New Project Opportunities (and Challenges) in International ......EU waste hierarchy and WtEprocesses 21 May 2019 Roland Ramusch 3 LEAST preferred options Preferred options European

New Project Opportunities (and Challenges) in International Markets – Poland and Eastern Europe

Dr. Roland Ramusch, Sector specialist – Solid Waste

Where we are

21 May, 2019 2

Established

1991The EBRD is owned by

67 countries from five continents, as well as the European Union and the European Investment Bank. These shareholders have each made a capital contribution, which forms our core funding.

Capital base

€30 billion

Triple-A rating from all three main rating agencies (S&P, Moody’s and Fitch)

The EBRD invests to build upeffective market economies incountries across three continentsand to make a positive impact onpeople’s lives.

With a focus on private sectorinvestment and support for policyreform, we work to ensure thateconomies in our regions arecompetitive, inclusive, well-governed, green, resilient andintegrated.

EU waste hierarchy and WtE processes

21 May 2019 Roland Ramusch 3

LEAST preferred options

Preferred options

European Commission Communication: The role of waste-to-energy in the circular economy.COM/2017/0034 Final.

Source separation of recyclables, compostingand anaerobic digestion

Waste incineration & co-incineration with high level ofenergy recovery; reprocessing of waste into materialsused as solid, liquid or gaseous fuel

Waste incineration and co-incineration with limited energyrecovery; utilisation of captured landfill gas

Circular Economy Package


New (and for many EU countries challenging)targets in the amended EU waste-relatedDirectives:

MSW treatment in EU (2017)


Eastern European Countries:

• Landfilling still prevailing disposal option: 30 – 80%

• Recycling rates low

• WtE: potential for develop-ment exists

• Remark: data uncertainty

=> Recycling and WtE are not mutually exclusive!

Source: CEWEP - http://www.cewep.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/EUROSTAT-MW-data-2017.pdf

Circular Economy Package


How to reach circular economy targets?

• Provision of infrastructure for source separation ofrecyclables alone is not enough;

• Economic development & public awareness have toraise;

• EPR systems need strong governance andenforcement;

• In order to reach landfill targets, source separationand complimentary solutions (MBT, WtE) are needed=> “technology mix”

• Integrated WM systems can close the loop, not onlymaterial-wise (material recovery), but also energy-wise.

Incineration capacity – 2014 data

21 May 2019 Roland Ramusch 7Source: Wilts et al. (2017): Assessment of waste incineration capacity and waste shipments in Europe

Incineration capacity – 2014 data

21 May 2019R Roland Ramusch 8Source: Wilts et al. (2017): Assessment of waste incineration capacity and waste shipments in Europe

100%-20%>100%

20%-10%

10%-7%

Poland


• Government considers WtE as important step from landfilling towards higher levelsin the waste hierarchy;

• Aim is to maximise amount of energy recovered from residual waste;

• Goal: 15% of gross final consumption of energy from renewable resources in 2020;

• 2015: only one WtE plant in Warsaw (60 ktpa) => too low for the demand

• But: 127 regional MBT plants with total capacity of 9.4 mtpa in place (this is higher as residual waste generated with approx. 25% recycling rate)

Sources:

denBoer E. and Jedrczak A. (2017): Performance of mechanical biological treatment of residual municipal waste in Poland, DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/20172200020

Malinauskaite J. et al. (2017): Municipal solid waste management and waste-to-energy in the context of a circular economy and energy recycling in Europe. Energy 141 (2017) 2013-2044.

Poland


Source: Cyranka et al. (2016): Municipal Waste-to-Energy plants in Poland – current projects. DOI:10.1051/e3sconf/20161000070.

• Approx. 1 million tpa WtE capacity in place(<10% of generated);

• Planned: 2.1 million tpa (<20%);

• future 30 plants with 3.8 to 3.9 million tpa(approx. 30%);

• With EU target: residual waste approx. 4.5million tpa.

Issues to be considered in the Eastern European context


• EU requirement: public financing of WM, whether at national or EU level, shouldbe consistent with the goal of shifting upwards in the waste hierarchy.

• EU member states and neighbourhood policy countries are affected by targets inthe Circular Economy Package.

• Reasonable planning of capacities over the lifetime of WtE facilities in order toprevent a “lock-in” of recyclables => impacts on calorific value, future decouplingof economic growth and MSW generation.

• Higher EU targets and measurement methodology will lead to even highercollection rates of recyclables: exploration of additional options, e.g. sortingplants before incinerators?

• Higher “degree (level) of sorting” lowering the value (quality?) of recyclables?

Issues to be considered in the Eastern European context


• Availability and quality of good quality data for planning?

• Availability and quality of national / regional WM strategies / plans?

• NIMBY: WtE should be promoted through highlighting benefits as (renewable)energy source, the conservation of land, reducing of GHG emissions etc.;

• Incentives: landfill tax and bans, feed-in tariffs, purchasing guarantees etc.;

• Affordability constraints;

• Optimum use of already established capacities. Cross-border shipments mighthelp to make optimal use of WtE capacity already in place;

• Combined supply of electricity and heating / cooling;

• Larger cities vs. rural regions.

Contacts

21 May 2019 Roland Ramusch

Roland RamuschSector specialist – Solid wasteSustainable Infrastructure Policy and Project Preparation (SI3P)Tel: + 44 020 7338 7862Email: [email protected]

EBRD, One Exchange SquareLondon, EC2A 2JN United Kingdomwww.ebrd.com

Find us on social media

13

Overview


WtE plants operating*)

Waste thermally treated [tpa]

Cement kilns [tpa]

Electricity from WtE+RDF

[MWh/yr]

Heat from WtE+RDF**)[MWh/yr]

Additional capacity WtE (2017-2025)

Additional capacity

RDF(2017-2025)

Landfil l tax

Landfil l bans Remark

Albania 0 ---- n/a n/aBosnia and Herzegovina

0----

n/a n/a

Bulgaria 0 ---- RDF Sofia x noCroatia 0 ---- no n/aCzech Republic 4 657,000 152,000 150,000 1,575,000 595,000 x noEstonia 1 250,000 138,000 320,000 to 400,000 360,000 x x overcapacityHungary 1 377,000 0 154,000 220,000 500,000 200,000 x xKosovo 0 ---- n/a n/aLatvia 0 ---- n/a n/aLithuania 1 260,000 x xPoland 7 1,000,000 x xRomania 0 ---- x xSerbia 0 ---- 340,000 n/a n/aSlovak Republic 2 230,000 x xSlovenia 0 ---- n/a n/a*) not including haz waste incin**) incl heating, cooling, steam

Source: Modified from The Wolf Theiss Guide To: Waste to energy in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe, 2016 Edition.

Documents

New Project Opportunities (and Challenges) in International ......EU waste hierarchy and WtEprocesses 21 May 2019 Roland Ramusch 3 LEAST preferred options Preferred options European