Business models for urban sustainability (GS Paper 3, Environment)
Context:
- Climate change is changing rainfall patterns, leading to increased frequency and intensity of extreme events, and sea-level rise. Waste management and climate change are closely inter-related.
- These challenges have significant implications for cities, particularly the environment, economy, and overall well-being of urban populations.
Details:
- Climate change can exacerbate the impacts of poor waste management, such as flooding and spread of diseases.
- Untreated waste also contributes significantly to the accumulation of low-quality and non-recyclable plastic waste, making it one of the primary sources of microplastics released into the oceans.
- Landfills are a significant source of methane, a potent contributor to global warming. Further, inadequate waste disposal contaminates water sources, leading to waterborne diseases.
Waste to Energy (WtE):
- Despite the progress made under the Swachh Bharat, a lot remains to be done. A significant quantity of municipal solid waste (MSW) is still unaccounted and untreated. Additionally, approximately 70% of the legacy waste (245 Mt), scattered across 2200 dumpsites, requires remediation.
- Fresh as well as legacy waste can be a source of energy and material. Annual MSW collected, for example, can produce 12-15 million tonnes of refuse-derived fuel (RDF). An additional 50 million tonnes can be obtained from legacy waste.
- Utilizing this resource by adopting sustainable waste management practices, such as recycling and energy recovery, can reduce fossil fuel consumption and associated emissions.
Advantage of co-processing:
- Two options for recovering material and energy from RDF are the deployment of co-processing in cement kilns and Waste to Energy (WtE) technologies.
- Both are superior to landfilling or open dumpsites. However, co-processing is better as it recycles material recovers energy. Moreover, it is cost-efficient and does not increase emissions.
- Given the advantages of co-processing, it has been adopted extensively in Europe, with some countries such as Germany, Poland and Belgium exceeding 50% co-processing rate.
- Southeast Asia and China are also expanding co-processing in cement industry. This approach is successful due to various advantages, including saving of fossil fuels, such as coal.
Status in India:
- In India, the cement industry is the second largest globally and highly energy efficient. However, co-processing rate remains modest, with Thermal Substitution Rate (TSR) of about 5% at the industry level. Given the increased focus on net-zero, cement industry is keen to adopt co-processing.
- An industry vision articulated by CII calls for 25% TSR by 2025. This is ambitious and applaudable, even if it takes a few years longer.
- In 2017-18, an expert committee formed by the Ministry for Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA) identified issues, challenges and made several recommendations.
- One of the key barriers identified was the consistency and availability of usable material. The committee made recommendation on standards, cost involved and desired regulatory measures.
Business models for managing segregated waste through co-processing and WtE route in India:
- In a research, four options were considered with specific capital and operational cost, process efficiency and cost recovery approach. The two crucial points need to be recognised:
- Waste management incurs a financial cost that has historically been overlooked. Dumping of waste results in significant environmental and social costs, which have also been ignored.
- The cost of managing waste should be borne by the polluter, adopting the ‘polluter pays’ principle. In this case, the polluter is the waste generator, i.e., the consumer or the society at large.
Observations made:
- A key finding from the research was that the financial cost of scientific waste management was relatively modest. Since society is best off with the least cost approach, co-processing should be preferred, wherever possible.
- However, market inefficiencies, inadequate regulation, and practical considerations can result in the adoption of costlier choices.
- Overall, waste management business models need to align to the ‘polluter pays’ principle. Such an approach will enable financing and enhance resilience.
- The analysis revealed various models to be economically viable, with relatively modest cost increases for consumers. On the other hand, untreated waste imposes a significant economic and social cost on the society.
Way Forward:
- Therefore, it is important to integrate climate considerations in waste management and broader urban planning frameworks.
- Adoption of circular economy principle will make our cities sustainable and resilient. There is need to find political will and administrative mechanisms to convert these ideas into action on the ground.
