Contents _______________________________________________________________________

Download Contents _______________________________________________________________________

Post on 01-Jan-2016




2 download

Embed Size (px)


Waste Management PPP: City of Johannesburg Alternative Waste Treatment Technology Project Municipal PPP Conference 18 February 2010. Contents _______________________________________________________________________. Background Institutional Arrangements The Need Legislative Mandate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


<ul><li><p>Waste Management PPP: City of Johannesburg Alternative Waste Treatment Technology ProjectMunicipal PPP Conference 18 February 2010</p></li><li><p>*Contents_______________________________________________________________________BackgroundInstitutional ArrangementsThe NeedLegislative MandateProject PlanningCoJ ProcessLessons Learned</p></li><li><p>*Proactive absorption of the poorBalanced &amp; shared growthSocial mobility and equalitySettlement restructuringSustainability &amp; environmental justiceInnovative governance solutionsThe GDS presents the Citys understanding of the longer term strategic direction and future efforts needed to accelerate growth and enhance development</p><p>The GDS ensures harmonisation and alignment with National &amp; Provincial strategies</p><p>GDS developmental paradigm consists of six principles, which collectively reaffirm the Citys commitment to its Constitutional objects and duties</p><p>Background ______________________________________________________________________________________The Growth and Development Strategy</p></li><li><p>*Background______________________________________________________________________________________The Citys VisionIn the future, Johannesburg will continue to lead as South Africas primary business city, a dynamic centre of production, innovation, trade, finance and services. This will be a city of opportunity, where the benefits of balanced economic growth will be shared in a way that enables all residents to gain access to the ladder of prosperity, and where the poor, vulnerable and excluded will be supported out of poverty to realise upward social mobility. The result will be a more equitable and spatially integrated city, very different from the divided city of the past. In this world class African city for all, everyone will be able to enjoy decent accommodation, excellent services, the highest standards of health and safety, access to participatory governance, and quality community life in sustainable neighbourhoods and vibrant urban spacesProactive absorption of the poorSocial mobility and equalitySettlement restructuringSustainability &amp; environmental justiceInnovative governance solutionsBalanced &amp; shared growth</p></li><li><p>*Background______________________________________________________________________________________Planning Instruments JoburgGDS13 Sectoral Plans</p></li><li><p>*INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES SECTORSECTOR FOCUS AREAS KEY OUTPUTS DELIVERY OF BASIC SERVICES IMPROVE SERVICE DELIVERYInstitutional Arrangements _______________________________________________________________________Infrastructure &amp; Services Sector</p></li><li><p>*Institutional Arrangements_______________________________________________________________________</p><p>Waste Management RegulatoryEnforcementPlanning &amp; monitoringService Delivery</p></li><li><p>*Institutional ArrangementsMandateISD: Waste SectorDevelops waste service delivery framework Ensure Pikitup delivers services in line with AgreementMonitors Pikitup performanceAssess &amp; verify Pikitup performanceReporting to Mayoral Comm &amp; Portfolio CommitteesTariff modelling &amp; determinationImplements strategic projects e.g LFG &amp; Alternative waste treatment Technology projects. </p></li><li><p>*Institutional ArrangementsPikitup Johannesburg (Pty) Ltd</p><p>Municipal Owned Entity, 100% owned by CoJDelivers waste services according to Service Delivery Agreement (SDA)Implements critical priorities as per GDS, IDP &amp; other prioritiesDevelops annual business plans outlining service levels, methodsRenumerated by CoJ via service fee &amp; Capex fundingReports monthly, quarterly &amp; annually</p><p>Mandate</p></li><li><p>*The Need______________________________________________________________________Major growth period for the CityLimited landfill airspaceDifficulty to establish new landfills due to:NIMBY &amp; lack of suitable landNew Waste Act &amp; Relevant authorities support for new landfillsIDP requires 15% waste diverted from landfill</p></li><li><p>*The Need______________________________________________________________________</p><p>LandfillAnnual Tonnage(Tons)Current Airspace(Years)Knock-on Effect Linbro Park00_Robinson Landfill279 5683_Marie Louise186 48474Ennerdale63727103Goudkoppies156 547173Private landfills (Chloorkop, Mooiplats)200 000__Total1 572 652_</p></li><li><p>*The Need______________________________________________________________________</p></li><li><p>*The Need______________________________________________________________________</p><p>Chart2</p><p>53</p><p>52</p><p>152</p><p>80AWT</p><p>Pecentage</p><p>current</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>Waste DiversionPecentagecurrent</p><p>composting53</p><p>Builder's Rubble52</p><p>recycling152</p><p>AWT80</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>Pecentage</p><p>Waste Diversion</p><p>Percentage</p><p>Sheet2</p><p>Pecentage</p><p>current</p><p>Sheet3</p></li><li><p>*Legislative Mandate______________________________________________________________________</p><p>The ConstitutionA right to an Environment that is not detrimental to human healthSchedule 4 &amp; 5National Environmental Management ActDuty of CarePolluter pays principleEnvironmental Conservation ActSection 20Municipal Systems ActMunicipalities to ensure universal access to essential servicesIntegrated Development Planning (IDP) processNEMA: Waste Act </p></li><li><p>*Legislative Mandate______________________________________________________________________Polokwane Declaration50% of waste away from landfill by 2012A plan for zero waste by 2022CoJ IDP Targets15% diversion of waste from landfill by 201050% composting of waste by 2010</p><p>Currently only 5-7% diversion achieved</p></li><li><p>*Legislative Mandate_______________________________________________________________________Waste Hierarchy </p><p>Prevention &amp; MinimisationRe-useRecoveryCompostingCleaner ProductionRecyclingPhysical, chemical destructionLandfillingTreatmentDisposal</p></li><li><p>*Project Planning______________________________________________________________________</p><p>Why Waste Treatment Technology (Waste to Energy)?Reduce waste to landfill by about 60-80%Electricity GenerationPotential for earning carbon creditsProven technology world-wide; Europe leading </p></li><li><p>*Project Planning______________________________________________________________________Thermal TreatmentsIncineration AutoclavingEmerging Thermal TreatmentGasificationPyrolysisBiological TreatmentsWindrow CompostingIn Vessel CompostingAnaerobic DigestionMechanical Biological Treatments (MBT) and Mechanical Heat Treatments</p></li><li><p>*Packaging Waste: Recycled56% (2000) In Denmark:13 organic household waste composting plants33 incinerators120 garden waste composting plants~5 biogas facilities~15 major landfills~20 inert landfills</p><p>Ref: COWI</p><p>Chart2</p><p>16822</p><p>174825</p><p>9910</p><p>611623</p><p>364910</p><p>9228</p><p>Recycling</p><p>Incineration</p><p>Landfill/Disposal</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>Household WasteBulky WasteGarden WasteIndustrial WasteCommercial WasteBuilding Waste</p><p>Recycling161799613692</p><p>Incineration8248116492</p><p>Landfill/Disposal225023108</p><p>RecyclingIncinerationLandfill</p><p>1985302238</p><p>1994562024</p><p>2000652411</p><p>200264269</p><p>Target 200865269</p><p>Sheet1</p><p>Recycling</p><p>Incineration</p><p>Landfill/Disposal</p><p>Sheet2</p><p>1985</p><p>1994</p><p>2000</p><p>2002</p><p>Target 2008</p><p>Sheet3</p></li><li><p>*Comparison of treatment technologies Ref: COWI</p><p>Treatment technologyIs it proven?Cost (invest / oper / revenue)Landfill diversionInput qualityOutput risksMBT - aerobicYes. &gt; 60 plants10 yearsProvenI: MediumO: High R: NegativeLow - no RDF)Medium - with RDFSize reductionRDF off-taker?Quality of recyclables</p><p>Compost to landfillMBT - AnarobicYes &gt; 30 plants10 yearsProvenI: HighO: HighR: Low/negLow - no RDF)Medium - with RDFSize reductionStructure/fiber materialWtE moveable grate /rotaryYes &gt; 1000 plants100 yearsProvenI: HighO: LowR: HighHighVery high if ash recyclingReceives all except excess bulkyFGT to H:h</p><p>Ash recyclingPyrolysis /gasificationNo. Very few plants5-10 yearsNot provenI: HighO: LowR: HighHighVery high if ash recyclingSize reduction and sortingChar, syngas user?Landfill of residue?</p></li><li><p>*Project Planning______________________________________________________________________The optimum combination of technologies for an integrated waste management system depend on the following key decision-making parameters:Landfill diversion targets CO2 reduction / Environmental targets Energy recovery and material recovery targetsAffordability targets (Capex, Opex, household levy /gate fee)Procurement, ownership &amp; financing strategy (risk allocation)</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________Mayoral Approval to initiate the projectRFI IssuedFeasibility Study Conducted in line with PPP guidelineProcurement process to follow involving:RFQRFPAppointment of preferred bidder</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________Technical Feasibility StudyNeeds Analysis Summary of need for alternative waste treatment technologies in the City.Technical Solutions Options Analysis This is a full analysis listing Technologies available.Technical Options to be considered for Johannesburg Service Delivery Options Analysis- A full review of service delivery options carried out.Proposed solutionsSummary and Recommendations.</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________Other Aspects of Feasibility StudyDetailed Due Diligence of all the key issues associated with the selected optionsExecution of a Value Assessment exercise in terms of affordability of the selection technical options as compared to avoided landfill costsRisks &amp; costing thereofDetailed Procurement Plan for the various optionsSubmission of Report to Treasury &amp; Council</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________</p><p>Gate fees IncomeDescriptionUnit DescriptionUnitsWasteTonnes/annum500,000FeeRand per tonneR112TotalRandsR56,000,000.00</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________</p><p>Refit TariffNet electricity available for sale per annumR277,222,713.60Price per KWh0.76Total incomeR210,689,262.34</p></li><li><p>**Electrical ConnectionLoad Study Linbro Complete - Eskom ConnectionOther 4 sites Complete City Power connection</p><p>Embedded Generation Application. </p><p>Systems Use Agreement / Supplementary Supply Agreement.</p></li><li><p>**</p><p>Electrical Connection</p></li><li><p>*Power Sale AgreementCity Power was initially approached to purchase the power.</p><p>NERSA, Renewable Feed In Tariff - April 2009.</p><p>License application with NERSA - May </p><p>Government Notice R.721 - Electricity Regulations Act (4/2006): Electricity Regulations on New Generation Capacity published in August 2009</p></li><li><p>*Electricity Amendment Act NERSA to draft rules for Independent Systems Operator (ISO)</p><p>REPA / ISO to purchase power from all Independent Power producers</p><p>REPA / ISO Tender process</p><p>Conditional upon;REPA needs Cost recovery Mechanism ( CRM) to be approved.IRP 1 - Integrated Resource Plan 1National Treasury Support (Guarantee) for the costs of the program</p></li><li><p>*CoJ Process______________________________________________________________________Key Considerations from Feasibility StudySite SelectionCalorific value of the wasteHazardous landfill siteSuitability of technology for CoJ purposesCoJ By-LawsFinancing of the projectHow to address the risks &amp; sensitivities</p></li><li><p>*Lessons Learned______________________________________________________________________PPP process requires proper time management &amp; project managementUse the support from National &amp; Provincial PPP UnitsEstablish a multi-disciplinary Steering CommitteeEnsure to procure Transaction Advisor with prior PPP &amp; Project Finance experienceBeing a 1st in South Africa, international expertise is necessaryEnsure Buy-in from Senior Management &amp; Politicians</p></li><li><p>*Thank You!Palesa MathibeliDirector: Waste SectorInfrastructure &amp; Services DepartmentTel: (011) 381 0323E-mail:</p><p>********************Visual Impact (EfW)Large energy from waste facilities (over 200,000 tpa) can cover around 4Ha of land. The siting of these facilities will be carefully considered and will depend upon a number of factors. The site should have a good road network as refuse collection vehicles will need access everyday. The electricity and heat generated by the plant might be used locally, if so the plant should be fairly close to either a power plant or to an industrial facility that could take advantage of the energy produced. Planning conditions will suggest that any new facility built should be in keeping with the surrounding area whether that is an industrial estate or a rural setting. Good design of plants can help to limit their visual impact. The largest stack (chimney) height a facility would have is around 70m high but as the picture of the Marchwood facility shows it can be made to blend in to the overall look of the facility.</p><p>Costs (EfW)If the biodegradable fraction (green waste and kitchen waste) of our rubbish cannot be diverted from landfill then the EU will fine the UK for every tonne of waste it continues to send to landfill. To avoid the fines and to find more sustainable ways of dealing with our waste local authorities are considering a number of different options to treat their waste. There is no right or wrong combination of options and each local authority might have a different set of facilities depending on local circumstances. These facilities will cost a lot of money and it is important that all the options are evaluated when the decisions are made. The cheapest option is not necessarily the best and what seems like a good option for the present might not be a good choice for 10 or 20 years time. The cost of a treatment facility can be dependant on many things: the cost of land, the current collection system, what other facilities your local authority is considering and whether this option will work well with them are just a few of the considerations.Energy from waste facilities are expensive and have long operating life spans but are currently used in Europe in many high recycling countries. Size(EfW)The size of an energy from waste facility will depend on the individual local authority and what facilities are already in place. A large authority or a group of authorities may decide that they would like one or two larger facility whereas a smaller authority may want a smaller facility. One size does not fit all though as an authority may decide that several smaller facility is the right option. Facilities will vary from around 1-4Ha in size. Current facilities in the UK accept anything from 60,000 tpa to over 500,000 tpa.</p><p>Costs (GAS&amp;PYR)If the biodegradable fraction (green waste and kitchen waste) of our rubbish cannot be diverted from landfill then the EU will fine the UK for every tonne of waste it continues to send to landfill. To avoid the fines and to find more sustainable ways of dealing with our waste local authorities are considering a number of different options to treat their waste. There is no right or wrong combination of options and each local authority might have a different set of facilities depending on local circumstances. These facilities will cost a lot of money and it is important that all the options are evaluated when the decisions are made. The cheapest option is not necessarily the best and what seems like a good option for the present might not be a good choice for 10 or 20 years time. The cost of a treatment facility can be dependant on...</p></li></ul>


View more >