XI International Symposium WASTE MANAGEMENT – ZAGREB 2010 Zagreb, Croatia, November 25th and 26th 2010 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF SCENARIOS FOR INTEGRATED

XI International Symposium WASTE MANAGEMENT – ZAGREB 2010 Zagreb, Croatia, November 25th and 26th 2010

DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF SCENARIOS FOR INTEGRATED

SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS IN SELECTED REGIONS

IN BULGARIA

T. LOLOS, G. TAVOULARIS, B. LYKAS, C. TSOMPANIDIS, G. LOLOS & R. SIMEONOVA

GENERAL OBJECTIVE:Support the preparation of a sound project pipeline for the environmental sector as a prerequisite for the absorption of funds available for the environmental sector and the improvement of the environmental infrastructure of the country according to EU standards.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES Update the regional waste management

systems according to EU legislation;

Prepare solid feasibility studies (preliminary designs, CBA study procurement plan);

Prepare detailed designs and tender documents ;

Construct viable waste management projects.

LEVSKI VELIKO TARNOVO BOROVO VARNA


Development of waste management scenarios and assumptions

Main objectives for the development of the Investment Programs for the necessary infrastructures:

ensure compliance with the national and EU legislation;

ensure affordable long term project planning and optimal utilisation of EU funds;

define a long-term, cost-efficient, waste management investment plan.

contribute to the national commitments and compliance of the infrastructures with the National Waste Management Programme 2009-2013.


Current situation of waste management in Bulgaria

Landfilling of waste - most of the landfill sites do not fulfil the specifications of the Landfill Directive;

Closing and rehabilitation of non-conforming sites is still pending;

Waste recycling, treatment and disposal facilities will be implemented in 23 regions;

Mandatory targets for 50% municipal waste recycling by 2020.


Current situation regarding waste collection and disposal in the assessed regions

Transportation takes place by both modern vehicles and older skip carrying trucks;

Waste management operations are performed by private or municipal owned companies;

Waste is disposed in local, unprotected municipal landfills and have their permit officially prolonged until end of 2009 or until the new regional landfills are constructed

No sealing works or other pollution abatement technical works were envisaged for the current disposal sites;

Pollution risks of varying levels were identified;

Both municipal and Construction & Demolition (inert) waste is accepted for disposal;

Many of the sites are neighboring to a surface water aquifer, with direct discharge of leachate.

The municipal dumpsites will be closed, covered with an impermeable layer and rehabilitated, following a detailed design study.!


Parameter Veliko Tarnovo Varna Levski BorovoTotal average income per cap, € 1.352 1.643 1.798 1.810

Expenditures on waste management, €/t

44,7 45,9 32,7 29,6

Expenditures in waste collection - transportation

62% 67% 68% 51%

Expenditures in landfilling 9% 16% 12% 12%

Waste tax / cap, € 20,2 13,5 4,9 4,5

Population 182.878 354.903 121.595 63.139

Waste generation, t/y 52.999 131.599 34.653 15.013

Selected Economical-Social Parameters of Studied Regions


Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Collection of residuals 1 bin for mixed waste 1 bin for mixed waste 2 bins(for mixed and organic waste) (in

Varna)Collection of recyclables

- From the Recovery Organisations - From the Recovery Organisations- From Civic Amenity Sites (Aksakovo and Beloslav)

- From the Recovery Organisations- From Civic Amenity Sites (Aksakovo and Beloslav)

Collection of bio-waste - 85% Green waste from parks and households

- 85% Green waste from parks and households- Organic from CAS (Aksakovo and Beloslav)

- 85% Green waste from parks and households- Separate collection through bio-bins in selected points (markets, restaurants, etc) and households (in Varna) - Organic from CAS (Aksakovo and Beloslav)

Collection of hazardous household

In landfill site In Civic Amenity Sitesand in landfill site

In Civic Amenity Sitesand in landfill site

Home –composting No Yes, 4% of BDW Yes, 4% of BDW

Transfer Station No No NoSorting Station (MRF) No No NoTreatment Composting of green waste (open

system)Existing MBT Plant.Recovery of i) recyclables and/or RDF and ii) Compost-like output

Composting of green waste (open system)Existing MBT Plant.Recovery of i) recyclables and/or RDF and ii) Compost-like output

Composting of green waste (open system)Existing MBT Plant.Recovery of i) recyclables and/or RDF and ii) Compost-like output

Treatment of C&D C&D waste recycling facility C&D waste recycling facility C&D waste recycling facility

Landfill site “Vaglen” “Vaglen” “Vaglen”Closure of dumpsites In situ rehabilitation or waste

transport to a compliant landfill, according to legislation

In situ rehabilitation or waste transport to a compliant landfill, according to legislation



Overview of Alternative Options for WMS in Varna Region

Waste Management Scenario 2 - VARNA


Waste Management Scenario 3 - VARNA



Mass Balance of selected Waste Management System (Scenario 1) in Varna

Option 1 has been ranked as the best among the three and selected, satisfying all set criteria:

Mixed waste is treated in the PPP Mechanical-Biological Treatment Plant;

Packaging waste recovery is promoted by the Recovery Organizations;

Home composting of biodegradable waste is promoted in rural areas of the region.

Green Waste is separately collected and composted in the Composting Facility within the Regional Waste Management Centre

Total Biodegradable waste in 1995 - tons82.382

Quantity of biodegradable waste allowed for landfilling relative to 1995 BDW quantity

Year

National Target - BDW allowed to landfillTARGET ACHIEVEMENT - BDW landfilled

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3tons/year % of 1995 BDW quantity tons/year % tons/year % tons/year %

2010 61.787 75% 25.536 31,00% 25.265 30,67% 25.265 30,67%2013 41.191 50% 27.189 33,00% 26.894 32,65% 26.894 32,65%2020 28.834 35% 30.112 36,55% 29.760 36,12% 29.760 36,12%

Year Regional target Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 32010 22,17% 59,13 59,58 59,582013 41,37% 59,52 59,98 59,982020 50,00% 60,06 60,54 60,54


National Target Achievement for Biodegradable Waste Allowance to Landfill – VARNA REGION

Regional Targets and Target Achievement for the Recycling of Municipal Waste

Preliminary Investment Cost for Alternative Waste Management Scenarios– VARNA REGION


Overview of Alternative Options for WMS in Veliko Tarnovo Region

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Collection of residuals 1 bin for mixed waste 2 bins(for mixed and organic waste) 1 bin for mixed waste

Collection of recyclables - From the Recovery Organisations- From Civic Amenity Sites (one in each municipality)

- From the Recovery Organisations - From the Recovery Organisations

Collection of bio-waste - 85% Green waste from parks and households- Organic from CAS

- 85% Green waste from parks and households- Separate collection through bio-bins in selected points (markets, restaurants, etc) and households

- 100% Green waste from parks and households

Collection of hazardous household

In Civic Amenity Sitesand in landfill site

In landfill site In landfill site

Home –composting Yes, 30% of rural BDW Yes, 30% of rural BDW Yes, 30% of rural BDW

Transfer Station No No NoSorting Station (MRF) No Yes Yes, included in MBT

Treatment Composting of bio-waste (open system)

Composting of bio-waste (open or closed system)

MBT Plant.Recovery of i) recyclables and/or RDF and ii) Compost-like output

Landfill site “Sheremetya” “Sheremetya” “Sheremetya”Closure of dumpsites In situ rehabilitation or waste

transport to a compliant landfill, according to legislation



The described options are consistent with the core principles of waste hierarchy, the producer responsibility, the polluter pays and eventually the central target Europe to become a “recycling society”.!


Waste Management Scenario 1 – VELIKO TARNOVO


Waste Management Scenario 2 – VELIKO TARNOVO


Mass Balance of selected Waste Management System (Scenario 3) in Veliko Tarnovo

Option 3 has been ranked as the best among the three and selected, satisfying all set criteria:

Mixed waste is treated in a Mechanical-Biological Treatment Plant with the recovery of recyclables, secondary fuel RDF, stabilised organic matter and residues;

Packaging waste recovery is promoted by the Recovery Organizations;

Home composting of biodegradable waste is promoted in rural areas of the region.


Comparison of Scenarios’ National and Regional Target Achievement

VELIKO TARNOVO

Year National target Regional targetScenario

1Scenario

2Scenario

32010 17,00% 14,42% 38,51 49,31 51,792013 33,00% 34,36% 38,78 49,66 52,152020 50,00% 50,00% 38,85 49,46 52,60


Total Biodegradable waste in 1995 - tons 49.093 Quantity of biodegradable waste allowed for landfilling relative to 1995 BDW quantity

Year

National Target - BDW allowed to landfill TARGET ACHIEVEMENT - BDW landfilled

tons/year% of 1995 BDW

quantity

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

tons/year % tons/year %tons/year %

2010 36.820 75% 17.745 36,15% 13.864 28,24% 12.758 25,99%2013 24.547 50% 18.243 37,16% 14.244 29,01% 13.113 26,71%2020 17.183 35% 19.142 38,99% 15.078 30,71% 13.706 27,92%

National Target Achievement for Biodegradable Waste Allowance to Landfill

Veliko Tarnovo Region


Scenarios’ Economic Evaluation with Dynamic Prime Cost (DPC) Indicator

Considered Parameters:

Investment Cost

Operational & Maintenance Cost

Lifetime of Proposed Solution

Ecological Effect (Waste Collection &Treatment)

DPC - index of discounted (present) value of all costs at real prices divided by the discounted quantity of waste and thus suitable for comparing different environmental solutions under Net Present Value terms

.

)1(

)1(

0

0

nt

tt

t

nt

tttt

i

EEi

KEKI

DGC

DPC: Dynamic Prime Cost,KIt: Investment expenditures in year t,KEt: Operation & Maintenance costs in year t,EEt: waste collected and treated in year t,i: the discount rate, that was taken 6% per annumn: lifetime of an investment.


Comparison – Investment Costs vs. Scenario PerformanceVELIKO TARNOVO REGION


Dynamic prime Cost (Indicator for Cost Effectiveness) VELIKO TARNOVO REGION

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3Total Dynamic prime cost 162,94 215,57 214,19Dynamic prime cost waste treated

39,69 58,29 74,57

Dynamic prime cost waste collected / transported

70,02 73,55 68,43

Dynamic prime cost waste landfilled

53,68 61,08 62,08


Veliko Tarnovo – Dynamic Prime Cost

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3Total Dynamic prime cost, €/t 67,2 84,7 88,4

Decision Making Factors

•Environmental

•Technical

•Social

•Financial

Least cost

Best overall performance after Multi-Criteria & Sensitivity Analysis



SCENARIO 1 SCENARIO 2 SCENARIO 3 Environmental objectives 30% 78 85 90

1 To ensure prudent use of land and other resources 15% 82,50 84,75 84,75 Depletion of resources, such as water and energy 30% 90 80 75 Necessary landspace 20% 90 85 80 Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill 25% 75 85 90 Rate of material recovery 25% 75 90 95

2 To reduce greenhouse gas emissions 15% 70 80 90 Greenhouse gases emitted 100% 70 80 90

3 To minimise adverse impacts on air quality and water 25% 78 83 91 Extent of odour problems 20% 80 80 90 Wastewater generation 30% 90 90 85 Generation of leachate during the landfilling of the residues 50% 70 80 95

4 To protect local amenity 15% 80 80 80 Extent of noise, litter and vermin problems 100% 80 80 80

5 To conform with waste policy and legislation 30% 80,0 92,5 97,5 Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill 50% 85 95 100 Recovery of packaging waste 50% 75 90 95 Implementation Objectives 30% 77 75 90

6 To ensure absorption of secondary products 20% 90 85 80

Maturity of market for secondary products (number of recycling companies, potential for compost use in agriculture etc 100% 90 85 80

7 To ensure public acceptance 30% 70 80 90 Level of public acceptance 100% 70 80 90

8 To ensure public participation 30% 70 60 95 Level of risk for the public not to participate efficiently in the system 100% 70 60 95

9 To implement optimum systems 20% 85 80 90 How proven the technologies used are, simplicity and flexibility of system, modular 100% 85 80 90 Financial Objectives 40% 90 80 80

10 To minimize costs of waste management 100% 90 80 80

Costs of collection, management, disposal and material and energy revenues 100% 90 80 80 Score 82,61 80,06 85,91

Veliko Tarnovo – Overall Performance of Alternative Options

Multi-criteria analysis – Veliko Tarnovo

The diagram illustrates in linear form the scores of

each alternative scenario. The X-axis

is the EWF and hence each point

determines the FWF as well. The

performance of each scenario alters

depending on the value of the EWF

Option 3 is qualified as the preferred scenario

for new waste management system

and the further feasibility study is

based on it

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Environmental / technical performance

86,46 89,15 100,00

Financial performance 100,00 89,00 89,00

Sensitivity analysis

75,00

80,00

85,00

90,00

95,00

100,00

105,00

0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

Op

tion

s ap

pra

isal

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Scenario 3


Discussion- Conclusions A basic engineering design has taken place, consisting of:

Technology selection;

Pre-dimensioning of the facilities and calculation of necessary area;

Investment, operational and unit costs for the entire lifetime of the waste management system were identified

Calculation of Discounted Expenditures with the index of Dynamic Prime Cost as €/tn of waste Cost effectiveness of the three scenarios;

Multi-criteria analysis evaluation of the three options, based on environmental, institutional and financial criteria.


Regional recycling targets set:

Sustainability, better public services and environmental protection through the proposed investments;

Compliance with the National Waste Management Programme 2009-2013;

A long-term, cost-efficient, waste management development plan.


Veliko Tarnovo Veliko Tarnovo Region,Region,

Sheremetya SiteSheremetya Site

Updated Investment Cost for Integrated Waste Management Center – VELIKO TARNOVO REGION


Affordability of project at municipal level

Payments do not exceed 1% of the monthly average income for households

Levski: 172 BGN/tn waste or 90 BGN/household-y; Borovo: 198 BGN/tn waste or 85,6 BGN/household-y Veliko Tarnovo: 142 BGN/tn waste or 66,57 BGN/household-y; Varna: 123 BGN/tn waste or 94,65 BGN/household-y.


THANK YOU!


Documents

XI International Symposium WASTE MANAGEMENT – ZAGREB 2010 Zagreb, Croatia, November 25th and 26th 2010 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF SCENARIOS FOR INTEGRATED