Current Status of Medical Waste Incinerator Use in Kenya’s County-Level Healthcare Facilities

Market Analysis

1. Decentralized Healthcare Expansion

Following Kenya’s 2010 constitutional devolution, healthcare responsibilities shifted significantly to county governments. This led to:

• Growth in county-level hospitals, health centers, and dispensaries

• A pressing need for on-site medical waste disposal infrastructure, especially in rural and peri-urban areas

County health departments now seek localized solutions for biohazard waste management, particularly due to:

• Increased immunization programs

• HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis treatment centers

• Maternal and child health facilities

2. Procurement Through County Budgets and Donor Support

County hospitals often procure incinerators through:

• Annual government allocations

• Grants from NGOs, including WHO, GAVI, USAID, and World Bank programs

• Emergency support (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic preparedness funding)

This has led to a fragmented but active procurement market involving both local distributors and foreign manufacturers like HICLOVER.

3. Demand for Small to Medium-Capacity Systems

Most county health units require incinerators with:

• 5 to 100 kg/hour capacity

• Basic to semi-automated systems

• Compact design suitable for space-limited facilities

The demand is typically for cost-effective, easy-to-install, and low-maintenance units.

Technical Characteristics

1. Preference for Dual-Chamber Incinerators

Due to increasing awareness of emission control and regulatory expectations, county-level facilities are shifting from single-chamber to dual-chamber incinerators, which:

• Improve combustion efficiency

• Ensure complete destruction of pathogens

• Minimize smoke and odor

Some counties are also beginning to consider wet scrubber systems for enhanced emission control, especially near residential zones.

2. Fuel Source and Power Requirements

Diesel is the most common fuel due to:

• Limited access to natural gas in rural areas

• High reliability even in off-grid settings

However, low fuel consumption remains a top priority due to high operating costs in county budgets.

3. Local Operation with Minimal Technical Complexity

Most county-level operators lack advanced technical training. Hence, preferred incinerators are:

• PLC-controlled or semi-automatic

• Designed for easy user interface

• Equipped with manual override functions

Vendors like HICLOVER provide models with intelligent sensors, remote training, and video installation support, which are crucial in these environments.

4. Compliance with NEMA and MoH Guidelines

County facilities must comply with:

• Kenya’s National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) air emission standards

• Ministry of Health (MoH) medical waste handling protocols

This has increased demand for technically compliant systems with proper documentation and emission data.

Conclusion

Kenya’s county-level healthcare system is a growing market for compact, compliant, and cost-efficient medical waste incinerators. The combination of decentralization, donor funding, and regulatory enforcement is pushing counties to adopt more technically advanced, low-emission, and user-friendly waste disposal systems.

Manufacturers like HICLOVER, with experience in the African context, modular designs, and CE-compliant technology, are well-positioned to meet these evolving county-level requirements.

Reliable Waste Management in Somalia: HICLOVER Incinerators Supporting UN & AU Camps for Over a Decade

In the heart of East Africa’s most challenging operational environments, HICLOVER has stood as a trusted partner in waste disposal for humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. Across United Nations (UN) camps and African Union (AU) military bases in Somalia, HICLOVER incinerators have been actively running for over ten years, ensuring safe, efficient, and environmentally responsible waste management.

Long-Term Solutions for Critical Waste Disposal

Somalia’s UN compounds and AMISOM (African Union Mission in Somalia) forward operating bases manage massive logistical challenges. Among them, medical waste, food packaging, general solid waste, and hazardous materials all demand secure on-site treatment. That’s where HICLOVER’s incineration technology plays a vital role.

With waste treatment capacities ranging from 50 kg/hour to 300 kg/hour, HICLOVER incinerators are tailored to suit different camp sizes and waste types. Units such as the TS50 PLC, TS100, and TS300 PLC models provide fully automatic operation, high combustion temperatures above 1000°C, and optional features like wet scrubbers and multi-chamber combustion to meet stringent environmental requirements.

Key Benefits Delivered by HICLOVER Incinerators

• High Performance: Efficient combustion with reduced fuel consumption.

• Operational Safety: PLC-controlled systems ensure minimal human contact with hazardous waste.

• Eco-Friendly Disposal: Dioxin control, smoke treatment, and heat retention systems reduce emissions.

• Rapid Deployment: Modular or containerized designs allow fast installation across remote sites.

• Long-Term Reliability: Proven operation for over a decade in rugged Somali environments.

Trusted by UN & International Missions

The use of HICLOVER incinerators in Somalia extends across major mission hubs including Mogadishu, Baidoa, Kismayo, and Belet Weyne, where continuous operations are critical. Procurement through UN contractors, NGOs, and international aid agencies has ensured these incinerators remain core infrastructure in sanitation and environmental health.

Field engineers and technical operators consistently report high uptime, ease of maintenance, and flexibility in waste handling. HICLOVER models have also proven adaptable to local diesel or LPG fuel availability.

Global Reach, Local Impact

Backed by over 15 years of manufacturing excellence, HICLOVER serves clients in over 80 countries, from UN peacekeeping zones to WHO-supported health centers. Whether in conflict zones, field hospitals, or mobile operations, HICLOVER incinerators empower safer, cleaner environments for vulnerable communities and frontline personnel.

Choose HICLOVER C Built for Missions That Matter

If you represent a UN mission, government contractor, NGO, or disaster relief agency, HICLOVER offers:

 Full customization
 Remote or containerized installation
 CE-certified components
 Spare parts & global support

Visit www.hiclover.com to explore the full product range or email info@hiclover.com for expert consultation.

• UN camp waste incinerator Somalia

• African Union base solid waste treatment

• Medical waste incinerators for AMISOM

• Field camp diesel incinerator 100kg/hour

• Containerized incinerator for humanitarian aid

• HICLOVER incinerator supplier Somalia

• Waste management for peacekeeping operations

Medical waste incinerators with a capacity below 100 kg/hr are widely used across African countries for several key reasons, closely tied to infrastructure, healthcare system scale, and funding availability:

1. Small and Decentralized Healthcare Facilities

Many African countries have a decentralized healthcare system composed of small hospitals, clinics, rural health centers, and mobile outreach units. These facilities typically generate relatively low volumes of medical waste, making large-scale incinerators inefficient and cost-prohibitive. A 10–50 kg/hr incinerator can adequately serve a rural health center or a small district hospital.

2. Limited Waste Collection and Transport Infrastructure

In many regions, especially remote or rural areas, centralized waste collection and transportation systems are either absent or underdeveloped. On-site treatment using small incinerators becomes the most practical and immediate solution to prevent hazardous waste accumulation.

3. Budget and Donor Constraints

Government budgets for waste management are limited, and many installations rely on international aid (e.g., WHO, UNDP, World Bank). Donors often fund compact, cost-effective incinerators with lower operating and maintenance costs. These are easier to install and train staff on, compared to complex high-capacity systems.

4. Flexibility and Mobility

Incinerators under 100 kg/hr are often mobile or modular, allowing deployment in emergency zones, temporary clinics, or disaster response operations (e.g., refugee camps). This flexibility is essential in conflict-prone or crisis-affected regions.

5. Regulatory Simplicity

Smaller units are often subject to less stringent environmental regulations and are easier to obtain local approval for. This accelerates deployment in regions where bureaucratic delays are common.

6. Adaptation to Energy and Technical Constraints

Large incinerators often require continuous electricity, high diesel consumption, and skilled technical support—resources that may not be reliably available in many parts of Africa. Smaller units consume less fuel, are easier to maintain, and can be operated with minimal technical input.

Conclusion:

The predominance of medical incinerators under 100 kg/hr in Africa reflects a strategic response to on-the-ground realities—scattered healthcare facilities, limited infrastructure, constrained budgets, and the urgent need for localized, low-cost solutions to medical waste management.

French Version:

Pourquoi les incinérateurs de déchets médicaux en Afrique sont majoritairement de moins de 100 kg/h 

Les incinérateurs de déchets médicaux d’une capacité inférieure à 100 kg/h sont largement utilisés dans les pays africains, en raison de plusieurs facteurs clés liés aux infrastructures, à l’organisation des soins de santé et aux ressources financières :

1. Structures de santé petites et décentralisées

De nombreux pays africains disposent d’un système de santé décentralisé composé de petits hôpitaux, de centres de santé ruraux et de cliniques. Ces structures génèrent des volumes relativement faibles de déchets médicaux. Un incinérateur de 10 à 50 kg/h suffit pour leurs besoins quotidiens.

2. Manque d’infrastructures de collecte et de transport des déchets

Dans les zones rurales ou isolées, les systèmes de collecte et de transport des déchets sont souvent inexistants ou inefficaces. Le traitement sur place à l’aide de petits incinérateurs est donc la solution la plus pratique pour éviter l’accumulation de déchets dangereux.

3. Contraintes budgétaires et dépendance à l’aide internationale

Les budgets publics alloués à la gestion des déchets sont limités, et de nombreux équipements sont financés par des organismes internationaux comme l’OMS, le PNUD ou la Banque mondiale. Ces partenaires privilégient les incinérateurs compacts, économiques, faciles à entretenir et rapides à installer.

4. Mobilité et flexibilité

Les incinérateurs de moins de 100 kg/h sont souvent mobiles ou modulaires, adaptés aux cliniques temporaires, aux zones de crise ou aux camps de réfugiés. Cette capacité d’adaptation est essentielle dans les régions instables ou touchées par des urgences sanitaires.

5. Moins de contraintes réglementaires

Les petits incinérateurs sont soumis à des normes environnementales souvent plus souples, ce qui facilite leur autorisation et leur mise en service rapide, notamment dans les contextes administratifs complexes.

6. Adaptation aux contraintes techniques et énergétiques

Les incinérateurs de grande capacité nécessitent une alimentation électrique continue, une consommation importante de carburant et du personnel qualifié. En Afrique, ces ressources ne sont pas toujours disponibles. Les unités plus petites sont plus simples à utiliser, moins gourmandes en énergie et plus faciles à entretenir.

Conclusion :

La prédominance des incinérateurs de moins de 100 kg/h en Afrique répond aux réalités locales : des structures de santé dispersées, une logistique limitée, des financements réduits et un besoin crucial de solutions de traitement des déchets médicales efficaces et abordables.

Ghana’s healthcare sector generates an increasing volume of medical waste—a byproduct of expanding services and population growth. Proper disposal of infectious and hazardous wastes is critical to protect public health and the environment. Incineration remains one of the most widely adopted treatment methods, particularly for waste that cannot be recycled or safely landfilled. This article explores the current applications of incinerators in Ghana, provides a market overview, profiles major healthcare institutions utilizing this technology, and outlines key funding and support agencies driving improvements in medical waste management.

Market Overview

The market for medical waste incineration in Ghana is characterized by a mix of modern and rudimentary solutions. Major teaching hospitals in urban centers have invested in engineered incinerators, while many smaller health facilities rely on basic pits or outdated equipment lacking air pollution control. A recent study of five major hospitals found that all surveyed incinerators operated without proper emission controls, leading to concerns over dioxin and furan release (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). Despite these challenges, the government and international partners are promoting safer, higher-capacity systems to meet rising demand.

Applications of Incinerators

• Teaching Hospitals

  • Ho Teaching Hospital operates two functional incinerators—one LPG-fired and one diesel-fired—to burn infectious and hazardous wastes daily. Waste is incinerated from predawn until the end of the day, with resulting ash buried on-site (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

  • Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital (KATH) utilizes an “Incinco” incinerator (since 1996) for anatomical wastes and a recently installed Addfield MP400 LPG incinerator for infectious waste, processing 30–50 kg per cycle at temperatures up to 1,200 °C (researchgate.net, pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

  • Korle Bu Teaching Hospital (KBTH) runs a two-chambered diesel “Incinco” unit, operating 5–6 hours daily, seven days a week, through a 20-foot chimney stack (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

• Regional and District Hospitals
  Facilities such as Brong Regional Hospital (Sunyani) and University of Cape Coast Hospital rely on locally fabricated incinerators or imported units without air pollution control devices. Here, cycle times range from 2 to 6 hours, often leading to incomplete combustion and manual waste burning in pits for certain items (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

• Emerging Non-Incineration Technologies
  Although incineration is prevalent, facilities like the Kumasi Medical Waste Treatment Plant have introduced microwave treatment equipment capable of handling up to 10 tonnes of hazardous waste per day without atmospheric emissions (thebftonline.com). However, widespread adoption of non-incineration methods remains limited.

Key Institutions and Users

• Public Healthcare Facilities: Major teaching hospitals (KBTH, KATH, Ho Teaching Hospital, Cape Coast Teaching Hospital) lead incinerator usage, driven by higher waste volumes and technical capacity.

• Private Clinics and Laboratories: Many smaller clinics lack on-site incinerators, relying on municipal waste companies like Zoomlion to transport segregated medical waste to central facilities or open pits.

• Municipal Assemblies: Local government bodies oversee permitting for waste burial and regulate private operators, though enforcement of emission standards is uneven.

Funding and Support Agencies

• World Health Organization (WHO) & Ghana EPA: Issue guidelines and recommend incineration as a temporary solution, emphasizing the need for air pollution control devices (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

• United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) & Global Environment Facility (GEF): Have piloted projects installing autoclave units at facilities like Cape Coast Teaching Hospital, shifting away from low-temperature incineration to steam-based sterilization (undp.org).

• Health Care Without Harm (HCWH): Advocates for safer alternatives and capacity building, collaborating with local stakeholders to improve waste sorting and treatment.

• Bilateral Donors (e.g., USAID, JICA): Occasionally fund upgrades to incineration equipment and training, although project details are often dispersed across multiple health initiatives.

Challenges and Opportunities

• Environmental Concerns: Lack of emission controls on incinerators leads to toxic pollutant release.

• Operational Constraints: Overuse and improper sorting overstretch equipment designed for lower waste volumes, reducing lifespan and efficiency (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov).

• Financial Barriers: High capital and maintenance costs limit procurement of modern incinerators with built-in air pollution control.

• Opportunities: Scaling microwave and autoclave technologies, expanding funding for APCDs, and enhancing training on waste segregation can drive market growth and environmental compliance.

Conclusion

Medical waste incineration in Ghana represents a vital component of the nation’s healthcare waste management system. While major hospitals have made strides with engineered incinerators, significant gaps remain in emission controls, equipment maintenance, and adoption by smaller facilities. Continued investment from international agencies, coupled with the gradual introduction of non-incineration technologies and stricter regulatory enforcement, will be key to ensuring safe, sustainable disposal of medical waste across Ghana.

Introduction

Le secteur de la santé au Ghana génère un volume croissant de déchets médicaux, conséquence de l’expansion des services et de la croissance démographique. L’élimination adéquate des déchets infectieux et dangereux est cruciale pour protéger la santé publique et l’environnement. L’incinération reste l’une des méthodes de traitement les plus répandues, notamment pour les déchets non recyclables ou non enfouissables. Cet article examine les applications actuelles des incinérateurs au Ghana, donne un aperçu du marché, présente les principaux établissements de santé utilisateurs et décrit les agences de financement et de soutien.

Aperçu du marché

Le marché de l’incinération des déchets médicaux au Ghana se caractérise par un mélange de solutions modernes et rudimentaires. Les hôpitaux universitaires urbains ont investi dans des incinérateurs conçus industriellement, tandis que de nombreux établissements plus petits utilisent des fosses ou des équipements obsolètes sans contrôle des émissions. Une étude récente a montré que tous les incinérateurs examinés fonctionnaient sans dispositifs de contrôle des émissions, ce qui soulève des inquiétudes concernant la libération de dioxines et de furannes.

Applications des incinérateurs

• Hôpitaux universitaires

  • Ho Teaching Hospital exploite deux incinérateurs (GPL et diesel) pour brûler quotidiennement les déchets infectieux et dangereux.

  • Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital utilise un incinérateur « Incinco » pour les déchets anatomiques et un incinérateur Addfield MP400 pour les déchets infectieux, traitant 30–50 kg par cycle.

  • Korle Bu Teaching Hospital dispose d’un incinérateur diesel à deux chambres, fonctionnant 5–6 heures par jour.

• Hôpitaux régionaux et district
  Des établissements comme le Brong Regional Hospital et l’University of Cape Coast Hospital utilisent des incinérateurs locaux ou importés sans dispositifs de contrôle, avec des temps de cycle de 2 à 6 heures.

• Technologies émergentes sans incinération
  L’usine de traitement des déchets médicaux de Kumasi a introduit des équipements de traitement par micro-ondes, capables de traiter jusqu’à 10 tonnes de déchets par jour sans émissions atmosphériques.

Institutions utilisatrices

• Établissements publics : principaux hôpitaux universitaires (KBTH, KATH, Ho, Cape Coast)

• Cliniques privées et laboratoires : souvent sans incinérateurs sur site, dépendant de sociétés comme Zoomlion.

• Assemblées municipales : gèrent les permis et régulent les opérateurs privés, avec une application variable des normes.

Agences de financement et de soutien

• OMS & Ghana EPA : émettent des directives et recommandent l’incinération comme solution temporaire.

• PNUD & GEF : ont piloté des projets d’installation d’autoclaves pour stériliser les déchets infectieux.

• Health Care Without Harm : plaide pour des alternatives plus sûres et renforce les capacités locales.

• Donateurs bilatéraux : (USAID, JICA) financent occasionnellement des équipements et des formations.

Défis et opportunités

• Environnementaux : émissions toxiques non contrôlées.

• Opérationnels : surcharge et tri inadéquat des déchets.

• Financiers : coûts élevés d’acquisition et de maintenance.

• Opportunités : diffusion des technologies par micro-ondes et des autoclaves, financement des dispositifs de contrôle des émissions et formation au tri.

Conclusion

L’incinération des déchets médicaux au Ghana est essentielle pour la gestion des déchets de santé. Si les grands hôpitaux universitaires ont fait des progrès, il subsiste des lacunes en matière de contrôle des émissions, d’entretien des équipements et d’adoption par les petits établissements. Les investissements continus des agences internationales, l’introduction progressive de technologies non incinératoires et un renforcement réglementaire seront déterminants pour un traitement sûr et durable des déchets médicaux au Ghana.

WHO-supported incinerators by country

• Tajikistan (2022)
  Through Gavi partnership, WHO supplied 8 diesel-fired (20–30 kg) and 6 wood-fired (10–15 kg) incinerators across regions to improve vaccine-related waste disposal in remote immunization centers (who.int).

• Sudan (May 2024)
  WHO, with EU funding, installed 8 high-temperature, zero-emission incinerators in hospitals across five states—Northern, Red Sea, Gedaref, Blue Nile, and River Nile—to enhance infection control and environmental safety .

• Yemen (by 2024)
  A joint initiative by WHO and the World Bank resulted in the deployment of 60 treatment units (shredders with burial pits), enabling 139 of 170 health facilities to safely handle medical waste (up from ~20%) (essentialaction.org).

UNDP & partners (GEF-funded) in Africa

• Across Ghana, Madagascar, Tanzania, and Zambia, UNDP–WHO–Health Care Without Harm introduced non‑burn technologies—autoclaves, microwaves—and implemented best practices, reducing reliance on polluting low‑cost incinerators (global.noharm.org).

• Incinerators for pharmaceutical waste were installed with UNDP support in Zimbabwe, Afghanistan, Chad, São Tomé & Príncipe, Sudan, and Zambia (undp-capacitydevelopmentforhealth.org).

World Bank Involvement

• The World Bank has historically funded at least 30 health sector projects involving incinerators in over 20 countries (essentialaction.org).

• Among ~156 World Bank Group (WBG) waste‑tech projects, ~29% included health-care waste incineration, with ~49% of all projects in Africa, and high concentrate in Kenya (12 projects), Brazil (8), Turkey (7), India (6), Zimbabwe (6), Tanzania (5), Mexico (5), Argentina (5), South Africa (5), Zambia (5) (essentialaction.org).

However, the Bank has faced criticism for continuing to promote incineration over safer alternatives, despite environmental concerns—experts argue that advanced alternatives are safer and more sustainable (essentialaction.org).

 Environmental & Health Impacts

• Hazards: Low‑temperature or unimproved incinerators release harmful pollutants—dioxins, furans, heavy metals, particulate matter—and residual ash may leach toxins (unep.org).

• Standards: Safe incineration requires high temperatures (≥850‑1 100 °C) and gas‑cleaning systems; otherwise, air pollution and public health risks remain high (who.int).

• WHO/UNDP push: WHO encourages adoption of non‑burn alternatives (autoclaving, microwaving, chemical disinfection) where feasible (who.int).

Summary Table – By Support & Scale

• Medical waste incinerator projects

• WHO‑supported medical waste disposal

• World Bank medical waste management

• UNDP medical/pharmaceutical incinerators

• High‑temperature incinerators ≥850 °C

• Non‑burn alternatives in healthcare waste

• Environmental impact of healthcare incinerators

1. Highlight key actors: WHO, World Bank, UNDP, GEF, Gavi, EU.

2. Quantify scope: units installed (e.g., 14 in Tajikistan, 8 in Sudan).

3. Emphasize standards: High-temp (>850°C) vs low-temp emissions.

4. Stress alternatives: Autoclaves, microwaves, shredders.

5. Discuss geography: Strong focus on Africa, Central Asia, Middle East.

6. Acknowledge critiques: WBG’s environmental concerns.

Overall, globally-funded medical waste incineration efforts have scaled across 20+ countries—with WHO deploying dozens of both modern incinerators and treatment units (e.g., 14 in Tajikistan, 8 in Sudan, 60 units in Yemen), UNDP/GEF backing non‑burn and pharma incineration in Africa, and the World Bank funding 30+ projects. Yet environmental experts advocate for high‑temperature incinerators with proper emission controls—or better still, non‑burn technologies—to minimize risks.