Expert questions Geo Pomona push, says methane is the real Ngozi Mine problem

BULAWAYO - Climate‑change mitigation expert Anglistone Sibanda has questioned Government’s reported decision to push Geo Pomona Private Limited into managing Bulawayo’s Richmond Waste Management Site, popularly known as Ngozi Mine, arguing that the intervention risks addressing visible waste while overlooking the landfill’s deeper climate challenge.


Sibanda said Government’s stated objective of tackling pollution around Ngozi Mine was legitimate, but the manner in which Local Government Minister Daniel Garwe was handling the matter raised concerns about devolution, procurement and whether the proposed solution was scientifically suited to Bulawayo. He argued that any presidential directive concerning Bulawayo should ordinarily be channelled through Minister Judith Ncube, who represents the President in the province.

More fundamentally, Sibanda said imposing a solution on an elected local authority appeared inconsistent with Government’s commitment to devolution. He said central Government should first consult the City of Bulawayo, residents, researchers, environmental experts and other local stakeholders before determining how Ngozi Mine should be rehabilitated. He noted that NUST was already working on issues relating to the landfill, raising questions about whether local scientific expertise was being incorporated.

“The imposition of the perceived solution violates the very same principle of devolution of power the President, Dr ED Mnangagwa, has been championing,” Sibanda said.

He also questioned procurement processes, arguing that any arrangement involving a private company must comply with tender regulations and be subjected to scrutiny. However, he distinguished his concerns about Geo Pomona’s suitability for Bulawayo from an outright dismissal of its work in Harare, acknowledging improvements in waste collection and the establishment of collection points in the capital.

The issue, he said, was whether a model suited to Harare’s circumstances was automatically appropriate for Bulawayo. He added that Geo Pomona’s waste‑to‑energy component needed to be assessed against its actual implementation and environmental performance rather than being presented as a technological fix.

“The elephant in the room is not waste management in the case of Bulawayo,” Sibanda said, arguing that Bulawayo already had private companies supplementing the City’s limited fleet of compactors. The more serious challenge, he said, was the climate impact associated with an open landfill.

Sibanda said decomposing organic waste at Ngozi Mine produces methane, a potent greenhouse gas. He challenged Geo Pomona executive chairman Dr Delish Nguwaya to demonstrate that the company had the technical capacity to capture and utilise landfill methane at scale. “I challenge Dr Nguwaya to submit a 10kg gas cylinder full of methane gas trapped from Pomona to prove that they are able to solve the GHG emissions problem which is the real elephant in the room in landfills,” he said.

He said Bulawayo should investigate technologies capable of capturing landfill methane and converting it into usable energy, while introducing waste separation at source. “Sustainable waste management systems are inclusive and people‑centric by nature. You need buy‑in and active participation of the community before you do anything,” he said.

Sibanda also argued that a properly designed methane‑abatement programme could unlock carbon‑market opportunities and climate finance. Projects that demonstrate genuine greenhouse‑gas reductions and measurable environmental benefits may qualify for revenue‑generating mechanisms, he said — an important consideration given the financial struggles of local authorities.

He warned that adopting a conventional waste‑management model without demonstrable climate benefits could leave Bulawayo paying for a service without unlocking green‑finance opportunities. He also questioned whether waste‑to‑energy incineration should automatically be regarded as climate‑friendly, arguing that environmental implications depend on technology, emissions controls, feedstock and full life‑cycle assessments.

Sibanda said Bulawayo needed a technology‑driven, scientifically grounded waste‑management strategy combining methane capture, waste separation, recycling, environmental rehabilitation, measurable emissions reductions and community participation. He urged Government to explain the proposed funding model, including obligations on the City and residents, and the economic and environmental benefits expected.

“Hon Garwe must come and explain how his imposed company will work with the local companies and above all unpack the funding model and co‑benefits of his idea to the Bulawayo community,” he said.

The dispute goes beyond whether Geo Pomona can collect rubbish. It raises broader policy questions about whether local authorities should be given space to identify solutions to their own service‑delivery challenges, particularly where those solutions involve significant financial, environmental and contractual implications.

Sibanda said Bulawayo should be allowed to follow proper tender processes and identify a technology partner capable of addressing both waste management and the climate impacts of the landfill. “Bulawayo does not need the Geo Pomona model to solve the climate and environmental crisis at Ngozi Mine,” he said. “It needs a detailed, scientific, climate‑focused, inclusive process that has proven additionality and digitally monitored impact‑measuring systems to quantify methane‑abatement impact and tCO2e, not business as usual.”

Sibanda is executive director of PAPRUM Green Projects Pvt Ltd and founder of the Africa Carbon Markets Forum. He is a climate‑change mitigation and carbon‑markets expert and lead consultant in local‑authority climate action and environmental sustainability.

This debate feeds into wider national conversations around climate‑aligned waste management and municipal devolution.