Regional Research Project Integrated solid waste management system leading to zero waste for sustainable resource utilization in rapid urbanized areas in developing countries

Regional Research ProjectIntegrated solid waste management system leading to zero waste for sustainable resource utilization in rapid urbanized areas in developing countries Funded by A

Regional Research Project

Integrated solid waste management system leading to zero waste for sustainable resource utilization in rapid urbanized areas in developing

countries Funded by Asia Pacific Network

for Global Change Research

Center for Environmental Technology and Management, Van Lang University,

Vietnam

Not all waste collected

No waste separation

Co-disposal HW and MSW Illegal Dumping/Open Dumping

Background - Solid waste management

No Operational Procedures No Environmental Controls

What should be done?

http://www.hierarchystructure.com/waste-management-hierarchy/

ISWM with 3Rs Strategies

http://upstreampolicy.org/solutions/recycling-and-zero-waste/

Tentative Schedule (Yr 1)

Project activities First Year (October 2014 – September 2015)

Communications with all stakeholders

Literature review

Data collection in Bhutan and Vietnam

(field visit, interview with stakeholders)

Proponents’ trip to Bhutan

(expected in the second week of October, 2014)

Proponents’ trip to Vietnam

(expected in the first week of November, 2014)

Project summary report (Dec 5th 2014)

Develop baseline reports for Bhutan and Vietnam

Preparation of training workshop and field visit in 

Thailand 

Expected number of participants: 20

Organize training workshop in Thailand (expected

in the last week of May)

Data analysis and propose management options

for each country

Proponents second trip to each country to finalize

the management options

Preparation of final report

APN final technical report and financial report

Activities in the 1 st Year Sept 2014 - Sept 2015

• Collect baseline data in each country: Data were collected by local partners in collaboration with the proponent, baseline report was prepared for each country

• Training of trainers including the study visit to

show good waste management practices in

Thailand

• Data analysis and propose management option and preparation of final report

Tentative Schedule (Yr 2)

Project activities Second Year (October 2015 – September 2016)

Communications with all stakeholders

management and decision making tools

based on characteristics of waste

Annual progress report

Testing of the decision‐making tools

preparation and finalization of guidelines

Finalize the guidelines and tools

Country workshop for local authorities

and stakeholders once in Bhutan and

Activities in 2 nd Year Around Sept 2016 - Sept 2017

• Demonstration project implementation

based on the options proposed from first year

• From this demonstration project in both countries we have compile the success and drawbacks of the implementation

plan.

– Drawbacks may come from technology,

finance, stakeholders’ participation, and etc.

Activities in Year two

• Final product is to integrate all information and produce the guidelines for sustainable waste management for each country in

both English and local language

• Increasing environmental awareness in solid waste

management both for local citizens and authorities.

• Increasing capabilities of local authorities in conducting scientific research and dissemination of results through national workshops/site visits and developing network for sustainable solid waste management.

• Networking among the team members through the

project,

Decision Making Guidelines

 Background of the study

 Objectives of the study

 General information of the country and selected city

 City’s baseline data

 Available technologies for various kinds of waste

 Methodology in decision making process

 Identification of waste management options

 Implementation of pilot project successful factors and drawbacks

Thailand National Waste Management Policy

Participation of stakeholders

Integrated technology Clustering

Promoting

3Rs

16

Alternative Energy Development Plan 10 Year

Development TowardsLow Carbon Society

from private sector

Wast e

New forms of Energy

Hydro power

Target for renewable energy = 25% in

2021

Barrel

Renewable energy

in 2011 = 8.98%

17

177 municipalities Total 3,794 T/d

Waste 5-10 T/d

267 municipalities Total 1,839 T/d

MSW Characteristics

Area Waste Composition (%)

Ash content

Combustib

le component

Indoor waste sorting

Waste receiving floor

Outdoor system

22

No waste separation at source = higher investment & operation Costs

• Waste is tipped into a holding area (1) where it is picked up by grabs and dropped into a hopper (2).

• The waste is pushed gradually into the incinerator (3) which

runs at a temperature of 750 degrees Celsius.

• Heat from the burning waste is used in a boiler (4) and steam

from this is piped to a turbine generator to create electricity.

• The heaviest ash falls into a collection point (5) and is passed

over with an electromagnet to extract metal content for

recycling.

• Flue gases containing fine ash then pass through a scrubber

reactor(6) to treat acid pollutants such as SO2 and also

dioxins.

• The gases then pass through a fine particulate removal

system (7)and are released through the chimney stack (8). 26

• Pyrolysis is the chemical decomposition

by heat in the absence of oxygen

converting carbonaceous material into

fuel gas that can be used as a substitute

for natural gas

• The process works best when the input

waste is carbon-rich, preferably

sorted or pre-sorted

• Best results are obtained from single

stream wastes such as sewage sludge,

plastics, wood, tyres, or agricultural

wastes

• The pyrolysis process can be

continuous or batch fed, producing char,

pyrolysis oils, and gases

• The process produces a liquid residue

and gaseous output which may be

combusted to generate electricity

• A solid slag is also produced which may

require disposal or additional processing.

(Source:http://www.mbt.landfill-site.com/Pyrolysis _Gasification/pyrolysis _gasification.html)

27

Advantages Disadvantages

The process is highly exothermic (gives off heat)

and therefore requires very little energy

None of the by-products of pyrolysis have great value

End products can be utilized by a wide variety of

end users

Capital costs and operating costs are high

Energy recovery rate is considerably higher than

that of a conventional incinerator

Many processes will still have residues to be disposed of, some of which (from flue gas treatment) will be hazardous in nature Potential to recycle a large proportion of residues

depending on the process

Unproven on a commercial scale on MSW in Thailand

High temperatures may make the system more

flexible for other waste streams such as medical

waste

More sensitive system than moving grate incineration technology, required skillful operators

Smaller units more acceptable and part of an

• Gasification is the thermal

decomposition of organics

(combustible, putrescible, and

plastic fractions of the waste),

producing carbon monoxide

and hydrogen gases

• The process usually operates

at a high temperature (greater

than 700ºC) range, with the

addition of an oxidant (either

air or oxygen)

• Gasification of organic derived

wastes will produce a gas

which can be combusted to

generate electricity and a char

which usually requires disposal

if no markets are available

• Preparation of feedstock for

gasification varies greatly with

the process

(Source:http://www.mbt.landfill-site.com/Pyrolysis _Gasification/pyrolysis _gasification.html)

29

End products of gasification are very useful for making

products including

methanol, ammonia, and diesel fuel

Reliable results with full-scale and pilot-scale gasifiers had not been achieved

a relatively new development

Hazardous by-products produced during incineration

such as dioxins and furans are given little opportunity

for formation during gasification

Unproven on a commercial scale on MSW in Thailand

High temperatures may make the system more flexible

for other waste streams such as medical waste

Pre-treatment or sorting is required to reduce air pollution and improve performance

Smaller units more acceptable and part of an integrated

system

Complexity of the system and the difficulty of producing consistent feedstock from a

heterogeneous municipal solid waste stream

Capable of being integrated with other processes such

as the output from MBT / Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF)

production

High moisture content of Thai waste may reduce performance and increase cost for drying unit.

30

Phitsanulok Mechanical Biological Treatment – MBT

Suthi Hantrakul Deputy Mayor, Phitsanulok City Municipality 33

MBT on Landfill

36

pallet built ventilation system

37

38

Compost-Like Substance

Refuse Derived Fuel :RDF

40

Pyrolysis to liquid fuel

Biogas Production in School

43

Biogas production in fresh markets

Waste separation campaign

Reactor tank Gas collection balloon

• Aor Tor Kor market

• Organic waste load capavity

• Municipa;lity in Lopburi Province

• Biogas production unit + RDF production unit

Biogas production in municipality with less than

5 T/d of waste generation

Biogas production

Organic waste 800 kg/day

RDF production4.2 T/d

45

Criteria on MSW Technology Selection (1)

Criteria Waste management operation/ utilization methods

Composting (Aerobic) Anaerobic

Widely used in developed countries

Mostly applied in developed countries

Mostly applied

in developed countries

Type of MSW Sorted organic waste;

High lignin material (wood) is acceptable

Sorted organic waste;

Animal or human excreta;

Waste;

Pre-processed RDF or SRF from MBT

Appropriate scale of

operation

Small scale (Household: yard waste,

vermicomposting);

Large scale (Community:

windrow, aerated, static pile, in-vessel)

Small scale farm composting);

(on-Large scale (community organic MSW)

Large scale (Community)

Large scale (Community, city)

Large scale (Community, city)

Large scale (Community, city)

Large scale (Community, city)

Conditions for

success

Temperature sensitive;

Long residence time;

Regular aeration required;

Odor control;

Clean input material;

Contamination sensitive measure

Clean, homogeneous, and consistent input materials;

Good process control (easily disruption of microbial)

Clean, homogeneous, and consistent input materials;

Good process control

Clean, homogeneous, and consistent input materials;

Good process control (leachate, methane, and contamination)

Homogeneous and consistent input materials;

Good process control (syngas)

Clean, homogeneous consistent inputs;

Good process control

Homogeneous and consistent input materials; Good process control (syngas)

Criteria on MSWM operation and utilization

Criteria Waste management operation/ utilization methods

Composting (Aerobic)

Anaerobic digestion (AD)

MBT Landfill Incineration Pyrolysis Gasification

Final products Compost-like

product

Compost-like product;

Low calorific RDF;

Heat

Compost-like product;

RDF or SRF product;

Operational cost Medium for

windrow technique;

High for in-vessel technique

Medium for manual system;

High for automated system

Medium Medium High High High

Land

requirement

Medium for windrow technique;

Low for in-vessel technique

Criteria Waste management operation/ utilization methods

Composting (Aerobic)

Anaerobic digestion (AD)

MBT Landfill Incineration Pyrolysis Gasification

Needed skills Technical skills

required;

Training required specially for in- vessel technique

Technical skills required;

Training required

Technical skills required;

Training required

Technical skills required;

Training required

Technical skills required;

Training required

Technical skills required;

Training required

Technical skills required; Training required

Odor and insect problem

Problems form odor, insect, rodent, methane emission, leachate leakage, limited recovery efficiency of recyclable materials, fire

Pollution from syngas and toxic

emission

High energy consumption during

operation;

Noise and pollution

air-High energy consumption during

operation; Noise and air-pollution

Contribution to

energy security

None Power

generation from biogas

Energy from RDF;

Power generation from combustion

Power generation from biogas

Power generation from heat

Power generation or use as raw materials of oil-like product

Power generation from heat

Contribution to

food security

Use as compost for cultivation

Use as compost for cultivation

Use as compost for cultivation

None, high contamination

None None None

Criteria on MSWM operation and utilization

Criteria on MSW Technology Selection (2)

• Possible environmental impact

• Demand for final products

• Initial investment

• Operating cost

• Time consuming for entire process

• Complexity and required skills

• Waste utilization techniques: T1 =

composting, T2 = AD, T3 = MBT, T4 =

sanitary landfill, T5 = Incineration, T6 =

Pyrolysis, T7 = Gasification

• Level of impact of each criterion:

L = Low, M = Medium, H = High

• Influence of impact of each criterion:

= Positive, = Neutral, = Negative

Criteria on MSW Technology Selection (2)

Next steps

• To identify the criteria set for Vietnam

• Identify successful factors and drawbacks

• To find solutions for drawbacks

THANK YOU

ỦY BAN NHÂN DÂN THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH

SỞ TÀI NGUYÊN VÀ MÔI TRƯỜNG

ooo HIỆN TRẠNG VÀ ĐỊNH HƯỚNG

HỆ THỐNG QUẢN LÝ CHẤT THẢI RẮN SINH HOẠT

TRÊN ĐỊA BÀN TPHCM

Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, tháng 8/2016

Người trình bày: Võ Thanh Huỳnh Anh

HIỆN TRẠNG

HỆ THỐNG QUẢN LÝ

CHẤT THẢI RẮN SINH HOẠT

Nguồn phát sinh

Phân loại và lưu trữ tại nguồn

Thu gom

Trung chuyển -Vận

Bãi chôn lấp vệ sinh

Sơ đồ hệ thống

QLCTRSH

Khối lượng thu gom,

Thu gom tại nguồn

Thu gom dân lập, hợp tác xã:

- chiếm 60% công tác thu gom,

tại nguồn

- Đối tượng: HGĐ trong hẻm

Cty DVCI Q/H và Cty MTĐT

- chiếm 40% công tác thu gom, tại

tự chế (3)200 xe tải nhỏ (500 kg)

Lực lượng thu gom tại nguồn

Thu gom tại nguồn

Chất lượng vệ sinh của các phương tiện thu gom

Tình trạng thu gom “da beo”

Lực lượng quản lý kiêm nhiệm  công tác quản lý và

kiểm tra giám sát chưa cao

Thiếu cơ sở dữ liệu quản lý lực lượng RDL  khó khăn khi triển khai các chương trình trọng điểm của thành phố

Ý thức người dân chưa cao

Thu gom tại nguồn

Chưa ban hành quy định kịp thời

Chưa quản lý chất lượng vệ sinh của lực lượng thu gom RDL như thời gian, tần suất thu gom, phương tiện thô sơ

Chưa hỗ trợ vấn đề an sinh xã hội cho lực lượng RDL như BHXH, y tế, trang thiết bị bảo hộ lao động,…

Thu gom tại nguồn

Thời gian thực hiện: trong vòng 1h

Giám sát chất lượng vệ sinh: UBND Q/H và

Sở TNMT

Số lượng: 1000 điểm

Điểm hẹn

Chưa được giám sát thường xuyên và xử phạt

Sự kết nối không đồng bộ giữa thu gom và vận chuyển

Chất lượng vê sinh chưa cao 

Thường xuyên bị di dời do phản ánh của người dân

Điểm hẹn

Trạm trung chuyển

Chưa được giám sát thường xuyên và xử phạt

Thường xuyên bị phản ánh và yêu cầu giải tỏa

Chưa có qui hoạch vị trí TTC, đầu tư không định hướng

Trạm trung chuyển

Hình thức thực hiện:

-Phân cấp: UBND Q/H phân cấp và 2

Quận đấu thầu đặt hàng hoặc đấu thầu với Cty DVCI Q/H và Cty MTĐT

- Chưa phân cấp: Sở TNMT đặt hàng

với Cty MTĐT

Vận chuyển

Phương tiện cũ kỹ  NRR

Kết nối không đồng bộ giữa công tác

vận chuyển và tập kết tại điểm hẹn

Không đủ nhân sự để giám sát

thường xuyên

Tồn tại