Muthulakshmi*, a sanitary worker contracted with the Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC), begins her day at 4 am, travelling from her home in Kodungaiyur to South Chennai. After street cleaning, she and her co-workers use battery-operated vehicles (BOV) to collect household waste.
Few families practise waste segregation, leaving sanitary workers like Muthulakshmi to sort mixed waste themselves. Despite BOVs having separate bins, the process is time-consuming.
This is where Micro Composting Centres (MCC) and Material Recovery Facilities (MRF) play a vital role. They provide dedicated spaces to sort waste and sell recyclables in exchange for incentives.
However, the GCC’s decision to shut down 168 MCCs and 88 MRFs across the city, while prioritising a waste-to-energy (WTE) plant, now shifts the segregation burden entirely onto sanitary workers.
The rationale behind the closures
Chennai generates 6,300 metric tonnes of solid waste daily. To manage this, GCC launched a decentralised waste management strategy in 2019, establishing 212 MCCs, 100 MRFs, and 92 Resource Recovery Centres (RRC).
According to the civic body, it closed the waste processing units for two reasons: firstly, their proximity to burial grounds, locations with religious and cultural significance, deemed the operations inappropriate. Secondly, residents nearby complained of foul odour, particularly from units with open-type composting.
The decision prompted a suo motu case by the National Green Tribunal’s (NGT) southern bench, which took cognisance of media reports on the issue. Data submitted by the GCC to the NGT reveals that 50 MCCs and 14 MRFs located in burial grounds were closed, along with 118 MCCs and 74 MRFs that faced public opposition. As a result, only 22 MCCs and 49 MRFs remain operational today, with processing capacities of 116 and 140 tonnes per day, respectively.
Dilip Srinivasan, a waste management enthusiast, believes that the real issue is poor maintenance and inadequate staffing. “These problems ought to have been addressed scientifically rather than by shutting the units down,” he remarks.
Read more: Waste segregation requires participation from all stakeholders: Chennai Corporation Commissioner
Impact of the closure on sanitary workers
MRFs served as crucial sorting and storage hubs. “Only when a significant volume is collected can an aggregator arrange a pick-up. It is unrealistic to expect workers to sort waste in the middle of the road. Without proper facilities, where will this sorting now take place?” asks Janani Venkitesh, a member of the Residents of Kasturba Nagar Association (ROKA).
Despite GCC’s claim that conservancy workers benefit from selling recyclables, P Srinivasalu, General Secretary of the Red Flag Union for Greater Chennai Corporation Sanitary Workers, argues that their heavy workload leaves little time for waste segregation and resale.
“We must ensure that we cover all assigned streets in our divisions. Additionally, we have extra duty during government events. The workload does not permit us to prioritise recycling. On average, sanitary workers would segregate less than 10% of the collected waste,” he explains..
Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the city processed only 193.4 tonnes of wet waste and 107.9 tonnes of dry waste daily out of a total generation of over 4,000 tonnes. Since 2019, the quantum of waste collected in Chennai has risen to over 6,300 tonnes per day.
“With the recent closure, there is a significant concern regarding how the remaining waste will be managed. The lack of real-time data on current waste processing makes it difficult to assess the full impact of these closures,” says Ann Anra, founder of Wasted 360 Solutions, a Chennai-based waste management company.
Impact on the community
Dilip is the only one segregating waste in his apartment complex, housing 13 other families. Despite efforts like placing three separate bins, he has failed to convince the others. The closure of MCCs and MRFs has further discouraged him, as his neighbours now have an excuse to avoid segregation. So, waste is ending up in landfills.
“People will now question the value of segregation when the infrastructure to support it has been dismantled. This threatens to undo years of awareness and behavioural change. Without a visible facility for processing, segregation efforts will inevitably take a backseat,” notes Janani, who has been working with the community for many years now.
She adds that having at least one MCC for every three or four wards has been significantly helpful in reducing the distance waste needed to travel. The closure of these facilities has centralised waste management again, raising both transportation costs and the city’s carbon footprint.
In the absence of reliable local infrastructure, even the most enthusiastic community-driven efforts are bound to falter.
Decentralised waste management: Untapped potential
Experts and urban planners argue that this move reflects an underutilisation of a decentralised system. At full operational strength, Chennai’s MCCs had the capacity to process 585.46 metric tonnes of wet waste per day, while MRFs could handle 250 metric tonnes of dry waste daily. RRCs added another 230 metric tonnes of processing capacity. “Despite these numbers, the existing infrastructure was being used at a dismal 26% of its potential, as per the Chennai Climate Action Plan,” points out Chythenyen DK from the Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA).
Decentralised waste management, as per the Solid Waste Management Rules 2016, is considered both sustainable and cost-effective. It reduces transportation costs and carbon emissions, lessens the manpower requirement, and generates local employment. “Cities such as Bengaluru have demonstrated the success of such models, with MCCs managed by waste pickers turned micro-entrepreneurs,” he adds.
Missed opportunities
Had the MCCs and MRFs been operating at their full potential, Chennai could have efficiently processed close to 2,000 tonnes of organic waste daily. If the GCC identifies, assesses, and redesigns at least 100 such units for optimal performance, they could collectively process at least 300 tonnes of waste every day.
This decentralised network could have been effectively supplemented by biogas plants at Madhavaram and Chetpet, which have a combined capacity of 280 tonnes per day. These plants are better suited for handling food waste, especially from restaurants, which is ideal for biogas generation.
“This alone would account for approximately 600 tonnes,” says P Natarajan, founder of Namma Ooru Foundation, who also operates an MCC in Pudupet. “If we strengthened this network and scaled up the infrastructure, we could easily manage 2,000 tonnes of organic waste without harming the environment. Infrastructure is key to enhancing capacity,” he adds.
Read more: How can Micro Composting Centres in Chennai be improved?
GCC’s response and the road ahead
The GCC maintains that the closures are temporary setbacks, with alternative facilities in the pipeline. A GCC official said that the plans are underway for a windrow composting unit capable of processing 100 tonnes daily on reclaimed land in Perungudi. Additionally, two Bio-CNG plants in Sholinganallur and Madhavaram, each with 100 tonnes of daily capacity, are nearing completion.
The official asserts that conservancy workers continue to recover recyclables for personal income, thereby minimising the impact on recycling. “Compost facilities are also part of the Integrated Solid Waste Processing Facility/WTE plant project,” the official adds.
As a resident of Kodungaiyur, Muthulakshmi shares her concern. She is grappling with numerous health issues due to the landfill’s proximity. With the WTE plant being developed nearby, she says, “I can feel the difference in the air and water quality when I travel from Kodungaiyur to other parts of the city. I have already paid a heavy price for cleaning the city’s waste. Does the government want us to breathe more poisonous air from the WTE facility?”
Here is what the GCC can do:
- Relocate some of the waste processing units to suitable locations with improved infrastructure.
- Ensure adequate staffing in the units and proper facilities for sanitary workers.
- Maximise waste processing capacity through decentralised networks and bio-gas plants.
- Increase awareness among residents through targeted campaigns on source segregation.
For people like Muthulakshmi and Dilip, the question remains: Will Chennai invest in systems that value human effort and ecological well-being, or will it continue to shift the burden downstream, eroding both public trust and environmental health?
(*name changed on request)