Service Contract No 2007 / 147-446 Strategic ... - Swaziland

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Thanks to the promotion of co-generation of electricity using tops and trash, and theopportunities opened for PPAs, a shift is taking place in the sugar mill estates towards GCH.Apart from the reduction in POPs and the agronomic advantages of GCH (see Table 15),increased co-generation will also have positive effects on reducing energy dependency,reduced use of coal and reduced atmospheric emissions.BCH will most likely be substituted by manual GCH in the case of RSSC, and mechanisedchoppers in the case of Ubombo Sugar. These alternatives will have different socioeconomiceffects. In the case of RSSC cane cutters will be offered a premium for cuttinggreen cane, whilst in the case of Ubombo Sugar there will be a reduction in the need forcane cutters (i.e. loss of employment opportunities).On the other hand, expansion of areas under sugar cane due to new schemes under LUSIPand KDDP will imply more cane burning, and thus an increase in the generation of POPs,offsetting the reductions at the mill estates. For the time being mill estates have notexpressed an interest in buying the tops and trash from small cane growers. The practice ofGCH is not economically attractive for small cane growers, as it represents more labour forcane cutting and increased cost of transport. The advantages of GCH will not offset thedisadvantages.The following measures should be explored to address the environmental and socioeconomicimpacts of cane burning:- Ensure that premiums offered to manual cane cutters are agreed with them, andadequate mechanisms set up to ensure these are transferred to the cane cutters bythe outsourcing companies.- Carry out an assessment of the economic value of GCH for small cane growers,taking into account savings in agrochemicals (due to weed control provided bymulching), higher sucrose content in cane delivered to mills (due to reduced KTM),and water and energy (irrigation) savings (considering also the future cost of water),as well as the increases in cost of transport and cane cutting. Such a study wouldprovide the basis either to encourage GCH (if there are cost savings), or identify theincentives that would be required for small cane growers to shift to GCH (e.g.transport subsidies) in the context of efforts to reduce generation of POPs.- Linked to the study above, carry out an assessment of the economic value of topsand trash for power generation, as a basis to negotiate a price at which tops andtrash could be purchased from small cane growers for its use in co-generation at themills.5.7 Key aspect 6: Water pollution fromagricultural run- off / monitoring of waterquality (Medium Priority)5.7.1 Current stateSugar cane farming, as most intensive agricultural practices, makes use of a series ofagrochemical products which serve different functions, e.g. fertilisers, ripeners, herbicides,insecticides, fungicides. These products may eventually find their way into water bodies andaquifers, where they take the form of pollutants. There are two main mechanisms throughwhich agrochemical products may end up in water systems: run-off and leaching.The main polluting agents are nutrients (mainly nitrates and phosphates derived fromfertilisers), agrochemical products (e.g. pesticides, herbicides), and sediments from soilerosion.RDMU (Strategic Environmental Assessment of the National Adaptation Strategy) - Page 92
Many factors intervene in determining the impacts of agriculture on water quality, e.g.amount of product applied in relationship to absorbing capacity; form of application (e.g.application of fertiliser through a drip system will minimise run-off); soil characteristics (typeof soil, compaction, erosion); irrigation system in use; drainage systems; distance to waterbodies; presence of riparian vegetation; rainfall (periodicity, volume and intensity); time ofapplication (applications during the dry season will have less impact) and properties of thepollutants (more soluble components such as nitrate and sulphate tend to be more mobile,whilst less-soluble ones like phosphate and ammonium are relatively immobile throughleaching).Run-off refers to surface drainage, whereas leaching refers to subsurface drainage. In thecase of subsurface drainage, it is the soluble chemical products (leachates) that are carried,affecting chemical composition of deeper soil strata or groundwaters, or flushing thesepollutants into waterways.As well the degree of contamination of water bodies will depend on the physico-chemicalcharacteristics of the products used (e.g. toxicity levels, oxygen demand) and the dilutionprovided by the receiving water body. Table 16 below shows the agrochemical productcomponents commonly used in sugar cane farming in Swaziland.Table 16:Agrochemical components commonly used in the Swazi sugar industryRipeners Garlon 4 (triclopyr) Velpar DF (hexazinone)Ethrel (Ethepon) Gramoxone (paraquat) Veloxytril(ioxynil+bromoxynil)Fusilade Forte (fluazifop-Pbutyl)HexazinoneFertilisersVolley 125EC Lumax (mesotrione+S-metol.+terbuthyl) OrganicFungicides MCPA (methoxone) Green manure cropsEria (limited use) Merlin (isoxaflutole) StillageHerbicides Metrad (diuron + metribuzin) Mill ashAcetochlor Metribuzin Kraal manureAlachlor MSMA Chicken manureAmetrynParabat 500 + Extreme Plus(pendim+chlori-ethl-metribuzin)InorganicAtrazine Pendimethalin Ammonium sulphateAuthority (sulfentrazone) Roundup (glyphosate) Di-ammoniumphosphateDiuron Servian (halosulfuron) Mono-ammoniumphosphateEptam Super (EPTC) Tebusan (tebuthiuron) Muriate of potashExtreme Plus (chlorimuronethyl+ metribuzin)Terbo (terbuthylazine+bromoxynil)Potassium chlorideFalcon Gold (metolachlor) Tolla (metolachlor) Single superphosphateFusilade Forte (fluazifop-Pbutyl)Touchdown Forte (glyphosate trimesium)UreaRDMU (Strategic Environmental Assessment of the National Adaptation Strategy) - Page 93
Page 1 and 2:
Restructuring and DiversificationMa
Page 3 and 4:
DISCLAIMERThe contents of this repo
Page 5 and 6:
5.7.2 Expected impacts in absence o
Page 7 and 8:
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Page 9 and 10:
HIVHPIIAIAIDIPCCIPPISOITFIWRMJWCKDD
Page 11 and 12:
PSIRBARDMUREASWARMFRPDPRSARSSCSS&MS
Page 13 and 14:
UNEPUNFCCCUNICEFUNISWAUSUS$VACVCTWF
Page 15 and 16:
1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYSwaziland has be
Page 17 and 18:
- In spite of the above water-stora
Page 19 and 20:
to keep the same quality), destruct
Page 21 and 22:
ooooMust be based on a basin-wide h
Page 23 and 24:
ooooMust address the socio-economic
Page 25 and 26:
- Optimal use should be made of thi
Page 27 and 28:
2 BACKGROUND2.1 The EU sugar reform
Page 29 and 30:
eing implemented directly by the in
Page 31 and 32:
for implementation. For future StrE
Page 33 and 34:
operating in Swaziland, one in Simu
Page 35 and 36:
4.2 Climate and climate changeSwazi
Page 37 and 38:
4.4 Land and land tenureLand tenure
Page 39 and 40:
Most of the water in Swaziland (96%
Page 41 and 42:
−−−Decline in biodiversity (m
Page 43 and 44:
Figure 6: Cause-effect relationship
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 8:Cause-effect relationships
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 10:Cause-effect relationship
Page 49 and 50:
economic and social welfare in an e
Page 51 and 52:
5.2.1.3 Water usage and demand in S
Page 53 and 54:
Table 7:Capacity, use, types and ch
Page 55 and 56: 5.2.1.5 The Komati Downstream Devel
Page 57 and 58: Table 8: Industry area (ha) by irri
Page 59 and 60: 5.2.2 Expected impacts in absence o
Page 61 and 62: ipening period. Presence of pests a
Page 63 and 64: 5.2.2.5 Effects of future water sho
Page 65 and 66: As was noted in the scoping report,
Page 67 and 68: contribute to poverty alleviation.
Page 69 and 70: sufficient to cover all the farmers
Page 71 and 72: which revealed that 66% of the popu
Page 73 and 74: funds, and they then have to mark u
Page 75 and 76: contracts; in practical terms there
Page 77 and 78: The United Nations Conference on Tr
Page 79 and 80: safety net would alleviate fears ar
Page 81 and 82: Table 11:Species diversity by ecosy
Page 83 and 84: Figure 19:Distribution of endemic p
Page 85 and 86: mostly on paper, are not cross-sect
Page 87 and 88: particularly true where mitigation
Page 89 and 90: Enforcement of legislation is key t
Page 91 and 92: In general, however, the HIV preval
Page 93 and 94: The HAPAC Programme applied two imp
Page 95 and 96: The company implements an HIV/AIDS
Page 97 and 98: improving co-ordination; to have a
Page 99 and 100: measures of the NAS, the RDMU indic
Page 101 and 102: sustainable business. Based on ISO
Page 103 and 104: Table 15:Synthesis of advantages an
Page 105: Considering an approximate total of
Page 109 and 110: The legal responsibilities for the
Page 111 and 112: 5.8 Key aspect 7: Regulation of eff
Page 113 and 114: effluent standards. Otherwise there
Page 115 and 116: 5.9.4 Options to address the key as
Page 117 and 118: Table 17:NAS logframe indicators ne
Page 119 and 120: IndicatorObjective 1a: Positive and
Page 121 and 122: IndicatorObjective 1a: Positive and
Page 123 and 124: 6.2 Proposed StrEA performance indi
Page 125 and 126: Indicator Measurement ObservationsL
Page 127 and 128: Indicator Measurement ObservationsR
Page 129 and 130: 7.1 Addressing High Priority aspect
Page 131 and 132: RECOMMENDATION INVOLVED INSTITUTION
Page 137 and 138: H. REGULATION OF ATMOSPHERIC EMISSI
Page 141 and 142: NAS Area Description Proposed measu
Page 149 and 150: Figure 29:Environmental and socio-e
Page 151 and 152: NAS ACTIONSWater balanceCont. of gr
Page 153 and 154: NAS ACTIONSWater balanceCont. of gr
Page 155 and 156: Annex 3: Key stakeholdersTable 19:M
Page 157 and 158:
Institutional ActorMinistry of Natu
Page 159 and 160:
Institutional ActorSwaziland SugarA
Page 161 and 162:
Institutional ActorDepartment of Wa
Page 163 and 164:
Table 20:Other key stakeholders rel
Page 165 and 166:
StakeholderRiver BasinAuthorities (
Page 167 and 168:
StakeholderWorld VisionWorld FoodPr
Page 169 and 170:
Annex 4: Main policy documents and
Page 171 and 172:
Policy, Plan orProgrammeNational Re
Page 173 and 174:
Policy, Plan orProgrammeComprehensi
Page 175 and 176:
Policy, Plan orProgrammeNational En
Page 177 and 178:
Policy, Plan orProgrammeDraft Natio
Page 179 and 180:
Piece of legislationNational TrustC
Page 181 and 182:
Piece of legislationThe Public Heal
Page 183 and 184:
Piece of legislationTreaty on devel
Page 185 and 186:
Piece of legislationUnited NationsF
Page 187 and 188:
Annex 5: Stakeholder engagement met
Page 189 and 190:
Date Time Place Name Organisation P
Page 191 and 192:
StrEA STUDY PHASEDate Time Place Na
Page 193 and 194:
Annex 7: List of participants to th
Page 195 and 196:
Annex 8: Agenda for the stakeholder
Page 197 and 198:
Cortez, LAB and Brossard Pérez, LE
Page 199 and 200:
Matsebula, M (2009) EC Accompanying
Page 201 and 202:
Seebaluck, V.; Leal, MRLV; Rosillo-
Page 203 and 204:
Annex 10: Terms of ReferenceTERMS O
Page 205 and 206:
2.2. Requested services for the fir
Page 207 and 208:
under consideration. The consultant
Page 209 and 210:
2.5.4. Analysis of performance indi
Page 211 and 212:
• Fluency in both written and spo
show all

Service Contract No 2007 / 147-446 Strategic ... - Swaziland

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?