, only the selected organic and combustible fraction of the

36
households’ solid waste were analyzed. Based on the above, the results of the analyses of the
household solid waste are expressed on a per organic and combustible fraction basis; that is,
the results are expressed per household solid waste fraction after the removal of the
inorganic components. For the temporary storage and transport of each sample to the laboratory,
waterproof plastic bags were used. The time interval between collection and arrival at the
laboratory was three hour. For the preparation of laboratory samples, necessary safety equipment
like gloves was used. Size reduction of materials was achieved using knives and scissors.

4.6.1. Proximate Analysis

Proximate analysis consists of % moisture content, % ash content, % volatile matter and fixed
carbon were determined by putting sampled waste to different range of temperature, between 100
to 950°C. The samples for proximate analysis were taken from each components of the waste by
homogenizing the total collected sampled waste components. The laboratory methods to
measuring the proximate analysis of samples in this research were conducted according to
ASTM cited in (Gidarakos et al., 2005).

4.6.1.1. Moisture Content

The percent moisture content of the household solid waste samples were determined by weighing
1 kg of the samples into a pre weighed dish and drying the samples in an oven at 105°C for one
hour and it was repeated until a constant weight reached. The percent moisture content was
calculated as a percentage loss in weight before and after drying for each solid waste component.
Eq. (2): cited in (Gidarakos et al., 2005).

Wet Weight − Dry Weight

% Moisture content = 100 (2)
Wet weight

4.6.1.2. Volatile Matter Content

The volatile matter content was determined by ignition of the sample at 950°C. The triplicate
samples of the solid waste components used in the moisture content determination were weighed
and placed in a muffle furnace for 7 minutes at 950°C. After combustion, the samples were
weighed to determine the ash dry weight, with volatile solids being the difference between the
dried solids and the ash, Eq. (3):

37
 Dry sample weight − Ash weight
% VS = 100 (3)
Dry sample weight

4.6.1.3. Ash and Fixed Carbon Content

Ash content of waste is the non-combustible residue left after waste is burnt, which is represents
the natural substances after carbon, oxygen, sulfur and water. Analysis include the dried sample
was heated in a ceramic crucible at 750°C for 1 hour. Fixed carbon was defined by carbon found
in the ash sample was calculated using the following equation (4):

Fixed carbon (Wt% wet basis) = 100 − (Wt % moisture content + Wt % Ash +
Wt % volatile matter) (4)

4.6.3. Calorific Value

The energy content of the organic and combustible components in households solid waste were
determined by experimental bomb calorimeter and mathematical models based on compositional
and proximate analysis result. In experimental determination, known dry weights of solid waste
samples were grounded and milled in a blender and fed into a bomb calorimeter. The samples
were then ignited in excess oxygen at 30 bars using an electric arc where the rise in temperature
due to combustion of the sample was noted and the calorific values of the sample read. The
analysis were performed in triplicates for each samples.

Several empirical models have been developed to describe and predict the energy content of
solid waste (Uson et al., 2012; Amin, 2011; Kathiravale et al., 2003; Abu-Qudais and Abu-
Qdais, 2000). Table 2 summarizes some of the published models that correlate the energy
content of MSW with its compositional and proximate analysis. Models predict HHV, which
assumes that all of the water in the products has condensed to liquid and LHV assumes that none
of the water has condensed. HHV scenario liberates the most amount of energy, as condensation
is an exothermic reaction; hence values are higher than LHV (Abu-Qudais and Abu-Qdais,
2000). The LHV is a better measure than the HHV of the heat released by the waste under actual
operating conditions, however in most instances only HHV is reported. HHV includes the heat of
condensation of water vapor formed in the combustion reaction, which is not realistic for

38
industrial combustion equipment, as water in the final combustion products remains as vapor
(Cooper et al., 1999). An estimate of the LHV is obtained from the measured HHV by
subtracting the heat of vaporization of water in the products, as shown in Eq. (5). Calculation
considers wet weight, heating values at constant pressure, the wet basis moisture content in
mass fraction decimal, and the latent heat of vaporization of water (Komilis et al., 2012).
The difference between HHV and LHV expressed by the following equation:

LHV = HHV(1 − M) − 2.443M (5)

Table 2: Some of the models available from literature review for the prediction of heating
value.

Name Equations Remark Units Reference

Model based on proximate analysis:
Eq. (7) 356.248VM - 6998.497 Dry (Wt %) KJ/Kg Kathiravale, et al (2003)
Eq. (8) 356.047VM - 118.035FC - 5600.613 Dry (Wt %) KJ/Kg Kathiravale, et al (2003)
Eq. (9) 44.75VM - 5.85W + 21.2 Wet (Wt %) Kcal/Kg Kathiravale, et al (2003)
VM = %Volatile Matter, FC = Fixed Carbon, W = Total Moisture
Model based on Compositional analysis:
Abu-Qudais and Abu-
Eq. (10) 0.004(267(pl/pa) + 2285.7) Wet (Wt %) MJ/Kg
Qdais (2000)
0.001(112.15Fo + 183.386Pl +
Eq. (11) Wet (Wt %) MJ/Kg Kathiravale, et al (2003)
5064.701)
0.001(112.157Or + 184.366Pa +
Eq. (12) Wet (Wt %) MJ/Kg Uson, et al (2012)
298.343Pl - 1.92W + 5130.38)
Pl = plastics, Pa = paper, Fo = Food, Or = organic matters

Since no calorific value analyses were performed on the inorganic fraction, to express calorific
value per total commingled household solid waste the values reported here was multiplied by
[1- inorganic fraction of the commingled MSW]. The inorganic fraction of the commingled
household solid waste used in this research work ranged from 0.16 to 0.23.

4.6.4. Elemental/Nutrient Determination

Two to five kilogram household solid waste samples were collected for analysis of organic
carbon, total nitrogen, total potassium, total phosphorus, and total sulfur as nutritional variables

39
were measured following standard procedure and method. Samples were collected with plastic
container from five sub-samples: food waste, yard waste, papers waste, plastics waste and textile
waste components; samples were oven dried and stored in a refrigerator at 4 0C. Then all samples
were transported to JIJE analytical testing service laboratory in an insulated box containing ice
packs. Total nitrogen were determined AOAC official method (Kjeldahl method), organic carbon
were analyzed by APHA 2540G. (loss on ignition at 550⁰c), total phosphorus and potassium
were determined using spectrophotometer and flame photometer, respectively following the
procedures set for the parameter. Summary of parameters and their corresponding test methods
are presented below.

Table 3: Summary of parameters and their corresponding test methods

S/N Parameter Test Method

1 Total Nitrogen (TN) AOAC Official Method 978.04 – Kjeldahl Method
2 Organic Carbon (OC) APHA 2540 G.-Loss on Ignition at 550 ⁰C
3 Total Potassium (TK) AOAC Official Method 923.03-Flame-photometer
4 Total Phosphorus (TP) AOAC Official Method 985.35
5 Total Sulfur (TS) FAO-Ash and Turbidimetric (Spectrophotometer) at 420 nm

The elemental analysis used to achieve/define the Carbon to Nitrogen Ratio (C: N) for biological
conversion process Tchnobanoglous et al. 1993) calculated as Eq.(6)

% Carbon
C: N = (6)
% Nitrogen

4.7. Solid Waste Bio-Char Production and Characterization

The samples used in this study were obtained from Jimma town households, these samples were
mixed (mix of food, yard, paper, plastic and textile wastes) based on weight composition of solid
waste components. The samples were initially dried in an oven (105⁰c).

Bio-chars were produced over three hour and 20 minute periods using a slow pyrolysis process.
Solid waste bio-char was produced in a batch pyrolysis unit at 400⁰c. In these processes, the bio-

40
char mass recovery was calculated as a percentage of the mass of feedstock input (dry wt. DW)
and bio-char mass output (Bio-char mass DW/Feedstock mass DW). Similarly, to assess the
suitability of using the solid waste bio-char for biological conversion, three samples (1 kg each)
of household solid waste bio-char were taken. These samples were analyzed for pH, organic
carbon, total sulfur and main nutrient contents (TN, TP, and TK). Total carbon and nutrient
levels in addition to pH are considered as principal factors regulating the speed and degree of
biological conversion of the waste (Zuccconi and Bertoldi, 1987).

The pH was measured by preparing a mixture of bio-char sample and deionized water (1:5).
After approximately 5 hours, the measurements were taken with pH meter. For nutrient contents,
the samples were first dried and then grinded into powder form. Kjeldahl method was used for
determination of total nitrogen and loss on ignition at 550⁰C for organic carbon. Total potassium
and phosphorous were determined by flame photometry and spectrophotometry methods,
respectively.

4.8. Instrument
To carry out the analysis a number of items of equipment like hand protective plastic gloves for
handling, hand push and horse drown carts and Bajaj car for transport of waste, scales of
different ranges, plastic bag for collection and sorting of solid wastes, trash bag for collection of
already processed wastes and photo cameras to record the research process. Different laboratory
materials like dish, oven, and crucible were used to carry out the research process.

4.9. Operational Definition

 Bio-Char: also called solid product of biomass carbonization, a stable form of carbon, is
produced from pyrolysis of biological materials.
 Calorific Value/ Heating Value: ): is measured using a bomb calorimeter; and defined
as the amount of heat released when dry solid waste is combusted and the products have
returned to a temperature of 25°C. The heat of condensation of the water is included in
the total measured heat. It is measured as a unit of energy per unit mass of substance
(kcal/kg, kJ/kg).
 Compost: The controlled aerobic biological decomposition of organic matter, such as
food, yard, paper waste and textile into humus, a soil-like material.

41
  Density: is the weight per unit volume of material (household solid waste). It is
expressed in kilograms per cubic meter (kg/m3).
 Elemental Analysis: It includes the quantitative determination of carbon, nitrogen, sulfur
and potassium, Phosphorous within a solid waste material.
 Higher Heating Value (HHV): is the higher calorific value measured using a bomb
calorimeter; the heat of condensation of the water is included in the total measured heat.
It is measured as a unit of energy per unit mass of substance (kcal/kg, kJ/kg).
 Lower Heating Value (LHV): is defined as the net calorific value and is determined by
subtracting the heat of vaporization of water vapor (generated during combustion of dry
waste) from the higher heating value (kcal/kg, kJ/kg).
 Pyrolysis: are the thermo-chemical processes that convert solid waste into bio-char by
heating the solid waste in the absence of air.
 Recovery of Energy: recoverable energy is stored in chemical form in all solid waste
materials that contain hydrocarbons; this includes everything except metals, glasses, and
other inorganic materials (sands, rags, plaster, etc).
 Recovery of Materials: recovered paper, plastic, rubber, fiber, metal, and glass can be
re-used to produce similar materials.
 Valorization of Waste: refers to any activities aimed at reusing, recycling or composting
of waste, useful products or source of energy.
 Waste Composition: is the term used to describe the individual components that
make up a solid waste stream and their relative distribution, usually based on percent
by weight.

4.10. Data Analysis

After checking the completeness, missing value, data were entered to computer, processed and
analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2009 and then finally data were presented in tables, graphs.
Generation rate of household solid waste was calculated from the studied household, average
family size of the town (5.6) and total number of housing units (27,575). Data were presented as
mean ± standard deviation.

42
4.11. Limitations of the study
Considering variations between days in waste composition and generation rate, a week round
(seven days) sampling was conducted. However, due to lack of financial resource and time,
seasonal variation was not considered. So the result may vary if repeated in different climate
season.

The proximate analysis, calorific value and nutrient determination were intended to do in all
solid wastes categories or components. However, due to budget constraint it was done only in
five fractions like food, yard, paper, plastic and textiles wastes.

4.12. Quality Assurance

For the sake of data quality assurance sample collection and analysis was conducted carefully
using standard operating procedures (Gidarakos et al., 2005) and double entry of data were
performed to assure quality of data.

4.13. Ethical Consideration

The study was conducted after getting permission from ethical committee of Jimma University,
college of public health and medical sciences. Waste segregation was performed in healthy
condition with protective devices.

4.14. Dissemination Plan

The final result of this study was presented to Jimma University Public Health and Medical
Science, Department of Environmental Health Science and Technology and was disseminated to
concerning ministers, Oromia Regional State, Jimma Zone and other governmental and non-
governmental organizations which are concerned with the study findings. Publication in national
or international journal will also be considered.

43
 CHAPTER FIVE: RESULT
5.1. Generation Rate and Waste Composition
The generation rate and composition of household solid wastes vary considerably according
to changes in life style, commercial activities, population behavior, consumption patterns and
economic growth rates that depend upon the season of the year, days of the week.

5.1.1. Waste Composition

Results of physical composition and typical percentage distribution of household solid waste are
shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Average household solid waste composition percentage by weight in Jimma town.

Components Average % by Wt. + SD

Food waste 31.58 ± 4.22

Yard waste 25.11 ± 2.28
Paper 6.06 ± 0.60
Plastics 10.09 ± 2.06
Textile 3.48 ± 0.41
Rubber and leather 0.76 ± 0.50
Glass and ceramic 1.67 ± 0.83
Wood 1.57 ± 1.10
Metals 0.27 ± 0.25
Miscellaneous 19.41 ± 2.18

NB: Miscellaneous component - including rock, sand, plaster, bones, ashes, paint strippers,
batteries and paint residues, other organic & inorganic materials.

Food waste that include food left over, egg shells, fruit or vegetable peels, and cooked food left
over comprise the largest component of Jimma town household solid waste stream account
31.58%. Yard waste comprises the second largest components, 25.11%, of Jimma town
household solid waste stream. It includes grass clippings, leaves, and tree trimmings. Paper and
paper products comprise 6.06% of household solid waste stream. The products that consists

44
paper and paperboard wastes are newspapers, magazines, exercise books, tissue paper, cigarette
packages, towels, paper plates, cups, corrugated boxes, milk cartons etc. Plastic products
comprise 10.09% of the total household solid waste of the study area. The plastic product
consisting mainly of plastic food items, trash bags, milk and water bottles, and soft drink bottles.
Textile (occurred in discarded clothing, footwear) and rubber and leather products (occurred in
bicycle tires, leather clothing and shoes) were found in Jimma town household solid waste
stream in small amount (3.48 and 0.76% respectively). Glass products comprise 1.67% of the
total household solid waste and occurred primarily in the form of containers as soft drink bottles,
beer bottles, bottles and jars of food, and other consumer products. Metals comprising 0.27% of
the total household solid waste consists mainly of aluminum foil, ferrous metals (iron and steel
found in appliances, furniture, and corroded metal scrap, containers and packaging materials).
Some hazardous materials were also recognized in household solid waste stream of study area
such as paint strippers, batteries and paint residues.

40
37.5
35 Food waste
32.5 Paper
30
27.5 Yard waste
Weight (%)

25 Plastics
22.5
20 Textile
17.5
15 Rubber &Leather
12.5 Glass & Ceramic
10
7.5 Wood
5 Metals
2.5
0 Miscellaneous
Monday Tuesday Wendsday Thursday Friday Saterday Sunday

Figure 2: Variation of waste categories quantity during one week

5.1.2. Generation of Household solid waste

Results of solid waste collected from households in this study over the survey period (seven
days) are summarized in Table 3. And Table 4 shows that household solid waste generation rates

45
of an individual of Jimma town in day, week, month, and year. The result indicated that the
household solid waste generation rate of Jimma city resident was 0.5 kg/capita/day (Table 5).

Table 5: Estimated household solid waste generation rates by weight and volume in a year in
Jimma town

Daily Weekly Monthly Yearly

3 3 3
Wt. (Kg) V (m ) Wt. (Kg) V (m ) Wt. (Kg) V (m ) Wt. (Kg) V (m3)
Per capita 0.50 0.002 3.48 0.014 14.93 0.061 181.67 0.744

5.1.3. Waste Density

Table 6 shows that the density of household solid waste components of Jimma town. The density
of solid waste generated is ranging from 110.35 to 662.59 kg/m3.

Table 6: Density of household solid waste by components

Components Density (Kg/m3)

Food waste 325.9

Paper 118.37
Yard waste 277.43
Plastics 110.35
Textile 186.18
Rubber and leather 152.17
Glass and ceramic 285.69
Wood 202.8
Metals 662.59
Miscellaneous 445.99

5.2. Analysis of Chemical Composition of the Waste

5.2.1. Proximate Analysis

Proximate analysis involves determination of moisture content, volatile matter, ash content and
fixed carbon of sample. The analysis was performed according to ASTM method (Amin, 2011).
The overall proximate analysis of wet waste samples is presented in Fig. 3 which shows that the

46
average moisture content of household wet solid waste sample was 49.38 %, the volatile content
was 41.01% and fixed carbon was 6.09%.

The result also indicated that paper waste has higher volatile matter (87.09%)
(87.09%) next to plastic
waste which had 93.93% volatile matter. And food waste had highest moisture content (69.96%)
compared to other components

100 4.01 0.77 1.75

5.09 2.13 6.43
3.41 4.98 9.94 13.57

15.56 0.65
21.54
80
30.09

Ash content
60
Weight (%)

68.63 Fixed Carbon

87.09 93.93
68.11 Volatile Matter
40
69.96 Moisture Content
59.20

20

17.15
9.90
3.92 2.19
0
Food Paper Yard Plastics Textile Wood
waste waste

Figure 3: Obtained results

sults from proximate analysis (wet
et basis) of collected sample at Jimma
town residents

Proximate composition of solid waste shown in Table 7.. The values in the table are percentages
based on dry (moisture-free)
free) content. Organic and combustible materials,
materials such as paper and
plastic are the components with high percentage of volatile matter usually between 85 to 97%.

47
 Table 7: Representative proximate composition of household solid waste (dry basis) of
Jimma town

Percent (%) Tuesday Thursday Sunday Average

Volatile Matter 76.53 79.14 75.9 77.19

Fixed Carbon 17.69 13.17 18.41 16.42

Ash Contents 5.78 7.69 5.69 6.39

5.2.2. Elemental Analysis

Table 8 shows that a comparative nutrient contents of household solid waste. Yard wastes had
carbon contents of 46.73%. Plastics had the highest carbon contents among all components
(52.4%). Textile had the lowest carbon content (37.96%) among household solid waste
components. Food and paper waste had the carbon content of 45.77 and 45.69% respectively.
Nitrogen was found in high contents in yard waste and textile waste 1.97 and 1.94% respectively.
Paper products had nitrogen contents less than 0.34%. In general, a large variability in the
nitrogen contents among all components was observed.

Table 8: Comparative Nutritional values and C/N ratio of Solid Waste and Chemical fertilizer

MC
Components %OC %TN C/N %TS %TK %TP
Fraction
Yard waste 0.592 46.73 1.97 23.72 0.0045 2.73 0.15
Food waste 0.699 45.77 1.49 30.72 0.0061 2.30 0.14
Textile 0.099 37.96 1.94 19.57 0.0018 0.42 0.07
Plastics 0.0219 52.4 0.08 655.00 0.0021 0.45 0.003
Paper 0.0392 45.69 0.34 134.38 0.0019 0.21 0.03
Composite 0.493 47.02 1.41 33.35 0.004 1.48 0.08
Chemical Fertilizer
22 0.86 25.58 No Specs 0.75 0.18
(Gautam et al., 2010)
MSW Compost
< 50 > 25 >1 < 25 No Specs No Specs No Specs
Standard
OC = Organic Carbon, TN = Total Nitrogen, TS = Total Sulfur,
TK = Total Potassium, TP = Total Phosphorus, MC= Moisture Content, Specs = Specification

48
5.3. Heating value (Calorific value)
5.3.1. Experimental Result Using Bomb Calorimeter
Calorific values for the components of household municipal solid waste are shown in Table 9.
Plastic waste had highest calorific value of 40.81 MJ/kg. And Food waste had lower value of
11.10 MJ/kg.

Table 9: Energy contents (HHV) of household solid waste

Components HHV (MJ/kg) LHV (MJ/kg)

Yard waste 16.40 5.24
Food waste 11.10 1.63
Textile 16.03 14.20
Plastics 40.81 39.86
Paper 16.19 15.46
Composite waste 17.50 9.54
Net calorific Value (Composite SW) 9.54
Moisture Content (%) (Composite SW) 49.38

5.3.2. Mathematical Models Predicted Result

The graphical representation of the obtained HHV data base on compositional and proximate
analysis is presented in Figures 4 and 5. This figure indicates the trend of the predicted HHV
values as compare to selected different days of sampling period. The result of mathematical
model prediction of the HHV of composite household waste shows that Eq. (7) has been 20.50
MJ/kg, Eq. (8) 20.20 MJ/kg and Eq. (9) 13.36MJ/kg (Fig.4).

49
 22.00

20.00
HHV (MJ/Kg)

18.00
Eq. (7)

16.00 Eq. (8)

Eq. (9)
14.00

12.00

10.00
Tuesday Thursday Sunday

Figure 4: HHV values (MJ/kg) from model based on proximate analysis

Food waste, plastic and paper waste are the examples of components which contribute positively
towards the calorific value (HHV). Eq.12 gave higher average HHV of 30.66 MJ/kg and Eq. 10
and Eq. 11 predicted the HHV of Jimma city household solid waste 21.61 and 20.52 MJ/kg
respectively (Figure 5).

35.00

30.00

Eq. (10)
25.00
HHV (MJ/Kg)

Eq. (11)
Eq. (12)

20.00

15.00

10.00
Monday Tuesday Wensday Thursday Friday Saterday Sunday

Figure 5: HHV values (MJ/kg) from model based on Compositional analysis.

50
5.4. Solid Waste Bio-char

5.4.1. Solid Waste Bio-Char Heating Value and Nutrient Determination

Bio-char is prepared from a variety of biomass. The Bio-char from household solid waste had
higher Potassium (2550 mg/kg) than phosphorous (2121.50 mg/kg) and Sulfur (36.34 mg/kg).
The Bio-char had a density of 0.45 kg/m3. The results showed that the pH of Bio-char was near
neutral (7.5) with the carbon and nitrogen content of 41.59 and 1.61% respectively (Table 10).

Table 100: Average Chemical Composition of Household Solid Waste Bio-Char.

Standard Values
Parameters Average values
Suitable for Composting
HHV (MJ/kg) 21.83
LHV (MJ/kg) 9.84
3
Density (kg/m ) 0.45
pH 7.5 5.5-8.0
Carbon (%dry basis) 41.59 30-40
Nitrogen (%dry basis) 1.61 > 0.6
C/N ratio ( total dry basis) 25.83 25 - 50:1
Phosphorus (mg/kg) 2121.5 No specs
Potassium (mg/kg) 2550.37 No specs
Sulfur (mg/kg) 36.34 No specs

51
 CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSION
Composition describes the individual components that make up a solid waste stream and their
relative distribution, usually based on percent by weight. A waste composition study, commonly
known as waste sort, is needed to estimate the fraction of various waste material or items present
in a waste stream. It is done for various projects, such as designing of recycling programs or
finding out whether a waste is suitable for incineration. For this study it was done for finding out
where a waste is suitable for energy recovery and nutrient.

Values based on percentage of collected household solid waste in Jimma town, it was evident
that food waste (~ 31.58%) is the main constituent of waste stream. This result was in agreement
with those results obtained for Ethiopian towns such as Hawassa town (Diriba, 2009), Dessie
town (Cheru, 2011) where the food waste was found to be the major component of the solid
waste stream generated. The study also shown that there were high variability in quantity of food
and yard waste during the sampling period and yard waste fluctuated from 21.71 to 28.17%
(Figure 2). Plastic waste was another important ingredient of household solid waste found to be
of large amount, on average 10.09%. Another main component was the paper and textile waste
which made about 6.06 and 3.48% of the total weight respectively. According to the result from
sorting process, the amount of mixed paper, wood, glass and ceramics and metals that come from
residential were not much different during the sampling period. The result also indicated that
food waste, yard waste followed by plastic film make up the largest fraction of household solid
waste of Jimma town residents.

In general, household solid waste in Jimma town was characterized by a high organic content
with combustible matter consisting of food, yard, textile, paper, and plastic comprising 76.32%
of the total waste suggesting that both decomposable and combustible matter were high. The
estimate of the quantity of waste generation to be handled is crucially important to design
collection services and disposal facilities. Because inappropriate recording of the amount of
waste could lead to over or under provision of collection services or disposal facilities (Diriba,
2009).

The daily generation rate of household’s solid waste in Jimma town varies from 0.42 to 0.61
kg/cap/day with average value of 0.50 ± 0.08 kg/cap/day. A similar survey conducted in Adama

52
town indicates that it varies from 0.11 to 0.57 kg/cap/day (Lema, 2007). And in Makurdi, Nigeria
it was about 0.54 kg/cap/day (Sha’ Ato, et al., 2007). According to Tegegn (2008) the value of
waste generation per capita of Jimma town household was 0.157 Kg/capita/day. Therefore, this
indicates that the solid waste generation rates vary according to time, lifestyle of the people,
urbanization and population growth.

The density of the sampled waste ranged from 116 to 260 kg/m3 within a week study period.
This is in agreement with values documented by (Peavy et al., 1985), which shows that none
compact MSW densities range from 100 to 280 kg/m3. The significance of density in MSW is
that it enables to decide for storage, collection, transportation of waste, and in designing of
sanitary and bioreactor landfills and the managers to plan and identify the capacity of waste
haulage vehicles to be used (Gidarakos et al., 2005).

Selected individual waste component of the household solid waste was later subjected to
proximate analysis for the determination of physicochemical properties. Proximate analysis (wet
basis) in the study area showed household solid waste characteristics as: moisture 49.38%,
volatile matter 41.21%, fixed carbon 6.10%, and ash content 3.31%. Moisture and ash content
represent the noncombustible component of the solid waste. Both are undesirable in the waste as
they add weight to the fuel without adding to the heating value. The volatile matter and the fixed
carbon content are the preferred indicators of the combustion capability of solid waste (Amin,
2011). The awareness of physicochemical characteristics of waste helps in deciding and setting
up a good waste processing and disposal facility in the city and in determination of efficiency of
a waste treatment process (Sapna et al., 2013). The high percentage of the fixed carbon in waste
materials such as textile (15.56%) and yard waste (9.94%) shows that this element requires a
longer detention time on the surface of the furnace to achieve complete combustion compared to
plastics waste, food waste and wood. The result also shows that the high percentage of ash
content in textile, wood, food waste with 6.43, 13.57 and 5.09% respectively, dominating in the
ash content percentage. The composite household solid waste has 41.21% volatile matter, which
was portion of the wastes that is converted into the gas phases during the heating process
(950°C).
The average value of moisture content was found to be 49.38 %. High moisture content of solid
waste has negative and undesirable effect on applicability of the waste for energy recovery as it

53
adds weight to the fuel without adding to the heating value (Das & Hoque, 2014). Result from
moisture content analysis directly affected by the quantity of wet basis materials, such as yard
waste and food waste in waste stream. Higher percentage of yard waste (28.17%) and food waste
(34.79%) on Sunday compared with result on Tuesday (yard waste 22.92 % and food waste
25.33%) is the reason of increasing the percentage of moisture content.

Proximate composition of solid waste shows in Table 7 the values are percentages based on dry
(moisture-free) content. Organic and combustible materials such as paper and plastic are the
components with high percentage of volatile matter usually between 85 to 97%. Collected
samples from households shows the higher volume of these materials on Thursday compare to
other sampling days, is the reason on increasing the volatile matter up to 79.14%.

The estimation of the energy content of household solid waste can be of practical interest in the
design and operation of the related energy conversion systems. Energy content of solid waste
usually described in terms of HHV, LHV, Net Heating Value or Gross Heating Value. In this
paper, the amount of heating value was determined by using experimental analysis and
mathematical models based on compositional and proximate analysis. The experimental result
indicated that the energy content of Jimma town households’ solid waste was 17.50 MJ/kg as dry
basis. The net calorific value (LHV) of the waste was 9.54 MJ/kg and a moisture content of
49.38% (Table 9). However, the moisture content was found to be higher than the desirable
range (< 45), which is important waste parameters stated in Amanuel (2011) for technical
viability of energy recovery through different treatment routes listed by (Amanuel, 2011). The
calorific value of collected solid waste (17.50 MJ/kg) indicates that it can be incinerated without
providing additional fuel and reveals the suitability of Jimma town household solid waste as
energy recovery option. The acceptable recommended range of energy recovery from solid waste
suggested by Whiting (2002) is 7.50 to 12.00 MJ/kg. Jimma town household solid waste has a
comparative result of HHV with poultry pure waste (11.71MJ/kg), wheat straw (17.36 MJ/kg),
sugar cane leaves (17.41MJ/kg), and cotton gin waste (17.48MJ/kg). The results indicated that
such refuse is amenable to several disposal options with less adverse impact on the environment
(Ojolo et al., 2008).

The calorific value of composite (mixed) households solid waste (9.54 - 17.5 MJ/kg) was
approximately about one-half of the calorific value of coal (25-30 MJ/kg) and one-third of fuel

54
oil (45 MJ/kg) and Natural gas (54.75MJ/kg) (Table 11). These might be depends upon the
density and composition of the waste; relative percentage of moisture and inert materials, which
add to the heat loss; ignition temperature; size and shape of the constituents; design of the
combustion system (Peavy et al., 1985).

Table 111: Typical Calorific Values for Alternative Fuels/Raw Materials.

Fuel/Raw Materials HHV (MJ/Kg) Reference

Wood (soft wood) 20.00 (Demirbas, 1997)
Wood (red wood) 20.72 (Jenkins and Ebeling, 1985)
Peat 7.39 (Clemens et al., 1981)
Coal, Lignite 19.20 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Coal, Bituminous 26.20 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Coal, Anthracite 29.50 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Fuel Oil 45.00 (Ityona et al., 2012)
Natural Gas 54.75 (Ityona et al., 2012)
Eucalyptus 18.64 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Eucalyptus-Grandis 19.35 (Grover et al., 2002)
Wheat straw 17.36 (Grover et al., 2002)
Moringa-oleifera (leaves) 14.23 (Grover et al., 2002)
Sugar cane leaves 17.41 (Grover et al., 2002)
Tannery waste 7.87 (Grover et al., 2002)
Cotton gin waste 17.48 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Poultry pure waste 11.71 (Grover et al., 2002)
HHs MSW (Jimma City) 17.50 Present Study
Red wood char (400 -550⁰c) 28.84 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Oak char (450 -650 ⁰c) 24.80 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Coconut shell char (750⁰C) 31.12 (Jigisha et al., 2005)
Rice husk char 14.94 (Grover et al., 2002)
HHs MSW Char (400 ⁰C) 21.83 Present Study

The elemental composition of MSW can significantly vary among countries, regions and
cities, as a result of differences in the physical composition of MSW. The physical composition

55
of MSW is usually dependent on the socio-economic conditions of a country, its population size,
the climatic conditions and the national environmental legislation (Abu-Qudais and Abu-Qdais,
2000).

The knowledge of the calorific value of solid waste is necessary when it is to design waste to
energy technology for energy recovery purposes. When direct calorific value measurements are
not feasible, empirical models can be useful to predict the calorific value of solid waste
(Liu et al., 1996). Several models (Table 2) have been developed to describe and predict the
energy content of mixed solid waste. The common independent variables in such empirical
models are either the elemental composition (Liu et al., 1996), the physical composition (Abu-
Qudais and Abu-Qdais, 2000) and the proximate composition (i.e., the content in volatile matter,
moisture, fixed carbon) of MSW (Kathiravale et al., 2003).

Proximate analysis models were created based on the weight of percentage of the volatile matter,
fixed carbon and moisture contents in solid waste (Kathiravale et al., 2003). The advantage of
using proximate analysis data was that it gave result based on sample sizes where about Eq. (7 –
9) (Liu et al., 1996). Figure 4 shows some of the common models that have been used to estimate
the HHV according to proximate analysis result. The positive point is that, these models do give
an accurate estimation of the calorific values of the samples (Abu-Qudais and Abu-Qdais, 2000;
Amin, 2011; Liu et al., 1996). As figure 4 shows there is small difference between the results
from Eq.7 (20.50 MJ/kg), Eq.8 (20.20 MJ/kg) and they gave almost good prediction of HHV
values as compare to Eq. 9 (13.36 MJ/kg).

Based on compositional analysis the predicted HHV values as compared to selected different
days of sampling period food waste, plastic and paper waste are the examples of components
which contribute positively towards the calorific value. Plastic as an individual component
accounted about 10.09% of the total daily disposal household solid waste of the study area and
contribute greater value the heating value followed by paper and yard waste. Increasing the
amount of plastic in waste stream on Thursday compared to Wednesday was a reason for
obtaining higher volatile matter and higher value of HHV in that day. As Figure 5 showed, Eq.10
and Eq.11 gave also good prediction of HHV values.

56
Thus, Eq.7 (20.50 MJ/kg), Eq.8 (20.20 MJ/kg), and Eq.11 (20.52 MJ/kg) are the best model in
this category compared to the laboratory result (17.50 MJ/kg). The finding of proximate and
compositional analysis results strengthen the argument that models are best suited in their own
area and this finding is precise and accurate in predicting the HHV of household solid waste in
Jimma town.

The ratio of carbon to nitrogen (C/N ratio) is an indicator of the compostability of materials.
Table 7 shows representative C/N ratios of compostable components of Jimma town household
solid waste, which vary from 19.57 to 655, due to their high carbon contents and the low
nitrogen contents of paper and plastics wastes have high C/N ratio. The chemical composition
shown above indicates that the waste, except plastic and paper waste, can be composted and used
as a fertilizer due to the fact that the carbon to nitrogen mass ratio occurs within the optimum
range for waste to undergo biodegradation. To maximize the composting rate while minimizing
odor generation, a C/N ratio of 20/1 to 30/1 is considered optimum. Higher ratios reduce the
composting rate, while lower ratios invite odor problems (Zuccconi & Bertoldi, 1987).
Composting of paper and plastic waste, with a C/N ratio of 134.38 and 655 respectively, is
difficult unless large quantities of another material, such as yard waste, food waste are mixed in
to reduce the ratio. The organic fraction of composite household solid waste that includes
plastics has a C/N ratio of around 33.35. The C/N ratio moves above the optimum level as
quantities of plastic waste are added to the mixture, however yard and food waste serve as
effective bulking agents in composting or removing plastic waste from the quantity gave the C/N
of 28.48, which is also ideal for composting. This study also revealed that the C/N mass ratio
ranged from 23.24 to 35.29 for different combination of the waste components generated from
Jimma city households (Annex 2). Previous work by Peavy et al. (1985) shows that at the
optimum C/N ratio of 30, there is adequate nitrogen for cell synthesis and carbon for energy
source.

Bio-chars were produced by pyrolysis of household solid waste. Pyrolysis is the chemical
decomposition of an organic substance by burning in the absence of oxygen. The high
temperatures used in pyrolysis can induce polymerization of the molecules within the
feedstock, whereby larger molecules are also produced (including both aromatic and
aliphatic compounds), as well as the thermal decomposition of some components of the

57
feedstock into smaller molecules (Jeffrey, et al., 2009). During the pyrolysis or oxidation process
that generates bio-char; heating causes some nutrients to volatilize, especially at the surface of
the material, while other nutrients become concentrated in the remaining bio-char (Jeffrey, et al.,
2009). Nitrogen is the most sensitive of all macronutrients to heating; thus the N content was
higher (1.61%). The pH measured in 1:5 solid water suspension, was neutral (7.5). The study
also revealed that the C/N mass ratio of the bio-char waste components was 25.83. Therefore,
Bio-char is likely more important as a soil conditioner and a driver of nutrient transformations
and so as a primary source of nutrients.

With regard to agronomic parameters, the quantities of essential plant nutrients, especially
nitrogen (1.41%), phosphorous (0.08%) and potassium (1.48%) of household solid waste and
nitrogen (1.61%), phosphorous 2,121.5mg/kg (0.21%) and potassium 2,550.37 mg/kg (0.26%) of
solid waste bio-char were found to be in acceptable concentration for soil conditioning and eco-
friendly cheap and best as compare to chemical fertilizer. However, according Zuccconi and
Bertoldi, 1987 and Jilani, 2000 the excellent quality of compost contains high percentage of
nitrogen content (>1%), whereas no specific international standard has yet been set for
phosphorous and potassium concentration content. Therefore, its use in soil may add compost
and improve the aeration, aggregation and water holding capacity (Jilani, 2000).

High biodegradable organic fraction (~62.75%) and good nutrient contents suggest the
applicability of Jimma town household solid waste stream for implementing composting
operations. Even though Jimma town is located within the best of Ethiopian areas, conducive for
agricultural production with abundant annual rainfall, applying compost as soil amendment will
be valuable as it will improve the soil fertility by supplying main nutrients such as TN, TP, TK,
as well as increase water holding capacity due to its high organic matter content.

The heating values for various bio-char samples in the literature were presented in Table 8 to
make a comparison between different biomass feedstock. As can be seen from Table 11, the
heating values of biomass derived bio-chars in the literature vary between 11.83 and 44.2 MJ/kg,
whereas the values for Jimma town household solid waste bio-char was 21.83 MJ/kg. Generally,
the high heating values of bio-chars make them attractive feeds for energy production instead of
fossil-based solid fuels. And bio-chars can be alternative to the conventional fuels partially due
to their high calorific value.

58
Hence, for the Jimma city, composting, thermo-chemical conversion (pyrolysis) can be
considered as the best options for the biodegradable fraction after segregating recyclables
components.

59
 CHAPTER SEVEN: CONCLUSION AND RECCOMENDATION
7.1. Conclusion
Solid waste is a domestic energy resource with the potential to provide a significant amount of
energy. The amount of this energy identified as an important issues affecting the suitability of
design the waste to energy plan. The good average amount of heating value (about 17.50 MJ/kg)
of collected household solid waste from Jimma town shows the feasibility of design the waste to
energy plan such as pyrolsis in the study area.

The HHV estimated from some models were found to be closely match with the value
determined from laboratory experiment. Thus, models are reliable in predicting the energy
recovery potentials from different solid waste components and the quantity of energy obtainable
from a known amount and composition of mixed solid waste can be estimated without
conducting calorimetric experiments.

The biodegradable fraction and the nutrient composition of solid waste bio-char are within the
acceptable range. Thus, the waste can be considered as suitable for soil conditioning. As such, an
economic benefits can be obtained from the waste while avoiding the cost of waste management.

Further separation of recyclable fraction of rubber, leather, glass, ceramic, wood, and metals
from the waste would be helpful and can reduce the total waste disposed. Thus if energy
recovery, composting, and recycling were applied, more than 80% of the total waste stream can
be used as a source materials leaving only 19.41% to be disposed at the landfill. This will
decrease the cost and environmental footprints dramatically.

60
7.2. Recommendation
Since there are no waste treatments facilities present in the town and waste management simply
is a linear system of collection and disposal without any source segregation, creating health and
environmental hazards, responsible body should look after this problem otherwise the town solid
waste management division should look other solid waste management options like composting,
recycling and energy production because as observed from the study result the composition of
solid waste in the study area is suitable for other disposal options other than landfilling.

The calorific value of Jimma town household solid waste make them attractive feeds for energy
production instead of fossil-based solid fuels and can be alternative to the conventional fuels.
Therefore, Jimma town administration should implement waste to energy technology for both
waste management and energy recovery. But, the implementation of waste to energy schemes
should not be done in haste, rather should first proceed cautiously in pilot schemes, which may
then transform into large-scale schemes. Thus based on the those available data of solid
wastes in Jimma town composting and waste to energy transformation are recommended.

A household solid waste quantity and composition study should be conducted during a rainy
season in order to get more year round data on waste generation and composition. Since the
study was conducted only for household solid waste similar studies should be conducted in other
waste sources like commercials, institutions, and street to have full information of MSW of the
town.

Additional analysis to measure more parameters such as fusion point of ash, halogens, hydrogen,
oxygen, and heavy metals would be required to gain a more complete picture about the chemical
composition of solid waste in Jimma town.

61
REFERENCES

Abebe, Z., and Kebede, F. (1999). "Assessing awareness and practices of solid waste.".
Integrated developemnet for water supply and sanitation. 25, pp. 317-319. Addis Ababa.

Abila, B., and Kantola, J. (2013). Municipal solid waste management problems in Nigeria:
Evolving knowledge management solution. International Journal of Environmental,
Ecological, Geological and Mining Engineering, 7, 169-174.

Abu-Qudais, M., and Abu-Qdais, H. (2000). Energy content of municipal solid waste in Jordan
and its potential utilization. Energy Conversion & Management, 41(9), 983–991.

Agro-Industrial-Biogas-in-Kenya. (2010). www.docstoc.com/docs/49139138/Agro-Industrial-

Biogas-in-Kenya. Retrieved Augest 24, 2014

Amanuel, T. (2011). Assessment of energy recovery options and its economic evaluation from
Municipal solid wastes in Addis Ababa (Arada subcity). Master thesis Addis Ababa
Institute of Technology, Ethiopia, 13-95. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/2589

Amare, T. (2010). Ethiopian Environmental Review. Addis Ababa: Forum for Environment.

Amin, K. (2011). Energy potential from municipal solid waste in Tanjung langsat landfill, Johor,
Malaysia. International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 3, 8560- 8568.

Amoo, O. M., and Fagbenle, R. L. (2013). Renewable municipal solid waste pathways for energy
generation and sustainable development in the Nigerian context. International Journal of
Energy and Environmetal Engineering, 4(42), 2251-6832.

APHA. (1995). Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater. washington DC:
American Public Health association.

Asrat, S. (2006). Solid waste management: A case study of household solid waste management
in Arada Subcity, Addis Ababa. Master thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.

62
Babayemi, J. O., and Dauda, K. T. (2009). Evaluation of solid waste generation, categories and
disposal options in developing countries: A case study of Nigeria. Journal of Applied
Sciences & Environmental Management, 13(3), 83-88.

Bailie, R., Everett, J., Lipták, B. G., Liu, D. H., Mack Rugg, F., and Switzenbaum, M. S. (1999).
Solid Waste. CRC Press LLC.

Baum, B., and Parker, C. H. (1973). Solid Waste Disposal, Incineration and Landfill. Michigan:
Ann Arbor Science Pub. Inc.

Becidan, M. (2007). Experimental studies on municipal solid waste and biomass pyrolysis. PhD
dissertation, NTNU, Norway.

Charles, R., Leander, J. S., Robert, B., and Mary, G. (1995). In waste management and resource
recovery (pp. 25 - 57). Florida: CRC Press LLC.

Cheru, S. (2011). Assessment of municipal solid waste management service in Dessie town.
Masters Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia, 15-116.

CIWMB. (2007). Statewide alternative daily cover by material type. California integrated waste
management board.

Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons.

Cooper, C., Kim, B., and MacDonald, J. (1999). Estimating the lower heating values of
hazardous and solid wastes. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 49(4),
471– 476.

CSA. (2013). Report on 2012/2013 city population and Household profile. Jimma.

Das, B. K., and Hoque, S. M. (2014). Assessment of the potential of biomass gasification for
electricity generation in Bangladesh. Journal of Renewable Energy.

Diriba, D. (2009). Household solid waste generation rate, composition and content analysis for
disposal and resource recovery in two selected kebeles of Hawassa Town. Master Thesis,
Addis University, Ethiopia, 28-92.

63
Fruergaard, T., Christensen, T., and Astrup, T. (2010). Energy recovery from waste incineration:
assessing the importance of district heating networks. Waste Management, 30(7), 1264-
74.

Gagliardi, R. (1982). Cogeneration in a commercial environment: Paper incineration with heat

recovery, electricity, space heating and cooling. Advances in energy productivity.
Atlanta, USA Fairmont Press, 125 -128.

Gebrehiwot, M. (2011). Biogas potential of organic municipal solid waste, generation in Jimma
Town. Jimma, ethiopia: Master thesis, Jimma Univesity, Ethiopia.

Gebrie, K. (2009). Management of domestic solid waste in Bahirdar town: Operational analysis
and assessment of constraints that affect solid waste management, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia. Master Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.

Getahun, T., Mengistie, E, Haddis A, Wasie F, Alemayehu E, Dadi D, Van Gerven T, Van der
Bruggen B. (2012). Municipal solid waste generation in growing urban areas in Africa:
current practices and relation to socioeconomic factors in Jimma, Ethiopia.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184(10), 6337–6345.

Getahun, T., Nigusie, A., Entele, T., Van Gerven, T., and Van der Bruggen, B. (2012). Effect of
turning frequencies on composting biodegradable municipal solid waste quality.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 65, 79-84.

Gidarakos, E., Havas, G., and Ntzamilis, P. (2005). Municipal solid waste composition
determination supporting the integrated solid waste management system in the island of
Crete. Waste Management, 26(6), 668–679.

Giugliano, M., Grosso, M., and Rigamanti, L. (2008). Energy recovery from municipal waste: A
case study for a middle-sized Italian district. Waste Management, 28(1), 39-50.

Gupte, D. D., and Saptarshi, P. G. (2012). Supply chain management as a tool for collection and
disposal of organic waste in Pune. Universal Journal of Environmental Research and
Technology, 4(2), 261-268.

64
Hoornweg, D., and Perinaz, B.T. (2012). What a waste: A global review of solid waste
management. Washington DC, USA: world bank urban development and local
government.

Ityona, A., Daniel, M. K., and Nicholas, G. (2012). Generation, characteristics and energy
potential of solid municipal waste in Nigeria. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa, 23,
47-51.

Jeffrey, M. N., Isabel, L., Baoshan, X., Julia, W. G., Christoph, S., K.C., Harry, S. (2009).
Characterization of Designer Biochar produced at different tempratures and their effects
on a loamy sand. Jornals of Environmental Science, 3, 195-206.

Jilani, J. (2000). Municipal solid waste compost characterstics. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene,
183-185.

Julius, N. F. (2005). Evaluation of municipal solid wastes for utilisation in energy production in
developing countries. Int. J. Environmental Technology and Management, 5(1), 76-86.

Kalyuzhnyi, S. (2008). Energypotential of anaerobic digestion of wastes produced in Russia via

biogas and microbial fuel cell technologyies. Pure Applied Chemistry, 80, 2115-2124.

Kathiravale, S., Yunus, M., Sopian, K., Samsuddin, A., and Rahman, R. (2003). Modeling the
heating value of Municipal Solid Waste. Fuel, 82(9), 1119–1125.

Kazimbaya-Senkwe, B., and Mwale, A. (2001). Solid waste in Kitwe: Solid waste
characterisation study for the city of Kitwe, Zambia : Phase 1 (No. IHS SINPA 28).
Institute for Housing and Urban Development Studies (IHS). Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/1765/32250

Khan, A. A., Ahmed, Z., and Asadulla, M. (2012). Issues with solid waste management in South
Asian countries: A situational analysis of Pakistan. Journal of Environmental and
Occupational Science, 1(2), 129-131.

Komilis, D., Evangelou, A., Giannakis, G., and Lymperis, C. (2012). Revisiting the elemental
composition and the calorific value of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes.
Waste Management, 32(3), 372–381.

65
Lema, A. (2007). Household solid waste generation rate and composition analysis in two
selected kebles of Adama town. MSc thesis paper, Addis Ababa University. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

Linne, M., and Bryant, M. (2004). Summary and analysis of the potential production of
renewable methane (biogas and SNG). Biomil, Swedish Gas center.

Liu, D. H., and Liptak, B. G. (1997). Environmental Engineers' Handbook, Second Edition. In
Hazardeous waste and solid (p. 192). Florida: CRC Press.

Liu, J., Paode, R., and Holsen, T. (1996). Modeling the energy content of multiple regression
analysis. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 36, 650–656.

Mohd, S. Z., Wan Mohd, F. W., and Mohd Armi, A. S. (2010). Study on solid waste generation
in Kuantan, Malaysia: Its potential for energy generation.

Mossie, A. (2000). The prevalence and socio-demographic characteristics of khat chewing in

Jimma town, South Western Ethiopia. Master Thesis Jimma univesity, Ethiopis, 72-75.

Mshandete, A., and Parawira, W. (2009). Biogas technology research in selected sub-saharan
Africancountries- A review. African Journal Biotechnology, 8, 116-125.

Ogwueleka, T. C., and Ogwueleka, F. N. (2010). Modelling energy content of municipal solid
waste using artificial neural network. Iran. J. Environ. Health. Sci. Eng., 259-266.

Ojolo, S., Bamgboye, A., Ogunsina, B., and Oke, S. (2008). Analytical approach for predicting
biogas generation in a municipal solid waste anaerobic digester. Iranian Journal of
Environmental Health Science & Engineering, 5(3), 179-186.

Peavy, H. S., Rowe, D., and Tchobano, G. (1985). Environmental Engineering. London:
McGraw Hill.

Rao, P. B., Samdin, S. D., and Mutnuri, S. (2010). Biogas generation potential by anaerobic
digestion for sustainable energy development in India. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 14(7), 2086–2094.

66
Sapna, S., Kothiyal, N. C., Nema, A. K., and Kaushik, M. K. (2013). Characterization of
municipal solid waste in Jalandhar City, Punjab, India. Journal of Hazardous, Toxic, and
Radioactive Waste, 17(2), 97-106.

Sha’ Ato, R., Aboho, S., Oketunde, F., Eneji, I., Unazi, G., and Agwa, S. (2007). Survey of solid
waste generation and composition in a rapidly growing urban area in central Nigeria.
Waste management, 352-358.

Suberu, M. Y., Mokhtar, A. S., and Bashir, N. (2012). Renewable power generation opportunity
from municipal solid waste: A case study of Lagos Metropolis (Nigeria). Journal of
Energy Technologies and Policy, 2.

Tay, J. (1988). Energy generation and resources recovery from refuse incineration . J. Energy
Eng., 114(3), www.science.gov/topicpages/i/incineration+energy+plant.html, accessed on
Augest 24/2014.

Tchnobanoglous, G., Hilary, T., and Samuel, A. (1993). In Integrated Solid Waste
Manangement, Engineerin Principles and Management Issues. Singapore: McGraw-Hill
.Kogakusha, ltd.

Tegegn, M. K. (2008). Household solid waste generation rate and physical composition analysis
in Jimma Town Ethiopia. Masters Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethipia.

Teka, S. S. (2006). Commercial solid waste generation and composition analysis: Arada Subcity,
Addis Ababa. Master Thesis, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.

Ucuncu, A., and Vesilind, P. A. (2006). Energy recovery from Mixed paper waste. Durham,
North Carolina: Final Report, Duke University, North Carolina.

UNDP. (2004). Secondary Cities; Urban Poverty Participatory Action Research Initiative (ARI).
Volume I: Reports for Adama, Mekele, Jimma, Bahir Dar and. UNDP Development
Assistance Group.

USEPA. (2003). Municipal Solid Waste in the United States. 2001 Facts and Figures. USA.

67
Uson, A., Ferreira, G., Vasquez, D., Bribian, I., and Sastresa, E. (2012). Estimation of the energy
content of the residual fraction refused by MBT plants: a case study in Zaragoza’s MBT
plant. Journal of Cleaner Production, 20(1), 38–46.

Whiting, K. (2002). Large scale MSW incineration Technologies. Incineration of municipal

Waste Report,. Leeds, UK: University of Leeds, Department of Fuel and Energy.

Yimer, S., and Sahu, O. P. (2014). Assessment and Management of Municipal Solid wastes for
Kombolcha City. World Journal of Soil, Water and Air Pollution, 1, 1-20.

Zuccconi, F., and Bertoldi, M. D. (1987). Compost specification for the production and
characterization of compost from municipal solid waste. Elsevier Applied Science
Publishing Co.,Inc.,New York.

68
ANNEXES
ANNEX 1. Data sheet for waste collected characterization from individual household.

1. Data sheet for waste collected from individual household.

House Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Total
No.
/Code Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V

Total

69
2. Data sheet for composition (weight kg and volume) for the waste collected from all income
groups.

WASTE CHARACTERIZATION ANALYSIS DATA SHEET

NAME OF HOUSEHOLD ---------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTACT ADDRESS -------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAMPLE ADDRESS / IDENTIFICATION CODE: --------------------------------------
SAMPLING DATE: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
GROUP NUMBER: -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL WEIGHT OF SAMPLE COLLECTED: -------------------------------------------

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Day 6 Day 7 Total

Components
Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V Wt V
Food waste

Paper

Yard waste

Plastics

Textile

Rubber &
leather

Glass &
Ceramic

Wood

Metals

Miscellaneous

Total

70
3. Description of components of Household Municipal Solid Waste

Category Description
All food waste type includes discarded meat scraps, dairy
Food waste products, egg shells, fruit or vegetable peels, and other food
items from homes excluding bones.
Yard waste Branches, twigs, leaves, grass, & other plant materials
All types of paper including Mixed colored paper,
Paper magazines, newspaper, office & computer paper, Kraft, etc
Glass * Clear & colored glass
Plastics All types of plastics
Metals* Iron, steel, tin can, & bi-metal cans
Wood Lumber. wood products, pallets, & furniture
Textile Clothing, footwear, covered furniture, mattresses, etc
Rubber and leather Tires, wire cords, gaskets(rope), leather shoes, leather bags,
or leather belts
Miscellaneous * Other organic & inorganic materials, including rock, sand, ,
plaster, bones, ashes, battery etc
* Indicates the non-combustible parts, not included in the proximate & Heat value analysis

71
ANNEX 2.

Total quantities of solid waste collected from sampled households.

Component Monda Tuesda Wednesd Thursd Frida Saturda Sunda Averag

s y y ay ay y y y e
Food waste 95.62 82.68 149.16 93.58 116 153.72 163.92 122.10
Paper 19.98 22.42 21.54 17.32 24.26 29.96 26.10 23.08
Yard waste 79.3 74.82 83.38 80.94 99.7 126.6 132.72 96.78
Plastics 36.5 38.12 33.44 43.62 41.6 35.48 33.44 37.46
Textile &
9.98 10.6 13.86 11.82 10.6 18.14 19.36 13.48
Leather
Rubber 0 2.84 4.90 3.88 0 5.3 4.08 3.00
Glass &
7.14 5.70 2.06 8.56 10.40 3.66 4.90 6.06
Ceramic
Wood 6.52 10.6 0.82 8.76 5.92 5.92 0 5.51
Metals 1.22 2.44 0.3 0 1.64 0.62 0.4 0.95
Miscellaneo
64.57 76.19 74.58 71.21 59.64 81.59 86.29 73.44
us
369.7
Total 320.83 326.41 384.04 339.69 460.99 471.21 381.85
6

Laboratory result, Energy content (Calorific value) of household solid waste

Calorific value Calorific value

Field No. Lab. No.
(cal/gm) KJ/Kg
Yard waste 6247/14 3919.91 16411.87919
Food waste 6248/14 2649.76 11094.01517
Textile 6249/14 3829.83 16034.73224
Plastics 6250/14 9747.08 40809.07454
Paper 6251/14 3867.54 16192.61647
1cal = 4.1868J

72
Laboratory result of Elemental/ Nutrient determination of household solid waste

TS TK TP
Components %OC %TN
mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg
Yard waste 46.73 1.97 44.78 27250 1473.75
Food
45.77 1.49 61.07 23000 1368.13
waste
Textile 37.96 1.94 17.9 4230.96 670.25
Plastics 52.4 0.08 21.03 4450.87 28
Paper 45.69 0.34 19.27 2117.59 270.25

Comparative average nutritional values and C/N ratio of HHs SW

Mixed C (%dry N (%dry
C/N ratio
Components basis) basis)
ya+Fo+Tex 45.72 1.73 26.41
Ya+Fo+Tex+Pa 45.71 1.6 28.48
Fo+Tex+Pa 45.09 1.35 33.29
Ya+Pa 46.53 1.67 27.82
Fo+Pa 45.76 1.3 35.29
Ya+Fo 45.66 1.97 23.22
Ya+Fo+Pa 46.15 1.72 26.86
ya = yard waste, Fo = Food waste, Pa = paper waste, Tex = Textile waste

ANNEX 3.

Laboratory procedure for proximate analysis

Moisture Content Determination

 Heat the muffle furnace to 750⁰c and place previously ignited porcelain crucibles
 Covers in the furnace for 10 minutes.
 Cool the crucibles in desiccators for 1 hour.
 Weigh the crucibles and add to each approximately 1 gram of sample

 Place the samples in the oven at 105⁰c for 1 hour.

 Place the dried samples in desiccators for 1 hour and weigh.

73
  The samples shall be considered oven dry when the decrease in weight of consecutive
weighting is 0.005g or less. Succeeding drying periods shall not less than 1 hour.

Volatile Matter Determination

 Heat the muffle furnace to 950⁰c
 Preheat the crucibles for the moisture content determination, with lids in place and
containing the sample, as follows: with the furnace door open, for 2 minutes on the outer
edge of furnace (300⁰c) and then for 3 minute on the edge of furnace (500⁰c)
 Then move the samples to the rear of the furnace for 6 minute with the muffle door
closed.
 Cool the samples in a desiccators for 1 hour and weigh.

Ash Content Determination

 Place the samples in the furnace at 750⁰c for 1 hour.
 Cool the crucibles with lids in place in desiccators for 1 hour and weigh.
 Repeat burning of the samples until a succeeding 1 hour period of heating results in a loss
of less than 0.0005g.

74