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?

IV. How Waste to Resource Approach Reduces Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions?

V. What is Co-benefit?

VI. Examples of Potential Co-benefits of Waste to Resource Approach: Waste Concern’s Approach in Bangladesh.

VII. Way Forward for Climate Financing using NAMA

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 Worldwide

3.8 million tons/ day Developing countries.

Waste Generation

60-70% organic

Source: World Bank 2013, What a Waste

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%

www.wasteconcern.org

Source: World Bank ( 2012) “ What a waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management”

Waste Bins Demountable Containers

Mixed Waste

Transfer Stations

Present Situation in Developing Countries

Source of Waste

Landfill

LEACHATEPolluting Ground& Surface Water

VERMINSSpreading more than

40 Diseases

METHANE GASBad Odor &Green Housegas

Current approach: waste management not resource recovery…

PROBLEMS FROM PRESENT PRACTICE

80% Compost

6-10% Recyclables

10-14% Non-compostable

GHG Reduced

Agriculture

CER

Local market

Landfilled

IRRC

100% Collected with user fee

House-to-house waste collection method 86% RECYCLED

Waste

EnergyRefuse Derived Fuel

What is Waste to Resource Approach?

Since 2007, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), inpartnership with Waste Concern, has been promoting decentralized and Integrated ResourceRecovery Centers (IRRCs) in secondary cities and small towns in Asia-Pacific with the objective torecover 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 andprocessed in a cost effective way near the source of generation in a decentralized manner. IRRC isbased on 3 R Principle.

Organic Waste Landfill Methane (CH4) Emission

Baseline situation (organic waste dumped in landfill sites becomes anaerobic and generates methane)

Organic Waste

Organic Waste

Used Cooking Oil

Organic Waste (non-

compostables)

Composting (Aerobic Process)

Biogas Plant(Anaerobic Digestion)

Refused Derived Fuel (RDF)

Organic Waste

Co-composting(Aerobic Process)

Bio diesel Plant

Human Excreta

Compost (Diverted organic waste from landfill and replacing use of

chemical fertilizer )

Biogas to Electricity(replacing fossil fuel based

electricity)

Fuel in Pellet form(replacing diesel or coal used

in boilers or brick kilns)

Compost (Diverted organic waste

from landfill and replacing

use of chemical fertilizer)

Bio diesel (replacing diesel as

fossil fuel)

IRRC model converts waste into resource and reducing green house gas methane (CH4)

Input Technology Produce No Methane Emission

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

Replace use of fossil fuel

Climate Change Benefits

Avoids methane from landfill and reduces

CO2 emission by replacing grid power

Generates Carbon Credits by avoiding methane from

Landfill and reduce CO2 to produce chemical fertilizer

Baseline Situation vs. IRRC model

Waste

Baseline Situation

Existing Practice: land filling of waste

Methane Emission (Green House Gas) No Methane Emission

CDM project

Composting Plant

City Authorities Collecting transport

CDM Project in Waste Sector Through Composting

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.

The globally first CDM composting project is already operational in Bangladesh since 2008 and CERs has been issued for this project.

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

January 10.37775 11.65613 11.29042 4.4433 0.420182 0.456273 0.03

February 8.9878 11.54475 11.7965 5.02381 0.3665 0.4692 0.38

March 10.68018 11.5338 12.96922 4.689364 0.3598 0.361048 0.39

April 11.1527 12.589 13.54568 4.320526 0.327524 0.3163 0.50

May 12.3952 12.90513 13.22667 3.927913 0.417826 0.247818

June 11.743 12.85943 12.16909 3.965143 0.5054 0.224762

July 12.41739 12.02466 10.48981 3.620364 0.582609 0.306

August 12.93619 12.52295 9.174609 3.202957 0.334545 0.31

September 12.56833 13.34953 8.805909 2.3412 0.671905 0.289455

October 12.79182 12.95286 7.757619 1.682783 0.56687 0.266435

November 12.43595 11.85545 6.779273 1.055909 0.45181 0.3511

December 12.2381 11.42254 5.2501 0.591158 0.4343 0.443111

Yearly Avg. 11.72703 12.26802 10.27124 3.238702 0.453272 0.336792 0.31

Source: https://www.theice.com/marketdata/reports/icefutureseurope/ECXCERIndex.shtml

CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PROJECTS

Waste Sector

GHG EMISSION REDUCTION

YES YES

CO-BENEFITS

Low price of Carbon Public/Private Benefit

ECONOMIC OPPORTURNITIES FROM CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION PROJECTS

The term co-benefits is defined as all the potential developmental benefits of climate change mitigation actions in areas other than GHG mitigation.

What is Co-benefit

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 thispresentation, an attempt has been made to quantify and monetize the co-benefits(apart from GHG emission reduction) associated with a waste sector compostingproject described in the following section. Projects that reduce GHG emission canhave economic, social, environmental, and health benefits apart from climatechange benefits ( emission reduction benefits).

SL Problem Co-benefits Co-BenefitIndicators

Type of Benefit

Baseline Data Condition After Implementation of the Project

Net Co-benefit

1 Lack of job opportunities for poor prevailing in the towns and cities.

Can create safe job opportunity for waste pickers engaged in recycling of mixed waste without any protection.

Number of safe jobs created for low income people and waste pickers.Increase in income of workers by having safe jobs.

Both public and private

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.

2 jobs per ton.Average income of waste pickers working in the plant is Taka 7000 per month.

2 jobs per ton.Average increase inincome of wastepickers by working inthe compost plant isTaka 4400 permonth.

Creation of New Jobs= 2 nos.

Create 2 new jobs for the urban poor,

including waste pickers

Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

SL Problem Co-benefits Co-BenefitIndicators

Type of Benefit

Baseline Data Condition After Implementation of the Project

Net Co-benefit

2 Unmanaged organic waste full of nutrients are remaining unutilized and creating pollution.

If waste is segregated properly and appropriate technology is used, compost can be produced and used in the agriculture.

Amount of compost produced.

Both public and private

No compost plant was operational in city using the market waste.

200-250 kg per ton of organic waste treated.

200-250 kg per tonof organic wastetreated.

Produce 0.20-0.25 tons

of good quality compost

Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

SL Problem Co-benefits Co-BenefitIndicators

Type of Benefit

Baseline Data Condition After Implementation of the Project

Net Co-benefit

3. Unmanaged organic waste generates methane if kept anaerobic.

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

0.5 tons per ton of organic waste composted.

Reduce 0.5 tons of

CO2eq GHG emissions by recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

GHG Mitigation through Composting of Organic

Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

SL Problem Co-benefits Co-BenefitIndicators

Type of Benefit

Baseline Data Condition After Implementation of the Project

Net Co-benefit

4. Land for landfill sites are becoming scarce in most of the developing countries due to increase in land price and environmental regulations.

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 baselinescenario, nowaste is divertedtowardscomposting.city spends Taka600/ton fortransportation ofwaste and Taka300/ton forlandfilling ofwaste.

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).

Save 1.1 cubic meter of landfill area

Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

SL Problem Co-benefits Co-BenefitIndicators

Type of Benefit

Baseline Data Condition After Implementation of the Project

Net Co-benefit

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.

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

(BIRRI Rice 46)NPKS @80-35-40-10 kg/ha) + no compost Taka 19,676 /ha (excluding fertilizer application and labor cost)

Yield: 4.58 tons/ha

(BIRRI Rice 46)75% NPKS @80-35-40-10 kg/ha) + 1 ton/ha compostTaka 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.

The use of compost can increase crop production between 25-30% and reduce use of chemical

fertilizer by 35-40%.

Co-benefits of recycling 1 (one) ton of organic waste

Type of Benefit

Sector of Benefit

Co-Benefits/ GHG emission reduction Value of Co-benefits/ GHG emission reduction

Public andPrivate

Social Sub sector: Employment generation

Creation of additional income for four waste pickers by working in the compost planConsideration: 4 jobs created to process 2 tons of organic waste to reduce 1 ton CO2eq

US $ 7.53

Public Economic Sub-sector: urban/municipal

Cost saved for the municipality from disposal of wasteConsideration: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)

US $ 23.36

Private EconomicSub sector: agriculture

25% saving in chemical fertilizer usage by use of compostConsideration: 25% savings in use of chemical fertilizer resulting in savings of Taka 1515/ha.

US $ 9.71

Public Economic Sub-sector: Agriculture

25% less subsidy on chemical fertilizer Consideration: At present Government of Bangladesh (GOB) is giving BDT 7793.17/Ton on chemical fertilizer.

US $ 4.13

Private andPublic

Environmental and Economical

Increase in crop yield of 0.21 ton per of rice per half ha Consideration: from 2 tons of waste 0.5 ton of compost can be produced

US $ 49.09

Total value of co-benefits per ton of GHG emission reduction through composting US $ 93.82

Potential Co-benefits by Reducing 1 (One) Ton of CO2e

2 Tons Organic Waste

if Processed into Compost

1 ton CO2eq

Reduced

100 Tons/day Capacity Composting Project (with 10 (ten) Years Life)

Income from Carbon Finance

CERs

INCOME: US$ 9125/ year50 tons*365 day*US$ 0.5

Price of 1 (ton) CO2e Reduction: Euro 0.3 / US$ 0.5

Income from Climate Finance

CO-BENEFITS

INCOME: US$ 1.71 million/ year50 tons*365 day*US$ 93.8

Co-benefit from 1 (ton) CO2e Reduction: US$ 93.5

BENEFIT OF A 100 TONS/DAY CAPACITY COMPOST PLANT

WHAT IS CLIMATE FINANCE?

Climate Finance is used to describe Financial Flows for Climate Change Mitigation/Adaptation Project

National

CLIMATE FINANCE

Transnational International

Financing Institutions/Agencies/ Development

Banks etc.

WHAT IS CLIMATE FINANCE?

Measuring, Reporting & Verifying (MRV)

Mitigation

Mitigation-Adaptation Loop

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