Background. Mission team. Mission objectives. Mission activities. Mission itinerary. International Expert Mission to Japan on Disaster Debris

Transcription

1 Background International Expert Mission to Japan on Disaster Debris Management Muralee Thummarukudy Chief, Disaster Risk Reduction United Nations Environment Programme UNEP has been communicating with the Government of Japan since the tsunami event in March In May 2011, UNEP joined an international expert mission to tsunami hit areas arranged by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center In Q4, 2011, UNEP was requested by MoFA to organise an international expert mission to Tohoku region to study the management of disaster debris Mission objectives Observe the disaster debris management in Japan and learn lessons which may be applied in other countries Facilitate experience exchange from other disaster situations Mission team Ronnie Crossland, US EPA, (Organisation and management) Thorste Kallnischkies, Germany, (Landfill operations) David Smith, UK, (Hazardous wastes and asbestos) Mike Cowing, St Lucia, (Waste recycling) Yves Barthelemy, France, (Waste estimation) Mario Burger, Switzerland, (Monitoring) Prof Toshiaki Yoshioka, Tohoku University, (Member, National Task Force) Surya Chandak, UNEP, International Environmental Tech Centre, (Waste to Energy Projects) Muralee Thummarukudy, UNEP, Disasters and Conflicts Sub-programme, (Team leader) Experience in Hurricane Katrina, Rita, China earthquake, SE Asia tsunami, earthquake in Haiti, Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, oil spills + other emergencies Mission itinerary Day 1 Sendai Day 2 Miyako and Ofonato Day 3 Ichinomaki Day 4 Soma City Day 6 Tokyo Waste Management Facilities Mission activities Gather basic information and maps Visit city officials, discuss their challenges and progress Visit the waste management facilities Exchange experiences Document them in videos, pictures, GPS Final output video and report 1

2 Exclusions Fukushima reactor + exclusion zone Debris which got washed off into the sea during the tsunami The challenge faced by Japan is massive and unprecedented This will be the most expensive disaster debris management project ever, costing over ten billion dollars, overtaking Hurricane Katrina (USD 4 billion) This is done under very restrictive conditions (limitations of landfilling and transport) disaster waste at October 18, 2011 Local Local Pref. wastes Pref. Local dwastes Pref. wastes Hirono 15,000 Sendai 1,352,000 Iwaki 880,000 Kuji 96,000 Ishinomaki 6,163,000 Souma 217,000 Noda 140,000 Shiogama 251,000 Minami-souma 640,000 Fudai 19,000 Kesen-numa 1,367,000 Shinchi 167,000 Tanohata 86,000 Natori 636,000 Hirono 25,000 Iwaizumi 42,000 Tagajyo 550,000 Naraha 58,000 Miyako 751,000 Iwanuma 520,000 Tomioka 49,000 Iwate Yamada 399,000 Higashi-Matsushima 1,657,000 Ohkuma 37,000 Miyagi Fukushima Ohtsuchi 709,000 Watari 1,267,000 Futaba 60,000 Kamaishi 762,000 Yamamoto 533,000 Namie 147,000 Ohfunato 752,000 Matsushima 43,000 Rikuzen-Takata 1,016,000 Shichigahama 333,000 Rifu 15,000 Onagawa 444,000 Minami-Sanriku 56,000 Total 4,755,000 Total 15,691,000 Total 2,280,000 The Central has given clear technical direction and financial package to deal with the disaster debris in a time-bound manner (MoE Directive, May 2011) The local municipalities are implementing them, with support of prefectures, in a rapid and systematic manner Cities which had prior contingency plans were able to move forward faster Aomori 0.8 million t, Ibaraki 0.46 million t, Chiba 0.13 million t Total: 29 million tons Tsunamis typically mix up all types of debris into one mass The collection of disaster debris from the original location and primary sorting is almost over Secondary sorting and final disposal is ongoing Burnable 310,000 t Plastic, Wood Paper 74,000 t 240,000 t Planning for the Disaster Waste Treatment Disaster waste 1.35 million tons Public Treatment 1.03 million tons Non-burnable 720,000 t Private Tsunami Facilities sediment Metal Bulky Concrete, Kawara, 10,000t waste asphalt Plaster B 310,000 t 1.30mil. t 19,000t 34,000 t 608,000 t 58,000 t Temporary Storage Sites Store ( 図 ) 処理フロー Crush Crush Incineration (Public) (Temporary Built ) 37,000 t 265,000 t Landfill (Public Facility) 151,000 t 12,000 t Recycle 545,000 t 514,000 t 128,000 t Landfill (Private Facility) 187,000 t Recycled by private companies Treatmen t will be done by each facility Temporary Storage Recycling (if able) 12 2

3 TV Gamo Storage Site for Disaster Wastes Plastic, Paper and Tatami Concrete, Bricks Very high degree of mechanisation, from sorting to treatment Local employment is promoted but additional employment generation is limited Wood for recycling Incinerator Sediment Waste oil Refrigerators Wood for combustion Debris from Tsunami Washing machines Concrete, Bricks Debris from Tsunami Air conditioners Tv Metal 13 When possible, use of local facilities - such as cement plant - to treat disaster waste has been attempted and white goods have not yet been processed Speed at which new facilities are being set up, such as sorting incineration and desalinization, is impressive The biggest incinerator in Japan is being set up in Ichinomaki and will be operational within next 6 months Typically these take many years in other countries Quantity of raw timber is massive The concrete foundations of buildings have not yet been removed Quantity of hazardous substances was somewhat limited compared to disaster situations elsewhere Observations Some waste is not amenable to easy management, such as fishing nets Some waste still needs to be dug up from the ports 3

4 Monitoring of environmental conditions is ongoing at all locations Results are made publicly available often within hours of monitoring Health and safety management in the facilities are of a high standard No reported fatality relating to health and safety in the field Lessons for other situations Having a contingency plan enables cities to initiate the disaster debris management quickly, thereby speeding up overall recovery Clear instructions from central (or agency) at an early stage will facilitate standardisation of approaches Without liberal financial support and technical back-up, local municipalities will not be able to cope with such disasters Lessons, continued.. Lessons, continued.. Environmental monitoring should be integral part of the projects Documentation and communication of the process and results are important Sorting of the debris to a reasonable number of categories enables maximising recycling, the earlier it is done, the better All options, including land reclamation, should be attempted on an opportunistic basis Where possible, local opportunities for waste-to-energy should be evaluated Good health and safety should not be neglected even during emergency situations Lessons, from elsewhere applicable in Japan No options, including landfilling, should be discounted at the earliest stage Local variations should be promoted from the national guidelines so long as it suits local environmental conditions Monitoring is best done by an independent academic/research agency rather than the contractor or Lessons from elsewhere applicable in Japan There should be continued effort to coordinate between the municipalities and prefectures so that good practices can be shared Continued involvement of national experts to technically backstop the local authorities will ensure more optimal outcomes locally 4

5 Follow-up actions A UNEP report on Japan s disaster debris management A video documentary Website content, ongoing outreach to share findings UNEP to establish an international network of experts on disaster waste management Disaster debris estimation methodology to be fine tuned 5