The Feasibility of Integrated Transfer Station in Solving
Waste Problem in Jakarta, Indonesia
Lenggogheni, Helmut Yabar
University of Tsukuba, Life & Environmental Sciences, Program of Environmental Sciences

Abstract
The main objectives this study is observing the best solution in reducing the waste volume at final
landfill site of the city. The object of the study is Jakarta, the capital city of Indonesia which has population
approximately 10 million people and generates waste approximately 6700 ton/day. As one of themunicipal city in developing country, the population increasing by urbanization, the amount of waste
generated is getting higher time by time. Meanwhile, the solution to reduce and treat the waste has notbeen dealt due to many factors such as shortage budget, law enforcement and citizen awareness.
In this study, the neighborhood-based solid waste management approach will be analyzed. The
idea in reducing the waste volume to final site is by cutting the transportation frequency by minimized theamount of waste at transfer station. The integrated transfer station is needed to reach the goal of waste
reducing by promoting recycling and other advanced treatment methods. All of the possibility will beanalyzed and considered through the availability of land, composition of waste and citizen`s willingness.

Keywords:
Waste, Transfer station, Jakarta, Recycling
JEL classifications:
Q01, Q51

1.

Introduction
Municipal solid waste is always become an
emerging issue in all over the world both indeveloped country and developing country. With
the increasing growth of population andeconomic activities, the volumes of waste to behandled increase accordingly. Rapid population
growth in urban areas, socio-cultural classes'
heterogeneity and community participation thatis generally not well directed and well organizedhave caused complex MSW problems formunicipalities.
Moreover, the funding situation andrelatively low priority in waste handling among
local governments are general trends, along withthe limitations in proper human resources,
adding to the low performance of municipalities
in handling the sanitation and waste in urban
areas. Many factors are involved in inadequate
MSW management, some of which are lack ofsupport for municipalities to address waste
problems
systematically,
integrally
andcomprehensively, lack of standard policies thatare comprehensive and consistent in matters ofwaste handling, and lack of discipline among
waste managers in terms of applying proper
technical procedures (Damanhuri, 2005).
The greatest challenge from the result of
rapid population growth that lead to increasing ofwaste generated is to provide more waste
disposal facilities such as landfill to treat thewaste (Hassan et al., 2001). Despite thecomplexity of waste produced, the standards oflandfills in most developing countries are still
poor; these include inadequate waste treatment
facilities, inefficient collection and storage
systems, co-disposal of municipal waste withhazardous waste, inefficient utilisation of disposal
space, lack of environmental abatement
measures and poor documentation (Hassan et al.,2000).
Compared to high-income residents indeveloped countries, the urban residents ofdeveloping countries produce less solid waste
per-capita. However, the capacity of developing
countries to collect, process, dispose, or reuse
the waste in a sustainable manner is highly
limited (Bandunee, 2015).
Indonesia is one of the developing countries
in Asia facing this problem since long time ago.
According to Jakarta Post, Indonesia is the thirdlowest ranking in ASEAN country in terms ofsanitation quality. Many rivers contaminated byorganic materials due to lack of measurement in
waste management. Ranked number four as
populous country in the world, population ofIndonesia reached 253 million people in 2014
(Detik finance). In 2013, the total of waste
generated in all of provinces in Indonesia reached200.000 ton/day.

As the capital city of Indonesia, DKI Jakarta is
the most developed city with economic growth
5.9%-6.3% predicted in 2015. (DPRD DKI Jakarta,2015) This growth is also driven by urbanizationin Jakarta. The rapid growth of population in
Jakarta Metropolitan Area has created a rapid
increasing in waste/garbage from residential andindustrial both in volume and in type. According

to national census, the population of DKI Jakarta
reached 10 million people with the area of land is
664 km2.
Figure 1. Map of Jakarta(Source: http://ongkirnya.com/daftar-kode-posdki-jakarta.html)
Municipal solid waste issue never could be
solved caused by the increasing of waste
generated and the developing of capacity inmanaging the waste are not balance.
Government as the important key role in solving
the problem has to take action in reforming theregulation and waste management as well as
encouraging the participation of society in waste
reduction.
The objectives of this study; to overview thecurrent waste management in DKI Jakarta, to see
the correlation of the optimization the using oftransfer station and waste reduction into thelandfill. It`s also expected with the adaption ofneighborhood-based waste management can
improve and promote the using of transfer
station optimally.

with the mainly purpose of trade or business aswell as entertainment. Therefore, the total of thewaste coming from commercial site in DKI Jakarta
is 28,3% of the total waste.

2.

2.1 Waste Collection
The Cleansing Agency of DKI Jakarta has
division in 5 municipalities controlling andconducting waste collection that operate directly
and indirectly. For household in housing area
(non-apartment), the collection is done indirectly.
Primary collection is done door-to-door by service
officer appointed by community or by household
itself. Collected waste will be brought to waste
shelter or decentralized transfer station. From
this part, the transportation of waste to landfill
will be handled by government trough thegovernment itself or by hiring private company.
On the other hand, for household in apartment,high income residential and commercial, thecollection is done directly by government or hired
private company. Waste from Institutional, publicarea and street is done by government withstreet sweeping system.

Municipal Solid Waste Management in DKI
Jakarta
MSW management in DKI Jakarta relies on aconventional collect-haul-dispose system. In
order to carry this out, the Cleansing Department
of Jakarta has divisions in each municipality. It
mainly relies on manual labor and nonspecialized
trucks to collect and transport the waste totransfer stations and/or the final disposal site
(Pasang, 2007).
DKI Jakarta generates waste of 6716 ton/day(2451340 ton/year) recorded in 2012. With total
population of 10.187.595 people, it is estimatedthat the waste generation per capita is 0.65 kg
per day. There is increasing of waste volume
every year with growth rate almost twice than
population growth, 2,85% and 1.6% respectively.

Apartment/
LuxuryResidence

Figure 2. DKI Jakarta MSW Generation and
Population 2003-2012(Source: DKI Jakarta Cleansing Agency, 2014)

Government/P
rivateHousing

PublicArea

Comm
ercialTransfer
Station

Neighborhood
Community

Jakarta`s major waste generator ishousehold. 60% of total quantity of waste comesfrom both single and multiple family per day inthe city. Following by office as the second biggest
waste source at 22.48% of the total waste.
Commercial waste consist of waste coming fromLANDFILL
Figure 3. Waste Collection Stream

According to Cleansing Department`s reportin 2012, the collection rate of waste is 88% in
average. This number is calculated by theestimation of waste generated and wastetransported to landfill. 7% of waste total isrecycling and 5 % is remained in the street, in theriver or burned.
2.2 Waste Composition
As the characterization of waste indeveloping country, composition of waste isdominated by organic fractions 54% of total
waste. Following by paper and plastic 15% and
14% respectively. Additionally, according tosurvey done by the cleaning agency, the inorganic
fractions collected from commercial waste islarger than organic fractions. There is a big
potential of recycling if the waste collected issegregated first.

Waste Composition 2012

1%
1%

1%

2%
2%

10%

Organic
Paper
Plastic

14%
54%
15%

Glass
Metal
TextileFigure 4. Waste Composition DKI Jakarta 2012
(Source: Cleansing Agency of DKI Jakarta, 2014)
2.3 Waste Treatment
Currently there are two pre-treatment
installation in DKI Jakarta i.e. Sunter Transfer
station and ITF Cakung-cilincing. Sunter Transfer
Station is a waste compacting facility that istreated waste coming from areas in DKI Jakarta
that is located far from the landfill. In 2007, thetotal of actual waste handled in this facility isaround 800 ton/day. ITF cakung-cilincing isequipped with Micro Biological Treatment withcapacity 1500 ton/day. According to 2012 report,
ITF cakung-cilincing handled waste 81.222
ton/year. However no actual updating regarding
to the performance of this ITF.
Almost 90% of waste is landfilled in TPST
BantarGebang located 40 km far from the centralof DKI Jakarta. The location of final landfill
become the one of the major issues in collecting
and transporting waste. The traffic condition in
the city affect the schedule of the transportation
which is consumed time double than predicted
before.
TPST BantarGebang is a sanitary landfill withtotal area 108 ha already operated since 1989.
This landfill is awarded as the best landfill inIndonesia equipped with leachate collection andMethane Recovery facility that also produce
electricity. It produces some 10.5 MWh per day.
Moreover there is small composting facility withcapacity of waste 400 ton/day.
However, the capacity of Landfill which is3000 ton waste per day, accepting waste 5800
ton/day. This volume of waste transported to thelandfill is almost twice the amount of waste
should they accept. Lack of treatment facility andcapacity make the condition of waste at landfill is
not controlled.
Recent years, recycling has been promoting
in DKI Jakarta. It was recorded in until 2009 therecycling rate reached 7% of total waste through
3R (Reduce, Recycle, and Reuse) program. Mostof the recycling process is done by the informal
waste picker and residence community or
recently called as waste bank. 5% of inorganic
waste is recycled and 2% of organic waste iscomposted. This rate of recycling has proved thepotential of waste treatment before government
interfere.

Waste collection rate is still far from 100%
because of many issues. 5% of uncollected waste
is still remained at transfer station, street, riverand burned that lead to increasing of air pollution,
health problem and city esthetic. Those transfer
station becomes dump site because no treatment
equipment and cover and waste remains forseveral days.
3. Methodology and Discussion
3.1 Transfer Station
Transfer stations are an integral part ofpresent-day
inmunicipal
solid
waste
management systems. The main criteria used todecide on the location of a transfer station has
traditionally been the minimization of transport
costs, since it is cheaper to transport greatamounts of waste over long distances in large
loads than in small ones (Boveaet al., 2007)
Where the distance from the waste
collection area to the waste treatment facility islarge, a transfer station may be used to bulk up
the waste for more efficient transport by a larger
truck (Boveaet al., 2007).
According to Gil & Kellerman (1989), there
are three reasons why transfer stations are useful.
First, because small or medium sizedcommunities may not generate sufficient waste
to support a disposal facility. Second, if the
distance to the disposal plant is long the use ofsmall collection trucks may be unnecessarily high.
Third, the location of a single disposal plant in aremote location to serve several communities willremove negative environmental impacts fromresidential areas.
The main criteria used to decide thefeasibility of incorporating a transfer station into
a waste management system has traditionallybeen the minimization of the economic costs oftransport to and from the station, since it ischeaper to transport large amounts of waste overlong distances in large loads than in small ones
(Tchobanoglouset al., 1993).
Most of waste coming from household andpublic area are unloading at transfer station
before transported to disposal landfill. DKI Jakarta
has 1612 points of intermediate collection pointof waste within five municipalities. Among thosespaces, the area of 130 points of them is morethan 300 m2. In current situation these areas
looks like dumping sites because of uncollected
waste are remained there for days.

Figure 5. Transfer Station at DKI Jakarta
Through this research, I proposed an
Integral transfer station as the solution in
reducing waste to final disposal site. According toresearch done at Surabaya city, reforming thedump site type of transfer station with MRF(Material Recovery Facility) equipped withstorage for dry waste and composting facility fororganic waste is possible. It needs at least 300 m2
land depends on the facility will be installed tosupport the MRF. (Pratiwi,2011)
3.2 A Neighborhood-based waste management
Community-based of waste management
has been applying and promoting since long timeago by government and NGO. However, inn
Jakartaneighborhood-basedorganizations(NBOs) are different than community-basedorganization (CBOs). The main differencebetween the two lies in their status and function.
In Jakarta, NBOs are formal organizations within
local government, while CBO’s are not part of thelocal government structure.

not require a secondary garbage collection
service by the municipality. Decentralized
schemes provide better income and employment
options to the underprivileged sections of thesociety (Pastore,2005).

Category

NBO

CBO

StatusFormalInformalManagement

Local
government

Nongovernment

Willingness

Force

Voluntary

Funding

Continuously

Project
basedPlayerAll
incomehousehold

Smallmedium
incomeSuccessfulrate

Depends on
Rule

Depends on
LeaderContinuation

No change inparticipation

Depends onparticipant

3.3 Integrated Waste Management Model-2(IWM)
IWM-2 (Integrated Waste Management
Model 2) is a software tool which allows you tomodel thewaste collection, treatment andlandfilling of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW).
The model predicts overall environmental
burdens of municipal waste management
systems and includes a parallel economic model.
The model has been designed as a decisionsupport tool for waste managers in both industry
and local government, who need to decide
between various different options for waste
management.
By using this model, I would like to introduce
some possibly scenarios to manage the waste
flow start from separating, collection andtreatment. By using this model, we can compare
the technology using for composting, biogasification, RDF, thermal combusted andincineration. Moreover, this software is not only
provided the output of waste total but also fromenvironmental perspective and cost calculating
both initial and maintenance cost.

Figure 6. Differences of NBOs & CBOs
The collaboration of citizen andgovernment participation will bring theimprovement in waste management continuously
in DKI Jakarta. There is also differences in scale ofwaste could be handled between CBOs and NBOs.
Municipal waste management system in
DKI Jakarta is centralized with one final disposalsite at TPST BantarGebang. Without support ofsufficient treatment facility in one landfill site, allof the total waste generated in DKI Jakarta cannot
be handled completely.
One of the obvious advantages of adecentralized system is the improved aesthetic
and hygiene condition in the locality. Also it will

4.

Future Works
For the next step of this research, I will use
IWM-2 software to find the result of eachscenario that will be proposed.
From thecalculation of cost for collection, transportation,
treatment and disposal, we can get the cost andeconomy benefit of transforming the transfer
station into 3R transfer station with participationof both citizen and government.

Not only from the economical aspect, I willconsider the effect from environmental aspect.
Each collection way and treatment options has
their own effect to environmental and society. By
considering all of aspect, we can get the best
scenario that could be applied in DKI Jakarta.

References
Damanhuri, E. (2005). Some Principal Issues on
Municipal Solid Waste Management inIndonesia, 1st Expert Meeting on Waste
Management in Asia-Pacific Islands, Oct 2729, Tokyo.
Hassan MN, Chong TL, Rahman M, Salleh MN,
Zakaria Z, Awang M (2001). Solid waste
management in Southeast Asian countries
with special attention to Malaysia.
Proceedings Eighth International Waste
Management and Landfill Symposium. S.
Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy.
Hassan MN, Abdul RR, Chong TL, Zakaria Z, Awang
M (2000). Waste recycling in Malaysia:
Problems and prospects. Waste Manage. Res.
18:320-328.
Bandunee, Liyanage, Gurusinghe, Renuka. 2015.
Case Study: Finding Better Solutions for
Municipal Solid Waste Management in a
Semi Local Authority in Sri Lanka. Open
Journal of Civil Engineering, 63-73.
Purnomo, Herdaru. (2014, June 6). Negara
denganpendudukterbanyak di dunia, RI
masuk
4besar.
Retrievedfrom
http://finance.detik.com/read/2014/03/06/
134053/2517461/4/negara-denganpenduduk-terbanyak-di-dunia-ri-masuk-4besar.
DPRD
DKI
Jakarta.
PertumbuhanPerekonomian DKI

2015.
Jakarta2015 diprediksi 5.9%-6.3%. Retrieved fromhttp://www.dprddkijakartaprov.go.id/wp/pertumbuhanperekonomian-dki-jakarta-2015-diprediksi59-63/
Pasang, Haskarlianus, Andrew, Graham, Sitorus,
Guntur, 2007. Neighborhood-based Waste
Management: A Solution for Solid Waste
Problem in Jakarta, Indonesia.Asean
Environment.info.
Marshall, Rachael, Farahbakhsh, Khosrow, 2013.
Systems approaches to integrated solid
waste management in developing countries.
Waste Management 33, 988-1003.
Bovea, M., Powell, J., Gallardo, A., Capuz-Rico, S.,
2007. The role played by environmental
factors in the integration of a transfer
station in a municipal solid waste
management system. Waste Management27, 545-553.
Tchobanoglous, G., Theisen, H., Vigil, S., 1993.
Integrated Solid Waste Management:
Engineering Principles and Management
Issues. McGraw-Hill, Singapore.
Pastore, P Md. Tariq, Rani, U, Kumar, V,2005.An
Initiative towards decentralized solid waste
management , A collaborative effort of
RWA- Defense colony, New Delhi and Toxic
link ( An Environmental NGO), New Delhi.
Pratiwi, L., Rahmadewi, Trihadiningrum, Yulinah.
2011. Perencanaan Material Recovery
Facility di KecamatanSukililo, Kota Surabaya.
Surabaya.
DinasKebersihan DKI Jakarta, 2014.
KebersihanTahun 2012. Jakarta.

Info