Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

or k

in g

- Explanation of Technical Option and Site Selection-

4th Thematic Technical Working Group for Solid Waste in Infrastructure Sector

ro up

ra ft

Satoshi Higashinakagawa JICA Study Team

1

M
9th October, 2013

at

er ia

Contents

ra ft

or k

in g

ro up

Zone boundary based on the Future Demand Projection of Solid Waste Amount (according to this socio-economic framework in this Urban M/P) Consideration of Technical Options Consideration of Site Selection Future Action Plan and Necessary Capacity Development

at

er ia

l
2

4500 4000 3500 Generated Wste [t/day] 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2005

M ro up G in g or k W
2010 2015 2020 Year 2025 2030 2035 Household waste Commercial waste Market waste Total amount of waste (JICA Urban Plan Study) Total amount of waste(JICA SWM Study in 2010)

ra ft

at

er ia

Future Projection of Solid Waste Amount (Waste Generation)

Future Projection of Solid Waste Amount

Self-disposal Self-disposal rate 3R activities Waste reduction rate Reduction rate by recyclable waste recovery Reduction rate by biodegradable waste recovery 2015 10% 2015 2020 10%

er ia at
10% 2025 2025 10.0% 10.8% 3.4% 2025 83.6%

ro up

2020

5.0% 6.3%

7.5%

9.3% 3.4%

in g

3.3%

Waste collection rate Waste collection rate

or k

2015 48.8%

2020 64.6%

ra ft

Source :JICA SWM M/P (2010)

4

l
2030 10% 2030 10.0% 12.3% 3.4% 2030 100%

Collected waste in each area (2030)

803 ton/day

in g

ra ft

or k

917 ton/day

ro up

297 ton/day

M
620 ton/day

at

er ia
5

Options Handcart

Merit -Easy to collect along small road -Cheap cost -Easy to collect and transport effectively -Easy to collect -Effective collection - Not so expensive

Demerit - Not effective for collection

at

ro up

Compactor vehicle Container vehicle Dump truck

-Slightly expensive -Necessary for maintenance

in g

- Slightly taking time for collection

Options House to house collection Station collection

Merit

or k

Demerit -Taking the time for collection Necessary to monitor the collection point Individual house Apartment, secondary collection area
6

-Effective collection

ra ft

-Easy to collect -No incentive for waste reduction

er ia
Area of narrow road Area of high income Area of station collection Other area

Consideration of Technical Options (Collection and transportation)

Options Landfill

Merit -Comparatively cheaper option -Technically feasible -Comparatively cheaper option -Technically feasible

Demerit

in g

3R+Incineration+ Landfill 3R+Composting+ Landfill

-Effective volume reduction of waste

ra ft

or k

-Effective volume reduction of organic waste -Not expensive option

3R + landfill + (composting)
7

ro up

3R+Landfill

M
-If no cooperation with waste generator, not enough waste reduction -Expensive for initial cost and O&M cost -Waste separation is necessary and necessity of market of compost

at

-No waste reduction

er ia

Consideration of Technical Options (Treatment and Disposal)

10000 9000 Incinerator introduced from Europe

Lower Calorific Value (kJ/kg)

8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 1950 Large difference

M
Large difference

ro up in g G
Current lower calorific value in Kenya Issues of pollution and high O&M cost due to high water content waste

at
Japan Europe
Efficient heat recovery and power generation 1980 1990 Dioxin removal 2000 2010

1960

or k

1970

YEAR

1963The first machinery incineration plant completed(Japanese technology) 1965The first EfW plant completed(European technology)

ra ft

Source : Plan and Design Guideline for Solid Waste Treatment Facility
8

er ia

Consideration of Technical Options (Consideration of Incineration)

Selection Criteria Social and Environmental Acceptability

Sanitary Landfill It will be acceptable, if the operation follow the sanitary landfill method and wastewater quality satisfy the international standard

in g

Initial Cost

O &M Cost [/Year] Necessary Area

or k

47 million US$ (around 2000 ton/day for 20 years)

Around 5 to 6 US$/ ton 0% reduction 80ha Experiences in developing countries

Volume Reduction [%] Technical feasibility and experience

ra ft

ro up

at

Waste to Energy (Incinerator) It will be acceptable, if the exhausted gas or wastewater quality satisfy the international standard 100 to 150 million US$ (1000 ton /day) Around 30 to 70US$/ton 85% reduction 5 ha to 10 ha

Experiences in developed countries

9

er ia

Consideration of Technical Options (Treatment and Disposal)

Improvement of Treatment and Disposal System (Difference between dump site and sanitary landfill site)

ra ft

Open dump site (e.g. Dandora dump site) Current issues - Odor problem - Rodents and birds - Leakage of leachate to water course - Bad condition of inner and access roads - Bad condition of unloading place

Improvement - Cover soil - Liner system and leachate treatment facility -Improvement of access and inner roads -Monitoring by waste pickers and landfill officers

or k

in g

ro up

M
Image of Sanitary Landfill Site After Improvement - Reduction of odor - Reduction of rodents and birds - Prevent the leachate leakage - Improvement of unloading and waste spreading activities - Improvement of waste picking activities

at

er ia
10

Source :JICA Preparatory Survey (2012)

11

ra ft

Non operation area is covered by soil

or k

in g

Operation area is only part of landfill site

ro up

at

er ia

Improvement of Treatment and Disposal System (Example of effectiveness of cover soil)

Kiambu County

ra ft

Kajiado County

or k

in g

Nairobi County

ro up
Machakos County
12

at

er ia

Thika County

Consideration of the Site of Suitable Treatment and Disposal System

ra ft

or k

in g

ro up

at

er ia
13

Consideration of the Site of Suitable Treatment and Disposal System

Scoring for suitable sanitary landfill site

at

er ia

Near the airport within 13km Mirema farm Nijiru area Ruai site Ngong road forest Arboretum Karual forest Embakasi garrison Kamukunji Eastleigh Kasarani area Juja area Ruile area Dagorreti forest Ongata Rongai Athi river area

Flight path (betwee n 10 degree)

Other counties

Residentia l or Commerci al area

Forest area

Unsuitable point

ro up

in g

or k

ra ft

l
2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1

14

M
Dagoretti forest T/S at Dandora

at ra ft W or k in g G ro up D

Ruiru area

er ia

Consideration of locations of suitable treatment and disposal system

Athi river area Mavoko area

15

l
Juja

Ruai area

Future Action Plan

Program Program 1 Collection & Transportation General description of action plans Formulation and implementation of waste collection and transportation plan Procurement of waste collection vehicles and construction of access road in slum Implementation of waste collection service by PPPP scheme and CCN/SWMPC zone Program 2 3R&Intermediate Plan Program 3 Final Disposal Plan Sort-term plan

er ia

Middle-term plan

l
Long-term plan Formulation and Implementation of 3R and Intermediate treatment plan

ro up
Necessary to develop the capacity and implement the plan

Program 4 Organizational restructuring and human resource development plan

ra ft

Establishment of SWMPC Implementation of capacity development Mid-term and long-term monitoring and restructuring
16

Closure of Dandora dump site and illegal dump sites

or k

Construction and operation of new landfill site at Ruai

in g

Improvement of Dandora dump site

at

Future Action Plan

Program 5 Legal Institutional Reform Plan Program 6 Financial Management Plan Improvement of monitoring and enforcement in the legal framework Legislation of Establishment of SWMPC and related financial system and PPP Establishment of waste charging system and new accounting system Review, revise and monitoring of waste charging system and cost accounting system

Program 8 Community Participation Plan

Source :JICA Study Team based on JICA SWM M/P (2010)

17

ra ft

Implementation of Community based SWM including environmental education and public awareness raising activities

Establishment of PEC Unit

or k

Program 7 Private Sector Involvement Promotion Plan

Mid-term and long-term monitoring of the PPPP structure

in g

Establishment of PPPP structure for collection, transportation, intermediate treatment and disposal system

ro up

at

er ia

Sort-term plan

Middle-term plan

Necessary to improve institutional framework not only for municipal level but also national level

Long-term plan