Download Opportunity of Co-benefits of Climate Change Mitigation Actions Concern in Bangladesh

Opportunity of Co-benefits of
Climate Change Mitigation Actions
from Waste: Experience of Waste
Concern in Bangladesh
Iftekhar Enayetullah
Co-founder & Director
WASTE CONCERN
Session 2:
Opportunities for Linking the SWM Sector with
International Climate Financing
CONSULTATION WORKSHOP ON NAMA FOR WASTE
MANAGEMENT SECTOR IN SRI LANKA FOR SWM SECTOR
WITH INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE FINANCING
web: www.wasteconcern.org
Presentation Outline
I.
Current Practice of SWM in Asia and the Pacific Region
II.
Problems From Present Practice
III.
What is Waste to Resource Approach?
How Waste to Resource Approach Reduces Greenhouse
Gas (GHG) Emissions?
What is Co-benefit?
Examples of Potential Co-benefits of Waste to Resource
Approach: Waste Concern’s Approach in Bangladesh.
Way Forward for Climate Financing using NAMA
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
Waste Generation Worldwide and in Developing Countries
It is estimated that 5.2 million tons of solid waste are generated daily worldwide,
of which 3.8 million tons are from developing countries.
5.2 million tons/ day
3.8 million tons/ day
60-70% organic
Waste Generation
Source: World Bank 2013, What a Waste
Worldwide
Developing countries.
Global Perspective: Solid Waste Management Costs Versus Income
LOW INCOME
COUNTRY
MIDDLE INCOME
COUNTRY
HIGH INCOME
COUNTRY
Average WASTE GENERATION
0.2 t/capita/y
0.3 t/capita/y
0.6 t/capita/y
Average INCOME FROM GNP
370 $/capita/y
2,400 $/ capita/y
22,000 $/ capita/y
Collection Cost
10-30 $/t.
30-70 $/m.
70-120 $/t.
Transfer Cost
3-8 $/t.
5-15 $/t.
15-20 $/t.
Sanitary Landfill Cost
3-10 $/t.
8-15 $/t.
15-50 $/t.
TOTAL COST WITHOUT TRANSFER
13-40 $/m.t.
38-85 $/t.
90-170 $/t.
TOTAL COST WITH TRANSFER
16-48 $/t.
43-100 $/t.
105-190 $/t.
Total Cost per Capita
3-10 $/capita/y
12-30 $/capita/y
60-114 $/capita/y
COST AS % OF INCOME
0.7-2.6%
0.5-1.3%
0.2-0.5%
Source: World Bank ( 2012) “ What a waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management”
www.wasteconcern.org
Present Situation in Developing Countries
Source of Waste
Mixed Waste
Waste Bins Demountable
Containers
Landfill
Transfer Stations
PROBLEMS FROM PRESENT PRACTICE
VERMINS
Spreading more than
40 Diseases
METHANE GAS
Bad Odor &
Green House
gas
Current approach: waste management not resource recovery…
LEACHATE
Polluting Ground
& Surface Water
What is Waste to Resource Approach?
 Since 2007, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), in
partnership with Waste Concern, has been promoting decentralized and Integrated Resource
Recovery Centers (IRRCs) in secondary cities and small towns in Asia-Pacific with the objective to
recover value from waste and provide livelihood opportunities to the urban poor.
 IRRC is a facility where significant portion (80-90%) of waste can be composted/recycled and
processed in a cost effective way near the source of generation in a decentralized manner. IRRC is
based on 3 R Principle.
100% Collected
with user fee
House-to-house
waste collection method
Waste
80%
Compost
86% RECYCLED
Refuse
Derived Fuel
IRRC
6-10%
Recyclables
10-14%
Non-compostable
GHG Reduced
Agriculture
Energy
Local market
Landfilled
CER
Baseline Situation vs. IRRC model
Organic Waste
Landfill
Methane (CH4) Emission
Baseline situation (organic waste dumped in landfill sites becomes anaerobic and generates methane)
Input
Organic Waste
Technology
Composting
(Aerobic Process)
Produce No Methane Emission
Compost
(Diverted organic waste from
landfill and replacing use of
chemical fertilizer )
Organic Waste
Biogas Plant
Biogas to Electricity
(Anaerobic Digestion)
(replacing fossil fuel based
electricity)
Organic Waste
Refused Derived Fuel
(noncompostables)
Human Excreta
Organic Waste
Used Cooking Oil
(RDF)
Co-composting
(Aerobic Process)
Bio diesel Plant
Fuel in Pellet form
(replacing diesel or coal used
in boilers or brick kilns)
Climate Change
Benefits
Generates Carbon Credits by
avoiding methane from
Landfill and reduce CO2 to
produce chemical fertilizer
Avoids methane from
landfill and reduces
CO2 emission by
replacing grid power
Avoids methane from
landfill and reduces
CO2 emission by
replacing grid power
Compost
(Diverted organic waste
from landfill and replacing
use of chemical fertilizer)
Bio diesel
(replacing diesel as
fossil fuel)
Generates Carbon Credits by
avoiding methane from
Landfill and reduce CO2 to
produce chemical fertilizer
Replace use of
fossil fuel
IRRC model converts waste into resource and reducing green house gas methane (CH4)
CDM Project in Waste Sector Through Composting
Baseline Situation
Methane Emission (Green House Gas)
CDM project
No Methane Emission
At present only 50-70% of the
generated solid waste in the urban
areas is collected by the municipalities
and disposed in crude dumping
manner in low-lying areas without any
cover and gas collection system.
City Authorities
Collecting transport
Waste
The globally first CDM composting
project is already operational in
Bangladesh since 2008 and CERs
has been issued for this project.
Existing Practice: land filling of waste
Composting Plant
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Yearly Avg.
2009
10.37775
8.9878
10.68018
11.1527
12.3952
11.743
12.41739
12.93619
12.56833
12.79182
12.43595
12.2381
11.72703
2010
11.65613
11.54475
11.5338
12.589
12.90513
12.85943
12.02466
12.52295
13.34953
12.95286
11.85545
11.42254
12.26802
2011
11.29042
11.7965
12.96922
13.54568
13.22667
12.16909
10.48981
9.174609
8.805909
7.757619
6.779273
5.2501
10.27124
2012
4.4433
5.02381
4.689364
4.320526
3.927913
3.965143
3.620364
3.202957
2.3412
1.682783
1.055909
0.591158
3.238702
Source: https://www.theice.com/marketdata/reports/icefutureseurope/ECXCERIndex.shtml
2013
0.420182
0.3665
0.3598
0.327524
0.417826
0.5054
0.582609
0.334545
0.671905
0.56687
0.45181
0.4343
0.453272
2014
0.456273
0.4692
0.361048
0.3163
0.247818
0.224762
0.306
0.31
0.289455
0.266435
0.3511
0.443111
0.336792
2015
0.03
0.38
0.39
0.50
0.31
ECONOMIC OPPORTURNITIES FROM CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PROJECTS
CLIMATE CHANGE
MITIGATION PROJECTS
Waste Sector
GHG EMISSION
REDUCTION
CO-BENEFITS
YES
YES
Low price of Carbon
Public/Private Benefit
What is Co-benefit
The term co-benefits is defined as all the potential
developmental benefits of climate change mitigation actions
in areas other than GHG mitigation.
Globally First CDM Based Composting Project Located at
Bulta, Greater Dhaka initiated by Waste Concern
Waste related projects that reduce GHG emission can have economic, social,
environmental, and health benefits apart from climate change benefits. In this
presentation, an attempt has been made to quantify and monetize the co-benefits
(apart from GHG emission reduction) associated with a waste sector composting
project described in the following section. Projects that reduce GHG emission can
have economic, social, environmental, and health benefits apart from climate
change benefits ( emission reduction benefits).
Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste
Creation of New
Jobs= 2 nos.
Create 2 new jobs
for the urban poor,
including waste
pickers
SL Problem
Co-benefits
Co-Benefit Type of
Indicators Benefit
Baseline Data
1
Can create
safe job
opportunity
for waste
pickers
engaged in
recycling of
mixed waste
without any
protection.
Number of Both
public and
safe jobs
created for private
low income
people and
waste
pickers.
Increase in
income of
workers by
having safe
jobs.
Average
income of
waste picker in
is Taka 2600
per month out
of which 15%
are medical
expenses per
month.
Average
disposable
income is Taka
2210 per
month.
Lack of job
opportunities
for poor
prevailing in
the towns
and cities.
Condition After
Implementation
of the Project
2 jobs per ton.
Average income of
waste pickers
working in the plant
is Taka 7000 per
month.
Net Co-benefit
2 jobs per ton.
Average increase in
income of waste
pickers by working in
the compost plant is
Taka
4400
per
month.
Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste
Produce
0.20-0.25 tons
of good quality compost
SL Problem
Co-benefits
2
Amount of
If waste is
segregated compost
produced.
properly
and
appropriat
e
technology
is used,
compost
can be
produced
and used
in the
agriculture
.
Unmanaged
organic
waste full of
nutrients are
remaining
unutilized
and creating
pollution.
Co-Benefit
Indicators
Type of
Benefit
Baseline Data
Both public
and private
No compost
plant was
operational in
city using the
market waste.
Condition After
Implementation of
the Project
200-250 kg per ton
of organic waste
treated.
Net Co-benefit
200-250 kg per ton
of organic waste
treated.
Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste
Reduce 0.5 tons of
CO2eq GHG emissions by
recycling 1 (one) ton of
organic waste
SL Problem
3.
Unmanaged
organic waste
generates
methane if kept
anaerobic.
Co-benefits
Co-Benefit
Indicators
Type of
Benefit
Baseline Data
Net Co-benefit
Condition After
Implementation of
the Project
Aerobic
composting
technique can
produce good
quality
compost and
at same time
avoid GHG
emissions.
Amount of
GHG reduced.
Public
0.
0.5 tons per ton of
organic waste
composted
GHG Mitigation through Composting of Organic
0.5 tons per ton of organic
waste composted.
Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste
Save 1.1 cubic
meter of landfill
area
SL Problem
4.
Land for landfill
sites are
becoming
scarce in most
of the
developing
countries due to
increase in land
price and
environmental
regulations.
Co-benefits
Co-Benefit
Indicators
Type of
Benefit
Baseline Data
Condition After
Implementation
of the Project
Net Co-benefit
Composting
can save
landfill areas
as well as
land filling
cost for the
local
governments.
Amount of
waste
diverted.
Cost saved
for the
municipality
from disposal
of waste.
Public
In the baseline
scenario,
no
waste is diverted
towards
composting.
city spends Taka
600/ton
for
transportation of
waste and Taka
300/ton
for
landfilling
of
waste.
1.1 cubic meter of
landfill area per ton of
organic waste
composted.
USD 11.68/ton
(transportation and
landfilling cost)
1.1 cubic meter of landfill
area per ton of organic
waste composted.
USD 11.68/ton
(transportation and
landfilling cost).
Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste
The use of compost can
increase crop production
between 25-30% and
reduce use of chemical
fertilizer by 35-40%.
SL Problem
5.
Due to heavy
use of chemical
fertilizer, lack of
crop rotation,
high cropping
intensity,
drought, and
other reasons,
the soil is losing
its fertility thus
causing threat
to food security.
Co-benefits
Co-Benefit
Indicators
Type of
Benefit
Baseline Data
Condition After
Implementation
of the Project
Net Co-benefit
Use of
compost can
lower the use
of chemical
fertilizer at the
same
increase crop
yield due to
improved
Increase in
crop yield per
hectare.
Amount of
chemical
fertilizer
avoided by
use of
compost.
Public and
Private
Yield: 4.16 tons/ha
Yield: 4.58 tons/ha
(BIRRI Rice 46)
NPKS @80-3540-10 kg/ha) + no
compost
Taka 19,676 /ha
(excluding
fertilizer
application and
labor cost)
(BIRRI Rice 46)
75% NPKS @80-3540-10 kg/ha) +
1 ton/ha compost
Taka 18,161/ha
(excluding fertilizer
application and labor
cost)
0.42 tons/ha
(BIRRI Rice 46) which
has a value of Taka 7560.
25% savings in use of
chemical fertilizer
resulting in savings of
Taka 1515/ha.
Potential Co-benefits by Reducing 1 (One) Ton of CO2e
2 Tons
1 ton
Organic Waste
CO2eq
Reduced
if Processed into Compost
Type of
Benefit
Sector of
Benefit
Co-Benefits/ GHG emission reduction
Public and
Private
Social
Sub sector:
Employment
generation
Economic
Sub-sector:
urban/municipa
l
Creation of additional income for four waste pickers by
working in the compost plan
Consideration: 4 jobs created to process 2 tons of organic
waste to reduce 1 ton CO2eq
Cost saved for the municipality from disposal of waste
Consideration:1.1 cubic meter of landfill area per ton of
organic waste composted. US$ 23.36 saved by avoiding 2 tons
of organic waste to be land filled. Presently USD 11.68/ton
spent for (transportation and land filling cost)
25% saving in chemical fertilizer usage by use of compost
Consideration: 25% savings in use of chemical fertilizer
resulting in savings of Taka 1515/ha.
Public
Private
Public
Economic
Sub sector:
agriculture
Economic
25% less subsidy on chemical fertilizer
Sub-sector:
Consideration: At present Government of Bangladesh (GOB)
Agriculture
is giving BDT 7793.17/Ton on chemical fertilizer.
Private and Environmental Increase in crop yield of 0.21 ton per of rice per half ha
Public
and
Consideration: from 2 tons of waste 0.5 ton of compost can
Economical
be produced
Total value of co-benefits per ton of GHG emission reduction through composting
Value of Cobenefits/ GHG
emission reduction
US $ 7.53
US $ 23.36
US $ 9.71
US $ 4.13
US $ 49.09
US $ 93.82
BENEFIT OF A 100 TONS/DAY CAPACITY COMPOST PLANT
100 Tons/day Capacity
Composting Project
(with 10 (ten) Years Life)
Income from
Carbon Finance
Income from
Climate Finance
CERs
CO-BENEFITS
INCOME: US$ 9125/ year
INCOME: US$ 1.71 million/ year
50 tons*365 day*US$ 0.5
Price of 1 (ton) CO2e Reduction:
Euro 0.3 / US$ 0.5
50 tons*365 day*US$ 93.8
Co-benefit from 1 (ton) CO2e Reduction:
US$ 93.5
WHAT IS CLIMATE FINANCE?
WHAT IS CLIMATE FINANCE?
Climate Finance is used to describe Financial Flows for Climate Change
Mitigation/Adaptation Project
CLIMATE FINANCE
Financing Institutions/
Agencies/ Development
Banks etc.
National
Transnational
International
Measuring, Reporting & Verifying (MRV)
Mitigation-Adaptation Loop
Mitigation
Co-benefits
Way Forward
 Clear cut policy to create conducive environment for
investment.
 Inter-ministerial co-ordination essential for easy
implementation of projects with priority basis.
 Incentives Required: tipping fees/ free delivery of waste to
recycling facility, feed-in tariff, low interest rate/ soft loan, tax
holiday, land etc.
 Capacity building training programs: for monitoring of the
projects especially MRVs
 Standardization of technology is important by the Govt
THANK YOU