PROPOSED GARBAGE COMPOSITING PLANT FOR HOIMA MUNICIPAL
COUNCIL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
Prepared By:
Urban Research and Training Consultancy E.A Limited (URTC)
Plot 46, Stensera road, Kayanja Triangle, Nabunya zone, Rubaga- Kabusu,
P.o Box 34950, Kampala, Uganda. Web site: www.urbanrtc Email:
urbanrtc@info.com
Tel: +256-312-105641
Mob: +256-772-522707
Proponent/Developer:
Hoima Municipal Council,
P.0.Box 49, Hoima
April 2012
ESIA STUDY TEAM
NAME
DESIGNATIONS
Dr.Koojo
Charles
Amooti
Team Leader/Land PhD
use Planner
Dr.Robert
Kityo
Biodiversity
Specialist
PhD
Eng.
Patrick
Ludiigo
Civil Engineer
Msc.
Mr David Urban Planning
Wafula
ii
QUALIFICATIONS
Bsc.
SIGNATURES
ACRONOMYS/ABBREVATIONS
CDM
Clean development Mechanism
CITES
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora
EIA
Environment Impact Assessment
EIS
Environmental Impact Statement
EMCBP
Environmental Management and Capacity Building Project
EMMP
Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan
EMP
Environmental Management Plan
ESIA
Environmental Social Impact Assessment
LC
Local Council
MSW
Most Solid Wastes
HMC
Hoima Municipal Council
NEMA
National Environment Management Authority
NGO
Non Governmental Organizations
OSH
Occupational Safety and Health
TOR
Terms of Reference
WB
World Bank
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. XI
1.0.
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.
1.2.
BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................................ 1
GENERAL LOCATION .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.3.
1.4.
PURPOSE OF THE EIA ............................................................................................................................. 1
ASSESSMENT APPROACH/METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 2
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
Discussions with Client ................................................................................................................. 2
Physical Inspection ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
Biodiversity Inventory ................................................................................................................... 2
Stakeholders Consultations ........................................................................................................... 3
1.4.5.
1.4.6.
Professional Judgment .................................................................................................................. 3
Legislative and Policy Review ...................................................................................................... 3
1.4.7.
1.4.8.
Baseline Studies ............................................................................................................................ 4
Documents Review ........................................................................................................................ 4
2.0.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED COMPOSITING FACILITY ............................................... 5
2.1.
JUSTIFICATION FOR COMPOSITING.......................................................................................................... 5
2.2.
THE PROPOSED COMPOSITING OPERATING CONCEPT ............................................................................. 5
2.2.1.
Life Span of the Facility ................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.2.
2.2.3.
CDM Sustainability ....................................................................................................................... 7
Demonstration Gardens ................................................................................................................ 7
2.2.4.
2.2.5.
The Landfill Area .......................................................................................................................... 7
The Compost Plat Form ................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.
PROPOSED PROJECT ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................. 7
2.3.1.
Pre-construction ........................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.2.
Construction activities .................................................................................................................. 8
2.4.
TYPE OF WASTE COMPOSITING .............................................................................................................. 9
2.5.
2.6.
PROPOSED GARBAGE COMPOSITING PLANT ......................................................................................... 10
AEROBIC COMPOSTING ........................................................................................................................ 11
2.7.
2.7.1.
Strategies used in Aerobic composting............................................................................................ 11
Aerobic Compositing Parameters ............................................................................................... 12
2.7.2.
2.7.3.
Aerobic Composting Processes ................................................................................................... 13
Process Steps Involved in Compositing ...................................................................................... 13
3.0.
EXISTING WASTE MANAGEMENT SITUATION IN HOIMA TOWN ...................................... 17
3.1.
THE PROJECT SITE SITUATION.............................................................................................................. 17
3.2.
CURRENT PRACTICE OF WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL .............................................................. 18
3.2.1.
Waste Composition ..................................................................................................................... 20
iv
3.2.2.
3.2.3.
Collection of Wastes ................................................................................................................... 22
Poor Quality Composting Materials ........................................................................................... 22
3.2.4.
3.2.5.
Mixing of Solid Waste and Liquid Waste .................................................................................... 22
Mixing Solid Waste with Human Excreta ................................................................................... 23
3.2.6.
Mixing of Medical Waste with Municipal Waste ........................................................................ 23
3.2.7.
3.2.8.
Dumping of Waste outside Skips and Waste Accumulation at Collection Centres ..................... 23
Dumping of Hot Ash and Burning of Waste in Skips .................................................................. 23
3.2.9.
3.2.10.
Scattering of Waste at Residences and in Transit to the Skips .................................................... 23
Contamination of Reusable Waste like Banana Peelings ........................................................... 23
3.2.11.
Collection of Waste in Spoilt/Weak Skips ................................................................................... 24
4.0.
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE CONDITIONS.............................................................................. 25
4.1.
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ................................................................................................................................ 25
4.1.1.
Administrative Units ................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.2.
4.1.3.
Population................................................................................................................................... 25
Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................. 25
4.1.4.
4.1.5.
Waste Disposal Methods Used.................................................................................................... 27
Land Ownership .......................................................................................................................... 27
4.1.6.
Settlement Pattern ....................................................................................................................... 27
4.2.
BIO-PHYSICAL...................................................................................................................................... 28
4.2.1.
4.2.2.
Topography ................................................................................................................................. 28
Climate and Rainfall Patterns..................................................................................................... 30
4.2.3.
4.2.4.
Soil Erosion................................................................................................................................. 30
Biological Environment Statement .............................................................................................. 30
4.2.5.
4.2.6.
Butterfly ...................................................................................................................................... 30
Birds and Mammals .................................................................................................................... 32
4.2.7.
4.2.8.
Air Quality/Pollution .................................................................................................................. 35
Soil .............................................................................................................................................. 37
4.2.9.
4.2.10.
Geology ....................................................................................................................................... 37
Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 37
5.0.
LEGAL INSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAME WORK ....................................... 38
5.1.
WORLD BANK ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL SAFEGUARD POLICY FRAMEWORKS .................................... 38
5.1.1.
5.1.2.
World Bank Safeguard Policy Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP) 4.12 ..................................... 38
Environmental Assessment Policy-(OP 4.01) ............................................................................. 39
5.1.3.
5.1.4.
World Bank Safeguard Policy on Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP) 4.11........................... 39
Natural Habitats (OP 4.04) ........................................................................................................ 40
5.2.
UGANDA ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION ............................................................................................ 40
5.2.1.
The Constitution of Uganda, 1995 .............................................................................................. 41
5.2.2.
5.2.3.
The National Environment Act, Cap 153, 2004 .......................................................................... 41
The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) EIA guidelines, 1997 ................... 42
5.2.4.
5.2.5.
The Public Health Act (1964) ..................................................................................................... 42
The Factories Act (1964) ............................................................................................................ 42
5.2.6.
5.2.7.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act (2006) ........................................................................ 43
The Land Act (1998) ................................................................................................................... 43
5.2.8.
5.2.9.
Physical Planning Act, 2010 ....................................................................................................... 43
The Local Governments Act 1997 ............................................................................................... 43
5.3.
EXISTING GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS IN UGANDA ....... 44
5.3.1.
Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Uganda, 1997 .......................................... 44
5.3.2.
Regulations 3 to 17 of the National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and Lake Shores
Management) Regulations (2000) ................................................................................................................ 44
v
5.3.3.
5.3.4.
The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999) ....................................... 44
The National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or on Land)
Regulations (1999) ....................................................................................................................................... 45
5.3.5.
The Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1998 ....................................................................... 45
6.0.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES............................................................................................................... 46
6.1.
EXISTING SITE AT KINUBU ................................................................................................................... 46
6.3.
6.4.
DO NOTHING SCENARIO ....................................................................................................................... 46
TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS ........................................................................................................................ 46
6.4.1.
6.4.3.
Land filling.................................................................................................................................. 46
Incineration ................................................................................................................................. 48
6.4.4.
6.4.5.
Waste Reduction ......................................................................................................................... 48
Recycling..................................................................................................................................... 48
6.4.6.
6.4.7.
Storage Options .......................................................................................................................... 48
Collection Options ...................................................................................................................... 49
6.4.8.
6.4.9.
Collection from Communal Containers ...................................................................................... 49
Block Collection .......................................................................................................................... 49
6.4.10.
6.4.11.
Kerbside Collection .................................................................................................................... 49
Door-to-Door collection ............................................................................................................. 50
6.4.12.
Transport Options ....................................................................................................................... 50
6.5.
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ................................................................................................................... 50
6.5.1.
6.5.2.
Proposed Solid Waste Management ........................................................................................... 50
Storage and Sorting .................................................................................................................... 50
6.5.3.
6.5.4.
Transport .................................................................................................................................... 51
Composting ................................................................................................................................. 51
7.0.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ................................................................................................................. 52
7.1.
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND DISCLOSURE ............................................................................... 52
7.1.1.
7.1.2.
Stakeholder Consultation and the EIA ........................................................................................ 52
Project Stakeholders ................................................................................................................... 52
7.1.3.
Overview of the Consultation Process ........................................................................................ 53
8.0.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES OF THE GARBAGE
COMPOSTING PLANT .................................................................................................................................... 55
8.1.
POSITIVE ATTRIBUTES OF THE PROJECT ............................................................................................... 56
8.1.1.
8.1.2.
Benefits of the CDM Compost Project ........................................................................................ 56
Benefits of Compost .................................................................................................................... 57
8.2.
POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS ........................................................................................................... 57
8.2.1.
Factors Identified Leading to Negative Impacts ......................................................................... 58
vi
8.2.2.
8.2.3.
Production of Odors ................................................................................................................... 58
Biologic and Soil Contamination ................................................................................................ 58
8.2.4.
8.2.5.
Contamination of Ground and/or Surface Water from Leachate ................................................ 59
Health and Safety Impacts .......................................................................................................... 59
8.2.6.
8.2.7.
Accumulation of Solid Waste ...................................................................................................... 60
Impacts on Biodiversity............................................................................................................... 60
8.2.8.
Other Potential Negative Impacts ............................................................................................... 61
8.3.
NEGATIVE IMPACTS SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 61
8.3.5.
Construction Phase ..................................................................................................................... 61
8.3.6.
9.
Operation Phase ......................................................................................................................... 61
MITIGATION PLAN ................................................................................................................................ 64
9.2.
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE PROJECT DESIGN ............................................................................. 64
9.2.5.
Litter and Odor ........................................................................................................................... 64
9.2.6.
9.2.7.
Ground and/or Surface Water Contamination ............................................................................ 64
Dust Production .......................................................................................................................... 64
9.2.8.
9.2.9.
Impacts Related to the Natural Landscape ................................................................................. 65
Public Hazards ........................................................................................................................... 65
9.3.
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE .................................................................... 65
9.3.5.
Noise and Dust Emissions ........................................................................................................... 65
9.3.6.
9.3.7.
Construction Wastes ................................................................................................................... 65
Traffic Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 66
9.3.8.
Health and Safety Hazards ......................................................................................................... 66
9.4.
MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE OPERATION PHASE ................................................................................... 67
9.4.1.
9.4.2.
Litter ........................................................................................................................................... 67
Odor Production ......................................................................................................................... 67
9.4.3.
9.4.4.
Soil, Water and Natural Resources Contamination .................................................................... 68
Phytotoxicity ............................................................................................................................... 71
9.4.5.
9.4.6.
Health and Safety Hazards ......................................................................................................... 71
Noise Pollution ........................................................................................................................... 71
9.4.7.
Impacts Related to the Natural Landscape ................................................................................. 72
9.5.
SUMMARY OF IMPACT MITIGATION ...................................................................................................... 72
10.
MONITORING PLAN .......................................................................................................................... 76
10.4.
STANDARDS FOR COMPOST QUALITY ................................................................................................... 76
10.6.
10.7.
ODOR MONITORING ............................................................................................................................. 77
WATER QUALITY MONITORING ............................................................................................................. 77
10.8.
10.9.
AIR QUALITY MONITORING ................................................................................................................. 77
RECORDING OF COMPLAINTS AND RESPONSE ........................................................................................ 77
10.10.
10.11.
10.11.1.
10.11.2.
10.12.
10.13.
OTHER MONITORING ACTIVITIES ..................................................................................................... 78
MONITORING RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................................................................................... 78
Construction Phase ..................................................................................................................... 78
Operation Phase ......................................................................................................................... 78
EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN .......................................................................................................... 79
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................................... 80
Water Pollution ............................................................................................................................................ 81
Dust Generation ........................................................................................................................................... 82
Vegetation loss ............................................................................................................................................. 82
Noise Pollution ............................................................................................................................................. 82
Waste Generation / Construction debris ...................................................................................................... 83
Occupation health and safety ....................................................................................................................... 83
10.14.
10.15.
vii
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................... 83
CLOSURE PLAN ................................................................................................................................ 84
10.16.
11.
COMMITMENT TO THE EIS ............................................................................................................... 84
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................................... 85
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................... 86
ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE .......................................................................................................... 88
ANNEX 2: MINUTES OF MEETING .............................................................................................................. 89
APPENDIX 3: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED .......................................................................................... 92
ANNEX 4: PROJECT DESIGNS ...................................................................................................................... 94
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Proposed Construction Activities for the Composting Facility................................8
Table 3.1: Hoima Municipal Council services Provision- 2010 .............................................17
Table 3.2: Average Waste Composition ................................................................................20
Table 4.1: Forest dependent species ......................................................................................31
Table 4.2: Butterfly Species List ...........................................................................................31
Table 4.3: Species of birds recorded in the project area .........................................................33
Table 4.4: Summary of habitat preferences for species of birds recorded ..............................34
Table 4.5: Monthly average wind speed at Hoima Meteorological Station ............................37
Table 7.1: Views raised by some of the members present at a consultative meeting ..............54
Table 8.1: Potential Positive Benefits ...................................................................................56
Table 8.2: Potential Negative Impacts on Biodiversity ..........................................................60
Table 8.3: Summary of Potential Negative Impacts...............................................................62
Table 9.1: Separation Technologies ......................................................................................69
Table 9.2: Recommendation Mitigation Measures for Potential Negative Impacts ................73
Table 10.1: Environmental Monitoring for the Garbage Composting Plant ...........................79
Table 10.2: Garbage Composite Management Plan ...............................................................81
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: The Location of the garbage Collection Site relative to Hoima Municipal Council 2
Figure 1.2: Site Layout of the composting plant ......................................................................1
Figure 2.1: Plant Plan .............................................................................................................6
Figure 2.2: Process Flow Chart of the Proposed Aerobic Compositing Process Chart ...........11
Figure 2.3: Photo showing the typical type of tractor that will be used to discharge material in
the windrow at Kibati site garbage composting Plant .....................................................14
Figure 3.1: Photo showing piles of unsorted garbage in the present day dump situation ........19
Figure 3.2: Photo showing fire being used to reduce the piles of the garbage ........................19
Figure 3.3: Photo showing current state of garbage at site .....................................................19
Figure 3.4: Photo showing the garbage dump area being used for grazing Livestock.............20
Figure 3.5: Photo showing masses of smoke released into the atmosphere from burning the
Garbage .........................................................................................................................20
Figure 4.1: Photo showing British American Tobacco Warehouse along the main road to the
Site ................................................................................................................................26
viii
Figure 4.2: Photo showing Access road to the garbage site ...................................................26
Figure 4.3: Photo showing unsorted waste at the proposed site-Katungo ...............................27
Figure 4.4: Photo showing the nearest settlements to the site ................................................28
Figure 4.5: Showing showing the general Topography of the area ........................................28
Figure 4.6: Figure Showing Topography...............................................................................29
Figure 4.7: Photo showing a natural water boby, stream and surrounding wetland vegetation at
a distance of 300metres from the proposed site ..............................................................30
Figure 7.1: Photo of Public Consultative meeting at Kibati village on 12th December 2010...53
ix
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Special thanks go out to Hoima Municipal Council and Hoima District Environment office for
their significant input in preparing this Environmental Social Impact Statement (ESIA). Our
appreciation also goes out to National Environmental Management Authority (NEMA) for
their insight and guidance. Contributions from various opinion leaders and the residents of
Kibati cell, in Southern Ward, Kahoora Division, Hoima Municipal Council are appreciated.
x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Hoima Municipal council has been listed as one of the Municipal councils to benefit from
funds for setting up a modern garbage compositing plant and landfill. This programme is a
World Bank funded Environmental Management and Capacity Building Project 11(EMCBP11) under Municipal Solid Waste Compositing under Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)
through the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA).
The Environmental Impact Social Assessment (ESIA) for the proposed Garbage compositing
and recycling plant is being conducted by Hoima Municipal Council in order to fulfill the
requirements of the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA). NEMA is the
lead agency in Uganda that ensures that such projects are implemented according to the
environmental laws operating in Uganda.
Information upon which this assessment is based was collected using a combination of
methods. This included review of literature on appropriate subject areas including garbage
waste management in Uganda and project background documents from Hoima Municipal
Council. A list of reference material consulted is given at the end of this EIS. Consultations
with major stakeholders provided additional information with regard to their concerns and
possible mitigations. During the assessment, constant reference was made to the NEMA
environmental Impact Assessment Guidelines (1997) and Environmental Impact Assessment
Regulations (1998) in additional, the consultant also conducted field work (biophysical and
social/ public consultations) through which on spot assessments were done.
Biodegradable garbage rotting in landfill produces methane gas—a ‘greenhouse gas’ that
contributes to global warming. Methane is 21 times more potent in its greenhouse effect than
carbon dioxide (from car exhaust), and landfills are the largest man-made source of methane
(37% globally). That’s why the European Union, World Bank, Government of Uganda and
Hoima Municipal Council are moving to ban biodegradable material from landfills. By
separating and composting biodegradable materials under controlled conditions instead of
land filling them, methane production is significantly reduced and these materials are recycled
into compost, a valuable resource for fertilizing soil.
Proposed Composite Facility Operation Concept
The composting plant will utilize windrow technology. Its capacity is 70 tons, with an
estimated output of 30 tons per day of manure. The major equipment used here will include a
back hoe and fork lift for turning waste and moving it to the next windrow, but waste sorting
will be undertaken manually. Up to 30 persons will be employed at the site
Aerobic composting is a biological treatment system based on aerobic fermentation of organic
wastes using bacterial/enzymatic preparation. The objectives of aerobic composting
operations are waste volume reduction (reaching up to 50%), and compost production
(humus-like material) in a controlled and odor free environment.
xi
Construction Time Framework
The facility will be operational within 12 months of contract signature between the
municipality and the contractor.
Design Period for the Facility
When properly maintained, the facility equipment, including the composting drum, should be
viable up to 25 years. Care should be taken to maintain proper flow of electricity to all
equipment. Operators should not load the drum with more than the nominated weight capacity
of 5-6 tons per compartment.
CDM Sustainability
Project sustainability will be ensured if the by-products, particularly compost and recyclables
are marketable. The domestic solid waste generated in Hoima Municipality is characterized
with a high percentage of putrefaction able materials, high moisture content, and relatively
small percentages of plastics, paper/cardboard, and metals
These characteristics render the waste suitable to be composted. High quality compost can
therefore be produced and sold. The quality of the compost will depend mainly on the
efficiency of waste sorting to avoid the presence of impurities in the final product; hence
sorting at the source along with on-site sorting will guarantee a better product quality. In
general, farmers express interest in utilizing such compost as a source of soil amendment.
The Impacts associated with a Garbage Compositing Plant
The project will be associated with a number of positive impacts that will enhance
development of both Kibati village and Hoima Municipal Council. However, the project will
also have limited adverse impacts on the physical and social environment which may be of
significance if not mitigated. The anticipated enhanced/positive impacts of the project will
include:
•
Employment/Job creation of between 30-40 people
•
Improved services and infrastructure development such as water, road and electricity
•
Investment attraction in the area because of social services
•
Income generation from the compost manure
•
Cleanliness of Hoima Municipal
•
Improved living standard and better health improvement as vector breeding will be
drastically reduced.
xii
Summary of Potential Positive Benefits
Impact
Cause
Significance
Eliminating the
negative The composting plant Long-Term
will receive and treat the
effects of open dumping
organic waste within and
around
Hoima
Municipality.
Eliminate gas emissions
and leachate generation
from dumping of organic
material.
Compost use
Compost use Compost Short Term
can be used as a soil
conditioner
and
has
significant
positive
impacts
Employment generation
Creating jobs for the locals
Creating income generating Revenue to the Hoima Short Term
municipal Council from the
activity
waste
management,
in
addition to selling the
compost and the recyclable
Material
Solid waste reduction
Protection
resources
of
Separation of non-sorted Long term
waste at the compost plant,
with gradual increase of
source separation following
increased awareness of the
local population
natural In-vessel composting with Long term
no/minor leachate generation
Decreased quantity of waste The solid waste will be Short term
to be land filled increasing separated for recycling, and
only a small portion of inert
the lifespan of the dumpsite.
rejects will result from the
composting activity. The
facility by itself is not landintensive.
The adverse impacts that may be associated with a garbage composting and recycling plant in
Kibati village will include:
xiii
Vegetation loss due of about two to three acres out of eight acres ( for the proposed
buildings and yards) to clearance to give way for development;
Limited disturbance of the existing ecosystems and biodiversity of the area since it is
largely un inhabited;
Effect on the air quality due to construction activities and tree cutting;
Erosion caused by increased run off due to vegetation loss and land scape;
Bad odor from the garbage being transported from Hoima Municipal (about 3 kms) and
dumped at the compositing site;
Health hazards due to disposal of wastes in Kibati Village. There are a number of aspects
of environmental management and monitoring which should be part of Hoima Municipal
Council routine activities as a consequence of this project. They include the development
of measures to safeguard the quality of Hoima Municipal Council and Kibati village
environment and its attributes.
Summary of Potential Negative Impacts on Biodiversity
Impact
Cause
Habitat loss or destruction
Construction works
Altered abiotic/site factors
Soil compaction, erosion
Mortality of individuals
Destruction of vegetation
Loss of individuals through emigration
Following disturbance or loss of wild life
habitats.
Habitat fragmentation
Habitat removal and/or introduction of barriers
like roads
Disturbance
Due to construction noise, traffic, presence of
people…
Altered species composition
Changes in biotic conditions, habitats…
Vegetation loss
Soil/water contamination from poor quality
Compost
xiv
Other Potential Negative Impacts
• Production of dust from waste trucks while transporting and unloading the waste;
•
Noise pollution due to truck traffic and/or to operation of the facility;
•
Littering of the surrounding area by the light waste fraction, plastic bags and paper,
transported by winds;
•
Natural resource contamination and various other impacts from uncontrolled dumping of
composting rejects;
•
Phytotoxicity of plants due to high compost application rates; and
•
Landscape and visual intrusion from the offensive sight of the facility buildings in the
natural environment.
Negative Impacts Summary and Analysis
Impact analysis focused on characterizing negative impacts, according to their significance
(long term vs. short term), extent (level of environmental degradation or conservation), and
mitigation feasibility. The summary and analysis of potential negative impacts are presented
in table below. Impacts classified as having long-term effects are the most significant
compared to those with short-term effects, since they lead to long-term environmental
degradation.
Construction Phase
The main negative impacts occurring during the construction phase result from construction
works and land reclamation activities. Such activities will generate noise, dust, and wastes (all
of which can be mitigated for and are short-term impacts). Health and safety hazards during
the construction phase can be prevented by appropriate precaution measures. The destruction
of vegetation caused as well by construction activities is not very significant since the project
only affects a small portion of the ecosystem and will not destroy any sensitive or critical
species or habitat.
Operation Phase
Impacts directly related to the operation of the facility include odor, dust, and noise
generation, littering of surrounding areas, occupational and health hazards, and water and soil
contamination from potential leachate. The most significant impacts having long-term
environmental effects are those related to the usage of contaminated compost, which leads to
soil, water and biological contamination. However, all impacts can be prevented by
implementing the mitigation measures presented in section 9.
xv
Summary of Potential Negative Impacts
Construction Phase
Impact
Cause
Significance
Noise and dust
Resulting from construction activities and Short term
truck traffic
Health and safety
Construction waste
Construction waste Resulting from Short term
construction activities, land reclamation
Health and safety
Accidents to workers and members of the Long term
local community due to lack of safety
regulations and uncontrolled access to the
construction site
Biodiversity
Biodiversity Land reclamation and Long term
construction activities leading to the
destruction of the natural ecosystem at
the facility site
Operation Phase
Litter
Light fraction of waste carried by winds Short term
Short term
Odor
Compost facilities that are not properly Short term
operated allow anaerobic conditions to
develop thus generating foul odors
Waste trucks incoming and leaving the
facility
Natural
contamination
Phytotoxicity
xvi
resources Application (on agricultural lands) of poor Long term
quality contaminated compost containing
hazardous material, potential leachate
generated, uncontrolled drainage, and
improper storage and receiving areas and/or
application of contaminated compost,
uncontrolled dumping of composting
residues such as un-compostable and
unrecyclable material
High compost application rates Health and Long term
safety hazards
Health and safety hazards
During waste separation and operation of Long term
the process, and with minimal
precaution measures, uncontrolled access to
the facility
Noise and dust
From circulation and unloading of trucks
Short term
Landscape esthetic
From circulation and unloading of trucks Long term
Short term
Landscape esthetic Offensive sight in the
natural landscape
While the purpose of the EIA process is to identify potential adverse impacts and recommend
appropriate mitigation measures to minimize/ offset the impacts, EMP is a tool devised for the
implementing agency, to implement the required mitigation measures. Mitigation measures
identify mainly the following issues:
• Solid legal background for the enforcement of all the environmental obligations relevant
to Garbage composting and recycling,
• Setting up a strong and efficient organization able to monitor all environmental and social
issues associated with a garbage compositing and recycling plant and to enforce
mitigation measures,
• Provision of adequate land for compositing purposes free of any wrangles,
• Compensation and disturbance allowance in case of any health effects arising from the
compositing plant,
• Proximity to water bodies and how leachates are to be managed not to affect the eco
systems,
• Monitor the garbage compositing and recycling plant and report to designated institutions
to establish accountability
Environmental Monitoring Plan
Environmental Monitoring will be needed during implementation of a garbage compositing
and recycling plant. The aspects of the project that need a well-planned monitoring
programme include:
Activities during vegetation and land clearance to give way for the development of a
compositing plant;
Activities during construction of a garbage compositing and recycling plant;
Training of staff involved in garbage management in environmental management
principles;
Preventive maintenance such as regular inspection of garbage recycling plant to ensure
that conforms environmental standards; and
Regular inspection on how the wastes are transported to the composting site
xvii
Recommendations and Conclusions
It is important in the implementation of the garbage composting plant that compliance with
relevant environmental legislation be given due consideration. Hoima Municipal Council
should ensure that project activities are carried out according to the environment laws and
implement mitigation measures as endorsed by NEMA.
Hoima Municipal Council is committed to implementing the conditions of approval once given
by NEMA based on this environmental Impact statement finding. NEMA has also has an
agreement of understanding with the council arising from the joint ownership of the composite
facility by NEMA and Hoima Municipal Council.
xviii
1.0.
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
Background
Hoima Municipal Council is located in Hoima District in mid-western Uganda about 200 kms
Northwest of Kampala city. It is also the headquarters of the district. It is bordered by other
local governments namely Buhanika Sub-County in the east and mainly surrounded by Busiisi
Sub County. The Municipal council has a total area of 20.95 sq km with a population of
70,958 with a growth rate of 2.8%.
Hoima Municipal Council has been listed as one of the Municipal to benefit from funds for
setting up a modern garbage compositing plant and landfill. This programme is a World Bank
funded Environmental Management and Capacity Building Project 11(EMCBP-11) under
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) through the National Environment Management
Authority (NEMA).
The CDM supported project is among those initiated by Kyoto Protocol as one of the
mechanisms for developed countries to invest in projects in developing countries that would
realize GHG emission reduction and use the resulting certified emission reduction to help
meet their targets, also aims at helping developing countries to achieve sustainable
development and contribute to the ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that Uganda signed in 1992.
It is against this background that the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA)
undertook the initiative to collaborate with the authorities of urban centers to improve
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) management through waste composting and thereby able to
reduce the GHG emissions and subsequently participate in carbon trading under the CDM.
Garbage management is very important for every Municipal council because it is visible and
politically sensitive; inadequacies can have severe implications on the credibility of public
administration. Proper management of garbage is also vital for public health, environment and
economic development of Hoima Municipal Council and therefore deserves increased
attention.
This Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared as part and parcel the project
planning and design process for the development. The environmental Statement is to be
submitted by Hoima Municipal Council to National Environmental Management Authority
(NEMA) for review of its environmental implications and subsequent approval.
It is the policy and legal requirement in Uganda that an Environmental Impact Assessment
(EIA) be conducted for activities such as garbage composting sites that are likely to have
adverse environmental effects so that they can be eliminated or minimised while positive ones
are enhanced.
Section 23 of the National Environmental Act, Cap 153 indicates that the operator of a project
should take all reasonable measures to mitigate any undesirable effects not contemplated
1
during the implementation of the project. To undertake an EIA study, the developer is
required to submit a project brief to NEMA from which the nature of the EIA study can be
decided.
1.2.
General Location
Hoima Municipal Council has acquired a piece of land at Kibati Village, Southern ward in
Kahoora Division, Hoima Municipality which they intend to develop for solid waste
composting the urban garbage and eventually sale off the compost for improving gardens. The
area for the garbage collection is located south of Hoima Municipal where it occupies a small
low lying hill below 1180 m. The situation of the location is in a peri-urban setting where the
only major development is the BAT Hoima stores (Figure 1.1). The project site for the
proposed composite site covers 8.2 acres (3.4 Ha) and is owned by the Municipal Council.
BAT Stores
Garbage dump site
Figure 1.1: The Location of the garbage Collection Site relative to Hoima Municipal Council
2
Figure 1.2: below shows the site layout of the proposed garbage composting plant.
Figure 1.2: Site Layout of the composting plant
1.3. Purpose of the EIA
The Environmental evaluation was conducted in accordance with the Terms of Reference
(Appendix 1) in order to examine, analyze and assess the proposed project with the view to
ensuring that it will be environmentally sound and sustainable.
The purpose of the Environmental Impact Statement is to:
•
Describe the physical characteristics, scale and design of the proposed garbage
composting and recycling plant;
•
Predict the possible environmental impacts of the proposed garbage recycling plant;
•
Specify practical measures aimed at offsetting, reducing and eliminating the anticipated
adverse environmental impacts;
•
Specify measures for enhancing the area ecology and bio diversity and,
•
Examine the existing environmental character of the proposed site and the area likely to
be affected by the garbage composting and recycling plant.
1
•
1.4.
Provide the lead agency (NEMA) and the public/ stakeholders with information on the
proposed project that will assist in making a decision.
Assessment Approach/Methodology
The Environmental Impact study was carried out in accordance with the National
Environment Act CAP 153, the Environmental Impacts Assessments Regulations, 1998 and
approved Terms of Reference for the EIA (see Annex 1).
The EIA team used a number of techniques and methods at each stage of data gathering and
information synthesis. However, the techniques and methods varied from one expert to
another (social and bio-physical assessments). These techniques and methods include, but are
not limited to, literature review, stakeholder consultations, onsite observation and specialist
studies and analyses. Some of these methods are further described below.
1.4.1. Discussions with Client
In line with the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Guidelines (1997) and Regulations
(1998) for Uganda, it is the responsibility of any developer, in this case Hoima Municipal
Council intending to set up a garbage composting plant for which an EIA is required to carry
out the EIA and bear all the costs associated with its conduct.
Discussions were undertaken with the Hoima Municipal Council authorities between the 15th
and 30th of December 2010. The objective was to identify key issues, concerns and queries
related to the proposed garbage composting plant in order to propose appropriate mitigation
measures. Discussions with the technical team of the Town council were held (The Town
Clerk-Mr. Amir Nsamo, Town Planner-Mr. Muhumuza Geofrey, and Mr. Mugano Felix
Fortunate-Senior Health Inspector.) The local land use plan for Hoima Municipal council
(structure plan 2008-2018) was a basis for reference and discussions with the physical planner
were held on determination of probable future state of the environment and development.
Hoima Municipality provided details of the waste management status in the Municipal, waste
generation factors such as population distribution, economic activities, land use, area physical
and proposed development plans among others, including the lay out plans for project
components. The project schematic drawings showing project spatial relationship with the
neighborhood infrastructure, and the tenure agreements for the site on which the disposal
plant lies were also referred to.
1.4.2. Physical Inspection
During the EIA study, the Environmental Impact Assessment Team hereby referred to as
Environmental Practitioner (EP), visited the proposed site several times in order to assess the
environmental and social conditions of the site and identify any key concerns.
1.4.3. Biodiversity Inventory
Transect walks were conducted through the proposed site for development and surrounding
areas, to assess site suitability and the likely impacts as a result of the project implementation.
2
This enabled the consultants to make professional observation of the physical environment in
addition to other social and environmental attributes likely to affect or be affected by the
implementation of the project.
The fauna in the proposed landfill site and the surrounding area were sampled through the
systematic use of sweep net. Sweep netting was done randomly within the areas (Rapid
Biodiversity Assessment) that involved combing through the area, and catching every species
encountered. Weather conditions were favorable. All species of butterflies recorded were
assigned to their specific ecological preferences as described by Davenport (1996).
Qualitative methods such as direct observation and photography were used to obtain
information on the site and the neighborhood. Quantitative techniques were applied in the
assessment of the flora and fauna status of the site and surroundings. The study team used
various methods to identify key significant environmental issues and assess the potential
impacts of the proposed garbage composting plant on the bio-physical, physical and social
environment of the surrounding environs of Kibati village.
1.4.4. Stakeholders Consultations
Consultative meetings were held with local leaders, the community, stakeholders and
regulatory institutions to facilitate public and stakeholder participation in the EIA of the
proposed composting site as recommended by the National Environmental Act, CAP 153,
EIA Regulations (1998), and Conduct of Environmental Practitioners Regulations (2001) and
Guidelines for EIA in Uganda. The aim of these meetings was to identify and take note of
environmental concerns and views of all the stakeholders at an early stage so that their
proposed mitigations are incorporated in the final implementation plan of the project. It also
provided an opportunity to secure their participation in the environmental monitoring of the
proposed development.
Stakeholders were consulted to give their views on the proposed garbage composting plant.
Discussions were undertaken with stakeholders from, NEMA, Hoima Municipal Council,
Hoima District environmental office and Kibati village offices. Community consultative
meetings were held at Kibati village offices attended by all the people neighboring the
proposed garbage composting site. These meeting took place between the 15th and 30th
December 2010. See Annex 3 for list of people consulted.
1.4.5. Professional Judgment
The Environmental Impact Assessment team that comprised of environmental scientists,
Biodiversity Specialists, Socio-economists, and land use experts used its professional
judgment to interpret results from baseline studies.
1.4.6. Legislative and Policy Review
Literature was reviewed to obtain background and secondary baseline information on the
proposed project and the site, the regulatory and institutional context relevant to the project,
3
the environment, and the objectives of the CDM project and Waste management in Uganda.
All documents referred to are given in the section on references.
The team further reviewed applicable Ugandan environmental and waste management
guidelines. The review of Ugandan legislation revealed that the applicable legislation mainly
focused on issues of:
•
•
•
•
•
Environmental management
Waste management
Health and safety
Water management
Ecological concerns
1.4.7. Baseline Studies
The baseline studies were exploratory in nature and aimed at gathering sufficient information,
where practical, to enable the assessment team to assess significant environmental issues.
Transect walks through the proposed land establish the flora and fauna of the area was
undertaken by the biodiversity experts.
To capture socio-economic information, key informant interviews with Government and local
institutions and community meetings with stakeholders, as well as literature review were
carried out. The EIA team also carried out a socio-economic survey, specifically targeting
waste generators in Hoima Municipality to establish the viability of the project.
1.4.8. Documents Review
Documents that were relevant to the proposed project were reviewed and the results used to
interpret findings of the proposed project during the assessment.
4
2.0.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED COMPOSITING FACILITY
2.1.
Justification for Compositing
Methane constitutes 50% of Land Fill Gas (LFG) emissions. The major factors driving LFG
emission levels are the amount of organic material deposited in landfills, the type of landfilling practices, the extent of anaerobic decomposition, and the level of landfill methane
recovery and combustion. Composting, when managed properly limits methane and carbon
dioxide emissions only to transportation and mechanical turning. Uganda is among several
countries that signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
(UNFCC), making a commitment to combating Green House Gas (GHG) emissions. This
protocol also put in place the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to allow developed
countries invest in projects that realize reduction in GHG emissions.
Biodegradable garbage rotting in landfill produces methane gas—a ‘greenhouse gas’ that
contributes to global warming. Methane is 21 times more potent in its greenhouse effect than
carbon dioxide (from car exhaust), and landfills are the largest man-made source of methane
(37% globally). By separating and composting biodegradable materials under controlled
conditions instead of land filling them, methane production is significantly reduced and these
materials are recycled into compost, a valuable resource for fertilizing soil.
2.2.
The Proposed Compositing Operating Concept
The proposed waste composting will mainly involve segregation of waste so that only organic
waste is composted, recover recyclables and/or reusable’s and the rest land filled. The
construction phase will involve construction of a composting yard facility which will include:
a concrete pad/base, leachate drains, rain gutters and windrow roofing, supply and installation
of two rainfall harvesting tanks, construction of a leachate collection tank, construction of a
waste reception area and weigh bridge, construction of an office building, construction of a
two-stance latrine, construction of landfill cells, construction of a fence, supply and
installation of a gate, and construction of a storm water drainage system.
The operation phase will involve activities like Delivery and offloading of waste, Sorting of
waste, transfer of waste to different windrows, leachate collection and recycling, loading and
selling of manure and land filling activities.
The composting plant will utilize windrow technology. Its capacity is 70 tons, with an
estimated output of 30 tons per day of manure. The major equipment used here will include a
back hoe and forklift for turning waste and moving it to the next windrow, but waste sorting
will be undertaken manually. Up to 30 persons will be employed at the site.
Aerobic composting is a biological treatment system based on aerobic fermentation of organic
wastes using bacterial/enzymatic preparation. The objectives of aerobic composting
operations are waste volume reduction (reaching up to 50%), and compost production
(humus-like material) in a controlled and odor free environment.
5
The facility will be operational within 12 months of contract signature between the
municipality and the contractor. Below is the figure of the plant design (plan). For further
details of the plant designs see Annex 4.
Figure 2.1: Plant Plan
6
2.2.1.
Life Span of the Facility
When properly maintained, the facility equipment, including the composting drum, should be
viable for more than 25years. Care should be taken to maintain proper flow of electricity to all
equipment. Operators should not load the drum with more than the nominated weight capacity
of 5-6 tons per compartment.
2.2.2. CDM Sustainability
Project sustainability will be ensured if the by-products, particularly compost and recyclables
are marketable. The domestic solid waste generated in Hoima Municipality is characterized
with a high percentage of putrefaction able materials, high moisture content, and relatively
small percentages of plastics, paper/cardboard, and metals
These characteristics render the waste suitable to be composted. High quality compost can
therefore be produced and sold. The quality of the compost will depend mainly on the
efficiency of waste sorting to avoid the presence of impurities in the final product; hence
sorting at the source along with on-site sorting will guarantee a better product quality. In
general, farmers express interest in utilizing such compost as a source of soil amendment.
2.2.3. Demonstration Gardens
The demonstration garden will be located at the highest point of the site with an area of
approximately 3200m2 (0.32 Ha) for planting trees and other farming to help demonstrate to
trhe farmers how manure obtained from the solid waste can be utilized.
2.2.4. The Landfill Area
The landfill area at the lowest part of the site approximately 14000m2( 1.4 Ha) with trees
around to demacate the area is designed with the capacity that can serve for over 25 years if
the waste sorting and composting is practiced.
2.2.5. The Compost Plat Form
The compost plat form of an area 3960m2 has been designed to slope towards the leachate
tank to the east direction of the site. A 10m wide compacted murram working area around the
platform will be allowed. This is to ease maneuverability of the plant equipment. A 6m wide
compacted murram road leading to the platform will also be provided.
2.3.
Proposed Project Activities
The project activities include; pre-construction of the composting plant, construction and
operational phases of the proposed garbage compost plant. Each activity has potential impacts
on the environment.
2.3.1. Pre-construction
• Surveying and transfer of land title to Hoima Municipal Council ownership;
•
7
Environmental Impact Statement approval from NEMA;
•
Tender for design and construction, including power and water to the site(less than 100
meters)
2.3.2. Construction activities
• Vegetation and site clearance;
• Grading of site to get a level;
• Construction of office structures, fence and gate;
• Construction of windrow structures;
• Construction of access road to the site; and
• Construction of amenities and other infrastructure activities
Table 2.1: Proposed Construction Activities for the Composting Facility
Item of work
A
Civil Works
1. Composting Yard works
a. Aerobic Composting Yard
b. Covered waste processing Shed with compost storage and Storage for admixtures
c. Reject storage Platforms
2. Building works
a. Security building
b. Office, laboratory and vehicle parking and diesel storage
c. Empty Bags storage space, stores for consumables, tools room, panel & control room,
generator room and toilets in plant premises
d. Land fill
3. Miscellaneous Works
a. Construction of the compound wall with gates.
b. Internal roads in the compost plant
c. Drains around the yard
d. Water storage tank
e. Leachate tank
f. Slurry tank
B
8
Electro Mechanical Equipment
Item of work
Weigh bridge/centre
Electro mechanical equipment for processing.
Office vehicles
Plant Vehicles
Mechanical Augur
Electrical connections, Transformer
Plant and Yard Lighting
Backup generator
C
Others
Boundary Green Cover & green layout within the plant
Office Furniture
Laboratory equipments
Wells for water
2.4.
Type of Waste Compositing
Waste composting is the aerobic processing of biologically degradable organic wastes, such
as garden waste, to produce an end-product (compost) which can be applied to land to
improve soil structure and enrich the nutrient content of the soil. Composting is currently
carried out at individual household level and private flower and nursery operators.
Composting can offer benefits. It removes organic waste from final landfill so reducing
methane emissions and the threat of groundwater pollution. The end product can also be used
as a substitute for manure. Composting does, however, have environmental consequences.
Municipal Waste composting operations will include collection, separation, composting,
curing and storage, which shall take place at the proposed site after the approval of the
National Environment Management Authority. These activities can adversely impact the
existing ecological environment.
Composting is a controlled aerobic bio-oxidative process that converts fresh organic matter
and leads to production of carbon dioxide, water, minerals and stabilized organic matter.
Composting is the process of degradation of organic matter that converts the fresh organic
9
matter into compost. Compost is the product of the composting process that is suitable for use
in agriculture and horticulture.
Organic waste constitutes the major fraction of domestic waste in Hoima Municipal Council,
so making optional use of this resource from the wastes is a good choice for Hoima Municipal
council. Garbage compositing has the most potential to be sustainable when integrated with in
proper management systems. The major challenge lies in the need to develop a stable and
reliable market for the compost based on external demand. Compositing is interesting in that
it provides an alternative to disposal, so the cost of securing the waste flow and producing
compost should in fact be considered as one of the means to reduce disposal costs.
The industrial scale composting is done through two routes: aerobic composting and vermin
composting. Aerobic composting is undertaken in presence of air and the micro-organisms,
which survive in presence of the air and convert the organic materials. The vermincomposting is the accelerated and controlled decomposition of biodegradable waste using
deep burrowing earthworms. The vermin composting requires partially decomposed organic
waste as feedstock.
2.5.
Proposed Garbage Compositing Plant
The garbage composting plant will mainly deal with composting biodegradable wastes of
non- biodegradable will be sorted out ant the proposed site at Kibati Village. The composting
plant will be comprised of an office block, toilet structures, water tank, a gate and fence
around it, leachate tank and windrows for aerobic composting. The other facilities which will
be required will be electricity and water. The World Bank fund also caters for modern
transportation trucks and tractors. The latter will facilitate transportation of wastes from
Hoima Municipal and sorting of wastes respectively.
10
Waste Receipt at gate,
weighing and recording
Waste taken to yard and made into windrows
and cow dung slurry / bio culture addition
Turning of windrow using front-end loader. 5 rounds of turning are undertaken at
10-day intervals.
Transfer of waste, and routine
removal of castings
Grade A aerobic
Compost
Enhancement, bagging
and sale
Composted waste sieving
Grade B aerobic compost,
re-sieved and sold in bulk
Recycling
Rejects
Pit filling / Landfill
Figure 2.2: Process Flow Chart of the Proposed Aerobic Compositing Process Chart
The preferred option for compositing to be undertaken by Hoima Municipal Council is an
aerobic composting as the main composting method.
2.6.
Aerobic Composting
Under Aerobic, composting is going to be undertaken in presence of air and the
microorganisms, which survive in presence of the air and convert the organic materials. The
organics are going to be converted into compost by microorganisms, which require the
oxygen in air for their survival and growth. During this process of conversion heat is to be
released.
2.7.
Strategies used in Aerobic composting
There are two main strategies which will be used for aerobic composting. One is the in-vessel
composting technique and its variants and the second is the windrow based composting
system. The in-vessel composting system involves putting the waste into vessels, trenches or
above ground tunnels. Second, is the windrow-based system involves laying the waste in
long heaps of about 4-5 m base and 3-4 m height and length of 25 m and above. Turning the
waste using front-end loaders or using special purpose machines is done for aeration. It is this
windrow method which is going to be used in the Hoima composting plant because the in11
vessel method systems are very expensive, as they require a huge infrastructure to be set up.
The costs can be typically 2-5 times the costs of the windrow-based systems.
2.7.1. Aerobic Compositing Parameters
The various parameters, which affect the composting process and the compost quality, are
given below.
a)
Organisms
Micro-organism facilitates the process of decomposition. Bacteria, fungi, actinomycetes are
the major organisms supporting the process. These organisms thrive in waste but there has to
be a minimum start up population for quick degradation. Initial start up cultures can be
obtained from cow dung slurry or special bacterial cultures. This has to be provided till
threshold concentrations are available in the waste.
b)
Carbon/Nitrogen (C/N) Ratio
Carbon and Nitrogen are two important elements in composting process. Carbon provides the
food and nitrogen provides the raw material for building up bacterial mass. The proper
proportions of these are important for the composting process to go on smoothly. The ratio of
carbon / Nitrogen availability is an important parameter dictating successful composting.
Typically no adjustment needs to be made in municipal waste for this.
c)
Temperature
Most micro-organisms have an ideal or optimum temperature for growth. The composting
process is exothermic and the windrow temperature rises due to the process. The desired
maximum temperature is about 70°C. When the oxygen availability comes down and the
aerobic activity reduces the temperature comes down. When air is supplied the microbial
activity improves and the temperature rises again but the extent keeps coming down as
organics get consumed. When the maximum temperature comes down to between 40-45°C
typically the initial phase of composting is stopped. The changes in temperature are a good
indicator of the activity and needs to be monitored for assessing the composting process.
d)
Aeration
Aerobic micro-organisms do composting. It is necessary to ensure that oxygen is supplied
throughout the mass and aerobic activity is maintained. During the decomposition, the oxygen
gets depleted and has to be continuously replenished. This is achieved by different strategies
based on the composting method adopted. Blowing air in the waste or turning of waste are
two of the common strategies adopted.
e)
Moisture
Moisture tends to occupy free air space between the particles. Hence when moisture is high,
anaerobic condition sets in. However composting mass should have certain minimum
moisture content in it for organism to survive. The optimum moisture content is known to be
40% to 60%. Typically the initial moisture in the organics should be adequate for the whole
composting process. In case the initial moisture is low or mixed wastes are being composted
12
additional water may be required. The water should be sprinkled in such way that adequate
moisture level is maintained.
2.7.2. Aerobic Composting Processes
Aerobic composting Process consists of two stages – a biological process for decomposition
of organic matter and a mechanical process for screening the decomposed organic matter. In
this case the biological process is to be used.
2.7.2.1.
Biological Process
A mixture of mesophillic and thermophillic micro-organisms identified to be more effective
in speedy decomposition of organic waste will be used as an inoculum. The inoculum will be
prepared using the mixture of bacteria, cow-dung and water. Solid wastes collected by Hoima
Municipal council will be delivered at project site regularly. Soon on arrival, inoculum will be
sprayed on the garbage and the treated garbage will be stacked in the form of windrows.
Separate windrows will be formed for each day’s collection. These windrows will be turned
once a week for proper aeration, so that aerobic process continues uninterrupted. Progress of
composting will be monitored by measuring the inside temperature of the heap and the level
of moisture. For optimum results, the temperature has to be between 65-70 degree centigrade
and the moisture should be 25%. Composting will be completed in 25-30 days.
2.7.3. Process Steps Involved in Compositing
Composting will require a series of distinct, but inter-related operations. These include;
a) Receiving, including sorting and size reduction
b) Mixing
c) Pile and windrow formation
d) Watering
e) Active compositing and turning
f) Curing/screening
g) Storage and marketing
2.7.3.1.
Receiving, Sorting and Size Reduction
A compost site needs an area for receiving the incoming garbage loads and in the same area
the incoming garbage loads can be sorted if necessary. The waste is received at the gate in
trucks or other transport equipment. A detailed record on incoming wastes is maintained at the
gate. A time record of the staff and visitors is also there at the gate.
In cases where garbage consists of large branches of cardboard, size reduction will be
necessary. Size reduction is necessary because compositing occurs on surface. The more
surface available the more the compost bacteria can decompose the waste. There are three
technological types of waste size reduction. These are;
13
a) Hammer mill: This beats the material to reduce size,
b) Shredder: with rotating knives to cut the waste into strips, and
c) Chipper: this has rapidly whirling blades to produce small flat particles. Hand cutting is
also an option.
2.7.3.2.
Mixing
The wastes need to be mixed before the pile is constructed. Mixing can take place on a
compacted and dry natural ground or on a paved pad. Hand mixing requires a cart or wheel
barrow with shovels, rakes or pitchforks. While mechanical mixing requires a wheel loader
with smooth bucket or tractor fitted with earth-tilling device.
2.7.3.3.
Pile and Windrow construction
The construction of a compost pile is determined by the type of equipment available and the
type of organic materials. To avoid odor problems, raw materials should be moved to the
windrow within 28 hours to 48hours of arriving at the site. Other considerations include
climate- important in determining pile width and height, with cold and wet climates requiring
larger piles to insulate the materials or prevent excess rain infiltration. Studies show that
polythene bags and fabric are suitable cover materials. Below are the pile construction
techniques;
Pile Construction Techniques
One of the techniques is to discharge the materials directly into the windrow. The most
appropriate equipment for this is a tractor equipped with either horizontal or vertical rear
discharge manure spreader and a smooth bucket attachment in front.
Figure 2.3: Photo showing the typical type of tractor that will be used to discharge material in
the windrow at Kibati site garbage composting Plant
Another technique is to deposit the various materials in succession of horizontal layers
whenever the site is large enough. It is usual to start at bottom with a layer of high carbon,
14
saw dust, branches etc. the larger pieces allow the air flow from beneath. This is followed by
layers in high nitrogen materials, which are denser and wetter, alternating with more carbon.
Some times this pile technique reduces the need for turning, reducing labour and energy.
2.7.3.4.
Active compositing, Turning and Aeration
Aerobic composting needs large amount of oxygen because if the supply of oxygen is limited,
the composting process will slow down and the temperature will decrease. Turning allows
oxygen to enter the windrows. This aids the bacteria in maintaining thermophilic temperatures
inside the windrow. Turning can be manual with shovels or mechanical, using a variety of
machinery. A turning machine allows for somewhat uniform compost. However the machine
will increase the capital costs and increase the pile spacing requirements.
2.7.3.5.
Watering
Water is required for all composting processes. Water is necessary to activate the microorganisms during the active composting stage. Access to water is an important criterion for
site selection. During composting, on average 34% of the water will be discharged as water
vapour and will need to be replaced.
In areas where there is regular rainfall, piles can be watered by turning piles during rain fall.
Water can also be trapped and used to water the piles. Moisture content should be kept
between 40% and 60%. Where there is water scarcity, 40% of moisture is usually adequate.
2.7.3.6.
Curing and Screening
The curing process begins when the temperature no longer increases to 55oC after the last
turning and all other parameters are met, moisture, oxygen levels etc. at this point windrows
can be left, or they can be combined into larger piles and moved out of the active composting
area. Curing continues until temperatures fall to near ambient temperatures (within a range of
approximately 5oC) and the compost smells like rich soil.
Screening is not essential to the use of compost, but it makes the compost more uniform and
easier to use. Therefore the type of screen and target particle size usually depends on the need
of the landscapers, gardeners and farmers. Most screening is done with an inclined manual
screen, which is inexpensive and easy to build by hand. Screening works best when the
moisture content is below 45%.
2.7.3.7.
Prediction of Methane Emissions
The predicted Methane emissions at the dump site have been calculated using the IPCC Tier 1
method, in order to enable the estimation of emission reductions as required in the CDM. The
results have shown an estimated methane emission of 0.287Gg/year, which should reduce
with implementation of waste composting.
15
2.7.3.8.
Marketing
A good marketing strategy should be established in advance, when the needs of the users can
influence the type and quantity of the finished product. The marketing strategy has two
important objectives:
a) To find home for the compost so that nothing that is produced is disposed off as waste.
b) To identify and receive purchase commitments from arrange of potential customers
that can pay for the compost.
In terms of planning and management, the marketing strategy will influence:
a) The dimension of the storage surface area
b) Maintenance of quality and minimizing of potential deterioration of the compost
during curing sand storage.
c) Technical adjustments or modifications in the decomposing process to respond
dynamically to end user demands. Below are the plates indicating how the proposed
composite plant will look like.
2.7.3.9.
Economic Valuation of the Waste
Each ton of waste is estimated to cost Ug. Shs. 5,000 thus generating revenue of up to Ug.
Shs. 100,000 per day for 20 tons of manure (Just over Ug. Shs. 30,000,000 per year!). This
amount will greatly help in addressing the budget deficiencies for waste management, in
addition to fees paid by waste generators for waste collection.
16
3.0.
EXISTING WASTE MANAGEMENT SITUATION IN HOIMA TOWN
3.1.
The Project Site Situation
In Hoima Municipal Council solid wastes are generated daily by households, commercial
businesses, industries, institutions, medical clinics and hospitals, construction sites, natural
plant leaf fall and grass cutting, and offices. There are also cases where solid wastes are
generated on special occasions such as churches and parties. In general, 60-80% of the total
wastes generated in Hoima town are domestic refuse largely consisting of kitchen wastes. Out
of this garbage, there are different types of special wastes that will need special attention to
prevent adverse environmental impacts and effect, resulting from the composting process.
These include medical wastes from hospitals and clinics, hazardous wastes such as batteries,
used tyres, industrial waste, used car oil and plastics like ”buvera” (plastic packaging bags).
Waste is not a uniform material in terms of its constituents: the main distinguishing feature
relates to the product from which it is derived. It is often perceived as valueless and therefore
unwanted. Human activities create waste and it is the way these wastes are handled, stored,
collected or disposed which pose risks to the environment and the public health.
Table 3.1: Hoima Municipal Council services Provision- 2010
Total Number of Households
Kahoora-7080
Bunjumbura-3520
Busiisi-4440
Mparo-4229
No of Households connected to Electricity
Kahoora-4,248
Bujumbura-401
Busiisi-1332
Mparo-1,057
No of Households connected to Water
Kahoora-2,438
Bujumbura-488
Busiisi-130
Mparo-195
17
3.2.
Current Practice of Waste Collection and Disposal
A number of action points can be identified with waste management in general and
specifically at the present dumping site which would pose immediate issues for management
of the accumulation: i.
Not all the refuse generated in town is collected (collects between 10-15%) only
within the central business district.
ii.
There are currently only 12 skips and refuse is collected twice a week. There are
sixteen litterbins which are located along 5 streets. The collection is privately done
and there are 22 workers.
iii. Two trucks (one not operational) Dumper Lorry LG 0136-10 ( only one operational)
Jiefang LG0139-10
iv. The garbage at the present time is not sorted
v.
It consists of a large quantity of non-biodegradable wastes including plastic bags
vi. Many hazardous wastes including needles and syringes from medical facilities are
littered amongst the other garbage.
vii. Large heaps of garbage are now dumped on the access road and not delivered onto the
dumpsite. The dumping site itself has not been maintained and this makes it difficult
to be accessed and is worsened by access road especially during the rainy seasons
when trucks get stuck.
viii. A lot of the plastic bags are subsequently dispersed from the dump site to other
surrounding areas presumably largely through wind and rain action or moved by
people.
ix. Garbage heaps are not protected or contained which means they can be easily moved
around by the factors in (v) above.
x.
The Only form of treatment that was observed for the garbage is burning (Figures 3.1
-3.5) which results into masses of smoke into the environment and atmosphere.
xi. The smoke from the burning of the mixed garbage could pose potential health risks to
both humans and wildlife.
xii. With the scattered garbage the risk of fire escaping beyond the dump site to destroy
neighboring areas’ vegetation is real and could be enhanced particularly in the dry
seasons.
xiii. To the south side of the dump site it is very likely that leaching of all sorts of
chemicals organic and inorganic
18
xiv. In Figure 3.4 it is observed that the dump site is presently freely used for foraging by
livestock. This could have resultant negative impacts on the stock with real
implications to humans who will consume products from them.
Figure 3.1: Photo showing piles of unsorted garbage in the present day dump situation
Figure 3.2: Photo showing fire being used to reduce the piles of the garbage
Figure 3.3: Photo showing current state of garbage at site
19
Figure 3.4: Photo showing the garbage dump area being used for grazing Livestock
Figure 3.5: Photo showing masses of smoke released into the atmosphere from burning the
Garbage
3.2.1. Waste Composition
The waste composition in Hoima Municipal Council is mainly general and domestic waste
consisting of garbage, rubbish and agricultural wastes. The average waste composition from
domestic sources is as follows:
Table 3.2: Average Waste Composition
Waste Generated (per year, tons)
25,200 (2010)
Waste Collected(per year, tons)
8,640
20
Area Covered( approximately 5%) of the The Central Business District
entire Municipality
Vegetable matter
99%
Paper
0.6%
Plastic &Polythene Paper
0.4%
Textile
Other
0.3%
1.4%
21
Hoima Municipal Council is responsible for the collection of solid waste. The following are
what pertains to current waste management in Hoima Municipal Council. Solid waste
generated per day in Hoima Municipal Council is 170 tons Per day, however refuse collected
per day 10x 5= 50 tons per day) 20 skips x 5 tones =100.It was noted and observed during the
field work that waste is not sorted and graded. Hoima Municipal Council has 20 refuse skips
sited randomly in various locations of the Municipal Council. These facilities are provided by
the Municipal Council.
The rate of waste generation from Hoima Municipal Council households is difficult to
estimate since less than 10% of waste is collected from residential areas. With the poor waste
generation figures, the gross waste generation rates for Hoima can only be estimated taking
into consideration the rural nature of the Municipal. The waste generation rates for low
income countries are 0.2-0.6 kg/capita/day while Lira and Kampala have 0.3 and 0.5
kg/capita/day respectively. An estimate for Hoima is therefore put at 0.2 kg/capita/day.
3.2.2. Collection of Wastes
The leachate is neither pre-heated nor drained. This enhances massive fly breeding. The site is
not fenced rendering it open to unauthorized persons and animals. Solid waste collection in
Hoima is done by use of temporary dustbins which are provided by business proprietors. The
solid waste from dustbins is poured on to wheel burrows and pushed up to the collection
centres.
At household level, the current solid waste disposal practices make waste recycling and reuse
extremely unattractive as the solid waste is largely unsorted. The disposal of wastes has
further been exacerbated by the fact that a greater proportion of waste is disposed in polythene
bags which tend to lock up waste making decomposition slow and sometimes impossible. The
mixing of decomposable wastes with the non-biodegradable wastes makes it difficult to
utilize the decomposable organic component for making organic manure.
3.2.3. Poor Quality Composting Materials
Sorted organic waste could be mixed with sorted polythene & plastics at the landfill if there
are proper mechanisms of waste separation at the landfill. This will reduce the quality of
compost manure produced and could fail the composting project.
Much as waste from the Municipal to the landfill will be inspected and re-sorted to fully
isolate only organic waste for composting and polythene for burning, this exercise should not
be encouraged to continue at the landfill. All waste categories must be sorted from homes and
at the skips/collection centres in Municipal. Sorting of waste at the landfill is tedious,
ineffective and expensive. If this is allowed to continue, the composting project could fail due
the poor quality of compost manure that will be produced and lack of funds to sustain it.
3.2.4. Mixing of Solid Waste and Liquid Waste
Residents are likely to mix solid waste and liquid waste while sorting and collecting waste at
their homes and at the collection centre. Mixing organic solid waste with liquid waste may not
be harmful but it will increase the weight of the waste. Mixing liquid waste with polythene
22
and plastics will slow the rate of burning; besides making the polyethene dirty and difficult to
recycling.
3.2.5. Mixing Solid Waste with Human Excreta
The EIA findings discovered that some people choose to excrete in polythene bags and damp
their waste into skips. This could spark off sanitation related diseases besides giving the waste
a terrible smell and making it difficult for human handling by the waste collection team.
Unless the residents are well informed of their obligations as far as waste sorting and the new
management criteria of waste is concerned, mixed waste will prevail in the skips. This will
definitely curtail the progress of the proposed project.
3.2.6. Mixing of Medical Waste with Municipal Waste
Some medical centres and clinics don’t have a proper system of handling medical waste.
Waste such as syringes, needles, foetuses, placentas have always found their way into skips. If
this persists, the heath and lives of waste management staff will be in danger.
3.2.7.
Dumping of Waste outside Skips and Waste Accumulation at Collection Centres
A majority of residents misuse these skips. Waste is never damped into the skips but rather
besides them. This makes waste collection expensive, as another force has to be employed to
load the waste into skips. A survey around all the collection centres in both northern and
industrial division portrayed the same state affairs. This must not continue in the new waste
management system because it will encourage waste mixing, which will be expensive and had
to handle at a later stage. Skips must not be allowed to overflow and waste to accumulate. If
this continues, the composting project will not be feasible.
3.2.8. Dumping of Hot Ash and Burning of Waste in Skips
In some instances, residents have attempted to burn the waste in skips. Some pour hot ash into
skips, which ends up setting the waste on fire. Burning waste in skips destroys the skip
material and makes waste collection difficult especially when it’s hot. This should not
continue.
3.2.9. Scattering of Waste at Residences and in Transit to the Skips
Residents have a tendency of establishing home-based rubbish pits that they later fail to
manage. This should not be encouraged. Residents tend to pour waste in lanes on transit to the
skips. This usually happens at night. Such acts are a threat to the health of the people and also
to the composting project. It should not be tolerated at all.
3.2.10. Contamination of Reusable Waste like Banana Peelings
The idea of re-selling banana peeling to cattle and animal keepers should be encouraged.
However, care must be taken to ensure that such waste is not contaminated with toxic
chemicals and meat extracts. Cows/goats don’t eat meat and should be protected from being
23
exposed to contaminated foods. Chemicals such as DDT, Lead and others should not mix with
such foods because this is a threat to animals and human beings.
3.2.11. Collection of Waste in Spoilt/Weak Skips
Several skips observed in the divisions are no longer fit for waste collection. A majority of
them lack handles and are rusty, perforated with holes. Such skips if left at collection centres
will increase costs of waste collection, since waste will always have to be transferred into
normal skips. All spoilt kips must not be left at collection centres. All spoilt skips must be
repaired or sold off to steel rolling mills for recycling. Only strong skips must be fabricated.
24
4.0.
ENVIRONMENTAL BASELINE CONDITIONS
4.1.
Socio-Economic
4.1.1. Administrative Units
Hoima Municipality comprises of 4 divisions namely: Mparo (with 4 wards and 45 cells),
Kahoora (4wards and 33 cells), Bujumbura Division (3 wards and 30 cells) and Busiisi (4
wards and 32 cells).The current population is about 80,000.
4.1.2. Population
The population is predominantly female than male. Many families have rented for their wives
and children to live in town, in order to access relatively better social and economic facilities
available in town. The youths also constitute a big part of the population. Due to scramble for
accommodation, slums are gradually emerging especially in Kiryatete, Isaka lower and
Kiganda in central and Northern wards respectively. Such homes are headed by female
generally. The town population has however continued to increase due to emigrations from
people from other districts mainly due to the discovery of oil.
Hoima’s population pyramid is broad based, which is a characteristic of populations with high
levels of fertility. The impact of rapid population growth on social and economic development
in Hoima District, include high birth rates amongst the youthful population. 47% of the
population is under the age of 15 years. This has created a high dependency ratio and burden
on the working population, health risks, and the productive and reproductive health status.
The District vision of achieving a healthy society can only be achieved through investment in
entire infrastructure for health, education, housing, food and energy to maintain the current
and future standard of living for its people.
4.1.3. Infrastructure
The proposed compost site is accessed by a gravel road liking Kiryatete, Busisi, Bulera and
Kijungu, Via British American Tobacco warehouses at Kibati. This gravel road is motorable
with a road width of about 4.5metres. It is in a useable condition although there is need to
improve on the access road to the site to at least 10 meters for a distance of 500 meters to the
garbage site. This crucial in order to accommodate the big trucks and trackers which are going
to be used in transporting garbage.
25
Figure 4.1: Photo showing British American Tobacco Warehouse along the main road to the
Site
Figure 4.2: Photo showing Access road to the garbage site
The project area is well serviced by several mobile telecom links such as MTN, Air Uganda,
UTL and Warid.
There is piped water supply in the proposed project area, though there is need to connect to
the site for a distance of about 500m
26
4.1.4. Waste Disposal Methods Used
The wastes are transported to landfills and dumped there to rot with no further management.
There are several long standing garbage skips because of lack of vehicles and resources to
effectively manage wastes by Hoima Municipal Council.
The most common way of disposing of human excreta is by use of pit latrines. There are no
water borne toilets because the area is not joined to the water system and sewer system.
Figure 4.3: Photo showing unsorted waste at the proposed site-Katungo
4.1.5. Land Ownership
The land is owned by Hoima Municipal Council covering approximately 8 acres have been
acquired.
4.1.6. Settlement Pattern
The settlements are sparse close to the proposed project area. The number of houses nearest to
the site is about 600m. BAT warehouses are the nearest commercial premise as one access the
site from the western side.
27
Figure 4.4: Photo showing the nearest settlements to the site
4.2.
Bio-Physical
4.2.1. Topography
The topography of the site can be described as gently sloping with slopes approximately 5 %
or less. The ground elevation varies of the site is 1152 m above mean sea level.
The natural landscape in the area surrounding the project area is largely modified for
settlement, cultivations and other forms of land use including garbage disposal. To the south
side of the project area is a natural water course that extends northwards towards Hoima
Municipal. The portion of the natural water course immediately to the south side of the
project area had a large open water pond that flowed out in the surviving stand of natural
vegetation as a small stream. Figure 4.5 shows the appearance of the water in this area
suggesting high levels of suspended solids perhaps due to siltation in the water.
Figure 4.5: Showing showing the general Topography of the area
28
Figure 4.6: Figure Showing Topography
Fringing the valley bottom that carries wetland and streams the natural vegetation cover
although quite depleted, survives in some places preserving a cover that will be useful as a
buffer to hold silt and other solids that could end up in and clogging the wetland areas in
valley bottoms.
Figures 4.2-4.5 show different views in the project area. The garbage disposal site is not being
newly acquired but has been used for the same purpose for 7 years The project site sits on an
area of 8 acres , a fairly good sized property on which garbage could be properly and carefully
managed. The fact that such an area exists, has meant that the management of garbage in
Hoima Municipal has been consolidated in one location removing the hazards of garbage
accumulation in other parts of the Municipal coverage
It is evident from Figures 4.2-4.5 that although the garbage management is consolidated in the
one location, its management to date is poor and could be greatly improved.
29
Figure 4.7: Photo showing a natural water boby, stream and surrounding wetland vegetation at
a distance of 300metres from the proposed site
4.2.2. Climate and Rainfall Patterns
Hoima experiences two distinct rain seasons. The shorter and lighter rains fall from March to
May while heavier and longer rains are experienced from August to November.
4.2.3. Soil Erosion
Since the proposed site is on a gentle slope, it was noted that the site is likely to have
minimum soil erosion during construction phase as a result of clearing existing vegetation.
Soil erosion could be minimized by carrying out construction during the months of the year in
addition to proper landscaping after construction
4.2.4. Biological Environment Statement
The general environment for the project area is largely a modified wooded bush land. Most of
natural vegetation is converted but the neighboring areas have vegetation remnants which
point to the potential original vegetation for the area. The vegetation today comprises of a
variety of grasses including Digitaria ciliaris, Hyparrhenia variabilis, Panicum maximum,
Pennisetum unisetum, Eleusine coracana, Eragrostis tenuifolia, Imperata cylindrical,
Pennisetum unisetum. The woody vegetation comprised of a number of trees and shrubs
including Vernonia amygdalina, Combretum collinum, Albizia grandibracteata, Erythrina
abyssinica, Solanum incanum, Indigofera arrecta, Ricinus communis Lantana camara,
Acacia polyacantha, Mimosa pigra, Acacia polyacantha, Eucalyptus sp, Acacia hockii,
Annona senegalensis, Lantana trifolia, Albizia coriaria, Grewia similis, Rhus natalensis,
Acacia polyacantha, Acacia xanthophloea, Ficus ovate, and Ricinus communis among others.
Overall no plant species of conservation concern were recorded on the project area.
Observations and surveys were also conducted to record one group of invertebrates, birds and
mammals seen, heard or evidence of which were found on the project area.
4.2.5. Butterfly
A total of 37 butterfly species were recorded in the proposed landfill site and the surrounding
areas. No species of conservation concern (IUCN Red Listed species) was recorded in the
study site. A number of habitat specific species were present for example seven (7) forest
specialists were recorded especially in the surrounding area along the stream. According the
30
Davenport (1996), such species tend to have restricted range and therefore very susceptible to
habitat loss and degradation.
Table 4.1: Forest dependent species
Species
Acraea sotikensis
Anthene larydas
Ariadne enotrea
Hypolycaena hatita
Leptosia nupta
Neptis strigata
Papilio lormieri
Family
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Pieridae
Nymphalidae
Papilionidae
Ecotype
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
The forest dependants were recorded from the fairly dense vegetation along the stream located
below the landfill site. Papilio lormieri was however recorded from the vegetation right at the
edge of the fence.
•
According to the IUCN criteria, there were no species of conservation concern recorded.
Most of the species are common open country, migrant species or widespread species.
•
Because of the mixed nature of the habitats in the areas surrounding the landfill site,
variable effects may be experienced in the different parts. Vegetation cutting /trampling
especially through the thicketed areas that are preferred feeding and breeding areas for the
butterflies. Poor quality vegetation supports a lower density of species. Loss of vegetation
cover reduces the suitability of any habitat to support species peculiar to them.
•
Also of concern is the stream located just below the site of the landfill. This may be
susceptible to effects of leachate from the degradable wastes at the landfill, which in turn
may affect the vegetation on which different fauna including the butterflies depend.
Table 4.2: Butterfly Species List
Species
Acraea Alicia
Acraea eponina
Acraea sotikensis
Amauris tartarea
Anthene larydas
Ariadne enotrea
Axiocerces harpax
Belenois aurota
Belenois creona
Bicyclus vulgaris
Cacyreus lingeus
Charaxes varanes
Danaus chrysippus
31
Family
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Pieridae
Pieridae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Ecotype
W
W
F
f.
F
F
W
M
M
W
f.
W
M
Eretis umbra
Eurema hecabe
Eurema regularis
Graphium policenes
Henotesia perspicua
Hypolycaena hatita
Junonia oenone
Junonia Sophia
Junonia stygia
Junonia terea
Lampides boeticus
Leptosia nupta
Leptotes pirithous
Neptis saclava
Neptis strigata
Papilio bromius
Papilio lormieri
Phalanta eurytis
Phalanta phalanta
Tirumala petiverana
Ypthima albida
Ypthima asterope
Zizeeria knysna
Hesperiidae
Pieridae
Pieridae
Papilionidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
Pieridae
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Papilionidae
Papilionidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Nymphalidae
Lycaenidae
O
M
W
f.
O
F
W
W
f.
W
M
F
M
W
F
f.
F
M
M
M
f.
O
W
4.2.6. Birds and Mammals
Birds and mammals are the most extensively used taxa in biodiversity assessments, largely
because they are well known taxonomically, and for birds are relatively easy to identify, and
generate large amounts of data through simple, standard methods.
The methods used involved general searches for species or their signs in the project area.
These aimed at accumulating species lists for presence with some indication of relative
abundance for the different species found.
Birds are obviously easier to inventory since they are active during the day, are vocal and will
easily be observed flying over or foraging in study areas. Mammals on the other hand would
require more involving approaches for complete inventories. For the mammals’ surveys for
this report, searches were done on their signs including their spoors and scats. In addition
local people were interviewed for information on mammals that still ranged in the area.
Signs for fur species of mammals (Egyptian mongoose, Slender Mongoose, Bunyoro Rabbit
and Side Striped Jackal) were recorded in the project area. We found no evidence or reason to
suggest that the project area may be an important area for the survival of any mammal species
of conservation concern.
It may be the case that several species could visit the area to scavenge on the organic refuse
deposited in the dump, which might make the area key component of their range.
32
A total of 45 species of birds were recorded (Table 4.3), the names of birds follow Carswell et
al (2005). These comprised of three species of birds of prey (African Harrier Hawk
Polyboroides typus, Shikra Accipiter badius and Lizard Buzzard Kaupifalco
monogrammicus). Birds of prey are particularly important in ecosystems since their presence
will mirror the presence of other species that comprise their prey.
Table 4.3: Species of birds recorded in the project area
Briton
number
B64
B186
B206
B226
B384
B608
B610
B634
B640
B684
B718
B724
B806
B820
B830
B972
B1120
B1132
B1148
B1156
B1208
B1258
B1260
B1440
B1464
B1470
B1502
B1743
B1751
33
Common name
Marabou Stork Leptoptilos crumeniferus
African Harrier Hawk Polyboroides typus
Shikra Accipiter badius
Lizard
Buzzard
Kaupifalco
monogrammicus
Spotted Crake Porzana porzana
Tambourine Dove Turtur tympanistria
Blue-spotted Wood Dove Turtur afer
Red-eyed Dove Streptopelia semitorquata
Ring-necked Dove Streptopelia capicola
Eastern Grey Plantain Eater Crinifer
zonurus
Diederik Cuckoo Chrysococcyx caprius
White-browed
Coucal
Centropus
superciliosus
African Palm Swift Cypsiurus parvus
Little Swift Apus affinis
Speckled Mousebird Colius striatus
Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird Pogoniulus
bilineatus
White-headed Saw-wing Psalidoprocne
albiceps
Mosque Swallow Hirundo senegalensis
Angola Swallow Hirundo angolensis
Yellow Wagtail Motacilla flava
Little Greenbul Andropadus virens
Common Bulbul Pycnonotus barbatus
Western Nicator Nicator chloris
Winding Cisticola Cisticola galactotes
Tawny-flanked Prinia Prinia subflava
White-chinned Prinia Prinia leucopogon
Grey-backed Camaroptera Camaroptera
brachyuran
Scarlet-chested
Sunbird
Chalcomitra
senegalensis
Bronze Sunbird Nectarinia kilimensis
Habitat
W
F
F
Threat
F
W
F
F
F
F
F
F
W
W
F
F
F
W
fW
F
F
F
F
R-RR
Briton
number
B1789
B1795
B1799
B1845
B1849
B1865
B1965
B2015
B2075
B2083
B2089
B2137
B2149
B2151
B2173
B2175
Common name
Variable Sunbird Cinnyris venusta
Copper Sunbird Cinnyris cuprea
Yellow White-eye Zosterops senegalensis
Brown-crowned Tchagra Tchagra australis
Black-crowned Tchagra Tchagra senegala
Tropical Boubou Laniarius aethiopicus
Grey-headed Sparrow Passer griseus
Lesser
Masked
Weaver
Ploceus
intermedius
Yellow-mantled Widowbird Euplectus
macrourus
Grosbeak Weaver Amblyospiza albifrons
Grey-headed
Negrofinch
Nigrita
canicapilla
African Firefinch Lagonosticta rubricata
Common Waxbill Estrilda astrild
Black-crowned Waxbill Estrilda nonnula
Bronze Mannikin Lonchura cucullata
Black and White Mannikin Lonchura
bicolor
Habitat
F
fW
F
Threat
F
fWW
F
W
F
F
The diversity and relative abundance of the birds of prey was however low, but nevertheless
could still be taken to indicate several other species that form the prey base for these species.
The majority of the other birds recorded are of common and fairly widely occurring species.
Of those recorded 31 species (Table 4.4) have particular habitat preferences with the majority
requiring the presence of a fair amount of woody vegetation for their survival.
Table 4.4: Summary of habitat preferences for species of birds recorded
Habitat preference
Numbers
f (resident in and near forests)
22
fW (resident in and near forests + always resident in or near water)
2
fWW(resident in and near forests + always resident in or near water or
Wetlands)
1
W (always resident in or near water)
6
Grand Total
31
None of the species recorded is listed by IUCN as of particular conservation concern. One
species however (the White-headed Saw-wing Psalidoprocne albiceps) has been listed as a
species of Regional responsibility by Benun & Njoroge (1997). For this species, the East
African region is considered important for their survival.
34
4.2.7. Air Quality/Pollution
Due to the absence of sources of air pollution, the monitored ambient concentration of sulphur
dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and carbon monoxide (CO) are extremely low. Natural
sources of all of these gases exist, but are most often associated with the combustion of fossil
fuels, NO2 in motor vehicles and SO2 and CO by industries which are largely absent in the
Kaiso-Tonya Valley. WHO annual guideline for SO2 is 50µg/m3 and for NO2 it is 40µg/m3
(Tullow Uganda Operations PTY EIS study, 2009).
Ambient air quality was not monitored, as there are no regulations on air pollution control in
Uganda. NEMA has a draft regulation that is pending for final ratification of the concerned
authority. No reliable information on air quality could be obtained for the project area.
However, it is evident that traffic on the existing gravel road causes dust problems which both
hamper crop and vegetation growth and health problems (respiratory diseases) for people
living along the road. Pollutants greatly contribute to the greenhouse effect, leading to
increased global atmospheric temperatures. Emission of greenhouses gases occurs as a result
of the following:
•
Human activities that have influence on atmospheric concentration of water vapour;
•
Domestic wastes and agricultural activities that result in the release of methane gas
(CH4) into the atmosphere;
•
Chloro-fluoro-carbons (CFCs) mainly emitted from refrigerators, freezers and aerosols
that are CFC based; and
•
Combustion of fossil fuels and bushes which emit nitrous oxide (N2O).
Air pollution can be defined as “presence in the atmosphere of contaminants in such a
quantity and duration as to be harmful to human and animal health, plant life and materials”.
The effects of air pollutants on the environment are dependent on their concentration in the
atmosphere in addition to their physical and chemical characteristics. The concentration levels
are in turn dependent on the emission rates, and atmospheric conditions such as wind speed,
atmospheric stability and other atmospheric processes such as chemical and photo-chemical
reactions and deposition rates.
For a fully suspended non-reactive pollutant, the emission strength, wind speed and
atmospheric stability are the most important factors that determine its atmospheric
concentration. The concentration decreases with distance approximately in accordance with
the Gaussian diffusion process. However for chemically or photo-chemically active
pollutants, the concentration must be allowed to decay as a function of the rate of reaction
which can generally be regarded as constant over the distance where atmospheric conditions
remain unchanged.
Assessment of air pollution poses a problem where the surface is uneven. The problem
becomes more complex when the source of pollution is very far from the point of wind
measurement. However, in a situation where the intervening distance between point of
measurement and pollution source is characterized by fairly flat terrain and few structures, the
wind measurement may be a fairly good representation of the wind field.
35
Regarding atmospheric stability, diurnal variation of the surface based inversions associated
with radiative surface cooling at night and thermal convection after sunrise can result in high
concentration levels of pollutants in the early morning periods.
Atmospheric Processes Affecting Air Pollution
• Wind field
Wind speed determines the rate of transportation of air pollutants downwind from the source
and at the same time participates in their dispersion process. Wind direction on the other hand
determines the direction of pollution transportation and thereby the areas of its impact.
Atmospheric stability
Atmospheric stability determines the lateral and vertical dispersion of air pollutants. It is a
function of vertical thermal structure and wind speed. An existing temperature inversion can
seriously limit the vertical dispersion resulting in high pollutant concentrations.
Dry deposition
The particulate pollutants with large diameters will settle to the ground with a constant
settling velocity determined by their sizes:
Wet deposition
Precipitation scavenging of air pollutants can be effective in cleaning the atmosphere while at
the same time can result in serious impacts on both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems through
acidification of soil, surface water, injury to plant tissue and corrosion of materials.
Long Term Air Pollution Estimates
The long term impacts of air pollution can be assessed by use of climatology of the
meteorological parameters that influence the long term atmospheric concentrations, the main
ones being the wind field and atmospheric stability.
Wind Field in the project Area of Influence
The nearest station to the proposed garbage compositing facility site is Hoima meteorological
station. This wind regime can be taken to be representative of the study area. Wind analysis
for Hoima indicates that winds are stronger in the afternoon as can be seen from Table 4.5
36
Table 4.5: Monthly average wind speed at Hoima Meteorological Station
Wind speed in knots
Month
0600 GMT
1200 GMT
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Ave
7
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
7
6
7
7
12
13
12
11
12
13
12
11
11
10
10
11
11
The winds at Hoima Meteorological Station are mainly southerlies throughout the year.
4.2.8. Soil
The soils of the area are predominantly clay loams. The soil profiles studied in different
sections have revealed that the lateritic soil is remarkably uniform in terms of its geotechnical
behavior. It has uniform grain size distribution, close texture with high degree of bonding
resistant to the rain water saturation. (Soils of Uganda, Langlands, 1974)
4.2.9. Geology
The geology of the area is of Precambrian basement complex consisting of undifferentiated
gneisses underlies the project site, which comprises biotitic gneisses, granite gneisses, and
quartzite. These are rocks that range from sandy silts to sandy clays. The site is intersected
locally by rocks of Bunyoro-Kioga series, which include argillites, shale and sandstone. The
peneplain area is characterized by the presence of several plateaus which are extensively
cultivated and occur at different elevations.
4.2.10. Hydrology
Ground water aquifers exist in a number of locations, the hydrology of which is undoubtedly
influenced by a number of environmental conditions including geology and rainfall. Ground
water is harnessed in many areas, largely to provide for water needs of local communities.
Evidence from many boreholes and shallow (DWRM, 2008) wells indicate relatively high
water table conditions in many places. Such conditions imply high sensitivity of the water
resources to the compost facility development activities, which could lead to serious problems
of pollution of the shallow aquifers, if not well handled.
37
5.0.
LEGAL INSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAME WORK
5.1.
World Bank Environmental Social Safeguard Policy Frameworks
The World Bank as a funding agency has policies, procedures and guidelines that detail the
way in which environmental assessment is to be carried out if any of the triggers below are
invoked. The key environmental triggers are:
•
•
•
•
•
Land acquisition that requires the involuntary resettlement of people;
Projects in protected areas;
Projects with impacts on the habitats of protected and threatened species;
Projects where there are indigenous people. The key issue here is that no minority people
are to be unfairly discriminated against, either due to loss of access to existing resources
or to be unfairly excluded from project benefits;
Projects that impact cultural heritage
The World Bank requires Environmental Assessment (EA) of projects proposed for
Bank financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, so
as to improve decision-making. This study is therefore in line with the Bank’s requirements.
A number of activities will be out of the character of the surrounding and will include land
clearing which will involve bush and tree cutting, socio- economic aspects, soil exposure and
ecological disturbance. It’s for this reason that the World Bank environmental and Social Safe
guard policies for environmental assessment have been adhered to.
The EIA on this Hoima CDM site project is therefore based on developments that is likely to
or will have significant negative impacts on the environment so that they can be eliminated or
mitigated during and after implementation.
An overview of the relevant World Bank Safeguard Policies, potentially including
Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP 4.04), Involuntary Resettlement
(OP 4.12), and Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11) has been carried out. Other reviews of
international protocols and instruments regarding carbon emissions reductions, rights of local
communities, human rights, etc. that impinge on the carbon component of the management
plan have also been done.
5.1.1. World Bank Safeguard Policy Involuntary Resettlement (OP/BP) 4.12
The resettlement action plan aims at involving public in consultations and creating awareness
so as to reduce the costs of RAP implementation for the sponsor. It also requires that land
acquisition, payment of compensation on affected assets, and resettlements to take place
before the onset of the project.
The World Bank involuntary Resettlement Operation Policy Framework 4.12 has been taken
into account as they are financiers of the compositing plant. The World Bank’s requirements
regarding involuntary resettlement are detailed in Operation Policy Framework 4.12. The
Directive outlines the following principles:
•
38
Acquisition of land and other assets, and resettlement of people should be minimized as
•
much as possible by identifying possible alternative project designs, and appropriate
economic, operational and engineering solutions that have the least impact on people in
the project area.
The populations affected by the project are defined as those who may stand to the
consequences of the project, all or part of their physical and non-physical assets, homes,
homesteads, productive lands, commercial properties, tenancy, income opportunities,
social and cultural activities and relationships, and other losses that are identified during
the process of resettlement planning.
The proposed site for the Compositing site was found to have no encumbrance and the
ownership is under Hoima Municipal Council. Therefore there will not be any resettlement at
the site or nearby.
5.1.2.
Environmental Assessment Policy-(OP 4.01)
The Bank policy requires environmental assessment (EA) of projects proposed for Bank
financing to help ensure that they are environmentally sound and sustainable, and thus to
improve decision making. This policy examines the potential environmental risks and benefits
associated with Bank financed investments, supports integration of environmental and social
aspects of investments into the decision making process, specifies consultation of the affected
people, involve NGOs, and provide opportunities for their participation in the environmental
assessment aspects.
The principles of this policy are;
• Environmental Assessment (EA) is required by Bank-financed investments;
• The Borrower is responsible for carrying out the EA;
• The Bank advises the Borrower on Bank’s EA requirements; and
• The Bank does not finance activities that will contravene national legislation or relevant
international environmental agreements identified during EA.
The World Bank favors preventive measures over mitigation or compensatory measures,
whenever feasible. This policy aims at identifying ways of improving project selection, siting,
planning, design, and implementation by preventing, minimizing, mitigating, or compensating
for adverse environmental impacts and enhancing positive impacts; and includes the process
of mitigating and managing adverse environmental impacts throughout project
implementation.
The EIS has taken all measures to prevent, avoid or mitigate any likely impacts as a result of
constructing and operating the compositing site at Kibati Village.
5.1.3. World Bank Safeguard Policy on Physical Cultural Resources (OP/BP) 4.11
The World Bank safeguard policy OP/BP 4.11on physical cultural resources recognize that
cultural resources are important as source of valuable historical and scientific information, as
assets for economic and social development and as ancestral parts of people’s authentic
identity and practices. The policy aims at involves or mitigating adverse impacts on cultural
resources for development projects that the World Bank finances. In this regard, the policy
requires the preparation of PCRs management plan which will be undertaken.
39
The assessment did not encounter any significant cultural resources within the site.
5.1.4. Natural Habitats (OP 4.04)
The conservation of natural habitats, like other measures that protect and enhance the
environment, is essential for long term sustainable development. The Bank therefore supports
the protection, maintenance, and rehabilitation of natural habitats. Natural Habitats are land
and water areas where (i) the ecosystems biological communities are formed largely by native
plant and animal species, and (ii) human activity has not essentially modified the areas
primary ecological functions. All natural habitats have important biological, social, economic
and existence value. Important habitats may occur in tropical humid, dry and cloud forest;
temperate and boreal forest;
Therefore the Natural Habitats policy may be triggered in certain cases because the
investments proposed under this project (component 1.4.2) may have largely through ancillary
activities potential adverse impacts on Wetland, rivers and forest which contribute to the
sustainability of critical ecosystems. Therefore, this OP requires that any activities funded
under the World Bank that adversely impacts these ecosystems are successfully mitigated so
that the balance of the ecosystems are enhanced or maintained. This would require that the
implementing agencies and their partners design appropriate conservation and mitigation
measures to remove or reduce adverse impacts on these ecosystems or their functions,
keeping such impacts within socially defined limits of acceptable change. Specific measures
may depend on the ecological characteristics of the affected ecosystem.
The proposed compositing site will not have any adverse effect on the natural habitat as the
site has modified vegetation as a result of cultivation for a long time. The site is not close to
any sensitive ecological system.
5.2.
Uganda Environmental Legislation
The main policy statement on the environment for Uganda is the National Environment
Management Policy (1994). The above policy was developed through an extremely
consultative process in 1994 and its overall objective is to achieve sound sustainable
development, by reconciling economic development and conservation of resources. The
NEMP calls for concerted effort by all Ugandans, the various government and private sector
structures both at national and local levels, to adopt policies and approaches that integrate
environmental concerns into the economic, social and development plans, policies and
programs into their sectors.
The NEMP (1994) is legalised by the National Environment Act Cap 153. This Act is a
framework law aimed at laying down the basic legal provisions for managing the environment
in Uganda. The National Environment Management Policy (1994) is further justified by a
number of sectoral policies and laws on waste management, wildlife, forestry, water, land,
energy and minerals management. These sectoral laws address the main policy goals on
environmental management in Uganda including the integration of environmental
considerations into all sectoral policies, plans and programs. In addition, these laws highlight
the need for all projects with potentially damaging effects on the environment to be preceded
40
by an environmental impact assessment (EIA) prior to their implementation. Further emphasis
is also laid on the necessity for users and polluters of the environment to pay for the use or
pollution of the environment, which is explicitly indicated in the ‘Polluter Pays Principle’.
The overall policy goal of the National Environmental Policy is sustainable development
which conserves environment to meet the needs of the present and future generations.
There are several legislations that deal with environmental management in Uganda both in
general and specific terms, the most important of which is the Constitution of the Republic of
Uganda (1995). The specific legislations that deal with environmental assessments are the
National Environmental Act, Cap 153 and its subsidiary, the Environmental Impact
Assessment Regulations (1998). In this section, the various laws and regulations that are
designed to assist in management of environment in Uganda are briefly reviewed and
described below.
5.2.1. The Constitution of Uganda, 1995
The Constitution of Uganda provides for, inter alia: Matters pertaining to land, natural
resources and the environment, and the sustainable development thereof (Objective XXVII),
including energy resources and the right of every Ugandan to a clean and healthy environment
(Article 39)
5.2.2. The National Environment Act, Cap 153, 2004
Following the enactment of the National Environment Act Cap 153, the National
Environment Management Authority (NEMA) was created and charged with the
responsibility to oversee, coordinate and supervise environmental management in Uganda.
The National Environment Act Cap 153 stipulates that an environmental impact assessment
be undertaken by the developer where the lead agency, in consultation with NEMA, is of the
view that the project:
•
may have an impact on the environment,
•
is likely to have a significant impact on the environment; or
•
will have a significant impact on the environment".
According to Third schedule of the National Environment Act Cap 153, any development that
involves processing and manufacturing is subjected to an EIA. This Environmental Scoping
report has been prepared in accordance with the EIA Guidelines (1997) and the EIA
Regulations (1998) for Uganda as provided by NEMA. In conformity with these guidelines,
the assessment process followed the major steps of scoping and EIA study. Under subregulation (1) of regulation 37 of the EIA Regulations (1998), fees are payable for approval of
environmental impact statements and the amounts are prescribed in Schedule Three of the
regulations.
41
5.2.3. The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) EIA guidelines,
1997
The guidelines specify that it is the general policy of the government of Uganda that EIA be
conducted for projects that are likely to or will have significant impact on the environment, so
that adverse impacts can be foreseen, eliminated or mitigated. The guidelines also spell out
guidelines for use by developers, EIA practitioners; procedures for public participation;
guidelines for use by lead agencies and guidelines for monitoring.
5.2.4. The Public Health Act (1964)
Section 7 of the Act provides local authorities with administrative powers to take all lawful,
necessary and reasonable practicable measures for preventing the occurrence of, or for dealing
with any outbreak or prevalence of, any infectious communicable or preventable disease to
safeguard and promote the public health and to exercise the powers and perform the duties in
respect of public health conferred or imposed by this act or any other law.
Section 105 of the Public Health Act (1964) imposes a duty on the local authority to take
measures to prevent any pollution dangerous to the health of the public. The Act details the
siting of waste disposal facilities such as solid waste skips and septic tanks in relation to
settlements and food points.
5.2.5. The Factories Act (1964)
This act makes provisions for the health, safety and welfare of persons employed in factories
and other places (including waste management plants).
Section 13 of the Act requires that every factory be kept in a clean state, including floors,
walls, workrooms, ceilings or top of rooms.
Section 15 provides for ventilation in which effective and suitable provision shall be made for
securing and maintaining by the circulation of fresh air in each workroom the adequate
ventilation of the room.
Sections 19 to 46 in Part V of the Act deal with general provisions of safety in a factory
including work in confined spaces and fire safety. For example, in section 29, no person shall
be employed at any machine or in any process, being a machine or process liable to cause
bodily injury, unless he has been fully instructed as to dangers likely to arise in connection
therewith and the precautions to be observed, and:
a) Has received a sufficient training in work at machine or in the process; or
b) Is under adequate supervision by a person who has through knowledge an experience of
the machine or process.
Sections 51 to 55 provide for the welfare of persons employed in factories. It requires the
provision of protective clothing and appliances for the protection of eyes, ears, nose, limbs,
etc. in certain processes and other special applications. It is the duty of the owner of the
42
premises to provide safety of the workers from any dangerous aspect of his establishment at
the owner's cost.
5.2.6. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (2006)
The Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act replaces the Factories Act (1964). It departs
from the original listing of ‘don’ts’ and now has a new scientific approach in which the
technical measures required in the protection of workers are spelled out to be put in place. In
so doing it is preventive in approach.
The Act provides for the prevention and protection of persons at all workplaces from injuries,
diseases, death and damage to property. The OSH Act covers not just the ‘factory’ but also
any workplace where persons are employed and its provisions extend not just to employees
but to the self employed and any other persons that may be legitimately present in the
workplace who may be exposed to injury or disease.
Employers must provide for the protection of workers from adverse weather, provision of a
clean and healthy work environment, sanitary conveniences, washing facilities, First Aid and
facilities for meals. The Act provides for safe access to the workplaces and safe work
practices.
5.2.7. The Land Act (1998)
Sections 43, 44 and 45 (1) and (2) of the Land Act (1998), Government or local government
may acquire land in accordance with the provisions of Article 26 and clause (2) of Article 237
of the Constitution of the Republic of Uganda.
A person who owns or occupies land shall manage and utilize the land in accordance with the
National Environment Act Cap 153 and any other laws binding.
The Government or the local government shall hold land in trust for the people and protect
natural lakes, ground water, natural streams, wetlands and any other land reserved for
ecological purposes for the common good of the citizens of Uganda.
5.2.8. Physical Planning Act, 2010
This is the principal law governing physical planning in Uganda. This act helps analyze
existing planning provision and ascertain the current land use as per the Hoima Municipal
Council Structure plans 2008-2018 and district development plans.
At present no developer would be issued with a permit to erect any buildings or carry out any
developments on land in a planning area if he or she does not comply with the EIA
requirements under the National Environment Statute and the EIA Regulations.
5.2.9. The Local Governments Act 1997
The Act establishes a form of government based on the district as the main unit of
administration. Districts are given legislative and planning powers under this Act. [Sections
36-45] They are also enjoined to plan for the management of wastes in their areas and
conservation of the environment within their local areas. District Environmental Committees
43
established under section 15 of the National Environment Act Cap 153are supposed to guide
the district authorities in that regard.
5.3.
Existing guidelines and Regulations for Environmental Considerations in Uganda
5.3.1. Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Uganda, 1997
The Guidelines reiterate the cardinal principle of environmental management, that
environment and development must be viewed as complementary, interdependent and
mutually reinforcing. It explains the purpose of Environmental Impact Assessment, as a tool
for better planning, which permits the integration of environmental concerns into the policy
and project planning processes at the earliest possible stages of planning and designing.
5.3.2. Regulations 3 to 17 of the National Environment (Wetlands, River Banks and
Lake Shores Management) Regulations (2000)
In Regulation 17 (1), every landowner, occupier or user who is adjacent or contiguous with a
wetland shall have a duty to prevent the degradation or destruction of the wetland and shall
maintain the ecological and other functions of the wetland. The tool used under these
Regulations to ensure compliance is the permit. The Executive Director of NEMA can only
permit activities in a wetland if he or she is satisfied that such activities shall not degrade the
wetland in question.
5.3.3. The National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999)
Regulation 4 of the National Environment (Waste Management) Regulations (1999) describes
the sorting and disposal of domestic waste and provides that the generator of domestic waste
may, without a licence issued under these regulations, dispose of non-hazardous waste in an
environmentally sound manner in accordance with by-laws made by a competent local
authority.)
The regulations directly mention the application of cleaner production as a means to
minimise production of wastes. Regulation 5 (1) states that: A person who owns or controls a
facility or premises, which generate waste, shall minimise the waste generated by adopting the
following cleaner production methods:
a) Improvement of production processes through:
1. Conserving raw materials and energy;
2. Eliminating the use of toxic raw materials;
3. Reducing toxic emissions and wastes
b) Monitoring the product cycle from beginning to end by –
1) Identifying and eliminating potential negative impacts of the product;
2) Enabling the recovery and reuse of the product where possible;
3) Reclamation and recycling;
44
c) Incorporating environmental concerns in the design and disposal of a product.
5.3.4. The National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or on
Land) Regulations (1999)
They address standards for air quality, water quality, discharge of effluent into water, control
of noise and soil quality. Standards for discharge of effluents into water or on land and
minimum standards for management of soil quality are developed.
5.3.5. The Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations, 1998
According to Regulation 4 (1) of the Water (Waste Discharge) Regulations (1998); No person
shall discharge effluent or waste on land or into aquatic environment. NEMA sets standards
for the discharge of such substances in consultation with the lead agency. A person who
wishes to discharge such substances in the prohibited environment must obtain a permit from
the Executive Director of NEMA.
45
6.0.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
6.1.
Existing Site at Kinubu
The collected garbage is transported to Kirasa refuse dumping site is located about 2 km
North Eastern of the Municipal Centre on a 3 acre piece of land using a dumper lorry and
sometimes a Jiefang lorry-waste is crudely damped in a pit. The site pit is poorly drained
leading to flooding during rainy season rendering it in accessible by the refuse tracks.
The site is limited in space and is now within the middle of a fast expanding Municipal.
6.2.
Identified Site at Kibati
The site is well accessible, far from any human dwelling and gently sloping. The site is
suitable for a composting site.
6.3.
Do Nothing Scenario
This is a situation where Hoima Municipal Council abandons the idea of executing the project
as a result of a number of constraints, notable among these being financial. The implications
of this alternative are garbage not being collected and the population being exposed to all the
dangers and problems that are associated with lack of solid waste management system .It is,
therefore, not an alternative that Hoima Municipal Council should be considering as its
consequences have already been experienced within the Municipal when garbage is not
collected.
6.4.
Technology Options
6.4.1. Land filling
Many urban centres in Uganda rely on landfills to dispose solid wastes. The urban centre
needs the capacity to identify and develop the land fill sites and this requires enormous
environmental, technological and economic resources. The sanitary landfill technique
employs basic engineering techniques to avoid environmental problems. The activities that
need to be carried out under this alternative include:
•
Development of capacity for identification of sites/land for landfill development,
•
Development of technical capacity for design, construction, operation, monitoring and
management of landfills,
•
Resource mobilization for landfill development and construction.
The various factors that need to be assessed can drain all the resources of HMC and this
alternative can be considered by big municipalities that have the resources to manage
landfills. The various issues that have to be considered before embarking on development of
landfill for a garbage composite site at Kibati cell include:
•
Physical geography (topography and surface drainage, vegetation, climate,
infrastructure and man-made features).
46
•
Sub-surface features (soils, geology, geo-hydrology)
•
Potential for landfill gas problems
•
Design (conceptual and technical) and operation concerns of the landfill
(conformation of site classification, site life, site layout, leachate and gas management
systems, final cover or capping, erosion from landfill surfaces, closure plan and after-use
provisions).
•
Leachates and associated problems.
•
Blowing out and odour concerns during transportation and after dumping
•
Aesthetics of the area.
•
etc.)
Socio-economic issues (odour, hours of operation, blowing out, socio-cultural effects,
6.4.2. Composting
This method is commonly used in low income communities in which decomposed solid
wastes provide manure (soil conditioner and organic fertilizer) for farming. Central or on plot
techniques can be employed for composting. The composting can be small or large scale. The
small scale composting involves composting on individual plots in low density areas (such as
rural areas in Uganda) where people use their gardens for composting. The vegetable waste
could be applied directly to the crops and mixed with the upper layer of soil or placed in small
heaps somewhere in the garden for composting. Community campaigns and public education
is probably required to encourage people in using this simple technique. Much as it has a
number of advantages, it is only possible in low density areas where people use gardens for
growing crops. It can also result in bad odors if the heap becomes anaerobic (turning avoids
this problem) and has a potential to attract flies and other vermin’s.
Centralised compost plants are sometimes used to recover resources (e.g. manure), reduce
environmental pollution from landfill sites and save valuable disposal capacity. The aerobic
composting is carried out in long heaps called windrows. Wastes with a large proportion of
compostable materials are suitable for windrows. Fly larvae and pathogens are killed by heat
generated in the windrows, which are turned to keep them aerobic (manually or using adapted
earth moving equipment). The main factors to consider, much as this alternative has a number
of advantages, are:
47
•
Total recovery is seldom achieved unless the compost is properly managed.
•
Composting is only feasible if a market exists or can be developed.
•
The market price of compost should be sufficient to recover most of the costs for
composting.
•
There are high transport costs involved in garbage and manure transport.
6.4.3. Incineration
Incinerators are employed in high income countries where land is scarce and technology is
readily available to control the air pollution. Controlled combustion may achieve a reduction
of the volume of solid wastes by 80-90%. Residues are disposed to landfill and energy from
the combustion may be utilised, for example, in producing electricity. The incinerators
involve the expensive and sophisticated construction, are very difficult to operate and to
maintain and are not suitable for wastes from low income communities which have high
moisture content and a large organic fraction.
6.4.4. Waste Reduction
The main motivations for waste reduction are mainly related to the high cost and scarcity of
sites for landfills and environmental degradation caused by toxic materials in the deposited
wastes. Solid waste managers in Uganda tend to pay little attention to waste reduction because
the wastes collected contain between 50% to 90% organics, dirt and ashes. These wastes are
suitable for composting or digestion provided that they contain very low levels of synthetic
materials such as plastics. Therefore, if the main aim is to produce manure through
composting, waste reduction will be very useful in controlling the amount of nondecomposable in the collected wastes. This can be achieved by promoting waste reduction
and materials recovery at the local level through promotion of consumer awareness, sorting at
source and support for composting.
6.4.5. Recycling
Solid wastes contain a considerable amount of valuable items which can be segregated and
reused or reclaimed. Such items include paper, glass, textiles and plastics. For recycling to be
effective, the policy of sorting and segregation has to be implemented. The sorting of the
materials should take place as early as possible (in the households is the best). Sorting at
communal containers, transfer stations (such as composting site) and landfill sites may cause
substantial operational problems.
6.4.6. Storage Options
• Primary storage: These may be temporary containers such as cardboard boxes, old jerry
cans, baskets, gunny bags or plastic bags for waste storage in the households. The provision
of permanent containers like bins (plastic or metallic) would be more desirable but the cost
might be prohibitive in the low income area like Hoima. If, however, it is possible to secure
the funds to purchase the permanent containers, it would be the better alternative.
• Secondary Waste Storage: These are usually larger containers which are provided by the
refuse collection agency like TCC. The containers are directly fed by the households or
through primary collection by collection agency. Communal containers are very suitable for
serving low income groups. They have to be spaced so that walking distances between two
containers does not exceed 200 to 300 metres (depending on the communities’ willingness to
cooperate). A convenient height for children has to be considered. Concrete bunkers can also
be constructed to be used waste storage. These are very convenient for housing estates and
48
institutions. They have a disadvantage of being fixed in one place so that relocation is not
possible in case of change of plans.
6.4.7. Collection Options
The collection of solid wastes from the point of storage may be carried out by several
techniques. These include collection from communal containers, block collection, kerbside
collection and door-to-door collection.
6.4.8. Collection from Communal Containers
This usually requires special purpose vehicles designed to carry filled containers or equipped
with automatic lifting and emptying devises. Communal containers should be emptied daily
whenever possible (preferably seven days a week). This method is expensive in terms of
capital investment and operations and it is commonly used in large cities and municipalities.
6.4.9. Block Collection
In this method of collection, the residents bring their refuse containers to the collection
vehicle and hand them over to the crew for emptying. The vehicle stops at defined locations
and informs people by using a bell, whistle, horn, etc. The main advantages of this method
are:
•
permanent containers like bins are not necessarily required
•
no receptacles are left outside household premises
•
no littering by animals, no access to children, flies and rain
•
no costs for provision of storage facilities.
•
Simple means of transport (like tractors and carts) can be employed.
The disadvantages of the block collection method are:
• requires good timing and organization
• relies on community cooperation
• relatively long waiting periods for vehicles and therefore low efficiency of operations
• access for vehicles to collection points may cause problems
• Loading to standard trucks is labour intensive and unhygienic.
6.4.10. Kerbside Collection
In this method of collection, residents leave bins, bags or containers at the kerbside which are
collected by the vehicle crew at fixed intervals, usually on two or three specific days of the
week. It is a common method in areas with good access to individual premises. Standardized
bins with lids are advantageous. The main advantages of the method are:
49
•
it is convenient for people
•
use of standardised bins allows for hygienic storage of waste
•
handcarts can be employed in areas without vehicular access
The disadvantages of the kerbside collection method include:
•
high costs due to low efficiency of vehicles (frequent stops to pick up small quantities)
•
access by trucks or handcarts to individual premises is essential
•
in case standardised bins are not being used, a well organised collection service is required to
avoid risk of littering.
6.4.11. Door-to-Door collection
The collection crew enters each premise, takes out the container or bag and puts it back after
emptying. This method is convenient for residents, no refuse outside individual premises and
there is minimum littering by animals or access to children. The main disadvantages include
very high costs, poor vehicle productivity and high labour requirements. It also has problems
with access to premises and is usually not economically feasible in developing countries.
6.4.12. Transport Options
Of the total expenditure incurred in refuse collection, the biggest percentage is required for
solid waste transport. Some of the factors that determine which mode of transport is to be
used include distance to the dumping site, the road surface and its condition, the labour
requirements and availability and common vehicles should be preferred for ease of
procurement of spare parts and repairs. Different solid waste transport options include human
handcarts, animal (e.g. donkey) cart, human pedal cart, tractor and trailer, conventional truck
(tipper), roll-top truck, rear-loading hydraulic compactor and automatic loaders of containers.
6.5.
Preferred Alternative
6.5.1. Proposed Solid Waste Management
In this section, the proposed options for solid waste management that should be used by
Hoima Municipal Council are given. Consideration has been given to cost, convenience and
the intended objectives and goals of the proposed project.
6.5.2. Storage and Sorting
The sorting and segregation of solid waste into decomposable and non-decomposable should
be best done at the primary storage stage in the household. The residents of Hoima should
each be provided with two bins (with different colour codes) in which one will be for
decomposable and the other for non-decomposable.
This will eliminate the cumbersome and expensive exercise that HMC was using to sort the
garbage at the disposal site. At the beginning, these bins can be provided by the project and
thereafter, the residents can buy their own bins (after education, training and awareness).
50
Because of the nature of the market area, bins can be placed at strategic points in easy access
to vendors.
From the bins (primary storage), the refuse should be transferred to communal containers
placed at strategic points in the Municipal. Special attention should be to market areas to
ensure the filled bins from the vendors are emptied in the communal containers placed around
the market. For residential areas, the option of block collection can be considered.
6.5.3. Transport
During their past operations, HMC will acquire trucks to transport the solid waste from
communal containers to the compost site. This proved very expensive and was one of the
reasons the project came to a halt. It is now proposed that the project acquires a tractor and
trailer to transport the waste. A loader can also be acquired to assist in transporting wastes
from the communal containers. The main advantages of a tractor as compared to other
vehicles are that operating costs are low; it is very versatile and has high maneuverability.
6.5.4. Composting
Large scale composting should be adopted as method of producing manure from the sorted
wastes. Their operations required a lot of space (the project acquired 2 acres of land for this
purpose) and heaps of composted manure littered the land randomly. This is not only wasteful
of valuable land but makes it very difficult to control environmental pollution. It is now
proposed that a well-designed structure be constructed so that windrows are turned within the
windrow area with ten compartments. The structure will also include space for storage during
maturation of manure, screening of the compost and office space. A manual screen can be
used to separate large size particles and non-compostable fraction like plastics, metals and
glass that escaped the sorting process. The manure should be bagged in returnable gunny bags
as and when the market is available. In the meantime, the manure can be held in maturation
store.
The non-compostable that will be sorted out at the source or sieved out at the compost site
should be incinerated to minimise the formation of heaps in Municipal and at the compost
site.
51
7.0.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
For any project to survive and last, it must have the will of the local people. Therefore public
consultative meetings were held between 10th and 30th December 2010 with the different key
stake holders. Consultations with the residents of Kibati village were conducted and a public
meeting was held on the 11th December 2010 at Kibati village grounds chaired by the LC 11
Chairperson LC 11. Several consultations were carried out at the Hoima district offices and
Municipal council.
7.1.
Stakeholder Consultation and Disclosure
This section summarises the stakeholder consultation process conducted as part of the EIA for
the proposed garbage compositing site. The concept of stakeholder consultation is initially
presented. The Section then provides an overview of the consulting process, including the
project stakeholders who have been involved and the consultation activities that have been
carried out to date. The Section concludes with consultation findings.
7.1.1. Stakeholder Consultation and the EIA
The stakeholder consultation process was conducted to provide stakeholders with an
opportunity to raise concerns and comment on the potential impacts and merits of
development. Their input was captured in order to focus the assessment on key concerns, and
to better understand expectations of the affected population. Stakeholder consultation is
fundamental to the development of the EIS in the following ways:
•
Information is shared in a meaningful and timely manner to enable the public to provide
considered feedback;
•
The EIA team is fully able to understand and characterise the potential environment and
socio-economic impacts of the project; and
•
It enables the Project to develop effective mitigation measures and management plans that
are sensitive to the local context.
7.1.2. Project Stakeholders
Project stakeholders include individuals, groups or organisations that will be affected by or
may influence the project either positively or negatively. During Scoping, an initial list of
project stakeholders was developed. This list has been reviewed and updated on an on-going
basis to ensure that it is comprehensive and accurately represents the array of stakeholders.
Key Stakeholder Groups
•
Project participants ( Hoima Municipal Council )
•
Community leaders and Local community members
•
Vulnerable groups (e.g. women, refugees)
•
Local businesses (BAT)
52
•
National and District level authorities
•
Local authorities
7.1.3. Overview of the Consultation Process
The stakeholder consultation process has been designed to conform to the Ugandan national
legislation. Information about Ugandan regulations is provided in Section 3. Initial
consultation was undertaken during site reconnaissance, at which time the EIA project team
met with select key stakeholders in Hoima from 10th – 30th December 2010. (1) The
following tasks relating to stakeholder consultation were undertaken as part of this EIA:
•
A stakeholder database was compiled of stakeholders at a local; district and national level
A Background Information was documented and discussed with potential stakeholders.
The purpose of the background information was to convey information about the proposed
project and allow stakeholders the opportunity to raise any issues or concern regarding the
proposed project Study phase.
Figure 7.1: Photo of Public Consultative meeting at Kibati village on 12th December 2010
Records of meeting and List of attendance are attached in ANNEX 2 and 3 respectively.
53
Table 7.1: Views raised by some of the members present at a consultative meeting
NAME
Locals
ISSUES RAISED
What are the benefits to us as locals of the area and immediate
neighbours of the project ,
When is the work commencing because presently the whole area is
littered with wastes that smell and attract flies to the whole
neighbourhood;
There is no wrangle and objection to the site because that is where
the municipality has been dumping its wastes. We are however
interested in seeing that the area is improved as you are suggesting
so that the sanitation of the area is improved by highlighting the
negative issues;
Where is the contractor of the project get his workers, because we
are interested in working but you find that the contractors often
come with their own people which is not acceptable to us because
we also have many un employed locals who need some income;
Is there a possibility that if the municipal council fails to raise the
required acreage, the project will not be implemented or will they
still implement it, even with in the available land;
Incase water is piped to service the modern composting plant,
shall we as the locals be allowed to tap for our domestic needs as
one of the benefits of this project in the area or the water will be
restricted to only the compositing site;
Will they tarmac for us this road since we already have BAT in the
area, hence it is expected that the traffic will be high;
How will the respective Division be involved in the management
and gaining from the revenues of the compost plant or all the
management and benefits will go to the municipal council; and
We are very happy that we have been consulted and informed in
details of what is going to take place instead of relying on rumors,
however, in case there is occurrence of a problem like smell, how
shall we be helped.
Municipal Clerk Hoima-Mr The Municipal Town Clerks concerns were on a proper EIA being
conducted and to ensure that all stakeholders are consulted and
Armil Nsamo
their views taken into account during the design of the garbage
composting site
District
Environmental The Terms of Reference being followed and also to ensure that the
siting is not close to the community or to sensitive ecological
Officer-Hoima- Ms.Nyagoma
system
The design to be specifically design to the site for the composite.
NEMA –Kampala –
NEMA as a stakeholder was to ensure that an appropriate design is
done just like for other Municipals in the same project funding
54
8.0.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND
GARBAGE COMPOSTING PLANT
MITIGATION
MEASURES
OF
THE
The fore going observations have a number of implications: •
Most of the land take is already acquired and largely modified through years of
garbage deposition. This would therefore mean minimal impacts on natural habitats
and any surviving wildlife in the areas around the project site.
•
An additional small amount of land currently under subsistence agriculture 2 acres is
to be acquired to expand the acreage of the present dumpsite. Most of the land to be
acquired is largely agricultural implying that not very much more natural vegetation
will be converted
•
The land for the project area has remnant stands of vegetation cover all largely
modified which depending on the plan for land use on the dumpsite could be lost
•
The area is in a largely human modified environment that does not contain very much
biodiversity, except for species that are capable of surviving in human modified
habitats.
•
The valley bottom and the water course to the south side of the project site present a
potential site of significant impacts. These would arise from siltation if the hillside
vegetation gets cleared; leaching of organic and inorganic compounds from the
garbage heaps and compost.
We note that the garbage composting plant could have a number of positive impacts and
negative environmental impacts. All organic waste generated at the collection centres/skips
and in factories will be transported to the composting site; according to the waste
management plan.
The following aspects should be considered when planning for a compost plant. A compost
site should not be; 1) a floodplain, 2) a wetland, 3) a fault zone, 4) areas with high risk of
earthquakes, 5) unstable areas, and finally 6) the immediate area of an airport. In addition to
the above regulations, the hydrogeology and the demographics of the surrounding area must
be considered. No one really aspires to live near a landfill, so it is important to examine how
many people live near a potential landfill location and what affects that landfill may have on
the community, such as whether or not there are any drinking water wells that could
potentially be polluted.
55
8.1.
Positive Attributes of the Project
The implementation of a composting plant has many benefits. The project solves various
environmental and social problems, reduces the waste volume to be land filled, and results in
the production of compost. Moreover, the application of compost to soil amendment has
direct and indirect advantages.
8.1.1.
Benefits of the CDM Compost Project
The implementation of a compost facility could lead to various environmental benefits, with
the most significant being environmental conservation since it stops the degradation caused
by the presence of current open dumping in rural areas especially in the case of Hoima dump.
Table 8.1 Summarizes the potential positive Impacts associated with HSW compositing
facility with respect to its level of environmental conservation
Table 8.1: Potential Positive Benefits
Impact
Cause
Significance
Eliminating the
negative The composting plant will receive Long-Term
effects of open dumping
and treat the organic waste within
and around Hoima Municipality.
Eliminate gas emissions and
leachate generation from dumping
of organic material.
Compost use
Compost use Compost can be used Short Term
as a soil conditioner and has
significant positive impacts
Employment generation
Creating jobs for the locals
Creating income generating Revenue to the Hoima municipal Short Term
Council from the waste management,
activity
in addition to selling the compost and
the recyclable material
Solid waste reduction
Protection
resources
of
Separation of non-sorted waste at the Long term
compost plant, with gradual increase
of source separation following
increased awareness of the local
population
natural In-vessel composting with no/minor Long term
leachate generation
Decreased quantity of waste The solid waste will be separated for Short term
to be land filled increasing recycling, and only a small portion of
inert rejects will result from the
the lifespan of the dumpsite.
composting activity. The facility by
itself is not land-intensive.
56
8.1.2. Benefits of Compost
Compost helps divert organic materials from landfills. In addition, the use and application of
finished compost result in a multitude of benefits, such as enhancing the physical, chemical,
and biological properties of soils, which in turn results in various environmental and
economic benefits. A summary of some of the major benefits of composting is provided
below:
8.1.3. Direct Benefits to Soil
Compost has many benefits when applied as soil amendment:
•
Improvement of the physical properties of soils: Compost enhances water holding
capacity, soil aeration, structural stability, resistance to water and wind erosion, root
penetration, and soil temperature stabilization.
•
Enhancement of the chemical properties of soils: Compost increases macro- and
micronutrient content, increases availability of mineral substances, ensures pH stability,
and provides a long-term source of nutrient input by acting as a nutrient reservoir.
•
Improvement of the biological properties of soils: Compost promotes the activity of
beneficial microorganisms, reduces attacks by parasites, promotes faster root
development, and promotes increase in yields of agricultural crops.
8.1.4. Indirect benefits
Land application of compost has further indirect environmental and economic benefits
presented below:
Compost has the ability to improve soil water holding capacity and fix nitrogen into a form
that can be used by plants, which mitigates (at least partially) non-point sources of pollution
such as commercial fertilizers. By improving the soil water-holding capacity and reducing
water loss as a result of percolation, evaporation, and runoff, compost application results in
water conservation benefits.
Compost reduces reliance on pesticides, herbicides, and fungicides by providing an
environment rich in organic matter and nutrients for healthy plant growth. Beneficial
microorganisms thrive in this environment and can out compete and suppress detrimental
pathogens found in soils where organic matter is low (if adequately composted).
Consistent application of compost reduces soil erosion resulting from wind and water by
improving soil structural stability.
8.2.
Potential Negative Impacts
The project could result in various potential and predicted negative impacts. The identified
potential impacts could result from improper construction and/or operation activities of the
facility. Some negative impacts were identified in the waste management facilities
57
implemented. For composting to be a viable option, the following issues should be controlled:
production of odors, presence of pathogens, presence of heavy metals, compost quality, and
blowing of papers and plastic materials.
8.2.1. Factors Identified Leading to Negative Impacts
The following factors were identified in some implemented facilities and were used to predict
potential negative impacts of the proposed facility that could result from similar operational
errors and process design, unless the plant is properly managed:
•
Improper and incomplete waste separation;
•
Uncovered improvised trucks for waste collection and transportation;
•
Improper storage of received and separated waste;
•
Uncontrolled dumping of composting rejects;
•
Improper fencing and waste handling leading to litter in the surrounding area of the plant;
•
Manual handling of waste without appropriate safety precautions leading to occupational
hazards.
8.2.2. Production of Odors
Without proper control of the waste transport and the composting process, the production of
odors can become a problem. In the proposed facility, odors may be generated from:
Improvised uncovered trucks transporting the waste to the facility;
Piled wastes for long periods of time before their processing;
Improper composting processes;
Maturating compost piles;
Separated wastes stored for recycling;
Rejects dumped in improvised dumps;
Odors are generated when the compost is undergoing anaerobic decomposition and that, is
usually promoted when the following conditions are prevailing: low carbon to nitrogen ratios,
poor temperature and airflow control, excessive moisture and poor mixing.
8.2.3. Biologic and Soil Contamination
The final product must meet some specifications to be considered as compost. Compost
quality can be defined in terms of nutrient content, organic content, pH, texture, particle size
distribution, moisture content, moisture holding capacity, presence of foreign matter,
concentration of salts, residual odor, degree of stabilization or maturity, presence of
pathogenic organisms, and concentration of heavy metals. The compost produced in some
58
facilities can contain impurities such as plastics, glass and metals. Contaminated compost is a
result of improper waste separation, which leaves metals and other contaminants in the waste
stream or improper composting that, fails to eradicate pathogens. Metals in solid wastes may
generate metal dust particles that become attached or held to the materials in the light fraction,
and then in the compost produced.
Contaminated compost could lead to soil contamination and potential consequent biological
uptake of hazardous material subsequently leading to the food chain. Note that previous metal
analysis of compost showed concentrations within standards since most of the organic
material used to produce such compost is of domestic origin. Therefore, it is essential to
restrict any introduction of hazardous wastes such as medical or industrial wastes in the
composting process in order to prevent contamination of the produced compost.
8.2.4. Contamination of Ground and/or Surface Water from Leachate
Although the proposed facility does not result in any leachate production during the
composting operation, leachate can result from the waste received prior to its processing,
waste stored for recycling, and maturating compost piles. Leachate production and
subsequently water contamination is aggravated with the occurrence of rainstorm, in case the
facility is not fully covered and does not possess adequate drainage control structures to divert
rain water from the plant.
8.2.5.
Health and Safety Impacts
Health and safety at the proposed facility are considered primarily in terms of potential
exposure to pathogens and accident occurrence to workers and members of the local
population during both the construction and operation phases.
8.2.5.1.
Occupational Hazards
The composting plant is a potentially dangerous work environment unless proper precaution
measures are implemented. The waste is manually transferred and sorted on the conveyor
belts; which subjects the workers to multiple hazards. The project does not present any
specification for worker’s protection. Hazards to workers may result from equipment and
conveyors, and from the manual separation of commingled municipal solid waste. Other
issues to be considered are the worker's fatigue since the project does not provide moving
belts with adjusted heights for the manual separation of waste.
8.2.5.1.
Public Health and Safety Hazards
If the composting operation is not conducted properly, pathogenic organisms may survive the
composting process and result in contaminated compost causing health hazards for the future
users of the compost such as farmers
Furthermore, activities involved with the operations of the composting plant are potentially
dangerous to the public. Uncontrolled access to the facility may result in various hazards.
59
8.2.6. Accumulation of Solid Waste
On-site construction will generate substantial amounts of non-hazardous construction waste,
primarily excavated earth. Other waste will include potentially hazardous sewage from on-site
sanitation facilities, oil-contaminated soil and machine parts. The poor management of
construction waste will extend impacts of erosion and sediment pollution far beyond the site
surrounds and may have lasting impacts on water quality. Contamination by hydrocarbons,
even in small amounts, still poses a significant health hazard for people who depend on the
receiving waters.
In addition, potential vermin infestations at the site and surrounding areas will pose a health
hazard for both project personnel the general public.
A clear understanding of potential sources and types waste to be generated as well as waste
streams both during construction will be essential in developing appropriate mitigations. The
study therefore analyzed proposed work plans, processes and project requirements to
determine the nature, extent and severity of potential waste impacts.
8.2.7. Impacts on Biodiversity
Potential negative impacts on the biodiversity of the area could result from construction
activities such as land reclamation, construction of buildings, and generation of construction
waste and from the usage of contaminated compost (table 8.2). However, the analysis of the
impacts resulting from this project on the biodiversity (based on the size, diversity, rarity, and
naturalness of the affected vegetation) shows that the potential negative impacts are not very
significant. This is because the project will only affect a small portion of the ecosystem, will
not lead to the extinction of important species, and will not affect any sensitive or critical
area. Furthermore, the project will reduce and limit the wild expansion of the existing landfill
by reducing the amount of landfilled material.
Table 8.2: Potential Negative Impacts on Biodiversity
Impact
Cause
Habitat loss or destruction
Construction works
Altered abiotic/site factors
Soil compaction, erosion
Mortality of individuals
Loss of individuals through emigration
Destruction of vegetation
Following disturbance or loss of wild life
habitats.
Habitat removal and/or introduction of
barriers like roads
Due to construction noise, traffic, presence of
people…
Changes in abiotic conditions, habitats…
Soil/water contamination from poor quality
Habitat fragmentation
Disturbance
Altered species composition
Vegetation loss
Compost
60
8.2.8. Other Potential Negative Impacts
•
Production of dust from waste trucks while transporting and unloading the waste;
•
Noise pollution due to truck traffic and/or to operation of the facility;
•
Littering of the surrounding area by the light waste fraction, plastic bags and paper,
transported by winds;
•
Natural resource contamination and various other impacts from uncontrolled dumping of
composting rejects;
•
Phytotoxicity of plants due to high compost application rates; and
•
Landscape and visual intrusion from the offensive sight of the facility buildings in the
natural environment.
8.3.
Negative Impacts Summary and Analysis
Impact analysis focused on characterizing negative impacts, according to their significance
(long term vs. short term), extent (level of environmental degradation or conservation), and
mitigation feasibility. The summary and analysis of potential negative impacts are presented
in table 8.3. Impacts classified as having long-term effects are the most significant compared
to those with short-term effects, since they lead to long-term environmental degradation.
8.3.5.
Construction Phase
The main negative impacts occurring during the construction phase result from construction
works and land reclamation activities. Such activities will generate noise, dust, and wastes (all
of which can be mitigated for and are short-term impacts). Health and safety hazards during
the construction phase can be prevented by appropriate precaution measures. The destruction
of vegetation caused as well by construction activities is not very significant since the project
only affects a small portion of the ecosystem and will not destroy any sensitive or critical
species or habitat.
8.3.6. Operation Phase
Impacts directly related to the operation of the facility include odor, dust, and noise
generation, littering of surrounding areas, occupational and health hazards, and water and soil
contamination from potential leachate. The most significant impacts having long-term
environmental effects are those related to the usage of contaminated compost, which leads to
soil, water and biological contamination. However, all impacts can be prevented by
implementing the mitigation measures presented in section 9
61
Table 8.3: Summary of Potential Negative Impacts
Construction Phase
Impact
Noise and dust
Cause
Significance
Resulting from construction Short term
activities and truck traffic
Health and safety
Construction waste
Construction waste Resulting Short term
from construction activities,
land reclamation
Health and safety
Accidents to workers and Long term
members of the local
community due to lack of
safety
regulations
and
uncontrolled access to the
construction site
Biodiversity
Biodiversity
Land Long term
reclamation and construction
activities leading to the
destruction of the natural
ecosystem at the facility site
Operation Phase
Litter
Odor
Light fraction of waste Short term
carried by winds Short term
Compost facilities that are Short term
not properly operated allow
anaerobic
conditions
to
develop thus generating foul
odors
Waste trucks incoming and
leaving the facility
62
Natural
contamination
Phytotoxicity
resources Application (on agricultural Long term
lands) of poor quality
contaminated
compost
containing
hazardous
material, potential leachate
generated,
uncontrolled
drainage,
and
improper
storage and receiving areas
and/or
application
of
contaminated
compost,
uncontrolled dumping of
composting residues such as
un-compostable
and
unrecyclable material
High compost application Long term
rates Health and safety
hazards
Health and safety hazards
Noise and dust
Landscape esthetic
During waste separation and Long term
operation of the process, and
with minimal
precaution
measures,
uncontrolled access to the
facility
From
circulation
and Short term
unloading of trucks
From
circulation
and Long term
unloading of trucks Short
term
Landscape esthetic Offensive
sight in the natural landscape
63
9.
MITIGATION PLAN
In order to eliminate or reduce potential negative environmental impacts, mitigation measures
are typically recommended to prevent the impacts associated with composting. Mitigation
measures are highly dependent on the significance of the predicted impact, the nature of the
impact (temporary vs. permanent), or the phase of the project (construction vs. operation).
9.2.
Mitigation Measures for the Project Design
9.2.5. Litter and Odor
To prevent the contamination of the surrounding area by the light fraction of waste (paper and
plastic bags) transported by winds, the unloading area should be designed as a depression pit,
and all storage and receiving areas should be closed, which will also reduce the dispersion of
odors. Furthermore, appropriate fencing (3 m and 25 mm net) around the facility area will
catch any transported waste, and a buffer zone of one to two kilometers will prevent potential
produced odors or transported waste from reaching residential areas.
9.2.6. Ground and/or Surface Water Contamination
All the facility, especially the storage, receiving, and compost maturating areas should be
paved with an impermeable floor structure (10-7 cm/sec) and covered. Furthermore, an
effective drainage system must be established for leachate and storm water collection and
management. Storm water and runoff should be diverted to avoid any contact with the waste
or the compost.
The diverted channel or intermittent river passing through the site should be confined using a
retaining wall that should be built on its northern side for a distance of 470-500 meters.
Although this measure might be costly, it is an essential measure in order to prevent any flash
flooding, mainly in the winter, from reaching the plants and the landfill causing a major
disaster. A wastewater treatment unit of small capacity is necessary for the evacuation and the
treatment of wastewater and leachate incoming from the worker buildings, the receiving
storage, and compost maturation areas. The treated wastewater and leachate from the plant
can be discharged in the intermittent river that is located on the southern side of the site. The
discharged treated effluent should be monitored regularly. The project design should be
modified to include a drainage system and galleries that diverts rain and storm water away
from the treatment plant and the landfill. Moreover, after its rehabilitation the landfill base
should be lined with a proper Geo-membrane lining in order to prevent the infiltration of any
generated leachate even though, only inert material is expected to be sent to the landfill.
9.2.7. Dust Production
To prevent dust along roadways, circulation and access roads used by the collection trucks
should be paved. To prevent dust from unloading of wastes in the facility, a high quality
paving capable of withstanding frequent truck traffic should be used to cover the receiving
area.
64
9.2.8.
Impacts Related to the Natural Landscape
The facility should not destroy any sensitive habitat or species. Furthermore, a landscape plan
should be included to enhance the appearance of the facility. Although the portion of unrecyclable and non-compostable material is small and inert, it should not be disposed directly
in land pits. Rejects resulting from composting operations will be contaminated and may lead
to the production of contaminated leachate; therefore, they should be disposed in sanitary
landfills. The rehabilitation of the old landfill will provide a proper area for land filling of the
generated inert material that is not expected to exceed 5% of the total treated wastes. Landfills
should contain liners to prevent any contamination resulting from these rejects.
9.2.9. Public Hazards
Proper fencing at a minimal height of 3 meters around the whole site should be ensured in
order to prevent unauthorized access to the facility. The final compost material should be
monitored constantly in order to prevent any potential contaminated compost material from
reaching the market or end users.
9.3.
Mitigation Measures for the Construction Phase
During the construction phase, it is essential to adopt strategies to prevent or minimize dust
emissions, noise generation, health and safety hazards, and negative impacts related to the
generated construction wastes. The main control measures should be included within the
construction contracts and be considered as requirements from contractors.
9.3.5. Noise and Dust Emissions
The major mitigation measures required to reduce noise and dust emissions are mainly during
the construction phase. The recommended mitigation measures for dust emissions are on-site
mixing and unloading operations, and ensuring adequate maintenance and repair of
construction machinery. The recommended mitigation measures for noise impacts are usage
of quiet properly maintained equipment, limiting site construction activities to the working
hours (7:00 am to 4:00 pm) and noisy activities to morning hours (8:00 am to 12:00 am), and
informing the local community when noisy activities are planned.
9.3.6. Construction Wastes
A site waste management plan should be prepared by the contractor prior to commencement
of project. This should include the designation of appropriate waste storage areas, collection
and removal schedule, identification of approved disposal site, and a system for supervision
and monitoring. Preparation and implementation of the plan will be the responsibility of the
building contractor with the system being monitored independently. Special attention should
be given to waste minimization.
The developer shall ensure good housekeeping practices to minimize the accumulation of
solid waste at the composting site and along access routes. All wastes should be collected and
disposed of appropriately such as in a sanitary landfill permitted disposal site. The developer
will carry out regular fumigation of the plant premises to minimise vermin infestations.
65
Vegetation and combustible waste must not be burned on the site but can be composted and
be used in the tree plantations as manure.
Uncontrolled littering in the facility and surrounding areas should be prevented. Furthermore,
some of the waste such as rocks or excavated soil can be used in the construction processes.
For example the rocks can be used to prepare the base for the fence around the facility and
soil can be used for landscape initiation as well as in the processes of cut and fill for the
purpose of land level adjustments in the landfill area.
Rejects and un-composted waste deposited at the site after the compost plant operation begins
should be disposed in a lined and capped cell; the capping material (re-compacted murram)
should be got from the landfill/ cell pit dugout soil (clay) within the garbage compositing
plant.
The leachate should be handled in the same manner as is the case with other secure landfills,
where the first line of defense is a thick bottom cushion of compacted clay that surrounds the
pit like a bathtub. Moist clay is flexible and resists cracking if the ground shifts. It is also
impermeable to ground water and will safely contain wastes. A layer of gravel is spread over
the clay liner and perforated drain pipes are laid in a grid to collect any seepage that escapes
from the stored material. Sump pumps collect any liquids that filter through the landfill, either
from rainwater or leakage of contained materials. This leachate should be treated and purified
before being released. Monitoring wells check ground water around the site to ensure that no
toxins have escaped.
9.3.7. Traffic Impacts
Increased traffic (mainly trucks and other load-carrying vehicles) along access routes will
inevitably increase the risk of road accidents. The developer will sensitize project drivers and
communities on road safety aspects of the proposed project.
The developer shall ensure the proper mechanical condition of project vehicles and
appropriate speed control features, such as speed humps, should be constructed along the
proposed access route.
The proponent should ensure that there are speed limit especially during construction and
operation to reduce accident incidents; and
There should be limitations on the routes and hours during which garbage trucks pass through
the residential area leading to the compost site.
9.3.8. Health and Safety Hazards
9.3.8.1.
Occupational Hazards
Health and safety regulations should be imposed on all the workers. Safety regulations
include life and health insurance in addition to regulations concerning the storage and use of
hazardous material such as gas. Furthermore, the facility should be kept clean to prevent pest
infestation and workers should not be allowed to exceed working hours.
66
Hazard communication and training programs to prepare workers to recognize and respond to
workplace chemical hazards. Programs should include aspects of hazard identification, safe
operating and materials handling procedures, safe work practices, basic emergency
procedures, and special hazards unique to their jobs.
Provision of suitable personal protection equipment (PPE) (footwear, masks, protective
clothing and goggles in appropriate areas), emergency eyewash and shower stations,
ventilation systems, and sanitary facilities.
Monitoring and record-keeping activities, including audit procedures designed to verify and
record the effectiveness of prevention and control of exposure to occupational hazards, and
maintaining accident and incident investigation reports on file for a period of at least five
years.
9.3.8.2.
Public Safety
To prevent accidents, members of the public should not be allowed to access the construction
site at any time, especially after working hours. This is ensured by proper site closure,
fencing, and securing the site using a night guard. In case, of local monitoring teams visits,
the team should respect the safety codes set by the site management and should be
accompanied by responsible personnel.
9.4.
Mitigation Plan for the Operation Phase
9.4.1.
Litter
To prevent littering along roadways, collection vehicles should be enclosed or covered with
cloth traps. Littering of the surrounding area is prevented by ensuring appropriate unloading
of wastes only in the designed depressions for that purpose and the landfilled material should
be bailed and well protected to prevent any undesired dispersion all over the dumpsite.
9.4.2. Odor Production
To prevent odor production during the composting operation consider the following points:
Proper process design and operation are essential in minimizing potential odor production;
special attention must be devoted to preprocessing, aeration requirements, temperature
control, and mixing requirement. The facility should be able to mix completely and
effectively any required additives, such as nutrients, inoculums or enzymes (if used), and
moisture with the waste material to be composted. The aeration equipment must be sized to
meet peak oxygen demand requirements. Temperature should be adequately controlled. The
bio-filters if used should be regularly checked and maintained to prevent any noxious odors
generation from the plant.
Ensure that the compost operation follows the specific design consideration to prevent
anaerobic fermentation: sufficient velocity, moisture content 50 to 60 % and controlled
airflow rate.
67
Trucks transporting wastes to the compost facility should be covered with appropriate
material which ensures that wastes are not littered and smell to the locals. This should also
include control of the times when wastes are transported through especially busy areas and
residential areas.
Furthermore, the received wastes should not be kept in the facility for more than 1 day before
processing. Wastes separated for recycling should be kept in designated closed containers or
rooms.
9.4.3. Soil, Water and Natural Resources Contamination
Mitigation of soil, water, and natural resources contamination is achieved by ensuring that the
compost produced satisfies quality standards, is not contaminated by pathogens or metals.
Specific measures are recommended to obtain good quality compost that does not lead to
negative environmental impacts. Furthermore, compost quality should be constantly
monitored.
Further mitigation measures to protect the environment are related to the level of compost
contamination and the application rate; only standard application rates should be used
depending on the grade of the compost obtained in the process.
9.4.3.1.
Pathogen Contamination
Most pathogenic organisms found in MSW and other organic material to be composted will
be destroyed at temperatures and exposure times used in controlled composting operations
(typically 55ºC for 15 to 20 days). Only a few can survive at temperatures up to 67ºC for a
short period. Elimination of all pathogenic microorganisms can be accomplished by allowing
the composting waste to reach a temperature of 70ºC for 1 to 2 hours. It is also possible to kill
all the pathogens, weeds, and seeds during the composting process by maintaining the
temperature between 60 and 70ºC for 24 hours.
9.4.3.2.
Metal Contamination
Heavy metal contamination is prevented by magnetic separation of the wastes prior to their
composting or by achieving source separation and that to prevent any chemical reaction of
some unstable metal items during the composting process.
Options for Contaminant Levels reduction in MSW Composts are:
Separate clean organic materials at the source for separate collection and composting: This
option generally requires households to separate their waste into three streams:
1) recyclables,
2) compostable (yard trimmings, food scraps, and non-recyclable paper), and
3) materials destined for disposal.
This option needs and rely mainly on the implementation of awareness campaigns. A variety
of organic waste source separation programs have been developed and implemented
successfully in different villages.
68
Separate contaminants at the source for separate collection and proper disposal or processing:
Unlike the first option, which separates compostable materials from other waste, this
approach attempts to remove those items identified as dangerous from the waste stream.
Problems with this method are that not all targeted contaminants will be separated; some
contaminated wastes cannot be manually separated (e.g., house dust and paint chips) and will
remain in the stream destined for composting. Moreover, any industrial wastes such as byproducts of paper and cardboard industries or even sawdust should be monitored for any
contamination before their integration in the composting process or even a specialized vessel
could be used to treat such kind of compostable industrial by-products.
Separate contaminants from MSW at facility before composting: a wide range of technologies
has been developed to separate contaminants before composting. Manual picking lines, size
separation, magnetic or eddy-current metal recovery, air classification, and other mechanical
approaches can achieve waste separation. However, such approaches rarely target the specific
sources of contaminants, many of which are not particularly amenable to these centralized
separation approaches. Lead is a particularly difficult contaminant, since current mechanical
technologies are not effective at separating lead acid batteries and consumer electronics, the
major sources of lead in MSW. Special bins will be made available for the disposal of
batteries. Table 9.3 presents some of the technologies used for the separation of contaminants
from the waste stream.
Table 9.1: Separation Technologies
Technology
Material Targeted
Screening Large
Film plastics, large paper, and cardboard…
Mid-sized
recyclables, organic metal fragments …
fine
Hand picking Fine
Recyclables, inert material, and chemical
contaminants.
Eddy current separation
Non-ferrous metals
Magnetic separation
Ferrous metals
Air classification
Lights: paper, plastic
Heavies: metals, glass, organics
Wet separation
Floats: organics
Sinks: metals, glass, gravel …
Ballistic separation
69
Light (plastic, paper), Medium (compost),
Heavy (metals, glass, gravel)
Separate contaminants from MSW compost after composting: This approach may be used as
an additional step in the separation process; however, it is rarely used alone since delaying
separation until after composting normally results in the highest levels of metal
contamination.
The earlier sorting occurs during the collection and composting process, the lower the metal
contamination in the finished compost. Once contaminants are mixed with compostable, they
become increasingly difficult to recover. Leaching, abrasion, and mixing disperse
contaminants in a mixed waste stream, and separation becomes less effective with time or
intensive processing. Some contaminants, such as motor oil and oil in filters are liquid and,
therefore, subject to spill. Abrasion during waste handling can break off bits of lead from oil
or weights. Fine dust or paint chips can attach to otherwise clean organic wastes. Even
seemingly, sturdy materials, such as consumer electronics, can contaminate neighboring
organic materials through leaching and direct contact before, and during collection. The
current waste separation method is insufficient and results in a highly impure and thus
hazardous product. Proper separation should be ensured to prevent the occurrence of adverse
negative impacts associated with the usage of contaminated compost.
9.4.3.3.
Compost Quality
Composting process requires some design and operational considerations to achieve optimum
results and good quality compost. The main parameters to be considered for a compost of a
grade A
Temperature: for best results, temperature should be maintained between 50 and 55°C for the
first few days and between 55 and 60°C for the remainder of the active composting period. If
temperature goes beyond 66°C, biological activity is reduced significantly.
Furthermore, the hygiene characteristics require that the compost should be subjected to a
temperature above 65°C during the sanitization phase / thermophilic decomposition phase.
Particle size: most material in MSW tends to be irregular in shape. This irregularity can be
reduced substantially by shredding the organic material (if necessary) before they are
composted. Particle size influences the bulk density, internal friction and flow characteristics,
and drag forces of the materials. A reduced particle size increases contact surface area
subsequently increasing biological reaction rate during aerobic composting process. The most
desirable particle size for composting is less than 5 cm, but larger particles can be composted.
The required particle size depends on the compost requirement and on economic
considerations. For optimum results, the size of solid wastes should be between 25 and 75 mm
(1 and 3 in).
Carbon-to-nitrogen (C/N) ratio: initial carbon to nitrogen ratios (by mass) between 20:1and
30:1 are optimum for aerobic composting. At lower ratios, ammonia is given off. Biological
activity is also impeded at lower ratios. At higher ratios, nitrogen may be a limiting nutrient
causing nitrogen starvation in crops if used as an organic fertilizer.
Moisture content: moisture content should be in the range between 50 and 60 percent-during
the composting process. The optimum value appears to be about 55 percent. pH control: to
achieve an optimum aerobic decomposition, pH should range from 7 to 7.5.
70
To minimize the loss of nitrogen in the form of ammonia gas, pH should not rise above about
8.5. Maturation Grade: the maturity of compost is determined and carried out by the DEWAR
self-heating test, The five categories on the interpretation scale are often grouped into three
major classes, where the lowest grade (I) is called “fresh-compost,” the middle two (II-III) is
referred to as “active compost,” and the upper two (IV-V) are termed “finished compost.”
Compost marketers expect compost to be grade IV or V.
9.4.4. Phytotoxicity
In order to prevent phytotoxicity and soil contamination, compost should be applied in proper
quantities relevant to the crop and soil type. Each crop can tolerate certain chemicals and
nutrients concentrations before it develops signs of phytotoxicity or even nutrient deficiencies
due to competition among various available nutrients Depending on the concentration of these
chemicals in the compost, the total concentration of chemicals and the amount of compost, to
be applied to the crop before phytotoxic levels are reached, can be determined.
9.4.5. Health and Safety Hazards
9.4.5.1.
Occupational Hazards
Health and safety regulations should be imposed on all the workers. Furthermore, workers
should not be allowed to exceed working hours. Workers should have protective clothing
(uniforms), air-filtering headgear, safety shoes, eye and noise protection gears, and puncture
proof impermeable gloves for their protection while manually separating the MSW.
Furthermore, each worker should not exceed the allowable working hours. The facility should
be cleaned frequently to prevent the occurrence of diseases. Safety regulations include life
and health insurance, first aid kits, in addition to regulations concerning the storage and use of
hazardous material such as gas.
9.4.5.2.
Public Hazards
The public should be excluded from access except under careful control as during conducted
tours. Proper fencing at a minimal height of 3 meters around the whole site should be ensured.
Furthermore, the facility should have a night guard. In case, of local monitoring teams visits,
the team should respect the safety codes set by the site management and should be
accompanied by responsible personnel.
Hazard communication and training programs to prepare workers to recognize and respond to
workplace chemical hazards. Programs should include aspects of hazard identification, safe
operating and materials handling procedures, safe work practices, basic emergency
procedures, and special hazards unique to their jobs.
9.4.6. Noise Pollution
To reduce objectionable noises, collection and transport of wastes to the facility should be
performed at times not to create traffic, nor to disturb the public during hours of sleep. Noise
from the plant should not reach objectionable levels, and working hours (7:00 am to 6 pm)
should not be exceeded. The various incoming trucks to the location should be equipped with
71
proper mufflers to reduce noise. Use of specialized electrical generators along with muffler
silencers and electro-mechanical components of the plant should be maintained regularly to
prevent malfunctions and subsequently unpleasant noise generation. Moreover, the location of
the plant in the valley will significantly reduce the spread of generated noise to the
surrounding. Even though, noise control is a requirement in order to provide a safe working
environment for plant operators.
9.4.7. Impacts Related to the Natural Landscape
The facility should not destroy any sensitive habitat or species. However, if detected, sensitive
species or habitats should be conserved. Furthermore, the facility and surrounding area should
be kept clean, and the landscape plan properly implemented. The compost process rejects
should be collected and disposed of in the sanitary landfill with proper liners and then proper
closure is implemented by isolating the land filled cells and restoration of the original
landscape by using native plant and trees species already present in the area.
There should be establishment of a vegetative buffer zone around the compost plant facility to
ensure that the landscape is maintained and runoff levels are minimized.
9.5. Summary of Impact Mitigation
The identification and analysis of potential negative impacts indicated that significant impacts
would occur during construction and operation phases, thus implying the necessity of
implementing mitigation measures recommended for the project design, construction, and
operation (Table 9.4). With respect to the project design, the following considerations should
be included: a drainage system for leachate and runoff management, appropriate paving of the
facility site and storage places, and fencing around the facility or site. With respect to the
construction phase, dust and noise generation, waste production, and health and safety hazards
are the most significant impacts and they are minimized by ensuring safety regulations,
working during daytime and proper site paving and closure.
However, impacts related to the operation phase are the most significant since they have longterm effects, especially impacts related to the application of contaminated compost.
Mitigation measures to prevent the production of contaminated compost include appropriate
operation of the facility according to the specified standards and considerations.
72
Table 9.2: Recommendation Mitigation Measures for Potential Negative Impacts
Design Phase
Impact
Recommendation
mitigation measures
Odor Production
Include a buffer zone Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
around the facility, provide
closed containers for waste
storage
Paving of storage and Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
operation areas, drainage
control system, covering
areas where wastes are
stored (incoming wastes
and maturating compost)
Paving of access roads
Hoima Municipal Council
Resources
contamination
Dust Production
Responsibility
Landscape esthetics Include a landscape plan
and visual amenity
Facility site fencing (3 m Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
Public hazard
height)
Included in design
Litter
Fencing and providing a Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
closed depression pit for Included in design
unloading waste
Construction Phase
Impact
Recommendation
mitigation measures
Noise and dust
On-site operation activities, Contractor
maintenance and repair of
equipment,
control
of
timing of noise emissions,
informing local community
Construction waste
Waste
transport
and Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
disposal in quarries for reuse or in sanitary landfills
Health and safety
Provide protective clothing, Hoima Municipal Council /Contractor
follow
general
safety
regulations, prevent unauthorized access to the
construction site by fencing
and night security guard
73
Responsibility
Operation Phase
Litter
Covered collection vehicles,
unloading waste only in the
Hoima
Municipal
/Contractor
Council
designed depression pit
Proper process operation, Hoima Municipal Council
maintaining
aerobic
conditions, and storing waste
in designated areas
Odor production
Natural
resources Ensuring the production of Hoima Municipal Council
contamination
good quality, safe compost
according to the suggested
standards, and appropriate
disposal of contaminated
compost
Phytotoxicity
Ensure standard application Hoima Municipal Council
rates
Water contamination
Conduct
pre-construction Contractor,
community
water quality assessment to Hoima municipal council
minimize pollution
Protection of community
water
points
from
contamination, by fencing
them off
Avoid servicing of vehicles
close to water points and put
in place mechanisms of
handling waste oils so that
they don’t pollute water
source
Health
hazards
Noise
74
and
safety Always
use
protective Hoima Municipal Council
clothing and equipment,
implement safety regulations,
prevent unauthorized access
to the facility, keep the
facility clean
Control waste collection and Hoima Municipal Council
transport timing, do not
exceed working hours
and
Landscape esthetic
Methane
reduction,
compost
heap
temperature
and
moisture
Keep the facility clean, do not Hoima Municipal Council
litter, implement and maintain
the landscape plan
Regular
monitoring
of
combustible gas (methane) levels
at the composting site to ensure
the control of fire hazards.
Environmental audits of all
operations and equipment should
be and more than 36 months
conducted in accordance with the
EIA Regulations, 1998, that is, no
less than 12 months and more than
36 months after commencement of
the project
75
10. MONITORING PLAN
Hoima Municipal Council with the technical support from NEMA will be responsible for the
environmental monitoring activities during the operation of the facility (for an expected
period of 25 years) whereas, during the construction phase the Municipality and NEMA will
undertake the monitoring
Environmental monitoring will be carried out during both the construction and operation
phases to ensure appropriate operation of the facility, the implementation, and effectiveness of
the recommended mitigation measures, the production of good quality and safe compost, and
the response to unanticipated environmental impacts.
10.4. Standards for Compost Quality
To determine the safety of compost applied to land NEMA concerns itself mainly with two
vectors, which might cause pollution, mainly pathogens and heavy metals. In general,
compost should be rich in organic matter, be low in soluble salts, meet all regulatory
standards for its end-use, contain negligible amount of germinable weed seeds , have no
undesirable odor, have a consistent pH (usually near neutral), and have a moisture content of
at least less than 50 percent. Pathogens: Salmonella sp. should be absent completely. This is
achieved by maintaining the operation temperature at 65ºC or greater for at least 7 days
during the Sanitization phase.
10.5. Monitoring of compost quality
The compost should be tested for metal contamination, the presence of pathogens, and
material composition (Table 7.4). Lab tests on the final compost produced should be
performed on a monthly basis to determine the safety of the material produced for land
disposal. If the compost does not meet suggested standards (presented in the impact
mitigation section), it should be discarded to a landfill or used as daily cover. The parameters
to be monitored are:
•
The absence of pathogens
•
The level of heavy metals and in particular the limits of mercury, cadmium, and lead to be
within the allowable limits set by local standards for mainly Grade A and Grade B
Compost.
•
While the other Grades, such as Grade C should be used only for landscaping,
rehabilitation of quarries and green space along traffic roads. Grade D can be used in
landfills as rehabilitation material.
•
Material identification analysis, to identify the product obtained as compost based on the
organic matter and carbon content (C/N ratio)
76
•
Determination of maturity grade / decomposition degree (DEWAR self-heating test). The
DEWAR self-heating test may be utilized by producers under field conditions where a
temperature of 20-25°C can be maintained around the testing vessel.
•
Compost samples should be collected from different compost bags (at least four bags) in
order to constitute a representative sample, and analysis could be performed in any
certified laboratory or from the compost, pile according to sampling procedure.
•
This would include a full characterization of the compost that will be a key component in
the marketing process of the produce showing the parameters for declaration to the user.
10.6. Odor Monitoring
The ideal goal for a compost facility would be to have an undetectable odor level at the
property line as measured by the odor panel or alternatively a buffer zone specifying
minimum distances to the nearest occupied residences.
10.7. Water quality monitoring
Water quality monitoring in the proposed garbage composting project site should be in three
stages. These are prior to project commencement, for establishing the water quality baseline;
during the construction phase and; during operation of the composting plant sources of water
to be monitored shall be community water points such as rivers, streams, wells and
underground water points. A monitoring programme will be implemented as presented below;
Standard water sampling techniques would be used in sampling. The samples collected will
be sent to an accredited laboratory for analysis. The results of pre-construction monitoring
shall be made available to the proponent as part of baseline data.
Parameters of water quality such as Turbidity, PH, and coliforms should be periodically
monitored before in all tributaries of rivers used for domestic purposes and wells used by the
community also during operation.
10.8. Air Quality Monitoring
It is recommended that the air quality should be monitored through visual and using dust level
sampler such as the SITRANS LR 400, and personal respirable dust samplers like the
SIMSLINII. Visible suspended particles and potential sources of air pollution should be
monitored before construction and periodically during operation.
Activities that generate extreme noise such as mixing of concrete will not be done in the
night. The contractor will be required to provide Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for all
employees working at noisy areas, and will be monitored. The site supervisor will monitor the
wearing of these PPE’s and determined their effectiveness for required remedial actions.
10.9. Recording of complaints and response
All the grievances of the communities adjacent to the proposed site and garbage truck access
route / road should be regularly recorded and thereafter a timely response accorded to these
77
grievances/ complaints and an agreed solution be reached upon between the municipal council
and the aggrieved party.
Monitoring of the situation should continue so as to counter reoccurrence of the problem(s).
Hoima Municipal Council should start regularly recording and responding to complaints.
10.10. Other Monitoring Activities
•
Litter, health and safety monitoring is achieved continuously or weekly through visual
inspections, and recording of accidents.
•
Noise monitoring is achieved by measuring noise levels in the facility and surrounding
area only after complaints, since the facility is fairly distant from residential areas located
in a valley that will prevent the dispersion of noise to the surroundings.
10.11. Monitoring Responsibilities
NEMA and Hoima Municipal Council will be responsible for the monitoring of various
impacts to ensure the proper functioning and implementation of mitigation measures along
with environmental management plan presented in the EIS are adhered too. Weekly
inspections should be performed to ensure that the mitigation measures are implemented and
that the facility is not adversely affecting the environment.
10.11.1.
Construction Phase
During the construction phase, the contractor will be responsible for monitoring of dust and
noise emissions in addition to health and safety hazards along with the proper implementation
of the construction operation. The following parameters will be continuously monitored at the
construction site:
•
Noise levels
•
Landscape visual inspection
•
Health and safety
10.11.2.
Operation Phase
During the operation phase, quarterly monitoring of some critical parameters is necessary, and
will be the responsibility of Hoima Municipal Council. . The parameters that will be
monitored at the facility site include water quality of surface runoff), noise level, odor
generation, compost quality, health and safety, and landscape esthetics. Environmental
parameters to be monitored with their frequency, duration, and responsible body are sum
Environmental monitoring will be part of the overall garbage compositing plant. Table 10.3
gives critical parameters that need to be monitored. The results of the monitoring can form
part of the annual garbage compositing audit. According to the National Environment Act
Cap 153, a developer is supposed to keep record and make annual reports to NEMA outlining
the extent to which the project is conforming to the predictions made. Regular Environmental
78
Audits will be carried out to ensure that all issues that are identified in this EIS are properly
handled including activities and mitigation measures adhered to.
Table 10.1: Environmental Monitoring for the Garbage Composting Plant
Location
Parameter
Frequency of monitoring
Nearest river stream
Water quality
Monthly
Leachate sump
Leachate quality and quantity
Monthly
In the compost plant
Air quality
Continuous
Road and warning sign
Damage, Maintenance
Continuous
Surface water pool
Sediment build
quality
Perimeter fencing
Damage, Maintenance
Continuous
Climatic conditions
Rain, Wind Direction
Continuous
up, water Monthly and/or after major
storm events
10.12. Emergency Response Plan
Along with the monitoring plan of the Hoima Municipal solid waste management
Plan/strategy, a contingency plan should be available in case of emergency. This plan focuses
mainly on setting various emergency scenarios along with a specific response plan for each
situation. The main concern is during the operation phase when the compost plant where any
unexpected discontinuation in the plant operation could rapidly lead to an accumulation of
untreated wastes in the premises of the plant and eventually to health and environmental
problems.
However, the type of technology used can facilitate the tasks of remediation. Such is the case
of in vessel composting, specifically the drums where more than one operating unit is
installed hence each drum is independent, and therefore the likelihood of having all the drums
malfunctioning is very low.
In additionally, the plant should be able to have its own autonomy with respect to energy
supply in order to account for any shortage in electricity or fuel.
In case monitoring results show high pathogenic contamination of the final compost product,
thorough investigation should be conducted in order to detect the contaminated waste source
or the faulty composting process. Furthermore, in case vessel drum composting is used it is
recommended to select drums for specific organic waste streams in order to prevent
contamination. Moreover, the waste streams can be diverted into specific drums
Ultimately, the plant should be equipped according to international and local safety codes of
industrial plants such as fire extinguishers, emergency doors, first aid kits, alarms and others.
79
10.13. Environmental Management Plan
The development and implementation of an effective environmental management plan in
Uganda is hindered by weak institutional capacity for effective environmental management
and protection, low environmental regulatory enforcement, and shortage of financial
resources and qualified personnel in the environmental field. NEMA could strengthen the
institutional framework, however, further strengthening and enhancement of cross-sectorial
coordination, planning, and control mechanisms is needed in order to effectively protect and
enhance environmental conditions.
The implementation of an environmental management plan on the level of the proposed
project could enhance environmental conditions. The objectives of this plan are to reduce the
waste volume, recover recyclable material, achieve better quality compost, and develop the
compost markets. Three main tasks are suggested to achieve the specified objectives: training,
conducting local awareness campaigns, and ensuring markets for compost.
As part of the proposed project, Hoima Municipal Council will be responsible for
implementing an environmental management plan, which aims at:
•
Developing a local team to help in the awareness campaign;
•
Implementing an awareness campaign regarding the sorting of waste;
•
Training housewives and young on alternative solid waste management systems.
•
The training workshops having some common objectives with the awareness campaign
will be also opened for the locals.
80
Table 10.2: Garbage Composite Management Plan
Project Impact
Mitigation Measure
Responsible Party
General
Air Quality Pollution
Composting management;
Developer- Hoima
Municipal Council
Capping systems that keep the compost site
and landfill from releasing harmful gases
into the air;
Careful design of the composting site and
siting far away from nearest settlements.
Operational and maintenance procedures
will be followed at the composting site; and
Wastes transported in time before they start
decomposing
Water Pollution
Capture or direct all leachate to absorption
in sand or soil;
Developer
Construction of a leachate tank to receive all
the leachates;
Constant analysis of compost needs in order
to be able to monitor loads of chemicals or
other toxic substances that may end up into
the water bodies;
Enforcement of water standards and
constant research on pre-composting and
composting control mechanisms is to be
conducted; and
Continuous monitoring of groundwater at
the compost site for contamination
81
Project Impact
Mitigation Measure
Responsible Party
Dust Generation
Use of dust suppressants as far as possible, Developer
during compost plant construction;
Workers availed with dust masks at all times
during construction; and
Neighborhood warning on the possible
generation of dust during construction times.
Vegetation loss
Vegetation will only be cleared where there Developer/
is going to be construction of structures;
NEMA
Emphasis should be on planting trees along
the compost site to help in the environment;
and
The compound of the composting plant
which is not used by the composite or land
fill should be re-vegetated to ensure that the
vegetation of the area is reborn.
Noise Pollution
Construction equipments should be a good Developer
condition, operating optimally and with
operational noise mufflers;
Discourage importation of old trucks and
tractors to transport wastes; and
All activities carried out should comply with
the National Noise and Control Regulations,
2003
Soil Erosion
Stabilization of the soil along the edges of Developer/ NEMA
the proposed composting site since it is on a
somewhat hilly area;
Planting of grass in the compound and on
the steep parts of the composting site to
reduce the runoff; and
Incorporation of soil conservation measures
during construction in order to help mitigate
the damage caused by erosion
82
Project Impact
Waste Generation
Construction debris
Mitigation Measure
Responsible Party
Store wastes only in the designated places Developer/NEMA
/ and removed and disposed of regularly;
Periodic inspection of waste storage areas
and facilities should be conducted to help in
ensuring proper handling of waste materials;
There should be a handling protocol, e.g.,
waste storage away from public view, and
provision of retention areas to contain
accidental spills of toxic, hazardous, and
harmful construction materials, such as
caustic and acidic substances, waste oil, and
diesel will be prepared and implemented at
the site.
Information dissemination on prevailing Developer
Occupation health and
diseases in the project area, and how to
safety
minimize exposure and transmission;
Mounting regular HIV-AIDS awareness
campaigns.
Availing condoms to the construction crews
and workers;
Well stocked First Aid kits at the site with a
well trained personnel to quickly administer
it in case of injuries; and
Provision of workers with personal
protective gears like boot, overalls, gloves
and smell masts for their noses.
10.14. Training Requirements
Two types of training workshops are required. The first workshop is to increase
environmental awareness of all individuals concerned with the project (construction,
operation, mitigation, monitoring), whereas the second is to train the workers who will be
involved in the facility operation.
83
10.15. Closure Plan
The closure of the garbage compositing plant is the final part of the process of operation and
management. The main objective of garbage compositing closure is to rehabilitate the site so
that it is environmentally acceptable and suited to the implementation of the proposed enduse. The closure has to consider the rehabilitation and end use and the long-term impacts of
the closed garbage compositing plant. The closure plan of the garbage will involve:
• Inform NEMA of the intention to close one year before closure by preparing a Closure
Report that will contain intended end-use, anti-erosion measures, management of
demolish debris, final shaping and landscaping, permanent storm water diversion and
monitoring program.
• Landscaping and final cover of all excavated parts of the garbage; and
• Continuous monitoring of leachates, water and air quality, soil erosion and vegetation
around the rehabilitated site.
10.16. Commitment to the EIS
Hoima Municipal Council is committed to implementing the conditions of approval once
given by NEMA based on this environmental Impact statement finding. NEMA has also has
an agreement of understanding with the council arising from the joint ownership of the
composite facility by NEMA and Hoima Municipal Council.
84
11. CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, some unavoidable minor negative impacts often associated with construction
works should be expected. This is the case concerning clearing and excavation of the earth
surface for the construction of windrows. Such undesirable impacts are limited, and are going
to be mitigation upon the commissioning of the garbage Composting plant. Environmental
Management and Monitoring plans have been proposed with this aim. Appropriate
environmental mitigation measures that are practicable and achievable have been reviewed in
this EIS and should therefore be implemented together with the Monitoring Plan.
Because of the expected positive outcomes from the Garbage composting plant and land fill,
It is therefore recommended that the project be approved for implementation on condition that
the identified key issues are addressed.
.
85
REFERENCES
Biswas A. K. and Geping 0.1987, Guidelines for environmental impact assessment in
developing countries. In: Environmental Impact Assessment for developing countries. Eds.
Biswas AK and Geping O. pp. 191 -218. United Nations University. New York.
East African Mammals. An Atlas of Evolution in Africa. Vol. I and III Part B. Academic
Press. London, New York, Kingdom J. 1997
East African Mammals. An Atlas of Evolution in Africa. Vol. I and III Part B. Academic
Press. London, New York, Kingdom J. 1997
Ecaat et al.1999.Proposed Action Plan for Municipal Solid Waste Management in Uganda
Environmental Assessment Source Book, Vol. 1, Policies, Procedures and Cross-sectoral
issues, Environment Department, World Bank Technical Paper No. 139, The World Bank,
Washington, D.C.
Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Uganda, National Environment
management Authority (NEMA), 1997.
http://www.magicsoil.com/MSREV2/environmental_impacts_of_compost.htm
http://www.unep.or.jp/Ietc/ESTdir/Pub/MSW/SP/sp4/SP4_3.asp Newsletter and Technical
Publications: Municipal Solid Waste Management
Lakhdar A, Hafsi C, Rabhi M, Debez A, Montemurro F, Abdelly C, Jedidi N and Ouerghi Z.
2008 Application of municipal solid waste compost reduces the negative effects
of saline water in Hordeum maritimum L.Bioresour Technol (15):7160-7
Landlands.B.W,1974.The soils of Uganda, department of Geography, Makerere University.
National Environmental Management Policy, National Environment management Authority
(NEMA), 1994
Peigné J. and Girardin P. 2004 Environmental Impacts of Farm-Scale Composting Practices
Water, Air, & Soil Pollution Volume 153, Numbers 1-4
The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations 1998,
The Land Act, 1998
The Local Government Act, 1997
The National Environment (wetlands, river banks and lake shores management) Regulations,
2000
The National Environmental Statute, 1995
The Physical Planning Act, 2010
86
The Public Health Act, 1964
The Uganda Wildlife Statute, 1996. Statutes supplement No.8 The Uganda Gazette: 32.
87
ANNEX 1: TERMS OF REFERENCE
88
ANNEX 2: MINUTES OF MEETING
Minutes of the meeting held at Kibati village on the proposed garbage compositing and
recycling plant. The meeting was conducted on 11 th December 2010 starting at 2.30pm
Agenda
Prayer
Introduction from the LC1 Chairperson of Kibati Village
Briefing from the consultant team
Reactions and views raised by the locals present at the meeting
Remarks from the consultant on the views raised by the locals
Closing remarks by the area Chairperson
Chairperson
The meeting was chaired by the Chairman of the local area Mr. Kibaigana Lawrence, who
welcomed the team of consultants to Kibati village who gave a brief highlight of the purpose of
the consultants visit to the benefit of the community present.
Consultant
The team of consultants comprising of Bio diversity experts, environmentalist (team leader),
pollution experts and a physical planner, informed the community that the purpose of the
meeting is to collect people’s views on the proposed garbage composting and recycling plant to
be built in their area so that these views are captured in the EIA report for NEMA approval.
The consultant informed the community that this exercise (EIA) is being conducted by Hoima
Municipal council who is the client and developer of the proposed Garbage composting and
recycling plant.
The consultant explained the requirement of this meeting by laws governing developments such
as a garbage compositing and recycling plant. He further explained that this project is a modern
garbage compositing and recycling plant. This project will require water and electricity to
function.
The consultant told the community that garbage is a very important resource (Gold) if properly
managed it can produce fertilizers and energy for domestic cooking needs. This plant will not
smell because it will under go processes to remove moisture and other measures such as planting
trees around and discovering where the wind blows so that it is altered from settlements, will be
enhanced.
The consultant informed the locals that this is a world bank funded project which will come
along with waste collection trucks to ensure that all garbage produced in Hoima Municipal
council is collected on time to avoid long standing skips. The consultant indicated that there is
going to be separation of wastes at both the source and at the plant to determine the Bio
89
degradable and Non Biodegradable wastes. The non bio degradable (e.g. polythene bags) will be
recycled while the Bio degradable (food staffs) will be composited to make fertilizers and
manure.
Reactions from the community
All the members of the community who included the immediate neighbours of the site; Mr.
Silver Assimwe, Lubanje Simon, Byenkya Steven, Late. Kajamulunbi Charles’ family and the
Defence Sec. Mr. Peter, were given chance to raise their views and reactions. However heeding
to the request by the locals, no names were recorded in line with the reactions and questions. The
following reactions were raised;
What are the benefits to us as locals of the area and immediate neighbours of the project?
When is the work commencing because presently the whole area is littered with wastes that
smell and attract flies to the whole neighbourhood;
There is no wrangle and objection to the site because that is where the municipality has been
dumping its wastes. We are however interested in seeing that the area is improved as you are
suggesting so that the sanitation of the area is improved by highlighting the negative issues;
Where is the contractor of the project get his workers, because we are interested in working but
you find that the contractors often come with their own people which is not acceptable to us
because we also have many un employed locals who need some income;
Is there a possibility that if the municipal council fails to raise the required acreage, the project
will not be implemented or will they still implement it, even with in the available land;
Incase water is piped to service the modern composting plant, shall we as the locals be allowed
to tap for our domestic needs as one of the benefits of this project in the area or the water will be
restricted to only the compositing site;
Will they tarmac for us this road since we already have BAT in the area, hence it is expected that
the traffic will be high;
How will the respective Division be involved in the management and gaining from the revenues
of the compost plant or all the management and benefits will go to the municipal council;
We are very happy that we have been consulted and informed in details of what is going to take
place instead of relaying on rumours, however, in case there is occurrence of a problem like
smell, how shall we be helped;
I normally hear from people that factories emit gasses that affect the environment of the local
area and the health of the people in the area. How is this problem going to be addressed so that
we don’t get sick?
Hoima Municipal council should cover the trucks transporting wastes and dispose off wastes in
time because often wastes smell since they are transported when already decomposing.
90
There should be provision of a clinic/health unit in our area so that any accidents are easily
treated.
Hoima properly dealt with the land owner and since there is no land wrangle the project is
welcome.
Reactions from the consultant
Project construction will commence as soon as the EIS is approved and the funds are released to
Hoima Municipal council.
One of the major benefits of the project to the locals will be employment opportunities,
elimination of smell, scavengers and flies.
It is requirement by law that at least 70% of the work force is reserved for people from the local
area. Therefore whoever will be in charge has to oblige to this requirement and while giving
jobs, gender equality should be emphasized;
Not all jobs on the garbage compositing and recycling plant require skilled laborers. There are
going to be many jobs at the plant which don’t require any skills.
The municipal council has a responsibility to ensure that all its citizens have access to safe, clean
drinking water; therefore if they are supplying water to the compositing plant they will put a
provision for the locals to tap water for their purposes.
As a team of consultant, we are not in position to guarantee whether or when the road will be
tarmacked, however we know that once the road becomes major with a lot of activities, there is
always a tendency to tarmac it.
The management of the proceeds of the compositing plant will be decided administratively by
the Municipal Council and the respective Division and local area.
Within the compositing plant there is going to an office and a person in charge, in case there is a
problem the locals through their leaders can approach him/her and talk out issues.
This is a modern plant which will use electricity to remove the moisture which normally causes
the smell.
The land where the garbage compositing plant is going to be located is sufficient because the
municipal council has acquired additional 7 acres required to qualify for funding.
Conclusion
The meeting was then concluded at about 06.00 pm by the chairman of the area who thanked the
consultants for coming to educate them on the upcoming development in their area.
91
APPENDIX 3: LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED
92
93
ANNEX 4: PROJECT DESIGNS
Plan Roof
Administration Block
94
Administration Block Details
Window and Door Drawings
95
Section Details
Typical Roof Plan
96
Struts Details
97
Typical Tank Details
Typical Truss Details
98
Typical Washing- changing rooms
Gents- Ladies rooms
99