Landfills in Tropical Climates –

Knowledgebase for an Environmentally

Friendly Operation
Edi Munawar. Syiah Kuala University
Anna Kubin, Johann Fellner. Vienna University of Technology

CONTACT

Name: Edi Munawar

E-mail: edi.munawar@tuwien.ac.at

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Until now the largest fraction of municipal solid waste generated is still landfilled. In particular in
developing countries landfilling and dumping represents the only feasible option for final waste
disposal. The emissions associated with the landfilling of waste (leachate and biogas) depend on the
composition of the waste, the climatic conditions as well as the operation of landfills. All three fac-
tors are strongly diverse in tropical countries in comparison to conditions prevailing in most indus-
trialized countries. This represents a major problem, as the vast knowledge about proper design and
operation of landfills has been generated for landfills in industrial countries; knowhow which is due
to the reasons given above only of limited significance for waste disposal sites in tropical climates.
The present paper presents preliminary results of an on-going research project that is aimed at es-
tablishing a knowledge base for the construction and operation of landfills under tropical climatic
conditions. The research is funded by the project grant of the International Solid Waste Association
ISWA and is conducted in cooperation of Vienna University of Technology (Austria) and Syiah
Kuala University (Indonesia).

The knowledge base summarized within the study will consider the specific demand and problems
of tropical landfills. In particular the status quo of landfilling in Indonesia and current efforts con-
cerning the transition of waste disposal practice to sophisticated sanitary landfills are taken into
account as a case study.

Keywords: Landfill; Developing Countries; Tropical climate; Landfill guidelines; Indonesia

INTRODUCTION

On a global scale landfilling still represents the main disposal method for municipal solid waste
(MSW). In particular low and middle income countries are still almost exclusively depending on
landfilling, since it represents by far the cheapest method of waste disposal. However, landfilling
and dumping of waste in many countries is still associated with severe negative impacts on the envi-
ronment (e.g., groundwater pollution, greenhouse gas emissions) and the human health (e.g., land-
fill fires, landslides). Besides the composition of the deposited waste the main factor determining
landfill emissions (and thus the environmental pollution) is quantity of water entering the waste
body. Water is essential for microbial biodegradation and thus for the generation of landfill gas, but
also for the generation of leachate. Hence, the behavior of landfill is strongly dependent on the pre-
vailing climate. Whereas most scientific investigations regarding landfilling have been conducted
for temperate climates (Western Europe, United States) little information about the behavior of
landfills (including their emissions) in tropical climate zones is available at present. However in
order to enable an environmentally friendly operation of landfills, comprehensive knowledge about
the behavior of the landfilled waste is crucial.

The present paper presents preliminary results of an on-going research project that is aimed at es-
tablishing a knowledge base for the construction and operation of landfills under tropical climatic
conditions. The research is funded by the ISWA project grant and conducted by Vienna University
of Technology (Austria) and Syiah Kuala University (Indonesia).

The knowledge base developed within the study will consider the specific demand and problems of
tropical landfills. In particular the status quo of landfilling in Indonesia and current efforts concern-
ing the transition of waste disposal practice to sophisticated sanitary landfills are taken into account
as a case study.

METHODS

The methods applied within the present study include

 literature research addressing landfilling in tropical climates and associated problems as well
as major differences in comparison to landfills in temperature climates,
 a field survey investigating the current status of landfilling in tropical climates (using the
example of Indonesia), and
 an analysis of landfill legislation and its recent development, again using the example of In-
donesia.

In the frame of the literature study research work accomplished in different countries with tropical
climates, namely Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Malaysia, Nigeria, and South Africa have been ana-
lysed. Besides the tropical climate most of those countries are characterized by low to medium eco-
nomic development.

For the field survey a questionnaire was distributed to more than 20 landfill operators in Indonesia,
and information about the design and operation of landfill sites have been collected and evaluated.
Thereby special focus was given to the problem currently encountered by landfill operators.

Subsequently an analysis of landfill legislation in Indonesia has been conducted. It includes a sum-
mary of waste and landfill related acts during the last decades, as well as their main developments
and challenges. In addition driving forces for changes in legislation have been evaluated.

RESULTS

Literature Research
The main publications conducted in the field of landfilling in tropical climates only appeared re-
cently, starting in 2000 and becoming more important in the past few years. Studies cover landfills
in countries like Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, Malaysia, Nigeria, South Africa and Thailand amongst
others. Also different scales of landfills have been taken into account ranging from lysimeter studies
to some of the biggest landfills worldwide. While there are lots of issues related to landfilling in
tropical countries, this research line has a strong focus on emissions from the landfill into the envi-
ronment; mainly leachate emissions into ground- and surface waters and the soil, as well as landfill
gas emissions into the atmosphere have been considered. All of the investigated landfills have
leachate collection systems and most of them also a system for gas collection. This eases scientific
investigation on the amount and the composition of leachate or gas generated but it is, of course, a
strong derivation of the regular case seen in practical operation where 90% of landfills in develop-
ing countries are still operated as open dumpsites (Visvanathan et al. 2004). Therefore, results have
to be carefully interpreted when predicting how observed emissions would adversely affect the en-
vironment in the case of open dumping.

Leachate
The amount of leachate is determined by the water balance of a landfill, and can be calculated as
follows:

Precipitation – Evapotranspiration – Runoff – Leachate +

+Water content of the waste + Recirculated Leachate +/- Storage of Water = 0 (1)

In tropical countries the amount of precipitation is higher than in temperate climates, and, due to
higher temperatures, evapotranspiration also is on an elevated level. In addition the water content of
the waste landfilled is bigger owing to the larger fraction of organic compounds in MSW generated.
Consequently, the water balance of tropical landfills is quite different from landfills in more tem-
perate climates. For the latter annual leachate generation rates are in the range of a few hundred
mm, whereas for landfills in tropical regions leachate amounts far above 1000 mm per year are
common (Ariyawansha et al., 2010; Kortegast et al., 2007). But not only quantities of leachate are
usually quite different, also the seasonal distribution of leachate production.

From the literature review it is quite clear that a significant difference in leachate generation can be
observed between the -Berriel et al. (2008)
determined from bioreactor studies that in the dry season, landfill sites will produce smaller leach-
ate volumes, which likely are more concentrated. In another study from South America, Machado et
al. (2010) noted that during the prolonged dry periods, the generation of leachate was stopped or
strongly reduced owing to a lack of moisture in the waste lysimeters. Furthermore, in the open-
dump cell in their experiments, nearly 70%
Other authors experienced similar outcomes: Tränkler et al. (2001),
Kuruparan et al. (2003), Visvanathan et al. (2002) showed that leachate generation – stopped com-
pletely during the dry season due to low soil moisture levels and started to increase shortly after the
beginning of the rainy season. Associated with the cessation of leachate production also a reduction
in biodegradation rates was observed (lower gas generation rates). They also found that concentra-
tion levels varied greatly, from high leachate concentrations during the dry period to large varia-
tions during the rainy season; the latter results from the alternation of intense rainfalls with certain
drier times during the wet season. A very few studies (Kuruparan et al. 2003, Aluko et al. 2003)
reported also that the highest amounts of COD, BOD/COD ratio and Nitrogen components were
observed during the rainy season, as well as higher concentrations of pollutants particularly for
conductivity, dissolved solids, phosphate, lead, iron and zinc. Contrariwise in the dry season higher
values for colour, turbidity, dissolved O2, NH3, Ni, Cd and manganese were measured. To which
extent these observations are representative for tropical landfills may be questioned, as the vast ma-
jority of investigations denoted a different trend in leachate composition (dry season – high pollu-
tion, wet season – low pollution).

Besides the pre-treatment of MSW, also the top cover design influences leachate generation to a
certain level. Seeing that the highest degradation of waste can be achieved during the rainy season,
the open system – allowing for a higher moisture level in the landfill – provides enhanced possibili-
ties to operate landfills in order to achieve equally high biodegradation in the dry season. Combin-
ing the open system with leachate recirculation and the utilization of evaporation, pre-treatment and
“natural compaction” can be achieved within the landfill due to biodegradation. Furthermore, using
a soil or soil/compost mixture as an intermediate cover layer of the landfill can increase leachate
purification and efficiently remove part of the organic pollution COD (Chiemchaisri and Sri-
sukphun 2003, Visvanathan et al. 2003).
In literature the main solutions proposed to handle leachate emissions include certain landfill cover
design and leachate storage during the wet season, thereby allowing for recirculation throughout the
dry season so as to

 avoid cracking of mineral cover layers (e.g., clay),

 promote continuation of biodegradation within the landfill,
 attain a certain extent of purification and cleaning of the leachate and
 to achieve stabilization of the landfilled waste.

Landfill Gas
In a landfill the organic components of MSW undergo anaerobic biodegradation in three stages: The
hydrolysis, the acidogenic phase, and the methanogenic phase. Landfill gas consists mainly of CH4
and CO2 and some minor components like hydrogen sulphide, ammonia or volatile organic com-
pounds. In a lot of landfills in developing countries, methane is simply released into the atmosphere
and thus – for some countries - even amounts to their biggest contribution to greenhouse gas emis-
sions (Visvanathan et al. 2004). From one ton of MSW in developed countries (containing 60% dry
biomass), about110 m3 or 80 kg of methane can be generated (Ahmed et al. 2011). As in developing
countries the organic fraction in MSW is more prominent in comparison to industrialized countries,
larger amounts of landfill gas could be generated and released to the environment.

Scientific studies provide much less information on the effect of tropical climates on the amount
ofclandfill gas produced than on leachate production, since in most cases in developing countries it
is not economically feasible to collect the generated gas from waste disposal sites. Most of the pub-
lications focus on ways to oxidize methane from landfills to CO2using microorganisms. Whalen et
al. (1990) found that microbial methane oxidation rates for the topsoil of old landfills are the high-
est compared to any other environment. The optimum temperature for CH4 oxidation is reported to
be about 30°C and moisture conditions should be in the range of 15 to 20% H2O, allowing enough
air to penetrate into the soil (Visvanathan et al. 1999). From this data, it was concluded that me-
thane oxidation is highest right after the rainy season and lowest during the dry season. Further-
more, as soon as water was reintroduced to the “dry” lysimeter, oxidation recommenced immediate-
ly, demonstrating that the methanotrophs were able to survive under the extreme conditions of a
very low-moisture content in the top soil.

With respect to landfill gas generation, other studies (Ishigaki et al. 2001, Chiemchaisri et al. 2006,
and Sanphoti et al. 2006) found that the higher moisture content of tropical wastes can lead to a
stimulation of anaerobic degradation and could produce more landfill gas in a shorter time, provid-
ed the moisture levels are kept high enough. Storing the generated leachate during the wet season
and recirculating it during the dry season or even adding additional water to the leachate recircula-
tion can keep moisture levels at the required level and even make the landfill reach the methanogen-
ic phase faster. Visvanathan et al. (2004), finally, recommended a top cover design that could to a
large extent oxidise methane into CO2: a 0,6m thick mixture of sandy loam and market waste com-
post. The soil was able to keep the optimum moisture content and temperature conditions both in
the rainy and in the dry season. The mixture holds moisture even during the extreme dry season and
drains additional moisture during the rainy season.

The need to include a methane oxidative layer for such operations stands in contrast to current prac-
tices to design landfills with a hydraulic barrier. It introduces a trade-off between the wish to keep
leachate emissions low (local impacts) and gas emissions low (global impact).

Field Survey Investigating Indonesian Landfill Sites

The total amount of MSW generated in Indonesia is estimated to about 38.5 million ton per year
(MoE, 2008). Most of this waste ends up at landfills or dumping sites which are spread over 497
districts and municipalities. Only a small fraction of MSW is recycled or treated by composting.
There is no official information about the number of waste disposal sites in Indonesia available.
However, the State Ministry of Environment (MoE) estimates that each district and city has at least
one landfill or dumping site in operation. The landfills in Indonesia are generally operated by local
governance or in cooperation with private companies. According to official figures about 14 million
tons or more than one third of MSW generated is produced in mega cities, such as Jakarta, Ban-
dung, Surabaya, Medan, etc (MoE, 2008).

In order to evaluate current landfill operation and management (O&M) in Indonesia, 12 landfills in
10 metropolitan and big cities were investigated. The investigated landfills comprise 3 sites in Su-
matra, 8 sites in Java, and 1 site in Bali. Altogether the investigated sites serve for about 20% of
Indonesian population, which in total amounts to almost 240 million. In Figure 1 the locations of
landfills surveyed (during a field trip conducted in the period from January to February 2012) are
indicated.

The information presented was gathered by a two stages survey. First, information was collected by
distributing questionnaire sheets to landfill authorities. The questionnaire comprises information
about technical specification of landfills, landfill O&M, economic and social aspects, and several
questions addressing problems frequently faced by landfill operators. During the second stage, in-
terviews with the person in charge for landfill operation, worker and scavengers were conducted, in
order to gain detailed information about practical issues of landfill O&M. The interview results
were subsequently compared to official answers obtained from landfill authorities. Using a combi-
nation of open- and close-ended interviews was used to obtain detailed information and to verify
and falsify answers given by the authorities. The findings of the field survey are described briefly in
the following paragraphs.

Figure 1 The location of landfill sites evaluated in the frame of the present study

In general, almost all landfills visited have originally been designed as controlled landfill; two of
them are planned as sanitary landfills (i.e. Bantar Gebang and Sumur Batu landfills). The controlled
landfills should be characterised by the existence of a simple baseliner, a leachate collection system
and treatment pounds for the leachate. Landfill gas is not collected at these sites. The Bantar
Gebang and Sumur Batu landfills (both sanitary landfills) do have a composite base liner to ensure
that leachate will not pollute the groundwater. In addition, both sites should be equipped with multi-
stage anaerobic and aerobic pounds to treat generated leachate prior its discharge. However, form
field survey it was found that landfill operation was different from its original design. The landfill
operational stage “ led dumping” ing. It was also
found that the application of a daily or weekly soil cover was very rare or never applied at all. This
observation was verified during the field visit of the sites. Most persons in charge for landfill opera-
tion explained that the application of soil cover was very rare due to limited budget available.
Table 1 presents general information about the city where the investigated landfill site is situated.
The information given in Table 1 comprises data about the area, number of inhabitants, and eco-
nomic development (expressed by the total GDP in the region) as well as the size of the landfill site
which serves as final disposal for MSW generated. Figure 2 illustrates the conditions observed at
the landfills sites investigated. The pictures were taken during the field survey conducted in Janu-
ary/February 2012. From the pictures it becomes obvious that the incoming waste is piled up with-
out any treatment prior landfilling and that no cover soil (daily or weekly cover) has been applied to
the surface of the waste deposition.

Table 1 Information about the investigated landfill sites and the area/region that is covered by each site.
Investigated area
Districts/city/region Area of the Population b GDP Landfill site Landfill Initial design
region (US$)b Area of disposal
(km2)a (ha) site
Banda Aceh & Aceh Besar 3,030.4 574,864 2,549.88 GampongJawa 20.0 controlled
Medan city 155.0 1,126,203 4,317.28 TerjunMarelan 17.6 open dump
Medan city 112.4 972,389 4,317.28 NamoBintang 14.0 controlled
Jakarta region 653.8 9,583,247 9,753.07 BantarGebang 110 sanitary
Bekasi & Kota Bekasi city 1,431.5 4,965,272 2,595.38 SumurBatu 10.0 sanitary
Bandung region 3,280.7 6,809,840 814,20 Leuwigajah 70.8 open dump
Bandung region 3,280.7 7,624,877 1,710.95 Sari Mukti 25.2 controlled
Semarang & Semarang city 1,324.0 2,486,711 2,043.83 Jatibarang 12.5 controlled
Yogyakarta, Bantul & Sleman 1,115.5 2,393,240 1,368.80 Piyungan 46.0 controlled
Malang & Malang city 1,323.9 2,486,711 2,043.83 SupitUrang 19.2 controlled
Surabaya city 350.2 2,765,487 6,988.04 Benowo 37.5 controlled
Denpasar, Badung&Gianyar 914.4 1,801,698 1,655.53 Suwung 38.0 controlled
Sources: aMoH, 2012; b BPS, 2011

Figure 2 Conditions observed at the investigated “controlled dumping” sites. Terjun Marelan landfill in Medan
(top left), Bantar Gebang landfill in Jakarta (top right), Benowo landfill in Surabaya (bottom left) and Suwung
landfill in Bali (bottom right).

In addition, also the treatment of leachate differs from the original design, which projected that
leachate will first be treated under anaerobic conditions and followed by an aerobic treatment pound
prior its discharge to nearby rivers. Based on the observations of the field survey it can be summa-
rized that in particular the aerobic treatment stage was not operated due to technical problems and
again due to budget constraints.

One common technical problem observed at several sites was that at the landfill there is no electrici-
ty supply which makes it difficult or almost impossible to aerate the pounds. Moreover, in some
investigated landfills there was no aerator installed, although electricity would have been accessible.
In general it must be stated that the treatment of leachate organically polluted at high concentrations
would by all means require an aerobic treatment stage.

Some landfill operator installed an electric generator and low voltage aerator, which is usually used
to aerate fish pounds. This effort of operators (although aeration is of course suboptimal) must be
highly appreciated, as it is crucial to operate landfills as environmentally friendly as possible, of
course considering financial resources available (Rushbrook, 1999).

Analysis of Indonesian Landfill And Waste Legislation

According to the Manual for Technical Operation for Municipal Solid Waste Management (which
represents a national standard issued by Indonesian Standardization Agency), landfills are distin-
guished into three categories: controlled landfill, sanitary landfill and anaerobic waste disposal in
tidal area (BSN, 2002). The standard defines several requirements that must be fulfilled by the land-
fill operator in order to avoid environmental pollution. For instance, a soil cover for controlled and
sanitary landfills must be applied at least once a week or every day, respectively. It is also required
according to the Manual for Technical Operation that the landfill has to be surrounded by a green
belt and the minimum distance to settlements must be more than 500 meters - measured from the
outer border of the landfill site (MoPW, 2012).

With regards to these requirements all landfills visited are neither controlled nor sanitary landfills.
This can be concluded as no one landfill operator applied a soil cover (not even once a week).
Based on the interviews, two reasons for this can be found: First, limited financial resources availa-
ble for the procurement of cover soil materials, which in some case would have to be transported
over longer distances (e.g., Gampong Jawa, Namo Bintang, Terjun Marelan, Bantar Gebang, Sumur
Batu, Benowo, and Suwung landfills), as this sites are located in flat or tidal land areas. Neverthe-
less, also landfills located in hilly areas, which would have easily access to soil cover material, did
not apply cover soils neither. The second reason, which probably makes the application of cover
soil difficult, is the fact that contrary to international standards and practice of waste disposal, the
active area (disposal area) of all investigated sites was rather large (2 to 4 ha). Normally the opera-
tor would segregate the landfill surface into different working areas, whereby only a comparatively
small area is designated to active waste disposal. Hence, applying a daily or weekly soil cover
would require more resources (in terms of money, work load and landfill space) at the investigated
landfills as this would be necessary “ g ” waste disposal at a small active area
of the landfill.

Although, Article 24 of the Indonesian Waste Act states that the government obliges to finance
waste management costs, landfills are usually underfunded as most of the waste budget is spent on
waste collection and transportation.

The Waste Act asks to share responsibilities between central and local governances. The central
governance is responsible for capital investment, such as landfill construction, procurement of
heavy equipment (waste compactors) and waste collection vehicles, while the local governance has
to run waste management service (GoI, 2008). The financial resources to run waste management
services are mainly donated from annual governance budget. Studies evaluating MSW management
in Indonesia (Damanhuri et al., 2009; Pasang et al., 2007; Meidiana&Gamse2011) conclude that
insufficient coverage of waste management expenses is the main factor for inappropriate manage-
ment of all waste facilities including landfills. On the other hand, the local governances as MSW
authorities are not allowed to generate revenues from waste management services.

Since the insufficient coverage of landfill costs has resulted in an inappropriate management and
operation of landfills, there are two possible ways to improve the current situation observable in
Indonesia. One option would be to establish local waste regulations that allow landfill operators to
generate revenues from waste management activity. In general this would be possible as there is no
article in the Waste Act which forbids the local governance as waste management authority to gen-
erate revenues. In addition inhabitants should be forced to contribute to the waste budget by appro-
priate waste collection fees, as this is a more plausible way to fulfil the needs of landfill O&M costs
than solely depending on annual municipal budget. The second option for improving financial re-
sources for landfilling would address the formalization of informal MSW recovery. This issue does
not only deal with the fact that the presence of informal scavengers represents an important factor
that prevents landfills in Indonesia to be considered as sanitary sites; a formalization also would
generate income to landfill operators, as revenues from waste recovery would be earned. Of course
scavengers would have to be recruited by landfill owners as labourers and would have to be paid a
regular salary. However, recovery activities on landfills or prior landfilling could be managed much
better, if organized by the landfill operator.

The Ministry of Cooperative, Small and Medium Enterprises (MoCSM) estimated the number of
scavenger in 2008 to about 1.3 million people, which work under very bad conditions without any
health protection. The daily transaction of saleable waste recovered from landfill sites was estimat-
ed to more than 20 billion IDR (about US$ 2.1 million) (MoCSME, 2008). Implementing the for-
malization of informal waste recovery followed by promoting waste separation prior landfilling,
and collecting MSW by its categories, would provide healthier working conditions for waste work-
ers and higher recycling rates of waste, which would reduce waste quantities that need finally to be
landfilled.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of the literature study and field survey conducted the following characteristics
of landfills (dumping sites) in tropical climates can be summarized:

 Large quantities of leachate (often more than 1000 mm/a) as well as strong variations in sea-
sonal generation rates represent a major challenge for landfill operators in tropical countries
 Leachate generated during the wet season is characterized by lower pollution and hence
would require less intensive treatment as leachate generated during the dry season
 During dry season waste decomposition rates are reduced, a problem which could be tackled
by leachate recirculation
 Appropriate design of landfill covers is instrumental for minimizing leachate emissions as
well as landfill gas emissions.
 In general decomposition rates at tropical landfills tend to be higher in comparison to land-
fills in temperate climates, a fact which is beneficial regarding the stabilization of landfills.
 Although large quantities of landfill gas are generated (due to high contents of biodegrada-
ble matter in MSW and optimal conditions for microbial decomposition of organic matter),
landfill gas is usually not utilized in tropical climates (mainly due to financial constraints).
 Financial constraints is probably almost the most important factor for inappropriate opera-
tion and construction of landfills in tropical climates (as shown by the field survey conduct-
ed in Indonesia)
 Existing regulations (legal requirements) of waste management and landfill operation are of-
ten not obeyed, either due to insufficient financial resources or due to limited knowledge of
stakeholders (landfill operators). Hence training of stakeholder, an in the present case land-
 fill operators, is important for improving current situation of landfilling, as wells as the de-
velopment of strategies for earning additional income by landfill operation (e.g. JI/CDM
projects for mitigating landfill gas emissions).

In general it can be concluded that landfills in tropical climates face different problems and chal-
lenges in comparison to landfills in temperate climate zones. Hence they require also different solu-
tions, which can only be found by problem oriented research efforts considering local (climatic and
economic) conditions.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are grateful for the financial support of the International Solid Waste Association
(ISWA).

REFERENCES

Ahmed et al. (2011) Renewable Energy and Carbon Reduction Potentials of Municipal Solid Waste
in Malaysia.Proceedings of the IEEE First Conference on Clean Energy and Technology CET.
Kuala Lumpur.

Aluko et al. (2003) Characterization of leachates from a municipal solid waste landfill site in Iba-
dan, Nigeria.Journal of Environmental Health Research,
2,http://www.cieh.org/jehr/jehr3.aspx?id=11404.

Ariyawansha, R.T.K., Basnayake, B.F.A., Pathirana, K.P.M.N., Chandrasena, A.S.H. (2010) Open
Dump Simulation for Estimation of Pollution Levels in Wet Tropical Climates. Tropical
Agricultural Research, 21(4): 340-352.

BPS (2011)Aggregate Data of Indonesian Statistic, Bureau Statistic the Republic of Indonesia. ac-
cessed from http://www.bps.go.id/ on April 2012.

BSN (2002)Manuals for Technical Operation for Municipal Solid Waste Management (SNI 19-
2454-2002), National Standardization Agency the Republic of Indonesia.

BSN (2002)National Standard for Operational Procedures of MSW Management (SNI 19-2454-
2002). Agency for National Standardization, the Republic of Indonesia.

“ g g
I ” J al of Hazardous Materials, 181, 962–968.

Chiemchaisri, S. (2003) Performance of soil and compost mixture in leachate purification at inter-
mediate cover layer of tropical landfill.Proceedings of the IWA Conference on Environmental Bio-
technology Advancement on Water and Wastewater Applications in the Tropics, Kuala Lumpur.

Chiemchaisri et al. (2006) Operating Strategies for Enhancing Waste Biodegradation and Incorpora-
tion of Vegetated Coversoil to Minimize Methane Gas Emission in MSW Landfill.Proceedings of
the Seminar on Solid Wastes Landfill Technology in Asia, Bangkok.

Damanhuri, E., Wahyu, I., Ramang, R. & T. Padmi, 2009, Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste
Flow in the Bandung Metropolitan Area, Indonesia, Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Man-
agement,11, 270 – 276.
Her -Berriel et al. (2008) The effect of moisture regimes on the anaerobic degradation of mu-
nicipal sol Waste Management, 28, 14–20.

Ishigaki et al. (2011) Greenhouse Gas Emission from Solid Waste Disposal Sites in Asia. in: Kumar
(Ed.): Integrated Waste Management - Volume II, InTech, 461 – 472.

Kortegast, A.P. et al. (2007). Leachate generation and treatment at the Bukit Tagar Landfill,
Malaysia, Sardinia Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. CISA, S. Margherita di Pula,
Cagliari, Italy.

Kuruparan et al. (2003) Influence of Tropical Seasonal Variations Operation Modes and Waste
Composition on Leachate Characteristics and Landfill Settlement. Workshop on Sustainable Land-
fill Management, Chennai.

Machado et al. (2010) Evaluation of the geotechnical properties of MSW in two Brazilian land-
fills.Waste Management, 30, 2579 – 2591.

Meidiana, C. & T. Gamse (2011) The new Waste Law: Challenging opportunity for future landfill
operation in Indonesia. Waste Management & Research, 29, 20-29

MoE (2008)Indonesian Domestic Solid Waste Statistic Year 2008. State Ministry of Environment
the Republic of Indonesia.

MoHA (2012)Aggregate Data of the Regional Profile, Ministry of Home Affair the Republic of In-
donesia. accessed from http://www.depdagri.go.id/ on April 2012.

MoPW (2012)The Guideline for Spatial Landfill Area. Ministry of Public Work the Republic of
Indonesia.

MoCSME(2008)Assessment Model Business Development among the Scavengers. Ministry of

Cooperatives, Small and Medium Enterprises the Republic Indonesia.

Pasang, H., Moore, G. A. &Sitorus, G., (2007) Neighbourhood-based Waste Management: A Solu-
tion for Solid Waste Problems in Jakarta, Indonesia, Waste Management, 27, 1924 – 1938.

Rushbrook, P., (1999) Getting from subsistence landfill to sophisticated landfill, Waste Wanage-
ment& Research, 17,4 – 9.

Sanphoti et al. (2006) The effects of leachate recirculation with supplemental water addition on
methane production and waste decomposition in a simulated tropical landfill.Journal of Environ-
mental Management, 81, 27 – 35.

An attempt to perform water balance in a Brazilian municipal solid waste

landfill.Waste Management, 32, 471 – 481.

Tränkler et al. (2001) Effects of Monsooning Conditions on the Management of Landfill Leachate
in Tropical Countries.Proceedings Sardinia 2001, Eighth International Waste management and
Landfill Symposium, Pula.

Visvanathan et al. (1999) Methanotrophic activities in tropical landfill cover soils: effects of tem-
perature, moisture content and methane concentration.Waste Management & Research, 17, 313 –
323.
Visvanathan et al. (2002) Influence of Landfill Operation and Waste Composition on Leachate Con-
trol: Lysimeter Experiments under Tropical Conditions.Proceedings of the 2nd Asian Pacific Land-
fill Symposium, Seoul.

Visvanathan et al. (2003) Effects of Monsoon Conditions on Generation and Composition of Land-
fill Leachate - Lysimeter Experiments with Various Input and Design Features.Proceedings of the
Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, S. Margherita di
Pula.

Visvanathan et al. (2004) Influence of Landfill Top Cover Design on Methane Oxidation: Pilot
Scale Lysimeter Experiments under Tropical Conditions. Proceedings of the 3rd Asian Pacific
Landfill Symposium, Kitakyushu.

Whalen et al. (1990) Rapid Methane Oxidation in a Landfill Cover Soil.Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, 56, 3405 – 3411.