Features
Making cash from trash
by PROF. HIROSHAN HETTIARACHI
The organic fertiliser ship from China was one of the hotly debated topics in Sri Lanka. The quality of the fertiliser shipment, which resulted heated exchanges between the stakeholders, almost sparked a diplomatic brawl between the two countries. During this debacle, the public also reacted with their opinions; some were genuinely concerned about the quality issue while some others were angered by the importation process. Another faction rejected it because it believed that it was a shipment of “fertiliser made out of garbage.” Although the Chinese company is known for making organic fertiliser out of seaweed, I do not know if this particular shipment was made of seaweed, or garbage as some have put it. I want to focus on the sentiment that it was rejected based on the suspicion that it may be made of garbage. My question is what if it was made of garbage? Is it that bad to make organic fertiliser out of garbage?
Making organic fertiliser out of garbage (or waste material) is not a new or a foreign concept. For centuries, cattle manure has been used as fertiliser in Sri Lanka. When chicken farming grew as an industry, chicken manure became popular as another type of organic fertiliser. Backyard composting was not limited to tree leaves; many used kitchen waste too. Animal manure and kitchen waste are essentially garbage too. We should also note that the use of waste material as fertiliser was not something unique to Sri Lanka; this has been the story of the entire humanity. Historically, there was no harm in doing so, as long as the waste material was used safely (especially considering the risk posed by pathogens that may be present in animal manure).
Although it may sound alarming when we look back now, selling night soil (human excreta) as fertiliser was also commonplace not too long ago. This had been the practice in many larger cities around the world until those cities received their sewage collection systems about a century ago. Introduction of city sewage collection systems offered us a way to upgrade the use of human waste in agriculture to a much safer level. When the sewage collected is treated at a wastewater treatment plant, we have the option to use the sewage sludge, one of the safer byproducts of this treatment process, as a soil conditioner in agricultural applications.
Liquid waste (sewage) was not the only type of waste that received a technological upgrade to become useful for agricultural applications; solid waste also followed the same course. When compost making grew as an industry, so did the demand for raw material (feedstock). Where compost making happens in large scale, this increasing demand for feedstock is now met mainly with the solid waste collected by/in cities, which is usually defined as Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). Obviously, the entire volume of MSW cannot be composted. The organic material such as food/yard waste in MSW is the portion that can be used towards compost making. Depending on the lifestyle and the economic status of a population, the percentage of organic waste in their MSW can vary in a wide range. It can be as little as 20% to as high as 70% or more. When you factor in the total volume of MSW, even a low organic fraction such as 20% can still give you a very large volume of organic waste that can provide a guaranteed supply of feedstock for compost making.
The countries that have realised this resourcefulness of organic waste are already benefiting from it: the list includes not only the developed countries but also many developing countries. It is unfortunate to see that Sri Lanka is not among them yet. On the contrary, we are still looking at organic waste with disgust rather than seeing its potential. This unawareness has gone a long way in our society to generate comments like “I do not want any fertilizser made of garbage” that I mentioned earlier. The negative connotation that we have instilled in MSW is mainly due to the unpleasantness of mixed waste. No one sees value in mixed waste. But this perception changes when the same waste is sorted into groups based on different types of material, for example, one pile of paper/cardboard, another pile of glass bottles, another pile of plastics, and perhaps, all organic material such as food waste in another. The minute we separate them, the seemingly useless garbage becomes a bunch of small piles with potentially useful material.
If you want your organic waste to become a useful material like compost, it needs to be separated from other stuff in MSW. Removing larger items such as boxes or bottles or tin cans is doable, although not cost effective to do it manually. But the real challenge is posed by the non-compostable smaller things such as candy wrappers, fractured glass bottles and pieces of styrofoam that may be mixed with the organic material, which you might not even spot easily. Separating organic material from mixed waste is labor intensive and not easy even if you have money or technology. The simple answer is not to mix waste in the first place. The process becomes simpler if you separate them right at the source. This means that the process should begin at home or at your workplace. The compostable material such as food waste you generate in the kitchen (waste produced during/after cooking as well as unwanted/spoiled food) and the garden waste such as leaves and twigs needs to be collected in a separate bin. This method of waste sorting at the point of its generation is called “source separation,” that is in fact regarded as the very first step towards any sustainable solid waste management strategy.
In a way, source separation is also not entirely a new concept. Years ago, our society had a habit of setting aside old newspapers, glass bottles and scrap metals until the next visit of a scavenger who usually shows up once in a few months to collect the materials. What we did back then was exactly source separation. That tradition became almost obsolete when the demand for such secondary use material dropped after markets were flooded with new materials, especially plastics. However, thanks to some recent recycling awareness campaigns, some of us practice source separation again, by setting aside paper/cardboard and plastics. If we want to benefit from organic waste as a society, we have to extend the same courtesy, that is, set them aside.
Unlike paper/glass bottles/metals, organic waste is not something that you can set aside and keep for too long. It decomposes rapidly making gas and liquid byproducts that may be unpleasant to bear, attract rodents or insects, and possibly cause health hazards too. What this means is that you have to use it before it is too late. Not everyone is willing or able to make compost in their backyard.
Unfortunately, this is where things get complicated. There is little you can do by yourself to contribute to this good cause if your community (neighborhood, village, town, or city) does not have a mechanism to collect your organic waste separately and send it to a composting plant. This is the real issue and this is where we are stuck in the process. We have a very limited number of composting plants, let alone separate collection schemes. We do not have such a system or a culture yet.
What can we do to move forward and benefit from this resource? There are two things that we have to address – awareness raising and capacity development. Thanks to the fertiliser fiasco, composting awareness has gone up in the society. The government has shown clear interest in going for an organic-based agriculture. Although the sudden move caused some unfortunate events and backlash, the same events have increased awareness of organic fertiliser and especially of compost. Within this context, isn’t this the best time to address capacity building as well? I have seen compost making projects failing in other countries mainly due to the lack of demand and inability to compete with government-subsidized chemical fertilisers. However, when there is already more awareness and government backing, I do not see any better time than now for Sri Lanka to capitalise on organic waste composting.
Sri Lanka produces about 7,000 metric tonnes of MSW per day and about 65% of it is organic. In addition to Colombo, which has about a million daytime population, there are 23 other Municipal Councils and 41 Urban Councils covering all provinces that collect (or supposed to collect) MSW every day. The MSW volume from these large population centers will certainly enable the composting industry to have a guaranteed supply of feedstock. The money that we will have to spend on upgrading the MSW sorting and separate collections is in fact a wise investment compared to the benefit this whole process may bring back. When the organic waste, which is 65% of our MSW, is diverted for compost, it already saves money by considerably shrinking the final volume of MSW that needs disposal space. If there is a guaranteed supply of feedstock and a demand for compost, private investors will also jump in to bear the financial burden. Is it not better to invest on this sustainable local solution rather than spending the same money on nurturing a fertilizer importation culture?
(A product of the University of Moratuwa, Prof. Hettiarachchi is currently working as the Geotechenical Engineering Professor, United Nations University, New Jersey. He is also an expert on Waste Management, Circular Economy, and Sustainability.)
Features
Combining local resources,traditional knowledge and science to build a food-secure Sri Lanka
World Food Day 2026: Innovating today for a better food future
by Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
What will be on the Sri Lankan dinner table ten years from now? Will our children be able to get nutritious food at a price their families can afford? Will farmers be able to grow enough despite changing weather and rising costs? And how much of the food we produce will actually reach the consumer, instead of being lost or wasted along the way?
These questions can’t wait. A farmer faces unpredictable weather. A family faces rising food costs. Fruit goes unsold after a good harvest. Some children do not get enough nutrition. The future of food is tied to the future of Sri Lanka itself.
World Food Day 2026 is a chance to look beyond the immediate problems and ask whether we can build a food system that feeds our people well, gives farmers better opportunities, protects the environment and makes better use of what we already have. The answer can be yes, but we will have to think differently.
We are not starting from zero. Sri Lanka has diverse crops, fisheries, traditional food knowledge, indigenous varieties, research institutions, universities and a young generation able to create new solutions. What we need is to bring these together and act. Producing more will not secure our food future on its own. It will depend on how intelligently we produce, process, preserve, distribute and consume food.
Making more of what we already have
Innovation does not always mean inventing something new. Often it means finding better uses for the resources we have.
Sri Lanka grows traditional rice varieties, kurakkan, green gram, cowpea, jackfruit, breadfruit, cassava, sweet potato, coconut and palmyrah. All of them have great potential for modern, nutritious, value-added foods. Jackfruit and breadfruit can be made into flour and other convenient products. Traditional rice varieties can go into new foods that suit changing consumer needs. Palmyrah, with its strong cultural heritage, can create new income through better processing, packaging, quality assurance and market development.
The aim is to connect our traditional food knowledge with modern consumer needs and technology, while keeping our food heritage.
Stop wasting the food we produce
Reducing food loss and waste should be a major priority. Seasonal fruits such as mango, banana, papaya and pineapple can be lost in large quantities when production exceeds demand or when storage, transport and processing facilities are inadequate. With suitable technology, these fruits can become dried products, pulps, powders, beverages and other shelf-stable foods.
Agricultural and fisheries by-products are resources too. They could be turned into food ingredients, animal feed, bio-based products and other useful materials, which would move us toward a more circular food economy.
Technology alone is not enough. We need stronger local processing facilities, cold storage, efficient transport, collection centres and market information systems, especially close to where food is produced. Cutting food loss raises the value of what our farmers and fishers already produce.
Nutrition and food safety come first
Food security means more than having enough food. People also need food that is safe and nutritious.
Sri Lanka can develop affordable, nutritious foods from local pulses, grains, vegetables, fruits and fish. Children and other vulnerable groups should get particular attention. Schoolchildren in particular deserve a focus: safe, nutritious, locally sourced products for school feeding programs would support child nutrition, local farmers and domestic food industries at the same time.
Food safety must stay at the centre of food innovation. Good hygiene, quality control, laboratory testing, traceability and appropriate food safety systems are what make new products safe as well as attractive and nutritious.
A food system that can cope with climate change
Climate change is already affecting agricultural production, water availability, crop yields and food prices. We need food systems that can handle changing conditions. That means climate-resilient crops, efficient water use, soil and water conservation, better storage and resource-efficient food processing.
Traditional knowledge matters here. Generations of Sri Lankan farmers have developed practices suited to local climates and ecosystems. Combining that experience with modern science can give us solutions that fit local conditions and are sustainable. Technology alone will not build the future of food. Science, experience and local knowledge together can.
Give young people a bigger role
Sri Lanka’s universities have an important part to play in shaping our food future. Young people should be encouraged to identify real problems in the food system and work on practical solutions in areas such as food waste, sustainable packaging, nutrition, food safety, modernising traditional foods and digital technologies.
A good research project should not always end as a research paper. Where appropriate, research should be supported to move on to products, technologies, enterprises and community solutions. That needs stronger partnerships between universities and industry, along with mentoring, research funding, business support and market connections. If young researchers and entrepreneurs can turn their ideas into viable food innovations, both consumers and producers will benefit.
A pathway designed for Sri Lanka
We do not need to copy food-system models from other countries. We can build a pathway that suits our own resources, culture and needs. It would bring together local resources, traditional knowledge, scientific research, appropriate technology and entrepreneurship, with farmers, fishers, universities, research institutions, food industries, entrepreneurs and policymakers working side by side.
The goal goes beyond selling raw materials. We need to create more value, reduce waste, improve nutrition, generate jobs and strengthen rural livelihoods. This matters especially for small and medium-scale food enterprises, which can drive local economic development when they get the right technical, financial and market support.
The choices we make today
The food future will not create itself. It will be shaped by what we grow, what we research, what we process, what we consume and what we choose not to waste.
So, the question for World Food Day 2026 is this: what can we do today so that every Sri Lankan has safe, nutritious, affordable and sustainable food tomorrow?
The answers are already around us, in our farms, fisheries, food businesses, universities, laboratories and communities. We have the resources, the traditional knowledge, the scientific expertise and talented young people. What we need now is to connect them and act.
A better food future begins with the choices we make today.
Dr. Kaushalya Wijayasekara
Senior Lecturer, Department of Biosystems Technology, Faculty of Technology, University of Ruhuna
Features
20th Anniversary of Digampathana blast – the day Sri Lanka Navy cried
By Admiral Ravindra C Wijegunaratne
WV, RWP and Bar, RSP, VSV, USP, NI (M) (Pakistan), ndc, psn, Bsc
(Hons) (War Studies) (Karachi) MPhil (Madras)
Former Navy Commander and Former Chief of Defence Staff
Former Chairman, Trincomalee Petroleum Terminals Ltd
Former Managing Director Ceylon Petroleum Corporation
Former High Commissioner to Pakistan
The Digampathana suicide truck attack on 16th October 2006 remains the deadliest single strike in Sri Lanka Navy history, leaving scars that time cannot erase.
It was a seemingly ordinary Monday morning on 16 October 2006, but the calm of that day would soon be shattered in a way none of us could have imagined. As the Commandant of the Naval and Maritime Academy and Flag Officer Commanding Naval Fleet at Trincomalee, I was aware that a number of my cadets were travelling that morning, part of a convoy of fifteen buses carrying naval personnel from Trincomalee, Colombo, and other bases, heading toward Dambulla to rendezvous with another group. The convoy also included trucks and escort vehicles, a routine movement planned and coordinated with the army to ensure the roads were clear. The morning started quietly. Some personnel greeted friends, handed over their weapons, or strolled to a nearby tea shop. It all seemed so ordinary—too ordinary for what would come next.

Sri Lanka Navy sunk LTTE Ships carrying arms, ammunition and warlike materials thousand miles away from Sri Lanka in Indian Ocean in September and October 2007.
By late morning, both convoys had reached the small ground at Digampathana, near the Sigiriya junction, and personnel mingled briefly, unaware that a carefully orchestrated act of terror was waiting. Then, suddenly, an empty half-truck veered directly into the convoy. It exploded with a ferocity I can still recall as if it were yesterday. Nuts, bolts, and high explosives tore through the air. Pandemonium erupted instantly. I later learned that 107 of our naval personnel were killed on the spot and another 153 critically injured. The scene was indescribable—bodies scattered, vehicles mangled, personal effects strewn across the ground. I remember later hearing that the head of the suicide bomber was recovered more than 100 meters away from the blast, a grim testament to the sheer force of the explosion.
I was in my office at the Naval and Maritime Academy when my mobile phone rang. A young midshipman from the 21st intake called, his voice trembling: “Sir, there was a huge explosion at the convoy point! Many are dead … my batch mate Wijesundara is among them.” I immediately jumped into my jeep with my escort Chief Petty Officer and driver and rushed to Digampathana, relying on every ounce of my driving skill to reach the scene. The journey, which usually took little more than an hour, felt endless that day, each passing mile weighed down by dread.
When I arrived, I was confronted with a sight that no training can prepare you for. The injured were being rushed to Dambulla Hospital, where doctors and nurses worked tirelessly, improvising in ways that saved lives despite the overwhelming chaos. I went back to the site after visiting the hospital. The remains of our naval personnel were scattered across the ground, and someone had begun collecting weapons and protective gear. I immediately contacted Surgeon Rear Admiral Nico Jayasekara and received his instructions: collect all body parts in separate bags and transport them to the Trincomalee Naval Hospital mortuary. This gruesome work had to be done with care and dignity, and it filled the icebox in my vehicle. Through DNA testing initiated by Rear Admiral Nico, we were able to identify every naval personnel lost that day, bringing some closure to grieving families.
The Navy Commander at the time, Vice Admiral Wasantha Karannagoda, was devastated. I had worked closely with him and knew how deeply he cared for his men. He ensured that the fallen were honoured with full ceremonial naval funerals at Welisara Naval Base, attended by families and comrades. Sixty-seven funerals were conducted in a single day—a number that still haunts me.
The Digampathana attack remains the largest single loss of naval life in our history. It was a day of sorrow, but also a day that reinforced our resolve. The tragedy galvanized the Navy to target the LTTE Sea Tiger wing with renewed determination and reshaped our maritime operations forever. Every time I think of that day, I remember not just the lives lost, but the courage, professionalism, and dedication of those who survived, those who treated the injured, and those who ensured the fallen were honored properly. May the souls of our naval hero’s rest in peace, their sacrifice guiding us and inspiring generations of naval personnel to come.
Features
‘Murder at Whitby Abbey’
Tales of Mystery and Suspense – 24
I was intrigued by the title of a book I found in a book drop at the condominium of a friend, Murder at Whitby Abbey, and I brought it home with me though I will not be able to return it in the near future. It was described on the cover page as ‘a standout in the crowded medieval mystery field’, though I fear I do not know of other books in this field, apart from the Cadfael series, which I have dealt with earlier.
The book, by Cassandra Clark, is set during the reign of Richard II and has as a backdrop his precarious position, which led to his being replaced, and murdered, by his cousin Henry, who reigned as Henry IV. It is a gloomy book, the action taking place in the twelve days of Christmas leading up to the Epiphany. And the gloom is pervasive, even though this is supposed to be a time of festivity, with mummers performing, and many of those in the guest house where the heroine stays going to town to enjoy themselves, with much drinking and much music, which also fills the guesthouse.
The heroine Hildegarde is a nun, sent to try to acquire a relic being sold by Whitby Abbey, though this was also a penance set by the Abbot of the monastery that governed her abbess because she had had sex with a man. Soon after she and her companions reach the Abbey set high on a cliff, she finds that there are other bidders, and soon suspects that the hierarchy, not perhaps the Abbot who seems a weakling, but his rapacious bursar, is determined to make money, and not above creating false relics to sell to several aspirants.
After Hildegarde and her Cistercian companions – Whitby is a Benedictine Foundation – two monks, Gregory and Egbert, and a young priest Mark, reach the abbey, they find that Aelwyn, a monk they had met on their way to the guesthouse had died. This was in the apple store, and they realize, when they find the surplices of novices stuffed into the air vents, that he had been left to suffocate in the overwhelming scent of apples.
The Cistercians are asked to look into the death, perhaps because they are likely to get no cooperation from the Abbey folk, but perhaps because those in charge are keen to know what happened. And the infirmarer, an old monk, suggests Hildegarde talk to a man called Edred who worked for the bursar, and had been a friend of Aelwyn’s. But Edred too is killed, before he can keep an appointment he had made with Hildegarde, drowned in a pool near the farmhouse of the Abbey.
Meanwhile tensions arise between the fisherfolk and the abbey for the bursar wants to charge them for using the beach that technically belongs to the abbey to dry their fish and their nets. This leads to physical battles, when the guards used by the abbey, under the command it seems of the bursar whose determination to make money is not resisted by the abbot and the prior, try to storm the area where the fishermen live.
Hildegard finds out more about what had happened through two youngsters, one of whom Torold is the son of Aelwyn by a woman who worked as a prostitute for a cartel, and with whom Mark fell in love. The other works on the farm and had seen Edred meet someone near the pool, after which that someone left the place by himself. And the boy had also found in the pool a sort of dagger with the seal of the abbey.
He and his dog, and Torold who follows her, rescue Hildegarde from a man at arms who has waylaid her and tries to rape her earlier. Escaping into the abbey she was nearly been raped then by the bursar, but she managed to escape, in the process setting fire to him and the muniments room, which led, when he was rescued, to the discovery of a box with the money he said had been stolen, blame being cast on both Aelwyn and Edred.
Matters come to a head when the fisherfolk try to storm the abbey, being resisted by the men at arms stationed on the towers. But then Hildegarde realizes that behind the murders was the bursar’s clerk, whom she pursued to the cathedral. There is great drama then as she escapes from him when he tries to kill her, and then from the man at arms who had tried to both rape and kill her, but they both fall from the scaffolding she had climbed, the latter coming from a tower where he had been stationed.
Both of them think they run the rapacity of the abbey, the latter claiming to work for the nobles opposed to Richard, who is presented throughout the book as devoted to his subjects, not to power or money. But though the villains die, the bursar continues, having got over the hysteria the fire had caused and his acknowledgment then of guilt – and though the abbot and the prior seem less vicious, whether they will be able to assert themselves is questionable.
Before the climax, when the others in the guesthouse were leaving, Hildegarde found that two of them were in possession of the relic, for which they seem to have paid well. Hildegarde herself had made a derisory offer, but before she leaves the abbot gives her the relic, perhaps in gratitude for what she and her fellow Cistercians had discovered, the abbey having made as much money as it needed and more from the gullible other buyers.
Mark’s inamorata is saved from the stews because she moves in with Edred’s widow whom the bursar had thrown out of the rooms he occupied when her husband was found dead. Hildegarde had paid for lodgings, in a house run by the man who ran the brothels, but he had a kindly side and was going to finance them to make nets for the fishermen.
So, the Cistercians set off for their home as swiftly as they can to get there on the day of the Epiphany, having stopped en route to pray for King Richard whose birthday it was.
-
News6 days agoSri Lanka escalates anti-graft drive with Shiranthi’s jailing
-
News7 days agoNPP govt. reminded of its responsibilities as US warship leaves Colombo
-
Latest News7 days agoFarhan, Sadaqat help Pakistan ace 183 chase to go 1-0 up
-
Latest News5 days agoFarhan and Sadaqat help Pakistan seal series in style
-
News6 days agoIranian ships stranded, Lanka fears US sanctions
-
Latest News3 days agoNissanka’s return headlines Sri Lanka’s Test squad against Pakistan
-
Features5 days agoIntake 16: 45 years of duty and honour
-
News7 days agoInterdicted top House official Kularatne receives special recognition in Mexican Parliament

