International Expert Mission to Japan on Disaster Debris

Management

Muralee Thummarukudy

Chief, Disaster Risk Reduction

United Nations Environment Programme

Background

• UNEP has been communicating with the Government of Japan since the tsunami event in March

• In May 2011, UNEP joined an international expert mission to tsunami hit areas arranged by the Asian Disaster Reduction Center

• In Q4, 2011, UNEP was requested by MoFA to organise an international expert mission to Tohoku region to study the management of disaster debris

• Observe the disaster debris management in Japan and learn lessons which may be applied in other countries

• Facilitate experience exchange from other disaster situations

Mission objectives

Ronnie Crossland, US EPA, (Organisation and management)Thorste Kallnischkies, Germany, (Landfill operations)David Smith, UK, (Hazardous wastes and asbestos)Mike Cowing, St Lucia, (Waste recycling)Yves Barthelemy, France, (Waste estimation)Mario Burger, Switzerland, (Monitoring)Prof Toshiaki Yoshioka, Tohoku University, (Member, National Task Force)Surya Chandak, UNEP, International Environmental Tech Centre, (Waste to Energy Projects)Muralee Thummarukudy, UNEP, Disasters and Conflicts Sub-programme, (Team leader)

Experience in Hurricane Katrina, Rita, China earthquake, SE Asia tsunami, earthquake in Haiti, Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar, oil spills + other emergencies

Mission team

Mission itinerary• Day 1 – Sendai

• Day 2 – Miyako and Ofonato

• Day 3 – Ichinomaki

• Day 4 – Soma City

• Day 6 – Tokyo Waste Management Facilities

• Gather basic information and maps

• Visit city officials, discuss their challenges and progress

• Visit the waste management facilities

• Exchange experiences

• Document them in videos, pictures, GPS

• Final output – video and report

Mission activities

• Fukushima reactor + exclusion zone

• Debris which got washed off into the sea during the tsunami

Exclusions

• The challenge faced by Japan is massive and unprecedented

• This will be the most expensive disaster debris management project ever, costing over ten billion dollars, overtaking Hurricane Katrina (USD 4 billion)

• This is done under very restrictive conditions (limitations of landfilling and transport)

Key observations

at October 18, 2011

Pref.Local

government

Amount of

wastes

(tons)Pref. Local government

Amount of

dwastes

(tons)Pref.

Localgovernment

Amount of

wastes

(tons)Hirono 15,000 Sendai 1,352,000 Iwaki 880,000Kuji 96,000 Ishinomaki 6,163,000 Souma 217,000Noda 140,000 Shiogama 251,000 Minami-souma 640,000Fudai 19,000 Kesen-numa 1,367,000 Shinchi 167,000Tanohata 86,000 Natori 636,000 Hirono 25,000Iwaizumi 42,000 Tagajyo 550,000 Naraha 58,000Miyako 751,000 Iwanuma 520,000 Tomioka 49,000Yamada 399,000 Higashi-Matsushima 1,657,000 Ohkuma 37,000Ohtsuchi 709,000 Watari 1,267,000 Futaba 60,000Kamaishi 762,000 Yamamoto 533,000 Namie 147,000Ohfunato 752,000 Matsushima 43,000Rikuzen-Takata 1,016,000 Shichigahama 333,000

Rifu 15,000Onagawa 444,000Minami-Sanriku 56,000

Total 4,755,000 Total 15,691,000 Total 2,280,000

Iwate Miyagi Fukushima

Aomori 0.8 million t, Ibaraki 0.46 million t, Chiba 0.13 million t

Total: 29 million tons

Amount of disaster waste

• The Central government has given clear technical direction and financial package to deal with the disaster debris in a time-bound manner (MoE Directive, May 2011)

• The local municipalities are implementing them, with support of prefectures, in a rapid and systematic manner

• Cities which had prior contingency plans were able to move forward faster

Key observations

• Tsunamis typically mix up all types of debris into one mass

• The collection of disaster debris from the original location and primary sorting is almost over

• Secondary sorting and final disposal is ongoing

Key observations

12

（図）処理フロー

Landfill

（ Public Facility）

151,000 t

Recycle

545,000 t

Landfill

（ Private Facility）

187,000 t

514,000 t

128,000 t

Temporary Storage Sites

Public TreatmentPublic Treatment 1.03 million tons1.03 million tons

Plastic, Paper

74,000 t

Wood

240,000 t

Metal

19,000t

Concrete, asphalt

608,000 t

Bulky waste34,000

t

Kawara, Plaster B58,000 t

Burnable 310,000 t Non-burnable 720,000 t

12,000 t

Private Facilitie

s

310,000 t

Cars

10,000t

Recycled by

private companie

s

Treatment will

be done by each facility

Planning for the Disaster Waste Treatment

Crush

Disaster waste 1.35 million tonsDisaster waste 1.35 million tons

（ Public)

37,000 t

(Temporary Built )

265,000 t

Store

Crush

Tsunami

sediment

1.30mil. t

Recycling

(if able)

Temporary Storage

Incineration

13

Gamo Storage Site for Disaster Wastes

がれき

その他

TV

エアコン 木くず 燃えるごみ

木くず

木くず

木くず

がれき

がれき

蒲生搬入場平面図 S=1:3000

廃車置場

廃車置場

大型車両 置 場 普通車両

置 場小型車両 置 場

普通車両 置 場

農機具その他

冷蔵庫

洗濯機

木くず選別ヤード

トロンメル

がれき破砕ヤード

破砕機

廃車置場

廃車置場

廃車置場

木くず置場

木くず置場

木くず

木くず

木くず

廃車置場

廃油

SedimentWood for recycling

Wood for combustion

Cars

Concrete, Bricks

Waste oil

Ｔ v

Refrigerators Washing machines

Air conditioners

Debris from Tsunami

Debris from Tsunami

Plastic, Paper and Tatami

Cars

Incinerator

Metal

Concrete, Bricks

• Very high degree of mechanisation, from sorting to treatment

• Local employment is promoted but additional employment generation is limited

Key observations

• When possible, use of local facilities - such as cement plant - to treat disaster waste has been attempted

• Cars and white goods have not yet been processed

Key observations

• Speed at which new facilities are being set up, such as sorting incineration and desalinization, is impressive

• The biggest incinerator in Japan is being set up in Ichinomaki and will be operational within next 6 months

• Typically these take many years in other countries

Key observations

• Quantity of raw timber is massive

• The concrete foundations of buildings have not yet been removed

• Quantity of hazardous substances was somewhat limited compared to disaster situations elsewhere

Key observations

• Some waste is not amenable to easy management, such as fishing nets

• Some waste still needs to be dug up from the ports

Observations

• Monitoring of environmental conditions is ongoing at all locations

• Results are made publicly available often within hours of monitoring

• Health and safety management in the facilities are of a high standard

• No reported fatality relating to health and safety in the field

Key observations

• Having a contingency plan enables cities to initiate the disaster debris management quickly, thereby speeding up overall recovery

• Clear instructions from central government (or agency) at an early stage will facilitate standardisation of approaches

• Without liberal financial support and technical back-up, local municipalities will not be able to cope with such disasters

Lessons for other situations

• Sorting of the debris to a reasonable number of categories enables maximising recycling, the earlier it is done, the better

• All options, including land reclamation, should be attempted on an opportunistic basis

• Where possible, local opportunities for waste-to-energy should be evaluated

• Good health and safety should not be neglected even during emergency situations

Lessons, continued..

• Environmental monitoring should be integral part of the projects

• Documentation and communication of the process and results are important

Lessons, continued..

• No options, including landfilling, should be discounted at the earliest stage

• Local variations should be promoted from the national guidelines so long as it suits local environmental conditions

• Monitoring is best done by an independent academic/research agency rather than the contractor or government

Lessons, from elsewhere applicable in Japan

• There should be continued effort to coordinate between the municipalities and prefectures so that good practices can be shared

• Continued involvement of national experts to technically backstop the local authorities will ensure more optimal outcomes locally

Lessons from elsewhere applicable in Japan

• A UNEP report on Japan’s disaster debris management

• A video documentary

• Website content, ongoing outreach to share findings

• UNEP to establish an international network of experts on disaster waste management

• Disaster debris estimation methodology to be fine tuned

Follow-up actions