The Korean government plans to invest 444.1 billion won for constructing 34 waste-to-energy facilities by 2013. Especially, 72.9 percent of the government funding for the projects, 323.8 billion won, is to be invested on Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) fa-cilities. However, the government is likely to waste the tax payer’s money because of inexperience to operate waste-to-energy facilities in a large scale. In this regard, it is not only appropriate but also necessary to evaluate the feasibility of RDF projects. The report provides estimates of the environmental impact and economic cost of RDF projects by conducting Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Cost-effectiveness Analysis (CEA).
These evaluations have shown three significant features as follows, Above all, the analysis presents that the expected economic effects of RDF projects are signifi-cantly overestimated. According to the results of the re-estimation, the expected effects are 71.5 percent lower than those of government’s action plan. Secondly, tests to assess feasibility and Value-for-money (VFM) did not yield precise results. For instance, some mistakes such as benefit over-estimation and cost omission are found at the VFM test report of Busan RDF facility. Last but not least, although some problems were clearly detected in the pilot project, Korean government has pushed forward the projects without in depth investigation.
Based on the evaluation, this report suggests several policy recommendations. Firstly, the waste-to-energy projects should be implemented only when the feasibil-ity of project is thoroughly tested, and then proved by comparative projects which contain other policy alternatives such as waste reduction, recycling, incineration, etc. Secondly, the Korean government needs to consider the regional characteristics during the process of applying the waste-to-energy technology. Lastly, the waste-to-energy projects should be gradually expanded in the wake of scrutinizing possible problems for the future.
These evaluations have shown three significant features as follows, Above all, the analysis presents that the expected economic effects of RDF projects are signifi-cantly overestimated. According to the results of the re-estimation, the expected effects are 71.5 percent lower than those of government’s action plan. Secondly, tests to assess feasibility and Value-for-money (VFM) did not yield precise results. For instance, some mistakes such as benefit over-estimation and cost omission are found at the VFM test report of Busan RDF facility. Last but not least, although some problems were clearly detected in the pilot project, Korean government has pushed forward the projects without in depth investigation.
Based on the evaluation, this report suggests several policy recommendations. Firstly, the waste-to-energy projects should be implemented only when the feasibil-ity of project is thoroughly tested, and then proved by comparative projects which contain other policy alternatives such as waste reduction, recycling, incineration, etc. Secondly, the Korean government needs to consider the regional characteristics during the process of applying the waste-to-energy technology. Lastly, the waste-to-energy projects should be gradually expanded in the wake of scrutinizing possible problems for the future.