ISS of Local Regulations 2015

Transcription

1 ISS of Local Regulations 2015 PLASTIC WASTE RECYCLING City of Sombor (Serbia) case study Vladislav Grubac Chiara Magrini Marco Oreste Marelli Matus Sloboda Mihal Belousiuc

2 01.March Serbia get a status of candidate for membership in EU EU Directive no 2006/12/EC National Strategy for waste management for Prevention 2. Re-use 3. Recycling 4. Waste disposal. ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

3 ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 GENERAL COUNTRY PROFILE General indicators Values Units GNI per capita, PPP (current international $) $/yr Population people Population density 83,37 people/sq. Km of land area Urban population 56,38 % of population COUNTRY WASTE PROFILE Waste indicators Values Units Generation per capita 317,6 kg/yr Municipal waste generation tn/yr Waste Management Performance Values Units Collection coverage 60 % Unsound disposal 40 % WASTE COMPOSITION Materials Values Units Other 17,1 % Organic matter 49,8 % Glass 5,4 % Plastic 12,7 % Paper and cardboard 12,6 % Metals 2,4 % Plastic waste recycling

4 Republic of Serbia Autonomic province of Vojvodina Western Backa district City of Sombor Municipality of Apatin Municipality of Kula Municipality Odzaci Inhabitants Square km ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

5 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Almost all waste is landfilled improperly or recycled very inefficiently. Local authorities thus squander potential revenues from using waste resources. Serbia currently recycles 7% to 8% of communal waste

6 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND At local level a key role is played by municipalities. The municipalities are in charge of tendering the services and they define tariffs, revenues, investments. Municipal waste management falls under the competence of local selfgovernment units. The only economically feasible solution is creation of regional waste management centres where the waste collected from several municipalities will be treated at the plants for separation of recyclable waste and the rest of it will be disposed of at the regional landfills.

7 FIELD ANALYSIS: ACTORS 1. The Serbia Plastic Recycling Association 2. Ministry in charge of the environmental protection and other competent ministries 3. Competent authority of the autonomous province - Vojvodina 4. Competent authority of the local self-government unit - city of Sombor 5. Environmental Protection Agency of Republic of Serbia (hereinafter referred to as: Agency) 6. Environmental Protection Fund (hereinafter referred to as: Fund) 7. Consumers/suppliers 8. EU/EU Commission 9. Market actors 10. Public waste company Cistoca ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

8 ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 FIELD ANALYSIS: INCENTIVES 1.) The Serbia Plastic Recycling Association - better cooperation and opportunities in the field of recycling of plastic. 2.) Ministry in charge of the environmental protection and other competent ministries. Reaching a National strategy goals and EU directives. 3.) Competent authority of the autonomous province - Vojvodina: equity, redistribution. 4.) Competent authority of the local self-government unit - city of Sombor; equity, redistribution, electoral consensus, financial public budget constrains. 5.) Environmental Protection Agency of Republic of Serbia (hereinafter referred to as: Agency): effectiveness and quality, better environmental protection, reduction of landfills, stimulation of re-use of recyclable materials. Plastic waste recycling

9 FIELD ANALYSIS: INCENTIVES 6.) Environmental Protection Fund (hereinafter referred to as: Fund): reaching a National strategy goals and EU directives. 7.) Consumers/suppliers: quality of service, accessibility. 8.) EU/EU Commission: reaching the environmental goals 9.) Market actors: profit 10.) Public waste company Cistoca Sombor: efficiency in provision of the service, reduce the surface of landfills. Maintenance. ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

10 FIELD ANALYSIS: INFORMATION Operational costs - YES - non residential (published on annual financial report on APR agency) - residential for actor 10. Investment costs -YES - non residential (published on annual financial report on APR agency) - residential for actor 10. Assets: physical assets - NO - residential for actor 10. Revenues: market revenues or transfers - NO - residential for actor 10. Demand side: who the customers/users are, where they are located NO - residential for actor 10 ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

11 FIELD ANALYSIS: RELATIONSHIPS Appointment: The 100 % share holder - the city of Sombor appoint the senior management of the public waste company Cistoca. Election - city of Sombor, Vojvodina. Lobby pressure - Public waste company Cistoca Sombor - lobby pressure of public waste company to maintain the tariff at sufficient level. Strong political influence: EU/EU Commission, Ministry in charge. Also the Consumers as the electorate - increase in price or decrease in quality may have an effect in electoral result. Corruption and clientelism - Public waste company may be potentially threatened by politician s interests. ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

12 FIELD ANALYSIS: RELATIONSHIPS Regulation (under different forms: regulation of price, quantity, quality, accessibility, distributional aspects), Ministry in charge of the environmental protection and other competent ministries, competent authority of the autonomous province - Vojvodina, competent authority of the local self-government unit - city of Sombor; environmental Protection Agency of Republic of Serbia. Rule of law / judicial enforcement - Council Directive 99/31/EC on the landfill of waste Directive 75/442/EEC Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC Annex III to Directive 2008/98/EC The European List of Waste (Commission Decision 2000/532/EC) Conference on Plastic Waste 30 September 2013 ) The role of plastic waste in a circular economy Waste Management Law of Serbia Sl. Glasnik RS, BR. 36/2009, 88/2010 ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

13 FIELD ANALYSIS: RELATIONSHIPS Assignment: City of Sombor, direct assignments; Market power: Public waste company Cistoca Sombor - local monopoly. Other market actors - collectors, black market. Command: Competent authority of the local self-government unit - city of Sombor, Competent authority of the autonomous province - Vojvodina. ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

14 CASE STUDY - The project PET (polyethylene terephthalate): plastic soft drink bottles, water bottles, beer bottles, mouthwash bottles and many more HDPE (high density polyethylene): milk bottles, detergent bottles, oil bottles, toys, plastic bags PVC (polyvinyl chloride): food wrap, vegetable oil bottles, blister packaging LDPE (low density polyethylene): bread bags, frozen food bags, squeezable bottles, fiber, tote bags, bottles, clothing, furniture, carpet, shrink-wrap, garment bags PP (polypropylene): margarine and yogurt containers, caps for containers, wrapping to replace cellophane PS (polystyrene): egg cartons, fast food trays, disposable plastic silverware Other: This code indicates that the item is made with a resin other than the six listed above, or a combination of different resins

15 Sorting plant

16 Sorting plant

17 Sorting plant

18 Sorting plant

19 Sorting plant

20 A bottle story

21 CASE STUDY - The process of recycling Plastics recycling 1.Separation of different polymers 2.Crushing 3.Washing 4.Drying 5.Grinding 6.Cleaning (others material separation) 7.Melting and mixing with virgin polymer

22 Balistic screen

23 Under-screen Over screen 13

24 Magnetic Separation 14

25 On belt transportation 15

26 Spectrometer transparent PET separation 16

27 blue PET separation PP and PE

28 Final compaction

29 CASE STUDY - The investment Cost of investment/asset financed by equity financed by loan Useful life 20 years Operating start date Expected quantity sold p.a. as result of investment* tons maximum capacity 5.5 Capital structure: % Estimated losses in the prosses 14% Equity 33.33% Debt 67% Tax rate 15%

30 CASE STUDY - The investment Years Result for the period Add back Depreciation Interest Working capital recovered (last year only) Scrap value of asset Deduct Working capital Cost of asset Cash flows Discounted cash flows NPV Working capital % of revenue 2%

31 CASE STUDY - The investment

32 CASE STUDY - The investment

33 TOTAL REVENUES VS. TOTAL OPERATING COST ISS of Local regulation Torino 2015 Plastic waste recycling

34 CASE STUDY - The tariff We can use the price cap regulation, in order to incentivize cost reduction. The goal it to set the tariff. For this particular case the tariff is 163,7. That gives the NPV As a regulator we want to keep the tariff low that can generate a small profit for investments in new technologies. The regulator will evaluate and recalculate the tariff level every year.

35 CONCLUSION In addition to reducing the amount of plastics waste requiring disposal, recycling and reuse of plastic can have several other advantages, such as: -Conservation of non-renewable fossil fuels Plastic production uses 8% of the world s oil production, 4% as feedstock and 4% during manufacture. -Reduced consumption of energy. -Reduced amounts of solid waste going to landfill. -Reduced emissions of carbon-dioxide (CO2), nitrogen-oxides (NOx) and sulfur-dioxide (SO2).

36 CONCLUSION LIMITS: We consider that the plant will receive a part of the tariffs, proportional to the average percentage of plastic material collected in the Country. We use data from another plant, located in Sombor, as model. The implementation of an efficient separation at source system for municipal solid waste stream is an important input for the plant. For this reason, it s important to improve the education of population on waste.

37 CONCLUSION AVAILABILITY OF DATA: There is a lack of information on waste qualitative and quantitative analysis, i.e. data base of quantities, characteristics, especially content, and classification of waste. The data for the qualitative and quantitative composition of waste in Serbia are not sufficient since until recently waste was disposed in uncontrolled landfills.

38 REFERENCES OPPORTUNITIES & BARRIERS OF RECYCLING IN BALKAN COUNTRIES: THE CASES OF GREECE AND SERBIA- Aida Anthouli, Konstantine Aravossis, Rozy Charitopoulou, Bojana Tot, Goran Vujic CONTAMINATED SITES. PRACTICE OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN A DEVELOPING COUNTRY (SERBIA)- DUNJA PROKIC, ANDJELKA MIHAJLOV European Commission, EU waste policy: the story behind the strategy Accessed 10 April 2012 European Environmental Agency web sitehttp:// Plant in Sombor web site- AnnualFinancialReportshttp://pretraga2.apr.gov.rs/EnterprisePublicSearch/Details/Enterprise AnnualFinancialReports/ ?code=52F34C77149D58929D2B BB06295D5FAE4C8F39DA

39 THANK YOU FOR THE ATTENTION

40 Wasted group