HIMALAYA COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

(AFFILIATED TO TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY)

CHYASAL, LALITPUR

SUITABILITY ANALYSIS OF LANDFILL SITE & DESIGN OF MRF

IN
NUWAKOT, NEPAL

BY
(HCE076BCE01) AASHISH NEUPANE
(HCE076BCE05) AKRITI YOGI
(HCE076BCE18) BISWAS ADHIKARI
(HCE076BCE26) JYOTI BHATT
(HCE076BCE31) LALIT BABU JOSHI

A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING IN

THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF
BACHELOR IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

LALITPUR, NEPAL

February, 2024
 APPROVAL

This project report entitled “Suitability analysis of landfill site & design of MRF in Nuwakot,
Nepal” submitted by Aashish Neupane, Akriti Yogi, Biswas Adhikari, Jyoti Bhatt, Lalit Babu
Joshi in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor in Civil Engineering has
been examined and is being recommended for the acceptance and approval.

………………………………….
Supervisor: Dr. Er. Shanti Kala Subedi
Himalaya College of Engineering

………………………………….
Project Coordinator: Er. Ujjwal Marasini
Himalaya College of Engineering

………………………………….
Head of Department: Er. MD Abrar Alam
Himalaya College of Engineering

…………………………………..
External Examiner: Shukra Raj Poudel
Pulchowk Campus, Civil Department

February, 2024

1|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We would like to express our special thanks to our supervisor Dr. Er. Shanti Kala Subedi for
her guidance, encouragement and critical suggestion throughout the course of this study without
whom, this research couldn’t achieve this state of work. We highly appreciate her scholastic
attitude and pragmatics thinking over this project.

We are also very thankful to Department of Civil Engineering, Himalaya College of Engineering
for their support throughout this project. We are also thankful to Sishir Dahal sir for his ideas
and encouragement to successfully complete this work up to this stage. Also, our field and
academic knowledge for the research have been broadened by the assistance of our colleagues
and we want to give them special thanks for it.

In addition, we would like to thank all the teachers and staff of Himalaya College of Engineering
for helping us in carrying out my field work by providing us with sampling materials. Also, we
would like to thank our family members for their moral support and encouragement throughout
this research period.
We would like to extend further thanks to all individuals for their direct and indirect help.

2|Page
 Table of Contents
APPROVAL ..................................................................................................................................................................1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................................................2
Table and Figures ..........................................................................................................................................................4
1. Introduction ...............................................................................................................................................................5
1.1 Background .........................................................................................................................................................5
1.2 Problem Statement ..............................................................................................................................................5
1.3 Objectives............................................................................................................................................................6
1.3.1 General Objective ........................................................................................................................................6
1.3.2 Specific Objectives ......................................................................................................................................6
2. Literature Review ......................................................................................................................................................6
2.1 Status of Solid Waste Generation in Nepal .........................................................................................................6
2.2 Suitability Analysis .............................................................................................................................................7
2.3 Analytical Hierarchy Process ..............................................................................................................................7
2.4 Weighted Overlay Method ..................................................................................................................................8
2.5 Material Recovery Facility (MRF) ......................................................................................................................9
2.6 Payback Period .................................................................................................................................................. 10
3. Materials and Methods ............................................................................................................................................ 11
3.1 Study Area ......................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.2 Present Condition of Bidur Municipality .......................................................................................................... 11
3.3 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................................... 12
3.3.1 Primary Methods ........................................................................................................................................ 12
3.3.2 Secondary Methods .................................................................................................................................... 13
3.4 Methodology for Material Recovery Facility .................................................................................................... 15
4. Result and Discussion .............................................................................................................................................. 16
4.1 Survey on viewpoints of locals ......................................................................................................................... 16
4.2 BOD Test .......................................................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Calculation of Waste Generation Rate .............................................................................................................. 17
4.3.1 Waste Generation Rate............................................................................................................................... 17
4.3.2 Current waste generation rate of Bidur Municipality ................................................................................. 18
4.3.3 Determination of required landfill area ...................................................................................................... 19
4.4 Landfill Site Suitability ..................................................................................................................................... 19
4.5 Feasibility of Material Recovery Facility in Bidur Municipality ...................................................................... 29
5. Conclusion & Recommendation .............................................................................................................................. 33
APPENDIX: Photographs ........................................................................................................................................... 34
References ................................................................................................................................................................... 38

3|Page
 Table and Figures
Figures
FIGURE 1: STUDY AREA FOR LANDFILL SITE SELECTION ---------------------------------------------------------- 12
FIGURE 2:FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY TO SELECT A SUITABLE SANITARY LANDFILL SITE IN BIDUR
MUNICIPALITY ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15
FIGURE 3: CHART SHOWING RESULTS OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEY ------------------------------------------------- 17
FIGURE 4: BOD SAMPLE COLLECTION SITE----------------------------------------------------------------18
FIGURE 5: SLOPE MAP--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
FIGURE 6: ROADWAYS MAP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------23
FIGURE 7: ROADWAYS BUFFER MAP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23
FIGURE 8: WATERWAYS MAP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23
FIGURE 9: WATERWAYS BUFFER MAP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23
FIGURE 10: FOREST MAP--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
FIGURE 11: FOREST BUFFER MAP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------24
FIGURE 12:CROPLAND BUFFER MAP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
FIGURE 13:SOIL MAP ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
FIGURE 14:SOIL SETTLEMENT MAP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26
FIGURE 15:SOIL SETTLEMENT BUFFER MAP ----------------------------------------------------------------------26
FIGURE 16:RANGELAND MAP --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
FIGURE 17:RANGELAND BUFFER MAP------------------------------------------------------------------------ 27
FIGURE 18:BUILT-UP AREA MAP ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 27
FIGURE 19:BUILT-UP AREA BUFFER MAP --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
FIGURE 20: LANDFILL SITE SUITABILITY MAP------------------------------------------------------------29
FIGURE 21: CHART SHOWING SUITABILITY AREA ------------------------------------------------------29
FIGURE 22: PIE CHART SHOWING WASTE COMPOSITION OF STUDY AREA----------------------31

Tables
TABLE 1: PAIRWISE COMPARISON SCALE IN AHP -------------------------------------------------------------------- 8
TABLE 2: INTENSITY OF IMPORTANCE IN WEIGHTED OVERLAY METHOD FOR ARCGIS ------------------------ 8
TABLE 3:TABLE SHOWING DATA SOURCES OF VARIOUS CRITERIA ---------------------------------------------- 13
TABLE 4:FACTORS CRITERIA FOR LANDFILL SITE SELECTION SUITABILITY, CLASS & RANK---------------- 20
TABLE 5: PAIRWISE COMPARISON MATRIX (DECISION MATRIX) ----------------------------------------------- 27
TABLE 6: WEIGHTAGE FOR THE CRITERIA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
TABLE 7:DESCRIPTION OF WASTE COMPONENT CATEGORIES ---------------------------------------------------- 29
TABLE 8: PRICES OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS OF NUWAKOT DISTRICT AS OF JAN 2024 ------------------ 30
TABLE 9: PAYBACK PERIOD ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 32

4|Page
 1. Introduction

1.1 Background
Solid waste management (SWM) is a crosscutting issue that impacts various areas of sustainable
development. Around the world, waste generation rates are rising. Annually, our planet becomes
home to about 2.01 billion tons of municipal solid waste and this number is expected to reach up
to 3.40 billion tons of waste by 2050 (Khanal, 2023). Compared to those in developed nations,
over 90% of waste generated in developing countries is often open dumped or burned. The
average waste generation in Asia was 0.52kg/capita/d, which was lower than the global of
0.74kg/capita/din 2016 (Khanal, 2023). In the context of Nepal, 1 million tons of waste is
generated in Nepal per year. A total of 389,983 tons of emitted garbage is sent to landfill sites,
315,069 tons dumped on riverbanks while 22,075 tons of garbage is burnt down (CBS, 2019).
Landfills are one of the as a major sources of methane emission, which ultimately adds up to
increased greenhouse gasses. As a developing nation, there is constantly increase in municipal
waste generation in Nepal. This waste gives rise to extreme conditions caused due to emission of
greenhouse gasses which could increase the risk of fire, endanger the human health, destroy the
vegetation mass around the landfill, pollute and degrade the groundwater resources, affect the
climate changes worldwide and produce unfavorable odors (Saleem, 2014). A sanitary landfill is
a pit with a protected bottom where trash is buried in layers and compressed to make it more
solid. Sanitary landfills help to prevent environmental contamination and to protect public health
by collecting and storing waste in the safest manner possible.
The history of solid waste management in Nepal goes back to 1919 after the establishment of
Safai Adda in Kathmandu. Solid waste management national policy of Nepal was issued in 1996,
which had emphasized on the minimization of waste by integrating the private sector. However,
due to unstable government and awareness, Surveys have shown that many municipalities in
Nepal do not follow sanitary solid waste practices. There are many reasons why these
communities have not taken steps to protect the health and welfare of their citizens from the
hazards associated with the inadequate and insanitary collection and disposal of solid wastes.
Predominate among the basic causes, is the belief that adequate service is too expensive, and a
lack of information on how to establish and operate a satisfactory system. (Gupta, et al., 2018).

1.2 Problem Statement

Over the number of years, population growth, new home construction, increased industrial
activity has significantly increased in the production of solid waste in communities. The
challenges of waste management are manifold.
Nuwakot district produces a large amount of waste annually and is struggling to manage the
waste. Proper collection of garbage and sorting is also not done regularly. The location of
ultimate disposal sites of this city represents the unconsciousness about the environmental and
public health hazards arising from disposing of waste in improper location. Hence, a proper

5|Page
landfill is a must for proper management of solid waste. A proper siting of waste disposal
location by using GIS based Multi Criteria Decision Analysis uses logical procedures
incorporating different factors and criteria that address the biophysical and ecological aspects of
environment.

1.3 Objectives
1.3.1 General Objective
To calculate waste generation rate of study area and conduct suitability study of landfill site.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

• To determine the waste generation rate and conduct the classification of solid waste.
• To determine the suitability site for landfill site using AHP.
• To access the suitability of material recovery facility.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Status of Solid Waste Generation in Nepal

In Nepal, the Municipal waste has been increasing day by day due to population growth, rapid
urbanization and availability of various physical facilities. Establishment of factories and
industries, development and expansion of trade and commerce, adoption of advanced technology
and changes in consumption habits have caused increase in waste generation as well as change in
nature and composition of solid waste. The increased volume of domestic waste, industrial
waste, chemical waste, health institution related waste or harmful waste has posed challenges to
the environment throughout the country. (OAG, 2015)
The household survey revealed an average per capita household waste generation rate of 170
grams (g)/capita/day. The study also uncovered that the household waste generation rates vary
with the economic status and climatic conditions. A survey conducted in all 58 municipalities of
Nepal in 2012 found that the average municipal solid waste generation was 317 grams per capita
per day. (ADB, 2013) This translates into 1,435 tons per day or 524,000 tons per year of
municipal solid waste generation in Nepal.{ibid} Many of these technically and financially
constrained municipalities are still practicing roadside waste pickup from open piles and open
dumping, creating major health risks.
The existing sanitary landfills are not properly managed due to negligence and lack of awareness
among the general public. As an example, the present condition of sanitary landfill of sisdol can
be considered. The landfill site has an area of 15 hectares. Two hectares of land is used for the
actual filling while 12 hectares are used as a buffer and the remaining 1 hectare is used for other
facilities. The landfill site has two valleys, with a capacity of 166,085 and 108,910 cubic meters
respectively. The landfill site was leased by the Nepal government in June 2005 for two years
from the locals as a temporary location. However, the government kept on using the land even
after the lease expired. Due to overuse, the nearby 40-50 ropani of land have become unusable.

6|Page
This has caused numerous clashes between the locals and the government resulting in strikes and
stoppages of vehicular movement to the dumping location.

2.2 Suitability Analysis

Suitability Analysis is performed via GIS analysis and determines the best locations for
something dependent on applied criteria. However, various methods and approaches like fuzzy
logic site selection, weighted site selection and many more similar have been adopted for the
suitability analysis process.

A fuzzy logic site suitability analysis is an analysis method that is used when data is continuous,
and does not adhere to discrete boundaries. It assigns membership values to locations that range
from 0 to 1. 0 indicates non-membership or an unsuitable site, while 1 indicates membership or a
suitable site. Fuzzy logic site selection is different from other site selection methods because it
represents a possibility of an ideal site, rather than a probability and it is commonly used to find
ideal habitat for plants and animals or other sites that are not specifically chosen by a user or
developer.

Weighted site selection analysis is an approach that allows users to answer questions or solve
problems that are impacted by many factors and assign varying weights to each of the criteria.
Criteria Weights can be defined as a value assigned to an evaluation criterion which indicates its
importance relative to other criteria under consideration. (Kirkwood, 1997) There are four
different techniques of assigning the weights, namely, ranking, rating, pairwise comparison and
trade of analysis methods. Calculating weight for the criteria using the method of pairwise
comparison method has major advantages that two criteria had to be considered at a time and
also, it can be easily incorporated into GIS based decision making procedures.

2.3 Analytical Hierarchy Process

The most popular and most commonly used Multi Criteria Decision Analysis method is Analytic
Hierarchy Process (AHP) which was introduced and established by Saaty in 1980. It is a
mathematical method that may be applied to resolve highly complex decision-making problems
involving multiple scenarios, criteria, and factors. The AHP is a powerful and flexible decision-
making process to help people set priorities and make the best decision when both quantitative
and qualitative aspects of decisions need to be considered. The AHP applies to the decision
problem after it is structured hierarchically at different levels, each level consisting of a finite
number of elements. It constructs a ratio scale associated with the priorities for the various items
compared. At initial formulation in the conventional AHP, Saaty proposed a four-step
methodology comprising of modeling, valuation, prioritization, and synthesis. At the first stage, a
hierarchy representing relevant aspects of the problem (criteria, sub-criteria, attributes, and
decision alternatives) is constructed. The goal or mission of the decision-making problem is
placed at the top of this hierarchy. Other relevant aspects (criteria, sub-criteria, attributes, etc.)
are placed in the remaining levels. The second stage involves the comparison of pairs of criteria,

7|Page
pairs of sub-criteria (pairs of sub criteria, etc.), and pairs of alternatives. The AHP uses a
fundamental 9-point scale measurement to express individual preferences or judgments, creating
a matrix of pairwise comparisons (Table 1). These pairwise comparisons allow independent
evaluations of each factor’s contribution, thereby simplifying the decision-making process.
(Bozdağ, et al., 2016)
TABLE 1: PAIRWISE COMPARISON SCALE IN AHP

Intensity of Importance Description

1 Extremely less important
2 Very strongly less important
3 Strongly less important
4 Moderately less important
5 Equally important
6 Moderate important
7 Strongly important
8 Demonstrate important
9 Extreme important

2.4 Weighted Overlay Method

A weight can be defined as a value assigned to an evaluation criteria which indicates it's
importance compared to other criteria under considerations. (Al-Ansari, et al., 2018) The
weighted overlay method is a geographic information system (GIS) technique used to combine
and analyze multiple spatial datasets or layers where each of the layers represent a different
factor or criteria by assigning weights to each layer based on their relative importance to the
analysis. There are 4 different techniques when assigning the weights which are ranking, rating,
pairwise comparison method and trade of analysis method. (Doyuran, et al., 2006) .The
comparison matrix indicates the relative importance to the criteria in the column compared with
the criteria in rows where for each of the comparison, it was decided which of the two criteria is
most important and the score was assigned to show the difference.
The site selection criteria were retrieved based on the existing literatures and landfill siting
guidelines from around the globe. Several input criteria were used for this paper which includes
existing water bodies, road networks, croplands, built-up areas, slopes, soil types, soil
settlements, rangelands, forest covers and land covers. All these criteria maps were prepared
using GIS (Geographic Information System) software after which the criteria weight was
obtained from AHP pairwise comparison matrix and normalization. Hence, the weighted criteria
were evaluated through GIS software by using the weighted overlay tool in ArcGIS. The result
of the study is categorized into 5 categories as:

TABLE 2: INTENSITY OF IMPORTANCE IN WEIGHTED OVERLAY METHOD FOR ARCGIS

8|Page
 Intensity of importance Definition
5 Not suitable
3 Less suitable
3 Moderately suitable
2 Highly suitable
1 Very Highly suitable

The very highly suitable sites are those which possess the optimum quality and characteristics for
sustainable solid waste disposal.

2.5 Material Recovery Facility (MRF)

Material recovery facility refers to a plant that separates and is ready to sell single-stream
recycling materials to final consumers and is also known as materials reclamation facility or
materials recycling facility. The location of a MRF plant is used to gather non-biodegradable
garbage and sort them either manually or automatically so that they can be disposed properly.
The recyclables are either sold to factories which make recyclables or are transformed into other
goods, with the remaining materials being dumped in landfills. The primary goal of the structure
is to reduce the overall trash generation, and this procedure not only achieves that goal but also
has the welcome side effect of producing revenue. Materials recovery facilities sort a wide range
of recyclable materials, including, Plastics, Cardboard (OCC), paper including newspapers,
magazines, office paper, mixed paper, Glass bottles and jars, metal containers including
aluminum and steel cans, cartoons etc. because they frequently estimate how much of the
collected recyclable material may be recovered for recycling, MRFs are a crucial component of
the Solid Waste Management (SWM) system.
MRF plants are again categorized on the basis of the type of waste received:
• Clean waste: where the solid waste is already sorted out before arriving.
• Dirty waste: where the solid waste is not sorted out in the MRFS.
• Mixed waste: where even the degradable waste is brought in. (Dhakal, 2015)
The stages involved in designing a MRF system to process recyclables include:
1. Conceptual design
2. Evaluation of the markets and economics of operation
3. Development and gathering of data necessary for the design
4. Detailed engineering design of system
5. Siting design
6. Procurement of equipment
7. Construction
8. Processing of materials
9. Marketing (Dubanowitz, 2000).

9|Page
While MRFs cannot be examined in isolation from the other components of the SWM system
due to their integration, comprehensive standalone MRF process models are necessary to
effectively simulate the life-cycle impacts of complete SWM systems. Decision-makers involved
in solid waste management are more attentive to recyclable materials found in solid waste since
recycling solid waste can help achieve goals connected to sustainability, such as resource
recovery, decreased energy use, and lower emissions. Only limited work has been done to
systematically characterize MRF operations and the resulting emissions.
Globally, average material use has increased from 5.0 tons to 10.3 tons per capita per annum
between 1950 and 2010 due to population growth, industrialization and an increase in socio-
economic power. (Krausmann, et al., 2014) In context of Nepal, Material recovery facilities
receive a low priority both at the national and local level. Lack of financial resources, human
resources capacity, waste management technology, and infrastructure are often cited as the
common barriers to waste management and MRF. A rapid assessment of solid waste
management (SWM) practices was conducted in 16 selected municipalities across seven
provinces of Nepal in mid-2018, The average composition of MSW was: organic (43.6%), paper
and paper products (22.7%), plastic (13.8%), glass (6.4%), metals (2.7%), textile (3%), rubber
and leather (1.3%), and others (6.6%) (Khatoon, 2020).
There are many organizations working in Nepal involved in solid waste management and
material recovery facilities such as Doko recyclers, Upcycle Nepal, Tyre Treasures, Smart Paani,
as well as municipal government offices and local recycling companies generating good revenue
and positive contribution in waste management and environment with their work. These
companies also provide services such as Shredding, Composting, E-waste and workshops. One
of the first MRF plant established in Nepal was in the village of Mulkharka - a buffer zone inside
the protected area of Shivpuri-Nagarjun national park which was designed to be a clean type of
MRF plant, (Dhakal, 2015).

2.6 Payback Period

The payback period is the length of time it takes to recover the cost of an investment or the
length of time an investor needs to reach a breakeven point. In other terms, payback period
shows how long it takes for a business to recoup an investment. The payback period is often used
as an initial analysis that can be understood without much technical knowledge as easy and quick
to calculate. During the calculation of payback period the time value of money is not considered,
hence the actual calculations may vary.

10 | P a g e
 3. Materials and Methods

3.1 Study Area

Bidur Municipality lies in Nuwakot District which is middle of Nepal and located about 69 km's
northwest of the capital city Kathmandu, Bagmati Province is taken as proposed study area to
determine suitable site for landfill. (Saleem, 2014) Bidur Municipality comprises of 13 wards
and lies between coordinates of latitudes 27°51′ N and 27°58′ N, coordinates of longitudes
85°14′ E and 85°40′ E. It covers an area of 130.01 sq. Km and has a population of 59,227. (CBS,
2020)

FIGURE 1: STUDY AREA FOR LANDFILL SITE SELECTION

3.2 Present Condition of Bidur Municipality

Bidur municipality is located in north-central of Nepal and acts as the capital of Nuwakot
province. According to "Strategic Urban Planning: Bidur municipality & surrounding areas" in
2017, Bidur has 13 wards with the total area of 130 square kilometers. The total population of
Bidur municipality is 5,351 with 12,712 males and 14,038 females (Census Nepal, 2011). Bidur
only has 8.85% of the total land useful for settlement and construction which is mainly
comprised of river valley scatted in the hills. The non-construction land is mainly made up of
forest land, paddy field terrace where mountains cover about 6,315.01 hectares (47.82%),
relatively gentle slope covers 3,586.32 hectares (27.16%), paddy fields covering about 1,454.45
hectares (11.01%) and rivers covering 517.6 hectares (3.92%). (WPDI & WLSP, 2017) The
construction land of Bidur consists of urban area and rural land where urban area is only
concentrated in the valleys and tableland along the Trishuli and Tadi rivers.

11 | P a g e
With regards to waste disposal, our survey showed approximately 4 tons of waste is produced
every day in Bidur. Based on information gathered from site surveys, the Bidur Municipal
Government's environment and health departments are in charge of handling solid trash in the
area. Workers that are qualified for the job primarily gather and carry waste. In the city,
curbsides serve as waste collection sites. Locals can place their trash on the side of the road, and
government-employed cleaners will come pick it up. The city employs 12 temporary cleaners,
each of whom is equipped with 11 trolleys, 8 wheelbarrows, and 1 trailer. Waste is loaded into
wheelbarrows and trolleys once they are filled with waste. There are no projects running in the
municipality promoting recycling of solid waste. Waste is generally composted at household and
community levels. Although there are hospitals, health care facilities, schools and industries in
Bidur municipality, they are not separated and dumped with municipal waste similarly, they have
no system to collect other special types of waste and segregation process are rarely practiced in
the municipality.
3.3 Methodology
The management of waste generated by the households as well as other individual bodies is very
crucial for a quality of life in communities as well as environmental protection. Proper waste
management allows us to explore various positive outcomes like waste to energy, improves
aesthetics, recovery and reuse of valuable resources along with income generation opportunities.
In order to collect the waste generation following methods can be used:

3.3.1 Primary Methods

a) Collaboration with waste management authorities
We can collaborate with regulatory bodies for the waste management for the collection as well as
disposal of the waste. Also identify the problems and capacity of those bodies along with other
information regarding the routes, pickup durations, volumes, etc.
b) Conducting various surveys to access the present condition of study area
Surveys to access the current situation of the study area are done among the locals at the
beginning of the study. Household survey is to be done by preparing a questionnaire format and
keeping a proper record of the survey result is an important task.
c) Random distribution of garbage bags for sample collection
The sample garbage bags are distributed throughout the area so it could well represent the
households of different communities. The garbage bags are provided in coordination with local
bodies so the process of sample collection could be done in effective and true manner.
d) Characterization of waste and its reusability
The collected waste sample goes through waste characterization process such as metals, plastics,
cardboards, papers, degradable, glass, etc. to analyze its reuse ability and recyclability.
e) Weighing and measurement of waste.

12 | P a g e
The characterized wastes are then studied for various beneficiary purposes such as reselling, bio-
gas generation, reusing, etc. to the scrap dealer or plastic and paper mills after its volume or
weight has been measured. The wastes are studied in multiple ways for its reuse ability along
with income generation potentials.
f) Application of GIS and landfill site selection
The remote sensing technologies like Geographic Information System (GIS) is used to study
efficient waste collection routes as well as locating landfills and MRF plants.
Studying and analyzing the published articles, reports, books, data, etc. in order to accumulate all
the necessary information and knowledge required for the waste management and MRF site
selection. Collection of the demographic data from the concerned authorities and calculate the
total waste generation in accordance to sample survey conducted.

3.3.2 Secondary Methods

1. Accumulation of relevant secondary data
Secondary data of the study area are acquired from various sources for suitability analysis which
includes from reports, books, online, and other works of literature. These data include:
1) Digital Elevation Model (DEM)
2) Land Use/Land Cover Data
3) River network across the area
4) Road network throughout the study area
5) Slope
6) Soil Settlement
7) Built-up Area
8) Aerial Imagery and Satellite Data

TABLE 3:TABLE SHOWING DATA SOURCES OF VARIOUS CRITERIA

Criteria Data Source

DEM USGS

River Network ICIMOD

Road Network HDX

Soil-Settlement ICIMOD

Soil Type FAO

LULC (Built-up, forest, ESRI

rangelands, croplands)

13 | P a g e
2. Determining siting criteria
There are numerous environmental, social, and economic criteria to consider while choosing a
landfill site. Based on data availability and significance, factors such as distance to roads,
distance from water sources, distance from residence, land use and land cover, elevation, slope,
landfill size, and wind direction will be considered in this study for the analysis of a suitable
landfill site. (Asefa, et al., 2021) After reviewing works of literature, the criteria are to be
selected with fixed suitable buffer. These criteria are then ranked relative to its importance with
other values from a set {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}. (ibid)
3. Land suitability assessment
Secondary data are processed using a suitable model in ESRI Arch GIS software. Each criterion
is to be reclassified as unsuitable, least suitable, moderately suitable, suitable, and highly suitable
by the Euclidean distance and reclassify spatial tool. Then the reclassified criteria are overlaid by
a weighted overlay spatial tool to produce a potential landfill site for solid waste disposal in
Bidur Municipality, Nuwakot. Field visits will also be conducted to validate the final site
selected landfill obtained using the methodology used in this study interval.

FIGURE 2: FRAMEWORK OF THE STUDY TO SELECT A SUITABLE SANITARY LANDFILL SITE IN BIDUR MUNICIPALITY

4. Determination of landfill area

For the estimation of landfill size, secondary data from the central statistics agency and survey
reports are used to extract estimated population. Further, works of literature is reviewed for the
assumption of compacted specific weight of solid waste and other landfill size calculation
specifications. To calculate the area required for a landfill, factors such as waste generation rate,

14 | P a g e
population growth, and density of the compressed landfill material are to be considered. (MM &
MTU, 2020) (Singh, 2013) To calculate the volume of landfill area, landfill height is chosen
accordingly to the groundwater depth of site. All calculations are performed using equations
given below;
𝒗𝒘 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 ′𝑁′ 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠(𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠)/𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(𝑘𝑔/𝑚3),
where, 𝑣𝜔 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒(𝑚3/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)

𝒗ⅆ𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝒗𝒘 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑣ⅆ𝑐 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟

𝒗𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟓𝒗𝒘 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑣𝑐 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟

𝒄𝒊 = 𝒗𝒘 + 𝒗ⅆ𝒄 + 𝒗𝒄 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑚3/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

𝑨𝒊 = 𝑪𝒊 ⁄𝑯𝒊 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐴𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝒍𝒂𝒏ⅆ𝒇𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂(𝒉𝒂) & 𝐻𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 (𝑚)

3.4 Methodology for Material Recovery Facility

Material recovery facilities emphasize the triple bottom line of reuse, recycle, and reuse. The
concept of refusing, recycling, and reusing helps bring about significant improvements globally
since the amount of garbage produced worldwide is rising daily, with much of it being dumped
inappropriately and solid waste becoming an enormous threat to the environment.
The weighted overlay approach and ArcGIS tools were utilized to analyze the suitability of the
landfill location. Here, we used a sample of 20 households worth of data to estimate the waste
generation rate for the Bidur municipality. Using this waste generation rate as a basis for
calculation, the total land area needed for the dump site was determined for the entire Bidur
population. In order to determine the amount of garbage generated for each category, we
separated the waste during the waste generation rate calculation process.
With these waste composition and local current rate of recylable waste dataog the municipality,
we can now assess the economic feasibility of material recovery facility in bidur municipality.

15 | P a g e
 4. Result and Discussion

4.1 Survey on viewpoints of locals

The home questionnaire survey among the people of the several wards of the Bidur municipality
following a field visit to the dumping site and mayor's office in the Nuwakot district was
completed. The survey was done for 26 households and hence, the generalized result in form of a
bar graph is as follow. The existing condition of the landfill site and difficulties in solid waste
management showed:

Yes/No questions
YES NO

20
17 17 16
14
12
9 9 10
6

Waste Biowaste in familarity with familarity with problems in

separation farming landfill waste managing
management waste

FIGURE 3: CHART SHOWING RESULTS OF HOUSEHOLD SURVEY

Since they use the biodegradable solid waste for farming, the general people were mostly aware
of the need to separate the two types of waste (degradable and non-degradable). However, some
people about 25% don't use their bio waste, which was evident in the dump site, generating an
unpleasant stench and leachate that ultimately has an impact on the residents of the Bidur
municipality's quality of life.
The main issue was their knowledge with the current dumping area and how the site disposes of
the gathered rubbish. The location of the dump site, as well as its drawbacks and issues, are
unknown to 65% of the general public. People in the know discussed the transient nature of the
solution and how it will impact the neighboring river. They talked about the need to relocate as
soon as possible.
In order to improve the quality of life for the residents of Nuwakot, the new location for the
dumping zone must be able to address all the shortcomings of the existing dumping zone.

16 | P a g e
4.2 BOD Test
BOD, or Biochemical Oxygen Demand, is a critical parameter used to assess the quality of water
in terms of its organic pollution levels. It measures the amount of dissolved oxygen consumed by
microorganisms as they break down organic matter in water. Essentially, BOD indicates how
much oxygen is needed to sustain aquatic life and provides insights into the health of water
bodies, making it a fundamental tool in environmental monitoring and management.

FIGURE 4: BOD SAMPLE COLLECTION SITE

The BOD of the Trishuli River was found to be 5 mg/L. This value indicates the amount of
dissolved oxygen that is consumed by microorganisms as they decompose organic material in the
water sample. The considerably low BOD values, suggesting that the water contents have a
relatively low level of organic pollution and that the water quality is relatively good. This might
be because of the early stages that the landfill site is in; however, in the long run, the source of
water will be greatly affected due to the limited distance from the landfill site.
4.3 Calculation of Waste Generation Rate
4.3.1 Waste Generation Rate
The waste generation rate refers to the amount of waste produced over a specific period of time,
usually measured in terms of weight or volume. This includes various types of waste, such as
municipal solid waste, industrial waste, or hazardous waste.

17 | P a g e
Waste generation rates help in assessing the environmental impact of human activities.
Authorities and researchers can gain a better understanding of the scope of environmental
concerns and work towards practical solutions by quantifying the amount of waste created. It
informs the formulation and evaluation of waste management policies and also provides a
baseline for monitoring the effectiveness of waste reduction initiatives over time. It encourages
sustainable consumption and waste reduction practices. Waste generation rate helps raise
awareness about the environmental impact of consumer choices. Identifies and mitigates
potential health hazards associated with improper waste disposal.
The waste generation rate has various applications across different sectors and disciplines. Here
are some key applications:
• Guides infrastructure development and land use planning for effective waste
management.
• Assists in environmental impact assessments and biodiversity conservation efforts.
• Informs the development of waste management regulations and incentive programs.
• Aids in budget planning and personnel deployment for waste management.
• Sets targets for reduction and supports educational campaigns.
• Identifies opportunities for material recovery and influences product design.
• Guides businesses in assessing and reducing waste in supply chains.
• Addresses health risks associated with improper waste disposal and supports community
health programs.
• Facilitates global comparisons and harmonization of waste management policies.

4.3.2 Current waste generation rate of Bidur Municipality

Solid waste management of Bidur municipality has been a concern in terms of long-term
solution. The current landfill site is located just beside the Trishuli river which is a huge concern
for environmental health. The focus of this study was to calculate the waste generation rate of
Bidur municipality and find the best area for landfill. The data were collected from 20 household
from different wards of Bidur municipality. Random sampling was done in coordination with the
local ward office and the garbage bags were distributed among the households. Proper
instructions among the household were provided and was requested to segregate the waste
produced into different bags. Data collection was done for the produced waste in the interval of 7
days for 3 weeks. The outcome was analyzed and was thoroughly studied.
From the output, it is found that the waste generation rate of Bidur municipality was
167g/capita/day. The organic waste produced in the study area was found to be 97gm/capita/day
and for the inorganic waste, the waste generation rate was 70gm/capita/day. It shows that the
total annual waste generation rate of Bidur municipality was 3610.181 Metric Tons per year. The
inorganic waste comprises of large percentage of plastic, papers and polyethene.

18 | P a g e
Limitation of the result
As the sample size is small, it does not fully represent the whole population and hence the results
might not be actual results. Sample was taken among the household only which restricts the data
and the actual waste generation rate of study area might vary. So, large sample size is preferred
that includes unique sample to get the actual waste generation rate.
4.3.3 Determination of required landfill area
Here,
𝒗𝒘 = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 ′𝑁′ 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠(𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠)/𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛(𝑘𝑔/𝑚3),
3610.181∗1000
or, 𝑣𝜔 = (m3/years)
400

or, 𝑣𝜔 = 9025.45 m3/year

𝒗ⅆ𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟏𝒗𝒘 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑣ⅆ𝑐 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟

or, 𝑣ⅆ𝑐 = 0.1 ∗ 9025.45 = 902.545 m3/year

𝒗𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟐𝟓𝒗𝒘 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑣𝑐 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑟
𝑣𝑐 = 0.25 ∗ 9025.45 = 1805.09m3/year

𝒄𝒊 = 𝒗𝒘 + 𝒗ⅆ𝒄 + 𝒗𝒄 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝑐𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑎𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑖𝑛 𝑚3/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

or, 𝑐𝑖 = 9025.45 + 902.545 + 1805.09 = 11733.08 m3/year

𝑨𝒊 = 𝑪𝒊 ⁄𝑯𝒊 , 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒 𝐴𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝒍𝒂𝒏ⅆ𝒇𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂(𝒉𝒂) & 𝐻𝑖 𝑖𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑙 ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 (𝑚)
or, 𝐴𝑖 = 11733.08⁄25
or, 𝑨𝒊 = 𝟒𝟔𝟗. 𝟑𝟐𝟑 𝒉𝒂
A study done by (Dangi, et al., 2011) in kathmandu city reveled that an average waste density of
for the Kathmandu metropolitan area was 400 kg/m3. As for the landfill height, it ranges from
10m to 30m throughout the landfill sites in nepal. (Shrestha, 2019) suggested that 25m of landfill
height provides a extended lifespan to the landfill site. The result shows that 469.323 hacters of
land is required to cater the supply of 3610.181 metric tonnes of waste per year.

4.4 Landfill Site Suitability

Many issues have to be considered to identify the proper landfill site and planning site
investigations and assessing the suitability of a site for a landfill. Comprehensive site suitability

19 | P a g e
assessment has to be done regarding the characteristics of the sites and potential for engineered
systems to overcome site deficiencies in terms of methods of operation proposed for the site and
social and cultural issues. Therefore, criteria are formulated to select the appropriate landfill
location for solid waste disposal. Factors are identified depending on the environmental, socio-
economic and surface conditions of the study area. Table 3 shows the criteria along with its
suitability ranking used during this suitability analysis.

TABLE 4:FACTORS CRITERIA FOR LANDFILL SITE SELECTION SUITABILITY, CLASS & RANK

Criteria Zones Suitability Class Rank Reference

Distance from Road 0-300m Not suitable 5 (Ayo & Basu,
300-600m Very highly suitable 1 2011)
600-1000m Moderately suitable 3 (Mohammad,
1000-2000m Less suitable 4 et al., 2014)
Slope 0-2% Very highly suitable 1
2-5% Moderately suitable 3 (Fidelis, et al.,
2019) (Behera,
5-10% Less suitable 4
et al., 2022)
10-69.1% Not suitable 5
Soil type Eutric Cambisols Not suitable 5
Gleyic Cambisols Highly suitable 2 (Mohammad,
Chromic Cambisols Moderately suitable 3 et al., 2014)
Chromic Luvisols Very highly suitable 1
Distance from rivers 0-300m Not suitable 5
300–500m Less suitable 4 (Mohammad,
500–1000m Highly suitable 2 et al., 2014)
(Behera, et al.,
1000–1500m Very highly suitable 1
2022)
1500-2000m Moderately suitable 3
Distance from Built-up 0-300m Not suitable 5
300-500m Less suitable 4
500-1000m Highly suitable 2
1000-1500m Very highly suitable 1
1500-2000m Moderately suitable 3
Distance from Croplands 0-300m Not suitable 5
300-500m Very highly suitable 1
500-1000m Highly suitable 2
1000-1500m Moderately suitable 3
1500-2000m Less suitable 4 (Balew, et al.,
Distance from Rangelands 0-100m Very highly suitable 1 2022)
100-300m Highly Suitable 2 (Karwan, et
300-500m Moderately Suitable 3 al., 2020) (Dar,
500-1000m Less Suitable 4 et al., 2019)
1000-1500m Not suitable 5
Distance from Forest Area 0-100m Not suitable 5
100-300m Very highly suitable 1
300-600m Highly suitable 2
600-1000m Less Suitable 4
Soil Settlement 0-500m Not suitable 5
500-1000m Moderately suitable 3
1000-1500m Very highly suitable 1
1500-2000m Highly suitable 4

20 | P a g e
The selected criteria for the operation are:
1. Slope
Slope is correlated with ground variation, making it a crucial component in determining whether
a landfill is suitable for a given use. It controls both groundwater infiltration and surface runoff.
The Bidur municipality's slope was determined to be between 0 and 69.1%, which is regarded as
extremely inappropriate for the development of any landfill site. Economically speaking,
building will cost more in places with steep and high slopes than in areas with medium slopes.
Consequently, a stable slope is needed to reduce expenses and surface runoff. (Ayo & Basu,
2011) states that the preferred areas for waste disposal are those with medium slope of not more
than 20%. (Fidelis, et al., 2019) confirmed that areas with slopes ranging from 0% to 5% are
highly suitable for landfill site. Hence area with uniform or even slope was more preferred
during this analysis.

FIGURE 5: SLOPE MAP

2. Distance from road network

The road network in the Bidur municipality consists of national highway along with major and
minor roads. The landfill site should not be too far from the road network to avoid the expensive
construction cost of road. (Majid & Mir, 2021) stated that a minimum distance is also necessary
to avoid visual impact with garbage and other nuisance like foul smell. Hence a buffer of 200m
is provided along the both side from the center-line of road network. (Mohammad, et al., 2014)
and (Behera, et al., 2022) confirmed that distance from a road network should be kept minimum.

21 | P a g e
 FIGURE 6: ROADWAYS MAP FIGURE 7: ROADWAYS BUFFER MAP

3. Distance from waterways

The landfill site should not be placed near to the stream of water as there is a high chance of
contamination of water bodies due to leachate from landfill. Leachate is a by-product derived
from municipal solid waste due to their physical, biological and chemical changes over the
period of time. It is a major problem for landfill site. Bidur municipality consists of Trishuli river
as a main surface water body. Hence range of 1500-2000m and above were considered highly
suitable for solid waste disposal. Distances ranging from 0-300m were restricted during the
analysis. (Dar, et al., 2019) and (Majid & Mir, 2021) agreed that landfill should not be
constructed near any source of water to ensure the proper protection of water bodies.

FIGURE 8: WATERWAYS MAP FIGURE 9: WATERWAYS BUFFER MAP

22 | P a g e
4. Distance from Forest Area
A forest area is defined as terrain covered by naturally occurring or artificially planted stands of trees
that are at least five meters in situ, regardless of their productivity. Because there is a possibility of
soil contamination, which would lower the productivity and fertility of the land where forests are
found and ultimately causing harm to the ecosystem, the landfill site shouldn't be located too
close to any forest areas. It was determined that a distance of (600–1000) meters was unsuitable
for the construction of a landfill site, while a distance of (100–300) meters was thought to be
extremely acceptable and would cause the least amount of environmental disruption with more
area available for landfill site.

FIGURE 10: FOREST MAP FIGURE 11: FOREST BUFFER MAP

5. Distance from Cropland

A lush plot of land utilized to grow vegetables and cash crops for the growth of an agricultural
nation such as Nepal is called a cropland. Any location's ability to produce crops is based on the
pH level, or acidity, of the soil. The Nuwakot district's land was determined to have a pH of 4.03,
which is somewhat acidic. (Bista & Prakriti, 2016) Acidity in the soil can result in stunted root
growth, which limits the amount of water and nutrients that can be absorbed by the crop.
Reduced water and nutrient availability also limit crop growth and yield, and crops grown in
acidic soils are more susceptible to crop fires caused by landfill gas releases, which lowers
cropland productivity. It is regarded building a landfill site is thought to be extremely highly
suited between 300 and 500 meters away, and not suitable between 0 and 300 meters.

23 | P a g e
 FIGURE 12:CROPLAND BUFFER MAP

6.Soil type
Bidur Municipality has four main types of soil: Eutric cambisols, Gleyic cambisols, Chromatic
luvisols, and Chromatic cambisols. where the majority of the municipality is covered in soil of
the Chromic Cambisols type. Due to their superior drainage qualities and greater load carrying
capacity, chromic luvisols are typically a better choice for landfill site construction. Additionally,
their relatively low susceptibility to waterlogging and erosion can contribute to the long-term
stability and integrity of landfill site which is denoted by green color in the map below.

FIGURE 13:SOIL MAP

24 | P a g e
7. Soil Settlement
The map below indicates the areas with a higher likelihood of soil settlements along with a
buffer. Compaction and other geological processes can cause soil settlement areas to sink and
subside, making them unsuitable for landfill sites since they shorten their life lifetime and cause
unintended hazards. Building a landfill site is deemed appropriate if it is at least 1000–1500
meters away from the soil settlement area.

FIGURE 14:SOIL SETTLEMENT MAP FIGURE 15:SOIL SETTLEMENT BUFFER MAP

8. Distance from Rangeland

Rangelands refers to vast expanses of land primarily covered with grasses, herbs, shrubs, and
other non woody vegetation, which are used for grazing by domestic livestock such as cattle,
sheep, and goats. rangeland plays a crucial role in supporting livelihoods, bio diversity, and
ecosystem functions. rangeland often have fewer sensitive environment features such as wetland
and forests compared to other types of landscapes which can simplify the environmental
assessment process and reduce the likelihood of significant ecological impacts associated with
landfill development. Landfill sites are considered highly suitable to be constructed at a distance
of (0-100) meters from any rangelands. The area covered by rangelands in our area of study and
its buffer area are shown in the map below.

25 | P a g e
 FIGURE 16:RANGELAND MAP FIGURE 17:RANGELAND BUFFER MAP

9. Distance from Built-up Area

Built-up area refers to the region or locality where the land is extensively covered by buildings,
structures, infrastructures, and other forms of development. The extent of built-up areas can vary
widely depending on factors such as population density, urbanization rates, land use policies, and
historical development patterns. Built-up areas are characterized by high levels of human
activity, infrastructure density and land use intensity, contrasting with natural or rural landscape.
Bidur municipality consists of 13 different wards with wide spread of population throughout.
While constructing a landfill, sanitation and human health should be prioritized so it is advised to
construct a sanitary landfill at a distance of about (1000-1500) meters.

FIGURE 18:BUILT-UP AREA MAP FIGURE 19:BUILT-UP AREA BUFFER MAP

26 | P a g e
 Due to the complex nature of the data, AHP was used to interpret all criteria and find out the best
locations for landfills in the study area. The algorithm adopted for the current research study was
the AHP in which a comparison matrix was prepared and the importance of each criterion over
the other criteria was categorized and weighted (Table 5).
TABLE 5: PAIRWISE COMPARISON MATRIX (DECISION MATRIX)

Matrix Built- Slope Road River Soil Settlement Croplands Rangelands Forest
up type
Built-up 1 7.00 7.00 7.00 9.00 9.00 7.00 8.00 8.00
Slope 0.14 1 8.00 8.00 9.00 9.00 9.00 8.00 8.00
Road 0.14 0.12 1 0.17 8.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 7.00
River 0.14 0.12 6.00 1 8.00 9.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Soil Type 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 1 2.00 0.14 0.14 0.14
Settlement 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.50 1 0.14 0.12 0.12
Croplands 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.14 7.00 7.00 1 0.50 7.00
Rangelands 0.12 0.12 0.17 0.14 7.00 8.00 2.00 1 9.00
Forest 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 7.00 8.00 0.14 0.11 1

The highest score in the AHP comparison matrix was given to the built-up area, slope, river
stream and roads because the study area is heavily covered by built-up and it is expensive to
relocate a large population. Roads affect the operational and construction cost of landfill sites by
providing the accessible routes for waste transportation during all weather conditions and are
also important for their aesthetic value. The weightage of the different criteria developed using
the AHP method is shown in (Table 6).
TABLE 6: WEIGHTAGE FOR THE CRITERIA

Criteria Priority Rank (+)/(-)

Built-Up 38.00% 1 38.80%
Slope 25.70% 2 24.40%
Road 9.10% 4 7.70%
River 13.70% 3 11.80%
Soil type 1.20% 8 0.90%
Settlement 1.00% 9 0.90%
Croplands 3.90% 6 3.50%
Rangelands 4.90% 5 4.40%
Forest 2.40% 7 2.10%

27 | P a g e
Suitability Map
The suitable waste disposal site selection was done on the basis of weighted overlay method.
Based on criteria and their zones, buffer map for all the individual criteria was created. These
maps were then reclassified based on the suitability ranking as per the table 3. These reclassified
maps were considered for generation single suitability ranking map with the help of weighted
overlay tool in ArcMap. Figure 20 shows the suitability map for landfill site in Bidur
municipality.

FIGURE 20: LANDFILL SITE SUITABILITY MAP

The generated suitability map was classified as not suitable area, moderately suitable and very
highly suitable land which respectively occupy 56% (6945.25 ha), 28.83% (3576.5 ha) and
15.17% (1881.6 ha) of the total study area. The chart below shows the suitability area for the
study site.

Suitability Area in Hectors(ha)

1881.6

6945.25
3576.5

Not Suitable Moderately Suitable Highly Suitable

FIGURE 21: CHART SHOWING SUITABILITY AREA

28 | P a g e
4.5 Feasibility of Material Recovery Facility in Bidur Municipality
A Material Recovery Facility (MRF) is a utility area built close to a sanitary landfill site with the
intention of recycling and reusing municipal solid waste in order to preserve the environment and
lengthen the landfill's useful life. Overall, MRF's plays a vital role in promoting sustainability,
resource efficiency, and environmental step wardship.

Importance of a Material Recovery Facility

MRFs are important factors because of their capacity to process as much recyclable material as
possible while creating products that will provide the largest market profits and revenue through
the sale of recycled materials benefiting the local economy. MRFs contribute to the preservation
of our natural environment by reducing greenhouse gasses emission associated with production
processes of raw materials, the conservation of natural resources by separating and recovering
materials such as paper, plastics, glass and metals reuse, and the removal of harmful pollutants
from our soil and water. MRFs assist in lowering the waste stream, preventing most of leaching
problem, also recycling materials instead of disposing them reduces the need for raw material
extraction and energy consumption, and the pollution brought on by the production of new goods
by sorting and preparing materials for recycling. MRFs also help with the problem of land
shortage in future for the sanitary landfill. MRFs also promote the municipality's recycling
programs as they help to increase the quantity of the recyclable materials being diverted from
landfill sites. The proper waste management facilitated by MRFs can help in reduction of land,
water and air pollution which minimizes pollution borne diseases promoting a healthier living
environment for the communities.
TABLE 7:DESCRIPTION OF WASTE COMPONENT CATEGORIES

Category Description

Organic Yard waste (Branches, twigs, leaves,

grass pruning and trimmings, and other
plant material), food waste

Plastic Bottles, expanded polystyrene, film

plastic, other rigid plastics

Paper Office paper, computer paper, magazines,

glossy paper, waxed paper, newsprint,
cardboard, old/torn books.

Metal Ferrous (Iron, steel, tin cans,), aluminum,

and non-ferrous non-aluminum metals
(copper, brass, etc.)

Glass Bottles, drinking glass, jars, mirrors,

louvers, auto windscreens, computers,
etc.
Source: Surveywaste.info ,online

29 | P a g e
Waste composition and price of recyclables
The prices of key recyclable materials, such as plastics, metal, paper, and glass, are affected by
the global economy and demand from the manufacturing sector. Common recyclables generated
at households, commercial establishments, and institutions (e.g., polyethylene terephthalate
[PET] bottles, white paper, and newspaper) sell at good prices. The waste composition of our
study shows that a major part from total waste contributes to food waste i.e. 58%. Waste such as
metals, glasses and special waste were not observed during our study as the sample size was
limited to households only. The chart below shows the current waste composition of the study
area.

Waste Composition

Plastics
26%
Paper
58% 16%
Food waste

FIGURE 22: PIE CHART SHOWING WASTE COMPOSITION OF STUDY AREA

As per our study, about 42% of the total waste generated in study area is recyclable. This shows
that current total population of Bidur municipality i.e. 59227 (Census, 2021) produces 4.15 tons
of recyclable waste per day that possess high value in the market. Table 8 shows the current price
list of recyclable materials in the study area. For design year of 20 years, with current population
growth rate of 1.7% per annum, it is estimated that a projected population of 82973 will produce
a total of 5.81 tons of waste per day or 2120.65 tons/year. To recycle this waste, a MRF with a
capacity of 5-10 tons per day is most suitable.
TABLE 8: PRICES OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS OF NUWAKOT DISTRICT AS OF JAN 2024

Recyclable Material Junk Shop Price (per Factory Price (per ton)
ton)
Mineral water bottles Rs. 20000 Rs. 22000
Glass bottles Rs. 3000 Rs. 5000
Plastics Rs. 10000 Rs. 12000
Cartoon boxes Rs. 10000 Rs. 12000
Electronic Items Rs. 5000 Rs. 7000
Shoe sole Rs. 12000 Rs. 14000
Jute bag Rs. 5000 Rs. 7000
Iron Rs. 35000 Rs. 37000
Tin Rs. 20000 Rs. 22000

30 | P a g e
Materials Recovery Facility Construction and Operation & Maintenance Cost
The establishment of an MRF will entail cost in the following items:
1) Feasibility study
2) Environmental permitting
3) Lot acquisition
4) Site development
5) Facility construction
6) Equipment acquisition
7) Training of operations personnel (ADB, 2013)
The cost of each item, as well as permit requirements, varies according to the location of the site.
The price also varies, depending on the desired size of the facility. Site development cost also
vary and will depend on particular features such as terrain, land use, vegetation, and
accessibility. Low areas will need backfilling, while rolling terrain requires leveling and
earthmoving to attain the desired flat level. The cost of construction of MRF structure will vary
depending upon the location as the value of land is not stationary throughout. The cost of the
equipment has a big role in the development cost of the MRF facility. The type of MRF plant
(Manual, Semi-automatic, automatic) that is being constructed will influence the equipment cost.
The basic equipment, even for a manual operation, would include sorting tables, weighing scales,
a baler, and payloader.
A semi-automatic MRF plant with a capacity to process 1.5 tons of waste per hour is estimated to
cost about NRP 78 lakhs in Nepal (excluding land acquisition cost). Semi-automated have lower
cost for labor but require higher skills for Operation & Maintenance (O&M) of equipment,
facility, and utilities. In general O&M cost is placed at 5%-10% of the total investment and it
should not exceed the revenue from the sales of recyclables.
This research showed that 4.15 tons/day of recyclable waste (plastic and paper) is produced in
Bidur municipality that results to a total of 1514.75 tons of waste per year. As per (ADB, 2013)
the collection efficiency is 70% for urban areas and 30% for rural areas. As the municipality is in
early stages of development and most of the population practice self-disposal techniques like
burning and buying of the produced waste, the total waste collection efficiency is taken as 30%
and the recovery percentage ranges about 40-50% of collected waste. The calculations are as;
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 1514.75 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
𝑊𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 = 454.425 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒 = 181.77 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑠/𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
Considering the cost of equipment required on the material recovery facility to be around NRP
48 lakhs and the cost of construction to be NRP 30 lakhs, we require an initial investment of
NRP 78 lakhs. Taking the locally obtained salvage value rate of NRP 10 per kg the total revenue
from the material recovery facility can be NRP 1817700 while considering a 10% of operation
and maintenance cost. The payback period for the project is shown in table below:

31 | P a g e
TABLE 9: PAYBACK PERIOD ANALYSIS

Payback Period Analysis

Undiscounted Payback Period Analysis

Projected
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Undiscounted Net Cash Flow -7800000 1037700 1141470 1255617 1381179 1519297 1671226 1838349
Cumulative Net Cash Flow -6762300 -5620830 -4365213 -2984034 -1464738 206488 9844837
Positive Cash Flow? FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE FALSE TRUE TRUE
Undiscounted Payback Period 6 First Year Positive
Partial Year Payback Period 5.9 Actual Number of Years

The table shows that the estimate payback period of a MRF project that can handle the current as
well a future supply of waste in Bidur municipality is 5.9 years. This demonstrates that the
construction of a material recovery facility in the study area is feasible from both environmental
and economic perspective.

Operations in Materials Recovery Facility

Operations in material recovery facility start with the inspection and registration of the waste and
its placement in the receiving area. Bulky or heavy materials are hand sorted and the remaining
waste is placed on to the conveyor belt for further processing. Conveyor belt is present for both
semi-automatic and fully automatic type of project.
For organic waste or mixed waste, they are separated immediately and are placed in a vehicle to
transport them to a composting facility nearby. The separated biodegradables must not be stored
within the roofed section of the MRF and must be transferred to a composting plant or disposal
facility, preferably within the same day. (ADB, 2013)
Valuable recyclable items are sorted and are placed in their respective allocated locations by
either workers or by machines. The recovered recyclables are weighed and temporarily stored in
designated locations. When sufficient quantities have been accumulated, tin cans are compacted
and baled; plastic bottles are pierced, flattened, and baled; paper is stacked; and glass is broken,
then bulked up. Metals are also separately stored and sold as they possess high value.
The residual materials are temporarily stored and then disposed of in a sanitary landfill.
Records of amount of incoming waste materials and outgoing waste materials are kept daily and
are validated by the site supervisor.

32 | P a g e
 5. Conclusion & Recommendation
Conclusion

The research paper on "Suitability analysis of landfill site and design of MRF in Nuwakot,
Nepal" at the Bidur municipality of Nuwakot district has been finalized by the team of civil
engineering students. The present-day issue of municipal solid waste and its rightful
management in the research area are the primary subjects of this essay. The current landfill,
which is adjacent to the Trishuli river, is in dire shape and could soon present a number of
environmental challenges. We performed a survey to learn about the current conditions and
public sentiment regarding the landfill site and how it may influence the quality of the Trishuli
river's water in the future. We additionally carried out bod tests from two distinct sources within
close proximity to the landfill site, and the results indicated a modest impact, nevertheless it
could get worse.
On a weekly basis, we retrieved solid waste samples from two distinct wards. A total of 20
household were selected by random sampling. After three weeks of data analysis, we estimated
the aggregate quantity of solid trash generated in the area and utilized that information to
estimate the total area required for the construction of a sanitary landfill. We created several
geographical and analytical maps for the study area through GIS-based software, and we used
the weighted overlay technique for deciding which area is the most appropriate for the sanitary
landfill.
Similarly, we also carried out a feasibility study of MRF in Bidur municipality considering other
projects from different parts of the world. If we are to construct a material recovery facility in
Bidur, our study concluded that a semi-automatic plant is best suitable which will require an
initial investment of around NRP 78 lakhs with the cost of equipment NRP 48 lakhs. The
payback period was also calculated to be 5.9 years which is according to the present
circumstances and can definitely be increased with proper collections and segregation processes.
Construction of a material recovery facility along with the landfill site can be beneficial to the
municipality in terms of economic growth as well as environmental betterments.
Recommendation

The following are some of the recommendations form this study;

1. In accordance to our research, the disposal facility is posing health and ecological
hazards, consequently the local government of the study location is encouraged to
relocate it as soon as possible.
2. Based on the outcomes of our survey, there are inconsistencies in the local waste
collection schedule that contribute to the accumulation of municipal solid waste in public
areas; thereby, regular waste collection is strongly recommended.
3. It is advised that the municipality of Bidur emphasize on the potential benefits associated
with MRF and the possible revenues it may yield.
4. The obtained revenue and payback period are calculated considering exiting
circumstances which can definitely increase with proper collection and segregation
methods for better economic results.

33 | P a g e
 APPENDIX: Photographs

CONDUCTING HOUSEHOLD SURVEY WASTE MANAGEMENT SURVEY FORM

CURRENTLY USED LANDFILL SITE IN BIDUR MUNICIPALITY

34 | P a g e
WEIGHTING WEEKLY SAMPLE FOR STUDY AREA

35 | P a g e
CENTRAL JAIL NEAR DUMPING SITE TRISHULI RIVER NEAR CURRENT DUMPING SITE

SAMPLE COLLECTION FOR BOD TEST SATELLITE IMAGE OF SAMPLE COLLECTION SITE

36 | P a g e
FIELD VISIT OF BIDUR MUNICIPALITY

37 | P a g e
 References

ADB, 2013. Material Recovery Facility Toolkit, Mandaluyong City: Asian Devlopment Bank.
Al-Ansari, Al-Anbri, M., Thameer, M. Y. & Nadir, 2018. Landfill site selection by weighted
overlay technique: case study of AL-kufa, Iraq. sustainability, p. 999.
Asefa, E. M., Damtew, Y. T. & Barasa, K. B., 2021. Landfill Site Selection Using GIS Based
Multicriteria Evaluation Technique in Harar City, Eastern Ethiopia. Environmental Health
Insight.
Ayo, B. & Basu, I., 2011. Selection of Landfill Sites for Solid Waste Treatment in Damaturu
Town-Using GIS Techniques. Journal of Environmental Protection, Volume 2, pp. 1-10.
Balew, A., Alemu, M., Leul, Y. & Feye, T., 2022. Suitable landfill site selection using GIS-
based multi-criteria decision analysis and evaluation in Robe town, Ethiopia. GeoJournal,
Volume 87, pp. 895-920.
Behera, D. K., Ahire, V., Ahire, V. & Saxena, M. K., 2022. Potential landfill site suitability
study for environmental sustainability using GIS-based multi-criteria techniques for nashik and
environs. Environmental Earth Sciences, p. 15.
Bista, R. G. & Prakriti, 2016. Crop diversification improves pH in acidic soils.. Journal of Crop
Improvement, pp. 657-667.
Bozdağ, A., Yavuz, F. & Dönertaş, A., 2016. AHP and GIS based land suitability analysis for
Cihanbeyli, Turkey. Article in Environmental Earth Sciences, pp. 1-15.
CBS, 2019. Statistics of Nepal, Kathmandu: Central Beareu of Statistics.
Census Nepal, 2011. Population And Housing Census of Nuwakot Aministrative of Nepal,
Nuwakot: s.n.
Census, 2021. National Population and Housing Cencue, Nepal: National Statistics Office.
Dangi, M. B. et al., 2011. Municipal solid waste generation in Kathmandu, Nepal. Journal of
Environmental Management, 92(1), pp. 240-249.
Dar, S. N., Ahmed, S., Skinder, S. & Wani, M. A., 2019. Identification of suitable landfill site
based on GIS in Leh, Ladakh Region. GeoJournal, Volume 84.
Dhakal, A., 2015. CGED-Nepal. [Online].
Doyuran, S. B., Lufti, S. & Vedat, 2006. Landfill site selection by using geographic information
system. Environment Geology, pp. 376-388.
Dubanowitz, A. J., 2000. Design of a material recovery facility (MRF) for processing the
recyclabe materials of new work city's municipal solid waste. Columbia University, p. 43.

38 | P a g e
Fidelis, O. A. et al., 2019. Combining multicriteria decision analysis with GIS for suitably siting
landfills in a Nigerian state. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, Volume 3-4.
Gupta, N. et al., 2018. Automatic Waste Segregation. New York, s.n., pp. 1688-1692.
Karwan, A., Salahalddin, S. A., Nadhir, A.-A. & Jan, L., 2020. Landfill Site Selection Using GIS
and Multi-Criteria Decision-Making AHP and SAW Methods: A Case Study in Sulaimaniyah
Governorate, Iraq. Scientific Research Publishing, Volume 12, pp. 254-268.
Khanal, A., 2023. Forecasting municipal solid waste generation using linear regression
analysis, kathmandu, Nepal: Multidisciplinary jornal section.
Khatoon, A., 2020. Waste Management- A Case Study in Nepal. Solid waste policies and
strategies:Issues,Challenges and Case Studies, pp. 185-196.
Kirkwood, C., 1997. Strategic Decision Making: Multi Objective Decision Analysis with
Spreadsheets, Belmont, Australia: Duxbury Press.
Krausmann, et al., 2014. The global metabolic transition: Regional patterns and trends of global
material flows,. Global Environmental Change, pp. 87-97.
Majid, M. & Mir, B. A., 2021. Landfill site selection using GIS based multi criteria evaluation
technique. A case study of Srinagar city, India. Environmental Challenges.
MM, H. & MTU, R., 2020. Landfill area estimation based on solid waste collection prediction
using ANN model and final waste disposal options. J clean Prod.
Mohammad, A. A., Nadhir, A.-A. & Hadeel, K. J., 2014. GIS and Multicriteria Decision
Analysis for Landfill Site Selection in Al-Hashimyah. Natural Science, Volume 6, pp. 282-304.
OAG, 2015. Evironment Audit Report, Kathmandu: Office of Auditor General.
Saleem, D. U. &. S., 2014. Sustainability modelling and assesment of product recovery system-
an engineering approach to sustainable future, s.l.: .
Shrestha, K. K., 2019. Sustainable Management of Solid Waste in Nepal: Comparative Study of
Landfills in Kathmandu and Pokhara, Pokhara: .
Singh, A. O. &., 2013. GIS based environmental decision support system for municipal landfill
site selection. Manage Environmentl Qual.
WPDI & WLSP, 2017. Intergrated Development Planning of Bidur Municipality, Bidur: .

39 | P a g e