THE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE EIGHT CITIES OF UKRAINE

According to the World Bank’s researches (hereinafter referred to as the WB) [3], MSW volume and structure depend on volume of population and its incomes. Table 1 shows basic economic indices of the country: Table 1.

The reference cities choice is spent on following parameters

The reference cities choice is spent on following parameters: –

Population [8]

Statistical analysis [8] represents the information on incomes of population as average in the a region. Because of data lack of population incomes in each city, the population incomes in the reference cities equal to ones of the corresponding regions. The calculated income is estimated as a probable minimum. This results from the fact that the actual incomes in the cities are always above those of the rural inhabitants.

Statistics of the Ministry of Regional Development, Building and Housing and Communal Services of Ukraine presents the data on the MSW volumes collected in a region as a whole [9]. The MSW generation is also updated according to the information of regional statistical offices [10].

The monitoring spent by the National Energy and Utilities Regulatory Commission (NEURC) has defined percent of population using the service of centralized waste collection in a region [11].

MSW generation W g city in each analyzed city was determined by the formula: (1) W g c i t y = S c i t y × W g r e g i o n S r e g i o n [ tons ] where:

S ^city – population of the reference city in the reporting year [people],

In per capita waste generation rates m g city was determined by the formula: (2) m g c i t y = W g c i t y × 1000 S c i t y ÷ 365 [ kg/capita/day ] where:

W g city – MSW generated in a reference city in the reporting year [tons],

For comparison there were chosen eight cities with similar population and real incomes, but located in various regions of Ukraine.

Ukraine has 36 cities over 100,000 people [8]. These cities host 35% of the population of the country. Small towns and urban-type settlements with population less than 100,000 inhabitants host 34% more.

According to State building codes of Ukraine [12], cities with population over 100,000 people are divided into the four groups: the small cities with a population of 100,000-250,000 inhabitants, the medium-sized cities with population of 250,000–500,000 people, the large cities with population of 500,000–1 million people and the largest cities with population over 1 million people. Table 2 shows the classification of the cities with population over 100,000 people from different regions of Ukraine.

As shown in Table 2 the biggest number of small cities placed in the western and central region.

The population was divided into next four groups by the annual income levels: low-income (less than 90% from the national average per person), lower middle-income (from 90 to 100%), upper middle-income (from 100 to 125%) and high-income (more than 250%) (Table 3).

The analysis of Tables 2, 3 has shown that the people with the lower official incomes live in small cities with population up to 250,000 inhabitants, and the high official incomes – in the capital and the large cities with developed industrial output (Dnipropetrovsk, Zaporizhzhya and Odesa Oblast).

For MSW analysis for the first group sized 18 small cities there was chosen the city from the western region – Uzhgorod (the regional center of Zakarpatska Oblast (Transcarpathian region) and the city Nikopol from the southeast region (Dnipropetrovsk Oblast) having similar population. From the second group 11 medium-sized cities (Table 2) there were chosen 2 cities with close subgroup of population and incomes (Table 3), but from different regions (the regional centers of Cherkasy Oblast – Cherkasy from the central and the regional center of Kherson Oblast – Kherson from the southern region).

From the third group 4 the large cities with official incomes exceeding national average (Table 3) there was chosen the city from the western region (the regional center of the Lviv Oblast – Lviv) and the large city from the southeast region (the regional center of Kharkiv Oblast – Kharkiv).

From the fourth group that consists of the national high incomes the largest cities having population of more than 1 million inhabitants the regional center of southern Odesa Oblast – Odesa was chosen. An individual interest represents the largest city in the central region – capital Kiev where population and its incomes twice exceed corresponding figures of the rest cities in this group.

The information on reference cities presented in Table 4. Waste Generation Per Capita produced by inhabitants of the cities per day is also presented in the same place.

The data shown in Table 4 confirm dependence in wastes generation on incomes. The official incomes in the reference cities depend on development degree of the industry, tourism etc.

Comparison of two cities (Uzhgorod and Nikopol) with close population (difference 0.1%) but with difference level of official incomes showed, that the income excess in Nikopol by 40% has led to increase of MSW volumes at 30%.

However, in other two cities (Kherson and Cherkasy) having not only a close population (difference 4%) but also similar incomes (difference close to 0.1%) MSW volumes difference equals 12%.

Comparison of Lviv, Odesa and Kharkiv (having difference on population by 30%, and the incomes by 5 and 10%) shows difference in waste generation rates per capita by 25%.

IMSW generation rates per capita in Kiev corresponds to ones in the countries having top level of national average incomes [3].

The author studied the waste composition in the reference cities for the estimation of MSW components of secondary use.

There is no official statistical information on MSW composition taken for each city of Ukraine. However, the researches on MSW composition in the cities were being developed during the preparation of “Solid Waste Management Strategy”, “Program of Solid Waste Management”, “Investments Program in Waste Management”, “The Sanitarian Cleaning Schemes in Cities”. The research on MSW composition in the reference cities has been carried out in compliance with “Methodological Recommendations for the Determination of the Morphological Composition of Solid Waste” [13].

In The Methodological Recommendations MSW composition is divided into the 11 categories: organic waste, paper and cardboard, plastic, glass, black metal, non-ferrous metal, textiles, wood, hazardous waste, leather and rubber, solid waste residue after removal of components (small debris, stones, street garbage, etc.). The waste composition data is available as percentages. In World Bank Report [3] waste composition is divided into the 6 categories. To meet the World Bank Report data, present Ukrainian classification of MSW composition requires some changes: category “other waste” has included some other categories, such as textiles, rubber, ash, etc, amount of which in MSW of the reference cities is extremely little.

The author has used the data for the MSW composition analysis regarding the reference cities [14–22].

Change in urban waste composition of waste in the reference cities is shown in Table 5.

The data shown in Table 5 demonstrates prevalence of organic waste in all cities regardless of incomes. Increase content of organic in MSW of Odesa compared to other cities testifies the fact that city is the main resort in Ukraine with resort season lasting about 5 months. More than 2 million tourists come there and raise number of population by 3 times respectively raising volume of food waste.

Also the content of such components as paper, plastics and glass in MSW of all cities correspond to ones in cities of the countries with the average incomes on WB classification [3]. The average composition of the analyzed cities has been presented in Table 6.

Table 6 shows that the share of paper and glass in MSW of Ukraine corresponds to ones of the countries with maximum national average incomes. As for the share of plastic and metal – to ones of the countries with lower middle average incomes. As for the share of glass it corresponds to the countries with high national average incomes. Some excess in the part of inert materials testifies about low level of separation and sorting techniques implementation in Ukraine.

The analysis of Table 5 and 6 shows the advisability of processing enterprises implementation for secondary use of MSW material potential. Since Ukraine is an energy dependent country, the National Strategy of waste management provides utilization for MSW energy potential.