2024-12-08-世界银行-亚美尼亚雨水管理行业评估和改革计划_久姆里城市废物管理分析报告（英）_34页_1mb

Summary of Gyumri Solid Waste Management Sector Assessment and Reform Plan

Core Content

This report presents an analysis of the current state and potential improvements of the solid waste management (SWM) system in Gyumri, Armenia, as part of the Solid Waste Management Development Program (SWMDP) for 2023–2027. The assessment outlines the existing waste management operations, their associated costs, and financial sustainability, while also evaluating four scenarios for improved waste management. The findings are supported by data on waste generation, population trends, and institutional structures, with a focus on achieving environmentally sound and financially viable waste services.

Main Points

1. Waste Generation and Composition

• In 2024, Gyumri generates over 30,000 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) annually.
• Organic waste constitutes 60% of the total waste, while recyclables make up 20%.
• The remaining 20% includes textile and inorganic waste.

2. Current Waste Management Operations

• Waste Collection:
  • The current system is transitioning to larger 1.1 m³ containers and rear-loading trucks.
  • The system is in the process of reorganization, with potential efficiency gains from modernization.
• Waste Disposal:
  • The existing dumpsite is outdated and does not meet environmental standards.
  • Efforts are expected to focus on upgrading the disposal system to a sanitary landfill.
• Source Separation and Recycling:
  • Gyumri is participating in the EU-funded 'Alliance for Better City Governance' project.
  • Currently, 240 blue containers are in use for source separation of plastics.
  • Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) mechanisms are under development in Armenia to manage specific waste streams.

Key Financial and Institutional Considerations

3. Current Costs and Financing

• Polluter Pays Principle:
  • Waste fees are intended to recover service costs, but current rates are 30% of the affordability threshold.
  • The affordability threshold is 1% of actual expenditures, currently around 542 AMD/month (2024).
• Cost Recovery:
  • The community covers 2/3 of the waste collection operating costs through other budget revenues.
  • Subsidies and grants are a major source of funding for waste management.
• Tariff Structure:
  • Current tariffs are inadequate, and subsidization is required to maintain service.
  • The legal threshold for waste fees is 400 AMD/person/month, but Scenario 3 and 4 require higher fees.

Improved Waste Management Scenarios

4. Scenarios for Improved Waste Operations

• Scenario 1: Upgrade of waste collection system.
  • Replaces 0.7 m³ containers with 1.1 m³ wheeled containers.
  • Replaces side-loading trucks with rear-loading trucks.
  • Expected to reduce collection costs by 34%.
  • Waste fee: 188 AMD/person/month (net of VAT).
• Scenario 2: Upgrade of collection system + sanitary landfill.
  • Combines improved collection with a new, environmentally compliant landfill.
  • Costs are within the affordability threshold.
  • Waste fee: 378 AMD/person/month (net of VAT).
  • Projected to reduce GHG emissions by 429,000 tons over 15 years.
• Scenario 3: Source separation of dry recyclables and sorting system.
  • Introduces a 3-container system for source separation.
  • Waste fee: 436 AMD/person/month (net of VAT).
  • Requires tariff increase above the legal threshold.
  • EPR schemes could reduce costs if implemented.
• Scenario 4: Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) plant for mixed waste.
  • High investment and operating costs make it currently unaffordable.
  • Regionalization of waste services could reduce unit costs through economies of scale.
  • Waste fee: 947 AMD/person/month (net of VAT).

Cost Implications

• Scenario 1 has the lowest net cost at $25.2/ton.
• Scenario 2 has a net cost of $50.6/ton.
• Scenario 3 has a net cost of $58.3/ton.
• Scenario 4 has the highest net cost at $126.8/ton.
• Revenue from recycling is negative in Scenarios 3 and 4 due to high initial investment.

Greenhouse Gas Emission Effects

• Current GHG emissions from Gyumri's solid waste sector are around 34,000 tons CO₂e/year.
• Scenario 2 is projected to reduce emissions by 429,000 tons over 15 years, with a marginal abatement cost of $36/ton CO₂e.
• Scenario 4 could offer greater climate benefits, but requires higher investment and tariff increases.

Recommendations

• Scenario 2 is recommended as the most feasible and expedient option for short-term improvement.
• Actions to implement Scenario 2 include:
  • Completing the upgrade of the waste collection system.
  • Establishing a fully engineered sanitary landfill.
  • Closing the existing dumpsite.
  • Moving towards full cost accounting and cost recovery.
  • Revising waste fees to align with the polluter pays principle.
• Long-term goals include:
  • Regionalization of waste management services.
  • Integration of EPR schemes to reduce the financial burden on the community.
  • Full cost recovery to ensure financial sustainability of the sector.

Conclusion

The report emphasizes the need for modernization of Gyumri's waste management system, including the upgrade of collection infrastructure, establishment of a sanitary landfill, and implementation of source separation and sorting systems. Financial sustainability is key, and full cost recovery is essential for long-term viability. Scenario 2 is considered the best option for immediate implementation, offering significant environmental and financial benefits. The SWMDP provides a strategic framework to guide these improvements, supported by EU funding and institutional reforms.