This document assesses potential options to mitigate methane emissions from solid waste in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. It identifies composting, incineration, and landfill gas recovery as measures that could reduce methane emissions from landfills. An evaluation matrix scores these options based on their potential impact on greenhouse gas emissions, cost-benefit ratio, economic impacts, and consistency with environmental goals. Composting scores highest overall due to its relatively low cost and contribution to reducing emissions. The assessment recommends implementing composting and landfill gas recovery to most cost-effectively mitigate methane emissions from Addis Ababa landfills.

1. AN ASSESSMENT OF
MITIGATIONOF METHANE
EMISSIONSFROMSOLID WASTE
Final Report (Part Two)
2000
March 2000
Addis Ababa

2. 2
AN ASSESSMENT OF MITIGATION
OF
METHANE EMISSIONS
FROM
SOLID WASTE
By:
Fikru Tessema (M.Sc, B.Sc, D.Sc)
Consultant

3. 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGE
Introduction 9
Background 9
Goals and objectives 10
Scope of the assessment 11
Methods 11
Target beneficiaries 11
Potential mitigation measures 12
Evaluation of mitigation measures 13
Prioritizing of mitigation measures 16
Selection of mitigation measures 16
Baseline and mitigation emission scenarios 16
Implementation strategy 18
Economic Feasibility 20
Discussion 24
Conclusion and recommendation 25
References 26

4. 4
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Mitigation - Deliberate action to reduce the impact of climate change through
reducing the rate of accumulation of carbon in the atmosphere by
encouraging the development of carbon sinks or reducing the rate of
emissions from anthropogenic sources.
Mitigation analysis - Assessment of the impact of activities to mitigate climate
change with special emphasis on the cost of the mitigation
activities and the social and other economic costs of such
action.
Baseline - The series of activities that would follow development in the case of no
deliberate action to reduce the accumulation of carbon in the
atmosphere. Activities include economic activities and the emission of
greenhouse gases. The baseline is often illustrated as the time
progression of greenhouse gas emissions.
Baseline scenario - The sequence of activities that follow development in the
case of no deliberate action to reduce the accumulation of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Mitigation scenario - The sequence of activities that follow a development case
with deliberate action to reduce the accumulation of carbon
in the atmosphere.
Emissions inventory - The account of all sources and sinks of greenhouse gas
emitted into the atmosphere normally presented in the
format recommended by the ipcc.
Assumptions - The list of conditions that mark the environment within which an
analysis I done. This normally includes quantitative variables that
can take a range of values.

5. 5
Base-year - The initial year for which all relevant data is available for emission
reduction costing previously preferred to be 1990 and now 1994 by
the conference of parties.
Bottom-up - Analytical technique based on the effect of the investment or project
level on the macroeconomic level.
Mitigation strategy - The plan including policy and institutional framework for
implementing greenhouse gas emission reduction options.

6. 6
ACRONYMS:
1. S.W: solid Waste
2. CSA: Central Statistics Authority.
3. ESTC: Ethiopian Science & Technology Community.
4. NMSA: National Meteorological Service Agency.
5. NGO: Non - Government Organization.
6. IPCC: Inter Government Panel Climate.
7. GHG: Greenhouse gas.
8. SWDS: Solid Waste Disposal Site.
9. NA: Not Applicable.
10.CH4: Methane.
11.MSW: Municipal Solid Waste.
12.O&M: Operation & Maintenance.

7. 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Methane emissions originate from several anthropogenic sources including: municipal
solid waste landfills and open dumps, wastewater treatment, domesticated livestock and
coal mining. About 65% of methane emissions from landfills come from the more
developed countries of the world, another 15% from countries with transitional
economies and 20% from developing countries.
The goal of the assessment of mitigation of methane emissions is to provide policy
makers with potential mitigation options that can both mitigate climate change and also
contribute to national and regional development objectives.
The main objectives of the mitigation assessment are also to identify, screen and
characterize technologies and practices that have potential to mitigate climate change
and contribute to the improvement of solid waste management. The output of the
assessment consists of access the decision-maker to design mitigation policies and
economic and greenhouse gas impacts of mitigation options. The analysis of mitigation
options for methane emission reduction is more aimed at identifying the solid waste
management measures that have the potential impacts on mitigating climate change
through reduction of methane emissions from landfill. Various stakeholders are potential
beneficiaries. Since mitigating climate change is a national issue, the primary users of
the mitigation assessment are likely to be decision-makers. The two approaches for
reduction of methane emissions from landfill are recovery of methane generated in the
landfill to produce energy and waste management measures to reduce quantity of
wastes go to landfill. Evaluation is done to make a rough assessment of the potential
attractiveness of options. The purpose of evaluation is to assess the impacts that the
mitigation options have on the emissions.
Various criteria were used for both evaluation and in-depth analysis of mitigation
options. Considering their potential reduction of greenhouse gas emission,
comparability with current SWM goals and priorities and potential economic,
environmental or social benefits, has prioritized the mitigation measures.
Methane emission of the Addis Ababa landfills accounts for 18% of the total emissions
of urban centers of Ethiopia and from solid waste sector accounts for 61% of the total
emissions of waste sector.
The Addis Ababa City landfill methane emission could be the focus of mitigation
measures. Because it presents the greatest opportunity in reducing greenhouse gas

8. 8
emissions. For the purpose of methane emission mitigation analysis two different
scenarios are basically defined in this assessment. One scenario reflects a baseline
case and the other reflects the impact of mitigation options. The options like
composting, incineration and landfill gas recovery are the measures that have potentials
to mitigate methane emissions from SW of Addis Ababa City.
Table-l Analysis of Mitigation of Methane Emission from Solid Waste of Addis
Ababa City
Mitigation Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Scenario Baseline and Mitigation Scenario
Country Ethiopia
Year 1994 - 2030
1994 2000 2010 2020 2030
BASELINE SCENARIO:
 Emissions (in Gg) 4.65 9.52 12.73 16.24 19.45
MITIGATION SCENARIO:
 Reduction by Composting (30% of yearly
emission, in Gg)
0.00 2.86 3.82 4.87 5.84
 Reduction by Incineration (45% of yearly
emission, in Gg)
0.00 4.28 5.73 7.31 8.75
 Reduction by gas recovery from SLF (70%
of yearly emission, in Gg)
0.00 6.66 8.91 11.37 13.62
The degree of mechanization or adoption of option will depend upon economical
development, cost of labor and energy and socio-cultural attitudes of the community.
Project costs will include equipment purchase and installation, as well as operation and
maintenance (O & M) and site-specific cost. The O & M include labor costs.
Table-ll Cost of Mitigation of Methane Emission from Solid Waste of Addis Ababa
City
Mitigation Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Cost Mitigation Cost
Country Ethiopia
Year 2000
Options Total cost (US$) Cost (US$)/ton of CH4
Composting 134983 30
Incineration 666717 99
Landfill gas recovery 430052 41
vii
Composting is the most promising measure and more reliable solid waste treatment
option for Addis Ababa City because major portion is organic. Compost from such type

9. 9
of wastes can be a good quality, consistently produced, and accepted by customers and
meeting needs of end users.
Establishing and operating incineration plants is not only for GHG emission reduction
but it can assist the solid waste management service in the improvement of collection
and transport of wastes by increasing the number of disposal sites and increasing
frequency of collection.
Sanitary landfill is an essential tool for mitigating GHG and disposing safely all types of
solid wastes. It is the only option for the disposal of the unwanted end product of other
different solid waste treatment options.
This methane emissions mitigation assessment, therefore, recommends that
composting and landfill gas recovery should be implemented since they are cost
efficient for mitigating Addis Ababa landfill methane emission. Incineration, even if its
cost is not attractive, its impact on methane emissions from solid waste is significant.

10. 10
1. INTRODUCTION
Methane is one of the principal greenhouse gases and major contributor in its
contribution to the global warming. Methane emissions originate from several
anthropogenic sources including: municipal solid waste landfills and open dumps,
wastewater treatment, domesticated livestock and coal mining. Methane is a valuable
fuel and can be collected from sources and used in one of several ways including
power generation, direct industrial, commercial and residential use (1).
Methane is emitted from landfills as the result of the anaerobic decomposition of
organic wastes. The methane migrates through the waste laterally and vertically,
eventually escaping to the atmosphere. Landfills are major global sources of methane.
About 65% of methane emissions from landfills come from the more developed
countries of the world, another 15% from countries with transitional economies and
20% from developing countries (1).
Methane emissions-reduction options for the solid waste management sector are
mainly focused on its primary sources of its emissions from landfills. Of the available
measures to mitigate and recover methane gas from its sources, collecting and
combusting the landfill gas is the primary method for reducing methane emissions
from existing landfills. Diverting organic refuse to other disposal and treatment options
and keeping refuses away from landfills can also reduce future emissions (1,2).
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 SOLID WASTE GENERATION RATE:
Quantity of waste generation units of per capita per day in Addis Ababa City was very
much unclear until 1982 when a Norconsult, a private company on waste
management, first published its findings. A Luisberger consult was also made a study
on solid waste generation rate in 1994 and 1995 (2,3).
According to the Norconsult study, the per capita generation of SW was 0.150 kg per
day. In its conclusion, the volume growth rate of the domestic solid waste generation
has an increase of 1% per year per capita based and density of 370 kg/m3
(2).
According to the 1994 study, the per capita generation of SW 0.221 kg per day per
person and density of 336 kg/m3
can be taken for planning purpose. According to the
Luisberger consult study, based on the income level, the unit of domestic waste
generation of per capita per day is 0.252 kg and density 205 kg/ m3
(3).

11. 11
According to the Norconsult study, .of the total solid waste generated in the city, 76%
is from households and the rest 5% from industries, 6% from street sweepings, 9%
from commercial areas, 1% from hospital and 3% from hotels (2).
At present, the daily total SW generation is estimated to be reach 573 tones out of
which 360 – 412 tones is collected and disposed of in landfill. The per capita based
disposal rate is also estimated to be reached 0.17 kg/capita/day. The Addis Ababa SW
generation is expected to increase to 30% by the year 2010. Wastes from households
will take the large portion due to rapid increase of population in the city (5).
2.2 COMPOSITION OF SOLID WASTE:
Domestic waste varies in composition both geographically and seasonally. The
percentage composition by weight for organic component of the solid waste of Addis
Ababa City is about 64% by weight. The combustible materials constitute 21%, the
non-combustible 3%, the organic fines 34%, the fines less than 10mm size 29% and
the recyclable materials 13% by weight (3).
2.3 LANDFILLED SOLID WASTE:
The amount of refuse that already disposed of in to landfill is estimated to be more
than 6.6 million cubic meters or 2.4 million tones it is under operation for the last 35
years back. The landfill operational procedure is unsanitary. It is simply spreading and
leveling by using the two bulldozers and compacting by one steel studded wheel type
of compactor. The already disposed solid waste to the landfill in the last 10 years has
a yearly increment of 5.4% (4).
3. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
3.1 GOAL:
The goal of this mitigation assessment is to provide policy makers with an
evaluation of mitigation options that can both mitigate climate change and also
contribute to national and regional development objectives.
3.2 OBJECTIVES:
The main objectives of this mitigation assessment are to identify, screen and
characterize technologies and practices that have potential to mitigate climate
change and contribute to the improvement of solid waste management.

12. 12
3.3 OUTPUTS:
The output of this assessment consists of:
 Access the decision-maker to design mitigation policies.
 Economic and greenhouse gas impacts of mitigation options.
4. SCOPE OF THE MITIGATION ASSESSMENT OF METHANE EMISSIONS
This mitigation assessment is mainly focused on identifying potential mitigation
measures and their impacts on the Addis Ababa landfill methane emission and
developing methane emissions mitigation strategy.
5. METHODS
This mitigation study has been conducted for the year 2000 to assess mitigation
measures for methane emissions in the solid waste sector. This assessment is a
bottom-up approach for the analysis of mitigation options. Because it is carried out at
regional level, i.e. for the Addis Ababa City landfill methane emission reduction. It is
more aimed at identifying the solid waste management measures that have the
capacity and potential impacts to mitigate climate change through reduction of
methane emissions from landfill.
A data needed for the assessment of mitigation measures of the Addis Ababa City
landfill emissions has been collected from Health Bureau, CSA, ESTC and NMSA.
The compiled data has been analyzed using the IPCC guidance for mitigation
assessment. The figure analysis and cross tabulations have been done using the
computer.
6. TARGET BENEFICIARIES
Various stakeholders are potential beneficiaries. The primary users of the
assessment are likely to be decision-makers of the City Council. The benefits
obtained from the assessment are to satisfy the needs of policy makers who are
responsible for evaluating and designing mitigation measures.
The scientific community, NGOs, interested groups and regional and national
government organizations are likely to benefit from access to the output of this
assessment.

13. 13
7. POTENTIAL MEASURES FOR MITIGATION OF METHANE EMISSIONS
There are two approaches for reduction of methane emissions from landfill:
1. Recovery of methane generated in the landfill to produce energy
2. Waste management measures to reduce quantity of wastes go to landfill.
LANDFILLS METHANE RECOVERY:
The atmospheric emissions are gases from solid waste placed in the landfills. A
number of technologies are in use in several countries, both in developed and
developing countries to control landfill atmospheric emissions. The landfill gas can
be extracted through a series of wells drilled into the refuse placed in the landfill.
The recovered methane can be used to generate electricity. The waste heat
produced during electrical generation can also be recovered and used for local
heating needs. Electricity generation requires relatively large amounts of landfill gas
and is therefore suitable for larger landfills and economic benefits depend upon the
price at which the electricity can be sold (1).
ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT MEASURES:
The other technical alternative waste management practices applicable in the near
and longer term are reducing wastes go to the landfill. Minimizing waste go to the
landfill can also improve landfill management and operational costs for waste
management.
The potential alternative waste management and mitigation measures are:
1. Source reduction of solid waste
2. Composting of solid waste
3. Recycling of solid waste
4. Incineration of solid waste

14. 14
8. EVALUATION OF MITIGATION OPTIONS FOR METHANE EMISSIONS
Evaluation is done to make a rough assessment of the potential attractiveness of
options. The purpose of evaluation is to assess the impacts that the mitigation
options have on the emissions. Various criteria were used for both evaluation and
in-depth analysis of mitigation options.
Since for some options to quantify its impact on the GHG emissions is difficult,
simple assumptions have been made to roughly estimate its GHG impacts (Table-I).

15. 15
Table-I Evaluation of Implication of Mitigation Options on Methane Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste,
Addis Ababa, 2000
Mitigation Methane Emissions from SWDSs
Mitigation Mitigation Options
Country Ethiopia, Addis Ababa
Year 2000
Criteria
Score
(0:Low)
Mitigation Options
Waste source
Reduction
Waste
Recycling
Waste
Composting
Waste
Incineration
Sanitary
Landfill
Potential for large impact on GHGs 0-40 20 15 40 40 30
Direct cost/benefit ratio of the option 0-40 30 20 35 15 30
Indirect economic impacts:
 Increase in job opportunity
 Decrease in import payments
0-15
0-10
NA
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
15
10
Consistency with national environmental goals:
 Reducing emissions of air pollutants
 Effectiveness in limiting other environmental
impacts
0-15
0-20
NA
20
NA
10
5
10
5
10
5
10
Potential ease of implementation 0-25 10 20 20 10 10
Long-term sustainability of option 0-25 10 20 25 25 25
Consistency with national development goals 0-15 15 15 15 10 10
Data availability for evaluation:
 Technology characterization 0-10 NA 10 10 10 10
Contribution to improve waste management
system 0-20 20 10 15 15 15
Total 240 135(67%) 145(64%) 200(83%) 165(69%) 170(71%)

16. 16
SOURCE REDUCTION:
According to the overall evaluation result, it can be concluded that minimizing the
amount of solid waste goes to the landfill can mitigate the methane emissions (4). It
can reduce the landfilling of solid wastes through minimizing its generation. Of the
total waste generated in Addis Ababa City, 76% is from households. Source
reduction can be applicable through improving the wasteful life-style of the
population through encouraging and raising awareness of the population to use
reusable materials instead of using disposable materials (1,9).
RECYCLING:
According to the overall evaluation result, it can be concluded that this option may
not have significant impact on GHGs emissions because of low portion of
biodegradable and recyclable materials. The percentage composition by weight for
recyclable materials (paper, rubber, wood, bone, plastics, textiles, metals and
glasses) for Addis Ababa solid waste is 13% by weight. But organizing waste
recyclers to maximize their efficiency may help to limit waste go to the landfill that
will have an impact on landfill methane emissions in the future.
COMPOSTING:
According to the overall evaluation result, it can be concluded that this option is
found to be a feasible option to mitigate methane emissions because of that the
organic component constitute high portion that can be degraded aerobically to
compost (1). The percentage composition for organic component of the solid
waste of Addis Ababa City is about 64% by weight.
INCINERATION:
According to the overall evaluation result, it can be concluded that this option has
high impact on methane emissions from SW. Incineration is a combustion process
by which solid wastes are reduced primarily to ash and other gases. Often energy
recovery is applied. The feasibility of combustion process is dependent on the
nature of wastes and cost of incineration plants. The combustible portion of the
Addis Ababa Solid Waste constitutes 21% by weight. A waste with high organic
content, it is not suitable for mass incineration. As a result, the incineration plant
needs high capital and operating and maintenance costs.

17. 17
SANITARY LANDFILL WITH GAS RECOVERY:
According to the overall evaluation result, it can be concluded that this option is
found to be feasible in case of Addis Ababa City that the recovered gas can be used
for producing electricity and heating and cooling effect (1). Principally, gas is
generated from MSW placed in landfills. Methane also constitutes 50% of the total
gas generated from landfill with density of 0.718 kg/m3
(12).
9. PRIORITIZING OF MITIGATION MEASURES OF METHANE EMISSIONS
The Addis Ababa City landfill methane emission accounts on the average about
18% of the total emissions of urban centers of Ethiopia. Thus, the Addis Ababa City
landfill methane emission could be the focus of mitigation measures. Because it
presents the greatest opportunity in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The mitigation measures have been prioritized by considering their potential
reduction of greenhouse gas emission, comparability with current solid waste
management goals and priorities and potential economic, environmental or social
benefits. Some GHG mitigation measures can also be integrated with other current
waste management projects (6).
10.SELECTION OF MITIGATION MEASURES OF METHANE EMISSIONS
The potential mitigation measures that are feasible to mitigate methane emissions
from solid waste are composting, incineration of solid waste with energy recovery
and sanitary landfill with gas recovery.
11.BASELINE AND MITIGATION- EMISSION SCENARIOS
For the purpose of methane emission mitigation analysis two different scenarios are
basically defined in this assessment. One scenario reflects a baseline case and the
other reflects the impact of mitigation options.

18. 18
11.1 BASELINE SCENARIO:
A baseline/reference scenario is a projection of GHG of a country as if no
policies are out in place designed to reduce GHG emissions. There is not
landfill methane emissions recovery practice in urban centers of Ethiopia. A
GHG emissions projection for Addis Ababa City has been done to illustrate
methane emissions from landfill for each year 1994 – 2030, 1994 as a base-
year for emissions inventory (Table-II).
11.2 MITIGATION-EMISSION SCENARIO:
A mitigation scenario reflects a future in which climate-change mitigation is a
primary objective for adoption of technologies and practices that reduce GHG
emissions by limiting wastes go to the landfill for Addis Ababa City. A
compost plant that has a capacity to treat 200 tons of wastes per day can
reduce 30% of the yearly total methane generation from SW. An incineration
plant with a capacity of treating 300 ton of solid waste per day can reduce
methane emissions estimated at 45% of the yearly total generation from SW.
The methane generated from landfills can typically be recovered at 70% of
the yearly total methane gas emissions. The impacts of these different options
on methane emissions are given in (Table-III).

19. 19
12. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
The strategic plans for the solid waste management should aim at progressive
improvements of the existing environmental pollution in the city and gradually to
meet the standard requirements for safe handling and disposal methods, which will
help to achieve environmental effectiveness in general and mitigating methane
emissions from solid waste in particular. To this end, the following strategic plans
have been drawn:
12.1 GENERAL STRATEGIC PLANS WITHIN THE SOLID WASTE SECTOR:
12.1.1 Enhancing the present onsite handling capacity:
12.1.1.2 Reduce the miss-handling and uncontrolled disposal of wastes
and using use-and-throw materials at residential and working
areas.
12.1.1.3 Educate and encourage the population to use reusable materials
and transport and empty their wastes to the transfer stations
properly.
12.1.1.4 Enforce regulatory actions on practices of the population affecting
the environment by miss-handling of its by–product as solid
waste.
12.1.2 Enhancing the present solid waste collection and transport capacity:
12.1.2.1 Increase the solid waste collection capacity through securing
additional waste collection trucks and introducing incentives for
the collection crew.
12.1.2.2 Introduce additional transfer stations possibly at accessible points
in the residential, institutional and commercial sites.
12.1.3 Improving the present solid waste disposal and treatment method:
12.1.3.1 Close the existing landfill.
12.1.3.2 Construct new sanitary landfill.
12.1.3.3 Introduce composting and incineration of solid waste with energy
recovery.

20. 20
12.2 SPECIFIC STRATEGIC PLANS FOR METHANE EMISSION MITIGATION
OPTIONS:
12.2.1 Develop Composting of Solid Waste:
Municipal solid waste to compost is possible by use of compost technology.
This technology is a valuable tool already being used to increase
environmental effectiveness.
12.2.2 Develop Incineration of Solid Waste with Energy Recovery:
Municipal solid waste can be processed by use of incineration technology.
Atmospheric emissions in case of incineration of refuse produces a flue gas
that contains different components free of methane gas. Quality of incineration
plants emissions into the atmosphere determines the efficiency of the
technology. It is expected to be within the emission-limits for incinerators.
12.2.3 Develop sanitary landfill with gas recovery:
A sanitary landfill with gas recovery project can be considered with a rough
estimate of the current and potential future amount of gas that can be
produced. This rough approximation method only requires knowledge of how
much waste is in place at the target landfill. The waste tonnage should ideally
be less than 10 years old.
The Addis Ababa landfill is in use for the last 35 years back and designed to
handle 91400 tones of waste disposed of annually by the city’s 2.6 million
inhabitants. The already landfilled refuse is estimated to be more than 6.6
million cubic meters or 2.4 million tones (4).

21. 21
12.3 IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS
Barriers Possible Solutions
Lack of attractiveness of
waste-to-energy and waste-
to-compost
Aware policy makers on economic and
environmental benefits of waste-to-energy
and waste-to-compost.
Adopt tax incentives
Lack of awareness on the
part of government and
others with methane recovery
and source reduction
techniques
Provide information through workshops to
potential project developers and lending
agencies regarding the role waste
management projects can play in meeting
country goals
Lack of access to
technologies such as landfill
gas recovery, composting
and incinerator
Encourage joint ventures and the
introduction of new technologies
Lack of capital investment Raise awareness on profitability of solid
waste projects with development
agencies
13. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF THE PROJECT OPTIONS:
The purpose of evaluating the economic feasibility of the project options is to
ensure that the project meets a target level of cost effectiveness. There may be
several goals of a gas recovery project: profitability, energy & fertilizer supply, or
emissions reductions (or a combination of all).
The economics of such a project will be evaluated in terms of the cost of
emissions avoided. A threshold level of cost effectiveness may be set at US$ 50
per ton of methane emissions avoided. GHG recovery/reduction from MSW might
be considered a necessary environmental control operation. In such cases, costs
associated with gas recovery would be a necessary expense, whether gas
utilization is considered or not (10).
13.1 Cost Analysis:
The degree of mechanization to be adopted will depend upon economical
development, cost of labor and energy and socio-cultural attitudes of the
community. Project costs will include equipment purchase and installation, as well
as operation and maintenance (O & M) and site-specific cost. The O & M include
labor costs (10).

22. 22
13.1.1 Cost of Compost Technology:
 Plant Capacity: treat 100 - 200 ton of SW per day
 Cost Breakdown:
Mitigation Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Mitigation Cost of Mitigation Options
Country Ethiopia, Addis Ababa
Year 2000
Component Total Cost (US$)
Plant cost 107987
Operating and maintenance (O&M)
cost 10% of capital cost 10798
Construction cost 15% of capital
cost 16198
Total 134983
 Benefits:
 Soil conditioning compost production
 Reduce import cost for fertilizer
 Improve solid waste final disposal
 Job opportunities
 GHG emissions avoided
 Enhancing carbon sinks

23. 23
13.2 Cost of Incineration plants:
 Plant Capacity: treat 100 - 300 ton of SW per day
 Electric power generation: minimum 40 000 kW per day
 Cost Breakdown:
Mitigation Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Mitigation Cost of Mitigation Options
Country Ethiopia, Addis Ababa
Year 2000
Component Total Cost (US$)
Plant cost 533374
Operating and maintenance cost
10% of equipment cost 53337
Construction cost 15% of capital
cost 80006
Total 666717
 Benefits:
 Revenue from the gas recovery
 Energy supplied and reduce energy cost
 Emissions reductions
 Job opportunities
 Odor control
 Improve solid waste final disposal

24. 24
13.3 Cost of Landfill Gas Recovery:
 Plant Capacity: recover 70% of total methane emitted per day
 Cost Breakdown:
Mitigation Methane Emissions from Solid Waste
Mitigation Cost of Mitigation Options
Country Ethiopia, Addis Ababa
Year 2000
Component Total Cost (mill. US$)
Plant cost 344042
Operating and maintenance cost
10% of capital cost 34404
Construction cost 15% of capital
cost 51606
Total 430052
 Benefits:
 Revenue from the gas recovery
 Energy supplied and reduce energy cost
 Emissions reductions
 Job opportunities
 Odor control
 Improve solid waste final disposal

25. 25
25
14. DISCUSSION
There are different beneficial uses of compost including GHG emissions reduction
from SW, bio-remediation and pollution prevention, disease control for plants and
animals, erosion control and landscaping, composting of contaminated soils,
reforestation, wetland restoration and habitat revitalization.
The cost of compost technology is dependent on a number of factors: plant
capacity and cost recovery system. The cost recovered from the sale of compost
is also determined by its quality, consistency of product quality, customer
acceptance, and distance from supplier to customer and meeting needs of end
users. Compost quality and consistency of quality over time lead to customer
acceptance and continuing sales. The distance from the supplier to the customer
impacts the marketing of compost. Since compost is marketed at a comparatively
low value, the transportation cost may have a larger impact on compost than most
other recovered products.
The amount of solid waste intake per day per hour of the incineration plant varies
in accordance with the power of the required technology and the amount of
methane emission reduction. This plant can be planted in different zones, woredas
or kebeles where the waste is located or disposed.
The cost of incinerators is dependant on the efficiency of the technology which
enables not to pollute environment during the waste treatment process, to treat
every type of waste and to obtain from the process of waste treatment a
considerable amount of complementary products. Mass incineration of solid waste
is an approach to spare landfills space and minimizes transportation costs. The
main problem with mass incineration is that it is not a promising action because of
very large costs for facility construction and operation, unresolved issues of
harmful air emissions and control device adequacy and reliability, and concern
about ash toxicity and safe long-term disposal. Moreover, mass incineration
conflicts with the alternatives of recycling and composting.
The cost of sanitary landfill is dependent on the complexity of the technology
and cost recovered from the sale of gas recovered. It incurs costs for gas recovery
and a minimum amount for gas cleaning to remove moisture and impurities (12).

26. 26
26
15. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
The compost facility and the potential end users that are located within a
marketable distance may limit the markets available to a compost operation.
Incineration technology requires high capital for investment, which may not be
seen as an attractive. But, the installation of such a plant would definitely be
instrumental in reorganizing the transformation of urban waste in to economic
value.
Regarding the recovered landfill gas, it can be used for onsite electricity
generation or for residential and institutional uses.
Composting is the most promising measure and more reliable solid waste
treatment option to mitigate methane and improve solid waste management
system for Addis Ababa City because the major portion is organic. Compost from
such type of wastes can be a good quality, consistently produced, and accepted
by customers and meeting needs of end users.
Establishing and operating incineration plants is not only for GHG emission
reduction but it can assist the solid waste management service in the improvement
of collection and transport of wastes by increasing the number of solid waste
treatment options.
Sanitary landfill is an essential tool for mitigating GHG and disposing safely all
types of solid wastes. It is the only option for the disposal of the unwanted end
product of other different solid waste treatment options.

27. 27
27
15. REFERENCES:
1. H. Glas, etal, Solid Waste Disposal, Netherlands, 1994
2. Nor consult, Addis Ababa Solid Waste Management Study, 1982.
3. Gordon, S, Addis Ababa Solid Waste Management 3rd
and 4th
Study, 1994 &
1995.
4. Region 14 Health Bureau, Annual Activities Reports, Addis Ababa, 1984-1998.
5. Health Bureau, Addis Ababa, Health Sector Development Program, A5 Year
Plan (1998-2002), Addis Ababa, May 1998.
6. USEPA, Safer Disposal for Solid Waste, EPA/530-SW-91-092, 1993.
7. USEPA, Let us Reduce and Recycle: Curriculum for Solid Waste Awareness,
EPA/530-SW-90-005, 1990.
8. NMSA, A 1999 Greenhouse Gases Inventory Report, 1999.
9. USEPA, Waste Reduction Activities of Selected Waste-Wise Partners, SWER
(5306W), August 1997.
10.USEPA, A Guide for Methane Mitigation Projects, Jan. 1996.