Environment Systems and Decisions

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 286–294 | Cite as

Source separation-driven reverse logistics in MSW management

  • M. FehrEmail author
  • F. C. Santos


The research reported here characterizes municipal solid waste in terms of the quantity produced as a function of time and pre-sorting as well as post-sorting composition in a municipality with 90,000 inhabitants located in Central Brazil. It pursues the objective of identifying the basic strategy of a municipal solid waste management model specific to household waste. It shows that sorted-waste composition, and not raw waste composition, drives reverse logistics. The household waste production rate is 45 tons per day. The research provides data on the base case of progressive annual tipping rates without a diversion target. It goes on to determine a landfill diversion potential of 67 % of domestic waste produced, based on sorted waste composition data. Annual progress indicators required to reach this potential within a chosen timeframe are detailed. Reverse logistics capacity is identified and found sufficient to remove all inert waste items separated at the source. The necessary logistics for biodegradable matter, based on decentralized composting tests, is outlined. The challenge of the municipal administration is identified as the promotion of source separation, and the funds required for this undertaking are shown to derive from the correspondingly reduced landfill maintenance.


Household waste Landfill diversion MSW management MSW composition Reverse logistics Source separation Sorted-waste composition 



The Brazilian Research Council CNPq supported this study through grant 301120/2007-2 PQ.


  1. Al-Momani AH (1994) Solid waste management: sampling, analysis and assessment of household waste in the city of Amman. Int J Environ Health Res 4(4):208–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ballou RH (2001) Managing the supply chain: planning, organization and logistics (in Portuguese), 4th edn. Bookman Printers, Porto AlegreGoogle Scholar
  3. Barbieri JC, Dias M (2002) Reverse logistics as a tool for programming sustainable production and consumption (in Portuguese). Rev Tecnol, São Paulo, 6(77) AbrilGoogle Scholar
  4. Chanakya HN, Ramachandra TV, Devi V (2007) Micro-treatment options for components of organic fractions of MSW in residential areas. Environ Monit Assess 135(1–3):129–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Daskolopoulos E, Badr O, Probert SD (1998) Municipal solid waste: a prediction methodology for the generation rate and composition in the European Union and the U.S.A. Resour Conserv Recycl 24(2):155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fehr M (1999) The dynamic nature of MSW management. J Environ Syst 27(1):1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fehr M (2006) A successful pilot project of decentralized household waste management in Brazil. Environ 26(1):21–29Google Scholar
  8. Fehr M (2007) Confirming decentralized composting as definite option in urban waste management. Int J Environ Technol Manag 7(3–4):274–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fehr M, Calçado MR (2001) Divided collection model for household waste achieves 80 % landfill diversion. J Solid Waste Technol Manag 27(1):22–26Google Scholar
  10. Fehr M, Romão DC (2001) Measurement of fruit and vegetable losses in Brazil: a case study. Environ Dev Sustain 3:253–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. GAIA (Global Anti-Incineration Alliance), Accessed 16 Mar 2012
  12. Gay AE, Beam TG, Mar BW (1993) Cost-effective solid-waste characterization methodology. J Environ Eng 119(4):631–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Green K (2009) Trash talking, new trail. The University of Alberta Alumni Magazine, Autumn, pp 36–40Google Scholar
  14. Griffin M, Sobal J, Lyson TA (2009) An analysis of a community food waste stream. Agric Hum Values 26(1–2):67–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hansen TL, Jansen JC, Spliid H, Davidsson A, Christensen TH (2007) Composition of source-sorted municipal organic waste collected in Danish cities. Waste Manag 27(4):510–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hockett D, Lober DJ, Pilgrim K (1995) Determinants of per capita MSW generation in the south eastern USA. J Environ Manag 45(3):205–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. IPT & CEMPRE (1995) Municipal waste: integrated management manual (in Portuguese). Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas, São Paulo, Code 2163 pp 278Google Scholar
  18. Johannesburg (2002) Accessed 15 Mar 2012
  19. Moore S, Grime P, Kung B (2009) Urban solid waste characterization, Australian Waste Database Accessed 14 Dec 2009
  20. Nilanthi JGJ, Hettiaratchi JPA, Wirasinghe SC, Pilapiiya S (2007) Relation of waste generation and composition to socio-economic factors: a case study. Environ Monit Assess 135(1–3):31–39Google Scholar
  21. Rogers DS, Tibbenlembke RS (1999) Going backwards: reverse logistics trends and practices. Reno Publishers, University of Nevada, NevadaGoogle Scholar
  22. Thitame SN, Pondhe GM, Meshram DC (2009) Characterization and composition of MSW generated in Sangamnar City, District Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India. Environ Monit Assess 170(1–4):1–5Google Scholar
  23. Wada Y, Okumoto T, Wada N (2009) Evaluating household waste treatment systems with specific examination of collection and transportation. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 11(1):82–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. ZWIA (Zero Waste International Alliance), Accessed 14 Mar 2012

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of GeographyFederal UniversityUberlândiaBrazil
  2. 2.CEMIG Energy Utility of the State of Minas GeraisUberlândiaBrazil

Personalised recommendations