Solid Waste Management in Kampar Distri ct Council . Mal aysi a Council .

Kampar DititCDistrict Counc ilPil, Perak , MlMalaysi a

Operation area Total Population year 2005 ‐ year 2010

102000 101183 1) KAMPAR 100000 99102 2) MAMBANG 98000 DIAWAN 97064 96000 95068

3) TRONOH MINES ion 94000 Populat 4) 92619 of

92000 bers

5) KOPISAN m 90449 Nu 90000 6) LAWAN KUDA 88000 7) KOTA BHARU 86000 8) JERAM 84000 9) KUALA DIPANG Total population Year 2005 90449 Year 2006 10) 92619 Year 2007 95068 Year 2008 97064 11) (S) Year 2009 99102 Year 2010 101183

Estimated Total Waste Generation /Day Total Waste Collection/ Day 140 80

120 117.53 112.6 70 67.54 107.89 63.44 103 61 99 60 58.3 100 94.95 56 54.14

50 ons) (Tons)

T

80 (

Watse

Watse

40 of

of 60 bers mbers m 30 Nu Nu

40 20

20 10

0 0 Estimated total waste generation /days Total watse collection /days Year 2005 94.95 Year 2005 54.14 Year 2006 99 Year 2006 56 Year 2007 103 Year 2007 58.3 Year 2008 107.89 Year 2008 61 Year 2009 112.6 Year 2009 63.44 Year 2010 117.53 Year 2010 67.54 5. Total Recyclables (2005‐2010) MDKpr recycling RtRate…

Recycling Rate (%) 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 5% 7% 9% 11% 13%

No Materials 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 (Tones/year) 1 Papers 5,973.41 6,247.92 6,535.58 6,837.06 7,153.05 7,484.27 2 Plastics 2,810.57 2,931.91 3,058.68 3,191.11 3,329.47 3,474.04 3 Glass 1,336.38 1,398.34 1,463.30 1,531.41 1,602.82 1,677.71 4 Ferrous Metals 553.68 579.00 605.52 633.32 662.44 692.96 5 Aluminium 141. 13 147. 78 154. 76 162. 08 169. 76 177. 82 Total 10,815.17 11,304.95 11,817.84 12,354.97 12,917.54 13,506.80

Total Municipal budget and Waste characteristic its allocati on for SWM Based on the landfill data, the recorded average total waste as disposed to be around 67.54 tones/day 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 RM8mil 8mil8 mil 9mil9 mil 10mil 12mil No Generation Sources Waste as collected Percentage (tones/day) RM 2.7 mil 3.4 mil 4.0 mil 4.3 mil 4.7 mil 1 Household 40.71 60.27%

2 Commercial 12.43 18.40%

3 Market 11. 40 16. 88%

4 Industrial 1.2 1.78%

5 Public Parks /Garden 1.8 2.67%

Total 67.54 100.0%

Waste Flow in MDKpr 3. Waste Composition Waste generated

‐ Food waste : 39.6% Waste discarded for Waste Retained at source Others ‐ Paper : 31.2% collection ‐ Plastic : 8.1% ‐ Glass : 3.5% Collection trucks Waste pickers Sent to Reuse recycling ‐ Scrap metal : 117%.7% centers ‐ Aluminums : 0.7% Sent to landfill Truck workers Sold to Traders ‐ Others : 15.2% Recycling Final Disposal Scavengers Cooperative MDKS NGO Industries SWM Strategy of Kampar Action Plan

• Overall project plan for each targets. Year prepa re : 2005 Vision : Reduce waste disposal to

landfill by 22 % recygycling •Registration system •Reduce plastic bag

By: rate by year 2020 Majlis Daerah Kinta Selatan (MDKS) Supported by: Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MHLG) Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) MDKS

Mission : To promote waste awareness •Intensive PR and set up partnership for pilot area minimization by increasing public and •Activities, events for building effective recygycling system pilot schools •Billboard •Brochure etc. •In‐house promotion of recycling

Progress, results achieved already Issues

• Achieve 13% recycling rate • Issues ‐ privatization of SWM ( federal level) • 13 model schools • Challenges : continuous and sustaining • 2 community initiatives program • 20 trainers • CiConstraints : staff and finance • Recycle network unit in district office • Future action : • Information Network with recyclers continue as LA 21 program  Compost centre at landfill site

• 2 Cardboard Boxes How • SilSoil • Charcoal it get • Kitchen waste (Vegetable, fruits peels etc.) Started ? Promotion of • Mixing tool (shovel, turner, or lubber glove etc.) comppgosting in Kampar JOCV Try Recycle in correct way ***Optional*** to achieve ZERO WASTE society Rice bran 用正确的方式进行再循环, 以达致“零垃圾”的社会 Existing Composting Program THM – household program (Pilot Project) Started in 2010

Takakura home method – 2 basket per household

A) Technical workshopsB) Networking at Batu

Community Hall C Putih new villages operated by: O Recycling activities carried out M by: NGOs P Community committee resident association O village headman Charity organizations S distribution of basket MHLG T launching by stateman Schools information dissemination

Stakeholders involved, role and Mobilize external resources responsibilities 1.NGOS – information dissemination • Community participation – workshop with 2.Schools – information, workshop, role resident ggproup. model • Launching by the statesman. 3.AdAcademi c itittiinstitutions – ldlead role moddlel • NGO partiiicipati on – hdihandicap associiiation e.g. 4.Private sectors – financial support Kampar beautiful Gates 5.District council –main committee ( every • University students hands on project month reporting progress ) ( community service society) • International cooperation –JOCV

Budget Allocation For Compost Final product of compost

• Municipal budget ( part of Local Agenda 21 • Promotion of backyard gardening program )  RM 30 K a year • Sell back to landscape department for own • FdFederal government ‐ RM 45 K public places & garden use Lesson Learned Barriers

Success factor • Lack of knowledge, attitude ( do not segggregate waste) and skills • need continuous strengthening of project • Segggregation at source • MkMarket for compost is small • Pure organic waste ( homogenous) such as food and beverages industries • Price is low is easier • Characteristic of compost content sensitive • Bigger quantity and more sustainable ( HHllalal or haram perspective from religi ous • Market value for compost is also point of view) crucial

External assistance

• Demand market with reasonable price • Budget to implement compost needed • If market is available  feasible doing compost) Recycle Network Unit Kampar District Council • E.g. sell it back to landscape department of Jalan Iskandar, 31900, own office usage for public landscaping Kampar, Perak. Malaysia works 05-467 1020 / 467 1047 www.mdkampar.gov.my