Prime time for Malaysia to dig itself out of its landfill problem

 Malaysia’s landfills are costing the country dearly, but waste-to-energy and other solutions can help turn the situation around.

From Zayana Zaikariah

Malaysia’s dependence on landfill extends far beyond an eyesore for surrounding communities.

It carries consequences that ripple outward through governance shortfalls — dirtier water, more climate crises, and ballooning costs for taxpayers.

The question is: how big is the problem, and what can be done?

For context, SWCorp projects that Malaysia’s landfills will be full by 2041 as it continues to generate more waste, growing between 1.3% to 1.7% annually, with most of it going to a landfill rather than being recovered, reused or converted into more valuable items.

To make matters worse, only 22 of those 135 active landfills are sanitary and engineered to confine waste to a minimal area and volume so as not to threaten the health and safety of those living in the surrounding areas.

The remaining 103 landfills are essentially open dumps — where rainwater can dissolve the hazardous leachate created by the decomposing waste and, with no collection system to intercept, goes straight down into the soil underneath.

That includes a variety of waste, and it is important to understand that not all solid wastes behave the same once disposed.

Malaysia’s solid waste is made of municipal and industrial waste. For its composition, food scraps and organic matter such as kitchen waste, market refuse and horticulture waste constitute the largest category, making up about 35% of Malaysia’s daily waste.

Meanwhile, plastics account for roughly 26%, and paper, glass, textiles and metals make up most of the rest.

Food waste creates the most immediate damage to the environment while remaining somewhat inconspicuous.

When food scraps and organic matter are buried under layers of other waste, it decomposes without oxygen, producing methane, the gas that traps heat and destabilises the climate system.

As it stands, most Malaysian landfills have no infrastructure to capture this methane, allowing the gas to escape directly into the atmosphere.

To put this damage into perspective, the methane leaking from a single large landfill over the course of a year can be equivalent to the emissions of hundreds of thousands of cars.

With that in mind, now consider the fact that Malaysia has 135 active landfills. For a country with net-zero greenhouse gas ambitions and commitments, this issue would be more detrimental if not negated.

As a result, this dependence on landfill comes at a cost that every Malaysian ends up paying.

There’s lower quality of water coming out of the tap.

The country’s river systems are the source of drinking water for most of the population.

In Johor, when a bund surrounding the CEP Renggam landfill broke in 2019, it released leachate with concentrations of ammonia and heavy metals into Sungai Benut, forcing the closure of a water treatment plant and cutting supply to more than 75,000 residents.

Ultimately, when waste management fails upstream, it is communities downstream who bear the brunt.

Then there are more frequent and severe climate events that are increasingly difficult to decouple from how the country manages its organic waste.

The climate dimension affects everyone, though more gradually.

The methane escaping from Malaysia’s landfills contributes to the same warming that is intensifying the floods, droughts, and extreme heat events Malaysians are already living with.

The 2024 floods in Johor and Kelantan caused an estimated RM1.5 billion in damages.

While poor waste mismanagement did not cause those floods, it is part of the same emissions ledger that makes them more frequent and more severe.

The connection to how the country manages its organic waste is apparent, even if it is less obvious in the way a flooded street is.

Finally, there is the fiscal cost that every Malaysian taxpayer carries. Maintaining 174 already-closed landfill sites costs approximately RM1.9 billion a year and becomes a recurring bill that grows with every new site that fills up and is sealed.

In effect, it is the deferred cost of not having built a better system earlier as the longer landfill dependence continues, the larger the number becomes.

To be sure, the government is already moving in the right direction with the Circular Economy Blueprint for Solid Waste (2025–2035) and the National Energy Transition Roadmap indirectly complements this.

But the framework has yet to actively translate these policy intents into measurable outcomes on the ground.

To this end, what actually works? Malaysia must revolutionise waste management and utilise the tools and technologies it holds.

The most immediate lever is targeting the largest category, which is food waste.

Anaerobic digestion breaks down organic material in sealed tanks and captures the methane it produces as usable energy, turning what is currently a climate liability into a resource that feeds the grid.

Malaysia already has a working example in Ampang Jajar, where a food waste-to-renewable natural gas facility converts organic waste into biogas for energy distribution system.

Across the broader waste stream, the principle is similar.

Glass, textiles, and plastics that currently go to landfills can be transformed into engineered ceramics or construction materials.

Waste-to-energy (WtE) incineration is part of the innovation picture too, particularly given the current geopolitical environment.

With global energy markets volatile and Malaysia deepening its push for energy security, the ability to generate electricity from residual waste carries weight and the government’s plan for one WtE plant per state by 2035 reflects that.

That logic holds more firmly when the groundwork has been laid. If Malaysia can effectively divert food waste, recover materials, and capture landfill gas in the near term, the better-positioned it will be to make similar technologies work as intended decades ahead.

Responsibility lies with everyone: governments setting and enforcing policy frameworks, companies examining their own supply chains and material choices, and individuals supported by infrastructure that makes the responsible choice a convenient one.

To keep burying much of its waste while its landfills count down to a fixed deadline traps the country in a perpetual cycle of its own making, where each year of inaction would lead to bigger consequences. - FMT

Zayana Zaikariah is a senior researcher with the Climate, Environment and Energy Programme at Institute of Strategic and International Studies (Isis) Malaysia. She is an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.