70167 Report Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation: Prepared for: Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emission May 2011 www.erm.com The World Bank Washington, DC Delivering sustainable solutions in a more competitive world FINAL REPORT The World Bank Washington, DC Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation: Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emission May 2011 ERM Project: 0130996 World Bank Vendor ID Number: 125432 Environmental Resources Management City Tower Building 250 Ponce de León Ave., Suite 900 San Juan, PR 00918 FINAL REPORT The World Bank Washington, DC Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation: Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emission May 2011 ERM Project: 0130996 World Bank Vendor ID Number: 125432 José A. Hernández, P.E. Partner-in-Charge Noel Marrero Project Manager Eileen M. Pagán Phase II Technical Expert Solid Waste and Institutional Specialist Daryl Beardsley Phase II Technical Advisor Solid Waste and Institutional Specialist CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 ACRONYMS 4 1 INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 AUTHORIZATION 5 1.2 OBJECTIVES 5 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH 6 2.1.1 STUDY LIMITATIONS 6 3 RATIONALE FOR SOURCE REDUCTION 7 3.1 WHY IS SOURCE REDUCTION IMPORTANT TO MUNICIPALITIES & GOVERNMENTS? 7 3.1.1 WASTE MANAGEMENT HIERARCHY 8 3.2 DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSION 9 4 WORLDWIDE RESEARCH-DATA GATHERING 13 4.1.1 LEVEL 1: SURVEY OF SOURCE REDUCTION PROGRAMS 17 4.1.2 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS 29 4.1.3 LESSONS LEARNED 29 4.1.4 NEW PROGRAMS 29 5 IN-DEPTH REVIEWS FOCUSED ON A SUBSET OF PROGRAMS 31 5.1 INTRODUCTION 31 5.2 LEVEL 2- LEGAL/POLICY REVIEW 32 5.2.1 LANDFILL TAX (EUROPEAN UNION, EU) SINCE (1999) 32 5.2.1.1 DEVELOPMENT: 32 5.2.1.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 33 5.2.1.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 33 5.2.1.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 33 5.2.2 VENUES AND EVENTS: REDUCING WASTE, CALIFORNIA (SINCE 2005) 34 5.2.2.1 DEVELOPMENT: 34 5.2.2.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 34 5.2.2.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 35 BESIDES INCREASING PERFORMANCE, NO CHANGES WERE HIGHLIGHTED 35 5.2.2.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 35 5.2.3 PACKAGING TAXES FOR NON-REFILLABLES, FINLAND (SINCE 1970S) 36 5.2.3.1 DEVELOPMENT: 36 5.2.3.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 36 5.2.3.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 37 5.2.3.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 37 5.2.4 PAY AS YOU THROW (PAYT) IN USA (SINCE 1980S) 38 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 i CONTENTS 5.2.4.1 DEVELOPMENT: 38 5.2.4.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 39 5.2.4.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 40 5.2.4.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 40 5.2.5 INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING REGULATIONS (EU) (SINCE 1994, AMENDED 2004) 41 5.2.5.1 DEVELOPMENT: 41 5.2.5.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 42 5.2.5.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 42 5.2.5.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 42 5.2.5.5 OTHER SIMILAR POLICIES IMPLEMENTED: 42 5.2.6 IRELAND’S PLASTIC BAG LEVY (SINCE 2001) 44 5.2.6.1 DEVELOPMENT: 44 5.2.6.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 44 5.2.6.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 45 5.2.6.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 45 5.2.7 GREEN PURCHASING LAW (SINCE 2000) 46 5.2.7.1 DEVELOPMENT: 46 5.2.7.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 47 5.2.7.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 47 5.2.7.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 48 5.2.8 CALGARY MATERIAL EXCHANGE (CMEX), SINCE 2005 49 5.2.8.1 DEVELOPMENT: 49 5.2.8.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 49 5.2.8.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 50 BESIDES INCREASING PERFORMANCE, NO CHANGES WERE HIGHLIGHTED 50 5.2.8.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 50 5.2.9 WASTEWISE USA (SINCE 1994) 51 5.2.9.1 DEVELOPMENT: 51 5.2.9.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 51 5.2.9.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 52 BESIDES INCREASING PERFORMANCE, NO CHANGES WERE HIGHLIGHTED 52 5.2.9.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 52 5.2.10 MACHU PICCHU’S PLASTIC BAN (2011) 53 5.2.10.1 DEVELOPMENT: 53 5.2.10.2 IMPLEMENTATION: 54 5.2.10.3 CHANGES OVER TIME: 54 5.2.10.4 SOURCE REDUCTION IMPACT: 54 6 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS – COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROGRAMS 56 6.1 INTRODUCTION 56 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 ii CONTENTS 6.2 CALGARY MATERIAL EXCHANGE (CMEX) – GREEN CALGARY, CANADA 58 6.2.1 INVESTMENT COST 58 6.2.2 BENEFITS OBTAINED 59 6.2.3 NET BENEFIT PER WASTE DIVERTED 59 6.3 BAG LEVY TAX – IRELAND 59 6.3.1 INVESTMENT COST 60 6.3.2 BENEFITS OBTAINED 61 6.3.3 NET BENEFIT PER WASTE DIVERTED 61 6.4 PAY AS YOU THROW – CART BASED PROGRAM – GAINESVILLE, FL, USA 61 6.4.1 INVESTMENT COST 62 6.4.2 BENEFITS OBTAINED 62 6.4.3 NET BENEFIT PER WASTE DIVERTED 62 6.5 OVERALL CONCLUSION OF COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS 64 7 UNDERSTANDING LAC CIRCUMSTANCES 66 7.1 WASTE FINAL DISPOSAL IN LAC ACCORDING TO THE SIZE OF THE POPULATION 66 7.1.1 SOLID WASTE GENERATION PER CAPITA AND SETTINGS IN LAC 67 7.1.2 LAC MSW COMPOSITION 68 7.1.3 CURRENT LAC UPSTREAM WASTE REDUCTION STRATEGIES 69 7.1.4 SELECT CASE STUDY IN THE TOURISM SECTOR IN A LAC COUNTRY – PERU MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE Nº 06-2008 (2001) 76 7.1.4.1 CUSCO CITY: 77 7.1.4.2 SACRED VALLEY: 79 8 ASSESSMENT OF STRATEGY IN LATIN AMERICA 81 8.1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 82 8.1.1 APPLICABILITY OF PROGRAMS IDENTIFIED IN LAC 84 8.1.1.1 PLASTIC BAG TAX: 87 8.1.1.2 LANDFILL TAX: 87 8.1.1.3 PACKAGING TAXES FOR NON-REFILLABLES: 87 8.1.1.4 JAPAN'S GREEN PURCHASING LAW (SINCE 2000): 88 8.1.1.5 WASTEWISE 88 8.1.1.6 MATERIALS EXCHANGE PROGRAMS: 89 8.1.1.7 INTERNATIONAL PACKAGING REGULATIONS: 89 8.1.1.8 MACHU PICCHU PLASTIC CONTAINER BAN: 89 8.1.1.9 VENUES AND EVENTS: REDUCING WASTE: 90 8.1.1.10 PAY AS YOU THROW (PAYT): 90 9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 91 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 iii CONTENTS 10 ANNEXES 92 Annex 1: Description of Programs Annex 2: General Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 2.1 Lessons Learns Annex 3: LAC Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 4: LAC Supplemental Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 5: Landfill Tax (European Union) Reference Material Annex 6: Venues and Events: Reducing Waste, California Reference Material Annex 7: Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables, Finland Reference Material Annex 8: Pay As You Throw (PAYT) in USA Reference Material Annex 9: Green Purchasing Law Reference Material Annex 10: Levy Bag Tax – Ireland Reference Material Annex 11: Japan's Green Purchasing Law Reference Material Annex 12: Calgary Material Exchange Reference Material Annex 13: USA WasteWise Reference Material Annex 14: Machu Picchu’s Plastic Ban Reference Material ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 iv CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Hierarchy of Waste Reduction 9 Figure 2: Sacred Valley Figure 79 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Precursors of Dioxins and Furan Emissions in the State of Garbage 11 Table 2: World Data Gathering 14 Table 3 Summary Table of Case Studies for Cost Benefit Analysis 63 Table 4: MSW Generation per Capita in LAC Countries by Population 67 Table 5: Characteristic Waste Management Settings within the LAC Region 68 Table 6: MSW Composition in LAC Countries 69 Table 7: Summary of Current LAC Upstream Waste Reduction Strategies by Country 71 Table 8: Table Cusco Waste Disposal 78 Table 9: Overview of Weaknesses and Strengths of Programs 82 Table 10: Overview of Applicability of Programs 84 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Environmental Resources Management-PR, Inc presents this Report entitled “Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation and its Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emissions� as part of the project Phase II Study Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation and its Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emissions, approved by the World Bank on April 19, 2011. Burning of garbage is prevalent in Latin America at poorly managed disposal sites and when it is used as a means of disposal at the household level in rural areas and other areas not adequately covered by collection. Waste burning is one of the major sources of dioxins and furans in these Countries. Current strategies to reduce these emissions include the long- term process of converting dumpsites to landfills and expanding collection to areas not covered by the collection service. In addition to these programs, reduction in waste generation volume potentially present a cost-effective means to reduce overall dioxin and furan emissions and there is some evidence that reducing certain types of wastes (plastics and chlorinated polymers) would reduce the levels of dioxin and furans emitted from a given quantity waste. Waste reduction has been an integral part of the solid waste management strategy for years and has taken a variety of forms including: bans on disposal or production of certain materials, economic incentives (taxes on materials use, tariffs and disposal fees), product stewardship (design for durability, waste reduction and recycling), and product and packaging standards. More recently, national and city-based laws in Europe, USA, and in some capital cities and tourism areas in Latin America and Asia have focused on reducing the use of plastic bags and other plastic products using outright bans, taxes, and other incentives. Petroleum-based plastics can have a devastating impact on our environment. Approximately 300 million tons of plastic are produced globally each year. At these quantities, we could wrap the entire planet several times over. ERM carried out a Benchmark Study of 50 programs and strategies to date published during the last 15 years from all continents. The information covers programs from the following countries: South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zanzibar, Ruanda, Somalia, Ghana, Cameroon, Botswana, Eritrea, Kenya, Australia, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, Europe, Canada, USA, Mexico, Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica, and Puerto Rico. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 1 ERM concluded that whatever the programs or strategies of upstream waste reduction efforts implemented internationally by private, public or non government entities, the preferred choice is policies and legislation where the consumer has individual responsibility and accountability, who must determine whether the extra financial costs of waste disposal are worth the reduced garbage bill and health benefits. ERM also examined the key legal and/or policy provisions implemented that contributed to the success of the Programs selected. From the information gathered, ERM has concluded that these programs have been successful because they were implemented through a regulatory framework, followed by the provisions, and the institutional execution. When implementing a program, there must be a successful of legislative development, an effective educational campaign, and efficient continuous monitoring process. ERM has concluded that any one of the ten selected programs may be included in the legal framework of most Latin American countries, without difficulty; since we understand there are no legal restrictions to implement any of the 10 selected programs. The ten Programs selected were: 1. Landfill Tax (European Union) 2. Venues and Events: Reducing Waste (California) 3. Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables (Finland) 4. Pay As You Throw (PAYT) (USA) 5. International Packaging Regulations (European Union) 6. Plastic Bag Levy (Ireland) 7. Green Purchasing Law (USA) 8. Machu Picchu’s Municipal Ordinance Nº 06-2008 (2001) (Peru) 9. Calgary Material Exchange (CMEX) (Canada); and 10. Waste Wise (USA) The evaluation of the Program’s effectiveness was based upon identified accomplishments – noting the status of key indicators such as: waste reduced participation levels, environmental significance, and geographic impact. Worldwide information available through the Internet, telephone interviews, and site visits were utilized to gather all of the necessary information in order to select the best-defined successful programs/strategies. ERM also used preliminary data provided by the World Bank. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 2 After the selection of the 10 programs ERM performed a Cost Benefit Analysis for three programs. These analyses were completed for the following programs: 1. Pay As You Throw (PAYT) -USA 2. Calgary Material Exchange (CMEX) - Canada 3. Packaging Taxes For Non-Refillables -Finland Although, the benefits are oftentimes greater than the cost of implementation, a key item to take into consideration is that these programs can only work successfully in those cities or communities that have strong financing, adequate infrastructure (road network in good condition, a properly designed landfill) and capacity to implement a mechanism of supervision and control over the generators regarding the imposition of taxes or municipal fees. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 3 ACRONYMS C/B Cost/Benefit CSR Corporate Social Responsibility EPA Environmental Protection Agency GBTP Garbage-By-The-Pound ISO International Standards Organization KPI Key Performance Indicator MSW Municipal Solid Waste NGO Non Government Organizations PAYT Pay-As-You-Throw POP Persistent Organic Pollutants SR Source Reduction TSDF Treatment, Storage and Disposal Facility US, USA United States, United States of America ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 4 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 AUTHORIZATION The World Bank requested this Study from ERM in accordance with the scope of work presented in ERM’s Proposal CR116021007. 1.2 OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation: Implications on Dioxin and Furan Emission Report were: • Review worldwide policy, incentive-based, and other Programs focused on reducing waste generation at the sources; • Assessing their effectiveness, costs and benefits; and • Understanding their potential for application or expansion in Latin American countries (LAC)1. To achieve these objectives ERM: • Conducted data gathering to identify Programs that have been implemented; • Evaluated the Programs to determine which were relevant and useful to the objectives; • Communicated findings to the World Bank during April 24, 2011 and later on May 17, 2011 for further refinement of the investigation based on findings; and • Performed more in-depth analyses of the selected Programs. 1 Information obtained from Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management Services in Latin America and the Caribbean for year 2010 (www6.iadb.org/Residuos) ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 5 2 TECHNICAL APPROACH This section includes a general overview of the Technical Approach carried out by ERM in order to evaluate and analyze the information gathered to meet the objectives of the Study. The variety of Approaches/Programs that were found from around the World was examined on three levels: 1) Level 1 - Survey of Approaches: The purpose of the survey is to give a sense of the range of measures being implemented to address source reduction, the basic circumstances of their implementation, and where to go for more information about them. 2) Level 2 - Detailed Evaluation of Approaches: From the survey, 10 approaches are selected for further evaluation; to examine the details of their implementation such as what factors influenced their design, participants, performance (successes and failures), etc. 3) Level 3 - Cost / Benefit Assessment of Approaches: More detailed information about the costs and benefits associated with 3 of the approaches is presented to help discern the feasibility of implementing like approaches elsewhere. Not only the magnitude of the costs and benefits is presented but also how they were measured/calculated is included when possible so that adjustments can be made to reflect varying local factors. 2.1.1 Study Limitations The following limitations were found in development of the Report: • Data is a sampling representation of a number of resources; • Assumptions and hypothesis have been necessary for the cost Benefit analyses; • Data from the Internet was assumed to be factual (i.e., source reduction statistics); • Information gathering in Peru was limited to interviews and the data received during the study period; and • Contacts for level 3 investigations were not readily available. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 6 3 RATIONALE FOR SOURCE REDUCTION 3.1 WHY IS SOURCE REDUCTION IMPORTANT TO MUNICIPALITIES & GOVERNMENTS? In recent years source reduction, also known as waste prevention, has been gaining momentum around the World. A key goal of source reduction programs is to decrease the amount and toxicity of waste material that must be managed; preventing its generation in the first place, i.e. at its source does this. Thus, source reduction is distinguished from other forms of solid waste management, such as recycling and yard waste collection, because it reduces or eliminates the need to manage waste. Waste generation impacts society in several manners: • Municipal capital and operating expenses, • Human health impacts, and • Diminished environmental quality. These impacts are not necessarily borne by the waste generators. Frequently, they are economic externalities, or social costs, borne by society as a whole or by individuals not necessarily connected to the generation of the waste. For example: • Waste collection and disposal costs are often borne by Municipalities who organize a centralized system to preserve city sanitation. In this way, the costs associated with waste generation are shared and are not directly tied to specific individual waste contributions. • Health care costs, whether paid by individuals who become ill or by government health care systems, may result when people are exposed to toxins in air emissions from open burning of solid wastes. • Disposal methods that degrade habitats, thereby reducing wildlife populations, can affect the ability of people to hunt or fish for food. Currently, most developed countries with a mature system of waste management, such as Europe and Japan, seek to prevent the generation of waste and increase reuse and recycling, while in countries with less economic development and a poor waste management system such as countries in Latin American and Caribbean, the goal is on improving or introducing a basic system of waste management aimed at landfills and the proper management of hazardous waste. Burning of garbage is a prevalent practice in Latin America at poorly managed disposal sites and when it is ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 7 used as a means of disposal at the household level in rural areas and other areas not adequately covered by collection. The lack of political and economic support to implement various programs, the continuing rise in the cost of waste management, and lack of marketing studies for recyclable materials are some of the reasons why waste management in LAC has been poorly developed. In rural areas, occasionally solid waste collection is not available at all. Nevertheless, if waste management were available, landfills would not be the best option as environmental impacts include air emissions, water, and soil pollution in addition to environmental footprint due to space usage. Despite the fact that waste is a problem, it also represents opportunities and potential business like exchange programs, disused materials maintenance, and repairs and recycling companies. For example in Europe, the waste management and recycling sector has a high growth rate and has an estimated turnover of over €100 billion for EU. It is labor-intensive and provides between 1.2 and 1.5 million jobs. The recycling industry is providing increasing amounts of resources to manufacturing industry: at least 50% of paper and steel, 43% of glass and 40% of non-ferrous metal produced in the EU are currently derived from recycled materials. In general, source reduction has a broader scope than dealing with waste or material management; it is resource management and includes the following: • Decreasing or eliminating the amount or toxicity of material used in the manufacture and packaging of products; • Redesigning products for increased life span, reusability, and reparability; • Changing purchasing decisions to favor those products that have minimized residual toxicity and waste associated with them; and • Modifying patterns of consumption and material used in a way that reduces the amount and toxicity of waste generated. 3.1.1 Waste Management Hierarchy The waste management hierarchy is a nationally and internationally accepted guide for prioritizing waste management practices with the objective of achieving optimal environmental outcomes (Refer to Figure 1). ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 8 Figure 1: Hierarchy of Waste Reduction The waste hierarchy sets out the preferred order of waste management practices, from most to least preferred, while still recognizing the need for flexibility based on local and regional economic, social and environmental conditions. The most preferred waste management strategy is to avoid waste generation at the source; followed then by reducing the waste generation, reusing, recycling, recovering, treating and finally the least preferable is disposing. 3.2 DIOXIN AND FURAN EMISSION Precursor formation of dioxins and Furan Emission involves the reaction at higher temperatures of particles such as polychlorinated biphenyls, chlorophenols and chlorobenzenes. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 9 Table 1 below summarizes a report dated 2010 from the State of Garbage. USA has the higher levels of Dioxin and Furan Emission from Biomedical waste and municipal waste incineration while European countries and Australia are way below emission concentrations. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 10 Table 1: Precursors of Dioxins and Furan Emissions in the State of Garbage Incineration Process Category Australia UK " USA b Canada c Netherlands d Austria d Switzerland d West Germany d New Zealand e Biomedical (grams l-TEQ/yr) 2.5 - 9.6 18 - 88 1,600 - 16,000 3.1 2.1 4 2-3 5.4 0.26 Hazardous (grams I-TEQ/yr) < 0.5 1.5 - 8.7 11 - 110 1.3 16 6 <1 0.5 - 72 0.001 - 0.003 Sewage Sludge (grams I-TEQ/yr) 0.09 - 0.77 0.7 - 6 10 - 52 0.3 0.3 <1 Unknown 0.01 - 1.1 0 Municipal (grams I-TEQ/yr) 0 460 - 580 1,300 - 6,700 151.7 382 3 90 - 150 5.4 - 432 0 Included in above Crematoria (grams I-TEQ/yr) 0.14 - 4.8 1 - 35 Biomedical Unknown " 0.2 f " 0.1 f " 0.42 f " 2.1 f 0.05 - 1.68 " Unified Germany Note: a Source: Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution, 1995 b Source: USEPA, 1995 c Source: Environment Canada, 1999 d Source: P A E Study, 1998 e Source: New Zealand Inventory of Ditox in Emissions, 1998 f Source: Landcsu mwclta mt NRW, (1997) ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 11 A number of international treaties bear on chlorinated solvents. Following the Montreal protocol, the Swedish parliament adopted a plan to abolish the use of ODS in Sweden. Between 1988 and 1994 the use of ODS decreased by 93%. Another important study1 on Swedish prohibition of chlorinated (or halogenated) hydrocarbons revealed the ban has been at best a partial success and illustrates the dilemmas of policymaking. Use has declined but not stopped, largely because the decision to ban TCE was challenged in the courts. A cross-country comparison indicates that the Swedish ban was less effective than the very strict technical requirements in Germany or the tax used in Norway. A tax (or deposit refund scheme) would be a good mechanism to achieve a swift phase out. This may also be the case with Dioxins and Furan precursors, the well studied polychlorinated biphenyls, chlorophenols and chlorobenzenes found in most plastics. As of April, 2011, there are 173 parties to the Stockholm Convention to reduce Persistent Organic Pollutants, POPs. The Latin American - Caribbean Region are part of the parties who co-signed agreeing to outlaw nine of the dirty dozen chemicals, limit the use of DDT to malaria control, and curtail inadvertent production of dioxins and furans. The negotiations for the Convention were completed on May 23, 2001 in Stockholm. The convention entered into force on May 17, 2004 with ratification by an initial 128 parties and 151 signatories. Parties to the convention (including the high populated countries of Brazil, Mexico, and Argentina) have agreed to a process by which persistent toxic compounds can be reviewed and added to the convention, if they meet certain criteria for persistence and trans-boundary threat. The first set of new chemicals to be added to the Convention was agreed at a conference in Geneva on May 8, 2009. There were initially twelve distinct chemicals listed in three categories where dioxins and furans are listed in the category of Unintentional Production2. 1 Implementation of Policy Instruments for Chlorinated Solvents, A Comparison of Design Standards, Bans, and Taxes to Phase Out Trichloroethylene by Daniel Slunge and Thomas Sterner 2 http://chm.pops.int/Countries/StatusofRatification/tabid/252/language/en-US/Default.aspx ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 12 4 WORLDWIDE RESEARCH-DATA GATHERING ERM completed a Benchmark Study of 50 programs published during the last 15 years from all of the continents. The Countries where strategies were evaluated during the Study are: South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zanzibar, Ruanda, Somalia, Ghana, Cameroon, Botswana, Eritrea, Kenya, Australia, Bangladesh, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Nepal, New Zealand, Pakistan, Singapore, Taiwan, Europe, Canada, USA, Mexico, Brazil, Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, Argentina, Chile, Costa Rica and Puerto Rico. A list of the programs reviewed is available in Error! Reference source not found.. The world data gathering focused on Canada, USA, Europe, Africa, Asia, and Australia. Figure 2: Worldwide Waste Generation Reduction Programs-Strategies Data Gathering ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 13 Table 2: World Data Gathering Program-Approach LAC USA Canada EU Africa Asia Australia Plastic bag ban X X Plastic bag tax X X X X X Paper bag tax X Polystyrene ban X X X X Bottle bill X PVC ban X X Unit pricing-Pay as You Throw- X X X X PAYT Improper waste sorting fine X Landfill tax X X Landfill bans X X X Collection bin sizes X Recycle bank X X Waste Minimization Clubs X X X X Exporting Waste Clean Production X X X X X X X Stepwise Incentive System (SIS) X Product stewardship X X X X X X Prolonged product life Extended Producer Responsibility X X X X X (EPR); Life cycle cost Food Recycling Law X Construction Material Recycling Law X Tax Product Packaging X X X Refillable Beverage X X X Tire Stewardship/ Tire Tax X X X E-Waste Law X X The Green Purchasing Law X Home Appliance Recycling X Venues and Events: Reducing Waste X Zero Waste Law X X X X Oregon Paint Program X ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 14 Program-Approach LAC USA Canada EU Africa Asia Australia Plastic ban in Machu Picchu X State Agency Buy Recycled X Campaign (SABRC) Mandate Recycled Content Law in X Plastic Packaging Taxing Virgin Natural Resources X Bag it back (Bottle Bill) X Empty Space Limits X X X X Ontario Blue Box- Canada- printed X paper and packaging Orange Drop-Canada- household X hazardous and special waste Continuous Improvement Fund- x Canada Hong Kong ECO Responsibility X Ordinance No. 322008 China electric and electronic waste X reduction- January 2011 Prolonged product life X China Circular Economy- January 2009-a generic term for reducing reusing and recycling from X production, circulation and consumption Waste reduction and recovery MSW X In Hong Kong LatinoSan 2007, (Objetivos de X Desarrollo del Milenio) La Declaración de Cali, X CARIBSAN 2008 X “Kingston Recommendations �, X Jamaica 2008 Foro Centroamericano y República Dominicana de Agua y Saneamiento X (FOCARDAPS) Plastic Bag- Ban in Argentina X Pay as you throw- Malden, Mass X Sustainable Materials Packaging- X DELL Computers ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 15 Program-Approach LAC USA Canada EU Africa Asia Australia Government Interviews for MSWM in Cusco, Machu Picchu and X COPESCO Regional Plan Centro Guaman Poma de Ayala, Peru X BORSI, Colombia, Ecuador, and X Costa Rica MERCI-Costa Rica X Material Exchange Programs X X X Urban Solids Residuals Regional Management at Latin America and X the Caribbean Industrial Waste Exchange Program X Material Campaigning About Preventing X X X X Waste ERM selected 50 Programs and developed a matrix with sort-able features in order to ease the search for information – e.g., seeking programs that have worked in rural areas, took a short time to implement, or do not rely on technology (Refer to Annex 2). This was not an exercise of recording the first 50 Programs identified but rather an educated and balanced selection from the breadth of pertinent examples according to: • Knowledge of LAC circumstances and future trends (to know which existing programs identified may have relevance to LAC); • Understanding of technical, legal, institutional, and financial aspects of the subject matter; and • Desire to provide an informative mix of Programs covering different: types of waste, source reduction strategies, implementing authorities, and other significant characteristics. The variety of Programs that were found from around the World was examined on three levels of investigation. The following section offers details on these levels. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 16 4.1.1 Level 1: Survey of Source Reduction Programs Source reduction efforts are on-going worldwide; they are measured, analyzed and publicized to varying degrees. Level 1 of this report presents key categories of source reduction approaches: • Mandates and restrictions, • Incentives and disincentives, • Voluntary efforts, • New systems for materials management, • By-product as product (a special category, considered distinct from recycling), and • Packaging changes for source reduction (which is highlighted separately because of its current prevalence among worldwide efforts for source reduction). Many examples exist – For each of these key categories; strategies to address them are identified (such as additional taxes that act as disincentives to certain behaviors or products). For each of the strategies identified, at least one example of its application (such as Ireland’s plastic bag levy) is presented in a matrix of source reduction approaches. An informative mix of programs covering different types of waste, source reduction strategies, implementing authorities, etc. is included. The Matrix provides the most basic of information about each of the 50 approaches listed. Its layout enables easy scanning of the approaches for particular characteristics of an approach and then for examination of patterns across approaches. For example, one can quickly identify which approaches: apply to consumers or industries; apply to rural areas; took a short time to implement; or do not rely on technology. This initial matrix can serve as a base upon which to expand over time, enabling greater examination of patterns, costs, and key characteristics for an approach’s success. Recognizing the complexity underlying these approaches, sources for further details about the approach are also noted. For a municipality or other entity interested in reproducing one of the approaches presented, a variety of aspects might be important to investigate for relevance or comparison to another application. Some approaches are more heavily influenced by the ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 17 setting in which they takes place (e.g., socio-economic factors, infrastructure features) than others. Special Case: Packaging - This Report places a particular emphasis on packaging in general and disposable plastics in particular. With respect to disposable plastics, it is becoming apparent that petroleum-based plastics can have a devastating impact on our environment. Approximately 300 million tons of plastic are produced globally each year. At these quantities, we could wrap the entire planet several times over. Less than 5% of plastic is estimated to be recycled globally. Discarded plastics can end up in landfills, being improperly burned, or as part of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch where plastics are accumulated by ocean currents from California to China.1. When certain types of plastics are burned, they contribute to the formation of dioxins and furans, which are extremely hazardous to human health. Furthermore, the use of disposable packaging has been rising for decades and it constitutes a significant – and potentially avoidable – portion of the municipal solid waste stream. Its brief useful life and its questionable necessity make it a target for many source reduction programs, strategies for which include: • Packaging elimination (such as plastic bag bans); • Packaging reduction (such as supplying foodstuffs in bulk); and • Packaging reusability (such as for refillable beverage containers). Producers of packaging are being asked to participate in finding solutions to the packaging dilemma through stewardship programs whereby they identify and implement options appropriate to their materials and services. Schemes for ensuring the return of packaging to suppliers for re-use include: deposits, taxes, rebates, and ease of return (e.g., drop-off locations, pre-paid mailers). An important consideration in LAC is whether there are low-packaging practices in some areas that are transitioning over to more packaging use. Efforts to preserve and learn from the low-packaging status might be prioritized. For example, the manager of a farm (kibbutz) in Israel2 describes a countervailing pressure from Israeli consumers against the conversion to 1 Plastics and other garbage finding their way into the Pacific Ocean may become part of this “floating continent� that is estimated to be over 1,000,000 square kilometers (visit http://www.greatgarbagepatch.org for more information). 2 David Levy, interview, April 2011. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 18 more pre-packaged produce, such as is being seen in the US. Whereas US supermarket operators find that their own waste volumes may be reduced by pre-packaging of produce (e.g., selling 4 tomatoes at a time, eliminating excess handling and possible damage of individual tomatoes but using a cardboard or foam tray plus plastic wrap), his end customers demand to feel and choose produce. Other contributing factors to reduced pre-packaging include that Israeli food outlets tend to be of smaller scale in comparison to the US and the distances from farm to market are also much less. In trying to promote packaging source reduction, it will be important to account for other programs that may be in conflict with this goal. For example, food sanitation rules may need to include provisions for selling food in bulk at grocery stores if customers bring their own packaging. Special Case: By-Product as Product- The use of a by-product that is currently a waste as an input to another process may seem like recycling rather than source reduction. However, there are several circumstances under which treating a by-product as product does support source reduction differently than does recycling, including: • when the by-product is inevitable (it cannot be reduced at the source, as with the inedible pits or skins from foodstuffs); • when a material has reached the end of its useful life for one application but is well suited to another use. Examples of by-products that are potentially usable as input to another use, creating a new market or sequential use structure, include: • Food leftovers and residues, which can: Be provided to another group (e.g., restaurant or function left-overs that can be delivered to those in need); Be used as animal feed; Enrich soils (e.g., source reduction of synthetic fertilizers); Generate biogas. • Electronic equipment that is being upgraded for a sensitive application but can service the needs of another, less demanding situation. • Durable goods that have failed (broken) may be remanufactured to extend product life, replacing only worn components and preserving the materials and embodied energy of the majority of the goods. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 19 • Wastes from quality-sensitive processes may find application in less sensitive processes. For instance, a pharmaceutical company’s quality criteria for a cleaning solvent may end its useful life in that industry but the material may be acceptable to an automotive parts cleaning operation. • Construction and demolition residuals may be applied to other construction projects. Residuals from large projects may not be worth the logistics of managing for reuse on the next large project but may be appealing to small or low-income projects. Using wastes as input into another productive outlet might also serve as a transitional or interim method while moving towards source reduction. Despite the fact that waste is a problem, it also represents opportunities and potential business like exchange programs, disused materials maintenance and repairs and recycling companies. For example in Europe, the waste management and recycling sector has a high growth rate and has an estimated turnover of over €100 billion for EU. It is labor-intensive and provides between 1.2 and 1.5 million jobs. The recycling industry is providing increasing amounts of resources to manufacturing industry: at least 50% of paper and steel, 43% of glass and 40% of non-ferrous metal produced in the EU are currently derived from recycled materials. Following is a description of the consolidated worldwide experiences of policies and incentives to reduce waste generation at the consumer, retail, commercial and manufacturer level, categorized by type, and summarized basic characteristics of the Program. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 20 Taxes Fundamentals of the Approach The objective of the tax can be to influence consumer-purchasing decision, fund disposal of the product, or persuade production and manufacturing to adopt source reduction measures that avoid undesirable characteristics. Strategies / Subcategories Eco-taxes Tax in Virgin Natural Resources, Plastic Bag Tax Paper Bag Tax Paper Bag Tax Landfill Taxes. Basic Characteristics Taxes are proportional to material use and waste fraction of a product like plastic bags. Taxes discourage purchases of materials; can be used to encourage or require participation in waste Reduction and collection fees may be used to pay sources reduction-operating costs. Issues to Consider Some of the concerns regarding the taxes are such that may affect competition, because people always try to evade taxes, in other cases may lead to illegal dumping and that the taxes have the desired effect should be accompanied by alternatives to what you're trying to decrease. Partnership Fundamentals of the Approach Voluntary partnerships between the government and businesses, state and local governments, and institutions to prevent waste, recycle, and buy and manufacture products made with recycled materials. Strategies / Subcategories Waste wise Industrial Waste Exchange Program (IWEP) Materials Exchange Programs (may also fall into Donations and Sales and in Repairs) Basic Characteristics Such strategies focus on business and industry. Provide tools for planning and development of an effective Reduction of waste according to the nature of each company. Guide on how to measure the results of the effort, take the records and provide expert assistance as appropriate. Issues to Consider There are usually no issues because it is an entirely voluntary act. Only in cases of materials exchanges, The program does not assure a payment or the condition of the product, but rather intermediaries of materials. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 21 Packaging Changes Fundamentals of the Approach Packaging is singled out for source reduction consideration because it: can be a significant component of solid waste; may affect residential and commercial entities similarly; be of relatively short-term use; and is typically designed according to criteria other than source reduction. Strategies / Subcategories Source reduction approaches to packaging include: Redesign and Type of materials used- Dell Sustainable Materials Packaging Reduction in amount – Frustration Free Packaging Empty space limits Reusable / refillable- mentioned above Fee mechanism Based on Packaging Types Basic Characteristics Modifying or redesigning reduces packaging. Sometime, manufacturer may adjust to reuse packaging several times changing the type of material, others reduce the package more in line with the product and in some cases redesigning the packaging to make it less thick. Issues to Consider The issue is for the manufacturer where redesigning may require equipment or technology investment. Refillable Beverage Container Fundamentals of the Approach Like packaging, refillables beverage containers are singled out for source reduction consideration because it: can be a significant component of solid waste; may affect residential and commercial entities similarly; be of relatively short-term use; and is typically designed according to criteria other than source reduction. Strategies / Subcategories Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables Bans no Refillables Banned Cans Quota Packaging Covenant Basic Characteristics This strategy is the reuse of bottles of soda or alcoholic beverages to refill. This practice has been in use some years; this strategy has been promoted by providing exempts from taxes or any type of payment that you impose on other packages such as analogous to aluminum cans or bottles "one way ". Issues to Consider The European Commission criticizes and strongly opposes this type of tax that favors the refill. Their argument is that it violates or limits free competition, as people chose to evade the taxes mostly by purchasing refillable putting other companies at great disadvantage. On the other hand, the cans or other types of plastic bottles tend to be lighter and easier to carry anywhere. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 22 Deposits and Refunds Fundamentals of the Approach Deposits and Refunds are singled out for source reduction consideration because it is another way of reducing a significant component of solid waste; may affect residential and commercial entities similarly; be of relatively short-term use; and is typically designed according to criteria other than source reduction. Activities such as deposit and refund systems for beverage containers have been shown to reduce litter and increase the recovery rate for these materials to more than 80 percent in most places. Strategies / Subcategories Bag it back Bottle bill Basic Characteristics Consumers pay a fee to ensure that the product or packaging will be returned. Upon returns, the tax paid is refunded; otherwise, the fund will be used for any management program, environmental program support or simply retained by the dealer. Issues to Consider The issue that may occur is that there could be some kind of smuggling in the territory near this type of deposit / refund. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 23 Bans & Restrictions Fundamentals of the Approach Bans and restrictions specify which behaviors are or are not acceptable, limiting activities to those deemed consistent with solid waste management goals. In comparison to incentives, disincentives and educational programs, bans and restrictions are the most absolute in defining desired behavior leaving little or no flexibility for choice by participants. Strategies / Subcategories Bans / Prohibitions Plastic Container Ban Plastic Bag Ban Polystyrene Ban PVC Ban Recyclable Garbage ban Basic Characteristics Bans and prohibitions address an aspect of waste generation (a system, a behavior/action, a product, a material, etc.) which has been decided should not be permissible under any circumstances, perhaps: • to promote or not be at odds with another source reduction program, • because the consequences of failure to meet guidelines for acceptable products/behaviors are too great1 and/or become the burden of an entity other than the source of the problem, • because alternatives have been tried and failed, Materials and items that are compostable, recyclable, repairable, or large in quantity and toxicity can be banned or restricted to keep them out of waste disposal systems. Placing bans on materials can encourage consumers and establishments to participate in source reduction activities because of the problems associated with restricted disposal. Stewardship requirements (see Environmental Policy) Basic Characteristics Material bans are most effective when a consumer education program or community outreach program is implemented, and infrastructure for alternative collection of the materials is available. Issues to Consider It is also important to note that restricting disposal of a material may not result in source reduction. The ramifications of a material ban on commerce laws and waste management should be considered in advance 1 This is a risk avoidance method for risk management. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 24 Environmental Policy Fundamentals of the Approach Environmental Policy and programs that support and encourage (but do not mandate) new behaviors by consumers, institutions, and businesses are often initiated by the government or NGOs. These environmental Policies are usually voluntary efforts are also pursued as the result of having had one’s awareness of source reduction benefits rose. Strategies / Subcategories Environmental Policies may be promoted through: Green Procurement Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Cleaner Production (CP) Zero Waste Law Basic Characteristics Environmental Policies are most effective when education program or community outreach program is implemented, and infrastructure for alternative collection of the materials is available. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)- an environmental strategy which objective is to reduce the total environmental impact of a product. The manufacture assumes responsibility for the entire life cycle of the product and especially for the take back, recycling and final disposal of the product. Also referred to as Life Cycle Analysis, and related to Unit Pricing, and Product Stewardship. Issues to Consider Relies heavily on education, awareness, ease/availability of alternatives, and possibly peer pressure. Cannot guarantee results or the pace of progress towards goals. Can spur innovative actions for source reduction when not constraining parties to prescribed actions (i.e., voluntary initiatives may lead to creative, unanticipated solutions). Often the step proceeding mandatory programs. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 25 Venues & Events Fundamentals of the Approach Large venues and events generate a large amount of waste in a short period time. The California law requires the largest venue facilities and events (as defined) in each city and county to plan for solid waste reduction and upon request, report information regarding their waste reduction efforts to their local jurisdiction. Strategies / Subcategories Reducing waste Campaign about Preventing Waste Desmesura-Theater Company Basic Characteristics Venues and Events are most effective when California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery promotes education program or community outreach program, and infrastructure for alternative collection of the materials is available. On the other hand, Campaigning for waste reduction and Desmesura are basic for behavior changes. Issues to Consider Relies heavily on education, awareness, ease/availability of alternatives, and possibly peer pressure. Cannot guarantee results or the pace of progress towards goals. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 26 Incentives and Disincentives Fundamentals of the Approach Although whether one chooses to take advantage of incentives or avoid disincentives is discretionary, it differs from voluntary efforts for source reduction. Many incentives and disincentives for source reduction attempt to alleviate social costs (market externalities) associated with waste (at any point in its life-cycle, from extraction of raw materials to disposal) by either fostering their avoidance (incentives) or recovering some portion of those costs (disincentives). In other words, incentives and disincentives seek to change the influences on waste generating behavior, often through internalizing social costs (that are otherwise externalities) or other adjustments to market factors contributing to waste generation. Strategies / Subcategories Grants Discounts to avoid the plastic bags usage School Recycling Learning Grants School Recycling Learning Grants Pay As you Throw (PAYT) Rewards Recycle bank Waste minimization club Taxes (Refer to Taxes category) Fines Deposits ( Refer to Deposits and Refunds Category) Improper waste sorting fine Basic Characteristics The PAYT program is implemented in the U.S., which has encouraged recycling and waste reduction at home, since they only pay for the bags or cans collected, which changes the concept of paying for waste disposal as a house tax, or payment for services such as electricity, water, etc, in which no matter the volume, there is a flat fee payment. Stewardship Fundamentals of the Approach Stewardship initiatives aims to maintain and/or improve the condition and extent of targeted matters of environmental Significance Strategies / Subcategories Construction Material Recycling Law Tire Stewardships fees Tire Management Law Oregon Paint Product Stewardship Law E-waste Law Stepwise incentive system (SIS) Basic Characteristics The Stewardship program provides long-term opportunities for waste generators to get involved in conservation on their environment and recognizes the vital role consumers have in conservation and the stewardship of our natural environment. Space for storage and processing waste, labor shortage and the required educational level, lack of incentive, lack of markets and lack of information and guidelines. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 27 Reuse/Repair Industry Fundamentals of the Approach Many of the products going to landfills have great potential to be reusable. The reuse and repair industries are responsible for renewing and re-distributing these products. According to data there are more than of 6100 reuse centers in USA. In Maryland there are businesses such as Loading Dock in Baltimore to recover from the landfill to 7000 tons of construction materials. Strategies / Subcategories e-waste Basic Characteristics These industries are responsible for reconditioning and distributing items that can be reused. Many of these centers consist of second hand item stores, charitable donations centers, exchange of material, and used equipment stores. Issues to Consider In order to be successful, these industries need a lot of promotion and personal care. A simple Internet list has no outlet for itself. Also in the case of sales, the company makes no warranty or guarantee of products or payments. Voluntary Fundamentals of the Approach Policies and programs that support and encourage (but do not mandate) new behaviors by consumers, institutions, and businesses are often initiated by the government or NGOs. Voluntary efforts are also pursued as the result of having had one’s awareness of source reduction benefits rose. The distinction between purely voluntary efforts and optional efforts undertaken in response to incentives and disincentives is that voluntary efforts may proceed without regard for immediate financial benefit. Furthermore, such efforts can eventually lead to changes in markets and other systems that then cause the economics of source reduction to change. For example, growth in purchases of more costly but less wasteful products can lead to a change in the economies of scale associated with those products, thus resulting in their reduced cost, or can foster research, development and innovation for such products. Strategies / Subcategories Voluntary efforts are largely promoted through education and awareness-building for students, consumers, commercial enterprises and industry: • Curriculum and other educational materials (e.g., literature, promotional campaigns) • Clubs / consortiums Government policies may communicate authorities’ interests in pursuing source reduction, perhaps through preferential treatment of service and product suppliers who adhere to source reduction principles (e.g., green procurement). Issues to Consider Relies heavily on education, awareness, ease/availability of alternatives, and possibly peer pressure. Cannot guarantee results or the pace of progress towards goals. Can spur innovative actions for source reduction when not constraining parties to prescribed actions (i.e., voluntary initiatives may lead to creative, unanticipated solutions). Is often the step preceding mandatory programs. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 28 4.1.2 Presentation of Findings ERM developed a Matrix (Refer to: Annex 2: General Upstream Reduction of Solid Waste Generation Matrix). The layout of the Matrix provides summary information about basic characteristics of each approach in a manner that facilitates scanning of the entries for particular features (e.g. pertains to retail establishments). ERM consolidated the worldwide experiences of policies and incentives to reduce waste generation at the consumer, retail, commercial and manufacturer level (this does not include waste management or recycling programs but rather purely upstream measures to reduce waste generation), categorized them by type, and summarized the basic characteristics of the Program. An electronic copy of the Matrix has been provided as well (in Excel format), thereby allowing for user-defined, automated sorting and grouping of the Program by typology (e.g., sorted by country, filtered by target audience, etc.). 4.1.3 Lessons Learned In order to provide the World Bank with the most thorough information available, ERM included a select number of Programs that were not included in the selected Programs but that however are interesting from a lessons learned point of view. Annex 2.1 includes brief assessments in table format of 3 source reduction programs that have encountered particular difficulties, thereby providing “lessons learned� value. 4.1.4 New Programs In order to provide the World Bank with the most thorough information available, ERM included a select number of new Programs that were found during the data gathering and that although have not been fully implemented and have no detailed sound source reduction impact statistics have been included below because of their innovation, popularity, and interest. A. Extended Producer Responsibility - A major challenge of the future for upstream waste reduction is Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), which mentioned earlier, are voluntary programs that challenges multiple players in the EPR product chain to reduce the life-cycle environmental impacts of products. “While Europe’s rules have been centralized and largely ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 29 harmonized by Brussels, the USA is seeing a growing number of uncoordinated local and state initiatives�1. The technology to create plastic from plant material is fairly new. Last month, PepsiCo unveiled a new plastic bottle made from switch grass, pine bark, cornhusks and other natural materials while new sugar cane bottles will be replacing the traditional plastic in Pantene’s Nature Fusion collection. It will initially be launched in Western Europe with expansion plans to the rest of the world over the next two years. Coca-Cola and Heinz have announced a packaging collaboration that will enable packaging from Plant Bottles made partially from plants. Coca-Cola has revealed it saved more than $100m by cutting 85,000 tons of primary packaging worldwide in 2009, in its latest sustainability report.2 Every manufacturer of goods is recognizing that sustainability is a journey and that waste reduction pays off investing in eco-design and environmental, economic, ethical and social considerations in product and service development and design. B. Life Cycle Analyses of Carrier bags (April, 2011): The United Kingdom Environment Agency (EA) has removed its report that showed that cotton bags were no greener than plastic bags from its website because of a legal query. The LCA highlighted that HDPE bags are, for each use, almost 200 times less damaging to the climate than cotton hold-alls favored by environmentalists, and have less than one third of the CO2 emissions than paper bags. The removal of the report from the EA website comes at a time when EU officials are considering banning all single-use plastic bags across Europe as part of plans to reduce the environmental impact of plastic waste. However, critics suggested that the report ignored the effects of plastic bag litter. This LCA jeopardizes the plastic bag ban the European commission has been working with. 1 Packaging CEO’s Pledge to Tackle Litter, Liz Gyekye, 27 May 2011 2 Coca-Cola highlights $100m packaging savings in sustainability report, Simeon Goldstein, 9 February 2011 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 30 5 IN-DEPTH REVIEWS FOCUSED ON A SUBSET OF PROGRAMS 5.1 INTRODUCTION From the matrix of the Programs, ERM agreed with the World Bank on the cases to be explored in the subsequent analyses: • At least 10 would undergo legal/policy review and program effectiveness evaluation, and • At least 3 would undergo Cost-Benefit Analysis. Integral to making useful choices for the in-depth reviews is an understanding of LAC’s materials flow, waste generation, and infrastructure characteristics. Being able to link options practiced elsewhere in the world with conditions found in LAC can help to focus in on options with a greater likelihood of succeeding in implementation. Examples include: • Systems of materials flow that are more vertically integrated within a region have greater potential for cradle-to-grave feedback mechanisms for source reduction. A locally controlled food production-distribution- use-discard might offer a more robust setting for cyclic (e.g., packaging reduction, recycling, or take-back) or innovative packaging programs. • There may be low-waste systems in place now that work well (e.g., self- sufficient, rural agricultural areas) but are on the verge of change. Are there Programs that offer opportunities to shape new developments in consumerism and consumption patterns, etc. Based on the Study Review and cases selected for in-depth analysis, the selected programs complied with the following: • Wide geographical coverage • Different waste minimization approaches • Waste focused in Dioxins and furans contamination • Existence of strategy written evaluation to reduce waste • Case studies fulfill polices and regulation to reduce waste • Experience can be transferred to LAC ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 31 5.2 LEVEL 2- LEGAL/POLICY REVIEW ERM evaluated the legal and policy documents for 10 relevant waste reduction programs. ERM reviewed how these policies and laws were applied in a legal and social context and assess the feasibility of the application of the policy within the legal framework. The LAC Recommended Upstream Waste Reduction Strategies Matrix Table is included in Annex 3) includes policies, laws, regulations, institution deploying, institutions implementing and institutions reviewing/ verifying the policy mechanism, the contacts, links, and associated pdf files. The origin of each Program was evaluated by determining its legal roots, meaning whether these are based on the constitution, laws, regulations, directives, public or municipal ordinances, executive orders, court or administrative decisions. The titles, dates and country of origin of each law, policy or decision analyzed were provided when possible. ERM reviewed the original intent of these policies, laws and programs, for example the social and economic aspects that promoted the legislation or policy. In tandem, ERM examined the key legal or policy provisions implemented that contributed to the success of the programs selected. Annex 4 shows the Supplemental LAC Waste Reduction Strategies Matrix. What made these programs successful was the regulatory framework, followed by the provisions and the institutional execution. A summary of the legal and policy mechanisms employed of each Program follows. 5.2.1 Landfill Tax (European Union, EU) since (1999) 5.2.1.1 Development: Landfill taxes across EU countries are intended to prevent or reduce waste and their adverse effects on the environment and comply with the 1999 EU Landfill Directive (99/31/EC). It has set targets for existing sites to: • Reduce biodegradable waste • Ban landfill of hazardous and non-hazardous waste together from July 2004 • Ban liquid waste and certain hazardous waste by 2001 • Ban Landfill of whole tires by 2003 and shredded tires by 2006 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 32 5.2.1.2 Implementation: Landfill taxes vary in their structure and each country has their own rate. For example in Austria the landfill tax is differentiated by waste and type of landfill, while in UK the type of waste is only considered. The highest rates are in Netherlands €86/t for low-density waste and €14/t (for non- combustible high density waste) Flanders €62/t, Denmark more than €50/t, Austria and Sweden € 40/t, Wallonia, UK and Finland (more than €20/t), Ireland, France, Czech Republic, Italy and Cataluña €7 to €15/t. The economic incentive created by the waste tax is used to maximize waste reduction by means of different programs for waste management and waste prevention including but not limited to recycling program, energy recovery and other waste prevention programs. For example in Cataluña, Spain, the economic incentive is used to help the development of schemes for separation of bio wastes at source. 5.2.1.3 Changes Over Time: Countries have increased the waste tax with time except Finland that has the same rate since 2005. 5.2.1.4 Source Reduction Impact: In general, the effectiveness of the landfill tax is directly proportional to the tax level. Usually high landfill taxes are associated with higher level of waste recovery. It is important to take into account that other policies such as landfill bans were implemented at the same time and also influence in the outcome. The directive issued by the European Economic Community, have set targets for existing sites to reduce biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfills, prohibit the disposal of mixed hazardous and non-hazardous waste, prohibit the disposal of liquid waste and prohibit certain types of waste like the disposal of whole tires and shredded tires, for which each country has implemented taxes. When the waste producer has to pay a tax for their waste disposal, they commit to reduction. This type of tax would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of neither any Country, nor any law and only just include the tax in an administrative decree. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 33 Refer to Annex 5: European Union Landfill Tax information. For more information Contact Links Dr. Louise Dunne- UCD http://www.economicinstruments.com/index.php/component/zine Environmental Policy Research /article/280 Manager 5.2.2 Venues and Events: Reducing Waste, California (since 2005) 5.2.2.1 Development: Large venues and events generate a large amount of waste in a short period time. The law, requires the largest venue facilities and events (as defined) in each city and county develop management plans for solid waste reduction and upon request, report information regarding their waste reduction efforts to their local jurisdiction. • Assembly Bill [AB] 2176 [Montanez] Chapter 879 • Public Resource Code Section 42648.2 (b) 5.2.2.2 Implementation: Each event implements its own specific program for reducing waste. However, there are some steps in common, such as the post- event waste management information that the event operator must submit to the local agency, city or county, upon request. The management plan should be updated and reviewed every two years. The information requested includes: • Name and location of event or venue. • Description of event or venue. • Brief description of types of waste generated-such as paper, cardboard, bottles, cans, food, food soiled paper. • Types and amounts of waste disposed and diverted- consider different programs in order to achieve a great quantity of waste reduced and diverted, for examples: minimize the use of plastics, especially plastic film used in packaging, reduce the volume or weight of waste materials, purchase recyclable, longer-lasting products and products made of recycled materials, donate or resell usable materials, recycle and compost materials. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 34 • Description of existing solid waste reduction, reuse and recycling programs- Operator should meet with local waste haulers and recycled materials buyers. Operators also should consult with local organizations to develop a successful recycling program. The organizations can be: recycling coordinator of local agency, local food banks and community conservation corps. • If no programs are in place, description of why there are no programs. • Contact information for responsible persons submitting the annual report to the local agency. 5.2.2.3 Changes Over Time: Besides increasing performance, no changes were highlighted 5.2.2.4 Source Reduction Impact: This legislation has been successful in promoting reducing waste program in venues. The estimated diversion rate and reporting rate have increased each year. 2005- 172 local agencies (out of 420, or 41 percent) reported on 330 venues & events. The overall diversion rate was 60% 2006-190 local agencies (out of 415, or 47 percent) reported on 361 venues & events. The overall diversion rate was 69% 2007-236 local agencies (out of 415, or 57 percent) reported on 511 venues & events. The overall diversion rate was 69% This is a code issued by the State of California, USA, aimed at regulating the major events and public spaces, which include counties, golf club, amusement park, including having more than 2.000 people per day, and obviously generating large amounts of waste, forcing them to prepare a Waste Management Program, which must consider which waste stream is available for waste reduction, which for reuse and which for recycling, for which the waste characterization should be performed. They must provide information on where the waste is to be donated, recycled or composted. The purpose of this Code is to reduce the amount of waste going to final disposal, and require such large generators to properly manage waste. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 35 This type of regulation would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of any country and only include the requirement in statutory law and develop a regulation requirements. Refer to Annex 6 for California’s Venues and Events information. For more information: Contact Links California's Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery Public Affairs Office: http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/venues/ opa@calrecycle.ca.gov. Tel. (916) 341-6300 5.2.3 Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables, Finland (since 1970s) 5.2.3.1 Development: Since 1970s, Finland has used a tax system to promote refilling and is one of the most successful countries in requiring refilling system. The volume- based packaging tax on non-refillables took effect in 1994. This law applies to soft alcoholic drinks and has the purpose of discourage the use of disposables and recyclables over reusable containers. The law also reduces biodegradable waste. 5.2.3.2 Implementation: This tax is levied on the volume of the packaging products, with tax rate applied per liter of container. The Environment Ministry is the main responsible for the tax and the Finance Ministry assert that the administrative cost of the tax is low. The packaging waste cost is: • No recovery on packaging waste: €0.67 per liter • Recycling: €0.17 Euro per liter • Refilling no tax To obtain an exemption from the levy on beverage container: • A deposit of €(0.08-0.25) • Returns rates of 75% in the first year, 85% in the second, 90% in the third and 95% in the fourth year ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 36 • Submission of reports to the Ministry of the Environment 5.2.3.3 Changes over Time: In January 2008 the drinks packaging tax on beverage packaging reutilized was abolished. Refillable beverage containers, cans and recyclable deposit bottles will be subject to the same terms and condition on taxation. 5.2.3.4 Source Reduction Impact: In 2000, Finns consumed 73% of their beer and 98% of their packaged soft drinks and mineral water from refillable bottles. The levy has achieved promoting refilling, reduces waste of packaging materials and brought revenue to the government. In 2008 the return of refillable bottles was still 98%. To impose a tax in order to promote the filling of empty beverage containers, soft drinks and mineral water, is reflected in refillable containers that are used as they are, collected and returned, washed and refilled. The glass bottles are filled an average of 33 times and the plastic bottles 18 times. The rate of return of refillable bottles is 98%; it has also caused an increase in the recycling of PET bottles and aluminum cans. Aluminum cans are melted and aluminum is used to make new cans, which is beneficial, since it requires only 5% of energy needed to produce a new aluminum can. The rate of return of cans is approximately 90%. Recyclable plastic bottles returned are not reused, as they are, its plastic is reused. To impose such a tax would be seen instead of a tax, rather as an encouragement for the return of the money when the container is returned. This type of tax would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of neither any country, nor any law and only just include the tax in a decree. Refer to Annex 7 for Finland Packaging Tax information. For more information: ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 37 Contact Links Finland Environment Ministry and http://www.scandbrewrev.dk/User_files/812155675bd5976df4040b3e2dcee9cf.p Finance Ministry df P.O. Box 35 http://www.economicinstruments.com/index.php/solid-waste/charges-and- FI-00023 Gov. taxes-/article/216- Finland Tel. + 358 20 610 100 5.2.4 Pay As You Throw (PAYT) in USA (since 1980s) 5.2.4.1 Development: PAYT is a quantity-base fee for waste disposal program. This program educates people on the waste generation cost, promotes source reduction, recycling, and composting. PAYT essentially places the cost of waste disposal directly on the generator and reflects the cost for each unit of waste to be disposed. By tying the cost of waste management to each unit of waste, the assumption is that generators will act in their own financial interest to reduce costs (through waste reduction) where feasible. Such programs can be considered educational in that generators gain a better understanding of the true costs for waste management, treatment and/or disposal, although the components of or reasons for those costs are not necessarily communicated or understood. In seeking to reduce wastes, generators may pursue source reduction, reuse, recycling and composting. PAYT programs are increasingly being adopted by municipalities, which are then responsible for overseeing their implementation. The division of responsibility for enforcement, measurement, educational outreach, etc. may vary according to the design of the PAYT program (see below) and the abilities among the municipality, collection and disposal entities. Waste disposal vendors who have been dealing directly with residential and business customers have long had clear financial motivation to charge customers according to the quantity of waste generated so PAYT is a more established concept in that arena. Largely the vendors control the logistics of implementation; generators choose to abide by vendor requirements when subscribing to a vendor’s service. Mandatory- all communities or haulers must implement PAYT, (WA, MN) ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 38 Mandatory if goals not met- Communities not reaching 25% or 50% diversion goal must implement PAYT (WI, IA) Menu Selection- Community required to adopt subset of menu strategies, with PAYT included on the list.(OR) Financial incentives/grants- some states provides grants specifically for or with preferences for community with or considering PAYT (multiple states, Massachusetts for example) Active promotion/education- many states have funded workshops, manuals, newsletter, or case studies about PAYT (multiple States for example: Illinois and Wyoming) Voluntary recommendations- a number of states put PAYT in the State Master Plan or comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan. 5.2.4.2 Implementation: The key technical challenge to implementation is how to link a generator to its waste quantity and receive appropriate payment. The PAYT program has been implemented in communities in many forms: Can system-Disposal fee are based in the number of can used. Each can have a different gallon or weight limit. Bag System-Customers purchase bags imprinted with a particular city or hauler log and the waste to be collected must be put in the appropriately market bag. Tag or Sticker System-It is almost identical to bag programs but instead of a special bag, customer affixes a special logo, tag or sticker to the waste they want collected. Hybrid System-Costumer pay a flat fee for waste removal, usually this rate include 1 or 2 cans or bags, and the collection of additional waste is charged through a bag or sticker system. Weight-based System- Called Garbage by the Pound, (GBTP). This system uses truck-based scales to weight garbage containers and charge customers are billed on the pounds of garbage set out of disposal. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 39 5.2.4.3 Changes Over Time: Changes in PAYT are usually accompanied by concurrent modification in recycling programs and costs. 5.2.4.4 Source Reduction Impact: Over 7,100 communities in USA (25% of the population) have implemented the program. Different cities and states have implemented legislation or ordinance to require PAYT program. PAYT program reduces residential trash disposal about 17%. Analysis shows about 6% in increasing recycle, about 5% increased of composting and a 6% increasing in avoided generation including buying in bulk and items with less packaging.1 PAYT program impacts vary widely depending upon the type of implementation, availability of alternatives, and ability to measure impacts. Some analyses of PAYT estimate the following (Refer to Annex 8 for additional detailed information). The PAYT program is implemented in the U.S., which has encouraged recycling and waste reduction at home, since they only pay for the bags or cans collected, which changes the concept of paying for waste disposal as a house tax, or payment for services such as electricity, water, etc, in which no matter the volume, there is a flat fee payment. However, a major concern about implementing the PAYT in Latin America is that illegal dumping could increase, even though research shows that illegal dumping is a bigger fear than reality. Illegal dumping ordinances have proven to solve the issue in three month or less; and only about 15% of the material found is from household origin. Another concern is about large families of low income or poor, who cannot pay the amount of garbage generated, On the other hand, most Latin American countries do not pay a direct cost for garbage collection; it is a cost absorbed by the government who later impacts on the taxes charged, so that the waste generator would not see a direct benefit to this program. 1 http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/tools/payt/pdf/sera06.pdf ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 40 Refer to Annex 8 for USA PAYT information. For more information: Contact Links http://www.paytwest.org/pdf-files/paytlegislationSERA_012908.pdf U.S Environmental Protection http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/tools/payt/tools/bulletin/fall98. Agency (EPA) htm http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/tools/payt/index.htm 5.2.5 International Packaging Regulations (EU) (since 1994, amended 2004) 5.2.5.1 Development: The European Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste 94/62/EC, first passed in 1994 and amended in 2004 as Directive 2004/12/EC, it focused in two general priorities, the first one is to prevent packaging waste at upstream source and the second is to reduce the downstream disposal. This law established recycling targets and to producer responsibility systems to prevent packaging waste. European Union members must comply with the following: Source Reduction- companies must demonstrate that they reduce their packaging as much as possible an identify critical areas Recovery Standards- packaging components must be recoverable by energy, organic or material recovery. Reuse-optional, but if it’s reusable it should accomplish with the standard requirements. Heavy Metals Content- limits the concentration for lead, cadmium, mercury and hexavalent chromium in packaging. Exemptions: packaging made of lead crystals, recycled plastic crates or pallets used in close products loops and recycled glass product on or before June 30, 2006. Reduction of Hazardous Substances in Packaging-noxious substances that could be released in emissions, ash or leachate must be minimized. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 41 5.2.5.2 Implementation: Each nation’s member has the option to plan and implement their own programs to comply with this packaging reduction and waste management policy in the private and the public sector. 5.2.5.3 Changes over Time: In 2004, the EU’s packaging Directive’s was amended to clarify various provisions, but in essences still been the same priority; waste reduction upstream and downstream. 5.2.5.4 Source Reduction Impact: By 2002 the E.U. found that out of the 66 million tons of packaging waste generated by Member States, 54% was being recycled and that 25 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions were eliminated in the process. 5.2.5.5 Other similar policies implemented: Material Restriction and Recycle Content- Select examples: Several US States have established minimum recycled content standards for plastic (CA, OR, WI), glass container (CA, OR) plastic trash bags (CA), and newspaper (27 states), France and Denmark provide a fee reduction for certain materials if the recyclable content is greater than 50%. Japan and South Korea banned packaging press packed, coated or shrink-wrapped in PVC. Denmark, Sweden Norway and Japan have restrictions in the use of DEHP, DINP in certain types of food packaging as well as child care products. Packaging Reduction and Empty Space Limits- South Korea allows no more than 10-35% of empty space, in Australia the empty space varies from 25%- 40%, depends on the category of the products, Japan 40% of empty space for cosmetic products and countries as: Belgium, Netherlands, Greece, Slovakia, Spain, South Korea and Australia require companies to submit a detailed packaging reduction plan. PVC in packaging for beverage-is forbidden in Switzerland Expanded polystyrene (EPS)-in packaging of toys, dolls, electrical products, IT products and audio-visual appliances are forbidden in South Korea • Products with volume £ 20000 cm3 1 Jan 2004 • Products with volume £ 30000 cm3 1 Jan 2006 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 42 • Products with volume £ 40000 cm3 1 Jan 2008 Today many countries have the responsibility to ensure that the packer or importer are charge for the packaging and its recycling, and stipulates that companies must meet their obligations individually or collectively. In response, industry associations have set up groups to manage compliance for obligated companies, usually by dividing the cost of providing collection services and recycling among its members according to the amount of packaging they generate. This European Directive sets out the reduction at source, standards for recovery, reuse, heavy metal content and the reduction of hazardous substances in packaging, which means an improvement in the environment. It states that all packages that are put on the market of the European Economic Community must comply with the Essential Requirements products. Products that are in default are being recalled. The process of assessing compliance with the ERs is similar to the requirements of ISO 14000 in establishing a framework for assessing attributes of the packaging system and identifying areas for improvement with regard to the requirements of the law. European standards are developed to provide a common procedure for evaluation and documentation of compliance The introduction of a tax by the type of packaging used would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries; it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of any country, nor any law and only enough to include the tax in a decree. Refer to Annex 9 for European Union Packaging Regulations information. For more information: Contact Links European Commission http://www.iopp.org/files/public/Sustainable_PKG_Updates_Goodall.pdf Environment DG http://www.deq.state.or.us/lq/pubs/docs/sw/packaging/intlpkgregulations.pdf B - 1049 Brussels Belgium ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 43 5.2.6 Ireland’s Plastic Bag Levy (since 2001) 5.2.6.1 Development: A key reason for the implementation of the levy was to reduce litter. (National litter monitoring statistics are available at www.environ.ie .) Regulations enacted at the national level: • Plastic Bag Regulations (S.I. No. 605 of 2001) • Plastic Bag (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations (S.I. 167 of 2007) Bags that are exempt from the levy include: • Reusable plastic bags, provided the retailer charges at least 70 cents for the bag, and • Selected bags below a specified size limit and used to package certain foodstuffs (e.g., loose fruit). 5.2.6.2 Implementation: Regulation was needed to develop the legal framework to charge the tax and implement modifications based on the feedback on the performance of the program. The enforcement was delegated to local authorities. The Revenue Commissioner’s office was delegated the task of collecting the levy taxes each quarterly accounting period from retailers. Regulation also establishes the retailers must keep records pertaining the levy charges and bags credited. Levies are remitted into Ireland’s Environment Fund (authorized under the Waste Management Act, 2001) for use toward the topics of: • Waste prevention, reduction, recovery, recycling, management; • Environmental awareness, education, training; and • Other waste-relevant environmental activities. Local authorities enforce the levy. Retailers pay collected levies to the Revenue Commissioners each accounting period (quarterly). Retailers must also maintain records pertaining to bags and levies. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 44 5.2.6.3 Changes Over Time: In 2007, in response to rising per capita bag use, the levy was increased from 15 to 22 Euro cents to reinforce the disincentive. The intention of the levy was to reduce the amount of MSW generated by the plastic bags. Legislation was developed to create the legal framework to implement the program. The regulations developed are: Plastic Bag Regulation (S.I. No. 605 of 2001), which was amended on 2007 as Plastic Bag (Amendment No. 2) Regulation (S.I. 167 of 2007). The legislation intends to reduce bag use by charging 0.15 Euros per bag (2001). Since 2007 the charge is for 0.22 Euros per bag. The regulation includes exemptions to bag taxing by two cases: in one case the sell of reusable plastic bags, provided they cost more than 0.70 euro/bag or special bags for smaller items such as perishables, fruit or other pathogen carrying foodstuffs. 5.2.6.4 Source Reduction Impact: The establishment of the program was initially successful because the bag used reduced by more than 90% to avoid the taxation. Before the levy, bag generation rates were 328 bags/person-year (1,327,619,048 bags/year) and were reduced to 21 bags/year-capita (85,000,000 bags/year) within the next five months; a 90% reduction. Within the first 5 months of enactment, plastic bag use reduced by 90%. Per capita bag use: • Pre-levy -- 328 bags/year • Immediately post-levy -- 21 bags/year (85 million/year total) • 2006 -- 31 bags/year (115 million/year total) The Goal is to generate per capita less than 21 bags/year. The possibility of imposing a tax on Irish plastic bags was initially discussed in 1994. In 1996 the legal framework (Waste Management Act) was published in which the government had the assignment to impose environmental taxes in commercial and other businesses. Small bags for fruits and meats are exempt, or reasons of hygiene and to avoid cross contamination. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 45 To impose a tax on plastic bag use is to prevent its use or reduce at source. In most Latin American countries at the time of imposing a fee or charging directly to the plastic bag will encouraged the use of other types of bags. This can be achieved by a decree, without need to amend the constitution. If a direct collection is chosen, there is no need of any decree or legislative act. The regulation needed to be modified in 2007 to increase the rate from 0.15 euro/bag to 0.22 euro/bag to try and maintain a rate of 21 bags/person/year. In 2006, the rate had increased to 31 bags/year (115,000,000 bags/year). Refer to Annex 10 for Irelands Plastic bag Levy information. For more information: Contact Links Environment, Community and Local Government http://www.economicinstruments.com/index.php/solid- Tel. 1890 20 20 21 or +353 (0)1 waste/charges-and-taxes-/article/214- 888 2000 5.2.7 Green Purchasing Law (since 2000) 5.2.7.1 Development: The waste disposal facilities in Japan were pushed to capacity in April 2000. This issue encouraged and forced the Japanese government to adopt a series of laws to reduce waste stream to landfills. The Green Purchasing Law was enacted to promote recycling, so that recycled products would be better accepted in the market and avoid the use of raw materials as well resulting in reduction of environmental impacts. The law also encourages the public sector, including the government, to promote the procurement of eco- friendly goods, and to provide information on such goods. (Law No. 100 of 2000) - Green Purchasing obligates purchasing by the State and other public organizations and expects the same of local governments, businesses and citizens. The Green Purchasing Law also obliges national governmental bodies to formulate green procurement policies and requires the bodies to compile records of their purchasing and disclose this information publicly. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 46 5.2.7.2 Implementation: The government made a list (January 2001) of 101 designated procurement goods and their standards. In 2002, 50 more items were added to the list of designated procurement goods, and the government decided to add 17 items pertaining to public works activities and products are added as needed. The different categories are: • Paper, writing materials • Fixtures and furniture -chairs, desks, shelves, coat hangers, umbrella stand, bulletin board, black board, white board, etc. • Office electric appliances-copying machines, personal computers, facsimile machines, etc. • Home electric appliances-refrigerators, television sets, video recorders, and air-conditioners. • Lighting • Automobiles • Uniform/working cloth • Interior - curtains, carpets, blankets, etc. • Working globes • Textile product -tents, sheets, etc. • Facilities - solar power generation systems, solar heating systems, fuel cells, and composing machines for kitchen garbage. • Public works - building materials, building machines, building methods, sophisticated pavement, rooftop greening. • Services - energy saving diagnosis, printing, restaurants, recycling of car tires. 5.2.7.3 Changes Over Time: The Japanese Cabinet included a legal wood in the list of items based in the Green Purchasing Law. This inclusion was in response to the issue of illegal logging and started in April 2006. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 47 5.2.7.4 Source Reduction Impact: The Ministry of the Environment analyzed some examples in order to calculate the effects in reduction of environmental impacts as well as the contribution to the creation of the market for green products, for example: • Copy Paper- In fiscal year 2001, 92.6 % of the copy paper procured by the national bodies consisted of products on the list of designated procurement goods under Green Purchasing Law. If those 74,958 tons of copy paper were made from 100-percent virgin pulp, 207,000 cubic meters of pulpwood would be required as raw material. It is clear that national bodies have actively embraced the use of designated goods. This Act promotes the recycling of products, which requires recycled materials to be used as raw material, and to prevent illegal logging through the obligation to use only wood from authorized locations. In order to do the same in Latin America, to be effective a law must be developed, taking reference to the Green Purchasing Law (Green Purchasing Law) as applicable to the legal system each Latin American country and develop it taking into account the social, economic conditions of the country. Another way is to implement tax incentives to purchase environmentally friendly products. In countries like Mexico, however, there is a Sustainable Forest Management Act, a regulation and a number of official Mexican standards that prohibit illegal tree logging; nevertheless the issue is a problem that has not been eradicated. Refer to Annex 11 or Japan’s Green Purchasing Law information. For more information: Contact Links Ministry of Economy, Trade and http://www.env.go.jp/en/earth/forest/pamph_jgpp.pdf Industry. http://www.japanfs.org/en/mailmagazine/newsletter/pages/027760.h Banri Kaieda-Minister tml ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 48 5.2.8 Calgary Material Exchange (CMEX), since 2005 5.2.8.1 Development: The purpose of CMEX is to divert industrial waste from landfills by facilitating materials exchanges. This program is managed by Green Calgary, a non-profit charitable organization, where all funds go directly to running Commercial Environmental Services. CMEX provides resourceful contact information of companies that have products available to exchange to industrial, commercial and institutional companies. Reportedly, the 24/7 Information technology assistance has proven to be effective. 5.2.8.2 Implementation: Calgary Material Exchange provides a list where industrial, commercial, and institutional companies can check the categories to find out what materials companies have available or are looking for and they may also post their own listings by contacting the program manager. All members receive a monthly update news and new list of material available and wanted via email. All companies in the directory are participants of the program. CMEX are not responsible for the payment or quality or determination of hazardous of any transaction. In order to increase program value and responsibility, CMEX created different participants levels and annual membership fees: • Sponsor: includes membership, promotional material and business logo. Sponsorship is based on number of employees: $500/year for <50 employees $1000/year for 51-200 employees $2000+/year for >200 employees • Membership: $100 annual fee includes materials referrals, access to research access to the website and posting listings, quarterly newsletters, progress reports, and access to workshops. • Partners: non-profit organizations that are involved with CMEX, includes membership benefits. • Participant: free trial for new companies, includes materials referrals and waste issues, with no extra benefits. This level allows companies to ensure the service is useful and of value to them. There has been some unsuccessful materials exchange for two main reasons: Lack of funding and lack of personal contact and communication between participants and the program coordinator. An important key for the successful of the CMEX has been the development of an active waste ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 49 exchange that integrates community-based social marketing techniques. This strategy emphasizes personal contact between staff and participating businesses such as meetings and telephone calls in order to make easier the access to information, support, and follow up. Other important elements for program success are: • Clear objectives • Program Philosophy • Community-based social marketing • Sufficient time for pilot program • Long-term funding • Dedicated full-time Program Coordinator with the right set of skills, passion and personality • Effective strategy and program design • Database that meets long-term needs • Defined geographic area • Clear understanding of resources required (e.g., human, financial, temporal) • Industrial park comprised of diverse industry • Regularly available, diverse Technical Advisory Committee • Dedicated Industry Steering Committee • Support from local municipality and environmental organizations 5.2.8.3 Changes Over Time: Besides increasing performance, no changes were highlighted 5.2.8.4 Source Reduction Impact: There have been 5,235 exchanges representing 557 companies as members and a cost savings of $754,701.54. A total of 10,819 tons of CO2 were reduced and 10,819.72 tons of wastes were diverted. The CMEX is one of the many services provided by the Calgary Green Program Environmental Business Services. It is an online forum for businesses to enlist the materials that are available or want to exchange. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 50 Due to the fact CMEX provides only one service in order to reduce waste generation, and is not responsible for the transactions or the quality of goods received, a law should not be modified, or published and only apply in Latin American countries, as in Calgary, and could be done through a civil society or similar legal figure in Latin America. This means that those who want to exchange goods enroll in the program and sponsors should be sought, as in Calgary to be the ones to pay the administrative costs of the program. Refer to Annex 12 for Calgary’s Material Exchange information. For more information: Contact Links Sarah Begg-Program Manager http://www.cmex.ca/ (403) 230-1443 ext. 226 http://www.cmex.ca//documents/CMEX_Guidance_Doc_final- Cell: (403) 667-6761 Feb_7_2006.pdf sarah@greencalgary.org 5.2.9 WasteWise USA (since 1994) 5.2.9.1 Development: WasteWise is a Voluntary Partnerships between the EPA and USA established since 1994. Helps its partners meet goals in preventing waste, improving recycle efforts, conserving energy and reducing GHG emissions. 5.2.9.2 Implementation: The members can join as Partners, Endorsers, or both. Partners agree to reduce or recycle municipal solid waste and select industrial wastes and endorsers agree to recruit organizations to become WasteWise partners and provide partners with promotional, educational, or technical information. WasteWise partners can use the following resources and supports to develop and sustain a waste reduction program: • Plan Your WasteWise Program: Tools and recommendations for planning an effective waste reduction program. • Measure Your Progress: Data sources and calculators to determine the environmental and economic benefits of your waste reduction program. • Report Results: Baseline (for new partners) and annual (for all partners) data reporting forms, instructions, and sample forms. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 51 • Announce Your Achievements: Sample press releases, articles, and WasteWise logo guidelines. • Get Expert Help: Free, tailored technical assistance from the information specialists at the WasteWise Helpline. Each year, the EPA recognizes outstanding achievements of their Partners with awards in different categories including business, government, and educational sectors. To qualify, Partners must submit complete annual reporting forms that detail tonnage of waste reduced, associated cost savings, and promotion of the WasteWise program to employees, customers, and suppliers. The categories are: • Hall of Fame: It is the highest honor awarded to and indicates continue and progressive waste reduction action. • Partners of the Year: Recognizes overall waste reduction achievements, efforts to purchase or manufacture recycled-content products, and activities to promote WasteWise. • Endorser of the Year: The Endorser of the Year award recognizes an organization for outstanding efforts to promote the WasteWise program. • Gold Achievement Awards: Recognizes Partners with the greatest achievements in specific areas such as climate change, green buildings, product stewardship, packaging reduction, community involvement, industrial material recycling and beneficial use of secondary materials. • Honorable Mentions: Awarded to Partners who made noteworthy accomplishments in waste prevention, recycling collection, and buying or manufacturing recycled-content products. 5.2.9.3 Changes Over Time: Besides increasing performance, no changes were highlighted 5.2.9.4 Source Reduction Impact: The program continues to grow, there are more than 2,100 Partners and Endorsers, representing nearly 50 industry sectors and 12.5 million tons of waste were reduced in 2007. The WasteWise is a completely voluntary program that created the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, for its acronym in English) and the ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 52 United States Government to reduce waste generation through improved recycling, reduce energy, reduce greenhouse gases, with the participation from small local governments and nonprofit organizations to large enterprises and multinational corporations across different types of incentives. Since it is voluntary, its implementation would be very easy in Latin American countries, as through stimuli that are not prosecutors, both local governments and businesses would be interested in to announce that they are reducing waste and thereby contributing to a better environment. The WasteWise voluntary program would not require any legislative reform in LAC. Refer to Annex 13 for USA Wastewise information. For more information: Contact Links U.S Environmental Protection http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/partnerships/wastewise/index.htm Agency (EPA) 5.2.10 Machu Picchu’s Plastic Ban (2011) 5.2.10.1 Development: Machu Picchu in Peru receives over 3,000 tourists per day creating a waste issue. The municipal council of Machu Picchu approved during 2009 a series of decrees to prohibit the sale and drink consumption in plastic bottles and granted a term to the distributing companies so that they adapt new packages in this jurisdiction. Municipal ordinance Nº 06-2008 prohibits the drink sale in plastic packages within the district of Machu Picchu; it is currently in standby until popular consultation. This ordinance prohibits the sale of beverages in plastic containers in the district of Machu Picchu, but the date is on standby until it is submitted to referendum, approved and published. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 53 5.2.10.2 Implementation: The city of Machu Picchu implemented solid waste management through: Coverage 100% Aguas Caliente (Residential and Commercial) segregation and separate collection at source and Separation Plant Solid Waste: Plastics (PET Bottles) • Inorganic • Organic • Harvesting by hand trucks • Disposal: • Plastic Crushed and transported by train to Cusco to market for recycling • Inorganic and Organic: They are transported to the Landfill Maras – Urubamba This ordinance promotes the treatment of solid waste and prohibits the sale of beverages in plastic containers in Machu Picchu, Peru. 5.2.10.3 Changes Over Time: To date, this Ordinance has not passed as it encountered opposition from the community. 5.2.10.4 Source Reduction Impact: The opposition to ban plastic beverage containers was due to the economic interests behind the application of this Ordinance. Unfortunately, during this evaluation study, there was no evidence of source reduction impacts nor education and awareness trainings. The RETAMA monthly waste composition study was not available upon request. In order to implement this in Latin American countries, if as a law or regulation, it should be developed taking into account the social, economic, political, conditions of the country or region, and consensus before starting work on a draft and lobbying with the stakeholders to assure no opposition. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 54 Refer to Annex 14 for Machu Picchu’s Special Case Study and other related information. For more information: Contact Links Municipality of Cuzco http://www.bvsde.paho.org/bvsacd/cd53/Ordenanza-20126-MC.pdf Bernardo Centeno Miranda http://municusco.gob.pe/documentos/MUNICIPALIDADDELCUSCO Sub-Manager Environment PlanProvincial.pdf TTelephone: 51 84-236716 http://www.ima.org.pe/file_noticias/NOT_PIGARS_urubamba.pdf ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 55 6 LEVEL 3 ANALYSIS – COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROGRAMS 6.1 INTRODUCTION As mentioned above, developed Countries are moving in the direction to minimize waste at source and have been, based on the philosophy, of waste reduction hierarchy: reduce, reuse and recycle and have created different policies and strategies to promote this philosophy. This trend solves or alleviates the problems faced by countries heavily populated where landfills quickly fill up available space or useful life is short, besides avoiding the air emissions generated by treating these wastes. Additionally there is a potential to develop the economy and create jobs, especially in the case of reduction at source. In the case of some strategies for the source reduction or upstream waste reduction, the taxes and fees, taxes, and any un-returned beverage container deposits, provide revenues to government and unlike recycling or traditional waste management, the source reduction does not require collection cost or treatment as usual. Source reduction costs are used at: • Data Collection- Provides information about the composition and quantity of waste generated and therefore allows you to prioritize the effort required of source reduction. Besides, it is necessary to establish goals and Key Performance Indicators. • Waste Audits- Measures program effectiveness and progress. Also helps the community to identify areas that need further effort. • Legislative Development- Implementing a policy is the first step for the source reduction plan. The policy, mandate or law must be clear, well defined and with established targets. It must avoid ambiguity as a diversion from landfills, which could mean many things such as recycling. • Education- an effective educational campaign for the success of programs implemented is essential. Communication and academic media are used. • Technical Assistance- An effective program requires independent leadership, authority, and appropriate resources. It should not be the waste management head or the recycling head but committed to minimizing materials entering the waste stream. • Equipment- Computer software demonstrates to facilitate statistics and dashboards on data collection to measure source reduction. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 56 • Planning- Define what will be reduced, how much will be achieved, and how will results be measured. ERM undertook a detailed Cost-Benefit Analysis of three programs covering the costs of implementing the program (government, companies and consumers), and the benefits (including production, disposal and collection cost savings, tax revenues, and employment creation). The programs selected were chosen for their relative ease of implementation, since they intend to reduce the amount of MSW reaching the landfills, and encourages recycling and waste source reduction to avoid being penalized by the tax or levy. For in depth details on costs and benefits future work will likely require coordination with the city and data gathering in the three locations (Canada, Ireland, and USA). It must be noted, that the model would only work in those cities or communities that are affluent enough to absorb the tax without losing essential services. Rural communities or those that lack proper infrastructure (i.e. proper road network, adequately designed landfill) do not benefit from this sort of program since it is easier to dispose illegally than to absorb the tax. The models selected are administrative in nature. Proper regulatory framework and an administration system need to be developed in cooperation of the government to impose the tax, levy or tariff program and to incorporate penalties for not following the program. Thus, the benefit analysis would be to maximize the amount deviated from the landfill and get the associated savings of said deviation. For instance, if the solid waste generation reduces by 15 to 25% the collection of wastes could be reduced from 3 trips to 2 trips in a large community. Another benefit would be the profits collected from the taxes themselves. It must be considered that the intention of these programs is not to collect the taxes, but to use the taxation as a deterrent to reduce the waste generation rate by recycling and source reduction at an individual level. The cost benefit for these programs is to compare the benefits, essentially the reduction on solids wastes reaching the landfill, expressed in tons/year to the costs, or the actual net profits generated for the activity. The larger the number, it implies a better program. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 57 The program is almost always government sponsored. Thus, once the regulatory framework is established then an administrative system, usually a computer based system, a record collection system to track the progress and any potential goals the city or municipality wants to reach needs to be established, at an initial investment cost. The three programs analyzed as case studies are presented below. A table summarizing the results of the studies is presented at the end of this section. 6.2 CALGARY MATERIAL EXCHANGE (CMEX) – GREEN CALGARY, CANADA Calgary Material Exchange is a private sector program created by Green Calgary in Canada. The program was created to minimize the waste reaching the Calgary landfills. Calgary industrial, commercial and institutional companies are offered the service to provide contacts with resources that are available to exchange. The system only provides the framework to establish the contact. The actual payment term and logistics are assumed by the potential sellers and buyers. According to the webpage there have been 5,235 exchanges by the time of this report, made by 557 companies that have implied cost savings of $754,702. It has also implied the reduction of 10819 tons of CO2 and deviating 10820 tons of waste per year from reaching the landfill. The following assumptions were made: 6.2.1 Investment Cost Based on their case study of January 2006 the following operational costs were expected: Salaries 155,000 $/year Operational Costs 48,000 $/year These costs are essentially website hosting, office space and utilities spent for the operation. Fixed Assets: 90,000 $ on office equipment 15,000 $ for contingencies. Operational Contingency: 20,000 $ (one month operations) A total annual cost for operations is $328,000 / year is expected to run the program. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 58 6.2.2 Benefits Obtained According to the 2006 report, cost savings of $754,701.54/y were made between the parties. In addition 10,819.72 tons/year were deviated from the landfill. No fees are charged by Calgary. Thus: Annual Savings: $754,701.72/y Solid Waste deviated from landfills: 10,819.72 tons/y 6.2.3 Net Benefit per Waste Diverted Save: 754,701.72 $/y Cost: 328,000.00 $/y Net Savings: 426,702.00 $/y Net Savings: 10,819.72 tons/y Net Savings: 39.4 $ saved/ton deviated 6.3 BAG LEVY TAX – IRELAND The intention of the levy was to reduce the amount of MSW being generated by the plastic bags of the country. Legislation was enacted to create the regulatory framework to implement the program. The program would charge a price per bag to stimulate the use of reusable bags. The original regulation was developed in 2001 as Plastic Bag Regulation (S.I. No. 605), and was subsequently modified in 2007 as Plastic Bag Amendment 2 (S.I. 167 of 2007). The original legislation intended to reduce plastic bag use at 0.15 Euros per bag (2001). The legislation was modified in 2007 to increase the cost to 0.22 Euros per bag, to dissuade use of bags. The regulation excludes the small plastic bags used for fruits, meats or other pathogen prone products. Reusable bags are also exempt, provided they cost more than 0.70 euro/bag. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 59 This is a state led initiative. Regulation needed to be developed to implement the tariff system, the penalties and tracking system for the bags. Enforcement was delegated to the staff of the Revenue Commissioner’s office. Quarterly accounting reports need to be submitted by clients of the program to the Commissioner. Recordkeeping is delegated to the individual retailers. The funds collected as revenue is used to feed and Environment Fund that is used for training sessions that include the following topics: • Waste prevention, reduction, recovery, recycling and management; • Environmental awareness training and education; and • Other waste and environmental activities. 6.3.1 Investment Cost According to the discussions made by the program directors the initial implementation of the program required the investment of 1.2 million Euros to create the new computer system and modify the Revenue Commissioner’s staff to audit and keep track of all the transactions relating to the bags. An advertising campaign costing 358,000 Euros/year (525,000 $/y) was established to increase awareness on the program. Salaries 200,000 $/year (Hard assumption, these are government employees reassigned to run this program) Operational Costs 1.7 million $/year (1.2 million/y) (Same as above. Short lifespan of computer systems). A total annual cost for operations is $2,258,000 / year is expected to run the program. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 60 6.3.2 Benefits Obtained The establishment of the program was initially successful since the bag usage dropped by 90% to avoid paying the levy tax. Before the levy, bag generation rates were at 328 bags/person-y (1,327,619,048 bags/year) and were reduced to 21 bag/person-year (85,000,000 bags/year) within the next five months. However, the regulation needed to be modified in 2007 to increase the tax from 0.15 to 0.22 euro per bag to maintain the goal of 21 bags/day/person. On 2006, the number was 31 bags/person-year (115,000,000 bags./year). The benefits are for the deviation of the bags from the landfill. Reducing from the initial 1,327,619,048 bags/year (5854 tons/y) to the 2001 85,000,000 bags/year (374.8 tons/year) saved 5486 tons/year from reaching the landfill. According to the government records the savings implied by the program are between 14 – 15 million dollars. Annual Savings: $14,000,000 – 15,000,000/y Solid Waste deviated from landfills: 5,486 tons/y 6.3.3 Net Benefit per Waste Diverted Save: 14,000,000 $/y Cost: 2,258,000 $/y Net Savings: 11,742,000 $/y Net Savings: 5,486 tons/y Net Savings: 2142 $ saved/ton deviated 6.4 PAY AS YOU THROW – CART BASED PROGRAM – GAINESVILLE, FL, USA Pay As You Throw programs are a quantity-based approach to structure fees for waste disposal. As more waste is generated more is charged to the client. The client is then forced to promote recycling, do source reduction and reduce their overall disposal quantities to a target level. If the client does nothing it will be forced to pay more for the collection. Since this a public effort, regulations, and a proper regulatory framework needs to be established. The program is popular in the United States. The city of Gainesville, Florida has a population of 96,000. It established a cart- based system where the clients subscribed to the service pay a monthly fee ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 61 for a certain volume of waste collected. This monthly fee is $13.50 for a 35 gal container, $15.96 for a 64 gal container or a $ 19.75 for a 96 gal container. The program reduced the solids waste and was able to reduce tipping fees at the landfills and reduce routes. 6.4.1 Investment Cost To create the program a computer inventory system and a container distribution program needed to be developed. Since the system is similar in nature to Ireland’s levy program. It has been assumed to cost in the range of 1.5 million dollars/year. It is also assumed that around 100,000 $/y would need to be invested in containers for those interested in joining the program. 200,000 $/y would be needed to run the distribution system for new clients. A total annual cost for operations is $1,800,000 / year is expected to run the program. 6.4.2 Benefits Obtained Solids waste was reduced from 22,000 tons/year to 18,000 tons/year after the program was implemented. In 2004, the fees were increased and the waste dropped to 18,000 tons/year. Tipping fees at the landfill were reduced, saving 200,000 $/year. The reports for that same period indicate profits from the cart charges program of 2.7 million dollars per year. To avoid increasing the cart size, clients are increasing recycling and reducing their discharges at the source. Annual Savings: $2,900,000/y Solid Waste deviated from landfills: 4,000 tons/y 6.4.3 Net Benefit per Waste Diverted Save: 2,900,000 $/y Cost: 1,800,000 $/y Net Savings: 1,100,000 $/y Net Savings: 4,000 tons/y Net Savings: 275 $ saved/ton deviated ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 62 Table 3: Summary Table of Case Studies for Cost Benefit Analysis Dollars Waste to Waste to Waste revenue Capital and Landfill Landfill After Deviated Annual Net per ton Program Operating Before Program from Revenue Profit removed Costs Program Establishment Landfill from landfill 1,700,000 USD for computer and audit 1,327,619,048 85,000,000 system bags/y* bags/y* 525,000 USD Bag Tax for an Levy advertising (Ireland) and marketing campaign 14,000,000 11,742,000 2142 5486 – 5854 tons/y 374.8 tons/y $2,258,000/y – $ revenue/ tons/y 15,000,000 12,742,000 ton reduced USD 1,500,000 USD to establish 2,700,000 program $/year on fees $100,000 initial Pay As You 22,126 tons investment on Throw per year on 18,116 4,000 200,000 containers Cart Based a 96,000 tons/year tons/year $/y in population saved $200,000 Collection tipping implement Program costs program and (Gainesville, distribute FL, USA) containers. 275 18,116 4,000 2,900,000 1,800,000 1,100,000 $ 22,126 ton/y tons/year tons/year $/year $/year $/y revenue/ton reduced Calgary Material Exchange 10,819.72 10,819.72 10,819,72 754,701 Salary: 155,000 426,702 39.4 $ tons/y tons/year were tons/year $/y $/y $/y revenue would have deviated from savings Office/Website /ton reached the the landfill by Maintenance: reduced landfill if the the program $48,000/y program did Office not exist Equipment: ERM $90,000 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 63 Intangible Actives: $15,000/y Dollars Waste to Waste to Waste revenue Capital and Landfill Landfill After Deviated Annual Net per ton Program Operating Before Program from Revenue Profit removed Costs Program Establishment Landfill from landfill Contingency ($20,000/y (1 mo operation)) 754,701 39.4 $ 10,819.72 10,819,72 426,702 10,819.72 ton/y $/y 328,000 $/y revenue/ton ton/y tons/year $/y savings reduced 6.5 OVERALL CONCLUSION OF COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS The benefits derived from these programs come from the difference between the columns of weight of the wastes sent to the landfill after the application of the program. This means that the larger the reduction of wastes sent to the landfill, the larger would be the benefits of the program. In the first years from the beginning of this type of program, the benefits may be high, however they will be adjusting as the generator implements actions to reduce their waste generation, which is the final intention of the three programs selected, to reduce the final disposition and stimulate action or measures to save or be efficient by the potential generator. This study has identified the implementation costs for each of the programs for which there is a reduction goal for the wastes that the government of the city is interested in implementing, on the other hand, the operational costs of these programs are marginal, given that the advantage of using the existing structural institutions and available personnel resources of the programs made by the generating institution making the strategy to implement these waste management operations more cost effective for the administration. It is important to mention that there are limitations to project the operation and develop a cash flow analysis and a specific cost benefit analysis for a present value of the operations since it is still an unknown the potential future behaviors of the benefits and costs of each step of the program. However, it must be stressed that the calculated benefits exceed significantly the costs associated to the implementation of each of these programs. This makes the contributions of these programs insignificant to the total cost of the operation. The execution and development of these types of programs in Latin America will be dependent on a great measure that the conditions are ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 64 similar or homogeneous to the characteristics of the cities where these type of programs have worked successfully. Even if it is true that the benefits are much larger than the cost of implementation it must be clarified that these programs can only work successfully in those cities or communities that have strong financing, adequate infrastructure (road network in good condition, a properly designed landfill) and capacity to implement a mechanism of supervision and control over the generators regarding the imposition of taxes or municipal fees. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 65 7 UNDERSTANDING LAC CIRCUMSTANCES In addition to reviewing the world experiences to highlight new and innovative Program and traditional good practices, a particular effort was made to understand the extent and character of possible implementation in Latin America. Following evaluation of the approaches as summarized in Table 1, the approached were then assessed for their general applicability to various waste management settings found within the LAC region. 7.1 WASTE FINAL DISPOSAL IN LAC ACCORDING TO THE SIZE OF THE POPULATION The big cites of LAC manage their MSW by mostly disposing it in landfills (engineered landfills or controlled landfills). However, MSW collection remains deficient outside the urban areas. In rural areas of LAC countries there is still open air burning which with the associated environmental burdens1. Table 4: Waste Final Disposal in Latin American and Caribbean Countries (percent distribution by disposal method according to the size of Population) Final Disposal Micro Small Medium Large Mega Group Landfill 36.6 35.9 49.7 73.4 78.3 55.2 Controlled Landfill 6.1 10.5 24.6 18.1 21.7 18 Open Air Dumps 44 45.7 23 7.2 - 22.7 Open air burning 14 6.7 0.7 0 - 2.8 Other Forms 0 1.2 2 1.3 - 1.2 (1) Information obtained from Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management Services in Latin America and the Caribbean for year 2010 (www6.iadb.org/Residuos) (2) Micro ≤ 15,000 inhabitants (3) Small 15,001-50,000 inhabitants (4) Medium 50,001-300,000 inhabitants (5) Large 300,001-5,000,000 inhabitants (6) Mega > 5,000,000 inhabitants As shown in the Table 4 above final disposal using open air dumps and open air burning are significant practices in population centers with 50,000 inhabitants or less. In the case of large population centers the predominant final disposal practice is the use of landfills or controlled landfills. In spite of 1Implementation of Policy Instruments for Chlorinated Solvents, A Comparison of Design Standards, Bans, and Taxes to Phase Out Trichloroethylene by Daniel Slunge and Thomas Sterner ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 66 the fact that the 2010 data for Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management Services in Latin America and the Caribbean does not have a category for rural areas we can say that populations in rural areas are in the category of population centers of 50,000 or less habitants. In fact the Report published by the Pan-American Health Organization on Solid Waste Management Services in LAC Countries in 2005 had a country category to represent the rural areas. For this category in the Report open air dumps and open air burning were a significant and common method of waste disposal for rural areas. 7.1.1 Solid Waste Generation per capita and Settings in LAC Municipal solid waste includes solid waste from residential, commercial, institutional and industrial activities (small industry and crafts), sweeping and sanitation of public areas, which management is the responsibility of the municipal authorities. The household wastes correspond to wastes generated within a house and is a significant component of the municipal solid waste. Table 5 presents the average Municipal Solid Waste Generation per capita in Latin American countries, which is lower than the waste production in developed countries. The waste management settings and their defining characteristics are summarized in Table 6. Table 5: MSW Generation per Capita in LAC Countries by Population Micro Small Medium Large Mega Group Household solid waste 0.46 0.51 0.61 0.74 0.73 0.63 (kg/inhabitants/day) Municipal solid waste 0.82 0.79 0.8 1.1 1.01 0.91 (kg/inhabitants/day) (1) Information obtained from Evaluation of Municipal Solid Waste Management Services in Latin America and the Caribbean for year 2010 (www6.iadb.org/Residuos) (2) Micro ≤ 15,000 inhabitants (3) Small 15,001-50,000 inhabitants (4) Medium 50,001-300,000 inhabitants (5) Large 300,001-5,000,000 inhabitants (6) Mega > 5,000,000 inhabitants ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 67 Table 6: Characteristic Waste Management Settings within the LAC Region1 The largest-population cities, typically, capital cities Largest Cities, Stronger municipal financial/investment capacity Higher Income Higher per-capita incomes (Stronger Municipal Higher cost of living Investment Capacity) Municipal waste collection Good road network Small, medium, and some large cities Smaller Cities, More limited municipal financial/investment capacity Lower Income Lower per-capita incomes (Limited Municipal Investment Lower cost of living Capacity) Municipal waste collection, but adequacy varies Adequacy of regional road network varies Rural developed areas and very small cities Rural, Little municipal financial/investment capacity Low Income Low per-capita incomes (Little Municipal Investment Low cost of living Capacity) Municipal waste collection unlikely Regional road network is limited Regions with special land constraints Land-Constrained Population density, municipal capacity, income levels, and road (Small Islands, Mountains) infrastructure varies with the locale. Remote primitive areas, tribal Remote Areas Limited, if any centralized, local government (Primitive Economy) Subsistence economy 7.1.2 LAC MSW Composition In general terms the municipal solid waste composition in LAC countries, while it varies in the different population centers, maintains a constant pattern in which the content of perishable organic matter is high (an average of around 56%) with a moderate paper and plastic contents. It is characterized by a high percentage of humidity (40%-60%) and a low caloric power (less than 1.381 kcal/kg). In the United States paper and cardboard constitute the largest component of the MSW generated and perishable organic matter (food waste and garden waste) is the second largest component. In LAC, the organic component makes up the majority of the 1 Information from 0130996 WB DSW Treatment Disposal Dioxin and Furan Emissions (Final) (2)-05/25/11 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 68 wastes, seconded by paper and cardboard. Refer to Table 7 for MSW Composition in LAC. Table 7: MSW Composition in LAC Countries Others Cardboard Perishable Country/City Metal Glass Textiles Plastics and and paper organics inert Barbados 20 … … … 9.0 59.0 12.0 Belize 5.0 5.0 5.0 … 5.0 60.0 20.0 Costa Rica 20.7 2.1 2.3 4.1 17.7 49.8 3.3 Peru 7.5 2.3 3.4 1.5 4.3 54.5 25.9 Caracas A.M. 22.3 2.9 4.5 4.1 11.7 41.3 11.2 Asuncion* 10.2 1.3 3.5 1.2 4.2 58.2 19.9 Ecuador 9.6 0.7 3.7 … 4.5 71.4 … Guatemala** 13.9 1.8 3.2 0.9 8.1 63.3 8.8 Mexico D.F. 20.9 3.1 7.6 4.5 8.4 44.0 11.5 7.1.3 Current LAC Upstream Waste Reduction Strategies The breadth of Programs that have been employed or are in process of being developed in LAC are: • Plastic Bags Disincentive - Mexico City (08/2010): Penalty to those who provide plastic bags to consumers in commercial centers. Buenos Aires (2008)-bans plastic bag use in commerce by charging fines, mandating weekly labor hours, bag decommissioning and temporary or permanent close of tenant. Panama, Chile, Colombia and Bolivia prohibition laws are ongoing. • Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables -Until the 1990s: refillables dominated the packaging mix in Latin American because these packaging beverages are affordable to more people. After reading about subject in Brazil, Mexico and Argentina soda pop refillable bottles are down because soda company’s shareholders make more money with one way. Coca cola and Pepsi are recently hitting the market with organic bottles more “green� eco friendly. • Pay as You Throw - Mexico (2010): Cost range ($0.50-$2.60)/kg to excess of 50 kg per day to industrial installations. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 69 • Zero Waste Law - Buenos Aires, Argentina (2009): In 2005, the City Council in Buenos Aires, Argentina unanimously passed a Zero Waste law. The law sets goals and milestones to reduce the volume of municipal solid waste going to landfill disposal. The law bans land filling of recyclable and compostable waste by 2020. • Clean Production (CP)-Latin America (2001): wide spread strategy, very successful in Chile. More than 2,700 companies, usually small and medium size (Known as Pymes fro its Spanish acronyms), have implemented CP gaining competiveness and environmental performance. • Plastic Ban -Panama (05/2010): The Kuna Congress banned plastics from entering Kuna Yala an indigenous region in Panama where ecotourism has flourished. • Plastic Bag Ban- Buenos Aires (2008)-bans plastic bag use in commerce by charging fines, mandating weekly labor hours, bag decommissioning and temporary or permanent close of tenant. • Plastic Ban -Machu Picchu, Peru (01/2011): A municipal ordinance prohibited plastic commercialization and use, the norms effectiveness was dated 04/17/2011 but economical interest behind the ordinance put a stop on the plastic ban ordinance. Detailed information is provided in Annex 14. • Tire Ban - Puerto Rico 1996: A law was passed in 1996 to divert 4.7 million tires a year from landfills. Twelve years later the 1996 Law was amended by PR Law 41 of July 22, 2009 to fill in the gaps of the previous law. After many years of permits and lobbying, in March, 2011 tires are burned in a cement kiln. • Material Exchange- Puerto Rico 2008: Industry partners can exchange materials such as: Oil, Car Batteries, Cardboard, Glass, Electronic equipment, wood and wood pallets, Metals, Tires, Paper, Plastics, Containers (cardboard, metal and plastic), Organic Residues, Glass and Other Materials. • BORSI - Colombia Ecuador and Costa Rica: (for its Spanish acronyms is Waste Exchange and industrial by-products) is a mechanism created by the National Center for Cleaner Production and Environmental Technologies to promote the exchange of waste and industrial by- products through sales transactions between supply and demand and through recovery, recycling and reintroduction of these materials production chains. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 70 Refer to Table 8 for a Summary of Current LAC Upstream Waste Reduction Strategies by Country. Table 8: Summary of Current LAC Upstream Waste Reduction Strategies by Country LAC Country Approach Description Status Plastic Bags Law N˚13868 bans plastic Initiated October Disincentive bag use in commerce by 2009; no metrix, charging fines, mandating opposition ongoing weekly labor hours, bag decommissioning and temporary or permanent close of tenant. Zero Waste Law Bill Zero Waste (Act 1854) Zero Waste Act Policy entitled Management Act establishes a gradual comprehensive solid waste reduction in the approved in 2005 in Buenos disposal of solid Aires, sets Goals and waste, which milestones to reduce the according to volume of municipal solid Greenpeace have waste going to landfill, failed because Argentina meaning through the growth instead of reducing, of industries recycling and the waste stream has reduced waste generation. increased reaching a The law plans a zero waste record of waste to by 2020. landfill in year 2010. e-waste A group of students and Successful faculty of the School of “Informatica� in Buenos Aires restored obsolete electronic equipment they receive. They install free software and educational applications so that they can operate and then donate them to low-income sectors of society. Refillables beverage Argentina- Coca Cola also Soda refillable operates a bottling plant near bottles are declining Buenos Aires. An because soda examination of the company’s company's 2000 report shareholders make suggests that one-way more money with containers are taking over one way Argentina's soft drink market. In Buenos Aires Coca Cola sold 10% of its soda pop refillable bottles in 2000 but sold 70% in 1994. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 71 LAC Country Approach Description Status Plastic Bags A bill (PL 612/2007) was Not approved Disincentive introduced in the House of Representatives in March 2007, which promoted the replacement of the conventional biodegradable bags in different points of sales This bill was not passed Campaigns Sao Paulo-In March 2008 an Accomplished agreement was signed between the Government of the State of Sao Paulo and the São Paulo State Supermarket Association (APAS) to promote environmental awareness campaigns with the Ministry of Environment of Sao Paolo and retail entities. Refillables beverage Brazil- The volume Soda refillable percentage in refillables bottles are decline plummeted from 96% in 1990 because soda to 13% in 1998. company’s shareholders make more money with one way Brazil Educational The Ministry of Environment Accomplished Campaigns in March 2008 took place the exhibition "The best practices and innovations in packaging" as part of the campaign "Conscious Consumption of packaging", organized as the beginning of the educational work that will spread across Brazil . Plastic Bags Rio de Janeiro-07/15/09- law Ongoing. The law Disincentive restricting the use of plastic has a phased bags by retail stores. The implementation over shops will have to give a three years discount if they do not provide alternatives to plastic bags or customers refuse to use it. Plastic Bags President of the Social Policy Paperwork bill Disincentive Committee of the House of Representatives, sent to the plenary of Deputies a bill that would regulate on the matter according to the idiosyncrasies of each region ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 72 LAC Country Approach Description Status Plastic Bags There is a draft law 96/2008 Paperwork bill Disincentive "through creating the National Committee for the use Intergremial Waste Containers and Packaging and restrict the free use of plastic bags in shops, supermarkets and hypermarkets" BORSI Mechanism created by the Ongoing Colombia National Center for Cleaner Production and Environmental Technologies to promote the exchange of waste and industrial by- products through sales transactions between supply and demand and through recovery, recycling and reintroduction of these materials production chains. BORSI Mechanism created by the Ongoing National Center for Cleaner Production and Environmental Technologies to promote the exchange of waste and industrial by- products through sales transactions between supply and demand and through recovery, recycling and reintroduction of these materials production chains. Reducing by Reusing Women of the city of San Limited information; Costa Rica Ramon prepare handcrafts may be in initial with some waste. These stages projects are part of the plan for solid waste management that promotes the project of strengthening and decentralization (FOMUDE, for its Spanish acronyms), the Western Federation of Municipalities of Alajuela (FEDOMA, for its Spanish acronyms) and National Technical University (UTN for its Spanish acronyms). ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 73 LAC Country Approach Description Status Plastic Bags Senators in the Chilean Paperwork bill Disincentive government, in 2008, proposed a bill that prohibits the distribution of non- Chile degradable plastic bags and a tax or fee on non-degradable bag producers that cannot be passed onto customers. BORSI Mechanism created by the Ongoing National Center for Cleaner Production and Environmental Technologies to promote the exchange of waste and industrial by- Ecuador products through sales transactions between supply and demand and through recovery, recycling and reintroduction of these materials production chains. Plastic Bags In 2008 Reformed the Federal On going Disincentive District solid waste law whose main objective is to control the unbridled use of plastic bags. This Act prohibits the free provision of non-biodegradable bags. Violation of this law could cost a fine from 57.46 to 1.14 million pesos (4.5-90,500 dollars) and 36 hours in jail. Pay as You Throw The Secretary Works and On going, This is Services (SOS) signed the used as part of Verification Management commitment to (2010), which focuses on waste reduction that minimizing waste generation has taken over the in industries. Ensures that head of Federal Mexico large waste generators to District Government, comply with the Act and which has achieved a establishes a Cost range reduction of 600t / ($0.50-$2.60)/kg to excess of d.. 50 kg per day to industrial installations. Refillables beverage Until the 1990s, refillables Soda refillable dominated the packaging bottles are declining mix in Latin American because soda because these packaging company’s beverages are affordable to shareholders make more people. Mexico- Has more money with one of the strongest market one way for refillables beverages but has experienced a declined in refilling too. Coca Cola sold 45% in refillable bottles in ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 74 LAC Country Approach Description Status 2000 but sold 88% in 1994 Plastic Ban The Kuna Congress(05/2010) Ongoing banned plastics from entering Kuna Yala an indigenous region in Panama where ecotourism has Panama flourished. Plastic Bag Ban Draft law banning the use of Ongoing non-biodegradable plastic bags has been discussed. Plastic Ban Machu Picchu, Peru Economical interest (01/2011): A municipal behind the ordinance ordinance prohibited plastic put a stop on the Peru commercialization and use, plastic ban the norms effectiveness was ordinance. dated 04/17/2011. Tire Ban A law passed in 1996 to Successful divert 4.7 million tires a year from landfills. Twelve years later another tire law is administered PR Law 41 July 22, 2009 to fill in the gaps of the previous law. After many years of permits and lobbying, in March, 2011 tires Puerto Rico are burned in a cement kiln. Material Exchange The categories are: Oil, Car Program Batteries, Cardboard, Glass, management is Electronic equipment, wood limited. and wood pallets, Metals, Tires, Paper, Plastics, Containers (cardboard, metal and plastic), Organic Residues, Glass and Other Materials. Plastic Bags In 2008, Uruguayan Inactive Proposal Disincentive lawmakers proposed a tax on plastic bags and a transition from plastic bags to biodegradable bags in a 2 Uruguay year period. The bill was passed by the House of Representatives on September 17, 2009 and was transferred to the Senate for ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 75 LAC Country Approach Description Status review. Campaigns On September 2, 2009 the Accomplished Ministry of Housing and Environment launched a campaign called “Get Bags Out of the Environment� Policy In 2007, Ordinance No. Standby 260/2007 was adopted which required merchants to implement actions to minimize waste, generation of plastic bags, and to develop management plans for their rational use, reuse and recycling. Clean Production Successful in Chile. More Ongoing than 2,700 companies, usually small and medium Latin America (2001) size (Known as Pymes for its wide spread strategy Spanish acronyms), have implemented CP gaining competiveness and environmental performance. 7.1.4 Select Case Study in the Tourism Sector in a LAC Country – Peru Municipal Ordinance Nº 06-2008 (2001) In order to provide the World Bank with an in depth study of one of the Programs, ERM carried out a site visit to the Sacred Valley in Peru. In this section, we have included our evaluation of this select waste reduction program focused in the tourism sector. This evaluation is framed with the aim of presenting the municipal ordinance for banning plastic in addition to major policies, programs and strategies implemented or planned by various governmental and private entities, focusing on integrated management of Solid Waste in areas of high flow of tourists in Peru, in the department of Cusco, specifically made by the City of Cusco, Sacred Valley and Machu Picchu. The methodology used to achieve the objective of our study was based on the review and analysis of preliminary information, interviews with government agencies and reviewing the results of the program. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 76 The main programs in the area are RETAMA Project, which comprises only 5% of the City of Cusco, the Solid Waste Project in the Vilcanota Valley (Sacred Valley) and the Municipal Ordinance # 06-2008 (Prohibition of plastics) in the Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu (which remains stalled by a disagreement between the government and the people of the area.) The methodology used to achieve the objective of our study was based on the review and analysis of preliminary information, interviews with government agencies and reviewing the results of the program. It is noteworthy, that the Municipalities are responsible for the management of solid waste in its area of jurisdiction, which will among others, plan, regulate and supervise the overall management of solid waste, including street cleaning, public spaces and monuments, the infrastructure of transfer, treatment and disposal of solid waste. Of the 627 registered solid waste companies, only 7 are in the department of Cusco and the companies providing solid waste services, only one is registered in the department of Cusco (according to the last search conducted on April 13 2011). Besides the above mentioned, it is important to note that the same department does not have any approved landfill. Some of the governmental entities involved in these projects are the Vice Ministry of Tourism, Ministry of Environment, the Ministry of Health, the Forestry Department, the Institute of Environment and Water and the respective municipalities. SELIP (a decentralized agency of the provincial municipality of Cusco) provides public cleaning services. The main problem in these areas is based on the massive increase in population due to migrations from surrounding regions, in search of jobs and opportunities, increased by the large number of tourists (nearly a million annually) to visit the region, leading to a poor and inadequate management of solid wastes, which are rising, exacerbated by the lack of importance given the government, both financially and in pro- environmental policies. 7.1.4.1 Cusco City: The City of Cusco is located in the Region of Cusco, Department of Cusco, south west of the region / department. The City consists of 5 districts, is one of the 13 provinces of the department with the same name and has an area of 385.1 km ². It has a population of 358.052 inhabitants, to which must be added the 750,000 tourists who visit annually, of which 28% are nationals and 72% are foreign (January 2009 - March 2011), which makes it fall into the ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 77 category of "Big City" (population over 300,000 and less than 5, 000.000 people). Of the 2,370 tons of solid waste generated in the city, only 5% coverage (118.5 tons) is reached in the RETAMA plan. Of these, it is estimated that 16.5 tons are plastic bottles (according to data from April 2011). The household waste generates 0.48 kg per person per day while urban waste generates 0.85 kg per capita. Manually Sweepings covers an area of approximately 81.3% of the city (313 km ²) and 99.2% is municipal service. On the subject of the collection, 82.8% of the city has service coverage (80.3% is municipal service and 2.5% is contract service). Daily collection covers 55.7% and 44.3% is offered from 2 to 5 times per week. There are 0.58 collection vehicles per 10 thousand inhabitants, of which 44% of the fleet is less than 10 years old. Given this it is noteworthy that only 37.6% of vehicles have compaction. Table 9: Table Cusco Waste Disposal Municipality Department Waste Disposal (RS) according to Department Cusco Open Dump 76 Cusco Burned 14 Cusco Recycled 11 Cusco Landfill 44 Cusco Total Districts 108 ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 78 7.1.4.2 Sacred Valley: Also known as the Vilcanota Valley, ranging from the Abra la Raya, 4,318 m, in the political boundary between the departments of Puno and Cusco, to the confluence of the rivers Yanatile and Urubamba, 500 m above sea level (2'000, 000 hectares Approx). This region has developed a COPESCO Regional Plan, which is a plan for development and improvement of living standards in the areas with tourism potential, through the planning and execution of investment works. In 2003, a World Bank technical team and the Vice Ministry of Tourism Project started Project Vilcanota, in order to preserve the ecological heritage, natural, cultural, and historical heritage of the people that make up the Sacred Valley. Figure 2: Sacred Valley Figure The solid waste management at Vilcanota Valley, focuses on the areas formed by the provinces of Cusco, Urubamba, Calca (excluding districts Yanatile and Lares) and Quispicanchi (only considering the districts of Lucre and Oropesa). This area, demographically speaking, has a population of 470.240 inhabitants and an area of 2.825 km ². ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 79 The project has been divided into 3 phases. The first phase started in late April 2011 with the intention of diagnosing the current situation and proposals in the profile-level solution. The second is scheduled for June 2011 trying to make the pre-feasibility studies. Finally, the third phase with a deadline in September 2011, seeks to develop feasibility studies, complemented with the development of final technical-profile. References: Políticas e Incentivos para la Reducción de la Generación de Residuos Sólidos en Cusco y el Valle Sagrado, Perú. (ERM Perú S.A. / abril 2011) http://www.inei.gob.pe/ http://www6.iadb.org/Residuos/informacion/InfoPais.bid;jsessionid=1BB25D965C7 DF42A2C8E0875A5E1A137 Note: It should be noted that the data are estimates based on data from the bibliographic sources mentioned. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 80 8 ASSESSMENT OF STRATEGY IN LATIN AMERICA In addition to reviewing the world experiences to highlight new and innovative Program and traditional good practices, a particular effort was made to understand the extent and character of possible implementation in Latin America ERM is evaluating the implementation of these waste reduction strategies from the point of view of the general applicability to LAC. With that understanding, ERM: • Identified the waste characterization in a range of LAC countries where Program may benefit the current waste management practices. • Identified the breadth of Program that have been employed or are in process of being developed; and • Highlighted (perhaps with additional details) those programs that appear to have the most relevance to LAC. ERM’s ability to evaluate potential applicability to LAC is supported by the professional experience of its staff in LAC offices.1 Having information about the target countries’ current (and anticipated future) conditions will enable ERM to select more relevant Programs for presentation from among the multitude of examples that exist. This pre-screening will facilitate the World Bank’s selection of Programs for the more in-depth analyses of subsequent tasks. The LAC countries where upstream waste approaches may benefit the current waste management practices are Brazil and Mexico based on the population demographics, they are among the first 12 most populated2 The suitability of each strategy for application in urban and rural areas of Latin American countries and the reasons for suitability/unsuitability in each case were accessed. Issues considered while selecting Program for in-depth review and evaluation included: 1 ERM has offices in Argentina/Chile (Buenos Aires/Santiago), Brazil (São Paulo, Alegre, Rio de Janeiro, Salvador), Colombia (Bogota), Mexico (Mexico City, Monterrey), Panama, Peru (Lima), and Puerto Rico (San Juan). 2 http://www.worldatlas.com/aatlas/populations/ctypopls.htm ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 81 • Did the Program rely on a particular technology for implementation and is that technology available (or can it be made available in a suitable timeframe) in the countries of interest; • Are there source reduction needs that cannot be met by other options; • Are there competing or complementary programs for waste management emerging or already in place; • Are conditions changing in ways that would influence an approach’s application in the long-term; and • What is the recycling or reprocessing potential (e.g., soil amendments, fuel, etc.) of one target waste compared to other target wastes? 8.1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS A summary of the general observations focusing the strength and weaknesses of the evaluated program follows. Table 10 gives an Overview of the strengths and weaknesses and of upstream solid waste reduction in Latin America. Table 10: Overview of Weaknesses and Strengths of Programs Approaches Strengths Weaknesses/issues • Change the behavior • It is effective if given practical of consumers as they alternatives to consumers. Landfill Tax will seek to evade tax. • May cause illegal dumping. • Brings Revenues to Government. • Reduce waste • Requires good organization generation at big and contact with other centers events where it such as recycling and generates large composting. Venues and Events: Reducing amounts in short time. Waste • It is a municipal mandate-requiring fulfillment as required to submit documentation. • It is effective as people • Puts disadvantage in opt for the refillable to competition, thus affecting the Packaging Taxes for non- avoid paying tax. same. refillable • Brings Revenues to • It is not as flexible and Government. practical to carry as cans or other plastic bottles. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 82 Approaches Strengths Weaknesses/issues • It is a fair measure • May cause illegal dumping in because everyone pays order to avoid the payment. according to amounts • The large and poor families, as generated. is the case in many places in • People look for ways LAC can barely cover the most Pay As You Throw (PAYT) to reduce waste basic needs and would make generated, recycling them very difficult to pay for and reuse to lower the trash. their trash costs • It is not as effective in places Brings Revenues to where there are excellent Government. recycling programs. • They are effective • Some may require investment because they are in new equipment and to mandates that must be redesign packaging and met by law. wrapping material changes. • They are aimed at International Packaging industries, which are Regulations major generators of waste. • By reducing packaging also reduce the cost and the amount of materials needed. • Achieve a shift in • If not applicable in conjunction consumers because with a tax on paper bags, they choose to evade increased consumption in Ireland’s Plastic Bag Levy tax. paper bags which are more • Bring the government eco-friendly than plastic. revenue. • Reduce successful use • Purchasing mislabeled green of virgin material. products. Green washing. • It is a law which is a must comply. Green Purchasing Law • Provides savings in purchases of materials and reused or recycled materials that tend to be cheaper. • Reduce waste; • Impacts income of people who eliminate potential make a living by selling Machu Pichu Plastic ban emission of pollutants beverages. if burned. • Reduce by reusing by • You need a personalized exchange and sale, service to be effective, such as eliminating the waste. telephone calls, and not be just Calgary Material Exchange • Environmental experts a list on the Internet. (CMEX) and guidance tools. • No responsibility taken for payments or for the quality of materials, act only as mediators. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 83 Approaches Strengths Weaknesses/issues • Reduce generated • No major drawbacks since it is waste brings savings a completely voluntary. to participants • Offers expert WasteWise consultancy, which helps in planning and auditing of waste reduction. 8.1.1 Applicability of Programs Identified in LAC The following section is a summary of the applicability of each program to LAC. Table 11: Overview of Applicability of Programs Approach Program Summary Discussion Applicability LAC Identification Effectiveness • A fee of 22 Euros • Within the first 5 • In LAC countries, this cents is imposed on months of strategy will each bag used in enactment, plastic encouraged the use of stores. bag use reduced by other types of bags. • In different countries 90%. • This can be achieved Ireland’s Plastic those taxes are used by a decree, without Bag Tax in stewardship need to amend the programs. constitution. If a direct collection is chosen, there is no need of any decree or legislative act. The tax help us to reduce • The effectiveness is • This type of tax the waste in the ground directly would be easy to by imposing a financial proportional to the include in the penalty and to encourage tax level. legislation of most to reuse, reduce waste and • Other policies such Latin American develop technologies to as landfill bans countries. Landfill tax make better use of waste were implemented • It is not necessary to (EU) as a recyclable material. at the same time amend the Each country has its own and also influenced Constitution of fee. the outcome. neither any country, nor any law and only just include the tax in an administrative decree. A volume-based • In 2000, Finns • This type of tax packaging tax on non- consumed 73% of would be easy to Packaging refillables (with a lower their beer and 98% include in the Taxes for Non- tax rate on recyclables) to of their packaged legislation of most Refillables, discourage the use of soft drinks and Latin American Finland disposables and mineral water from countries recyclables over reusables. refillable bottles. • It is not necessary to • In 2008 the return amend the ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 84 Approach Program Summary Discussion Applicability LAC Identification Effectiveness of refillable bottles Constitution or law was still 98%. • Only just include the tax in a decree. • This law promotes • In fiscal year 2001, • In order to do the the procurement of 92.6 % of the copy same in LAC and to Eco-friendly Goods paper procured by be effective it is and Services by the the national bodies important to take into State and other consisted of account the social and entities by state, products on the list economic conditions towns, villages and of designated of the country. business. procurement • Another way is to Japan's Green • Before and after goods, which imply implement tax Purchasing Law every fiscal year, a a reduction in the incentives to plan or report is use of virgin purchase submitted. material. environmentally • It is clear that friendly products. national bodies have actively embraced the use of designated goods. Voluntary Partnerships • The program • Since it is voluntary, between the EPA and continuous to grow its implementation USA businesses to • There are more would be very easy in prevent waste, recycle and than 2100 partners LAC. buy and manufacture and endorsers, • Through stimuli that products made with representing nearly are not prosecutors, recycled materials. 50 industries. both local • 12.5 million tons of governments and Wastewise waste was reduced businesses would be (USA) in 2007. interested in reducing waste, which in turn also reduces costs. • The WasteWise voluntary program would not require any legislative reform in LAC. Residents are charged for • PAYT program • Most LAC do not pay the collection of municipal reduces residential a direct cost for solid waste based on the trash disposal garbage collection, it amount they throw away. about 17%. is a cost absorbed by This creates a direct • About 6% in the government who economic incentive to increasing recycle later impacts on the Pay As you recycle more and to taxes charged. • About 5% increased Throw (PAYT) generate less waste. USA of composting • About 6% increasing in avoided generation including buying in bulk and items with less packaging. The law requires the • 2005- 172 local • This type of Venues and largest venue facilities agencies reported regulation would be Events: and events (as defined) in on 330 venues & easy to include in the ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 85 Approach Program Summary Discussion Applicability LAC Identification Effectiveness Reducing each city and county to events. and 60% of legislation of most plan for solid waste diversion rate LAC waste, reduction and report • 2006-190 local • It is not necessary to California information regarding agencies reported amend the their waste reduction on 361 venues & Constitution of any efforts to their local events and 69% of country and only jurisdiction. overall diversion include the rate requirement in • 2007-236 local statutory law and agencies reported develop a regulation on 511 venues & requirement. events. The overall diversion rate was 69% The CMEX is a materials • 5,235 exchanges • Law is not necessary exchange program, which • 557 companies as to be modified provides a resource where members • As in Calgary could different organization can • cost savings of be done through a use to match those who $754,701.54 civil society or similar Calgary have unwanted materials legal figure in LAC • 10,819 tons of CO2 Material with others who may • Those who want to were reduced Exchange want those materials. exchange goods • 10,819.72 tons of (CMEX), waste were enroll in the program diverted. and sponsors should Canada be sought, as in Calgary to be the ones to pay the administrative costs of the program. Directive 2004/12/EC By 2002 the EU found: - The introduction of this require all companies that out of the 66 million policy would be easy to sell products in EU, tons of packaging waste include in the legislation comply with a source generated by Member of most Latin American International reduction plan. Each States, countries; it is not Packaging Union’s member has the • 54% was recycled necessary to amend the option to plan and and -25 million tons Constitution of any Regulations implement their own of greenhouse gas country. (EU) programs to comply with emissions were this packaging reduction eliminated in the and waste management process. policy in the private and the public sector City ordinance that The opposition was due If a law or regulation is to prohibits the use of plastic to the economic be approved, it should be containers. interests behind the developed taking into application of this account the social, Machu Picchu Ordinance. economic, political, plastic Unfortunately, there is conditions of the country no evidence of source or region, and consensus container ban reduction impacts. before starting work on a draft and lobby with all stakeholders to assure no opposition. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 86 8.1.1.1 Plastic Bag Tax: In most Latin American countries at the time of imposing a fee or charging directly to the plastic bag will encouraged the use of other types of bags. This can be achieved by a decree, without need to amend the constitution. If a direct collection is chosen, there is no need of any Decree or Legislative Act. Program would only be applicable to the major Latin America metropolitan areas that have the necessary resources and infrastructure in place to haul the materials as required. In addition, the population of these cosmopolitan centers is affluent enough to afford the full imposition of the levy tax without being impacted adversely by its requirements. Other cities with poorer populations would need to have a subsidized program where the state assumes the cost of the disposal, which would go against the intention of the program. The program would not be viable at all for rural, undeveloped areas. 8.1.1.2 Landfill Tax: This type of tax would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of neither any country, nor any law and only just include the tax in a administrative decree or law. Nevertheless it needs to be assumed that a properly constructed landfill is operational in the vicinity for the program to be effective. If this is not the case then the capital investment costs would need to be absorbed by the Government. This would eliminate the original purpose of the program that is to reduce disposal and stimulate recycling to avoid getting the tax. 8.1.1.3 Packaging Taxes for Non-Refillables: To impose such a tax would be seen instead of a tax, rather as an encouragement for the return of the money when the container is returned. This type of tax would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it will probably not need an amendment to the Constitution of any country, only just include the tax in a Decree, Municipality Ordinance or Law. The Program would only be applicable to the major Latin America metropolitan areas that have the necessary resources and infrastructure in place to haul the materials as required. In addition, the population of these cosmopolitan centers is affluent enough to afford the full imposition of the levy tax without being impacted adversely by its requirements. Other cities with poorer populations would need to have a subsidized program where the state assumes the cost of the disposal, ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 87 which would go against the intention of the program. The program would not be viable at all for rural, undeveloped areas. In addition, it will require involvement with the product suppliers to incorporate them into the program and have their assurance to adhere to its implementation will not incur in an economical burden to the public. 8.1.1.4 Japan's Green Purchasing Law (since 2000): This Act promotes the recycling of products, which requires recycled materials to be used as raw material, and to prevent illegal logging through the obligation to use only wood from authorized locations. In order to do the same in Latin America, to be effective a law must be developed, taking reference to the Green Purchasing Law (Green Purchasing Law) as applicable to the legal system each Latin American country and develop it taking into account the social and economic conditions of the country. Another way is to implement tax incentives to purchase environmentally friendly products. In countries like Mexico, however, there is a Sustainable Forest Management Act, a regulation and a number of official Mexican standards that prohibit illegal tree logging; nevertheless the issue is a problem that has not been eradicated. It could be implemented in most of the cities of Latin America but is would require a strong promotional campaign from the government authorities with aid by the private sector. This effort would have little or no net effect in the rural sectors of Latin America. 8.1.1.5 Wastewise Since it is voluntary, its implementation would be very easy in Latin American countries, as through stimuli that are not prosecutors, both local governments and businesses would be interested in to announce that they are reducing waste and thereby contributing to a better environment. The WasteWise voluntary program would not require any legislative reform in LAC. Could be implemented in most of the cities of Latin America but is would require a strong promotional campaign from the government authorities with aid by the private sector. This effort would have little or no net effect in the rural sectors of Latin America. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 88 8.1.1.6 Materials Exchange Programs: Due to the fact CMEX provides only one service in order to reduce waste generation, and is not responsible for the transactions or the quality of goods received, a law should not be modified, or published and only apply in Latin American countries, as in Calgary, and could be done through a civil society or similar legal figure in Latin America. This means that those who want to exchange goods enroll in the program and sponsors should be sought, as in Calgary to be the ones to pay the administrative costs of the program. Would not recommend this program unless the Latin-American countries can commit to a formal exchange program. This type of program must establish incentives for those who enter into the program. It could be manageable in large industrial and commercial sectors of Latin America, which can benefit from the exchanged goods. The program would not be viable for small cities or rural areas. 8.1.1.7 International Packaging Regulations: The introduction of a tax by the type of packaging used would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries; it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of any country, nor any law and only enough to include the tax in a decree. This program would require a strong commitment across Latin America. It is not easy to implement unless strong legislation supports the required fiscal elements of the program. If applicable the largest benefits would be reaped by larger cities, it is not an option for small cities or rural areas. Its’ implementation would require strong promotional support from the Government and an involvement of the private sectors. 8.1.1.8 Machu Picchu plastic container ban: The current general solid waste management at Machu Pichu is easy to implement, through poor infrastructure and low technology, and has high coverage. It has decreased rodent and environmental pollution. In order to adopt this in Latin American countries, if a law or regulation, it should be developed taking into account the social, economic, political, conditions of the country or region, and consensus before starting work on a draft and lobby with the stakeholders to assure no opposition. Program would only be applicable to the major Latin America metropolitan areas that have the necessary resources and infrastructure in place to haul the materials as required. In addition, the population of these cosmopolitan centers is affluent enough to afford the full imposition of the levy tax without being ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 89 impacted adversely by its requirements. Other cities with poorer populations would need to have a subsidized program where the state assumes the cost of the disposal, which would go against the intention of the program. The program would not be viable at all for rural, undeveloped areas. 8.1.1.9 Venues and Events: Reducing waste: This type of regulation would be easy to include in the legislation of most Latin American countries, it is not necessary to amend the Constitution of any country and only include the requirement in statutory law and develop a regulation requirements. Will only apply for large Latin America’s cosmopolitan cities that can promote large sports or artistic events. Not an implementable option for small or rural areas that do not do large venues or can afford the increased cost to implement them on their local arenas. 8.1.1.10 Pay As you Throw (PAYT): However, a major concern about implementing the PAYT in Latin America is that illegal dumping could increase, even though research shows that illegal dumping is a bigger fear than reality. Illegal dumping ordinances have proven to solve the issue in three month or less; and only about 15% of the material found is from household origin. Another concern is about large families of low income or poor, who cannot pay the amount of garbage generated. On the other hand, most Latin American countries do not pay a direct cost for garbage collection, it is a cost absorbed by the government who later impacts on the taxes charged, so that the waste generator would not see a direct benefit to this program. Program would only be applicable to the major Latin America metropolitan areas that have the necessary resources and infrastructure in place to haul the materials as required. In addition, the population of these cosmopolitan centers is affluent enough to afford the full imposition of the levy tax without being impacted adversely by its requirements. Other cities with poorer populations would need to have a subsidized program where the state assumes the cost of the disposal, which would go against the intention of the program. The program would not be viable at all for rural, undeveloped areas. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 90 9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The current solid waste management system of LAC is characterized by institutional, legislative, financial and social constraints. Deficiencies in the waste service provision are among others the results of inadequate financial resources, lacking management and solid waste system, lack of coordination with several institutions and limited communication with stakeholders. Based on the findings of this Study, the following recommendations should be considered as a way of ensuring efficient and effective upstream waste strategies. The recommendations are the following: • The country and municipal governments’ political will to implement these waste reduction policies is extremely important. Therefore government officials should be educated about the benefits of implementing these strategies. • Approval and enforcement of a Waste Reduction Act. • Formulation of a State, National and Regional Policy on Solid Waste Reduction. • Establishment of a framework that should focus on improving reduction data information flow between the government and the public • Better involvement of the participation and partnership with the private sector. In this case privatization is seen as a way to help relieve the government of financial burden in providing services. • Enforcement of monitoring mechanism by the Ministry of Environment or any other government institution that has jurisdiction. • Introduction of a cost recovery system based on fees or taxes • Even if the benefits of the proposed programs are much larger than the cost of implementation it must be clarified that these programs can only work successfully in those cities or communities that have strong financing, adequate infrastructure (road network in good condition, a properly designed landfill) and capacity to implement a mechanism of supervision and control over the generators regarding the imposition of taxes or municipal fees. • To prevent the recurrence of opposition like the plastic container ban from municipal ordinance in Peru, all stakeholders must be involved. ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 91 10 ANNEXES ERM 0130996 WB UPSTREAM REDUCTION OF SWG (FINAL)-05/30/11 92 Annex 1: Description of Approaches Annex 2: General Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 2.1: Lessons Learn Annex 3: LAC Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 4: LAC Supplemental Waste Reduction Matrix Annex 5: Landfill Tax (European Union) Annex 6: Venues and Events: Reducing Waste, California Annex 7: Packaging Taxes for Non- Refillables, Finland Annex 8: Pay As You Throw (PAYT) in USA Annex 9: Green Purchasing Law Annex 10: Levy Bag Tax – Ireland Annex 11: Japan's Green Purchasing Law Annex 12: Calgary Material Exchange Annex 13: USA WasteWise Reference Material Annex 14: Machu Picchu’s Plastic Ban Reference Material