METRO MANILA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECTnswmc.emb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Report... · ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Executive

H

Republic of the Philippines Department of Environment and Natural Resources Asian Development Bank

METRO MANILA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT (TA 3848-PHI)

Final Report Report No: 5c

STUDY OF MARKETS FOR RECYCLED SOLID WASTE

September 2003

AEA Technology In Association With GlobalWorks • CalRecovery • ENR Consultants

METRO MANILA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECT (TA 3848)

FINAL REPORT

REPORT No: 5c

STUDY OF MARKETS FOR RECYCLED SOLID WASTE

Project Team

Neil Varey, AEA Technology, Project Director Luis F. Diaz, CalRecovery, Inc., Technical Team Leader

Nick Allen, GlobalWorks, Disposal

Levi Buenafe, GlobalWorks, Institutional Horace Crowe, AEA Technology, Institutional Luis Diaz, CalRecovery, Inc., Medical Waste

Linda Eggerth, CalRecovery, Inc., Community Awareness Grace Favila, ENR Consultants, Community Awareness

Manjit Kahlon, AEA Technology, Solid Waste Roger Lopez, ENR Consultants, Social Agnes Palacio, GlobalWorks, Financial

Richard Pook, AEA Technology, Financial Reynor Rollan, ENR Consultants, Disposal Joey Sta. Ana, GlobalWorks, Solid Waste

September 2003

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 1

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3

1.1 Background...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Objectives of the study..................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 General methodology and scope of the study.................................................................................. 4

2. The Recyclable (Factory Returnable) Materials ...................................................................................... 4

2.1 Types of recyclable materials ................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Recovering the recyclable materials....................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Quantity of generated and recovered materials...................................................................................... 6 2.4 Scale of marketing operation.................................................................................................................. 7 2.5 Recycling companies and organizations ................................................................................................ 8

3. The Compost Product.............................................................................................................................. 9

3.1 Type and quantity of compostable materials .......................................................................................... 9 3.2 Existing facilities and production capabilities........................................................................................ 10 3.3 Composting requirements .................................................................................................................... 11 3.4 Feasibility of composting ...................................................................................................................... 12

3.4.1 Basic economic figures ................................................................................................................... 12 3.4.2 Total investment cost ...................................................................................................................... 13 3.4.3 Return of investment ....................................................................................................................... 14

3.5 Potential market for compost................................................................................................................ 15 3.5.1 Promoting market demand .............................................................................................................. 15 3.5.2 Potential area within 25-km ............................................................................................................. 15 3.5.3 Potential market in nearby provinces .............................................................................................. 16

3.6 The association of organic fertilizer manufacturers/suppliers ............................................................... 17

4. Marketing Problems ....................................................................................................................... 18

4.1 Recyclable materials ...................................................................................................................... 18 4.1.1 Poor quality of materials.................................................................................................................. 18 4.1.2 Problem in sourcing quality materials.............................................................................................. 18 4.1.3 Limited capital ................................................................................................................................. 18 4.1.4 Limited pushcart capacity................................................................................................................ 19 4.1.5 Distrust towards the eco-aides and waste pickers........................................................................... 19

4.2 Compost......................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2.1 Limited supply ................................................................................................................................. 19 4.2.2 Low buying price of dealers............................................................................................................. 19 4.2.3 Compliance with FPA requirements ................................................................................................ 19 4.2.4 Limits to demand............................................................................................................................. 20 4.2.5 Inadequate promotion campaign..................................................................................................... 20

5. Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 20

5.1 Establishment of MRF’s by phases ................................................................................................ 20 5.2 MRF capacity ................................................................................................................................. 21 5.3 Management of MRF business operation ...................................................................................... 21 5.4 Organization of the Community Management Group (CMG) ......................................................... 21 5.5 Sustained technical support ........................................................................................................... 22 5.6 Involvement of the NGOs............................................................................................................... 22 5.7 Waste segregation at source.......................................................................................................... 22

List of References: ..................................................................................................................................... 23

Annex 1. List of Recycling Companies in Metro Manila.............................................................................. 25 Annex 2. Pictures of DOST-ITDI Bioreactor ............................................................................................... 27 Annex 3. Typical DOST-ITDI Bioreactor Compost Product ........................................................................ 29

Annex 4. FPA Regulations & Standard Specification ................................................................................. 31 Annex 5. List of Organic Fertilizer Manufacturer in Metro Manila ............................................................... 33 Annex 6a Land Use.................................................................................................................................... 35

ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Executive Summary

This study investigates the current market for recycled solid waste materials in Metro Manila. The objectives are to look into the type and quantity of waste materials being recovered and marketed, determine the economic opportunities and potential for recyclable materials and compost produced in Metro Manila, identify the relevant problems, and make recommendations that could promote recycling in Metro Manila. The study is directed only at those aspects where relevant information is readily available and allows analysis to achieve the objectives in mind. There are two general classifications of recyclable waste, namely: factory returnable and compostable wastes. In this report, the first is referred to and distinguished from compostable waste as recyclable material and is further subdivided into paper, plastics, glass and metal, each with respective sub categories. Recyclable materials are mostly recovered at source, especially households, by pushcart-driving eco-aides; at roadside litters and illegally dumped garbage by scavenging waste pickers; at the garbage collection truck while the waste is transported to the dumpsite, by the paleros and “jumpers;” and at the dumpsite, by resident waste pickers. Most of the eco-aides that are now collecting recyclable materials in Metro Manila are a component part of a network organized by the Linis-Ganda Foundation. The network includes the Metro Manila Federation of Environmental Multi-Purpose Cooperatives (MPCs); the federation’s 17 individual member-MPCs, each representing the 17 cities/municipalities of Metro Manila; a total of 572 MPC-member junkshops, 2,500 junkshop workers, 1,200 eco-aides, and 132 drivers. It is estimated that the households alone in Metro Manila generate a total of more than two million tonnes of potentially recyclable household materials in one year. Approximately 25% of this was reportedly recovered last year (2002) by the Linis-Ganda network costing a total of Php230 million. In the transaction between eco-aides and households, which does not yet include the junkshop operators, junk dealers, and recycling plants/factories where much larger amounts are involved, the purchase, is paid in cash. Thus, an average cost to Linis-Ganda of approximately Php630, 000 daily is paid to various communities of Metro Manila. There are about one hundred identified recycling companies and organizations in Metro Manila, not to mention the many junkshops that were separately surveyed and contained in Appendix 1 of this report. Valenzuela City has the largest number of the identified recycling companies, followed by Quezon City, and so on. Companies engaged in recycling plastics are of the largest number, followed by those in metal, paper, glass and other recyclable materials. These companies have respective associations identified with the type or kind of material they are recycling. Market demand for recyclable materials appears to be unmatched by locally available supply. One large paper company, for instance, is willing to buy all of the recyclable paper materials obtainable from Metro Manila, but only 10% of its requirements can currently be supplied. There is competition among buyers and users of waste paper. Some problems are also noted in the recovery of recyclable materials such that not all of these can be retrieved and, if they are, not all are acceptable to recycling plants due to excessive contamination. This is largely due to the practice of mixing different types of waste at source or when transported to the dumpsite. The current levels of compost supply are limited and these have to be sourced from the few and scattered small-scale community-based composting facilities. Most of the compost is sold by the producer MRF’s to residents in the community and interested outside buyers, some coming from the neighboring provinces of Bulacan and Batangas. Compostable materials, which constitute about 50% of the solid waste, consist of organic or biodegradable materials identified as follows: a) food waste, such as food leftovers, peelings, vegetable trimmings, fish/fowl entrails, innards, washings etc; b) garden or yard wastes, like leaves, twigs, weeds; c) animal wastes, including manure and carcass. Over 2,000 tonnes of biodegradable household waste is estimated to be generated daily in Metro Manila. At a conversion rate of 50% that is from raw material to compost, a

Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c AEA Technology 1

ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report potential daily production of some 1,000 tonnes of compost could be obtained. But the few composting facilities in Metro Manila can only process at full capacity a little over 20 tonnes of compostable waste daily and produce a total of only 10 tonnes a day. There are two types of locally manufactured mechanized composting units in Metro Manila. These are: • Bioreactor - a continuous-type where feeding of raw material and harvesting of compost are done

daily; • Composter - which is batch-type where, after feeding the material, there is a wait of 5 days before

harvesting the compost and feeding it again with the next batch of material. Thus, by comparison, one unit of 1-ton bioreactor can handle one ton of biodegradable waste generated daily; for the same volume, five units of 1-ton composter are needed.

. The problem with the marketing of compost, however, is that its enormous potential supply can hardly be matched by demand in Metro Manila and even including those in nearby provinces. Promoting the use of compost to match the potential supply is needed. There is yet no organizational network to effectively market the compost, and there are legal requirements that are rather difficult to meet for the small community-based producers to produce compost for sale in the open market. In order to promote a condition that is mutually conducive to recycling and marketing of recycled materials, the pertinent steps are recommended and briefly summed up as follows:

• Establish the needed MRF's in every barangay or cluster of barangays throughout Metro Manila by phases

and synchronized with intensive market promotion on the use of compost. • Management of MRF operation to be entrusted by the Barangay to a Community Management Group

(CMG), through a management contract containing terms and conditions satisfactory to both parties. • Sustained technical support shall be extended to the CMGs by the concerned NSWMC-member agencies,

namely, DTI, DA, DOST as well as FPA. • Involvement and support of NGOs towards the CMGs shall be sought, through the NSWMC and its

counterpart SWM Boards in each City and Municipality of Metro Manila.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 1 Introduction

1.1 Background One way to alleviate the garbage problem in Metro Manila is to reduce the quantity of waste through recycling. This is the practice of converting waste materials into something useful so that there would be no need to dispose of these to the dumpsite anymore. Republic Act 9003 defines recycling as a process of “treating used or waste materials to make them suitable for beneficial use and for other purpose” [RA 9003]. It is also defined as a “reproduction of waste to new materials and products” [JICA, 1997]. By definition, recycling includes composting, which is a process of “controlled biological decomposition or degradation of organic waste” [DOST-ITDI] to convert biodegradable materials into compost or “organic fertilizer” [FPA] that are useful particularly to farmers and gardeners. Previous studies indicated that a large proportion of the total solid waste generated in Metro Manila is actually recyclable and need not be thrown or wasted away as garbage. For instance, DOST cited the MMDA 1996 data that about 56% of the waste is biodegradable waste or compostable; 28.4% as recyclable, often referred to as factory returnable; and only 15.6% as remaining materials that cannot be recycled and have to be disposed. A study conducted by JICA in 1997 also highlighted the potential impact of recycling on waste reduction. It revealed that waste composition in Metro Manila is characterized as follows: organic (or compostable waste) constitutes 52%; paper, 17.0%; plastics, 16.0%; metals, 5.0%; textiles, 4.0%; glass, 3.0%; and miscellaneous, 3.0% [PET]. As such, almost all of the solid waste materials can be recycled. This is reflected in the Waste Characterization component of this project. In order to achieve significant reduction of waste through recycling, the factors that must have hampered its overall effectiveness should be addressed. Only a small fraction of the solid waste is being recycled in spite of the fact that recycling is a long-established practice in Metro Manila as it is in various parts of the country. In the case of recyclable waste, much of the materials appear to remain in the waste stream despite the presence of many recycling factories that are ready to buy and process these materials. In the case of compostable waste, community-based small-scale composting has been conducted for some years in a number of barangays and seen to have beneficial impacts on the residents and the community as a whole. Yet, only few communities are adopting it while efforts to initiate it in other communities have not succeeded due to a number of reasons, including the difficulty to get all-out support of the community.

1.2 Objectives of the study The objectives of this study are as follows:

• To look into the types and quantities of recyclable materials that are generated, recovered and marketed in the 17 LGU’s of Metro Manila;

• To determine the economic opportunities and the market potentials for recyclable materials and compost produced in Metro Manila;

• To identify the marketing problems that constrain the marketing of recyclable materials and compost product; and

• To provide recommendations that could assist in the formulation of strategies to promote recycling and alleviate the waste disposal problem in Metro Manila pursuant to RA 9003.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 1.3 General methodology and scope of the study The present study is premised on the assumption that the existing market situation for recycled waste is a crucial factor to consider in promoting recycling in Metro Manila. It attempts, therefore, to investigate the present situation particularly with respect to recyclable materials that are recovered from the waste stream and the compost produced out of the diverted biodegradable wastes. The data utilized in this study was collated from the literature, including agency reports, information materials, and workshop proceedings. Key groups and personal interviews were conducted with heads of government agency units and the private sector that are involved in recycling programs or engaged in recycling business in Metro Manila. 2. The Recyclable (Factory Returnable) Materials

2.1 Types of recyclable materials There are four general types of recyclable materials. These are, namely: paper, plastics, glass and metals, which are further classified into specific kinds in Table 1. able 1.Type and Specific Kinds of Recyclable Materials

Type Specific Kinds

Paper Newsprint (old/used newspaper) Printing & Writing (bond paper, book paper, computer paper) Kraft (old boxes and brown paper bags) Paperboard (carton and tag board) Tissue/Napkins Office/Bank/School waste paper Mixed paper Printing press trimmings

Plastic

Polyethelene terephthalate or PET (soft drink/mineral water bottle) High-Density Polyethelene or HDPE (shampoo bottles/food crates) Low-Density Polyethelene or LDPE (e.g. clear plastic bags) Polyvinyl chloride or PVC (e.g. floor tiles, water pipes, molded chair/table) Polypropylene or PP (e.g. bottle cap, egg tray, waste basket) Polystyrene or PS (e.g. styropor and styrofoam) Other unclassified types of plastic (some also used as food containers)

Metal

Tin/steel (tin/steel can, scrap iron/bronze/copper) Other ferrous (or magnetic) metal Aluminum (aluminum can, aluminum scrap/cuttings) Other non-ferrous (or non-magnetic) metal Mixed/composite metal

Glass

Clear (crystal, no color) Colored (amber, green) Mixed glass Mixed/composite

Others Used car battery, used cartridge, scrap marble, empty/used doy packs (lately used as handicraft materials), junk computer, sawdust

References: Pulp and Paper Manufacturers Association, Inc.; Nilo Mulles. “Plastic: One Small Step,” Doon Po Sa Amin. Manila: Earth Day Network Philippines. 2002. pp. 176ff; and NSWMC Secretariat, “List of Recycling Companies as of 2002.”


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Paper is, of course, also a compostable material, but can be more beneficial if converted to a new paper product than to compost; hence, it is here classified as recyclable.

2.2 Recovering the recyclable materials The process of recovering the recyclable materials starts at the source, such as in individual households where 74% of the estimated more than 5,900 tonnes of solid waste generated daily in Metro Manila is produced. Many households segregate and sell some of their used and disposable items like old newspaper, empty bottles, and scrap metal. These are usually bought by pushcart-driving buyers, either the informal waste pickers or the organized eco-aides that, in turn, sell the items to junk shops or dealers. Other sources of recyclable solid wastes, like the large commercial and industrial establishments, segregate and sell the materials directly to dealers and are delivered to or picked up by the latter in bulk. At present there is a network in Metro Manila that buys the recyclable materials from individual households. This network was established and led by the Linis-Ganda Foundation, with the main operating arm consisting of the Metro Manila Federation of Environmental Multi-Purpose Cooperatives and the 17 member-MPCs, each representing the 17 cities and municipalities of Metro Manila. It involves a total of 572 MPC-member junkshops, 2,500 junkshop workers, 1,200 eco-aides (from informal waste pickers), and 132 drivers of service trucks and jeeps [Doon po sa amin]. The remaining recyclable wastes are recovered away from the source. While a few are gathered by waste pickers from roadside litter, the largest quantities are retrieved from waste collection vehicles while in transit to the dumpsite and at the dumpsite itself. While collecting the waste, the paleros (crew members accompanying the garbage collection truck) immediately segregate the saleable recyclable materials from the rest of the waste. En route to the dumpsite, after the inspection of the truckload for purposes of subsequent payment to contractor, the segregated recyclable materials are dropped by the paleros at certain points based on prior arrangement with junk buyers or dealers. For example, the waste bound for the Payatas dumpsite, managed by the Quezon City government, is estimated that about 10% of the collected waste would have been already unloaded by the paleros by the time it reaches the disposal area. Around 1,200 tons of waste are received at the dumpsite everyday [QC-EPWMD]. Upon reaching the dumpsite, the paleros are replaced by the so-called “jumpers,” who climb the truck to pick up the leftovers of the paleros or whatever can be quickly sorted out from the garbage heap as the truck moves on to unload at the designated spot. There are still recyclable materials left in the heap when it is finally unloaded. It is now the turn of the resident waste pickers, who dwell right at the periphery of the dumping spot, to recover and then sell the remaining materials to the junk dealers. According to the Payatas dumpsite manager, about 20% of the waste deposited is recovered after all the waste picking sequences. Recovery of recyclable materials is also done at transfer stations, and in redemption centers established in some barangays in Metro Manila. This process similarly involves waste picking and sale of the materials to the junkshops [see Junkshop Survey Report No: 5b].


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 2.3 Quantity of generated and recovered materials Aproximately 45% of the solid waste materials generated in Metro Manila are estimated to be recyclable (paper, plastic, metal, glass). Corresponding data on the percentage of recovery of these materials is not readily available. This is determined by estimating the total quantity of household waste and recyclable materials generated per annum and compare this with the percentage of recovery achieved by Linis-Ganda. The estimates are calculated by using the data on household population [NSO Census 2000], the weighted average household waste generation of 0.419kg/person per day [JICA study], the 45% quantity of recyclable waste out of the household waste. The results are shown in Table 2. For immediate comparison, the table also shows how much of the estimated quantity of recyclable materials is recovered by the Linis-Ganda network from the 17 LGU areas, based on the data obtained from its latest annual (2002) report of purchases. Table 2.One-Year Generation of Recyclable Household Wastes and % Recovered by Linis Ganda

% Recovered by Linis Ganda City/ Municipality

Total Population (CY2000)

Estimated tons of Recyclable

Waste % to Est. Tons % to Total1

1.Caloocan 1,174,673 80,842 14.6 6.5 2.Las Pinas 470,154 32,356 28.3 5.0 3.Makati 442,144 30,429 15.6 2.6 4.Malabon 336,516 23,159 29.6 3.8 5.Mandaluyong 275,106 18,933 39.3 4.1 6.Manila 1,568,092 107,917 8.3 4.9 7.Marikina 389,763 26,824 28.5 4.2 8.Muntinlupa 370,333 25,487 27.6 3.9 9.Navotas 229,717 15,809 64.3 5.6 10.Paranaque 446,766 30,747 25.3 4.3 11.Pasay 353,798 24,348 32.6 4.4 12.Pasig 503,013 34,618 24.9 4.7 13.Pateros 57,172 3,935 74.2 1.6 14.Quezon City 2,158,367 148,540 41.3 33.7 15.San Juan 117,398 8,080 81.5 3.6 16.Taguig 462,591 31,836 19.2 3.4 17.Valenzuela 481,047 33,106 21.0 3.8 TOTAL 9,862,978 678,773 26.8 100.0

1This is the percentage of the recovered materials to the total recovery achieved by Linis Ganda in 2002, which was 182,051 tons. See Table 3 below. As estimated, all the households of Metro Manila generate a total of more than two million tonnes of recyclable household materials per annum. The largest quantity is registered in Quezon City, followed by Manila and then Caloocan. Of the estimated quantity, only 26.8% was actually recovered by the Linis-Ganda network. The remaining recovered materials would have to include those retrieved by the informal waste pickers doing their own house-to-house buying operation and collecting litter at roadsides and vicinities; by the paleros and “jumpers;” and by the resident waste pickers at the dumpsite. A close look at the data from Linis-Ganda reveals that the network appears to have gathered 81.5% of the recyclable materials in San Juan, the place where Linis-Ganda started its network organizing. But the largest bulk of its recovered materials, which is over one-third of the network’s total, came from Quezon City. Very little was achieved in the next most populous cities of Manila and Caloocan.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 2.4 Scale of marketing operation Further analysis of the data provided by Linis-Ganda is shown in Table 3. The table shows the different types of the recovered recyclable materials as classified by Linis-Ganda and the amount of total purchases for each category. Table 3.Linis-Ganda Purchase Report of Recyclable Materials: January-December 2002 (Ton)

City/ Municipality

Old Newspaper

Waste Paper

Carton Broken Glass

Plastic Metal1 Total

Caloocan 2,387 1,158 2,781 1,016 1,772 2,675 11,788 Las Pinas 1,331 1,116 2,497 633 1,164 2,419 9,161 Makati 752 377 1,408 266 534 1,424 4,762 Malabon 604 465 686 789 265 4,060 6,849 Mandaluyong 1,362 1,093 1,694 465 978 1,849 7.442 Manila 1,897 1,134 1,595 695 1,696 1,903 8,920 Marikina 1,897 1,452 1,396 693 694 1,504 7,636 Muntinlupa 1,548 1,141 1,276 1,123 660 1,301 7,048 Navotas 1,464 1,248 1,225 754 984 4,486 10,160 Paranaque 1,166 940 1,583 744 1,356 1,987 7,776 Pasay 1,107 935 1,692 838 1,564 1,812 7,947 Pasig 1,327 964 1,586 1,201 1,465 2,071 8,614 Pateros 834 477 727 172 298 412 2,920 Quezon City 7,683 11,107 22,176 4,847 6,033 9,536 61,382 San Juan 2,028 1,006 1,169 770 668 941 6,582 Taguig 911 722 1,069 816 930 1,657 6,104 Valenzuela 1,086 1,675 1,712 1,056 634 795 6,957 TOTAL2 %3

29,384 16.1

27,010 14.8

46,272 25.4

16,858 9.3

21,695 11.9

40,832 22.4

182,051 100.0

Price/kg (Php)4 TOTAL (Php)5 % 6

2.00 58.8m 25.4

0.50 13.5m

5.8

1.00 46.3m 20.0

0.50 8.4m 3.6

2.00 43.4m 18.7

1.50 61.2m 26.4

231.6m 100.0

1 Includes bakal, tapalodo, yero, and aluminum cans. 2Total tonnage. 3Percent of total tonnage. 4This is the average price based on the price list set by the network. 5Total purchases. 6Percent of total purchases. As shown in Table 3, the house-to-house buying operation of Linis-Ganda in Metro Manila has resulted in a total purchase amounting to Php231.6 million. More than half of the total amount went to the three types of waste paper (old newspaper, waste paper and carton). Metal was next, then plastics and broken glass. The purchases were made by the eco-aides, guided by the price list set by the network, and thus, the total amounts represent the volume of transactions at the first level of the network’s multi-level marketing operation that involves the eco-aides and the households. The subsequent levels comprise the junkshop operators, then the junk dealers, and finally the recycling plants/factories. It should be noted that the eco-aides buy the materials from households on the spot and in cash. As such, an average of Php634, 520 worth of cash is distributed daily through these transactions in various communities of Metro Manila. This amount is augmented by the payments made by junkshop operators to the eco-aides, which consist of the latter’s margin of profit at the end of each day’s buying operation. At Payatas, where the recyclable materials sustain the livelihood of most of the people in the community, an average of more than a million pesos reportedly circulates in the area daily.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 2.5 Recycling companies and organizations Most of the recyclable materials in Metro Manila are sold to large recycling companies though a few are used as raw materials in livelihood projects, like the use of used doy packs into quality handicraft products. A list of companies and organizations engaged in recycling is given in Annex 1 and summarized in Table 4 by type of materials and by LGU. Table 4.Number of Buyer Companies and Organizations by Type of Materials by LGU City/Municipality Plastic Paper Metal Glass Others Total Caloocan 1 4 1 6 Makati 3 5 8 Malabon 4 2 1 1 8 Mandaluyong 1 1 2 Manila 2 1 1 1 1 6 Marikina 1 1 Muntinlupa 1 1 Navotas 2 1 3 Paranaque 1 1 1 3 Pasay 1 1 Pasig 1 1 1 3 Quezon City 7 9 3 1 3 23 Taguig 2 2 Valenzuela 13 3 13 3 32 TOTAL 34 24 26 4 11 99

Source: see list in Annex 1. Nearly a hundred companies and organizations in Metro Manila are involved in recycling. Valenzuela, followed by Quezon City, has the largest number of companies based or have a business address within Metro Manila. The greatest numbers of companies are engaged in the recycling of plastics followed by those in metal, paper, glass and other recyclable materials. Linis-Ganda reported that it coordinates with the recyclers’ associations in marketing its recovered recyclable waste [Doon po sa Amin]. For instance, it sells the paper materials to 18 different paper mills in coordination with the Pulp and Paper Manufacturers Association (Pulpapel), and plastic materials to 16 different companies through the Metro Manila Plastic Recyclers Association. It also claims to have a market tie-up with five glass factories led by San Miguel Corporation and five steel mills that include Cathay Steel and Milwaukee Corporation. Based on the reported demand for paper to recycle by the large paper mills in Metro Manila, the potential market for waste paper materials is large. The Trust International Paper Corporation (TIPCO), for instance, has a demand for all kinds of waste paper that cannot be met from local sources. It is reported to be manufacturing high quality paper while a sister-company manufactures corrugated medium chipboard and other inferior paper products. Only 10% of TIPCO’s requirement could be supplied locally, the rest is imported. Aside from the other large paper mills competing with TIPCO in buying locally available materials, there is a reported increasing use of waste paper as wrapping by vendors and mango growers, and it is also used by a growing number of funeral parlors for coffin lining [Doon po sa Amin]. Plastics appear to also have a large market except that the materials are of a low bulk density and the buying price at the first level of marketing operation is low resulting in a very low percentage of retrieval. Companies producing PET bottles and other packaging materials, like Coca-Cola and 21 other PET plants, have organized a PET Recycling Task Force together with DOST. The aim is to promote recovery and facilitate buying back of used PET products [Doon po sa Amin] that are then ground into flakes and exported to China where it is reprocessed into garments and carpet.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Purchase price ranges from Php10-12 per kilo that is equivalent to 24 pieces of empty 1.5-litre Coca-Cola PET bottle. The same can be said of polystyrene (PS) plastic products. Here, the manufacturers have organized the Polystyrene Packaging Council of the Philippines (PPCP) and, with the assistance of World Bank, set up a recycling plant in Bulacan. But recovery rates are low due to the reported high cost of retrieving and transporting the materials to the plant site [Doon po sa Amin]. Feedback from Payatas revealed that there is no let up in the intensity of waste picking at the dumpsite, which covers all recyclable materials, including PS products like Styrofoam. 3. The Compost Product

3.1 Type and quantity of compostable materials As highlighted in the preceding section, the compostable materials constitute some 52% of the solid waste generated daily in Metro Manila. If all were recovered for processing this would represent a considerable savings in waste requiring disposal. These organic and biodegradable wastes consist of the following [DOST]:

• Food wastes (food leftovers, peelings, vegetable trimmings, fish/fowl entrails, innards/washings, etc.

• Garden/yard wastes (leaves, twigs, weeds) • Animal wastes (manure, carcass)

In order to estimate the amount of compostable waste that is generated in the 17 different LGU areas and the quantity of compost that can be produced out of it to assess its market implication, this evaluation is focused on household waste where data is available. The quantity of biodegradable household waste can be estimated by multiplying the population [NSO Census 2000] by the weighted average household waste generation of 0.419kg/person per day [JICA study]; then multiply the result by 52%, the percentage of the organic waste in household waste. The result is shown in Table 5. Table 5 also shows the estimated quantity of compost that can be produced. The figures are based up on the average compost conversion rate of 50% [DOST].


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 5.Biodegradable Waste and Potential Compost Production In Metro Manila: HH Waste Only

City/ Municipality

Total HH Population Est. HH Waste Generation /day

(Ton)

Est. Generated Biodegradable/day

(Ton)

Est. Compost Production/day

(Ton) 1.Kalookan 1,174,673 492.2 255.9 128.0 2.LasPinas 470,154 197.0 102.4 51.2 3.Makati 442,144 185.2 96.3 48.1 4.Malabon 336,516 141.0 73.3 36.6 5.Mandaluyong 275,106 115.3 59.9 30.0 6.Manila 1,568,092 657.0 341.7 170.8 7.Marikina 389,763 163.3 84.9 22.4 8.Muntinlupa 370,333 155.2 80.7 40.4 9.Navotas 229,717 96.2 50.0 25.0 10.Paranaque 446,766 187.2 97.3 48.6 11.Pasay 353,798 148.2 77.1 55.4 12.Pasig 503,013 210.8 109.6 54.8 13.Pateros 57,172 24.0 12.5 6.2 14.Quezon City 2,158,367 904.4 470.3 235.1 15.San Juan 117,398 49.2 25.6 12.8 16.Taguig 462,591 193.8 100.8 50.4 17.Valenzuela 481,047 201.6 104.8 52.4 TOTAL 9,862,978 4,132.6 2,143.5 1,074.4

A total of 2,143.5 tons of biodegradable household waste is estimated to be generated daily in Metro Manila, which means a potential daily production of some 1,074 tons of compost.

3.2 Existing facilities and production capabilities There are a few existing composting facilities in various parts of Metro Manila where biodegradable wastes are brought in by residents or hired eco-aides. Most of these are mechanized facilities installed in community-based material recovery facilities (MRF’s) using an electrically operated drum and microbial inoculants to hasten a composting process suitable to the urban conditions in Metro Manila. The rest use non-mechanized technology, either the manual rotating drum that also uses inoculants or those that rely on the natural process of decomposition using a variety of inexpensive technologies, such as the compost pit, windrow, bottomless drum, and so on. With the exception of the MRF facility at Smokey Mountain in Tondo, which uses a 1-ton capacity and continuous-type of composting drum, all the other reported mechanized facilities are using the batch-type mostly 2-ton capacity drum. The first type is otherwise called bioreactor; the second, composter as already mentioned. The number of sites in Metro Manila with the batch-type of composting equipment is shown in Table 6, together with the total number composters classified by capacity.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 6. No. of Sites with Batch-Type Composting Facilities by LGU

Total Number of Composter by Capacity City/Municipality

No. of Sites 2000-Liter/2-Ton

Capacity 200-Liter/200-Kg

Capacity Las Piñas 4 7 12 Makati 2 4 Mandaluyong 2 4 Manila 3 3 Marikina 1 2 Muntinlupa 4 10 14 Parañaque 13 34 16 Pasay 1 2 Pasig 2 7 Quezon City 16 19 Taguig 1 6 TOTAL 39 98 42

Both bioreactor and composter are electrically operated drums with sizes depending on the rated capacity. The main difference between the two lies in the design for feeding the raw (compostable) materials and retrieving the processed product or compost. The bioreactor is designed for continuous daily feeding and retrieving. If the capacity is one ton, for instance, then one ton of materials are fed into it everyday. Since it is reported that the composting process inside the drum needs at most 5 days to complete, the bioreactor needs at the start of the operation an initial 5 days of continuous feeding before compost (from the first feed) is produced and discharged automatically by the machine. As for the composter, the design is to feed the materials and allow them to stay inside the machine for at least 5 days. Let us take, for instance, the 2-ton composter that is usually divided into two compartments. One is first filled to capacity with one ton of materials, before doing the same with the other. Then each is given 5 days to process the materials before it is opened to gather the compost. In this case, there is always a 5-day gap before the compartment can be filled again with fresh materials. The same can be said of the whole composter if it is not divided into compartments. Comparing the two types, a one-ton bioreactor can accommodate one ton of waste materials and simultaneously produce the equivalent amount in compost (500kg) daily. But the 2-ton composter can accommodate one ton of waste in one compartment and another ton in the other compartment, and while waiting for five days for each to produce the compost, the composter cannot anymore accommodate the daily ton of waste unlike the bioreactor. See pictures in Annex 2. In terms of throughput, a 1-ton bioreactor can handle one ton of biodegradable waste daily. The same volume needs 5 units of 2-ton composter. Given the bioreactor at Smokey Mountain and the composters in 39 sites in Metro Manila, the number of composting facilities so far reported can only process a little over 20 tons of waste everyday. This is clearly too limited a capability to have any impact on the more than 2,000 tons of biodegradable waste generated daily in Metro Manila.

3.3 Composting requirements The composting requirements in Metro Manila are determined by first estimating the total number of composting facilities that would be needed to handle the daily biodegradable waste generated. This is conducted by using the 1-ton bioreactor capacity as the basis. The results are presented in Table 7, together with the average number of bioreactors that are needed per barangay, assuming that composting would be done in every barangay or cluster of barangays pursuant to RA 9003.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 7.Composting Requirements in Metro Manila: No. of Bioreactors by LGU and by Barangay

City/ Municipality

Estimated Total Biodegradable/day

(Tonne)4

Estimated No. of Bioreactors

(1-Tonne Capacity)

Total No. of Barangays

Ave. No. of Bioreactor per

Barangay 1.Kalookan 255.9 256 188 1.362 2.LasPinas 102.4 102 20 5.1 3.Makati 96.3 96 333 2.909 4.Malabon 73.3 73 21 3.476 5.Mandaluyong 59.9 60 27 2.222 6.Manila 341.7 342 898 0.381 7.Marikina 84.9 85 14 6.071 8.Muntinlupa 80.7 81 9 9 9.Navotas 50.0 50 14 3.571 10.Paranaque 97.3 97 16 6.063 11.Pasay 77.1 77 201 0.383 12.Pasig 109.6 110 31 3.548 13.Pateros 12.5 12 10 1.2 14.Quezon City 470.3 470 142 3.310 15.San Juan 25.6 26 21 1.238 16.Taguig 100.7 101 18 5.611 17.Valenzuela 104.8 105 32 3.281 TOTAL 2,148.9 2,144 1,695 1.264

An estimated total number of 2,144 bioreactors at 1-ton capacity each are needed to compost the entire biodegradable household waste generated daily in Metro Manila. The requirement of 17 LGU’s ranges from 12 bioreactors for the smallest LGU of Pateros, to 470 bioreactors for the largest LGU of Quezon City. The estimate is based on population; thus, it is only natural for Quezon to have the largest need, followed by the next most populous cities of Manila and Caloocan. At the barangay level, the requirements vary considerably. In the cities of Manila and Pasay, for instance, where the barangays are relatively small, a 1-ton bioreactor could already serve the requirements of about 3 barangays, unless a lesser-capacity bioreactor is preferred by the concerned barangay so that each will have its own facility. Muntinlupa has the highest average number of bioreactors needed per barangay, followed by Marikina, Paranque and Taguig. Considering the enormous requirements, the questions that immediately come to mind will have a bearing on the issue of sustainability, such as cost considerations, economic feasibility, market demand and affordability of the price of compost to the end-users (farmers, gardeners, and landscapers).

3.4 Feasibility of composting

3.4.1 Basic economic figures Computation of the basic cost and return for establishing, operating and maintaining a composting facility is made by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST), the agency whose main function is to develop and promote appropriate technology; particularly the Industrial Technology Development Institute (ITDI), the unit that takes charge of the bioreactor technology in support of the solid waste management program of government. The computation is based on the requirements and projected production capacity of a 1-ton bioreactor reactor, as shown in Table 8.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 8.Economics of DOST-ITDI 1-Ton Bioreactor

Item Amount (Php) A. Capital Investment Cost

1. Fixed capital • 1-Ton/day bioreactor • 1-Ton/day shredder • 70-sqm shed • Miscellaneous equipment

2. Working Capital (Equivalent to 2-month inventory)

608,000.00 560,000.00 300,000.00

40,000.00 210,000.00

10,000.00 48,000.00

B. Daily Operating Cost (Manufacturing Cost/Day) 1. Direct cost/day

• Labor • Electricity • Microbial innoculant • Sacks

2. Indirect cost/day • Depreciation cost • Maintenance cost

814.66 534.66 300.00 158.00 26.66 50.00

280.00 186.67 93.33

C. Administrative Cost (5% of B) 40.73 D. Marketing Cost (10% of B) 81.47 E. Total Product Cost/Day (B + C + D) 936.88 F. Total Product Cost/Kg of Compost 1.87 G. Selling Price/Kg of Compost 3.00 H. Gross Sale (500kgs/day x 300 days x Php3.00) 450,000.00 I. Production Cost (936.88/day x 300 days) 281,000.00 J. NET INCOME/YEAR (at 300-day/year basis) 169,000.00

Source: Engr. Romeo M. Cabacang, Chief, Microbiology and Genetic Division, Industrial Technology Development Institute, DOST Each set of 1-ton bioreactor composting facility requires a capital investment cost of Php608, 000. At a yearly gross sale of Php450, 000 and a total production cost of Php281, 000, the facility earns a net income of Php169, 000 per year. Here, the cost of producing compost is Php1.87/kilo while the selling price is pegged at Php3/kilo. The net income will reflect any changes in the selling price. It may be noted that at present some compost is sold at Php5.00/kg in some Metro Manila MRF's. By dividing the Net Income by the Capital Investment Cost, the return of investment (ROI) is 27.8%. On the other hand, the pay-off period (Fixed Capital cost over Net Income) is a little over 3 years, which means the money invested on the plant and equipments would be recovered within that period of time. However, composting generates another form of benefit that could be added to the total returns. This is the savings from trucking cost caused by diverting the waste to the composting facility, less distance to travel and disposal savings.

3.4.2 Total investment cost Based on the preceding data, the total capital investment cost to meet the requirements of the entire Metro Manila is estimated based again on a 1-ton bioreactor capacity and the results are shown in Table 9. It should be borne in mind, however, that the consistent use of this capacity is basically for convenience in the analysis and is meant to be only indicative. A barangay may not need a 1-ton bioreactor but one with either a lesser capacity or a larger one, depending on the volume of biodegradable waste to be composted and the desire of the barangay to have a facility of its own or share a common facility with neighboring barangays.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 9.Total Capital Investment Cost (in PhP million)

City/ Municipality

Bioreactor Sets Required

Fixed Capital Cost (@0.560/set)

Working Capital Cost (@0.048m/set)

Total (0.560+0.048 )

1.Kalookan 256 143.36 12.288 155.648 2.LasPinas 102 57.12 4.896 62.016 3.Makati 96 53.76 4.608 58.368 4.Malabon 73 40.88 3.504 44.384 5.Mandaluyong 60 33.60 2.88 36.48 6.Manila 342 191.52 16.416 207.936 7.Marikina 85 47.60 4.08 51.68 8.Muntinlupa 81 45.36 3.888 49.248 9.Navotas 50 28.00 2.40 30.40 10.Paranaque 97 54.32 4.656 58.976 11.Pasay 77 43.12 3.696 46.816 12.Pasig 110 61.60 5.28 66.88 13.Pateros 12 6.72 .576 7.296 14.Quezon City 470 263.20 22.56 285.76 15.San Juan 26 14.56 1.248 15.808 16.Taguig 101 56.56 4.848 61.408 17.Valenzuela 105 58.80 5.04 63.84 TOTAL 2144 1200.08 102.864 1302.944

1Source: Based on Tables 7 & 8. As estimated, the total capital investment cost is more than Php1.3 billion.

3.4.3 Return of investment The potential return for the investment is shown in the Table 10, based on net income and savings from trucking cost. The potential total return for a period of one year is more than Php751 million. This means a 57.7% return of investment (ROI) and a pay-off period of 1.6 years. As such, the invested capital could be recovered within a period of less than two years. However, if the computation were based only on the net income derived from sale of the compost, the pay-off period would be more than two and a half years. On the other hand, if the basis is only on savings from trucking or disposal cost, the pay-off period is more than three and a half years. Clearly, the high rate of return and short pay-off period is highly dependent on the net income derived from the sale of compost. But here, the estimate assumes that all the compost produced in one year by the 2,144 bioreactors, which is equivalent to more than 320,000 tons, is sold entirely and at a selling price of Php3/kg. The validity of this assumption depends on whether there is, in reality, a commensurate demand for the compost, which in turn depends on the extent compost is being used or could be used in the future. Hence, the rationale behind this market assessment.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Table 10.Potential Total Returns/Year from Composting in Metro Manila (in Php million) 1

City/ Municipality

Bioreactor Sets Required

Net Income/ Year (@ Php 0.169m/set)

Savings/ Year (0.151) 2

Total Returns (0.169+0.151) 3

1.Kalookan 256 54.784 38.656 93.440 2.LasPinas 102 21.828 15.402 6.426 3.Makati 96 20.544 14.496 35.040 4.Malabon 73 15.622 11.023 26.645 5.Mandaluyong 60 12.840 9.060 21.900 6.Manila 342 73.188 51.642 124.83 7.Marikina 85 18.190 12.835 31.025 8.Muntinlupa 81 17.334 12.231 29.565 9.Navotas 50 10.700 7.550 18.250 10.Paranaque 97 20.758 14.647 35.405 11.Pasay 77 16.478 11.627 28.105 12.Pasig 110 23.54 16.610 40.150 13.Pateros 12 2.568 1.812 4.380 14.Quezon City 470 100.580 70.970 171.550 15.San Juan 26 5.564 3.926 9.490 16.Taguig 101 21.614 15.251 36.865 17.Valenzuela 105 22.470 15.855 38.325 TOTAL 2,144 458.602 323.593 751.391

1Source: Based on Tables 7 & 8. 2 Savings equals 300,000 kg/set/year divided by 200 (kg/m3) = 1,500m3 divided by 16 (m3/truck) = 94 trucks x Php1602 per truck = Php150, 588.00 or, say, Php0.151million/bioreactor set per year. The trucking cost is based on the standard costing in Quezon City of Php1, 650/truck and at 16 cubic meter of garbage per truck. 3 Total net income plus savings from trucking cost.

3.5 Potential market for compost

3.5.1 Promoting market demand By definition, the compost produced by the bioreactor or the composter is a pure organic fertilizer [FPA Guidelines]. It has both fertilizing and soil conditioning characteristics, and is highly recommended to enrich soil nutrients in a manner that also enhances soil texture conducive to plant development. The desirability of compost is being promoted through combined efforts of both the government and the private sector, such as the nationwide demonstration program on balanced fertilization jointly implemented by the Department of Agriculture (DA), the Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (FPA), and the association of organic fertilizer manufacturers in the country. Through the program, it is demonstrated that compost, combined with inorganic fertilizer, boosts productivity in rice farms where the campaign is directed. The ideal application consists of a total of 11 sacks (50kg/sack) of compost per hectare in rice farms that practice two-cropping per year, namely: 5 sacks for the wet season and 6 sacks for the dry season. As one of the direct results of the program, some LGU’s in Region III (or Central Luzon, the immediate neighbor of the National Capital Region or Metro Manila) are already taking the initiative to intensify the promotion campaign and are ordering large supplies of organic fertilizer from Metro Manila sources.

3.5.2 Potential area within 25-km Previous studies claimed that for composting to be successful, it should have a market demand for compost within 25 kilometers from its production base [Presidential Task Force, 1998]. Beyond this distance, compost marketing would become so costly and elevate the selling price to a level that is already unaffordable, if not


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report discouraging, to the users. An assessment is made to determine the area of lands devoted to farming within the 25-kilometer distance from the boundaries of Metro Manila. This was done by means of a digitized land use map of the area, which is shown in the annex (Annex 6). Table 11 is a descriptive presentation of the various land uses within Metro Manila (NCR) and surrounding 25-km areas. Table 11.NCR and surrounding 25-km Area: Existing Land Use

Existing Land Use Area (ha) 1. Agricultural Land: a. Cultivated land, crops mainly cereal and sugar b. Coconut plantation c. Crop land mixed with coconut plantation d. Crop land mixed with other plantation

196,524 156,700 16,040 16,360 7,424

2. Grassland, grass covering > 70% 7,286 3. Closed canopy, mature trees covering > 50% 16,910 4. Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50% 23,180 5. Fishpond 22,240 6. Marshy area and swamp 323.2 7. Mangrove 313.4 8. Quarry 256.4 9. Built-up area (mostly within NCR) 57,380 TOTAL 324,413

Source: ENR Consultants and compilation of maps, 1982 edition; and GIS-generated data, 2000. The estimated total agricultural land area is 196,524 hectares. The table cannot provide the specific area of rice farms, especially those with double-cropping system requiring 11 sacks of compost per hectare. Assuming that the entire agricultural land area would apply the 11 sacks as required, this would mean a total requirement of 108,088 tons of compost every year. This amount is only 33.6% of the estimated annual production of compost (321,450 tons) in Metro Manila. As such, there would be a huge surplus of more than two-thirds of the supply that must find a demand from areas beyond the 25-km distance.

3.5.3 Potential market in nearby provinces A similar search for farm areas was therefore conducted in the nearby provinces of Central and Southern Luzon, and the result is shown Table 12. Table 12.Farm Area of NCR and Nearby Provinces: Potential Market of Metro Manila Compost

Location Total Farm Area Rice Farm Area % of Rice Farm Area NCR 12,667 658 5.2 Bataan 18,445 10,284 55.8 Batangas 105,205 35,058 33.3 Bulacan 49,940 36,357 72.8 Cavite 33,178 11,811 35.6 Laguna 48,273 17,276 35.8 Nueva Ecija 132,918 112,049 84.3 Pampanga 46,627 34,810 74.7 Rizal 19,517 10,098 51.7 Tarlac 72,980 60,272 82.6 TOTAL 539,750 328,633 60.9

Source: NSO 1991 Census of Agriculture.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report The total farm area in NCR and the 9 nearby provinces is 539,750 hectares. Out of this, 328,633 (60.9%) hectares are rice farms. Assuming that the rice farms practice double-cropping, its total compost requirement would be 180,748 tons, which is just more than half (56.2%) of the estimated total potential supply of 321,580 tons. If the 11-sack requirement were applied to all the farm areas, including the rice farms, the total compost requirement would be 296,862 tons, which is equivalent to 92.3% and, thus, still not enough to consume the estimated total supply. The figures in the Table 12, as is also the case in Table 11, are generalized but illustrate that if the biodegradable waste in Metro Manila were all composted under present conditions the result would be a huge annual supply of compost that cannot be matched with demand. It should be noted that the additional distance to travel to these areas would incur additional costs and therefore not realize the savings identified earlier. It is becoming clear that the marketing of compost cannot rely on demand from traditional farming areas alone, assuming that this demand can be fully developed, for the simple reason that these areas are limited. Marketing efforts have to be directed at finding or developing demands for other applications of compost, such as in namely: landscaping, roadside vegetation, reforestation, parks development and maintenance, urban vegetable and ornamental gardening, and rehabilitation of impoverished/destroyed lands [DOST]. Furthermore, the establishment of composting facilities—be it in every barangay or cluster of barangays—in compliance with RA 9003 must have to be pursued with due regard to market demand to make it sustainable. Given the present situation, therefore, it is advisable not to establish the needed facilities all at once throughout Metro Manila, even if it is possible to do so. Rather, it has to be done in a phased approach, synchronized with the development of such demand.

3.6 The association of organic fertilizer manufacturers/suppliers There are a number of manufacturers of organic fertilizer in Manila that have been actively supporting development programs of the government, some of which are in fact involved in a number of ways in solid waste management. Those who are participating in the Balanced Fertilization Program jointly with the DA and the FPA are members of the Organic Fertilizer Manufacturers Association in the Philippines. Interviewed officers of this organization had already expressed their interest and willingness to get involved in the marketing of compost produced in Metro Manila provided that it is under an arrangement that is properly discussed and mutually advantageous to the parties concerned. A list of these manufacturers was obtained from the FPA who provides accreditation of products and issues license to manufacture. This list is also attached in Annex 5 and is summarized in Table 13 indicating their number, the name of their product, and the LGU where they are based. Table 13. No. of Organic Fertilizer Manufacturers/Suppliers and Product Names by LGU

LGU No.

Product Name

Makati 5 Crop Giant 8-8-8 Organic Fertilizer, Agrimate Fortified Organic, Green Acres Organic Fertilizer, Nutrismart Organic, Rancap Organica, Nutrismart Organic, Rancap Organica

Mandaluyong 2 Lakas Ani Bio-Organic Fertilizer, Happy Earth Compost Pasig 6 Bioearth Organic Fertilizer, Greenbio Microbial Compound, Nutriplex Fortified

Organic Fertilizer, Coco Wonder Plus Fortified Organic, Organica 2000 Bio-Organic Fertilizer, Union Hikari Liquid Fertilizer

Quezon City 9 Growing Mix Organic Fertilizer, Exquisite BDTM Organic Fertilizer, Alpha SP Fortified Organic, Manila Organic, Nova Pure Processed Chicken Manure, Pil-Solfer Organic Fertilizer, Yama-Bym Organic Fertilizer, Farmers Product Organic Fertilizer

San Juan 1 Saka Organic Fertilizer TOTAL

23 No. of Product Names: 23 also (one for each manufacturer)


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report There are 23 identified manufacturers of organic fertilizer; either of the pure or the fortified type as defined by FPA. The largest number is based in Quezon City, followed by Pasig and then Makati. Each manufacturer has its own product with accredited brand name. The guaranteed N-P-K content and the respective type of crops tested with these products are shown in Annex 4. For purposes of comparison, the standard N-P-K content specified by FPA is also presented in Annex 3 as well as the typical N-P-K content of compost produced by DOST-ITDI bioreactor. 4. Marketing Problems 4.1 Recyclable materials Recycling companies in Metro Manila are ready to buy materials, but meeting their demand could not be maximized due to the difficulties of recovering the specific materials from the waste stream. The problems are as follows:

4.1.1 Poor quality of materials Large quantities of the materials are recovered from non-segregated wastes and thus in a condition that is contaminated or full of dirt. This reflects mostly the quality of that hauled by the city waste collection truck and brought to the dumpsite. Depending on its quality, contaminated recovered material commands a lower price than clean or may be rejected by the buyer.

There are reasons why source waste segregation is not fully practiced. The most common are: a) it means additional work and expense on the part of the household; and b) the same city waste collection truck collects the garbage regardless of whether it is segregated or not. Present requirement to segregate waste into biodegradable and non-biodegradable and have these hauled separately by the contracted waste collection truck is reported to be a problem to the contractors.

4.1.2 Problem in sourcing quality materials This applies mostly to materials that are segregated and kept uncontaminated at source and bought house-to-house by the eco-aides and informal waste pickers, or have found their way to the paleros. But the household sources are scattered limiting the daily quantities collected by pushcart-driving buyers; while the special attention that the paleros are giving to segregated materials, is itself affected by the collection target of the garbage truck they are working with as crew members.

4.1.3 Limited capital The eco-aides and informal waste pickers have limited capital as they buy the materials from one household source to another. The Linis-Ganda eco-aides, for instance, are provided by the respective junkshop operators with capital in the form of a loan. Loan payments are automatically deducted from the sale of the materials bought by the eco-aides from the households. But the loan is limited to only Php500, and must first be liquidated before it is replenished. The eco-aide ends his buying round once the amount is consumed. Depending on the location of his house in relation to the junkshop, he may just return to it the following morning to sell the materials, liquidate the loan, and get a new loan for the day’s buying operation. Because of limited capital, the eco-aide is thus also limited in his purchases and he tends to prioritize the materials he would buy.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report 4.1.4 Limited pushcart capacity The pushcart has an average effective space of just about a square-meter floor area and half-meter high walls, which is thus limited to accommodate the usually bulky recyclable household materials (old newspaper, cartons, bottles). Because of this, the volume of materials that the eco-aide or waste pickers can purchase will naturally be limited and, as in the case of limited capital, the purchase tends to be selective with priority given to less bulky materials but commands the same price per unit weight or even higher, such as scrap iron, copper or bronze.

4.1.5 Distrust towards the eco-aides and waste pickers A certain degree of distrust is reportedly manifested in some communities and subdivisions towards the eco-aides and waste pickers that explain the refusal of some households to deal with them and who, instead, just rely on the collection services of city waste collection trucks. Moves to address this problem were initiated by Linis-Ganda. It encouraged the wearing of distinctive uniforms by the eco-aides and donated a number of uniforms for distribution by member-junkshops to respective eco-aides. But the initiative is apparently not enough and needs sustained support to be effective.

4.2 Compost Issues arise both in the supply and demand aspects of the market. It consists of the following:

4.2.1 Limited supply The production of compost is still limited. It is of particular concern to compost dealers whose products are sourced from the existing composting facilities in Metro Manila. Demands for large volume of compost are reported to be coming from outside Metro Manila, such as the latest ones from Quirino and Baguio City that cannot be immediately met because of the absence of a ready supply.

The existing composting facilities in Metro Manila are producing compost on a small-scale, and the producers tend to sell the product directly to community residents and other interested buyers, including some who are also coming from provinces outside Metro Manila, like Batangas and Bulacan. The dealers must first negotiate with the producers and need time to assemble the volume of the materials ordered by the buyers.

4.2.2 Low buying price of dealers Some dealers are currently buying or are offering to buy the compost from producers at prices as low as Php1.00/kg, relative to production cost as high as Php3.00/kg. One reason being cited for the low price is the cost involved in buying the compost from a number of scattered small producers which, as a result, causes the dealer to incur additional costs to collect and transport and therefore is reflected in the price offered. Another is the fact that the producers have not sought accreditation of their product from FPA; hence, its product does not have a brand name and cannot be sold in the open market. As such, the dealer must assume certain risk and reflects this in his price offer.

It is largely due to this low price that the producers have the tendency to just sell the compost directly to the community residents or to outside buyers who are willing to pay a higher selling price, which is quoted at Php5.00/kg by a number of producers. This tendency makes it all the more necessary for the dealer to first negotiate with the producers to be able to assemble the amount of compost that he needs for his buyers.

4.2.3 Compliance with FPA requirements In order to have a brand name for the compost, it must first get accreditation and the producer must secure a license to manufacture it from the FPA. As implied in the preceding discussion, the brand name would enable


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report the product to gain access to the open market and provide the producer with a better bargaining leverage with the dealers. However, complying with the FPA requirements is a rather slow process and involves series of quality tests and field trials that are costly to the small-scale producers. See some of FPA guidelines and specifications in Annex 4.

4.2.4 Limits to demand The pressure to intensify composting as a waste reduction strategy pursuant to RA 9003 is bound to create a situation where it might be already extremely difficult to match demand with supply. While enormity of the supply is unavoidable under the situation, the demand has certain limits among compost users. Through farm demonstrations, it is now established that the desirable limit in irrigated rice lands is 550 kilograms (11 sacks at 50kg/sack) of compost per hectare. It is not known yet what the maximum demand of other uses of compost would be. But it is unlikely that the demand could match the potential supply that can be produced in Metro Manila. Therefore the overall local demand will need augmentation from potential compost users outside Metro Manila, or alternative uses will need to be found.

4.2.5 Inadequate promotion campaign While information campaigns to arouse public awareness on the advantages of compost are a continuing IEC concern, the need to demonstrate how to apply compost and how much is needed in specific uses is crucial to encourage actual adoption among potential users. This is the rationale behind the Balanced Fertilization Program jointly implemented by the DA, FPA, manufacturers of organic fertilizers, and farmer-cooperators.

However, the program is still limited in its coverage and as has not yet extended beyond its original limit. The lack of budgetary resources has hampered the expansion of activities that would have enabled the program to cover more areas and agronomic uses. 5. Recommendations To create market conditions favorable to recycling and composting, appropriate steps have to be taken with due consideration to the existing situation, the opportunities obtaining therein, and the problems that need to be resolved to facilitate the achievement of objectives. The following steps are thus recommended based on the results of this study.

5.1 Establishment of MRF’s by phases A recycling facility or MRF (Material Recovery Facility) should be established in every barangay or cluster of barangays throughout Metro Manila, not just to comply with RA 9003 but to earnestly provide the actual physical requirements for recycling the enormous quantity of recyclable materials and reduce the quantity of waste that needs to be disposed to the dumpsite. The City/Municipality should follow a phased program of implementation adopting a system of prioritization and zoning. The establishment should not be undertaken simultaneously in all barangays but by stages of strategically selected barangays synchronized with the program to promote market demand, especially for compost, to achieve economic feasibility and sustainability of MRF operation. Each MRF must have a defined service area, with adequate facilities and equipment for handling the recyclable materials and composting. The MRF could be established as a government property, as such, through government funds and on land owned or to be acquired by the Barangay consistent with the provisions of RA 9003 and the Local Government Code.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Establishment of the MRF should be accompanied by adequate social preparation and community organizing (CO) to ensure people support and are involved in the whole process.

5.2 MRF capacity The capacity of the MRF should be based on population size or the service area, whether a whole barangay, a district of a large barangay, or a cluster of small barangays. Using the composting requirements and the alternative bioreactor designs developed by DOST-ITDI as a basis, a 1-ton bioreactor set is seen to be just about the average capacity requirement of one barangay. Presently, DOST-ITDI has designed, developed and tested for this capacity, as well as for a 500-kg and 5-ton bioreactor capacities. The 500-kg capacity would be suitable for small barangays, such as those in Manila and Pasay, assuming that each would want to have its own facility and that it is technically feasible to do so. The 5-ton capacity would be suitable for large barangays, such as those in Muntinlupa, Marikina and Paranaque, as well as in some parts of Quezon City and northern Caloocan; or for a cluster of average-sized barangays. Whichever is considered, any decision should be guided by the findings of DOST-ITDI that the larger is its capacity, the higher also is the expected ROI and shorter is the pay-off period. It should also be guided by the necessity to process the biodegradable waste as soon as possible to avoid causing obnoxious odor and hazard to health.

5.3 Management of MRF business operation The management of the business operation of the MRF should be entrusted to a community management group, with which the Barangay shall enter into a management contract while maintaining ownership of the facility and reserving oversight powers in the agreement. The MRF operation will basically involve the collection and marketing of factory returnable materials; and the collection of biodegradable waste, composting, and marketing of compost product. The management contract shall contain necessary safeguards for the sharing of benefits and responsibilities mutually agreed upon and satisfactory to both parties. The terms and conditions should take into account the basic elements that underlie the economic feasibility and sustainability of operating the facility, namely, the costs involved and the derivable returns that should factor in the savings to be realized from reduced garbage collection expenditures on the part of the Barangay and the City/Municipality. The systems and procedures for managing the facility and its business activities could be formulated and adopted by the CMGs during the stage and continuously updated and improved as necessary.

5.4 Organization of the Community Management Group (CMG) The Barangay, together with the respective City/Municipality, should encourage and facilitate the organization of the Community Management Group (CMG) that will thus be entrusted by the Barangay to manage the operation of the MRF. This should be achieved through appropriate CO work during the social preparation stage prior to the actual establishment of the MRF. Membership of the CMG should be open to all interested and qualified stakeholders within the service area. These include the eco-aides/waste pickers regularly operating in the service area, the paleros and the “jumpers,” and resident waste-pickers at the dumpsite. The CMG can be duly registered to acquire a legal personality and have the status to enter into a management contract with the Barangay. It can be structured in such a manner that it can properly manage the business of the MRF.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Part of the CMG strengthening plan could require that at a later stage it could combine with the other CMGs and, together, organize a city-wide organization that performs central function services (e.g. warehousing, transport, communication, market information and institutional networking) catering to the needs of each CMG. The CMG may take the form of a registered association or cooperative; and the citywide organization could take the form of either’s type of federation. Alternatively, the CMGs may opt for a corporation and be its controlling stockholders.

5.5 Sustained technical support Sustained technical support shall be extended to MRF operation by the concerned NSWMC-member agencies, such as the DTI, the DA and the DOST, pursuant to the pertinent provisions of RA 9003. DTI should provide training on business and financial management and incentive to compost manufacturing; DA should intensify its promotion program on the use of compost product; and DOST provide technical assistance in establishing the facilities, technical training on composting operation and equipment maintenance, and coordination in providing future repairs and trouble-shooting services. It may be beneficial if the FPA could facilitate the accreditation and issuing of necessary permits to produce and sell the compost, and coordinate with DA in promoting the use of compost that falls under its definition of pure organic fertilizer to minimize cost of fertilizer importation and the adverse long-term effects of intensive use of inorganic fertilizer in the farm. FPA may have to look into possible improvements in its present accreditation procedure and coordinate with the DOST especially on technical aspects.

5.6 Involvement of the NGOs Involvement of NGOs, particularly those engaged in SWM programs/projects in Metro Manila, should be sought and be made an integral part of the overall strategy consistent with the spirit of RA 9003 and the implementation approaches adopted by the NSWMC through its secretariat. This could be achieved in coordination with the NGO representatives in the NSWMC and its counterpart Board in every City and Municipality in Metro Manila.

5.7 Waste segregation at source The Barangay should take appropriate steps to encourage compliance with Section 21 of RA 9003 mandating waste segregation at source that includes household, institutional, industrial, commercial and agricultural sources; and enforce Section 48 of the same law prescribing the penalties against acts that contravene source segregation efforts, such as collection of non-segregated waste and mixing of source-segregated waste.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report _______________________________________________________________ List of References: Camacho, Leonarda N. “Urban Community Solid Waste Management: The Case of Linis-Ganda Project in S.Juan,” Participatory Environmental Conservation and Management. PCARR. 1995. DA Bureau of Soilso & Water Management. Balanced Fertilization Strategy (Information material produced by the bureau). Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG). Memorandum Circulars No. 2000-117 dated August 30, 2000 entitled “Implementation of Zero-Waste Management;” and No. 2001-38 entitled “Addendum to DILG MC 2001-19” dated April 10,2001. Monina Allarey Mercado (ed.). Doon Po Sa Amin. Quezon City: Earth Day Network Philippines. 2000. The publication contains several articles on waste recycling including one authored by Leonarda N. Camacho and several authored by Nilo Mulles. DOST-ITDI. “The Biology and Principles of the Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Composting Process,” (unpublished material). 2003. Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority. FPA Memorandum Circular N0. 96-08. Series of 1996. Dated August 9, 1996. Also, forms for securing license from FPA; and list of FPA-accredited manufacturers of organic fertilizer (either pure or fortified) in Metro Manila as of December 31, 2002. Lacto Asia Pacific Corporation. “Happy Soil: Systems Installed and User Listing, March 1999 to February 28,2002.” (Information material obtained from the company.) Linis Ganda/Metro Manila Federation of Environment Multi-Purpose Cooperative. “Purchase Report from January to December 2002.” (Copy of report furnished by Linis Ganda, April 4, 2003.) Metro Plastic Recycling Association. “Association Profile” and “Samples of Locally Recyclable Plastics.” (Information materials obtained from the NSWMC Secretariat.) National Solid Waste Management Commission Secretariat. Directory of Recycling Companies. (Information materials obtained from the NSWMC Secretariat.) Organic Fertilizer Manufacturers Association of the Philippines. “Areas of Assignment of Members Participating in the Agrikulturang Makamasa Rice Program, Corn Program and HVCC Program.” (Copy furnished by DA-BSWM Office. April 8, 2003.) PET Recycling Development Association, Inc. “PET Plastics Industry in the Philippines.” A briefing material furnished by the association through the NSWMC Secretariat.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Philam Barangay Council. “Barangay Philam Incentive Package CY2002.” (This document shows the computation of the incentive that Bgy Philam gets from the City Government for achieving waste reduction through MRF operation in accordance with City Ordinance No. SP1203, with the attached pertinent provision of the Ordinance.) Pulp and Paper Manufacturers Association, Inc. “Waste Paper Recycling;” Also Statement of “Commitment of Support,” in a letter addressed to the National Solid Waste Management Commission. (Information Materials obtained from the NSWMC Secretariat). Presidential Task Force on Waste Management. Solid Waste Management for Local Governments. DENR: Environment Management Bureau, 1998. Quezon City Council. City Ordinance No. SP-1203. 52nd Regular Session. Quezon City Environmental Protection and Waste Management Department. “Project Proposal: Materials Recovery and Compost Facility for Quezon City.” Republic Act 9003. The Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000. Approved January 26,2001. Tin Can Manufacturers Association of the Philippines, Inc. “Position Paper on Solid Waste Management.” Dated August 22, 2002.


ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report

Annex 1. List of Recycling Companies in Metro Manila

Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c AEA Technology


Annex 1. List of Recycling Companies in Metro Manila

Company Name/ Type of Material

Address/Contact Person and/or Telephone

Kind of Waste Material Used: Capacity & Use of the Material

Paper: 1.Abrigo Enterprises

Aurora Blvd., QC: Lourdes Abrigo

Newspaper, Carton, assorted

2.ACLEM 3501 Juan Luna, Binondo, Manila: Robert Lim 847-6324

Newspaper, office waste, other white grades

3.Asia Paper Industrial Corp

62 de Jesus St., Balintawak, QC: Jimmy Sy 361-8151


4.Bataan Pulp & Paper Mills Inc

2/F ACE Bldg., 101 Rada, Legaspi Village, Makati


5.Casan Paper Corp 25 21st Ave, QC Newspaper, cartons, white grades, others 6.Container Corp. of the Philippines

60 Old Samson Rd., QC: Victor Pascual 361-9801

OCC, kraft paper, paper boards, other brown grades

7.Don Box Industries

BF Homes Paranaque: Don Ventura 842-5160

Newspaper, carton, assorted

8.Embuscado Trading

Mendez St., Baesa, QC: Wendy Embuscado 361-7113

Paper

9.Globe Paper Mills 1000 Pascual Ave., Malabon: Carlos Yu 361-2516/ 242-7321

Newspaper, white waste paper: 70t/day (to make white/kraft paper & chip board)

10.Kimberly Clark Phils

Buendia Makati; also, Laguna: Leopoldo Baylon 808-0064

Waste Paper

11.Liberty Mfg. Corp.

40 Gov Pascual, Malabon: Josie Olivares 361-2541

Paper boxes

12.Los Angeles Trading

41 Mendez, Baesa, QC: 98-2728 Newspaper, carton, assorted

13.Manila Paper Mills

Sangandaan, QC; Also, Makati: Boy Tecson 90-5159

Newspaper, carton, assorted

14.MM Fed of Env MPC/Linis-Ganda

123 N. Domingo St., QC: Bong Teves 410-03-83

All kinds: No limit (to be sold to recycling factories)

15.Noah’s Paper Mills

Marcos Hi-way, Marikina: David Hwang 645-5684

16.Paper City Corp. of the Philippines

A. Mariano St., Valenzuela: Michael Sy 241-0489

17.Paperland Industrial Corp.

Lelland Drive, Balintawak, QC: Jose Gan 361-8531

Newspaper, office waste, other white grades: to make white paper and newsprint

18.PICOP Resources, Inc.

Picop Bldg Makati: Sopnny Ubalde 816-7170


19.Sunrise Paper Mills

3549 Reyes, Valenzuela: Robert Yu 293-3002

Waste Paper

20.Trans-National Paper Corp

Jollibee Ctr Pasig; Also, Tanza, Cavite: Stephen Cheng 633-4212


21.Trust International Paper Corp (TIPCO)

6/F ACE Bldg., 101 Rada Makati: Freddie Chan 892-9781

All kinds of waste paper: 700t/day only 10% can be met by local suppliers (to make quality white paper)

22.United Pulp & Paper Co Inc

166 Salcedo Makati & Bulacan: Miguel del Rosario 870-0100


23.Vanson Paper Industry Corp.

152 R. Delfin St. Marulas, Valenzuela: Eddy Sy 231-6806

Assorted waste paper & paperboard: 5,760t/year (to make box/clip board

24.Worldwide Sucat Rd., Muntinlupa Cont: Waste paper board, kraft paper, other brown

Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c Annex 1 page 1


Paper Mills, Inc. 837-1039 grades: to make paper/kraft board Plastics: 1.Adventure Mfg. Corp.

77D Pablo, ValenzuelaGenaro Chua 292-0550

Plastics

2.Asia Plastics Industries Corp

12E 8th cor 6th Ave Caloocan: Beth Ong 363-8832

Plastics

3.Aurora Cerrera 1699 Orosa, Malabon Tetrapak 4.Chemrez Inc. 65 Industries, Bagumbayan, QC:

Romeo Tan 635-0680 Styrofoam

5.Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils Inc.

Herrera St. Makati: Leonides Valencia

PET soft drink bottles 480 million (1.5-liter) bottles/year

6.Cunanan Enterprises

93 Dona Victoria, Malabon: Romualdo Cunanan

Hard plastics, plastic cups

7.Cunanan Plastic Recycling

Rincon Road, Malinta, Valenzuela

Scrap plastic: 20t/day (to be crushed then sold)

8.Daily Harvest Mercantile Ind. Inc.

21 Railroad St., Port Area, Manila: Joseph Sia 527-4024

Styrofoam

9.DOW Chemical Pacific Ltd.

23F 6750 Ayala Ave Makati: Bobby Batungbacal 819-1986

Styrofoam

10.Ever Fortune Thermoplas Corp

42 Sto. Domingo St., QC: Carlos Sy 731-1291

Plastic cups

11.Fil PET Inc. Maysilo, Malabon: Carmencita Abelardo 373-9797

PET Plastics

12.Golden River Plastic Industries Corp

Daang Bato, Lawang Bato, Valenzuela

Polypropylene: 12t/day (to be palletized)

13.Hopewell Poly Industry Corp

101 Balumbaran St., Valenzuela Scrap plastics: 10t/day (to be palletized then sold)

14.Imperial Plastic Mfg Corp

14 Tuayan, QC Cont: 712-2801 Plastics

15.Interpolymer Corp

Malabo-Maysan, Valenzuela: Alex Go 292-4878

Plastics

16. Kilus Foundation

Bgy Ugong, Pasig: Andy Santiago 641-34-99

Doy pack (sewed into bags for both domestic and export market)

17.Manila Plastic Products

26 Gov Pascual Ave Malabon: Leonardo Andaya 361-2691

Plastics

18.Marulas Industrial Corp

141 McArthurHi-way Marulas, Valenzuela: Wilson Fung 291-8105

PET, & all types of plastics except ABS PVC: 7t/day (to be palletized then sold)

19.Metro Polychem 80 Mendrez Rd. Baesa, QC PE, PT: 0.2-0.3kg/day 20.MM Fed of Env MPC/Linis-Ganda

123 N.Domingo St., Cubao QC: Bong Teves 410-03-83

All kinds: No limit (buying only)

21.Multi PET 1ST Malinta Assn. , Valenzuela: Wilfredo Go 292-4011

Plastics

22.Pacific Plastic Corporation

7 T Santiago, Valenzuela: Elsie David 292-7831

Plastics: to make kitchenwares, toys and bags

23.Polysterene Packaging Council of the Phil

9001 Victoria Bldg. UN Ave Manila; Sta. Maria, Bulacan: Tony Chiong 526-0889

Waste materials: 100t/year (ground to blocks for export)

24.PEMA Plastic Mfg Corp

80 Mendez Road, Baesa, QC: Ms. Marcelena 363-4593

Plastics

25.Plastic City Corp 7 T Santiago, Valenzuela: Ellaine Reyes 292-7831

Plastics

26.Polyhome Industry

Franscisco St. Maysan, Valenzuela: Clara Lim 292-8111

All kinds of plastic: 0.5t/day (to be palletized then sold)



27.Recyplast Industries Corp

Industria,l Karuhatan, Valenzuela

Soft plastics: 10 sacks/day (to be palletized then sold)

28.Rowell Plastic 8 Obrero St, Bagumbayan, QC: Antonio Azarcon 637-0987

Plastics

29.San Miguel Packaging Products

109 C Palanca, Legaspi Makati: Benjamin Gregorio 813-8000

PET, hard plastics: to make crates, pellets, refillable PET

30.Synber Manufacturing

Meliton cor Sucat Rd Paranaque Cont: Val Co 825-5356

Plastics

31.Top Fine Plastic Mfg Inc

184 Int. McArthur H Marulas, Valenzuela

Scrap hard/soft plastics: 50t/mo (to be palletized then sold)

32.United Vinyl Corp

70 Escoda S. Rafael Village, Navotas

PVC scrap: 105t/day (to make pipe, coupling, elbow

33.Valenzuela Pelletized Plastic Products Corp

10 Isidro Francisco, Maysan Rd Valenzuela: Choi Siukam 292-5024

PET plastic waste: to be palletized then sold)

34.ZKK Foundation Dagat-dagatan, Navotas; also, Antipolo, Rizal

Waste materials: as much as it can collect (for delivery to plants)

METAL: 1.Alba Metal Mfg. Corporation

M. Antonio St. Maysan, Valenzuela

Scrap iron: 30t/quarter (to make coupling, pulley, elbow

2.Alliance Foundry Shop & Eng’g Inc.

135 Teodoro cor 10th & 11th Ave.Caloocan

3.Allied Smelting and Metal Supply

7 Atis Road, Malabon: 361-3857 Scrap lead: to make lead washer, fastener, sinker

4.Amalgamated Iron Works

97 Pablo dela Cruz St S. Bartolome, QC

Aluminum, metal scraps

5.Art Foundry & Machine Shop

59 Gen Malvar cor Rizal St, Valenzuela

Scrap iron: to make mixer anger/palette

6.ASA Metal Product Inc

707Comp. Bagbaguin Valenzuela

Scrap cast iron: to make soil pipe

7.Ashland Phil., Corp

16 P. Gregorio St , Lingunan Valenzuela

Aluminum scrap: 20t/day (to make secondary aluminum scrap)

8.Biosan Marketing .

3001 Abad Santos cor Morong, Manila: Anton Lim 20-91-33

Aluminum cans & resalable caps

9.Cathay Pacific Steel Corp. City Foundry

8th Ave, Grace Park Caloocan; 25FGaleria Corp Ctr EDSA Pasig: Benjamin Chua 633-8033

Mill scale, scrap iron

10.Canumay Metal Craft

6 Doneza, Canumay, Valenzuela Aluminum ingots, cuttings: 2t/day (to make pots/pans)

11.Globe Aluminum Products

100 Malinis, Lawang Bato, Valenzuela

Scrap aluminum: 2.5t/day (to make pots/pans

12.Goodwill Metal Enterprises

225 Gen Luis Kaybiga, Caloocan: 90-42-76

Aluminum, metal scrap

13.Hilton Mfg Corporation

648 T. Santiago St., Lingunan Valenzuela: Robert Yu 292-8134

Aluminum

14.Hycaros Enterprises

130 Rincon Road, Malinta, Valenzuela

Scrap materials with bronze: 0.2t/mo (to make spare parts)

15.Kim Bee Factory 9th Ave., Caloocan Crust iron 16.Limbos Industrial Corporation

269 Tangke St., Malinta, Valenzuela

Scrap metal: 3t/mo. (to make mag-wheels

17.Malinta Metal Works

37 Rincon St., Malinta, Valenzuela: 293-2978

Scrap brass: (to make window handle)

18.Metal Wealth 37 Gen Luis Novaliches, QC Aluminum cans: No limit 19.MM Fed of Envl 123-b N. Domingo St., QC: All kinds: No limit (buying only)



MPC/Linis-Ganda Bong Teves 410-03-83 20.MRDC-DOST Bicutan, Taguig: Engr. Viloria Steel 21.Quality Metal Mfg., Inc.

28 Rincon St., Malinta, Valenzuela

Scrap iron: 10t/melting (to make iron bars)

22. Reynolds Phils. Corporation

2/F FENICS Bldg., FTI Taguig: Jaime Gonzales 838-9071

Aluminum cans

23.Swan Aluminum & Allied Products

14 Arayat, Mandaluyong Scrap aluminum: to make new products

24.Valenzuela Foundry and MachineShop

118 Maysan Rd., Maysan, Valenzuela

Scrap cast iron: 2t/day (to be palletized then sold)

25.Westmar Industrial Corp

ITC Compound, Babaguin Valenzuela

Brass scrap, bronze scrap: 0.5t/day (to make water meter strainer

26.ZKK Dagat-Dagatan

Navotas/Antipolo Tin cans: 15,000pcs (to make mixing can for factories)

Glass: 1.Bubog/Basag na Bote

270 Malapantas Barangka Itaas Mandaluyong: Dorotea Victoria

Broken glass

2.MM Fed of Env’l MPC/Linis-Ganda

123 N. Domingo St., QC: Bong Teves 410-03-83

All kinds: No Limit (buying only)

3.Republic-Asahi Glass Corporation

Pinagbuhatan, Pasig; 4F Bldg B SM EDSA Mandaluyong: Buenvenida Cruz 641-9181

4.San Miguel Corporation

Parola, Binondo, Manila: Atty. Ernesto Villanueva 40-89-21

Glass

Others: 1.Constant Battery

Pasolo, Valenzuela: 292-27-73

Used battery

2.Honest Parts 2579 16th St Tambo Paranaque Used battery: 3t/day (to make new battery) 3.Philippine Recyclers, Inc

Contact: Vicky Ignacio (044) 711-22-36

All types of lead acid batteries: 1 million pcs/year (to make new battery)

4.SJ and L Marketing Corp

2205 Aurora Blvd Pasay City: 833-93-92

Used battery

5.Applied Info Tech Inc.

87-C Scout Dequia, QC Used cartridges (to make refilled)

6.Laser Source 236 Samson Rd 1400 Caloocan Ribbon cartridges (to make refilled) 7.Manila Techtrade Ventures

3F 122 West Ave QC: Romil Lopez

Empty cartridge (exported to Korea)

8.Purruganan Industries

Victoria Village, East Canumay Valenzuela

Scrap bar detergent: 50t/day (to make cleanser)

9.Agreso Minerals Corp

So. Malinis, Lawang Bato, Valenzuela

Scrap marble chips: 30t/day (to make calcium carbonate

10.HMR Group of Companies

Sta. Rosa, Laguna:Gene Cruz Tel: 520-85-46 (Manila line)

Used computers, PABX system, telecom equipt: to make refurbished or repaired

11. Globe Paper Mills

1000 Pascual Ave., Malabon: Carlos Yu 361-2516/ 242-7321

Sawdust: 110 tons/day

Source: National Solid Waste Commission Secretariat, List of Recycling Companies. DENR. 2003; Monina Allarey Mercado (editor), Doon po sa Amin. Earth Day Network Philippines, 2002. PLDT, Directory. 2003. Pulp and Paper Manufacturers Association, Inc. Linis-Ganda Foundation.



Annex 2. Pictures of DOST-ITDI Bioreactor



Annex 2. Pictures of DOST-ITDI Bioreactor

500-kg Bio Reactor

5-Ton Bioreactor



Annex 3. Typical DOST-ITDI Bioreactor Compost Product



Annex 3. Typical DOST-ITDI Bioreactor Compost Product Compared with Bureau of Soils Standards1

Bureau of Soils Standards Natural Compost Organic Fertilizer

ITDI Compost

Nitrogen

2.09-6.0%

Phosphorous

0.57-0.79%

Potassium

N+P+K = at least 7

0.14-0.17%

Organic Carbon Content

20%

36-39%

pH

7

7

6.5-7.0

% Moisture

not more than 30%

not more than 30%

22-30%

Pathogen content

no pathogen

no pathogen

no pathogen

1Typical compost product data compared with Bureau of Soils Standards for natural compost and organic fertilizer (natural compost fortified with inorganic fertilizer). Source: DOST-ITDI, 2003.

Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c AEA Technology Annex 1 page 1


Annex 4. FPA Regulations & Standard Specification



Annex 4. FPA Regulations & Standard Specifications A. Definitions Organic Fertilizer Any product of plant and/or animal origin that has undergone decomposition through biological, chemical and/or any other process as long as the original materials are no longer recognizable, free from plant or animal pathogens, soil-like in texture, contains not less than 20% organic matter (o.m.) oven-dry basis and can supply nutrients to plants. All other materials that fall short of these requirements shall be classified as soil conditioners or amendments whichever is applicable.

• Pure organic –decomposed plant or animal materials to which decomposing activators my have been added to hasten the process of decomposition and to which no chemical or inorganic fertilizer material has been added to the finished product to affect the nutrient content.

• Fortified/enriched organic fertilizer – an organic fertilizer material, which had been

enriched with microbial inoculants, hormones and/or chemical additives to increase its nutrient content.

Soil conditioner or amendment Any organic or inorganic material, natural or synthetic, that is applied to the soil to modify certain soil physical properties, such as structure, moisture retaining capacity, shrinking and swelling capacity or resistivity to crusting and to improve soil chemical and biological conditions. Examples are polyelectrolytes such as complex vinyl and acrylic, gypsum, diatomaceous each, vermiculite, perlite, lime, and sawdust. Strictly a fertilizer is also an amendment but the term is more commonly used for materials applied for their fertilizing value. B. Standards and Specification 1. Specification of Pure and Fortified Organic Fertilizer PURE FORTIFIED Total NPK 5 - 8% 7% minimum C: N 12: 1 12: 1 Moisture Content < 35% < 35% Organic Matter < 20% < 20%

2. Tests for Pathogens for Organic Fertilizer Faecal Streptococci < 5 x 103/g compost Total coliforms < 5 x 102/g compost Salmonella 0 Infective parasitic 0



3. Allowable level of heavy metals in organic fertilizer Heavy Metal Maximum Allowable Level in Compost

(mg/kg dry weight) Zn 1000 Pb 750 Cu 300 Cr 150 Ni 50 Hg 5 Cd 5

4. Presence of weeds at 30 and 60 DAT or DAS

Density (no/m2) Weight (g/m2) Weeds 30 DT 60 DT 30 DT 60 DT

Grasses Broadleaves Hedges



Annex 5. List of Organic Fertilizer Manufacturer in Metro Manila



Annex 5. List of Organic Fertilizer Manufacturer in Metro Manila (As of December 31 2002)

Company/

Contact Person

Address/Tel No. Product Name Guaranteed Analysis (N-P-K)

Crop/s

1.Aldiz, Inc (Francisco Dizon)

Unit 1905 Cityland Cond H Dela Costa, Ayala, Makati 812-70-88 (20)

CropGiant 8-8-8 Organic Fertilizer

8-8-8 Rice

2.Bulacan Garden Corp

P. Tuazon/5th Ave Cubao, QC

Growing Mix Organic Fertilizer

1-5-1 Rice

3.Exquisite Focus Phils. Inc. (Mr Chong Ken Koo)

Unit 7 Bldg 2 Philam Townhomes, EDSA QC

Exquisite BDTM Bio-Organic Fertilizer

5 Bacillus strains & 3

Paeni Bacillus sts

Pechay

4.EZ Grow Agric’l Product Inc. (Nestor T. Anonuevo)

5/F ENZO Bldg., 399 Gil Puyat Ave Makati 890-96-95

Agrimate Fortified Organic

3-3-3 Corn

5.Fabcon Phils. Inc. (Roberto Espino)

12th Flr, Jollibee Center Ortigas Complex Center, San Miguel Pasig City

Bioearth Rooting Mix Bioearth Organic Fertilizer

0.3-14-3 0.6-1.5-0.6

Rice Rice

6.Fiber & Agro Systems Tech. (DR.Roberto Atmosfera)

3/F Belson House, 231 EDSA, Mandaluyong City

Lakas Ani Bio-Organic Fertilizer

1-5-3 Rice

7.Galactic Res. Dev. Corp. (Rosalina Tan)

5-7 Binmaka, SFDM, QC 372-86-23 (4)

Alpha SP Fortified Organic

1-4-3 Rice

8.Galaxy Ford International Co. (John Y.C. Lai)

Suite 2602 Discovery Center, Ortigas, Pasig City 910-63-21(2)

Greenbio Microbial Compound

2Bacillus & 1Paeni bacillus

Pechay

9.Grain Traders Consumers, Inc (Romulo Sigua)

22/F The Pearrlbank Center, 146 Valero St., Salcedo Village, Makati

Green Acres Organic Fertilizer

2.27-1.87-1.77

Rice

10.Jardine Davies (Renato Rondon)

Jardine Davies Bldg., 222 Gil Puyat Ave., Makati

Nutrismart Organic 0-6-0 Rice

11.Lacto Asia Pacific Corp (Rolando Shianghio)

115 Calbayog cor Dr. Fernandez St., Mandaluyong 535-05-64

Happy Earth Compost 1.35-0.89-1.04

Bush Beans



12.Manila Fertilizer, Inc (Ramon Ismael G. Mathay)

132 West Ave, QC 921-60-77

Manila Organic Fertilizer

2-3-2 Rice

13.Manila Water Co (Dem de Leon)

489 Katipunan Road, Balara, QC 981-81-76

Domestic Dried Sludge 1.21-0.78-0.07

Corn

14.Novatech Agri Food Ind.(Ronaldo Sumaong)

Rm. 503 Anita Bldg 1300 Quezon Ave cor Timog QC 371-95-81

Nova Pure Processed Chicken Manure

1.5-1.5-1 Pechay/ Leafy

Vegetables

15.Nutrigrowth Phils., Inc. (Atty Herminigildo Reyes)

Suite 301 Manila Luxury Cond. Pearl Drive Cor Gold Loop, Ortigas Center, Pasig

Nutriplex Fortified Organic Fertilizer

3-3-3 Pechay

16.Pililla Poultry Processing Plant (Rodolfo Peralejo)

4/F Innovative Coop Center 32 F. Castillo, Proj 4 QC 438-83-46

Pil-Solfer Organic Fertilizer

3.67-0.37-1.63

Rice

17.Pontmain Res. Inc. (Atty Ariel F. Aguirre)

Unit 2303 The Orient Square Bldg., Emerald Ave Ortigas Center, Pasig

Coco Wonder Plus Fortified Organic

5.4-5.66-5.29

Pechay

18.Rancap Mfg. (Olive Padilla)

71 Real St., Urdaneta Village Makati 810-64-81/2

Rancap Organica 2.8-2.5-1.8 Rice

19.Romark Enterprises (Encar Castillo)

3 Masigla St, Teacher’s Village, QC 922-79-65

Yama-Bym OrganicFertilizer

3.3-3.0-2.2 Rice

20.Saka Agriventures Inc. (V. P. San Felipe)

3/F Arcel Bldg., F. Roman cor N. Domingo, San Juan

Saka Organic Fertilizer 3.5-3.0-2.5 Rice

21.Tadeja Enterprises (Dolores Tadeja)

20 Lands St., Vasra Village, Diliman, QC 926-45-38

Farmers Product Organic Fertilizer

1-6-1 Rice Tobacco

22.T’boli Agro Ind Dev Inc (Maridel Dizon)

3103-C Phil Stock & Exchange Ctr Rd, Ortigas Pasig 635-50-28/37/38

Organica 2000 Bio-Organic Fertilizer

1.83-11.06-0.55

Rice

23.Union Hikari Fertilizer Ind. (Mr. Hisashi Gomamoto)

E.Rodriguez Jr. Ave., Ugong, Pasig 671-71-30

Union Hikari Liquid Fertilizer

5-0-1 Rice

Source: Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority. As of 31 December 2002.



Annex 6a Land Use



Annex 6a Land Use

NCR and surrounding 25-km Area: Existing Land Use

Existing Land Use Area (ha) 1. Agricultural Land: a. Cultivated land, crops mainly cereal and sugar b. Coconut plantation c. Crop land mixed with coconut plantation d. Crop land mixed with other plantation

196,524 156,700 16,040 16,360 7,424

2. Grassland, grass covering > 70% 7,286 3. Closed canopy, mature trees covering > 50% 16,910 4. Open canopy, mature trees covering < 50% 23,180 5. Fishpond 22,240 6. Marshy area and swamp 323.2 7. Mangrove 313.4 8. Quarry 256.4 9. Built-up area (mostly within NCR) 57,380 TOTAL 324,413

Source: ENR Consultants and compilation of maps, 1982 edition; and GIS-generated data, 2000.

Farm Area of NCR and Nearby Provinces: Potential Market of Metro Manila Compost

Location Total Farm Area Rice Farm Area % of Rice Farm Area NCR 12,667 658 5.2 Bataan 18,445 10,284 55.8 Batangas 105,205 35,058 33.3 Bulacan 49,940 36,357 72.8 Cavite 33,178 11,811 35.6 Laguna 48,273 17,276 35.8 Nueva Ecija 132,918 112,049 84.3 Pampanga 46,627 34,810 74.7 Rizal 19,517 10,098 51.7 Tarlac 72,980 60,272 82.6 TOTAL 539,750 328,633 60.9 Note: a) Compost requirement of one hectare of rice farm is determined as follows:

• 5 sacks during dry season and • 6 sacks during wet season; • Or a total of 11 sacks for 2-cropping rice farms. •

b) Assuming that all the 308,251 hectares are 2-cropping rice farms, the total compost requirement is 308,251 x 11 = 3,390,761 sacks. At 50kg/sack, this is equivalent to 169,538 tons of compost. This volume can be produced in only 182 days of compost production period (at 929 tons/day) in Metro Manila. c) It is clear that the estimated total compost production in Metro Manila cannot be all consumed by the rice farms in NCR and even the nearby provinces. A yearly oversupply of compost will thus exist unless its application is expanded to the other farm types (vegetable, orchard, and ornamental) and that there is more of the urban gardening as now promoted and already existing in some CBSWM sites. Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c AEA Technology Annex 6a page 1


Study of Markets for Recycled Solid Waste Report No: 5c AEA Technology Annex 6b page

Documents

METRO MANILA SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECTnswmc.emb.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Report... · ADB TA 3848 PHI: Metro Manila Solid Waste Management Project Final Report Executive