Document Actions
Detailed Assessment
Up one level
8.2. Detailed Assessment
Taking into account the absolute values, the specific weight of the economic loss in the gross domestic product of the country and current costs of environmental protection for water in the Republic of Belarus (Annex 14), as well as professional judgment, the scores of the Hot Spots by the economic parameters are presented in accordance with the Methodology (Tables 5 - 16, Annex D). The matrix for economic assessment forms the methodological basis for this scoring (see Methodology, Chapter 3). Once the score has been calculated for the Hot Spot with the extreme (highest) impact, all of the remaining Hot Spots are ranked relative to the assigned score. Note. The comparative assessment of the results was based on the following official data:
Gross domestic product (GDP) of the Republic of Belarus in 2000 was 9125600000 thousand Byelorussian roubles ($US 11407 thousand) [3]. The total current cost of protection and efficient use of water resources for Belarus was 82617406 thousand Byelorussian roubles ($US 103271.8), including payments to other enterprises (organizations) for the collection and treatment of wastewater of 21602509 thousand Byelorussian roubles ($US 27003).
By sources of financing, the current costs of protection and efficient use of water resources include the following:
- from own funds – 81602725 thousand Byelorussian roubles ($US 102003 thousand) (including payment to other enterprises (organizations) for the collection and treatment of wastewater – 21141202 thousand Byelorussian roubles ($US 26426);
- republican budget – 450069 thousand Byelorussian roubles or $US 56.3 thousand;
- local budgets – 528896 thousand Byelorussian roubles or $US 22.4;
- off-budget funds – 4595 thousand Byelorussian roubles or $US 5.7 thousand;
- budget environmental protection fund – 17925 thousand Byelorussian roubles or $US 22.4 thousand; and,
- other – 13196 thousand roubles or $US 16.4 thousand
The most detailed assessment by economic issues is presented below for the following five Hot Spots:
- Minsk vodokanal; Retchitsa vodokanal; Gomel vodokanal; Mozyr treatment plants; Mogilev “Gorvodokanal” (Tables D-3, Annex D).
- The scores of the remaining ten Hot Spots are presented in Annex D (Tables D-4).
8.2.1. Category 1. Direct Pollution
This group of criteria allows for the assessment of the effect that pollution has on the water supply downstream of the Hot Spots, as well as the incremental costs associated with water treatment.
Criterion 1.1. Negative impact of the Hot Spot on downstream water supply. Required additional treatment (incremental costs) to meet drinking water quality standards.
The experts took into consideration the self-purifying capacity of the river and the location of downstream water intakes. The highest score by this criterion was assigned to the Minsk vodokanal Hot Spot (86), which has the largest volume of the polluting discharge (43.5% of the total discharge for 15 Hot Spots). It is followed by the scores of Gomel vodokanal – 13 (5.9% of the total discharge for 15 Hot Spots), Mogilev Gorvodokanal – 14 (7.0% of the total discharge for 15 Hot Spots) and Mozyr treatment plants – 2 (0.9% of the total discharge for 15 Hot Spots).
Criterion 1.2. Assessment of the cost of treatment for drinking water in the area of the Hot Spots versus the national average cost for treatment.
Based on professional judgment and taking into account the characteristics of the vodokanals and the industrial enterprises by technological and financial factors (Annex 7), the Hot Spots Retchitsa Vodokanal and Mogilev Gorvodokanal were assigned the highest score - 60, as being the most polluting sources discharging their wastewater literally untreated. The Mozyr treatment plant was assigned the score of 60, due to the expensive treatment of such substances as petroleum products, heavy metals, etc. Minsk vodokanal and Gomel vodokanal were each assigned the score of 20.
Criterion 1.3. Negative impact of the Hot Spot on the downstream water supply. Required additional treatment (incremental costs) to meet industrial water quality standards.
As per the assessment for Criterion 1.1, additional wastewater treatment (and additional costs) are required here more to meet the established norms of the maximum admissible discharge (MAD) for fishing (or recreational) water bodies, rather than to meet the industrial water quality standards (suitable for technical purposes). But for all that the experts took into consideration the presence of industrial water users downstream of the Hot Spot as well as the distance from the Hot Spot to these industrial water users.
By Criterion 1.3, Minsk vodokanal was assigned a score of 25, followed by Retchitsa Vodokanal (8), Gomelvodokanal (5) and Mogilev Gorvodokanal (5) and Mozyr treatment plants (1).
Criterion 1.4. Assessment of the cost of treatment for industrial water in the area of the Hot Spots versus the national average cost for treatment.
Retchitsa Vodokanal, Mozyr treatment plants and Mogilev Gorvodokanal were assigned a score of 10. The remaining Hot Spots were given a score of 1 for Criterion 1.4. The percentage of industrial enterprises using industrial water was taken into account.
Criterion 1.5. The level of investment required to meet the EU water quality standards outlined in the Water Framework Directive and Pollution Control Directive.
By Criterion 1.5, Minsk vodokanal was assigned a score of 85, Retchitsa Vodokanal – 60, Mogilev Gorvodokanal – 50, Gomel vodokanal – 25 and Mozyr treatment plants - 20.
The score assigned took into account the economic damage caused by pollution of the Dnipro Basin (Annex 13), characteristics of vodokanals (Annex 7), professional judgment.
Thus, for Category 1, based on the calculations presented in the summary sheet, the highest weighted score was assigned to Minsk vodokanal – 3.278. It is followed by Retchitsa Vodokanal – 1.730, Mogilev Gorvodokanal – 1.075, Gomel vodokanal – 0.678 and Mozyr treatment plants – 0.435.
8.2.2. Category 2. Agricultural Production
Criterion 2.1. Increased average operating and investment cost, in fertilizers and chemicals.
Taking into account the increased operating and investment cost for fertilizers and chemicals, including those related to the negative effects of the Hot Spot, Retchitsa vodokanal, Mogilev Gorvodokanal and Mozyr treatment plants were each assigned a score of 20 and Minsk vodokanal and Gomel vodokanal – a score of 10.
Criterion 2.2. The loss in arable land.
The effects of pollution from the Hot Spot can cause a loss in arable land, which means losing the economic potential of that resource. No substantial loss in arable land was observed within the vicinity of the Hot Spots, directly resulted from pollution. All Hot Spots are assigned a score of 0.
Thus, for Category 2 (based on the calculations in the summary sheet), the highest weighted score 0.500 was assigned to Retchitsa Vodokanal, Mozyr treatment plants and Mogilev Gorvodokanal; a score of 0.250 was assigned to Minsk vodokanal and Gomelvodokanal.
8.2.3. Category 3. Macroeconomics
Criterion 3.1. General appraisal of the Hot Spot’s importance to the national economy in terms of the gross domestic product (GNP).
The operation and output of the Hot Spots do not make a substantial contribution to the GNP, therefore Minsk vodokanal and Gomel vodokanal were assigned a score of 0, Mogilev Gorvodokanal – a score of 5, Mozyr treatment plants – 6 and Retchitsa Vodokanal – 6.
Criterion 3.2. General appraisal of the Hot Spot’s importance to the national economy in terms of export and foreign exchange earning ability.
The output of the Hot Spots is not a significant exporter and (net) foreign exchange earner. Minsk vodokanal, Retchitsa Vodokanal and Gomel vodokanal were each assigned a score of 0, while Mozyr treatment plants and Mogilev Gorvodokanal were each assigned a score of 30.
Criterion 3.3. General appraisal of the Hot Spot’s importance to the national government as a source of tax revenue.
The Hot Spots do not generate substantial tax revenues for the government.
Criterion 3.4. Economic significance of the number of people employed within the Hot Spot.
By Criterion 3.4, Retchitsa Vodokanal was assigned the highest score – 80, because unlike the other Hot Spots, it is a major employer for the population of the city of Retchitsa. The Mozyr treatment plants and Mogilev Gorvodokanal were assigned each assigned a score of 60, Minsk vodokanal and Gomel vodokanal – 10.
The score was based on professional judgment and was supported by employment numbers in the area of the Hot Spots at a specific water-protective facility
Thus, for Category 3, based on the calculations in the summary sheet, the highest weighted score was assigned to Mogilev Gorvodokanal – 1.188. It is followed by Mozyr treatment plants – 1.200, Retchitsa Vodokanal – 1.075, Gomel vodokanal – 0.125 and Minsk vodokanal – 0.125.
8.2.4. Category 4. Microeconomics
Criterion 4.1. Assessment of the share of the Hot Spot industrial sector in the regional industrial employment.
By Criterion 4.1, the leader is Retchitsa Vodokanal, with an assigned score of 40, followed by Mozyr treatment plants – 30, Mogilev Gorvodokanal – 10, Minsk vodokanal – 5 and Gomel vodokanal – 3.
The score was based on professional judgment and took into account that the share of the Hot Spot in the regional industrial employment is as follows: Retchitsa Vodokanal – over 80%, Mozyr treatment plants – about 60%, Mogilev Vodokanal – 20%, Minsk vodokanal – 10% and Gomel vodokanal – 6%.
Criterion 4.2. Assessment of the significance of the the Hot Spot’s employment share in a specific industrial sector of the country.
By Criterion 4.2, the highest sectoral significance and the highest score were assigned to Minsk vodokanal and Mogilev Gorvodokanal (25), followed by Mozyr treatment plants (10), Gomel vodokanal (9) and Retchitsa Vodokanal (6).
The scores were based on professional judgment and the social status of industrial enterprises and their economic contribution to the gross domestic product of the country.
Thus, for Category 4, based on calculations, the highest weighted score was assigned to Retchitsa Vodokanal (1.150). It is followed by Mozyr treatment plants (1.000), Mogilev Gorvodokanal (0.875), Minsk vodokanal (0.750) and Gomel vodokanal (0.300).
