Integrated and Sustainable Waste Management System in 3 counties in
Croatia, the cases of Split – Dalmatia, Karlovac and Dubrovnik - Neretva
County
Theofanis Lolosa, Eleni Ieremiadia, Alex Panagoulopoulosa, Krystallia Oikonomoua,
Giorgos Litasa, Georgios Lolosa, Christos Tsompanidisa
aENVIROPLAN S.A., 23 Perikleous & Iras str. 15344 - Gerakas, Greece
Corresponding author: Mr. Theofanis Lolos, ENVIROPLAN S.A., 23 Perikleous & Iras str.
15344 - Gerakas, Greece, [email protected]
ABSTRACT
In 2014, the counties of Split-Dalmatia, Karlovac and Dubrovnik-Neretva launched procurement procedures for technical assistance services in relation to the elaboration of
Feasibility Studies and EU project funding applications. The aforementioned 3 projects were awarded to a consortium consisted of Enviroplan S.A., Brodarski Institut and Procurator
Vastitatis d.o.o.. For the identification and assessment of the current waste management situation, field assessments were performed in all 3 counties. The EU and national legislative framework was thoroughly analysed. Option analysis and the development & evaluation of waste management scenarios are described. Additionally a MCA was undertaken. The resulting selected options (transfer stations, landfills for residues and non hazardous industrial waste, landfills for inert waste, etc.) were described. Based on the outcomes of the option analysis, the investment projects were described in depth from operational and technological aspect.
Within the environmental and social assessments elaborated for each of the project areas, data, points and conclusions of EIA Study were detailed. Furthermore, the incremental GHG emissions were calculated for both with and without project scenarios.
1
KEY WORDS
Waste management, County, Croatia, Waste Management Centre
1 INTRODUCTION
Waste management in the Republic of Croatia is one of the most important environmental issues, as well as one of the most challenging areas in terms of compliance with the standards of the European Union (EU). Solving these problems and moving towards integral and modern waste management are two of the environmental priorities of the Republic of Croatia.
According to the Strategy on Waste Management in the Republic of Croatia (OG 130/05) and the respective Waste Management Plan for the period 2007-2015 (OG 85/07, 126/10 and
31/11), regional and county waste management centres should be established. The counties and the City of Zagreb are obliged to prepare waste management plans that will define the waste management system consisting of not more than one WMC in each County and the city of Zagreb.
Speaking of Waste Management Plans of project areas, the locations of the WMCs and the locations of transfer stations for the Counties of Split – Dalmatia, Dubrovnik – Neretva and
Karlovac were determined at the Lećevica-Kladnjice site in the Municipality of Lećevica, the site of Lucino-Razdolje in settlement Trnovica (1 km away) and Babina Gora, respectively.
When the WMCs will be constructed, it will allow the closure and rehabilitation of the current landfills in the relevant counties, as well as final disposal of the remaining non-hazardous waste.
Procurement subject of these projects’ task is the feasibility studies which will represent the best option of the waste management system for the area covered by the aforementioned projects and the projects’ applications needed for the WMCs for co-financing from the
Cohesion Fund.
In order for the waste management system to be optimal in terms of efficiency, economic viability and environmental acceptability, very important is to know the composition of mixed
2
municipal waste, which changes depending on a number of factors, the most important of which are the population, the type of areas of economic activity, the purchasing power of the population, season considerations and so on.
The final result of all activities covered by the aforementioned projects’ tasks is a feasibility study and project applications (apps) for co-financing projects through the EU cohesion fund, accepted by the competent national authorities,that can reasonably be expected to be accepted by the European Union.
The feasibility study and the project application were made as a complete document, together with all necessary supports, supplements and documents, which are precisely the subject of this Agreement in accordance with the requirements of the European Union.
Feasibility study demonstrates the choosing process of the most acceptable solution to the technical - technological and financial - economic aspects, and as such was the basis for all technical solution and associated project documentation (preliminary and final design, documentation for the implementation of procedures for environmental impact assessment and documentation for the impact assessment procedure for the ecological network) for all study provided facilities, equipment and vehicles needed for integrated waste management system.
Background
The existing waste management system in Dubrovnik-Neretva County, Split-Dalmatia County and in Karlovac County, NE part of Lika-Senj County and W part of Sisak-Moslavina County is still not fully in line with the legislation provisions.
Project objectives
The final result of all activities covered by these projects’ tasks was a feasibility study which has also included Cost Benefit Analysis and project applications (apps) for financing projects through the EU Cohesion Fund, accepted by the competent national authorities and that can reasonably be expected to be accepted by the EU.
3
The feasibility study and project application were made as complete documents, together with all necessary supports, supplements and documents, which are precisely the subject of this
Agreement in accordance with the requirements of the EU.
2 METHODOLOGY
For the implementation of the feasibility studies (one for each County) the following were prepared:
Background information and review of the existing waste management system. This
chapter includes background information regarding previous studies; provides information
regarding project and its relationship with the national waste management strategy and its
objectives. Also describes the project location, environmental and infrastructure aspects,
collection and treatment system, an overview of current waste streams, waste generation
and management, recycling and recovery industry in usage and existing waste management
system costs.
Socio-Economic Context. This chapter includes the current status and future projections
regarding demographics and tourism, the current and future status regarding affordability
and economic aspects.
Waste content and future generation forecast. This chapter includes morphological
composition and physical-chemical properties of the mixed municipal waste, future waste
generation and its content.
Market analysis. This chapter includes supply and demand analysis.
Institutional framework-legal and policy context. This chapter includes EU waste
management policy and legal instruments, national political and institutional framework,
local spatial policy, the implications of the legal and policy issues on the project, available
sources of financing.
Project determination and its objectives. This chapter includes a GAP analysis based on
chapters 2-6, and a definition of the project boundaries.
4
Option analysis. This chapter includes option analysis regarding location, collection system,
Transfer Stations and technologies for WMC. Also financial analysis regarding the proposed
technologies for WMC and a multi criteria analysis in order to justify the selected
technology for WMC.
Proposed investment project. This chapter describes the future waste management system
from operational and technological aspect. This chapter will provide CAPEX, OPEX and re-
investment costs’ analysis. Also promoter organization should be described together with
the current competences level.
Environmental and social assessment. This chapter includes all relevant information from
the Environmental Impact Assessment and also a CO2 footprint calculation and a report in
climate change adaptation/resilience.
Financial analysis and
Economic valuation. Cost Benefit Analysis of the proposed waste management system.
Risk analysis. This chapter includes the evaluation of risk matrix, risk mitigations and
management.
Procurement and implementation. This chapter provides the procurement strategy and
proposal of future contract arrangements and also detail project implementation plan.
3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The data for the permanent population are according to Census 2011 (Croatian Bureau of
Statistics). In order to calculate the future population, the Publication ‘Population projections of the Republic of Croatia 2010-2061’ of the Croatia Bureau of Statistics was taken into account. In this report three variants of population projections were used (middle, high and low). It is decided that population forecast with medium growth rate variant was used in calculations.
Based on Croatian Bureau of Statistics and the Master Plan of Touristic Development in SDC,
2006-2015, the number of unregistered overnight stays, mainly connected to private accommodation, was estimated to be 15% of the registered overnight stays. In order to make
5
a projection of the number of overnight stays for the reference period (30 years), four regression models were examined and one (the linear function) was selected. The Gross
Domestic Product for the Republic of Croatia and of the Split-Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-Neretva and
Karlovac Counties is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Gross Domestic Product for the Republic of Croatia and of Split-Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-
Neretva and Karlovac counties
GDP per Capita (HRK) Croatia 76,755 Split-Dalmatia 60,007 Dubrovnik-Neretva 74,129 Counties Karlovac 57,310 NE part of Lika-Senj 60,078 W part of Sisak-Moslavina 61,064
The average income per household was estimated using data from Croatian Bureau of
Statistics, the total charges from residential users were stated in the received questionnaires and the number of households in the municipalities served. Then, the affordability for current charges was calculated.
In order to quantify the waste which will be transferred to WMC after the elaboration of source separation of different waste streams for the Split-Dalmatia County, 4 samplings took place in 7 landfills of Split-Dalmatia County during the following periods: 17-22/11/2014, 13-18/10/2014,
25-29/8/2014 and 4-9/8/2014. The analysis was performed in 2 phases and for two locations,
Karepovac landfill in Split and Kozjačić landfill in Imotski. The collected data were statistically elaborated in order to identify the quantities of total produced waste in Split-Dalmatia County for 2013, per category of European Waste Catalogue and per Town/Municipality that will be served for each Transfer Station that will be constructed (Data from CEA, PL-SKO form for 2013) and the same quantities taking into consideration the assumptions for bulky waste and the assumption for garden and park biodegradable waste. The waste production results were further elaborated in relation to Census 2011 (Croatian Bureau of Statistics) and estimation of
6
2013 from Croatian Bureau of Statistics regarding population of each town/municipality and overnight stays and the forecast for permanent and seasonal population was calculated. Waste production quantities resulting using low scenario case are presented in Table 2.
In order to quantify the waste which will be transferred to WMC after the elaboration of source separation of different waste streams for the Dubrovnik-Neretva County, 5 sampling sites were selected (which cover about 92.2% of the population of the County) out of the 8 active landfill sites. During the tests 12 samples of mixed municipal waste were taken (around
250 kg each). The waste composition analysis has been elaborated in periods 2-4/2/2015 and
16-18/6/2015. The analysis was performed in 3 samples (50kg weight) on 05/02/2015 and in 3 samples (65 kg weight) on 18/06/2015 in "Grabovica"-Dubrovnik location. The projections of produced MSW have been calculated for the next 30 years from 2015 [3 years implementation period (2017-2019) of the County Waste Management Centre and 25 years operational phase of this Centre (2020-2044)]. Also three scenario cases were examined for the evolution of waste production rate (regarding municipal solid waste). Table 3 presents the forecast of municipal solid waste that will be delivered to Lucino Razdolje WMC.
In order to quantify the waste which will be transferred to WMC after the elaboration of source separation of different waste streams for the Karlovac County, the NE part of Lika-Senj
County and the W part of Sisak Moslavina County, 10 sampling sites were selected that correspond to 10 different landfill sites. Sampling was done during 10 to 15 of December.
During the tests, 18 samples of mixed municipal waste were taken (around 250 kg each). In order to calculate the future waste generation forecast for the counties that will be part of the present study, data from Croatian Environment Agency for municipal waste (year 2013), construction waste (year 2013) and non-hazardous industrial waste (year 2013) have been used. Also 3 scenario cases were examined for the evolution of waste production rate
(regarding municipal solid waste). Table 4 presents the forecast of municipal solid waste,
7
construction waste, sludges derived from wastewater treatment plant and non-hazardous
industrial waste.
For all cases, the standards that have been used for the determination of waste composition
analysis comply with international standards. Moreover, according to the Terms of Reference,
the analysis of physical-chemical characteristics and biodegradability of municipal solid waste
were performed on representative samples taken from the previous analysis of the composition
and morphological properties.
Table 2: Waste production calculation overview in Split – Dalmatia County
2013 2020 2044 Population, Waste Production Rate, Produced Municipal Waste Permanent Population 454,711 454,057 429,573 Seasonal Population 38,232 (year 2014) 44,096 77,285 Quantity of produced Municipal 193,779 190,580 193,261 Waste (t) Waste production Rate for 0.393 0.380 0.376 permanent population (t/ca/year) Waste production Rate for seasonal 0.412 0.410 0.410 population (t/ca/year) Source separated Recyclable waste Household Recyclable Waste Commercial Recyclable Waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 1,457 25,334 Future situation/Year 2020 (t)* 25,843 34,356 Percentage of Recycling (according method 2 of Decision 2011/753/EU) Current situation/Year 2013 (%) 23.4% Future situation/Year 2020 (%) 52.5% Source separated biodegradable waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 0 Future situation/Year 2020 (t) 3,763 2020 2044 Total waste that will be delivered to WMC (t) 109,351 110,772
Table 3: Waste production calculation overview in Dubrovnik-Neretva County
8
2013 2020 2044 Population, Waste Production Rate, Produced Municipal Waste Permanent Population 122,509 122,370 115,773 Seasonal Population 16,932 19,838 32,794 Quantity of produced 65,072 64,056 65,259 Municipal Waste (t) Waste production Rate for permanent 480 463 459 population (kg/ca/year) Waste production Rate for seasonal population 370 370 370 (kg/ca/year) Source separated Recyclable Waste Household Recyclable Commercial Recyclable
Waste Waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 4,367 2,307 Future situation/Year 2020 (t) 13,963* 2,476 Percentage of Recycling (according method 2 of Decision 2011/753/EU on Dir. 2008/98/EC) Current situation/Year 2013 (%) 20.2% Future situation/Year 2020 (%) 50.3% Source separated biodegradable waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 0 Future situation/Year 2020 (t) 2,014 2020 2044 Total waste that will be delivered to WMC (t) 43,345 44,159
Table 4: Waste production calculation overview in Karlovac County
2013 2020 2044 Population, Waste Production Rate, Produced Municipal Waste Total Permanent Population 158,612 154,399 142,465 Seasonal Population 1,815 (year 2014) 1,910 2,373 Total Quantity of produced 51,727 48,709 44,730 Municipal Waste* (t) Karlovac County: 307 296 293 Waste production Rate for Western part of Sisak Moslavina County: 371 367 permanent and seasonal 384 population (Kg/ca/day) Northeastern part of Lika-Senj County: 367 363 380
9
Source separated Recyclable waste Household Commercial
Recyclable Waste Recyclable Waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 1,148 10,389 Future situation/Year 2020 (t) 6,329** 11,020 Percentage of Recycling (according method 2 of Decision 2011/753/EU) Current situation/Year 2013 (%) 29.0% Future situation/Year 2020 (%) 51.9% Source separated biodegradable waste Current situation/Year 2013 (t) 183 Future situation/Year 2020 (t) 1,850 2020 2044 Total waste that will be delivered to WMC (t) 36,809 33,810 *The Total Quantity of produced Municipal Waste includes the produced quantity from permanent and seasonal population. As for the quantity of seasonal population includes the produced quantity of overnights stays of all the touristic areas. The daily visitors were not taken into consideration because their contribution to the total waste production was assumed not significant *The quantity of the household recyclable waste is the quantity that results after Mechanical treatment of the source separated household recyclable waste. We mentioned this quantity due to the fact that it has been taken into consideration for the target calculation according to dir. 2008/98/EC
Additionally, a quantification of specific targets determined from dir. 2008/98/EC, 2004/12/EC
and 1999/31/EC took place. Figures 1-3 present the quantification of the aforementioned
targets.
10
Figure 1: Recycling percentages and quantification of EU Directive 2008/98/EC for Split-Dalmatia
County
Figure 2: Recycling percentages and quantification of EU Directive 2008/98/EC for Dubrovnik-
Neretva County
Figure 3: Recycling percentages and quantification of EU Directive 2008/98/EC for Karlovac
County
The recycling from sorting at source are 52.5%, 50.3% and 51.9% in Split-Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-
Neretva and Karlovac, NE part of Lika-Senj and W part of Sisak Moslavina Counties respectively by 2020; the recycling from treatment in the WMC will be 17.0%, 18.5% and 17.5% respectively.
Therefore the total recycling (source separated recyclables and recyclables from WMC) are
69.5%, 68.8% and 69.4% respectively. The above rates have been calculated according to method 2 of dir. 98/2008. Also, the proposed project will reach the new targets regarding the circular economy package presented by the Commission on 02.12.2015.
11
Figure 4: Quantities that will be deposited in landfill for Split-Dalmatia County
Figure 5: Quantities that will be deposited in landfill for Dubrovnik-Neretva County
Figure 6: Quantities that will be deposited in landfill for Karlovac County
Figures 4-6 present:
12
a. the total produced waste in each County,
b. the total produced biodegradable waste
c. the target that must be fulfilled according the dir. 99/31 EC
d. the biodegradable waste which will be disposed to the landfill. Thus the proposed
scenario achieves the target that corresponds to 1999/31/EC European Legislation
In order to identify the most feasible solution to be suggested in the new Integrated Waste
Management System in Split-Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-Neretva and Karlovac, NE part of Lika-Senj and W part of Sisak Moslavina Counties, an option analysis relating to the location of WMC,
Collection system, Transfer Stations and Waste Management Centre Technology took place.
Different criteria were set and by the use of MCA tool (PROMETHEE Model), the sites for the construction of a landfill and of the respective WMC were selected to be the Kladnjice-Lećevica, the Lucino-Razdolje and the Babina Gora sites, respectively.
Additionally, different alternative solutions were identified regarding waste collection system, as presented in Table 5.
Table 5: Waste collection system alternatives in Split-Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-Neretva and
Karlovac Counties
a. Separate collection of paper, glass, metal and plastic Two way stream: b. Collection of residual municipal waste a. Separate collection of paper, glass, metal and plastic Three way stream: b. Separate collection of biodegradable waste c. Collection of residual municipal waste
SWOT analysis has been completed for the above two alternative options. Then, taking into consideration the geopolitical characteristics of the project area and the produced waste quantities, for Split-Dalmatia County it is advised to keep the current collection system in force
13
i.e. three waste streams. Additionally, the number of collection bins and trucks required in the project area was determined. The Total Cost for purchased collection equipment is calculated as
2,714,480€. Similarly, for Dubrovnik-Neretva and Karlovac Counties the proposed waste collection systems are the current collection systems, i.e. the two way stream system proposing also home composting actions.
Additionally, different alternative solutions regarding transfer stations technology, technical characteristics of standard transport equipment and transfer stations locations have been taken into consideration.
For the analysis of the necessary number of TS for Split-Dalmatia County the variants that were created are shown at Table 6.
Table 6: Waste TS alternatives in Split-Dalmatia County
Variant 0 Variant 1 Variant 2 Variant 3 Variant 4 Direct transport to WMC 9 TS 8 TS 7 TS 6 TS Split Split Split Split Sinj Sinj Sinj Sinj Zagvozd Zagvozd Zagvozd Zagvozd Brač Brač Brač Brač 55 LSGU Hvar Hvar Hvar Hvar Vis Vis Vis Vis Trogir Trogir Trogir Šolta Šolta Vrgorac
The selection of the preferred variant was based on waste transfer technologies option analysis, total operational costs, Monthly waste amounts – Waste transport frequency, TS operational needs (personnel and equipment), Investment costs in TS construction and equipment. The analysis of variants of transporting waste from the point of its generation to the location of its treatment showed that 6 transfer stations’ construction is justified: Split, Sinj, Zagvozd, Brač,
Hvar and Vis, in the case of mechanical and biological treatment at the same location namely in
Kladnjice, Municipality of Lećevica.
14
For the Dubrovnik-Neretva County, for the determination of the optimum number of TS in terms of logistics as well as investment cost, four variants were proposed and examined. It is concluded that the optimal option is to have six (6) TS (variant no. 3).
Three (3) TS at mainland: Dubrovnik, Janjina and Metkovic
Three (3) TS at islands: Vela Luka, Lastovo and Mljet
The investment cost of the selected option is 6,012,500 € and the annual OPEX of the selected option is 646,112 €. The DPC of the selected option is 33.3 €/t.
For the Karlovac County, for the determination of the optimum number of TS in terms of logistics as well as investment cost, five variants were proposed and examined. It is concluded that the optimal option is to have six (4) TS (variant no. 1).
3 TS at Karlovac County: Otok Ostarijski TS, Slunj TS, Karlovac TS
1 TS at NE part of Lika-Senj County: Podum TS
The investment cost of the selected option is 4,163,000€ and the annual OPEX of the selected option is 612,326€. The DPC of the selected option is 33.5 €/t.
In order to support decisions regarding future solutions for the Waste Management in Split-
Dalmatia, Dubrovnik-Neretva and Karlovac Counties, reliable strategies and concepts are needed. For this purpose, 4 main waste management scenarios have been defined. The scenarios are based on objectives and recent national legislation for waste management and take into consideration waste production of the County and composition as well as existing waste system infrastructure. The Scenarios are shown at Tables 7-9:
Table 7: Proposed WMC technology alternatives in Split-Dalmatia County
Proposed Scenarios Description Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF and Scenario 1 Biological treatment (Aerobic composting) for production of CLO Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF, Anaerobic Digestion Scenario 2 with electricity production and further Aerobic composting for production of CLO Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF and Scenario 3 Biological Treatment (Biodrying) for production of SRF Scenario 4A Biological treatment (Biodrying) for production of low SRF quality and
15
mechanical separation with recovery of Fe/Al Biological treatment (Biodrying) for production of high SRF quality and Scenario 4B mechanical separation with recovery of Fe/Al Scenario 5 Thermal treatment unit (mass burn incineration) for electricity production
Table 8: Proposed WMC technology alternatives in Dubrovnik-Neretva County
Proposed Scenarios Description Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF and biological Scenario 1 treatment (aerobic composting) for CLO production Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF, wet AD with Scenario 2 electricity production and dewatering of digestate Biological treatment (Biodrying) for production of low quality SRF and Scenario 3 mechanical separation with recovery of Fe/Al Mechanical Separation with recovery of recyclables and RDF, dry fermentation Scenario 4 with electricity and heat production and bio-stabilization of digestate (Hybrid MBT)
Table 9: Proposed WMC technology alternatives in Karlovac County
Proposed Scenarios Description Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF and Biological treatment Scenario 1 (Aerobic composting) for production of CLO Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF, Anaerobic Digestion with Scenario 2 electricity production and further Aerobic composting for production of CLO Mechanical separation with recovery of Recyclables and RDF and Biological Treatment Scenario 3 (Biodrying) for production of Biodried product that will be deposited in a bioreactor landfill Biological treatment (Biodrying) for production of low SRF quality and mechanical Scenario 4 separation with recovery of Fe/Al
Then, the targets of National Legislation for all scenarios were calculated. The quantifications
of targets are presented at Table 10:
Table 10: Evaluation of WMC technology alternatives
Recycling target according European Target on landfilling of waste according Directive 2008/98/EC European Directive 1999/31/EC
Article 55 of Act on Sustainable Waste Article 24 of Act on Sustainable Waste Management (OG No 94/13) Management (OG No 94/13)
16
Achievement of Achievement of Percentage (*) Percentage(**) target target Split-Dalmatia County Scenario 1 69.5% Yes 16.4% Yes Scenario 2 69.5% Yes 16.4% Yes Scenario 3 69.5% Yes 16.4% Yes Scenario 4A 54.2% Yes 30.6% Yes Scenario 4B 54.1% Yes 38.9% No Scenario 5 53.6% Yes 13.7% Yes Dubrovnik-Neretva County Scenario 1 68.8% Yes 8.8% Yes Scenario 2 68.8% Yes 12.8% Yes Scenario 3 52.3% Yes 34.5% Yes Scenario 4 68.8% Yes 4.3% Yes Karlovac County Scenario 1 69.4% Yes 5.3% Yes Scenario 2 69.4% Yes 5.3% Yes Scenario 3 69.4% Yes 34.7% Yes Scenario 4 53.6% Yes 27.8% Yes (*) Recycling percentage (combination of source separation and Mechanical treatment in WMC)
calculated according Dir. 2008/98/EC.
(**) Percentage of biodegradable waste that will be deposited in landfill, in relation to the total produced
biodegradable waste in DNC in year 1997.
Finally the paragraph describes the financial and economic analysis. Specifically, for each
scenario, investment cost, operational cost, revenues and dynamic prime cost were calculated.
The results are summarized at Tables 11-13:
Table 11: Economic evaluation of WMC technology alternatives in Split-Dalmatia County
Proposed Scenarios Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4A Scenario 4B Scenario 5 Total Investment 38,586,043 47,584,556 34,767,574 36,559,625 41,326,961 112,499,140 costs €
(Including 41,914,786 51,723,166 37,752,655 41,147,442 44,902,388 122,390,062 contingencies) Total Operating Cost 3,999,428 4,512,599 3,960,038 4,212,522 4,214,673 6,497,712 €/y
17
Revenues 1,054,541 2,010,174 43,462 -1,379,189 346,664 4,470,655 Dynamic Prime Cost 57.9 61.1 64.1 81.3 68.3 94.2
Table 12: Economic evaluation of WMC technology alternatives in Dubrovnik-Neretva County
Proposed Scenarios Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Total Investment costs 20,185,943 23,821,830 18,230,485 24,231,940 (Including contingencies) Total Operating Cost 1,714,516 2,188,959 1,962,014 1,943,816 Average Revenues 341,832 950,909 201,955 992,374 Dynamic Prime Cost 68.6 72.5 73.9 66.6
Table 13: Economic evaluation of WMC technology alternatives in Karlovac County
Proposed Scenarios Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Total Investment costs 20,772,518 23,626,216 22,294,941 20,020,253 (Including contingencies) Total Operating Cost 1.678.553 1.859.749 1.787.862 1.854.508 Average Revenues 265,036 611,681 505,450 149,302 Dynamic Prime Cost 86.3 88.3 86.3 92.9 Note: For Tables 11-13 the quantities of investment and operating cost and revenues referred to average
quantities of the period 2020-2044
The criteria selected in the MCA PROMETHEE Model were classified into four groups
incorporating Legislative, Environmental, Technical and Financial Criteria. There were 3 group
weights calculated for every criterion (A, B, C). The selected scenarios for Split-Dalmatia,
Dubrovnik-Neretva and Karlovac Counties were Scenario 1, Scenario 4 and Scenario 3
respectively.
A GHG footprint calculation took place in order to calculate the Greenhouse gases emissions
generated from activities of the proposed waste management system. GHGs include the 7 gases
listed in Kyoto Protocol.
Jaspers suggests considering Scope 1 Direct GHG emissions (physically occur from sources that
are operated by the project within the project boundary) and Scope 2 Indirect emissions
18
(generated by the electricity that is consumed by the project) as well as avoided emissions as a consequence of material or energy recovery by the project. Avoided emissions create a net benefit to society that clearly has to be included as an economic benefit of the project.
Table 14 presents the total GHG emissions, in t CO2(eq), for the different components of the waste management system in the with-project scenario, in the baseline (without-project) scenario and the incremental GHG emissions that are calculated when subtracting the GHG emissions in with project scenario from GHG emissions without project scenario.
Table 14: Economic evaluation of WMC technology alternatives
Split- Dubrovnik- Karlovac Dalmatia Neretva
Total With Project Scenario GHG Emissions (t CO2(eq)) -91,149 -24,432 -14,403
Total Without Project Scenario GHG Emissions (t CO2(eq)) -1,842 12,797 10,805
Total Incremental GHG Emissions (t CO2(eq)) -89,307 -37,230 -25,208
4 CONCLUSIONS
The EU and national legislative framework was analysed and the key targets and objectives for
Directives ‘2008/98/EC on waste’, ‘2004/12/EC for packaging waste’ and ‘1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste’, were presented analytically. Targets are expected to be achieved through sorting at the source and the new proposed regional waste management centres.
The resulting selected options were: for Split-Dalmatia project - a 3 waste stream collection
(recyclable, residual and biodegradable waste), 6 transfer stations, 1 mechanical-biological
(aerobic composting) treatment facility with production of CLO, RDF and Recyclables, 1 landfill for residues and non hazardous industrial waste and 1 landfill for inert waste; for Karlovac project - a 2 waste stream collection (recyclable and residual waste), home-composting actions, 4 transfer stations, 1 mechanical-biological (biodrying) treatment facility with production of RDF, Recyclables and biodried product, 1 bio-reactor landfill for residues and non hazardous industrial waste and 1 landfill for inert waste; for Dubrovnik-Neretva project - a
2 waste stream collection (recyclable and residual waste), home-composting actions, 6 transfer
19
stations, 1 mechanical-biological (anaerobic digestion with CHP and biostabilization of digestate) treatment facility with production of RDF, recyclables, CLO, 1 landfill for residues and non hazardous industrial waste and 1 landfill for inert waste.
Based on the above detailed outcomes of the option analysis, the investment projects were described in depth from operational and technological aspect. Consequently, the economic analysis has been elaborated according to EU guidelines, which is based on the incremental approach, comparing economic cost and benefits of the project.
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project was supported by Enviromental Protection and Energy Efficiency Fund (EPEEF), the
Ministry of Environment and Nature Protection of the Republic of Croatia (MENP) and the
Beneficiaries (RCCO d.o.o., AGO d.o.o., KODOS d.o.o.). We would like to thank the directors of the beneficiaries in each County and the supervisors of the project from EPEEF and MENP for their guidance and the provision of data for the successful implementation of the three projects.
REFERENCES
«Assessment of the options to improve the management of bio-waste in the European
Union, Annex E: Approach to estimating costs», EC DG Environment, Arcadis
ΑΕΑ Study (Waste Management Options and Climate Change, 2001)
Bardos P. (2004): Composting of Mechanically Segregated Fractions of Municipal Solid
Waste - A Review. SITA Environmental Trust.
Costs for Municipal Waste Management in the EU, Eunomia Research and Consulting
Croatia Environment Agency Report on Municipal Waste (Year 2012)
Dougherty Group LLC on behalf of WRAP (2006): Materials Recovery Facilities.
Guide to Cost-benefit Analysis of Investment Projects, Economic Appraisal tool for
20
Cohesion Policy 2014-2020, European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional
and Urban policy, December 2014.
«Economic Analysis of Options for Managing Biodegradable Municipal Waste» Eunomia
research and consulting
ΕΙΒ Induced GHG Footprint, The carbon footprint of projects financed by the Bank,
Methodologies for the Assessment of Project GHG Emissions and Emissions Variations,
Version 10.1
Haug R. (1993): The Practical Handbook of Compost Engineering. Lewis Publishers
JASPERS Staff Working Papers, Calculation of GHG Emissions in Waste and Waste-to-
Energy Projects, Dorothee Teichmann & Christian Schempp, November 2013 (revised
version).
Leikam K., and Stegmann R. (1999): Influence of Mechanical-Biological Pretreatment of
Municipal Solid Waste on Landfill Behavior. Waste Management and Research, Vol. 17,
No.8, pp. 424-429
Tsobanoglous G., Theisen H. and Vigil S. (1993): Integrated Solid Waste Management,
Engineering Principles and Management Issues. McGraw – Hill, Inc
Williams P. (2005) Waste Treatment and Disposal, 2nd edition. John Wiley & Sons Ltd,
Chichester, UK.
21