www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul

Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1609–1614

Quantification and classification of ship scraping wasteat Alang–Sosiya, India

M. Srinivasa Reddy, Shaik Basha *, V.G. Sravan Kumar, H.V. Joshi, P.K. Ghosh

Marine Algae & Marine Environment Department, Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute, Bhavnagar 364002, India

Abstract

Alang–Sosiya located on the Western Coast of Gulf of Cambay, is the largest ship recycling yard in the world. Every year on

average 365 ships having a mean weight (2.10 · 106 ± 7.82· 105 LDT) are scrapped. This industry generates a huge quantity of solid

waste in the form of broken wood, rubber, insulation materials, paper, metals, glass and ceramics, plastics, leather, textiles, food

waste, chemicals, paints, thermocol, sponge, ash, oil mixed sponges, miscellaneous combustible and non-combustible. The quantity

and composition of solid waste was collected for a period of three months and the average values are presented in this work. Sosiya

had the most waste 15.63 kg/m2 compared to Alang 10.19 kg/m2. The combustible solid waste quantity was around 83.0% of the

total solid waste available at the yard, which represents an average weight of 9.807 kg/m2; whereas, non-combustible waste is 1.933

kg/m2. There is not much difference between the average of total solid waste calculated from the sampling data (96.71 MT/day) and

the data provided by the port authorities (96.8 MT/day).

� 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Alang–Sosiya; Ship scrapping yard; Solid waste; Oiled sponge; Textile waste; Wood pieces

1. Introduction

Wastes in the marine environment include litter as-

sociated with human activities, and are increasingly

being recognized as an international pollution problem.

The amount and nature of solid waste are two factors

which define the severity of the problem (O�Callaghn,1993). Waste posses problems on beaches, where it is

aesthetically displeasing, expensive and difficult to re-

move, causes mortality of coastal wild life, and it ispotentially toxic, especially in the case of medical, mil-

itary and some industrial wastes. The impacts of marine

debris to wild life, tourism and human health are well

documented (Cottinghan, 1989; Joyner and Frew, 1991;

Corbin and Singh, 1993) and not discussed here. Several

workers worldwide have quantified and classified marine

debris on beaches, estuarine coasts etc. Frost and Cullen

(1997) surveyed four beaches on the north coast of NewSouth Wales, Australia and reported the quantitative

and qualitative amount of waste collected. Madzena and

Lasiak (1997) studied the spatial and temporal varia-

*Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-278-2561354; fax: +91-278-

2566970/2567562.

E-mail address: salt@csir.res.in (S. Basha).

0025-326X/$ - see front matter � 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/S0025-326X(03)00329-1

tions in beach litter collected on the Transkei coast of

South Africa and reported the composition and quantityof litter, while Thornton and Jackson (1998) studied

debris accumulation in the estuarine shoreline of Cliff-

wood beach, New Jersey, USA. Quantification and

classification of marine litter on the municipal beach of

Ensenada, Mexico was carried out by Iniguez and

Fisher (2003). The deleterious effect of plastic debris on

the marine environment has been carried out by several

workers (Pruter, 1987; Laist, 1987; Stefatos et al., 1999;Derraik, 2002).

However, no work has been carried out on the waste

generated by a ship scrapping industry on the marine

coast. Hence an attempt has been made to study the

various types and amount of solid waste generated by a

ship scrapping industry. Of the approximately 45,000

ocean-going ships in the world, about 700 are taken out

of service every year. To maximize the profits, shipowners send their vessels to scrap yards in Asia. Today,

most (70%) are scrapped in India at Alang. Alang–

Sosiya is the largest ship-scraping yard in the world,

established in 1982. The beach is in fact on one of the

longest continental shelves with the second highest tide

port in the world, a very rare occurrence, which makes

Alang a geographically natural tidal dry port, and ideal

1610 M. Srinivasa Reddy et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1609–1614

for the ship breaking industry, making Alang a pre-

ferred ship-scrapping destination. There are 192 plots

which carry out ship-recycling activities. Every year an

average of 365 ships having the mean weight2.10 · 106 ± 7.82 · 105 LDT are scrapped. This yard

produces steel for numerous uses. This industry also

generates a huge amount of solid wastes in the form of

scraped wood, plastic, insulation material, glass wool,

sponge, waste paper, oiled rope, cotton waste, etc. The

ship scraping activity forms an industry by itself, as it

provides employment to more than 40,000 workers and

generates steel totaling millions of tons every year with aminimum consumption of electricity. These workers

along with local villagers use the inter-tidal belt for

Fig. 1. Location map o

Fig. 2. Map showing sampling l

dumping all kinds of domestic waste, which generate

considerable solid waste amount besides high concen-

tration of nutrients and bacteria (Tewari et al., 2001).

2. Study area

Alang–Sosiya (Lat. 21�50 21�290 N; Long. 72�50 72�150E) is located on the western Coast of Gulf of Cambay, in

the western part of India (Figs. 1 and 2). Alang has a

very high tidal range (�13 m) in the world, gentle

sloping and firm and hard rocky bottom. Ships can befloated to the work place. During the study period, it

was observed that about 130 ships were waiting for

f Alang–Sosiya.

ocations in the study area.

M. Srinivasa Reddy et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1609–1614 1611

scrapping. Around 300 ships from the US alone are also

waiting for clearance (Pers. Comm., Port officer, Alang).

The yard is about 14.3 km long, north-south, and covers

a total area of approximately 67 km2. There are alto-gether around 112 plots towards Alang and around 80

plots along Sosiya side, varying in length (50–240 m)

and breadth (30–120 m) placed parallel to the coast up

to a distance of 14.3 km. The total number of vessels

beached till March 2002 were 3573 with an LDT of

26.24 million MT, mainly of cargo vessels, oil tankers

and passenger liners with occasional warships. The LDT

of ship ranges from 7000 to 35,000 ton. It takes one orone and half a day to dismantle a normal 10,000–13,000

ton ship (Pers. Comm., Port officer, Alang Yard).

3. Materials and methods

A systematic study has been carried out at Alang–

Sosiya during May to July 2002 to classify the varioustypes as well as to calculate the amount of solid waste

generated. The yard was divided into two areas: Alang

and Sosiya. Different types of solid wastes were collected

at every 1 km interval parallel to the coast covering a

distance of 10 km (A1–A10) at western fringe of Alang

and 4 km (S1–S4) along the eastern fringe of Sosiya (Fig.

2). Composite-Grab (Quadrat) having an area of 9 m2

was deployed at every 30 m on line transects covering adistance of 180 m (Q1–Q6) away from the highest high

Table 1

Total and relative abundance, contribution and density of various types of s

Sr. no. Type of waste Total abundance

(Alang+Sosiya) wt.

(kg) in

Relative abun

in Alang wt. (

756 m2 area % 540 m2

area

%

1 Paper 367.50 4.14 226.00

2 Metals 319.50 3.60 203.50

3 Glass and ceramics 432.00 4.87 285.00

4 Plastics 678.00 7.64 449.50

5 Leather 320.70 3.61 159.20

6 Textiles 760.00 8.56 256.50

7 Wood 1464.50 16.49 907.00

8 Rubber 1211.50 13.65 948.00

9 Food waste 440.00 4.96 361.00

10 Chemicals 141.00 1.59 37.50

11 Ash 220.00 2.48 141.00

12 Paint scrap 208.50 2.35 138.00

13 Thermocol 528.90 5.96 145.00

14 Oiled sponge 801.00 9.02 546.00

15 Miscellaneous

combustible

491.50 5.54 350.00

16 Miscellaneous

non-combustible

494.00 5.56 350.00

Total 8878.6 100 5503.2 1

water mark perpendicular to the coast at each sampling

transects. Different types of waste collected from each

quadrat at every sampling location were collected and

weighed. Each sampling location was covered threetimes during the study period. However, the average

values are presented in this work. Solid waste was

classified in sixteen groups according to its composition:

paper, metals, glass and ceramics, plastics, leather, tex-

tiles, wood, rubber, food waste, chemicals, paints,

thermocol, sponge, ash, oil mixed waste and miscella-

neous combustible and non-combustible.

4. Results and discussion

Qualitative and quantitative analysis of solid waste

collected at Alang–Sosiya is presented in Tables 1 and 2.

Sosiya had higher quantities of waste (15.63 kg/m2)

compared to Alang (10.19 kg/m2). Wood, textiles and

thermocol pieces contributed 16.5, 14.9 and 11.3% re-spectively of the total solid waste collected at Sosiya,

whereas, in Alang, rubber, wood and oiled sponge

contributed maximum to the total waste, 17.2, 16.4 and

9.92% respectively (Fig. 3). High abundance of solid

waste at eastern fringe of Sosiya is due to dumping of

waste generated from the western fringe of Alang.

Combustible solid waste is around 83% of the total

solid waste available at the yard, which represents an av-erage weight of 9.807 kg/m2, where as non-combustible

hip scraping waste at Alang and Sosiya

dance

kg) in

Relative abundance

in Sosiya wt. (kg) in

Total

(kg/m2)

Alang

(kg/m2)

Sosiya

(kg/m2)

216 m2

area

%

4.11 141.50 4.19 0.49 0.42 0.66

3.70 116.00 3.44 0.42 0.38 0.54

5.18 147.00 4.36 0.57 0.53 0.68

8.17 228.50 6.77 0.90 0.83 1.06

2.89 161.50 4.78 0.42 0.29 0.75

4.66 503.50 14.92 1.01 0.48 2.33

16.48 557.50 16.52 1.94 1.68 2.58

17.23 263.50 7.81 1.60 1.76 1.22

6.56 79.00 2.34 0.58 0.67 0.37

0.68 103.50 3.07 0.19 0.07 0.48

2.56 79.00 2.34 0.29 0.26 0.37

2.51 70.50 2.09 0.28 0.26 0.33

2.63 383.90 11.37 0.70 0.27 1.78

9.92 255.00 7.55 1.06 1.01 1.18

6.36 141.50 4.19 0.65 0.65 0.66

6.36 144.00 4.27 0.65 0.65 0.67

00 3375.4 100 11.74 10.19 15.63

Table 2

Total and relative abundance of ship scraping waste at Alang and Sosiya

Sr. no. Type of waste Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Average

Total abundance

1 Paper 74.15 61.25 59.60 60.00 57.40 55.10 61.25± 6.68

2 Metals 64.15 53.25 53.20 50.90 49.40 48.60 53.25± 5.67

3 Glass and ceramics 83.90 72.00 70.70 69.50 69.00 66.90 72.00± 6.08

4 Plastics 126.50 113.00 112.70 109.70 108.90 107.20 113.00± 6.98

5 Leather 65.95 53.45 52.80 51.10 49.50 47.90 53.45± 6.46

6 Textiles 142.53 126.67 125.80 124.10 123.00 117.90 126.66± 8.36

7 Wood 268.82 244.08 241.00 238.70 237.20 234.70 244.08± 12.5

8 Rubber 217.28 201.92 200.70 199.50 195.40 196.70 201.91± 7.91

9 Food waste 86.37 73.33 70.60 71.40 70.00 68.30 73.33± 6.60

10 Chemicals 35.25 25.45 24.68 24.10 23.10 25.60 26.36± 4.45

11 Ash 46.53 36.67 35.50 35.00 34.10 32.20 36.66± 5.06

12 Paint scrap 38.55 34.75 34.80 34.70 33.60 32.10 34.75± 2.13

13 Thermocol 102.75 88.15 85.30 85.70 84.40 82.60 88.15± 7.38

14 Oiled sponge 148.80 133.50 133.00 131.70 128.40 125.60 133.5± 8.07

15 Miscellaneous

combustible

99.08 81.92 78.90 78.20 77.20 76.20 81.96± 8.63

16 Miscellaneous

non-combustible

104.17 82.33 81.30 78.00 74.90 73.30 82.33± 11.26

Relative abundance in Alang

1 Paper 47.83± 1.44 37.66± 1.20 36.00± 1.2 36.75± 1.3 34.75± 101 33.15± 1.3 37.66± 0.1

2 Metals 40.48± 0.25 33.91± .55 34.21± 0.6 31.85± 0.7 31.62± 0.6 31.52± 0.8 33.91± 0.1

3 Glass and ceramics 56.6± 1.55 47.5± 1.29 46.30± 1.3 45.00± 1.3 45.42± 1.3 44.20± 1.3 47.50± 0.1

4 Plastics 83.18± 2.05 74.91± 2.04 74.80± 2.1 72.81± 2.0 72.52± 2.1 71.35± 2.1 74.91± 0.03

5 Leather 36.36± 1.79 26.53± 1.65 25.90± 1.7 24.60± 1.7 23.42± 1.5 22.41± 1.6 26.53± 0.07

6 Textiles 52.65± 6.91 42.75± 6.01 42.00± 6.2 41.40± 5.7 40.60± 5.9 37.19± 5.3 42.75± 0.4

7 Wood 164.03± 5.86 151.16± 5.22 148.50± 4.8 148.70± 5.0 148.00± 5.3 146.62± 5.3 151.16± 0.4

8 Rubber 169.9± 4.40 158.00± 4.77 156.30± 4.7 155.80± 4.9 153.10± 4.5 154.92± 4.9 158.00± 0.1

9 Food waste 70.83± 2.21 60.16± 2.46 57.3± 2.6 58.50± 2.5 57.90± 2.6 56.30± 2.5 60.16± 0.1

10 Chemicals 14.3± 0.89 8.21± 0.95 7.48± 0.6 7.20± 0.6 7.10± 0.6 10.40± 1.4 9.11± 0.1

11 Ash 30.8± 1.09 23.51± 1.17 22.20± 1.3 21.90± 1.1 22.00± 1.2 20.60± 1.3 23.50± 0.1

12 Paint scrap 27.4± 1.11 23.11± 1.11 22.30± 1.2 22.20± 1.0 22.10± 1.1 21.00± 1.3 23.00± 0.07

13 Thermocol 32.53± 4.01 24.16± 3.64 22.10± 3.4 22.60± 3.7 22.70± 3.7 20.90± 3.3 24.17± 0.2

14 Oiled sponge 101.4± 2.97 91.00± 2.64 90.50± 2.5 89.80± 2.6 87.5± 2.5 85.80± 2.6 91.00± 0.2

15 Miscellaneous

combustible

70.06± 3.20 58.33± 2.94 56.22± 2.8 55.40± 2.7 55.10± 3.1 54.90± 3.2 58.33± 0.2

16 Miscellaneous

non-combustible

77.56± 2.77 58.33± 0.94 57.62± 1.1 54.40± 1.4 51.20± 1.4 50.90± 1.5 58.33± 0.73

Relative abundance in Sosiya

1 Paper 26.31± 0.91 23.58± 0.8 23.60± 0.9 23.32± 0.7 22.70± 0.9 22.00± 1.0 23.58± 0.1

2 Metals 23.66± 0.96 19.33± 0.8 19.00± 1.1 19.10± 0.7 17.80± 0.9 17.10± 0.8 19.33± 0.1

3 Glass and ceramics 27.31± 2.1 24.59± 0.7 24.47± 0.4 24.50± 0.5 23.12± 0.5 22.70± 0.5 24.50± 0.6

4 Plastics 43.31± 1.7 38.08± 1.5 37.96± 1.3 36.94± 1.5 36.45± 1.4 35.90± 1.6 38.08± 0.1

5 Leather 29.58± 1.9 26.91± 1.3 26.90± 1.3 26.53± 1.2 26.10± 1.1 25.50± 1.2 26.94± 0.3

6 Textiles 89.88± 3.0 83.91± 2.5 83.80± 2.9 82.70± 2.3 82.40± 2.2 80.80± 2.2 83.91± 0.6

1612

M.Srin

ivasa

Reddyet

al./Marin

ePollu

tionBulletin

46(2003)1609–1614

7Wood

104.78±4.1

92.91±3.1

92.50±2.8

90.00±3.1

89.20±3.3

88.10±3.2

92.91±0.4

8Rubber

47.38±2.4

43.91±1.8

44.40±1.8

43.70±1.7

42.00±1.7

41.80±1.8

43.91±0.2

9Foodwaste

15.53±1.9

13.16±2.1

13.30±2.1

12.90±2.1

12.10±2.1

12.00±2.1

13.16±0.5

10

Chem

icals

20.95±1.1

17.25±1.5

17.20±0.9

16.90±1.4

16.00±0.1

15.20±1.2

17.25±0.1

11

Ash

15.73±1.2

13.16±0.8

13.30±0.8

13.19±0.8

12.10±0.9

11.60±0.9

13.16±0.1

12

Paintscrap

11.15±1.15

11.75±1.1

12.57±1.4

12.50±1.2

11.50±0.9

11.10±0.9

11.75±0.1

13

Thermocol

70.21±4.4

63.98±4.9

63.22±4.9

63.10±5.1

61.70±5.1

61.70±4.9

63.98±0.2

14

Oiled

sponge

47.47±2.2

42.56±2.4

42.59±2.5

41.90±2.6

40.90±2.3

39.80±2.4

42.50±0.1

15

Miscellaneous

combustible

29.01±2.1

23.58±2.1

22.75±1.9

22.80±2.1

22.10±2.1

21.30±1.9

23.58±0.1

16

Miscellaneous

non-combustible

26.69±1.5

24.00±0.9

23.73±1.1

23.60±0.9

23.70±0.9

22.40±0.8

24.00±0.2

Q1–Q6¼quadrats

(composite-grab),weightin

kg.

SD¼Standard

deviation.

M. Srinivasa Reddy et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1609–1614 1613

is 1.933 kg/m2. Among the combustible waste, wood and

its associated products were found to be greatest in

weight (2.06 kg/m2) followed by cotton wool and syn-

thetic polymer wastes (1.83 kg/m2).An attempt has been made to calculate the amount

of solid waste accumulated and per day generation with

the actual amount of waste collected during the study

period. The details are as follows.

4.1. Sampling data

The site from where sampling was carried out ex-tended 14 km (10 km at Alang from the western fringe

and 4 km at Sosiya from the eastern fringe) and 0.18 km

from the highest high tide line towards the land. So,

total area covered for the study¼ 2.52 km2.

Total number of sampling points¼ 84 (60 at western

fringe and 20 at eastern fringe).

One sampling point (one quadrat) corresponds to

9 m2 area.Total area in which solid waste was collected¼ 84 · 9

m2 ¼ 756 m2 (Alang¼ 540 m2 and at Sosiya 180 m2

area).

Average weight of solid waste collected from

Alang¼ 5503.20 kg in 540 m2 area and at Sos-

iya¼ 3375.40 kg in 180 m2 area.

Weight of solid waste collected from Alang¼ 180,000

m2 · 10.19 kg/m2 ¼ 1834200 kg or 1834.20 MT.Weight of solid waste collected from Sosiya¼ 72,000

m2 · 15.63 kg/m2 ¼ 1125360 kg or 1125.36 MT.

Therefore, the average of total solid waste collected in

an area of 2.52 km2 (Alang+Sosiya)¼ 2959.56. Hence

the solid waste accumulated ¼ 96.71 MT/day. This

matches data available from the Port authorities which

indicate that, per day per plot, solid waste is generated

of approximately 500 kg. This is equivalent to a totalweight of solid waste generated in the Alang and Sosiya

ship scrapping yard (192 (plots) · 500 (kg))¼ 968,000 kg

or 96.8 MT/day.

5. Conclusion and recommendations

The waste includes certain toxic substances including,glass wool, thermocol, scarped paints, oiled sponge etc.,

which create disposal problems. At present the scrapped

material is dumped along the coast without proper

treatment. Moreover, the waste is carried by tides into

the intertidal zone and the possibility of the waste en-

tering into the marine environment, during the highest

high tide is not ruled out. At present waste is eliminated

by open burning, which in turn creates environmentalpollution of other kinds.

The generation of combustible waste by this ship

scrapping yard can be a potential renewable energy

source, and by using the energy conversion technology

Fig. 3. Relative abundance of ship scrapping waste at Alang and Sosiya.

1614 M. Srinivasa Reddy et al. / Marine Pollution Bulletin 46 (2003) 1609–1614

like gasification and incineration with proper air pollu-tion control measures can be used for generation of

power, thereby solving the disposal problem of the

waste and also health of the coastal zone environment is

protected.

References

Corbin, C.J., Singh, J.G., 1993. Marine debris contamination of

beaches in St. Lucia and Dominica. Marine Pollution Bulletin 26,

323–328.

Cottinghan, D., 1989. Present marine debris, Part 1––the threat.

Mariners Weather Log 3, 8–15.

Derraik Jose, G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by

plastic debris: a review. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44, 842–852.

Frost, A., Cullen, M., 1997. Marine debris on northern new south

wales beaches (Australia): sources and the role of the beach usage.

Marine Pollution Bulletin 34 (5), 348–352.

Iniguez, L.S., Fischer, D., 2003. Quantification and classification of

marine litter on the Municipal Beach of Ensenada, Baja California,

Mexico. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46, 132–138.

Joyner, C.C., Frew, S., 1991. Plastic pollution in the marine environ-

ment. Ocean Development International Law 22, 33–69.

Laist, D.W., 1987. Overview of the biological effects of lost and

discarded plastic debris in the marine environment. Marine

Pollution Bulletin 18, 319–326.

Madzena, A., Lasiak, T., 1997. Spatial and temporal variation in

beach litter on the transkei coast of South Africa. Marine Pollution

Bulletin 34 (11), 900–907.

O�Callaghn, P., 1993. Sources of costal shoreline litter near three

Australian cities. Report to the plastic industries association of

Australia by the Victorian Institute of Marine Sciences, Mel-

bourne.

Pruter, A.T., 1987. Sources, quantities and distribution of persistent

plastics in the marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 18,

305–310.

Stefatos, A., Charalampakis, M., Papatheodorou, G., Ferentions, G.,

1999. Marine debris on the seafloor of the Mediterranean Sea:

examples from two enclosed gulfs in western Greece. Marine

Pollution Bulletin 36, 389–393.

Tewari, A., Joshi, H.V., Trivedi, R.H., Sravan Kumar, V.G., Raghu-

nathan, C., Khambhaty, Y., Kotiwar, O.S., Mandal, S.K., 2001.

Studies the effect of ship scraping industry and its associated waste

on the biomass production and biodiversity of biota ‘‘in situ’’

condition at Alang. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42 (6), 462–469.

Thornton, L., Jackson, N., 1998. Spatial and temporal variation in

debris accumulation and composition on an Estuarine Shoreline,

Cliffwood Beach, New Jersey, USA. Marine Pollution Bulletin 36

(9), 705–711.