3. CHAPTER THREE
3.3 Results and discussion
3.3.1 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics
3.3.2.4 Waste storage
Waste storage is an important aspect as it has negative influences on society and the environment, regardless of being a temporary or permanent storage. In this case, the study is limited to temporary waste storage in a household prior collection or disposal.
The study revealed that in ward 27, 70% of the respondents use pit holes excavated in the yard to store their waste while in ward 25, both the plastic bags and bins (44%) are equally used to temporarily store waste prior the collection of disposals (Figure .13). To provide and distribute skip containers to rural areas and rural transfer stations, a three- year contractor was hired in 2019–20. However, the project is facing budget limitation (Polokwane local municipality IDP 2019/2020).
(a)
58
Figure 3.13: Storage containers used (a) plastic bins (c) plastic bags
(b)
(C)
59 3.3.2.5 Waste collection
According to the Polokwane local municipality IDP (2019/2020), all 45 wards are receiving EPWP litter picking and collection services. There is a need to expand the weekly waste collection service to other villages in other wards as it is now only available to 47 communities. However, the ward 27 respondents (74%) claim that waste collection service is not available while 26% say the waste collection service they receive is the collection of waste in communal bins located in schools and illegal dumping spots, collected by the waste pickers deployed by the EPWP see figure 3.14.
Furthermore, 66% of the respondents claim waste collection service frequency is not sufficient while 34% say it is enough if they can handle the waste independently in their households. During field observation, the researcher notices waste on roadsides, waterways, and shrubs, indicating concern with the frequency of waste removal. Open canals and sewers are being clogged by dumping massive amounts of SW due to the lack of continuous SW collection systems (Abdel-Shafy and Mansour, 2018).
The presence of waste collection services and the type of waste collection method have a big impact on the type of waste storage container utilized in ward 25. Furthermore, 80% of the respondents say that ―the once per week‖ waste collection frequency is sufficient while 20% say it is not sufficient. The suggestion is that at least another day should be added to the waste collection schedule refer to figure 3.15. According to Ngeleka (2010), 53% of respondents want waste collected twice a week as this will reduce illegal waste dumping in the area. Because they will be unable to keep the waste until the next collection, which will be in 7 days. The enumerated service users that pay the collection fee reported that they are satisfied with the collection frequency of once per week (32%), neutral (35), while 33% said they were dissatisfied (Seng, et al., 2018).
Most respondents (72%) were "satisfied" with the SW collection method, while (28%) were "not satisfied.
60 Figure 3.14: Waste collection by EPWP waste pickers
Figure 3.15: Door to door waste collection service
61 3.3.2.6 Waste handling
The study findings disclosed that there is a huge difference in how waste is handled in both ward 25 and ward 27 from a missed collection or no collection service (Figure 3.16). The SWM is influenced by the presence of the SW collection service. The ward 27 mainly uses two methods to handle waste which are burning of waste and disposal of waste in illegal spot with no prior treatment. On the other hand, in ward 25 most respondents prefer to wait for the next collection service day or to transport the waste to the transfer station called Mankweng transfer station. Few of the respondents in ward 27 opt for transporting waste to a landfill or transfer station due to lack of proper transport and associated cost while in ward 27, most respondents do not have the option of burning waste or disposing it on the illegal spot as they have the benefits of receiving waste collection services. The household income and employment status in ward 27 allow the respondents to be categorised as the low-income group as their income is mainly from R1001 to R3000 per month. Most of these respondents indicated that they are unemployed and/or pensioners. Moreover, the unavailability of a waste collection service causes the respondents to burn the waste or dump it in illegal spot. In ward 25, most respondents indicated that they earn at least R7001 and more.
Furthermore, they are either employed, self-employed, or pensioners. This enables them to have the ability to either transport their waste to the transfer station or designated disposal site by themselves. Moreover, their locality receives waste collection service, they can buy extra refuse bags to store waste until the next scheduled waste collection service. Burning of waste without precaution also generate contaminants, swelling the population's health concerns (Tue et al., 2016). In the Mexican municipality of Huejutla, about 24% of households burnt the overall waste generated was burnt, with 90% of those living in rural settlements with no MSW collection system. Black carbon (BC) is produced. This technique pollutes the environment and adds to the GWP (Reyna-Bensusan, et al., 2018). It is best to prevent open burning and substituted with proper and sustainable technology to reduce environmental contamination and public apprehensions, according to a review of scientific literature.
62
Figure 3.16: Handling of solid waste from a missed waste collection service or with no collection service?