evaluation of nama opportunities in colombia`s solid waste sector

Comments

Transcription

evaluation of nama opportunities in colombia`s solid waste sector
EVALUATION
OF NAMA
OPPORTUNITIES
IN COLOMBIA’S
SOLID WASTE
SECTOR
WRITTEN BY:
Leo Larochelle
Michael Turner
Michael LaGiglia
RESEARCH SUPPORT:
CCAP
CENTER FOR CLEAN AIR POLICY
Hill Consulting (Bogotá)
O C TOBER 2012
Dial ogue. I ns i ght . S o lu t io n s.
Acknowledgements
This paper is a product of CCAP’s Mitigation Action Implementation Network (MAIN) and was written by
Leo Larochelle, Michael Turner, and Michael LaGiglia of CCAP.
This project was undertaken with the financial support of the Government of Canada through the
Federal Department of the Environment.
Special thanks are due to the individuals and organizations in Colombia who offered their time and
assistance, through phone interviews or in-person discussions to help inform this work. The support of
the Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible was essential to the success of this report as well as
help from the Steering Committee (made up of the Ministerio de Ambiente Vivienda Y Desarrollo
Territorial, the Departamento Nacional de Planeación, the Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo
Sostenible, and the Superintendencia de Servicios Públicos Domiciliarios), representatives from Santiago
de Cali (Empresa Pública de Gestión Integral de Residuos Sólidos de Cali, Departamento Administrativo
para la Gestión del Medio Ambiente), Medellín (Area Metropolitana del Valle de Aburra Unidad
Ambiental), Ibagué (Corporación Autónoma Regional del Tolima-Cortolima and Interaseo) and
Sogamoso (Secretario de Desarrollo y Medio Ambiente and Coservicios).
The views expressed in this paper represent those of CCAP and not necessarily those of any of the other
institutions or individuals mentioned above. For further information, please contact Michael LaGiglia at
([email protected]).
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
1
List of Acronyms
CARs - Regional Autonomous Corporations (Regional Environmental Authorities)
CCAP - Center for Clean Air Policy
CDM - Clean Development Mechanism
CEMPRE - Corporal Commitment on recycling - www.cempre.org.co
CPC - Colombian Politic Constitution of 1991
CRA - Regulatory Commission for Water and Sanitation - www.cra.gov.co
DANE - National Department of Statistics - www.dane.gov.co
DNA - Designed National Authority
EICE - Industrial and Commercial State´s companies
EPR - Extended Product Responsibility
EU - European Union
GHG - Greenhouse Gas
HDPE - High Density Polyethylene
ICA - Colombian Institute of Agriculture
IDEAM - Colombian Institute of Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies www.ideam.gov.co
IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISWM - Integrated Solid Waste Management
LFG - Landfill Gas
LFGTE - Landfill Gas to Energy
MADS - Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development - www.minambiente.gov.co
MBT - Mechanical Biological Treatment
MDL - Clean Development Mechanism
MRV - Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable
MSW - Municipal Solid Waste
NAMA - Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action
PGIRS - Integrated Solid Waste Management Plans
RAS - Technical Regulation for drinking water and sanitation
RDF - Refuse Derived Fuel
RUPS - Public Services Providers Registry
SINA - National Environmental System
SSPD - Superintendence for Household Public Services - www.superservicios.gov.co
SUI - Unique Information System of domiciliary public services providers - www.superservicios.gov.co
SWM - Solid Waste Management
UNFCCC - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
USEPA - United States Environmental Protection Agency
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
2
USTDA - United States Trade and Development Agency
WTE - Waste to Energy
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
3
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................................................................1
List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................................2
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................6
Economic Model ............................................................................................................................................................8
Analysis of Technologies ................................................................................................................................................9
Cost Prohibitive Technologies ...................................................................................................................................9
Potentially Viable Technologies ...............................................................................................................................10
Recommended Colombia Integrated Waste NAMA ....................................................................................................12
Assessment Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................................13
Assessment Recommendations ...................................................................................................................................15
Section 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................17
Background on Canadian Waste Initiative ..........................................................................................................17
Colombian Waste Assessment Report ................................................................................................................17
Section 2: Solid Waste Management and GHG Emission Fundamentals ....................................................................26
Section 3: Waste NAMA Fundamentals .......................................................................................................................30
Section 4: Solid Waste Management in Colombia.......................................................................................................35
4.1 Solid Waste Generation and Disposal ................................................................................................................35
4.2 Solid Waste Composition ...................................................................................................................................37
4.3 Recycling and Recovery in Colombia .................................................................................................................39
4.4 Solid Waste Disposal in Colombia ......................................................................................................................44
4.5 Institutional Framework ....................................................................................................................................46
4.6 Municipal Integrated Solid Waste Management Plans (PGIRS).........................................................................50
4.7 Target Community Solid Waste Management Conditions ................................................................................52
a. Santiago de Cali ...............................................................................................................................................52
b. Medellin ..........................................................................................................................................................60
c. Ibagué ..............................................................................................................................................................69
d. Sogamoso ........................................................................................................................................................71
Section 5: Climate Change Activities in Colombia .......................................................................................................75
5.1 Climate Change Policy and Initiatives in Colombia ............................................................................................75
5.2 Colombia CDM Projects Overview and Experience ...........................................................................................77
Section 6: Alternative ISWM Scenarios – Viability and GHG Mitigation Potential ......................................................81
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
4
6.1 Waste Reduction ...............................................................................................................................................88
6.2 Collection and Transport ...................................................................................................................................88
6.3 Recycling, Processing and Recovery ..................................................................................................................89
6.4. Disposal .............................................................................................................................................................93
6.5 Integrated Solid Waste Management Processes ...............................................................................................95
6.6 Net GHG Mitigation Effects ...............................................................................................................................95
Section 7: Economic and Financial Considerations .....................................................................................................99
7.1 ECONOMIC VIABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY....................................................................................................100
7.2 COLOMBIA'S CURRENT TARIFF STRUCTURE AND ALLOCATION ......................................................................110
7.3 FINANCING AND SERVICE PROVISION ALTERNATIVES .....................................................................................111
Section 8: Colombia Waste NAMA Alternatives and Design .....................................................................................114
8.1 Waste NAMA Related Activities and Initiatives ...............................................................................................114
8.2 Recommended Colombia Integrated Waste NAMA ........................................................................................116
8.3 Technical and Economic Basis for the Integrated Model ................................................................................119
8.4 Waste NAMA Related Factors and Processes in Colombia ..............................................................................121
8.5 Waste NAMA Development Drivers – Strengths and Weaknesses .................................................................121
8.6 Waste NAMA Implementation Impediments ..................................................................................................123
Section 9: Conclusions and Recommendations .........................................................................................................125
Assessment Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................125
Assessment Recommendations .............................................................................................................................126
Annex 1: Principal Active MSW Landfills in Colombia ...............................................................................................128
Annex 2: Solid Waste Composition in Colombian Departments ...............................................................................129
Annex 3: Companies Currently Active in Buying Recovered Recyclables in Colombia ..............................................130
Annex 4: Cement Manufacturing Plants in Colombia ................................................................................................131
Annex 5: Major Private Sector Contractors Active in Colombia ................................................................................133
Overview of Waste Management Companies in Colombia ...................................................................................133
Company profiles ..............................................................................................................................................133
Annex 6: Economic Model Assumptions ...................................................................................................................136
Annex 7: Construction and Demolition Waste Management ....................................................................................143
Annex 8: Extended Product Responsibility ................................................................................................................150
Annex 9: References ..................................................................................................................................................157
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
5
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in
Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Executive Summary
The intent of the Colombia Waste NAMA assessment is to analyze solid waste management (SWM)
technologies and programs that could be implemented in Colombia to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG)
reductions as well as other health, economic, and social co-benefits under the framework of a Nationally
Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA). The assessment investigates baseline conditions and factors that
influence the development of new SWM programs and facilities, and provides a scoping analysis to
identify elements of SWM that could be implemented singly or as an integrated package.
In undertaking the assessment, the Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) in association with Hill Consulting
of Bogota, and on behalf of Environment Canada, made use of extensive available national information
and data to determine the applicability of alternative SWM approaches that can achieve GHG emission
reductions while also improving solid waste management conditions in an economically viable and
sustainable manner. To accomplish this, CCAP also investigated specific conditions in four municipalities
(Santiago de Cali (Cali), Medellín, Ibagué and Sogamoso) that were viewed to represent different
demographic and institutional settings in Colombia.
SWM is one of the major urban problems faced by municipalities throughout the world. In recent years,
the focus for improving municipal SWM has been towards the development of Integrated Solid Waste
Management (ISWM) programs where each facet of the sector (waste generation, collection, transfer,
disposal, etc.) is analyzed in a holistic manner. Through this integrated approach, SWM in developing
countries has increasingly been focusing on waste minimization, energy and resource recovery rather
than solely viewing the sector as an environmental risk and public service issue. In developed countries,
expensive disposal and public opposition to landfill siting has only increased this trend. MSW recovery
potential is primarily the function of the physical characteristics of the solid waste to be managed and
the manner by which recovery is achieved. Mature and proven processing technologies are
commercially available for recovery and treatment purposes. However, worldwide experience has
shown that the application of some conventional technologies must be carefully evaluated to determine
that they are economically viable and sustainable within the specific settings for which they are
intended.
In recent years, municipalities in Colombia have made significant progress in improving their core SWM
services and functions including collection, transport and disposal processes. (Current government
estimates indicate that up to 92% of the municipal solid waste in Colombia is disposed of in sanitary
landfills.) National policies have also evolved to promote ISWM approaches that seek to achieve a “zero
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
6
waste” culture. By regulation, Colombian municipalities were required to develop solid waste
management plans to define how they will further improve their local SWM programs to meet national
regulations. However, implementation of these plans has been slow as a result of a number of factors
described in this report.
Currently and in parallel to these evolving SWM situations in Colombia, increased concern about
anthropogenic climate change effects has brought solid waste management into a new global focus as a
potential source of climate change mitigation. By their nature, most SWM processes are a source of
GHG emissions (i.e., methane emissions from landfills) but this report will outline ways that this can be
remedied.
For initial screening purposes, CCAP evaluated the applicability of a number of conventional solid waste
management approaches in two scenarios and various technical configurations within each scenario
including:
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Processing
1. Waste to Energy (WTE) - incineration for energy recovery
2. Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility - utilizing anaerobic digestion as the core
biological process
3. Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility - utilizing windrowed compost as the core
biological process
4. Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility - utilizing In-Vessel compost as the core
biological process
5. Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) (With refuse derived fuel generation) - primarily for
materials recovery including recyclables and/or the production of refuse derived fuel (RDF) for
offsite utilization.
Source Separation
Source separation and independent collection of:
6. Organic waste - from residences (yard waste, food scraps, non-recyclable paper, etc.) or
specific large-scale generators such as markets, restaurants, etc.
7. Recyclable materials - from specific high-volume commercial/industrial generators and from
residential sources
Landfill gas collection and treatment
8. Landfill gas collection and treatment - in closed and active landfills throughout Colombia
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
7
Economic Model
During the assessment process, CCAP developed an economic model to evaluate the cost and GHG
impact for the different SWM technology/program options. The model used estimated revenues from
potential tipping fees, and the generation and sale of electricity, recyclables, compost and refuse
derived fuel for different technology/program options. The model also estimated costs for capital
equipment, operations and maintenance, and financing for different technology/program options. In
order to run the model, CCAP used specific information on Cali’s municipal solid waste (MSW) (e.g.
amount of annual municipal solid waste and solid waste composition data, etc.). The model calculated
the added cost per ton of MSW to treat the waste under each technology/program option.
Table ES-1 shows the results of the economic model under best case, average and worst case assumptions.
Alternatives
1. Waste To Energy
2. MBT (Anaerobic
Dig.)
3. MBT (Windrowed
Compost)
4. MBT (In-Vessel
Compost)
5. MRF (With RDF
Generation)
6. Source Separation Organics
7. Source Separation Recyclables
8. Landfill Gas
Recovery*
Cost to Treat MSW
(USD/ton)
GHG Reduction
(USD/ton CO2e )
GHG Reduction (ton
CO2e/ton of
processed waste)
Best
Avg.
Worst
Best
Avg.
Worst
Best
Avg.
Worst
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
-55
-99
-143
53
96
138
1.04
1.04
1.04
-42
-70
-98
31
52
73
1.35
1.35
1.35
-6
-28
-51
4
21
38
1.35
1.35
1.35
-19
-41
-64
14
30
48
1.35
1.35
1.35
-15
-39
-63
10
27
43
1.46
1.46
1.46
-3
-21
-40
5
36
66
0.6
0.6
0.6
-6
-39
-73
6
39
73
0.33
0.33
0.33
n/a
n/a
n/a
* Landfill gas recovery was not included in the model because its economics are very site specific.
It should be noted that due to the complex nature of waste management technologies and the
significant impact that location can have on costs and revenue, this economic analysis should be
considered only as indicative to help explore initial economic viability. It should also be noted that the
cost data presented in this report relates to an assessment of economic factors consistent with a waste
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
8
stream in a city similar to Cali. This model can be utilized as a tool for other cities in Colombia if local
factors and scale issues are taken into account.
While all of the options analyzed result in increased costs for treatment as compared to disposal in
sanitary landfills assuming current tipping fees, CCAP believes several of these options are still possible
as elements of a waste NAMA given the factors described below. NAMA financing has the ability to help
reduce the cost increases associated with new waste processing systems.
These factors could significantly affect or reverse the negative numbers shown in the above table:
• Reduced collection and transport costs. Although the model already factors in avoided
disposal costs by considering the tipping fee as potential revenue, it does not include avoided
collection and transportation costs. The collection and transport system is very site specific
depending on where a processing facility would be located in relationship to the current landfill.
There could be significant cost savings and an increase in collection efficiency in the collection
and transport system (which in Cali is 78% of total SWM costs, or USD 42/ton). These savings
could be passed on from municipalities to SWM service providers to incentivize diversion of
waste going to landfills.
• Tariff reform. Further, incentives given by municipalities could be greatly enhanced by the
upcoming tariff reform process. It is anticipated that, at a minimum, tariff reform will seek to
allocate tariff funds to recovery projects based on the avoided costs for both disposal and
collection/transport. If the government decided to include an incentive element to the tariff to
support recovery projects and initiatives, this could also reduce the additional costs associated
with recovery projects.
• Reduced need for future landfills. Deferred capital investments in landfill expansion due to
decreased landfill airspace utilization may also result since design landfill airspace will be utilized
at a slower rate through diversion of solid waste materials away from the landfill.
• More attractive financing terms. Especially for capital intensive facilities, the viability of each
scenario is highly dependent on financing terms such as interest rates, loan term, and debt to
equity ratios. CCAP has used conservative financing terms for our assessment. The Government
of Colombia, either local or national, could also drive the diversion of waste away from landfills
by providing concessional terms to SWM projects. Incentives for renewable energy could also
boost the viability of those scenarios that produce electricity or use waste as direct fuel (RDF).
Analysis of Technologies
Cost Prohibitive Technologies
Waste to Energy and Anaerobic Digestion. Conventional waste to energy technologies such as
those utilized in the United States and European Union are, most likely, not viable in Colombia for both
technical and economic reasons. The high organic (and resulting moisture) content of typical municipal
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
9
solid waste in Colombia makes it very difficult for conventional incineration technologies to effectively
combust the solid waste without significant preconditioning of the waste prior to direct combustion. In
addition, the high capital and operating costs associated with these systems and typical air pollution
control systems normally utilized would significantly increase in the cost of solid waste management.
Similarly, the utilization of mixed solid waste Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities that utilize
anaerobic digestion as the core biological process would also be cost prohibitive.
Potentially Viable Technologies
The six remaining options could be economically feasible and therefore should be evaluated further as a
potential Waste NAMA in Colombia. A number of these alternatives may be a technical component of a
composite mixed solid waste processing facility utilizing various treatment processes as will be defined
in the proposed Waste NAMA model.
•
•
•
MBT (Windrowed Compost). A mechanical biological treatment facility with a windrowed
compost component as the primary biological element is an attractive alternative to pursue as
part as an integrated waste NAMA because of its lower capital cost (25-60 million USD based on
the scenario evaluated in the model) and low cost per ton of CO2e reduction ($4/ton in the best
case scenario). A key sensitivity in the economic analysis of this technology is the value and
marketability of compost produced in Cali. As compost markets in Colombia are highly
fragmented and prices are volatile, a full market study is needed to ensure sufficient demand for
the low-grade compost generated in this type of MBT facility when processing a mixed solid
waste stream.
MBT (In-Vessel Compost). A MBT facility with an in-vessel composting approach shares some
of the same favorable aspects of the windrowed facility. While In-vessel systems are more
capital intensive (35-70 million USD based on the scenario evaluated in the assessment) than
windrowed composting, their advantage is that they require less space, have lower processing
times (3-28 days) and better controlled odor and leachate issues. Again, compost values and
sufficient demand will determine the economic feasibility of this technology.
MRF (With RDF Generation). There is a positive economic case for the inclusion of Materials
Recovery Facilities with Refused Derived Fuel (RDF) generation in the development of the Waste
NAMA, especially when considering the potential demand for RDF in some Colombian
communities where cement kilns are located. While these facilities are more expensive with
capital costs between 32 to 67 million USD for the evaluated scenario, market conditions for
RDF in cities such as Sogamoso offer an opportunity to offset high capital and operating &
maintenance unit costs and achieve considerable GHG reduction impacts (1.46 ton CO2e/ton
processed waste) through energy substitution. Cities or regions that have robust cement
industries that rely on fossil fuels would be suited for RDF generation. Assessing market
conditions for RDF in each site will be critical for assessing the economic feasibility of this
technology in various local settings.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
10
•
•
•
Source Separation – Organics. The economic feasibility of the source separation organics
(SSO) alternative is highly dependent on the generation and sale of the high quality compost
which can be produced through composting source separated organic material. It should be
noted that collection costs are site specific and it is assumed that any SSO program will utilize
the structure of the existing waste management collection system to the degree possible or, at a
minimum, possibly decrease the scope of the conventional collection system for the sources
where organic materials are independently collected. This alternative is also considered an
important component of any Colombian waste NAMA because it is consistent with the existing
waste management strategies and goals as represented in the municipalities’ ISWM (Integrated
Solid Waste Management) or PGIRS plans.
Source Separation – Recyclables. Strong markets for recovered recyclables exist in Colombia
which may provide a basis for developing a program that collects source separated recyclable
materials. However, this would directly compete with the existing informal sector recycling
process (which collects about 10% of the total waste stream) which may make it difficult to
formally collect available recyclable materials set out by generators for collection. Source
separation set-outs could provide a greater opportunity for informal recyclers to simply take the
material prior to the formal collection process thereby affecting the recovery rate that could be
achieved through the formal process.
Landfill Gas Collection and Treatment. In addition to the above, the possible installation of
landfill gas to energy systems could lead to GHG mitigation benefits. A recent study funded by
the United States Trade and Development Agency related to the CIS El Guacal landfill site in the
greater Medellin region concluded that an enhancement of the existing landfill gas collection
and treatment system at the landfill site to recover energy is economically feasible based on the
continued receipt of the current amount of solid waste at the site throughout the life of the
project. Similar situations at other landfills in Colombia would need to be evaluated on a case by
case basis.
With support of the above model results, CCAP has made the following observations:
1. Markets for recyclable materials recovered from the municipal solid waste stream are strong
and sufficient for a significant increase in the amount of recyclable materials recovered through
formal recovery processes. This is also the basis for the strength of the informal sector in their
material recovery endeavors.
2. Markets for both high and low quality compost in Colombia need to be developed if composting
is to be adopted as an option for treating solid waste organic content.
3. Potential opportunities exist in utilizing refuse derived fuel derived through mechanical
processing for co-firing in the numerous cement kilns located throughout Colombia.
4. Some landfills in Colombia have already installed landfill gas collection and treatment systems
under the CDM framework. Most of these, if not all, were developed as a means for achieving
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
11
the revenue derived from the sale of Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs). Additional
opportunities may exist for installing landfill gas treatment systems (particularly landfill gas to
energy systems), especially considering the fledgling market for CERs worldwide.
5. For the most part, solid waste management plans prepared by the municipalities that were
reviewed by CCAP emphasize the intent to develop source separation processes for organics and
recyclables as a means for 1) reducing the amount of solid waste delivered to landfills and 2)
complying with national solid waste management policies and strategies.
6. GHG mitigation benefits associated with the various technology alternatives are a function of
both direct and indirect results. Any solid waste stream organic content diverted from landfill
disposal will help to reduce the quantity of methane generated at the landfill by reducing the
amount of material subject to the landfill’s anaerobic decomposition process. This will result in a
direct net increase in GHG emissions based on the manner by which organic content is diverted.
In addition, there will be significant levels of indirect avoided GHG emissions that will result
from some ISWM processes. For example, recovery of solid waste stream recyclable
components will help to avoid GHG emissions derived through producing new products from
virgin materials now displaced by the use of recycled materials.
Recommended Colombia Integrated Waste NAMA
Based on its findings, and consistent with current SWM planning initiatives at the national and local
levels, CCAP recommends that a Colombia Waste NAMA consist of an integrated approach model that
involves:
1. MBT facilities that could generate refuse derived fuel, recyclables and compost
2. Integrating tariff reform into the Waste NAMA evaluation
3. Potentially implementing landfill gas to energy on active landfills that currently collect and flare
landfill gas
4. Pursuing source separated waste for organics and recyclables.
The viability of these elements is dependent on local conditions. Financial support will be needed on
many options to help overcome the incremental costs of implementing facilities. NAMA financing
coupled with appropriate tariff reform measures could make integrated waste management strategies
economically viable.
The principal driver will be the existence, viability and economic effect of market outlets for recovered
commodities. These “market” conditions will define the nature, capacity and viability of technical
elements (and resulting economic impact) of the model components as reflected in the schematic
below. The principal output commodities will be recyclables, compost and refuse derived fuel derived
through source separation and mixed waste processing activities. The mixed processing element will
seek to derive all three of the output commodities depending on the characteristics of available
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
12
“market” entities in the local areas. The model also recognizes that the informal sector may continue to
play a role in recovering recyclable materials in the local areas.
In applying the model to any local or regional area in Colombia, specific conditions will determine the
definition, viability or design capacity of any individual technical element of the model. This may mean
that some local areas or regions will not support the development all of the technical elements or that
some elements may be more viable than others.
Figure ES-1 depicts the elements of the proposed integrated solid waste management NAMA model
Informal Recyclers
Formal Source Separation
Municipal Solid Waste
Mixed Waste Processing Element
Manual/Partial
Mechanical Separation
Source Separated
Organics
Dry Organic and
Other Materials
High Moisture Organics
L
Compost
Recyclables
H
Refuse Derived
Fuel
Landfill Disposal
Landfill Gas
Energy Recovery
H
L
Denotes Potential for High and Low quality compost
INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT MODEL SCHEMATIC
Assessment Conclusions
Based on its assessment of current conditions, CCAP derived the following general conclusions:
1. The general solid waste management situation in Colombia has progressed and evolved to a
point where a good level of service is provided in core collection, transport and disposal
processes in most municipalities.
2. Solid waste management improvements over the past decade have been supported by the
modification and strengthening of Colombia's national institutional framework. This has led to
the active participation of multiple service providers where private capital is playing a significant
role in the development of upgraded services and facilities. As a result of this, disposal facilities
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
13
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
throughout the country have been upgraded to a point where a significant proportion of the
solid waste generators in Colombia is now disposed of in facilities that are classified as sanitary
landfills.
Colombian solid waste management policy seeks to achieve a “zero waste” culture by
promoting integrated solid waste management approaches that will recover the intrinsic value
of solid waste components through a variety of means. This policy is reflected in the local solid
waste management plans (PGIRS) prepared by municipalities throughout Colombia.
Colombia still has a significant way to go in terms of implementing integrated solid waste
management processes. This is primarily due to the institutional and policy impediments that
currently exist. Important impediments to the development of ISWM processes relate to overall
economic sustainability where the existing solid waste management tariff structure does not
recognize recovery processes as a formula factor in defining tariff allocations. However, the
government of Colombia recognizes this impediment and is currently working on revising its
tariff framework to include waste recovery processes. Other legal requirements such as the
limitation capping any costs associated with solid waste recovery processes to be passed on to
generators to the offset cost of core collection and disposal services may also create an
impediment to the development of recovery programs and facilities that may achieve important
environmental benefits but at a higher cost than current core services.
Implementation of policy based programs such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
initiatives or the diversion and recovery of construction and demolition waste can derive some
GHG mitigation benefits. EPR elements that help to reduce the overall amount of municipal solid
waste generated or that improve the prospects for marketing output materials from recovery
projects will have a beneficial impact as will the recovery of construction and demolition waste
components that will decrease the total amount of solid waste placed in landfills or displace the
use of virgin materials through recovery. (An effective program to manage construction and
demolition waste will have the major added benefit of helping to rectify one of the most solid
waste management visible problems in Colombian municipalities.)
The regionalization of final disposal sites with the significant participation of the private sector
has been accomplished in many locations in Colombia with the result that there is a strong basis
for future regional applications of solid waste processing facilities and the availability of
sufficient solid waste from multiple sources to take advantage of economies of scale that may
affect the technical and economic viability of some ISWM processes and elements of the
proposed Waste NAMA integrated model.
Recycling in Colombia is primarily accomplished through the informal sector which is viewed to
be an important element for future solid waste management in the country. This includes the
need to incorporate the informal sector into future processes as well as consider its impact on
the viability of alternative formal programs and facilities with which the informal sector may
compete.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
14
8. Analysis of available outlets for recyclable materials in Colombia demonstrates that there are
strong markets with significant demand for materials for use in manufacturing new products.
Currently, supply has not kept up with demand to a point where recyclable materials are
imported into Colombia for manufacturing purposes. Current available markets are expected to
support significantly greater levels of recovery in Colombia in the future.
9. Source separation cost remains as one of the main obstacle for the implementation of some
municipal waste recovery strategies. Increased incentives will be necessary to achieve an
effective level of source separation of various materials. In addition, the strengthening of
ongoing public education programs will be required to help assure the effective participation
and cooperation of residential, commercial and industrial solid waste generators in new or
expanded source separation initiatives.
10. New programs and facilities that can achieve greater material or energy recovery levels from the
municipal solid waste stream are expected to increase the overall cost of solid waste
management in Colombia. The ability to accept and accommodate these increased costs will be
an important element in decision-making relative to the development of any new solid waste
management process that may be included as a component of a Colombian Waste NAMA.
However, all potential locale specific cost savings (such as those associated with the impact on
the efficiency and cost of conventional collection and transport processes) must also be
considered through the development and utilization of full cost accounting principles.
Assessment Recommendations
Based on this assessment, CCAP recommends the following:
1. A Waste NAMA in Colombia should be developed based on an integrated solid waste
management approach where mechanical biological treatment facilities could generate refuse
derived fuel, recyclables, and/or compost depending on the local market conditions for the
recoverable elements. The next steps for developing such a NAMA would include:
a. Conduct a feasibility study for an MBT facility in 1-2 municipalities which would include
an evaluation of the market potential for RDF, recyclables and compost.
b. Conduct a national scoping analysis to identify other municipalities in which favorable
conditions exist for MBT facilities
2. The upcoming tariff reform presents a critical opportunity to align stakeholder incentives with
integrated waste management goals. The current tariff should be analyzed as to how potential
revisions could strengthen the feasibility of a waste NAMA. CCAP would be open to directly
supporting the CRA (Comisión de Regulación de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Básico) in
researching alternative tariff adjustment scenarios affecting the upcoming tariff reform process,
dependent on the CRA’s willingness for this collaboration.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
15
3. There may be opportunities to implement electric generation projects on sites that are currently
collecting and flaring landfill gas. A scoping analysis should be done to fully evaluate this
potential.
4. Source separation for organics and recyclables can be an effective part of an integrated solid
waste management program in the longer term. Because the economic feasibility of source
separation is highly dependent on the generation and sale of compost and recyclables,
additional analysis should be conducted on the market for compost and recyclables, and should
specifically address the informal sector recycling process.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
16
Section 1: Introduction
Background on Canadian Waste Initiative
In early 2012 Environment Canada added substantial funding to CCAP’s well established MAIN program
(Mitigation Action Implementation Network), specifically targeting climate mitigation efforts in the solid
waste sector in Chile, Colombia, Dominican Republic and Mexico.
As part of the greater MAIN project, the Canadian waste initiative was created to support the design and
implementation of NAMAS in the solid waste sector. Funds were made available by the Canadian
government to support select pilot projects, feasibilities studies, and/or technical assistance and
workshops in these countries to result in “shovel ready” and financeable waste NAMAs by the project
conclusion date in March 2013.
The following report is part of the work done to date towards the development of a Colombian Waste
NAMA.
Colombian Waste Assessment Report
The intent of this assessment is to investigate baseline conditions and factors that may influence the
development of solid waste management (SWM) programs and facilities that will achieve climate
change benefits by mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The assessment is based on a need to
define the development process for an effective Waste NAMA in Colombia. Figure 1 presents a
schematic of an approach for implementing a Waste NAMA and also defines the key issues and activities
that will need to be addressed during the development process, with this initial assessment to serve as a
starting point.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
17
WASTE NAMA DEVELOPMENT MODEL
PROCESS
Define and evaluate current practices and facilities
Establish baseline GHG emission levels
Define new ISWM facilities for effective services
o
o
Examine existing national policies, plans, and targets
Understand/assess the progress of national policies/plan/targets in the
NAMA sector based on existing data and information
Understand the methodology to manage national policies, plans and
targets
o
Define reference
scenarios for evaluation
Set
Waste NAMA targets
o
o
o
Identify barriers to existing policies/plans/targets in the NAMA sector
Define and select reference scenarios for detailed evaluation
Consider countermeasures to address identified barriers to Waste
NAMA implementation process
o
o
o
Identify main GHG emission sources in the Waste NAMA sector
Select practical GHG mitigation measures
Estimate GHG emission reduction potential by identified practical GHG
mitigation measures
Set “NAMA Targets” considering the possibility of realization of
identified practical GHG mitigation measures
o
Define and develop
priority Waste NAMA
projects
o
o
o
Establish selection methodology of priority Waste NAMA pilot projects
Define priority Waste NAMA pilot project candidates
Select priority Waste NAMA projects in the NAMA sector for
implementation activities
Establish MRV
methodologies for Waste
NAMA plans
o
o
o
Define means for measuring Waste NAMA process results
Define means for reporting and verifying Waste NAMA process results
Establish protocols for MRV management
Identify possible
financial resources for
implementing Waste
NAMA plans
o
Evaluate and engage financial institutions and donors for
implementation of Waste NAMA pilot projects
Develop means for risk assessment capacity building for conventional
financing institutions
o
o
o
o
Establish process for implementing Waste NAMA
Develop implementation schedule for Waste NAMA elements
o
o
Develop schedule and
process for
implementing Waste
NAMA plans
o
WASTE NAMA DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND ACTIVITIES
Review related policies/
plans and their progress
in ISWM and NAMA
process
o
o
o
o
o
Define current solid
waste management
situation
KEY ACTIVITIES
Figure 1
In regards to new facilities and programs that may be identified as potential components of a Waste
NAMA, this preliminary assessment is not intended to replace the detailed feasibility studies that would
provide the level of information necessary to fully evaluate the viability and sustainability of individual
actions. In addition to identifying baseline conditions, the assessment also seeks to define
implementation impediments and to recommend procedures to overcome them.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
18
Solid Waste Management Basis for the Colombia Waste NAMA Assessment - Solid waste
management is one of the major urban problems faced by municipalities throughout the world. While
the historical public service funding priority allocated to municipal solid waste (MSW) management
often lags behind that associated with water and sanitation services, it is still one of the most visible
public service issues that governments must manage. This is particularly the case for MSW collection
services that can affect the perceived cleanliness of urban roadways and, as a result, the overall public
and visitor impression of a municipality.
In recent years, the focus for evaluating and improving solid waste management conditions has been
towards the development of Integrated Solid Waste Management (ISWM) programs. In such programs,
the integrated nature of various solid waste management processes is stressed and solid waste is
viewed as a resource rather than solely as an environmental risk and public service issue. Effective ISWM
programs usually seek to recover materials and/or energy from the MSW stream for sale while reducing
the amount of solid waste sent to landfills for disposal. It is important to note that an effective ISWM
program can involve a variety of SWM facilities and activities that address various components of a
municipality’s solid waste stream. Accordingly, individual processing facilities such as solid waste
incinerators or mechanical/biological treatment systems can coexist with other processes such as
recycling achieved through the informal sector.
MSW recovery potential is primarily the function of the physical characteristics of the solid waste to be
managed and the manner by which recovery is achieved given existing economic and social conditions.
Mature and proven processing technologies are commercially available for recovery and treatment
purposes. However, experience throughout the world has shown that the application of some
technologies must be carefully and thoroughly evaluated to determine that they are economically viable
and sustainable within the specific municipal settings and conditions for which they are intended. This is
particularly true when considering their use in countries with evolving economies where current solid
waste management practices and facilities are often substandard with resulting low costs and poor
performance.
In recent years, municipalities in Colombia have made significant progress in improving SWM services
and functions particularly as they relate to core service elements (collection, transport and disposal).
National policies have been developed that promote ISWM approaches that seek to achieve a “zero
waste” culture intending to reduce the quantity of solid waste that must be placed in landfills. Disposal
facilities throughout the country have improved as open dumps are being closed and new landfills with
improved design, operating, and environmental compliance standards are being implemented. Also, as a
result of increasingly stringent regulatory requirements and enforcement, Colombian municipalities
were required to develop solid waste management plans (PGIRS) that would serve as a basis for defining
how they would further improve their SWM systems and programs to meet national laws, policies and
regulations. However, since these municipal solid waste management plans were developed (mostly
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
19
about 5 to 6 years ago), they have not resulted in the actions (new programs and facilities) defined in
their plans. This is primarily due to implementation reality (the increased cost often associated with
improved practices and standards and the impediments created by existing policies and funding (tariff
mechanisms that do not consider waste recovery, for example).
From a sustainable development viewpoint, effective solid waste management is crucial for conserving
local environments and this has been the fundamental basis for worldwide solid waste planning and
development for decades, including Colombia.
Currently and in parallel to evolving SWM situations, increased concern about anthropogenic climate
change causes and effects has brought solid waste management into a new global focus. There is an
emerging recognition of the potential for shared co-benefits associated with the evolution of effective
solid waste management processes and climate change related initiatives. By their nature, most SWM
processes are sources of GHG emissions but, importantly, they are now also viewed as a potential sector
for significant mitigation of emissions both through direct and indirect means. The sector’s mitigation
effects can occur through improvement of current practices or the development of new solid waste
processing/recovery facilities and programs that divert solid waste components from landfill disposal.
Furthermore, lifecycle analyses have demonstrated that the use of recycled materials in production
processes can significantly reduce GHG emissions from the extraction and transport processes of virgin
raw material.
Worldwide, the SWM sector contributes 3 to 5% of total anthropogenic GHG emissions. In Colombia, it
is slightly higher at 5.7% (10,277 Gg of CO2e based on data from their last UNFCCC National
Communication). However, the sector is considered to be in a unique position to provide significant
GHG mitigation with increasing degrees of energy and resource recovery instead of traditional disposal
methods. This future evolution of the solid waste sector through the development of a Waste NAMA in
Colombia can build on the global climate change progress made to date. The United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) recognizes that total global GHG emissions from the waste
sector have significantly decreased in recent years primarily as a result of the increased prevalence of
landfill gas (LFG) recovery and treatment systems. However, LFG systems that eliminate the emission of
methane are not the only opportunities that exist in the waste sector for achieving beneficial GHG
mitigation results. This report seeks to define some of those opportunities as they relate to SWM
conditions in Colombia and recommend how they can be optimized through the development of the
Waste NAMA.
The intent of this assessment report is to evaluate the potential for reducing GHG emissions through
alternative approaches to SWM improvements in Colombia and to define potential actions that will
achieve that result. For the most part, many of these development initiatives are the same as those
already under consideration by Colombian municipalities in their solid waste management plans.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
20
Medellin
Sogamoso
Ibague
Sanitago de Cali
Figure 2
Waste NAMA Assessment Municipalities
Figure 2
In undertaking the assessment, the Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) in association with Hill Consulting
of Bogota and on behalf of Environment Canada, made use of extensive available national information
and data to determine the general applicability of alternative SWM approaches that achieve GHG
emission benefits while also providing the more immediate and visible benefits of improving solid waste
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
21
management in local areas in Colombia in an economically viable and sustainable manner. For
evaluation of representative local conditions, CCAP also investigated specific SWM conditions in four
municipalities viewed to represent different demographic and institutional settings in Colombia. This
local outreach sought to provide CCAP a further understanding of the issues related to developing new
SWM initiatives and scaling up the findings of the assessment to nationwide actions that may
subsequently define and implement an appropriate Waste NAMA. The municipalities included in the
assessment were: Santiago de Cali (Cali), Medellín, Ibagué and Sogamoso whose locations are shown in
Figure 2.
Table 1 presents a listing of all Colombian municipalities with populations over 100,000 people. (The
assessed municipalities are shown in green in this table.) CCAP believes that the selected municipalities
represent prevailing conditions for the full spectrum of municipalities shown in Table 1. Therefore,
assessment results may be applicable to other locations shown in the table with the caveat that the
specific situations in any municipality will have an effect on the best and most viable approaches to
achieve SWM and GHG mitigation benefits. However, the findings of this preliminary assessment will
hopefully have national applicability.
Since the technical and economic viability of new technology or process applications are often a
function of an effective economy of scale, the Table 1 municipalities are apt to be the possible locations
for new facilities that may utilize capital intensive technologies possibly through regional configurations
involving multiple municipalities including Colombia’s smaller municipalities not shown on the Table 1
listing. To the benefit of ISWM project development potential, regionalization of solid waste
management services is currently evident throughout Colombia. There are numerous regional landfills
throughout Colombia that serve as an important precedence for possible regional applications of
processing and recovery technologies. (A listing of the principal landfills in Colombia is shown in the
Annex 1 of this report.) Many of the possible institutional arrangements and relationships that may
support the necessary scale of regional ISWM facilities already exist and they include the strong
participation of a qualified private sector. CCAP views that both of these factors are an indication of the
progress that has been made in Colombia and they will continue to be advantageous in developing new
solid waste processing facilities in the future.
A critical objective of this assessment is to relate the technical and economic aspects of alternative SWM
scenarios and actions to the amount of GHG mitigation benefits that may be derived. However, any new
ISWM facility or process that seeks to accomplish these benefits must be carefully evaluated to assure
that it can be created in a manner that is economically viable and sustainable for the municipalities or
private sector organizations responsible for providing effective solid waste management services.
Unfortunately, new facilities and processes using state of the art recovery technologies and sound
practices will, most likely, increase the overall cost of solid waste management services in the areas
where they are developed. The ability to accommodate these increased costs is one of the most
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
22
important factors that political leaders and governments must consider in deciding whether to
implement new ISWM systems. This is also an important factor in defining new policies, laws and
regulations that may be necessary to overcome the current impediments to waste recovery initiatives. A
strong political and social driver for improving SWM while achieving GHG emissions reductions can help
stakeholders and decision-makers support and accept the possible higher costs necessary to achieve the
desired recovery (and climate change) results.
Based on experience with available recovery technologies and processes throughout the world, it is
evident that there is considerable variation in the technical nature and potential investments required
to implement the various technical elements and configurations of effective ISWM programs. Hightechnology systems such as waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration plants and mechanical biological
treatment (MBT) facilities that rely on anaerobic digestion as the core biological process are often too
expensive for use in countries with emerging economies. This is especially the case in countries where
improvements in core collection and disposal services must still be achieved to meet a basic level of
service and reduce imminent public health risks. (The economic justification for high-technology
facilities in industrialized countries is often the high cost of landfill disposal resulting from compliance to
very stringent laws and regulations). While significant progress has been made in Colombia in improving
core collection and disposal services, landfill tipping fees are still low when compared to U.S. and E.U.
conditions thereby possibly affecting the economic viability and sustainability of high-technology
systems.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
23
COLOMBIA MUNICIPALITIES WITH OVER 100,000 PEOPLE
MUNICIPALITY
Bogotá
Cali
Medellín
Barranquilla
Cartagena
Cúcuta
Bucaramanga
Ibagué
Pereira
Santa Marta
Bello
Pasto
Manizales
Neiva
Soledad
Armenia
Villavicencio
Soacha
Valledupar
Montería
Itagüí
Palmira
Sincelejo
Floridablanca
Buenaventura
Popayán
Barrancabermeja
Dosquebradas
Tuluá
Envigado
Cartago
Girardot
Florencia
Maicao
Sogamoso
Buga
Tunja
POPULATION
6,558,000
2,181,000
1,909,000
1,276,000
854,000
644,000
543,000
403,000
401,000
382,000
353,000
349,000
345,000
317,000
310,000
293,000
289,000
285,000
278,000
256,000
246,000
234,000
234,000
232,000
230,000
206,000
183,000
166,000
157,000
145,000
129,000
117,000
116,000
115,000
114,000
113,000
112,000
UNIT
COLLECTION
GENERATION
COVERAGE
RATE
100
97
100
100
97
100
100
97
94
97
97
100
100
98
100
100
98
95
98
100
98
100
100
95
80
98
100
84
100
99
98
95
80
100
81
100
100
0.72
0.77
0.81
0.80
0.87
0.46
0.55
0.63
0.58
0.72
0.49
0.61
0.72
0.80
0.60
0.58
0.51
0.88
0.85
0.60
0.62
0.66
0.51
0.50
0.65
0.67
0.60
0.40
0.75
0.31
0.44
1.02
1.04
0.60
0.38
0.61
0.79
TOTAL MSW
GENERATED
(KG/DAY)
4,721,760
1,679,370
1,546,290
1,020,800
742,980
296,240
298,650
253,890
232,580
275,040
172,970
212,890
248,400
253,600
186,000
169,940
147,390
250,800
236,300
153,600
152,520
154,440
119,340
116,000
149,500
138,020
109,800
66,400
117,750
44,950
56,760
119,340
120,640
69,000
43,320
68,930
88,480
TOTAL MSW
GENERATED
(TONS/DAY)
4,722
1,679
1,546
1,021
743
296
299
254
233
275
173
213
248
254
186
170
147
251
236
154
153
154
119
116
150
138
110
66
118
45
57
119
121
69
43
69
88
DISPOSAL METHOD
SANITARY CONTROLLED
LANDFILL
DUMP
OPEN
DUMP
WATERWAYS
OTHER
100
100
100
100
100
98
2
1
86
14
3
1
99
97
99
100
100
100
100
95
5
100
98
100
100
2
90
10
100
98
2
100
100
100
99
82
9
1
18
100
100
100
100
100
Table 1 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012
While cost effectiveness and affordability is important in determining which ISWM approaches are most
viable and sustainable for municipalities in Colombia, this situation does not necessarily change when
also considering potential new SWM projects and initiatives as a means for mitigating GHG emissions.
Projects must still be technically and economically sound and they generally face the same development
impediments that municipalities face in the implementation of their SWM plans. However, the GHG
mitigation aspect of new actions (in conjunction with economic and social benefits) may provide an
enhanced political driver that could beneficially affect the development process as well as creating new
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
24
potential opportunities for deriving financial support from outside international sources through a
consideration of these actions as a component of a Waste NAMA.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
25
Section 2: Solid Waste Management and GHG Emission
Fundamentals
Table 2 lists the conventional ISWM processes that are sources of GHG emissions. The table also
identifies possible mitigation processes and improvement opportunities inherent to each of the listed
ISWM activities. For assessment purposes, Table 2 is primarily intended to identify the linkage between
conventional SWM activities and the types of projects that will derive emissions reductions in Colombia.
This listing of potential projects will, most likely, be the source of the primary physical components of a
Colombian Waste NAMA. The nature and complexity of the listed mitigation activities and projects will
determine their technical viability and cost-effectiveness for realizing the GHG mitigation potential that
may be derived.
Table 2
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
26
As a result of ongoing international climate change considerations, Nationally Appropriate Mitigation
Actions (NAMAs) have potential to be the main vehicle for GHG emission mitigation actions in developing
countries in the future. (A basic description of generic NAMA characteristics and factors that may influence
the development of a Waste NAMA in Colombia is presented in the next section of this report.) NAMAs in
various development sectors (transport, energy, waste, etc.) may provide new opportunities for countries
to take action on their large and rapidly increasing emissions in specific sectors while also supporting and
managing their immediate growth, social, and development needs.
The potential projects identified in Table 2 include both the implementation of new facilities that may
require significant capital investment as well as other actions that may be accomplished through normal
budgetary sources in the agencies or companies responsible for SWM services. CCAP recognizes that the
Table 2 listing includes the possible use of high-technology systems that may be too costly to justify and
develop within the current Colombian national setting. Because of this, the recommendations contained
in this assessment also include possible actions such as modifications to existing policies, rules and
regulations that will affect solid waste management project implementation in the future particularly as
they relate to economic matters. At a minimum, this includes necessary tariff reform that will affect the
economic resources available for SWM services and any other related policies that, in turn, will affect
the ability to develop new recovery facilities and processes. In its national SWM policy, the government
of Colombia is seeking to achieve a "zero waste" culture thereby optimizing in recovering the value of
solid waste components and reducing the quantity of solid waste brought to landfills for final disposal.
To achieve this, new national programs and reforms of existing policies and laws may be required
especially in terms of how added cost to achieve the “zero waste” culture is allowed or managed. This
assessment report seeks to identify some of these government actions since they may be prerequisites
to the development of the types of projects and programs that can continue SWM improvement
progress while achieving climate change benefits.
Considerable work has been done around the world seeking to estimate the GHG impact of various solid
waste management processes including collection, transport, recycling, composting, energy recovery
and disposal. This work forms the technical basis by which CCAP sought to estimate the relative impact
of improved SWM in Colombia in comparison to baseline conditions represented by current facilities
and practices. The information available on GHG effects associated with SWM processes provided CCAP
with a means of estimating the economic value and cost of achieving the GHG mitigation benefits that
would result from improved practices and new ISWM facilities.
The most important GHG emissions associated with municipal SWM choices are carbon dioxide (CO2)
and methane (CH4). Of these, carbon dioxide is the most prevalent GHG generally emitted in
industrialized countries from a number of source sectors particularly the energy sector. Most CO2
emissions are due to energy production and use, particularly as a result of fossil fuel combustion for
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
27
power generation. Methane (about 25 times as potent as CO2) is produced when organic waste
components decompose in oxygen deficient (anaerobic) environments such as would be found inside
the mass of solid waste accumulated at a landfill. Universally, landfills are viewed to be a major source
of CH4 emissions and this has led to the stringent environmental regulations for landfill disposal in the
United States and European Union. It has also led to the development of many landfill gas collection and
treatment systems at landfills throughout the world supported by climate change-based Clean
Development Mechanism (CDM) initiatives.
The GHG mitigation potential of the SWM sector, however, comes from a variety of sources. From a life
cycle assessment standpoint, a large amount of energy is consumed when a new product is
manufactured and ultimately discarded as a component of a municipal solid waste stream. Through the
life cycle process for various commercial products, energy is consumed by: 1) extracting and processing
raw materials to produce the product (including the destruction of any carbon sinks); 2) manufacturing
and fabricating products; 3) managing products at the end of their useful lives; and 4) transporting
materials and products between each stage of their life cycle phases. As a result, energy-related GHG
emissions occur in all of these life cycle stages. The energy consumed during product use by consumers
is about the same irrespective of whether a product was manufactured from virgin or recycled
materials. However, this parity is not the case when it comes to actually producing the product where
more energy is necessary to manufacture a product from virgin materials. Accordingly, there can be
significant GHG emission reduction by recovering solid waste components through recycling and reuse
of solid waste components and, most importantly, by reducing the generation of solid waste since
product manufacturing will also correspondingly decrease.
When solid waste is used to generate electricity (either through direct combustion, combustion of
anaerobic digestion-related biogas, or through the capture and combustion of CH4 generated at
landfills), the generation process usually displaces the use of other fuels that would otherwise be
consumed by an electric utility to generate the displaced electricity. The extent of this impact is a
function of the nature of the competing energy source. In Colombia where a significant proportion of
generated electricity is from hydroelectric sources, the offset impact is less than what would be
expected in a country where generation is primarily accomplished through the combustion of fossil
fuels. In addition to affecting GHG mitigation potential, this also affects economic viability when energy
is derived from solid waste processing and sold since the value of the recovered energy is apt to be less
than it would be if the displaced energy was derived from fossil fuels.
Table 2 also identifies the types of GHG emissions generated from various SWM processes. The relative
impact of these processes, particularly as they compare with expected landfill emissions in Colombia, is
discussed in Section 6 of this report. Such comparisons serve the purpose of helping to define the GHG
mitigation benefits resulting from improved SWM. The potential projects listed in Table 2 also provide a
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
28
basis for initially defining candidate pilot projects that may be developed as a means for demonstrating
the function and effectiveness of a Colombia Waste NAMA.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
29
Section 3: Waste NAMA Fundamentals
Since the development of the Bali Action Plan and, as a result of COP16 in Cancun, Nationally
Appropriate Mitigation Actions emerged as an important mechanism to recognize and support possible
emission reductions in developing countries within the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC) framework. At the time of its development, the Bali Action Plan anticipated
that NAMAs would be voluntary, country-driven actions that were sustainable within the context of
each country’s political, physical and financial setting. Further, as a result of the COP16 accords, many
developing country parties formally submitted their plans to limit growth of their emissions, with
appropriate and adequate technological, financial and capacity support from industrialized countries.
Many of these plans include broad-based goals without detail on specific policies and measures. This
provides an impetus for evaluating the potential impact of new ISWM programs and facilities in
Colombia as a means for achieving the target GHG emission mitigations.
NAMAs are expected to achieve GHG emission reductions from various sources and through enhanced
capture by carbon sinks. In addition, NAMAs need effective MRV (Measurement, Reporting and
Verification) mechanisms in order to document GHG reductions and gain support for funding, in addition
to various economic and social co-benefits that should also be a part of financial support. NAMAs will
provide an effective tool by which developing countries can contribute to the worldwide reduction of
GHG emissions. By definition, a Waste NAMA in Colombia should be developed by principal stakeholders
and tailored to specific situations, resources and priorities in the country within the context of overall
effectiveness and sustainability.
Unfortunately, the successful implementation and function of a Waste NAMA in Colombia must
overcome the same impediments that have influenced the pace of improving SWM services in the
country. CCAP believes that a Waste NAMA designation for defined ISWM activities will help overcome
some of these historical impediments to achieve Colombia's desired “Zero Waste” culture.
NAMAs are intended to be supported and enabled by technology, financing and capacity building in a
measurable, reportable and verifiable manner. However, the means by which this can be accomplished
is still being defined in many countries and in many of the anticipated NAMA development sectors. As
structured in the Bali Action Plan, NAMAs should include the following general elements:
•
•
Nationally Appropriate: NAMAs should be appropriate for the particular national setting,
circumstances and development needs of any country where they are implemented.
Sustainable: NAMAs should promote the country’s sustainable development agenda. In
another important sense, NAMAs need to include the private sector as stakeholders and should
not be solely public sector investments (either international or national). NAMA design should
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
30
•
•
aim for business models that need a partial public sector investment (in the form or grants, loan
guarantees, capacity building, research, etc) to overcome impediments but let the profit
mechanism of the private sector take hold.
Support: NAMAs should have access to developed country support including, at a minimum,
technology, financing, and capacity building support.
Measurable, Reportable and Verifiable (MRV): The defined NAMAs (and the support from
developed countries) should be subject to international and nationally defined MRV to validate
their performance and results.
Accordingly, an appropriate Waste NAMA in Colombia may be a policy, program, or physical project that
achieves the desired climate change impact within the waste management sector. Through consultation
with the Colombia Waste NAMA Steering Committee, a number of solid waste management actions
were identified as sources for GHG emission reductions and candidate Waste NAMA focus areas. These
provided an investigatory framework to the CCAP assessment process and include the following, some
of which can be packaged into an integrated Waste NAMA:
1. Mixed Waste Processing Facility - Technologies are available that can process and treat a
mixed solid waste stream. These systems are primarily designed for the processing of residential
solid waste in the condition that it is normally collected. The design intent of these systems is to
recover materials and/or energy. In some situations, they are designed to create useful
byproducts such as biogas and compost.
2. Separation of Organic and Recyclable Material at Source - This involves the sorting and
classification of organic waste (and the organic content of municipal solid waste) and its
subsequent diversion away from landfills. Following source separation, organic material may be
processed aerobically using composting processes (for the agricultural sector or land
reclamation), or could be utilized for energy generation through the use of incinerators or biodigesters (for electricity generation or direct use of biogas on or offsite). In addition to the GHG
emission benefits that may be derived from material recovery, the diversion of organic material
from landfill disposal will have a beneficial impact of reducing the amount of landfill gas
generated by reducing the amount of solid waste exposed to anaerobic decomposition and the
resulting methane generation process. In general, this process would involve developing both
the means for collecting source separated organic material as well as a means for processing it
into useable end products. A similar approach can also be applied to the source separation,
collection and processing of dry recyclable materials such as paper, cardboard, glass, and metal.
This has the benefit of recovering cleaner materials compared to recyclables separated from the
mixed solid waste stream, and this tends to increase the revenue derived from the sale of the
recovered materials.
3. Alternative Biogas Market - This area has many potential avenues to explore. In particular,
low power-grid electricity prices are a potential barrier to develop a biogas market in Colombia
where electricity generation is considered. As an alternative, other options exist such as using
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
31
biogas to fuel garbage collection trucks traveling solely to and from large landfill sites. Other
potential uses include the use of biogas at industrial or other applications near landfill sites, the
production of compressed natural gas, etc. Clearly, the cost effectiveness of such applications
needs to be carefully considered to assure that these approaches are economically viable and
sustainable.
4. Restructuring of Solid Waste Collection Tariff Model - If done correctly, a change in the
Colombian tariff framework may provide an incentive to the separation of recyclable materials
or diversion through composting or the recovery of energy. This NAMA could involve
coordination with the Comisión de Regulación de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Básico (CRA) and
the various operators involved in solid waste collection and disposal. The objective of this Waste
NAMA would be to increase the potential for diversion of recyclable and organic material away
from landfill disposal and increase the recycling and recovery rate in the country. During this
assessment process, CCAP learned that the government of Colombia is currently working on
reforming its tariff structure to accommodate prospective waste diversion projects and
activities. A number of the private sector representatives that CCAP met with during the
assessment process indicated that the existing tariff structure and formula is one of the major
impediments preventing them from considering waste diversion actions. It is currently
anticipated that required tariff reform to support diversion initiatives will take effect in late
2013. The manner in which the tariff framework is modified will be extremely important in the
viability of waste diversion projects that will achieve GHG mitigation benefits. For example, if
tariff reform only seeks to reallocate tariff allotments to diversion projects solely on the basis of
avoided cost without an increase in the overall tariff amounts to recognize the value of the
environmental, health and social benefits of diversion, it may make it more difficult to
implement any project that increases the overall cost of solid waste management.
5. Construction and Demolition Waste (C&D) - Activities related to this NAMA may divert
reusable construction materials away from landfills or possibly use combustible content of this
waste for waste-to-energy applications. Recoverable components from the C&D waste sector
may also be applicable to the production of other products. This would have the co-benefit of
dealing with a major SWM and aesthetic problem in Colombian municipalities while possibly
providing some emissions reductions. The common physical characteristics of C&D material in
Colombia is a major factor in exploring the potential GHG mitigation benefits associated with
enhanced construction and demolition debris processing and disposal actions.
6. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) - According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), EPR is an “environmental policy approach in which a
producer’s responsibility for a product is extended to the post-consumer stage of a product’s life
cycle. An EPR policy is characterized by: 1) the shifting of responsibility (physically and/or
economically; fully or partially) upstream toward the producer and away from municipalities;
and 2) the provision of incentives to producers to take into account environmental
considerations when designing their products.” EPR initiatives may take the form of reuse, buy-
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
32
back, or recycling program support. The producer may also choose to delegate this responsibility
to a third party possibly paid by the producer for used-product management. Through this
approach, producers, importers and/or sellers are obliged to internalize SWM costs in their
product prices thereby helping to ensure the safe handling of their products. The expectation is
that any program that helps to reduce solid waste generation or enhances the prospects for
recycling and recovery can have a beneficial impact on GHG emissions.
The above areas provide an assessment focus by which CCAP is evaluating existing SWM conditions in
Colombia for the purpose of defining a framework (and potential projects) for a Waste NAMA. This
investigation recognizes that there are potentially 3 types of NAMAs that could evolve from this
assessment process, including:
•
•
•
Unilateral NAMAs/Domestically Supported NAMAs: (potentially implemented on a voluntary
basis by developing countries without the expectation of outside support): This would possibly
include various mitigation actions undertaken by national and local governments in Colombia on
their own using their own technical and economic resources. The required funding comes from
domestic financial sources. Improvements to solid waste collection and transport processes and
the development of public education programs are possible examples of unilateral NAMAs.
Internationally Supported NAMAs: These actions are classified as mitigation actions that may be
supported directly by developed country entities (this could be bilateral or multilateral support),
possibly under the UNFCCC framework. Supported NAMAs will, most likely, cover a portion of
the incremental costs of moderate cost mitigation options such as the development of capital
intensive solid waste processing facilities (WTE, MBT, etc.). MRV processes associated with this
class of NAMA are likely to be accomplished through emerging international standards and
protocols for measuring NAMA performance.
Credited NAMAs (or credit generating NAMAs): While not formally recognized by the UNFCCC,
this type of NAMA would be funded through income generated from selling carbon credits on an
international carbon market once developed. One concern raised about credited NAMAs is the
potential for counting emissions reductions twice—once toward the developing country’s
climate goals and again towards the developed country’s commitment. Another concern relates
to competition between the public and private sectors for use of low-cost mitigation actions
within a developing country.
By its nature, the solid waste sector may provide opportunities within each of the above NAMA
categories. This is based on the recognition that there are significant opportunities in the sector for the
mitigation of GHG emissions that range from simple enhancement of core services such as collection
and transfer or the development of source separation programs to the development of capital intensive,
high-technology processing facilities capable of significantly diverting mixed municipal solid waste
content from landfill disposal while achieving recovery outputs.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
33
Technically, there is no limitation on the type of action that could be eligible under a NAMA except to
the extent that it meets requirements for MRV and for achieving their climate impact goals. Accordingly,
this assessment seeks to identify potential waste sector sources of these mitigation opportunities and
identify potential impediments to realizing them. Since the entire NAMA concept is evolving, the
assessment is also intended to identify capacity building elements that may be required to effectively
develop and implement a viable Waste NAMA in Colombia and to support and monitor it to assure that
it achieves its intended results.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
34
Section 4: Solid Waste Management in Colombia
4.1 Solid Waste Generation and Disposal
To investigate the current setting in Colombia, CCAP evaluated national solid waste management
conditions as defined by existing policies, laws, rules, regulations and available operational data. In
addition, local solid waste management conditions in Cali, Medellin, Ibague and Sogamoso were also
investigated to determine representative local situations and impediments that currently hinder the
implementation of local SWM plans.
As is the case in most countries, SWM services in Colombia are significantly affected by the high rate of
urbanization that has occurred in the country. In the second half of the twentieth century, Colombia
experienced an accelerated urbanization process so that by 1950, about 40% of Colombia’s total
population lived in cities. By 2005, Colombia’s urban population was estimated to have increased to
more than 75% of the total population. The Colombian National Department of Statistics (DANE)
estimates that, by 2020, this number will increase to about 80%. The rate of urbanization creates many
of the urban problems faced by Colombian cities including issues related to environmental conditions
and the provision of necessary public services such as solid waste collection and disposal. According to
Government projections, by the year 2020, the number of cities in Colombia with more than one million
people will increase from four to seven, and those with more than 100,000 people will increase from 37
to 55.
Currently, there are four main cities in Colombia (Bogota, Cali, Medellin and Barranquilla) which account
for about 40% of the country’s urban population. These are followed by a group of 37 intermediate
cities with populations between 100,000 and one million people which account for about 30% of the
urban population (as shown in Table 1). The remaining 30% of the urban population live in cities with
less than 100,000 people and these smaller municipalities represent about 95% of the total number of
cities in the country. Irrespective of their population, all municipalities in Colombia must deal with the
provision of public services including SWM. Logically, the quantity of MSW generated in any Colombian
municipality is a function of its population and the extent of its commercial and industrial development.
The large municipalities in Colombia shown in Table 1 most likely represent the locations with the
economy of scale that may be necessary to justify and support the potential application of modern
systems for solid waste processing. In addition, the potential for regional facilities receiving solid waste
from a number of smaller municipalities can also achieve the economy of scale required to justify these
systems. (The numerous regional landfills that serve multiple municipalities in Colombia are an
important precedence for both locating and developing regional waste processing facilities in the
future.)
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
35
Currently, Colombia has 32 departments comprised of 1,101 municipalities that generate about a
country-wide total of about 25,100 metric tons per day of municipal solid waste. The Colombian
Superintendent of Public Services (SSPD) estimates that 41% (about 10,000 tons per day) of this MSW is
generated in the Colombia's four largest cities (23.6% in Bogota, 8.0% in Cali, 7.3% in Medellin and 2.1%
in Barranquilla). Another 18.7% of the national total (about 4,700 tons per day) is generated in
Colombia’s 28 department capital cities and 40.5% (about 10,200 tons per day) is generated in the 1,069
remaining municipalities. Table 1 also shows the estimated quantity of municipal solid waste generated
daily in each of the municipalities with a population of over 100,000. These expected daily generation
rates form some of the basis for estimating the processing capacity that will be required for any ISWM
facilities developed to treat solid waste. This also includes the possibility of source separation programs
to derive high-quality materials for processing (composting, recyclables, etc.)
The per capita production in Colombia is estimated to be about 0.6 kg/person/day, but varies depending
on the size and economic development of individual cities. Table 1 shows the estimated per capita
generation rates for the 100,000+ municipalities based on data contained in their solid waste
management plans. For example, Bogotá has an estimated average unit generation rate of about 0.95
kg/person/day while smaller, poorer municipalities, such as Sogamoso, have a unit generation rate of
about 0.31 kg/person/day. This variation is consistent with worldwide experience relating per capita
generation rates to population and the living conditions in individual municipalities. The unit generation
rates are consistent with what CCAP would have expected in municipalities such as those in Colombia.
In the past, most municipalities in Colombia disposed of their MSW in open dumps. Also, local services
were often controlled by public and private entities without any accreditation or regulatory/economic
incentive to improve their performance. However, with the passage of Resolution 1390 in 2005, national
authorities required regional and local authorities Regional Autonomous Corporation (CARs) to identify
and close open dumps and other uncontrolled and random informal disposal sites to prevent further
environmental damage and the resulting health effects. Also, Resolution 1390/2005 included incentives
to develop new, properly designed and appropriately sited landfills. The resolution also promoted
regional approaches that would further enhance management conditions and reduce overall costs. This
emphasis on regionalization has also helped to create a better business situation for national and
international private sector companies with expertise in landfill design and operation thereby further
stimulating service improvements in both collection and disposal. (A brief summary of some of the
private companies actively involved in SWM in Colombia is shown in Annex 5.)
Currently, according to the SSPD, about 90% of the MSW in Colombia is disposed of in effectively
designed and operated landfills or at a limited number of small-scale solid waste processing plants. The
current characterization (according to the SSPD) of the disposal facilities serving the 100,000+
municipalities is also shown in Table 1. Annex 1 presents a listing of the principal landfills in Colombia
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
36
including some of their important operational characteristics such as the number of regional
municipalities for which disposal services are provided.
The improvement of disposal facilities has contributed to increased regionalization since a number of
regional landfills were developed by the private sector as business opportunities to serve multiple
municipalities. Regionalization of disposal services in Colombia has continued to increase. For example,
during 2011, landfill regionalization activities increased by about 10% when compared to 2010.
Currently, 69 of the 206 reported landfills in Colombia are regional facilities with the result that about
60% of all municipalities dispose of their MSW in a regional landfill. This provides a strong precedent for
the possible development of regional processing facilities that will require sufficient incoming solid
waste for technical and economic viability. Table 3 summarizes the national solid waste disposal
characterization in 2010 and 2011 demonstrating that progress continues to be made in improving
disposal facilities throughout Colombia and closure of substandard open dump sites. The decrease in the
total number of landfills in the two years shown in Table 3 is, most likely, an indication of the growth in
the number and service areas of regional disposal facilities and the continued closure of substandard
sites. As would be expected with the improvement of any public service, disposal costs have increased in
Colombia as new disposal sites (built to improved design standards) have been built and come into
service. From the perspective of this assessment, this situation helps to make the projected costs that
may be associated with new recovery processes more competitive and achievable.
Colombian Disposal Sites by Waste Amounts and Number of Municipalities
Indicator
Tons/day
# of municipalities # of disposal sites
2010
2011
2010
2011
2010
2011
Landfill
21,600
24,600
674
762
229
206
Transitory cells
1,000
300
90
38
79
27
Open dumps
1,400
1,330
199
190
193
176
Integrated treatment plants
330
190
83
67
39
35
Burial
170
80
36
27
34
24
Water streams
20
20
10
9
8
7
Open burning
10
10
6
5
6
5
24,530
26,530
1,098
1,098
588
480
Total
Table 3. Source: SSPD, 2011
4.2 Solid Waste Composition
Solid waste composition is one of the key factors in the technical viability of various commercial solid
waste technologies and diversion processes. Common physical characteristics such as organic and
moisture content has a major impact on technology and design decisions. For example, the high
moisture content normally found in municipal solid waste in developing countries makes it difficult to
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
37
use mass burn incineration (as commonly utilized in the U.S. and E.U.) as a core process without
significant initial physical processing of the solid waste stream. Table 4 below shows the range of
differences between solid waste streams typically generated in low, medium and high GDP countries.
These differences commonly include the unit generation rate, the percentage of putrescible organic
material, and the resulting heating value of the mixed municipal solid waste streams. Excessive moisture
resulting from high organic content will affect the heating value of the processed solid waste and
therefore affect the overall combustion process as well as the amount of recovered energy output. This
can have a significant impact on waste to energy facility technical and economic viability. As a result,
energy recovery technologies that have direct applicability to recovering energy in industrialized
countries may not be transferable to processing applications in countries such as Colombia.
Characteristics of MSW in Low, Medium, and High GDP countries
Low GDP countries
Medium GDP countries
High GDP countries
India
Argentina
EU – 15
GDP US$/capita/year
<$5,000
$5,000 – $15,000
> $20,000
MSW kg/capita/year
150 – 250
250 – 550
350 – 750
MSW collection rate
<70%
70% – 95%
> 95%
% MSW putrescible waste
50% – 80%
20% – 65%
20% – 40%
Heating value kcal/kg
800 – 1,100
1,100 – 1,300
1,500 – 2,700
Example country
Table 4. Source: Lacoste and Chalmin, 2006
In Colombia, municipalities were required to
investigate the physical composition of their
solid waste streams as an element of their solid
waste management plans. The data presented in
Annex 2 shows that the solid waste composition
throughout Colombia is relatively consistent and
generally includes high percentages of food and
yard waste thereby affecting recovery and
processing technology selection. The typical
solid waste composition shown in Figure 3 was
utilized by CCAP in investigating the applicability
of various ISWM processing technologies to
specific situations in Colombia.
Figure 3: Assumed Typical Colombian Municipal Solid
Waste Composition
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
38
4.3 Recycling and Recovery in Colombia
Historically, the informal sector has been the primary source of recycling in Colombia. The government
of Colombia has estimated that there are approximately 50,000 Colombian families whose income
depends on informal collection and recycling activities. In 1986, a non-governmental organization began
a program to organize informal recyclers into local associations. The main purpose of the National
Association of Recyclers (ANR, Spanish acronym) was to help informal recyclers improve their working
and living conditions by strengthening their logistical systems and establishing a quality control process
for what they recovered.
The ANR program was also intended to address the informal sector’s social needs including early
childhood education, access to the social security system and addressing issues related to women’s
rights. The ANR program also created new waste storage facilities and developed formalized waste
management systems in conjunction with the municipal governments. Through the ANR, equipment and
training was also provided to the informal sector players. It is estimated that the ANR’s program
resulted in an increased income of about 30% for participating
Materials Collected by the
recyclers thereby increasing their quality of life and the economic
Informal Sector
viability of their recycling functions.
Material Type
%
Glass
31
Plastics
19
In supporting recycling activities in Colombia, the ANR undertook a
study of the recovered materials that were marketed as a result of
Paper
19
informal sector activities. According to this evaluation, about 53% of
Cardboard
15
the material collected by informal recyclers is traded with
Scrap Metal
12
intermediary warehouses with the remaining 47% sold directly to local
Non-ferrous metal
3
industrial plants capable of utilizing the recovered material to
Other
1
manufacture new products. Based on the study results, glass, plastics
TOTAL
100
and paper are the most common materials collected by informal
Table 5. Source: Aluna
recyclers (% shown in Table 5). Government studies also concluded
Consultores Limitada, 2011
that Colombia municipal solid waste generators produce about 9.4
million tons of solid waste per year and that the informal recycling sector recovers about 0.98 million
tons per year (or about 8.7% of the amount generated). The integration of these informal recovery
processes into more formal programs developed by municipalities or the private sector will be an
important aspect of developing any new facilities or programs that rely on recycling revenues to achieve
sustainable economics. This incorporation process is already underway in some of the evaluated
municipalities. In Cali, this is a high priority activity and will be a factor in developing any proposed
Waste NAMA element.
A study of available markets for recyclables in Colombia was also undertaken by CEMPRE in 2011. This
study presents an estimation of the market for recyclables in Colombia for the materials normally
collected as identified in Table 5. The CEMPRE study determined that the commercial recycling systems
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
39
in the various regions of Colombia are quite similar in structure and are only differentiated by the size of
the population in each city served (and, therefore, the amount of material available). It was also
determined that the common linkage between entities involved in recycling, (including the informal
recyclers) is through a core group of 1) collectors, 2) warehouses, 3) specialized storage facilities and 4)
processing companies. The first three of these entities operate in most cities and locally focus on the
receipt and use of specific materials (mainly plastics and metal). For metal, glass, cardboard and paper
materials, the ultimate market consists of large industries which receive these materials from extensive
areas throughout the country and use the recycled materials to manufacture new products.
Based on the current recovery rates for primary recoverable components in typical Colombian MSW and
on the assessment of current markets for recovered materials, the CEMPRE study determined that there
is a significant margin to expand material delivery to available markets for increased recycling output.
Figure 4 demonstrates that, based on both the ANR and CEMPRE studies, the demand of recyclable
materials in Colombia is not being met by the amount of material actually recovered by the informal
system. For this reason, imports of recyclables by Colombian manufacturing plants have increased from
2000 to 2011. The CEMPRE market study estimates that the value of these imports was approximately
US $245 million demonstrating the failure of the current system in meeting industry demand. This
provides a strong basis for assuming that additional recovered material through a more formal process
can be effectively marketed. This helps to enhance the technical and economic prospects for future
processing facilities or other programs that would increase the recovery of recyclables.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
40
Figure 4: Recyclables Supply and Demand Relationships. Source: National Study on Recyclables and Recyclers for
CEMPRE, 2010
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
41
As is the case throughout the world, the Colombian recyclables market, operating in an open and
unsubsidized economic environment, is significantly influenced by prices and changes in international
markets. For this reason and because of a general shortfall in meeting industrial demand in Colombia,
the import of recyclables regularly occurs depending on industry needs for specific materials or on
periodic market opportunities where consolidators take economic advantage of niche markets and
prevailing market conditions. In order to ensure a stable supply of recyclable materials, companies in
Colombia have created a purchasing network throughout the country, either through the use of direct
material acquisition or indirect purchase mechanisms with marketers and wholesalers (big warehouses
and consolidators) that have collection capacity and that are able to meet material purchase quotas,
provide good supply logistics and working capital, and make use of customer loyalty strategies to ensure
supply. Often, warehouses engage in direct negotiations with informal recyclers, purchase directly from
other waste sources, and hire people who serve as links with the informal recyclers and their
organizational structures.
Warehouses assume the function of a market buffer and manage the recovery process by increasing or
slowing down the supply of materials to end markets. In addition, the warehouses use their knowledge
of seasonal demand for specific materials so that they manage their inventories and purchasing
activities to the anticipation of times when better prices can be realized. This overall dynamic is
consistent with institutional structures found in other countries where informal recycling activities are
prevalent.
The current marketing channels for recyclables in Colombia have evolved during more than 25 years of
continuous operations, generating linkages and economic functions and relationships that allow an
economically efficient system. The ability to optimize recovery of recyclables through this current
process will require the recognition of the dynamics involved and the interests of all of the current
participants. Critically, this recognition should include both a consideration of how to enhance ongoing
informal sector operations or to consider how existing recovery and marketing dynamics associated with
the informal recyclers affect the ability to develop any alternate means for recovering recyclables such
as the development of independent materials recovery facilities or as design elements of larger scale
mechanical-biological treatment facilities. This integration is clearly an example of the need for a fully
integrated process that involves many different elements as a component of an effective ISWM program
including the incorporation of the existing informal recycling sector and its participants.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
42
SOLID WASTE RECOVERY PLANTS IN COLOMBIA
Investment
Waste Received
Municipality
(Tons/month)
(COP$)
2,9
60.000.000
Providencia
3
Gutiérrez
9,6
135.000.000
Quetame
9,8
30.000.000
Yacuanquer
22
100.000.000
Fosca
24
Suratá
30
Los Santos
37
Argelia
824.542.407
38
El Colegio
Valle de San
40
Juan
40
200.000.000
Nocaima
52
130.000.000
Versalles
Castilla La
52
126.554.438
Nueva
60
160.000.000
Santa María
Santa María
80
165.500.000
(Huila)
100
100.000.000
Fómeque
104
388.005.000
El Playón
112
Villapinzón
135
45.000.000
Choconta
186.110.185
148
Pupiales
250
332.276.560
La Victoria
270
30.000.000
El Santuario
Carmen de
294
Viboral
320
Cajamarca
350,9
1.430.000.000
Garagoa
383
Caicedonia
624,5
470.307.681
La Plata
700
1.006.251.444
Ubaté
970
864.803.676
Garzón
1.155
Acacías
1.664
726.000.000
Pitalito
8.810
100.000.000
Ibagué
13.222
8.000.000.000
Heliconia
Integrated
Solid
Waste
Management
Facilities – Throughout Colombia, there are a
number of solid waste processing facilities. In
2008, the SSPD completed an evaluation of these
facilities and determined that there were 34 of
these plants in existence at the time of the study.
Table 6 identifies the municipalities where these
plants are located, the amount of solid waste they
typically received on an ongoing basis and the
capital investment made in developing them. The
total amount of solid waste received for processing
at these facilities was estimated to be about 6.5%
of the total solid waste stream generated in
Colombia. The SSPD reported that a total of about
COP$15.600 million (USD 8.7 million) was invested
in developing these plants with most of these
funds provided directly by municipalities (78%),
the Royalties National Fund (13%) (FNR, Spanish
acronym), public companies (8%), and the private
sector (1%). It is noteworthy that 21% of these
facilities functioned as regional processing centers,
serving two or more municipalities.
The recovery plants shown in Table 6 represent
two operational approaches to solid waste
collection and processing. 36% of the systems
utilized source separation processes where
residential and commercial waste generators are
directly involved in separating recoverable
materials and making these materials available to
an independent separate collection program
(generally on established collection routes
consistent with the primary waste collection
routes).
In the other 64% of the systems, mixed waste was
received at a processing facility and manually
separated by staff at the site. The SSPD also
recently reported that a number of these plants (in
Table 6
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
43
Valle del Cauca, Tolima, Cundinamarca, Santander, for example) ceased operations due to 1) a lack of
financial resources for operations, 2) environmental violations, 3) political decisions, 4) low marketing
potential for recovered materials and/or, 5) lack of sufficient labor to accomplish the separation
process. In addition a major solid waste management private contractor in Colombia (Interaseo)
reported that, for economic reasons, they have closed the two processing plants that they developed in
Santa Marta and Ibague. This illustrates the importance of effective planning and due diligence to
ensure project viability and sustainability based on prevailing local conditions and effective design and
operational standards.
In Colombia, the experience with compost generation from municipal solid waste has been mixed.
Generally, the quality of derived compost was a factor of poor control of the physical, chemical or
microbiological process required to assure good quality compost and its safety. Only 31% of the 26
plants evaluated by the SSPD utilized acceptable standards for compost production. However, compost
generated at substandard facilities was still provided for agricultural use without a clear understanding
of the full health risks associated.
Composting facilities that did not comply with regulations had problems because of: 1) the lack of
separation of extraneous materials that led to excessive contamination in the compost, 2) the lack of
monitoring during processing, 3) the mismanagement of leachate which affected the quality of the
compost. In many cases, the sale of the organic product (compost and humus) from many of these
facilities is carried out informally without registration or certification from the agricultural agency
responsible for compost certification in Colombia (ICA, Spanish acronym).
4.4 Solid Waste Disposal in Colombia
In the last 7 years, there has been significant improvement in the design and operation of disposal
facilities in Colombia. Increasingly stringent regulatory requirements have led to the upgrade of the
existing landfills and the development of new facilities throughout the country. Based on a 2011
assessment, the government of Colombia classified disposal facilities (see figure 5) which indicates that
92% of the landfills throughout the country are classified as sanitary landfills. In addition, Figure 6
presents the trend relative to the annual progress that was made in improving disposal facilities during
the last 7 years where substandard facilities (open dumps, etc.) were replaced by sanitary landfills
(either in individual municipalities or through the use of regional landfills). Figure 6 also demonstrates
another very important element to that progress. As shown, the effect of a major modification to the
Colombian tariff structure is illustrated. A major tariff revision occurred at the end of 2005 and served as
a strong incentive for the improvement of disposal facilities as shown in the progress made since the
tariff modification. (A similar modification accommodating waste diversion processes could have the
similar effect of incentivizing actions leading to the government’s “zero waste” culture with its resulting
environmental, social, and health benefits.)
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
44
Annex 1 presents a listing of the principal landfills in Colombia including the status of their landfill gas
collection and treatment systems. The listing also shows the number of regional communities utilizing
these facilities. In many cases, these landfill sites may ultimately serve as locations for processing
facilities since public opposition to developing new facilities may be minimal if they are developed at
those locations.
Figure 6: Characterization of Disposal Facilities in Colombia. Sistemas de disposición Final Año 2011.
Source: Comisión De Regulación De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento Básico (CRA), 2011
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
45
Figure 6: Landfill Improvement Progress – 2005 to 2010. Evolución de la disposición final
Source: Comisión De Regulación De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento Básico (CRA), 201
In 2009, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assisted the government of Colombia
in developing a landfill gas evaluation model intended to provide a mechanism by which existing and
new landfills in Colombia could be evaluated to determine the emissions impact of landfill gas and the
technical/economic viability of alternatives for managing the landfill gas. This model can be utilized to
investigate opportunities at existing landfills relative to landfill gas management potential in the
proposed integrated Waste NAMA.
As the new disposal facilities in Colombia age, an increasing amount of landfill gas will be generated due
to an increasing accumulation of solid waste at these facilities. This will, most likely, lead to the
increased economic viability of installing landfill gas treatment systems as a result of the increased
amount of gas generated at the landfill sites. The above referenced EPA supported model provides a
means for monitoring this effect.
4.5 Institutional Framework
At the end of the 20th century, many countries with emerging economies redefined the role of their
government institutions regarding the provision of public services. In many cases, state monopolies
were replaced by market structures with increased participation of private companies in a competitive
market environment. In this sense, the public sector reoriented its participation in public service
markets and often assumed the role of regulators rather than service providers. This new strategy in
providing public services was formalized in Colombia through the Colombian Politic Constitution (CPC) in
1991. Article 365 of the CPC established that public services are inherent to the social objective of the
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
46
State whose responsibility is to guarantee efficient provision of public services for the entire population.
Within this context, public services could then be provided directly or indirectly by the State, by an
organized community or by private companies to established service performance standards. In any
case, the State reserved the right to intervene in and supervise the delivery of specific services in order
to guarantee that the operating mechanisms and entities are compatible with the social purpose of
public services. Relevant institutions in Colombia have evolved to put this concept into practice even to
a point where service institutions with poor performance have been liquidated and replaced to achieve
effective service levels. (In Cali, the public agency previously responsible for solid waste management
services (EMSIRVA) is currently being liquidated as a result of poor performance.)
In 1994, Law 142 completely redefined the national institutional framework of the public service sector
in Colombia. The main purpose of this act was to encourage different ways of managing public service
providers to ensure their operational and economic efficiencies. This led to the various institutional
approaches that currently exist for providing SWM services which include both private and public sector
entities as implementing and operating organizations.
In addition to its service provision perspective, waste management is also viewed as an environmental
concern of the State. Therefore, SWM is included in Colombia’s environmental legislation framework
(whose core regulation is Law 99 of 1993). Law 99 defines and establishes the National Environmental
System (SINA) as the main institutional arrangement for environmental issues in Colombia. SINA’s
objective is the coordination of environmental concerns and actions between national, regional and
municipal environmental authorities. Through this Act, the Colombian Ministry of Environment (MADS)
was officially created.
Due to the above, SWM in Colombia must relate to two regulatory frameworks as illustrated in Figure 7.
The first aims to prevent health and environmental risk due to substandard SWM processes while the
second seeks to ensure the financial sustainability of the entities responsible for SWM services. The
figure below illustrates the structure of the SWM institutional framework, including the principal
authorities involved in each of the above regulatory branches.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
47
Figure 7 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012
Each of these regulatory branches and arrangements has different institutions that are involved in
decision making regarding investments, regulatory and monitoring procedures. The “public services”
arrangement has two main institutions involved in the regulation and control of SWM activities including
the SSPD and the Regulatory Commission for Water and Sanitation (CRA, Spanish acronym). Figure 8
presents the institutional management framework in Colombia and the role of each major party in the
public service management process.
The SSPD is responsible for the supervision and control of local service providers. The SSPD’s duties
include the collection of operational data and information from certified operators in order to guarantee
an effective level of service and its financial sustainability. As a key element of this framework, the CRA
was created for the main purpose of regulating fundamental monopolies, promoting competition within
service operators, enhancing the sustainability of services and ensuring the provision of effectiveness of
services at reasonable rates. (The CRA’s responsibility for the SWM tariff structure is an important
consideration pertaining to the economic elements of potential SWM projects that can achieve GHG
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
48
mitigation.) In practice, the CRA defines tariff formulas and procedures in order to prevent excessive
costs for public service users. Their current work in reviewing and reforming the existing tariff structure
in Colombia is a key element to the prospects for development of an effective supported Waste NAMA
in the country. Tariff reform could be a basis for a government action to stimulate the diversion of solid
waste from landfills. Conversely, it could be an impediment if the economic value of the environmental,
health and social benefits of solid waste diversion projects are not factored into the tariff framework
formula.
Figure 8 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012
The CRA is also responsible for releasing the Colombian Technical Normative for Potable Water and
Public Services (RAS). Resolution 1096 of 2000 compliments Law 142/1994 that established the RAS as
the main performance guideline regarding collection, transport, treatment, reuse and final disposal of
municipal solid waste.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
49
One of the most important planning milestones regarding SWM at a national level is Decree 1713 of
2002. This decree establishes that Colombia’s national solid waste management policy must comply
with principles to:
•
•
•
•
Guarantee the quality and coverage of service with an uninterrupted, efficient and continuous
operation.
Obtain proven economy of scale.
Define mechanisms guaranteeing access of services to all users, and assuring their participation
in the service management and auditing process.
Develop a zero waste culture by promoting ISWM processes to mitigate health and
environmental impacts of waste generation and management.
Another relevant legal instrument is the National Development Plan of 2007 (Law 1151/2007). This Act
establishes that the government would provide funds to regional authorities to fund environmentally
related programs including SWM. In 2008, the National Council for Economic and Social Policies
(CONPES) published a document (CONPES 3530) as a supplement to the National Development Plan
which presents the specific guidelines to prioritize and organize actions and policies to improve SWM in
Colombia. The above has led to the planning activities undertaken by municipalities in Colombia in
defining their solid waste management plans which emphasize the need to develop the type of facilities
that will achieve the intent of Decree 1713. The projects will, for the most part, also provide GHG
reductions and therefore serve as core development elements of a Colombian integrated Waste NAMA.
The above legal instruments and policy principles are important for developing ISWM facilities that will
achieve emissions reductions especially given the increased costs that may be experienced. It is
expected that the government will also need to deal with potential economic impediments created by
some of its other policies and laws. For example, Article 5 of Decree 1505 of 2003 establishes that the
costs of waste diversion activities can be transferred to final users only if the costs of these activities
plus the management costs are less or equal than the costs of traditional activities (collection, transport,
transfer and final disposal). This may be an impediment to the development of sufficient cash flow
without an alternative form of funding to assure the sustainability of diversion processes and facilities.
4.6 Municipal Integrated Solid Waste Management Plans (PGIRS)
At the municipal level, the main planning tool for assuring effective local SWM services is the Integrated
Solid Waste Management Plans (PGIRS) developed by each municipality. These plans were required as a
result of Decree 1713 which stipulated that the content of the PGIRS must include, among other things:
1. A description of the municipal organization responsible for PGIRS definition and
implementation.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
50
2. A current analysis of conditions (including technical, economic, institutional, environmental and
social) related to the generation and the management of municipal solid waste.
3. Demographic information, waste generation indicators, urban growth and land use description.
4. Specific and general goals in compliance with national and regional policy objectives.
5. Identification of alternative solutions to SWM issues. (Definition of programs focused on source
separation, storage, treatment, collection, transportation, reuse, and final disposal)
6. Feasibility studies to determine the technical and economic viability of alternative programs
defined as a result of Item 5 above. (As a result of the requirements of Decree 1505 of 2003,
these studies were also required to include an assessment of how informal recyclers can be
included in the SWM sector improvements)
7. Plan structure:
a. Specific projects: including a description of the proposed results, activities to be
developed, timeline for implementation, budget, total time of execution and
responsibilities for each principal stakeholder.
b. Public educational activities specifically oriented to the community in general and to key
stakeholders.
c. Budget and investment plans of every phase of the PGIRS.
8. Economic Development and sustainability plan.
By 2005, all municipalities in Colombia were required to have developed a PGIRS that was approved by
their respective City Councils with a clear program for its implementation. The PGIRS were intended to
serve as a basis for establishing local standards and develop new activities to implement the programs
defined by their PGIRS that would be consistent with national policy. Unfortunately, the implementation
of the PGIRS has been poor to date and waste recovery strategies stipulated in the PGIRS have not been
extensively implemented to achieve the “zero waste” culture defined in Colombia’s SWM policy. This is
partially due to the normal pace of developing public sector related projects in Colombia as a result of
contractual and legal issues. In some cases where there is an inherent conflict of proposed formal
systems with the activities of informal recyclers, there have been some delays or an inability to make
progress as a result of inherent conflicts between the municipal plans and the perceived interest of the
organized informal recyclers.
One of the other reasons for the delay in implementing PGIRS defined initiatives is that it has not been
determined who will assume the additional costs of implementing the ISWM plans defined in the PGIRS.
In addition, current service providers are constrained by the existing tariff structure formula which does
not properly consider recycling and other solid waste reduction or diversion processes in defining the
level of tariff collection and allocation. Since the existing tariff formula is strongly focused on the
quantity of solid waste received at disposal facilities without considering potential waste diversion
processes, the existing tariff formula may actually penalize service providers for any diversion that they
would achieve. Tariff reform is necessary to accomplish two purposes including: 1) development of a
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
51
means for economically accommodating solid waste recovery processes and facilities and 2) creating an
economic incentive to emphasize recycling and other diversion approaches. Whether this occurs, will be
a function of the revisions that are actually implemented in the tariff structure currently being evaluated
by the CRA.
4.7 Target Community Solid Waste Management Conditions
To review general local conditions that may also affect the development of Waste NAMA actions in
Colombia, CCAP evaluated local settings through an investigation of SWM conditions in four different
municipalities including Santiago de Cali, Medellin, Ibague and Sogamoso. Population data and solid
waste generation and management information relative to each of these municipalities is shown in
Table 1.
a. Santiago de Cali
In Cali’s SWM plan (Evaluación y ajuste del Plan de Gestión Integral de Residuos Sólidos. PGIRS 20042019), the municipality defined their preferences for implementing a number of SWM activities that are
intended to comply with national policy. These include the following:
1. Source Separation Program - The municipality will seek to develop a source separation
program for certain solid waste components. Currently, shopping malls and some solid waste
generators in commercial zones have already implemented source separation of various waste
materials. The plan aims to incorporate other large generators of waste material into an
expanded source separation initiative.
2. Selective routes for collection of recyclable material - The plan proposes the use of the 4
current MSW collection zones to design similar selective collection routes for source separated
materials. At the same time, the plan envisions the further incorporation of informal recyclers
into the formal recycling process to avoid competition for recoverable materials.
3. Organic material - The “Progama Municipal de Recuperación y Aprovechamiento” considers
collection and processing programs to utilize organic material generated from markets,
restaurants, malls, supermarkets, parks, and other sources.
4. Environmental Technology Park - The plan stipulates that the municipality will seek to
develop an environmental technology park (Parque Ambiental y Tecnológico) for development
of a solid waste or Environmental and Technical Facility for solid waste recovery and treatment.
It is anticipated that the industrial sector will contribute to the design and operation of this
facility. CCAP believes that the closed Navarro landfill site in Cali may be the proposed site for
this Environmental Technology Park.
5. Construction and Demolition Waste - One program element defined in the PGIRS envisions
the collection and processing of construction and demolition material derived from building
activities. This will include a program to separate, collect, and process rubble material and to
motivate construction companies to reutilize the processed material where possible. This
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
52
program element will also include the implementation of a processing facility to treat rubble
material and a separate disposal facility for rejected residual from processing.
6. Extended Producer Responsibility - Cali’s PGIRS also identifies the need for an EPR policy
and program to support reduction of solid waste generation in the production cycle and the
development of alternatives to packaging material for waste quantity reduction.
7. Closure of Navarro Landfill - Cali’s PRIGS also identifies a number of different initiatives to
reduce GHG emissions generated by the closure of the Navarro Landfill. (With the assistance of
the USEPA, the recovery of landfill gas from the Navarro site has already been evaluated.) Other
environmental issues associated with the site such as leachate management must also be
addressed.
8. Other Referenced ISWM Options - Based on the content of the Cali PGIRS, these include the
development of incineration, composting and biodigestion facilities, if they are determined to
be practical.
These activities constitute the main policy work lines in Cali’s current SWM planning and their
implementation depends on the actions and interests of the different entities and private stakeholders
shown in the following institutional framework schematic in Figure 9.
Municipal Mayoralty
Constitutional responsible for
cleaning public service
PGIRS
contracts
Waste management
plannnig instrument for
the municiplaity
National
Institutions
EMSIRVA
Is being Liquidated but it is
the contracts signatory
CRA
Operator companies
Regulation of economic
relationships and tariff
+DAP
MADS
DAGMA
Supervice environmental
impacts of operations
Private companies
More than ten
small specialized
companies.
Domiciliary collection,
Street Cleaning, Parks
and public Yards
Transfer Station
and Landfill
Promoambiental
Interaseo
Ciudad Limpia
EMAS
Public Policies and
regulation
SSPD
Supervice financial
sustainability and
manage operational
information
contracts
CVC
Special and
hazardous waste
generators
Regional Environment
authotity. It issue
licences to facilities
Figure 9 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
53
An ongoing issue related to the ability to move forward with SWM initiatives in Cali is the legal status of
the public company historically responsible for SWM in the city. The original company, EMSIRVA (the
agency that executed contracts with Interaseo and the 4 collection service operators currently active in
the city as shown in the above framework schematic) is now being liquidated and this process is
expected to take some time to resolve. EMSIRVA is being liquidated by SSPD because of poor financial
management particularly related to its pension liabilities. The municipality intends to replace EMSIRVA
with a specialized public agency, similar to the UAESP (Special Administration Unit for Public Services) in
Bogotá. The existing contracts with the public and contracted service providers will then be transferred
to the new entity which is expected to be formally created in about 6 months after completion of
current city council discussions.
For about 40 years, solid waste disposal in Cali was carried out using poor operational procedures.
However, since Cali’s adoption of its PGIRS, major changes occurred including the closure of Navarro
open dump (the city’s waste disposal site at that time) and the construction of a new landfill (the
Colomba-Guabal landfill located in Yotoco, a small municipality located 40 kms away from Cali).
Problems with the Navarro site had been identified as early as 1974. However, its use continued until
2008 when the new waste disposal site was opened.
The closure of Navarro dump was affected by the historical presence of hundreds of families of waste
pickers who lived near the site. It was estimated that about 600 recyclers consistently worked at the
Navarro site. Since closure, the informal recyclers who had worked at the Navarro site then were added
to the more than 2,500 informal recyclers who were already working in Cali’s streets. According to the
PGIRS, this has led to an effort to organize a more formal recycling network involving the informal
recyclers. In addition, the municipality is subject to findings of the Constitutional Court requiring the
inclusion of the informal recyclers in the formal waste management framework. Cali continues to work
toward this end.
Another important change since adoption of Cali’s PGIRS is the increase in the number of SWM service
providers. The public company, EMSIRVA, was the only entity in charge of this activity until 2011 when
the SSPD began their liquidation process. Since then, three private companies (Promoambiental Valle
S.A. ESP, Ciudad Limpia, and EMAS Cali) and one public agency (El Espinal ESP AAA 1), were authorized to
provide the SWM service in different geographical zones of Cali. In early 2012, one of the private
companies (Promoambiental) assumed the operations in the zone in which the public agency (El Espinal)
had been providing services. At this point, the entire solid waste collection and transport function was
provided by private companies in the general institutional arrangement shown in the above schematic.
Due to the changes that have occurred since the adoption of the PGIRS, public perception of SWM
services in Cali has improved. In particular, the collection process provided improved standards and
practices, while also providing increased service coverage. However, complaints have recently been
1
ESP: Public Household Services Company, by its Spanish acronym; AAA: Drinking water, sewage and waste
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
54
received by the municipality regarding the relatively low implementation of recycling processes on the
part of all four companies (Bohórquez, 2012). In addition, the informal recyclers are still waiting for an
effective plan related to how they will be included into the municipality’s waste management service
chain.
Solid waste generation - Cali produces about 8% of all solid waste generated in Colombia with a total
of about 1,800 tons of solid waste per day. With a population of more than two million people, the per
capita production of solid waste in Cali was estimated to be about 0.75 kg per day in 2009. Figure 10
presents the general distribution by source category of the solid waste generated in Cali.
Figure 10: Distribution of solid waste by source in 2009
Source: Departamento Administrativo de Planeación,
2012.
In addition Cali’s PGIRS presents data concerning the
generation sources for municipal solid waste directly
managed by the city from 2000 to 2005 as shown in the
table below:
Santiago de Cali Solid Waste Sources (tons/year)
Source
Residential
Commerce and industry
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
339,124
347,799
338,618
395,159
368,038
351,624
382,537
48,016
48,062
49,704
66,463
35,967
34,363
37,384
Hospitals
1,080
1,121
1,491
1,757
1,943
1,856
2,019
Market places
Street cleaning
waste
1,374
14,384
16,601
17,136
19,142
18,288
19,896
66,653
62,650
59,121
47,375
58,659
56,043
60,970
Debris
150,923
36,839
172,296
4,146
64,247
61,382
66,778
Others
2,394
1,996
1,951
9
11,437
10,927
11,887
Rural areas
2,374
2,395
2,471
2,105
1,789
1,710
1,860
611,938
515,246
642,253
534,150
561,222
536,193
583,331
Total
/mixed
Table 7. Note: Numbers in italic fonts were estimated by municipal planning department (DAP), not
measured. Source: DAP, 2011. Cali en cifras.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
55
Based on solid waste composition analysis completed during preparation of the PGIRS, Table 8 presents
the estimated quantity of recyclables contained in Cali’s municipal solid waste stream. This forms the
basis for the expected level of recovery that may be achieved through enhanced source separation and
mixed solid waste processing activities.
RECYCLABLES IN RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE COMPOSITION
% of Total
% of
Category
Tons per day
Solid Waste
Recyclables
Paper
Cardboard
Packaging
Plastics
Wood
Metal
TOTAL
3.84
2.39
6.93
3.21
2.56
1.06
19.99
20
12
35
16
11.5
5.60
100
53.20
31.79
92.97
42.56
30.59
14.90
266
Table 8: Source: DAP, 2009.
The typical physical composition of Cali’s residential solid waste proportion of organic content shown in
Table 9 is based on composition analysis data from 2006. This composition illustrates the high
proportion of organic material that is consistent with other locations in Colombia. This typical
composition was used in the economic analysis of this report, which was based on SWM conditions in
Cali.
Residential Solid Waste Composition in 2006
Category
%
Food
59.0
Sanitary
7.7
Bags and Packaging
6.9
Leaf and Garden
6.5
Paper
3.9
Plastic
3.2
Glass
2.6
Cardboard
2.4
Textile
2.0
Other
1.5
Metalic
1.1
Ceramic
1.3
Rubber and Leather
1.0
Wood
0.6
Bones
0.3
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Table 9: Source: DAP, 2009.
56
Collection, Transport and Transfer - In Santiago de Cali, there are four principal companies involved
in solid waste collection, street sweeping, transport, and transfer activities. Each company has the
license to operate in a specific geographical zone of the city as shown in the Table 10:
Waste Management Company Operations Data
Company name
Concession Zone
Promoambiental Cali S.A.
EMAS SA ESP
Promoambiental Valle S.A.
Ciudad Limpia SA ESP
Workers
Vehicles
Subscribers
Ton/year
16
175,000
170,700
11
5
162,500
142,300
12
3
8
134,000
131,000
79
9
4
15
102,500
110,300
391
50
20
44
574,000
554.,300
Sweeping
Collection
25 cy
16 cy
Others
North - 1
237
131
21
2
East - 2
189
89
8
South - 3
173
92
Downtown - 4
197
796
Total
Table 10: Source: DAGMA, 2012.
Processing and Recovery - According to a Cali census in 2006, there are about 2,600 people working
as informal recyclers in the municipality. Generally, these people search solid waste containers in the
city for materials that they can sell to the 353 warehouses in the city. Less than half of these warehouse
facilities meet the legal requirements to formally operate in the municipality. Based on the census, it
was also determined that about 69% of the recyclers live in the urban zone while 31% live in rural areas.
Additionally, it was determined that about 50% of the recyclers do not make the Colombian legal
minimum wage. Most of the recovered material is metal, paper and cardboard, plastic, and glass. When
the Navarro dump site was operating, recyclers at the site collected about 120 tons of usable materials
daily at that site. With the commencement of operations at the new Colomba-Guabal landfill in 2008,
informal recycling activities were not allowed at the disposal site.
In 2009, Cali updated its PGIRS with proposed strategies aimed at reinforcing the productivity and
competitiveness of the entire recycling network which included a decrease of the volume of recycled
material disposed in the landfill. The revised strategy also sought to improve the socio-economic
conditions for the people involved in the informal recycling process. To accomplish these strategies, five
recycler cooperatives operating in Cali (FERESURCO, COOPRIM, ECOFUTURO, AMCE and ARC) were
invited to be part of the development process. Through investigation, it was determined that there were
770 recyclers working through these cooperatives, 1,804 recyclers that worked independently, and a
third group of homeless people that also sought recyclable materials but not on a daily basis. The total
amount of recovered material from all three of the above type of recyclers was about 280 tons per day
(53% due to the cooperative recyclers; 30% due to the independent recyclers and 17% due to the
homeless part-time recyclers).
In accordance with DAGMA, there are about 300 companies in Cali that use recycled materials for
manufacturing new products or provide raw material for larger industries in Colombia. These companies
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
57
directly and indirectly support about 7,000 jobs in the city, produce 1,000 different products, and export
10% of its manufactured products.
Table 11 presents solid waste diversion data from one of the private companies active in Cali that collect
source separated solid waste components from large waste producers (educational institutions, public
agencies, offices, commercial establishments). This data can form the basis for estimating the amount of
solid waste recyclables that could be collected from similar processes in the other zones of the
municipality.
MAS Ambiente SAS Solid Waste Diversion
Material type
Ton/year
2010
2011
Collected waste
298
460
Diverted waste
259
400
PVC
33
51
Paper
14
36
Low density polyethylene
2
12
Cardboard
74
117
Scrap metal
1
5
Confidential documents
23
11
Other plastics
3
17
Low density cardboard
50
76
Newspapers
3
7
PET
10
11
Traditional X-ray
0
1
Digital X ray
1
1
Glass
44
56
Not diverted
39
60
Table 11: Source: DAP, 2012.
Disposal - Upon closure of the disposal site in Navarro in 2008, operations began at the new ColombaGuabal disposal site located 42 km from the center of Cali in a rural area in the municipality of Yotoco.
Interaseo del Valle S.A. E.S.P. (Interaseo) is the owner and operator of the Colomba-Guabal landfill and
the site is estimated to have an operational life of about 31 years at the current rate of disposal.
EMSIRVA (which currently is being liquidated) then contracted with four private operators for collecting
the municipal solid waste in the city and transporting it to a transfer station. From there, Interaseo
transports the solid waste to the landfill site. Interaseo received a concession from the Municipality of
Cali for the operation of the transfer station for a total period of 20 years commencing in June 2008.
As owner of the landfill, Interaseo issued a public tender in October 2009 for the development of a CDM
project at the landfill. Another private company, Green Gas, won the tender and a contract between
Green Gas Yotocó SAS and Interaseo was signed on June 25th 2010.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
58
The landfill site has an active area of about 64 ha of which 20 ha are expected to receive solid waste for
disposal. Since start-up, this landfill has received an average of about 1,800 tons per day and has the
operational capacity to receive up to 2,000 tons per day of waste from a number of regional
municipalities including: Yotoco, Santiago de Cali, Yumbo, Candelaria, Jamundí, Florida, La Cumbre,
Dagua, Caloto, Padilla, Villarica, and Corinto. Currently, about 230 trucks arrive at the landfill daily on a
24 hour per day operational schedule. Interaseo estimates that it receives an annual tonnage of about
625,000 tons.
The areas designated for the disposal of solid waste has a basic flexible membrane liner (HDPE
geomembrane - 1.5 mm thickness) and leachate collection and treatment system with a design capacity
of 16 liters/second) system. Landfill gas is currently collected from areas not in active use and
combusted through a flare system.
In their CDM application, Interaseo stated that their proposed landill gas project would be developed in
2 phases where only flaring will be used for gas treatment in phase 1 and electricity generation in phase
2. For back-up purposes, the existing flaring system will be retained to be used at times when the Phase
2 power generation system is not operational or is under maintenance. In their CDM application,
Interaseo estimated that Phase 2 of their CDM project would start a year after phase 1 was developed in
order to determine the quality and quantity of the gas actually collected and processed through the
flaring system. The Interaseo plans acknowledged that the implementation of power generation would
depend on observed conditions (gas quality and quantity). During the total project lifetime (projected to
be 21 years) Green Gas would implement additional power generation capacity based on the observed
increasing gas production and collection until reaching an output capacity of approximately 11 MW.
The amount of solid waste disposed in Cali at the Navarro and Colomba-Guapal landfills from 2003
through 2009 is shown in Table 12.
Solid Waste Received from 2004 to 2009 Categorized by Source
Item
Collection and transport
Units
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Ton/day
1,961
1,641
2,046
1,703
1,535
1,466
1,834
Waste disposal in Navarro Ton/year 624,310 478,407 574,735 613,360 554,101 263,102
Waste disposal in Yotoco
Ton/year
-
-
-
-
-
-
266,287 575,931
Table 12: Source: DAP, 2012.
Financial/economic Aspects - According to data provided by the current service providers, the estimated
costs associated with the management of the solid wastes in Cali are as shown in Table 13.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
59
Solid Waste Management Costs
Unit
Value
($ COP)
Cleaning and Sweeping cost
$COP/Km
21,206
Collection and Transport Cost
$COP/Ton
75,135
Excess Transport Cost
$COP/Ton
14,4521
Final Disposal Cost
$COP/Ton
19,203
Service Marketing Cost
$COP/Sus
886
Yotoco Town's Incentive Fee*
$COP/Ton
1,303
Cost
Table 13: Source: EMSIRVA, 2012. *Yotoco
municipality receives a monetary incentive for
allowing the operation of a regional landfill in its
territory.
As an indication of the annual incomes derived by the service providers, Table 14 shows the number of
users and the invoiced value received by the one of the private companies (EMAS Cali) classified by
socio-economical strata (1=poorest people, 6= richest). EMAS Cali provides services only in the eastern
zone of Cali where there are no subscribers classified as Strata 6.
Annual Incomes by Socio-economic Class (EMAS)
Number of
Users
Tariff Incomes
(USD/year)
Residential SC 1
59,143
$ 2,310,000
Residential SC 2
61,738
$ 2,851,000
Residential SC 3
33,564
$ 2,272,000
Residential SC 4
15
$ 1,000
Residential SC 5
0
NA
Residential SC 6
0
NA
Type of user
Industrial
Commercial
Official
5
$ 1,000
6,641
$ 1,456,000
227
$ 75,000
Total
$ 8,966,000
Table 14: EMAS Cali- Metropolitan Cleaning Company of
b.
CaliMedellin
S.A.E.S.P. Source: EMAS Cali, 2012.
The following have been identified by the municipality of Medellin as strategic components of their
PGIRS. CCAP views these elements as a statement of their overall priorities in achieving the intent of the
national policy.
1. Source Separated Collection - The PGIRS consideration of Source Separated Collection is
based on a study already completed by the municipality (Consideraciones Metodológicas para el
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
60
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Diseño de Rutas Selectivas del Área Metropolitana del Valle de Aburrá). This study proposed
selective collection routes of source separated waste materials based on major generator
locations and on the composition of their waste material. Regarding the nature of the selected
waste generators, the study proposed special routes for areas with the greatest concentrations
of large solid waste generators such as industrial and commercial areas. Regarding the
composition of waste material, the study also proposed routes that depend on the calorific
value and nature of waste material based on the following waste classifications: organics,
recyclable materials and non-recyclable material. Another important classification that will
affect source separation collection will be the collection for hazardous waste material,
construction and demolition waste, commercial, industrial, hospital waste and “green” waste
(from yards and public landscaping). The study also proposed the implementation of source
separated collection in different stages including 1) the implementation of pilot programs to
gain experience in the source separation collection process and 2) the participation of existing
informal recyclers in the new process.
Recycling Material - This component of the PGIRS envisions improvements in the process of
collecting recyclable material through the use of specialized vehicles, source separation waste
collection routes, and the use of mechanical sorting facilities to capture marketable material.
Improvements in the organization of informal recyclers and better “centros de acopio” or
recycling facilities are also proposed.
Organic Material - The PGIRS objective pertaining to organic material is to increase the rate of
organics capture and reuse to 15% within the next 15 years. The necessary actions to achieve
this intent include a feasibility study for a composting plant, evaluation of required tariffs for
project viability and sustainability, market studies for sale of processed compost, development
of an appropriate legal framework, etc. The inclusion of other communities in a regional
approach is another important aspect of this proposed component. The PGIRS also considers
support of small scale composting in rural areas.
Construction and Demolition Material - The plan considers two pilot project alternatives to
achieve the recovery of rubble material in the Valle de Aburrá region. Pilot plant alternatives to
process between 100-150 tons per day of rubble material include:
a. Alternative 1: Enhance an existing asphalt recycling system and upgrade the facility to
process asphalt material.
b. Alternative 2: Install a crushing system for the processing of rubble material at the
existing asphalt recycling facility.
Incineration - The plan also states that the “Valle de Aburrá” region should use 5% of
municipal solid waste material in thermal processes such as incineration within the next 10
years, and an additional 5% in the next 15 years.
Pruning waste and organic industrial material - The PGIRS proposed initiatives to recover
and utilize 100% of the “green” waste generated in parks, markets, industries, etc. which is
estimated to be about 108 tons per day. For this purpose, it presented two processing
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
61
alternatives including a composting plant (based on a windrow aerobic process, or a biodigester
system based on an anaerobic digestion process.) To finance the biodigester, the plan
considered the possibility of a loan from the European Union (€1 million, 5% interest rate for 12
years).
7. Biogas plant - The Medellin PGIRS also states that the municipality aims to use the biogas
generated in the “Curva de Rodas” and “La Pradera” landfills for electricity production,
cogeneration in the landfills, or biofuel.
The city of Medellin is within the Aburrá Valley Metropolitan Area (AMVA), which, in addition to
Medellin, consists of nine other municipalities (Barbosa, Bello, Caldas, Copacabana, Envigado, Girardota,
Itagüí, La Estrella and Sabaneta).
EMVARIAS ESP (Empresas Varias de Medellin) is the public company (the largest such company in
Colombia) responsible for the provision of SWM services in Medellin since 1964. EMVARIAS operates as
an Industrial and Commercial State Company and has more than 685,000 registered customers including
commercial (37,000), industrial (5,000) and residential (643,000) generators. Table 15 identifies the
companies responsible for SWM services in each of the Medellin Metropolitan Area municipalities and
the actual service operator.
Companies Responsible for Solid Waste Management in Medellin Metro Area
Municipality
Public Company
Operator
Barbosa
Bello
Caldas
Copacabana
Envigado
Girardota
Itagui
La Estrella
Medellin
Sabaneta
Embaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Belloaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Aseo Caldas S.A. E.S.P.
Copaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Enviaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Giraseo S.A. E.S.P.
Serviaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Aseo Siderense S.A. E.S.P.
Empresas Varias de Medellín. E.S.P.
Aseo Sabaneta S.A. E.S.P.
Embaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Enviaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Empresas Varias de Medellín. E.S.P.
Interaseo S.A. E.S.P.
Table 15: Source: AMVA, 2006.
AMVA, acting as the Medellin local authority for urban environmental and planning, developed the
study of SWM in the region through the development of the Regional Aburra Valley Integrated Solid
Waste Management Plan (PGIRS-R). This regional plan was developed according to the guidelines,
standards and methodologies stipulated in National Legislation (Decree 1713/2002) and Resolution
1045/2003 of the Ministry of Environment, Housing and Territorial Development. The PGIRS-R identified
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
62
5 different programs and 35 related projects to be implemented in 15 years, with an estimated
investment of COP $115,000 million (AMVA , 2006).
Since the formulation of PGIRS-R, Medellin has adopted two further policies concerning SWM. Municipal
Agreement 46/2007 issued by Medellin’s Council established the public policy for waste diversion in the
city to promote the recovery of solid waste. This policy includes four major strategies to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
promote separation and recycling at source,
promote health, education and training programs for recyclers,
create drop-off centers and downcycling facilities, and
promote economic incentives to fully establish recycling cooperatives.
The second strategy sets a Land Use Plan (POT, Spanish acronym), Municipal Agreement 46/2006, issued
by Medellin’s Council. This plan seeks to address the challenge of developing new infrastructure for
SWM in the city including the creation of drop-off centers (warehouses), the definition of appropriate
locations for Medellin’s final waste disposal, waste sorting in market squares and other related policies.
Solid Waste Generation - Medellin produces an average of about 1,300 tons per day of solid waste
with a per capita generation rate of about 0.45 kg/inhabitant/day. Table 16 shows the production rate
and total production of solid waste in Medellin by source. In addition, construction and demolition
waste is estimated at about 411 tons per day.
As shown in Table 16, the proportion of solid waste from the residential sector is estimated to be about
67% percent, 30% of which is recyclable. It was further estimated that informal recyclers collect about
13% of these materials (300 to 320 tons/day).
Solid Waste Produced by Source in 2004
Number of
subscribers
Total production
(ton/year)
Residential
561,632
323,496
Commercial
36,405
44,124
Industrial
Sweeping/street
cleaning
4,011
34,128
-
41,676
-
20,256
3,222 beds
1022,64
Source
Yards and gardens
Hazardous (medical)
Table 16: Source: AMVA, 2006.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
63
Figure 11 presents the typical solid waste composition for the city of Medellin and the AMVA area.
Further, Figure 12 presents the solid waste composition for the residential category of waste in the
municipality. This general solid waste composition data shown in Figures 11 and 12 is similar to that
found in other Colombian cities as shown in the Annex.
Figure 11: Physical composition of residential solid
waste in Medellin. Source: EMVARIAS ESP, 2009.
Figure 12: Physical composition of residential solid
waste in the Metropolitan Area. Source: AMVA, 2006.
Figure 13 presents the estimated per capita generation of residential solid waste classified by socioeconomic strata. The figure demonstrates the difference in generation between affluent (strata 6) and
poor residents (strata 1 and 2) of Medellin. In Medellin, about 73% of the dwellings are classified as
strata 1, 2 and 3, 16,3% as Strata 4 and the remaining residences are strata 4 and 5 (AMVA , 2006).
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
64
Figure 13: Per capita production of residential solid waste classified by socio-economic strata. Source: EMVARIAS
ESP, 2011.
Collection, Transport and Transfer - Solid waste collection in Medellin is provided by EMVARIAS.
For the other AMVA municipalities, this service is provided by a number of private contractors including:
Embaseo SA ESP, Enviaseo SA ESP or Interaseo SA ESP. Table 17 presents the general data concerning
the trucks, capacity and number of trips from 2004.
In Medellin the waste collection service is provided from two to seven times a week, depending on the
subscriber. Most of residential areas have a collection frequency of three times per week. EMVARIAS
ESP divided the city in seven different zones, for a total of 396 collection micro-routes including the ones
designed for Medellin’s suburbs (Altavista, San Antonio de Prado, San Cristobal, San Sebastian de
Palmitas y Santa Elena). 378 of the micro-routes collect the waste in the urban area. By 2004, EMVARIAS
had 175 drivers and 320 workers involved in waste collection and transport activities.
EMVARIAS ESP Vehicles and Transport to LA Pradera Landfill in 2004
Type of Truck
Compactor
Compactor
Compactor
Compactor
Dump truck
TOTAL
Loading
Capacity
3
14 Yd
3
20 Yd
3
25 Yd
3
28 Yd
3
6m
Loading capacity
(Ton)
6.5
10.5
13.5
16
7
Number of
vehicles
7
76
14
7
6
110
Total volume
3
(m )
75
1,113
268
150
36
Total capacity
(Ton)
46
798
189
112
42
Number of trips by
per month
336
3,648
672
192
Sporadic
4,848
Table 17: Source: AMVA, 2006.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
65
Construction and demolition (C&D) waste collection service is provided through the use of 8 dump
trucks and two loaders. Collected construction and demolition waste is delivered to 11 C&D waste sites
located in the AMVA Region.
There is only one solid waste transfer station currently in use. The South Transfer Station in the
municipality of Sabaneta was built by Interaseo SA ESP and CODESARROLLO SA ESP to optimize
transportation costs of waste from the Aburra Valley to the La Pradera landfill. It is noteworthy that
there is ongoing controversy between the administrators of the transfer facility and neighboring
communities who argue that the transfer station does not meet all the specifications defined in current
regulations. Planning is underway for another transfer station to be built close to the Medellín urban
area. The Medellín municipal Council is considering this project which is expected to cost about 10
million USD. (This is an example of an important major project that is required for core services which
could deemphasize the municipality’s interest in secondary recovery facilities and processes.)
Processing and Recovery - The Metropolitan Area of the Valley of Aburra has developed strategies to
increase and improve the use of recyclable and organic waste in the region. These strategies include
environmental education for recyclers, recycling organizations and the collectors´ association. It also
includes the creation and consolidation of a process to promote small-scale use of organic waste to
produce compost. However, only about 35% of these small scale composting plants comply with the
compost regulation. For the most part, the sale of the organic product (compost and humus) from these
facilities is carried out informally, with no registration or certification by the Colombian agricultural
authorities. Generally, evaluation of these activities showed that the quality of the produced compost is
not monitored through physical, chemical or microbiological analysis to ensure safety and effective
quality.
Since 2010, the AMVA has also implemented 55 small composting plants in 38 residential complexes in
Medellin which process about 155 ton of source separated organic waste. The resulting compost is used
as fertilizer in the residential complex grounds and also made available for use by the inhabitants.
Similar facilities are currently planned in the other municipalities in the region.
The estimated 3,880 Informal recyclers in Medellin are organized in cooperatives. The Recimed
Cooperative is the largest of these in the municipality 2. Members of this cooperative collect about 54%
of all the recyclable materials collected in the municipality. Members collect an average of about 75 kg
per day and receive between COP $15,000 and COP $30,000 for this material. On a monthly basis, this is
less than the minimum legal salary in Colombia.
2
In terms of number of associates, Recimed has grouped the 73% of recyclers and the remaining percentage is shared by 8 other cooperatives:
Manos activas, Girar, Convenir, Cañofistola, Promovernos, Precoambiental, El Limonar, Reciclatur yLa Alborada.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
66
The informal recycling activity is family oriented, with parents, children, and other family members
involved in the process. A study on work and health conditions of urban informal recyclers conducted by
the University of Antioquia concluded that they work under poor and dangerous conditions where the
informal recyclers are exposed to vehicular traffic, high temperatures, rain, carbon monoxide, bacteria,
viruses and other microorganisms present in the solid waste that they sort through for recoverable
materials. Cuts are often caused by the direct extraction of the recyclables from trash bags and other
containers. Major diseases within the population of informal recyclers in Medellin have been found
including respiratory infections (37%), diarrhea (9%), dermatological lesions (6%), intestinal infections
(6%), and other diseases (3%).
Disposal - Medellin’s solid waste disposal is performed at the La Pradera landfill, which was opened in
2003. The La Pradera site is a regional landfill receiving solid waste from Medellin, the other AMVA
municipalities and from other neighboring municipalities. Approximately 2,100 tons of waste are
received daily at the landfill.
Before 2003, the waste disposal occurred in the Rodas’ ravine located near the municipalities of Bello
and Copacabana. The Curva de Rodas landfill began operations in 1984 and was closed in 2003. The
Curva de Rodas landfill was designed, constructed, and managed by INTERASEO and has a total area of
73 ha with 33 previously used for active disposal. This site is located 10 km from the center of Medellin
in the northeastern part of the Aburra valley. Approximately 8.5 million tons of solid waste was placed
into the landfill from 1984 to 2003 when the site was closed.
The current La Pradera landfill, which is owned by EMVARIAS, is located in a 354 hectare area which
provides significant area for expansion. The current disposal site within the landfill (el Vaso Música) has
an estimated 5 years of airspace left at the current disposal rate. The next site to be used at the landfill
(el Vaso Altair) is estimated to have 9 years of capacity available (AMVA , 2006). The total site is
expected to reach closure capacity in 2027 at the current rate of disposal.
About 75% of the solid waste generated in Medellin is disposed at La Pradera. Approximately 12.5% is
diverted by informal recyclers and the various cooperatives and companies in the region.
Financial/economic aspects – Table 18 shows the current tariff to subscribers in Medellin for the
service in 2005. The table also shows the subsidy or contribution levels received by socio-economical
strata. The subsidy and contribution percentage is specified by a Municipal Agreement (043/2011)
issued by the Municipal Council of Medellin to balance the costs of services between the affluent and
poor factions of the population.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
67
Tariff in Medellin by Socio-economic Status
Type of user
Monthly Tariff
(COP$/Subscriber)
Subsidy and/or contribution
(%)
Residential SES 1
4,104
- 55%
Residential SES 2
4,397
- 40%
Residential SES 3
5,130
- 15%
Residential SES 4
5,570
0%
Residential SES 5
9,891
85%
Residential SES 6
11,095
100%
Commercial
9,283
50%
Industrial
11,603
30%
Table 18 source: Source: EMVARIAS, 2012.
The general costs associated with SWM in Medellin are shown in Table 19 based on the amounts
calculated according to the pricing methodologies issued by the CRA as a result of Resolution CRA
043/2006. (The amounts shown also show the designated entry notations for the current tariff
framework formula) This is followed by Table 20 that shows the general 2012 balance sheet of
EMVARIAS.
Solid Waste Management Costs in Medellin
Cost Element
Value (COP$)
Service Marketing fixed cost ($/subscriber) - CCS
879.93
Collection management fixed cost ($/subscriber) - CMRf
334.31
Collection and Transport Cost ($/Ton) - CRT
67,627.55
Transport average cost by Excess Length ($/Ton) - CTEp
24,570.24
Final average disposal cost ($/Ton) – CDTp
26,573.19
Collection management variable cost ($/ton) - CMRv
8,907.82
Cleaning and Swap cost ($/km)
21,577.78
Table 19: Source: EMVARIAS, 2012.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
68
EMVARIAS SA ESP 2012 Cash Flow
Concept
Collection and transport income
Incomes
Final disposal income
Expenses
USD
Millions
24.772
13,7
3.772
2,1
494
0,3
Tree and grass pruning services income
7.000
3,9
Special services income
1.857
1,0
Other current income
4.805
2,7
Capital Income
8.112
4,5
Operation expenses
7.314
4,0
30.341
16,8
Medical waste disposal income
Recollection and transport expenses
Investments
COP
Millions
Debris collection, transport and disposal
3.425
1,9
Tree and grass pruning services expenses
6.119
3,4
773
0,4
1.190
0,7
Awareness Campaigns cost
Service marketing cost
Incentive to the landfill
880
0,5
Collection commission
6.104
3,4
Land purchase
7.300
4,0
Development of disposal sites
2.200
1,2
300
0,2
SIAM 5
Leachate treatment
2.750
1,5
Social investment
600
0,3
Research and development
900
0,5
Table 20: Source: EMVARIAS, 2012.
c. Ibagué
The municipality of Ibagué has a population of approximately 550,000 people. About 9,300 tons per
month of solid waste is generated in the city (about 300 tons/day) from 110,500 customers served by
two private companies, Interaseo (the same company that provides SWM services in Cali) and Ecopijaos.
Approximately 92% of the service customers are served by Interaseo as shown in Table 22. Both
companies collect residential solid waste three times per week and deliver the collected material to the
La Miel landfill for disposal. This site is about 6.5 km from the city and is owned and operated by
Interaseo. It is expected to have sufficient capacity for use until 2017. The Ibague PGIRS states that the
solid waste generation rate in Ibagué is about 0.66 Kg per person per day. Table 21 shows the total
amount of waste placed in the landfill by the principal contractors.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
69
Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Total Solid Waste Delivered to La Miel Landfill
Interaseo [K Ton]
Ecopijaos [K Ton]
Total [Ton/year]
96
0
96,000
101
3.6
105,000
104.5
3.8
108,000
106
3.3
109,000
102.8
8.3
111,000
109.6
10.3
120,000
116.1
11.4
128,000
Table 21: Source: Alcaldía Municipal De Ibagué, 2009.
Users Served by the Principal Waste Companies
Class
Interaseo
Ecopijaos
Total
Residential
97,447
8,861
106,308
Commercial
6,319
67
6,386
Industrial
195
2
197
Total
103,961
8,930
Table 22: Source: Alcaldía Municipal De Ibagué, 2009.
Solid Waste Composition - In the past, Tolima University conducted a solid waste characterization
study of Ibague’s solid waste. Through this study, it was determined that the Ibague’s solid waste
consists of about 64% organics, 17% recyclable material, 15% residual, and 4% construction and
demolition debris.
During a CCAP site visit to Ibagué, the public sector entity responsible for SWM in Ibague (Cortolima)
indicated that the core SWM services (collection, transport and disposal) are in excellent condition
primarily due to Interaseo’s performance as the principal private contractor to the municipality. In their
operation of the disposal site, Interaseo began separating organic materials from the solid waste stream
received for disposal to generate compost. This program was also supported through the
implementation of source separation from some service customers (primarily residential complexes).
However, Interaseo has had difficulties selling the compost derived from the process and has also
experienced economic problems because of the cost of the process.
In its solid waste management plan, Ibagué states that about 2% (170 tons per month) of organic
material generated in the municipality’s MSW stream was used to produce compost. In their PGIRS,
Ibague proposes to create a "Company of General Recycling Services" that will process both organic and
inorganic material segregated from the municipal solid waste stream. For this purpose, the PGIRS set the
following objectives to:
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
70
•
•
•
•
•
Devise a business model for the recycling company.
Conduct technical and financial studies to allocate recycling tariffs to the municipal waste
management services.
Estimate the volume of recyclable material.
Evaluate the operational capabilities of the existing sorting facilities.
Define the strategies necessary to effectively sell the recovered recyclable material in the local
markets.
While the Ibagué PGIRS established a general timetable for accomplishing the above objectives, the
physical elements of the plan have not yet been fully realized.
According to the PGIRS, there are 33 registered companies who provide recycling and reuse practices in
Ibagué. Further, an Interaseo manager stated that he believes that the number of informal recyclers in
Ibagué is about 2,500. Local authorities state that about 1,500 informal recyclers are active in Ibagué.
d. Sogamoso
Since 1981, Sogamoso’s SWM core services (collection, transport and disposal) have been provided by a
public company (COSERVICIOS S.A.- E.S.P) (Compañía de Servicios Públicos de Sogamoso). COSERVICIOS
also provides Sogomoso’s water distribution, sewerage and street lighting services. From 1981 to 1994,
Sogamoso’s solid waste disposal was in open dumps located in different rural areas near the city where
the delivered solid waste was often burned in an uncontrolled manner.
In 1994, one of the principal open dumps (El Afilador) was closed by a legal order. At that time,
COSERVICIOS bought a 17.5 Ha parcel in the rural township of San Jose del Porvenir which is located
about 8 km away from Sogamoso’s urban area for the purpose of developing a new landfill site. In 2002,
COSERVICIOS also constructed a compost plant, a leachate treatment plant at the landfill and waste
drop-off centers in the city.
In 2005, Sogamoso’s solid waste management plan (PGIRS) was adopted through local Resolution
1246/2005). In 2008, CORPOBOYACA (the Department of Boyaca’s environmental authority) granted a
permit allowing the San Jose del Porvenir landfill to operate as a regional landfill which now provides
disposal services for 42 municipalities in the region.
Solid Waste Generation – Based on 2011 data, the municipality of Sogamoso produces about 62 tons
of solid waste per day with a per capita generation of solid waste of about 0.48 kg per day. Figure 14
shows the city’s solid waste distribution by source.
The physical composition of the residential solid waste in Sogamoso is shown in Table 23 (based on data
from 2008).
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
71
Figure 14: Distribution of solid waste by source in 2011. Source: Coservicios S.A. ESP.
Sogamoso Solid Waste Composition
Category
Organics
Paper and cardboard
Plastics
Textiles
Scrap metal
Glass
Others
%
50
19
10
4
2
2
13
Table 23: Source: Cooservicios SA ESP, 2010.
Collection, Transport and Transfer - Solid waste collection and transport of solid waste is managed
by one single company, COSERVICIOS that is also responsible for street sweeping. Currently, the
collection and transport service is provided twice weekly with 18 formal collection routes covering more
than 80% of the municipality. The collection system utilizes eight vehicles and 24 employees.
Processing and Recovery - After solid waste is collected and transported to the landfill, the material
is placed on a conveyor belt where sanitary waste is removed. This process then utilizes a rotating
screen (trammel) to also separate the biodegradable fraction from the mixed municipal solid waste at a
processing rate of about 25 tons per hour. The biodegradable waste is then used to produce a low
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
72
quality compost in about 45 to 60 days. In 2011, this process produced about 115 tons of low quality
compost. During site visits to the Sogamoso landfill site, CCAP observed that this system did not appear
to be in regular use for waste processing.
The recyclable materials that reach the landfill are minimal since informal recyclers recover over 80% of
the recyclable material in the waste stream prior to collection. After recovery, this material is sold to
buy-back centers and warehouses in the Sogamoso region. Sogamoso does not have any formal
recycling programs.
The plastic that arrives at the landfill is sorted manually on a conveyor belt, and sent to a washing plant
where it is processed in two industrial washing machines, followed by a mechanical drying process and
finally, packing. Table 24 shows the amount of various material recovered at the landfill and the unit
revenue derived. Annually, income for selling this recycled material is approximately $3,500,000 COP.
Materials Recycled at Terrazas del Porvenir Landfill in 2011
Selling price
Landfill diversion
Recovered materials
COP/kg
Ton/year
PP
$ 200
0.418
PET
$ 350
1.664
PE
$ 300
0.726
LDPE
$ 380
5.44
Scrap metal
$ 200
0.603
Glass
$ 60
2.027
Aluminum
$ 2.000
0.169
Table 24 Source: Sierra, Carlos, 2008.
Disposal - Since 1994, Sogamoso’s solid waste disposal site is the Terrazas del Porvenir Landfill located
8 kilometers away from the city’s urban area in San Jose del Porvenir township. Sogamoso’s landfill is a
regional landfill serving Sogamoso and 42 other municipality. During 2011, this landfill received over
30,000 tons of solid waste from the regional municipalities in addition to that derived from Sogamoso.
Table 25 shows the amount of solid waste placed into the landfill over the past six years. At the current
rate of disposal, the landfill is expected to have about 21 years of disposal capacity available.
Solid waste Disposed at Terrazas del Porvenir Landfill (tons/year)
Source/type of subscriber
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Other municipalities
2,669
3,143
9,125
25,975
28,752
Sogamoso
17,120
20,230
20,321
20,453
22,222
Total
19,789
23,373
29,446
46,428
50,975
2011
31,605
22,690
54,296
Table 25 Source: Sierra, Carlos, 2008.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
73
Financial/economic aspects - The costs associated with SWM in Sogamoso are shown in Table 26.
Solid Waste Management Costs in Sogamoso
Cost
Unit
Value
Street sweeping and cleaning COP $/Km 20,117
Collection and Transport
COP $/Ton 71,343
Final Disposal
COP $/Ton 46,699
Service Marketing
COP $/Sus
690
Table 26: Source: Coservicios SA ESP - Tariffs by Rocio Tibocha.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
74
Section 5: Climate Change Activities in Colombia
5.1 Climate Change Policy and Initiatives in Colombia
Currently, the Colombian Government has an official and active institutional arrangement supporting
climate change policies. This has allowed the country to assume a leadership role with other developing
countries in the region in the establishment of voluntary goals regarding the mitigation of GHG
emissions while supporting sustainable development models within emerging economies.
Colombia approved the UNFCCC in 1994 and the Kyoto protocol in 2000. These milestones defined the
course of Colombia’s political actions in climate change matters under a philosophy of “shared but
differentiated responsibilities”. The Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development (MADS) is
the policy leader in Colombia through its Climate Change division. Further, IDEAM (Colombian Institute
for Hydrology, Meteorology and Environmental Studies) is the Colombian public entity responsible for
publishing official climate change national communications.
The first national communication regarding climate change was published by IDEAM in 2001 and this
included the GHG inventory of 1990 - 1994. The second official national communication published in
2009, contained GHG inventories for the period from 2000 to 2004. These documents constitute the
official baseline of national GHG emissions and are an example of the technical actions accomplished by
the National Government to investigate elements for identifying strategic development alternatives for
implementation of a low carbon economic model. However, inventory calculation methodologies need
to be improved to increase the accuracy of future inventories and for defining information exchange and
generation protocols that allow the construction of MRV systems and procedures for NAMA initiatives
such as the proposed integrated Waste NAMA that is the subject of this assessment.
There are two key policy documents from the CONPES that define Colombia’s roadmap for climate
change actions including:
1. The National Strategy for securing environmental services related with Climate Change
Mitigations - CONPES 3242 (2003), and
2. The Institutional Strategy for promoting climate change actions and policies - CONPES 3700.
The former paved the way for CDM projects in Colombia by defining institutional and administrative
processes for approving them. The later document defined four policy priorities including:
•
•
•
•
Establishment of a National Climate Change Adaptation Plan (PNACC)
Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation National Strategy (EN REDD+)
Establishing a Low Carbon Development National Strategy (LCDS)
Developing a Financial protection strategy against natural disasters
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
75
These four priority areas are aligned with the current National Development Plan for 2010 to 2014, and
may serve as the political and legal basis for future mitigation actions.
Currently, LCDS is under development by the Climate Change Section of MADS and this is expected to
define key projects in different sectors (Energy, Housing, Transport, Waste and Agriculture). One
important characteristic of this strategy is that it is being implemented from a bottom-up policy
implementation approach which implies that key stakeholders are engaged in the climate change
inventory and development process. In addition, mitigation actions are being qualitatively and
quantitatively analyzed to define priority projects which could be implemented in the near future.
The LCDS comprises of three steps including the:
1. Projection of future GHG emission scenarios and identification of promising mitigation actions.
This phase will end shortly (October 2012) and will be the basis for project formulation and
implementation.
2. Formulation of mitigation plans through detailed feasibility studies and co-benefits analyses. In
this phase which is expected to run until about July 2013, the Colombian government will
explore financing options, as well as policy and regulatory alternatives for consolidating and
implementing a low carbon development model.
3. Implementation, control and evaluation of specific mitigation actions. Once the National
Government had prioritized specific and promising projects with clearly identified financing
sources, the implementation phase will begin. In this stage, MRV systems should also be
designed to quantify emission reductions in comparison with phase 1 estimates.
In the end, the Low Carbon National Strategy will allow Colombia to focus on climate change financing
opportunities while simultaneously supporting and advising productive economic sectors to be
competitive within a changing economy that is expected to migrate to low carbon economic models. In
order to achieve this broad policy objective, Conpes 3700 seeks to create the Climate Change National
System (SNCC) for Colombia as illustrated in the following schematic.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
76
Executive secretary
MADS
Consulting groups
Executive Commission on
Climate Change
Orienting group
Preside: DNP
Participants: MADS, MHCP, MVCT,
MME, MT, MPS
Committee of Financial
management
Technical Secretary: DNP
Economic sectors
sub-commission
Territorial subcommission
International negotiation and
cooperation sub-commission
Information management transversal group
Interdisciplinary working groups
Figure 15 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
5.2 Colombia CDM Projects Overview and Experience
Overall experience in developing CDM projects in Colombia has been generally unsatisfactory since the
majority of projects seeking CDM status have had difficulties in completing the registration process. As
shown in Figure 16, only 29 of 154 CDM candidate projects that have been identified in the country
(taking into account all CDM sectors) have been registered by the United Nations, and only 10 of these
projects have successfully obtained Certified Emission Reduction (CER) status. According to the MADS,
these 10 projects derived a total of USD $91 Million in economic benefits due to CER sales from 2007 to
2010.
Figure 16: Colombian CDM Projects portfolio Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
77
The implementation pattern reflected in Figure 16 also applies to waste sector projects. The Colombia
CDM portfolio includes 43 solid waste related projects, the vast majority of which (73%) have been
proposed at landfills where landfill gas is combusted through flaring. In the current portfolio, there are
also composting and energy generation projects. As shown in Figure 17 below, only a small number of
the Colombian waste-related CDM projects that started the validation process have been registered
with the UNFCCC. Of these, only 4 have obtained CERs benefits. All four successful projects involve
landfill gas treatment processes and none of the other waste-related projects (wastewater, composting
or energy generation) have managed to obtain CER’s.
Figure 17: Waste Related CDM projects in Colombia Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
78
CDM Projects in Colombia
(with Letter of Approval of MADS)
Landfill Name
Location
Project
Phase
Emission
Reduction
Gg CO2eq
Bionersis
Pasto
CERs
25
La Pradera
Medellín
CERs
169
Doña Juana
Bogota
CERs
724
El Carrasco
Bucaramanga Monitoring
Guabal
Yotoco
Validation
247
El Guacal
Medellín
Monitoring
109
El Guayabal
Cucuta
Registration
159
El reciclante
Villavicencio
Registration
27
La Esmeralda
Manizales
Registration
56
Los Pocitos
Galapa
LoA
72
Montería
Montería
Registration
26
Pirgua
Tunja
Registration
11
Los Corazones Valledupar
LoA
21
Palangana
Santa Marta
LoA
130
El Oasis
Sincelejo
LoA
40
La Miel
Ibague
LoA
68
Montenegro
Quindío
Registration
N/A
La Glorita
Pereira
Validation
N/A
Table 27 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
59
Today, there are only 18 CDM projects
formally registered and endorsed by MADS
listed in Table 27. On average, these
projects are estimated to mitigate about
120 Gg of CO2-equivalence each year.
Recent experience has shown that other
CDM projects in Colombia face difficulties
in achieving registration status. As in other
countries, one of the biggest constraints in
achieving registration has been long delays
in the registration application process to
the detriment of projects that were seeking
registration.
Another important factor relative to the
Colombian experience with CDM projects is
that the GHG reductions estimated by
project proponents (which usually served
as a basis for estimating their expected
cash and income flows) were rarely close to
the reductions effectively certified. Figure
18 presents the proportion (%) of CER´s
issued compared to the estimated emission
reductions for the four Colombian waste
sector CDM projects that have received
CER's.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
79
Figure 12: CERs Issued/Estimated Reductions from CDM Waste Projects Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
80
Section 6: Alternative ISWM Scenarios – Viability and GHG
Mitigation Potential
As shown in Table 2, there are both GHG emissions sources and mitigation opportunities in conventional
ISWM processes and technologies. The current business-as-usual extent of GHG emissions in any
Colombian municipality that result from solid waste management is a function of the physical
characteristics and performance of their existing programs and facilities. The processes currently in use
in Colombian municipalities are primarily basic core services (collection, transport and disposal) along
with limited recycling and composting activities. In some instances, new facilities have been developed
to improve SWM system performance which have the co-benefit effect of also decreasing GHG
emissions. For example, a state-of-the-art transfer station was constructed in Cali to optimize the
municipality’s overall solid waste collection and transport system. The transfer station significantly
improves the cost effectiveness of Cali’s collection system and also results in a reduction in GHG
emissions by decreasing travel requirements for vehicles directly involved in the waste collection and
transport process. Medellin is considering a similar transfer station to optimize their collection system
because of the travel distance (about 60 kilometers) between the city center and its principal La Pradera
disposal site.
Based on the assessment site visits and subsequent investigations, CCAP believes that, in general, core
collection and disposal services in Colombia are effective in the target municipalities and function at
good environmental and performance effectiveness standards. This provides a good foundation for the
development of the next tier of SWM actions that seek to manage generated solid waste as a potential
resource thereby decreasing the amount of solid waste requiring final disposal.
To date, formal systems designed to recover solid waste materials either for direct reuse, recycling,
composting or energy recovery purposes have not been extensively developed in Colombia. Recycling is
primarily a function of the informal sector due to economic and national policy factors including the
existing tariff formula framework which does not consider solid waste diversion from landfills in
calculating tariff allocations and other policy limitations that preclude passing on the cost of new
initiatives to generators above existing baseline levels for current services. In general, the current tariff
framework does not affect the function of the informal sector recycling network since cash flow in this
informal process essentially consists of the revenues derived from sale of recovered materials by the
informal recyclers which provides for their livelihood.
Core SWM service development work is still necessary in some municipalities (Medellin, for example)
which is likely to be viewed as a higher investment priority than the development of new recovery
projects especially if they are not mandated by national regulations or increase overall solid waste
management costs. However, in municipalities where core services are currently effective and viable for
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
81
existing and future solid waste management needs (such as in Cali, for instance), consideration is being
given to the development of waste diversion projects and programs as components of a comprehensive
ISWM program as defined in their SWM plans.
For this evaluation, CCAP believes that there are a number of alternative scenarios and processing
technical configurations by which individual municipalities (or groups of municipalities in regional
configurations) can achieve waste diversion in a manner consistent with their SWM plans (PGIRS) to
both improve SWM effectiveness and achieve GHG mitigation benefits. Two conventional scenarios exist
which focus on the:
1. Processing of mixed municipal solid waste for materials and/or energy recovery (the Mixed
Municipal Solid Waste Processing Scenario); and
2. Source separation and independent collection of recyclable and organic materials for direct sale
or processing into secondary products (compost, biogas, etc.) (the Source Separation Scenario)
Each of these scenarios has been successfully utilized in other countries to achieve solid waste recovery
and diversion objectives and to realize the intrinsic economic value of municipal solid waste
components. However, the full spectrum of potential alternative design configurations and technologies
available within each scenario may not be universally applicable to individual municipal and solid waste
management situations in Colombia for a number of reasons. Technologies with high capital and
operating costs such as mass burn incineration may be viable in the United States and European Union
because of the prevalent high cost of disposal and the typical physical composition of municipal solid
waste streams. However, in countries where disposal costs are significantly lower and where typical
MSW has high organic content (as is the case in Colombia), these systems may not be economically or
technically viable. For evaluating potential treatment alternatives to determine which may be viable and
applicable to Colombian solid waste management situations, the following conventional technical
configurations were initially investigated:
Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Processing
•
•
•
•
•
Waste to Energy (WTE) - incineration for energy recovery
Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility - utilizing anaerobic digestion as the core
biological process
Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility – utilizing windrowed and aerobic
composting as the core biological process
Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facility – utilizing In-Vessel composting as the
core biological process
Materials Recovery facility (MRF) - including recyclables and/or the production of refuse
derived fuel (RDF) for offsite utilization.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
82
Source Separation
•
•
Source separation and independent collection of organic waste - from residences (yard
waste, food scraps, non-recyclable paper, etc.) or specific large-scale generators such as
markets, restaurants, etc.
Source separation and independent collection of recyclable materials - from specific
high-volume commercial/industrial generators and from residential sources
Landfill gas collection and treatment
•
Landfill gas collection and treatment - in closed and active landfills throughout Colombia
The scale of any of the above applications is a function of the type and amount of solid waste to be
managed. In Colombia’s large municipalities (such as Cali and Medellin), mixed waste processing
facilities could be developed that are designed to treat the most of the residential and commercial solid
waste stream utilizing a variety of different processing systems. Based on the current amount of solid
waste generated in Cali, a comprehensive processing facility would require a daily processing capacity of
about 1,500 tons per day. A moderately sized municipality such as Ibague would require a much smaller
facility (In Ibague, about 250 tons per day). Obviously, as is the case with the existing regional landfills in
Colombia, combinations of municipalities in regional configurations can lead to a wide spectrum in
design processing capacities. Since processing technologies normally experience an economy of scale,
regionalization can help provide the scale necessary to help justify the high investments that may be
required to implement some processing technologies. While the amount of solid waste to be processed
may determine the required design throughput capacity, the extent and nature of available markets for
processing output will, most likely, determine the technical design of the processing system. This
consideration may include limiting the throughput capacity design of a specific facility if there is a limit
on the amount of output material that can be absorbed by available local and regional markets. This
could be the case in designing a processing facility that produces RDF for a local kiln facility, for example,
where the processing design capacity may be limited to produce the amount of RDF that can be
effectively marketed.
Logically, the strength and availability of local markets (and the resulting value for recovered energy,
recyclables, RDF, or compost) will define the viability and sustainability of any technology applications. If
there are no market outlets for recovered energy, for example, it would not make sense to implement
an energy recovery facility. Similarly, low revenues that may be available from selling recovered
commodities can have a major impact on economic viability of some technologies. In Colombia where a
significant proportion of electricity generation is derived through hydroelectric sources, the market
value of recovered electricity from a waste to energy facility is expected to be lower than that which
could be derived from a WTE facility constructed in a location where competing high-cost electricity
from fossil fuel generation sources are offset.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
83
Figure 19: Mixed Solid Waste Processing Alternatives and Outputs
The schematic above provides an illustration of the processing functions and outputs that may be
derived through conventional mixed solid waste processing system designs. CCAP views that the
processing path shown in red in the schematic is the most probable processing scenario that may be
viable in Colombia.
There are a number of commercially available processing technologies and systems that are capable of
achieving the processing and outputs illustrated in the above schematic. Many of these have been
successfully used in a variety of SWM settings throughout the world. For reference purposes, additional
descriptive information on alternative SWM technologies and processes can be found at the following
internet link which presents a detailed SWM manual prepared by the United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP). http://www.unep.org/ietc/informationresources/
solidwastemanagementpublication/tabid/79356/default.aspx
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
84
For indicative purposes and for the intent of this assessment, CCAP utilized cost and design performance
data from facilities in other countries similar in size to what would be required in a municipality such as
Cali. This was done solely to assess the impact of prevailing conditions in Colombia on the viability of
alternative technologies and to observe the impact of local factors on economic viability and
sustainability. For comparison purposes, the alternative technical approaches were evaluated in a
manner that focused on product output categories as may be viable in Colombia including energy
markets for electricity, markets for compost from either mixed waste processing (low quality compost)
or source separated organics (high quality compost), markets for recyclables, and outlets for RDF
utilization such as the cement kilns located throughout the country. This assessment sought to
determine the economic viability of the various approaches within the specific economic circumstances
(landfill disposal tipping fees, energy value determined by current sources of electricity, recyclable
revenues currently derived by the informal sector, etc.) applicable to the evaluation case.
Subsequent to the assessment and the review of market factors, a potential processing scenario was
defined to further refine CCAP’s understanding of the impediments that exist for implementing any
mixed waste recovery technology in Colombia. Based on this assessment, the most probable commodity
production path was identified and is shown in the above output schematic.
Clearly, the economic viability of any processing approach will be a function of the value of recovered
commodities and the total cost of deriving them. In evaluating the mixed municipal solid waste
processing scenario, CCAP attempted to relate expected costs to derive these output materials to the
competing costs of existing core disposal services. The source separation scenario for organics and
recyclables was subjected to the same evaluation to determine the viability of this approach and the
potential effect that it may have on GHG emissions.
In conjunction with the processing and source separation scenarios, other SWM processes such as
collection and transport can also be enhanced to provide GHG mitigation benefits. In addition, the
potential impacts of Extended Product Responsibility (EPR) policies and construction and demolition
waste management were also evaluated to determine their possible effect on GHG mitigation as a
component of a comprehensive Waste NAMA in Colombia. CCAP’s findings concerning these later two
issues are presented in the Annex of this report.
GHG Effects and Mitigation - The ability to estimate GHG emissions from existing and future SWM
processes to determine their overall climate change impact and to meet MRV requirements is an
important element of a successful Waste NAMA. This has led to considerable research aimed at defining
an accurate and practical protocol for estimating emissions from SWM scenarios such as those listed
above. Some SWM management technologies (such as conventional waste to energy mass burn
incinerators, for example) have an inherent ability to accurately measure most of the direct emissions
derived during processing through annual stack emission tests and continuous emission monitors that
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
85
provide an accurate and continuous means for monitoring primary emissions. However, controlled and
uncontrolled landfills and dump sites (and processing systems such as mechanical processing and
composting facilities) do not have this monitoring ability to directly measure emissions. However, this
does not mean that an effective means for monitoring GHG impact as a component of an effective
Waste NAMA is not required.
For assessment purposes, the full GHG impact of SWM processes needs to consider two types of
mitigation elements. Since most SWM processes are a source of GHG emissions, the net effect of these
processes must be considered where:
Net Emissions = Direct Emissions - Avoided Emissions
Both the direct and avoided emissions are important elements in determining the actual net effect of
new SWM processes and facilities. For various purposes, research and evaluations of the effect of
various SWM technologies and approaches on GHG emissions have been completed by a number of
international agencies including Environment Canada and United States Environmental Protection
Agency. In these evaluations, direct and avoided emissions were characterized as follows:
•
•
Direct emissions: The emissions that occur as a direct consequence of a particular SWM
activity including, for example, methane from landfills or carbon dioxide from stack emissions
resulting from the incineration of waste materials.
Avoided emissions: The emissions that are avoided as a direct or indirect consequence of the
SWM activity such as the emissions from energy production using other fuels due to the
production of primary materials that could be eliminated through the use of recovered
recyclable materials.
In defining avoided emissions, the life cycle steps of any product that eventually becomes a component
of the municipal solid waste stream must be considered. The various component materials in MSW
represent what is left over after a long series of product life cycle steps including:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Extraction and processing of raw materials;
Manufacture of products;
Transportation of materials and products to markets;
Use by consumers; and
Waste management (including collection, transport, processing, and disposal of residual
material).
Each of the above steps along a product’s life cycle chain impacts GHG emissions. As a result, solid waste
management decisions can help to reduce GHGs by affecting the various steps of the life cycle chain
including:
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
86
1. Energy consumption associated with making, transporting, using, and disposing of a product or
material that becomes a component of an MSW stream.
2. Non-energy related manufacturing emissions, such as the CO2 released when limestone is
converted to lime in the case of steel manufacturing.
3. CH4 emissions from landfills where some of the organic components of a municipal solid waste
stream are placed and anaerobically decompose.
4. Direct CO2 and N2O emissions derived from combustion of solid waste at WTE facilities or
through the combustion of refuse derived fuel.
5. Carbon sequestration through the natural or manmade processes that remove carbon from the
atmosphere and store it for long periods or permanently in a physical location or condition
where it will not contribute to climate change impacts.
The first four of the above mechanisms physically increase GHG emissions while the fifth (carbon
sequestration) reduces GHG concentrations by removing carbon-based CO2 from the atmosphere. Using
life-cycle considerations, the avoided emissions reflected in the above listing can be translated into CO2equivalents and factored into estimates of GHG emission impacts due to new or existing SWM
processes. The actual net reduction or increase in GHG emissions is a consequence of two factors
including: 1) the amount of decrease in the direct emissions associated with the process and 2) the
amount of increase in avoided emissions. Avoided energy production can also include contribution from
landfills where methane is recovered and used as an energy source, thereby substituting alternative
(mostly fossil-fuel based for this element to be consequential) energy production.
Although the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released guidelines for estimating GHG
emissions, there is still some uncertainty related to the actual emission levels that can be realized given
the complexity of the physical issues involved. While research on waste degradation chemical, biological
and physical dynamics in typical landfill environments have been completed, the inherent variability in
waste characteristics and landfill configurations/operations limits the value of this research in predicting
reliable and accurate results in all locations. However, this does not eliminate the need for an inventory
of GHG emission from various SWM processes and facilities in order to gauge their environmental and
economic impact particularly during planning and decision-making activities.
Currently, most countries estimate GHG emissions for various SWM applications based on IPCC
guidelines. However, as more experience is gained in monitoring GHG mitigation effects through waste
sector initiatives in a number of countries with significantly different physical characteristics (solid waste
composition, climate, etc.), the means for estimating emission levels will become more reliable and
accurate. To this point, the predominant estimation schemes for GHG emissions and mitigation effects
were developed in and for industrialized countries. As SWM initiatives in other countries evolve,
additional performance measurement schemes may evolve that are more applicable to specific locales
in non-industrialized countries. For this assessment, a model developed by IFEU Heidelberg was utilized
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
87
to evaluate the relative impact of investigated scenarios. This model is the basis for the net impacts
reported in this assessment.
Actual GHG mitigation impacts associated with any new SWM processes and facilities in any country is a
function of existing specific circumstances and the net impact created by implementing the new
processes and facilities. In developing countries, existing GHG emissions will be significantly affected by
the nature of existing disposal facilities. As improved landfill designs and operating standards are
developed, countrywide methane emissions may actually increase until landfill gas collection and
treatment systems are also incorporated into the improved landfills. This is the evolving situation in
Colombia as new landfills have come into service over the past 7 years. In this assessment, the
estimation of GHG effects in the test case is based on comparing the new ISWM processes to emissions
realized at the Cali landfill which includes an active landfill gas collection and treatment system. If this
were not the case, the net GHG mitigation effects would be greater. The following presents basic
parameters associated with the GHG impact of various solid waste management processes relevant to
this assessment.
6.1 Waste Reduction
Any initiative that reduces the amount of municipal solid waste that must be managed will have a
positive impact on GHG emissions. Accordingly, the evolution and adoption of EPR programs will have
the effect of possibly decreasing the amount of generated solid waste through producer supported
modifications in product manufacturing and packaging as well as in the development or support of endof-product life programs that foster recycling and reuse. This is discussed in greater detail in the Annex
of this report.
6.2 Collection and Transport
GHG emissions are derived from collection and transport processes. The level of emissions associated
with collection and transport has increased in the last 30 years due to a general increase in the amount
of solid waste that must be managed and the need to transport solid waste to more distant locations
where landfills have been developed outside of urban areas in remote locations. While the actual GHG
emission levels from collection and transport processes are relatively small, they are still estimated to be
approximately 1/3 of the net GHG emissions for the entire solid waste sector. This is particularly the
case in developing countries where collection and transfer vehicles are often utilized well beyond their
useful lives and are poorly maintained. A number of alternative approaches to the collection and
transport process that can be considered as a means for mitigating GHG emissions including:
1. Development of transfer systems - Transfer systems (such as that in the Cali region) can
increase the effectiveness of collection programs and decrease travel requirements for
collection vehicles thereby reducing GHG emissions.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
88
2. Better operations and maintenance of collection and transport vehicles - This can
improve the efficiency and performance of collection and transport vehicles thereby decreasing
GHG emissions.
3. Alternative fuels - Landfill methane and biogas are being explored as potential alternative
motor vehicle fuels similar to compressed natural gas (CNG) and liquefied natural gas (LNG).
4. Improved diesel engine systems that lower emissions - Improved diesel engine designs
can help to reduce emissions which include particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and
hydrocarbons.
5. Collection route optimization - The optimization of collection routes can maximize tons of
waste collected per mile. This reduces the overall GHG emissions from the collection process. In
addition, truck size and collector performance efficiencies are also factors in ensuring that full
trucks are derived as close as possible to the final disposal location thereby minimizing GHG
emissions.
6.3 Recycling, Processing and Recovery
There are a variety of alternative solid waste processing technologies that have been developed for
processing municipal solid waste streams. The selection of the best technical approach for treating MSW
in any locale is a function of solid waste stream physical characteristics (quantity and composition of the
material to be processed) and the availability of output markets for recovered material and energy endproducts.
There are alternative commercially available and proven technologies that can recover energy from
MSW streams. Conventional waste-to-energy facilities that utilize mass burn incineration (where solid
waste is combusted in the physical condition that it is received at the incineration facility) is a reliable,
common process utilized throughout the world but particularly in industrialized countries such as the
United States, countries of the European Union, and Japan where there are high costs for landfill
disposal. The high cost and scarcity of landfill capacity help to justify the high cost of incineration in
those countries. Because of the high organic content of the typical municipal solid waste in Colombia
(and in many other countries throughout the world) the utilization of mass burn technologies may not
be appropriate without significant preconditioning. The combustibility triangle shown in Figure 20
illustrates the relationship of waste composition ash, combustibles and moisture content that
establishes solid waste combustibility. The shaded area in the triangle represents the waste
characteristics that are necessary for auto-ignition (the ability of the combustion process to continue
solely with the continual addition of the solid waste feedstock). The general physical characteristics of
municipal solid waste in Colombia places its position near to the extremity of the combustible zone.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
89
Figure 20: Mixed Municipal Solid Waste Combustibility Triangle
However, there are a number of alternative technologies by which energy can be recovered from
Colombia's municipal solid waste stream. This includes the segregation and use of sorted dry
combustibles for the production of RDF which may be combusted at offsite locations such as the
numerous cement kilns located throughout Colombia. In addition, there are also a number of emerging
technologies that may be available in the future. Some of these have not yet been commercially proven
with the resulting effect that there is still considerable technical risk associated with utilizing them in a
full-scale application. Because of these high technical risks, these emerging technologies (gasification,
pyrolysis and plasma processing) have not been considered as viable options within this assessment.
Mechanical biological treatment is a common term utilized for a processing approach where both
mechanical separation and biological treatment processes are utilized to derive output products
including recovered materials and energy. There are alternative configurations for MBT systems
particularly in terms of the biological component incorporated into the treatment design. Biological
processes can include anaerobic digestion and composting. Typically, the capital cost associated with
anaerobic digestion facilities is considerably higher than that for compost facilities as a result of their
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
90
increased technical complexity. Accordingly, MBT facilities utilizing anaerobic digestion facilities may not
be cost-effective in some locations while facilities that utilize simpler compost production processes as
the core biological element may lead to project economics that are viable under local conditions.
Naturally, this depends on the viability of available markets for output materials. Mechanical biological
treatment facilities that utilize anaerobic digestion generate biogas which can then be used for direct
purposes or for generation of electricity. However, these systems, along with conventional waste-toenergy technologies, are usually the most costly technologies available for mixed solid waste processing
and, as such, may not be economically viable in Colombia because of low (competing) current disposal
costs and electricity value.
The various technologies that use biological decomposition to produce compost reduce GHG emissions
by sequestering biogenic carbon in soils, improving soil physical properties, adding soil nutrients, and
diverting organic material away from landfill anaerobic processes where methane and carbon dioxide
emissions are generated and emitted. Throughout the world, the organic component of the municipal
waste stream (e.g. paper, cardboard, food waste, garden waste, etc.) ranges from 30-70% of total
municipal waste production. Typically, the organic content of municipal solid waste in Colombia is
approximately 50 to 60% of the total amount collected. If accessible, the recovery and processing of this
organic material could contribute significantly to GHG emissions reduction if processed into marketable
quality compost that complies with Colombia certified compost standards. However, the ultimate value
of processing outputs has to be carefully evaluated within the context of the total cost to achieve it.
Additionally, the ability to process source separated organic materials that have not been contaminated
by contact with other solid waste forms greatly enhances the ability to generate marketable and good
quality compost. This is also generally the case for source separated recyclables since market value is
often determined by the level of contaminants associated with a recyclables delivered to available
markets.
In most cases, the economic viability of solid waste processing facilities will be a function of the value of
derived end-products and the costs associated with achieving them to the required quality standards. A
compost production facility, for example, will not be successful where there is little need, value or
market for the produced compost. Unfortunately, past experience with some mixed MSW compost
facilities have led to situations where initially available markets have ceased taking produced compost as
a result of its poor quality. In Colombia, any compost produced from any processing feedstock must
comply with minimum standards for product certification if the material is to be used for agricultural
purposes. These standards provide the technical and performance basis for any compost facility design
and operations to assure that the value of the output material can be achieved and sustained. In one of
the municipalities evaluated during this assessment (Sogamoso), solid waste material from the local
traditional market is regularly delivered to the current landfill site for processing and production of
compost. However, the lack of operational effectiveness and the poor quality of material received for
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
91
processing has not allowed the municipality to meet certification standards thereby affecting the value
and marketability of the material that they produce.
To evaluate GHG mitigation effects of various recovery approaches, international agencies such as
Environment Canada and the USEPA investigated alternative SWM processes to determine their
individual GHG emission impacts. (While the typical solid waste composition in Colombia is different
than that of typical MSW in Canada and the United States, the relative impact of recovering individual
materials as a component of a mixed solid waste stream is still relevant to the Colombian situation on a
unit basis.)
The Environment Canada evaluation concluded the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
In general, recycling reduces GHG emissions relative to landfilling. The emission reductions, on a
per tonne basis, are quite significant in some cases.
The effect of including or excluding carbon sinks has an important effect on the results for
paper, food scraps, and yard trimmings. For comparisons between combustion and landfilling
for newsprint and yard trimmings, it changes the sign from positive (combustion increases
emissions when carbon sinks are included) to negative (combustion decreases emissions when
carbon sinks are excluded). This is particularly evident for newsprint, which has a large landfill
carbon storage factor.
On a per-ton basis, the metals (aluminum, copper wire, steel), paper, plastic, and several of the
composite materials (PCs, microwaves, white goods), and tires have the greatest magnitude of
negative net emissions through recycling due primarily to reductions in energy use in the raw
material acquisition and manufacturing step and (for paper) forest carbon sinks.
For metals and glass bottles, there is almost no distinction in GHG emissions between any of the
“downstream” waste management methods, i.e., landfilling, combustion, anaerobic digestion,
and composting – with the exception of steel combustion as a result of the ability to recover
metal from incineration process ash residue. For the other materials, such as paper, plastics,
organics, electronics, and tires, the choice of management method can have significant
implications.
The emissions factors for the landfilling of paper and organics are quite sensitive to whether the
landfill has a gas collection system (and to a lesser extent, whether gas capture is accompanied
by flaring or by energy recovery).
Recycling of both metals and plastics is associated with relatively high energy consumption
benefits.
The impact of landfill gas recovery and energy generation is clearly evident when comparing
landfill disposal for forest products and organics. Fine paper in particular has nearly a 1 GJ/tonne
differential when comparing landfills with and without landfill gas collection and energy
generation.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
92
•
The combustion of steel presents some energy benefits due to the recovery of ferrous materials
at the combustion facility and subsequent recycling of the material.
Similarly, the USEPA undertook a study to determine the impact of SWM processes on GHG emissions
and mitigation processes. One of USEPA's primary reasons for undertaking the study was to develop
material-specific GHG emission factors that could be utilized to estimate and measure GHG mitigation
effects based on various ISWM scenarios. These emission factors were not intended to establish
absolute values by which GHG mitigation effects can be determined for application of any solid waste
management process but were intended to provide a means for comparing decisions related to any
particular solid waste management approach in comparison to alternatives. As was the case in the
Environment Canada study, the USEPA evaluation concluded that the effective management of
municipal solid waste presents numerous opportunities for GHG emission mitigations and included the
following:
•
•
•
•
Source reduction, in general, represents an opportunity to reduce GHG emissions in a significant
way. For many materials, the reduction in energy-related CO2 emissions from the raw material
acquisition and manufacturing process, and the absence of emissions from waste management,
combine to reduce GHG emissions more than other options do.
For most materials, recycling represents the second best opportunity to reduce GHG emissions.
For these materials, recycling reduces energy-related CO2 emissions in the manufacturing
process (although not as dramatically as source reduction) and avoids emissions from waste
management. Paper recycling increases the sequestration of forest carbon.
Composting is a management option for food discards and yard trimmings. The net GHG
emissions from composting are lower than landfilling for food discards (composting avoids CH4
emissions), and higher than landfilling for yard trimmings (landfilling is credited with the carbon
storage that results from incomplete decomposition of yard trimmings). Overall, given the
uncertainty in the analysis, the emission factors for composting or combusting these materials
are similar.
The net GHG emissions from combustion of mixed MSW are lower than landfilling mixed MSW
(under national average conditions for landfill gas recovery). Combustors and landfills manage a
mixed waste stream; therefore, net emissions are determined more by technology factors (e.g.,
the efficiency of landfill gas collection systems and combustion energy conversion) than by
material specificity. Material-specific emissions for landfills and combustors provide a basis for
comparing these options with source reduction, recycling, and composting.
6.4. Disposal
Landfill gas is formed as a natural by-product of the anaerobic decomposition of organic waste materials
in landfills. Typically, LFG is composed of about 50% methane, 45% carbon dioxide, and 5% other gases,
including hydrogen sulfide and volatile organic compounds. The pattern of LFG generation is a function
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
93
of the amount of solid waste accumulated and time required for the anaerobic decomposition process
to evolve in the accumulated solid waste mass in the landfill. Methane is a potent GHG, with up to 25
times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide. LFG can also contribute to odor problems and
present health and safety hazards if it is not well controlled. Many landfill sites throughout the world
have installed landfill gas to energy systems to recover the energy value of LFG and to minimize its
environmental effects. In some cases, LFG has been collected and simply combusted through flaring as a
means of treatment. This type of system has been incorporated into some Colombian landfills and has
been the basis for CDM applications prepared on behalf of those landfills. In the United States and the
European Union, flaring systems are utilized to meet regulatory emission standards.
In addition to the consideration of the conventional technologies available for treating landfill gas, there
are a number of other considerations that are being explored in landfill technologies and operations
that may have an impact on gas production and, therefore, on GHG emissions. Some of these include
the following:
Landfill Bioreactors - Bioreactor technologies attempt to control the gas generation process
in landfills by increasing the rate of solid waste decomposition and stabilization. From the
landfill gas generation perspective, a bioreactor design will lead to earlier generation of landfill
gas at a higher production rate thereby increasing the potential technical and economic viability
of landfill gas energy recovery systems. This has the added benefit of also decreasing the time
required for post closure care after the landfill has closed. It may also lead to a favorable
economic impact through the use of leachate as a means for increasing moisture content as part
of the bio-reaction process. In settings where there is high value to landfill airspace, the
accelerated rate of solid waste decomposition helps to also salvage landfill airspace for future
disposal needs through accelerated subsidence.
• Compost as Landfill Cover - Some research has implied that using compost on closed landfills
may reduce methane emissions. This may be appropriate for small landfills where active gas
collection and treatment economics are not viable. This may have the added benefit of
potentially utilizing compost derived from waste diversion processes if more viable markets do
not exist for actual sale of the material.
• Additional Landfill Gas Capture and Energy Recovery – Opportunities may exist to install
landfill gas to energy systems at a number of the existing landfills in Colombia. This may include
landfills that have already installed gas flaring systems through the retrofit of those systems for
energy recovery. In a recent study funded by the United States Trade and Development Agency
(USTDA), an existing landfill treatment (flaring) system was evaluated to determine the potential
of energy recovery in the landfill’s service area. This USTDA funded project in the Valle de
Aburrá region (where Medellin is located) provided insight into some of the factors influencing
waste to energy applications in Colombia. This study can be found at the below link:
http://www.ustda.gov/program/regions/lac/downloads/us/LAC_Task15_ElGuacalLandfill_Nov11.pdf
•
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
94
6.5 Integrated Solid Waste Management Processes
By its nature, integrated solid waste management utilizes different processes to manage various
components of the solid waste stream. The design basis for ISWM systems is often focused on the
recovery of end products that are determined by available market conditions. The specific situations in
the different municipalities in Colombia are such that market conditions are apt to vary significantly with
the result that a viable ISWM program in one locale may be very different than that in another. One of
the opportunities explored during this assessment was the potential for utilizing refuse derived fuel in
the various cement kilns located throughout the country. (A listing of some of the major kilns and their
locations is shown in the Annex 4.) Accordingly, the potential demand for RDF as an alternate fuel in any
region of Colombia may support a recovery focus on the production of RDF.
In addition, an ISWM program does not necessarily mean that all manner of treatment is accomplished
at single facilities. For example, a compost facility developed in one locale may become the destination
for collected organic material from multiple municipalities or from other processing facilities that
provide a means for separating recoverable organics. The evolution of regional landfills and strong
private sector participation in the development of those landfills may provide a basis for developing
regional processing facilities that receive materials from different locales.
6.6 Net GHG Mitigation Effects
The net mitigation effects created by the application of any solid waste management approach in
Colombia are a function of the specific characteristics of individual projects and programs. The amount
of solid waste that is managed and the processes utilized will determine the net GHG emission or
mitigation effects. Accordingly, the overall effect of any specific project will need to be based on the
technical definition and performance criteria for that project including the nature of current processes
and facilities. For example, the active landfill in Cali already collects landfill gas and treats it through
flaring. This establishes the baseline against which alternative recovery processes and facilities must be
evaluated. In locales where landfill gas is not collected and treated, the net effect of new initiatives will
be greater.
In addition, the economic value of the mitigation effects will be a function of the cost associated with
achieving it. Accordingly, the overall costs associated with a solid waste management process will lead
to varying economic values for the GHG mitigation benefits. In some cases, high costs will significantly
decrease the unit value of potential GHG benefits. However, the nature of solid waste management is
such that decisions related to alternative processes will, most likely, be made on a basis of overall
economic viability for individual projects rather than on the economic benefit of the GHG mitigation
effects. However, the unit value of the climate change benefits may be important in increasing the
incentive for supporting agencies in providing assistance for the development of initiatives associated
with a Colombian Waste NAMA.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
95
For evaluation purposes, the following tables present a generalized listing of potential unit GHG
mitigation effects associated with the scenarios and technical configurations previously listed based on
potential project processing capacity consistent with the Cali solid waste stream. This is only intended to
be illustrative and the individual impact of potential projects will need to be determined on a case by
case basis and on general understanding of existing baseline conditions in Colombia (solid waste
characteristics, power generation sources, etc.)
Key Assumptions from GHG Model
Total Waste Amount
Population
Waste Composition
Organics
Recyclables
Other
Waste Characteristics
GHG emission factor for generation of
electricity
% of collected landfill gas vented
% of collected landfill gas flared
495000
2294293
64%
27%
8.6%
High water
content
155 CO2-eq/KWh
20%
80%
Table 28
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
96
Alternatives
1. Waste To Energy
2. MBT (Anaerobic
Dig.)
3. MBT (Windrowed
Compost)
4. MBT (In-Vessel
Compost)
5. MRF (With RDF
Generation)
6. Source Separation Organics
7. Source Separation Recyclables
8. Landfill Gas
Recovery*
GHG Reduction
($US/ton CO2e )
Absolute emission
reductions/yr (t)
GHG Reduction
(tCO2e/ton of
processed waste)
Best
Avg
Worst
Best
Avg
Worst
Best
Avg
Worst
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
53
96
138
512,801
512,801
512,801
1.04
1.04
1.04
31
52
73
667,297
667,297
667,297
1.35
1.35
1.35
4
21
38
667,297
667,297
667,297
1.35
1.35
1.35
14
30
48
667,297
667,297
667,297
1.35
1.35
1.35
10
27
43
721,232
721,232
721,232
1.46
1.46
1.46
5
36
66
297,162
297,162
297,162
0.6
0.6
0.6
6
39
73
162,287
162,287
162,287
0.33
0.33
0.33
n/a
n/a
n/a
Table 29: Greenhouse Gas Impact of 8 Alternatives
* Landfill gas recovery was not included in the model because its economics are very site specific.
Table 29 summarizes the estimated GHG impact for implementing the 7 alternatives identified in this
assessment report. The above tables are intended to provide insight into what impact various
technologies and waste management strategies may have on GHG emissions in the waste sector in
Colombia when compared to the standard landfill disposal method, with an active landfill gas collection
and treatment system. It is important to note that these figures are estimations and will change
depending on location specific conditions and a more detailed on-the-ground analysis. For example the
level of GHG emission mitigation would increase significantly if the landfill from which solid waste is
diverted had no landfill gas collection and treatment system.
Additionally, the model was unable to incorporate some technical details of the identified technologies,
such as the GHG impact of biogas generation as a byproduct of the anaerobic digestion facility. Some
general observations can be made, however, regarding the above summary. The more capital intense
facilities (options 1 &2) have a much higher GHG reduction cost relative to options 3-7, which is a key
consideration when considering financially viable waste management scenarios. Options 3-5 have lower
GHG reduction costs due to lower capital costs and a relatively high emissions factor (tCO2e/ton of
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
97
processed waste) because they divert methane-producing organics from the landfill and capture the
indirect emission reductions from recycling. Option number 5 (MRF with RDF generation) has a
particularly high absolute emissions reduction and emissions factor, in part, because of the additional
fuel produced that could offset more carbon intense fuel sources, such as the coal used in cement kiln
operations. While options 6 & 7 have low GHG reduction costs, their absolute emissions reductions are
relatively low, due to the lower yearly tonnage processed at these facilities and the fact that they divert
only organics or recyclables but not both at the same facility.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
98
Section 7: Economic and Financial Considerations
Economic viability and sustainability is a critical element in the development of ISWM services and
facilities that can achieve emissions reductions. The enhancement of core service provision and the
development of new facilities and programs will often increase the overall costs of SWM in
municipalities. This was undoubtedly the case in Colombia when new sanitary landfills were developed
to replace the open dumps that were commonly used for disposal. Unfortunately, this is also apt to be
the case in developing new solid waste diversion programs and facilities. Accordingly, the development
of the means for accomplishing the various programs that could increase ISWM functions and, as a
result, achieve emissions reductions will be a function of development drivers that must be sufficient to
support and cause the actual implementation of the necessary programs and facilities. The following is a
listing of the standard SWM development drivers for the physical activities required to develop effective
ISWM programs. Some of the final Waste NAMA recommendations resulting from this assessment are
aimed at increasing the strength of the following ISWM project drivers.
•
•
•
•
•
Regulatory - Are laws and regulations in effect (and enforced) that mandate specific physical
actions? (The landfill directives in the EU are an example of an extremely strong regulatory
driver.)
Political - Is there strong and vocal political support or opposition for particular SWM
approaches and initiatives?
Technical - Are standard integrated SWM technologies and processes technically appropriate
for the local setting?
Economic - Are there economic reasons for developing individual ISWM projects based on the
high cost of alternatives? Is preferential financing or governmental economic incentives
available for any particular ISWM approach?
Social - Is there strong local public or media support or opposition for new or enhanced ISWM
projects?
Each of these drivers can have an important influence on national and local perspectives on SWM
decisions. In particular, the economic aspects associated with individual SWM programs and projects
become extremely important and are often the principal driver or impediment to ISWM project
development. A good example of an effective economic driver is the decision made in Cali to construct a
new transfer station to optimize their solid waste collection programs. CCAP expects that such a
decision would have had a significant positive impact on the cost of collection and transport in Medellin.
Unfortunately, experience throughout the world has shown that the development of ISWM projects and
programs have often led to increased costs that must be offset by the perceived value of the benefits
derived. This is expected to be the case in Colombia as well. The ability to bear these increased costs will
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
99
be an important factor in determining the viability of some of the scenarios and technical configurations
available to municipalities to achieve the desired results stipulated in their SWM plans.
The above, in general, presents the basis by which projects and initiatives inherent to a Colombian
Waste NAMA must be evaluated. However, it also illustrates the need for clearly establishing the
economic viability of any new process or facility created to increase solid waste diversion and
processing. The need to accomplish the desired results to an appropriate performance and output
standard establishes the minimum technical requirements for the process. In turn, sufficient economic
resources must be available to sustain any developed program or facility. This does not change in
situations where either the public or private sector provides the necessary services or facilities. In each
case, economic resources need to be sufficient to accomplish and maintain the desired level of service
for the entire design life of a new ISWM facility. In many examples throughout the world, facilities or
new programs have been implemented that have not been economically sustainable with the result that
they have failed even after the significant capital investment to create them. This is somewhat seen in
the current operational status of the recovery facilities constructed in Ibague and Santa Marta.
Accordingly, this emphasizes the need to clearly understand the economic ramifications of any decision
made in developing a new SWM process or facility. This is the basis for the detailed feasibility studies
that are required prior to deciding whether to go ahead with a capital intensive ISWM project.
7.1 ECONOMIC VIABILITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
In order to evaluate the prospects of the various scenarios and technical configurations available to
municipalities in Colombia for achieving ISWM and emissions reductions, CCAP undertook a preliminary
economic assessment of technical alternatives based on possible configurations for mixed waste
processing facilities as well as source separation programs for organics and recyclables. To this end,
CCAP developed a basic economic model to investigate the impact of the important variables that will
affect the economic viability of specific applications. This included variables such as: possible financial
terms for capital facilities, output revenues from sale of output commodities, capital and operating
costs, recovery potential based on prevailing solid waste characteristics and technology capabilities,
output market characteristics, etc. In considering any specific projects, each of the important variables
potentially affecting technical and economic viability must be carefully evaluated and considered in an
effective feasibility study.
For the purpose of this assessment, a generalized throughput capacity was selected as a basis for
investigating the possible economic ramifications of various technology applications. For this purpose, a
throughput capacity of 1,500 tons per day (the approximate amount of solid waste generated each day
in Cali and Medellin was utilized solely to test the impact of project variables for various technical
configurations. General results of the economic model showed that, in all cases, increased costs would
be expected as a result of the implementation of conventional waste processing technologies above and
beyond the current cost of disposal.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
100
Summary of Economic Model Results – Through this assessment, CCAP reviewed eight (8) ISWM
facility and process alternatives that may serve as technical elements of an integrated Waste NAMA as
part of Colombia’s current policy actions in the solid waste management sector. While the assessment’s
technical and economic aspects focused on the Cali solid waste stream, the assumptions and findings
inherent to the developed economic model can be adjusted to the conditions present in similarly sized
cities such as Medellin or to smaller service areas found in smaller cities or regional configurations in
Colombia.
Some of the assumptions made by CCAP for the economic analysis used data received from the
municipal authority responsible for SWM in Cali (DAGMA) while other assessment assumptions were
derived from relevant national and international sources. Ultimately, the detailed evaluation that will be
necessary to determine the feasibility of specific projects will need to be based on data that defines the
specific circumstances in any service area for a planned facility or program.
It should be noted that due to the complex nature of waste management technologies and the
significant impact that location can have on costs and revenue, this economic analysis should be
considered only as indicative to help explore initial economic viability of the application of various
technologies and SWM approaches. It should also be noted that the cost data presented in this report
relates to an assessment of economic factors consistent with a waste stream in a city similar to Cali.
However, it is not intended to fully economically evaluate the exact prospects for technology
applications in Cali which may require a detailed feasibility study. However, the economic model
developed by CCAP for this assessment can be utilized as a tool for other cities in Colombia if local
factors and scale issues are taken into account.
Economic Model Assumptions - A summary of the key assumptions can be found in table 30. These
illustrate the categories of technical, financial, revenue, and cost factors assumed by CCAP to develop
the economic model. The values attributed to these key assumptions reflect initial scoping research
performed by CCAP obtained from a variety of sources including international best practices, official
Colombian government documents, and standard industry practices. (A more comprehensive list of
sources can be found in annex 7) While imprecise, the purpose in this scoping study was to obtain a
range of numbers based on accessible data that would help provide a best case, average case, and worst
case scenario. These scenarios then guided an initial evaluation of the proposed waste management
alternatives, in addition to other country specific conditions such as current waste management
practices, national and local waste management priorities, and political leadership.
The assumptions used in the economic analysis were divided into two separate scenarios related to 1)
mixed solid waste processing and 2) source separated material collection and processing. Some of the
key differences in these assumptions are 1) the annual tonnage of waste being processed 2) the market
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
101
value of high and low quality compost 3) the recovery rate and value of recyclables and 4) the percent of
compost generated from 1 ton of processed mixed solid waste. Due to the smaller percentage of the
waste stream being captured and processed in a source separation scenario, less tonnage will be
processed on an annual basis. Also, due to the material pre-screening and independent collection
inherent to a source separation program, outputs such as compost and recyclables will be of a higher
grade and quality and are, therefore, expected to have a higher market value. Additionally, a source
separated program would be more effective at recovering a greater percentage of available recyclables
in the solid waste stream as well as being more effective at converting the processed waste into
compost due to the pre-separation and the resulting lower level of contamination.
Summary of Key Assumptions
Units
Daily Processing Capacity – Cali
tons/day
Number of Processing Days/year
Technical
Financial
Revenues
Costs
Days
Solid Waste Composition
%
Recyclables Recovery Rate
%
Unit generation - electricity WTE
KwH/ton processed
Unit generation - electricity AD
KwH/ton processed
Unit generation – compost
tons/ton processed
Unit generation – RDF
tons/ton processed
Annual Interest Rate
%
Term of Loan
Years
Tipping Fee
USD/ton
Unit Revenue from Electricity
USD/KwH
Unit Revenue from Compost
USD/ton
Unit Revenue from RDF
USD/ton
Unit Revenue from Recyclables
USD/kg
Facility Capital Cost
Facility Operating Cost
million USD
USD/ton processed
Table 30
The assumptions for financing a capital project in Colombia for both the mixed solid waste and source
separated waste scenarios are held constant in the economic assessment at a 7% annual interest rate
for 10 years in the best case, average case, and worst case. The financial terms (10 years at 7%) is based
on previous energy projects sponsored by IDEA (Instituto para el Desarrollo de Antioquia) that have
been financed. The debt to equity ratio was assumed to be 100% debt financing for all three cases. The
financial assumptions were held constant to highlight the economic conditions of each alternative,
rather than to investigate the impact of different financing scenarios (which could have a significant
impact on the economic viability of proposed projects). The economic model can be adapted to
investigate the impact of various interest rates, loan terms, and debt to equity ratios. However, it was
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
102
considered outside the scope of this initial assessment. Favorable or unfavorable financing terms could
have a major impact on the economic feasibility of each alternative and should be considered in future
evaluations and feasibility studies.
The key assumptions and results of the assessment economic analysis are shown below. Again, these
are only intended to serve as a basis for understanding the relative importance of the variables that will
establish the economic viability of alternative approaches in various local areas.
Mixed Waste
Key Assumptions
Best
Case
Avg
Case
Worst
Case
Other Assumptions:
Annual Interest Rate
7%
7%
7%
Annual Tons of MSW
Term of Loan (Years)
10
10
10
16
0.066
41
14
0.057
21
12
0.049
-
30
15
-
Tipping Fee
Price of Electricity ($/kWh)
Price of Compost ($/ton)
Price of Refuse Derived Fuel
($/ton)
Price of Recyclables ($/ton):
Paper
Newspaper
Cardboard
Glass
Aluminum
Scrap metal
Plastics
140
117
93
36
30
24
1,344
180
168
1,120
150
140
896
120
110
Daily Processing Capacity
(tons)
Annual Days of Processing
% compost from ton MSW
KwH/ton MSW WTE
495,000
1,500
330
10%
500
KwH/ton MSW AD
150
% of RDF per ton of MSW
40
Table 31: Mixed Waste (Alternatives 1-6) (prices in USD)
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
103
Mixed Waste
Key Assumptions
Best
Case
Avg
Case
Worst
Case
Other Assumptions:
Annual Interest Rate
7%
7%
7%
Annual Tons of MSW
Term of Loan (Years)
10
10
10
16
0.066
81
14
0.057
41
12
0.049
-
30
15
-
Tipping Fee
Price of Electricity ($/kWh)
Price of Compost ($/ton)
Price of Refuse Derived Fuel
($/ton)
Price of Recyclables ($/ton):
Paper
Newspaper
Cardboard
Glass
Aluminum
Scrap metal
Plastics
140
117
93
36
30
24
1,344
180
168
1,120
150
140
896
120
110
Daily Processing Capacity
(tons)
Annual Days of Processing
% compost from ton MSW
KwH/ton MSW WTE
495,000
1,500
330
10%
500
KwH/ton MSW AD
150
% of RDF per ton of MSW
40
Table 32: Source Separated Waste (Alternatives 6 & 7) (prices in USD)
Summary of Alternatives –Table 33 is a summary of the economic results for the eight previously
described alternatives that are included in this scoping analysis. The first five alternatives assume the
processing of a mixed municipal solid waste stream under traditional collection conditions, while
alternatives 6 and 7 assume separation at source of organic and recyclable materials. Economic results
for alternative 8 (landfill gas recovery) are not shown in the model results because the economic aspects
of such applications are very site specific and require individual analysis.
Based on economic analysis performed by CCAP, conventional waste to energy and anaerobic digestion
(options 1 &2) are, most likely, not viable in Colombia for economic reasons. (The application of
conventional commercially available waste to energy technologies may also not be viable for technical
reasons associated with the high organic content of the solid waste to be processed.) Options 3 through
7 could be economically feasible depending on specific local circumstances and market factors and,
therefore, should be further evaluated as a potential component of an integrated Waste NAMA in
Colombia.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
104
Alternatives
1. Waste To Energy
2. MBT (Anaerobic
Digestion)
3. MBT (Windrowed
Compost)
4. MBT (In-Vessel
Compost)
5. MRF (With RDF
Generation)
6. Source Separation Organics
7. Source Separation Recyclables
8. Landfill Gas
Recovery*
Cost to Treat MSW
(USD/ton)
GHG Reduction
(USD/ton CO2e )
GHG Reduction (ton
CO2e/ton of
processed waste)
Best
Avg
Worst
Best
Avg
Worst
Best
Avg
Worst
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
Case
-55
-99
-143
53
96
138
1.04
1.04
1.04
-42
-70
-98
31
52
73
1.35
1.35
1.35
-6
-28
-51
4
21
38
1.35
1.35
1.35
-19
-41
-64
14
30
48
1.35
1.35
1.35
-15
-39
-63
10
27
43
1.46
1.46
1.46
-3
-21
-40
5
36
66
0.6
0.6
0.6
-6
-39
-73
6
39
73
0.33
0.33
0.33
n/a
n/a
n/a
Table 33
* Landfill gas recovery was not included in the model because its economics are very site specific.
The following is a summary of the results shown in table 33.
Waste to Energy & Anaerobic Digestion (Options 1 &2) - The high organic (and resulting moisture)
content of typical municipal solid waste in Colombia prevents conventional incineration technologies to
effectively combust the solid waste without significant preconditioning of the waste prior to direct
combustion. In addition, the high capital and operating costs associated with these systems and typical
air pollution control systems normally utilized would significantly increase the cost of solid waste
management in the locales where they would be developed. Similarly, the utilization of mixed solid
waste Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities that utilize anaerobic digestion as the core
biological process would also be cost prohibitive based on the expected capital and operating costs of
such systems. This is demonstrated in the above economic summary table where the waste to energy
and anaerobic digestion alternatives result in the highest cost per ton of solid waste processed. In
addition to the high capital and operating and maintenance costs of these facilities, the expected low
value for recovered electricity (0.049 to 0.066 per KwH) and questionable compost markets for mixed
solid waste derived compost act as further significant barriers to the financial viability of these options.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
105
Table 34 illustrates MBT (Compost), MRF (With RDF Generation), Source Separation-Organics, Source
Separation-Recyclables, Landfill Gas Collection and Treatment (Options 3 through 8) - A number of
these alternatives may be a technical component of a composite mixed solid waste processing facility
utilizing various treatment processes as will be defined in the proposed integrated Waste NAMA model.
3. MBT
(Windrowed
Compost)
MIN AVG
MAX
Capital Cost (millions
USD)
COSTS ($ per ton MSW)
Operation &
Maintenance
Debt Payment
TOTAL COSTS
REVENUES (USD/ton)
Tipping Fee
Electricity
Compost
Refuse Derived Fuel
Recyclables:
- Paper
- Cardboard
- Glass
- Aluminum
- Scrap metal
- Plastics
- Plastic Bags
TOTAL REVENUE
Estimated Revenue less
Cost (USD/ton of MSW)
4. MBT
(In-Vessel Compost)
MIN AVG MAX
53
70
5. MRF
(With RDF
Generation)
MIN AVG MAX
25
43
60
35
Best
Case
Avg
Case
Worst
Case
Best
Case
25
7
32
37
12
49
50
17
67
35
10
45
47
15
62
60
20
80
40
9
49
50
14
64
60
19
79
16
14
12
16
14
12
16
14
12
4.1
2.1
0
4.1
2.1
0
12
6
0
Avg Worst
Case Case
32
50
67
Best Avg Worst
Case Case Case
1.82
0.54
0.13
0.85
0.16
2.56
3.47
26
1.52
0.45
0.11
0.71
0.13
2.13
2.89
21
1.22
0.36
0.09
0.56
0.11
1.71
2.31
16
1.82
0.54
0.13
0.85
0.16
2.56
3.47
26
1.52
0.45
0.11
0.71
0.13
2.13
2.89
21
1.22
0.36
0.09
0.56
0.11
1.71
2.31
16
1.82
0.54
0.13
0.85
0.16
2.56
3.47
34
1.52
0.45
0.11
0.71
0.13
2.13
2.89
25
1.22
0.36
0.09
0.56
0.11
1.71
2.31
16
-6
-28
-51
-19
-41
-64
-15
-39
-63
Table 34
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
106
•
•
•
MBT (Windrowed Compost). A mechanical biological treatment facility with a windrowed
compost component as the primary biological element may be a viable alternative to pursue as
part as an integrated Waste NAMA because of its lower capital cost (25-60 million USD based on
the scenario evaluated in the model) and low cost per ton of CO2e reduction ($4/ton in the best
case scenario). A key sensitivity in the economic analysis of this technology is the value and
marketability of the compost produced. As compost markets in Colombia are highly fragmented
and prices are volatile, a full market study is needed to ensure sufficient demand for the lowgrade compost that may be generated in this type of MBT facility when processing a mixed solid
waste stream.
MBT (In-Vessel Compost). A MBT facility with an in-vessel composting technology application
shares some of the same favorable aspects of the windrow composting facility. While In-vessel
systems are more capital intensive (35-70 million USD based on the scenario evaluated in the
assessment) than the windrow composting approach, their advantage is that they require less
space, have lower processing times (3-28 days) and better control of odor and leachate.
However, compost values and sufficient demand will determine the economic feasibility of this
technology as was the case in evaluation of the windrow and aerobic composting approach.
MRF (with RDF Generation). There is a positive economic case for the inclusion of Materials
Recovery Facilities where Refused Derived Fuel (RDF) is generated in the development of the
integrated Waste NAMA, especially when considering the potential demand for RDF in some
Colombian communities where cement kilns are located. While these facilities may be more
expensive with capital costs between 32 to 67 million USD for the evaluated scenario, market
conditions for RDF in cities such as Sogamoso offer an opportunity to offset high capital and
operating & maintenance costs and achieve considerable GHG reduction impacts (1.46 ton
CO2e/ton processed waste) through energy substitution. Cities or regions that have robust
cement industries that rely on fossil fuels for kiln operation may be suited for RDF use as an
alternate fuel. Assessing market technical and market conditions for RDF in each local area will
be critical for assessing the economic feasibility of this technology in various local settings. In
addition, regulatory issues will need to be clearly evaluated and addressed to assure that the
proper regulatory approvals can be secured for use of the refuse derived fuel in the cement kiln
applications.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
107
Capital Cost (millions USD)
COSTS (USD per ton MSW)
Operation & Maintenance
Collection Costs
Debt Payment
TOTAL COSTS WITH COLLECTION
REVENUES (USD/ton)
Tipping Fee
Compost
Refuse Derived Fuel
Recyclables:
- Paper
- Cardboard
- Plastic
- Bags
- Scrap Metal
- Glass
TOTAL REVENUE
REVENUE MINUS COSTS WITH
COLLECTION (USD/ton)
Source Separation
(Organics)
MIN AVG
MAX
3.5
3.5
3.5
Source Separation
(Recycling)
MIN AVG
MAX
9
11
13
Best
Case
10
32
10
52
Avg
Case
10
32
10
52
Worst
Case
10
32
10
52
Best
Case
40
64
26
130
Avg
Case
55
64
32
151
Worst
Case
70
64
38
172
16
32
14
16
12
0
16
14
12
28.3
1.9
15.5
43.8
8.2
0.1
112
25.1
1.7
13.8
38.9
7.3
0.1
99
-39
-73
48
30
12
31.4
2.1
17.3
48.6
9.1
0.1
125
-3
-21
-40
-6
Table 35
•
•
Source Separation and Processing of Organics. The economic feasibility of the source
separation organics (SSO) alternative is highly dependent on the generation and sale of the high
quality compost which can be produced through composting source separated organics. It
should be noted that collection costs are site specific and it is assumed that any SSO program
will utilize the route structure of the existing waste management collection system to the
degree possible and possibly decrease the requirements (frequency, etc.) of the conventional
collection process for the generator sources where organic materials are independently
collected. This alternative is also considered an important component of any Colombian
integrated Waste NAMA because it is consistent with the existing waste management strategies
and goals as commonly stipulated in the PGIRS plans of many Colombian municipalities.
Source Separation and Sale of Recyclables. Strong markets for recovered recyclables exist
in Colombia, which may provide a basis for developing a program that formally collects source
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
108
•
separated recyclable materials. However, this approach will, most likely, directly compete with
the existing informal sector recycling process (which currently collects about 10% of the total
waste stream in Colombia). This may make it difficult to formally collect available recyclable
materials set out by generators for collection. Source separation set-outs could provide a
greater opportunity for informal recyclers to simply take the material prior to a formal collection
process thereby affecting the recovery rate that could be achieved through the formal source
separation process. Therefore, the amount of recyclable material available for recovery was cut
by 50% in the economic model to reflect the potential impact of the informal sector.
Landfill Gas Collection and Treatment. In addition to the above, the possible installation of
landfill gas to energy systems in landfills with no landfill gas collection and treatment systems
could lead to significant GHG mitigation benefits. A recent study funded by the United States
Trade and Development Agency related to the CIS El Guacal landfill site in the greater Medellin
region concluded that an enhancement of the existing landfill gas collection and treatment
system to recover energy is economically feasible based on the continued receipt of the current
amount of solid waste at the site throughout the life of the project. Similar situations at other
landfills in Colombia would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The GHG mitigation
benefits associated with this type of application would be limited to the avoided GHG emissions
that would be accrued as a result of the energy generation using the landfill gas as a fuel source.
In considering the above recommended options (3 through 8) as part of an integrated Waste NAMA in
Colombia, there are factors that could significantly affect or reverse the negative numbers shown in the
above summary table:
•
•
Reduced collection and transport costs. Although the model already factors in avoided
disposal costs by considering the avoided tipping fee as potential revenue, it does not include
avoided collection and transportation costs. The collection and transport system is very site
specific depending on where a mixed waste processing facility would be located in relationship
to the current landfill site. There could be significant cost savings and an increase in the
operational efficiency in the collection and transport system (which in Cali represents 78% of
total SWM costs, or USD 42/ton as defined by the current tariff assessment in Cali). These
savings could be passed on from municipalities to SWM service providers to incentivize
diversion of solid waste going to landfills.
Tariff reform. Incentives provided to municipalities or service providers could be greatly
enhanced by the upcoming tariff reform process. It is anticipated that, at a minimum, tariff
reform will seek to allocate tariff funds to recovery projects based on the avoided costs for both
disposal and collection/transport elements of the tariff allocation. If the government decided to
include an incentive element to the tariff to support recovery projects and initiatives, this could
also reduce the additional costs associated with recovery projects. However, if the CRA seeks to
accomplish tariff reform without increase tariff charges to generators, the economic reason for
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
109
•
•
diverting solid waste components is reduced and the added costs associated with recovery
processes will need to be offset through another funding mechanism.
Reduced need for future landfills. Deferred capital investments in landfill expansion due to
decreased landfill airspace utilization may also result since landfill airspace will be utilized at a
slower rate because of the diversion of solid waste components from landfills.
More attractive financing terms. Especially for capital-intensive facilities, the viability of each
scenario is highly dependent on financing terms such as interest rates, loan term, and debt to
equity ratios. The Government of Colombia, either local or national, could also drive the
diversion of waste away from landfills by providing concessional terms to ISWM projects.
Incentives for renewable energy could also boost the viability of those scenarios that produce
electricity or use RDF as an alternate fuel (RDF).
7.2 COLOMBIA'S CURRENT TARIFF STRUCTURE AND ALLOCATION
In 2010, the SSPD completed a study of tariff allocations affecting solid waste management services
based on information reported by 135 solid waste service providers in Colombia. The SSPD calculated
the cost of each component of the solid waste service tariff, divided according to value chain service into
four components including: 1) sweeping and cleaning of public areas, 2) collection and transportation, 3)
disposal, and 4) service billing costs. The collection and transportation component of the tariff allocation
is a major proportion of the tariff bill (42%), followed by the sweeping and cleaning of public areas
(28%), and disposal (17%). The billing cost component had the lowest share of the tariff allocation,
(15%). Current tariff allocations for 3 of the investigative municipalities are shown in the following table.
Current Tariff Allocations in Evaluated Municipalities
Cali • 2012
Medellín • 2012
Concept/Tariff Component
Units
COP
USD
COP
USD
Street Sweeping
$/KM
21,200
12
21,600
12
Collection and Transport
$/Ton
75,140
42
67,600
38
Excess Transportation*
$/Ton
14,450
9
24,600
14
Final Disposal
$/Ton
19,200
11
26,600
15
Commercialization Costs
$/User
900
1
880
1
Ibagué
COP
USD
18,600
11
21,400
12
Table 36 Source: Hill Consulting (Bogotá), 2012.
*This is an extra cost that is included in the tariff when landfills are more than 20 km (12.5 miles)
COP – Colombian Pesos
Currently, the CRA is exploring ways to modify the existing tariff framework to accommodate projects
and programs that divert solid waste from landfill disposal. It is CCAP’s understanding that they are
considering the inclusion of waste diversion through the concept of avoided costs as a factor in a revised
tariff formula. Accordingly, recycling and recovery processes would be paid the money saved in the
collection and final disposal processes. Unfortunately, this places a significant burden on total cost of
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
110
any recovery projects to match the offset cost of collection and disposal. The existing low cost of
disposal in Colombia would, therefore, become a major impediment towards the implementation of any
process that may achieve a desired recovery purpose but at a higher cost than the offset costs. This
reinforces the need for a thorough and detailed feasibility study pertaining to any new ISWM facilities
that would be developed in the future to assure that they are able to be competitive with current
collection and disposal costs. The feasibility studies will need to closely focus on the potential savings in
collection and transport costs in alternate process designs to achieve acceptable economics based on
the modified tariff formula. This may influence site selection activities for processing facilities to
optimize collection and transport cost savings and their impact on tariff allocations.
7.3 FINANCING AND SERVICE PROVISION ALTERNATIVES
The general rule for providing public services in Colombia is an open process which allows any
contractor or operator to start providing services without having an exclusive right to do so.
Nevertheless, exclusive service areas can be designated and these establish the presence of a specific
operator who is responsible for providing a service in a given time and place. A Sectoral Study of Waste
Management Public Service in 2010, conducted by the Technical Group of Waste Management of the
SSPD, provided a detailed analysis of the financial, administrative, commercial and technical information
submitted by the public services providers, municipal mayors and CARs.
Since the development of the public service regime in 1994 through Law 142, public solid waste
management service has experienced an evolution, both in the nature of service providers and the
scenarios by which they deliver their services. In the last decade, there has been a significant increase in
the participation of the private sector (especially in municipalities with more than 25,000 inhabitants).
This has normally focused on one or more of standard core components of the SWM services including
collection, transport, and disposal. Contracted services have also typically included street sweeping and
cleaning.
This open market approach has often led to situations where the same services in a municipality are
provided by two or more contractors (particularly in commercial collection and transport functions). The
increased involvement of the private sector has also led to an increase in the number of regional
disposal facilities where several collection and transport service providers serving different market
service areas (municipalities) deliver solid waste to the same regional landfill. To the benefit of solid
waste management in Colombia, this scenario has also led to the formation of strong business
organizations and specialized companies seeking to provide services. Currently, the waste management
service industry in Colombia is a growing business, with significant and increasing incentives for foreign
participation. Within the sector, there are companies that have ventured into the provision of the
service in other countries, as it is the case of Interaseo which provides SWM services in Panama and
Venezuela. Interaseo also provides SWM services in 16 cities in Colombia. (A description of a number of
the major private sector SWM service providers is presented in Annex 5 of this report.)
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
111
In 2012, 93.5% of the entities registered as waste service providers are classified as companies. The
municipalities that are direct service providers constitute the remaining 6.5% of the registered SWM
service entities. Since 2002, the most frequent type of company service providers are the industrial and
commercial State companies (EICE) and those with shared capital (with mostly private capital). These
represent about 43% of solid waste services companies in Colombia. As shown in figure 21, the number
of private sector companies providing SWM services has been increasing while municipalities that
provided direct services has been decreasing.
Figure 21: Waste Management Service Providers Legal Structure. Source: Renaser (2002) RUPS (2006) SSPD.
Figure 22 below presents a summary of investment sources for recent solid waste management facilities
as reported by SSPD in its Waste Management Sectorial Assessment. As shown, municipal governments
are the main source of investments. The Participation General System investment category is the legal
mechanism, through which the national budget is divided into fixed expenditures and investments
categories and, later, allocated to municipal budgets. Similar financial sources are anticipated to be
utilized in developing the capital elements of the proposed integrated Waste NAMA in Colombia.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
112
Figure 22: Financing Sources of Facilities Investments in Colombia in 2010.
Source: SSPD, 2011.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
113
Section 8: Colombia Waste NAMA Alternatives and Design
8.1 Waste NAMA Related Activities and Initiatives
As illustrated in Figure ES-1, there are a number of baseline evaluations and studies that are required to
develop a Waste NAMA and provide a foundation for determining what a potential Waste NAMA can be
accomplished and the means for doing so. In Colombia, some of these baseline evaluations have already
been completed at both the national and local levels as part of an ongoing process to improve solid
waste management in the country. Various reports pertaining to these evaluations are identified in the
Annex References. National level planning work already completed includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
An evaluation of current national waste practices and performance
An assessment of waste quantities (generated and recovered) and waste composition
An analysis of current waste policies and regulations
A review and analysis of status and performance of the existing informal waste recycling sector
Development of a (baseline) general greenhouse gas Inventory
Development of a national waste management and recycling strategy
A database of active and closed disposal sites
The planning work reflected in the above was driven by an effort to improve SWM practices and
facilities throughout Colombia and to move toward the national solid waste management policy
objective of creating a “zero waste” culture by supporting the development of ISWM programs. This
work also contributes to a fundamental Waste NAMA objective of using the enhancement of SWM
practices in Colombia as a meaningful GHG mitigation mechanism.
Based on worldwide experience, the development of effective ISWM programs is very difficult involving
many diverse factors, issues and stakeholder perspectives that can significantly affect ISWM process
design and implementation choices as well as their technical and economic viability and sustainability.
Through this assessment, CCAP sought to identify the potential structure of an integrated Waste NAMA
model that would achieve the co-benefits of improving SWM conditions while also achieving the highest
degree of GHG emission mitigation. In doing so, CCAP also sought to identify the principal impediments
to continued solid waste improvements beyond what has already been accomplished throughout
Colombia. Logically, current SWM development impediments are also the impediments that will hinder
the development and implementation of an effective Waste NAMA.
As a result of its assessment, CCAP believes that the application of some conventional solid waste
processing technologies will not be viable in Colombia based on both technical and economic
considerations. A summary of potential economic impacts of various ISWM scenarios (for an example
application in Cali) available to process or recover solid waste stream components is presented in
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
114
Section 7. The identification and evaluation of the various SWM scenarios and configurations defined in
Section 4 of this report led to the following conclusions relative to the viability of some of the identified
alternatives:
1. Conventional waste to energy technologies such as those utilized in the United States and
European Union are, most likely, not viable in Colombia for both technical and economic
reasons. The high organic content of typical municipal solid waste in Colombia makes it difficult
for conventional incineration technologies to effectively combust the solid waste without
significant preconditioning of the waste prior to combustion. In addition, the high capital and
operating costs associated with these systems would significantly increase in the cost of SWM in
the locales where they were implemented. CCAP does not foresee incineration as an option for
Colombia in the near to medium term except for isolated areas, such as the WTE facility that is
near implementation on San Andres island, which will soon be the country’s first incinerator.
Similarly, the utilization of mixed solid waste mechanical biological treatment facilities that
utilize anaerobic digestion (such as that utilized in the E.U.) as the core biological process would
also be cost prohibitive.
2. Markets for recyclable materials recovered from the municipal solid waste stream are strong
and sufficient for a significant increase in the amount of recyclable materials recovered through
formal recovery processes. However, the current status and organizational strength of informal
recyclers may be an impediment to developing formal materials recovery programs for the solid
waste components currently sought by the informal recyclers.
3. Markets for compost in Colombia need to be developed if composting is to be adopted as a
basic process for treating solid waste organic content. The potential market for high-quality
compost derived from processing source separated organics is anticipated to be stronger than
that which will exist for marketing compost derived from mixed solid waste processing.
4. Potential opportunities exist to utilize refuse derived fuel derived through mechanical
processing for co-firing in the numerous cement kilns located throughout Colombia. Important
regulatory issues will need to be addressed if the cement kilns are to be allowed to combust RDF
as an alternate fuel.
5. As a result of emerging regulations in Colombia, disposal facilities and services have significantly
improved in recent years where most of the solid waste generated throughout the country is
now disposed of in effective sanitary landfills. This has resulted in the closure of the dump sites
previously used for disposal. Some of the existing active landfills were developed by the private
sector as regional landfills serving multiple municipalities thereby improving the prospects for
similar regional approaches in developing waste processing and recovery facilities.
6. Some landfills in Colombia have already installed landfill gas collection and treatment systems in
an attempt to achieve CDM certification and its resulting economic benefits. Additional
opportunities may exist for installing landfill gas treatment systems (flares or landfill gas to
energy) systems thereby helping to mitigate ongoing methane emissions. With a lack of a
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
115
regulatory requirement mandating landfill gas treatment, new landfill gas projects will need to
be economically viable to generate such investments.
7. For the most part, SWM plans prepared by the municipalities that were reviewed by CCAP
emphasized an intent to develop source separation processes for organics and recyclables as a
means for 1) reducing the amount of solid waste delivered in landfills and 2) complying with
national SWM policies and strategies.
Each of the above observations lead to CCAP’s proposed design of an integrated Waste NAMA which
considers both source separation and mixed solid waste processing approaches as target GHG mitigation
activities. The potential Waste NAMA framework is described in greater detail below.
8.2 Recommended Colombia Integrated Waste NAMA
Based its findings, CCAP recommends that the Colombia Waste NAMA consist of an integrated process
model that recognizes the diverse elements affecting SWM in Colombia. The proposed integrated
process model correlates with probable new activities that reflect current SWM planning initiatives at
both the national and local levels. Development factors were identified as a result of this assessment
that may provide some guidance into the most appropriate activities and technologies that may be best
suited to accomplish the desired SWM and GHG mitigation benefits in specific local areas in Colombia.
An integrated process model recognizes that there are a number of technical alternatives available to
manage various components of the Colombian solid waste stream and that viable uses for recovered
commodities (recyclables, compost, refuse derived fuel and energy) must exist and be sufficient to
assure success and sustainability of any recovery process. The utilization of an integrated model must
also recognize that many of the factors that may affect the development potential of the model’s
technical components are local or may evolve over time as SWM conditions change and national policies
and strategies evolve into meaningful regulations or development incentive programs. This includes
contemplated changes to the SWM economic framework affecting development choices such as reform
of the existing SWM tariff framework currently being considered. For example, the manner by which
tariff reform is accomplished may provide an economic incentive for recovery projects in the manner by
which reform is accomplished. For illustration purposes, the proposed integrated function Waste NAMA
model is shown in the following schematic:
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
116
Informal Recyclers
Formal Source Separation
Municipal Solid Waste
Mixed Waste Processing Element
Manual/Partial
Mechanical Separation
Source Separated
Organics
Dry Organic and
Other Materials
High Moisture Organics
L
Compost
Recyclables
H
Refuse Derived
Fuel
Landfill Disposal
Landfill Gas
Energy Recovery
H
L
Denotes Potential for High and Low quality compost
INTEGRATED SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT MODEL SCHEMATIC
Through an integrated process where multiple existing and prospective activities and processes are
utilized, the integrated model seeks to accomplish target results in a manner that may vary in different
locales in Colombia because of prevailing local conditions that affect the development potential of the
model’s individual technical elements. The model implementation must be flexible since local conditions
may actually preclude the utilization of some technical elements of the integrated approach shown in
the above schematic.
The integrated Waste NAMA model seeks to optimize GHG mitigation benefits by optimizing the
recovery and effective utilization of solid waste components or output products by whatever means that
may be technically viable and economically sustainable. The model driver will be the existence, viability
and economic effect of market outlets for recovered commodities. This commodity basis will define the
technical elements (and resulting economic impact) of the model’s implementation. In some cases,
multiple opportunities (and design choices) will exist for recovering some materials in the solid waste
stream. For example, solid waste stream organic content may be recovered for processing (composting,
most likely) as either source separated organic material (food waste, leaf and yard waste, etc.) and or as
organic material derived from mixed solid waste processing. The means for accessing organic content
can affect the ultimate value of developed compost. Organic material derived through separation at
source and independent collection will be less contaminated as it enters a composting process than
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
117
organic material derived through mixed waste mechanical processing. This will result in an enhanced
ability to produce high quality compost from the source separated organic material when compared to
what could be produced through the use of organic material derived from mixed waste processing. As a
result, two separate market conditions may exist for compost materials depending on the nature of the
material that was used in producing it. This is reflected in the above schematic for the integrated
process model which shows both the source separated and mixed solid waste processing organic
streams.
Landfill gas recovery and treatment projects are also a component of the integrated model but are
generally independent of the overall ISWM system except in the manner that the requirements of the
landfill gas management system may influence the ISWM development process. For example, in the
USTDA funded feasibility study for the CIS El Guacal landfill in the Medellin region, it was determined
that the evaluated modification of the existing landfill gas flaring system at the landfill to include energy
recovery would be economically viable only if the quantity of solid waste currently delivered to the
landfill continues at the same general level throughout the financing life of the landfill gas system
enhancement. Contractual commitments of solid waste to any facility that required the delivery of a
minimum amount of solid waste may preclude other recovery projects that seeks to divert a portion of
the solid waste stream away from the landfill. However, the model considers that, in some
circumstances, enhanced landfill gas management may be the best approach to achieve GHG mitigation
goals in some local areas if there are significant local impediments to implementing other recovery
elements. However, it should be noted that the proposed CIS El Guacal project is based on enhancing an
existing landfill gas active management system where a significant amount of gas collection
infrastructure already exists. In any landfill where there is no landfill gas collection system in place, the
added economic burden of installing such a system may affect the economic viability of a landfill gas to
energy project where CDM benefits are no longer available. In addition, it should also be noted that the
GHG mitigation benefits of enhancing an existing active landfill gas management system for energy
recovery may be limited to the avoided GHG emissions associated with the displaced energy generation.
To be successful, the integrated Waste NAMA model must also fit within the overall solid waste
management development plans of the municipalities who are responsible for the provision of SWM
services and that may also be responsible for implementing facilities and programs that meet current
and emerging standards and regulations. This allows the model implementation process to utilize all
work to date by national and local solid waste planners and decisions made during that planning. The
model also provides linkage to the political considerations and input that went into the development of
the local SWM plans by building off the work done to date in developing them.
The model must also clearly recognize the importance of integrating the informal recycling process in
Colombia into the ISWM program envisioned for individual local areas. The proposed components of the
integrated Waste NAMA are compatible with the organized informal recycling activities. At a minimum,
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
118
the detailed feasibility study of any capital element of the ISWM process must consider the impact and
incorporation of the informal sector’s interests and activities.
8.3 Technical and Economic Basis for the Integrated Model
As proposed, the technical definition and viability of model technical elements are based on output
commodities that may be successfully utilized in Colombia. These “market” conditions will define the
magnitude and viability of the technical elements of the model as reflected in the schematic. For further
definition, the effect of commodity positions is described below:
Recovery of Recyclables – Well defined and strong markets exist in Colombia for recyclable materials.
Market studies undertaken by the Colombian government indicate that demand for various recyclable
materials significantly exceeds supply thereby providing an opportunity to increase the proportion of
recyclable material recovered and marketed. However, this market strength also creates a situation
where there is a strong informal recycling sector that currently achieves recovery for recyclable
components from commercial and residential sources. This informal process may directly compete with
any formal processes implemented by municipalities. Viability of a formal recovery process will be
achieved by either recognizing and accepting this level of competition or attempting to incorporate the
informal recyclers into the formal SWM activities. This illustrates the need for the model to adapt to the
specific local conditions in the manner by which its individual elements are defined and developed.
Production of Marketable Compost – Certification standards exist in Colombia for the production
and use of compost. To achieve certification, compost must meet minimum quality standards based on
defined physical and chemical parameters. The marketability of compost will be a function of its quality
and experience has shown that good quality compost can best be achieved through the processing of
source separated organic material where compostable materials do not become contaminated through
direct contact with other waste forms as would be the case in the conventional physical handling
(collection, transport, etc.) of mixed solid waste. Accordingly, the model recognizes that there are
potentially two compost streams that may be developed in some municipalities from either source
separated materials or through mixed waste processing (or possibly both). Similarly, an effective source
separation collection and treatment program may preclude the development of a formal mechanical
processing facility unless there is an alternative compelling reason for developing such a facility such as
the desire to produce RDF for use as an alternative energy source in locations where this material can be
used (cement kilns locations, for example).
Utilization of Solid Waste Energy Content – CCAP’s assessment analysis has shown that the
application of conventional waste-to-energy technologies commonly utilized in many industrialized
countries may not be applicable in Colombia because of the physical characteristics of Colombia's solid
waste stream and the high costs associated with this technology. The economic aspects of the CCAP
assessment demonstrated that the economic viability of such applications will be affected by the current
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
119
low generation costs of electricity as a result of the high proportion of hydroelectric power in Colombia's
power generation base. While low energy costs are a benefit to the country as a whole, they become an
impediment towards any SWM approach seeking to recover energy and generate electricity for sale.
However, there may still be opportunities throughout Colombia to utilize the energy content of the solid
waste stream through the production of refuse derived fuel for utilization in cement kilns as a
replacement for the fossil fuels commonly used by these facilities in their cement production
operations. During the assessment process, a representative of the CCAP team met with a major cement
manufacturer with facilities throughout Colombia and was told that there was strong interest in the
utilization of RDF as an alternate fuel for their production process. This opportunity will depend on the
value of RDF energy content as will be determined through the development of an RDF supply
agreement with possible outlets in the various local areas where they are located. The opportunity will
also depend on the regulatory requirements that will be imposed on the owners of the cement kilns in
seeking to use RDF as an alternate fuel.
Collection and Treatment of Landfill Gas - Due the high impact of uncontrolled landfill gas
emissions on GHG emissions, the ability to collect and treat this gas can have an important GHG
mitigation benefit. Accordingly, all landfills that do not already collect and treat landfill gas may become
candidates for future gas recovery projects. While a strong regulatory driver has led to the development
of landfill gas treatment systems in the U.S. and the E.U., this is not the case in Colombia under the
current regulatory framework. Accordingly, an economic incentive may be required (such as that
perceived from CDM certification) to support the development of this model element.
National Applicability and Regional/Demographic Variation - The proposed integrated Waste
NAMA is intended to be a national instrument that seeks to achieve GHG mitigation benefits throughout
Colombia. Accordingly, implementation of the model requires detailed investigations to address
prevailing conditions in all locales particularly in the municipalities with sufficient population and solid
waste generation to justify and support the development of the model elements. Given the wide
spectrum of municipal demographics in Colombia, the model must adapt to the conditions that exist in
individual local areas to determine which elements are viable and that can achieve the best results.
Regionalization effects as demonstrated in some of the existing landfills throughout the country can be
beneficial in achieving the scale necessary to justify specific applications. Accordingly, the model must
also be viewed as a flexible instrument that may involve both the private and public sector in developing
the required elements. It should also be noted that there may be a viable interaction between different
technical elements. For example, a contractor or municipality could decide to construct a composting
facility that would receive organic material from multiple jurisdictions including possible processing
facilities in the locales that separated compostable organics from the mixed solid waste stream.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
120
8.4 Waste NAMA Related Factors and Processes in Colombia
Based on CCAP’s preliminary assessment, there are a number of important factors that influence the
development of all elements of the proposed integrated Waste NAMA model. These include the
following:
National Policies and Regulations – Colombia’s SWM policies are stressing the development of
ISWM processes such as that reflected in the proposed integrated Waste NAMA framework. However,
there are other policy and regulatory elements that currently work against the development of these
processes. The necessary reform to the national tariff formula is an important action that must occur if a
major impediment to waste diversion processes is to be eliminated.
Economic Implications – CCAP expects that developing solid waste programs that increase recovery
and landfill diversion objectives will increase the overall cost of SWM in Colombia. Economic factors
such as the low cost of disposal services and the low value of recovered energy make it difficult for
potential recovery projects to compete with the status quo since they may require additional financial
resources to assure successful function and sustainability. An enhanced political or regulatory driver can
help to offset the economic impact of achieving recovery processes. This has already occurred in the
enhancement of core disposal services through the regulatory impact that led to the closure of the
dump sites and the development of sanitary landfills throughout the country.
Informal sector recycling – The informal sector accounts for most of the recycling that currently
occurs in Colombia. Informal recyclers in Colombia are generally organized and have an influence on
SWM decisions particularly those that relate to their livelihood. This is a factor that must be addressed
in planning any specific elements of the model in any locales. Examples do exist, however, of the
manner by which the informal sector could be incorporated into the formal SWM process while also
improving the health and welfare of people historically involved in the informal recycling process.
Recovered Commodity Output markets – Individual opportunities for recovery output must be
evaluated in planning any element of the model in any locale. For example, municipalities with cement
manufacturing industries may be supportive of developing model mixed solid waste processing
elements where derived refuse derived fuel is generated as a means to help ensure the business
strength of a major local industry and the security of local jobs involved in the industry. This may include
a willingness to pay more for a SWM element and process as a means of supporting a local industry and
assuring local employment.
8.5 Waste NAMA Development Drivers – Strengths and Weaknesses
As a result of this assessment, CCAP recognizes that the effectiveness of conventional ISWM
development drivers will continue to be important in implementing the elements of the proposed
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
121
integrated Waste NAMA model. The following is a characterization of the status of existing development
drivers in Colombia.
Regulatory - The government of Colombia has demonstrated that the adoption and enforcement of
effective regulations can achieve improved SWM conditions. This is demonstrated in the development
of new solid waste disposal facilities throughout the country. While national policies are aimed at urging
a “zero waste” culture and local SWM plans reflect this policy, recovery processes and projects are not
mandated and must be determined to be technically and economically viable on their own merits
including the willingness of affected stakeholders to bear the possible increased cost associated with
such facilities and processes.
Economic – CCAP’s assessment determined that the application of conventional recovery processes
will, most likely, increase the cost of SWM in the locales where they are implemented. The extent of this
increase will be a function of local conditions affecting the market value of any recovered materials and
produced commodities such as compost or refuse derived fuel. Accordingly, the economic driver for
development of recovery projects is generally weak in Colombia because of existing low cost of current
disposal services. This situation could change depending on the manner by which the CRA achieves tariff
reform.
Political - The political driver for developing recovery projects will be determined by the willingness of
national and local elected officials to implement programs that are aimed at supporting the stated policy
of achieving a “zero waste” culture. This will occur at the national level through the possible
development of support programs as incentives for recovery projects and also at the local level where
local elected officials may seek to develop recovery initiatives as a means of expressing the
municipality’s “green” environmental position or providing support to local industries that may use
recovered materials (such as cement kilns that may utilize RDF, for example).
Institutional - The current institutional structure in Colombia is strong with active involvement of well
qualified private sector contractors involved in providing various core SWM services. This can enhance
the possibility of developing recovery projects so long as these projects are determined to be
economically viable and sustainable based on the business principles that drive the private sector
participants in their current SWM roles.
Social - A social driver exists in Colombia through active concern about informal recyclers expressed by
a number of individuals with whom CCAP met during the assessment process. However, this concern
may be significantly buffered when compared to the potential economic implications of developing
facilities that could incorporate informal sector participants into formal activities.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
122
8.6 Waste NAMA Implementation Impediments
Based on the evaluation of the national and local information gathered during this assessment, CCAP
believes that there are a number of development impediments that will impact the implementation of
the integrated Waste NAMA and its various elements. A component of the proposed Waste NAMA may
be work aimed at minimizing or eliminating these impediments. Some of the key impediments include
the following:
1. Low Cost of Disposal Services - While significant progress has been made in core collection
and disposal services and facilities throughout Colombia, the cost of disposal remains low
thereby minimizing the economic driver for developing new recovery projects. Preliminary
economic analysis of the available alternatives for developing ISWM projects that can achieve
GHG mitigation benefits showed that the cost of SWM will, most likely, go up as a result of
various recovery initiatives.
2. National Policy Issues – Current national policies associated with solid waste cost control and
the priority order allocated to public investments in SWM create impediments to achieving
sufficient cash flow to support the development and sustainability of new solid waste processing
initiatives.
3. Tariff Reform – The existing tariff framework for SWM services does not take into
consideration any new projects or processes that divert solid waste components from landfill
disposal. While tariff reform is being considered by the Colombian government, it is not
anticipated that this will be accomplished until late 2013 at the soonest. In addition, current
considerations indicate that tariff reform may revise the tariff formula so that the economic
considerations allocated to diversion processes will be based solely on the actual costs offset
from collection, transport and disposal services. CCAP expects that major investments in SWM
diversion initiatives will not occur until tariff reform is complete and that the economic viability
of model elements may be affected by the manner by which tariff reform is achieved. Public and
private sector investments in feasibility studies for specific integrated Waste NAMA model
elements may be affected by questions related to the manner by which tariff reform will be
eventually accomplished.
4. Private Sector Contracts – The private sector has made significant investments in Colombia in
the development of new regional landfills. Contract terms may exist between the owners of
these regional landfills and solid waste suppliers (municipalities, other private contractors,
commercial/industrial sources, etc.) that may require a minimum amount of solid waste to be
delivered on a regular basis. This could prove to be a disincentive to the development of
diversion projects particularly given the potential economic impact of diversion projects on solid
waste generators. The integrated Waste NAMA development process needs to consider the
investments made by the private sector and their anticipated rate of return on those
investments.
5. Energy Value – The economic value of recovered energy is a function of the value of the
energy that would be displaced as a result of the energy recovered from solid waste. In
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
123
Colombia, a high proportion of electricity generated in the country is derived from hydroelectric
sources and this results in low electricity prices. Since the competing prices of energy from
current sources is the basis for potential revenues that could be derived from any project that
recovers energy from solid waste, the economic viability of conventional waste to energy
facilities will be affected by potentially low revenues. In the case of RDF, the fuel that the RDF
would displace (for example, fossil fuels) establishes the potential value of the RDF alternate
fuel.
6. Competition from the Informal Sector – Colombia has a well-organized and strong informal
recycling network that currently recycles up to 10% of the country’s total waste stream. This
informal process may be in direct competition with any formal project aimed at recovering
recyclable materials unless the informal recyclers were incorporated into a formal solid waste
management process. If placed into a competing position, the informal sector recycling process
may affect the viability of formal recovery initiatives. Unlike the ability to control informal
recyclers at disposal sites, it is significantly more difficult to control informal recyclers accessing
solid waste components in collection locations.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
124
Section 9: Conclusions and Recommendations
Assessment Conclusions
Based on its assessment of current conditions, CCAP derived the following general conclusions:
1. The general solid waste management situation in Colombia has progressed and evolved to a
point where a good level of service is provided in core collection, transport and disposal
processes in most municipalities.
2. Solid waste management improvements over the past decade have been supported by the
modification and strengthening of Colombia's national institutional framework. This has led
to the active participation of multiple service providers where private capital is playing a
significant role in the development of upgraded services and facilities. As a result of this,
disposal facilities throughout the country have been upgraded to a point where a significant
proportion of the solid waste generators in Colombia is now disposed of in facilities that are
classified as sanitary landfills.
3. Colombian solid waste management policy seeks to achieve a “zero waste” culture by
promoting integrated solid waste management approaches that will recover the intrinsic
value of solid waste components through a variety of means. This policy is reflected in the
local solid waste management plans (PGIRS) prepared by municipalities throughout
Colombia.
4. Colombia still has a significant way to go in terms of implementing integrated solid waste
management processes. This is primarily due to the institutional and policy impediments
that currently exist. Important impediments to the development of ISWM processes relate
to overall economic sustainability where the existing solid waste management tariff
structure does not recognize recovery processes as a formula factor in defining tariff
allocations. However, the government of Colombia recognizes this impediment and is
currently working on revising its tariff framework to include waste recovery processes.
Other legal requirements such as the limitation capping any costs associated with solid
waste recovery processes to be passed on to generators to the offset cost of core collection
and disposal services may also create an impediment to the development of recovery
programs and facilities that may achieve important environmental benefits but at a higher
cost than current core services.
5. Implementation of policy based programs such as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
initiatives or the diversion and recovery of construction and demolition waste can derive
some GHG mitigation benefits. EPR elements that help to reduce the overall amount of
municipal solid waste generated or that improve the prospects for marketing output
materials from recovery projects will have a beneficial impact as will the recovery of
construction and demolition waste components that will decrease the total amount of solid
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
125
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
waste placed in landfills or displace the use of virgin materials through recovery. (An
effective program to manage construction and demolition waste will have the major added
benefit of helping to rectify one of the most solid waste management visible problems in
Colombian municipalities.)
The regionalization of final disposal sites with the significant participation of the private
sector has been accomplished in many locations in Colombia with the result that there is a
strong basis for future regional applications of solid waste processing facilities and the
availability of sufficient solid waste from multiple sources to take advantage of economies of
scale that may affect the technical and economic viability of some ISWM processes and
elements of the proposed Waste NAMA integrated model.
Recycling in Colombia is primarily accomplished through the informal sector which is viewed
to be an important element for future solid waste management in the country. This includes
the need to incorporate the informal sector into future processes as well as consider its
impact on the viability of alternative formal programs and facilities with which the informal
sector may compete.
Analysis of available outlets for recyclable materials in Colombia demonstrates that there
are strong markets with significant demand for materials for use in manufacturing new
products. Currently, supply has not kept up with demand to a point where recyclable
materials are imported into Colombia for manufacturing purposes. Current available
markets are expected to support significantly greater levels of recovery in Colombia in the
future.
Source separation cost remains as one of the main obstacle for the implementation of some
municipal waste recovery strategies. Increased incentives will be necessary to achieve an
effective level of source separation of various materials. In addition, the strengthening of
ongoing public education programs will be required to help assure the effective
participation and cooperation of residential, commercial and industrial solid waste
generators in new or expanded source separation initiatives.
New programs and facilities that can achieve greater material or energy recovery levels from
the municipal solid waste stream are expected to increase the overall cost of solid waste
management in Colombia. The ability to accept and accommodate these increased costs will
be an important element in decision-making relative to the development of any new solid
waste management process that may be included as a component of a Colombian Waste
NAMA. However, all potential locale specific cost savings (such as those associated with the
impact on the efficiency and cost of conventional collection and transport processes) must
also be considered through the development and utilization of full cost accounting
principles.
Assessment Recommendations
Based on this assessment, CCAP recommends the following:
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
126
1. A Waste NAMA in Colombia should be developed based on an integrated solid waste
management approach where mechanical biological treatment facilities could generate refuse
derived fuel, recyclables, and/or compost depending on the local market conditions for the
recoverable elements. The next steps for developing such a NAMA would include:
a. Conduct a feasibility study for an MBT facility in 1-2 municipalities which would include
an evaluation of the market potential for RDF, recyclables and compost.
b. Conduct a national scoping analysis to identify other municipalities in which favorable
conditions exist for MBT facilities
2. The upcoming tariff reform presents a critical opportunity to align stakeholder incentives with
integrated waste management goals. The current tariff should be analyzed as to how potential
revisions could strengthen the feasibility of a waste NAMA. CCAP would be open to directly
supporting the CRA (Comisión de Regulación de Agua Potable y Saneamiento Básico) in
researching alternative tariff adjustment scenarios affecting the upcoming tariff reform process,
dependent on the CRA’s willingness for this collaboration.
3. There may be opportunities to implement electric generation projects on sites that are currently
collecting and flaring landfill gas. A scoping analysis should be done to fully evaluate this
potential.
4. Source separation for organics and recyclables can be an effective part of an integrated solid
waste management program in the longer term. Because the economic feasibility of source
separation is highly dependent on the generation and sale of compost and recyclables,
additional analysis should be conducted on the market for compost and recyclables, and should
specifically address the informal sector recycling process.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
127
Annex 1: Principal Active MSW Landfills in Colombia
Num
Departamento
Municipio
Nombre
32
13
17
41
40
1
7
9
48
14
8
10
23
15
37
49
20
19
16
5
2
34
33
39
47
6
4
31
50
12
3
30
29
51
11
45
24
18
26
22
21
46
27
36
35
25
38
56
42
44
43
28
55
Cundi na ma rca
Anti oqui a
Va l l e del Ca uca
Bol i va r
Atl á nti co
Cundi na ma rca
Ri s a ra l da
Norte de Sa nta nder
Tol i ma
Sa nta nder
Córdoba
Va l l e del Ca uca
Atl á nti co
Ca l da s
Qui ndío
Ma gda l ena
Ces a r
Meta
Hui l a
Boya cá
Cundi na ma rca
Ca uca
Sucre
Anti oqui a
Anti oqui a
Na ri ño
Boya cá
Na ri ño
La Gua ji ra
Ca s a na re
Sa nta nder
Hui l a
Ca l da s
Sa n Andrés
Anti oqui a
Ma gda l ena
Norte de Sa nta nder
Ces a r
Norte de Sa nta nder
Sucre
Qui ndío
Meta
Atl á nti co
Hui l a
Gua vi a re
Sucre
Anti oqui a
Putuma yo
Ca l da s
Ca s a na ré
Ca quetá
Boya cá
Cundi na ma rca
Bogotá
Donma tía s
Yotoco
Ca rta gena
Ga l a pa
Boja cá
Perei ra
Cúcuta
Iba gue
Buca ra ma nga
Montería
Sa n Pedro
Ba ra noa
Ma ni za l ez
Montenegro
Sa nta Ma rta
Va l l edupa r
Vi l l a vi cenci o
Nei va
Soga mos o
Gi ra rdot
Popa yá n
Si ncel ejo
Puerto Na ré
Ita güi
Pa s to
Oi ca tá
Ipi a l es
Ri oha cha
Yopa l
Sa n Gi l
Pi ta l i to
La dora da
Sa n Andrés
Hel i coni a
Ara ca ta ca
Pa mpl ona
Agua chi ca
Oca ña
Coroza l
Ca l a rca
Gra na da
Sa nto Tomá s
La Pl a ta
Sa n Jos é del Gua vi a re
Tol uvi ejo
Ci uda d Bol i va r
Mocoa
Ma rqueta l i a
Vi l l a nueva
Fl orenci a
Chi qui nqui rá
Pa ra tebueno
Doña Jua na
La Pra dera
El Gua ba l
Loma de l os Cocos
Los Poci tos
Nuevo Mondoñedo
La Gl ori ta
Gua ya ba l
La Mi el
El Ca rra s co
Loma Gra nde
Pres i dente
Puerto Ri co
La Es mera l da
Anda l ucía
Pa l a nga na
Los Cora zones
Bi oa grícol a del Ll a no
Los Ángel es
Terra za s del porveni r
Pra dera s del Ma gda l ena
El Oji to
El Oa s i s
El pes ca o
La Aurora
Anta na s
Pi rgua
La Vi ctori a
Ri oha cha
Ma condo
El Cucha ro
Bi orgá ni cos del s ur
Dora di ta
Ma gi c Ga rden
Centro Indus tri a l del Sur
Ara ca ta ca
La Corta da
Agua chi ca
La Ma dera
La Ca ndel a ri a
Vi l l a Ka ri na
La Gua ra ta ra
La s Ma rga ri ta s
Bi orgá ni cos
El Al ga rrobo
Los cerros de Tol uvi ejo
Buena vi s ta
Rel l eno s a ni ta ri o de Mocoa
La Vega
La Es pera nza
Sa n Jua n del Ba rro
Chi qui nqui ra
Rel l eno s a ni ta ri o Don Jua ni to
TOTAL
Profundidad
Vida útil
media
(años)
(mts)
2,096,560
691,112
616,159
30
29
460,887
39
15
304,063
5
29
283,809
18
27
278,637
259,048
20
64
212,689
184,635
40
142,016
5
15
129,523
20
120,251
15
115,943
27
6
114,728
22
9
114,312
12
110,790
2
108,510
22
33
92,118
43
90,880
7
62
83,297
12
11
77,692
12
76,304
20
76,251
73,653
15
73,594
15
17
68,591
8
43,118
45
37,647
32,712
14
41
31,185
5
29,714
7
27,066
26,280
3
23,875
33
20.5
22,466
15
28
20,113
20,102
4
7
17,577
11
16,264
14,935
15
14,750
6
25
10,426
18
25
10,257
8,960
8,720
6,571
8
5,326
4,392
96
3,617
1,482
27
1,143
10
694
17
697.5
Año
Año
Residuos
apertura clausura Ton/año
2,010
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,007
2,007
2,007
2,005
2,005
2,005
1,997
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,009
2,009
2,009
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,003
2,005
2,005
2,009
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,002
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
2,005
Capacidad
(m3)
18,559,802
5,568,357
19,862,846
7,698,592
6,500,000
N° de municipios N° de municipios
Annex 1: Principal Active MSW Landfills
in Colombia
2,025
2,039
2,039
2,037
2,074
2,025
2,016
2,019
2,043
2,053
2,072
2,021
2,022
2,030
2,025
2,027
2,018
2,051
2,015
2,031
2,038
2,017
2,035
2,035
2,018
2,106
2,037
697.5
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
803,407
814
190,000
310,517
38,257
669,612
576,000
2,145,531
NR
3,770,342
204,420
81,773
492,000
5,160,234
NR
4,786
270,000
8,000
221,000
NR
NR
961,085
74097375
5
14
11
3
3
72
22
19
14
20
18
8
13
4
9
10
13
31
37
4
5
3
2
22
33
6
16
35
6
6
16
3
8
10
7
9
9
3
6
4
4
8
3
3
3
3
6
563
7
11
8
1
4
69
13
18
1
12
13
18
9
18
10
1
4
5
13
20
24
1
5
4
2
11
43
6
1
10
38
15
6
1
9
5
7
2
2
3
2
3
3
1
2
1
3
1
3
1
4
2
1
477
764
62%
Población atendida Residuos
kg/hab dia
2010
Ton/dia
7,422,001
2,840,316
2,867,629
944,481
1,271,686
1,894,305
891,610
897,884
526,527
1,114,621
875,976
768,977
779,119
785,757
445,363
447,963
458,405
506,130
504,705
339,880
467,125
265,839
337,251
480,223
260,122
518,318
466,296
214,909
213,091
169,339
324,528
347,769
154,373
68,283
184,381
185,109
113,802
103,372
130,635
93,118
104,299
78,564
77,615
57,389
80,309
48,172
23,639
38,564
65,482
22,808
37,998
16,546
7,578
32,332,603
45,509,584
71%
5,744
1893
1688
1,263
833
778
763
710
583
506
389
355
329
318
314
313
304
297
252
249
228
213
209
209
202
202
188
118
103
90
85
81
74
72
65
62
55
55
48
45
41
40
29
28
25
24
18
15
12
10
4
3
2
20530
22670
91%
0.77
0.67
0.59
1.34
0.66
0.41
0.86
0.79
1.11
0.45
0.44
0.46
0.42
0.40
0.71
0.70
0.66
0.59
0.50
0.73
0.49
0.80
0.62
0.44
0.78
0.39
0.40
0.55
0.48
0.53
0.26
0.23
0.48
1.05
0.35
0.33
0.48
0.53
0.37
0.48
0.39
0.51
0.37
0.49
0.31
0.50
0.76
0.38
0.18
0.43
0.11
0.19
0.25
128
Annex 2: Solid Waste Composition in Colombian Departments
Paper
Rubber,
Yard
Toilet
Other
Department
Food
and
Diapers
Wood
leather,
Textiles
residues
paper
organics
Annex
2: Solid
Waste
carton Composition in
bonesColombian Departments
Amazonas
Antioquia
Arauca
Atlántico
Bogotá DC
Bolívar
Boyacá
Caldas
Caquetá
Casanare
Cauca
Cesar
Choco
Córdoba
Cundinamarca
Guajira
Guainía
Guaviare
Huila
Magdalena
Meta
Nariño
Nte Santander
Putumayo
Quindío
Risaralda
San Andrés
Santander
Sucre
Tolima
Valle del
Cauca
Vaupés
Vichada
Metals
Construction
debris
Glasses,
pottery
Plastic
Other
inorganics
1,50%
1,30%
1,00%
1,40%
0,80%
3,50%
2,30%
1,40%
1,50%
1,00%
0,60%
1,40%
0,00%
0,80%
1,60%
1,50%
1,50%
0,40%
1,70%
1,00%
0,70%
1,50%
1,20%
0,80%
1,10%
1,00%
0,00%
2,70%
0,00%
0,00%
3,00%
10,00%
0,00%
3,80%
2,30%
0,00%
0,00%
3,00%
10,10%
0,00%
0,60%
0,00%
2,20%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
4,40%
3,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,40%
0,50%
0,00%
4,90%
0,60%
0,10%
3,30%
3,10%
2,00%
3,00%
1,00%
2,00%
8,70%
3,20%
3,30%
2,00%
0,90%
7,90%
1,00%
1,00%
5,60%
3,30%
3,30%
0,50%
3,20%
2,00%
6,70%
3,30%
4,20%
1,50%
9,30%
1,10%
1,00%
4,50%
10,40%
14,80%
10,40%
8,70%
18,70%
10,30%
8,60%
16,10%
10,40%
10,40%
7,00%
15,20%
11,20%
17,80%
11,10%
10,40%
10,40%
3,60%
7,10%
10,40%
4,70%
10,40%
13,70%
19,00%
9,20%
11,90%
11,20%
9,20%
0,40%
7,10%
5,00%
3,30%
2,30%
0,00%
11,40%
1,50%
0,40%
5,00%
1,00%
0,00%
18,20%
8,90%
3,50%
1,80%
0,40%
0,40%
12,20%
3,50%
5,00%
18,20%
10,10%
0,40%
1,50%
2,10%
4,40%
3,50%
8,90%
0,20%
69,80%
52,40%
52,00%
26,40%
56,30%
58,00%
42,30%
50,40%
69,80%
52,00%
57,90%
51,80%
58,80%
65,00%
54,70%
40,90%
69,80%
69,80%
68,50%
30,10%
52,00%
58,80%
49,80%
69,80%
44,10%
56,10%
51,10%
45,70%
65,00%
61,00%
3,60%
8,60%
7,20%
10,90%
8,20%
10,30%
14,20%
15,40%
3,60%
7,20%
8,50%
14,60%
7,40%
3,10%
8,60%
10,00%
3,60%
3,60%
1,50%
5,40%
7,20%
7,40%
15,90%
3,60%
4,40%
7,50%
11,80%
5,70%
3,10%
9,40%
7,80%
6,20%
5,50%
24,30%
6,40%
6,40%
4,50%
2,50%
7,80%
5,50%
6,70%
6,10%
6,40%
5,90%
6,40%
20,00%
7,80%
7,80%
8,10%
33,90%
5,50%
6,40%
5,10%
7,80%
4,70%
3,70%
6,00%
5,20%
5,90%
7,10%
0,60%
3,20%
1,40%
1,90%
1,90%
3,20%
2,80%
4,00%
0,60%
1,40%
0,70%
3,00%
0,70%
1,00%
3,20%
2,20%
0,60%
0,60%
4,00%
1,40%
1,40%
0,70%
2,00%
0,60%
4,10%
1,60%
3,00%
6,40%
1,00%
2,80%
1,10%
0,20%
1,20%
0,00%
0,50%
1,10%
0,20%
0,80%
1,10%
1,20%
0,70%
0,00%
1,00%
1,00%
0,30%
1,00%
1,10%
1,10%
0,40%
1,90%
1,20%
1,00%
2,20%
1,10%
2,70%
1,50%
1,50%
3,10%
1,00%
0,50%
1,70%
2,60%
2,50%
3,90%
4,00%
1,40%
1,00%
4,70%
1,70%
2,50%
5,80%
0,00%
3,80%
2,20%
3,70%
0,90%
1,70%
1,70%
0,80%
1,80%
2,50%
3,80%
2,80%
1,70%
9,70%
4,20%
2,60%
7,00%
2,20%
1,20%
0,00%
0,00%
2,50%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
2,50%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
2,50%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
2,30%
0,00%
1,10%
0,00%
0,50%
3,00%
0,60%
0,00%
0,00%
1,70%
0,00%
0,00%
3,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
2,80%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
5,60%
3,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,20%
0,00%
0,10%
0,00%
0,00%
3,50%
5,50%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
3,50%
0,00%
0,00%
3,60%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
0,00%
3,50%
3,60%
0,00%
0,00%
9,50%
1,50%
0,00%
2,10%
0,00%
0,00%
59,70%
6,40%
6,10%
0,60%
1,30%
1,90%
0,00%
0,00%
7,20%
-
-
-
-
16,80%
69,80%
52,00%
3,60%
7,20%
7,80%
5,50%
0,60%
1,40%
1,10%
1,20%
1,70%
2,50%
0,00%
2,50%
0,00%
3,00%
0,00%
3,50%
1,50%
1,00%
0,00%
3,00%
3,30%
2,00%
10,40%
10,40%
0,40%
5,00%
Source: EPA, 2011.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
129
Annex 3: Companies Currently Active in Buying Recovered
Recyclables in Colombia
COMPANY
ColombianaKimberlyColpapelS.A.
PazdelRío
CartónColombia
PropalS.A.
ProductosFamilia
Peldar
BiofilmS.A.
PapelesdelCaucaS.A.
EnkadeColombia
AceríasdeColombia,ACESCO
KimberlyClark
CartonesAméricaS.A.
Corpacero
PapelesNacionalesS.A.
SiderúrgicadelNorte,SIDUNOR
FamiliadelPacíficoLtda.
SiderúrgicaNacional
Tablemac
TecnoglasProductosdeVidrio
SiderúrgicadelPacífico
DistribuidoradePapelesS.A.
EmpacorS.A.
PapelesyCartonesS.A.
CristarSAS
CompañíaColombianadeEmpaques
KimberlyClarkAntioquiaGlobal
EmpaquesColombianosIndustriales
SiderúrgicadelOccidente
TetrapakLtda
SaintGobaindeColombia
Sonoco
ColombianadeMoldeadosS.A.
UnibolS.A.
EmpresaMetalmecanicadeAluminios
CorrugadosdelDarién
CypdelRisaralda
OccidentaldeEmpaquesS.A.
PackingS.A.
CITY
SECTOR
Itagüí
Paper
Bogotá
Steel
Yumbo
Cardboard
Yumbo
Paper
Medellín
Cardboard and paper
Envigado
Glass
Cartagena Plastics
Puerto TejadPaper
Medellín
Polymers
Bogotá
Steel
Tocancipá Cardboard and paper
Cali
Cardboard and paper
Bogotá
Metals
Pereira
Cardboard and paper
Barranquilla Metals
Caloto
Cardboard and paper
Bogotá
Metals
Medellín
Cardboard and paper
Barranquilla Glass
Yumbo
Metals
Bogotá
Paper
Bogotá
Cardboard
Barbosa
Cardboard and paper
Envigado
Glass
Palmira
Cardboard and paper
Barbosa
Cardboard and paper
Soledad
Cardboard and paper
Yumbo
Metals
Bogotá
Tetrapak
Bogotá
Glass
Cali
Cardboard and paper
Cali
Cardboard and paper
Soledad
Cardboard and paper
Itagüí
Metals
Apartado
Cardboard and paper
Dos QuebradCardboard and paper
Girardota
Cardboard and paper
Tocancipá Cardboard
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
YEAR 2008 (million COP)
ASSETS
NET YEAR PROFIT
1.834.407
216.699
1.811.627
13.079
1.787.628
51.889
1.145.499
57.779
1.132.657
19.496
906.139
103.745
710.044
53.387
619.026
32.007
609.556
27.003
599.413
3.854
494.869
11.887
410.447
1.645
360.433
4.476
329.265
2.041
31.191
17.305
267.752
3.541
215.886
29.039
172.827
742
164.512
3.654
154.687
1.291
153.495
5.797
145.124
2.084
136.303
7.405
131.058
14.622
127.987
10.356
124.106
1.795
98.924
698
96.157
23.293
93.218
22.464
8.177
357
66.684
8.945
64.973
4.309
57.292
371
68.091
3.951
52.366
423
50.937
205
41.439
1.128
40.904
4.558
130
Annex 4: Cement Manufacturing Plants in Colombia
Because cement kilns require high temperatures to produce cement, they are ideal for safely
incinerating various solid waste elements such as chipped tires, sewage sludge, municipal solid waste,
and biomass such as rice and coffee husks, sawdust, and palm residues while recovering energy for
production in the process. Kilns enable cement producers to provide an alternative to landfilling while,
at the same time, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and avoid related emissions of greenhouse gases.
In Colombia there are three principal cement companies:
1. ARGOS - Colombia/Sindicato antioqueño (50% of market share): Has 12 cement plants (kilns)
in Colombia (mainly in Antioquia, Valle del Cauca and Atlantic Coast) with a cement production
installed capacity of 14 million tons/year.
2. CEMEX - Mexico (35% of market share): 5 plants in Colombia (in Tolima, Cundinamarca and
Santander) with an installed capacity of 5 million of tons/year.
3. HOLCIM - Switzerland (15% of market share): 2 plants in Cundinamarca and 1.8 millions of
tons/year of capacity.
4. The cement price is about 11.7 USD per bulk (50 Kg).
Plant name
Barranquilla
El Cairo
Puerto Inmarco
Sabanagrande
Argos-Sogamoso
Toluviejo
Bucaramanga
Caracolito
Cúcuta
La Calera
Rioclaro
Company
Location
Annual cement
production
Cementos del Caribe SA Vía 40, Las Flores, Atlántico
(Argos)
Cementos el Cairo SA Santa Bárbara, Antioquía
(Argos)
Cementos Nare SA (Argos)
Cra 46 # 56-11. Piso 12
Medellín
Concrecem S.A. (Argos)
Sabanagrande, Atlántico
Cementos Paz del Rio SA Km 6 vía Sogamoso Corrales,
(Argos)
Sogamoso, Boyacá
1.50 Mt/yr
Cales y Cementos de KM 26 Sincelejo Tolu,
Toluviejo SA (TOLCEMENTO) Toluviejo, Sucre
(Argos)
Cemex
Km.
4
Vía
Rionegro,
Bucaramanga, Santander
Cemex Caracolito
Km 6 Via Buenos Aires,
Payandé, Tolima
Cemex
Km 7 Los Patios vía Pamplona,
Norte de Santander
Cemex
Planta Santa Rosa, Km 14 vía
La Calera, Cundinamarca
0.85 Mt/yr
Cementos San Marcos SA
Cementos Rioclaro SA
0.16 Mt/yr
1.4 Mt/yr
Yumbo, Valle del Cauca
Km 160, Sonson-Antioquia
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
0.39 Mt/yr
0.38 Mt/yr
0.18 Mt/yr
1.40 Mt/yr
0.17 Mt/yr
2.53 Mt/yr
0.33 Mt/yr
--
131
AntioquiaMedellin
Colclinker
Puerto Isaacs
Cementos el Cairo SA
Cra 49#24-398, Medellin
La Siberia
Cementos del Caribe SA
Cartagena
Cementos del Valle SA Yumbo, Valle del Cauca
(Argos)
Cementos de Caldas SA
Los Llanos, Municipio de
Neira, Caldas
Cementos Boyaca SA
Via a Nobsa, Nobsa, Boyaca
Cemex
Km 14, Via Bogota, La Calera,
Cundinamarca
Cemex
Km 5 Via La Calera
Tolima
Cemex
Montebello,
Antioquia
Cementos el Cairo SA
Neira, Caldas
Nobsa
Santa Rosa
0.390
Mt/yr
(grinding facility)
1.25 Mt/yr
1.5 Mt/yr
0.25 Mt/yr
1.70 Mt/yr
0.894
Mt/yr
(grinding facility)
Temporarily shut
down
Km 22 Via Ibague, Espinal
Temporarily shut
down
Carretera Medillin km 60, 0.187 Mt/yr
Montebello, Antioquia
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
132
Annex 5: Major Private Sector Contractors Active in Colombia
Overview of Waste Management Companies in Colombia
According to the “2010 Ranking of water and sanitation companies in Colombia”, by lanota.com, there
are a number of SWM companies in the top five ranking according to annual revenue. Those are
Sociedad de Acueducto, Alcantarillado and Aseo de Barranquilla (Triple A), with total sales of
approximately US$149 millon, 2.1% more than 2009, followed by Group Ethuss with its companies:
Interaseo (US$62 million), Aseo Técnico de La Sabana (Atesa) (US$29 million); Aseo Técnico (US$20
million); Atesa de Occidente (US$14 million); Interaseo del Valle (US$9 million) and Aseo Soledad (US$8
million); which collectively account for a total of US$143 million, growing 16,4% compared to 2009.
Other companies included in this ranking are shown in the next table:
Company
Empresas Varias de Medellín
Aseo Capital
Limpieza Metropolitana (Lime)
Servigenerales
Aseo Urbano - Sala Group
Empresas Metropolitana de Aseo (Emas) - Sala Group
Ciudad Limpia
Source: Lanota.com 2011
Annual Sales
(USD million)
72
50
47
23
17
11
35
Annual growth
2009 - 2010
4,4%
6,4%;
2,9%;
10,9%.
1,9%
20,2%
5,5%;
Company profiles
ETHUSS GROUP (Colombia) - www.interaseo.com.co - ETHUSS is a Colombian group that, in 1993,
established itself as a waste management company under the law that established the ability for
private investors to operate public services (Law 142). Currently, Interaseo S.A. (its main subsidiary
company) has a major presence in several Colombian departments and capital cities, such as
Barranquilla, Valledupar, Sincelejo, Santa Marta, Riohacha, Bogotá, Ibagué, Pereira and Cali. In
addition, the company also provides international services and operates landfills in San Miguel
(Panama) and Quito (Ecuador).
GROUP SALA (Colombia) - www.gruposala.com.co - Created in 1996, Group SALA manages five
landfills receiving about 7% of the waste generated by the country. The two head companies, Aseo
Urbano and EMAS are certified with ISO 9000; other companies of the group are in the process of
certification.
TRIPLE A S.A E.S.P (Colombia) - www.aaa.com.co – Since 1991,Triple A provides water, sanitation
and solid waste management services to over 1.5 million people in the city of Barranquilla. This
company also has operations in the Dominican Republic and Mexico.
IMPSA (Argentina) - IMPSA is a 100 year-old Argentinean company that provides integrated
solutions for power generation from renewable resources, equipment for the process industry and
environmental services. Today it holds a portfolio of projects for power generation from renewable
resources which exceed 40,000 MW in more than 25 countries.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
133
SERVIGENERALES (Colombia) - www.servigenerales.com - SERVIGENERALES is a private company
created in Colombia in 1996 which currently operates in medium size cities including Armenia, Buga,
facatativa, Montería, Soacha, Tunja and Yumbo. This company recently associated with ASEO CAPITAL
(which is also private), created in 1992 for provision of solid waste collection service for about 25% of
Bogota´s service subscribers.
VEOLIA ENVIRONNEMENT (France) - A French company in existence for about 155 years in Europe,
in Central and Latin America, Veolia Water is present via a Colombian subsidiary (Proactiva Medio
Ambiente) of the Veolia Environment Group and the FCC group (United Kingdom). In the solid waste
sector, Veolia owns Onyx - C.C.L. (Ciudad Limpia) which is involved in solid waste collection.
The following is a general listing of the municipalities where private companies are currently active.
LOCATIONS WHERE MAJOR PRIVATE SECTOR COMPANIES ARE WORKING
Company name
Year
Department
Aseo Caldas Empresa De Servicios Publicos
1997 Antioquia
Aseo Siderense S.A. E.S.P.
1998 Antioquia
Empresa De Aseo Sabaneta S.A. E.S.P.
1998 Antioquia
Serviaseo Itagui S.A.E.S.P.
1997 Antioquia
Sociedad De Aseo De Bello S.A. E.S.P.
1996 Antioquia
Aseo Especial Soledad S.A. E.S.P.
2005 Atlantico
Aseo Tecnico De La Sabana S.A E.S.P
2003 Bogota, D.C.
Aseo Tecnico S. A.
1994 Bogota, D.C.
Aseo Del Norte S.A. E.S.P.
2000 Cesar
Empresa De Servicios De Aseo De Valledupar
Ethuss
1998 Cesar
S.A
Ethuss
Interaseo De La Frontera S.A E.S.P
2000 La Guajira
Ethuss
Interaseo S.A E.S.P
1996 Magdalena
Ethuss
Interaseo Del Valle S.A E.S.P.
2007 Valle Del Cauca
Sociedad De Acueducto, Alcantarillado Y Aseo
Grupo Triple Aaa
1991 Atlantico
De Barranquilla S.A. E.S.P.
Impsa
Limpieza Metropolitana S.A E.S.P.
2003 Bogota, D.C.
Sala
Aseo Urbano De La Costa S.A. E.S.P
2005 Bolivar
Sala
Empresa Metropolitana De Aseo De Chinchina
1995 Caldas
Sala
Empresa Metropolitana De Aseo S.A. E.S.P.
1994 Caldas
Servigenerales - Aseo
Trash Busters S.A. E.S.P.
1995 San Andres
Servigenerales – Aseo Consorcio Aseo Capital S.A.
2001 Bogota, D.C.
Servigenerales – Aseo Ecocapital Internacional S.A Esp
2004 Bogota, D.C.
Servigenerales - Aseo
Servigenerales Ciudad De Duitama S.A. Esp
2009 Boyaca
Servigenerales - Aseo
Servigenerales Ciudad De Tunja S.A. E.S.P.
2007 Boyaca
Centro De Gerenciamiento De Residuos Doña
Veolia
2010 Bogota, D.C.
Juana S.A. E.S.P
Veolia
Ciudad Limpia Bogotá S.A. E.S.P.
1998 Bogota, D.C.
Veolia
Ciudad Limpia Del Huila S.A. E.S.P.
2007 Huila
Veolia
Proactiva Oriente S.A. E.S.P.
2000 Norte De Santander
Veolia
Aseo Ambiental S.A. E.S.P.
2001 Valle Del Cauca
Veolia
Aseo El Cerrito S.A. E.S.P.
1997 Valle Del Cauca
Veolia
Aseo Pradera S.A. E.S.P.
1997 Valle Del Cauca
Veolia
Bugueña De Aseo S.A. E.S.P.
1996 Valle Del Cauca
Veolia
Empresa Regional De Servicio Público De 2009 Valle Del Cauca
GROUP
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Ethuss
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Municipality
Caldas
La Estrella
Sabaneta
Itagui
Bello
Barranquilla
Bogota, D.C.
Bogota, D.C.
Valledupar
Valledupar
Maicao
Santa Marta
Yotoco
Barranquilla
Bogota, D.C.
Cartagena
Chinchina
Manizales
San Andres
Bogota, D.C.
Bogota, D.C.
Duitama
Tunja
Bogota, D.C.
Bogota, D.C.
Neiva
Cucuta
Yumbo
El Cerrito
Pradera
Guadalajara
Candelaria
134
Veolia
Veolia
Veolia
Candelaria S.A. Esp.
Palmirana De Aseo S.A. E.S.P.
Proactiva De Servicios S.A. E.S.P.
Tulueña De Aseo S.A. E.S.P.
1997
2000
1997
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Valle Del Cauca
Valle Del Cauca
Valle Del Cauca
Palmira
Cali
Tulua
135
Annex 6: Economic Model Assumptions
Model Input Values
Technical
Daily Processing
Capacity - Cali
Number of Processing
Days/year
Solid Waste
Composition
Organic Content
Paper
Cardboard
Glass
Aluminum
Scrap metal
Plastics
Plastic Bags
Recyclables Recovery
Rate-Mixed Solid Waste
Paper
Cardboard
Glass
Aluminum
Scrap metal
Units
Best
Case
Average
Case
Worst
Case
tons/day
-
1500
-
days
-
330
-
Morales, Guido Escobar. 2011.
Based on 365 day calender year with average industry standard 35 days taken for
maintenance and repairs
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
-
64
3.8
2.4
3.0
0.5
0.5
3.0
6.9
-
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. 2009.
%
%
%
%
%
-
15
15
15
15
15
-
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Sources
136
Plastics
Plastic Bags
Recyclables Recovery
Rate-Source Separated
Waste
%
%
-
15
15
-
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Based on Anticipated "dirty" MRF Performance
Paper
%
-
38
-
Cardboard
%
-
19
-
Plastics
%
-
16
-
Bags
%
-
50
-
Scrap Metal
%
-
80
-
Glass
Unit generation electricity WTE
Unit generation electricity AD
%
-
10
-
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
kWh/ton processed
-
500
-
Hogg, Dominic, et. al.
kWh /ton processed
-
150
-
Hogg, Dominic, et. al.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
137
Unit generation compost
Unit generation - RDF
tons/ton processed
tons/ton processed
-
.10
.40
-
Hogg, Dominic, et. al.
Hogg, Dominic, et. al.
Financial
Annual Interest Rate
Term of Loan
Debt to Equity Ratio
%
7
7
7
years
10
10
10
%
100/0
100/0
100/0
Revenues
Tipping Fee
Unit Revenue for
Electricity
USD/ton
16
14
12
USD/kWh
0.066
0.057
0.049
Unit Revenue for
Compost
USD/ton
41-81
21-41
0
Unit Revenue for Refuse
Derived Fuel
USD/ton
30
15
0
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
10 years at 7% is based on previous energy projects sponsored by IDEA that have
been financed. (Cambridge Project Development Inc. 2011.)
10 years at 7% is based on previous energy projects sponsored by IDEA that have
been financed. (Cambridge Project Development Inc. 2011.)
In a U.S. municipal solid waste project, 100% debt would be a viable assumption but
in Colombia lenders would expect a certain % of equity. For a city project this would
be a cash contribution to the project costs. For purposes of this analysis, 100% debt
was assumed however equity contributions will have a measurable impact on the
level of annual debt service payments. (Resource Mobilization Advisors.)
Hill Consulting based on primary research with solid waste operators.
Cambridge Project Development Inc. 2011.
Correal, Magda C. et al. 2008. Ranges in best case scenario and average case scenario
reflect the expected price difference for high quality compost produced from source
separated organics.
Caputo C., Antonio and Pelagagge M., Pacifico. RDF production plants: Design and
costs. Applied Thermal Engineering. Volume 22, Issue 4, March 2022, pages 423-437.
Print.
138
Unit Revenue for
Recyclables
Paper
Newspaper
Cardboard
USD/kg
USD/kg
USD/kg
+20%
+20%
+20%
0.17
0.10
0.08
-20%
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
-20%
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
-20%
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
Glass
USD/kg
+20%
0.03
-20%
Aluminum
USD/kg
+20%
1.12
-20%
Scrap metal
USD/kg
+20%
0.15
-20%
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
139
Plastics
USD/kg
+20%
0.14
-20%
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011. Best and worst case assume a 20% increase and 20% decrease,
respectively.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Paper
USD/kg
620
+10%
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Bags
USD/kg
500
+10%
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Cardboard
USD/kg
285
+10%
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Glass
USD/kg
80
+10%
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Scrap metal
USD/kg
410
+10%
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una
Plastics
USD/kg
747
+10%
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
+20%
Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad
De Cali. 2011.
140
Costs
Capital Cost:
Cali (1500 tons per day)
Waste to Energy
MBT
(Anaerobic
Digestion)
million USD
242
197
152
Wheeler, P.A., and L de Rome. 2002.
million USD
215
149
83
Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (defra). 2007.
million USD
60
42.5
25
million USD
70
52.5
35
MRF-RDF
million USD
67
49.5
32
Tsilemou, Konstantinia and Panagiotakopoulos, Demetrios. Economic Assessment of
Mechanical-Biological Treatment Facilities. No.1 (39) p.55-63. Environmental
Research, Engineering and Management, 2007.
Database
of
Waste
Management
Technologies
(epem.gr/waste-ccontrol/database/default.htm)
Database
of
Waste
Management
Technologies
(epem.gr/waste-ccontrol/database/default.htm)
MRF (recyclables only)
Operating Cost:
Cali (1500 tons per day)
million USD
13
11
9
Tsilemou, Konstantinia and Panagiotakopoulos, Demetrios. 2007.
Technologies
(epem.gr/
60
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
Technologies
(epem.gr/
80
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
Technologies
(epem.gr/
25
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
MRF-Compost
(Windrow)
MRF-Compost
(Advanced)
Waste to Energy
MBT
Digestion)
USD/ton
110
85
(Anaerobic
MRF-Compost
(Windrow)
USD/ton
USD/ton
120
50
100
37.5
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
141
MRF-Compost
(Advanced)
USD/ton
60
47.5
Technologies
(epem.gr/
35
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
Technologies
(epem.gr/
Technologies
(epem.gr/
MRF-RDF
USD/ton
60
50
40
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
MRF (recyclables only)
USD/ton
70
55
40
Database
of
Waste
Management
waste-c-control/database/default.htm)
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
142
Annex 7: Construction and Demolition Waste Management
Throughout the world, the management of construction and demolition waste (C&D) has become an
important urban and environmental issue. This is primarily due to increasing construction activities
particularly in urban areas that result in growing quantities of construction-related waste. An increase in
construction activities usually results in the increased demand for construction materials that deplete
raw materials and, in some cases, cause environmental damage. Since construction is often associated
with demolition activities, waste from demolition activities is also similarly increasing.
In many countries, some types of the construction waste is used as fill or base material in road and
building construction often without any standards or regulations governing such activities. Some of the
C&D waste stream is also delivered to municipal landfills that are primarily designed for municipal solid
waste thereby using up airspace capacity. Unfortunately, in many countries with evolving environmental
and regulatory standards, much of the waste derived from construction and demolition activities is
dumped randomly along roads, in ravines, or in any convenient but inappropriate open space.
Uncontrolled disposal of C&D in this manner can cause contamination of soil, water and air. However,
these effects have not been properly evaluated and quantified in many countries. In addition, the
proper management of this material has often not been a high priority when compared to other
potential environmental and urban issues such as those associated with managing municipal or
hazardous solid waste. While there is a common understanding that recovered components of a C&D
waste stream can replace the need for raw materials for new construction products or for other uses,
the systems and programs required to accomplish this have not been established in many countries
including Colombia.
Description of Construction and Demolition Waste - C&D waste can make up a significant
proportion (up to 50%) of all the solid waste generated in a country. The material can be as diverse in
composition as the structures from which it derives. The material can be of mineral or organic origin,
inert or hazardous, homogeneous or mixed. The following are commonly accepted definitions of the
type and properties of typical C&D waste.
•
•
Construction waste is derived from building construction and renovation, and results from
excess material beyond that required for a particular construction task. Construction waste can
also be derived from damaged or broken material, cut-off pieces, processing waste such as
sawdust, old tools and accessories, packaging and the general solid waste generated by
construction personnel during their work activities.
Demolition waste can be derived from a number of activities including: 1) natural disasters
such as earthquakes and hurricanes, 2) wars or civil conflict, 3) vandalism and 4) accidents
(explosions, fires, collapse of weak structures, etc.). Demolition material can also logically result
from the purposeful demolition of structures (building, roads, etc.) that are being renovated or
completely removed to make room for new structures. Every part of a structure, from the roof
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
143
to a foundation can be a source of demolition waste and this contributes to its composition
variation.
Colombian legislation also classifies various solid waste forms as “special waste” including construction
and demolition materials, as well as hazardous and hospital waste. According to applicable guidelines
construction and demolition material must be managed separately in accordance with existing
regulations. Resolution 541/1994 is the main regulation regarding construction and demolition materials
in Colombia. In addition, Decree 1713 of 2002 (Article 44) states that debris generators are responsible
for collection, transport and disposal of these materials in authorized places. Local or regional
authorities and public services companies must coordinate the control of these activities using the PGIRS
as the local guideline. Decree 838 of 2005 further modified Title VIII of Decree 1713/2002, and
established the current policy relative to final disposal of solid waste. An important aspect of
subsequent modifications is that Law 1259 of 2008 and 1466 of 2011 created a legal instrument to fine
individuals or companies who do not meet national standards.
Problems of C&D disposal - When distances to formal disposal sites are too great or if the tipping fees
for disposal are high, C&D is often dumped illegally at roadsides, in depressions, in rivers, etc. Once this
has happened, there is often a high cost to remove the accumulated waste from these informal and
inappropriate locations. These costs usually have to be borne by municipalities or by private landowners
who own the property where the material was dumped.
Disposing of C&D in municipal solid waste landfills and in uncontrolled locations while also producing
new materials and components for the construction industry contributes to the depletion of natural
resources. This use of virgin materials can also cause environmental damage by generating noise, dust,
air pollution while also requiring higher energy consumption that results in increased CO2 emissions.
While this clearly supports the need for C&D processing and recycling, the necessary systems and
facilities that are required to copy this are difficult to implement without sound enforcement of effective
regulations that govern the management of the material from its source to the manner by which it is
disposed of. In addition, the recovery of C&D components will usually not occur without fostering an
economic reason to recover specific components of the C&D waste stream for various productive
purposes.
Recycling or reuse of C&D - Efforts to promote the reuse and recycling of C&D have been difficult to
develop throughout the world. The material has generally been considered as waste with little recovery
value. In recent years, however, there has been change in perception where construction and
demolition waste is now perceived as a potential source of recoverable materials with some value. In
some situations, the value of the recovered materials has justified the work required to separate the
target components. However, to be accomplished at a significant scale, a regulatory driver has often
been necessary mandating recovery processes or prohibiting disposal of the material at municipal solid
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
144
waste landfills. In some cases, high charges for disposal or steep fines for inappropriate disposal have
created a sufficient incentive for the development of recovery processes. In addition, markets for
recovered materials must be available or developed to support the economic function of recovery
processes which must be capable of meeting market specifications concerning the physical
characteristics of the recovered materials. These dynamics are not currently available in Colombia to
drive the development of construction and demolition recovery processes to the degree required to deal
with the C&D problem in most cities.
For C&D to be reused or recycled, the demolition of buildings should be carefully planned, properly
organized and strictly controlled to assure that recoverable materials are not affected to the degree
where their value is lost. In its most strict sense, deconstruction can take place in the reverse order of
construction to derive recoverable materials in their purest form. However this is often difficult and
time-consuming when compared to simply demolishing a building in its entirety. To optimize recovery
opportunities, care must also be taken to prevent potential environmental or health problems that may
be associated with dangerous materials that may be found in some structures such as asbestos or
asbestos-containing materials.
The table on the following page shows the common materials that comprise C&D waste streams. The
table also identifies the recovery processes often used to secure the material and the end uses for which
the material can be utilized. As shown, the opportunities that are available for reusing individual
components are often a function of the manner by which they are derived with greater opportunities
available for clean materials.
Difficulties In Establishing Effective C&D Management Systems - C&D management is not being
practiced in a systematic way in many countries. However, some individual activities can be found in
almost all countries. In the United States and European Union, C&D management has evolved to a point
where the material is effectively managed as a result of both regulatory and economic factors. However,
it took a long time for this to be the case because of the early perception that this material was not as
dangerous as other forms of solid waste. The main reasons why there has been slow progress in
establishing effective C&D management practices in some countries include the following:
1. The lack of awareness on the part of the general public about the problems associated with the
uncontrolled disposal of construction and demolition waste - There is often a general perception
that some forms of construction and demolition debris are not as dangerous as industrial or
municipal solid waste.
2. The lack of public acceptance that wastes of all forms may be a source of recoverable
components - in some cases, public purchasing approaches is often biased to products made
from virgin materials rather than recycled. This is often the case even if the materials produced
from recycled content are less expensive than those produced from virgin materials.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
145
3. The ease of disposing of waste legally or illegally especially when there is little or no
enforcement of applicable regulations - A lack of enforcement of regulatory standards regarding
the disposal of construction and demolition debris make it easy for C&D generators or haulers to
dump the material in inappropriate locations. Once dumped, it is practically impossible to
determine the origin of the material and cleanup becomes the responsibility of municipalities or
private property owners.
4. The lack of clear and effective C&D management policies at the national and local level - While
municipalities generally recognize that the inappropriate disposal of C&D material as a problem,
there is often a lack of clear management policies and regulations concerning this material.
However, even if the policies and regulations are in place, they must be accompanied with strict
and effective enforcement.
5. The lack of technology, knowledge and standards in many countries - The progress that has
been made in locations such as the United States and the European Union can be utilized to
develop effective practices in Colombia for managing C&D materials. This would allow
municipalities in Colombia to learn from both the successful and unsuccessful practices that
have been developed in the locations with evolved C&D management standards.
6. The lack of markets for reusable or recycled C&D components - As is the case with the recovery
of any recycled content, effective markets must exist for recovered materials. If readily
identifiable markets do not currently exist, it is necessary to establish markets through
education or incentive programs that provide better opportunities for the sale of recovered
materials.
7. The lack of funds to establish effective programs or to construct C&D processing centers Typically, municipalities face many different urban environmental issues that they must address.
As a result, the funds available to develop effective C&D programs or to develop processing
centers are often difficult to secure given the priority often placed to other issues.
8. The lack of information on good practices - Sound practices can be defined from the lessons
learned in industrialized countries where C&D management practices have evolved. However,
the ability to educate C&D generators on these practices is often difficult. This is compounded
by the fact that these sound practices are often significantly more costly than their direct cost of
inappropriate dumping whether this is done by the generator or by a hauling contractor that is
commissioned to take the material away from the construction or demolition site.
COMMON CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION MATERIALS AND THEIR USES
Type of Material
Recovery Process
End uses
Plain concrete (DW)
1. Crushed
Fresh concrete (CW)
1. Washed to remove cement
1. Aggregate
and recover aggregate
1. Crushed and steel bars removed 1. Crushed concrete reused as aggregate
2. Steel recycled
2. New reinforcement steel
Reinforced concrete
1. Aggregate
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
146
Clay bricks and roof tiles
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
3. Pulverized
1. Reused for masonry
2. Aggregate
3. Mixed with lime to produce mortar
Calcium silicate bricks
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
3. Pulverized
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
1. Crushed and cold-mixed
2. Crushed and hot-mixed
1. Reused for masonry
2. Aggregate
3. Recycled into new calcium silicate bricks
1. Reused for masonry
2. Aggregate
1. Flooring, cladding
2. Aggregate
1. Flooring, cladding
2. Aggregate
1. Road base, fill material
2. Road construction
Mixed DW (asphalt, bricks,
concrete)
1. Crushed
1. Road base, fill material
Steel
1. Cleaned
2. Recycled
1. Reused steel components
2. New steel components
Aluminum
Timber beams, doors, etc.
1. Cleaned
2. Recycled
1. Cleaned
1. Reused Alum. Components
2. New Alum. Components
1. Reused as beams, doors, etc.
Timber boards
1. Cleaned
Timber (miscellaneous items) 1. Cut to suitable sizes
2. Chipped
1. Reused for various products
2. Feedstock for engineered woods
1. Firewood, co-processing
2. Landscape mulch, soil conditioner, fuel, etc.
Plastics
1. Recycled
1. New products
Gypsum plasterboard
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
3. Recycled
1. Reuse as boards
2. Soil conditioner
3. New gypsum products
Glass
1. Cleaned
2. Crushed
3. Recycled
1. Reused for windows, mirrors, etc.
2. Aggregate
3. New products
Electrical and sanitary
fixtures
1. Clean
1. Reuse
2. Separate unusable items into 2. New products
individual components to facilitate
recycling
Insulation
1. Clean
2. Recycle
1. Reuse
2. New products
Packaging materials
1. Recycle
1. New packaging material
Natural stone masonry
Natural stone slabs
Ceramic tiles
Asphalt paving
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
147
Benefits of introducing C&D Management and recovery Systems
Experience in industrialized countries has shown that the benefits of effective C&D management
programs outweigh any drawbacks that are encountered. The main benefits of introducing sustainable
C&D Management Systems are:
1. Environmental and aesthetic improvement - Municipalities are faced with significant
aesthetic issues associated with the inappropriate dumping of construction and demolition
debris waste. Once inappropriately dumped, the cost of cleaning up this material is high and
must be borne either by municipalities or landowners on which the material is dumped.
2. Healthy conditions - In addition, people living or working near inappropriate dumping sites
are often exposed to potential health issues derived from the exposure to the materials
contained in the accumulated C&D waste.
3. Increase of landfill life spans - C&D recovery processes will decrease the amount of material
that eventually must be placed into landfills. This can help to extend the life of any formal
disposal site.
4. Saving natural resources, as well as foreign exchange for imports - The use of recovered
components from a C&D stream will offset the need for raw materials derived from natural
resources, both those produced domestically or imported.
5. Saving energy for production of new materials - The reuse of construction and demolition
waste components will save energy that would otherwise be used from producing new
products. This will result in beneficial GHG mitigation impacts. In a study of the effects of
recycling C&D materials in the United States, the USEPA estimated that increasing recycling of
construction and demolition debris materials to 100% will mitigate up to 150 MMTCO2e per
year; to 50% 75 MMTCO2e per year; and to 25% 40 MMTCO2e per year.
6. Reduction of costs of new constructions - Recovered materials may be less costly than new
products manufactured with virgin materials. This could have the effect of reducing the overall
cost of new constructions
Important prerequisites and recommendations for efficient C&D management in Colombia
A number of measures are necessary for the development of effective C&D management systems and
programs in Colombia. These may be viewed as the types of actions that may be required to accomplish
the effective management of C&D materials in the country.
1. Research and development - Research concerning the effects of inappropriate dumping of
C&D materials will help to establish the basis by which effective regulations and enforcement
can be achieved. In addition, research may be required to provide a basis by which the
construction industry will accept the quality of recovered materials in meeting appropriate
building and construction standards thereby increasing the market opportunities for recovered
materials.
2. Legislation and enforcement - Effective C&D management requires legal status and proper
enforcement of rules and regulations to prevent poor and illegal practices. This enforcement
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
148
needs to be accompanied with sufficient fines that will serve as a strong incentive for properly
managing the material from its source to final disposal or recovery.
3. Economic incentives to support the market - In addition to research and development
concerning the characteristics of recovered materials, economic factors such as the lower cost
of construction materials derived from recovered C&D components will increase the
opportunity for reusing or selling recovered materials. In addition, public procurement practices
in construction that give preference to recycled materials that meet required specifications will
create greater demand for this materials. Such actions will be important in establishing
sufficient outlets for the materials.
Conclusions and Recommendations
As a result of this initial assessment, CCAP concludes the following in regard to including construction
and demolition waste initiatives in an integrated Waste NAMA in Colombia:
1. The improper disposal of construction and demolition waste is a major environmental and
anesthetic problem in many Colombian cities.
2. While laws and regulations exist to address construction and demolition waste, enforcement is
lacking with the result that indiscriminate disposal of the material in inappropriate locations
continues.
3. Experience in industrialized countries has shown that various components of construction and
demolition waste can be recovered and sold if markets exist for the recovered material.
4. Due to the typical composition of construction and demolition waste in Colombia, climate
change (GHG mitigation) benefits may be primarily derived through avoided emissions resulting
from the use of recovered materials in lieu of virgin materials for producing new construction
products or through direct reuse in construction projects.
5. Even with the maximum recovery of construction and demolition waste components through
reuse, processing and recycling, GHG mitigation benefits are expected to be significantly lower
than what could be achieved through processing and recovery processes associated with
municipal solid waste stream which can contribute significant levels of organic material to
anaerobic decomposition and resulting methane generation processes in Colombian landfills.
Based on these conclusions, CCAP recommends the following:
1. The national and municipal governments of Colombia should continue their efforts to improve
the management of construction and demolition waste through further research into alternative
uses of C&D materials and through enhanced enforcement of existing laws and regulations.
2. The management of construction and demolition material involves processes and output
markets that are unique to the specific physical characteristics of the C&D waste. Since GHG
mitigation benefits are greater from new approaches associated with managing municipal solid
waste and its high organic content, CCAP recommends that the management of construction
and demolition waste not be part of the integrated Waste NAMA based on potential resources
available to accomplish meaningful progress in implementing the Waste NAMA in the near term.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
149
Annex 8: Extended Product Responsibility
In the original discussion concerning the content of a possible Waste NAMA in Colombia, consideration
was given to including Extended Product Responsibility as an element of the waste NAMA. With this
inclusion, EPR implementation would create a regulation for specific sectors where the responsibility of
the producer over the whole life cycle of a product is established. In the waste management sector, this
will encourage recycling and source reduction. An EPR policy is characterized by: (1) the shifting of
responsibility (physically and/or economically; fully or partially) upstream toward the producer and
away from municipalities who are totally responsible for solid waste management; and (2) the provision
of incentives to producers to take into account environmental considerations when designing their
products.
The Ministry of the Environment has already started to produce mandatory regulations for the postconsumption treatment of several goods (including pesticide containers, medicines and expired drugs,
and batteries and other electric accumulators); under which manufacturers must establish adequate
channels so clients can return the products once they are used. Extending these efforts to other sectors
will require overcoming barriers such as: a lack of technical capacities to implement such a program, a
lack of education in the general population about the importance and benefits of recycling, and the
presence of a very strong informal sector that depends on recycling for a living. Support from
contributing countries would help promote EPR by providing financial assistance for the transition to a
system that produces less landfill waste and emissions, capacity building, and the development and
implementation of a comprehensive educational initiative.
1. Proposed core components of the EPR Waste NAMA element would include the following
activities:
2. An analytical study to identify GHG emission reduction potential in different sectors and cobenefits of such a policy in order to identify priority sectors. The study would also identify
possible legal and other barriers for implementing EPR in the identified priority sectors.
3. Proposal to define the mechanism of EPR that will be implemented for each selected sector, in
the case that a different mechanism is required for particular sectors (e.g., deposit refunds,
quotas, product bans, etc.).
4. Creation of an educational component to improve public consciousness about the importance of
recycling.
5. Propose any necessary legal and regulatory changes to achieve the objective.
EPR Basics
Extended Producer/Product responsibility (EPR) is a strategy designed to promote the
integration of environmental costs and responsibility associated with products throughout their life
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
150
cycles into the production of the products. In this way, policies are adopted that require producers to be
financially or physically responsible for their products after their useful life.
The concept was first formally introduced in Sweden by Thomas Lindhqvist in a 1990 report to the
Swedish Ministry of the Environment. Subsequently, the following definition was initially adopted which
still applies over 20 years later.
EPR is an environmental protection strategy to reach an environmental objective of a
decreased total environmental impact of a product, by making the manufacturer of the
product responsible for the entire life-cycle of the product and especially for the takeback, recycling and final disposal of the product.
In many cases, EPR uses governmental policy and regulations as well as economic incentives to
encourage manufacturers to design environmentally responsible products by holding producers
responsible for the costs of managing their products at the end of their life cycles. This policy approach
attempts to relieve local governments of the full cost of managing priority products by requiring
manufacturers to internalize the cost of recycling or disposal within the product price. EPR is based upon
the principle that because producers have the greatest control over product design and marketing and
these same companies also have the greatest ability and responsibility to reduce toxicity and the
quantity of waste derived from using the product.
EPR across the world can take the form of a reuse, buy-back, rake-back or recycling programs. In
addition, the producer may choose to delegate responsibility for managing the end of life material to a
third party paid by the producer for end-product management. In this way, EPR shifts the responsibility
for waste management from the government to private industry.
In the last 20 years, EPR programs grew in popularity in Europe and Asia. Some countries, such as the
United States, consider mandated EPR programs, as in Europe, too costly and, therefore favor voluntary
programs where producers participate by agreement. In addition, the concept of EPR is somewhat
controversial with differing opinions as to its value and results. The end results and effects are difficult
to measure which makes it difficult to consider the approach as a possible element of a Waste NAMA in
Colombia.
A number of economic approaches are currently employed to achieve EPR objectives including:
•
•
Deposit refund systems: Deposit refund systems can encourage reuse and, at a minimum,
provide an economic incentive to consumers to return products or containers.
Targeted Product Taxes: Product taxes influence the choice of materials used to manufacture
a product. For example, a targeted eco-tax is levied in Belgium that reduced the consumption of
PVC which, when combusted contributes to the generation of trace organic emissions such as
dioxin.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
151
•
Advanced disposal fees: These fees are designed to influence the choice of materials used,
and can generate substantial funds which may or may not be used by government for
environmental projects. They are sometimes refunded to consumers, but generally the
consumer is unaware of the fee.
The principle of Extended Product Responsibility is an outgrowth and modification of the term Extended
Producer Responsibility which is intended to not solely place the responsibility strictly on the producer.
This is the basis for the German Packaging Ordinance and other European policies where responsibility is
shared. The German Packaging Ordinance, for instance, is a system of shared responsibility among the
retailers of packaged products, the producers of packaging, and consumers. The term Extended Product
Responsibility has gained greater acceptance in the United States because it implies shared
responsibilities in the product chain, although often the producer is in the best position, both technically
and economically, to influence the rest of the product chain in reducing life-cycle environmental
impacts.
Extended Producer Responsibility in Colombia
In Colombia, there are some EPR regulations that encourage product producers to take care of the
whole life cycle of their products. The sectors with Colombia’s EPR regulation, at this point, are pesticide
containers; medicines and expired drugs; used acid lead batteries; batteries and electric accumulators;
used tires; fluorescent light bulbs; computers and peripherals. These are some quantifiable results of
these initiatives:
•
•
•
•
•
Pesticide containers: Between 1998 and 2010, 31,695 people participated and 3,146 tons of
containers were reused, with coverage of 386 municipalities in 24 departments.
Expired Drugs: 110 collection points in Bogota, 75 in the metropolitan area of Valle de Aburra,
and a total of 7.4 tons of expired drugs collected.
Used Acid Lead Batteries: this program started in September 2010, no conclusive information
available yet, but many mechanic shops have installed collection units.
Batteries and Electric Accumulators: 6 collection points in Bogota, 4 in Medellin, 3 in Cali and 2
in Manizales. About 120 collection points in the whole country. By 2010, 300 kilograms had been
collected.
Used Tires: 20 collection points in Medellin, about 80 in Bogota and 20 in Cali. By 2010, 162 tons
of tires were collected.
Climate Change Aspects of Extended Producer Responsibility
In addition to increasing product innovations and resource conservation benefits associated with EPR
policies, these initiatives can frequently lead to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by:
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
152
•
•
•
•
Reducing emissions from energy consumption due to manufacturing. Products
reconfigured or redesigned to reduce materials require less energy to produce. Similarly,
products made from recycled materials, and more durable products, are also more energy
efficient. When less energy is used, fewer fossil fuels are burned and less carbon dioxide enters
the atmosphere.
Reducing emissions from incinerators where these technologies are used. Diverting
certain materials from incinerators through waste prevention or recycling reduces greenhouse
gas emissions.
Reducing methane emissions from landfills. Waste prevention and recycling diverts waste
from landfills, reducing methane emissions.
Increasing absorption of carbon dioxide by trees (carbon sinks). More efficient use of
paper and wood resources, through source reduction and recycling, leaves more trees standing
in the forest, to absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Policies and Processes for Implementing Extended Producer Responsibility in Colombia
EPR policies and initiatives have been implemented in many forms which are represented by three
principal approaches where the EPR programs are mandatory, negotiated or voluntary. As is the case
with most environmental based endeavors, mandatory programs will achieve the best results but are
often the most difficult to implement. This is especially the case for EPR programs because of their
inherent controversy relative to their actual value.
Irrespective of whether the programs are mandated or not there are different instruments that are
available to governments to achieve the desired results through EPR programs and policies. These
include the following categories and instruments that are available to the government of Colombia:
Regulatory instruments can include:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mandatory take-back;
Minimum recycled content standards;
Secondary materials utilization rate requirements;
Energy efficiency standards;
Disposal bans and restrictions;
Materials bans and restrictions; and
Product bans and restrictions
Economic instruments can include:
•
•
•
•
Advance disposal fees;
Virgin materials taxes;
Removing subsidies for virgin materials;
Deposit/refund; and
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
153
• Environmentally preferable products procurement
Information instruments can include:
•
•
•
•
•
Seal-of-approval types of environmental labeling (Green Seal, Blue Angel);
Environmental information labeling (energy efficiency labeling, CFC use);
Product environmental profiles for the whole life cycle of materials;
Product hazard warnings;
Product durability labeling
A number of reasons are usually presented as to why EPR should be considered as a preferred policy
approach for the end of life management for materials such as packaging and printed paper. The four
common stated benefits represent that EPR:
1. Causes producers to alter packaging design and material selection leading to increased
recyclable content thereby leading to higher recycling rates and/or less packaging use.
2. Provides additional funds for recycling programs, resulting in higher recycling rates.
3. Improves recycling program efficiency, leading to less cost, which provides a benefit to society.
4. Results in a fairer system of waste management in which individual consumers pay the cost of
their own consumption, rather than letting governments and general taxpayers pay the cost of
managing the resulting waste materials.
In recent investigations, the above benefit claims have been challenged where data has shown that the
benefits accrued in locations where aggressive EPR programs have been in existence for a while are not
greater than those accrued in regions with aggressive recycling policies and programs.
In implementing EPR policies and regulations in Colombia, lessons can be learned from the countries
where similar programs have already been developed. The various studies of the program development
that occurred in these countries indicated the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Characteristics of products affect the management of the EPR programs and their effectiveness.
Mandatory programs give better results in the case when desired recycling level is economically
unprofitable.
Mandatory numerical collection/reuse/recycling targets have been effective in achieving higher
results.
Substance/landfill bans drive product re-design and development of alternative substances.
An effective and convenient collection system is a prerequisite for consumer participation.
Establishment of a financial mechanism for durable, complex products poses more challenges
than that for non-durable, simple products.
Individual financial responsibility presents an important opportunity to stimulate design changes
if it works for the product system.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
154
As a result, the following can be viewed as essential elements of an effective EPR program which could
form the basis for a more formal implementation of such programs in Colombia. Effective EPR programs
have the following characteristics:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mandatory
Focus on products
Assignment of responsibility
Physical or financial responsibility
Performance standards and deadlines
Mandated phase-out of hazardous materials
Ban waste disposal and exports
Flexibility and accountability
Conclusions and Recommendations
As a result of its initial assessment, CCAP concludes the following in regard to including EPR initiatives in
an integrated Waste NAMA in Colombia:
1. Successful EPR programs throughout the world have helped to manage various solid waste
materials thereby reducing the amount of solid waste placed in landfills while supporting the
recovery and proper management (recycling, etc.) of specific materials through producer
support and initiatives.
2. Controversy exists regarding the actual benefit and results associated with EPR programs where
some believe that aggressive recycling initiatives and programs can achieve the same benefits
that are accomplished by the most successful EPR programs but with less institutional
complexity.
3. Because of the major impact of EPR programs on manufacturers, these programs are extremely
difficult to develop and implement. To date, successful programs have focused on solid waste
elements that may not contribute to significant GHG mitigation benefits. EPR associated with
materials with significant organic content such as the German packaging EPR initiative is driven
by regulatory requirements (Landfill Directives) that preclude the placement of untreated
organics in E.U. landfills.
4. It is very difficult to measure the actual results attributable to EPR programs and initiatives. This
may make it difficult to include the development of such a program in an integrated Waste
NAMA which must include MRV considerations to accurately measure the NAMA component
impacts and results.
Based on the above general conclusions, CCAP recommends the following:
1. The government of Colombia should continue to explore the potential benefits that could be
accrued through developing effective EPR programs similar to that which have been successful
in other countries.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
155
2. Because of the difficulties in measuring the results and performance of conventional EPR
initiatives and because of the evolving nature of landfill regulations in Colombia, CCAP
recommends that the development of EPR policies should not be included in the development
and implementation of the Colombia integrated Waste NAMA because of the long-term aspects
for developing such programs and the difficulty in measuring program results after EPR
programs have been implemented.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
156
Annex 9: References
1. Alcaldía De Santiago De Cali. Primer Informe Proyecto NAMA. Santiago De Cali: Alcaldía De
Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2012. Print.
2. Alcaldía Municipal De Ibagué. Plan De Gestión Integral De Residuos Sólidos. Primera
Actualización. Ibagué Tolima, Colombia, 2009. Print.
3. Aluna Consultores Limitada. Aproximación Al Mercado De Reciclables Y Las Experiencias
Significativas. Estudio Nacional Del Reciclaje Y Los Recicladores. 2011. Print.
4. Aluna Consultores Limitada. Informe Condensado Del Estudio Nacional De Reciclaje. 2011. Print.
5. AMVA, Universidad De Antioquia, and AINSA. Plan De Gestión Integral De Residuos Sólidos
Regional Del Valle De Aburrá. Rep. no. Convenio 325 De 2004. Medellín, Colombia, 2006. Print.
6. Arbeláez, Johannio Marulanda. Evaluación Y Ajuste De Plan De Gestión Integral De Residuos
Sólidos PGIRS 2004-2019. Alcaldía De Santiago De Cali. Departamento Administrativo De
Planeación Municipal. Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2009. Print.
7. Barrera, Luis G and Luis B Castillo. Plan De Gestión Integral De Residuos Sólidos Municipio De
Sogamoso. Compañía De Servicios Públicos De Sogamoso SA ESP. Municipio De Sogamoso,
Colombia, 2005. Print.
8. Boulet, Emmanuel, et al. Inter-American Development Bank. Landfill Guidelines. An Approach to
Support Climate Change Friendly Landfill Investments. Washington, DC, USA, 2010. Print.
9. Caicedo, Apolinar Salcedo. Alcaldía Municipal De Cali. Plan De Gestión Integral De Residuos
Sólidos PGIRS 2004-2019. Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2004. Print.
10. Cambridge Project Development Inc. Waste to Energy Facility at El Guacal Landfill. Feasibility
Study. Task 15 Report: Final Report. USTDA. 2011. Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
157
11. Comisión De Regulación De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento Básico (CRA). Bases De Los Estudios
Para La Revisión Del Marco Tarifario Para El Servicio Público De Aseo. Bogotá, Colombia, 2011.
Print.
12. Comisión De Regulación De Agua Potable Y Saneamiento Básico (CRA). Opción Tarifaria Para
Multiusuarios Del Servicio De Aseo. Bogotá, Colombia, 2006. Print.
13. Consejo Nacional De Política Económica Y Social. Departamento Nacional De Planeación.
Lineamientos Y Estrategias Para Fortalecer El Servicio Público De Aseo En El Marco De La Gestión
Integral De Residuos Sólidos. Documento Conpes 3530. Bogotá, Colombia, 2008. Print.
14. Consorcio NAM Ltda and Velzea Ltda. Gestión De Los Residuos Orgánicos En Las Plazas De
Mercado De Bogotá, Principales Resultados. No. Contrato PNUD (COL/96/23). Print.
15. Correal, Magda C. et al. Superintendencia De Servicios Públicos. Diagnóstico Sectorial. Plantas
De Aprovechamiento De Residuos Sólidos. Bogotá, Colombia, 2008. Print.
16. Corredor, Martha. El Sector Reciclaje En Bogotá Y Su Región: Oportunidades Para Los Negocios
Inclusivos. FUNDES, No. 2. 2010. Print.
17. Dávila, José L., and G. A. Stege. Manual Del Usuario. Modelo Colombiano De Biogás. Versión 1.0.
2009. Print.
18. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (defra). Mechanical Biological Treatment of
Municipal Solid Waste. Enviros Consulting Limited. 2007. Print.
19. Fundación Carvajal. Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una Empresa De Separación Y Reciclaje Para
Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 En Cali. Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2011 Print.
20. Fundación Carvajal. Informe No. 2 Estudio De Factibilidad Para El Montaje De Una Empresa De
Separación Y Reciclaje Para Los Recicladores De La Zona 1 De La Ciudad De Cali. Santiago De Cali,
Colombia, 2011. Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
158
21. Gobierno de Chile, GTZ, Eco Ing. CONAMA. Infome Final. Estudio de Evaluación de Impactos
Económicos, Ambientales y Sociales de la Implemntación de la Responsabilidad Extendida del
Productor en Chile. Santiago, Chile. 2010. Print.
22. Gráficas Ducal Ltda. Resultados De Los Estudios Realizados Por El DANE Y La UESP Sobre El
Reciclaje En Bogotá, 2001-2003. El Reciclaje En Bogotá. Actores, Procesos Y Perspectivas. Rep.
no. Convenio OEI' UESP No 007-03. 2004. Print.
23. Hogg, Dominic, et. al. U.K. Eunomia Research and Consulting. Economic Analysis of Options for
Managing Biodegradable Municipal Waste, Final Report to the European Commission. Bristol,
UK. Print.
24. Jaramillo, Gladys, and Zapata, Liliana M. Universidad De Antioquia Aprovechamiento De Los
Residuos Sólidos Orgánicos En Colombia. Medellín, Colombia, 2008. Print.
25. Juan, Fonseca. Foro Reciclaje Y Saneamiento Básico Para Una Mejor Calidad De Vida. Asociación
Nacional De Empresas De Servicios Públicos Y Comunicaciones (ANDESCO). Medellín, Colombia,
2012. Lecture.
26. Lettieri, P., and Al-Salem , S. M. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Municipal Solid Waste
Management in the State of Kuwait. Rep. Vol. 34. European Journal of Scientific Research. 2009.
Print.
27. Marco Político Y Normativo Para La Gestión Integral De Residuos Sólidos En Colombia. Proyecto
Selección De Tecnologías Para La Recolección, Transporte, Recuperación, Tratamiento Y
Disposición Final En Torno Al Manejo Integral De Residuos Sólidos En Municipios Menores De
50.000 Habitantes. Rep. no. Convenio IDEAM-UNICEF-CINARA. Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2005.
Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
159
28. Ministerio De Ambiente, Vivienda Y Desarrollo Territorial. Generación Y Gestión De Residuos O
Desechos Peligrosos En Colombia - Año 2009. Bogotá, Colombia, 2011. Print.
29. Ministerio De Ambiente, Vivienda Y Desarrollo Territorial. Política Ambiental Para La Gestión
Integral De Residuos O Desechos Peligrosos. Dirección De Desarrollo Sectorial Sostenible.
Bogotá, Colombia, 2005. Print.
30. Ministerio De Ambiente, Vivienda Y Desarrollo Territorial. Reglamento Técnico Del Sector De
Agua Potable Y Saneamiento Básico Y Ambiental- RAS. Sección II Título F Sistema De Aseo
Urbano. Bogotá, Colombia, 2009. Print.
31. Morales, Guido Escobar. Cali en Cifras. Alcaldía De Santiago De Cali. Departamento
Administrativo De Planeación Municipal. Santiago De Cali, Colombia, 2011. Print.
32. Organización Panamericana de la Salud, Organización Mundial de la Salud. Análisis Sectorial de
Residuos Sólidos en Colombia. 1996. Print.
33. Ortega, María N. América Latina: Casos De Éxito En Reciclaje De PET. Tecnología Del Plástico.
2011. Print.
34. Reyes, Jonathan R. Inventario De Gases De Efecto Invernadero –GEI. Instituto De Hidrología Y
Estudios Ambientales IDEAM. Subdirección De Estudios Ambientales. Bogotá, Colombia, 2011.
Print.
35. Resolución 1459, No 46058 Diario Oficial et seq. 2005. Print.
36. Sierra, Carlos Alberto Pacheco, Natalie Arteaga Duarte, and Rocio Tibocha Tatino. Compania de
Servicios Publicos de Sogamoso. Ampliacion Relleno Sanitario-Diseno Terraza Doce. Sogamos,
Colombia, 2008. Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
160
37. Stege, Alex and Jim Michelsen. Environmental Protection Agency. Landfill Methane Outreach
Program. Landfill Assessment and Pre-Feasibility Study for Landfill Gas Recovery and Utilization
at El Navarro Landfill. SCS Engineers. Cali, Colombia, 2008. Print.
38. Superintendencia De Servicios Públicos. Informe Anual Del Servicio Público De Aseo 2008.
Bogotá, Colombia, 2008. Print.
39. Superintendencia De Servicios Públicos. Estudio Sectorial De Aseo 2010. Bogotá, Colombia, 2011.
Print.
40. Superintendencia De Servicios Públicos. Situación De La Disposición Final De Residuos Sólidos En
Colombia- Diagnóstico 2011 Bogotá, Colombia, 2011. Print.
41. Terraza, Horacio, and Sturzenegger, Germán. Dinámicas De Organización De Los Recicladores
Informales. Tres Casos De Estudio En América Latina. Tech. no. No. 117. Banco Interamericano
De Desarrollo. 2010. Print.
42. Tsilemou, Konstantinia and Panagiotakopoulos, Demetrios. Economic Assessment of
Mechanical-Biological Treatment Facilities. No.1 (39) p.55-63. Environmental Research,
Engineering and Management. 2007. Print.
43. UNFCCC. CDM Executive Board. Project Design Document Form (CDM PDD): The ColombaGuabal Gas Project, 2010.
44. UNFCCC. CDM Executive Board. Project Design Document Form (CDM PDD): Curva de Rodas and
La Pradera Landfill Gas Management Project, 2010.
45. UNFCCC. CDM Executive Board. Project Design Document Form (CDM PDD): El Guacal Landfill
Gas Flaring Project, 2010.
46. Unidad Administrativa Especial De Servicios Públicos. Programa Para La Gestión De Los Residuos
Sólidos Orgánicos Para La Ciudad De Bogotá, D.C. Bogotá, Colombia, 2010. Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
161
47. Uribe, Eduardo, and Carolina Domínguez. Evolución Del Servicio De Aseo Domiciliario Durante La
Última Década. Publication No. CEDE 2005-20 ISSN 1657-7191. Universidad De Los Andes.
Bogotá, Colombia, 2005. Print.
48. Wheeler, P.A., and L de Rome. Waste Pre-Treatment, R & D Technical Report. Environment
Agency UK. 2002. Print.
49. World Bank. Solid Waste Management Program Project. Rep. no. Report No. 48592- CO. 2009.
Print.
Evaluation of NAMA Opportunities in Colombia’s Solid Waste Sector
162
Su pported b y :
750 First Street, NE, Suite 940 Washington, DC 20002
p +1.202.408.9260 f +1.202.408.8896
www.ccap.org

Similar documents