E-Waste Treatment Facility in Uganda Business Plan

Transcription

1 E-Waste Treatment Facility in Uganda Business Plan Draft Report, May 2014 Markus Spitzbart* Contributions: Magdalena Höller, Peter Kurz Die Wiener Volkshochschulen GmbH/ Dismantling- and Recycling-Centre (D.R.Z.), Austria Mathias Schluep* Contributions: Fabian Blaser Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA) / World Resources Forum Association (WRFA), Switzerland *Corresponding Authors Prepared for the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)

2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We want to thank the following organizations for supporting the project the social enterprise BUZ-Neudorf in Austria, where the dismantling trails for CRTs and FPDs have been conducted, and the Belgian organization WorldLoop for providing us with information concerning acquisition costs for treatment equipment and layout considerations. Page 1

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY To address the issue of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), or e-waste, in Uganda, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) is targeting the implementation of a manual e-waste treatment facility in Kampala, Uganda. In a first phase, financially supported by the Austrian Development Cooperation, the current situation concerning e-waste in Uganda has been analyzed, potential quantities have been estimated [UCPC, 2013] and a feasibility study for an e-waste dismantling facility [Blaser et al., 2013] has been elaborated. The present business plan for a manual dismantling facility in Kampala marks the final step within the first phase. The main objective of this business plan is to submit a concrete profit and loss forecast for a manual e-waste dismantling facility in Kampala that could work as a practicable business case under the current framework conditions following international quality standards and environmentally-sound waste management. The business plan consists of three parts. The first part is a strategic analysis based on the previously mentioned studies proposing the following framework conditions for implementation: Remuneration of recycling fees for appliances where the intrinsic value of the treated material is not sufficient for a break-even; Collection fees charged for CRTs from B2B collection; Market prices for recyclable fractions according to the market situation in July 2013; Government-provided estate and building for the facility, including free rental for the first two years of operation. For the business case, a public-private partnership between a private entrepreneur and a governmental authority is proposed. Besides manual dismantling it has been considered that depollution of CRT tubes would take place in the facility. The second part analyzes a potential profit and loss forecast and break-even on the basis of input quantities and composition from four different input streams over a period of five years of operation. The following input streams have been assumed: delivery of e-waste to the facility by scavengers; B2B collection from companies and institutions; B2B collection from repair shops; delivery of e-waste at collection points spread over the municipal area of Kampala. For the input streams, different potential quantities and compositions have been assumed. The overall input has been estimated to start at 90 t/a in the first year, jumping to 270 t/a in the second year of operation and then slowly increasing from 220 t/a in the third year up to 300 t/a after five years of operation. The expected input is dominated by CRT devices, which will count for more than 60% of the entire input, followed by desktop PCs and minor shares of notebooks, printers/ scanners, FPD devices and IT accessories. Based on these assumptions, the following calculations have been conducted: quantities of produced output fractions, transport costs and potential revenues or disposal costs to destine each of these fractions to further recycling or final disposal; operational costs (staff, infrastructure, equipment, etc.), and recycling fees as additional revenues to ensure a positive financial performance. Page 2

4 Based on the assumed input, a possible layout for the facility has been designed and an investment plan has been calculated. The resulting profit and loss forecast is shown in Table A-1. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 [USD/a] [USD/a] [USD/a] [USD/a] [USD/a] Total Revenues 67, , , , ,439 Total Purchase and Downstream Costs -30,870-87,715-78,396-92, ,414 Total Staff Costs -28,248-36,168-29,832-31,416-33,000 Total Infrastructure Costs -7,048-7,048-12,092-12,092-12,092 Total Equipment Costs -1,496-3,141-1,645-2,094-2,243 Total Transport Costs ,332-1,152-1,244-1,356 Total Administration Costs -4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800 Total Depreciation -2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040 Operating Result -8,320 62,948 32,193 40,400 51,494 Investments -39,190 Operating Result + Investments -47,510 62,948 32,193 40,400 51,494 Credit Costs -9,094-10,913-5,403-2,325 Net Income Before Taxes -56,604 52,036 26,790 38,076 51,494 Taxes -15,611-8,037-11,423-15,448 Net Income After Taxes -56,604 36,425 18,753 26,653 36,046 Table A-1: Summarized Profit and Loss forecast for a manual dismantling facility in Kampala, Uganda The profit and loss forecast demonstrates that after five years of facility operation, separate collection and dismantling of e-waste in Kampala can achieve revenues of more than 200,000 USD/a; with half of these revenues having to be spent on purchase, disposal and external transport costs; with 25% of revenues to be spent on operational costs for running the facility; and with another 25%, or up to 50,000 USD/a, left as a positive operating result. This applies to collecting and dismantling 300 tons of e-waste per year and considering average revenues from recycling revenues of 200 USD/t of collected e-waste. Based on these results, different profit and loss forecasts have been calculated while modifying certain framework conditions. The most promising financial performance could be reached assuming a scenario, where CRT glass could be disposed in Uganda in an environmentally-sound manner; required investments could be financed by a non-repayable grant, and the government provided the estate and building for the facility within a public-private partnership. Under these framework conditions, the profit and loss forecast revealed a positive financial performance without collecting recycling fees as additional revenues. Under these optimized framework conditions, the intrinsic value of appliances like PCs or FPD monitors/tvs would even be able to finance recycling costs for devices like CRTs. Page 3

5 CONTENT PART A) INTRODUCTION + GENERAL INFORMATION... 6 A.1. Introduction... 6 A.1.1. History and Setup of the Project... 6 A.1.2. Objectives... 7 A.1.3. Methodology... 8 A.2. Description of the Planned Recycling Business... 9 A.2.1. Characterisation of E-Waste/ Focused Electronic Appliances... 9 A.2.2. Description of the Proposed Process Chain A.2.3. Downstream Options A.3. Options Concerning Ownership and Operator s-model...14 PART B) STRATEGIC ANALYSIS...16 B.1. Current Situation...16 B.1.1. Current Legal Framework B.1.2. E-Waste Generation and Current Massflows B.1.3. Stakeholders and Competitors B.2. Opportunities and Risks...23 B.3. Proposed Setup...24 B.3.1. Proposed Operator s Model B.3.2. Assumed Framework Conditions PART C) COLLECTION STRATEGY AND DOWNSTREAM OPTIONS...26 C.1. Collection Strategy...26 C.1.1. General Objectives and Approach C.1.2. Input Streams C.1.3. Purchase Conditions C.2. Expected Input...28 C.3. Produced Output Fractions...30 C.3.1. Selected Processing Options C.3.2. Existing Downstream Options C.3.3. Selected Transport and Storage Options PART D) LAYOUT, INVESTMENTS AND EQUIPMENT...37 D.1. Required Human Resources...37 D.1.1. Assumed Basic Data D.1.2. Required Staff D.2. Infrastructure and Equipment...39 D.2.1. Required Space D.2.2. Required Equipment D.2.3. Proposed Layout Page 4

6 D.3. Required Investments...47 D.3.1. Estate and Building D.3.2. Investment for Equipment PART E) OPERATIONAL REVENUES AND COSTS...48 E.1. Purchase Costs and Revenues...48 E.1.1. Expected Purchase Costs E.1.2. Required Recycling Fees from Producers E.2. Sales Revenues and Downstream Costs...49 E.2.1. Prices/ Costs per Tons E.2.2. Sales Revenues E.2.3. External Transport Costs E.2.4. Disposal Costs E.2.5. Net Sales Revenues E.3. Operational Costs...53 E.3.1. Staff Costs E.3.2. Infrastructure Costs E.3.3. Equipment E.3.4. Transport Costs E.3.5. Administration Costs E.3.6. Depreciation PART F) PROFIT & LOSS FORECAST AND INTERPRETATION...58 F.1. Required Recycling Fees...58 F.2. Profit & Loss Forecast...60 F.3. Calculated Break-Even...62 F.4. Modeling Different Framework Conditions...62 F.4.1. Modeling Framework Conditions F.4.2. Modeling Recycling Fees F.5. Conclusions...67 PART G) ANNEX...68 G.1. List of Tables...68 G.2. List of Figures...69 G.3. List of References...70 Page 5

7 PART A) INTRODUCTION + GENERAL INFORMATION A.1. INTRODUCTION As in many other African countries, Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), or e- waste, has become a serious environmental issue in Uganda. The consumption rates for electric and electronic appliances (EEE) have accelerated in the last decade. Due to this trend, the amount of WEEE thrown away by its users or handed to the informal sector is growing. Authorities, organizations and a numerous companies have been storing end-of-life equipment due to a lack of existing options to return WEEE for proper treatment. As there does not exist a recycling industry following international quality and environmental standards, e-waste is treated under conditions hazardous to human health and is causing negative environmental impacts by, for instance, the removal of valuable components like ferrous and non-ferrous metals and dumping toxic substances. On the other hand, dismantling of WEEE can be an opportunity for entrepreneurs to set up sustainable recycling businesses and creating green jobs. Against this background, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), with financial support of the Austrian Government, set up the present project to implement a manual e-waste dismantling facility in Kampala, Uganda. A.1.1. HISTORY AND SETUP OF THE PROJECT The project Establishment of a manual dismantling facility for e-waste in Uganda is designed in two phases: 1. analyzing the current situation concerning e-waste in Uganda, elaborating required framework conditions and developing a concrete business plan for an e-waste recycling facility as key objectives for the first phase; 2. the concrete implementation of a manual dismantling facility in Kampala as the core action in a second phase. The first phase was conducted between the end of 2012 and beginning of As a first step, an Inventory on e-waste management practices in Uganda was conducted by the Uganda Cleaner Production Centre [UCPC, 2013] under guidance of the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA). Within this inventory, the potential EEE- and WEEE- quantities for Uganda were estimated. Purchase prices for e- waste devices and other crucial costs to run a facility were estimated and the current legal framework conditions analyzed. Based on the data provided within the inventory and complemented by additional surveys, a feasibility study for an e-waste treatment facility in Kampala [Blaser et al, 2013] was elaborated by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA) supported by the D.R.Z Dismantling and Recycling Centre (D.R.Z). Within this feasibility study, the financial balance for a future dismantling facility in Uganda was estimated under different conditions. This included the variation of input quantities, WEEE composition, achievable prices for valuable output fractions, prices to be paid for hazardous fractions and transport costs. Page 6

8 The main result of the feasibility study was that under the current local and global economic conditions, the e-waste treatment facility in Kampala cannot become an economically selfsufficient business if solely relying on the intrinsic value of the treated material. These findings can be attributed to two cost factors which stand out with regard to their significance: the purchase prices for e-waste that are paid to incentivize collection, and the costs for the treatment of cathode ray tubes (CRTs). A further relevant issue for the business is the difficult transport situation for waste fractions destined for the regional or international market. Transport is cost- and time-consuming, as Uganda is a landlocked country and several border crossings are required, which generally entail a considerable bureaucratic effort. Furthermore the feasibility study concludes that a sustainable e-waste treatment business can only grow in Uganda in combination with a comprehensive framework, which ensures: 1. that business sustainability is guaranteed under both favorable and unfavorable economic conditions, i.e. an additional flexible income stream - enabled through a financing scheme - needs to be established for periods in which the intrinsic value of the treated material is not sufficient for a break-even. Additionally, seed funding or grants to support the initial phase of building up a business might be required; 2. that e-waste businesses can grow on a level playing field, i.e. that rules set by legislation and standards, as well as monitoring and control mechanisms favor high standard operations; 3. that market incentives, such as high collection and treatment rates, are encouraged, i.e. appropriate collection processes need to be attractive, ensuring that high volumes of both valuable and non-valuable waste materials are collected equally and that those materials reach appropriate treatment facilities; 4. that regional, cross-national, cooperation models are supported in order to gather critical volumes of e.g. PWBs. These models should allow e-waste businesses to participate on the global market for a maximal return of value for secondary raw materials, which also requires that government bodies guarantee a smooth, reliable and timely handling of export licenses and other administrative procedures to facilitate exports of certain e-waste materials. The present business plan calculates revenues and costs for a period of five years based on the results of the inventory and the feasibility study, considering the suggestions made concerning required framework conditions. A.1.2. OBJECTIVES The present business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda pursues the following main objectives: The financial balance for e-waste dismantling calculated within the feasibility study should be extended to a five-year business plan including profit and loss forecast calculation as well as break-even estimation. Estimated revenues and costs should be based on realistic assumptions concerning input of e-waste from different streams, process calculation and downstream options. Barriers identified in the feasibility study should be adapted based on realistic assumptions concerning required framework conditions such as remunerations from financing mechanisms, etc. Using the completed business plan, interested entrepreneurs should be in a position to get a loan from a bank or investor for the required investments and initial phase of operation. Page 7

9 Apart from the profit and loss calculation, the written business plan should provide information concerning space requirements and proposals to design the layout of the facility, required number of employees, equipment etc. Furthermore this business plan should be elaborated so as to be used in the future as a blueprint for similar UNIDO projects, by adapting regional framework conditions and key figures concerning prices and costs. The current business plan calculates revenues and costs for material recycling of e-waste only. In many cases, it will make sense to establish the recycling facility together with a refurbishment center or extend an existing refurbishment center by a dismantling facility selecting reusable EEE from the input streams. Revenues and costs for refurbishment have to be calculated separately and are not included in this business plan. A.1.3. METHODOLOGY The present business plan consists of two main parts: a strategic analysis based on the inventory [UCPC, 2013] and the feasibility study [Blaser et al., 2013], and a calculation of a profit and loss forecast based on assumed mass flows and expected revenues and costs For the business plan, a calculation tool, developed within the StEP (Solving the e-waste problem) network (Task-Force 4 Recycling) in cooperation with KERP, D.R.Z and EMPA, has been further developed by the corresponding authors into an Excel-based business plan calculation tool. With the business plan calculation tool it is possible to calculate the financial performance for the first five years of operation based on expected input quantities and composition of appliances groups. Local relevant cost factors like average salaries, purchase prices, fuel prices etc. have to be provided. Based on the general data provided and considering the chosen modeling parameters (dismantling depth and dismantling efficiency), the tool calculates the following results: required staff, investments and equipment; expected revenues and operational costs; an entire profit and loss forecast; required additional income stream (e.g. through an EPR financing mechanism, recycling fees, etc.); a calculated break-even. Using the business plan calculation tool, different profit and loss scenarios for the planned facility in Kampala have been calculated by modifying certain framework conditions (chapter F.4). Page 8

10 A.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANNED RECYCLING BUSINESS A.2.1. CHARACTERISATION OF E-WASTE/ FOCUSED ELECTRONIC APPLIANCES Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), or e-waste for short, is a generic term embracing various forms of electric and electronic equipment that have ceased to be of any value to their owners. In the present context, we use the terms WEEE and e-waste synonymously and in accordance to the EU WEEE Directive. The categories according to the EU WEEE Directive are listed in Table A-1. Table A-1: WEEE categories according to the EU directive on WEEE [WASSWA, SCHLUEP, 2008] When e-waste is disposed of or recycled without any controls, there are predictable negative impacts on the environment and human health. E-waste contains more than 1,000 different substances, many of which are toxic, such as lead, mercury, arsenic, cadmium, selenium, hexavalent chromium, and flame retardants that create dioxin emissions when burned. These toxins can cause a variety of ailments, ranging from allergic reactions to brain damage and cancer. E-waste contains considerable quantities of valuable materials such as precious metals. Early generation PCs used to contain up to 4 g of gold each; however this has decreased to about 1 g today. The value of ordinary metals contained in e-waste is also very high: one ton of e-waste contains up to 0.2 tons of copper [WASSWA, SCHLUEP, 2008]. Regarding the types of appliances to be treated in the future dismantling facility, the business plan follows the selected appliances within the feasibility study [Blaser et al., 2013], that encompassed appliances of the following WEEE categories 1 : small household appliances (cat. 2), IT and telecommunications equipment (cat. 3) and consumer equipment (cat. 4). The focus is set on the following appliances: desktop PCs (cat. 3), IT accessories (cat. 3), CRT and LCD monitors (cat. 3), laptops (cat. 3), printers, scanners, copiers (cat. 3) CRT and LCD TVs (cat. 4). 1 See classification according to the EU WEEE Directive 2002/96/EC: Page 9

11 It was decided to base the business plan calculations on these types of appliances due to the following reasons: The selected types of appliances are most relevant concerning quantities, content of resource efficient substances and potential negative environmental impact due to hazardous components. The calculations had to focus on typical appliances concerning the mentioned aspects to allow modeling procedures concerning output composition and financial performance. It is expected that other types of appliances will be found in the input as well, like irons or other small household appliances. However, such devices can be treated in the facility without relevant influence on technical and financial aspects, with two exceptions: End-of-life cooling and freezing appliances are a serious public issue due to their content of climate-relevant gases and hazardous substances. Contrary to other equipment, they are also relevant in terms of existing quantities. For depollution and recycling of cooling and freezing appliances, a separate project has to be set up due to different material composition and recycling requirements. At the stakeholder workshop in Kampala in July 2013 several stakeholders remarked that waste from medical devices is a serious environmental issue in Uganda: Medical appliances have to be collected and treated separately due to issues of hygene and therefore are beyond the scope of the current project. The expected composition of the WEEE bulk (see chapter C.2) that is collected (with regard to the chosen sample) is estimated based on previous studies in Morocco and Tanzania [(GIZ 2010; Blaser and Schluep 2012) see in Blaser et al., 2013], a field survey with scavengers in Uganda carried out by UCPC and the following assumptions: 15% laptops (of all computers) One printer for every two PCs 10% LCD monitors / 90% CRT monitors 10% LCD TVs / 90% CRT TVs A.2.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROCESS CHAIN The design of the facility and the calculation of the future financial performance of the dismantling facility follow the process chain pictured in Figure A-1. E-waste is generated both by private households and companies, organizations and authorities. As part of a collection strategy this business plan suggests to set up collection points at strategic locations in Kampala, in order to make it convenient for consumers or individual collectors to hand in their e-waste. It is assumed that these collection points are run by entrepreneurs and that the facility is buying and picking up the collected e-waste with their own vehicles from these collection points. Page 10

12 Figure A-1: Overall process-flow through the facility E-waste generated by companies, organizations and authorities has to be acquired directly and collected from the point of generation by a facility s vehicles and is characterized as B2B-collection. Collection from repair-shops works in a similar fashion to B2B-collection. As repair shops are dealing with broken devices mainly from private use, the composition of collected e-waste might differ from that of B2B-collection. Collection trips will probably have to be planned differently as well as orders from businesses to collect e-waste might fill a whole truck or even require more than one trip per order. Collected amounts of e-waste from repair shops will probably be lower per trip, as these shops do not have a lot of space for storage. On the other hand, repair shops generate e-waste regularly. Regular trips collecting e-waste from several repair shops per trip might be the solution for this input stream. Deliveries of e-waste by consumers and informal collectors directly at the facility have been considered as a fourth input stream within the business plan. The receiving of e-waste is the first process that has to be considered at the facility regarding space and personnel resources. All incoming e-waste has to be weighed and registered in respect of origin or destination. Selection of reusable appliances for refurbishment can take place at the e-waste intake point as well. Registered e-waste will go to an input storage, where the dismantling workers can take the material for dismantling and further processing. Depollution and further dismantling of appliances for material recycling are the main operation processes within the facility (Figure A-2). The main dismantling steps are: Opening of the appliance (separation of the housing from the rest of the appliance) Localization, identification and removal of hazardous components Dismantling and separation of the remaining components into marketable fractions For the dismantling of CRTs, aeration of the CRT-tube has to be included as an additional dismantling step to avoid implosion. Page 11

13 Figure A-2: Examples of different dismantling workstations Depending on the disposal options in the region, further depollution steps might be necessary and have to be considered in designing the layout and calculation of investments and operational costs (Figure D-3 in chapter D.2.2). Further treatment of CRT-tubes: If a recycling plant for CRT-treatment does not exist in the region, it is recommended to invest in equipment for that recycling step. CRT-tubes are normally opened using a heated wire. Then the phosphor powder is sucked away and the lead-containing CRT-glass remains. Decontamination of mercury-containing lamps: Some electronic appliances such as scanner or copiers contain Hg-containing lamps. As lamps get easily broken when transported over long distances, the facility should have at least a mobile decontamination unit for lamps if there is no stationary recycling plant for lamps in the region. A mobile decontamination unit for lamps is able to crush lamps under exclusion of air and separate mercury/ powder from the rest (glass and aluminum). Stripping of cables: Stripping units for the separation of copper from the insulation exist, and can be easily used to gain pure copper out of cables. Burning of cables has to strictly be avoided due to the resulting heavy environmental pollution and health problems. Crushing/ separation of plastics: Plastics can normally easily be recycled when separated into pure types of plastics (ABS, PP and so on). Unfortunately, electronic appliances contain more than 20 different types of plastics. Furthermore, some plastics can contain internationally banned brominated flame retardants (BFRs) that can produce dioxins when molded under uncontrolled temperature conditions. In addition, some BFRs are listed as persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and should not be re-introduced into secondary plastics. Hence plastics containing such BFRs have to be separated and disposed of. When the whole mixed plastic fraction is passed to specialized plastic recyclers, normally crushing for transport optimization is required. Separation of plastics into different types requires identification equipment (at least an IR-handheld device) and at least 50% of produced plastics will remain to be disposed of. A.2.3. DOWNSTREAM OPTIONS Depending on the input and the chosen dismantling scenario, the output of a dismantling plant for e-waste can comprise up to 30 different fractions. Dismantling scenarios concentrating on depollution and gaining high valuable fractions only (such as PWBs) lead to a high content of mixed fractions (mixed scrap, power supplies, etc.) that have to be further separated by means of mechanical separation processes. Dismantling scenarios trying to Page 12

14 gain as many pure materials as possible produce more pure metals destined directly to metal recovery processes (smelters, refineries, etc.). However, any manual dismantling process for e-waste is the first treatment step within the e- waste recycling chain to gain secondary raw materials. The recovery of secondary raw materials requires mechanical and/or sophisticated chemical-physical processes that cannot be provided by a dismantling plant. In any case, manual dismantling has to follow international quality standards. Substandard practices like burning of cables or leaching PWBs have to strictly be avoided due to serious environmental pollution and health problems caused by these practices. A list of possible output fractions and appropriate downstream destinations are listed in Table A-2. Possible output fractions Metals containing minimal impurities: iron/ steel, stainless steel, aluminum, copper, bronze, brass,... Mixed fractions containing both Fe/ NFmetals and other materials as plastics, glass etc.: mixed scrap, cables, hard disc drives, other drives, power supplies, deflection coils, motors, inductors, transformers Fractions containing precious metals: printed wired boards, processors, mobile phones without batteries Some hazardous fractions: batteries and lead accumulators printer cartridges Plastics: pure types of plastics without BFRs mixed plastics containing BFRs (brominated flame retardants) Nonmetals as wood, glass,... Fractions with positive economic value Further recycling/ recovery destinations Smelting plants for metal recovery Recycling plants for further mechanical separation Precious metals refinery Battery recycling plant Refilling or/and disposal of hazardous waste Fractions with very low or no positive economic value Main part of hazardous fractions: capacitors, LCD-displays, getter pill,... fluorescent tubes CRT-tubes or CRT-glass (lead glass) Non-hazardous waste: containing rubber, foam, dirt, etc. Depending on the quality of the fraction(s): - recycling plants specialized on plastic separation/ recycling or - pelletizing and molding or - thermal disposal/ landfill Material or thermal recycling Fractions with negative economic value Controlled disposal of hazardous waste Treatment of CRT-tubes Recovery or controlled disposal of CRTglass Landfill or thermal disposal Table A-2: Output fractions from manual dismantling plants and further destinations Usually it is possible to commercialize several fractions at the national or regional market (aluminum smelters, plastic recyclers, etc.). For several fractions (PWBs, etc.) adequate purchasers might be found only overseas. For the shipment of these fractions, relatively high transport costs have to be considered in the business plan. Page 13

15 A.3. OPTIONS FOR OWNERSHIP AND OPERATOR S MODELS The way the recycling business will be set up concerning ownership and plant management (hereinafter called business model ) is crucial for the success in the long term. As there are several environmental issues that have to be matched with economic aspects, a form of ownership that is capable to lead despite profit-reducing factors due to environmental issues needs to be found. It is a question of public interest that the dismantling and downstream processes comply with international quality standards in dealing and disposal of hazardous fractions. Due to missing resources in Uganda, hazardous and many other output fractions have to be exported for material recovery and/or disposal which reduce profit perspectives. The following different business model options could be identified: Establishment and operation of the facility financed and run solely by private investors and/or local entrepreneurs: A local entrepreneur setting up the business on its own is one practicable way for ownership and operator s model. A further characteristic of this business model is the missing involvement of the governmental sector. Required investments can come from financial resources brought in by the entrepreneur himself, from a bank loan, from a financial entity or a combination of them. As the business offers solutions to a serious ecological problem, creating green jobs and acquiring grants for investment from international development cooperation entities should be possible. Economic efficiency is one of the advantages this form of ownership brings with it, as the local entrepreneur has an intrinsic interest to set up an economically viable solution. A challenge will be that the entrepreneur has to have the knowledge to negotiate with international purchasers and also be able to manage a recycling plant. Since private entrepreneurs are mostly interested in maximizing profit, this operator s model would probably be the weakest solution when ensuring environmental responsibility. The private entrepreneur will probably always try to minimize efforts for cost intensive disposal. As long as strict legislation is not in place, it will be difficult to prosecute offenses in that regard. Establishment and operation of the facility within a public-private partnership Public-private partnership is a business model promoted by UNIDO and Microsoft Corp. [2008] as a solution for poverty reduction in countries like Uganda. Its main characteristics are ownership split between private and public shareholders and the nomination of the plant management by a board on which all shareholders are represented. As this form of partnerships builds bridges between business and the poor, it creates mutual benefits that go beyond immediate profits and higher incomes. For business, these include driving innovations, building markets and strengthening supply chains. For the poor, they include higher productivity, sustainable earnings and social and economic empowerment. For the implementation of a refurbishment center in Kampala, a shareholder-based commercial company was created composed of the local private sector, ICT providers as well as private individuals. The adopted business model further provided a seat on the company s board to the government and grants veto rights on strategic decisions. For the dismantling plant, a similar approach could be an appropriate way to balance ecological responsibilities and economic sustainability. A joint venture between a private investor/ entrepreneur and a governmental authority - especially in the initial phase - could be a practicable way to catalyze negotiations with producers concerning the payment of Page 14

16 recycling fees and/or acquisition of funds for investment. Infrastructure like the estate and building for the plant brought in by the government could be an in-kind contribution. In return, the government would have direct influence on how quality standards and cleaner production directives are met. As the dismantling facility would be the first pilot recycling company for e-waste in Uganda, a public-private partnership would offer the opportunity to gain practical experience in recycling e-waste, highlighting requirements for issues related to existing and potential legislation. Recycling facility run by the municipality A business model executed in some European cities consists of the execution of wasterecycling activities by a department of the municipality administration or a company owned by the municipality. When operated by the municipality, managing and operating staff are employees of the city administration. This business model was quite popular until the 1980s. In the 1990s a lot of city administrations outsourced waste management activities to private companies. One main advantage of this business model is the fact that revenues from commercialization of fractions can be used to reduce waste management fees charged to households and commercial entities. Association-based ownership and facility operation In many African and Latin American countries it is quite common that scavengers for paper, metals and other scrap are organized as associations, where every individual or family collects scrap on their own, but commercialization takes place on behalf of the association to reach better market conditions. Besides their main business purpose, a lot of these waste management associations manage to organize additional benefits for its members such as literacy courses, crèches, etc. Separate e-waste collection and manual dismantling could be organized in a similar way, where collection and preliminary dismantling steps are conducted by individual members and further treatment and recycling steps are organized by the association. WEEE dismantling by a social enterprise Social enterprises active in WEEE recycling exist in many Western European countries like Germany, France, Sweden or Austria. The main target of social enterprises is the reintegration of long-term unemployed persons into the primary labor market via temporary job contracts (normally between six months and one year). Contracted persons both work in the company s departments and receive personal support and career planning in order to graduate to a permanent job contract on the primary job market. At this stage, the business plan can only point out different options concerning ownership and operator s model. The decision about the setup has to be made in the beginning of the second phase based on a more accurate evaluation of the different options involving the different stakeholders again. Experiences in many countries show that further aspects like additional social benefits could be integrated as part of the recycling solution where the political context is advantageous. Page 15

17 PART B) STRATEGIC ANALYSIS B.1. CURRENT SITUATION B.1.1. CURRENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK The following chapter is an excerpt of e-waste related legislations and regulations described in the inventory on e-waste management practices in Uganda elaborated by UCPC [2013]. No further research has been conducted in this area. Electronic Waste Management Policy for Uganda A specific regulation addressing treatment standards for the recycling of e-waste in Uganda does not exist. On the other hand, Uganda adopted international conventions concerning e- waste, such as the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and the World Charter for Nature. Thus, technical standards provided by these international conventions should build the framework for setting up the technical design of the dismantling facility until national regulations are in force. However, in August 2012 the government of Uganda brought the Electronic Waste Management Policy for Uganda [Ministry of ICT, 2012] into force. The main goal of the policy is to guide, promote and ensure the safe management of e-waste in Uganda. Following issues are defined as objectives that the national e-waste policy shall pursue: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) To provide for the establishment of e-waste management facilities in the country. Awareness and Education: To mobilize and sensitize the Government, private sector and communities on the proper management and handling of e-waste on a sustainable basis. To provide specific e-waste regulations (legal and regulatory) for the acquisition and handling, up to the final disposal processes. To develop a critical human resource base, knowledgeable in handling e-waste. To provide for resource mobilization for efficient management and disposal of e-waste. To provide guidance on the standards of electronic equipment that is imported in the country. To incentivize investments in e-waste refurbishment facilities. To engage in regional and international efforts seeking transnational and global solutions Policy strategies are defined for each objective, which if fully implemented should lead to achievement of the goal, mission and vision of the policy. Although the strategies do not contain specific guidelines for the technical design and operation of a dismantling facility, several paragraphs of direct concern should be considered. Several strategies of the policy point out the need to develop sustainable models for e-waste management such as publicprivate partnerships (PPP), the importance of cross-cutting issues in e-waste management, like job creation for the unemployed youth and people with disabilities, the objective to elaborate national standards in strong compliance with international conventions, the willingness to integrate producer responsibility in the future recycling scheme, Page 16

18 the plan to develop incentives for the establishment of sustainable e-waste disposal agencies through mutually beneficial reuse and/or recycling schemes. E-Waste Related Legislation Further e-waste related legislation is listed in Table B-1: Legal instrument National Environment Act 4/1995 The Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations S.1 No 13/1998 The National Environment (Delegation of Waste Discharge Functions) Regulations S.I. No. 56/1999 The National Environment (Standards for Discharge of Effluent into Water or on Land) Regulations S.I. No. 5/1999 The National Environment (Solid Waste Management) Regulations S.I. No. 52/1999 The National Environment (Management of Ozone Depleting Substances and Products) Regulations S.I. No. 63/2001 The National ICT Policy The Ratification of Treaties Act 5/1998 The Water Statute 9/1995 The Waste and Hazardous Waste Management Regulations, 2000 National Bureau of Standards Act, Cap 327 The Penal Code Act Cap 120 The Factories Act, Cap 220, Laws of Uganda The Explosives Act, Cap 298 Objective of legislation To provide for sustainable management of the environment; to establish an authority as a coordinating, monitoring and supervisory body for that purpose To collect, organize, analyze, interpret and communicate information that is relevant to the consideration of the initiation of a new project; Monitoring and implementation of standards To regulate management of wastewater To regulate management of solid wastes To regulate management of ODSs To support ICT-related development in the country Provides for the procedure for ratification of treaties in accordance with Article 123 of the Constitution To provide for the use, protection and management of water resources and supply To regulate the management of wastes and hazardous wastes including: sorting, disposing, internal movement, transportation, packaging, labeling, trans-boundary movement, notification procedures, environmental impact assessment establishes the Uganda National Bureau of Standards whose functions include the promotion of standardization in industry Has few provisions relating to environmental protection Provides guidelines concerning protection of workers Stipulates conditions for the manufacture of explosives Table B-1: Environmental laws related to e-waste management [WASSWA, SCHLUEP, 2008] Page 17

19 Licensing Relevant Legislation Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda Before implementing the dismantling facility, the need for licensing procedures under the following regulations should be checked: Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) proceeding the National Environment Impact Assessment Regulations (1998) monitored by the National Environment Authority (NEMA), Occupational Safety and Health Act (2006) Further general licensing requirements have to be identified at the beginning of the implementation phase. International Conventions Uganda is a signatory to a number of international conventions and guidelines which in one way or another address issues pertaining to e-waste. The International Conventions to which Uganda is a signatory are given in Table B-2. Table B-2: International conventions and guidelines related e-waste managment [Wasswa, Schluep, 2008] B.1.2. E-WASTE GENERATION AND CURRENT MASSFLOWS In 2008, the mass flow of computers in Uganda has been researched by WASSWA, SCHLUEP [2008]. According to this study, the main stages of the product are the import, the distribution via retailers and refurbishment centres and the consumption. Once the computer reaches its end-of-life (EOL) it might stay in storage at the consumer for some time (not shown in diagram), but eventually enters the waste stream. In the waste stream, it either gets dumped informally or formally on dump sites and landfills or gets collected. In Uganda, Page 18

20 currently only informal collectors exist, who sort out plastics and metals and sell those fractions to existing plastic and metal recyclers. Remaining parts most probably are dumped or buried informally. Figure B-1 gives an overview of the different life cycle stages of a computer in Uganda. Figure B-1: Massflow diagram of computers in Uganda, situation of 2007 [Wasswa, Schluep, 2013] The life cycle stages for televisions, monitors, printers, scanners, etc. probably are quite similar to those of computers. It was assumed by WASSWA, SCHLUEP [2008] that in 2007, approximately 300,000 computers were in use. The study assumes that imported second-hand computers are used for five years and new computers for nine years, as a result of two usage stages: first use of about four years as it was reported by several businesses and a second use phase of five years according to the life span of a second-hand computer. According to these figures at least 30,000 units of computers (or 300 tons) should have reached an end-of-life status every year by As the ICT sector has increased significantly since then, the amounts should be higher by now. Further assuming that computers count for about 20% of EEE (see considerations in A.2.1) at least 1,500 tons of ICT-equipment and TV sets should have reached an end-of-life status in Uganda by now. The study further revealed that only a minor fraction of these appliances appears at informal collectors, plastic and metal recyclers and landfill sites. Assuming that only around 10% of EOL equipment currently reaches the waste stream, the country might have up to 80,000 computer units in stock, which are not in use anymore. Based on these estimations and considerations, it was assumed that after five years of operation at least 300 tons of e-waste can be acquired as input to the planned dismantling facility. It was further assumed that in the second year of operation, the input will be about 270 tons due to the large number of EOL units in stock. Governmental institutions and large enterprises in particular will start to clear their stocks from the moment when a sustainable e- waste recycling option exists. Page 19

21 B.1.3. STAKEHOLDERS AND COMPETITORS According to UCPC [2013], the key stakeholders of e-waste generation and management in Uganda are the policy-makers/regulators, importers, distributors and retailers, consumers, repair workshops/technicians (refurbishers), collectors, recyclers and disposal facilities. Policy-Makers/ Regulators According to UCPC [2013], the following governmental institutions are relevant concerning the implementation and operation of a manual dismantling facility: Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (ICT), National Information Technology Authority-Uganda (NITA-U), Ministry of Trade, Tourism and Industry (MTTI), Ministry of Health (MOH), National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), Uganda Communications Commission (UCC), National Information Technology Authority Uganda (NITA-U), Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS), Uganda Revenue Authority (URA), Local Governments, Uganda Investment Authority, Public Procurement and Disposal Authority (PPDA), Uganda Research Institute (URI). Manufacturers, Importers and Distributors Although the ICT sector is one of the most vibrant within the region, showing significant annual growth rates, no manufacturing of ICT equipment exists in Uganda - all electronic appliances are imported. According to UCPC [2013], there are two categories of imports into the country: formal cross-border trade through the Customs Department of the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) and the informal cross-border trade transactions between Uganda and its neighboring countries. According to WASSWA, SCHLUEP [2008], over 100 distributers of computers in the country exist. The main distributors according to customs records are: Computer Point (U) Ltd Kazinga Channel NCR service and computer industries Seven Seas computer empire CAL (Computer applications Ltd); The IBM representatives MFI computer solutions Master electronics (U) Ltd In 2007, computers imported by these seven companies represented 42% of all the imports within that year. Major clients of the firms are finance and banking institutions, nongovernment organizations, education and research institutions, corporate sectors and government ministries / parastatals. Important stakeholders at the interface between product- and waste-regime are the innumerable small refurbishers and repair-shops in the center of Kampala (Figure B-2). As they replace broken components with functioning ones, they can serve as an important source of e-waste for the facility. On the other hand, they can be important disseminators for the planned recycling business to private consumers. Page 20

22 Consumers Figure B-2: EEE-distributors and repair shops in the center of Kampala According to WASSWA, SCHLUEP [2008], consumers of ICT equipment can be divided into four different groups: Government: According to interviews from Ministries of Trade Tourism and Industry; Health, Finance and Works/Transport, the average life span of new computers is three to five years. After this period, the now old computers are auctioned to the public (which might include employees of the ministry in question) after being inspected by the Board of Surveys, under the Ministry of Finance. The reason for lifespan ranges between three and five years is that some computers when inspected at three years are found suitable for use for another two years whereas others are not. Large enterprises: In large enterprises (source: telecommunication companies and NGOs) the average life span of new computers is four years after which they are sold to small/medium enterprises, the public, or donated to schools. MSMEs including schools: Micro, small and medium sized enterprises are major buyers of second-hand/refurbished computers. Responses from five selected schools and three medium-size enterprises indicate that life span of second-hand computers is five years but can be extended to seven years when the faulty components are replaced by new ones. Private households: Based on a random sampling among 20 private computer owners, private households tend to hold on to their PCs longer than any other sector. All the interviewees had bought second-hand computers. 11 of the households indicated that that they had owned their (second-hand) PCs for more than five years and believed that they could serve for another three years because most had replaced the hard drives with new ones. Page 21

23 Collectors, Recyclers and Disposal Facilities According to the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA), there is no formal collection of e-waste in Uganda. Informal collection of obsolete computers exists where individuals survive on selling scrap from computers for cash to plastic plants, or metallic components to informal vendors. Downstream vending is a common practice and vendors engage in resale of whole units, refurbishing for reuse, dismantling into parts, and selling copper components to local welding practitioners [UCPC, 2013]. Concerning a collection strategy for the future dismantling plant, it will probably be one of the strongest challenges to compete with informal collectors. As environmentally sound e-waste recycling has to include controlled disposal of hazardous substances, it is natural that this process will be more expensive than what informal collectors do: namely, taking out valuable components and dumping the rest. In terms of recycling and disposal, a few metal recycling plants and several companies which recycle plastics exist. Fractions like iron, aluminum and some separated plastics can be sold on the local market. All further fractions have to be commercialized on the international market as secondary raw material. Due to missing disposal options in Uganda, hazardous fractions have to be shipped to other countries as well. In this context, companies specialized on material recycling/ recovery and disposal are important stakeholders both in neighboring countries as well as overseas. Stakeholder Overview and their Roles for the Facility Based on the subchapters above, the key stakeholders have been summarized below in Table B-3 again. Their potential roles for the recycling business have been listed. Stakeholders Governmental institutions Role for the Facility One governmental institution should be a partner/ shareholder of the facility Important for acquisition of funds Important source of e-waste (B2B-collection) Producers (international brands) Important stakeholders concerning recycling fees Importers and distributors Refurbishers and repair shops Potential disseminators Potential partners concerning take-back-system Potential source of e-waste (B2B-collection) Potential disseminators Large enterprises/ organizations Potential source of e-waste (B2B-collection) MSMEs including schools Potential source of e-waste (B2B-collection) Private households Local metal and plastic recycling companies International companies for recycling, recovery and disposal Institutions for financing and funds Potential source of e-waste (serviced via collection points and informal collectors) Purchasers of output fractions (iron/ steel, aluminum, plastic) Purchasers of all fractions which cannot be commercialized locally Purchasers of hazardous fractions Important for financing investments and acquisition of initial required funds Shipping agencies Partners for shipment of fractions Table B-3: Important Stakeholders and their Role for the Facility Page 22

24 Based on the considerations above, important initial intervention steps concerning stakeholders can be listed as followed: Establishment of a public-private partnership with a governmental institution Negotiations with producers Identification of large stocks of e-waste and acquisition of these amounts Negotiations with local recyclers and international recycling companies concerning commercialization of recyclable fractions and disposal of hazardous fractions The required key intervention mechanisms are pictured below in Figure B-3. Figure B-3: Required intervention mechanisms to enable e-waste recycling in Uganda [Schluep, 2013] B.2. OPPORTUNITIES AND RISKS Summarizing the current situation, some favorable factors for the implementation of an e- waste dismantling facility in Kampala can be identified: First of all, e-waste has been recognized as an important issue by the government. The e-waste management policy [Ministry of ICT, 2012] reflects the government s determination to catalyze sustainable solutions for e-waste recycling in Uganda, providing concrete policy strategies and claiming collaboration from various stakeholder institutions. An essential strategy from the point of view of a future plant operator is the favored set up for e-waste recycling facilities as public-private partnerships, expressing the Page 23

25 government s position that e-waste has to be seen as a joint responsibility between the public and the private sector. Surveys in relation with the inventory [UCPC, 2013] evidenced quite a high volume of old ICT equipment stored in governmental institutions and big companies. Being able to purchase this e-waste quantities in an early stage of plant operation with relatively low collection effort will facilitate the initial operation and have positive effects on the financial performance. The high number of repair shops in Kampala represents a second potential relevant input stream that can be serviced quite easily. By starting a pilot collection cooperation programme with some of them, specific input, purchase conditions and required collection efforts can be identified and used for technical plant design. Besides these favorable factors, a future manual dismantling facility will face several serious challenges and risks as identified in the feasibility study [Blaser et al., 2013]: The purchase prices having to be paid to informal collectors for e-waste is a critical factor with regard to the budget and to the collected volumes (collection incentive), which however reflect re-use prices rather than material prices. Under current conditions, the intrinsic material value of e-waste does not finance the operation of an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda, mainly due to high volumes of Cathode Ray Tubes (CRTs) in the waste stream, which are costly to treat. Missing recycling and disposal capacities in Uganda and the geographical position of the country without direct access to the ocean means a challenging transport situation for waste fractions destined for the regional or international market. Relatively high transport and disposal costs and the dependency on global commodity prices have to also be interpreted as a relevant risk for the business profitability. B.3. PROPOSED SETUP B.3.1. PROPOSED OPERATOR S MODEL It is recommended to set up the e-waste dismantling facility in strong collaboration with governmental institutions to seek a joint venture with the responsible authorities for two reasons: As the intrinsic value of e-waste material does not completely finance the plant operation, additional financial input streams are required to ensure a balanced financial performance of the recycling business. In a long-term perspective, additional remuneration has to come from a take-back system financed by extended producer responsibility. During initial plant operation, additional external financing will probably be necessary. A joint responsibility between the public sector and a private plant operator will foster the acquisition of such funds. Joint experiences in initial plant operation will support the design of an effective take-back-system and facilitate the process of claiming responsibility from producers. Public-private partnerships are seen as an effective business model by the government in solving the e-waste problem for Uganda. Page 24

26 B.3.2. ASSUMED FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS Based on the findings of the economic feasibility study [Blaser et al., 2013], the following settings have been assumed as achievable framework conditions for the business plan calculation: Remuneration of recycling fees for appliances where the intrinsic value of the treated material is not sufficient for a break-even: An additional flexible income stream depending on the composition of the input material can be acquired: through a financing scheme in the future and through other channels (funds, others) until this scheme is set up. The required amount of recycling fees has been calculated separately for each appliance group. For appliance groups with a high intrinsic value these calculations result in a reverse recycling fee (money to be paid to the financing scheme for recycling). These appliance groups help to reduce the calculated recycling fees for the whole business. For the purchase of CRTs from B2B, a collection fee can be charged: Contrary to the feasibility study where the average prices currently paid for appliances in the informal sector have been assumed as purchase conditions for all collection channels, the business plan calculation has modified these purchase conditions as follows: For the purchase of CRTs (monitors and TV-sets) from B2B, a collection fee of 2 USD/piece can be charged. Purchase prices for CRTs from other collection streams have been reduced to 3.5 USD/piece (from 5-6 USD/piece in the feasibility study), reflecting the material value of cables and deflection coil out of each appliance currently negotiated in the informal sector. Market prices for recyclable fractions according to the market situation in July 2013 Despite the fact that the international market for secondary material is a highly volatile issue, the business plan has been calculated with fixed market prices for all five initial years based on the market situation in July 2013, which represents an average price level compared to the last five years. Special conditions for rental of the estate and building: Due to the favored setup as public-private partnership, it was assumed that the estate and building for plant operation are provided by the government. The plant layout will be adapted according to the conditions of the provided building. No construction costs are necessary. It was further assumed that the estate and building can be rented for free during the initial two years of operation. After this, rental costs of 10 USD/m² per year have been estimated. Page 25

27 PART C) COLLECTION STRATEGY AND DOWNSTREAM OPTIONS C.1. COLLECTION STRATEGY C.1.1. GENERAL OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH The main objective of the e-waste treatment facility in Uganda is to ensure that high volumes of both valuable and non-valuable waste materials are collected equally and that those materials reach the facility. Hence the collection strategy has to ensure: Convenience for the consumer: it is convenient and attractive for the consumer to give back their end-of-life appliances. This means that the logistical effort for the consumer is minimal. Competitiveness: It is attractive for either the consumer or specialized collectors to deliver their waste material to the facility (instead of selling it to somebody else). This means that competitive market prices have to be paid for the waste material. Quality of waste: scavenging is avoided and waste is ideally collected as an untouched unity. I.e. neither non-valuable / hazardous parts nor valuable parts have been separated before the waste collected reaches the facility. This means that facility rules and purchase prices have to be set so that it is more attractive for the consumer / collector to hand in entire appliances instead of parts (e.g. whole CRT monitors instead of only the copper coil / an exceptional case are repair shops, who are usually disposing of parts of appliances only) In order to achieve this, the collection strategy defines appropriate input streams (the logistics) and purchase conditions (the incentives) as outlined in the following sub-chapters. C.1.2. INPUT STREAMS Deduced from the strategic analysis, the e-waste collection strategy for Kampala will be based on the following input streams: Input stream 1: in-house-collection E-waste can be handed in directly at the e-waste treatment facility. The facility will pay competitive purchase prices in order to ensure that it is attractive to hand in waste material directly at the facility. This scheme is mainly addressing individual collectors from the informal sector and private consumers (households). Concerning facility layout and resources, the e-waste receiving area has to be designed so that individuals can hand in devices. This area needs to be run by the administrative staff and has to include weighing equipment and a cash desk. Input stream 2: B2B-collection (business-to-business): The facility collects e-waste directly from companies or authorities. It depends on the kind of agreement (tender offer, donation, etc.) if a price is paid and how much it is. Average purchase conditions are given in the following sub-chapter. Page 26

28 The business plan is based on the assumption that the facility has its own truck, and that e- waste from companies and authorities are collected using this truck. Besides the driver, one co-driver for loading and unloading is considered. Input stream 3: collection from repair shops Collection from repair shops is a special version of B2B-collection. One of the main differences is that electronic devices for recycling are not provided by the end user but resulting from repair services. Therefore, the composition will be different, i.e. the waste material will be composed of broken components rather than of entire devices. Input stream 4: decentralized collection points: At different locations in the city, the facility will seek business partnerships with small collection points. It is assumed that individual entrepreneurs will be interested to set up such collection points if the facility provides appropriate incentives to them. Hence the facility will have to pay competitive purchase prices to the collection points in order to ensure that it is attractive for those entrepreneurs to have a business relationship with the facility, i.e. selling their collected waste to the facility. In addition, it should be considered to support the entrepreneurs with basic infrastructure needs, such as secure containers. Similar to the inhouse collection, this scheme is mainly addressing individual collectors from the informal sector and private consumers (households), but should also provide additional locations to hand in waste material, which are closer and more convenient. The business plan calculation assumes that the transport of e-waste from the collection points to the dismantling facility will be run by the facility using its own truck. C.1.3. PURCHASE CONDITIONS The prices that have to be paid to the suppliers of e-waste (i.e. informal collectors, households, companies, authorities) are summarized in Table C-1. These numbers are based on the assumptions and estimations made in the feasibility study [Blaser et al. 2013] and should reflect a competitive and realistic market price. Since those prices depend on several factors, such as the international raw material market prices, they are in constant change. Hence once a treatment facility has been set up and is running, they need to be reevaluated on a regular basis. Since the treatment of CRT monitors and TVs will be one of the main cost drivers of the facility, special assumptions have to be made. While it is assumed that B2B channels will pay the facility to treat CRTs, this cannot be assumed for the other input streams. On the contrary, individual collectors and consumers will expect remuneration; otherwise they would scavenge the CRT for the copper coil, sell it separately and dump the rest. Therefore, the facility will have to pay a price which is set so CRTs will be collected and brought to the facility as an untouched device. The decentralized collection points will cause higher purchase costs than waste received inhouse due to the operational costs and own profit margins of the collection points. The business plan was calculated with a purchase price 20% above the one for in-house collection. As outlined in the general objectives, in general, purchase prices will be paid only for delivered entire devices and not for components. This is to ensure that all hazardous components will enter the recycling process and an environmentally sustainable business Page 27

29 can be set up. Exemptions might have to be made concerning e-waste from repair shops, when it is clear that the collected components come from repair processes where broken pieces had to be replaced. Appliance Group 1-Facility 2-B2B 3-Repair shops 4-Decentralized Collection points Small household appliances coffee -0,20 /piece -0,24 /piece -0,24 /piece -0,24 /piece Small household appliances cloths -0,20 /piece -0,24 /piece -0,24 /piece -0,24 /piece PC/ Server -5,00 /piece -6,00 /piece -6,00 /piece -6,00 /piece Notebook -3,00 /piece -3,60 /piece -3,60 /piece -3,60 /piece Printer/Scanner/Copier -0,50 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) -0,10 /piece -0,10 /piece -0,10 /piece -0,12 /piece Mobile phone (incl. recharger) -0,80 /piece -0,96 /piece -0,96 /piece -0,96 /piece CRT monitor -3,50 /piece 2,00 /piece -3,50 /piece -4,20 /piece FPD monitor -1,00 /piece -1,00 /piece -1,00 /piece -1,20 /piece Audio appliances (CD-/Radiorecorder) -0,50 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece Video appliances (CD-/DVD-Player) -0,50 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece -0,60 /piece CRT TV -3,50 /piece 2,00 /piece -3,50 /piece -4,20 /piece FPD TV -1,00 /piece -1,00 /piece -1,00 /piece -1,20 /piece Table C-1: Assumed purchase prices for the different input streams [USD/piece] C.2. EXPECTED INPUT The business-plan has been based on the following input expectations (Table C-2). Collection Scheme Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 1-In-house-collection (facility) 20 t/a 30 t/a 40 t/a 45 t/a 50 t/a 2-B2B-institutions and companies 50 t/a 200 t/a 100 t/a 100 t/a 100 t/a 3-B2B-collection from repair shops 10 t/a 20 t/a 30 t/a 40 t/a 50 t/a 4-Collection points 10 t/a 20 t/a 50 t/a 70 t/a 100 t/a Total 90 t/a 270 t/a 220 t/a 255 t/a 300 t/a Table C-2: Expected input divided per collection schemes Deliveries at the facility are supposed to increase from an initial input of 20 t/a continuously up to 50 t/a after five years. Concerning B2B-collection from institutions and companies, it was supposed that during the second year of operation e-waste stores in governmental institutions and big companies will be emptied and therefore the input from this source will be higher in the beginning than during the following years. Collection from repair shops is supposed to increase similar to in-house collection. Decentralized collection points are expected to be the most important input source after five years but it is supposed that it will take up to two years time until contracts between the facility and collection point operators all over Kampala are established. It is expected that the composition of collected e-waste will be different from the various sources (Table C-3). While B2B-collection will probably be dominated by monitors and PCs, it is expected that TV devices will have a high share in the e-waste delivered at the facility and collected at the collection points. E-waste collected from repair shops will probably have a wider distribution. Additionally, it is assumed that the largest share of notebooks will come from this input stream, as a lot of repair shops visited have been specialized on these items. Page 28

30 Appliance Group WEEE-Sub 1-Facility 2-B2B 3-Repair shops Table C-3: Expected composition of e-waste per collection scheme 4-Collection points Small household appliances coffee 2A Small household appliances cloths 2A PC/ Server 3A 9.0% 30.0% 39.0% 9.0% Notebook 3A 1.0% 6.0% Printer/Scanner/Copier 3A 2.0% 4.0% 20.0% 2.0% IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) 3A 1.0% 12.0% Mobile phone (incl. recharger) 3A CRT monitor 4A 15.0% 63.0% 8.0% 15.0% FPD monitor 4A 1.0% 5.0% Audio appliances (CD-/Radiorecorder) 3B Video appliances (CD-/DVD-Player) 3C CRT TV 4B 73.0% 73.0% FPD TV 4C 1.0% 10.0% 1.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% The assumptions concerning input during the first five years (Table C-2, Table C-3) mean that the CRT TVs and monitors are the dominating appliance groups within the input. According to the input assumptions, their share within the whole input will be 65% (22 t/a + 37 t/a in the first year, 110 t/a + 90 t/a within the fifth year). PCs will have a share of between 21% and 27%; the expected input concerning these items will be 22 t/a in the first year, grow up to 72 t/a in the second year due the expected inventory liquidation in governmental institutions and then grow constantly from 50 t/a (third year) up to 63 t/a (fifth year). All other appliance groups will play a minor role in the input. The expected input divided per appliance groups can be seen in Figure C-1 and Figure C-2. The input distribution after five years correlates with the composition of WEEE assumed by Blaser et al. [2013] for the feasibility study: 69% CRTs, 20 % PCs, 3% FPDs, 5% Printers/ Scanners/ Copiers, 1% Notebooks, 2% IT accessories CRT TV CRT monitor FPD TV FPD monitor PC/ Server Printer/Scanner/Copier IT accessories Notebook Expected Input [t/a] Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Figure C-1: Expected Input in t/a Page 29

31 Due to different weights per appliance, the distribution of collected volumes is spread wider than the distribution per weight (Figure C-2). According to the assumptions, the input after five years will be about 8,000 units of CRTs per year, a bit more than 6,500 PCs and 11,000 printers, copiers, scanners and IT accessories (mouse, keyboard) per year. 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 0 Expected Input [t/a] CRT TV 1,428 CRT monitor FPD TV 1,142 FPD monitor 1,214 7,216 4,536 PC/ Server Printer/Scanner/Copier 1,000 5,979 IT accessories 2,888 3,777 Notebook 4,742 3,177 7,610 2,622 6, ,889 5, , ,022 5,264 7,947 2,273 4, , , ,684 2,152 2,807 Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 382 Figure C-2: Expected Input in pieces/a C.3. PRODUCED OUTPUT FRACTIONS C.3.1. SELECTED PROCESSING OPTIONS Due to low staff costs and missing further treatment options, a deep dismantling depth is the adequate treatment option within the facility where collected appliances are manually dismantled up to a point where only further mechanical processes can achieve higher material purities of the produced output fractions (Table C-4). Due to missing mechanical recycling options in Uganda at the moment, this dismantling approach is the only way to ensure that hazardous components are securely separated from recyclable fractions (i.e. power supplies from computers). Concerning further treatment steps, the business plan only included CRT-processing to separate lead glass and the fluorescent powder from the barium glass and other components, as other recycling facilities offering this treatment step do not exist and this recycling step is unconditionally necessary to ensure an environmentally- sustainable recycling solution. Cable stripping and shredding of plastics can become economically feasible options over time, especially if there exist possibilities to purchase further power supply cables (from cars or houses for example). The assumed input of cables from e-waste results in a maximum potential of 8 t/a, which is not enough in sustaining the investment of a cable stripping machine taking into account that only a share of about 35% of cables coming out of the Page 30

32 dismantling process have the required diameter to be treated in a cable stripper (only possible for power supply cables). Selected Dismantling Depth A superficial B medium C deep Selected Further Treatment Steps CRT- Processing Cable- Stripping Plastic- Shredding Table C-4: Selected Process Options Concerning processing efficiency, the following options have been selected (Table C-5) Dismantling Efficiency Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Dismantling low middle high high high Further Treatment CRT-Tubes low middle high high high Table C-5: Selected Efficiencies Low efficiency means that workers need twice the time for doing the same job as with high efficiency; middle efficiency takes 25% more dismantling time compared to high efficiency. C.3.2. EXISTING DOWNSTREAM OPTIONS Depending on the selected process options, the dismantling and further treatment results in 25 output fractions (Table C-6). The major part of them (15 fractions) can be destined for material recycling. Residual waste has to be disposed of locally and six fractions are hazardous waste that has to be shipped to recycling and disposal facilities overseas. Currently, local recycling options are only available for four fractions (aluminum, iron/steel, stainless steel and unleaded CRT glass). Concerning the recycling from WEEE-plastics, it has to be considered that part of them contain BFRs (brominated flame retardants) and therefore have to be separated from plastics without BFRs before further recycling. Plastics containing BFRs can emit dioxins and furans when not recycled under optimal conditions. In addition, some BFRs are internationally banned chemicals and should not be reintroduced into secondary raw materials and therefore need special treatment and separation. Although there is currently a lack of possibilities for the special treatment of BFR plastics in Uganda, the business plan calculations have been based on the assumption that both recycling of plastics without BFRs and disposal of plastics containing BFRs can be done locally. It was further assumed that sales revenues for recyclable plastics can cover the costs for the disposal of non-recyclable plastics. For the future implementation of a dismantling facility the special treatment or disposal of BFR plastics in Uganda, in the nearby region or overseas, as well as its impact on the cost structure need to be evaluated again. For fractions like mixed scrap, motors/inductors/transformers and cables, there might be downstream options available in the near future within a regional cross-national context anticipating growing recycling markets in Kenya or Tanzania. This is different for fractions like printed wiring boards (PWBs) that contain precious metals, which can be extracted only within sophisticated physical-chemical processes. They have to be shipped overseas as there exists a global market for these fractions and smelters for precious metals are located in Europe, Northern America and Asia. Page 31

33 Hazardous fractions like batteries, capacitors, leaded CRT funnel glass, etc. also need to be shipped overseas for further treatment. Printer cartridges as hazardous waste are supposed to be treated/ disposed within a regional cross-national cooperation; it might be possible to destine some of them for refilling as well. Fractions that are produced in very low quantities, like fluorescent powder, probably have to be stored for several years until transportable lot sizes are reached. Pretreatment of fluorescent tubes removed from scanners, copiers, etc. could be done by means of mobile decontamination stations. Transporting them over long distances entails the risk that they get broken and mercury is released. Within the business plan, fluorescent tubes have been considered as a fraction that will be stored until there exist adequate recycling options in Uganda or in neighboring countries in the future. Material recycling Disposal of nonhazardous waste Disposal of hazardous waste Local commercialization / disposal Regional crossnational cooperation International shipment - Aluminum - Iron/ Steel - Stainless Steel - Plastics without BFRs - Glass - Copper - Cable without plugs - Motors/Inductors/ Transformers - Deflection Coil - Mixed Scrap - Neodym Magnet - Processors - Printed Wiring Boards (Q1, Q2 and Q3) - Residual waste - Plastics containing BFRs Intermediate Storage: - Fluorescent Tubes - Fluorescent Powder - Printer Cartridges - Batteries - Capacitors - LCD-displays - CRT glass - Getter pill electron gun Table C-6: Identified downstream options for the output fractions According to the selected dismantling depth and further treatment options, the whole process leads to an output balance as depicted in Table C-7. Almost half of the output by weight can be recycled or disposed of locally. This is important especially for iron/steel which represents the second-highest quantity among all output fractions. About the same amount of output unfortunately has to be shipped for material recovery and further treatment/ disposal overseas due to missing local or regional options. CRT glass is the dominant output fraction (between 37% and 40% of the whole output) and responsible for over 80% of the overseas shipment in the first year. In our business model, this would even increase up to 85% after five years. It is therefore suggested that Uganda should consider a safe deposit of leaded CRT glass within national borders. However, it is assumed that this would need a longer political process and hence such a solution is not expected within the near future. Fractions that can be destined to further recycling and recovery processes in neighboring countries represent about 10% of the whole output. Page 32

34 Output after Dismantling and CRT-Processingt [t/a] Fractions Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Fluorescent Powder Fluorescent Tubes Total Intermediate Storage Aluminium Iron/ Steel Stainless Steel Plastics Glass Total Material Recycling Local Residual waste Total Disposal Local Total Local Destination Copper Bronze/Brass Cable without plugs Motors/Inductors/Transformers Deflection coil Mixed scrap Total Material Recycling Regional Cross-National Printer Cartridges Total Hazardous Waste Regional Cross-National Total Regional Cross-National Destination Neodym Magnet Processors Printed Wired Board, Q Printed Wired Board, Q Printed Wired Board, Q Total Material Recycling International Shipment Batteries Capacitors LCD-displays Getterpill - electrogun CRT glass Total Hazardous Waste International Shipment Total International Shipment Total Table C-7: Output fractions and destinations Page 33

35 C.3.3. SELECTED TRANSPORT AND STORAGE OPTIONS Type of Transport and Storage for Collected E-Waste Collection of e-waste can happen in different ways. The following is a summary of known and common options. However the final solution will have to be chosen by the facility and will be based on the availability of options in Uganda. Lattice boxes are a common way to store and transport small WEEE. One main advantage for this way of collection is that collected appliances remain in the same receptacle at the collection point, during transport, weighing input storage and the lattice boxes can be placed directly at the dismantling workstations. Reusable devices can be transported without being damaged and can be separated from devices for dismantling. Other options for collection are pallets or containers. Containers have the advantage that they can receive large quantities of devices but reusable devices get damaged due to the way of being packed within the container. For the transport of containers, a special container truck is required. Examples for collection of e-waste can be seen in Figure C-3. Collection in lattice boxes Collection on pallets Collection in containers Figure C-3: Different types of transport bundles for collected e-waste Page 34

36 Type of Transport and Storage for Outgoing Fractions For transport of outgoing fractions from the facility to the further recycling/ recovery the following options exist: 1. own truck for local transport 2. own container/ own container truck 3. container provided by purchaser 4. container - external transport costs In general, the way fractions are transported from the facility to the downstream processes determine the way they can be stored at the facility. Different storage options can be seen in Figure C-4. As collection often is done with an own closed van (see Figure D-2) the same vehicle can be used for transport of outgoing fractions to local purchasers, if there are free capacities (option1). Option 2 with an own container and own container truck, only makes sense for facilities with an input of at least 3,000 t/a as the investment is high and the container truck has to be kept in operation as well to justify the investment. Lattice boxes Container Plastic drums for hazardous fractions Bulk storage Figure C-4: Different types of storage for output fractions Page 35

37 A common option in Europe is that purchasers provide containers for storage and transport for some of the fractions. When fractions are collected from the dismantling facility for further recycling, the purchaser provides an empty container with the same vehicle transporting the fraction to his recycling facility (see Figure C-4). Normally, purchasers include transport costs and container rent in their offers. These types of logistics are economically viable for fractions produced in quantities of 100 t/a or more. For transport of fractions that have to be transported long distances or shipped internationally, shipping companies have to be commissioned. This means that fractions have to be stored at the facility in boxes or as a bulk storage and containers have to be loaded when ordered. According to international standards, hazardous fractions have to be stored in acid-resistant receptacles to avoid soil contamination by substances from hazardous components like batteries or capacitors. Fluorescent tubes should be stored in a lying position to avoid breakage and mercury contamination. Transport and storage solutions for output fractions concerning the current business plan are listed in Table C-8. Output fractions Type of Transport Type of Storage Aluminium own truck Collection Box Iron/ Steel own truck Bulk Storage Copper container - external transport costs Collection Box Neodym Magnet container - external transport costs Box for high valuable fractions Bronze/Brass container - external transport costs Collection Box Stainless Steel own truck Collection Box Plastics own truck Bulk Storage Cable without plugs container - external transport costs Collection Box Processors container - external transport costs Box for high valuable fractions Printed Wired Board, Q1 container - external transport costs Collection Box Printed Wired Board, Q2 container - external transport costs Collection Box Printed Wired Board, Q3 container - external transport costs Collection Box Motors/Inductors/Transformers container - external transport costs Collection Box Deflection coil container - external transport costs Collection Box Getterpill - electrogun container - external transport costs Plastic drum Mixed scrap container - external transport costs Bulk Storage Glass own truck Bulk Storage Residual waste own truck Bulk Storage Batteries container - external transport costs Plastic drum Capacitors container - external transport costs Plastic drum LCD-displays container - external transport costs Plastic drum Fluorescent Tubes Box for fluorescent tubes Printer Cartridges container - external transport costs Pallet Fluorescent powder Plastic drum CRT-glass container - external transport costs Bulk Storage Table C-8: Type of Transport and Storage per Fraction Type of transport and storage determine required space for storage (see chapter D.2.1). Page 36

38 PART D) LAYOUT, INVESTMENTS AND EQUIPMENT D.1. REQUIRED HUMAN RESOURCES D.1.1. ASSUMED BASIC DATA The dimensioning of the facility concerning human resources has been based on the data listed in Table D-1. In general it was assumed that one general manager will be needed to manage the company. Concerning department managers it was assumed that one department manager can coordinate up to 30 workers; this means that the calculation model proposes two department managers for more than 30 workers, three department managers for more than 60 workers and so on. As the assumed input is quite low still, no sales manager was considered, but instead it was supposed that sales and material acquisition issues will be covered by the general manager. It was assumed that 10% of all workers are skilled workers and 10% of all required human resources are administrative staff. Table D-1: Assumed basic data concerning staff composition and working hours The calculation of available working hours per employee has been based on information given by UCBC [2013]. According to this information and additional assumptions, the average working hours per employee was estimated to be almost 2,200 hours per year. D.1.2. REQUIRED STAFF Employees Quantities Calculation bases General Manager 1 Department Manager 1 per 30 dismantling workers Sales Manager 0 Skilled workers 10% of all workers Unskilled workers 90% of all workers Administrative Staff 10% of total staff Security 0 Drivers 1 per truck Co-Drivers 1 per truck Incidental wage costs 10% Saleries/a 12 Working hours per week 8 hs Working days per week 6 days Average sick leave per worker 5% Official Holidays per Year 10 days Holiday Entitlement per year 2 weeks Working days per year 275 days Annual working hours 2,196 hs According to the selected processing options for plant operation, the annual working hours listed in Table D-2 are required. More than 60% of required working hours are necessary for dismantling, about 30% for transport and logistics; CRT processing requires only about 5% of total required working hours. Due to the assumptions concerning time efficiency ( low within the first year and middle within the second year) as well as for the input-composition (higher share of CRTs within the second year of operation due to stock liquidation from B2B Page 37

39 sources), required working hours for the second year of operation are higher than for the other years. Dismantling Groups Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 smallweee 4,097 hs 8,876 hs 4,824 hs 5,511 hs 6,279 hs CRT 1,817 hs 3,948 hs 2,109 hs 2,354 hs 2,691 hs FPD 550 hs 1,030 hs 712 hs 873 hs 1,037 hs Total Dismantling 6,464 hs 13,854 hs 7,645 hs 8,738 hs 10,007 hs CRT Treatment 273 hs 888 hs 633 hs 706 hs 807 hs Cable Stripping Plastic Shredder Total Further Treatment 273 hs 888 hs 633 hs 706 hs 807 hs Weighing/ Take Over 418 hs 1,187 hs 996 hs 1,150 hs 1,342 hs Internal Logistics 1,011 hs 2,211 hs 1,242 hs 1,417 hs 1,622 hs Transport: Drivers 220 hs 736 hs 556 hs 644 hs 760 hs Transport: Co-Drivers 220 hs 736 hs 556 hs 644 hs 760 hs Total Transport and Logistics 1,868 hs 4,871 hs 3,350 hs 3,854 hs 4,484 hs Total Workers 8,605 hs 19,613 hs 11,627 hs 13,298 hs 15,298 hs Table D-2: Required working hours per year Required working hours for weighing/ take-over have been based on the assumed time requirements of 10 minutes per take-over procedure. It was assumed that on average 40 kg of e-waste will be delivered from individuals; from B2B-collection, 100 kg is the average quantity per weighing procedure. Required working hours for internal logistics are supposed to be 15% of required working hours for dismantling and further treatment. Working hours for transport are the result of transport calculations (chapter E.3.4). Required Workers [n] Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Dismantling small WEEE Dismantling CRT Dismantling FPD CRT Treatment Cable Stripping Plastic Shredder Weighing/ Take Over Internal Logistics Transport: Drivers Transport: Co-Drivers Total Table D-3: Required full-time equivalents Based on the results in Table D-2 and available working time per employee of 2,196 hours per year, between 3.7 and 8.5 full-time equivalents of workers are required (Table D-3). Together with managing and administrative staff, the facility will need a staff of seven to 12 persons during the initial five years of operation (Table D-4). Required Staff [n] Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 General Manager Department Manager Sales Manager Skilled workers Unskilled workers Administrative Staff Security Total Staff Table D-4: Selected staff composition Page 38

40 D.2. INFRASTRUCTURE AND EQUIPMENT D.2.1. REQUIRED SPACE Table D-5 gives an overview about the required space for the whole dismantling facility. Administration and sanitary rooms will at least require 95 m². This has been calculated based Required Space WEEE-receiving area 20 m² Management/ Administration 45 m² Recreation and sanitary rooms 30 m² Total Administration and Sanitary Rooms 95 m² Dismantling smallweee and FPD 100 m² Dismantling CRT 100 m² Additional Dismantling Space 50 m² Charging Stations Lift Truck Total Dismantling Area 250 m² CRT-treatment area 20 m² Cable Stripping area Plastic Shredder area Total Further Treatment 20 m² Input Storage 22 m² Output Storage 169 m² Storage Hazardous Fractions 22 m² Locked Storage 6 m² Total Indoor Storage 219 m² Open Shelter 63 m² Parking Area 20 m² Total Open Area 83 m² Total Indoor Area 584 m² Total Open Area 83 m² Total Required Area 667 m² on the specific space requirements listed in Table D-6 and the results concerning staff composition (Table D-4). The same procedure was used to calculate the required space for dismantling and further treatment. Additional dismantling space for logistics was set at 25% above the entire space for dismantling. As for the assumed input quantities, a lift truck is not necessary and no space for a charging station is required. Space for storage is required to buffer fluctuant input that cannot be treated immediately on the one hand, and for output fractions that have to be stored until specific lot sizes have been achieved, on the other hand. Output storage can be stored in the output storage or in open shelters; hazardous fractions have to be stored in a separate area that has to comply with higher requirements concerning floor sealing. For highly valuable fractions like processors, neodymium magnets etc. a locked storage is advised which can be included in the storage for hazardous fractions. Table D-5: Required space for the dismantling facility The input storage was set up on the condition to cover 2,000 kg of input, a specific storage weight of 178 kg/m³ and the possibility to be stored in one layer of collection boxes. Required space for storage has been calculated using the following assumptions and specific data: type of storage for the output fractions listed in Table C-8, different specific storage weights: from 100 kg/m³ for fractions like plastics, mixed scrap, fluorescent tubes up to more than 1,000 kg/m³ for the most heavy fractions like motors, batteries, etc. the possibility of two-layer storage for all fractions stored in collection boxes, one-layer storage for hazardous fractions and a maximum height of 2 m for bulk storage. It was assumed that the storage space has to cover at least the lot size for each fraction that is commercialized locally and regionally. For international shipment the possibility of mixed Page 39

41 lots (i.e. shipment of batteries together with printed circuit boards in one container) have been considered. D.2.2. REQUIRED EQUIPMENT General Description Key elements of the dismantling facility are the dismantling workstations, tools and further equipment for the dismantling workers (Figure D-1). The tables should have a height that permits workers to work in a standing position. Safety equipment like safety boots, work gloves, dust masks and safety glasses are essential. Figure D-1 shows a standard toolbox; included tools are sufficient for dismantling most of the equipment received. A cordless screwdriver should be part of the toolbox because it increases the dismantling efficiency significantly. For deeper dismantling (i.e. HDD) an additional toolbox including torx screwdrivers are required. Dismantling workstation, tools and safety equipment Dismantling working place Overall and safety boots Toolbox and Safety Equipment Figure D-1: Dismantling workstation, tools and safety equipment Page 40

42 For transporting collected e-waste to the facility and the output fractions produced to further recycling plants, vehicles are required. The type of vehicles depends on the amount, the input mix and the type of collection executed (see chapter C.3.3). For input up to 500 t/a, closed or open trucks as shown in Figure D-2 are the most adequate solution. For higher inputs, and a lot of own transport of output fractions, the use of a truck that can load containers or dumpsters should be considered. Internal logistics require hand pallet trucks. Forklift trucks facilitate loading, unloading and weighing and are necessary when fractions are stored in containers or in grid boxes in several layers. For storage logistics in more than one layer high-lift stacker as shown in Figure D-2 can be an alternative to a forklift truck. Equipment for transport and logistics Truck Forklift truck High-lift stacker (source: Figure D-2: Equipment for transport and logistics Hand pallet truck Type and extent of further treatment steps highly depend on purchasers for critical output fractions located at an adequate distance. Figure D-3 shows equipment for all further treatment steps that should be considered: a CRT-treatment station for the separation of leaded funnel glass from fluorescent powder and front glass a small crusher for smashing fractions like plastics for transport optimization a cable stripper for increasing the content of pure copper in the output, if mechanical cable recycling plants are located at a long distance to the facility mobile equipment for decontamination of mercury-containing lamps All these further treatment steps are essential to implement sustainable recycling practices, avoiding that hazardous substances might pollute the environment. Additionally, these Page 41

43 practices ensure that the percentage of hazardous fractions having to be transported for long distances - causing high transport costs - can be reduced significantly. In case the planned dismantling plant is the first in the region, the purchase of further treatment equipment can mean that hazardous fractions can be purchased from other future facilities, or decontamination services can be offered in the future. Equipment for further treatment steps CRT-treatment station Crusher Cable stripping machine Figure D-3: Equipment for further treatment steps Mobile lamp decontamination station Both for collection of e-waste, as well as for storage of fractions, appropriate receptacles are needed. The type of receptacles used depends on the practices in the country. Commonly used receptacles are pictured in Figure D-4. Page 42

44 Often used receptacles Grid boxes Pallets Acid proof barrels Figure D-4: Examples for commonly used receptacles Required Quantities and Investment Costs per Item According to the assumptions concerning input and processing, the equipment listed in Table D-6 is required to run the dismantling facility. Table D-6 further contains specific acquisition costs for the required items [UCPC, 2013]. Average life span indicated has been based on experiences in European dismantling facilities. Items Costs [/unit] Lifespan [a] Required space Required quantity Calculation bases WEEE-receiving and sorting area m² 1 total per facility Administrative Working Place (PC, table, chair) -1, m² 1 per administrative staff member Recreation and sanitary rooms m² per total staff member Dismantling Working station (table, chair) m² 1 per dismantling worker CRT-treatment unit -10, m² 1 total per facility Cable stripper -5, m² 0 total per facility Plastic Shredder -10, m² 0 total per facility Lift truck -14, m² 0 per 1000 t/a Input Truck -18, m² 1 per 1000 t/a Input Container (for transport) -2, m² 0 total per facility Working tools per dismantling worker HSE (shoes, helm, gloves, etc.) per worker Ventilator per total staff member Collection box per 100 t/a Input Palette per 100 t/a Input Scale -1, per 2000 t/a Input Pallet truck (internal transport) per 1000 t/a Input Table D-6: Specific space requirements and acquisition costs for infrastructure and equipment D.2.3. PROPOSED LAYOUT The proposed layout for the dismantling facility (Figure D-6, next page) has been developed based on practical dismantling experiences of the D.R.Z Dismantling and Recycling Centre in Vienna, Austria, and includes layout considerations by WorldLoop [2013]. Impressions of a visit at the WEEE-Center in Nairobi by a UNIDO delegation in July 2013 have been integrated. The proposed layout does not exactly correspond with the calculated space requirements. Furthermore it provides space for cable-stripping and crushing of plastics which was not considered in the calculations due to low quantities. The layout design intends to give an impression of the overall dimensions and workflow through the whole facility. As the business plan is based on the premise that an adequate Page 43

45 building will be provided by the government, layout and workflow have to be redesigned corresponding to the actual conditions of the estate. General aspects regarding the layout that should be considered: The spatial arrangement of the registration and weighing area is crucial to provide an efficient workflow. It should be located where it can be reached both by incoming streams and outgoing fractions. The required size of the area depends on the way e- waste is delivered and transported: delivery by individuals and/or handling with big trucks, forklift trucks, etc. Sufficient space for sorting e-waste should be considered when reuse activities are integrated. Depending on the expected fluctuations concerning the input quantities, the layout should include a sufficiently large input storage. It is important that dismantling workers can constantly take e-waste for dismantling from this input storage. In principle, the spatial arrangement of the different operational departments (dismantling, treatment of CRT-tubes, etc.) should follow the process flow. It should be avoided that intermediate fractions have to be transported long distances to the subsequent workstations. Dismantling workstations should be arranged in a way that input to be dismantled can be placed close to the dismantling workstations. The area surrounding the dismantling workstations should also provide enough space for boxes receiving the various output fractions. Furthermore, the dismantling department has to provide an area for intermediate storage of hazardous fractions, where dismantling workers can place batteries, capacitors etc. which were removed from the electronic devices, in receptacles appropriate to receive hazardous materials. Page 44

46 Figure D-5: Example for storage of hazardous fractions Full receptacles have to be transferred from this intermediate storage into a lockable storage for hazardous substances (Figure D-5). Following international quality standards, this storage space has to have a sealing that will ensure that any eventual leakage of hazardous substances cannot pollute the subsurface. Providing space for storing output fractions is a further crucial criteria to ensure an efficient workflow. The storage should be situated where it can be easily reached from the department producing relevant quantities. Some output fractions can be stored outdoors in open space, while some should be locked due to high economic value. The required space further depends on the available logistical equipment. Forklift trucks for example can lift grid boxes to be stored in up to three layers. This way required storage space can be significantly reduced. Page 45

47 Figure D-6: Proposed layout Page 46

48 D.3. REQUIRED INVESTMENTS D.3.1. ESTATE AND BUILDING The present business plan was calculated on the assumption that the estate and building are provided by the government. No extras investment costs for theestate and building have been considered. D.3.2. INVESTMENT FOR EQUIPMENT The current business plan is based on relatively low investment requirements of about 40,000 USD (Table D-7). Items Costs Required units acquisition [/unit] [number] costs Administrative Working Place (PC, table, chair) -1, ,000 Dismantling Working station (table, chair) CRT-treatment unit -10, ,000 Truck -18, ,000 Ventilator Collection box ,600 Palette Scale -1, ,190 Pallet truck (internal transport) ,000 Total -39,190 Table D-7: Calculated investment costs [USD] The highest investment amounts concern the purchase of a truck and a CRT-treatment unit. Further investments are required to equip the dismantling and administrative workstations, as well as provide a scale and logistical equipment. Page 47

49 PART E) OPERATIONAL REVENUES AND COSTS E.1. PURCHASE COSTS AND REVENUES E.1.1. EXPECTED PURCHASE COSTS According to the assumed input quantities and composition from different collection streams (see chapter C.2), and the purchase prices for e-waste devices listed in Table C-1, the following purchase costs have to be considered within the business plan (Table E-1). Appliance Group Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Small household appliances coffee Small household appliances cloths PC/ Server -13,453 /a -45,379 /a -31,074 /a -34,911 /a -39,316 /a Notebook -1,414 /a -4,114 /a -3,600 /a -4,371 /a -5,143 /a Printer/Scanner/Copier -604 /a -1,720 /a -1,556 /a -1,887 /a -2,244 /a IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) -175 /a -454 /a -474 /a -598 /a -722 /a Mobile phone (incl. recharger) CRT monitor 2,553 /a 12,826 /a 3,829 /a 2,769 /a 1,338 /a FPD monitor -200 /a -600 /a -500 /a -600 /a -700 /a Audio appliances (CD-/Radiorecorder) Video appliances (CD-/DVD-Player) CRT TV -2,096 /a -3,538 /a -6,551 /a -8,451 /a -11,137 /a FPD TV -78 /a -149 /a -235 /a -311 /a -394 /a Total -15,468 /a -43,127 /a -40,161 /a -48,360 /a -58,318 /a Table E-1: Expected Purchase Costs and Revenues for WEEE [USD/a] Table E-1 shows that almost 75% of all purchase costs have to be paid for PCs. Due to the assumption that for CRTs from private deliveries, reduced purchase prices have to be paid compared to the feasibility study [Blaser et al; 2013], and CRTs from B2B channels can be acquired without additional purchase costs, the purchase costs for CRTs are much lower than in the feasibility study. Even considering these assumptions, purchase costs are about 25% of all expected revenues. For this reason the ability to control purchase costs within certain limits will be crucial for a successful financial performance. E.1.2. REQUIRED RECYCLING FEES FROM PRODUCERS As the feasibility study [Blaser et al., 2013] already showed, the intrinsic value of CRTs and some other electronic devices do not cover the required efforts for sustainable recycling of these appliances. Thus, recycling fees paid by producers directly or via take-back systems are crucial to get a positive financial balance for the planned dismantling facility. According to the business plan calculations, recycling fees will be required to dismantle CRTmonitors and CRT-TVs, printers, scanners, copiers and IT accessories. For all other appliances, the fractions coming out of the dismantling should cover the efforts for the recycling chain covered by the facility (collection, treatment, transport and disposal). As CRTs have a large share within the expected input, the required recycling fees will be almost USD 15,000 for the whole first year of operation and grow up to more than USD 60,000 per year after five years of operation, as Table E-2 shows. Page 48

50 Appliance Group Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Small household appliances coffee Small household appliances cloths PC/ Server -9,720 /a -32,535 /a -22,410 /a -25,178 /a -28,350 /a Notebook -330 /a -960 /a -840 /a -1,020 /a -1,200 /a Printer/Scanner/Copier 1,817 /a 5,135 /a 4,661 /a 5,649 /a 6,715 /a IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) 476 /a 1,232 /a 1,288 /a 1,624 /a 1,960 /a Mobile phone (incl. recharger) CRT monitor 11,776 /a 43,232 /a 25,248 /a 26,704 /a 28,640 /a FPD monitor -40 /a -120 /a -100 /a -120 /a -140 /a Audio appliances (CD-/Radiorecorder) Video appliances (CD-/DVD-Player) CRT TV 10,841 /a 18,068 /a 32,522 /a 41,555 /a 54,203 /a FPD TV -338 /a -650 /a -1,014 /a -1,339 /a -1,690 /a Total 14,482 /a 33,402 /a 39,355 /a 47,875 /a 60,138 /a Table E-2: Required Recycling Fees from Producers [USD/a] Recycling fees have to cover between 15% and 25% of all revenues in order to get a positive financial balance under the identified circumstances. E.2. SALES REVENUES AND DOWNSTREAM COSTS E.2.1. PRICES/ COSTS PER TONS The calculation of expected revenues and disposal costs have been based on the assumptions listed in Table E-3. Output fractions Price/ Costs per ton* Transport Costs Price/ Costs per ton** Aluminium 1,000 /ton -9 /ton 991 /ton Iron/ Steel 250 /ton -9 /ton 241 /ton Copper 4,000 /ton -286 /ton 3,714 /ton Neodym Magnet 5,350 /ton -501 /ton 4,849 /ton Bronze/Brass 2,000 /ton -286 /ton 1,714 /ton Stainless Steel 250 /ton -9 /ton 241 /ton Plastics 0 /ton -9 /ton -9 /ton Cable without plugs 1,700 /ton -286 /ton 1,414 /ton Processors 60,000 /ton -286 /ton 59,714 /ton Printed Wired Board, Q1 9,800 /ton -286 /ton 9,514 /ton Printed Wired Board, Q2 2,700 /ton -286 /ton 2,414 /ton Printed Wired Board, Q3 700 /ton -286 /ton 414 /ton Motors/Inductors/Transformers 400 /ton -286 /ton 114 /ton Deflection coil 1,000 /ton -286 /ton 714 /ton Getterpill - electrogun -1,000 /ton -200 /ton -1,200 /ton Mixed scrap 150 /ton -286 /ton -136 /ton Glass 0 /ton -9 /ton -9 /ton Residual waste 0 /ton -9 /ton -9 /ton Batteries 350 /ton -200 /ton 150 /ton Capacitors -1,300 /ton -286 /ton -1,586 /ton LCD-displays -1,000 /ton -286 /ton -1,286 /ton Fluorescent Tubes 0 /ton Printer Cartridges -100 /ton -200 /ton -300 /ton Fluorescent powder 0 /ton CRT-glass -100 /ton -200 /ton -300 /ton *without transport costs from the dismantling plant to recycling plants ** including transport costs from the dismantling plant to recycling plants Table E-3: Expected Sales Revenues and Disposal Costs per Ton [USD/ton] Page 49

51 E.2.2. SALES REVENUES Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda The main share of the revenues comes from the commercialization of fractions. According to the expected input sales, revenues will be almost 53,000 USD during the first year of operation, more than 170,000 USD during the second year and then grow up from 122,000 USD up to almost 160,000 USD after five years of operation (Table E-4). Table E-4: Expected Sales Revenues [USD/a] Sales Revenues [USD/a] Fractions Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Aluminium 2,579 8,329 6,071 6,902 7,896 Iron/ Steel 5,027 16,353 11,792 13,390 15,268 Stainless Steel Plastics Glass Total Material Recycling Local 7,636 24,781 17,932 20,370 23,252 Copper 3,336 11,878 7,335 7,930 8,662 Bronze/Brass Cable without plugs 4,313 13,782 10,215 11,657 13,393 Motors/Inductors/Transformers 1,023 3,412 2,346 2,607 2,947 Deflection coil 2,138 6,883 4,996 5,602 6,437 Mixed scrap Total Material Recycling Regional Cross-National 11,039 36,663 25,450 28,449 32,195 Neodym Magnet Processors 5,646 18,696 13,128 14,856 16,800 Printed Wired Board, Q1 23,494 76,792 55,119 62,792 71,383 Printed Wired Board, Q2 3,022 9,612 7,137 8,082 9,320 Printed Wired Board, Q3 1,474 4,576 3,527 4,028 4,687 Total Material Recycling International Shipment 33, ,097 79,207 90, ,571 Batteries Total Hazardous Waste International Shipment Total 52, , , , ,301 As Table E-4 demonstrates very clearly, more than 60% of all sales revenues come from fractions that have to be shipped overseas, mainly printed circuit boards. Only 15% to 20% of sales revenues come from fractions sold on the local market and further 20% from fractions transported to neighboring countries. E.2.3. EXTERNAL TRANSPORT COSTS The sales situation described in chapter E.2.2 leads to comparatively high logistic costs for fractions having to be transported to neighboring countries or overseas. The following Table E-5 contains all expected external transport costs. These costs include all expenses that have to be paid for agencies to transport fractions to neighboring countries on the road and for further shipment overseas. They do not include transport costs caused by own transport logistics, which are calculated as operational costs within chapter E3.4. The output of quite a few fractions within one year is too low to fill a whole container for shipment. The business plan calculation is based on the assumption that fractions with a quantity lower than that to fill a 20ft-container can be shipped together with some other fractions. Page 50

52 External Transport Costs [USD/a] Fractions Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Copper Bronze/Brass Cable without plugs ,316-1,717-1,959-2,251 Motors/Inductors/Transformers ,437-1,676-1,862-2,105 Deflection coil ,966-1,427-1,601-1,839 Mixed scrap ,311-1,032-1,203-1,397 Total Material Recycling Regional Cross-National -2,730-8,883-6,379-7,194-8,214 Printer Cartridges Total Hazardous Waste Regional Cross-National Total Regional Cross-National Destination -2,781-9,026-6,508-7,351-8,401 Neodym Magnet Processors Printed Wired Board, Q ,239-1,607-1,831-2,081 Printed Wired Board, Q , Printed Wired Board, Q ,868-1,440-1,644-1,913 Total Material Recycling International Shipment -1,645-5,252-3,892-4,432-5,096 Batteries Capacitors LCD-displays Getterpill - electrogun CRT glass -6,631-18,129-16,870-19,890-24,087 Total Hazardous Waste International Shipment -6,862-18,824-17,441-20,563-24,875 Total International Shipment -8,507-24,076-21,333-24,996-29,971 Total -11,288-33,102-27,841-32,347-38,372 Table E-5: Calculated External Transport Costs [USD/a] Between 56% and 65% of all external transport costs have to be paid for shipment of CRTglass. All external costs reduce sales revenues by about 20%. E.2.4. DISPOSAL COSTS Disposal/ treatment costs for hazardous fractions are dominated by treatment costs for CRTglass, which cause about 85% of all disposal costs as shown in Table E-6. Disposal costs for other fractions form a minor financial impact on the business plan. Table E-6: Calculated Disposal Costs [USD/a] Disposal Costs [USD/a] Fractions Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Printer Cartridges Total Hazardous Waste Regional Cross-National Capacitors ,584-1,134-1,278-1,458 LCD-displays Getterpill - electrogun CRT glass -3,315-9,065-8,435-9,945-12,044 Total Hazardous Waste International Shipment -4,089-11,414-10,329-12,160-14,631 Total International Shipment -4,089-11,414-10,329-12,160-14,631 Total -4,114-11,485-10,394-12,238-14,725 Page 51

53 E.2.5. NET SALES REVENUES The following Table E-7 contains all expected sales revenues from commercialization of fractions reduced by external transport and shipment costs and by disposal costs. Net Sales Revenues [USD/a] Fractions Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Aluminium 2,579 8,329 6,071 6,902 7,896 Iron/ Steel 5,027 16,353 11,792 13,390 15,268 Stainless Steel Plastics Glass Total Material Recycling Local 7,636 24,781 17,932 20,370 23,252 Residual waste Total Disposal Local Total Local Destination 7,636 24,781 17,932 20,370 23,252 Copper 3,097 11,030 6,811 7,364 8,043 Bronze/Brass Cable without plugs 3,588 11,466 8,498 9,698 11,142 Motors/Inductors/Transformers Deflection coil 1,527 4,916 3,569 4,002 4,598 Mixed scrap Total Material Recycling Regional Cross-National 8,309 27,780 19,072 21,254 23,981 Printer Cartridges Total Hazardous Waste Regional Cross-National Total Regional Cross-National Destination 8,233 27,566 18,877 21,019 23,701 Neodym Magnet Processors 5,619 18,607 13,065 14,785 16,720 Printed Wired Board, Q1 22,809 74,553 53,512 60,961 69,302 Printed Wired Board, Q2 2,703 8,595 6,381 7,226 8,334 Printed Wired Board, Q ,709 2,088 2,384 2,774 Total Material Recycling International Shipment 32, ,845 75,315 85,661 97,475 Batteries Capacitors ,933-1,384-1,559-1,778 LCD-displays ,196 Getterpill - electrogun CRT glass -9,946-27,194-25,305-29,835-36,131 Total Hazardous Waste International Shipment -10,869-29,988-27,566-32,480-39,223 Total International Shipment 21,249 74,857 47,749 53,181 58,251 Total 37, ,203 84,559 94, ,205 Table E-7: Calculated Net Sales Revenues for Commercialization of Fractions [USD/a] Net sales revenues are between 350 USD and 450 USD per ton input depending on the share of CRTs in the input. This means net sales revenues of almost 37,000 USD/a during the first year of operation and growing up to about 100,000 USD/a. Commercialization of printed circuit boards is the main income source. The sales of these fractions contribute 32,000 USD/a during the first year, and almost 100,000 USD/a after five years of operation. Revenues from international shipments are reduced by 38%-46% due to high external transport and disposal costs for CRT-glass. Thus, net sales revenues from fractions commercialized overseas cover about 50% of all net sales revenues. Fractions commercialized locally and within a regional cross-national destination contribute about 25% to entire net sales revenues. Iron/steel, cables, aluminum and copper are the main income sources for fractions sold locally and to neighboring countries. Page 52

54 A striking detail concerning regional cross-national destination is the commercialization of mixed scrap. Mixed scrap comprises all composite materials consisting of different metals and plastics that cannot be further separated into pure materials without mechanical crushing and separation. Due to a lack of recycling facilities in Uganda, the business plan calculated a cross-national destination for this fraction, but transport costs are higher than possible sales revenues for mixed scrap. Thus, a local disposal for this fraction should be considered as an alternative. E.3. OPERATIONAL COSTS E.3.1. STAFF COSTS According to UCPC [2013], salaries listed in Table E-8 have to be paid to different staff levels. Workers and administrative staff get between USD 120 and USD 140 per month, the salaries for department manager and sales manager can be assumed to be USD 500 per month and USD 1,000 for the general manager. According to additional information concerning incidental wage costs of 10% [UCPC, 2013] and the assumption that 12 wages per year are paid to employees, personnel costs are between USD 1,584 and USD 1,848 per year for workers and between USD 6,600 and USD 13,200 for managing staff. Employees Salary [brutto/month] Personal costs [per employee/a] General Manager -1,000-13,200 Department Manager ,600 Sales Manager ,600 Skilled workers ,848 Unskilled workers ,584 Administrative Staff ,848 Table E-8: Salaries and personnel costs per employee [USD/a] Based on the selected staff composition (Table D-4) between USD 28,248 and USD 36,168 per year are the expenses for staff costs during the first five years of operation (Table E-9). Staff Costs [USD/a] Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 General Manager -13,200 /a -13,200 /a -13,200 /a -13,200 /a -13,200 /a Department Manager -6,600 /a -6,600 /a -6,600 /a -6,600 /a -6,600 /a Sales Manager Skilled workers -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a Unskilled workers -4,752 /a -12,672 /a -6,336 /a -7,920 /a -9,504 /a Administrative Staff -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a -1,848 /a Security Total Staff -28,248 /a -36,168 /a -29,832 /a -31,416 /a -33,000 /a Table E-9: Staff costs [USD/a] Page 53

55 E.3.2. INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS Rental Costs For the present business plan, it was considered that the estate and building for the dismantling facility will be provided by the government. The business plan was based on the further assumption that the operator for the facility does not have to pay rental costs during the initial two years of operation. After two years of operation, costs of USD 10 per year and m² have been considered to be charged on the total indoor area of 581 m² (see chapter D.2.1). The considerations result in rental costs of USD 5,815 per year. These very low rental costs have been assumed due to the fact that sustainable e-waste management is a new business of strategic importance for the country and a positive financial performance can be reached only by considering additional recycling fees. Electricity Expenses for electricity have been based on the specific electricity consumption in the dismantling facility D.R.Z Dismantling and Recycling Centre in Vienna/ Austria (40 kwh/m².a). According to prices of USD 0.20 per kwh having to be paid for electricity in Uganda, expenses will be USD 3,852 per year. CMR Infrastructure Expenses for cleaning, maintenance and repair of infrastructure have been calculated using the experiences of the D.R.Z again. USD 3 per m² and year was the specific value used for the calculation, what leads to expenses of USD 1,445 per year for CMR infrastructure. Business Liability Insurance and Tax Due to lack of information from Uganda, business expenses for liability insurance and taxes have been estimated to be USD 1,500 per year. E.3.3. EQUIPMENT Annual costs for equipment are expenses for low -value assets. Purchase prices for all items listed in Table D-6 with a life span of one year are covered by the calculated annual equipment costs (working tools and HSE - shoes, helmets, gloves, etc.). Required expenses vary between USD 1,500 per year and nearly USD 3,200 per year (Table E-10). Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Working tools , ,200-1,200 HSE (shoes, helm, gloves, etc.) , ,043 Total -1,496-3,141-1,645-2,094-2,243 Table E-10: Calculation of costs for low value assests per year [USD/a] Expenses for operating supplies have been ignored for the business plan calculation. According to the experiences of the D.R.Z, expenses for operating supplies are very low for dismantling activities and can be neglected. Expenses for required equipment with a lifespan of more than one year have been considered in the investment plan (chapter D.3.2) as well as annual depreciation costs (chapter E.3.6). Page 54

56 Page 55

57 E.3.4. TRANSPORT COSTS Fuel Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda Calculations of expected fuel costs per year have been based on the assumption that all following transport is conducted using own vehicles: all collected WEEE from organizations, companies or collection points are transported to the facility (except the quantities delivered at the facilities by others) all fractions that are commercialized on the local market Further general assumptions have been made as followed: Capacity of own trucks: 2 t fuel consumption: 10 l/100km fuel price: 1 USD/litre number of transport trips per day 2 trips required time per trip 4,0 hours kilometers driven per trip 40 km These assumptions result in fuel costs of USD 220 per year within the first year and grow up to USD 760 per year after five years of operation (Table E-11). Local Transported Quantities Year1 Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 WEEE Purchase 70 t 240 t 180 t 210 t 250 t Commercialisation Fractions 41 t 127 t 98 t 112 t 130 t Total 111 t 367 t 278 t 322 t 380 t Required trips per year 55 trips 184 trips 139 trips 161 trips 190 trips Required own truck hours per year 220 hs/a 736 hs/a 556 hs/a 644 hs/a 760 hs/a Required own trucks 0,10 0,34 0,25 0,29 0,35 Kilometres driven per year km km km km km Fuel costs per year -220 /y -736 /y -556 /y -644 /y -760 /y Table E-11: Calculation of fuel costs per year [USD/a] Motor Vehicle Insurance and Tax Expenses for motor vehicle insurance and tax have been set with USD 300 per year due to lack of further information. CMR Vehicles Maintenance costs for vehicles have been set with USD 300 per year due to lack of further information. Page 56

58 E.3.5. ADMINISTRATION COSTS Expenses for administration have been estimated as listed in Table E-12. Profit/ Loss - Forecast Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Travel Costs -2,500-2,500-2,500-2,500-2,500 Office Supplies, Postal and Bank Charges Telecommunication/ Internet Consulting Services Marketing and Public Relations Permissions and Quality Management Total Administration Costs -4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800 Table E-12: Estimated administration costs per year [USD/a] E.3.6. DEPRECIATION Depreciation of Infrastructure As the estate and building are rented according to the business plan, it is assumed that no depreciation costs for the estate and building occurs. Depreciation of Equipment and Vehicles Depreciation costs within the first five years of operation are USD 2,400 per year due to the aquired equipment and the expected lifespan for each item listed in Table E-13. Items Costs Required units acquisition Lifespan [a] [/unit] [number] costs Depreciation Administrative Working Place (PC, table, chair) -1, , Dismantling Working station (table, chair) CRT-treatment unit -10, , Truck -18, , Ventilator Collection box , Palette Scale -1, , Pallet truck (internal transport) , Total -2,040 Table E-13: Calculation of depreciation costs for equipment [USD/a] Page 57

59 F.1. Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda PART F) PROFIT AND LOSS FORECAST AND INTERPRETATION REQUIRED RECYCLING FEES Under the current framework conditions, a balanced financial performance cannot be reached without additional revenues from recycling fees. As a following step, the business plan calculation tool was used to calculate the required recycling fees with respect to remaining profits for each appliance group. The modeling has been conducted as followed: Using the business plan calculation tool, profit and loss forecasts have been calculated assuming that the input consists of one of the appliance groups concerned only for each modeling step. The input quantities have been assumed as in the business plan calculations for mixed input. Within a second modeling step, required recycling fees or remaining profits have been varied until the profit and loss forecasts led to a net profit after five years of operation of about 35,000 USD. The same modeling step has been repeated with all appliance groups concerned. The resulting required recycling fees and remaining profits in USD/t are listed in Table F-1. Appliance Group Required Recycling Fee Remaining Profit [USD/t] [USD/t] PC/ Server 450 Notebook 300 Printer/Scanner/Copier IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) CRT monitor FPD monitor 40 CRT TV FPD TV 260 Required Recycling Fees over All Appliance Groups Table F-1: Required Recycling Fees/ Remaining Profits USD/t] Table F-1 shows that recycling fees as additional revenues are required to achieve a balanced financial performance concerning printers/ scanners/ copiers, IT accessories, CRT- TVs and CRT-monitors. The highest amount is required for CRT-TVs (495 USD/t) followed by CRT-monitors (394 USD/t). The recycling of PC/ servers, notebooks, FPD-TVs and FPD-monitors has a positive financial performance. The intrinsic value of these appliance groups is sufficient to cover all operational costs; a profit up to 450 USD/t can be achieved. Concerning the assumed input composition in the fifth year of operation (see Figure C-1), recycling fees of 200 USD/t over all appliance groups concerned are required to achieve a balanced financial performance with the dismantling facility under the current framework conditions. Page 58

60 Page 59

61 F.2. Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda PROFIT AND LOSS FORECAST The profit and loss forecast, listed in Table F-2 shows the expected revenues and costs for the initial five years of operation, according to the required framework conditions. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 [USD] [USD] [USD] [USD] [USD] Funds Remuneration Take-Back-System 14,482 33,402 39,355 47,875 60,138 Sales Revenues 52, , , , ,301 Total Revenues 67, , , , ,439 Purchase Costs -15,468-43,127-40,161-48,360-58,318 Disposal Costs -4,114-11,485-10,394-12,238-14,725 External Transport Costs -11,288-33,102-27,841-32,347-38,372 Total Purchase and Downstream Costs -30,870-87,715-78,396-92, ,414 Netto Revenues 36, ,477 83,753 94, ,024 Management -19,800-19,800-19,800-19,800-19,800 Administration -1,848-1,848-1,848-1,848-1,848 Workers -6,600-14,520-8,184-9,768-11,352 Total Staff Costs -28,248-36,168-29,832-31,416-33,000 Rental Costs -5,044-5,044-5,044 Electricity -4,035-4,035-4,035-4,035-4,035 CMR Infrastructure -1,513-1,513-1,513-1,513-1,513 Business Liability Insurance and Tax -1,500-1,500-1,500-1,500-1,500 Total Infrastructure Costs -7,048-7,048-12,092-12,092-12,092 Low Value Assests and Operating Supplies -1,496-3,141-1,645-2,094-2,243 Total Equipment -1,496-3,141-1,645-2,094-2,243 Fuel Motor Vehicle Insurance and Tax CMR Vehicles Total Transport Costs ,332-1,152-1,244-1,356 Travel Costs -2,500-2,500-2,500-2,500-2,500 Office Supplies, Postal and Bank Charges Telecommunication/ Internet Consulting Services Marketing and Public Relations Permissions and Quality Management Total Administration Costs -4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800-4,800 Depreciation Infrastructure Depreciation Equipment and Vehicles -2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040 Total Depreciation -2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040-2,040 Total Costs -44,452-54,529-51,560-53,685-55,530 Operating Result -8,320 62,948 32,193 40,400 51,494 Investments -39,190 Operating Result + Investments -47,510 62,948 32,193 40,400 51,494 Table F-2: Profit and Loss Forecast [USD/a] According to the assumed input and framework conditions, revenues are fed by the sales of output fractions (75%) and recycling fees (25%). For e-waste input quantities of about 300 t/a, revenues of more than 200,000 USD/a can be achieved. Half of these revenues are eaten up by purchase-, disposal- and external transport costs. 30%-35% of these costs are due to high shipment and disposal costs for CRT glass to be treated overseas. Shipment Page 60

62 and disposal costs for CRT glass (10,000-36,000 USD/a) are almost as high as the calculated remuneration from recycling fees (15,000-60,000 USD/a). Operational costs are 44,000 USD/a in the first year of operation, growing to about 55,000 USD/a after five years of operation. The highest share of operational costs (60%-65%) has to be spent on staff costs. Infrastructure costs are the second highest consumer of operational costs: 12%-15% of operational costs during the first two years, and 20%-22% afterwards. Due to the assumed framework conditions, they are comparatively low. If the estate and building had to be rented without the assumed governmental support, rental costs would be significantly higher. This also applies to the calculated investment costs. As the estate and building can be rented, the business plan does not have to consider construction costs. Calculated investment costs of almost 40,000 USD have been earned by the net income balance after three years already. Due to this fact, depreciation costs are of minor importance: Provisions in the amount of 2,000 USD/a have to be considered as operational costs. Annual costs for equipment and local transport costs are of minor importance compared to other cost factors. However, it has to be remarked that calculated transport costs only include transportation of collected WEEE and locally commercialized fractions. Calculations including a passenger car and fuel costs for local trips concerning meetings and negotiations would lead to higher transport costs. Due to missing correlations with other cost factors in the business plan calculation model, administration costs had to be based on assumptions. The estimated share of 8%-10% of all operational costs for administration can give a rough scale for expenses that have to be provided for the business administration. Furthermore, administration costs will depend a lot on the need fornegotiations with purchasers of output fractions in neighboring countries and overseas, as almost half of the calculated administration costs are travel costs. In case shipment of fractions requires extensive negotiations, administration costs will consume a higher share of operational costs. Overall the profit and loss forecast demonstrates a perspective that after five years of facility operation, separate collection and dismantling of e-waste in Kampala can achieve revenues of more than 200,000 USD/a, with half of these revenues having to be spent on purchase-, disposal and external transport costs, with 25% to spent on operational costs of running the facility and with another 25%, or up to 50,000 USD/a, left as a positive operating result. This applies to collecting and dismantling 300 tons of e-waste per year and considering the assumed framework conditions (see chapter B.3.2). Page 61

63 F.3. CALCULATED BREAK-EVEN Break-even has been calculated in a simplified way. Calculation steps have been conducted as follows: Based on the operating result including investment, an account balance without credit costs was calculated deducting provisions for depreciation. Credit costs and savings have been calculated on this account balance without credit costs. According to UCPC [2013], the following amounts for interests have been used: 20% on credits and 5% on savings. A simplified calculation has been conducted assuming that all interests have to be paid at the end of the year. Net income before taxes has been calculated based on the operating result including investments reducing calculated credit costs. Taxes on earnings have been calculated based on the net income before taxes: 30% according to UCPC [2013]. The bank account balance including credit costs is the amount of money that will be in the bank account if no additional money exceeding operational costs is withdrawn. The freely available money is the amount that can be seen as the accumulated profit. This position was calculated by reducing allowances for investments (i.e. depreciation) of the account balance. The result of the above described calculation steps can be seen in Table F-3. According to this simplified calculation, a positive account balance can be achieved after three years of operation. Considering that allowances have to be built, profit can be taken out of the company after fou years of operation. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 [USD] [USD] [USD] [USD] [USD] Operating Result + Investments -47,510 62,948 32,193 40,400 51,494 Credit Costs -9,094-10,913-5,403-2,325 0 Net Income Before Taxes -56,604 52,036 26,790 38,076 51,494 Taxes 0-15,611-8,037-11,423-15,448 Net Income After Taxes -56,604 36,425 18,753 26,653 36,046 Account Balance (without credit costs) -45,470-54,564-27,013-11,623 14,745 Credit Costs/ Interests on Savings -9,094-10,913-5,403-2, Repayment of Credit/ Profit 0 38,464 20,793 28,693 38,085 Bank Account Balance (including credit costs) -54,564-27,013-11,623 14,745 53,568 Allowances -2,040-4,079-6,119-8,158-10,198 Remaining Profit -56,604-31,092-17,741 6,587 43,370 Table F-3: Break-Even Calculation [USD/a, USD] F.4. MODELING DIFFERENT FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS Based on the calculated profit and loss forecast, two different modeling steps have been conducted. The first modeling step analyzed the impact of modified framework conditions on the operating result and the net income after taxes assuming the same recycling fees calculated in the baseline scenario. Within a second modeling step for two scenarios, the recycling fees have been re-calculated, getting similar results for the financial performance as in the baseline scenario. Page 62

64 Page 63

65 [USD/a] Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda F.4.1. MODELING FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS The following scenarios have been chosen for modeling: B0 = Baseline scenario: B0 is the profit and loss forecast as calculated in chapter F.2. S1a = Scenario without recycling fees: S1 is a profit and loss forecast based on B0 but calculated without revenues from recycling fees. S1b = Scenario without support for estate/ building: S2 is a profit and loss forecast based on B0. Unlike the baseline scenario in scenario S1b, the estate and building have to be rented on the property market. Due to missing further information, rental costs have been estimated at 25 USD/m² and year. S1c = Scenario including funding for investment: S1c is a profit and loss forecast based on B0. Unlike the baseline scenario in S1c, investments do not have be financed by a credit loan but are funded by a non-repayable grant. S1d = Scenario assuming favorable disposal conditions for CRT-glass: S1d is a profit and loss forecast based on B0. The difference to B0 is that in scenario S1d CRTglass does not to have shipped overseas, but an environmentally sound possibility for final disposal of CRT glass in Uganda can be found. It was assumed that 25 USD/t have to be paid for local disposal of CRT glass. S1e = Scenario S1b + S1d: Scenario S1e is a scenario that contains the framework conditions both of scenario S1b and S1d: local disposal for CRT glass and no support for estate/ building by the government. The modeling results are shown in Figure F-1 and Figure F ,000 Operating Results with Different Framework Conditions 75,000 50,000 B0-Baseline Scenario S1a-without recycling fees S1b-without support for estate/ building 25,000 S1c-funding for investment 0-25,000 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Figure F-1: Operating Results with Different Framework Conditions S1d-local disposal option for CRT-glass S1e-Scenario 1b + 1d Page 64

66 [USD/a] Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda 75,000 50,000 25,000 0 Net Income After Taxes with Different Framework Conditions B0-Baseline Scenario S1a-without recycling fees S1b-without support for estate/ building -25,000-50,000-75,000 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 S1c-funding for investment S1d-local disposal option for CRT-glass S1e-Scenario 1b + 1d Figure F-2: Net Income after Taxes with Different Framework Conditions The modeling shows that missing recycling fees (S1a) have dramatic consequences both on the operating result and the net income after taxes. In this scenario, a positive financial result can be achieved only in year two due to favorable composition of e-waste (more PCs because of a higher share of B2B-collection). When the estate and building are not provided by the government (S1b), operating results are about 5,000 USD and the net income after taxes about 10,000 USD below the results of the baseline scenario. Within five years of operation, a positive account balance cannot be achieved. Funding for investment (S1c) does not influence the operating result and has low influence on the net income after taxes, but a positive account balance can be achieved already after one year of operation. The most significant effect on the financial performance can be achieved if CRT glass can be disposed of in Uganda (S1d). Modeling this scenario results in financial results up to 75% better than in the baseline scenario. If then the estate and building are not provided by the government (S1e) the financial results are 10-15% lower than in scenario S1d. Page 65

67 F.4.2. MODELING RECYCLING FEES In the second modeling step, the profit and loss forecast for two scenarios have been calculated. The recycling fees have been adapted so that the profit and loss forecast led to similar results concerning operating result and net income after taxes as in the baseline scenario. The following scenarios have been chosen: B0 = Baseline scenario: B0 is the profit and loss forecast as calculated in chapter F.2. S2a = Scenario S1b + S1d and adapted recycling fees: Scenario S2a calculated a profit and loss forecast based on a local option for disposal of CRT glass as in scenario S1d, and assumed that the estate and building have to be rented on the property market without support of the government. S2b = Scenario S1c + S1d and adapted recycling fees: Scenario S2a calculated a profit and loss forecast including the local option for disposal of CRT glass as in scenario S2a, but assumed that the estate and building are provided by the government for free during the first two years of operation and can be rented for 10 USD/m² per year afterwards. As in scenario S1c, the profit and loss forecast in scenario S2b is based on the assumption that required investments can be financed by a non-repayable grant. The results are listed in Table F-4. In scenario S2a, the required recycling fees for CRTmonitors and CRT-TVs can be reduced by about 20% due to the local option for disposal of CRT-glass. The required recycling fee over all appliances is reduced from 200 USD/t to 137 USD/t. Required Recycling Fees (+)/ Remaining Profit (-) Table F-4: Modeling Results for Recycling Fees in Different Scenarios The best news is the results for scenario S2b. In case that B0 S2a S2b [USD/t] [USD/t] [USD/t] PC/ Server 450 /t 450 /t 510 /t Notebook 300 /t 300 /t 380 /t Printer/Scanner/Copier -395 /t -395 /t -315 /t IT accessories (mix keyboard, mouse) -280 /t -280 /t -195 /t Mobile phone (incl. recharger) 0 /t 0 /t 0 /t CRT monitor -320 /t -246 /t -95 /t FPD monitor 40 /t 40 /t 120 /t CRT TV -495 /t -381 /t -200 /t FPD TV 260 /t 260 /t 340 /t Recycling Fees over All Appliances Groups -200 /t -137 /t 0 /t there is an environmentally sound solution for local disposal of CRT glass available in Uganda, the estate and building for the recycling plant can be provided by the government and initial investment for infrastructure and equipment are funded by a non-repayable grant the dismantling plant can be operated without additional recycling fees. Remaining profit from the recycling of PCs, notebooks, FPD monitors and TV sets are able to compensate the negative financial balance from recycling CRT TVs, CRT monitors and some other appliance groups. Page 66

68 F.5. Business plan for an e-waste treatment facility in Uganda CONCLUSIONS The feasibility study conducted by Blaser et al. [2013] already demonstrated the main challenges for implementing and operating a manual dismantling facility for e-waste in Kampala: Relatively high purchase costs have to be paid to get the available e-waste as input for the dismantling facility, even for devices, whose recycling causes higher costs than generate revenues. Almost 35% of all operational costs have to be accounted for purchasing e-waste. Due to the geographical position of Uganda as a landlocked country and missing recycling options for a lot of produced output fractions, more than 55% of the produced output has to be transported long distances to neighboring countries or shipped overseas for further recycling or final disposal. This results in disposal costs and international transport cost that eat up more than 25% of potential revenues. Among all fractions, international shipment and disposal for CRT glass has the most significant effect on the financial performance. Due the expected high share of CRT devices, almost 40% of the output is expected to be CRT glass. The calculated business plan could show that a manual dismantling facility can be implemented and operated under the current conditions without additional funds, if recycling fees of USD 200 per ton (calculated over all appliance groups) can be acquired from a take-back-system or directly from the producers, the estate and building for the facility can be provided by the government or any other body without required additional investment for infrastructure, the facility can be rented for free during the first two years of operation. Under these framework conditions, positive operating result and net income can be achieved already in the second year of operation. If all investments have to be raised as credit, it will take four years to reimburse this credit from the profit. Afterwards, the dismantling facility can yield a profit of about USD 20,000 to 30,000 per year. Thus, dismantling of e-waste operated in a sustainable manner can raise green jobs, under the current conditions it will not be a big business yielding high profits for investors. Against this background, the operator s model (see chapter A.3 for the different options) should be chosen carefully. From our point of view, an operational form of organization and ownership should be chosen that focuses on employment and ecological responsibility as part of the company s identity. Taking into account that the transport and disposal costs for CRT glass will be almost as high as the calculated remunerations from recycling fees, strongest effort should be put on identifying environmentally sound options in Uganda for recycling or disposal of CRT glass. Modeling different framework conditions within the profit and loss forecast clearly showed that local solutions for CRT glass would have the most significant effect on the financial performance of the dismantling facility. Assuming local environmentally sound disposal of CRT glass, the possibility of funding for investment as a non-repayable grant and and a public-private partnership, where the government provides the estate and building and charges rental costs only after two years of operation the profit and loss forecast reveals a positive financial performance without getting recycling fees as additional revenues. Under these optimized framework conditions, the intrinsic value of appliances like PCs or FPD monitors/tvs are able even to finance recycling costs for devices like CRTs. Page 67

69 PART G) ANNEX G.1. LIST OF TABLES Table A-1: Summarized P&L-forecast for a manual dismantling facility in Kampala, Uganda... 3 Table A-1: WEEE categories according to the EU directive on WEEE [WASSWA, SCHLUEP, 2008]... 9 Table A-2: Output fractions from manual dismantling plants and further destinations...13 Table B-1: Environmental laws related to e-waste management [WASSWA, SCHLUEP, 2008]...17 Table B-2: International conventions and guidelines related e-waste managment [Wasswa, Schluep, 2008]...18 Table B-3: Important Stakeholders and their Role for the Facility...22 Table C-1: Assumed purchase prices for the different input streams [USD/piece]...28 Table C-2: Expected input divided per collection schemes...28 Table C-3: Expected composition of e-waste per collection scheme...29 Table C-4: Selected Process Options...31 Table C-5: Selected Efficiencies...31 Table C-6: Identified downstream options for the output fractions...32 Table C-7: Output fractions and destinations...33 Table C-8: Type of Transport and Storage per Fraction...36 Table D-1: Assumed basic data concerning staff composition and working hours...37 Table D-2: Required working hours per year...38 Table D-3: Required full-time equivalents...38 Table D-4: Selected staff composition...38 Table D-5: Required space for the dismantling facility...39 Table D-6: Specific space requirements and acquisition costs for infrastructure and equipment...43 Table D-7: Calculated investment costs [USD]...47 Table E-1: Expected Purchase Costs and Revenues for WEEE [USD/a]...48 Table E-2: Required Recycling Fees from Producers [USD/a]...49 Table E-3: Expected Sales Revenues and Disposal Costs per Ton [USD/ton]...49 Table E-4: Expected Sales Revenues [USD/a]...50 Table E-5: Calculated External Transport Costs [USD/a]...51 Table E-6: Calculated Disposal Costs [USD/a]...51 Table E-7: Calculated Net Sales Revenues for Commercialization of Fractions [USD/a]...52 Table E-8: Salaries and personal costs per employee [USD/a]...53 Table E-9: Staff costs [USD/a]...53 Table E-10: Calculation of costs for low value assests per year [USD/a]...54 Page 68

70 Table E-11: Calculation of fuel costs per year [USD/a]...56 Table E-12: Estimated administration costs per year [USD/a]...57 Table E-13: Calculation of depreciation costs for equipment [USD/a]...57 Table F-1: Required Recycling Fees/ Remaining Profits USD/t]...58 Table F-2: Profit & Loss Forecast [USD/a]...60 Table F-3: Break-Even Calculation [USD/a, USD]...62 Table F-4: Modeling Results for Recycling Fees in Different Scenarios...66 G.2. LIST OF FIGURES Figure A-1: Overall process-flow through the facility...11 Figure A-2: Examples of different dismantling workstations...12 Figure B-1: Massflow diagram of computers in Uganda, situation of 2007 [Wasswa, Schluep, 2013] 19 Figure B-2: EEE-distributors and repair shops in the center of Kampala...21 Figure B-3: Required intervention mechanisms to enable e-waste recycling in Uganda [Schluep, 2013]...23 Figure C-1: Expected Input in t/a...29 Figure C-2: Expected Input in pieces/a...30 Figure C-3: Different types of transport bundles for collected e-waste...34 Figure C-4: Different types of storage for output fractions...35 Figure D-1: Dismantling workstation, tools and safety equipment...40 Figure D-2: Equipment for transport and logistics...41 Figure D-3: Equipment for further treatment steps...42 Figure D-4: Examples for often used receptacles...43 Figure D-5: Example for storage of hazardous fractions...45 Figure D-6: Proposed layout...46 Figure F-1: Operating Results with Different Framework Conditions...64 Figure F-2: Net Income after Taxes with Different Framework Conditions...65 Page 69

71 G.3. LIST OF REFERENCES Blaser F., Schluep M., Spitzbart M. [2013]: e-waste Treatment Facility in Uganda, Economic Feasibility Study, prepared for United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Switzerland/ Austria/ Uganda, July 2013 Ministry of ICT [2012]: Electronic Waste (E-waste) Management Policy for Uganda, Republic of Uganda, Ministry of Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Uganda, August 2012 Schluep M. [2013]: Economic Feasibility of e-waste Treatment in Uganda, Presentation at the UNIDO-Stakeholder Workshop, Kampala, Uganda, 9th August 2013 Schluep M., Wasswa J., Kreissler B., Nicholson S. [2008]: e-waste Generation and Management in Uganda, Proceedings of the 19th Waste Management Conference of the IWMSA (WasteCon2008), 6-10th October 2008, Durban, South Africa UCPC [2013]: Inventory on e-waste management practices in Uganda, prepared by the Uganda Cleaner Production Centre for United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Uganda, October 2013 UNIDO & MICROSOFT [2008]: Promoting Public-Private Partnerships: An innovative business model to foster pro-poor growth through information and communication technology (ICT), December 2008 Wasswa J., Schluep M. [2008]: e-waste Assessment in Uganda, A situational analysis of e- waste management and generation with special emphasis on personal computers, Study on behalf of UNIDO & MICROSOFT, May 2008 Worldloop [2013]: Provided documents out of e-waste projects in Tanzania and other African countries: acquisition costs for equipment and layout considerations Page 70