2015
DOI: 10.15244/pjoes/30933
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management Practices for an Industrialized City

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the benefit affects of the larger quantity of collected waste metal about -982.1 Mg, glass about 65.7 Mg and plastics -11.6 Mg. Glass as a material has a very good properties (stable, effective, and reuse and recycling of materials, made from inorganic materials, so there is no negative impact on the environment, cheap raw materials) [18]. Table 3 of processing waste from separate collection in Norway amounted to an average of 68% [19] and in Turkey less than 5% [20]. .…”
Section: Results Of Investigationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the benefit affects of the larger quantity of collected waste metal about -982.1 Mg, glass about 65.7 Mg and plastics -11.6 Mg. Glass as a material has a very good properties (stable, effective, and reuse and recycling of materials, made from inorganic materials, so there is no negative impact on the environment, cheap raw materials) [18]. Table 3 of processing waste from separate collection in Norway amounted to an average of 68% [19] and in Turkey less than 5% [20]. .…”
Section: Results Of Investigationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proper sustainable solid wastes management in rural areas, supported by the financial sustainability, inclusivity, coherent institutions and proactive public policies may minimize the negative ecologic and environmental effects of wastes generation, transport, treatment and final disposal, also supporting the social and economic pillars of sustainability [5,6]. The final steps of the sustainable waste management are landfilling of residual waste (waste after reducing the volume and quantity, unable to be processed by any other measures) as well as aftercare and reclamation of closed landfills [4,[7][8][9][10].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With representative samples from 160 municipalities, it was estimated that 0.87 kg/ capita/day of waste was generated in Serbia, which amounted to 318 t/day [1]. By comparison, waste generation in Turkey (Kocaeli) is 0.92 kg/capita/day, in Austria (Vienna) 1.50 kg/capita/day, and in the USA (New York) it is 2.58 kg/capita/day [2]. The number of landfi ll fi res in Nišava County, which comprises 71 settlements and more than 260,000 residents, is highly signifi cant, as indicated by the statistical data of the Sector for Emergency Management, Niš offi ce, for the period between 2009 and 2016, according to which 7.56% of all open-space fi res [3] and 5.60% of all fi res in total were landfi ll fi res.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%