650 likes | 858 Views
Solid Waste Work at the Bank – My Personal Journey since 1978. By Sandra Cointreau Solid Waste Management Advisor The World Bank, Washington DC January 2006. My Journey with the Bank. 1978 - Tunisia - Franglish 1979 – Nigeria – Proving Ground with Ed Motte and Randolph Anderson
E N D
Solid Waste Work at the Bank – My Personal Journey since 1978 By Sandra Cointreau Solid Waste Management Advisor The World Bank, Washington DC January 2006
My Journey with the Bank • 1978 - Tunisia - Franglish • 1979 – Nigeria – Proving Ground with Ed Motte and Randolph Anderson • 1979 - India – Handy work,palmist okays my role in urban mission • 1980 - John Courtney – my Brother typewriter and park benches to write strategic plan guide • 1981 - John Kalbermatten – A leap of faith and support for role in UN decade efforts • 1981 - Faxing and Word Processing – Wow!! • 1982 - Charles Gunnerson – Co-authoring • 1983 - Saul Arlosoroff – The fine of advocacy for recycling • 1986 - Everywhere - Looking for Printers
My Journey with the Bank • 1987 – Dumbing down and institutional insanity, where are all my mentors going?!! • 1988 – Lotus and Costing of Options • 1990 – Linked lotus spreadsheets for costing– Euphoria!! • 1991 – Privatization madness • 1993 – Have Equestrian Helmet will Travel • 1995 – Computers end BTO time
Happiness Is a Horse…
My Journey with the Bank • 1997 – Trust funds and tied consultants • 1998 - Carl Bartone - Global collaboration • 2000 – Email madness – endless “communication” • Somewhere in here – end of very dumb marriage • 2001 – 911 and a new Go Slow in my consulting • 2003 – Iraq – Utilities for the south – the satisfaction of working in the danger zone • 2004 – Climate Change – a new driver for operations funding of disposal improvements • 2005 – Avian Influenza – another new driver to fixing dumpsites
3 Decades of Bank Transition • 75-83 – community systems and user charges as part slum upgrading, compost trials. • 83-90 – new collection fleets and workshop improvements, institutional and financial strengthening, dumpsite upgrading. • 90-98 – stakeholders, strategic planning, private sector collection trials, cost recovery expectations, sanitary landfills with environmental assessments.
3 Decades of Bank Transition • 99-01 – waiting on decentralization of financial authority and private sector investment. • 01-03 – sanitary landfills and transfer stations, medical waste source segregation and treatment, upgrading waste picking. • 04-06 – sanitary landfills with gas recovery, composting, anaerobic digestion, transfer systems to regional sites, all with carbon finance and inter-municipal agreements
On the Horizon 2006+ • continued regional climate change disposal/treatment systems, • policies on economic incentives, • slaughter and livestock waste segregation and treatment, • source segregation of recyclables, holistic decision modeling of transfer and disposal technology options considering emissions, consumables, and costs.
What Have We Learned:First – What are the health and environmental concerns?
Environmental Concerns: • Greenhouse gases from solid waste activities – Landfills are top sources of methane GHG; refuse fleets are significant sources of CO2 and N2O. • Wasted recyclable materials have lost inherent energy from production. • Volatilized heavy metals (e.g., mercury and lead), dioxins and furans from open burning dumpsites and low-standard incinerators. • Leachate from unlined and uncovered dumpsites contaminates ground and surface waters. • Bioaerosols and dust from handling. • Smoke particulates from open dumping.
Health Concerns: • Infection – contact with human fecal matter, blood, and diseased tissue; contact with diseased dead animal matter and manure. • Animal diseases – foraging of animals/birds at open dumps; recycling of slaughter waste into animal feed. • Respiratory disease -- particulates and bioaerosols reduce pulmonary function. • Cancer -- volatilized refractory organics from uncontrolled landfill gases; heavy metals, dioxins and furans from poorly controlled burning. • Headaches – lack of oxygen and excessive CO from dumpsite decomposition and burning. • Injury – wounds from sharps, traffic accidents.
Direct Contact with Waste: Bombay, India, 1995 Significant contact during loading, no shoes or gloves Tema, Ghana, 1998 Children playing in an area of uncollected waste
Animals Raised and Fed on Raw Waste: Dominican Republic, 1998, Pigs living on dumpsites El Salvador, 1998, Cows and pigs searching for food
Dumpsite Linkage to Animal and Poultry Diseases: • Avian Influenza H5N1–virus in bird secretions and excreta are long-lived. Present in bedding and slaughter wastes, able to last weeks. Wild and domestic birds are carriers. Humans susceptible through contact and ingestion of poultry. • Encephalopathies (Mad Cow, Sheep Scrapie) -- prion proteins in brain and spinal materials are long lasting, even after composting, or thermal processing into animal feed. Humans susceptible through ingestion of meat. • Cattle, Sheep and Goat Foot-and-Mouth -- virus in secretions and excreta. Present in bedding and slaughter wastes. Dogs, rats, and birds are carriers. • Bovine TB – bacterium in secretions and excreta. Present in bedding and slaughter wastes. Infective to all mammals. • Rabbit Viral Hemorrhagic Fever –virus in rabbit blood and excreta. Present in bedding wastes and slaughter wastes, able to last weeks. Surviving rabbits are carriers.
Bio-aerosol Levels: • 10-1000 times Higher near the truck loading hopper. (Switzerland, Denmark local studies) • 2-10 times Higher inside materials recovery plants. (USA, Finland local studies) • 2-4 times Higher at sanitary landfills. (Italy local studies) Izmir, Turkey, 1994
Particulates High at Burning Dumps: Mauritius, 1998 Dominican Republic, 1998
Pulmonary Function: • 23% Dumpsite Workers with Abnormal Pulmonary Function. (India local study) • 40% Dumpsite Waste Pickers with Abnormal Pulmonary Function. (Thailand local study) • 53% Dumpsite Child Waste Pickers with Abnormal Pulmonary Function. (Philippines local study)
Blood Lead Levels: • 70% Dumpsite Children Pickers above WHO lead guideline --children pickers mean lead was 2.5 times higher than in control slum children. (Philippines local study) Quezon City, the Philippines, 1995
What Have We Learned:Second – How do we achieve cost-effective technical designs?
Waste Character: • Vegetable/putrescible material 2-3 times higher -- 40% to 80% by weight. • Recyclable paper, plastic, metal, glass 2-5 times lower -- 5% to 15%. • Inert fines 2-5 times higher -- 20% to 40%. • Moisture content 2-4 times higher -- 40% to 70%. • Density 2-3 times higher -- 350 to 400 kg/cu.mtr., uncompacted in collection truck. • Calorific values 2-3 times lower -- 800 to 1,300 kg/cal.
Waste Differences affect Technical Choices: • Compaction is not always justified. • Composting is technically viable, but farmers may not afford to pay the difference in cost above sanitary landfill. • Sanitary landfill gas generation is technically viable, but gas escapes quickly in warm tropical climates and requires extra investment to contain. • Incineration is rarely self-sustainable, since supplemental fuel is needed for low-calorie waste.
Strategic Planning is Essential: • Collection options vary widely in cost and quality of service, must fit the local setting. • Transfer facilities can dramatically cut costs. • Disposal systems have large economies-of-scale, must fit the local waste character. • Holistic modeling is available to comparatively assess costs, consumables, and emissions.
Collection Vehicle Types: • Small – power tiller, hand cart, mini-truck. • Slow moving – tractor and trailer, animal cart. • Fast moving – open tipper truck, rear loader truck. • Container lifting – roll on, skip, mechanical arm for carts. Accra, Ghana, 1997 Kukkattpally, India, 2001
Collection Vehicle Types: Liftable Container, Izmir, Turkey, 1994 Arm-Roll Container, Sekondi, Ghana, 1997
Collection Vehicle Types: Market Skip Lift Containers, Tema, Ghana, 1994 Arm Roll Container, Ahmedabad, India, 2001
Collection Vehicle Types: Open Tipper Lifts Hand Carts, Hue, Vietnam, 1996 Mini Private Truck, Bangalore, India, 2001
Public versus Private Operator: • Different financing costs. • Different overhead costs. • Different salaries and benefit costs. • Different insurance, tax, registration, and marketing costs (also corruption costs). • Different length of hours of work and productivity per worker. • Different vehicle availability. • Different accountability – per contractual specifications.
Private Sector Service: Woman-Owned Micro-Enterprise, Quito, Ecuador, 1998 Women-Owned Cooperative, Kukkattpally India, 2001
Public versus Private Costs: • Total costs for private versus public were so close in Quito, it was decided to maintain a balance of each, and gradually decrease government to about 30% through natural attrition.
Transfer Systems enable reducing Collection Haul Distance, Vehicle Emissions and Costs by 20 To 50 percent.
Determine Transfer Breakpoints: • Each type and size of collection vehicle has a different transfer breakpoint. • Traffic speed affects the transfer breakpoint. • Consider transfer for hauls over 30 minutes.
Typical 2-Level Transfer Stations Quito, Ecuador, 1998 Manila, Philippines, 1993
Direct Unloading to Transfer Truck Hyderabad, India, Skip Container Lift Collection Truck, Unloads to Open Tipping Truck, 2001
Transfer Systems: • Enable implementation of regional Treatment/Disposal activities that achieve Economies-of-Scale. • Treatment/Disposal facilities should be at least 300 tonnes/daily shift to have bulldozers, wheeled loaders, windrow turners fully utilized. • Roads, fences, weighbridges, gatehouses, utilities and maintenance components are fixed costs that should be applied to large waste quantities to lower cost/tonne.
Composting: • Compost plants are safe and clean and technically appropriate for clean organic waste. • Product quality is key to success. • Market demand may not be adequate to cover costs. Ahmedebad, India, 2001
Neighborhood Composting: • Lessen the need to transport waste to disposal. • Enable neighborhood revenues and employment. • Require motivated public support. Dakha, Bangladesh, 2001
Materials Recycling at Source: • Source segregation obtains cleanest reusable materials. • Source segregation requires extra collection systems. • Registration and route assignment upgrades the status and security of waste pickers. • Source segregation minimizes occupational and environmental health risks. Bangalore, India, 2001
Protective Gear for Workers: Khulna, Bangladesh (syringes), 2001 Tema, Ghana, 1998
Segregate Special Wastes: • Licensed private operators to safely handle segregated biomedical wastes. Hyderabad, India, 2001
What Have We Learned:Third – How do we arrange financial sustainability?
Solid Waste Service is Costly: • Total cost for solid waste collection, transfer, and disposal is typically $40-80/tonne. • Per capita waste generation is 0.2-0.3 tonnes/year. • 60-70% of total cost is for collection. • Full solid waste service requires 1-2% of GDP.
Adequate Cash Flow is Essential: • 50-70% of total cost is for recurrent expenditure – labor, fuel, tires, oil, spare parts. • Labor and fuel are priority expenditures. • If there aren’t enough recurrent funds, spare vehicles are cannibalized for parts.
Sources of Capital Funds: • Municipal bond issues for facilities, including intergovernmental tax credits that recognize externalities. • Municipal borrowings for vehicles, such as from national development banks. • Renewal funds replenished by special taxes, user charges, tipping fees. • Intergovernmental transfers. • Private sector investment.
Private Involvement raises Recurrent Budget Requirements: • Recurrent budget must be higher to involve the private sector. • Contractors have to pay monthly for their debt service for investment, and they borrow from short term notes at high commercial interest rates. • Few municipalities could afford to support private sector investment. • Mostly old non-specialized private vehicles are hired.
Economic Instruments for Regional or Global Externalities: • Intergovernmental transfers to upgrade disposal to desired national standards. • Intergovernmental transfers to encourage compost as a carbon sink and means of upgrading land for agriculture. • International transfers to encourage emission reductions to reduce climate change.