Provision of Waste Management Facilities

ANMC21 Seminar 7 Feb 2014

Kohei Watanabe

1Waste Facilities of Tokyo (23 central districts)

Why so many incinerators?

● 19 Incinerators O 1 landfill■urbanised area2

Tokyo23 (pop. 9mil daytime 12m)

S'pore (pop. 5m)

Name

Name

Capacity[t/day]

Capacity[t/day]

大 田 第一 工 場

600

Tuas

1700

有 明 清掃 工 場

400

Senoko2100

墨 田 清掃 工 場

600

Tuas south3000

江 戸 川清 掃 工 場

600

Keppel800

目 黒 清掃 工 場

600

No. 62400

千 歳 清掃 工 場

600

Total

10000

新 江 東清 掃 工 場

1800

港 清 掃工 場

600

豊 島 清掃 工 場

400

北 清 掃工 場

600

渋 谷 清掃 工 場

200

中 央 清掃 工 場

600

板 橋 清掃 工 場

600

多 摩 川清 掃 工 場

300

足 立 清掃 工 場

700

光 が 丘清 掃 工 場

300

世 田 谷清 掃 工 場

300

葛 飾 清掃 工 場

500

品 川 清掃 工 場

600

杉 並 清掃 工 場

600

練 馬 清掃 工 場

500

Total

12000

blue = in construction3

1971: Tokyo War on Waste
Opposition against construction of incinerator in Suginami Ward
Koto Ward declared they will block waste from Suginami coming inWaste collection in Suginami had to be suspended
Mayor declared "War on Waste" = use all means (including money) to solve
the situation
Principle of self sufficiencyof waste facility= each ward should have
one incinerator
Strongly advocatedagainst NIMBY sentiment
Local acceptance more
important than cost andperformance efficiency
4

Pro's and Con's of Size

Benefits of bigger facility• economy of scale• ease of pollution control• efficiency of waste to energy
Drawbacks of bigger facility• disbenefit of concentration - less resilience, longer distance totransport, road congestion• distance between benefit-ers and disbenefit-ers(lack of "our facility" perception - citizen becomes "consumer"of waste services, not participant of waste management. waste
becomes "invisible" = lack of awareness)• lack of incentive to reduce waste• reduced opportunity for citizen participation5

Issues with large scale operation• often collection and treatment body different - e.g. collection
by city, treatment and disposal by "joint waste authority"-> lack of transparency / democracy / responsibility(if city owns the facility, city's decision is made through electedmayors and councillors representing all citizen)-> difficult to coordinate policy - e.g. incinerator wants to burnplastic / collector wants to recycle plastic. Nobody overlooks
the total flow from generation to final disposal /recycle.
"lock-in" effect: if facility relies income on gate fees (orgenerated electricity?), reduction of waste = financial deficit.
Contracts promising fixed amount of waste. Lack of incentive toreduce waste
6

Numazu City, Shizuoka Pref (pop. 200k)
1973: Residents protest against existing waste facility-> plan of new facility difficult-> agreement: promise to reduce waste treated at facility-> waste reduction to be achieved by separate collectionof recyclables - diversion from disposal-> first official separate collection scheme in Japan
paper, metal, glass (full implementation 1976)• support of mayor• cooperation of waste officials/ workers, and residents* Limitation of facility was the motivating force for innovation* for ideal waste management, citizen cooperation is mostimportant, facilities comes second.
* moderate population - easier to solicit cooperation /adopt innovation
7

SummaryIn the provision of facilities, we need to consider:

not only economic and environmental efficiency of individual
processes
but also* coordination of the whole waste management system* motivation for waste reduction /recycling and participation/governance
The City Government is always responsible for managing thewhole waste management system - must make sure that publichealth and the environment are protected, no matter who owns/
operates the facilities.
8