Development and assessment of a selective collection plan for two districts in the Oceanic Region of Niterói, based on the template of the pioneer selective collection of São Francisco - RJ
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X83726Keywords:
Urban solid waste, Selective collect, RecyclingAbstract
The growing production of urban solid waste is a reality of modern society. A large part of this quantity can be recycled and/or reused in new processes. In some countries, such as Brazil, a very small percentage of total waste is picked up through selective collection projects, and an even smaller portion is recycled. A selective collection initiative established in the district of São Francisco, in the city of Niterói, in the state of Rio de Janeiro, was successful and kept in operation for more than 35 years, being one of the first initiatives of this type registered in the country. Its methodology is different from the general collection, using an alternative model truck where the materials are stored more diligently without the risk of one damaging the other. The present work implemented, monitored, and evaluated a pilot project of selective collection in the districts of Itacoatiara and Camboinhas, also located in Niterói. An average of 900 kilograms of material with recycling potential were taken weekly in the Itacoatiara district, an amount 3 times higher than what was collected before the operation, proving the effectiveness of the new model. In Camboinhas, similar results were obtained, although they needed to be improved in some respects. Thus, it was found that changing the type of vehicle and optimizing the collection were crucial points to improving the efficiency of the carried-out processes.
Downloads
References
Almeida, B. D. (2019). Gerenciamento de Resíduos Sólidos em Comunidade de Baixa Renda. (Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso). Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brasil.
Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Limpeza Pública e Resíduos Especiais (2020). Panorama dos Resíduos Sólidos no Brasil. Brasília: Autor.
Associação Brasileira de Empresas de Limpeza Pública e Resíduos Especiais (2021). Panorama dos Resíduos Sólidos no Brasil. Brasília: Autor.
Baldé, C.P., Forti, V., Gray, V., Kuehr, R. & Stegmann, P. (2017) The Global E-Waste Monitor-2017. United Nations University (UNU),
International Telecommunication Union (ITU) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA), Bonn/Geneva/Vienna.
Barroso, J. M. T. (2003). O Bairro de Itacoatiara. Recuperado de: http://www.feth.ggf.br/Itacoatiara.htm
Barsano, P. R. & Barbosa, R. P. (2013). Meio Ambiente: guia prático e didático. São Paulo, Brasil: Érica.
Bianchini, T. (2001). Coleta Seletiva é a Saída. Ecologia e Desenvolvimento. 96(11), p. 20.
Companhia de Limpeza Urbana de Niterói. Relatório de Coleta 2020/2021. (2021).
Companhia de Limpeza Urbana de Niterói. Sobre a CLIN. Recuperado de https://www.clin.rj.gov.br/SiteCLIN/home/empresa/dados-
da-clin/
Decreto n. 11.043, de 13 de abril de 2022. (2022). Aprova o Plano Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos. Brasília, Brasil. Recuperado de https://www.gov.br/mma/ptbr/assuntos/agendaambientalurbana/lixaozero/plano_nacional_de_residuos_solidos-1.pdf
Eigenheer, E. M. (Org.). (1993). Coleta seletiva de lixo: Experiências Brasileiras. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Iser.
Eigenheer, E. M. & Ferreira, J. A. (2015). Três décadas de coleta seletiva em São Francisco (Niterói/RJ): lições e perspectivas. Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental. 20(4), p. 677-684. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-41522015020040132994
Fernanda, A. (2022). Protesto cobra solução a demitidos da Econit, em Niterói. Recuperado de https://enfoco.com.br/noticias/cidades/protesto-cobra-solucao-a-demitidos-da-econit-em-niteroi-36952?d=1.
Ferreira, J. A., Eigenheer, E. M. & Sertã, F. (1986). Experiência Piloto de Coleta Seletiva. Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, 25, p. 355-357.
Gandra, A. (2022). Índice de reciclagem no Brasil é de apenas 4%, diz Abrelpe. Recuperado de https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/geral/noticia/2022-06/indice-de-reciclagem-no-brasil-e-de-4-diz-abrelpe
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística. (2012). Censo Brasileiro de 2010. Rio de Janeiro: Autor.
Lei n. 11.445, de 05 de janeiro de 2007. (2007). Estabelece as diretrizes nacionais para o saneamento básico. Brasília, Brasil. Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2007/lei/l11445.htm. Acesso em: 15 jun. 2022
Lei n. 12.305, de 02 de agosto de 2010. (2010). Institui a Política Nacional de Resíduos Sólidos. Brasília, Brasil. Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/l12305.htm
Lei n. 14.260, de 08 de dezembro de 2021. (2021). Estabelece incentivos à indústria da reciclagem; e cria o Fundo de Apoio para Ações Voltadas à Reciclagem (Favorecicle) e Fundos de Investimentos para Projetos de Reciclagem (ProRecicle). Brasília, Brasil. Recuperado de http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/l14260.htm. Acesso em: 05 out. 2022.
Melo, L. C. de, Mendez, G. de P., & Mahler, C. F. (2022). Critical Analysis of Solid Waste Information Systems in Brazil. Ciência E Natura, 42, e66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X42951
Passos Ibiapina, I. R., Oliveira, T. E., & Leocadio da Silva, A. L. (2022). As políticas públicas e os resíduos sólidos urbanos na alemanha e no brasil. Planejamento E Políticas Públicas, (60). DOI: https://doi.org/10.38116/ppp60art2
Patruni, R., F. (2018). O Transporte Irregular Dos Coletores De Lixo. Revista da Escola Nacional da Inspeção do Trabalho, 1, p. 165-184.
Pereira, T. S. T. & Heller, L. (2015). Planos municipais de saneamento básico: avaliação de 18 casos. Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, 20(3), p. 395-404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-41522015020000098824
Secretaria de Conservação e Serviços Públicos. (2020). Plano Municipal de Saneamento Básico. Niterói, Brasil. Recuperado de https://www.seconser.niteroi.rj.gov.br/plano-municipal-de-saneamento-basico#.
Silva, P. L. C., Nazari, M. T., Hernandes, J. C., Corrêa, L. B. & Corrêa, E. K. (2018). Dificuldades enfrentadas no cotidiano de trabalho em cooperativas de triagem de material reciclável. Revista Gestão & Sustentabilidade Ambiental, 7(2), p. 355-369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19177/rgsa.v7e22018355-369
Ribeiro, H. & Besen, G. R. (2006). Panorama da coleta seletiva no Brasil: Desafios e perspectivas a partir de três estudos de caso. Revista de Gestão Integrada em Saúde do Trabalho e Meio Ambiente, 2(1), p. 1-18.
Torres, F. S. (2015). Construção E Defesa De Um Paraíso: Itacoatiara. (Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso). Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brasil.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Ciência e Natura
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
