Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy for Sustainable Development

Techno-economic feasibility and environmental sustainability of

waste-to-energy in a circular economy: Sri Lanka case study
Keshan Samarasinghe a, Priyantha D.C. Wijayatunga b,⁎
a
Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand
b
Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippines

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Many countries in Asia-Pacific region have programs in place for clean energy transition aligned with their Na-
Received 15 August 2021 tionally Determined Contributions. However, in most of these countries waste-to-energy (WtE) has no major
Revised 8 April 2022 role in the current programs. The study presented in the paper has examined WtE in a circular economy as a so-
Accepted 11 April 2022
lution that can have economic, financial, social, and environmental co-benefits through efficient use of natural
Available online 29 April 2022
resources, reduced emissions, and fostering innovation. The case study involving Sri Lanka has shown that similar
Keywords:
countries have the potential to implement WtE projects coupled with appropriate circular economy elements
Waste-to-energy with adequate financial and economic returns. The results show the viability of a centralized incineration plant
Circular economy of 500 tons/day capacity and decentralized biogas facilities of 150–200 tons/day capacity for each of the three dis-
Economic analysis tricts in the country's Western province. The estimated total power generation capacity from incineration is
Financial analysis about 20.3 MW and the annual exported electricity is 129.86 GWh. The estimated power generation capacity
GHG emission reduction of the biogas plants is about 7.16 MW, and the annual exported electricity is about 41.4 GWh. The total amount
Externality cost of compost produced is estimated to be about 43,000 tons/year by processing digestate and 125 tons of recyclable
waste expect to be recovered daily. The proposed development plan positively impacts the grid emission factor of
the country and the estimated avoided annual GHG emission is about 380,000 tons of CO2. This pioneering case
study can be used as a basis for immediate action to solve waste management issues within a circular economy
helping similar economies in the Asia Pacific region in their efforts to achieve net zero emission target by the mid-
dle of this century.
© 2022 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction
The rising population, the growth of economic activities, and rapid
urbanization have led to changing consumption patterns and increasing
per capita solid waste generation (Namlis & Komilis, 2019). Globally,
37% of municipal solid waste (MSW) is disposed in landfills while 33%
is dumped in open environment. While 11% of MSW is incinerated,
19% of MSW is recovered though recycling and composting (World
Bank Group (WBG), 2018). Asia, with a population of more than 4.45
billion is the largest waste generating continent in the world. It is esti-
mated that Asian cities will generate 1.8 billion tons of MSW per
annum by 2025 and continue to grow at approximately 15% every
year (United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2017).
Mismanaged MSW has a significant socio-economic impact as well as
an impact on the marine environment. Many governments and
⁎ Corresponding author at: South Asia Energy Division, Asian Development Bank,
Philippines.
E-mail address: pwijayatunga@adb.org (P.D.C. Wijayatunga).
institutions have not been able to develop a sustainable waste manage-
ment sector due to inadequate financial support for integrated MSW
plan, absence of selective waste collection, lack of self-awareness on
the environment, and sufficient public policies related solid waste are
not in place (Pereira & Fernandino, 2019). Generation of clean heat
and electricity from non-recyclable waste is one of the strategies high-
lighted in the efforts to overcome economic development challenges
in a developing country (Asian Development Bank (ADB), 2012). This
will help to improve public health, minimize economic burden, and re-
duce environmental impact while creating a better and sustainable
country for future generation. Waste-to-energy (WtE) is therefore one
of the important elements in waste management programs which
many countries are currently pursuing.
This paper presents an assessment of WtE in the context of a circular
economy in developing countries using Sri Lanka as a case study. This
case study is a pioneering attempt to identify the techno-economic fea-
sibility of WtE plants based on the segregated waste against mixed
waste with due consideration given to cost of externalities. The existing
WtE plant in Sri Lanka accepts fresh unsorted MSW which discourages
circular economy. Therefore, this study will help in identifying the

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2022.04.005
0973-0826/© 2022 International Energy Initiative. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
importance of waste segregation to promote waste recycling, maximize
resource efficiency, and achieve clean energy development targets. The
study provides an estimate of total energy potential in MSW, financial
and economic viability of advanced incineration and anaerobic diges-
tion technologies in the Western Province and also, an estimate of cli-
mate mitigation potential.
Waste to energy in a circular economy
Developing countries in Asia and the Pacific region have developed
energy policies considering the new national and global agenda over
the past decades. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted
in 2015, and SDG7 requires to ensure access to affordable, reliable,
sustainable, and modern energy for all by 2030. The Paris Agreement
required all countries to develop their Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs) for climate change mitigation and adaption.
With the focused areas of intervention, it is expected that the global
renewable energy share will rise from about 15% of the total primary
energy supply in 2015 to around two-thirds by 2050. Similarly the
share of renewable energy in the electricity supply industry would
increase from 25% in 2017 to 85% by 2050 (International Renewable
Energy Agency, 2018). With increasing demand to meet the renewable
energy development targets and climate targets, circular economy has a
major role to play in waste management sector to maximize the
resource efficiency. WtE technologies have started playing an important
role in this emerging environment as it helps to maximize resource
efficiency. WtE technologies have improved rapidly and have become
increasingly cost competitive even though WtE is not a widely spread
technology.
The circular economy helps to minimize MSW landfilling and keep-
ing almost all the waste material in the economy via redesign, reuse,
recycling, and energy recovery (De Sadeleer et al., 2020). The circular
economy concept was adopted by European commission in 2015. In
New Zealand, a circular economy action plan was drafted to recycle ma-
terials where possible and use conventional and nonconventional WtE
technologies to treat non-recyclable materials to minimize MSW land-
fills (Munir et al., 2021). A study has recommended that Bangladesh
should have dedicated biogas based renewable energy generation tar-
gets for circular economy-based cities. Both China and Germany have
implemented policies and laws to promote bioenergy development
and circular economy (Nazmul et al., 2021). India has 2554 MW capac-
ity of WtE plants as of 2018 and the country was able to commission
India's largest WtE plant with 24 MW capacity by 2017 (Priyadarshini
& Abhilash, 2020). Thus, Sri Lanka also can have modern WtE energy
technologies to strengthen circular economy while increasing material
recycling and minimizing landfilling.
Technologies
There are several commercialized WtE technologies such as inciner-
ation, pyrolysis, gasification, anaerobic digestion, bioethanol produc-
tion, and landfill gas recovery systems. Studies have been carried out
to identify the most appropriate WtE technologies under different sce-
narios considering technical, environmental, economic, social factors
(Khan & Kabir, 2019; Stantec, 2011). Compared with other technologies,
moving grate incineration technology performs well and it is considered
to be the most commercialized and better waste treatment option for
non-recyclable waste (Xin-gang et al., 2015). Incineration technology
has several key advantageous over landfills in all environmental aspects
except in human toxicity potential. This technology has been imple-
mented in Europe, Asia, and North America (Jaymee et al., 2019). Incin-
eration plants require a sophisticated exhaust gas control and treatment
system since MSW combustion results in emission of dioxins and gener-
ation of fly-ash which are rich in metals and other impurities. Therefore,
the cost of these incineration plants is high and it has become a major
barrier in investments (Ediene, 2019). However, the collected fly ash
309
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
and bottom ash can be processed to remove contaminants and metals.
The treated ash can be used as a filling material in asphalt, cement,
and in other construction work. The level of effectiveness of WtE plant
depends on the properties of waste feed such as calorific value and
moisture content. One of the common characteristics in the developing
Asia is that most of the MSW is unsorted and it has high organic fraction
with high moisture content (United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) & International Solid Waste Association (ISWA), 2015). This
will result in several operational issues such as corrosion, process unre-
liability, and high auxiliary fuel consumption.
Various types of biogas technologies are available in the market to
treat biodegradable waste materials. The Plug-Flow Digester, the Chi-
nese Fixed Dome Digester, the Indian Floating Drum Digester, and the
Garage Shaped Digester are ordinary anaerobic digestion (AD) technol-
ogies. The most common and commercialized AD technologies are
Engineered Reactor with a Continuous Stirred Tank (concrete or steel)
and Unmixed Covered Earthen Anaerobic Lagoons. Biogas can be used
as a primary energy source in a typical thermal power generation sys-
tem. Such plants can be dispatched in the power system even as
baseload generation like any other plant. This is an advantage biogas
possesses over other intermittent renewable energy sources.
Choice of technology is critical depending on where the technology
is deployed. In addition to the techno-economic viability it is important
to ensure that the country has access to required skills and the facilities
to operate and maintain the selected technology. High operating costs
and high-level of competition from alternative treatment technologies
make the production of heat and power from MSW economically chal-
lenging (U.S. Department of Energy, 2019).
Technology costs
Incineration plants
Incineration is the most commercially existing types of MSW WtE fa-
cilities and 11% of MSW is treated via modern incineration technologies
in the world (World Bank Group (WBG), 2018). Prior separation of recy-
clables to achieve optimal resource recovery, will help to incineration
process control and efficiently produce electricity and heat. Cost of the
plant always varies with the waste properties, lifetime of the plant,
and technology readiness level. In Brazil, the capital cost of waste incin-
eration with the capacity of 575 tons per day is about USD 54.3 million
(USD 148/MWh) (Ediene, 2019). In China, the estimated investment
cost of grate-based incineration plant cost is 73.4 million (USD 106/
MWh) with the treatment capacity of 1000 tons/day (Xin-gang et al.,
2015). While, China was able to develop WtE facilities at an average
cost of USD 250 per annual ton with a short lifetime, the facilities in
the US and Europe, cost an average of USD 840 per annual ton with an
estimated over 30 years of plant life (Wu, 2018). The first ever WtE
plant (incineration) in Sri Lanka expects to accept fresh unsorted
MSW and the total investment is about USD 98 million (USD 1136/
MWh) (Daily, 2017).
Biogas plants
Anaerobic digestion is applicable only to organic species found in
MSW. Thus, it requires prior separation of non-biodegradable waste
from MSW. One of the most common treatment processes is anaerobic
co-digestion which is the process of combining multiple organic wastes
simultaneously as a means of increasing methane yields. As previously
mentioned, the capital cost of a biogas plant is highly depending on
technology readiness level. In Brazil, the capital cost of anaerobic di-
gester with the capacity of 300 tons per day is about USD 12 million
(USD 130/MWh) (Ediene, 2019). In Bolivia, the estimated capital cost
of AD plant is about 6100 USD/kW of electricity generation for small
scale plants (Garcia, 2014). In Australia, the capital cost of AD plant
with an annual treatment capacity of 35,000–50,000 tons of industrial
and commercial food waste is about USD 7.2 million. The plant has
2 MW electricity generation capacity, 2.2 MW of heat utilization
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
capacity, and up to 100 m3 of liquid biofertilizer at 6% dry solids per day
(IEA Bioenergy, 2018a).
Cost of externalities
The cost of externalities is key to capture the co-benefits from using
proper solid waste management systems where WtE can be one of the
elements in such systems. In the absence of country specific data, the
study needed to derive the costs of externalities from those available
in other countries.
The paper uses the cost of externalities derived for Greece because of
the availability of disaggregated values, as the basis for determining cost
of externalities in the absence of such data specific to Sri Lanka. In
Greece the externalities cost because of landfills is about USD 1.71 per
ton of MSW due to the impact on soil, groundwater, and surface water
and about USD 2.3 per ton on quality of life due to noise, odor,
disamenity, and adverse impact on aesthetics (Mavrotas et al., 2015).
However, these values may vary depending on the country and the re-
gion where one lives in. These values for Greece are therefore later ad-
justed to reflect the difference in gross domestic product (GDP) and
the population density. Asian Development Bank's (ADB) recom-
mended externality cost attached to GHG emissions is USD 36.30 per
ton of CO2 equivalent in 2016 and it is escalated by 2% annually in real
terms (Asian Development Bank, 2017). World Bank had used USD 30
per ton of CO2 equivalent for externality cost attached to GHG emissions
from power sector projects in 2015 (World Bank Group, 2015). Interna-
tional Renewable Energy Agency has reviewed different models which
have calculated social costs of carbon. The assessment concluded exter-
nality cost of CO2 lies between USD 11.6–54.7 in 2016 and these values
will rise to USD 16.8–80 in 2030 (International Renewable Energy
Agency, 2016). These values will help estimation of overall externality
costs (or the benefit by avoiding them) when using different method
for disposing MSW.
In this study, no externality cost from air emissions of WtE plants
will be considered such as Dioxin, Lead, Mercury, Nitrogen Oxides, Sul-
phur Oxides, and Particulate Matters because high tech air pollution
control systems will be recommended treating emissions from WtE
plants. A comparison of negative and positive externalities is shown in
Table 1. In the study, it was assumed that externality cost in a country
is proportional to its GDP and population density, reflecting the inten-
sity of the impacts. Thus, the global externality cost estimates based in
Greece was used to calculate the negative and positive externalities
from advance biogas and incineration projects in Sri Lanka. In 2018,
the GDP of Sri Lanka was USD 92 billion and the GDP of Greece was
USD 214 billion while population densities of Sri Lanka and Greece are
327 and 82 persons per km2 respectively (Mavrotas et al., 2015;
Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL), 2019).
Case study
MSW generation and collection in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is an island of 22 million people in upper-middle income
category (Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL), 2019). The country is one
of the islands with highest population densities in the world. The re-
cords show that in 2017, 10,500 tons of MSW was generated in Sri
Lanka daily and average per capita waste generation was about 0.47
Table 1
Externality comparison based on different waste to energy technologies.
Externalities Landfill
Impact from GHG emissions High
Impacts on soil, groundwater and surface water environment High
Impact on quality of life due to noise, disamenity, aesthetical High
Impact from the substitution of nitrogen fertilizers by compost Low
310
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
kg/day. The entire responsibility for solid waste management lies with
local authorities under respective legal enactments.
In Colombo district, 1950 tons of MSW were generated daily out of
which only 64% of waste generated was collected. 1090 tons of MSW
were generated in Gampaha district and only 37% of it was collected
by local authorities (LAs). Kandy is the next largest waste generation
district in Sri Lanka. It accounts MSW generation of about 760 tons
while the collection efficiency is about 23% (National Solid Waste
Management Support Centre (NSWMSC), 2017). Most of the LAs are re-
luctant to collect more MSW from households because of limited avail-
ability of waste disposal sites. All these factors show that waste disposal
is one of the biggest challenges in Sri Lanka as in the case of many devel-
oping countries.
In Sri Lanka, 100% of MSW collection is a major challenge since most
of residents have spread around the country. Every citizen expects LAs
to collect their waste at the right time and dispose the waste far away
from their locality. It has been estimated that the collection efficiency
can be improved up to 50% from 27.2% in the island at a cost of USD
2.2 per capita per annum for 50% of its population (Basnayake et al.,
2018).
Current status of waste disposal
Land fill
The Kerawalapitiya waste park built within greater Colombo city,
had a sanitary landfill and a compost plant. The operation in the park
was stopped in August 2019 since the capacity of the landfill exceeded.
The waste park used to receive 500 tons of biodegradable waste and 220
tons of non-biodegradable waste daily from Colombo and nearby
Gampaha districts. LAs were charged LKR 3000 (USD 15) per ton as a
tipping fee for segregated biodegradable waste and LKR 5000 (USD
25) per ton for mixed garbage. A considerable amount of MSW in sev-
eral major cities was being collected by private contractors. For this ser-
vice, municipal councils paid LKR 3000–5000 (USD15–25) per ton of
MSW to private garbage collection facility (Lalitha & Fernando, 2019).
As a result of a collective decision by the government, a sanitary landfill
was constructed in Aruwakkalu located 168 km away from Colombo.
According to the initial plan, only residual waste was to be disposed in
the sanitary landfill. However, since August 2019, a significant amount
of MSW is being transported to the Aruwakkalu site from Colombo.
The transportation cost has become an additional burden to the govern-
ment. Currently, a waste transfer station is under construction in
Kelaniya area.
Composting
Household composting units are commonly used particularly in
urban and suburban areas. This is considered to be one of best solutions
to treat household kitchen waste and other biodegradable waste. How-
ever, of the 341 local authorities consisting of Municipal Councils, Urban
Councils, and Pradeshiya Sabha, only 126 of them operate small and me-
dium scale compost sites (Samarasinghe et al., 2021).
Incineration
The first WtE initiative with 10 MW power generation facility and
700 tons of MSW treatment capacity was commissioned at the
Kerawalapitiya Industrial Zone in February 2021. It is expected to accept
all fresh waste generated in Colombo city and the WtE plant was
Biogas technology Incineration technology
Medium Medium
Low Low
Low Low
Medium Low
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317

proposed as a total solution for generated MSW in Colombo Municipal Table 2

Council. The government had granted a power purchase tariff of LKR Projection of waste generation in several LAs in Western Province. Source: JICA (2016).

37.10 (USD 0.19) to this plant (Daily, 2017). However, the WtE plant Local authority Annual waste Average growth rate
is not expected to charge a gate-fee for received waste from LAs. This generation (tons/day)
feed-in-tariff is relatively high compared what is offered by Ceylon Elec- 2015 2020 2024
tricity Board (CEB) for other renewable energy sources such as wind
Katunayaka Urban Council 57.6 62.8 69.0 2.1%
power and solar rooftops under standardized power purchase Moratuwa Municipal Council 124.5 137.9 150.0 2.2%
agreement.1 Kesbewa Urban Council 91.8 97.5 102.7 1.3%
Mt. Lavinia Municipal Council 175.2 196.2 215.4 2.4%
Data collection Final annual average waste generation growth rate 2.00%

The system boundary for the study is the Western Province. The
waste generation data were collected, compiled, and analyzed from
both primary and secondary data sources. The primary data collection
involved waste composition analysis by field investigation during
January–April 2019. Waste generation and waste collection data were
obtained through reliable secondary sources such as annual reports
from the Ministry of Provincial and Local Councils (National Solid
Waste Management Support Centre (NSWMSC), 2017), the Western
Province Waste Management Authority (Waste Management
Authority of Western Province (WMAWP), 2017), the Ministry of
Megapolis and Western Development (Ministry of Megapolis and
Western Development (MMWD), 2018), and various published mate-
rials, reports, documents, presentations, and particularly those involv-
ing government and private institutions.
Waste generation forecast
Table 2 provides estimated waste generation in several LAs in the
Western Province for the year 2020 and 2024 based on the literature.
The factors considered in determining this forecast are population
growth rate and GDP growth rate. The estimated DGP growth rate is
5% and population growth rate is about 0.208% (JICA, 2016).
Assuming that the maximum WtE project lifetime is 25 years, con-
struction period of 3 years and waste generation annual growth rate
of 2%, waste generation from 2024 to 2048 was determined. Actual
data of waste generation in the Western Province for year 2017 was
used as the base year.
Waste composition analysis
The waste composition analysis was carried out in the
Kerawalapitiya waste park in January 2019. Conical quartering method
was used to do the waste composition analysis. In the park, there are
two main waste streams, biodegradable waste stream and non-
biodegradable waste stream. The non-biodegradable waste contains
high amount of paper, plastic waste, and textile materials. The waste
composition analysis was carried out three times per day for the non-
biodegradable waste stream and one time per day for biodegradable
waste stream throughout a period of one week.
Energy calculations
Incineration
Based on the low calorific values (LCV) of each type of waste mate-
rials presented in Table 3, the total heat value of respective waste stream
was calculated. Eq. (1) shows the formulation of low calorific value of
waste. The total power generation capacity from incineration was calcu-
lated based on Eq. (2) and the annual electricity generation was esti-
mated based on Eq. (3).
LCV T  WGI  365  ηI
P¼ ð2Þ
h  3600
EI ¼ P  CF  h ð3Þ
LCV (MJ/kg) is the low calorific value of each waste material, C is the
waste composition of each material, WGI is amount of received waste
to the incineration plant annually, η is efficiency of the plant, h is the
number of plant operation hours per year, P is the total power
generation capacity, and E is annual electricity generation potential,
and CF is the capacity factor of the plant.
Anaerobic digestion
The total amount of biogas generation can be estimated by Eq. (4).
The power generation capacity of the plant is calculated by Eq. (5).
The total amount of generated electricity from the plant is calculated
by Eq. (6). It is assumed that the efficiency of the electricity generator
is about 30%, the capacity factor of the gas generator is 85%, and the
plant will be operated 7500 h per year.
V biogas ¼ M foodwaste  γb  TS ð4Þ
V biogas  γ e  ηbiogas
P¼ ð5Þ
3600
Ebiogas ¼ P  h  CF ð6Þ
where, Vbiogas is the volume of biogas (m3/h), Mfoodwaste is the mass flow
of food waste (kg/h), γb is biogas yield (m3/kg TS), TS is total solid com-
position of food waste, γe is energy yield of biogas, Ebiogas is annual
electricity generation potential.
Financial analysis
Financial analysis was conducted based on cash-flows of the pro-
jects. The cost streams include capital costs and operation and mainte-
nance costs while the benefits include those such as income from sale
of electricity and gate fee charged from MSW suppliers. The viability is
measured by comparing the financial internal rate of return (FIRR)
against the weighted average cost of capital which captures those
such as loan nominal interest rate, the expected rate of return on equity,
tax rates and inflation.
In order to carry out a financial analysis for each scenario, the capital
costs and the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for each type of
waste disposal technology were estimated. Further, the annual net
Table 3
Low calorific value of waste materials and ash content. Source: Ryu (2010).
Component of waste stream Moisture (%) LCV (MJ/kg)

LCV T ¼ ∑C w  LCV w ð1Þ Kitchen waste 66 4.08

Wood and grass 15 15.02
Plastic 6 32.62
1 Paper 18 12.06
For wind power per unit purchase tariff, USD 0.11(0–7 years), USD 0.04 (9–15 years)
Textile, rubber & leather 9 19.79
and USD 0.03 (16–20 years); for solar rooftop systems USD 0.11 (0–7 years) and USD
Incombustible 5 −2.21
0.078 (8–20 years).

311
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
cashflows generated within the project were estimated. The summary
of the financial analysis including costs and revenue streams for the sce-
narios is shown in Table 7. Based on these data, financial internal rate of
return (FIRR) of the project was estimated. Financial viability of the pro-
ject was assessed by comparing the FIRR and the weighted average cost
of capital (WACC). A currency exchange rate of 200 LKR/USD was as-
sumed.
WACC was estimated to be 3.7% based on the assumed capital struc-
ture of 25% of equity and 75% of debt financing for each WtE project. As
can be seen in Table 4, nominal interest rate of the loan is assumed to be
10% in local currency based on the current lending rates in local com-
mercial in banks. For the project equity contribution, it is assumed
that the expected rate of return is 14% which is equal to the long-term
treasury bill rate (Asian Development Bank, 2019).
The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) generation from WtE plants
over their lifetime are estimated as given in Eq. (7).
n
∑t¼1 ðCþM t
1þr Þt
LCOE ¼ n ð7Þ
Et
∑t¼1 ð1þr
Þt
where, C is the initial capital cost, Mt is the annual O&M cost in the year t,
r is the discount rate, E is the electricity generation in the year t, and n is
the expected operational years of a plant. A discount rate of 4% refleting
the WACC is used in the estimating the LCOE.
Economic analysis
In the economic analysis the cost stream includes border prices (eco-
nomic costs) of all the tradeable goods which includes capital costs and
operation and maintenance costs. The benefit stream includes, among
others, avoided cost of diesel in marginal generation plants and environ-
mental benefits of avoided emissions. These costs and benefits usually
available in financial terms are converted to border prices with an aver-
age conversion factor established for a specific country based to sepa-
rate studies.
The economic costs and benefits of the project were measured and
analyzed in 2021 constant prices covering the period of project evalua-
tion time. Benefits derived out of the development projects were cate-
gorized as incremental benefits and non-incremental benefits.
Incremental benefits are the benefits arising from the WtE facility and
currently not met through the previous waste management practices.
The non-incremental benefits are the benefits derived from replacing
alternative waste disposal methods used by consumers in the absence
of proper waste management system and replacing alternative sources
for power generation. The economic benefits were estimated based on
the values quoted from the literature and adopted to Sri Lanka. The eco-
nomic costs capital and O&M of the projects were derived by using the
overall standard conversion factor of 0.94 (Asian Development Bank,
2019). Based on these assumptions, economic internal rate of return
(EIRR) of each Scenario was determined.
Table 4
Weighted average cost of capital. Source: Asian Development Bank (2019).
Item Financing component
Loan Equity
Weighting (%) 75 25
Nominal cost (%) 10 14
Tax rate (%) 28 0 –
Tax-adjusted nominal cost (%) 7.2 14
Inflation rate (%) 5 5
Real cost (%) 2.1 8.6
Weighted component of WACC (%) 1.6 2.1
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
Proposed development plan
Currently available literature provided the basis for the contribu-
tions of each waste management method. To strengthen the circular
economy practices in the country, three scenarios were developed fo-
cusing on waste treatment technologies. Scenario 1 (OLD) is the early
waste treatment practices in the Western Province as of December
2020. The first WtE plant in the country with a daily treatment capacity
of 700 tons was commissioned in February 2021. Scenario 2 is business
as usual (BAU) where the existing WtE facility was considered in the
analysis. In Scenario 2, contribution of incineration increased up to
20% of the total waste generation while the contribution of landfills
has reduced to 11% because of the WtE plant. Under Scenario 2, the
WtE plant accepts fresh MSW from LAs where material segregation
and recycling are discouraged. Scenario 3 was developed considering
Scenario 1 & 2, total waste collection, and waste compositions. Scenario
3 indicates that the importance of material segregation and recycling
while minimizing landfilling and open dumping to promote circular
economy in Sri Lanka. Table 5 shows the summary of the developed
waste management scenarios. The proposed development plan to
achieve Scenario 3 is presented in Fig. 1. The proposed development
plan consists of biogas generation, recycling, and incineration with the
additional treatment capacities of 550 tons, 125 tons, and 500 tons, re-
spectively.
Results and discussion
Fuel source identification
As the system boundary for the study is the Western Province geo-
graphical area, the waste generation in three districts of the province
and current waste management practices evaluated based on the sec-
ondary data. A study had calculated the total amount of waste recycling
in the Western Province (Samarasinghe et al., 2021). Thus, it was as-
sumed that the waste material recycling rate based on waste collection
amount in Western Province is proportional to the recycling rate in each
district in the Western Province. The same study had calculated the
compositing, co-fueling, and landfilling rates for the entire island
(Samarasinghe et al., 2021). In this analysis, it was assumed that the cal-
culated compositing, co-fueling, and landfilling rates for the island are
compatible with the similar rates in each district of the Western Prov-
ince. Table 6 shows the overview of the waste management sector per-
formance in the Western Province as of 2018.
The waste composition analysis was carried out in the
Kerawalapitiya Waste Park to identify the properties of the waste gen-
erated in the Western Province. As can be seen in Fig. 2, there are two
waste streams in the waste park. LAs must supply only pre-segregated
waste based on instructions from the waste park. The kitchen waste
compositions are about 89% in the total biodegradable waste stream
and only 5% in nonbiodegradable waste stream (kitchen waste compo-
sitions were not presented in the figure). The plastics and paper consti-
tuted about 42% and 24% of the total nonbiodegradable waste stream
respectively.
Power generation potential from proposed development plan
Incineration (unsegregated waste)
The first WtE plant was commissioned in Kerawalapitiya as a com-
plete solution for MSW generated in Colombo Municipal Council
Total
(CMC) area. Due to covid-19 pandemic impact, the waste generation
100
in CMC area has reduced. The Western Province Waste Management
–
Authority is currently coordinating with other LAs to supply waste to
– the WtE plant as the treatment capacity of the plant is about 700 tons
– per day. Since the WtE facility is accepting fresh MSW, the estimated
– LCV of waste is about 9000–10,000 MJ/ton. It is noted that the LCV has
3.7
slightly improved because LAs used a part of biodegradable waste for
312
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
Table 5
Waste treatment scenario for the Western Province.
Scenarios Material recycling Incineration
Scenario 1 (OLD) 11% 0%
Scenario 2 (BAU) 11% 20%
Scenario 3 15% 34%
composing. The estimated efficiency of the WtE plant is in the
range15–18%. 395 kWh/ton of waste or 86.51 GWh/year electricity
can be injected from the existing incineration plant to the grid under
Scenario 2 (BAU) if the plant efficiency is assumed to be 16.75% and
the LCV of the waste stream is 10,000 MJ/ton.
Biogas
Circular economy of MSW can be strengthened through source seg-
regation and end of life waste treatment methods. Promoting waste
segregation will help in resources recovery and easy collection of recy-
clable waste such as plastic, steel, glass, and paper. In Australia,
Canada, and China, waste treatment capacities of the existing biogas fa-
cilities for food waste treatment laid between 100 and 200 ton per day
(IEA Bioenergy, 2018b). Total amount of MSW which is disposed in
landfills and dumped in open environment is 1870 tons. The composi-
tion of biodegradable waste which can be easily broken down naturally
by water and oxygen is about 35.12%. Thus, Western Province has a po-
tential to produce biogas from 657 tons of unused biodegradable waste.
Considering the total waste generation and collection in the three dis-
tricts and technological and cost discussions in Section 2.1, three
engineered steel reactors with a continuous stirred tank biogas plants
with treatment capacities of 200, 200, 150 tons/day have been proposed
to construct under Scenario 3 for Colombo, Gampaha, and Kalutara dis-
tricts respectively. It is important to keep extra biodegradable waste col-
lection, which is about 107 tons, to keep continues feed supply to the
biogas plants. The estimated biogas yield is about 23 MJ/m3 and the as-
sumed electrical efficiency of the biogas turbine is about 30%. Thus, 240
kWh/ton of pre-segregated biodegradable waste can be exported from
the biogas plants to the grid. The estimated power generation capacity
of the biogas plants is about 7.16 MW. The total amount of exported
electricity from the plant would be 41.4 GWh/year and the total amount
of compost produced is estimated to be about 43,000 tons/year by pro-
cessing digestate. This will help to minimize the dependency on
imported fertilizer and replace inorganic fertilizer. This will avoid the
use of Nitrogen and Phosphorus fertilizer production of which contrib-
ute GHG emissions in the rage of 1–10 kg of CO2 per kg of N, and
1–1.5 kg of CO2 per kg of P2O5 (Walling & Vaneeckhaute, 2020).
Incineration (segregated waste)
The calculated LCV of the non-biodegradable waste stream at the
Kerawalapitiya waste park is about 21,000 MJ/ton. A study has found
that the operational energy recovery efficiency and plant availability
Fig. 1. Proposed development plan under Scenario 3 for the Western Province.
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
Biogas Composting Co-fueling Landfills Open environment
0% 13% 2% 31% 43%
0% 13% 2% 11% 43%
16% 13% 2% 3% 17%
increase with higher waste treatment capacity (Tsai, 2019). Another
study in Japan, identified that the power generation efficiencies of
WtE plants showing a possibility of more than 20% with capacity of
300 tons/day (Tsai, 2019). Based on the technology and cost discussions
in Sections 2.1 and 2.2, a centralized incineration plant with moving
grate technology which is most commercially available waste incinera-
tion technology, was recommended with a daily waste treatment ca-
pacity of 500 tons for the Scenario 3. Since the proposed plant will
support in pre-segregating waste, it is expected to recover 125 tons of
recyclable materials from the 1870 tons of MSW which is currently dis-
posed in landfills and dumped in open environment. To promote circu-
lar economy, only 27% of MSW will be incinerated via proposed 500
tons and rest of waste will be recycled or used to generate biogas and or-
ganic fertilizer. The estimated LCV of the residual waste is about 16,000
MJ/ton which is lower than the above calculated value because of recov-
ery of more plastic and paper from the waste stream for recycling. Due
to promoting waste segregation and removing non-flammable mate-
rials, fuel feed quality can be improved. Therefore, efficiency of WtE
plant will be improved and the operational and maintenance cost will
be lower. If the net electrical efficiency of the proposed incineration
plant is 22%, 831 kWh electricity can be exported to the grid by using
1 ton of residual waste. The estimated total power generation capacity
from incineration is about 20.3 MW and the annual exported electricity
is 129.86 GWh. The estimated total amount of recovered plastic, metal,
cardboard, and paper from waste is about 70 tons, 5 tons, 11 tons, and
39 tons respectively by encouraging waste segregation process.
Co-generation
Efficiency of a typical waste incineration plant which generates only
electricity is in the range of 14–28%. Thus, large amount of thermal en-
ergy is wasted. To improve the efficiency of the plant, cogeneration
technology can be used to recover waste heat. The recovered heat can
be provided for industrial purposes which will reduce fossil fuel con-
sumption and improve air quality in and around industrial zones. The
total efficiency of cogeneration incinerators can be improved more
than 80%. In Korea, 35 large incineration plants are built in urban
areas and recovered heat is supplied for district heating (Bourtsalas
et al., 2019). In Europe, 206 plants have improved their efficiency
more than 69% out of 314 plants from 2007 to 2010 (Seo, 2014).
Financial benefits
A financial analysis for existing WtE facility and the proposed devel-
opment plan was carried out to investigate the financial sustainability of
the projects under the existing operating environment. Annual ex-
pected net cashflows were estimated within the project evaluation pe-
riod. The summary of the financial analysis for the Scenario 2 and 3 is
shown in Table 7. A WtE project can be registered as an On-Grid Renew-
able Energy Development Project under the Sri Lanka Sustainable En-
ergy Authority (SEA). If the power generation capacity of the project is
less than 10 MW, SEA and Ceylon Electricity Board (CEB) will offer a
Standardized Power Purchases Agreement (SPPA). The SPPA is non-
negotiable agreement and valid for 20 years from the commercial oper-
ation date.
Under the Scenario 2, A Small Power Purchase Tariff (SPPT) is
granted to the existing WtE facility since the project was eligible for
the SPPA. A feed-in-tariff of LKR 37.10 per kWh (USD 0.19/kWh) was
granted by CEB to first WtE plant in Sri Lanka. The estimated levelized
313
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317

Table 6
The waste management sector performance in the Western Province (tons/day).

District Generation Collection Material recycling Composting Co-fueling Landfills Open environment

Colombo 1946 1255 223.7 311.3 39.5 268.2 403.3

Gampaha 1086.5 405.5 124.9 100.6 12.8 86.6 761.6
Kalutara 447 160 51.4 39.7 5.0 34.2 316.7
Total 3479.5 1820.5 400.1 451.6 57.3 389.0 1481.5

cost of electricity (LCOE) of the existing WtE facility is about USD 0.124 Table 7
per kWh at 4% discount rate. The financial viability of the existing WtE Financial analysis for the scenarios.

plant was examined by comparing the incremental revenue and incre- Item Unites Scenario 2 Scenario 3
mental costs over the project evaluation period. The estimated FIRR of Incineration Incineration Biogas
the project is 8.76% which exceeds the WACC of 3.7%. This is indicating
Treatment capacity Tons 700 500 550
that the project is financially viable. The NPV of the project at 4% dis-
Total investment USD 98,000,000 103,519,600 34,375,000
count rate is about USD 46.75 million. O&M cost USD/year 4,900,000 5,175,980 1,718,750
Under the Scenario 3, the results show that the estimated LCOE is Levelized cost of electricity USD/kWh 0.124 0.081 0.085
about USD 0.081 per kWh and USD 0.085 per kWh for the proposed in- (at 4% discount rate)
cineration and biogas plants, respectively at 4% discount rate. The esti- Feed in tariff USD/kWh 0.19 0.11 0.11
Gate fee USD/ton – 15 10
mated FIRR of the incineration component is 9.36% and the NPV of the Compost sales USD/ton – – 25
incineration component at 4% discount rate is about USD 67.41 million. Loan ratio % 75 75 75
This indicates that promoting waste segregation and use non- Loan USD 73,500,000 77,639,700 25,781,250
biodegradable residual waste for incineration is financially attractive. Equity USD 24,500,000 25,879,900 8,593,750
Concession period Years 22 27 27
In addition, the estimated FIRR of the biogas component is about 15%
Construction period Years 2 2 2
and NPV at 4% discount rate is about USD 48.74 million. It is important Loan term Years 15 15 15
to highlight that both proposed incineration and biogas component Nominal interest rate for % 10 10 10
under the Scenario 3, the standard renewable energy feed-in-tariff the local currency loan
(LKR 22 per kWh) in Sri Lanka was considered. This will help to attract Weighted average cost of % 3.7 3.7 3.7
capital
government and utility for more grid connected WtE plans in the coun- FIIR % 8.76 9.36 15
try. Further, a couple of gate fee was incorporated for the waste treat- NPV at 4% discount rate USD 46,751,335 $67,407,247 $48,736,517
ment facilities which is about USD 15/ton of combustible residual
waste and USD 10/ton of biodegradable waste. This will push LAs to
recover more resource by segregating waste and promote circular The existing WtE plant as well as the proposed WtE plants under the
economy. Scenario 3, target to treat 547,750 tons of MSW per annum. The project
will tackle climate change and contribute to achieve the Sri Lanka's re-
Economic benefit newable energy targets. It is expected to generate 170 GWh of clean en-
ergy and reduce carbon dioxide emissions. This is equivalent to
The economic analysis was carried out to assess economic viability supplying approximately one month of residential electricity require-
of the proposed development plan and the existing WtE facility from ment or 4% of the total demand (2020) in the Western Province of Sri
the viewpoint of the country. Benefits derived out of the project outputs Lanka. The avoided electricity generation cost is about 32.85 LKR/kWh
can be broadly categorized as incremental benefits and non- in 2017 (Asian Development Bank, 2019).2 It is assumed high-cost die-
incremental benefits. The incremental benefits are the benefits arising sel power generation will be replaced by the WtE projects. The esti-
from the proposed projects currently not meeting through the previous mated value of avoided impact on soil, groundwater, and surface
solid waste management practices such as impact on soil, water, quality water environment is about 6.15 USD/ton of MSW. The estimated
of life due to noise, odor, disamenity, aesthetical. Incremental benefits value of avoided impact on quality of life due to noise, odor, disamenity,
were identified and quantified based on the literature values as dis- and aesthetical is about 8.27 USD/ton. The value of avoided emissions
cussed in Section 3. In addition, non-incremental benefits which are de- used in the study is 36.30 USD/ton of CO2 in 2016 and it is escalated
riving from alternative waste disposal methods to consumers in the by 2% annually in real terms (Asian Development Bank, 2017). With
absence of proper waste management system and replacing alternative this, it is assumed the value of avoided emission is 40.9 USD/ton of
energy sources for power generation such as avoided electricity gener- CO2 in 2021. Economic benefits from (i) diesel replacement for power
ation cost. generation, (ii) impact on solid, groundwater and surface water, (iii)
impact on quality of life due to noise, odor, disamenity, and
aesthetical, (iv) avoided emission of CO2 were taken into account in
the economic analysis. Table 8 shows the summary of the economic
analysis for the existing WtE plant as well as the proposed
development project.
The economic costs include capital costs and O&M cost of the project.
Traded project inputs such as tradable goods, foreign and local skilled
labor were valued at their border price equivalent values. To convert
these costs to their border price equivalent values, a standard

Fig. 2. Material composition of waste streams (%).
2
According to Sri Lanka Energy Balance 2017 (www.energy.gov.lk), Kelanitissa power
station, which is the typical marginal generator of the Sri Lankan power system, has con-
sumed 148 Gl of diesel sold in the market at 95 SLR/l, producing 401 MWh in 2017. Apply-
ing the derived standard conversion factor of 0.94, the marginal economic cost of
generation is calculated as 32.85 SLR/kWh.

314
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317

Table 8
Economic analysis for the scenarios.

Item Unites Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Incineration Incineration Biogas

Treatment capacity Tons 700 500 550

Annual waste treatment Tons 218,750 156,250 175,875
capacity

Economic cost
Standard conversion factor % 0.94 0.94 0.94
Capital investment USD 92,120,000 97,308,424 32,312,500
O&M USD/year 4,606,000 4,865,421 1,615,625

Economic benefits
Impact on soil, USD/year 1,345,313 960,938 1,057,031
groundwater, and surface
water environment
Impact on quality of life due USD/year 1,809,063 1,292,188 1,421,406
to noise, odor, Fig. 3. Sensitivity analysis of FIRR and EIRR.
disamenity, aesthetical
Diesel replacement for USD/year 14,209,692 21,329,688 6,798,892
power generation
Value of avoided emissions USD/year 9,205,567 9,453,845 7,774,922 study has found that GHG emission factors from MSW landfills and in-
of CO2 cineration plants is about 1.11 tCO2e/ton of MSW and 0.49 tCO2e/ton
Impact from the USD/year – – 326,133
substitution of nitrogen
of MSW respectively (Ting et al., 2014). Another study has estimated
fertilizers by compost the GHG emission factor from biogas plants is about 0.253 tCO2e/ton
EIRR % 20.72% 25.07% 39.38% of MSW (Tan et al., 2015). In Sri Lanka, a grid emission factor is always
ENPV at 12% USD 52,059,542 92,981,739 $70,372,556 considered for planning power generation system in the country. The
grid emission factor can count in three different forms under operating
margin, build margin, and combined margin (United Nations
conversion factor (SCF) was derived. It is assumed, the overall standard Framework Converntion on Climate Change, 2015). Under operating
conversion factor is 0.94 (Asian Development Bank, 2019). This leads to margin, the emission factor takes into all existing power plants im-
an estimated total economic cost of the Scenario 3 to be about USD pacted by a development project. Under build margin the emission fac-
129.6 million. The estimated EIRRs of the proposed incineration and bio- tor is determined based on the group of power plants under
gas plants are 25.07% and 39.38% respectively while EIRR of the existing construction of which future operation would be affected by the devel-
incineration plant is about 20.72%. The result of economic analysis indi- opment project. The emission factor under combined margin is the
cates that using segregated waste for incineration and biogas generation weighted average of those under operating margin and build margin
is economically more attractive for the country than using unsorted and is commonly known as the grid emission factor (Sri Lanka Sustain-
fresh waste in the existing incineration facility. able Energy Authority, 2017). The proposed WtE development projects
under the Scenarios 2 and 3 will help to minimize fossil fuel powered
Sensitivity analysis for financial and economic viability generation in the country since WtE plant can be utilized as baseload
power plant. Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority has published the
The above financial and economic analysis suggested that imple- grid emission factor (combined margin) as 0.8108 tCO2/MWh in 2017
mentation of proposed development project is favorable to the inves- (Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority, 2017). Thus, this grid emission
tors as well as the country. Sensitivity analysis was carried out to factor was used to determine CO2 reduction resulting from WtE
evaluate the sensitivity of economic and financial analysis of both Sce- projects. It is estimated that the existing incineration facility (Scenario
nario 2 and Scenario 3 as several assumptions have been made in the 2) has potential to reduce 203,572 tons of CO2 emission annually. As
initial analysis. Sensitivity of FIRR and EIRR were monitored by examin- can be seen in Table 9, the estimated avoided emissions of CO2 from
ing the impact of an increase in the project capital cost, an increase in the proposed incineration and biogas plants (Scenario 3) are 200,635
O&M, a reduction in the supply of electricity to the grid, a reduction in tons and 179,137 tons, respectively. Scenario 2 negatively impacts grid
feed-in-tariff, and a delay in project completion. Fig. 3 shows the results emission factor while Scenario 3 positively impacts energy sector grid
of the sensitivity analysis. The results show that the financial returns emission factor of the country. The main reason for the positive
and economic returns of the two Scenarios are robust even under impact on grid emission factor under Scenario 3 is more efficient
these adverse conditions. The existing WtE facility (Scenario 2- generation of electricity compared to Scenario 2.
Incineration) shows the minimum FIIR of 4.7% when the feed-in-tariff
has been reduced by 20%. However, the minimum FIRR of Scenario 2
Table 9
is greater than WACC of 3.7%. Also, the existing WtE facility shows the GHG emission reduction from waste to energy projects.
minimum EIRR of 10.9% when project implementation work is delayed
Item Unites Scenario 2 Scenario 3
by two years. Scenario 3 are more robust even than the based case of
existing WtE plant under defined adverse conditions and all of the cal- Incineration Incineration Biogas
culated EIRR are above the threshold rate of 9% used by ADB for clean Waste treatment Tons/year 218,750 156,250 171,875
energy investments (Asian Development Bank, 2017). Electricity generation MWh 86,500 129,900 41,390
Avoided emission from t-CO2e 240,625 171,875 189,062.5
landfill
GHG emission reduction and avoided ocean plastics
Avoided grid emission t-CO2e 70,134 105,323 33,559
Emission from incineration t-CO2e −107,187.5 −76,562.5 –
WtE has several key advantageous over landfilling and open dump- plants
ing in climate change mitigation. WtE has positive environmental im- Emission from biogas plants t-CO2e – – −43,484
pacts particularly GHG reduction such as CH4 and CO2 and recyclable Total GHG reduction t-CO2e 203,572 200,635 179,137
Emission factor t-CO2/MWh 1.2392 0.7008
waste recovery compared to landfilling (Boongaling et al., 2020). A

315
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
Fig. 4. Cumulative CO2 reduction and waste generation in Sri Lanka.
As 125 tons of recyclable waste material expect to recover daily by
implementing proposed development plan under Scenario 3, the esti-
mated avoided annual GHG emission is about 43,684 tons of CO2
because of recycling (European Parliamentary Research Serivce, 2017).
Further it has been estimated that 12.5% of improperly disposed
plastic waste in open environment is washed into the ocean in Sri
Lanka (Samarasinghe et al., 2021). Thus, the estimated avoided amount
of plastic flow to the ocean is about 6875 tons per year under the pro-
posed development plan in Scenario 3. Fig. 4 shows the total MSW gen-
eration in the country and total cumulative CO2 reduction forecasted
from 2020 to 2040 if Scenario-2 and Scenario-3 are to be implemented
covering entire country. It is estimated that 23.3 million t-CO2 emission
can be additionally reduced by implementing Scenario-3 instead of im-
plementing Scenario-2.
Viable solution for municipal solid waste disposal
UN-Habitat has recognized the need to strengthen the government
efforts to develop a comprehensive integrated solid waste management
plan with the support of an advisory waste management committee for
all provinces except the Western Province. The Western Province has its
own waste management plan together with the Ministry of Megapolis
and Western Development and the Western Province Waste Manage-
ment Authority (Basnayake et al., 2018). In 2017, the estimated MSW
collection is about 1802 tons/day out of the total generation of 7210
tons/day in these eight provinces. As indicated earlier, a study has esti-
mated that the collection efficiency can be improved up to 50% from
27.2% in these remaining eight provinces at a cost of USD 2.2 per capita
per annum for 50% of its population (Basnayake et al., 2018). The pro-
posed development plan under the Scenario 3 therefore can be imple-
mented to treat 50% of generated MSW in these eight provinces. The
summary of the recommended development plan is presented in
Table 10. According to the Scenario 3, there is 15% of generated waste
can be recovered for material recycling. To achieve this recycling target,
the government and local authorities could encourage private sector
Table 10
Waste management projects for the eight provinces in the country.
Item Unit Quantity
Total waste generation Ton/day 7210
Total waste collection Ton/day 3605
Waste treatment method Incineration
Scenario-3: waste treatment composition (%) 34
Treated waste amount Ton/day 2451
Power generation capacity MW 100
Annual exported electricity GWh/year 637
Annual GHG emission reduction t-CO2e 983,675
Total required investment for the Million 507.54
development project USD
It is estimated that the collection efficiency will be improved up to 50%.
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
investors to collect recyclable materials from households via door-to-
door waste collectors and establish recyclable material collection cen-
ters across the country in a in an organized manner. If the proposed
115 MW of WtE plants can be integrated into the system, around 5%
of total national electricity requirement can be supplied from WtE
plants in the country.
Conclusion
Resource recovery from waste and waste recycling are necessary
component of a circular economy. When a country is in transition
from a liner economy to circular economy, WtE technology deployment
can help the country to manage its waste most effectively and promote
sustainable development. The case study presented in the paper would
serve as a good example of how WtE technology can be deployed in
similar economies in the Asia-Pacific region considering that issues
and the characteristics of the waste generated in these countries are
similar in nature.
This pioneering case study involving Sri Lanka covered its most pop-
ulous province and country's economic hub, the Western Province. The
study identified the potential of WtE plants, and their capacities based
on both segregated and mixed waste while considering environmental
cost and benefits. Most importantly, comprehensive techno-economic
and financial analyses were carried out for both existing WtE facility
and proposed future WtE development projects. The study looked at
the energy potential of MSW, electricity generation capacity, financial
and economic viability, GHG emissions from WtE technologies. This
case study for the Western Province has evaluated three scenarios. Sce-
nario 3 which is implementable, indicates that the country can secure
more economic and financial benefits and support in global climate mit-
igation efforts by reducing GHG emissions while paving way to a circu-
lar economy.
The study concludes that Sri Lanka has the potential to implement
WtE projects in the Western Province with adequate financial and eco-
nomic returns while making it environmentally attractive and
supporting circular economy compared to alternative options. The
unit cost of power generation from WtE plants are significantly lower
(when avoided cost of externalities are considered) compared to mar-
ginal generation costs of oil fired thermal power plants widely used at
present. The study has shown the viability of a centralized incineration
plant of 500 tons/day capacity and decentralized biogas facilities of
150–200 tons/day capacity for each of the three districts in the province.
By implementing such development projects, waste management is-
sues in the province can be largely eliminated while securing economic
and social benefits.
This outcome of this case study can be used by the Government and
relevant authorities to ensure timely exploiting of these opportunities
and immediate action to solve waste management issues and promote
circular economy making WtE a proper renewable energy option in
the country. This will help the country in its efforts to achieve zero emis-
sion targets.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Biogas References
16
1154 Asian Development Bank. (2017). Guidelines for the economic analysis of projects. Manila,
15 Philippines.
87 Asian Development Bank. (2019). Sri Lanka: Clean energy and access improvement project.
375,732 no. December.
72.10 Asian Development Bank (ADB). (2012). Growing beyond the low-cost advantage. Manila,
Philippines.
Basnayake, B. F. A., Popuri, S., Visvanathan, C., Jayatilake, A., Weerasoori, I., & Ariyawansha,
R. T. K. (2018). Concerted initiative for planned management of municipal solid waste
316
K. Samarasinghe and P.D.C. Wijayatunga
in target provinces in Sri Lanka. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 21,
691–704.
Boongaling, C., Samala, C., Ordona, R., & Ordona, R. (2020). Economic analysis of waste-to-
energy investment in the Philippines: A real options approach. Applied Energy, 275
(April), Article 115265.
Bourtsalas, A. C. T., Seo, Y., Alam, T., & Seo, Y. (2019). The status of waste management and
waste to energy for district heating in South Korea. Waste Management, 85, 304–316.
Central Bank of Sri Lanka (CBSL). (2019). Annual report. Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Daily, F. T. (2017). Two waste-to-energy plants to get off the ground today. [Online].
Available:http://www.ft.lk/article/634380/Two-waste-to-energy-plants-to-get-off-
the-ground-today.
De Sadeleer, I., Brattebø, H., & Callewaert, P. (2020). Waste prevention, energy recovery or
recycling - Directions for household food waste management in light of circular econ-
omy policy. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 160(June), 104908 2019.
Ediene, R. (2019). Generating electrical energy through urban solid waste in Brazil: An
economic and energy comparative analysis. Journal of Environmental Management,
231(September 2018), 198–206.
European Parliamentary Research Serivce. (2017). Towards a circular economy – waste
management in the EU. Brussels - Belgium.
Garcia, A. P. (2014). Techno-economic feasibility study of a small-scale biogas plant for
treating market waste in the city of El Alto. Master of Science Dissertation, KTH.
IEA Bioenergy (2018). Integrated biogas systems.
IEA Bioenergy (2018). Food waste digestion: Anaerobic digestion of food waste for circular
economy.
International Renewable Energy Agency. (2016). The true cost of fossil fuels: Externality
cost assessment methodology. New York, United States.
International Renewable Energy Agency. (2018). Global energy transformation.
Jaymee, L., et al. (2019). Incineration of municipal solid waste in Brazil: An analysis of the
economically viable energy potential. Renewable Energy, 149, 1386–1394.
JICA (2016). Data collection survey on solid waste management in democratic socialist re-
public of Sri Lanka. Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Khan, I., & Kabir, S. M. Z. (2019). Waste-to-energy generation technologies and the devel-
oping economies: A multi-criteria analysis for sustainability assessment. Renewable
Energy, 150, 320–333.
Lalitha, R., & Fernando, S. (2019). Solid waste management of local governments in the
Western Province of Sri Lanka: An implementation analysis. Waste Management, 84,
194–203.
Mavrotas, G., Gakis, N., Skoulaxinou, S., Katsouros, V., & Georgopoulou, E. (2015). Munic-
ipal solid waste management and energy production: Consideration of external cost
through multi-objective optimization and its effect on waste-to-energy solutions.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 51, 1205–1222.
Ministry of Megapolis and Western Development (MMWD). (2018). Data sheet of re-
ceived municipal solid waste to Kerawalapitya Waste Park.
Munir, M. T., Mohaddespour, A., Nasr, A. T., & Carter, S. (2021). Municipal solid waste-to-
energy processing for a circular economy in New Zealand. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 145(August), 111080 2020.
Namlis, K., & Komilis, D. (2019). Influence of four socioeconomic indices and the impact of
economic crisis on solid waste generation in Europe. Waste Management, 89,
190–200.
National Solid Waste Management Support Centre (NSWMSC) (2017). Data base of solid
waste management-2017. Sri Lanka.
317
Energy for Sustainable Development 68 (2022) 308–317
Nazmul, K. M., Sarker, T., & Taghizadeh-hesary, F. (2021). Renewable energy generation
from livestock waste for a sustainable circular economy in Bangladesh. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 139(January), 110695.
Pereira, T. D. S., & Fernandino, G. (2019). Evaluation of solid waste management sustain-
ability of a coastal municipality from northeastern Brazil. Ocean and Coastal
Management, 179(January), 104839.
Priyadarshini, P., & Abhilash, P. C. (2020). Circular economy practices within energy and
waste management sectors of India: A meta-analysis. Bioresource Technology, 304
(February), 123018.
Ryu, C. (2010). Potential of municipal solid waste for renewable energy production and
reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in South Korea. Journal of the Air & Waste
Management Association(February 2010).
Samarasinghe, K., Kumar, S. P., & Visvanathan, C. (2021). Evaluation of circular economy
potential of plastic waste in Sri Lanka. Environmental Quality Management(January),
1–9.
Seo, Y. (2014). Current MSW management and waste-to-energy status in the Republic of
Korea. Columbia university.
Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority (2017). Sri Lanka energy balance 2017. Colombo,
Sri Lanka.
Stantec (2011). Waste to energy: A technical review of municipal solid waste thermal treat-
ment practices.
Tan, S. T., Ho, W. S., Hashim, H., Lee, C. T., Taib, M. R., & Ho, C. S. (2015). Energy, economic
and environmental (3E) analysis of waste-to-energy (WTE) strategies for municipal
solid waste (MSW) management in Malaysia. Energy Conversion and Management,
102, 111–120.
Ting, S., Hashim, H., Shiun, J., Shin, W., Tin, C., & Yan, J. (2014). Energy and emissions ben-
efits of renewable energy derived from municipal solid waste: Analysis of a low car-
bon scenario in Malaysia. Applied Energy, 136, 797–804.
Tsai, W. -T. (2019). An analysis of operational efficiencies in the waste-to-energy (WTE)
plants of Kaohsiung Municipality (Taiwan). Resources, 2.
U.S. Department of Energy (2019). Waste-to-energy from municipal solid wastes.
Washington, DC, USA.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2017). Asia waste management out-
look.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)International Solid Waste Association
(ISWA). (2015). Global waste management outlook. Kenya.
United Nations Framework Converntion on Climate Change. (2015). Methodological tool:
Tool to calculate the emission factor for an electricity system. New York, United States.
Walling, E., & Vaneeckhaute, C. (2020). Greenhouse gas emissions from inorganic and or-
ganic fertilizer production and use: A review of emission factors and their variability.
Journal of Environmental Management, 276(September).
Waste Management Authority of Western Province (WMAWP). (2017). Monthly progress
report on zonal level waste management program. Colombo, Sri Lanka.
World Bank Group. (2015). Guidelines for economic analysis of power sector projects.
Washington, DC, USA.
World Bank Group (WBG). (2018). What a waste 2.0 - A global snapshot of solid waste
management to 2050.
Wu, J. S. (2018). Capital cost comparison of waste-to-wnergy (WTE), facilities in China and
the U.S. Columbia University.
Xin-gang, Z., Gui-wu, J., Ang, L., & Ling, W. (2015). Economic analysis of waste-to-energy
industry in China. Waste Management, 48, 604–618.