Modern Waste Management for Kosovo Workshop no 6 July 26 2007 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Modern Waste Management for Kosovo Workshop no 6 July 26 2007 PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 740e81-YWE1M



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Modern Waste Management for Kosovo Workshop no 6 July 26 2007

Description:

Title: Slide 1 Author: keith Last modified by: Martin Steiner Created Date: 5/8/2007 7:22:21 AM Document presentation format: Bildschirmpr sentation – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:19
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: keit1186
Learn more at: http://wwro-ks.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Modern Waste Management for Kosovo Workshop no 6 July 26 2007


1
Modern Waste Management for Kosovo Workshop no 6
July 26 2007
  • Contractual and financial issues for waste
    management

2
Environmental Regulation
  • Why do we need environmental regulation?

3
Bhopal Union Carbide
  • 03/12/1984, an explosion at the Union Carbide
    factory caused a gas cloud to escape from the
    facility
  • The cloud contained Methyl Isocyanate, highly
    toxic organic compound used in pesticides, rubber
    and adhesives
  • 4,000 local residents killed, health problems for
    50,000 to 500,000, still persist today
  • The cause resulted from neglected safety
    procedures (because of budget cuts). Safety
    measure were in place but not functional.

4
Bhopal Union Carbide
5
The Love Canal chemical waste dump
  • 1920 Hooker Chemical turned an area in Niagara
    Falls into a municipal and chemical dump site
  • By 1953, the site was filled and sealed with a
    thick layer of red clay to prevent escape of
    chemicals
  • A housing and school project was developed which
    involving excavating into the dump site, called
    love canal
  • The dump site contains carcinogenic dioxins and a
    total of 248 species of chemicals (mainly
    pesticide residues chemical weapons research)
  • Chemicals had entered homes, sewers and yards
  • More than 900 families were moved from the area.
  • Hookers parent company had to pay over 230
    million for cleanup and management of the dump
    site.

6
London Smog 1952
  • December 1952, London suffered from the heaviest
    smog (industrial fog) ever known (visibility
    dropped to a few meters)
  • It lasted until March 1953 and made worse by
    light winds, high moisture, increased coal
    burning (because of the cold winter)
  • Particulate matter reached 56 x normal levels.
    Sulphur dioxide was 7 x normal levels and
    promoted acid rain in London
  • The smog killed approximately 12,000 people,
    mainly children, the elderly and the ill. Cause
    of death, breathing in acidic aerosols that cause
    irritation and inflammation
  • This disaster resulted in the Clean Air Acts
    1956. Government introduced smokeless zones,
    cleaner fuels and located power stations in rural
    areas. Tall chimneys were introduced to
    encourage dispersion of the gaseous emissions
    (sulphur dioxide etc)

7
London Smog 1952
8
London Smog 1952
9
Environmental Regulation in Waste
Government (Department of Food, Environment
Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
Sets waste policy, strategy and targets
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY (main body) LOCAL PLANNING
DEPARTMENT
Waste Management Licensing
PPC Permits
Statutory consultee with Planning Departments
Enforcement of licence conditions
Develop test protocol, monitoring etc
10
Environmental Regulation (UK)
  • In the UK sic, the government set up the
    Environment Agency, as the primary
    environmental regulator.
  • Environment Agency vision
  • "We are the leading public body for protecting
    and improving the environment in England and
    Wales UK. It's our job to make sure that air,
    land and water are looked after by everyone in
    today's society, so that tomorrow's generations
    inherit a cleaner, healthier world."

11
Environment Regulation (European)
  • Public authorities regulate in the public
    interest to achieve a variety of goals
  • ensure fair and competitive market price
  • to protect human health and the environment
  • to provide safety (e.g. health safety during
    operations)
  • to stimulate innovation, new practices
  • Better Regulation, EC 2006

12
Environment Regulation in Kosovo
  • EAR funded institutional support for
    environmental management (MESP)
  • MESP will be the primary environmental regulator,
    developing policy, strategy and importantly
    regulations for enforcement
  • MESP develops Environmental Action Plans for
    Kosovo to improve environmental awareness and
    reduce pollution of the environment
  • Enforcement roles for both ministry and municipal
    staff
  • Develop and improve infrastructure for waste
    management and other environmental sectors

13
Environment Regulation in Kosovo
  • The present waste management system does not
    record data on waste generation, collection,
    treatment, recovery, and disposal in a
    comprehensive and structured way. Although about
    90 of the urban population have garbage
    collection, it is generally of poor standard..
    In contrast, less than 10 of rural areas are
    covered by garbage collection. The fee payment
    collection is very low (30-40 ). Out of a
    total of 29 municipal landfills, 26 are
    rehabilitated and the European Agency for
    Reconstruction (EAR) and other donors have
    supported the reconstruction or construction of 9
    additional regional landfills (Kosovo
    Environmental Action Plan 2006-2010)

14
Commissions 6th Environmental Action Programme
  • Set out 4 key environmental priorities
  • climate change
  • nature and biodiversity
  • environment and health and quality of life
  • natural resources and waste
  • Better use of resources, greater efficiency and
    more sustainable waste management in the future
  • Decoupling of waste production and economic
    growth
  • Waste management to reduce greenhouse gas
    emissions in the coming years (i.e. restricting
    waste types, gas collection and treatment etc)

15
Background to economic issues in waste management
MS
  • Principles embodied in all Central European
    countries
  • The User Pays
  • The responsibility for municipal waste issues
    collection, disposal is generally with the
    Municipality.
  • It is up to the Municipality
  • to provide the relevant services on its own, or
  • to contract it out.
  • The user of the service (household, commercial
    premise, ) owes the cost for the service (as a
    fee) to the Municipality.

16
Example Tyrol 700.000 population, 9 political
districts
MS
17
MS
9 waste management districts (2 single
municipalities)
18
MS
Case study Waste Management Council Western Tyrol
  • 70.000 inhabitants
  • 54 municipalities (2 district capitals _at_ ca.
    10.000 inhabitants)
  • District capitals run waste collection service by
    own means
  • All other municipalities have contracted waste
    collection services out 5-year contracts
    yearly extension are typical
  • 4 private waste collection companies are active
    in the area
  • The municipalities are organized in a Waste
    Management Council, founded in 1984
  • The Council owns and operates a central landfill
    (in future a waste treatment centre).

19
MS
How does the whole thing work there ?
20
Background to economic considerations in waste
management II
MS
  • Principles continued
  • 5. Certain commercial and institutional waste
    generators may take back the responsibility for
    collection and disposal from the Municipality.
    They turn into "self-disposers".
  • 6. The differentiation between
  • household waste (which remains under the
    Municipalitys responsibility in any case) and
  • commercial waste (which might be disposed of
    under the self-responsibility of the relevant
    generator, eg. a supermarket chain)
  • usually is done according to quality and/or
    amount.

21
MS
and what about regulation ?
  • There is no economic regulator.
  • Collection tariffs are subject to the law of the
    market.
  • Disposal (landfill) tariffs are subject to
    approval by local government.
  • Landfills have indivi- dual tariffs (reflecting
    their individual cost) and defined catchment
    areas.

22
MS
Municipal waste fee example Vienna
Landlord


Residual waste



Waste paper
White glass
Coloured glass

Waste fee

3,16

Municipality








0,00

0,00

0,00
52 weeks




Metals
Plastics
Biowaste
164,3
per household and year





finances in addition to collection services (of
residual waste and recyclables) other services
like a infoline, free delivery of compost, etc.










0,00

0,00

0,00
23
Waste management charging principles and practice
MS
  • The User Pays
  • KISS Keep It Simple Stupid
  • It reduces administration efforts
  • It reduces regulatory requirements
  • Transparency counts in the long turn.
  • Tariff should incorporate / represent an
    incentive to support the systems policy in
    Europe the 3 Rs
  • Tariffs are due on a regular (monthly to yearly)
    basis
  • No differentiation between collection and
    disposal cost.

24
Tariff types for Municipal Waste Management
MS
  1. Tariffs per household
  2. Tariffs per household, considering also number
    of persons
  3. Tariffs depending on floorspace
  4. Tariffs depending on volume
  5. Tariffs depending on weight
  6. Tariffs depending on value of property
  7. Tariffs depending on distance to disposal
  8. and combinations thereof (usually 1/2/3
    combined with 4/5)

Tariff types 4 5 fulfil the request of
providing an incentive to support the systems
policy (i.e. to use recycling opportunities)
but A split-up of the fee in "basic (fixed)"
top-up (variable) fee" is recommended.
25
Tariff types for Municipal Waste Management
MS
  • Tariffs per household
  • give no incentive eg. to recycle

2. Tariffs per household, considering also
number of persons, and 3. Tariffs depending
on floorspace are both difficult being
administered (quality of data !)
26
Tariff types for Municipal Waste Management
MS
however, where the weight of a single
waste load can be taken easily (commercial
!), weight should be taken as tariff basis !
27
Example contract
  • Contract between
  • London municipality Royal Borough of Kensington
    and Chelsea
  • A private waste management contractor
  • Waste collected from about 90,000 domestic and
    commercial premises
  • Approximately 95,000 tonnes of waste per annum
  • Household collection twice a week, Monday to
    Friday
  • Commercial collection up to three times a day,
    seven days a week

28
Collection contract example
  • Contract elements included
  • General specification
  • Waste collection specification
  • Collection days
  • Collection amounts
  • Commercial waste
  • Recycling specification
  • Street cleansing specification
  • Container maintenance
  • Bulky items handling

29
General specifications
  • General specification includes
  • Annual Reporting
  • Reporting and communication
  • Meetings between municipality and contractor
  • Contract monitoring
  • Customer care
  • Quality assurance
  • Vehicles and plant
  • Premises
  • Environmental Performance

30
Waste collection specifications
  • Waste collection specification includes
  • Category of waste and type of collection i.e.
    household, commercial and co-collections
    (household commercial)
  • Collection timings (may be restricted in shopping
    areas)
  • Operational requirements (general)
  • Health and safety requirements
  • Maintain clean and tidy waste storage areas
  • Receive and resolve any operational complaints
  • Collection timescales
  • Operational requirements (household)
  • Collection twice a week
  • Collections for dry recyclables and green waste
    sacks
  • Deal directly with any complaints
  • Operational requirements (commercial)
  • Increase commercial waste customers
  • Premises to be served (customers)
  • Deal with all operational complaints

31
Waste collection specifications cont.
  • Operational requirements (special collections)
  • Special collection service too big for the bin
  • Service to households and businesses
  • Maximise reuse and recycling of all collected
    waste
  • Deal directly with any complaints
  • Operational requirements (container transport)
  • Manage, maintain repair all municipal
    containers
  • Provide maintenance (regular and annual)
    schedules
  • Deal with all operational complaints

32
Recycling requirements
  • Minimum recycling 11,000 tonnes per annum (with
    less than 10 rejects)
  • Collections to include
  • Paper and cardboard
  • Glass bottles and jars
  • Plastic bottles
  • Cans and tins
  • Kerbside collection 63,000 households
  • Bring sites collection through service area

33
Additional contract information
  • Waste streams, domestic and commercial, sources
    of waste and quantities
  • Collection timescales and vehicle routing
  • Container identification, type, number and
    condition
  • Collection days
  • Oversize item collection

34
Collection contract
  • Contract awarded to SITA (Suez Environmental) for
    collection
  • Collection contract 15 years
  • Cost of household collection 55.34/a
  • Total of household disposal 52.66
  • Total of cost for waste management 108

35
Kosovo waste management
  • Where have we come from?
  • Situation in 2000 much improved (EAR)
  • Old dump site closed, restored
  • Construction of new landfills complete
  • Improved collection infrastructure
  • Better environmental conditions and public health
  • 2007 onwards
  • Financial sustainability
  • Environmental improvements (LFG control,
    recycling..)
  • Better environmental regulation enforcement

36
Focus on waste management
37
Environmental strategy for Kosovo (2005)
38
Kosovo Environmental Action Plan (2006)
39
Kosovo Waste Management
Source KEAP, 2006
40
Why use it?
  • Requirement under European legislation (you have
    to, common sense!)
  • Provides useful information on the state of waste
    management in Kosovo
  • Provided updated records for reviews
  • Allows better determination of costs
  • Breakdown of different waste streams, optimise
    collection efficiency
  • Better determination of waste management fee/cost

41
How can the public and the private sector work
together for the good of all?
MS
Example Macedonia (Source NWMP)
And for Kosovo How can the involvement of the
private sector be facilitated in a controlled,
beneficial and sustainable way? (on a level
playing field)
42
MS
MSW collection in Kosovo Status quo
  • Collection of Municipal Solid Waste is presently
    within the responsibility of POEs (Publicly
    Owned Enterprises)
  • Main problems POEs are confronted with - Poor
    economical status, which to some extent is due
    to - low willingness to pay of certain customer
    groups (actually result of an institutional
    shortcoming Fees also for disposal are
    to be collected by POEs).
  • Presently there is strong pressure from the
    private sector to enter the market.
  • The private sector focuses on profitable
    customers (where willingness to pay is out of
    question) Institutional waste generators (KFOR,
    ), commercial industrial enterprises.

43
MS
MSW collection in Kosovo Status quo II
  • POEs fear that loosing the cash cows they have
    got pre-sently (ICI industrial, commercial
    institutional generators) might make it even more
    difficult to provide a proper service in the area
    of household waste, and other (street cleaning)
  • WWRO is issuing licenses for waste collectors.
  • WWROs competence is limited presently to POEs.
    However private contractors are already active,
    either informal or being equipped with permits
    issued by MESP.
  • What to do ?

44
MS
Green waste from gardens
45
MS
What sorts of waste are we talking about ?
  • Municipal Solid Waste is defined in UNMIK
    regulation No 2004/49 as
  • solid waste, not being hazardous waste,
    medical waste or toxic waste, from household,
    commercial, institutional or industrial sources
    and processed wastes.

46
MS
There are more less profitable waste streams
  • Waste from households
  • Bulky waste
  • End-of-life vehicles
  • Illegal dumpsites
  • C D waste
  • Certain recyclables
  • Commercial waste
  • Certain institutional sources (KFOR, UNMIK, )
  • Certain industrial sources

47
MS
Dont miss opportunities System-free collection
of cardboard
  • No investment needed, no increase of cost
  • Use standard compaction trucks
  • Decrease number of trips (with waste loads) to
    landfill
  • Save disposal fee
  • turn a 5,26 /t minus in a 5 /t plus in your
    books
  • KLMC will enjoy less leachate (and gas)
    production
  • Enhance your image (waste hauler ? waste manager)
  • If you dont do it today, your competitor will
    start with it tomorrow.

48
MS
So what to do ?
  • POEs continue to collect
  • WASTE, not FEES
  • Municipalities take according to Kosovo Waste
    Law the responsibility for waste management
    service provision
  • Main role of Municipalities (which may
    aggregate to larger, regional associations)
  • Development and implementation of policy
    including setting and control of targets
  • Creation of public awareness, conduction of
    information campaigns
  • Setting and collecting of waste fees.
  • Waste collection services are tendered out in a
    controlled way POEs will compete with private
    contractors on a level playing field
  • Disposal costs charged to municipalities
  • Landfills may transfer to regional associations
    at a later stage.

49
Final thoughts
  • Funding for main infrastructure is largely
    complete
  • On-going costs future investments must be
    funded by operational revenue (waste tariff,
    fees)
  • Current levels are about 60, not sustainable
  • Must find better ways to pay bills
  • Political will
  • Electronic payment through the banks
  • Increase number of payments points
  • Stimulate and encourage payment of utility bills
  • With sound financial footings, the industry can
    develop to provide Kosova with a sustainable,
    progressive waste management sector

50
MS
Final comments on the workshops day 2
  • Affordability of present waste fees (collection
    disposal) Is it really the matchmaking point in
    Kosovo ?
  • If that is the case No option left than to keep
    the service level as it is (or reduce it even
    further)
  • BUT Current figures do not support this
    assumption. Waste fees are supposed to be
    affordable when not exceeding 0.6 1 of GNDI
    1).
  • GNDI Kosovo 1.100 / person, yr (source IMF
    2)).
  • Range of typical waste fees in Kosovo 50 100
    per household, yr.
  • 1) Gross National Disposable Income
    2) International Monetary Fund

51
MS
Final comments on the workshops day 2
  • So isnt rather collectability of fees (which
    comes along with a understandably limited
    willingness to pay) the core problem of Kosovos
    entire waste management system ?
  • If that really is the case The institutional
    set-up has to be adopted in a suitable way.
  • If the relevant changes can be delivered, the
    present service level can be maintained, and in
    the mid to long term service levels can be
    improved sustainably

52
Thank you for your attention !
ben_at_purcell.ltd.uk martin.steiner_at_wwro-ks.org
About PowerShow.com