ENGINEERING - Board of Engineers Malaysia

LEMBAGA JURUTERA MALAYSIA 

BOARD OF ENGINEERS MALAYSIA 

KDN PP11720/1/2008 ISSN 0128-4347 VOL.34 JUNE - AUG 2007 RM10.00 

WASTE 

ENGINEERING

2 THE INGENIEUR 

Volume 34 June - August 2007 

18 

39 

48 

56 

c o n t e n t s 

4 President’s Message 

Editor’s Note 

5 Announcement 

Heartiest Congratulations 

Publication Calendar 

Events Calendar 

APEC And EMF International Registers 

Cover Feature 

6 Scheduled Waste Management: Issues And Challenges 

12 Life Cycle Inventorization Between Open Dumps And 

Sanitary Landfills 

18 Modelling Energy Recovery From Gasification Of 

Solid Waste 

22 Special Notice 

Registration Of Engineers (Amendment) Act 2007 

27 Guidelines 

Certificate Of Completion And Compliance (CCC) 

29 Engineering And Law 

Demystifying Direct Loss And Expense Claims: 

The Continuing Saga 

Feature 

38 Wet Market Waste To Value Added Products 

42 Sustainable Solid Waste Management: Incorporating 

Life Cycle Assessment As A Decision Support Tool 

46 Waste Management In The Plastics Industry 

52 Sanitation – The New Paradigm 

56 Engineering Nostalgia 

The Lumberjack Team Of The 60s

4 THE INGENIEUR 

KDN PP11720/1/2008 

ISSN 0128-4347 

Vol. 34 June - August 2007 

MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF ENGINEERS MALAYSIA 

(BEM) 2006/2007 

President 

YBhg. Dato’ Ir. Dr. Judin Abdul Karim 

Registrar 

Ir. Dr. Mohd Johari Md. Arif 

Members 

YBhg. Tan Sri Dato’ Ir. Md Radzi Mansor 

YBhg. Datuk Ir. Hj. Keizrul Abdullah 

YBhg. Mej. Jen. Dato’ Ir. Ismail Samion 

YBhg. Dato’ Ir. Shanthakumar Sivasubramaniam 

YBhg. Datu Ir. Hubert Thian Chong Hui 

YBhg. Dato’ Ir. Prof. Chuah Hean Teik 

Ar. Dr. Amer Hamzah Mohd Yunus 

Ir. Henry E Chelvanayagam 

Ir. Dr. Shamsuddin Ab Latif 

Ir. Prof. Dr. Ruslan Hassan 

Ir. Mohd. Rousdin Hassan 

Ir. Prof. Dr. Hassan Basri 

Tn Hj. Basar bin Juraimi 

Ir. Ishak Abdul Rahman 

Ir. Anjin Hj. Ajik 

Ir. P E Chong 

EDITORIAL BOARD 

Advisor 

YBhg. Dato’ Ir. Dr. Judin Abdul Karim 

Chairman 

YBhg Datuk Ir. Shanthakumar Sivasubramaniam 

Editor 

Ir. Fong Tian Yong 

Members 

Ir. Prem Kumar 

Ir. Mustaza Salim 

Ir. Chan Boon Teik 

Ir. Ishak Abdul Rahman 

Ir. Prof. Dr. K. S. Kannan 

Ir. Prof. Dr. Ruslan Hassan 

Ir. Prof. Madya Dr. Eric K H Goh 

Ir. Nitchiananthan Balasubramaniam 

Executive Director 

Ir. Ashari Mohd Yakub 

Publication Officer 

Pn. Nik Kamaliah Nik Abdul Rahman 

Assistant Publication Officer 

Pn. Che Asiah Mohamad Ali 

Design and Production 

Inforeach Communications Sdn Bhd 

Printer 

Art Printing Works Sdn Bhd 

29 Jalan Riong, 59100 Kuala Lumpur 

The Ingenieur is published by the Board of Engineers 

Malaysia (Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia) and is distributed 

free of charge to registered Professional Engineers. 

The statements and opinions expressed in this 

publication are those of the writers. 

BEM invites all registered engineers to contribute articles 

or send their views and comments to 

the following address: 

Publication Committee 

Lembaga Jurutera Malaysia, 

Tingkat 17, Ibu Pejabat JKR, 

Jalan Sultan Salahuddin, 

50580 Kuala Lumpur. 

Tel: 03-2698 0590 Fax: 03-2692 5017 

E-mail: bem1@streamyx.com; publication@bem.org.my 

Website: http://www.bem.org.my 

Advertising/Subscriptions 

Subscription Form is on page 51 

Advertisement Form is on page 55 

Malaysia’s vision of becoming a fully 

developed nation by 2020 and its associated rapid 

economic growth have necessitated the practice 

of proper waste management in accordance to 

acceptable international standards. Although 

there is extensive work to be carried out in the 

area of toxic and scheduled waste management 

in the country, there is still room for improvement in overall 

waste management, particularly in connection with solid waste 

management due to the large quantity produced daily. 

The Government is planning a new strategy towards solid 

waste management which includes the creation of a new bill 

and the formation of a regulatory body. In this regard, we should 

see more strategies and action plans being formulated. This 

should auger well for engineers as there will be opportunities 

to introduce state-of-the-art technologies and implement projects 

to treat the increasing solid waste generated, particularly from 

the domestic sector. 

While the opportunities are vast and varied, it is up to 

practising engineers to venture into this area, and in the process, 

make Malaysia a technology exporter. 

Dato’ Ir. Dr. Judin Abdul Karim 

President 


As the subject of waste management is causing 

concern from all stakeholders (particularly the 

industry players), we dedicate this edition to waste 

once again. The last edition on waste management 

has attracted significant interest from readers with all 

the copies snapped up within days of publication. 

In this edition, the article on ‘Modelling Energy Recovery 

from Gasification of Solid Waste’ provides a comparison between 

various thermal treatment of waste. The article on ‘Scheduled 

Waste Management’ categorizes the 107 scheduled wastes and 

examines the issues and challenges involved. On a global 

perspective, the World Toilet Organisation takes a new approach 

to sustainable sanitation and the three goals of sustainability. 

We hope this edition of The Ingenieur offers readers a 

general perspective on policies, technology, pollution effects 

and recycling effort related to waste management. 

Ir. Fong Tian Yong 

Editor 

President’s Message 

Editor’s Note

THE INGENIEUR ANNOUNCEMENT 

To 

YBhg Dato’ Ir. Dr Judin Abdul Karim 

for his appointment as 

Director General, 

Public Works Department Malaysia 

from Board of Engineers Malaysia 

The following list is the 

Publication Calendar for the 

year 2007 - 2008. While we 

normally seek contributions 

from experts for each special 

theme, we are also pleased 

to accept articles relevant to 

themes listed. 

Please contact the Editor 

or the Publication Officer in 

advance if you would like to 

make such contributions or to 

discuss details and deadlines. 

September 2007: CONTRACTS 

December 2007: PROJECT 

FINANCING 

March 2008: POWER 

Registration To The APEC And 

EMF International Registers 

• Entrance fee for new applicants waived 

• One subscription for two Registers. 

New members who sign up for year 2007 

pay only RM 300. 

Annual subscription is valid until 2009. 

SIGN UP NOW 

SPECIAL PACKAGE 

For further enquiries, kindly contact:- 

Valid For 

2007 Only 

APEC/ EMF International Engineer Registers Secretariat, 

Bangunan Ingenieur, Lots 60 & 62 

Jalan 52/4, P.O. Box 223, Jalan Sultan, 

46720 Petaling Jaya, 

Selangor Darul Ehsan 

Event Calendar 

Saudi – Malaysia Forum on Strategic Engineering Cooperation 

July 9 – 10, 2007 

Prince Hotel & Residence, Kuala Lumpur 

BEM Approved CPD : 16 hours/points 

Organiser : Board of Engineers Malaysia 

Tel : 03-26967098 / 03-26912090 / 03-26982413 

Fax : 03-26925017 

Email : bem1@jkr.gov.my; training_exam@bem.org.my; 

URL : www.bem.org.my 

MBAM Conference 2007- Going Global: Challenges 

and Opportunities 

July 31, 2007 

Sime Darby Convention Hall, Kuala Lumpur 


Organiser: Master Builders Association Malaysia 

Tel : 03-79848636 Fax : 03-79826811 

Email : mbam05@mbam.org.my 

URL : www.mbam.org.my 

Income Tax Reform Towards Enhancing The Nation’s 

Economic Competitiveness 

July 10, 2007 

The Legend Hotel, Kuala Lumpur 


Organiser : The Malaysian Institute of Certified Public 

Accountants 

Tel : 03-26989622 

Email : micpa@micpa.com.my 

URL : www.micpa.com.my 

Facilities Management Conference 2007 

July 23 - 24, 2007 

J W Marriott Hotel, Kuala Lumpur 

BEM Approved CPD : 12 hours /points 

Organiser : Asia Business Forum (Singapore) Pte Ltd 

Tel : 03-2070 3299 Fax : 02-26925017 

Email : puvanes@abf-asia.com 

URL : http://www.abf-asia.com/project/9440MC_EM.pdf 

Tea Talk on Financing Solutions for Service Exports 

July 9, 2007 

Level 6, Block B, Kompleks Kerja Raya Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 

Organiser : Professional Services Development Corporation 

Sdn Bhd 

Tel : 03-26988415 Fax : 03-26988416 

Email : aziz@mypsdc.com 

World Housing Congress (WHC2007) on Affordable 

Quality Housing: Challenges and Isues in the Provision of 

Shelter for All 

July 1 - 5, 2007 

Primula Beach Resort, Terengganu 

BEM Approved CPD : 28 hours /points 

Organiser : Housing Research Centre, UPM; Federation of 

Engineering Institutions of Islamic Countries, Saudi Council 

Engineers, Terengganu State Government & CIDB 

Tel : 03-89467849 

URL : http://eng.upm.edu.my/~whc2007 

View Latest Tender Information On-line 

July 3, 9, 12, 17, 24 & 31 and August 7 & 9, 2007 

Organiser: CIDB Holdings Sdn Bhd 

Tel : 03-40428880 

URL : www.cidb.gov.my/tender 

5

6 COVER FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Scheduled Waste Management: 

Issues And Challenges 

By Ir. Lee Heng Keng, Deputy Director General (Operation) Department of Environment Malaysia 

Control of toxic and hazardous 

wastes in Malaysia dates 

b a ck t o t h e d ay t h e 

Environmental Quality (Sewage 

and Industrial Effluents) Regulations 

1979 came into force on January 

1, 1979. Regulations 9 and 10 

provide for the restrictions on the 

discharge of effluents and disposal 

of sludge on any soil or surface of 

any land, unless with the written 

permission of the Director General 

of Environment. The purpose of this 

provision is largely to check, in 

the interim period, indiscriminate 

disposal of industrial waste on 

land. 

Generation of hazardous wastes 

must be controlled to protect public 

health and the environment. We 

have learnt from previous experience 

that environmental problems of 

developed countries are associated 

with illegal and indiscriminate 

disposal of hazardous waste that was 

detrimental to the environment and 

required costly clean-up measures. 

Realising the potential danger of 

improper management of toxic and 

hazardous wastes, the Government 

has taken initiatives since 1979 to 

identify the possible options and 

necessary measures for its proper 

management. These include the 

identification, classification and 

quantification of the various types 

of toxic and hazardous wastes being 

generated and also its treatment 

and disposal. This culminated 

in the formulation of three sets 

of regulation in 1989 for the 

management of toxic and hazardous 

wastes, termed as scheduled wastes 

in Malaysia, to ensure hazardous 

waste produced in the country 

is managed safely and in an 

environmentally sound manner. A 

review of the Environmental Quality 

(Scheduled Wastes) Regulation 

1989 was initiated to improve the 

management of scheduled wastes 

and resulted in the coming into 

force of the Environmental Quality 

(Scheduled Wastes) Regulation 

2005 on August 15, 2005. 

POLICIES AND LEGAL 

REQUIREMENTS ON 

THE CONTROL OF 

SCHEDULED WASTES 

Environmental Quality Act 1974 

The Environmental Quality Act 

1974 (EQA) was enacted on 

March 22, 1974 to prevent, 

abate and control pollution and 

enhance the environment and 

for related purpose. Since then, 

30 regulations and orders have 

been introduced to deal with 

specific pollution problems, from 

agro-based and manufacturing 

industries, air emissions from 

stationary and mobile sources, 

noise from motor vehicles and 

m a n a g e m e n t o f s c h e d u l e d 

wastes. The EQA was amended 

in 1985 to make it mandatory for 

prescribed activities to undertake 

Construction waste 

environmental impact assessment. 

In 1996, the Environmental Quality 

Act of 1974 was again amended 

and an explicit provision on the 

control of scheduled wastes was 

one of the inclusions made. It 

also addresses our international 

commitment more specifically the 

Basel Convention on the Control of 

Transboundary Movements of Toxic 

and Hazardous Wastes and Their 

Disposal. This provision prohibits 

the following activities without 

any prior written approval of the 

Director General of Environment: 

(i) Any placement, deposit or 

disposal of any scheduled 

wa s t e s o n l a n d o r i n t o 

Malaysian waters except at 

prescribed premises; 

(ii) Receive or send scheduled 

wastes in and out of Malaysia, 

and 

(iii) Transit of scheduled wastes. 

T h e E Q A a l s o a l l o w s 

e nvironmentally h a z a r d o u s 

substances to be prescribed which 

may then be required to be reduced, 

recycled, recovered or regulated in 

the form of a substance or product. 

The provision further empowers 

the authority to specify rules on 

the use, design and application of 

labels in connection with the sale 

of the substance or product. 

Environmental Quality (Scheduled 

Wastes) Regulations 1989 

The Regulations for the control 

of scheduled wastes were based on 

the ‘cradle-to-grave’ concept where 

generation, storage, transportation, 

treatment and disposal are regulated.

THE INGENIEUR COVER FEATURE 

A total of 107 waste categories are 

prescribed as scheduled wastes. 

The regulations focused on the 

following key provisions: 

(i) Control of the generation 

of waste by a notification 

system; 

(ii) Avoidance or minimization of 

waste generation; 

(iii) Safe storage of wastes; 

(iv) Licensing of scheduled waste 

facilities; 

(v) Treatment and disposal of 

waste at prescribed premises; 

and 

(vi) Implementation of the manifest 

system for tracking and 

controlling the movement of 

wastes. 

Waste generators have to notify 

the Department of Environment 

whilst the treatment and disposal 

of scheduled wastes can only be 

carried out at a licensed facility. 

The movement of wastes from the 

point of generation to the treatment 

facility is tracked by the use of 

consignment notes. 


Wastes) Regulations 2005 

After more than 15 years of 

enforcing the scheduled waste 

regulation, the Department of 

Environment encountered various 

shortcomings and a comprehensive 

review was carried out to address 

these shortcomings. As a result the 


Wastes) Regulations 2005 was 

e n a c t e d t h u s r e vo k i n g t h e 


Wastes) Regulation 1989. The major 

change in the 2005 Regulation is 

that scheduled wastes are now 

categorized based on type of waste 

rather than the source or origin 

of the wastes. New provisions 

instituted included the special 

management of waste, limiting 

the amount and duration of waste 

storage, recovery of scheduled 

wastes, conduct of training for 

persons handling scheduled wastes 

and improvement in the labelling 

requirements. 

Scheduled wastes are now 

categorised under five groups, viz. 

metal and metal-bearing wastes; 

wastes containing principally 

inorganic constituents which may 

contain metals or organic materials; 

wastes containing principally 

organic constituents which may 

contain metals and inorganic 

materials; wastes which may 

contain either inorganic or organic 

constituents and other wastes. 

These wastes were considered 

after reviewing hazardous waste 

categories from other countries 

as well as those prescribed under 

the Basel Convention on the 

Transboundary Movements of 

Hazardous Wastes and Their 

Disposal 1989. 

Four types of wastes in the 1989 

Regulations were deleted and 10 

new waste categories were included 

in the new Regulations. The 

deleted wastes were effluents from 

rubber factory; effluents from textile 

factory; leachate from landfills and 

slag from iron and steel industry 

whilst those added were: galvanic 

sludges; leaching residue from zinc 

processing; electrical and electronic 

wastes; wastes gypsum; waste of 

organic phosphorous compound; 

wastes containing dioxin or furans; 

discarded chemicals; obsolete 

laboratory chemicals; wastes 

containing peroxides and residues 

Old mobile phones 

from treatment of scheduled wastes. 

Also for the first time scheduled 

wastes generated are not allowed 

to be stored for more than 180 

days after its generation provided 

that the quantity of scheduled 

wastes accumulated on site shall 

not exceed 20 tonnes. However 

any person may store more than 

20 tonnes of scheduled wastes 

provided that the Director General 

of Environment grants a written 

approval subject to conditions or 

unconditionally. If the Director 

General has reason to believe that 

the scheduled wastes stored can 

cause environmental or health 

impact he may direct the waste 

generator to send any scheduled 

waste for recovery, treatment or 

disposal for such a period or up to 

a quantity as he may direct. 

Under Regulation 7, a waste 

generator may apply in writing to 

have the scheduled wastes excluded 

from being disposed, treated 

or recovered at the prescribed 

premises. This is to give waste 

generator an opportunity to prove 

that the wastes will not cause any 

adverse impact on the environment 

or public health. Toward this 

end, the waste generator must 

submit documentary evidence 

that the wastes do not exhibit 

any hazardous characteristics in 

terms of corrosiveness, ignitability, 

reactivity, toxicity etc. and also 

that the wastes do not have any 

hazardous effects on human or other 

life forms. Application must be in 

accordance with the guidelines for 

special management of scheduled 

wastes and accompanied by a 

prescribed fee of RM300. 

E-Wastes 

Electrical and electronic wastes 

or the so called E-waste has 

become a serious environmental 

and health challenge because it 

is potentially hazardous and also 

due to the fact that it is being 

generated at an alarming rate. It is 

estimated that in the US, by 2007 

7


THE INGENIEUR 

Export of waste 

there will more than 700 million 

obsolete computers. European 

studies indicated that E-waste is 

increasing by three to five % per 

annum. Other than computers, 

the used of mobile phones are 

also growing exponentially. With 

only 16 million users in 1991 it 

has grown to 1.3 billion in 2003 

globally. In Malaysia currently, 

there are more than 10 million 

subscribers. This growth creates 

waste as the end of life mobile 

phones have to be discarded. It is a 

challenge to ensure all these wastes 

do not end up in the landfills 

and releasing toxic substances 

to the environment. Computer 

scrap contains heavy metal such 

as lead, chromium and mercury 

that can be hazardous to human 

health and the environment if not 

managed properly. We should 

also be vigilant against dumping of 

used computers or mobile phones 

in the guise of refurbishment and 

recycling. 

R e a l i s i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l 

environmental impact if E-wastes 

are disposed indiscriminately, 


h a s i n c l u d e d t h e s e wa s t e s 

as scheduled wastes in the 


Wastes) Regulation 2005. These 

wastes are categorised as ‘waste 

from electrical and electronic 

assemblies containing components 

such as accumulators, mercuryswitches, 

glass from cathode-ray 

tubes and other activated glass 

or polychlorinated biphenylcapacitors, 

or contaminated with 

cadmium, mercury, lead, nickel, 

chromium, copper, lithium, silver, 

manganese or polychlorinated 

biphenyl’. As this is a new 

category of wastes, existing 

operators are allowed to continue 

with their activity of recovery 

under license. The Department 

has licensed 30 facilities for partial 

recovery and one for full recovery 

of E-wastes. Partial recovery refers 

to the process where the recovered 

materials, in this instance metals, 

require further recovery process 

to produce the final product. 

The partially recovered materials 

are still considered as scheduled 

wastes and need to be treated at 

prescribed premises. 

Basel Convention On The 

Transboundary Movements Of 

Hazardous Wastes And Their 

Disposal 1989 

Concerned and alarmed at 

the uncontrolled and unregulated 

movements of hazardous wastes, 

the United Nation Environment 

Programme (UNEP) initiated and 

promoted the Basel Convention 

on the Transboundary Movements 

of Hazardous Wastes and Their 

Disposal in 1989 that was adopted 

at a ministerial conference in Basel, 

Switzerland on March 22, 1989 

and signed by 116 countries. The 

Basel Convention, with its many 

apparent weaknesses has been a 

good attempt by the international 

community to respond to the urgent 

question of uncontrolled movement 

of hazardous wastes. 

The main objectives of the Basel 

Convention are: 

(i) To protect human health and 

the environment from adverse 

effects of hazardous wastes; 

and 

(ii) To reduce their generation 

and transboundary movement 

and to ensure environmentally 

s o u n d m a n a g e m e n t o f 

hazardous wastes. 

The Convention addresses 

the need to protect countries 

against illegal importation and 

to strengthen the capacity of all 

states to adequately manage their 

hazardous wastes. 

Old computers


During its first decade, the 

Convention was principally devoted 

to setting up a framework for 

controlling the “transboundary” 

movements of hazardous wastes, 

that is, the movement of hazardous 

wastes across international frontiers. 

During the next decade, the 

Convention will build on this 

framework by emphasizing full 

implementation and enforcement 

of the treaty’s commitments. The 

Basel Convention contains specific 

provisions for the monitoring of 

implementation and compliance. 

A number of articles in the 

Convention oblige parties to take 

appropriate national measures 

to implement and enforce its 

provisions, including measures 

to prevent and punish acts of 

contravention of the Convention. 

Malaysia became a Party to 

the Basel Convention on October 

8, 1993 and as of April 2007 

the total number of parties to 

the Convention stood at 169. 

The Department of Environment 

(DOE) is the competent authority 

in the implementation of the 

Basel Convention in Malaysia. 

National legislation in the form of 

Section 34B of the Environmental 

Quality Act 1974 on the control 

of scheduled wastes and the 


Wastes) Regulations 2005 have been 

enacted to regulate, control and 

restrict movements of hazardous 

wastes to be exported, imported 

or transit in the country. A control 

mechanism based on prior written 

notification and consent was also 

put into place in line with the 

provisions of the Convention. 

However, the transboundary 

movement of hazardous wastes is 

regulated under the Customs Act 

of 1967, specifically the Customs 

(Prohibition of Import) Order 

1993 and 1998 and the Customs 

(Prohibition of Export) Order 1993 

and 1998. The export and import 

of wastes as listed in the Orders 

have to be accompanied by a 

letter of approval issued by the 

Director-General of Environmental 

Quality. Hence the Royal Customs 

Department of Malaysia plays a 

very important role in preventing 

the illegal trafficking of hazardous 

waste through prohibition of imports 

and exports of waste governed by 

the above national legislations. 

The movement of wastes is 

monitored using consignment notes. 

Section 34B of the Environmental 

Quality Act, 1974 provides the 

maximum penalty of RM500,000 or 

imprisonment for a period of five 

years or both for any violation of 

this section. 

SCHEDULED WASTE 

MANAGEMENT FACILITIES 

In addition to the legal provisions 

mentioned above, the Government 

was aware of the need to set up a 

proper hazardous wastes treatment 

and disposal facility in the country. 

In this manner, the Government 

promoted the establishment of 

environmentally sound treatment, 

recovery and disposal facilities. 

Such facilities were also required 

to support the enforcement of 

legal provisions on scheduled 

waste. By having such facilities, 

industries in Malaysia are able 

to dispose waste in an orderly, 

regulated manner to avoid costly 

movements to other countries, and 

even more importantly, to avoid 

unnecessary risk to public health 

Clinical waste 

and the environment during its 

transport. To date two facilities 

have been licensed for treatment 

and disposal of scheduled wastes, 

one in Negeri Sembilan and the 

other in Sarawak. Beside these, 

there are three operators that are 

licensed to treat clinical wastes 

and 65 off-site facilities that are 

able to accept scheduled wastes 

for recovery. 

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES 

IN HAZARDOUS WASTE 

MANAGEMENT 

The 15 years experience gained 

through the administration of 

the scheduled wastes regulations 

indicate that hazardous waste 

management in the country has to a 

great extent, met the primary goals 

of the EQA. In 2005, the industries 

generated about 5,490,000 tonnes 

of scheduled wastes. Of these, 27% 

were sent for off-site recovery, 20% 

disposed 22% treated on-site, 30% 

stored on-site and a small quantity 

exported for recovery. Most of the 

industries are managing hazardous 

waste in accordance with the 

control procedures. However 

there are still issues that confront 

the authorities in dealing with the 

management of scheduled wastes. 

These include illegal dumping, 

increasing request to recover/reuse 

wastes and the new and emerging 

issue of contaminated land. 

9


THE INGENIEUR 

Illegal Dumping Of 

Scheduled Wastes 

Generally, there seems to be 

an increase in the number of 

illegal dumping cases detected 

by the Department in the last five 

years, from three cases in 2001 to 

31 cases in 2005. The types of 

wastes dumped were mainly waste 

paint, mineral oil and dross. These 

activities were mostly carried out in 

secluded areas to avoid detection. 

There were also factories that 

bury their wastes within their 

premises. However the amount 

of wastes dumped illegally were 

small compared to the total amount 

wastes generated in the country. 

This does not mean that we can 

treat this issue lightly because 

these wastes can contaminate 

groundwater and nearby rivers and 

affect public health. 

The reason for illegal dumping 

cannot be a lack of facilities 

available because we have stateof-the-art 

facilities for integrated 

hazardous wastes treatment and 

disposal. I believe it is the lack 

of awareness, accountability, 

responsibility and sheer wanton 

disregard for the environment and 

public safety, as well as greed for 

maximum profit. 

Recovery/Reuse Of Wastes 

Malaysia upholds practices and 

promotes resource conservation; 

any wastes that could be utilised 

should be reprocessed into useful 

products. Whilst we encourage 

wastes recovery and reuse, we also 

received applications that might 

be questionable such as recovery 

of products that might still be 

considered as scheduled wastes. 

Many applications have also been 

received requesting that their waste 

be not categorised as scheduled 

wastes thus effectively permitting 

d i s p o s a l a t n o n - p r e s c r i b e d 

facilities. The Department has to 

take cognizance of the agreement 

between the Government of 

Contaminated land 

Malaysia and Kualiti Alam Sdn Bhd 

that amongst others prohibits the 

issuance of any license for another 

treatment and disposal facility in 

Peninsular Malaysia. This includes 

off-site incineration of scheduled 

wastes. 

Contaminated Land 

Although the EQA provided 

powers to prohibit pollution of 

any soil or surface of any land, it 

has not gone further to specify the 

acceptable conditions for deposition 

of wastes into this segment or 

element of the environment. 

However, Environmental Quality 

(Scheduled Wastes) Regulations 

2005 categorised contaminated 

soil, debris or matter resulting from 

Motor workshop waste 

clean-up of a spill of chemical, 

mineral oil or scheduled waste 

as a scheduled waste and is 

subjected to the provisions of 

the scheduled waste regulations 

requiring treatment or disposal at 

prescribed premises. 

Potential contaminated land can 

be found in places such as motor 

workshops, petrol stations, fuel oil 

depots, railway yards, bus depots, 

landfills, industrial sites and sites 

with underground storage tanks. 

These places generate spent diesel, 

lube oil, other hydrocarbons, 

solvents and grease which if not 

properly managed could end-up 

polluting the soil and groundwater 

through leakage and seepage. 

There are also contaminated sites 

that remain hidden or unknown 

such as municipal landfill and 

refuse dumping sites that have been 

abandoned in the past. 

Assessment on soil contamination 

at industrial premises is still adhoc 

and has yet to provide any 

significant profile on the status of 

soil quality. These were carried 

out on some of the sites where 

illegal dumping of hazardous 

waste occurred. In most of these 

cases, the factory owners were 

required to carry out clean-up 

and post-monitoring of the sites.


11 

Besides illegal dumping cases, the 

Department of Environment was 

also alerted on the assessment and 

clean-up of decommissioned petrol 

stations. 

Realising the importance of 

dealing with contaminated land, 


has created a section in the 

Hazardous Substances Division 

to look into this issue. There is 

a need to develop criteria and 

standards for contaminated soil in 

Malaysia. Prior to any formulation 

of clearer policies and legal limits 

for soil, it is imperative that a 

compilation of contaminated soil 

status be initiated and a set of soil 

pollution guidelines be drawn up 

to assist both public and private 

sectors in managing this problem. 

Of course there is also a need 

to build capacity and capability 

on the assessment and clean-up 

methodologies and techniques. 

CONTROL MEASURES 

Illegal dumping of scheduled 

wastes remains a challenge. From 

2001-2005 there were 90 cases 

of illegal dumping detected but 

Illegal dump site 

only 39 were prosecutable in the 

court of law. This is due to the 

lack of evidence and the nature 

of the crime. Various actions 

have been instituted to tackle this 

environmental crime. These include 

the setting up of an intelligence 

unit to gather information from 

individuals and groups to detect and 

prevent environmental crimes. The 

assistance of RELA officers to detect 

illegal dumping activities and other 

environmental violations. Audits 

on waste generators, recyclers and 

disposal facilities were carried 

out in a systematic and regular 

manner. Special training modules 

have been prepared and training 

provided to officers to enable 

them to conduct their tasks more 

effectively. The Department of 

Environment is also reviewing the 

Environmental Quality Act 1974 

amongst others to introduce new 

provisions to facilitate effective and 

efficient enforcement of the laws. 

Stiffer penalties such as mandatory 

jail sentence especially for illegal 

dumping of scheduled wastes have 

been proposed. 

However contaminated land 

is an emerging issue that, if not 

addressed, may give rise to problems 

relating to health and safety of users, 

pollution of surface and ground 

water and financial implications. 

Programmes to develop national 

criteria and standards prior to 

formulation of dedicated legislation 

would be undertaken. Experience in 

other countries will provide useful 

guidance and reference to Malaysia 

in the implementation of these 

programmes. 

CONCLUSION 

The Environmental Quality 


1989, have served its purpose in 

providing the essential regulatory 

framework on scheduled waste 

management in Malaysia despite 

constraints faced in administering 

it’s various provisions. Based 

on the experience gained in 

the 15 years of enforcing the 

scheduled wastes regulations, 


enacted the Environmental Quality 


2005, amongst others to redefine 

waste categories; to exclude wastes 

that are not characterised as 

hazardous; to provide avenue for 

special management of wastes and 

to improve tracking of wastes. 

Waste disposal will not become 

cheaper hence it is prudent for 

industries to engage in waste 

minimisation. This could be done 

through process or raw material 

changes. If this is not possible 

then wastes should be reused 

or recovered. Industries should 

embark on cleaner technology 

to eliminate or reduce waste 

generation. An industry that 

engages in cleaner technology can 

be cleaner by reducing hazardous 

emissions, cheaper by saving 

money and smarter by conserving 

resources. BEM 

Note: Views expressed are 

not necessarily those of the 

Department of Environment.


THE INGENIEUR 

Life Cycle Inventorisation 

Between Open Dumps And 

Sanitary Landfills 

By Abdul Nasir Abdul Aziz, Local Government Department, 

Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia 

Mohd. Nasir Hassan and Muhamad Awang, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, 

Universiti Putra Malaysia 

In Malaysia, disposal of solid waste onto lands or landfill is still the 

most common method. Despite the country’s rapid economic growth 

and significant improvement in the standards of living, most of 

these landfill sites are still open dumps and only a few sites can be 

categorised as sanitary landfills (Local Govt. Dept., 2005). Sanitary 

landfills are solid waste disposal sites that are properly planned 

before construction and have gone through the Environmental 

Impacts Assessment (EIA) process, developed and operated with 

proper environmental protection and pollution control facilities 

and finally have proper plans for closure and post-closure. 

The environmental impacts of open dumps can be significant, 

mainly from uncontrolled and unregulated leachate generation and 

gas emissions. Hence, the Government of Malaysia is striving to 

improve the disposal systems for solid wastes as part of its solid 

waste strategic and action plan. The first step is to phase out open 

dumps and secondly in the future, to introduce sanitary landfill 

systems. This strategic move however, requires objective information 

about the relative environmental impacts between open dumps and 

sanitary landfills. To date, not much information has been published 

about the two systems. 

This paper discusses the environmental burdens released by 

open dumps and they are compared to those released by sanitary 

landfills. The comparison is made using the Life Cycle Assessment 

(LCA) technique that assesses potential environmental impacts of 

products, processes and activities comprehensively from its cradle 

to grave. 

Sanitary landfill, Air Hitam Selangor 

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) 

is a process to analyse the 

materials, energy, emissions, 

and wastes of a product or service 

system, over the whole Life Cycle 

‘from cradle to grave’ (McDougall 

et al., 2001). LCA is being used to 

examine every stage of the life cycle 

of a product, process or activity, 

from raw materials acquisition, 

through manufacture, distribution, 

use, possible reuse or recycling 

and then final disposal (Vigon et 

al, 1992). In LCA, all ‘upstream’ 

and ‘downstream’ effects of the 

activities are considered. 

LCA process is divided into 

four stages as shown in Figure 1: 

Goal Definition and Scope, Life 

Cycle Inventory Analysis (LCI), Life 

Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) 

and Life Cycle Interpretation. 

These four stages are intended to 

assist resource and environmental 

managers to encourage better 

product design, more effective 

process with respect to raw 

material inputs or waste outputs, 

improve transportation methods, 

more careful consumer use and 

better waste disposal practices. 

In the context of resource and 

environmental management, LCA 

is intended to lead to decisions 

which result in greater conservation 

of resources and the environment, 

increased energy conservation 

and decreased waste generation, 

improved industrial processes 

related to providing resource-based 

products, and fewer problems in 

final disposal.


13 

Life cycle assessment framework 

Goal and 

scope 

definition 

Inventory 

analysis 

Impact 

assessment 

I 

n 

t 

e 

r 

p 

r 

e 

t 

a 

t 

i 

o 

n 

Figure 1: Phases of an LCA (ISO 14040, 1997) 

C u r r e n t w o r l d w i d e 

environmental concerns have 

made Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) a 

useful tool for prioritising efforts, 

goal setting, and measuring 

environmental quality improvement 

of almost any plan of action 

and in this paper, LCI is used 

to evaluate all the inputs and 

outputs of an open dump and a 

sanitary landfill. The LCI model 

takes an overall approach of the 

Energy 

Figure 2: MSW management system boundary 

Direct applications: 

• Product development 

and improvement 

• Strategic planning 

• Public policy making 

• Marketing 

• Other 

investigation the different types of 

MSW management system and the 

general LCI system boundaries of 

the MSW management system as 

shown in Figure 2. 

LCI OF LANDFILLS 

The total life cycle inventory 

model for landfill consists of the 

inventory of energy consumption, 

air emissions and water emissions 

Residential/Commercial/Institutional 

during the phase of landfill 

construction, operation, closure 

and post-closure care. However, in 

this study only landfill operation, 

leachate gas emission and leachate 

generation were modelled. 

● Energy Consumption 

for Landfills 

For energy consumption, fuel 

(diesel) and electricity consumption 

during landfill operation was 

modelled to estimate the energy 

consumed in term of kWh of 

electricity and the amount of 

fuel (diesel) for managing one 

ton of solid waste in landfill. 

The electricity consumption 

during landfill operation was the 

electricity consumed for lighting 

of administration building, garage, 

site, and operation of weighbridge 

and leachate treatment plant. 

Diesel consumption is the amounts 

consumed by landfill machineries 

to place, spread and compact 

the waste, and transport, spread 

of daily, intermediate and final 

cover. 

● Gas Generation from Landfills 

The estimation of the quantity 

of landfill gas generated from 

Raw materials 

Waste separation facility Composting facility Incineration Landfill 

Recycling processes 

Recyclable materials 

Collection 

Transfer station 

Compost 

Energy 

MSW system 

boundary 

Air 

Emissions 

Water 

Emissions 

Waste 

Residue


THE INGENIEUR 

Table 1: Modelling of BOD and COD concentration in landfill leachate 

Age of waste (year) BOD conc. (mg/l) BOD/COD ratio COD conc. (mg/l) 

0 – 5 17500 – 2500 

Linear decrease 

5 – 10 2500 – 500 


10 - 20 500 – 50 


Source: Haniba, et. al., 1999 

landfill was modelled using the 

triangle gas production model 

(Tchobanoglous, 1993) that divides 

waste into two categories, i.e., 

rapidly biodegradable waste (RBW) 

and slowly biodegradable waste 

(SBW). The RBW gas generation 

rate was assumed to peak at the 

end of year one after waste was 

land filled and totally decomposed 

after five years, while for SBW 

was assumed to peak at year five 

and totally decomposed after 15 

years land filled. The composition 

of landfill gas was in the range of 

45% to 60% for CH 4 and 40% 

to 60% for CO 2 (Tchobanoglous, 

1993) and for the purpose of the 

generation estimation of CH 4 and 

CO 2 from landfills in Malaysia, the 

percentage of CH 4 emission was 

55% and 45% for CO 2 emission. 

The estimation of the amount 

of traces gases such as NH 4 , 

Total HC and Total NMVOC was 

estimated using USEPA AP 42 

model (USEPA, 1997). 

● Leachate Generation 

The leachate quantity generated 

from landfills was estimated 

using water balance method 

(Tchobanoglous, 1993). The BOD 

concentration in the leachate was 

modelled by assuming that BOD 

concentration started at high 

concentration and diminished over 

time as the waste aged. The COD 

concentrations were calculated 

using BOD/COD ratio of landfill 

leachate and other pollutants 

in landfill leachate are assumed 

constant through landfill design 

0.64 - 0.17 27500 – 15000 


0.17 15000 – 3000 


0.17- 0.05 3000 – 1000 


life. The modelling of BOD and 

COD concentration is shown in 

Table 1. The leachate quality used 

for estimating water emissions was 

the raw leachate from Air Hitam, 

Puchong landfill (MOHLG, 2005) 

as tabulated in Table 2. 

Table 2: Raw leachate from Air Hitam, Puchong Landfill 

● Functional Unit used in 

the Study 

The functional unit of this study 

was the average total tonnage of 

MSW generated per year for the 

duration of 20 years design life of 

landfill based on 2,257 ton per 

Parameters Unit Average Std. Dev 

BOD5 mg/l 1964.00 455.44 

COD mg/l 6392.00 743.99 

SS mg/l 420.00 158.03 

Hg mg/l 0.001 0.00 

Cd mg/l 0.02 0.01 

Cr (Hexavalent) mg/l 0.28 0.11 

Cu mg/l 0.02 0.00 

As mg/l 0.53 0.21 

Cy mg/l 0.12 0.06 

Pb mg/l 0.05 0.00 

Cr (Trivalent) mg/l 0.21 0.15 

Mn mg/l 0.08 0.02 

Ni mg/l 0.13 0.04 

Sn mg/l 0.46 0.31 

Zn mg/l 0.44 0.15 

Boron mg/l 43.38 90.35 

Fe mg/l 3.09 0.82 

Phenol mg/l 0.60 0.19 

Free chlorine mg/l 0.1 0.00 

Sulphide mg/l 3.90 5.32 

Oil & grease mg/l ND ND 

Ammoniacal Nitrogen mg/l 2934.00 505.40 

P mg/l 19.40 5.48 

Total Nitrogen mg/l 3452.00 62.21 

Dissolved solid mg/l 19220.00 258.84 

Source: MOHLG (2002), The Design, Construction, Completion and 

commisioning of Rawang Sanitary Landfill Project in Selangor, Malaysia. Design 

Brief, Vol. 3-Appendices


15 

Table 3: The composition of Kuala Lumpur’s MSW 

Type of waste Composition (% by weight) 

Food waste 

Yard waste 

Mixed paper 

Mixed plastic 

Textiles 

Ferrous 

Non-ferrous 

Glass 

Others 

day (Hassan et al, 2000) generated 

in the Federal Territory of Kuala 

Lumpur. The rainfall intensity was 

2,495 mm/yr and evaporation rate 

was 1,165 mm/yr. The composition 

of Kuala Lumpur’s MSW that were 

used in this study is shown in 

Table 3. 

The system boundary for lifecycle 

inventory of landfill is shown 

in Figure 3. 

● Other Assumptions Used in 

the Study 

The other assumptions that 

were made in facilitating this study 

are listed below: 

(i) Cover soil ratio to waste 

is 1:5 

(ii) Fuel economy for tipper is 

0.18l/km 

(iii) The distance from landfill to 

the source of cover material 

is 5km 

56.3 

6.9 

8.2 

13.1 

1.3 

2.1 

0.3 

1.5 

10.3 

Total 100 

Moisture content 

Source: Nazeri, 2002 

56.3 

Energy 

Raw 

materials 

Waste collection 

Landfill gas 

treatment 

Figure 3: Landfilling system boundary 

Landfill 

Leachate 

treatment 

Air 

emissions 

Water 

emissions 

Residual 

waste 

(iv) The fuel consumption of 

landfill equipment is 1l/ton 

(v) The electricity consumption 

of sanitary landfill is 3.78 

kW/h/ton 

(vi) The electricity consumption 

of open dump is 0.23 kWh/ 

ton 

(vii) L a n d f i l l g a s r e c o v e r y 

efficiency for sanitary landfill 

is 75% 

(viii) Landfill gas trapped in 

landfill is 15% 

(ix) Landfill gas released to 

environment is 10% 

(x) Landfill gas released to 

environment from open 

dump is 85% 

Energy consumption (GJ)/Tonne of Waste 

Open dump 4.30E+04 

Sanitary landfill 7.31E+04 

(xi) CH 4 combustion efficiency 

is 100% 

(xii) Landfill gas treatment for 

sanitary landfill is flaring 

(xiii) Leachate treatment for 

sanitary landfill is SBR with 

GAC filter 

RESULTS 

The summarized results of 

energy consumption, air emissions 

and water emissions of the open 

dump and sanitary landfill are 

shown in Table 4, Table 5 and 

Table 6. 

● Energy Consumption Between 

Open Dumps and Sanitary 

Landfills 

Between the two, it is obvious 

that sanitary landfill consumed 

more energy than open dump. 

The energy consumed by sanitary 

landfill was 7.31E+04 GJ per year, 

3.01E+04 GJ more than open 

dump. The high consumption of 

energy by sanitary landfill was due 

to facilities used by sanitary landfill 

such as leachate treatment plant, 

site lighting and administration 

building that are not available at 

open dump. 

● Air Emissions Between Open 

Dumps and Sanitary Landfills 

The highest CH 4 emission was 

emitted by open dump with the 

amount of 5.63E+06 kg per year. 

While, sanitary landfill emitted 

more CO 2 (fossil) and N 2 O than 

open dump with the amount per 

year of 1.38E+07 kg and 1.84E+02 

kg, respectively. 

For other air emissions such as 

HCl, HF, NH 4 , NO x , SO x and total 

metals, sanitary landfill was emitted 

more than open dump except for 

total HC and total NMVOC. The 

Table 4: Energy consumption of open dump and sanitary landfill


THE INGENIEUR 

Table 5: Life Cycle inventory of open dump and sanitary landfill (Air emissions) 

Parameter Unit/Tonne of Waste Open dump Sanitary landfill 

CH 4 

CO 2 (fossil) 

N 2 O 

HCl 

HF 

NH 4 

NO x 

SO x 

Total HC 

Total NMVOC 

Total Metals 

high emissions of HCl, HF, NH 4 , 

NO x , SO x were due to the process 

of electricity generation and the 

production and use of diesel fuel. 

As for the emission of total HC 

and total NMVOC, the emissions 

of these compounds were due to 

decomposition process of organic 

matter in landfill. 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

● Water Emissions 

5.63E+06 

3.89E+06 

8.48E+01 

3.27E+01 

3.45E+00 

7.20E-01 

6.10E+04 

5.84E+03 

7.83E+02 

5.12E+03 

3.20E+00 

Table 6: Life Cycle inventory of open dump and sanitary landfill (Water emissions) 

Dump site 

Open dump had the overall 

highest output of water emissions 

for all parameters studied except 

PO 4 as compared to sanitary 

landfill. 

B O D a n d C O D e m i t t e d 

per year by open dump were 

6.90E+05 

1.38E+07 

1.84E+02 

4.39E+02 

4.60E+01 

1.05E+01 

1.52E+05 

2.07E+04 

3.36E+02 

2.20E+03 

9.20E+01 

Parameter Unit/Tonne of Waste Open dump Sanitary landfill 

BOD 

COD 

N 

NH 3 

P 

PO 4 

Total Metals 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

kg 

4.42E+06 

1.19E+07 

4.64E+06 

3.95E+06 

2.61E+04 

9.34E+00 

6.43E+03 

8.84E+04 

2.38E+05 

4.64E+04 

4.96E+04 

2.61E+02 

1.34E+02 

3.46E+03 

4.42E+06 kg and 1.19E+07 kg, 

respectively, while sanitary landfill 

emitted 8.84E+04 kg of BOD and 

2.38E+05 kg of COD. 

However, sanitary landfill 

emitted higher PO 4 with 1.34E+02 

kg per year as compared to 

9.34E+00 kg by open dump. The 

high emission of PO 4 is due to 

the high consumption of electrical 

energy and diesel fuel. 

CONCLUSION 

Open dumps are obviously 

the main culprit for the aquatic 

degradation since leachate 

discharge from it does not go 

through any sort of treatment. 

However, as for air pollution, open 

dumps only play an important 

role in discharging high volume 

of CH to the environment while 

4 

sanitary landfill discharge the 

majority of other air pollutants 

under studied due to the greater 

consumption of electricity and 

diesel. BEM


17 

REFERENCES 

Vigon, B. W., D. A. Toller and B. W. Cornary. (1992). Life Cycle Assessment Inventory Guidelines and 

Principles. Lewis. 

Tamamushi, K. and P. White. (1998). Applying Life Cycle Assessment To Waste management in Asia. 

In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ecobalance. Japan, 25-27 November 1998.pp. 

501-504. 

ENSIC. (1994). A References Handbook for Trainers in Promotion of Solid Waste Recycling and Reuse In 

the Developing Countries of Asia. Kenya. 

McDougall, F.R., P.R. White, M. Franke and P. Hindle (2001). Integrated Solid Waste Management: 

A Life Cycle Inventory. Blackwell. London. 

Hassan, M. N., Y. Kamil, S. Azmin and A.R. Rakmi. (1998). Issue and Problems of Solid Waste Management 

in Malaysia. In: National Review of Environmental Quality Management in Malaysia: Towards the Next 

Two Decades. Nordin, H. Lizuryaty, A. A., Ibrahim, K. (Eds.). Pp.179-225. 

Tanaka, M., M. Osaka, T. Fujil, A. Saito, R. Sugiyama and K. Kurihara. (1998). A Study on Comparison 

of Municipal Solid Waste Management Alternatives Based on Life Cycle Inventory. In: Proceedings of the 

Third International Conference on Ecobalance. Japan, 25-27 November 1998.pp. 497-500. 

White, P. R., M. Frankeand P. Hindle. (1995). Integrated Solid Waste management: A Life Cycle Inventory. 

Blackie Academic and Professional. Glasgow. 

IPCC. (1992). Climate Change. In the IPCC Scientific Assessment. [Eds.] Houghton, J. T. 

Coulon, R., V. Camobrece, M. A. Barlar, R. T. Ham, E. Repa and M. Felker. (1998). Life Cycle Inventory 

of A Modern Municipal Solid Waste Landfill. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on 

Ecobalance. Japan, 25-27 November 1998. pp. 505-508. 

Morita, Y. and M. Tokuda. (1998). Life Cycle Assessment of Waste Management: A Study of City of 

Sendai. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Ecobalance. Japan, 25-27 November 

1998. pp. 513-516. 

Tan, K. K., K. S. Low, S. Pillay and H. Tan. (1986). A computer Simulation Model of Solid Waste Management 

System. In: Management and Utilization of Solid Wastes. Yong, F.F. and Tan, K.K. [Eds.]. pp. 59-83. 

Local Government Department, Ministry of Housing and Local Government Malaysia (2005). National 

Strategic Plan for Solid Waste Management. 

Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MOHLG) (2002), The Design, Construction, Completion 

and commisioning of Rawang Sanitary Landfill Project in Selangor, Malaysia. Design Brief, Vol. 3- 

Appendices 

Haniba, N. M., Hassan, M. N., Yusoff, M. K., Rahman, M., Rajan, S. and Mohamed, H. (1999). Leachate 

Quality and Landfill Age: An Overview. In: Proceeding of the Workshop on Disposal of Solid Waste 

through Sanitary Landfill – Mechanisms, Processes, Potential Impacts and Post-closure Management. 

Universiti Putra Malaysia, 25 – 26 August 1999. pp. 183-193. 

USEPA. (1997). Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources, 

Fifth Edition, AP-42. Section 2.4, Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 

National Pollutant Inventory. (1999). Emission Estimation Technique Manual for Municipal Solid Waste 

Landfills Version 1.1. Environment Australia.


THE INGENIEUR 

Modelling Energy Recovery From 

Gasification Of Solid Waste 

By Elaine Chan, Environmental Consultant, Perunding Utama Sdn Bhd 

Scott Kennedy, Assistant Professor, Head of Programme, Energy and Environment, 

Malaysia University of Science and Technology 

Mohd. Nasir Hassan, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia 

Waste is commonly 

referred to as unwanted 

or discarded by-products 

of domestic, agricultural and 

industrial activities having little or 

no economic value. Nonetheless, 

waste can also be considered as 

a valuable raw material. Today’s 

technological advancements and 

the pressure to reduce material 

wastage foster the emergence of 

markets for waste derived products 

such as secondary materials, 

fuel, fertilizers, animal feed and 

construction materials. 

The amount of municipal 

solid waste (MSW) generated in 

Malaysia is growing with increasing 

urbanisation and industrialisation 

where an estimated 16,000 tonnes 

of solid waste is being generated 

Wood waste 

daily or 5,840 kton/year; an 

average of 0.8 kg/per capita/day. 

Currently, municipal wastes 

are disposed at approximately 

170 landfills in Malaysia, of 

which approximately 10% are 

classified as sanitary landfills 

and the rest are open dumps 

lacking cover materials, leachate 

and gas emissions control, and 

release uncontrolled emissions to 

the air, water and groundwater. 

Seven mini-incinerators have been 

operating on resort islands but the 

amount of waste treated and the 

current status of these incinerators 

is not known. 

To overcome growing waste 

generation and insufficient 

waste treatment facilities, the 

Government is looking into 

Padi husks 

introducing thermal treatment 

of waste. Waste is a renewable 

source of energy that can be 

economically feasible since the 

fuel input often has a negative-cost 

and is readily available. Through 

thermal treatment, managing the 

disposal of solid waste can be 

coupled with energy recovery and 

is referred to as waste-to-energy 

(WTE) schemes. The use of 

waste-to-energy (WTE) schemes is 

also in line with Malaysia’s policy 

to diversify fuel types, sources, 

technology and to promote the 

development of renewable energy 

and co-generation as much as 

possible. 

Thermal Treatment Of Waste 

Thermal treatment or thermal 

processing of waste refers to 

the conversion of solid waste 

into gaseous, liquid and solid 

conversion products with 

concurrent or subsequent release 

of heat energy (Tchobanoglous et 

al., 1993). As shown in Table 1, 

thermal treatment can be divided 

into combustion or mass burn 

incineration, gasification and


19 

Table 1: Comparison between thermal treatments 

Transformation 

means or methods 

Auxiliary fuel 

during operation 

Principal 

conversion 

products 

pyrolysis systems. Essentially, 

combustion incinerators operate 

in stoichiometric or excess of air, 

gasification is partial oxidation 

of carbonaceous fuel under 

substochiometric air or starved 

air to produce a gaseous product 

known as synthesis gas or producer 

gas, while pyrolysis processes 

waste in the complete absence of 

oxygen. 

Gasification is an emerging 

technology acknowledged for 

its robust performance and is a 

potential option to provide for the 

lack of treatment facilities to treat 

growing waste generation as well 

as to produce renewable energy. 

It comprises a thermochemical 

conversion of solid or liquid 

carbonaceous material to a 

combustible gaseous product by 

supply of a gasification agent (i.e. 

air) (Higman & Burth, 2003). In 

WTE gasification systems, fuel 

is gasified to form producer gas 

that is subsequently combusted 

to produce high temperatures for 

process heat or power generation. 

Combustion Gasification Pyrolysis 

Thermal oxidation Starved air combustion Destructive distillation 

Exothermic. No fuel 

required 

CO 2 , SO 2 , other oxidized 

compounds, ash 

Waste type Commingled or sorted 

waste 

Energy recovery Heat release from 

combustion. 

Endothermic. Heat usually 

provided by combustion of 

producer gas. 

A low calorific value producer 

gas containing H 2 , CO 2 , CO, 

CH 4 , tar and a carbon char 

Sorted or shredded 

commingled waste 

Energy content of the 

producer gas 

Modelling Gasification 

Systems 

Modelling waste thermal 

treatment is crucial to assess 

the technical and economic 

feasibilities of the system as well 

as its environmental performance. 

Since pilot studies and trial runs are 

expensive and time consuming, a 

number of sophisticated modelling 

tools have been developed to 

simulate the actual process design 

of different types and geometries 

of gasifiers. Many feasibility 

studies, however, need to be 

performed prior to the design of 

the gasification system. In these 

cases, a more generic approach for 

modelling the gasification process 

is both faster and more useful. 

Two possible methods for 

this type of generic modelling 

of gasification systems are the 

kinetic model and thermodynamic 

equilibrium model. The kinetic 

approach is a dynamic model 

that considers the rates at which 

a reaction progresses while the 

Endothermic. Fuel 

required. 

A low calorific combustible 

fuel containing pyrolitic oil, 

gaseous CO 2 , CO, H 2 , CH 4 , 

N 2 and a char containing 

carbon and inerts present 

in the original fuel. 

Sorted waste or consistent 

feedstock 

Energy content of the 

producer gas, pyrolytic oil 

and char. 

Application Agro-waste, industrial Dependant on type of gasifier. Since 1960’s for industrial 

and MSW 

waste 

Experience Extensive for MSW Considerable for throughputs Limited experience for 

up to 100 tons/day/train MSW 

Source: Adapted from Tchobanoglous et al. (1993) and Perunding Utama Sdn Bhd (2003) 

equilibrium model assumes that 

the reactions reach chemical 

equilibrium (reactants and 

products are constant over time) to 

predict the maximum achievable 

yield of a desired product. Kinetic 

models are more complex, taking 

into account parameters such as 

reaction rates and residence time 

and are suitable for modelling 

pyrolysis and gasification processes 

operating at temperatures lower 

than 800ºC (Altafini, Wander & 

Barreto, 2003). 

Thermodynamic 

Equilibrium Model 

In reality, the products and 

reactants in gasification processes 

do not achieve equilibrium as 

the process must occur over a 

finite amount of time and will 

experience some disturbances in 

input compositions and processing 

conditions. Hence, the actual 

composition of the producer gas 

will deviate from equilibrium 

p r e d i c t i o n s . N o n e t h e l e s s ,


THE INGENIEUR 

thermodynamic equilibrium 

calculations are widely accepted 

mainly to estimate maximum 

achievable yields and the influence 

of material input and process 

parameters on the gasification 

process (Schuster et al., 2001). The 

model determines the composition 

of producer gas generated from 

gasification systems based on mass 

and energy balance calculations 

and the thermodynamics of 

simplified reactions governing the 

gasification processes: 

Partial oxidation: 

C + Qw 

O ⇔ CO (Eq. 1) 

2 2 

Boudouard reaction: 

C + CO ⇔ 2CO (Eq. 2) 

2 

Methanation reaction: 

C + 2H ⇔ CH (Eq. 3) 

2 4 

CO shift reaction: 

CO + H O ⇔ CO + H (Eq. 4) 

2 2 2 

Steam methane reforming: 

CH + H O ⇔ CO + 3H (Eq. 5) 

4 2 2 

In systems with a long residence 

time and high temperatures, 

equilibrium models will provide 

a more accurate approximation 

of the final product composition. 

Furthermore, Prins, Ptasinski and 

Janssen (2003) demonstrated that 

for a gasification temperature of 

800°C and a sufficiently long 

residence time, equilibrium in 

air gasification is well verified. 

Fluidized bed reactors, due to 

their higher residence time, would 

be an appropriate application. 

When the equilibrium approach 

is followed, one can examine the 

influence of input and process 

parameters such as type of waste, 

waste characteristics (e.g. moisture 

content), and operating temperature 

in a very straightforward manner. 

Application To Solid Waste 

Management In Malaysia 

The characteristics of waste 

such as moisture content, 

calorific value and ash content 

are important determinants of 

the incinerability of the waste. 

Table 2: Characteristics of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) and Refuse 

Derived Fuel (RDF) 

Waste with high moisture content 

yields very low energy per unit 

mass of input because the gross 

calorific content of the waste is 

mainly used up to evaporate this 

moisture. A self-sustaining function 

is imperative for waste thermal 

treatment systems since additional 

fossil fuel to provide energy for 

the process is uneconomical 

given the volatility of fossil fuel 

prices and not sustainable as the 

net energy recovery is no longer 

derived solely from a renewable 

resource. 

MSW in Malaysia is usually 

characterized as containing low 

heating value and high moisture 

content. Therefore the question 

remains whether MSW in 

Malaysia is suitable for gasification 

treatment. In a study conducted 

by Chan (2007), energy recovery 

from solid waste and Refuse 

Derived Fuel (RDF) was evaluated 

using the thermodynamic 

equilibrium model. The analysis 

in the study was independent of a 

detailed plant design and is based 

on a generic gasification waste 

treatment facility with an energy 

recovery system. The equilibrium 

model developed by Zainal et al. 

(2001) based on the methanation 

and CO shift reactions was used 

to predict the energy recovered 

from the gasification process. 

RDF is a waste fuel processed 

from the combustible fractions 

Percentage by weight – dry basis 

MSW RDF 

Carbon 57.17 50.87 

Hydrogen 8.48 6.68 

Oxygen 32.97 26.66 

Nitrogen 1.38 1.56 

Sulfur 0.42 1.1 

Ash 12.5 9.26 

Lower heating value (kcal/kg) 1,667 3,539 

Moisture content (%) 54.6 30 

a Nazeri (2003) 

b S. Kathirvale, Personal Comunication, September 8, 2005) 

of solid waste. Unlike MSW, 

RDF is a better fuel because of 

its homogenous nature, lower 

moisture content and higher 

calorific value. The characteristics 

of waste materials investigated are 

as shown in Table 2. 

If the moisture content is too 

high, or the energy content of the 

waste input is too low, gasification 

cannot be sustained without 

supplementary fuel input. The 

model developed by Chan (2007) 

estimated the threshold values 

for these two parameters. It was 

found that waste moisture content 

in the solid waste cannot exceed 

30%. This indicates that most of 

Malaysia’s waste could not be 

gasified unless the waste is dried 

prior to gasification. The drying 

process can be cumbersome due 

to its energy intensity, issues with 

holding facilities and air emissions 

of volatile organic compounds. In 

terms of waste energy content, the 

minimum limit for waste input 

heating value is 2,300 kcal/kg. 

In order to satisfy the 

requirements for gasification, a 

waste fuel blend of 30% palm 

kernel shell (PKS) was co-gasified 

with 70% MSW after drying the 

mixture to a moisture content of 

30%. PKS, an oil palm residue 

was considered for co-gasification 

because of its availability in 

Malaysia and high energy 

content (3,571 kcal/kg). Co-


21 

gasification reduces the minimum 

heating value of waste fuel to 

approximately 1,700 kcal/kg, thus 

gasification could occur. Besides 

PKS, coal and other solid biomass 

feedstock such as wood or wood 

waste, rice husks, fiber and empty 

fruit bunches from oil palm can 

be mixed with MSW. On the other 

hand, RDF gasification poses no 

problem due to its high energy 

content and low moisture. 

In addition to determining 

whether or not gasification could 

occur, the study also estimated the 

amount of energy that could be 

recovered from gasification. As a 

basis of comparison for MSW and 

RDF gasification, the net energy 

recovered was determined by 

subtracting the amount of energy 

consumed to produce RDF and 

to dry MSW to 30% moisture 

from the amount of energy that is 

recovered. The results showed that 

RDF production yielded higher 

net energy (0.142 kW/kg waste 

input) compared to the waste 

fuel blend of 70% MSW at 30% 

moisture and 30% PKS (-0.066 

kW/kg waste input). The negative 

net energy indicates that external 

energy is required and the amount 

of energy recovered is insufficient 

to support the entire process. 

Conclusion 

Waste thermal treatment may 

be the future of waste management 

in Malaysia, but there remains 

a number of challenges related 

to the unique characteristics of 

the local MSW. Models utilising 

the thermodynamic equilibrium 

approach can be useful for 

predicting the feasibility of 

thermal treatment by modelling 

the working parameters (i.e. waste 

moisture and energy content) of 

gasification as shown in the study 

conducted by Chan (2007). From 

the study, it was determined that 

MSW is unsuitable for gasification 

unless the waste is dried to an 

acceptable moisture level, fuel 

is supplemented or RDF is used. 

In the case of MSW, the energy 

required to dry the waste resulted 

in a net negative energy recovery. 

In view of the significance of waste 

energy and moisture content for 

REFERENCES 

WTE initiatives, waste management 

policies to promote materials 

recovery and waste moisture 

minimization during collection, 

transportation and final disposal 

should be implemented. BEM 

Altafini C.R., Wander P.R., Barreto R.M. (2003). Prediction of the 

working parameter of a wood waste gasifier through an equilibrium 

model. Energy Conversion and Management, 44, 2763 – 2777. 

Retrieved January 4, 2006, from Science Direct Database. 

Chan E. (2007). Modelling energy recovery and carbon dioxide 

emissions from gasification of solid waste under various separation 

and pre-processing strategies. Master’s thesis. Malaysia University of 

Science and Technology, Kelana Jaya, Selangor. 

Higman C. & Burgt M.V.D. (2003). Gasification. Burlington, MA: 

Elsevier Science. 

Nazeri S.M. (2003). Physical and chemical characteristics of solid 

wastes in the city of Kuala Lumpur. Unpublished master’s thesis. 

Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. 

Perunding Utama Sdn Bhd (2003). Detailed environmental impact 

assessment report for the proposed thermal treatment plant for solid 

waste management at Beroga, Mukim Semenyih, Daerah Hulu Langat 

Selangor. Available from Department of Environment, Shah Alam, 

Selangor. 

Prins M.J., Ptasinski K.J. & Janssen F.J.J.G. (2003). Thermodynamics of 

gas-char reactions: first and second law analysis. Chemical Engineering 

Science, 58, 1003-1011. Retrieved April 25, 2006, from Science 

Direct Database. 

Schuster G., Loffler G., Weigl K., Hofbauer H. (2001). Biomass steam 

gasification – an extensive parametric modeling study. Bioresource 

Technology, 77, 71-79. Retrieved January 23, 2006, from Science 

Direct Database. 

Tchobanoglous G., Theisen H., Vigil S. (1993). Integrated solid 

waste management: Engineering principles and management issues 

(International Edition). Singapore: Mcgraw-Hill. 

Zainal Z.A., Ali R., Lean C.H., Seetharamu K.N. (2001). Prediction 

of performance of a downdraft gasifier using equilibrium modeling 

for different biomass materials. Energy Conversion and Management, 

42, 1499 – 1515. Retrieved January 4, 2006, from Science Direct 

Database.

22 SPECIAL NOTICE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Registration Of Engineers 

(Amendment) Act 2007 [Act A1288] 

Akta Pendaftaran Jurutera (Pindaan) 2007 [Akta A1288] 

Date of coming into operation - 1 st April 2007 [P.U. (B) 102] 

All registered Engineers are hereby informed that the Registration of Engineers Act 1967, which was last amended in 

2002 [P.U. (B) 363], is now further amended in 2007. The relevant amended clauses are highlighted in the tabulation 

below for ease of reference. Please note that amendments to correct minor typographical errors and consequential 

amendments to the various amended clauses are not listed. 

EXISTING AMENDMENT REASONS 

PART II 

BOARD OF ENGINEERS 

4 (1) The functions of the Board shall be – 

(ec) to provide facilities for the promotion 

of learning and education and to 

hold or cause to be held professional 

development programmes for 

registered Engineers to further 

enhance their knowledge in the 

latest developments relating to that 

profession; 

(ed) to appoint a committee consisting 

of persons to be determined by the 

Board, to conduct examinations or to 

cause examinations to be conducted 

by an institution accredited by the 

Board for the purpose of admission to 

the profession; 

PART II 

BOARD OF ENGINEERS 

(ec) to provide facilities for the promotion 

of learning and education and to 

hold or cause to be held professional 

development programmes, including 

continuing professional development 

programmes, for registered Engineers 

to further enhance their knowledge 

in the latest developments relating to 

that profession; 

(ed) to appoint a committee consisting 

of persons to be determined by the 

Board, to conduct examinations or to 

cause examinations to be conducted 

by an institution recognized by the 

Board for the purpose of admission 

to the profession; 

(ef) to appoint a body consisting 

of members from the Board, 

Professional Engineers and other 

persons as may be determined by 

the Board to advise the Government 

and the public on matters relating to 

engineering education, including the 

certification of such programmes; 

To enforce the 

implementation 

of Continuing 

Professional 

Development. 

Replace the word 

‘accredit’ (which 

is protected by 

Jabatan Standard 

Negara) with 

‘recognize’. 

New subclause 

to add more 

functions to advise 

the Government & 

public. 


PART III 

REGISTRATION OF ENGINEERS 

7A. (5) If the Board finds that – 

(d) the sole proprietor or any partner, 

director, shareholder or employee of an 

Engineering consultancy practice, being 

a person registered under this Act, 

PART III 

REGISTRATION OF ENGINEERS

THE INGENIEUR SPECIAL NOTICE 

23 


PART III 


has committed, or is guilty of, or has 

contributed to, any of the acts or things 

set out in – 

(i) paragraph 15(1)(a); or 

(ii) paragraph 15(1)(b) to (o) except 

paragraphs (e) and (f), 

the Board may, subject to subsection 

(6), by written notice to the Engineering 

consultancy practice, order – 

(aa) the issuance of a written warning or 

reprimand to; 

(bb) the imposition of a fine not 

exceeding ten thousand Ringgit on; 

(cc) the suspension of the registration for 

a period not exceeding one year of; 

(dd) the cancellation of the registration 

of; or 

(ee) any combination of the sanctions 

set out in paragraphs (aa) to (dd) on, 

the Engineering consultancy practice. 

PART III 


(bb) the imposition of a fine not 

exceeding fifty thousand Ringgit on; 

(cc) the suspension of the registration 

for a period not exceeding two 

years of; 

To strengthen the 

penalty. 


suspension period. 


PART III A 

DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE 

Establishment of Disciplinary Committee 

14A. The Board shall appoint a 

Disciplinary Committee which shall 

consist of the following members: 

(a) a Chairman; and 

(b) two other members, 

who have been registered as Professional 

Engineers for not less than seven years. 

Powers of Disciplinary Committee 

14B. The Disciplinary Committee – 

(a) shall conduct hearings of 

any misconduct or complaint 

against any registered Engineer 

referred to it by the Investigating 

Committee; 

Introduction of 

new Part that 

deals with the 

establishment, 

powers & conduct 

of proceedings 

of a Disciplinary 

Committee.


THE INGENIEUR 

EXISTING AMENDMENT 

PART III A 

DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE 

REASONS 


PART IV 

CANCELLATION, REMOVAL, 

REINSTATEMENT, ETC. 

15. (1) The Board may make any or 

any combination of the orders 

specified in paragraphs (a) to (d) of 

subsection (1A) against a registered 

Engineer under any of the following 

circumstances : 

(a) if he is convicted of any offence 

involving fraud or dishonesty or 

moral turpitude in Malaysia or 

elsewhere; 

(b) may make any or any 

combination of the orders 

specified in Section 15 against a 

registered Engineer under such 

circumstances as set out in that 

section. 

Proceedings of the Disciplinary 

Committee 

14C. (1) Where a member of the Board 

has been appointed as a member 

of the Disciplinary Committee 

in pursuance of section 14A 

to conduct a hearing of any 

misconduct or complaint against a 

registered Engineer, that member 

of the Disciplinary Committee 

shall not sit as a member of the 

Board when the Board conducts 

a hearing or makes an order 

under subsection 7A(5) against an 

Engineering consultancy practice 

of which the registered Engineer is 

its sole proprietor, partner, director, 

shareholder or employee. 

(2) Subject to the provisions of this 

Act, the Disciplinary Committee 

may regulate its own procedures in 

such manner as it deems fit. 

PART IV 



(1) The Disciplinary Committee may 

make any or any combination of the 

orders specified in paragraphs (a) 

to (d) of subsection (1A) against a 

registered Engineer under any of the 

following circumstances : 

(a) if he is convicted of any offence, 

including offences involving 

false or negligent certification, 

fraud or dishonesty or moral 

turpitude in Malaysia or 

elsewhere; 

Action on 

submitting 

engineer related to 

CCC or others.

THE INGENIEUR SPECIAL NOTICE 25 


PART IV 



(1A) The orders referred to in subsection 

(1) are – 

(a) the issuance of a written warning 

or reprimand; 

(b) the imposition of a fine not 

exceeding five thousand ringgit; 

(c) the suspension of registration for 

a period not exceeding one year; 

(d) the cancellation of registration. 

17. (2) Any registered Engineer, other than 

a Graduate Engineer, or Engineering 

consultancy practice whose name has 

been removed from the Register for 

failure to renew his or its registration 

for a period of not more than three 

years shall be reinstated as soon as 

may be after he or it has notified the 

Registrar of his or its desire to be 

reinstated and upon payment of such 

fees as may be prescribed, and the 

Registrar shall issue a certificate of 

registration to him or it. 

(2A) A registered Engineer, other than a 

Graduate Engineer, or an Engineering 

consultancy practice, who fails to 

renew his or its registration for a 

period of more than three years 

consecutively may be reinstated 

if he or it applies to the Board for 

reinstatement and the Board if 

satisfied with his or its reasons for 

reinstatement, and upon payment of 

such fees as may be prescribed, shall 

issue a certificate of registration to 

him. 

PART IV 



(b) the imposition of a fine not 

exceeding fifty thousand Ringgit; 

(c) the suspension of registration 

for a period not exceeding two 

years. 

(2) Any registered Engineer, other than 

a Graduate Engineer, or Engineering 

consultancy practice whose 

name has been removed from the 

Register for failure to renew his 

or its registration for a period of 

not more than three years shall be 

reinstated as soon as may be after 

he or it has notified the Registrar of 

his or its desire to be reinstated and 

upon payment of such fees as may 

be prescribed and satisfying such 

conditions as may be determined 

by the Board, and the Registrar shall 

issue a certificate of registration to 

him or it. 

(2A) A registered Engineer, other 

than a Graduate Engineer, or an 

Engineering consultancy practice, 

who fails to renew his or its 

registration for a period of more 

than three years consecutively may 

be reinstated if he or it applies to 

the Board for reinstatement and 

the Board if satisfied with his or 

its reasons for reinstatement, and 

upon payment of such fees as may 

be prescribed and satisfying such 

conditions as may be determined by 

the Board, shall issue a certificate of 

registration to him. 


penalty. 


suspension period. 

Impose additional 

conditions to 

ensure engineers 

follow latest 

developments. 


PART V 

GENERAL 

24. Any person, sole proprietor, partnership or 

body corporate who – 

(a) procures or attempts to procure 

registration or a certificate of 

registration under this Act by 

PART V 

GENERAL


THE INGENIEUR 


PART V 

GENERAL 

knowingly making or producing 

or causing to be made or 

produced any false or fraudulent 

declaration, certificate, 

application or representation 

whether in writing or otherwise; 

(b) willfully makes or causes to be 

made any falsification in the 

Register; 

(c) forges, alters or counterfeits any 

certificate of registration under 

this Act; 

(d) uses any forged, altered or 

counterfeited certificate of 

registration under this Act 

knowing the same to have been 

forged, altered or counterfeited; 

(e) impersonates a registered 

Engineer; 

(f) buys or fraudulently obtains 

a certificate of registration 

under this Act issued to another 

registered Engineer or Engineering 

consultancy practice; 

(g) sells any certificate of registration 

issued under this Act; or 

(h) contravenes section 7 or 8, or 

subsection 7A(1), 24A(1) or 

24B(5); and 

shall be guilty of an offence and shall, 

on conviction, be liable to a fine not 

exceeding ten thousand ringgit in the 

case of an individual, or fifty thousand 

Ringgit in the case of a sole proprietorship, 

partnership or body corporate, or to 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

three years, or to both. 

25. (1) Any person, sole proprietorship, 

partnership or body corporate 

who contravenes this Act or any 

regulations made thereunder, shall be 

guilty of an offence and shall, where 

no penalty is expressly provided 

therefore, be liable, on conviction, 

to a fine not exceeding two thousand 

Ringgit. 

PART V 

GENERAL 

shall be guilty of an offence and shall, 

on conviction, be liable to a fine not 

exceeding fifty thousand Ringgit, or to 

imprisonment for a term not exceeding 

three years, or to both. 

(1) Any person, sole proprietorship, 

partnership or body corporate 

who contravenes this Act or any 

regulations made thereunder, 

shall be guilty of an offence 

and shall, where no penalty is 

expressly provided therefore, be 

liable, on conviction, to a fine not 

exceeding ten thousand Ringgit 

or to imprisonment for a term not 

exceeding one year, or to both. 


penalty. 


penalty. 

BEM

THE INGENIEUR GUIDELINES 

27 

Certificate Of Completion & Compliance 

CCC 

Submitted by Ir. Fong Tian Yong 

Amendments to Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 ( Act 133) and UBBL to replace Certificate of Fitness 

(CFO) with Certificate of Completin & Compliance (CCC): 

1. The Street, Drainage and Building Act and UBBL were amended with effect from April 12, 2007 to replace 

CFO with CCC. 

2. The new building delivery process: 

The planing permission and building plan of a project will still be approved by the local authority. After the 

completion of the project, CCC will be issued by Principal Submitting Person (PSP) for project for which the 

building plan is approved after April 12, 2007. For building for which building plan was approved before 

April 12, 2007, CFO will still be issued by local authority. 

3. Under UBBL, CCC ( Form F) of a building shall be issued by Principal Submitting Person (PSP) when : 

(a) all technical conditions have been duly complied, 

(b) when Forms G1 to G21 in the second schedule have been certified and received by him, 

(c) when all essential services have been provided, 

(d) when he certifies in Form F that he has supervised the erection and completion of the building and that 

to the best of his knowledge and belief the building has been constructed and completed in accordance 

to the Act, these By-Laws and the approved plans. 

4. PSP shall within 14 days from issuance of CCC deposit a copy of CCC together with Forms G1 to G21 with 

local authority and the Board of Architect Malaysia or Board of Engineers Malaysia as the case may be. 

5. Definitions : 

Principal submitting person (PSP) means a qualified person who submit building plans to local authority 

Submitting person means a qualified person who submits plans other than building plan to the local 

authority 

Qualified person means a Professional Architect, Professional Engineer or building draughtsman registered 

under any written law 

Building plan means plans that includes site plans, key plans, floor plans, sections and elevations of 

buildings, and are as stipulated in By-laws 8, 9 and 10. 

Technical conditions means conditions pertaining to health and safety issues relating to buildings and 

essential services serving the building. 

6. Forms G – stage certification : 

G1 – Earthworks G11 – Lift/Escalators installation 

G2 – Setting out G12 – Building 

G3 – Foundations G13 – External water supply system 

G4 – Structural G14 – Sewerage reticulation 

G5 – Internal water plumbing G15 – Sewerage treatment plant 

G6 – Internal sanitary plumbing G16 – External electrical supply system 

G7 – Internal electrical G17 – Road and drain 

G8 – Fire-fighting ( passive) G18 – Street lighting 

G9 – Fire-fighting ( active) G19 – External main drain 

G10 – Mechanical ventilation G20 – Telecommunications 

G21 – Landscape

28 GUIDELINES 

THE INGENIEUR 

7. Responsibility of PSP 

(a) to submit building plans in Form A for local authority approval 

(b) to submit Form B to inform local authority of the commencement of works 

(c) to comply with local authority directive or notice during the course of construction if there is any noncompliance 

(d) to supervise and certify works after completion 

(e) to ensure all Forms G (1 to 21) duly certified before issuance of CCC. Where particular From G is not 

relevant, certify it as not applicable by PSP in that particular form 

8. Power of local authority (LA) 

(a) to inspect building works at any stage and call attention to any failure to building or non-compliance 

with UBBL and issue notice to PSP for rectification 

(b) LA may issue directive to PSP to withhold the issuance of CCC 

(c) PSP shall issue a notice to LA to confirm rectification when it is being rectified 

(d) LA shall inspect and confirm the rectification within 14 days from receipt of notice from PSP 

9. Penalty under Act 133 : 

Penalty of fine up to RM250,000 or imprisonment of not more than 10 years if any person : 

(a) is not a PSP but issues a CCC 

(b) issues CCC without the relevant forms prescribed in UBBL 

(c) issues CCC in contravention of a direction given by LA to withhold such issuance pending rectification of 

any non-compliance 

(d) makes any false or fraudulent declaration, certificate, application or representation of any form 

prescribed in any By-law 

(e) use any forged, altered or counterfeit declaration, certification, application or representation 

(f) occupies or permit to be occupied any building without CCC 

BEM 

CCC 

Flow Chart 

Legend 

LA – Local authority 

PSP – Principal submitting 

person 

OSC LA – One stop centre of 

local authority 

BAM – Board of 

Architects Malaysia 

BEM – Board of 

Engineers Malaysia 

PSP 

OSC LA 

PSP 

Construction 

Certification of Form G 

Certification of Form G1 to G21 

by Submitting Persons and trade 

contractors to PSP 

PSP 

CCC 

Developer/Owner 

PSP submits Building plan for 

approval in Form A with LA 

OSC processes application for 

approval together with other 

relevant technical agencies 

PSP submits Form B to inform LA 

of commencement of works 

Letter of clearance from relevant 

Technical Agencies only 

PSP issues CCC to developer/owner 

forward cc of CCC to : 

Local Authority 

BAM /BEM

THE INGENIEUR ENGINEERING & LAW 29 

Demystifying Direct Loss And 

Expense Claims: 

The Continuing Saga 

By Ir. Harbans Singh K.S. 1 

The previous issue of The Ingenieur carried the 

introductory part of the article on “Demystifying 

Direct Loss and Expense Claim”; which amongst 

others dealt with the preliminary issues such as 

terminology, meaning, legal basis and procedural 

issues. However, the said article did not address 

the many practical issues that can ultimately render 

a claim either successful or futile. Much as one 

attempts to evade these matters, they must nevertheless 

be resolved satisfactorily if one were to realize the 

fruits of the claim endeavour. This area of the claim 

process is riddled with a minefield of uncertainties 

and grey areas that have no definitive answers, in 

particular in Malaysia, as there are hardly any 

authoritative guidelines either in the form of judicial 

pronouncements or texts to serve as useful pointers. In 

view of the said lacuna, the subsequent write-up has 

been penned with an objective of addressing some of 

the more pertinent issues vis-à-vis the practical aspects 

of a claim for direct loss and/or expense. It should 

be appreciated that in the absence of local sources of 

information, reference has been made extensively to 

foreign jurisdictions especially English sources to help 

formulate and/or augment rules of good practice so 

that the claimant and the assessor can undertake their 

respective tasks with a higher level of confidence and 

professionalism. Perhaps the publication of the instant 

article will spur further thought and contributions from 

other interested practitioners to help firm up some 

local guidelines or protocols relevant to this area. 

PRACTICAL ISSUES 

Pitfalls and Pratfalls 2 

Discounting procedural defaults that render many 

a claim for direct loss and/or expense ultimately futile, 

the other common matters compromising such claims 

are of a practical nature. These are shrouded more 

by myths and misconceptions rather than substantive 

principles. Over the years, ill-informed practitioners 

have, by their repeated adoption of such deviant 

practices, institutionalised these into the so-called 

common industry practice. Hence, it comes at no 

surprise when many an industry leader or practitioner 

in the field of claims on the local scene swears by its 

norms and preaches its use on the basis of recognised 

trade custom or usage. Such an attitude obscures 

the professional approach that needs to be taken to 

ensure that local practice falls in tandem with the 

international norms. A plausible explanation for such 

a fallacy is the paucity of information and case law on 

the practical aspects of this species of claims within the 

Malaysian context. In the absence of any authoritative 

pronouncements on the local front, it is the intent of 

the subsequent write-up to examine the approaches in 

other jurisdictions with a view of firstly understanding 

the practical issues pertaining to the same, and then 

perhaps proposing some suitable approaches that 

need to be taken so as to put the grey-areas of such 

claims on a more firmer footing. In the process, some 

common pitfalls and pratfalls that have occurred or 

may occur vis-à-vis direct loss and/or expense claims 

will be highlighted and hopefully some light will be 

shed on the hitherto elusive areas that rack the brains 

of many an enlightened practitioner. 

Identification of Entitlements 

Having established the legal right to pursue a claim 

for direct loss and/or expense and having satisfied all 

the relevant procedural requirements 3 , it is incumbent 

for the claimant to identify with suitable precision 

the respective heads of entitlements that need to be 

quantified and substantiated 4 . The principal areas of 

such claim usually encountered in practice include, 

inter alia: 

(a) Site Overheads; 

(b) ‘Offsite’ and ‘Head Office’ Overheads; 

1. B.E. (Mech) S’pore, LLB (Hons) London, CLP, DipICArb, 

P.E., C. Eng. , Director, HSH Consult Sdn. Bhd. 

2. See Ir. Harbans Singh K.S. ‘Direct Loss and Expense 

Claims’ Paper presented at Seminar for KPK Quantity 

Surveyors (Semenanjung) Sdn. Bhd. 27 th January 2007. 

3. E.g. notification, substantiation, etc. 

4. See Carnel, NJ “Causation and Delay in Construction 

Disputes” [2 nd Edn.] Blackwell Publishing at p 105.

30 ENGINEERING & LAW 

THE INGENIEUR 

(c) Additional Expenditure; 

(d) Loss of Profits; 

(e) Interest and Financing charges; 

(f) Loss of Productivity; 

(g) Inflationary Cost Increase of Materials and Labour; 

and 

(h) Cost of Preparing the Claim 

Depending on the nature of the delay and/ 

or disruptive element, a typical claim for direct 

loss and/or expense may encompass either one, 

or all, or a number of the above-listed heads of 

entitlements. Much also depends upon the relative 

strength of the particular case in terms of the quality 

of proof 5 available in justification of the particular 

entitlement or entitlements. Though some of the 

said entitlements appear relatively straight forward, 

these are nevertheless fraught with legal uncertainties 

where the ultimate decision is swayed more by 

subjective factors than objective considerations. 

Hence, the subsequent write-up expands upon the 

scope of some of the rather contentious areas of the 

claim for entitlements so as to shed some light for 

practitioners. The first and most common head i.e. 

“site overheads” though being relatively simpler to 

assess, is nevertheless dealt with in this paper as it 

usually represents the bulk of the amount claimed. 

Site Overheads 

This head of the entitlement generally 

encompasses the additional expenses incurred by 

the contractor in running its site operations and 

the incidental costs involved. In a typical contract, 

most of the costs governed by this particular head 

are itemized in the Preliminaries section of the 

costing 6 and cover the following four broad 

groups 7 : 

(a) The ‘Wholly Time Dependent’ items, the costs 

of which are solely determined by the length 

of the contract period e.g. supervisory and 

administrative staff expenses, utilities, security, 

protection, insurance, etc. 

(b) The ‘Partly Time Dependent’ items i.e. items 

which are relevant for only a part of the overall 

contract period e.g. visiting management, 

specialist personnel, special storage facilities, 

lighting, attendance, material handing equipment, 

scaffolding, dewatering facilities, etc. 

(c) The ‘One-Off’ items involving expenditure 

which is of a non-recurring nature e.g. land 

survey, site setting out, site office mobilization 

and clearing, factory testing, operation and 

maintenance training, ‘as-built’ records, etc.; 

and 

(d) Items influenced at least partly by the volume 

and type of any additional work undertaken e.g. 

small tools and equipment, testing and inspection 

facilities and equipment, etc. 

The identification and justification of site overheads 

generally poses little or no problem as this is relatively 

straight forward and there are usually no difficult legal 

or contractual issues governing the same, although 

much depends on the contractor’s quality of proof in 

terms of records, documents, etc. 

“Offsite” and “Head Office” Overheads 

Depending upon the particular meaning ascribed 

to the said phrase in the contract concerned, this head 

of entitlement covers all the costs incurred by the 

contractor, save for the Site Overheads, in running its 

business as a whole. It encompasses the contractor’s 

head office and administrative expenses 8 such as office 

rentals, marketing expenses, entertainment, research 

and development costs, emoluments of head office 

staff, loss of profit, loss of opportunity, etc. Although it 

is commonly cited by many a contractor as a principal 

component of the claim, its ultimate realization is pockmarked 

by legal uncertainties and pitfalls. Recovery is 

permitted per the applicable contractual formula or in 

its absence, per the common law principles adverted 

to in the preceding sections of this paper 9 . In the 

final analysis, the contractor has to show amongst 

others, that on a balance of probabilities that an act 

of prevention by the employer has resulted in a delay 

which effectively denies it an opportunity to recover 

an appropriate amount for these head office expenses 

from other sources 10 . The general approach taken by 

contractors in pursuing such an entitlement is explained 

by Roger Knowles in the following words 11 : 

“Contractors and sub-contractors when submitting 

claims for prolongation will normally include an 

item for head office costs. This can usually take 

one of the two forms: 

Firstly the argument may be that the contractor, 

in having resources locked into a site during the 

prolongation period, has lost an opportunity of using 

5. In terms of records, documents, etc. 

6. i.e. either in the Bills of Quantities, Schedule of Breakdown 

of Price or Contract Sum Analysis as applicable. 

7. See Chow Kok Fong “Law and Practice of Construction 

Contracts” [3 rd Edn.] Thompson, Sweet & Maxwell at p 

498-50. 

8. Ibid. 

9. See section entitled ‘Legal Basis’. 

10. See also, Peak Construction (Liverpool) Ltd. v McKinney 

Foundations Ltd (1976) 1 BLR 111. 

11. “150 Contractual Problems and Their Solutions” (2 nd Edn.) 

at p 173 & 174.

THE INGENIEUR ENGINEERING & LAW 

31 

those resources on other sites where they would 

have earned a contribution to the costs of running 

the head office. For this argument to be successful, 

the contractor or sub-contractor would have to show 

that work was reasonably plentiful and that on a 

balance of probabilities other work was or would 

have been available. This is sometime referred to 

as “unabsorbed head office overheads” in that the 

level of head office cost continues but the revenue 

stream from the particular contract suffering the 

delay shows a short fall. If the contractor is unable 

to establish a loss of opportunity, he may be able to 

demonstrate that time and cost identified resources 

at head office have been incurred during the overrun 

period …..” 

Therefore for the contractor to be reasonably 

successful in proving the above entitlement, it must 

formulate its claim with reasonable precision and 

present it in a manner that is tenable at law. This 

involves considerable effort and resources, which 

most contractors cannot afford. Hence, under the 

circumstances, the contractor is tempted to utilize 

a much more straightforward approach i.e. one 

involving the use of a recognized formula in lieu of 

detail accounting and its attendant documentation and 

analysis 12 ; the more popular of which are the Hudson 

Formula, Emden Formula and the Eichleay Formula. 

Though the English Courts have accepted the use 

of such formulae in certain circumstances 13 , they are 

nevertheless subject to a host of shortcomings and must 

therefore be applied with circumspect. It is generally 

accepted that each formula is merely an approximation 

with its respective inherent limitations. In most cases 

it serves as a good starting point in the computation 

process. To prove that it is appropriate, evidence 

must be called. A mechanical insertion of numbers 

into the respective formulae, per se, is inadequate. A 

logical nexus must be established between the proof 

adduced by the formula and a fair estimate of the 

actual loss. In all cases, the contractor must establish 

on a balance of probabilities that either because its 

resources were kept at site, it was prevented from 

earning a contribution by working elsewhere, or the 

actual costs of the head office overheads. 

This proposition is supported by Roger Knowles 

who reaffirms that 14 ‘…… whichever method of 

calculation is employed, the courts will require 

supporting evidence that either opportunities have 

been lost or additional costs incurred …..’. Qualified 

support for the use of the formulae is given by the 

Society of Construction Law’s Delay and Disruption 

Protocol 2002 which stipulates: 

“1.16.3 Unless the terms of the contract render 

unabsorbed overheads irrecoverable, 

they are generally recoverable as 

a foreseeable cost resulting from 

prolongation. The contractor must be 

able to demonstrate that because of the 

Employer Risk Events it was prevented 

from taking on other overhead-earning 

work. 

1.16.6 The three most commonly used formulae 

for assessing unabsorbed head office 

overheads are the Hudson, Emden and 

Eichleay. 

1.16.7 The use of the Hudson’s formula is 

not supported. This is because it 

is dependent on the adequacy or 

otherwise of the tender in question, and 

because the calculation is derived from 

a number which in itself contains an 

element of head office overheads and 

profit, so there is double counting. 

1.16.8 In the limited circumstances where 

a head office overhead formula is to 

be used, the Protocol prefers the use 

of the Emden and Eichleay formulae. 

However, in relation to the Eichleay 

formula, if a significant proportion (more 

than say 10%) of the final contract 

valuation is made up of the value of 

variations, then it will be necessary to 

make an adjustment to the input into 

the formula, to take account of the fact 

that the variations themselves are likely 

to contain a contribution to head office 

overheads and profit. 

1.16.9 The Contract Administrator, or, in the 

event of a dispute, the person deciding 

the dispute, should not be absolutely 

bound by the results of a formula 

calculation 15 . It is possible that the use 

of a particular formula will produce an 

anomalous result because of a particular 

12. See further, Davison, P “Evaluating Contract Claims” 

Blackwell Publishing at p 206-214. 

13. See for example St. Mowlem Developments Ltd. v 

Bowmer & Kirkland (1996) 38 BLISS 4, Norwest Hoslt 

Construction Ltd. v Co-operative Wholesale Society (1998) 

BLISS 4 and Property and Land Contractors Ltd. v Alfred 

McAlpine Homes North Ltd. (1996) 76 BLR 59. 

14. In “150 Contractual Problems and Their Solutions” (3 nd 

Edn.) Blackwell Publishing at p 182. 

15. In the ‘Building Contract Dictionary’ (3 rd Edn.) the author’s 

at p 196 state ‘….. whether it be Hudson, Eichleay and 

Emden or any other such formula, that approach to excontractu 

claims should, if at all possible, be avoided 

………..’ .


THE INGENIEUR 

input into it. It is suggested that the 

result of the use of one formula be 

cross-checked using another formula. 

1.16.10 The tender allowance for head office 

overheads may be used, if that is what 

the parties for convenience wish to 

do.” 

It should be noted that though the said Protocol 

can be dismissed as a mere guideline, nevertheless 

it has been accepted by the construction industry at 

least in the United Kingdom as authoritative vis-àvis 

delay and disruption claims good practice. The 

recommendations of the Protocol coupled with the 

caveats expressed by the leading authorities in the 

field of construction law necessitates caution to be 

used in adopting any formulae in lieu of actual proof 

for the instant head of entitlement. 

Financing Charges 

A typical head of a contractor’s claim for direct 

loss and/or expense would be “financing charges”; 

an entitlement that baffles many an employer as its 

basis is seldom appreciated. Hence, it is normally 

dismissed as a non-claimable head by most claims 

assessors. To understand this particular head of the 

claim, one must examine three main issues, namely: 

The meaning and basis of the financing charges; 

The right of the contractor to claim this head; 

and 

If established, the rate that needs to be applied. 

The first issue has been aptly dealt with in a string 

of English cases, the most notable being the case of 

FG Minter Ltd. v Welsh Health Technical Services 

Organisation 16 where Lord Justice Stephenson in his 

judgment stated: 

“It is further agreed that in the building and 

construction industry the ‘cash flow’ is vital to the 

contractor and delay in paying him for the work 

he does naturally results in the ordinary course of 

things in his being short of working capital, having 

to borrow capital to pay wages and hire charges 

and locking up in plant, labour and materials capital 

which he would have invested elsewhere. The loss 

of the interest which he has to pay on the capital 

he is forced to borrow and on the capital which 

he is not free to invest would be recoverable for 

the employer’s breach of contract within the first 

rule in Hadley v Baxendale (1854) without resorting 

to the second, and would accordingly be a direct 

loss if an authorized variation of the works, or the 

regular progress of the works having been materially 

affected by an event specified in clause 24(1), has 

involved in that loss” 

In a nutshell, the contractor’s entitlement arises 

due to the delay in receiving the amount in question 

in time thereby compelling the contractor to borrow 

the shortfall from financers or in utilizing its capital 

meant for other investments. Hence, the cost of 

either the borrowing or diversion of funds has to be 

recovered from the employer. This entitlement has 

been recognized by the English Courts; the Court of 

Appeal’s endorsement in Rees & Kirkby Ltd. v Swansea 

City Council 17 reinforcing the contractor’s right of 

recovery. 

As to the rate to be used for the financing charges 

incurred, contrary to widely held belief, it is apparent 

that the courts are prepared to award a level of 

charges reflecting the actual loss or damage suffered 

instead of a mere nominal rate. In calculating such 

charges, guidance should be sought from the relevant 

authorities; a classic example being the English Court 

of Appeal’s pronouncement in the celebrated case 

of Rees & Kirkby Ltd. v The Council of the City of 

Swansea 18 where Goff LJ neatly summed up the 

approach to be taken in the following enlightening 

words: 

“There remains to be considered the question whether 

[the contractors] are entitled to recover their financing 

charges only on the basis of simple interest, or whether 

they are entitled to assess their claim on the basis of 

compound interest, calculated at quarterly rests, as 

they have done. Now here, it seems to me, we must 

adopt a realistic approach. We must bear in mind, 

moreover, that what we are here considering is a debt 

due under a contract; this is not a claim to interest as 

such, as for example a claim to interest under the Law 

Reform Act, but a claim in respect of loss or expense 

in which a contractor has been involved by reason 

of certain specific events. [The contractors], like (I 

imagine) most building contractors, operated over the 

relevant period on the basis of a substantial overdraft 

at their bank, and their claim in respect of financing 

charges consist of a claim in respect of interest paid 

by them to the bank on the relevant amount during 

that period. 

16. (1980) 13 BLR 1 in respect of the 1963 JCT Standard 

Form. See also, Davison, P. “Evaluating Contract 

Claims” Blackwell Publishing at p 199-201 for further 

amplification. 

17. (1985) BLR 1 where it was also held that the Contractor’s 

application for payment must include a clear reference 

that it includes finance charges and that such notice 

should generally be given within a reasonable time of the 

loss or damage being incurred. 

18. (1985) 30 BLR 1; [1986] 5 ConLR 34.

THE INGENIEUR ENGINEERING & LAW 33 

It is notorious that banks do themselves, when 

calculating interest on overdrafts, operate on the 

basis of periodic rests; on the principle stated by 

the Court of Appeal in Minter’s case, which we here 

have to apply, I for my part can see no reason why 

that fact should not be taken into account when 

calculating the [Contractor’s] claim for loss and 

expense in the present case. It follows that, in order 

to calculate [the Contractor’s] contractual claim it 

will be necessary to calculate it with reference to 

the total sum …… in relation to the period I have 

indicated …… taking into account (1) the two 

payments made on account during the period; (2) 

the rates of interest charged by the bank to [the 

Contractors] at various times over that period; and 

(3) the periodic rests on the basis of which the 

bank from time to time added outstanding interest 

to the capital sum outstanding for the purposes of 

calculating interest thereafter …..” 

Though Goff LJ’s above-mentioned extract sets out 

in clear terms the general method of calculating such 

charges, it should be treated with circumspect as it 

is not exhaustive in that it does not encompass all 

situations encountered in the construction industry. 

Such exceptions include 19 : 

Where the contractor is self-financed; or 

Where the contractor is part of a group of 

companies and is financed from within the 

corporate group; or 

Where the financing is other than the above and 

the contractor has incurred exceptional costs 20 ; 

or 

Where the ultimate payment is calculated by 

reference to the contract unit rates and prices; or 

Where there is extensive sub-contracting and the 

contractor is not the final recipient but a mere 

conduit for the cash flow; or 

Where novel methods of contract financing using 

non-conventional financial instruments have been 

employed. 

In such situations, evidence has to be called to 

establish the actual level of charges incurred, failing 

which it would be prudent for the claim assessor to 

act in a fair and reasonable manner i.e. by calculating 

the financing charges at a commercial level of interest 

and period rests etc. that would reflect the reasonable 

expectation of the parties 21 . 

As many a claimant or assessor may appreciate, 

case law though useful, nevertheless fails to address 

many grey areas of this relatively difficult area of the 

claim entitlements. To obviate such difficulties, it is 

helpful for the relevant issues pertaining to finance 

charges to be expressly stipulated in the particular 

conditions of contract between the parties. It is not 

uncommon for the term “cost” or “loss or expense” 

to be defined to include such matters as finance 

charges, any restriction upon the contractor’s right 

spelled out and the formula for calculating the said 

head of entitlement clearly prescribed 22 . Although 

such practice is being introduced in contemporary “ad 

hoc” or “bespoke” forms of conditions of contract, it 

should be extended to the commonly used standard 

forms. Be that as it may, as a fall-back measure, heed 

should be taken of The Society of Construction Law 

Delay and Disruption Protocol 2002 which states: 

“Interest as damages/finance charges 

1.15.4 It is the position in most areas of business 

that interest payable on bank borrowings 

(to replace the money due) or the lost 

opportunity to earn interest on bank 

deposits, is quantifiable as damages where 

the claimant can show: 

1.15.4.1 that such loss has actually been 

suffered; and 

1.15.4.2 that this loss was within the 

reasonable contemplation 

of the parties at the time of 

contracting 

1.15.5 It is recognized that, in the construction 

industry, it will always be in the 

contemplation of the parties at the 

time they enter into their contract that 

if deprived of the money the Contractor 

will pay interest or lose the ability to 

earn interest. Contractors therefore need 

only establish that the loss was actually 

suffered. 

Time when interest starts to run 

1.15.6 There are often arguments as to the date 

on which interest on a Contractor’s claim 

should start to run. Contractors will argue 

19. See Davison, P. “Evaluating Contract Claims” (Blackwell 

Publishing) at p 202 & 203. 

20. beyond the normal bank charges. 

21. See Davison, P. “Evaluating Contract Claims” (Blackwell 

Publishing) at p 203. 

22. Including the rate to be applied, etc. See for example 

Clause 1.1 CIDB Form of Contract for Building Works 

(2000 Edition).


THE INGENIEUR 

that it should be the date on which they 

incurred expenditure for which they are 

entitled to compensation. Employers will 

say that interest should run only from the 

date that the Contractor has provided all 

information needed to satisfy them that 

the expenditure has been incurred. 

1.15.7 The appropriate starting date will not 

be the same in all circumstances, but 

generally the starting date for the payment 

of the interest should be the earliest date 

on which the principal sum could have 

become payable, which will be the date 

for payment of the certificate issued 

immediately after the date the Contractor 

applied for payment of the loss and/or 

expense. This will be subject to any 

notice requirements in the contract. In 

contracts where there are no certificates, 

the Protocol recommends that interest 

should start to run 30 days after the date 

the Contractor suffered the loss and/or 

expense”. 

Claim Preparation Costs 

Save for the smaller and simpler claims for direct 

loss and/or expense, contractors expend considerable 

time and resources in the preparation, submission 

and eventual resolution of such claims. This is often 

at quite a cost, which the contractor inevitably 

attempts to recover from the defaulting party. Until 

as of recent, these costs popularly labeled as “claim 

preparation costs” were summarily dismissed as a nonclaimable 

head of entitlement. Perhaps this was due 

to the commonly held belief that it constituted part 

and parcel of the contractor’s obligation in asserting 

its rights and as such was a non-reimbursable item. 

Most claimants, at least in the past, elected not to 

aggressively pursue such costs as these were relatively 

minor compared to the other heads and were thus 

able to absorb these as part of the administration 

costs. However, the situation has changed markedly 

over the years as both the quantum and complexity 

of most direct loss and/or expense claims have 

grown exponentially involving extensive “in-house” 

management resources as well as external experts 

such as legal and financial advisors and claims 

consultants; not discounting the often tedious and 

expensive process for the preparation of the claim 

documents, their presentation and the long-winded 

resolution process leading up to the realization of the 

end product. Hence, it comes at no surprise that a 

significant number of contemporary claims for direct 

loss and/or expense incorporate the claim preparation 

costs as a separate head of entitlement. 

Whether such claims are tenable in law is a moot 

point and depends on the particular circumstances of 

the case and on the following specific matters 23 : 

The presence of any express stipulation in the 

contract in question either permitting or proscribing 

such costs; 

The breach of any express provision in the contract 

mandating the ascertainment of the claim for loss 

and/or expense by the authorized person 24 : 

Whether such costs are incurred in contemplation 

of arbitration and the arbitrator eventually awards 

such costs. 

Where the contract requires the contractor to justify 

and/or substantiate its claim e.g. Clause 24.1 25 PAM 

98 Form (With Quantities Edn.), it is apparent, that 

this being an expressed obligation, the contractor has 

no entitlement to the costs incurred no matter how 

onerous the process transpires to be. If however, the 

contractor has complied with such stipulations but the 

contract administrator fails and/or neglects to ascertain 

and certify the costs due 26 , this may constitute an 

actionable breach of contract especially if the express 

provisions of the contract mandates such duty e.g. 

Clause 24.3 27 PAM 98 Form (With Quantities Edn.). 

The contractor’s consequent entitlement under such 

circumstances is explained by Roger Knowles to the 

following effect 28 : 

“It may be argued that both parties would 

contemplate that if the architect 29 fails to ascertain 

loss and expense, and hence is in breach, the parties 

should have contemplated that the contractor would 

be put to expense in preparing a fully documented 

claim which should therefore be recoverable ...... 

There is a precedent for the payment of managerial 

costs resulting from a breach in the case of Tate & 

Lyle Food Distribution v GLC (1982). In that case 

Mr. Justice Forbes said: 

‘I have no doubt that the expenditure of managerial 

time in remedying an actionable wrong done to 

a trading concern can properly form the subject 

matter of a special head of special damage.’ 

23. See also Knowles, R. “150 Contractual Problems and 

Their Solutions” (2 nd Edn.) at p 173. 

24. i.e. the contract administrator. 

25. entitled “Application to Ascertain Loss and/or Expense”. 

26. either at all or within a reasonable time. 

27. labeled “Ascertainment of Loss and/or Expense”. 

28. “150 Contractual Problems and Their Solutions” (2 nd Edn.) 

at p 171. 

29. or the contract administrator.

THE INGENIEUR ENGINEERING & LAW 

35 

This argument may be extended to cover the costs 

of claims preparation following a breach.” 

Even if an express provision proscribes the 

contractor from recovering such costs or renders 

the contractor’s claim for breach consequent to 

the contract administrator’s failure to ascertain and 

certify loss and/or expense futile, the contractor may 

nevertheless be still be able to some compensation if 

the matter is arbitrated and the latter can establish that 

the preparation of the claim had been in contemplation 

of such arbitration. In such a situation, the discretion 

ultimately rests with the arbitrator who may award 

the cost of preparing the claim covering such items 

as managerial time, claims consultant’s fees 30 (if any), 

etc. 

Further guidance on the recoverability of the 

instant head of claim entitlement can be elicited from 

The Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption 

Protocol 2002 which stipulates: 

“1.20.l Most construction contracts provide that 

the contractor may only recover the cost, 

loss and/or expense it has actually incurred 

and that this be demonstrated or proved 

by documentary evidence. The Contractor 

should not be entitled to additional costs for 

the preparation of the information, unless it 

can show that it has been put to additional 

cost as a result of the unreasonable actions 

or inactions of the Contract Administrator 

in dealing with the Contractor’s claim. 

Similarly, unreasonable actions or inactions 

by the Contractor in prosecuting its claim 

should entitle the Employer to recover its 

costs. The Protocol may be used as a guide 

as to what is reasonable or unreasonable.” 

It should be noted that the Protocol stipulates the 

reasonableness or unreasonableness of the actions or 

inactions of the parties as the principal criteria for the 

success or failure of recovery. Interestingly, it gives 

the employer corresponding rights of reimbursement 

against a dilatory contractor; a significant deviation 

from conventional practice in the industry which 

generally favours the contractor’s position. Anticipating 

problems expected in establishing the core issue of 

reasonableness or unreasonableness, the Protocol 

adopts the bold step of offering its relevant provisions 

as a basis of reaching such a decision. 

The Form of the Claim 31 

Quite apart from the satisfaction of the legal basis 

of the claim and its attendant procedural requirements, 

it is pertinent for the claim to be presented in a form 

that enables the assessor to easily comprehend the 

case stated so as to be able to form a considered 

decision in an expeditious manner. The particular 

form the claim is to eventually take is dictated by a 

number of factors; the principal ones of which include 

the nature, complexity and the claimant’s preference. 

This matter has been endorsed to the following effect 

by the English Court of Appeal in GMTC Tools & 

Equipment Ltd. v Yuasa Warwick Machinery Ltd. 

(formerly Warwick Mechanic Tools Ltd.) 32 where 

Lord Justice Leggat stated: 

“….. the plaintiffs 33 should be permitted to formulate 

their claims for damages as they wish, and not be 

forced into a straightjacket of the judge’s or their 

opponent’s choosing …..” 

In the construction industry, the most common forms 

of claims are the so-called “particularised” type and 

“global” claims. A “particularised” claim is one which 

comes in the form of a ‘de facto’ formal pleading i.e. 

it is fully particularized and formulated such that it 

meets the basic purpose of pleadings as underlined 

in British Airways Pension Trustees Ltd. v Sir Robert 

McAlpine & Sons Ltd. 34 , that is “to enable the 

opposing party to know what case is being made in 

sufficient detail to enable that party properly to answer 

it”. A fundamental characteristic of such a claim is 

that a proper nexus or linkage between the cause of 

each head of the claim and its effect is established, 

e.g. delay giving rise to extra preliminaries, etc. On 

the other hand, a “global” claim 35 is a claim that is 

neither particularised nor formally pleaded. It is one 

where no nexus or linkage is established between the 

cause of the alleged complaint and its effect i.e. the 

redress sought. The assessor is then left with the task 

of unravelling the actual apportionment of the total 

extra costs claimed. 

Despite the flexibility being given to the claimant 

in deciding on the ultimate form of its claim, it should 

be noted that each of the above listed forms of claims 

is suitable for a specific application only and should 

it be found unsuitable for the particular circumstances 

in question, the claim may be compromised to 

30. See James Longley & Co. Ltd. v South West Regional 

Health Authority (1984) 25 BLR 56 where the part or 

the claims consultant’s fees in respect of work done in 

preparing the claimant’s case for arbitration was allowed 

by the Court. 

31. See Ir. Harbans Singh K.S. “Engineering and Construction 

Contracts Management: Post Commencement Practice” at 

p 873 to 877. 

32. (1995) 44 Con LR 68. 

33. i.e. the claimants. 

34. (1995) 45 Con LR. 

35. also called “unparticularised” claims or “rolled-up” claims 

or “composite” claims.


THE INGENIEUR 

the detriment of the claimant. Therefore, it is 

prudent for the claimant to ensure that the claim 

is formulated in the form that is suitable for the 

particular application 36 . Guidance may be sought 

from The Society of Construction Law Delay and 

Disruption Protocol 2002 which states: 

“1.14.1 The not uncommon practice of 

contractors making composite or global 

claims without substantiating cause and 

effect is discouraged by the Protocol 

and rarely accepted by the courts. 

1.14.2 If the Contractor has made and 

maintained accurate and complete 

records, the contractor should be able 

to establish the causal link between the 

Employer Risk Event and the resultant 

loss and/or expense suffered, without 

the need to make a global claim. 

1.14.3 In what should only be rare cases 

where the financial consequences of 

the various causes of compensation 

are impossible to distinguish, so that 

an accurate apportionment of the 

compensation claimed cannot be made 

between the various causative events; 

then in this rare situation it is acceptable 

to quantify individually those items of 

the claim which can be dealt with in 

isolation and claim compensation for 

the remainder as a composite whole. 

1.14.4 The Contractor will nevertheless need to 

set out the details of the Employer Risk 

Events relied on and the compensation 

claimed with sufficient particularity so 

that the employer knows the case that 

is being made against it”. 

Hence, no matter how tempting it is for the 

claimant 37 to opt for a global claim, as the said 

Protocol aptly advises, unless the claimant can bring 

itself within the rare situation illustrated by the Protocol, 

it will be incumbent for a particularised form to be 

finally adopted. Eventually it may be necessitated 

by the rules of natural justice which in the quest of 

ensuing fairness requires the claimant to spell out its 

case with sufficient particularity 38 for the opposing 

party to answer. 

CONCLUSION 

Be that as it may, direct loss and/or expense claims 

have featured and will continue to feature in most 

engineering and construction contracts. These simply 

cannot be avoided; perhaps at the best minimized. A 

prudent approach would be to reduce their incidence 

at the very inception stage. For this the contract 

documents must be accurate and clear in terms of 

scope responsibilities and risk allocation. Should 

claims still arise, these should then be appropriately 

and timeously managed before they get blown-up into 

full fledged disputes attracting arbitration or litigation 

for their resolution. Hence, one should be mindful 

of the fact that at all stages of the claim process i.e. 

inception, formulation, assessment and resolution; 

professionalism should be exercised by all parties. 

The current practice of unnecessary ‘chest-beating’ 

and ‘arm-twisting’ should be avoided at all cost as 

this smacks of pure unprofessionalism. If Malaysians 

are to move in tandem with other jurisdictions, then 

international norms should be adhered to, and a more 

professional approach need to be followed; failing 

which the tendency to operate within the cocoon 

of one’s own making will handicap the industry in 

future. BEM 

REFERENCES 

Andrew B.L. Phang, Chesire, Fifoot and Furmston’s Law of 

Contract (2 nd Edn.), Butterworths. 

Carnell, N.J., Causation and Delay In Construction Disputes 

(2 nd Edn.), Blackwell Publishing. 

Chappell, D., Building Contract Dictionary [4 th Edn.], 

Blackwell Publishing. 

Chappell, D., Marshall, D., V P-Smith and S. Cavender 

Building Contract Dictionary [3 rd Edn.], Blackwell 

Publishing. 

Chow Kok Fong, Law and Practice of Construction 

Contracts, (3 rd Edn.), Thomson/Sweet & Maxwell Asia. 

Davison, P., Evaluating Contract Claims, Blackwell 

Publishing. 

Ir. Harbans Singh K.S., Engineering and Construction 

Contracts Management, Lexis/Nexis. 

Knowles, R., 150 Contractual Problems and Their Solutions 

(2 nd End.), Blackwell Publishing. 

Pickavance, K (1997), Delay and Disruption in Construction 

Contracts Informa Publishing Group. 

Sundra Rajoo, The Malaysian Standard Form of Building 

Contract (2 nd Edn.), Malayan Law Journal. 

The Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption 

Protocol 2002, SCL. 

36. See Judge Lloyd’s guiding principles in Benhard’s Rugby 

Landscapes Ltd. v Stockley Park Consortium Ltd. (1997) 

82 BLR 39 and John Doyle Construction Ltd. v Laing 

Management (Scotland) Ltd. [2004] 24 BLISS 10; [2004] 

BLR 25. 

37. for reasons of costs, saving in documentation, etc. 

38. See also Carnell, N. “Causation and Delay in Construction 

Disputes” (2 nd End.) at p 149.

38 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Wet Market Waste To 

Value-Added Products 

By Dr. P. Agamuthu, Institute of Biological Sciences, University Malaya 

Continuous economic growth 

for past two decades in 

Malaysia has improved the 

standard of living and this has 

turned the nation into a consumer 

society with the consequence of 

continuous increase in municipal 

waste generation. Currently 

the total amount of municipal 

solid waste (MSW) had reached 

approximately 19,100 tonnes daily, 

which translate into 1.3 kg of MSW 

daily per person. At this rate of 

MSW generation, the population 

growth will result in 3% average 

increase in total MSW generated 

annually. 

Th e q u a n t i t y o f M S W 

generated in past decade in 

various states in Malaysia is 

shown in Figure 1. States with 

large urban areas like Selangor 

and Kuala Lumpur generate the 

highest amount of MSW. 

Several studies also suggest 

that of the total MSW collected 

currently, less than 4% is recycled 

and the remainder is disposed in 

landfill sites. Among the factors 

that contribute to the low rate 

of recycling is that more than 

half of the MSW contains food 

and other organic waste which 

has limited recycling potential. 

Figure 2 illustrates the waste 

composition generated from 1975 

to 2006, indicating the high 

organic content in MSW. 

In Malaysia, there are small 

incinerators in some municipalities 

but in most places incineration is 

not done. Therefore, the majority 

of the waste generated is then land 

filled. In 2005 there were about 

170 landfills in Malaysia and almost 

80% of these would have been 

full by end of 2005. With land 

becoming more expensive and with 

‘Not in my backyard syndrome’ 

(NIMBY Syndrome), finding and 

operating sanitary landfills are 

becoming a problem for the state 

and federal Governments. With 

stringent environmental regulations 

and awareness, land filling MSW is 

also becoming a challenging task for 

Waste Generation (tonnes) 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

municipalities and concessionaries. 

Furthermore, many landfills in 

operation are without pre-treatment 

and other direct and indirect 

resource recovery facilities. This is 

not only applicable to household 

waste which generally is highly 

mixed, but also to industrial waste 

of homogenous nature. Since 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Year 

Figure 1: Trend in waste generation from 1996 to 2006 

Waste percentage (%) 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2003 2006 

Year 

Johor 

Kedah 

Kelantan 

Melaka 

Negeri Sembilan 

Pahang 

Perak 

Perlis 

Pulau Pinang 

Selangor 

Terengganu 

Kuala Lumpur 

Figure 2: Malaysian MSW composition generated from 1975 to 2006 

Organic 

Paper 

Plastic 

Glass 

Metal 

Textile 

Wood 

Others

THE INGENIEUR FEATURE 39 

Highly mixed waste in the waste collection bin at the market place 

organic waste forms the large bulk 

of the MSW, generating resource 

recovery options for managing this 

waste would contribute positively 

to overall waste management of 

MSW. 

Market Waste Management 

One of the obvious sources 

of organic waste is from the 

wet markets. Wet market waste 

contributes approximately 3.5% 

of the total waste generated in 

Sorting of waste at the loading bay 

Malaysia. In line with the concept 

of sustainable development 

proposed by UNEP, more focus had 

been directed at the possibility of 

converting waste into value-added 

products. 

Past Practice 

In the 60s and 70s, the amount 

of waste generated was much 

lower and more homogenous. 

These wastes were widely used 

as animal feed. However, with 

the generous utilization of plastic 

by the commercial sector since 

1980s, market wastes became 

more heterogeneous where waste 

sorting is no longer a convenient 

and easy practice. This had stopped 

the earlier practice of market waste 

conversion to animal feed. Since 

then, the market waste has always 

been disposed directly into landfills. 

Increased awareness among the 

public and corporate bodies had 

envisioned the idea of managing 

the environment in a friendlier 

manner. The approximately 670 

tonnes of organic wet market waste 

from MSW is becoming a popular 

candidate for resources recovery 

activities replacing direct disposal 

practice. Composting is a viable 

option. 

Among the most prominent 

bodies which had taken the 

effort to improve the unfriendly 

waste management to ‘greener’ 

technology is Perbadanan Kemajuan 

Pertanian Selangor (PKPS), a 

daughter company of Perbadanan 

Kemajuan Negeri Selangor. Past 

practice required the agro-waste 

generated to be sent to landfill 

for disposal. Realizing the nonenvironment 

friendly method 

of market waste disposal, they 

established a composting plant in 

Seri Kembangan to handle waste 

from the Selangor Wholesale 

Market. Approximately 15 tonnes 

of organic waste is generated daily. 

The composting system diverts 

approximately 90% of the total 

waste into a value-added product, 

i.e. compost. 

Biological Treatment 

Composting provides various 

positive outcomes including the 

simplicity in required technology, 

environmental friendliness, cost and 

many other benefits (Agamuthu, 

2001). Composting reduces and 

stabilizes the waste and converts 

it into hygienic and safe products 

which add economic value to the 

final product.

40 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Compost heap after mixing 

Compost ready for shredding and packaged products 

Composting of organic materials 

generates carbon dioxide and 

water and up to 75% of the 

organic material can be potentially 

converted resulting in almost 

50% reduction in total weight. 

At the composting site, organic 

wastes were mixed with other 

additives such as goat manure, 

chicken dung and other organic 

sources available. The waste 

and additive combination were 

thoroughly mixed prior to windrow 

application. 

The compost heap needs 

to be turned occasionally to 

remove excess moisture content. 

Temperature was monitored 

on a daily basis. The common 

temperature profile obtained is 

depicted in Figure 3. 

From Figure 3, four distinctive 

stages can be identified, namely: 

(1) Mesophilic stage – within two 

days where an active breakdown 

of organic components occurrs 

with increase in temperature 

Temperature ( 0 C) 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

0 

6 

12 

18 

24 

30 

time (days) 

Figure 3: Temperature profile of the composting process 

(50-55 o C) by the mesophilic 

organisms. 

(2) Thermophilic stage – the 

chemical oxidation stage 

where temperature rises to 

approximately 70 o C causing the 

death of temperature sensitive 

organisms. 

(3) Second Mesophilic stage 

- the cooling stage where 

the temperature is reduced 

gradually, and 

(4) Maturation stage - the nearcompletion 

stage where organic 

materials are broken down and 

composting organisms are 

dying off. 

Compost Quality 

Factors that affect the rate 

of composting are the nutrient 

balance (C/N), surface area, 

moisture content, supply of oxygen 

and temperature. The compost 

generated can be applied onto land 

as organic fertilizer as the oxygen 

demand of the products would have 

a six fold reduction and a lower 

C/N ratio. The compost production 

rate depends greatly on the method 

used. Compost produced from 

municipal solid waste generally 

contains approximately 1% of NPK 

where these components were 

released gradually for plant uptake. 

The nutrient level of the compost 

36 

42 

48


Table 1: Nutrient level of compost at the initial and final stage 

generated from market waste is 

shown in Table 1. 

The compost may also contain 

trace elements essential for plant 

growth such as Mn, Cu, Bo and 

Mo. These elements can also 

improve the ion exchange capacity 

of the soil. 

Commercialisation 

Parameters Value 

Initial C/N 44.2 

Final C/N 17.6 

N:P:K:Mg 17:3:1:1 

Implementation of composting 

activities in one of the major 

wholesale fresh markets in Selangor 

paved the way for compost 

commercialisation. Currently, the 

demand for the product from the 

composting plant owned by PKPS 

is beyond the ability to supply 

due to the limited raw material 

in the market place. However, 

more composting plants are 

proposed to be established in 

other PKPS fresh market facilities. 

The high demand generally comes 

from the agricultural sector, 

particularly from vegetable farms 

and plantations. 

Future Potential 

Evidently there is a huge potential 

in composting of organic waste 

with the increase in environmental 

awareness. The tendency to utilize 

more environmental friendly 

products such as compost as 

organic fertilizer may soon replace 

or reduce the need for inorganic 

fertilizer. 

Conclusion 

The conversion of market 

waste into compost is a ‘greener 

technology’. Besides the fact that 

the option reduced and diverted 

waste from the main MSW stream 

from being disposed into landfill, it 

proved to be reasonably good raw 

material for organic fertiliser. BEM 

ACknoWledgeMenT 

Sincere thanks to Dr Abdul Aziz 

Abdul Raman and Ms Fauziah 

Shahul Hamid for editorial 

assistance.

42 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Sustainable Solid Waste Management: 

Incorporating Life Cycle Assessment 

As A Decision Support Tool 

By Dr. Sumiani Yusoff, Programme Coordinator Environmental Engineering, 

Department of Civil Engineering, Universiti Malaya. 

With a world population 

growth rate of 1.5% 

a n d r a p i d u r b a n 

development, problems of water 

and air pollution and disposal 

of sewage and solid wastes will 

inevitably be severe. However, 

of these problems, the improper 

management of municipal solid 

waste is most notorious, and it 

constitutes a growing concern for 

cities in developing nations. Unlike 

air and water wastes, solid wastes 

problem is persistent and will 

not just disappear. Unfortunately, 

they stay for a relatively long time 

before getting biodegraded, and 

some of them like plastics are 

known to be non-biodegradable, 

remaining as rubbish for over a 

hundred years. 

Malaysia is a developing country 

that has recorded phenomenal 

Dump site 

economic development Whilst 

economic growth has brought 

prosperity, it has started to impose 

costs of pollution and degradation 

of its environment. The rapid 

transition of the economy has 

started to take its toll in the forms 

of deteriorating quality of air, 

water and land. Today, solid waste 

is one of the biggest environmental 

problems in Malaysia (Hassan, 

1991 and Nasir et al., 1995). 

The amount of waste generated 

continues to increase in response 

to rapid population increase and 

accelerated urbanisation and 

industrialisation. 

Management of the increasing 

quantities of solid waste is not 

unique to Malaysia but a global 

environmental issue. The issue is not 

only the increasing quantities but 

also the inadequate management 

system. In general, there is a lack of 

organisation and planning in waste 

management due to insufficient 

information about regulations 

and financial restrictions in many 

developing countries. Primarily, 

the target of municipal solid waste 

management (MSWM) is to protect 

the health of the population, 

promote environmental quality, 

develop sustainability, and provide 

support to economic productivity. 

To meet these goals, sustainable 

solid waste management systems 

must be embraced fully by the 

authorities in collaboration with 

both the public and private sectors. 

Although in developing countries 

the quantity of solid waste generated 

in urban areas is low compared to 

industrialized countries, the MSWM 

still remains inadequate. Reports 

estimate many local authorities in


developing countries spend over 

30% of their budgets on refuse 

collection and disposal but can 

only collect at most 50–70% MSW 

(Matrix, 1993). 

Malaysian Waste Scenario 

In 2006, Malaysia generated 

more then six million tones of 

solid waste of which a quarter was 

produced in the Klang Valley alone, 

the most affluent area in Malaysia. 

In 1995, per capita generation 

rates averaged 0.77 kg/capita/day, 

but these rates have increased 

steadily to about 1kg/capita/day 

as the Malaysian economy grew. 

Some urban areas in the country 

have already generated MSW as 

high as 1.2 kg per person per 

day substantially close to the 

major high income economies. 

(Jamal Othman, 2002). An average 

generation rate increase of 4% 

is predicted (2.5% attributed to 

population increase, 1.5% due to 

increase of waste production per 

capita). Kuala Lumpur and Selangor 

produced 7,922 tons/day in 2000, 

and this will increase to 11,728 

tons/day in 2010. For the states 

of Negeri Sembilan, Melaka and 

Johor, waste generated for 2000 

was 2,633 tons/day and 3,539 

tons/day are expected by 2015. It 

has been estimated that the average 

Tonnes of waste at dump site 

Klang Valley resident produced 

1.56 kg of garbage every day in 

1998, enough to fill all 88 floors of 

the Twin Towers in nine days. 

Constraints 

Like most developing countries, 

solid waste landfill sites in Malaysia 

are mostly practicing either open 

dumping or controlled dumping 

because proper sanitary landfill 

concepts are not fully implemented 

due to technological and financial 

constraints (MHLG, 1990). There 

are about 177 disposal sites in 

Peninsular Malaysia. In most cases, 

open dumping is being practiced 

and takes place at about 50% of 

the total landfills. In the Seventh 

Malaysia Plan (1995-2000), the 

federal Government had spent 

RM20.9 million to build nine 

sanitary landfills and upgraded 27 

existing landfills in 34 municipalities. 

(Malaysia Country Report, 2001). 

Solid waste management is a major 

challenge for municipal and local 

authorities, constituting some 40– 

70% of their operating budgets. For 

example, in 1998, the PJ Municipal 

council spent RM1.8 million a 

month for waste management, 

40% of its operating budget. With 

the volume increasing solid waste 

management merits urgent attention 

(Nik Mohd. Maseri, 2005) 

Plastics waste 

The generation of solid wastes 

presents challenges to solid waste 

managers and town and country 

planners, due to lack of available 

landfill space, significant increases 

in collection and disposal facilities 

and functions, and manpower 

needed to manage them. (Nik 

Mohd, 2005). The majority of dump 

sites in Malaysia have no leachate 

or gas management facilities, 

and no daily earth covering of 

the piles, so they are leaching 

chemicals into the ground water, 

poisoning the air with toxic gases 

and generally being health hazards. 

To compound the problem, most of 

the dumpsites are almost full. (Nik 

Mohd. Maseri, 2005) 

Sustainable Waste 

Management 

There is growing concern 

over the environmental impact of 

non-sanitary landfill and landfill 

operation; insufficient collection 

and inappropriate disposal of solid 

wastes giving rise to land, water 

and air pollution which poses 

harm to the environment as well 

as human health. Besides public 

health and safety, another concern 

is sustainable development. For 

sustainable development, municipal 

solid waste management has to be 

balanced between environmental 

effectiveness, economic affordability

44 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Figure 1: Elements of Life Cycle Assessment 

and social acceptability to ensure 

the quality of life now and in 

coming generations. Concerning 

the environmental sustainability 

of MSW management systems, 

energy and resource conservation 

and reduced environmental impact 

are desirable. To evaluate the 

performance of MSW management 

systems, the holistic approach 

and methodology of life cycle 

assessment (LCA) can be adopted 

as a useful tool for sustainability. 

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) 

Life cycle assessment has been 

defined as a technique for assessing 

the environmental aspects and 

potential impact associated with a 

product, by compiling an inventory 

of relevant inputs and outputs of 

a product system; evaluating the 

potential environmental impact 

associated with those inputs and 

outputs; and interpreting the results 

of the inventory analysis and impact 

assessment phases in relation to the 

objectives of the study. LCA is a 

methodology considering the entire 

life cycle of products and services 

from raw material acquisition 

through production, use, and 

disposal (cradle to grave). It is thus 

a holistic assessment methodology 

of products and services. LCA 

is increasingly being used as a 

supportive tool by Governments, 

companies, and NGOs. LCA has 

been proven to be a valuable tool 

to document the environmental 

considerations that need to be 

part of decision making towards 

sustainability. The methodology 

of LCA can be described by four 

inter-related phases, namely goal 

Incinerators 

and scope definition, inventory 

analysis, impact assessment, and 

interpretation. (See Figure 1) 

LCA For Sustainable 

Waste Management 

LCA has been successfully 

utilized in the field of solid 

waste management to assess 

environmental impact of solid 

waste management systems. Using 

LCA, a MSW management system 

is evaluated based on a system 

wide or life cycle perspective. 

A system that generates energy, 

such as incineration with energy 

r e c ove r y, i s c r e d i t e d w i t h 

reducing the amount of energy 

(and the associated resource 

use and emissions) that would 

otherwise need to be generated, 

typically at a power plant. If 

MSW management systems are 

compared in isolation without 

accounting for the systemwide 

environmental impact, 

referred in the study as a direct 

activity consideration, such a 

limited perspective may not 

provide a complete picture of 

environmental impact. 

LCA has a lot to offer in terms 

of selection and application 

of suitable MSW management 

techniques, technologies, and


programmes to achieve specific 

waste management objectives and 

goals. Thus, several agencies such 

as waste managers, local authorities 

or the central Government use LCA 

as a tool for municipal solid waste 

management to compare waste 

management alternatives such as 

recycling, incineration or landfill. 

The International Expert Group on 

Life Circle Assessment for Integrated 

Waste Management established in 

1998 is an example of a forum to 

support the development of LCA 

techniques for waste management. 

There are many models currently 

used by the members of the 

International Expert Group on Life 

Circle Assessment for Integrated 

Waste Management to address 

the environmental aspects and 

potential environmental impact (e.g. 

resource use and environmental 

c o n s e q u e n c e s o f r e l e a s e s ) 

REFERENCES 

throughout a waste management 

system from raw material acquisition 

through production, use, end-of-life 

treatment and disposal (i.e. cradleto-grave). 

Conclusion 

LCA is one of several techniques 

of environmental management 

which can be successfully applied 

to municipal solid waste (MSW) 

management systems to identify 

the overall environmental burden 

and to assess the potential 

environmental impact. A sustainable 

waste management system entails 

using a life cycle perspective that 

can give a complete picture of 

the environmental performances 

of MSW management systems 

to aid decision making and 

enhance its management. Thus, 

life cycle assessment could serve 

as an invaluable tool for assessing 

environmental sustainability of 

waste management systems, single 

as well as integrated ones. An 

integrated waste management 

system based on different waste 

management technologies, would 

be more efficient than a single 

option such as incineration or 

landfilling for economical and 

environmental viability. 

With the pressure mounting 

to solve waste problems in the 

country, the LCA methodology can 

assist in identifying opportunities 

to improve the environmental 

performance of waste management 

systems, giving decision-makers in 

industry, Governmental or non- 

Governmental organisations tools 

for sustainable strategic planning, 

priority setting and selection of 

relevant indicators of environmental 

performance. BEM 

Franke M., McDougall, F., 1999. Integrated waste management: LCA and its practical use. European Recovery and 

Recycling Association. In: Proceedings of: First International Conference on Waste Minimization and Recycling, 

May 3-4, 1999, Buenos Aires. 

Hassan, 1991 Hassan, M.N., 1991. The criteria for economic evaluation of waste disposal projects in Malaysia. 

In: Proceedings of EURO-American Experience and Malaysian Requirements in Solid Waste Management, Kuala 

Lumpur 

ISO, 2000 ISO, International Organization of Standardization, 14040 Series environmental management, Geneva, 

Switzerland (2000). 

Jamal Othman, Household Preferences for Solid Waste Management in Malaysia, December 2002. 

Lee and George, 2000 Environmental assessment in developing and transitional countries, Wiley, Chichester 

(2000) 

Matrix, 1993 Matrix Development Consultants, 1993. Nairobi’s Informal Settlements: An Inventory, Office of 

Housing and Urban Development Programmes, USAID 

MHLG, 1990 Ministry of Housing and Local Government (MHLG), 1990. Technical Guideline on Sanitary Landfill- 

Design and Operation (Draft). Technical Section of the Local Government Division, Kuala Lumpur. 

Mid-Term Review of the Eight Malaysia plan 2001 – 2005, Chapter 13 – Sustainable development. 

Nasir et al., 1995 H. Nasir, H. Nurlaily, A.R. Rakmi, I. Zamri and R. Saifullah, Existing solid waste management 

and problems in Malaysia, Privatisation of solid waste management in Malaysia, Tabung Haji Technologies, Kuala 

Lumpur (1995). 

Nik Mohd Maseri, Position Paper on Solid Wastes and Incinerators, October 26, 2005.

46 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Waste Management In 

The Plastics Industry 

By Malaysian Plastics Manufacturer Association 

The Malaysian plastics industry 

practices the reuse of plastics 

waste as part of its efforts 

to minimize waste, therefore the 

various types and handling methods 

of plastics waste has a bearing on the 

eventual re-usage of these wastes. 

Recycled plastics are developed 

into many household and industry 

products like tables, chairs and pails. 

Recycled plastics are not used in 

food contact applications. 

Classification of plastics wastes 

in Malaysia 

Plastics wastes in Malaysia are 

divided into two major groups 

– post-consumer (household waste) 

and post-industrial wastes (industry 

or factory waste), which is classified 

into five different groups. Table 1 

showcases the various classes of 

plastics waste, its source and its 

reuse factors. 

Plastics waste ready for recycling 

Disposal of plastics waste based 

on classification 

Post-industrial wastes originates 

from moulders, converters, packers 

and resin manufacturers. It is usually 

clean and easy to identify because it 

is from a single source. 

In Malaysia, most injection 

moulding converters and film 

converters have in-house recycling 

and recycle their scraps by using 

granulators or mechanical recycling. 

The crushed materials are then 

used up immediately by mixing 

with virgin resin of the same type. 

Plastics manufacturers who don’t 

have their own crusher and extruder 

facilities to recycle these wastes 

sell their scrapes to recyclers for 

reprocessing. 

Post-consumer wastes referred to 

as wastes from discarded consumer 

items - is a mixture of plastics and 

consist of a wide variety of resins 

which are usually contaminated in 

nature. These wastes are separated 

manually and then crushed into 

flakes before washing and drying. 

The flakes are then pelletized. 

Diagram 1 highlights the various 

treatment of plastics waste: 

RECYCLING 

● Recycling and recovery activities 


Plastics recycling enable reuse 

and reproduction of other products 

that extends the life-cycle of the 

material resource. In Malaysia, 

mechanical or conventional 

recycling is widely practised by 

the industry and large volumes of 

plastics wastes or rejects are being 

reused by blending with virgin 

plastic material to produce new, 

useful and marketable products. 

Most plastics injection moulding 

moulders recycle their scraps by 

using granulators or mechanical 

recycling. 

● Types of recycling practised 


At present, there are three main 

methods in the management of 

plastic wastes, besides land filling: 

1. Mechanical recycling 

2. Feedstock recycling 

3. Energy recovery 

Conventional recycling (mechanical 

recycling) is successfully practised 

by recycling companies which 

collect industrial scrap and reprocess 

them through activities of sorting, 

cleaning and repelletising using an 

extruder to produce uniform pellets. 

It is then sold to the plastics industry 

for production of new products. 

But the plastics recycling industry


Table 1 

Classification 

of waste 

Post-Industrial 

Primary Industrial 

Wastes 

Well-Defined 

Industrial And 

Agricultural Waste 

Long-Life Building 

and Automotive 

Waste 

Post-consumer 

Mixed consumer 

wastes 

Short-Life 

Application Waste 

is still experiencing limited success 

due to the limited domestic supply 

of post-consumer plastics. There 

is also the difficulty in segregating 

plastics waste as the use of labelling 

of plastics products is not widely 

practised. In addition to that, there 

is a poor domestic demand and few 

economic incentives to encourage 

the growth of the recycled plastic 

market. 

M e c h a n i c a l r e c y c l i n g i s 

limited by the low purity of the 

wastes and the limited market for 

recycled products. Furthermore, 

recycled polymers have commercial 

applications only when the plastics 

waste have been subjected to 

a previous separation by resin; 

Source Reuse factors 

Resin production of PS and PVC that supplies mainly 

reactor sludge and crusts discarded products 

Granulated and primary processing which supplies raw 

materials coming from processing machinery cleaning 

operations or from certain processing phases (such as 

resin or colour changes) as well as plastics that cannot be 

recycled during processing 

Secondary procreating: scraps from mouldings, lamination 

and thermoforming processors 

InduSTRy 

Sacks and drums from the chemical industry (mainly 

HdPE, PP and PVC), plastic containers and synthetic fibre 

scraps from the textile industry (polyamide and polyesters) 

packaging boxes for bottle handling and transport, shrink 

film from the industrial and food industry, cable insulation 

sheaths. (PVC and PE) 

AGRICulTuRE 

Mulch film in plantations and farm areas, fertilisers, sacks, 

nets and boxes 

Mainly water tanks (glass reinforced polyester resins), 

pipes and fittings (PVC), electrical switches (thermosetting 

resins), water cisterns (PS/PP), light diffuses (PS) and wall 

papers (PVC) 

Old and discarded consumer items such as house ware, 

appliances, toys, furniture, PVC sheets, diapers, packaging 

items, shoes, etc 

Plastic products classified under this category include 

consumer packaging and disposable items such as 

shopping bags, food wrappers, bottles and containers 

(PVC/EPS), etc 

and recycled plastics wastes can 

only be used in undemanding 

applications. 

Landfill/ 

Treatment/ 

Incineration/RDF 

Post-Industrial 

waste 

In-house 

Recycling 

Medium to good quality and a relatively 

homogeneous composition making it economically 

viable for recycling 

An important resource for recycling business. 

Traditionally used for the processing of lower 

value-added products such as shoe soles, knee-tops, 

sandals, agriculture nursery and rubbish trash bags 

Contaminated and in order to recover and reclaim 

them, it is necessary to use more complex recycling 

machines thus considered to be time-consuming and 

non-economical in terms of operation procedures, 

waste collection and separation problems. 

used for the processing of lower value-added 

products 

used for the processing of lower value-added 

products. However, newer technologies are able to 

produce new PET bottles from recycled PET bottles 

Total plastics waste 

discharge in 

Malaysia 

Diagram 1: Flowchart of plastic waste in Malaysia 

Feedstock recycling is a process 

that breaks down polymer molecule 

into petrol chemical feedstock or 

Post-Consumer 

waste 

Incineration/ 

RDF Recycling Landfill

48 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

products that can be used to make 

new plastics of high quality, whereas 

energy recovery is a self-combustion 

of plastics waste to recover plasticsderived 

fuel as energy for electricity 

and power-generation. 

Energy recovery is a process where 

plastics waste is used as a fuel 

source to generate heat or electricity 

with pollution control equipment 

to regulate the emission of dioxins 

and other chemicals within the 

permitted levels. 

Other forms of recycling 

such as feedstock recycling and 

energy recovery is still lacking in 

Malaysia because of the high capital 

investment involved. 

RECYCLING EFFORTS 

IN MALAYSIA AND THE 

MALAYSIAN PLASTICS 

CODING SYSTEM 

To improve the quality of 

plastics recycling in Malaysia, new 

standards and guidelines have been 

Plastics Coding System 

introduced. One of these efforts 

is the Coding System for Plastic 

Products that is initiated by MPMA’s 

Plastics Waste Management Task 

Force. Through the use of a resin 

identification code, the recovery 

of plastic products/components is 

made easier. The Malaysian Plastics 

Coding System – endorsed by SIRIM 

- is a Malaysian standard under 

MS 1405:1996, and consists of 10 

different codes for easy identification 

of plastics waste. In this way, 

recyclers and collectors can ensure 

that the recycled plastics are as 

homogenous (pure) as possible to 

meet the needs of the market. 

● Brief History 

Recycling of post-consumer 

plastics packaging began in the early 

1980s in the form of mechanical 

recycling (initiated to recycled used 

PET bottles). This form of recycling 

involved the sorting of collected 

plastics according to polymer type 

and/or colour by manual labour. 

now, technology is being introduced 

to sort plastics automatically, using 

various techniques such as X-ray, 

fluorescence, infrared and near 

infrared spectroscopy, electrostatics 

and flotation. Once the plastic is 

sorted, it is either melted down 

directly and moulded into a new 

shape, or melted down after being 

shredded into flakes and then 

processed into granules called 

regranulate or pellets. Early in the 

1990s, concern over the perceived 

reduction of landfill capacity spurred 

efforts by legislators to mandate the 

use of recycled materials. This has 

given rise to new technologies that 

could reuse even contaminated 

plastics, such as feedstock recycling 

and chemical recycling. 

● The Malaysian Plastics 

Coding System 

The coding system was drafted 

and completed in 1996 to facilitate 

the identification and segregation of 

plastics for recycling, thus making


it easier for recyclers to identify 

and separate plastics for recycling. 

● MS 1405: 1996 definition for 

Coding system for 

plastics products 

This Malaysian Standard specifies 

standard coding system for plastics 

products. The purpose of this 

standard is to provide a system for 

uniform marking of products which 

have been fabricated (excluding 

additives, silk screening, metalblading) 

from polymeric materials. 

This marking system is to provide 

assistance in identification of plastics 

products for making subsequent 

decisions as to handling, disposal 

or recycling. 

● Physical Features 

The symbol consists of a triangle 

of chasing arrows enclosing a 

number above an acronym for 

the designated resin. The symbol 

was designed to enable sorters 

to identify the code quickly and 

easily. 

It should be noted that the 

symbol is designed to identify 

resin material used to create the 

product; the symbol is not an 

indicator or guarantee that the 

product will be recycled. The 

symbol serves as a reminder 

Plastics waste 

that the product is inherently 

recyclable and that the coding 

system makes it easier for the 

product to be recycled at a higher 

value or purity resin. 

The code is to be applied to 

all plastic products produced for 

Malaysia. By aiding recyclers to 

sort plastic products by resin, the 

code will allow recyclers to obtain 

a higher level of ‘pure’ material 

for resale markets. 

● Why is One National System 

Necessary? 

A national coding system is 

necessary to maintain consistency 

throughout both the plastics 

and recycling industries, since 

plastic products are distributed 

nationally throughout all states in 

the country. 

Recyclers must have confidence 

in the system to feel sure that 

the coding symbol means the 

same thing to them as it does to 

the manufacturer who originally 

graded the resin type. 

Introduction of different systems 

would require recyclers to learn 

two or more systems. This would 

add to the difficulty of sorting 

and discourage recyclers from 

attempting to increase the value 

of the material by creating pure 

streams of a single resin. 

● Why does the industry need to 

adopt the system? 

The system is the Malaysian 

plastic industry’s initiative to 

demonstrate its commitment to 

sound environmental policies. 

Realising that recycling is an integral 

part of an ideal waste management 

policy; the system ensures that 

recycling can be achieved in a 

systematic manner. 

note: The coding system for 

recycling is based on the American 

Society of Testing and Material’s 

ASTM D 1972:1991, ‘Standard 

Practice for Generic Marking of 

Plastics Products’ and SPI’s coding 

system (Society of Plastic Industry 

Inc., 1988). 

● How can the Public use the 

Coding System? 

The public can use the system to 

identify materials to facilitate new 

or existing recycling programmes 

in their neighbourhood. It also 

serves as a reminder to the public 

that plastics are recyclable when 

collected and given to recyclers. 

INDUSTRY ORGANISATIONS 

INVOLVED IN RECYCLING 

MPMA Plastics Waste 

Management Taskforce (PWMTF) 

MPMA PWMTF was formed 

in October 1992. It comprises 

interested and involved groups 

from both the private and 

public sectors, including MPMA, 

the Malaysian Petrochemicals 

Association (MPA), the department 

of Environment, SIRIM Berhad, 

Ministry of Housing and local 

Government, Alam Flora Sdn Bhd 

and other related organisations. 

The main objective of the Task 

Force, which is fully supported 

and endorsed by the Government, 

is to manage plastics waste for 

the protection of the environment 

in a responsible manner. The

50 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Plastic containers for recycling 

Task Force is committed towards 

playing a proactive role in setting 

up an effective system of managing 

plastic wastes. The Task Force 

believes in the principle of 

shared responsibility involving the 

plastics industry, the consumers 

and Government authorities, as 

the effective means of creating 

a sustainable waste management 

programme. There are a few subcommittees 

under PWMTF, notably 

the Recyclers Sub-Committee and 

Education and Awareness Sub- 

Committee. 

Malaysian Plastics Forum 

T h e M a l a y s i a n P l a s t i c s 

Forum (MPF) formed in May 

2005 consists of three industry 

associations, namely the Malaysian 

Petrochemicals Association (MPA), 

the Plastics Resins Producers 

Group (PRPG) and the Malaysian 

Plastics Manufacturers Association 

(MPMA). Its objectives are to 

create awareness and education on 

plastics, to implement and execute 

positive media messages and 

handle issues including advocacy 

and trends on plastics to drive the 

4Rs concept for plastics - which 

is recycle, reduce, reuse and 

regeneration. 

Programmes and activities 

undertaken by MPMA and MPF: 

● RTM documentary on Recycling 

in 2005. 

● Press statements on PET bottle 

and PC bottle issues. 

● TV3’s Sure Heboh Carnival in 

2005. 

● national Recycling day in 

2005. 

● C o - o p e r a t i v e e f f o r t w i t h 

t h e M a l a y s i a n I n d u s t r i a l 

development Authority (MIdA) 

on the “proposed banning of 

plastics scraps import” issue in 

2005. 

● Participation in Green Partnership 

Programme (GPP) 2005, a 

joint Malaysia-Japan bilateral 

partnership programme. 

● Press Interview with Berita 

Harian on August 4, 2006 on 

the safety of PET bottles. 

● The Coding System for Plastic 

Products and MPF launch on 

September 16, 2006. 

● Exemption of EIA requirement 

for plastic recyclers starting from 

October 2006. 

● Press statement and press 

conference on the safety of 

HdPE for hot-fill applications in 

november 2006. 

● n a t i o n a l R e c y c l i n g d a y 

exhibition from november 25- 

26, 2006.

✄ 


● AOTS Training Programme 

on Industry and Environment 

Protection for Malaysia: life 

Cycle Assessment (lCA) from 

november 27 to december 8, 

2006 in Tokyo, Japan. 

● A O T S M y E n - 2 T r a i n i n g 

Programme on Industry and 

Environmental Protection for 

Malaysia, from november 26 to 

december 1, 2006, yokohama, 

Japan. 

● ‘Waste Management and 

Recycling – The Japanese 

Perspective’ Seminar and 

Workshop from March 6 to 7, 

2007. 

Asia Plastics Forum Sustainable 

Development Committee 

(APF-SDC) 

With the aim of addressing 

issues relating to plastics and 

the environment faced by the 

plastics industry in Asia, the 

Asia Plastics Forum Sustainable 

development Committee (APF- 

SdC) was formed during the APF 

Council Meeting on March 28, 

2007 in Kuala lumpur, Malaysia 

where this Committee addressed 

issues related to plastics and 

sustainable development through 

technical and advocacy support, 

strategies and programmes. The 

committee consists of plastics 

industry representatives of the 

APF member countries. 

The Asia Plastics Forum (APF) 

which was formed in 1991, 

currently comprises 12 member 

c o u n t r i e s v i z : B a n g l a d e s h ; 

China; India; Indonesia; Japan; 

Malaysia; Myanmar; Philippines; 

Singapore; Sri lanka; Thailand 

and Vietnam. 

It has been established for the 

following objectives: 

● Share and exchange information 

of the plastics industry and 

the country’s economy in the 

Asian region 

● Consider any issues related to 

the plastics industry and assist 

members in providing inputs 

for solutions 

● Foster close business cooperation 

among the plastics 

manufacturers (processors) in 

the Asian region. 

Subscription Form 

The Ingenieur is the official publication of the Board of Engineers Malaysia. The journal provides useful and quality 

information on policy update, accreditation of local and foreign universities, training and courses, safety and health, 

business opportunities and others within the engineering arena. It is published four (4) times a year. To subscribe, please 

complete the following details: 

BlOCK CAPITAlS PlEASE 

name: 

Address: 

Postcode: Country: 

Tel: Fax: E-mail: 

Enclosed is a postal order/cheque no. 

payable to lembaga Jurutera Malaysia. Please fax/mail this 

form to: 

lembaga Jurutera Malaysia, 

Tingkat 17, Ibu Pejabat JKR, Kompleks Kerja Raya Malaysia, 

Jalan Sultan Salahuddin, 50580 Kuala lumpur 

Tel: 03-2698 0590 Fax: 03-2692 5017 

BEM 

yes! I would like to subscribe The Ingenieur for: 

1 year of 4 issues RM30.00 



Others (Please specify) 

(Please tick the appropriate circle) 

Disclaimer 

Although MPMA has endeavoured 

to provide accurate and reliable 

information to the best of its 

abilities, it cannot be held 

liable for any loss or damage 

resulting from interpretation or 

application of this information. 

This information is intended as a 

guide for use at your discretion 

and risk. MPMA cannot guarantee 

favourable results and assumes 

no liability in connection with 

this article.

52 FEATURE 

THE INGENIEUR 

Sanitation 

– The New Paradigm 

Submitted by RS Arun Kumar, Executive Director, World Toilet Organisation 

In September 2000, 147 heads 

of state and Governments, and 

189 nations in total, committed 

themselves to the Millennium 

Development Goals (MDGs). 

The MDGs stand for a renewed 

commitment to overcome persistent 

poverty and address many of the 

most enduring failures of human 

development. Halving ‘by 2015, 

the proportion of people without 

sustainable access to safe drinking 

water and basic sanitation’ is one 

of the targets defined as one of the 

numerical and time-bound targets 

for the MDGs. It has been widely 

recognized that the improvement 

of water supply and sanitation is a 

core element for poverty reduction 

as well as for conflict prevention. 

Around the world, 3.5 million 

deaths are due to diarrhoea and 

other sanitation related diseases 

annually, with 80 % of these 

deaths in children under age five. 

About 2.6 billion people do not 

have access to even a latrine. The 

most important water contaminant 

in developing countries is human 

faeces from improper or no 

sanitation. Despite the fact that 

water and sanitation issues are 

inextricably linked to each other, 

sanitation receives attention much 

less than it deserves. 

ISSUES WITH CONVENTIONAL 

SANITATION PRACTICES 

Sewers and sewage treatment 

systems are considered signs of 

progress, but there is every reason to 

think again. The water-based sewage 

models are designed and built on 

the premise that human excreta are 

a waste suitable only for disposal, 

and that the natural environment is 

capable of assimilating this waste. 

Yet these models have failed to 

solve the sanitation needs for 

developing countries. First comes 

the sewage, along with a mixture 

of undifferentiated industrial and 

household wastes. Then there’s the 

treatment process, which attempts to 

clean the wastewater that the sewage 

contains. During this process, the 

treatment process basically converts 

one form of pollution into another 

(water to land), with varying degrees 

of efficiencies. While it might seem 

safe and convenient to have our 

waste whisked out of sight, we’re 

paying the piper at the end of 

the pipe. Annual investments for 

‘modern’ water and sewer systems 

have been estimated to be US$30 

billion, and by 2025 it may cost 

US$75 billion. 1 This excludes 

the cost of maintenance. Further 

more these treatment systems 

are treating less than 10% of the 

wastewater generated in the world. 

The fact that the other half of the 

world’s population has little or no 

access to sustainable sanitation 

reflects misconceptions about 

conventional sanitation systems 

and what they can and cannot do. 

There is, hence, a strong need to 

move away from linear, expensive 

and energy intensive ‘end-of-thepipe’ 

technologies to sanitation 

based on ecosystem approaches 

and the closure of material flow 

cycle. The development, testing 

and dissemination of alternatives 

to conventional wastewater 

and sewage disposal systems 

are becoming more and more 

indispensable for both economic 

and ecological reasons. 

SUSTAINABLE SANITATION 

S u s t a i n a b l e s a n i t a t i o n 

practices offers an alternative 

to conventional sanitation, and 

attempts to solve some of 

society’s most pressing problems 

– infectious disease spread, 

environmental degradation and 

pollution, and the need to 

recover and recycle nutrients 

for plant growth. In doing so, 

sustainable sanitation helps to 

restore soil fertility, conserve 

freshwater and protect marine 

environments – which are sources 

of water, food and medicinal 

products for people. 

In totality, sanitation systems 

must be sustainable, driven with all 

three goals of sustainability. 

In the social facet, it must 

● Restore dignity to women, men 

and children, giving them social 

security from the problems due 

to open defecation; 

● Realize the importance of 

sanitation, both for dignity as 

well as for better health; 

● Treat toilets, which is a taboo 

subject, more rationally by 

the public through usage of 

environmentally safe toilets; 

and 

● Motivate people to accept 

sanitation practices as part of 

their households. 

In the environmental facet, it 

must 

● Prevent the pollution of ground 

water and land degradation; 

and 

● Encourage reuse of water, after 

treatment, as a resource 

1 WJ Cosgrove and FR Rijsberman, 2000, World Water Vision, Earthscan Publications, 

London.


In the economic facet, it must: 

● Mitigate the cost of treatment 

of groundwater for potable 

or other similar uses; 

● P r o v i d e i n c e n t i v e s b y 

r e s o u rc e r e c ove r y f r o m 

the sanitation waste (in 

the form of energy and 

fertilizers); 

● Increase productivity by 

d e c r e a s e d i n c i d e n t s o f 

diseases; and 

● Reduce medical costs related 

to treatment of diseases 

from improper sanitation. 

Sustainable sanitation systems for the tsunami 

affected communities in Aceh, Indonesia 

World Toilet Organisation (WTO), a non-profit organisation 

established in Singapore in 2001, communicates the need for better 

toilet standards in both the developed and developing economies 

of the world and provides a service platform for all toilet associations, related 

organisations and committed individuals to facilitate an exchange of ideas, 

health and cultural issues. Its vision is - Clean, Safe, Affordable, Ecologically 

Sound and Sustainable Sanitation for Everyone. 

WTO was given the approval on April 27, 2006 to provide sustainable 

sanitation systems for tsunami-affected people of Meulaboh and Banda 

Aceh at 13 locations identified by Indonesia Toilet Association (ATI) and 

Badan Rekonstruksi dan Rehabilitasi (BRR), a body set up to oversee the 

reconstruction and rehabilitation efforts in Aceh and Nias. 

Besides providing the sanitation systems, this project also aims to train 

the locals by showing them how the system is being constructed, so that they 

can construct and maintain the system in future. This million dollar project 

is funded by Tidal Waves Asia fund managed by Singapore Red Cross. 

The 13 locations (11 in Banda Aceh and two in Meulaboh) identified are 

in densely populated areas and communal focal points: schools, mosques, 

kindergarten, orphanages, community centers and town focal points. 

World Toilet College, WTO’s training arm, conducted a capacity building 

training programme on sustainable sanitation to 36 Indonesian engineers, 

architects, contractors and students as part of the project, since WTO believes that 

‘hardware’ and ‘software’ 

must complement to 

each other. This training 

course, for 10 days, was 

at University of Syiah 

Kuala, Banda Aceh. 

Experts from Singapore, 

Germany, Africa, China 

and India conducted 

‘on the job’ training 

including case studies 

and designing of the 

sustainable sanitation 

systems by the trainees. 

Presently, toilets are 

being built using the 

contractors who were earlier trained, and using the designs developed by the 

participants in their case study exercise. The project aims to be completed 

by the end of this year. Also, in this process, WTO also created a lot of 

attention for better sanitation in Aceh, which has resulting in BRR inviting 

WTO as its Technical Advisor for Sanitation in its housing projects and model 

village projects. WTO is planning to also start an Acehnese social enterprise, 

dedicated to sanitation education and awareness building among the local 

communities. 

Jasdam biogas cooking 

F u r t h e r m o r e , p r o v i d i n g 

sustainable sanitation technologies 

for billions of people will require 

replacing the existing engineering 

and financial infrastructure that 

currently supports sewerage with 

one that supports ecological 

innovations in waste treatment. 

WAY FORWARD 

It’s very important to adopt a 

new approach towards sanitation, 

a n d a d d r e s s i n g t h e i s s u e s 

surrounding it in a more holistic 

way. Several ideas to achieve this 

are summarized below: 

● Principles that put source 

separation first in the decisionmaking 

hierarchy; 

● People who approach sanitation 

from both a health and 

ecological perspective; 

● Financing—both private and 

public—to develop production 

and marketing capabilities; 

● Easy access by those who 

want sustainable sanitation 

technologies to those who can 

deliver, install, and maintain 

them; 

● Financial packages to help 

people pay for toilets; and 

● Government policies that 

punish polluters, reward 

ecological innovators, and 

promote and help pay for 

universal sustainable sanitation 

coverage 

We have to always remember 

what Albert Einstein once said 

“we cannot solve problems with 

the same kind of thinking that 

created them.” BEM

54 SURVEY FORM 

THE INGENIEUR 


CUSTOMER SERVICE SURVEY FORM 

Our goal is to provide you with the best possible service and your input is vital to our success. Please help us serve you 

and others better by taking a few minutes to answer the questions below. Thank you for responding. Kindly send this 

form to Executive Director, Board of Engineers Malaysia,17 th Floor, Block F, JKR Headquarters, Jalan Sultan Salahuddin, 

50580 KL or fax to 03-2692 5017. 

Please tick (✓) where applicable: 

A. What was the nature of your contact with us? 

Registration Complaint/Professional Practice Examination/Training 

Accreditation Finance Publication / IT 

General information Other (specify): ………………………………………… 

B. Type of communication 

1. PERSONNEL 

Counter Telephone Email Letter 

ITEMS VERY POOR POOR MODERATE GOOD VERY GOOD 

a. Convincing 

b. Respectful and courteous 

c. Knowledgeable & skillful 

d. Helpful 

e. Friendly & Polite 

f. Overall Service Quality 

2. FACILITIES AND COMMUNICATION (Please tick [✓] where applicable) 


a. Seat 

b. Signage 

c. Cleanliness 

d. Telephone / Facsimile / email 

e. BEM Publication 

f. BEM Website 

3. WAITING TIME FOR SERVICES 


a. New application 

b. Renewal 

c. Others (Please specify) 

4. Suggestion for improvement (if any): 

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...................…… 

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………...................…… 

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...................… 

5. How can we contact you? (if needed) 

Name of individual: ………………………………………………………………………......................……............… 

Address: ……………………………………………………………………………………..................................……… 

………………………………………………………………………………………............................................……… 

Telephone: ………………………………… Email: .………………………………...................……...................

56 ENGINEERING NOSTALGIA 

THE INGENIEUR 

The Lumberjack Team Of The 60s 

Use of pulley system to move big logs, in Johor 

Contributed by Fong Chin

ENGINEERING - Board of Engineers Malaysia

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?