Evaluation of Plastic Waste Management in Thailand Using Material ...
Evaluation of Plastic Waste Management in Thailand Using Material ... Evaluation of Plastic Waste Management in Thailand Using Material ...
and oil recovery. As a result, the scenario 2 is the possible waste management way based on the financial analysis. This scenario also helps to reduce the consumption of petrochemical products. The amounts of plastic waste generations in this scenario will be reduced to decrease the expenditure for plastic waste management in 2016. Figure 4.35 illustrates the flows of expenditure for each waste management process in each scenario. Input Output 10,866,320 5,420,911 5,419,182 7,816,537 3,921 950 RDF production 14,857 14,857 Open envionment 3,168 3,076 3,076 2,979 357 189,899 168,799 (1) (2A & 2B) 949,496 (3) 49,548 248 333 Municipal incineration Collection and transportation Recycling 85 6,776 7,418 6,031 2,404,029 5,604 181,081 6,207 2,138 (1) (2A & 2B) 2,307 (3) Unit of flow: Million Baht/tonne 7,450,639 181,081 Industrial incineration 5,018,124 5,018,124 Landfilling 181,081 Plastic to Oil 7,450,639 8,346 6,163 6,163 2,554 Scenario 1 Scenario 2A Scenario 2B Scenario 3 Figure 4.35 Flows of expenditure for each waste management process in each scenario From above figure, the large arrow at the left side is the total expenditures of each scenario which will be spent for plastic waste management in 2016. On the other hands, the large arrow at the right side is the revenue of each scenario that will gain from waste management facilities. The expense of waste collection and transportation of scenario 1 will be 2,979 million Baht in 2016 because only 80% of plastic wastes will be collected compared to 90% of collected plastic wastes of scenario 2 and 3. There will be the hidden costs of waste management which are from uncollected wastes and improper disposed wastes in 2016. The highest hidden cost was presented at the open environment flow of a scenario 1 amounted to 950 million Baht in 2016. Increasing 30% of recycling rate in the scenario 2 will make the amount of improper disposed decrease in 2016, so the hidden cost of scenario 2 is less than the scenario 1 and 3. The expenditures of landfilling of each scenario will not different because the percentage of landfilling of each scenario is in range of 30%-40%. Similarly, the expenses of
industrial waste incineration of each scenario will be around 5-7 trillion Baht in 2016. However, the waste to energy scheme will make the expenditures of municipal incineration, RDF production and oil recovery increase dramatically in 2016 as illustrated as the expenditures of scenario 3. In conclusion, the government must carefully consider on the possible ways for plastic waste management because each scenario requires a lot of money to invest and operation. Gaining profits from waste recycling and waste to energy business is the incentive for private sectors and local administration. The regulator should provide the profitable regulation to increase the interesting of private sectors and local administration. The foundation, banks, and BOI have to promote these businesses by providing the best available technologies, budgets, markets, and networks. The government cannot improve waste management projects by considering only financial economics, but it have to survey the public awareness of projects to reduce the complaining from people. 4.3.2.3 Evaluation of public awareness on plastic waste management scenarios The questionnaires based surveys were carried out among household, waste pickers, waste shops, middle dealers, waste collector networks, and recycling factories. 125 questionnaires were conducted. The results of public opinion survey on plastic waste management scenarios are shown in Figure 4.36. Percentage of public opinion (%) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 46.4 Ban plastic bags 88 Increase recycling business 60 Agree with waste to energy Figure 4.36 Percentage of public opinion on plastic waste management scenarios From the results of public opinion, most schemes of the scenario 2 were accepted based on the public opinion such as use of bio-plastics, increase of recycling business, and banning plastic bags. Approximately 90% of 125 samples agreed with the bio-plastic used instead of pure plastic products, but they concerned on the cost of bio-plastics products which are expensive than conventional products. Increasing the recycling business is the next acceptable scheme for plastic waste management scenarios because most people think that the recycling activities help to save the environment and reduce the global warming. Next, people have knowledge on the waste to energy scheme from the promotion of biogas production in household project including anaerobic composting in schools, and housing 86 12.8 Pay plastic bag charge 15.2 Pay waste collection fees 90.4 Use Bioplastics
- Page 43 and 44: For example, if the stakeholder has
- Page 45 and 46: (DENR). A pilot collection program
- Page 47 and 48: 3.2 Study Area Seven provinces name
- Page 49 and 50: 3.3 Sample Size The sample groups w
- Page 51 and 52: Figure 3.4 Initial flow of plastic
- Page 53 and 54: Table 3.1 Details of Needed Informa
- Page 55 and 56: questionnaires, interview, field ob
- Page 57 and 58: From Table 3.2, the stakeholders we
- Page 59 and 60: Institute Foundation (FPRI) made a
- Page 61 and 62: 12%, 10%, and 7% respectively. The
- Page 63 and 64: From Figure 4.5, this figure shows
- Page 65 and 66: Plastic 17% Paper 8% Metal 2% Glass
- Page 67 and 68: Figure 4.9 BMA waste collectors Fig
- Page 69 and 70: Similarly, some recycling factories
- Page 71 and 72: Figure 4.21 Material flow of plasti
- Page 73 and 74: 50% of agricultural products was co
- Page 75 and 76: Figure 4.25 Recycling and plastic t
- Page 77 and 78: From Figure 4.26, the material flow
- Page 79 and 80: future is the same as current situa
- Page 81 and 82: From Figure 4.28, total plastic pel
- Page 83 and 84: The one issue of plastic waste segr
- Page 85 and 86: Figure 4.30 Material flow of plasti
- Page 87 and 88: Figure 4.31 Material flow of plasti
- Page 89 and 90: Most municipal plastic wastes (37%)
- Page 91 and 92: From Figure 4.33, the revenue from
- Page 93: sectors by the government organizat
- Page 97 and 98: 4.4.1. Lists of stakeholders and th
- Page 99 and 100: of them. For example, one individua
- Page 101 and 102: Local administrative bodies are als
- Page 103 and 104: was presented, and the percentage o
- Page 105 and 106: 5.1 Conclusions Chapter 5 Conclusio
- Page 107 and 108: 11. A simple revenue-expenditure an
- Page 109 and 110: References BBC News. (2008). Plasti
- Page 111 and 112: Jinran, Z. (2011). Ban on free plas
- Page 113 and 114: Plastic Waste Management Institute.
- Page 115 and 116: Treewijitkasam, P. (2013). Understa
- Page 117 and 118: Table A-1 Details of parameters and
- Page 119 and 120: Table A-2 Details of parameters and
- Page 121 and 122: Table A-4 Details of parameters and
- Page 123 and 124: Table A-6 Details of parameters and
- Page 125 and 126: A-2: Harmonized System Code Table A
- Page 127 and 128: Table A-11 Characteristics of stake
- Page 129 and 130: Table A-11 Characteristics of stake
- Page 131 and 132: Table A-11 Characteristics of stake
- Page 133 and 134: Table A-11 Characteristics of stake
- Page 135 and 136: - What is the knowledge that the wa
- Page 137 and 138: 2.5 Who do you buy plastic wastes f
- Page 139 and 140: 4. Environmental, law, policy, and
- Page 141 and 142: B.3 Questionnaire for Household Dat
- Page 143 and 144: B.4 Questionnaire for Plastic Recyc
<strong>in</strong>dustrial waste <strong>in</strong>c<strong>in</strong>eration <strong>of</strong> each scenario will be around 5-7 trillion Baht <strong>in</strong> 2016.<br />
However, the waste to energy scheme will make the expenditures <strong>of</strong> municipal<br />
<strong>in</strong>c<strong>in</strong>eration, RDF production and oil recovery <strong>in</strong>crease dramatically <strong>in</strong> 2016 as illustrated<br />
as the expenditures <strong>of</strong> scenario 3.<br />
In conclusion, the government must carefully consider on the possible ways for plastic<br />
waste management because each scenario requires a lot <strong>of</strong> money to <strong>in</strong>vest and operation.<br />
Ga<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>of</strong>its from waste recycl<strong>in</strong>g and waste to energy bus<strong>in</strong>ess is the <strong>in</strong>centive for<br />
private sectors and local adm<strong>in</strong>istration. The regulator should provide the pr<strong>of</strong>itable<br />
regulation to <strong>in</strong>crease the <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> private sectors and local adm<strong>in</strong>istration. The<br />
foundation, banks, and BOI have to promote these bus<strong>in</strong>esses by provid<strong>in</strong>g the best<br />
available technologies, budgets, markets, and networks. The government cannot improve<br />
waste management projects by consider<strong>in</strong>g only f<strong>in</strong>ancial economics, but it have to survey<br />
the public awareness <strong>of</strong> projects to reduce the compla<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g from people.<br />
4.3.2.3 <strong>Evaluation</strong> <strong>of</strong> public awareness on plastic waste management scenarios<br />
The questionnaires based surveys were carried out among household, waste pickers, waste<br />
shops, middle dealers, waste collector networks, and recycl<strong>in</strong>g factories. 125<br />
questionnaires were conducted. The results <strong>of</strong> public op<strong>in</strong>ion survey on plastic waste<br />
management scenarios are shown <strong>in</strong> Figure 4.36.<br />
Percentage <strong>of</strong> public op<strong>in</strong>ion<br />
(%)<br />
100<br />
90<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
0<br />
46.4<br />
Ban plastic<br />
bags<br />
88<br />
Increase<br />
recycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />
bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />
60<br />
Agree with<br />
waste to<br />
energy<br />
Figure 4.36 Percentage <strong>of</strong> public op<strong>in</strong>ion on plastic waste management scenarios<br />
From the results <strong>of</strong> public op<strong>in</strong>ion, most schemes <strong>of</strong> the scenario 2 were accepted based on<br />
the public op<strong>in</strong>ion such as use <strong>of</strong> bio-plastics, <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>of</strong> recycl<strong>in</strong>g bus<strong>in</strong>ess, and bann<strong>in</strong>g<br />
plastic bags. Approximately 90% <strong>of</strong> 125 samples agreed with the bio-plastic used <strong>in</strong>stead<br />
<strong>of</strong> pure plastic products, but they concerned on the cost <strong>of</strong> bio-plastics products which are<br />
expensive than conventional products. Increas<strong>in</strong>g the recycl<strong>in</strong>g bus<strong>in</strong>ess is the next<br />
acceptable scheme for plastic waste management scenarios because most people th<strong>in</strong>k that<br />
the recycl<strong>in</strong>g activities help to save the environment and reduce the global warm<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Next, people have knowledge on the waste to energy scheme from the promotion <strong>of</strong> biogas<br />
production <strong>in</strong> household project <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g anaerobic compost<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> schools, and hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
86<br />
12.8<br />
Pay plastic<br />
bag charge<br />
15.2<br />
Pay waste<br />
collection<br />
fees<br />
90.4<br />
Use Bioplastics
Change language