Case Study on Introduction of

Clean Brick Kilns in

Kathmandu Valley

Bhushan Tuladhar
Environment & Public Health Organization

1
 Kathmandu’s Air Quality
 Main problem is Particulate Matter
 PM10 increased by 2-3 folds in the past 10 years
 In the past two years PM10 has stabalized and in some
areas such as Bhaktapur it has gone down by about 15 %
(Note: Bhaktapur is an area with high concentration of Brick
Kilns)
 High PM2.5 to PM10 ratio
 In dry season, PM10 in Putali Sadak is above national
standards 99 % & in Thamel 90 % of the days
 SOx, NOx, levels are usually within WHO guideline
 Air toxins (Benzene, PAH) may be a problem
 Vehicle emission is the main concern
2
 Monthly Average PM10 in
350
Kathmandu
Patan
300
PM10 (micrograms/m3)

Bhaktapur
250
Putali Sadak
200
Tham el
150
TU Kirtipur
100
Maysyagaon

50 National Std.

0
Nov '02

Nov '03

Nov '04
May '03

May '04

May '05
Jan '03
Mar '03

Jul '03
Sep '03

Jan '04
Mar '04

Jul '04
Sep '04

Jan '05
Mar '05
Month
The PM10 in Bhaktapur (pink line) has dropped in the last two years
indicating the contribution of cleaner brick kilns 3
 SO2 in Kathmandu Valley
(Feb-March, 2003)
80 4th W 1st W 2nd W 3rd W
NAAQS 70g/m3 (24 hr avg) Feb Mar Mar Mar
70
g/
m3 60
NAAQS 50g/m3 (annual avg)
50

40
30
20
10
0
Putalisadak
Patan Thamel Bhaktapur Kirtipur Machhegau
Source: MOEST
n
Station
s
High SO2 in Bhaktapur is mainly due to coal used by the brick industry4
 Emission Inventory, 1993
 Brick Kilns responsible
PM10 Sources in KTM Valley, 1993
Road for 27% of PM10 and
Resuspe Other Refuse 31% of TSP
nsion Industry Burning
9% 6% 4% Brick  Himal Cement – 17%
Kilns
27%
PM10 and 36% of TSP
Vehicle
Emission  Vehicle Emission – 12%
12% PM10 and 3.5% TSP
Himal  Road Dust – 9% PM10
Domestic
fuel
Cement and 9% TSP
17%
25%  Domestic Fuel – 25%
Source: World Bank, 1997 PM10 and 14% TSP

5
 Emission Inventory, 2001
PM10 Sources in KTM Valley, 2001  Compared to 1993,
Road Refuse Contribution of Vehicle
Resuspe
nsion
Burning
Brick emission increased by
4%
24% Kilns 471%
22%
 Contribution of road
resuspension increased
Himal
Cement 356 %
6%  Contribution of Brick
Vehicle
Emission
kilns 30%
44%  Total Emission
increased by 61 %
Source: MOPE/ESPS, 2003

6
Environmental Impacts of
Brick Kilns
 Fugitive Emissions
 Mainly from brick handling
 Stack Emission
 Due to incomplete combustion
 Mainly particles, SOx; also
gaseous pollutants such as
PAH
 Loss of soil fertility
 Poor visibility
 Damage to irrigation
schemes and other
infrastructures

7
Air Pollution Due to Moving
Chimney BTK
 TSP & PM10 at Tikathali
was about about 3 times
higher in Brick kiln season
compared to off season
 SO2 level in Tikathali was
about two times higher
during brick kiln season
 PM10 and TSP in Jhaukhel
area near brick kilns was
about 3 times higher than
control area in Sipadol

8
Health Impacts of Brick Kilns
 Questionnaire Survey
 Comparative health study
in two schools
 High View School, Tikathali
 Valley Public School, Lamatar
 Preliminary Health
Examination of 287
students from grades 1-10
 2nd Phase – Examination
of over 100 students under
the age 6

9
Results of Questionnaire
Survey
 290 individuals in exposed and
control areas in Tikathali VDC
 54% in brick kiln area and 41% in
control area suffered from
respiratory disorders (RD)
 5.9% in Brick Kiln area and 3.3.%
in control area suffered from
severe RD
 Elderly and young children (0-4
yrs.) most affected
 For young children imprint score in
control area was 160.5 and in
brick kiln area was 220.3 (higher
by 37%)

10
 Results of Health Examination
of Students under age of 6
90 84.8
82.6 Valley Public School (Lamatar)
80
Percent of students

High View School (Tikathali)

70
with problem

60
50 47.8
50 46.8

40 34
30
20
10.6 8.7
10 6.4
2.1
0
Nose Throat Ear Sinus LRT
Problem in
Source: CEN, 2002
11
Impact of Brick Kilns on Soil
Fertility
Site Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
Background High Medium High
Medium Less than Low Medium
low
Brick Kiln Low Less than Low
area Low
Note:
Background: Never used for Soil Extraction
Medium: Used two years ago for Soil Extraction
Brick Kiln: Currently being used for Soil Extraction

Source: CEN, 2002

12
 Energy Consumption &
Emission from Various Kilns
Kiln Type Specific Fuel (tons SPM Indian Stds
Energy of coal / (mg/NM3) (mg/NM3)
(MJ/kg of 100,000
fired bricks) bricks
Clamp 1.9-3 30-48 NA NA

Moving 1.25-1.5 20-24 1021 750

Chimney BTK
Fixed 1-1.25 16-20 380 750
Chimney
VSBK 0.7-0.9 5-8 70 300

Source: Development Alternatives, India

13
 Campaign for Cleaner Brick
Kilns in Kathmandu
 1996: World Bank’s URBAIR study reported that about one third of the
TSP in Kathmandu Valley was due to brick kilns
 Late 1990s: Local people raised their voice against the pollution
caused by brick kilns by organizing rallies etc.
 Local NGOs supported the campaign by conducting studies, using local
media to raise awareness on issues related to pollution from brick kilns
and meeting concerned authorities
 2002: The government recognized the voice of local people and NGOs
and stopped the registration of polluting Moving Chimney Bulls Trench
Kiln (BTK) Technology in 2003 and completely banning it in 2004
 2003: Donors (DANIDA & SDC) supported the introduction of cleaner
technologies such as VSBK & Fixed Chimney
 2004: Industry switched to cleaner technology

The result of local people, NGOs, government, donors and private sector
working together has resulted in cleaner brick kilns & cleaner air in Kathmandu
14
 Vertical Shaft Brick Kiln
(VSBK)
 Originated in China
 First introduced in Nepal in
1991
 Reintroduced 2003 with two
plants in Imadol
 Energy Efficient and very low
emission
 Effective combustion
 Arrangement of bricks act as a
dust strainer
 Energy conservation due to
natural up drought
 40% less energy than Moving
chimney BTK
New VSBK with old BTK in the
back ground at Imadol in Kathmandu Valley
15
 Emission from Various Types
of Brick Kilns
9
(kg of SPM/1000 bricks)
8.06
Mass Emission Load

8
7
6
5
4
3
1.71
2
0.55
1
0
Movng Fixed Chimney VSBK
Chimney BTK
Type of Brick Kiln

Compared to Moving Chimney BTK, VSBK Emission is less by a factor of 14

Compared to Fixed Chimney, VSBK emission is less by a factor of 316
 The Way Ahead
 The introduction of cleaner
technology is a successful case
study of civil society and
government joining hands for
clean air. Similar effort is
required in other sectors as well
 New brick kilns need monitoring
to ensure proper design,
construction and operation
 Need to promote cleaner
technologies (eg. VSBK)
 High Quality of Coal

Children going to school next to brick kilns

These kilns are no longer there!!!
Thank You 17