PROJECT IDENTIFICATION FORM (PIF)
PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project
THE GEF TRUST FUND
S
Submission Date: 25 September 2005
Re-submission Date: 15 Oct 07/21 Jan 08
PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
11 February 2008
1
GEFSEC PROJECT ID : 2926
GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID: GF/CPR/08/XXX
COUNTRY(IES): Global (People's Republic of China)
PROJECT TITLE: Environmentally sound management and
disposal of obsolete POPs pesticides and other POPs wastes in
China
GEF AGENCY(IES): United Nations Industrial Development
Organization (UNIDO)
OTHER EXECUTING PARTNERS: SEPA/FECO-China
GEF FOCAL AREAS: Persistent Organic Pollutants
GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(S): POPs SP1, SP2, SP3
INDICATIVE CALENDAR
Expected Dates
Milestones
Work Program (for FSP)
CEO Endorsement/Approval
GEF Agency Approval
Implementation Start
Mid-term Review
Implementation Completion
April 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2011
February 2013
A. PROJECT FRAMEWORK (Expand table as necessary)
Project Objective:
Environmentally sound management (ESM) and disposal of obsolete stockpile pesticides and other POPs related
wastes in fulfillment of China’s commitment to the national implementation of the Stockholm Convention (SC) and the National Strategy for
Hazardous Waste.
The presence of geographically dispersed historic stockpiles of POPs wastes such as pesticides and dioxins rich incinerator fly-ash presents a
significant source and ongoing pathway risk to environmental receptors especially groundwater and surface water resources.
The scale of the risk and its global consequences, including wide geographic dispersion, makes it a uniquely Chinese issue with such transboundary impact.
The scope of this project incorporates the management and disposal of pesticides stockpiles and POPs wastes, qualitative environmental risk
assessment of the various sites, and management and disposal of dioxins rich incineration fly ash.
Project
Components
1
Investment,
TA, or
STA**
1. Formulation of
regulations and
policies consistent
with relevant
requirements of
Stockholm
Convention for lifecycle management of
POPs wastes
TA
2. Strengthening of
institutional
structures at national
and local levels for
life-cycle
management
including site
inspection, QERA,
handling, collection,
packaging, labeling,
transportation, and
disposal
TA
Expected
Outcomes
Expected Outputs
Strengthened
legal and
regulatory
framework
for ESM and
disposal of
POPs wastes
1.1 Regulations enacted
requiring ESM and disposal
of POPs wastes
Improved
institutional
capacity at
all levels of
POPs waste
disposal
management
2.1 Communication and
coordination system between
the project organizer and the
national competent
authorities responsible for
POPs and HW disposal.
Indicative GEF
Financing*
($)
Indicative Cofinancing*
%
($)
Total ($)
%
850,000
30
2,000,000
70
2,850,000
800,000
32
1,700,000
68
2,500,000
1.2 Market based economic
policies promoting ESM and
disposal of POPs wastes
1.3 Technical standards and
guidelines including
qualitative environmental
risk assessment (QERA)
methodology to be employed
2.2 Institutional capacity
enhanced for collecting and
analyzing POPs waste
inventory data, developing
strategy, and evaluating and
selecting disposal
technologies.
Project ID number will be assigned initially by GEFSEC.
1
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
2.3 Institutional capacity
enhanced for environmental
impact assessment for
disposal facilities, licensing
for operational permit
management, and operation
monitoring procedures of
disposal facilities.
3. Qualitative
environmental risk
assessment tool to
enable prioritization
of sites at specific
risks and for better
management of these
in future actions.
TA
4. Implementation of
pre-disposal activities
including qualitative
environmental risk
assessment, clearance
of stockpiled
pesticide waste,
packaging,
transportation,
storage at the
disposal sites.
TA
5. Waste disposal
operations
implemented using
fixed or mobile
treatment
technologies
TA
The
component
will also
qualitatively
assess and
prioritize the
residual
environment
al risks
remaining on
the sites.
3.1 A prioritized inventory of
potentially contaminated
sites
The central
outcome will
be the
removal for
disposal of
10,000 tons
of POPs
stockpiled
pesticides as
source
contaminants
for the
vulnerable
local
ecosystem
receptors.
4.1 Safe and effective handling,
packaging, transportation of
obsolete POPs pesticides for
disposal.
Once off
destruction
of 10,000
tons
stockpiled
POPs
pesticides
and disposal
of a
continuous
waste stream
of 11,000
tons dioxins
rich
incineration
fly ash
5.1 Analysis and evaluation of
adaptability of technically
feasible and commercially
proven technologies for
POPs waste destruction and
decontamination
600,000
30
1,400,000
70
2,000,000
3.2 The information to provide a
basis for a program of
quantitative environmental
risk assessments of the
prioritized sites, which will
ultimately lead to the
detailed planning and
remediation of these sites in
the future
3,359,000
26
9,550,000
74
12,909,000
3,750,000
20
15,000,000
80
18,750,000
100,000
9
1,000,000
91
1,100,000
4.2 Methodologies, procedures
and protocols established
and implemented for dioxins
rich incineration fly ash
collection, packaging,
transportation, and storage in
selected provinces between
waste generators and
destruction facility operators
4.3 Measures taken for the
public awareness raising and
participation including
involvement in stockpile
reporting, emergency
response, and health and
safety protection
5.2 Promotion of technology
transfer and investment by
identification and
implementation of
innovative mechanisms for
PPPs
5.3 Construction, certification,
operation, and supervision of
fixed or mobile treatment
facilities
5.4 Exploration of the feasibility
to extend the POPs waste
disposal capacity for CFCs
destruction
6. Development of
national and local
programs and/or
projects to further
address POPs wastes
beyond the scope of
TA
The national
or local
programs or
projects for
clean-up of
POPs waste
6.1 Mainstreaming the
Stockholm Convention
requirements into the
national survey on soil
pollution
2
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
the project
and the
related
remediation.
6.2 Development of programs
and/or projects for POPs,
clean-up of POPs wastes and
the related remediation.
6.3 A series of technical and
fund-raising workshops
carried out for participants
from home and abroad.
7. Project
management
Established project management office, stakeholder partnerships,
and relevant meetings
500,000
Total project costs
9,959,000
42
24
700,000
31,350,000
58
76
1,200,000
41,309,000
B. INDICATIVE FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)
Project Preparation
GEF Grant
Co-financing
Total
Project
350,000
120,000
470,000
Agency Fee
9,959,000
31,350,000
41,309,000
Total
995,900
11,304,900
31,470,000
42,774,900
995,900
C. INDICATIVE CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE ($), IF AVAILABLE
Co-financing Source
Project Government Contribution
GEF Agency (ies)
Bilateral Aid Agency (ies)
Multilateral Agency (ies)
Private Sector
NGO
Others
Total co-financing
Cash
In-kind
Total
4,000,000
50,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A
N.A.
4,050,000
1,250,000
300,000
N.A
N.A.
25,870,000
N.A.
N.A.
27,420,000
5,250,000
350,000
N.A
N.A.
25,870,000
N.A.
N.A.
31,470,000
PART II: PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
A. STATE THE ISSUE, HOW THE PROJECT SEEKS TO SOLVE IT, AND THE EXPECTED GLOBAL
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS TO BE DELIVERED:
1.
The risks from the storage of obsolete pesticide products containing persistent organic pollutants (POPs) are a major problem in China.
For decades obsolete and unwanted POPs pesticide stockpiles have been building and accumulating. The total quantity of stockpiled
POPs pesticide POPs in China is in the order of 10,000 tons with DDT being 6,000 tons and HCB, chlordane and mirex making the
balance.
2.
Based on the information of NIP, the POPs pesticide wastes are sparsely distributed in 44 POPs pesticide manufacturing plants and
numerous distribution and end user sites.
3.
The obsolete POPs pesticides are currently in dangerous storage conditions such as outdoor storage and simple enclosure, leaking
from rusted containers, contaminating ground water and soils and poisoning human health and the environment. Sample photographs
are presented in Appendix III. The absence of adequate capacity and infrastructure for the ESM and disposal of the above POPs
wastes in China poses significant risks and consequences to human health and the environment. Current practices dominated by
incineration without consideration of the SC requirements under the national hazardous waste program for POPs waste disposal are
likely to generate secondary pollution such as dioxin and furan formation and release.
4.
In addition, it is estimated that fly ash containing a high level of dioxin from incineration of hazardous wastes and medical waste
amounts to 11,000 tons per annum. According to the current regulations, these solid wastes should be disposed to landfill following
stabilization, or irreversibly destructed and transformed into environmentally harmless substances. Limited by site, technology and
concept, solid waste incineration plants commonly adopt storage or simple landfill disposal of hazardous thereby increasing the
potential POPs pollution risk to water resources.
5.
The project concept is illustrated in Appendix I: Project logic. The project will facilitate the risk assessment of these stockpiles in their
environmental context and systematically manage integrated predisposal activities and processes such as waste characterization,
collection, packaging, labeling, storage and waste transportation. The ultimate generic disposal options are illustrated in Table 1 and
Table 2 in Appendix I where the relative environmental risks, feasibility and costs of each option are weighted. Within each generic
disposal option there are many individual technologies. For example more than 30 technologies can be identified as non combustion
3
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
by USEPA and UNEP. However the commercially available ones suitable for transformation and irreversible destruction of the POPs
waste matrices mentioned above, needs to be closely verified.
6.
The project will strengthen the overall management and disposal of POPs containing products and wastes in an environmentally sound
manner and eliminate the risk of POPs to human health and the environment in China and globally. Methodologies for POPs waste
site risk assessment, handling, clearance, collection, labeling, packaging, transportation, disposal, and emergency response procedures
will be developed according to strict internationally accepted technical standards and guidelines including those developed by COP to
the Basel Convention. The emphasis will be put on the cost-effectiveness and sustainability of the proposed measures.
7.
The expected global environmental benefits to be delivered include the complete irreversible destruction and transformation of
thousands tons of obsolete POPs pesticides and dioxin rich fly ash from waste incinerators in an environmentally sound and costeffective manner.
B.
DESCRIBE
THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH NATIONAL PRIORITIES/PLANS (Is the proposal
consistent with country priorities? How does it build on ongoing programs, policies and political commitments?)
8.
9.
The National Program of Disposal Facilities Construction for Hazardous Wastes and Medical Wastes Treatment was approved in
2004. It is a pure engineering construction program in which 31 hazardous waste treatment and disposal centers will be constructed to
dispose of hazardous waste by incinerators. The project will interact with and influence the Program by:

Introducing life cycle management into current hazardous waste management systems, including qualitative site
environmental risk assessment, waste characterization, and pre-disposal treatment involving handling, collection, packaging,
labeling, transportation, and storage of stockpiled POPs pesticides;

Mainstreaming relevant Stockholm Convention requirements for ESM of POPs stockpiles and wastes into current legal and
institutional management structure; and

Expanding technology selection for destruction of stockpiled obsolete POPs pesticide waste thereby generating global
environmental benefits.
China National Implementation Plan requires the development of comprehensive strategies, including characterization, management,
and disposal of wastes consisting of, containing, or contaminated by POPs, and requires the demonstration of cost-effective and
environmentally sound technologies, including but not exclusively incineration and non-combustion options, as well as capacity
building for their commercial application. Environmentally sound management of POPs wastes is also one of the important elements
set in the National 11th Five-Year Plan on Economic and Social Development of China.
According to the NIP, China shall:





Establish a preliminary system for the environmentally sound management of POPs stockpiles and wastes by 2010;
Complete the environmentally sound management and disposal of 30% of pesticide POPs wastes identified nationwide by
2010;
Begin to achieve the environmentally sound management and disposal of pesticide POPs wastes across the country by 2015;
Fulfill the environmentally sound management and disposal of identified Dioxin wastes released by key industries by 2015;
and
Update the lists of POPs wastes and POPs contaminated sites, and gradually eliminate contamination caused by them as the
long-term objective.
10. The proposed project will play a vital role in supporting China for fulfilling the objectives.
C.
DESCRIBE THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH GEF STRATEGIES AND FIT WITH STRATEGIC
PROGRAMS:
11. The project is consistent with Strategic Program 1, 2 and 3 of persistent organic pollutants focal area strategy and strategic
programming for GEF-4 respectively:



D.
Strengthening Capacities for NIP Implementation, with the objective to strengthen and/or build the capacity required in
eligible countries to implement their Stockholm Convention NIPs in a sustainable, effective and comprehensive manner, while
building upon and contributing to strengthening a country’s foundational capacities for sound management of chemicals more
generally.
Partnering in investments needed for NIP implementation to achieve impacts in the reduction of POPs production, use and
releases, and reduce the stress on human health and the environment caused by POPs, including through promoting the use of
substitute products or alternative practices that prevent or reduce the generation and/or release of POPs.
Meeting the future challenges that lay ahead in the implementation of the Stockholm Convention, the GEF will support
projects that demonstrate and promote the replication of environmentally sound, alternative products to POPs, or the
substitution of materials and processes to prevent POPs formation.
OUTLINE THE COORDINATION WITH OTHER RELATED INITIATIVES (Coordination with other GEF agencies,
organizations, and stakeholders involved in related initiatives; if similar projects exist in the same country/region, including GEF
projects, report on synergies/complementarities with this proposal and demonstrate that there is no duplication).
4
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
12. The project will ensure close cooperation and coordination with the GEF projects on phase out and substitution of POPs pesticides and
medical waste incineration to enhance the sustainability relevant to POPs waste disposal. The project will monitor the progress of the
non-combustion projects in Slovakia and the Philippines and will incorporate results as appropriate when available. The project will
also seek to achieve synergies with the on-going efforts under Montreal Protocol implementation framework. The project will explore
the possibility of CFCs disposal using the experience and facilities generated by this project.
E. DESCRIBE THE INCREMENTAL REASONING OF THE PROJECT (What would happen without GEF support and what
would be the expected change in global environmental benefits):
13. Without GEF support a large country like China would not be able to access the sustainable approaches for environmentally sound
management and disposal of the large amounts of POPs stockpiles and other hazardous wastes and will continue to adopt
unsustainable POPs waste management, treatment and disposal practices with possible negative impact on the global environment.
With GEF support and technical assistance of UNIDO, China will be able to fully access new and innovative destruction technologies
and therefore comply with disposal requirements set by the Stockholm Convention. The GEF support will maximize opportunities for
private sector to venture capital, through joint venture with Chinese companies, into solving POPs priority problems with a global
dimension and large socio-economic scope. The scale and complexity of this project will require a multi-faceted response and draw on
the combined resources of the public and private sectors. While the project is centralized and deployed at provincial level, there are
opportunities for participation at the operational level by private organizations in co-operation with public bodies, as appropriate, with
relevant competences. The range of complexities required spans a spectrum encompassing nationwide environmental risk assessment,
waste characterization, handling, collection, specialist packaging, labeling, storage, sampling, laboratory analysis, not to mention
policy, regulations, and disposal technologies involved, which far exceeds the baseline scenario.
F. INDICATE RISKS, INCLUDING CLIMATE CHANGE RISKS, THAT MIGHT PREVENT THE PROJECT
OBJECTIVE(S) FROM BEING ACHIEVED. OUTLINE THE RISK MANAGEMENT MEASURES, INCLUDING
IMPROVING RESILIENCE TO CLIMATE CHANGE, THAT THE PROJECT PROPOSES TO UNDERTAKE:
14. The project is based on the provisional figure of 6,000 tons of POPs pesticide stockpiled waste as indicated in China’s NIP. This
estimation is conditional and anecdotal evidence would suggest that this is underestimated. A recent survey in Chongqing
Municipality shows the determined amount of obsolete POPs pesticides to be 3-4 times higher than the initial estimation.
15. The chain of custody including the identity of the original waste holders and waste generators has in many cases been lost. This gap
presents difficulties in the application of legal and market measures. Therefore, the project steps into this breach to resolve this
challenge.
16. The location of many of the stockpile sites are on floodplains which may be at an increased risk of flooding due to climate change.
The risk of floodwaters impacting on uncontained POPs pesticide wastes is therefore increased. Through the qualitative risk
assessment activities, these sites will be prioritized for the remediation and removal at future time.
G. DESCRIBE, IF POSSIBLE, THE EXPECTED COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROJECT (e.g. $/ton of CO2 abated). IF
COST-EFFECTIVENESS IS NOT PRESENTED, OUTLINE THE STEPS THAT PROJECT PREPARATION WOULD
UNDERTAKE TO PRESENT COST-EFFECTIVENESS AT CEO ENDORSEMENT:
17. The environmentally sound management of the targeted POPs pesticide wastes in dispersed locations involves necessary costs for
predisposal activities including the risk assessment and characterization, handling, collection packaging, storage and transportation.
These predisposal costs are common to all the generic disposal options.
18. Table 1 identifies and evaluates the risks associated with a number of disposal scenarios. The environmentally safest solution is
identified as non-combustion technology. Table 2 illustrates the technical feasibility and costs effectiveness of the disposal scenarios.
Based on these preliminary assessments, the most feasible and cost effective option is also non-combustion based alternative scenario.
19. Closer examination of the 5 options demonstrates the following:




The evolving serious situation in relation to stockpiled POPs pesticide waste is such that the baseline scenario is not tenable
and requires immediate action.
The temporary engineering containment solution does not destroy or dislocate the molecular structure of the chemicals and
relies on the structural integrity of the physical barrier that isolates it from the environmental receptors at risk. The potential
failure of the structural integrity could lead to catastrophic consequences. This temporary storage option requires indefinite ongoing management and maintenance of the facility, which requires significant resources and cost. It also presupposes the
availability of land for this purpose, which can not be assumed in the case of China.
The only incineration facility that will meet the Convention operating standards is located in northeast China, and is dedicated
to PCB disposal at the unit cost of 2,000 Euros per ton. This facility is not yet commissioned, and when operational, the
demand on this facility will be beyond its capacity, and in practice will not be available for this project. No other incineration
facility currently in operation in China meets the Convention’s standards for the disposal of POPs waste.
The two remaining options are export for treatment abroad and non-combustion technology treatment. The preparatory and
pre-treatment cost elements can be generally identified as follows:
5
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised



Site qualitative environmental risk assessment, waste characterization, handling, collection, packaging, labeling, storage,
transportation including shipment;
In the case of export for treatment abroad, some of these cost elements are dramatically increased because of the
requirements of the logistics management including assembling of the waste in an embarkment port and meeting the
requirements of international waste trans-shipment regulations. Compared with the logistics of locally managed disposal,
which will be the case for the non-combustion based alternative scenario, the cost differentiation is significant. The
disposal cost for treatment abroad is approximately 1,500 Euros. While this figure appears competitive with the PCB
disposal unit cost, it disguises the whole cost for life-cycle elements involved, particularly the inefficiencies of the
logistics demand.
The non-combustion based alternative scenario provides the opportunity to address the situation in a local context. The
project relies on the risk assessment process which quantifies environmental risks, technical feasibility and economic cost.
These locally based approaches allow for the optimization of local enterprises roles in partnerships with technology
providers and hence optimize the available financial resources. This combination inevitably leads to cost competitiveness.
Preliminary studies have already identified more than 30 proven and viable non-combustion technologies that could be
suitable for the disposal of wastes concerned. The PPG will further evaluate these technologies, including technical
feasibilities and operational costs.
20. The table below compares data from 3 management and disposal options that are within the Convention’s operating standards.
Options such as hazardous waste landfill disposal and cement kiln co-disposal are not considered because they fall outside these
standards. The options considered are as follows:
 Environmentally sound management and disposal of obsolete POPs pesticides and other POPs wastes in China (This project)
This project will cover costs for pre-disposal activities and disposal of 10,000 tons of stockpiled pesticides as well as for the
destruction of 11,000 tons of dioxin rich fly ash. The predisposal cost is almost a fixed one based on the currently available cost
information. The disposal cost is shown quite cost effective for GEF fund as China’s co-finance is three times higher than the
GEF. It should be noted that the calculation does not consider the dioxin rich fly ash scenario as related information is not
available. If this is considered, it is certain that the related costs would be lower.
 Pesticide disposal in EU
It is technically feasible and acceptable to dispose of stockpiled pesticides in hazardous waste incinerators within the EU that
meet the Convention’s standards. However, relying on this option, it will prevent the development of China’s own capability to
dispose of stockpiled pesticides and other POPs wastes in an environmentally sustainable manner. The calculation of cost in the
table below includes the figure of €1500 which is the gate fee for disposal. In addition, the assembly and in-country transport
costs of the waste and other pre-disposal activities including packaging to international standards, shipment cost, and compliance
with trans-frontier with shipment regulations impose significant costs. An analogue comparison would be the in-country unit
transport cost to the dedicated PCB disposal incinerator in northeast China. Based on this analogue, the unit cost is calculated at
least at €2289 per ton. The total unit cost for in-country predisposal activities and export to EU and disposal is therefore in the
order of €4000. In an academic paper published on July 21, 2006 in Environmental Science and Policy Journal entitled
“Environmentally sound destruction of obsolete pesticides in developing countries using cement kilns”, the cost of exportation
from African countries and treatment in Europe is discussed.
 Pesticide disposal in northeast China
As discussed in the PIF text, a dedicated PCB disposal incinerator is under construction to meet the Convention’s standards and
will be commissioned in 2009. Although this option is not available to this project, the hypothetical comparison is made for cost
analysis purposes. The in-country long-distance unit transport cost (exclusive of other predisposal cost), derived from empirical
data is €2000, while the unit disposal cost is a further €2000, giving a total of €4000.
The figures in the table are qualified as reasonable estimates and primarily presented for illustrative purposes. It is fully
acknowledged that further detailed cost comparisons will be required as an integral part of the PPG.
Table of Unit cost comparison table for environmentally sound management and disposal options
in compliance with Convention’s requirements
Unit cost (€)
Cost sharing (€)
Option
Predisposal activities
Disposal
GEF
China
This project
2000
128
532
1596
Pesticide disposal in EU
2289
1500-2000
3789-4000
Pesticide disposal in northeast China
2000*
2000
4000
* Long-distance transport cost only, no other activity cost data available
Total (€)
2128
3789-4000
4000
6
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
H.
JUSTIFY THE COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE OF GEF AGENCY: The project is focusing on technological
solutions to environment and health problems within Operational Program 14, where UNIDO has clear comparative advantages.
UNIDO is mandated to support developing countries and countries with economy in transition to achieve sustainable industrial
development. UNIDO has also developed and implemented a large number of GEF funded NIPs and post-NIP projects and
contributed to the efforts made in sound management of chemicals. This project will integrate both aspects of technology transfer
and investment, which are clearly falling in the comparative advantage domain of UNIDO.
7
UNIDO PIF China POPs pesticidas & other wastes
20Feb08revised
Appendix I: Tables
Table 1. Risk assessment matrix
Generic management options
Handling
Collection
Packaging
Labeling
Storage
Transportation
Disposal
NA
M
NA
M
NA
M
Overall
risk
rating
H
M
M
M
M
M
M
H
L
M-H
M
M
L-M
L-M
Baseline scenario
NA
NA
NA
NA
Temporary engineering containment
H
H
M
L
Incineration as recommended by
H
H
M
L
National HW Program
Export for treatment abroad
H
H
M
L
Non-combustion based alternative
H
H
M
L
scenario
Legend: Risk level symbol H = High, M = Moderate, L = Low, NA = Not Applicable.
Table 2. Conceptual illustration/Feasibility assessment matrix
Generic
management
options
Convention
requirement
National
policy and
institutional
support
Infrastructure
Baseline
1
1
1
scenario
Temporary
engineering
1
2
2
containment
and landfill
Incineration
as
recommended
3
4
3
by National
HW Program
Export for
treatment
4
1
3
abroad
Noncombustion
based
5
3
2
alternative
scenario
Legend: 1 = Least feasibility, 5 = Highest feasibility.
Stakeholder
transaction
cost
Predisposal
cost
Disposal
cost
Application
potential
through
innovation,
R&D, and
joint
ventures
Global
environmental
benefit
Overall
feasibility
and cost
3
1
1
1
1
10
3
2
2
2
2
16
4
4
4
5
2
29
1
2
1
1
4
17
3
4
4
5
5
31
8
UNIDO PIF China POPs non-com
21 Jan 2008 revised