113
CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION................................................... 3 1.1 Sustainable development.....................................4 1.2 Waste management issue......................................6 1.3 Analysis of the characteristics and objectives of the zero waste (ZW) concept..............................................9 2 EU WASTE FRAMEWORK............................................ 10 2.1 Targets and obligations....................................10 2.2 National regulation........................................12 3 HIERARCHY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEMES.........................14 3.1 Prevention and Minimization................................15 3.2 Reuse......................................................19 3.3 The Recycling costs and the importance of the materials purity.........................................................20 3.4 Energy recovery............................................22 3.5 The disposal of residual fraction..........................22 4 SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION.......................................24 4.1 MSW streams................................................24 4.1.1. General classification.........................................24 4.1.2. Ordinary MSW..............................................25 4.1.3. Bulky and Hazardous MSW.....................................26 4.2 Waste collection systems...................................27 4.2.1 Type of waste segregation model.................................28 4.2.2 Location of the collection system.................................28 4.3 Waste treatment............................................31 4.3.1 Biological treatments......................................... 31 4.3.2 Incineration................................................ 32 4.3.3 Landfill................................................... 33 4.3.4 Other treatments............................................ 33 4.4 Economic instruments for waste management..................34 4.4.1 Introduction................................................34 4.4.2 Taxes on products............................................34 4.4.3 Taxes on waste disposal and/or incineration........................34 4.4.4 Waste charges.............................................. 36 4.4.5. Conclusions................................................37 4.5 System flow diagrams.......................................37 5 ZERO WASTE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH............................39 5.1 Waste Prevention...........................................39 5.2 Recycling..................................................41 5.3 Municipal Composting.......................................44 5.3.1 Objectives of composting in the municipality........................44 5.3.2 Materials for composting......................................44

Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................31.1 Sustainable development............................................................................................................41.2 Waste management issue............................................................................................................61.3 Analysis of the characteristics and objectives of the zero waste (ZW) concept........................9

2 EU WASTE FRAMEWORK.......................................................................................................102.1 Targets and obligations............................................................................................................102.2 National regulation...................................................................................................................12

3 HIERARCHY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEMES......................................................143.1 Prevention and Minimization...................................................................................................153.2 Reuse........................................................................................................................................193.3 The Recycling costs and the importance of the materials purity.............................................203.4 Energy recovery.......................................................................................................................223.5 The disposal of residual fraction..............................................................................................22

4 SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION............................................................................................244.1 MSW streams...........................................................................................................................24

4.1.1. General classification.......................................................................................................244.1.2. Ordinary MSW.................................................................................................................254.1.3. Bulky and Hazardous MSW..............................................................................................26

4.2 Waste collection systems..........................................................................................................274.2.1 Type of waste segregation model......................................................................................284.2.2 Location of the collection system......................................................................................28

4.3 Waste treatment........................................................................................................................314.3.1 Biological treatments........................................................................................................314.3.2 Incineration.......................................................................................................................324.3.3 Landfill..............................................................................................................................334.3.4 Other treatments................................................................................................................33

4.4 Economic instruments for waste management.........................................................................344.4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................344.4.2 Taxes on products..............................................................................................................344.4.3 Taxes on waste disposal and/or incineration....................................................................344.4.4 Waste charges....................................................................................................................364.4.5. Conclusions......................................................................................................................37

4.5 System flow diagrams..............................................................................................................375 ZERO WASTE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH.............................................................39

5.1 Waste Prevention......................................................................................................................395.2 Recycling..................................................................................................................................415.3 Municipal Composting.............................................................................................................44

5.3.1 Objectives of composting in the municipality....................................................................445.3.2 Materials for composting..................................................................................................445.3.3 Key features and characteristics of composting................................................................445.3.4 How much composting plants............................................................................................475.3.5 Separation at Source for effective composting..................................................................485.3.6 Of course using compostable bags....................................................................................485.3.7 Where to put the compost..................................................................................................485.3.8 Success stories of composting plants.................................................................................49

5.4 Green Points.............................................................................................................................505.4.1 What is a Green Point (GP)..............................................................................................505.4.2 What diverting materials from landfills can be achieved through the operation of GP...525.4.3 Reuse and Green Points....................................................................................................52

Page 2: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

5.4.4 Creates costs for municipalities?......................................................................................535.5 Mechanical and Biological treatment.......................................................................................535.6 Anaerobic digestion..................................................................................................................555.7 Other strategies.........................................................................................................................57

5.7.1 Thermal treatment.............................................................................................................575.7.2 LFG utilization..................................................................................................................59

5.8 Information campaigns........................................................................................................606 ZERO WASTE IMPLEMENTATION IN MUNICIPALITIES..............................................63

6.1 Environmental analysis based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)............................................636.1.1 Waste collection and transport..........................................................................................646.1.2. Waste treatment................................................................................................................66

6.2 SWOT analysis.........................................................................................................................706.3 Benefit analysis of waste diversion..........................................................................................70

REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................71

Page 3: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

1 INTRODUCTION

Current state and the developing trends in the field of sustainable resource management in European countries can be evaluated as unsustainable and unfair on the basis of arguments that are noted in the contribution, especially from the developing countries’ point of view and the future, numerically superior world generations’ point of view. Disproportional high consumption (especially of not-renewable) natural resources and environmental services in economically developed countries are lowering the possibilities of future generations for satisfying their needs, it is also unfair in the light of unsatisfied basic needs of present world poverty.

The question of equitable division of natural resources and planetary ecosystem services is bringing new challenges into international policy of the 21st century, which will also have to be accompanied by the transfer of gravity’s center from quantitative to qualitative development elements in the framework of sustainable development paradigm. Development and security demands and wishes will only be possible to balance with international collaboration, which will respect human rights and will be grounded on the concept of development in terms of spreading human liberty in all parts of the world. In this way, European as well as other economically most developed countries of the world will have to realize the responsibilities and commitments to other parts of the world and future generations that they will play a key role in realizing sustainable development not only in the strategic and political agreements, but also in practice. Overcoming the supporting abilities of the planet sets a task before the developed European countries for them to focus on improving the quality of life inside the existent or reduced pressures on ecosystems.

Technology improvements and the reductions of life patterns’ dissipation of rich world minority would release the manoeuvre space for the poor majority to compensate its social-economic arrears, which are going to be connected with smaller or bigger increase of pressures on the environment because of the foreseen population growth. The increase of disparity between the supporting abilities and the pressures on environment tends to bring the world in the next decades in a situation, where the offer of ecosystem services will lag behind the demand so much that it could seriously shake the welfare or the fundamental achievements of the social-economic progress. This defines the challenge of the 21st century, that the humanity shares the same faith. This is the faith of a new form of global collaboration. The paradox of unified world economy presents one of the biggest threats for our planet.

Even though appropriate solutions for waste (resource) management exist, the problem is the global framework, which is still not set. Because of the multilayered influence on the developing patterns in other parts of the world and nevertheless the historic responsibility for the resulting development discordances, the economically developed countries are bound to look for new, more sustainable patterns of production and consumption and the increase of general living quality. The key task will include the limiting of ecological print, which does not only change with the number of population and the average consumption per inhabitant (in dependence to his buying power), but also with the effectiveness of energy and resource consumption (in dependence to available technologies). Because European countries don’t expect any further natural population growth, they will be able to focus on preventing wasteful consumption and on technological improvements.

Transfer of advanced technologies and knowledge to developing countries would enable them to maintain the low or moderate consumption level of ecosystem services and simultaneously achieving the best possible progress in the field of human development. Integration of environment safety and social-economic development will not be possible without international collaboration and without paying regard to the principles of solidarity and divided responsibility. The following will bring bigger limitations to developed countries and will encourage them to look for internal reserves, but it will allow developing countries the possibility of social-economic development at the reasonable pressures on the environment.

Page 4: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

In this respect the sustainable development demands are not just recommendations for tomorrow, but also commitments. Important consequence of GDP growth is that the new coming waves of waste could be needed in more new different systems for the processing and recycling purposes, because the complexity of waste management will grow extremely. Even now it is clear that the planet is overpopulated and that we are more and more connected and dependent on each other.

1.1 Sustainable development

Sustainable development (SD) is very hard to unambiguously define. There are several SD definitions, the most simple and the most famous is the one from World Commission for Environment and Development (Brundtland commission), which states that SD means ‘fulfilling current needs without jeopardizing future generations’ [Our Common Future, 1987]. Rio de Janeiro hosted the first Peak on SD in 1992 and many principles were accepted. Modern development strategies should be directed into separating environment degradation and natural resource consumption from progress in social and economic field, which is in fact also the key challenge of sustainable development. 6th environmental action program (2001-2010) defined considered world natural resource consumption and securing global ecosystem as simultaneous assurance of economic welfare and balanced social development [Environment 2010, 2001]. As prerequisite for achieving a more sustainable development, taking steps in four priority fields is outlined in the program:

Climate changes

Over-consumption of renewable and not-renewable natural resources

Losing biotic diversity and

Accumulating present poisonous chemical substances in environment

Simultaneous formation of sustainable development strategy of European Union has also included the above noted priority fields in environment priority segment. Meanwhile, when conferences on environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and acceptation of Agenda 21 gave the biggest impetus to sustainable deliberation in the world, the liability to sustainable development in negotiations on the highest European level appeared not until a few years later. Maastricht contract claimed equality of rights of environment security and economic development and introduced the concept of sustainable growth as a contractual principle, which would pay regard to the environment, but it was not until the Amsterdam contract in 1997, which moved the demand for realizing sustainable development goals from environmental chapter into the central text of the contract and so imparted the status of one of the main short-term goals of member states to sustainable development [Clement et al., 2001].

Sustainable development, at least formally, became the fundamental goal which was supported from the middle of 1998 by the efforts for formation of a special strategy, called ‘A Sustainable Europe for a Better World’ which was eventually accepted in European council in Goteborg in June 2001. Long-term vision of wealthier and more righteous society with better quality of life in more qualifying environment would become the driving force of institutional reforms and changes in companies’ and consumers’ behaviour [A Sustainable Europe for a Better World, 2001]. Even if this kind of strategy was still considered advanced in the break of the millennium and foresaw the spreading of obligations both for the new member states of EU and the rest of Europe, its deficiencies became obvious within the altered global circumstances. These deficiencies were reflected in the continuation of unsustainable trends in the field of climate changes and energy use,

Page 5: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

dangerous waste management, soul use and traffic challenges, the limiting health threats, poverty and social exclusiveness and aging of population, namely the majority of the priority strategic tasks.

In 2004, a broad public discussion for the revision of current strategy was opened again with goal to become more efficient and more ambitious at forming operative and individual goals and measures. The renovated EU strategy for sustainable development from June 2006 sets seven key challenges with corresponding goals and measures1.

Limiting climate changes and their negative influences on society and environment,

Sustainable traffic,

Sustainable consumption methods and production,

Maintaining and managing natural resources,

Protection against health threats and improving the population health,

Social inclusiveness, demographic conditions and migrations,

World challenges regarding poverty and sustainable development

The renovated strategy exposes the gradual change of current unsustainable patterns of consumption and production and unlinked approach in politics formation. Much more than it’s preceding strategy it emphasizes international circumstances, especially European countries’ duty to support sustainable development across the world and fulfil their international obligations. Ensuring social equivalence and cohesion, economic welfare, environment security and fulfilling international obligations would be monitored with sustainable development indices in the future. An overview of the actual state in European countries at the beginning of the 21st century shows that natural resource consumption and environmental services are disproportionably high and have been causing not only local and regional environmental problems for a long period of time, but also global ones (The Potential for regional Policy Instruments, 2007-2013).

Picture 1: Abstract from Ralph Hall, Introducing the Concept of Sustainable Transport to the U.S. DOT through the Reauthorization of TEA-21

1 http://circa.europa.eu/irc/opoce/fact_sheets/info/data/policies/environment/article_7294_sl.htm

Page 6: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Different devices reveal that no European country is meeting both criteria, because they tend to acquire bigger and bigger share of biosphere with social-economic progress. Developing countries follow the example of other more economically developed countries, among which, many with a medium income, good education and/or life expectation have approached the threshold of a high level of human development, but also, expect an increase of ecological print per inhabitant together with deceleration of population growth and an intensive economy without introduction of environmental friendly technologies.

1.2 Waste management issue

European economy is based on a high level resource consumption. This includes resources (metal, mineral sources for construction or wood), energy and lands. Main driving forces of European resource consumption are economic growth, technological progress in the changing patterns of consumption and production. Approximately one third of used resources are transformed into waste and emissions2. Every European citizen throws off 520 kg of household waste per year, but this number is expected to grow. In EU-15 countries the use of material has only slightly changed in the last two decades and still amounts to approximately 15-16 tons per inhabitant per year.

This number changes from country to country, from around 12 tons per inhabitant in Italy to 38 tons per inhabitant in Finland. The biggest share is presented by construction material, followed by fossil fuels and biomass. The efficiency of natural resource use is several times bigger in EU-15 countries as in new EU member states or in South-east Europe. In announcements for the period to 2020 it is stated that resource use in EU will continue to grow. Resource use is growing also in other regions in the world. This is partially a result of the aforementioned increased use of goods and services in Europe, which often relies on sources, acquired in these other regions.

Huge resource consumption in Europe is pressuring on, the environment in Europe and other regions in the world. These pressures include not-renewable resource utilization, intensive use of renewable resources, transportation, high emissions in water, air and soil due to mining industry, production, consumption and waste production. General consensus is that there are physical limitations for constant growth of resource use. Apartments, food and mobility present the biggest share of resource use and environmental pressures. Waste disposal can cause several influences on health and environment, including emissions in air, surface water and groundwater, which depend on how it is managed. Also waste causes the loss of natural resources (like metal and other materials that are contained and are recyclable, or used as an energy source). Thus, proper waste management can protect public health and environmental quality and it supports the maintenance of natural resources3.

The biggest currents of waste in Europe originate in construction, destruction and processing activities. Most of the EU communal waste still ends at dumping ground (45%). Even so, more and more communal waste is being recycled and composted (37%) or burned for energy recovery (18%). Rising living standard and settlement urbanization cause more waste, produced by households. The quantity of waste in the developed countries is still growing, but attitude to it is changing. The consequences of irresponsible environment management are still felt by several countries, hence the EU legislation is foreseeing the reduction of waste and its reuse to prevent serious consequences for living quality. Each of 500 million EU inhabitants disposes around half a tone of household waste per year.

2 http://www.eea.europa.eu/sl/themes/waste/about-waste-and-material-sources3 http://www.eea.europa.eu/sl/themes/waste

Page 7: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Beside that, also 360 million tons of industrial waste are produced, 900 million tons of waste in construction and around 95 million tons of waste in energy production and water supply. This way EU produces approximately three billion tons of waste per year. The basis of European policy on waste management is a revised frame directive on waste from 2008. It foresees a modern approach to waste management, where waste is no longer superfluous, but raw materials that end in plants instead of dumping grounds, where they are processed again into useful raw materials, compost or fuel. The goal of European policy’s waste management is the reduction of waste effects on environment and health and increasing resource use efficiency. Proper waste management is crucial in assuring sustainable European economy growth.

Executing European and national policies for waste management has a goal of increasing waste production and redirecting waste from dumping grounds into other processes, where waste presents source. Here, the increasing waste quantity, which is becoming more and more heterogeneous, plays a key role in avoiding environmental effects. The present EU policy on waste management is based on so called waste hierarchy. This means that it is ideal if production of new waste is prevented or reduced. Waste, which is already produced, must be preferentially included into reuse, recycle and other processing procedures. This reduces waste disposal, which is the least favourable method of waste management.

Disposal of unprocessed municipal waste is the worst possibility for the environment, because it causes methane emissions and consequences as greenhouse gas, soil and groundwater emissions, as well as the loss of means that are produced by resource disposal. The position of waste combustion in the hierarchy is a subject of many discussions in the framework of Waste Framework Directive revision (2006). However, it is clear, that its position in the hierarchy is favourable, in the case that waste combustion takes place in combination with high level energy processing and strict emission control. In the past, final disposal of waste was the leading method for municipal waste, but it has been substantially reduced in the last two decades. In 2004, 47% of waste was disposed in EU (Figure 14), this amount shall be reduced to approximately 35% till 2020. Recycling and other material processing methods are expected to rise from current 36% to around 42% till 2020. Finally, waste combustion was used for 17% of the total municipal waste in 2004 and will most likely increase to around 25% till 2020.

Figure 1: Formation and processing of communal waste in Europe (per inhabitant).

4 http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/briefing_2008_1/Supporting_document_to_EEA_Briefing_2008-01.pdf

Page 8: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

The Directive focuses on preventing waste creation and sets goals that would make Europe a recycling society. Member states should recycle 50 percent of household waste and 70 percent of industrial waste by 2020. It introduces principles of waste management, for example “principle where causer pays for burdens” and determines a corresponding hierarchy of waste management. This hierarchy defines waste prevention as the best possibility, followed by reuse of waste, recycling, other processing and waste disposal as the last and least favourable option. Member states had to accept laws and other regulations, related to this directive, until 12 of December last year. Electronic waste is a type of waste that its quantity grows quickly. Therefore, a new legislation for better handling of electronic waste products in EU is getting prepared.

Furthermore, the European parliament cooperates for the formation of new legislations and demands stricter rules in order to engage the increasing amount of waste electronic and electric equipment in Europe and simplify the administrative procedures that present an obstacle for the companies in this branch. Member states are bound to develop integrated waste management (by implementing preventing waste creation) in a framework of programs that cover the whole country. These plans have to include the whole analysis of all waste currents, existing systems for collecting, processing and removing, estimating the need for new objects. Programs for preventing waste creation have to be submitted by the end of 2013.

Generally, the announcements show that better waste management will contribute to reduced greenhouse gas emissions in Europe and separation of environmental burdens from economic growth, which is also announced by the Sixth environmental action program. Beside that, it is expected that further development and waste recycling growth will take place, as Europe becomes a society of recycling, as stated in the Thematic strategy on preventing and recycling.

Figure 2: Trendsand projections of greenhouse gases from communal waste management in European Union 5

Even the best waste management systems in the world indicate that they can’t retain the consequences of global financial crises and world population, GDP per inhabitant and the related

5 http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/briefing_2008_1/Supporting_document_to_EEA_Briefing_2008-01.pdf

Page 9: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

amount of waste, which increases in parallel. Therefore researches are looking for new challenges, because the current state shows that the majority of waste in third world countries is still disposed [Mavropoulos, 2011]. Waste management systems and trading circumstances can’t handle management of increasing amount of waste around the world. So if a new pattern of global cooperation and management is accepted, the existing pattern of uncontrolled disposal that is the leading method of waste management, especially in Asia, will be stopped. Which are the main directions for the next few decades?

Environment pollution and pandemic diseases don’t have limitations. A need for a new world initiative – how to handle waste – is more than obvious, the lack of any kind of appropriate measures means extending the agony and transposing problems. Poverty trap in poorest countries can easily turn into a trap of global rate, because it has to be dealt globally with abilities of plenty new waste currents. Even though OEEO market almost doubled between 2002 and 2009, this problem was not handled prioritily, illegal activities with sort of waste are still present, which are the leading methods for their management. Once again, existing circumstances on market and initiatives are not capable of finding environmentally friendly solutions for this problem, which is caused by fast market growth of never ending new products and waste. Prove for this is a recent decline of recycling programs due to global financial crises, which also proves the market’s incompetence, when it comes to recycling preservation and reuse. We therefore need a different kind of global cooperation, which will assure a different framework for market-oriented activities in combination with strong environment and social management.

1.3 Analysis of the characteristics and objectives of the zero waste (ZW) concept

ZW policies have many characteristics, all of which comprise an ethical goal, the elimination of waste. These characteristics have social and economical aspects. One definition of the ZW concept that is widely accepted is the following:

“Zero Waste is a goal that is ethical, economical, efficient and visionary, to guide people in changing their lifestyles and practices to emulate sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are designed to become resources for others to use. Zero Waste means designing and managing products and processes to systematically avoid and eliminate the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources, and not burn or bury them.

Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all discharges to land, water or air that are a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health6. This definition was adopted by the Zero Waste International Alliance in November, 2004. It is true that ZW policies can have strong social characteristics through social economy. In order to implement these policies, new economical entities need to emerge in the market such as repair and reuse centres, community composting enterprises, waste handling services businesses and so on. If well planned, these activities can be undertaken by the third sector, i.e. social economy, thus increasing employment and currency recirculation, which have a positive effect in the local economy.

Studies that were undertaken for specific municipalities in Greece through the MED Zero Waste project, showed that the implementation of a series of policies that aim to the minimization of waste, will both reduce the waste management costs of the municipality as well as increase employment by at least 260 jobs, by 2040.

Another characteristic of ZW policies is that they involve public participation. This is a prerequisite almost for any kind of waste management policy that is not based on an end-of-pipe logic.

6 Zero Waste International Alliance (www.zwia.org)

Page 10: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Structures such as green points or the implementation of home composting projects, involve the participation of the public. Participation is not compulsory and an increased level of sensitization is required. The success of these policies, set as an example before, rely solely on the people’s participation.

Information campaigns are essential in order to have significant results while implementing such policies. It is therefore a positive ‘side effect’ of implementing ZW policies, that the sensitization level, regarding waste management issues, is increased. This can improve other participatory processes in the local society, thus improving the welfare of citizens.

ZW policies are the actual objective of the ZW concept. Zero waste is an ideal goal that is achieved at a 100% level only in nature. The process of eliminating the discharges of human economic and social activities can be successful only by applying a series of policies and measures that will lead towards zero waste, but this is an on-going, never-ending struggle. The continuous improvement of waste management practices is the result of this struggle.

2 EU WASTE FRAMEWORK

2.1 Targets and obligations

European Directive 94/62/EC (20/12/1994) covers ''all packaging available on the market in the Community and all solid packaging waste, whether it is used or released at industrial, commercial, offices, shop, service, household or any other source, regardless of the material used''. In Directive 2004/12/EC (18/02/2004) which amends Directive 94/62/EC, criteria are defined in order to clarify the term ''packaging''. In the Annex I of this amendment Directive, clearly illustrative examples of these criteria are provided (e.g. tea bags are not considered as packaging, while gelatins surrounding CD cases and labels posted directly or attached at the products are considered as packaging). This Annex replaces Annex I of Directive 94/62/EC [Directive 2004/12/EC, 2004].

Directive 94/62/EC provided that member-states should introduce measures (basically included in national programmes) for the prevention of solid waste packaging creation, while the development of reuse systems of packaging is also encouraged. Member-states had to establish systems for solid packaging waste recovery, collection and exploitation in order to achieve the following quantitative targets, as they are defined in Directives 94/62/ΕC and 2004/12/ΕC:

No later than 30 June of 2001, recovery (or incineration in MSW incineration plants with energy recovery) between 50% (as a minimum) and 65% (as a maximum) by weight of the totality of packaging materials contained in the waste.

No later than 31 December 2008, recovery (or incineration in MSW incineration plants with energy recovery) by minimum of 60% by weight of the totality of packaging materials contained in the waste.

No later than 30 June of 2001, recycle between 25% (as a minimum) and 45% (as a maximum) by weight of the totality of packaging materials contained in packaging waste, with a minimum of 15% by weight for each packaging material.

No later than 31 December 2008, between 55% (as a minimum) and 80% (as a maximum) by weight of the totality of packaging materials contained in waste will be recycled, recycle fix targets for each packaging material are: 60% for glass, paper and cardboard; 50% for metals; 22.5% for plastics and 15% for wood.

Page 11: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Figure 3: Target achievement of Directives 94/62/ΕC and 2004/12/ΕC in Greece.

Directive 2004/12/EC gives the opportunity to Greece (together with Ireland and Portugal, because of their specific situation, i.e respectively the large number of small islands, the presence of rural and mountain areas and the low - for year 2004 – level of packaging consumption), to postpone the attainment of 2008 targets to year 2011. Figure 3 shows the attainment of the recycle targets given above for years 2003 and 2006 as well as a prediction of the attainment of targets for year 2011.

Members states have to establish harmonized information systems (databases) on packaging and packaging wastes in order to monitor the implementation of the objectives set out in Directive 94/62/EC, providing the relevant EU database with available data (EU, 2006). Also member-states have to organize information campaigns for public and economic operators. No later than 30 June of 2005, the Commission had to present relevant report concerning the progress of the Directive for packaging application and the existing possibilities on prevention - policy support and packaging reuse. Directive 2005/20/EC (effective from 05/04/2005) granted 10 new member-states with additional time for the attainment of the reformed Directive's (2004/12/EC) targets. Deviations of this type are provided until 31/12/2012 [Directive 2005/20/EC, 2005]

In December 2005, was announced by the EU the new thematic strategy for the waste production prevention and recycle. EU policy finally approaches the ''Zero Waste'' positions mentioned above and views waste production with a new perspective. Waste is now considered as an energy and material resource and the main question posed is how it can be exploited. All processes taking place at industry have to be as much efficient as possible in the use of materials and energy and a material life cycle analysis must be adopted in order to give emphasis at the possible downgrading within the material's life cycle. Priority is given to production procedures, which are also included in ''Zero Waste'' project, like clean, sufficient and finally circular production. Last, this new strategy refers to the application of additional measures as information exchange and general cooperation between the member-states of the EU.

In 2007, EU Council and Parliament set, based on a Commission indication, the targets for 2009 – 2014 period. Energy recovery from residual wastes and refuse derived fuels was classified as an efficient management way and is considered to contribute in the targets mentioned above, achievement [Directive 94/62/EC, 1994].

In 2008 the new Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) was announced, which replaces Directive 2006/12/EC and must be incorporated in the national network of EU member-states until the end of 2010. This Directive focuses on the further clarification of definitions as ''waste'', ''exploitation'' and

Page 12: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

''disposal'' and at the same time emphasizes in waste management hierarchy which is naturally intensified as the peak is approached.

This new Directive demands target quantification for the waste production prevention from the EU member-states, while in other places it poses its own targets. These targets comprise as minimum rate of 70% for recycle at the construction and demolition sector until 2020, a minimum recycle rate of 50% for household waste until 2020, while at least four streams of waste (paper, glass, metals and plastics) are provided until 2015 along with a separate collection for the biodegradable part (2008/98/EC).

Finally, Directive (2009/28/EC) for renewable energy sources determine that the biodegradable fraction of the MSW is considered as biomass (even without a necessary pre-sorting at the waste source), making clear the scenario over the energy exploitation possibilities, according the different technologies available and without requiring necessarily sorting at source.

2.2 National regulation

The national regulation regarding waste management for Greece, Italy, Slovenia, Spain and Catalonia are presented below and more analytically in the Zero Waste system’s analysis: common report which is available to download at the following link:

http://www.med-zerowaste.eu/deliverables/Zero%20Waste%20Systems%20Analysis%20Common%20Report.pdf

Greece

Presidential Decree No.82/2004 for waste oils

Law 2939/2001 ''Packaging and alternative management of packaging waste and other products'' for packaging waste

Presidential Decree No.116/2004 for end of life vehicles

Presidential Decree No.109/2004 for used tires

Presidential Decree No.115/2004 for batteries and accumulators

Presidential Decree No.117/2004 for waste of electrical or electronic equipment

Common Ministerial Decision 36259/1757/E103 24/8/2010 for construction and demolition waste

KYA (Common Ministerial Decision) 29407/3508/2002 for biodegradable waste

Italy

Page 13: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No.95/27 January 1992 for waste oils

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 for packaging waste

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No.209/24 June 2003 for end of life vehicles

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No.209/24 June 2003 for used tires

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No.188/20 November 2008 for batteries and accumulators

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No. 151/25 July 2005 for waste of electrical and electronic equipment

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 for construction and demolition waste

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No.36/13 January 2003 for biodegradable waste

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 for separate collection of organic waste

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 for dangerous domestic waste

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 for waste/vegetable and cooking oil

Slovenia

Operational programme on treatment of waste oils (target: 31/12/2006)

Operational programme of handling of packaging waste (target:31/12/2007)

Rules on the management of end - of - life motor vehicles OG RS 118/2004

Decree on the management of waste tires OG RS 63/2009

Legislative Decree No.152/3 April 2006 and Legislative Decree No. 151/25 July 2005 for waste of electrical and electronic equipment

Spain

Royal Decree 679/2006 of 2 June on the management of used industrial oils

Royal Decree 252/2006 of 3 March on packaging and packaging waste (revising the recycling and recovery targets set out in law 11/1997 of 24 April and Resolution: BOE-A-2009-324 (Plan Nacional Integrado de Residuos 2008-2015) for packaging waste

Royal Decree 1383/2002 of 20 December for the management of vehicles at the end of its useful life

Royal Decree 1619/2005 of 30 December on the management of used tyres

Royal Decree 106/2008 of 1 February on batteries and accumulators and environmental management of their waste

Royal Decree 208/2005 of 25 February on electrical and electronic equipment and waste management

Page 14: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Royal Decree 105/2008 of 1 February which regulates the production and management of construction and demolition waste

Royal Decree 1481/2001 of 27 December regulating the disposal of waste by landfill and Resolution: BOE-A-2009-324 (Plan Nacional Integrado de Residuos 2008-2015) for biodegradable waste

Catalonia

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for waste oils

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for packaging waste

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for end of life vehicles

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for used tyres

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for batteries and accumulators

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for waste of electrical and electronic equipment

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for construction and demolition waste

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for biodegradable waste

Municipal waste management program in Catalonia – PROGREMIC 2007-2012 for bulky waste

3 HIERARCHY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEMES

The waste management is strongly connected to the sustainability issue. It is important to choose policies with the aim of the reduction of waste disposal. Global methane (stronger greenhouse gas) emissions from landfill are estimated to be between 30 and 70 million tones each year. Landfills provide ideal conditions for methanogens, with lots of organic material and anaerobic conditions prevalent. The huge amounts of waste buried in landfill sites can mean that methane is being produced for many years after the site is closed, due to the waste slowly decaying underground. The methane emissions are only one of the problems connected to the waste disposal, such as: area occupation, groundwater pollution and disposal costs. The European directive 2008/98 (article 4) regulates the “waste hierarchy” of the waste management and policy:

(a) prevention;

(b) preparing for re-use;

(c) recycling;

Page 15: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

(d) other recovery, e.g. energy recovery; and

(e) disposal.

This Directive lays down measures to protect the environment and human health by preventing or reducing the adverse impacts of the generation and management of waste and by reducing overall impacts of resource use and improving the efficiency of such use. The hierarchy sets a priority order of what constitutes the best environmental option. The first point highlighted in the Directive 2008/98/EC is the prevention. Each state must develop a national prevention program, defining concrete actions.

For example in Italy this aspect is fixed by article 180 of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006, which is then implemented at regional level (Article 199 of Legislative Decree no. 152/2006). The priority criteria provided in the legislation are explained through the so-called hierarchy of 4R’s:

• Reduce

• Reuse

• Recycle

• Recover

The disposal is a residual phase of the waste cycle, the ultimate solution after the 4R’s strategy.

3.1 Prevention and Minimization

“Reduce” is to set actions to lower waste production by both consumers, and producers. The consumer can personally choose his purchases with the aim to reduce waste, such as:

• choosing products with limited and eco-friendly packaging;

• avoiding mono – portions products, preferring unpacked ones;

• preferring eco-refills for laundry detergents, milk, et cetera.. when available;

Concerning the producers, they must commit themselves to:

• adopt production technologies that use less raw materials, less energy and that origin less waste;

• plan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact;

• Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging, particularly those hard to recycle.

Following article 3 of the new Waste Framework Directive 2008/98, as of 19 November 2008, "Prevention" is defined as any measure taken before a substance, material or product has become waste, which reduces:

• the quantity of waste, including through the re-use of products or the extension of the life span of products;

• the adverse impacts of the generated waste on the environment and human health; or

• the content of harmful substances in materials and products;

With the new waste framework directive, the scope of “prevention” is clearly limited to those actions which are possible “before a product becomes a waste”. This aspect is very important because the word “prevention” is sometimes used to cover all kinds of “waste disposal prevention”

Page 16: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

actions. With the new legal concept, recycling and other recovery actions are clearly viewed as inferior levels in the waste hierarchy.

Following Article 29 (of the new Waste Framework Directive) concerning ”Waste prevention programmes”: ‘Member States shall determine appropriate specific qualitative or quantitative benchmarks for waste prevention measures in order to monitor and assess the progress of the measures and may determine specific qualitative and quantitative targets and indicators, other than those referred to in paragraph 4, for the same purpose’.

“Targets” can be defined as usually desired or promised levels of performance. They may specify a minimum level of performance, or define aspirations for improvement.’ Targets are time bound, they define a “desired”, “promised”, “minimum” or “aspirational” level of service and they are measured via performance indicators. Legally, it’s very important to note that the new Waste Framework Directive introduces an obligation to adopt benchmarks “if appropriate” and we can consider - as we shall comment here after – that some quantitative benchmarks are necessarily appropriate in the field of waste prevention. Some statistics of “kg of municipal waste per inhabitant per year” are available.

The concept of municipal waste which extends to household and other «assimilated» waste is not so clear but has the advantage of being rather flexible and easily understood by the public authorities. The OECD defines “municipal waste” as waste that includes, a part from household waste, waste from institutions and other waste flows such as commercial waste, waste from schools, hospitals, markets, certain firms, parks, road-sweeping and so on.

The “municipal waste” concept as part of a waste reduction campaign is a good choice because:

• it refers to a reality that is easily perceived by local authorities insofar as this concerns what they collect and process as waste within a given geographical area (with a given budget);

• it creates a scope for action that is not restricted to households but can be extended to schools, offices, businesses etc. and this results in a greater quantitative and qualitative potential;

• it represents a statistical reference commonly used throughout Europe.

The most recent Eurostat data (2007) provide with a figure of 522 kg/inh/year (EU 27).The reliability of these data is questionable. This has, amongst other things, to do with the limitations of the definition of municipal waste. Differences between countries arise for two main reasons: the differences found in specific categories to be included in this stream (the most relevant being 'household' and ‘similar’ waste, from shops, offices, etc.) and differences found in the calculation system applied in each country.

ACR+, an international network of members who share the common aim of promoting sustainable consumption of resources and management of waste through prevention at source, reuse and recycling realized the guide “Quantitative Benchmarks for Waste Prevention - A guide for Local & Regional authorities in support of the new Waste Framework Directive”. ACR+ consideration average of 600 kg of waste generated in Europe per inhabitant and per year. According to numerous data collected and analyzed by ACR+ working groups, the guide considers that, based on this theoretical municipal waste mass of 600 kg in 2009, there is a reduction potential of approximately 100 kg for every inhabitant every year, that is to say more or less 15%.

The “100kg less waste per inhabitant” aims to identify different waste prevention activities by cities and regions and to assess their implementation on the ground to evaluate their potential outcomes. The flow of municipal waste can be subdivided into 5 categories which are quantitatively very significant especially from the point of view of waste prevention, that is to say:

• Organic waste

• Paper waste

Page 17: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

• Packaging waste

• Bulky waste

• Other municipal waste

Home composting

Home composting is the composting of bio-waste as well as the use of the compost in a garden belonging to a private household. Home composting allows the treatment of the fermentable fraction of organic household waste by means of:

• heaps/piles – very common in rural areas;

• ad hoc composting bins – the use of which is often the result of promotion actions. More common in urban than in rural areas perhaps.

• silos or open boxes – a rarer process. Though, the time spent by the user for its construction might reveal a real motivation for making quality compost.

To be successful and efficient, home composting has to be promoted to residents using a range of measures, from public relations activities to incentive pricing schemes, through the training of compost counselors or the provision of composting boxes, etc. Promoting home composting appears particularly interesting in very low density areas and in poorer countries where selective collection and/or centralized composting may appear too capital intensive.

Paper consumption

Every stage of the paper production and consumption cycle is associated with a range of potential environmental problems. Most wood fiber, from which pulp and paper are made, comes from natural forests managed for their timber production in North America, Europe, and Asia and from plantations around the world. Half of the trees cut commercially around the world end up in paper products. The processing of pulp and paper also consumes vast amounts of energy. An average of 50% less energy consumption is used when recycling instead of incinerating paper and cardboard over the entire life-cycle. However the better strategy remains paper waste reduction at source: 1kg paper reduction equals to a reduction of ~2kg CO2 per inhabitant yearly. In Europe, between 15% to 20% of the municipal waste bin or 90 to 120 kg/inh/year is non packaging waste paper from which an average 66% is collected selectively. Paper waste represents – along with bio-waste - the most important fraction of municipal waste in Europe.

Dematerialization of documents in the Public Administration

Each Italian office-worker produces 36 prints a day, in other words about 1 kg of paper in a week. It’s possible to save 15 kg/empl. for year of paper by: setting copiers and printers to double side printing/copying by default; for editing and reviewing documents, transfer documents on disk or by e-mail, use electronic communications for directories, forms, bulletins, manuals, reports and storage when possible; computer’s default settings can be change to allow more text per page such as reducing margins, reducing font size; encourage paper reuse by using the blank sides of unneeded single-sided copies and using only used paper in the printer tray if printing emails is unavoidable.

Reduction of paper by rejecting mail advertising

Page 18: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Households and organisations (primarily) will reduce paper waste issued from unwanted and unaddressed mail (advertisement) through implementation of an “no junk mail” sticker on the door to avoid unsolicited advertising and unsubscribing to any paper format publication/catalogue, etc, not used and avoid joining new mailing lists when completing forms

The reduction of needless paper represents one of the waste reduction actions developed by the Italian Public Administration ( ref.: Direttiva della Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri, Dipartimento per l'Innovazione e le Tecnologie 18 dicembre 2003 in Gazz. Uff., 4 febbraio, n. 28; Decreto-legge 25 giugno 2008, n. 112 , art.27: “decretotagliacarta”- paper-cutdecree- ; L. n°13 del 27/02/2009, art. 7-bis; Penal Code, art.660 – 663, Art. 660).

Best practices for waste reduction

One of the first studies about waste reduction was made by ACR+. The work, «Les actions volontaires promues par les authorities locales en faveur de la prevention des dechets en Europe», illustrates significant experiences and means of work, promoted by local authorities, for the prevention of waste production. The waste collection is characterized by 5 main material flows: bio-waste, paper waste, packaging waste, bulky materials and WEEE, disposable materials. The ACR+ work identifies practical actions to reduce waste production from the 5 main material flows and calculates the amount of the reduction:

Actions for the 5 flowsGeneration

(kg/hab./y)

Potential

waste reduction

(kg/hab./y)*

1 Bio-waste 220 40

Green scaping90 10

Smart gardening

Act against food waste 30 10

Home, community & on-site composting 100 20

2 Packaging 150 25

Encouraging refillable/returnable bottles 35 12

Promoting tap water 6 2

Encouraging reusable bags 2 1

Fight against excess packaging 107 10

3 Paper waste 100 15

Page 19: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Reducing unwanted & unaddressed mail 15 4

Encourage dematerialisation through ICT 75 9

Reducing kitchen, tissue and towel paper 10 2

4 Bulky waste 52 12

Promote clothes & other textiles waste prevention 15 4

Promote furniture waste prevention 20 4

Promote WEEE prevention 17 4

5 Nappies and other wastes 78 8

Swap to reusable nappies and incontinence pads 18 2

Other municipal waste prevention strategies 60 6

Total waste reduction 600 100

3.2 Reuse

‘Reuse’ means any operation by which products or components that are not waste are used again for the same purpose for which they were conceived. It comes before recycling, because REUSE requires fewer resources to be consumed. The only energy consumed to reuse household waste is your own.

Concerning the reuse issue consumers can adopt concrete actions, such as:

using several times a single item

buying reusable products, reducing the disposable items

joining “Deposing Refund” systems

preferring the rechargeable batteries

preferring recoverable packaging and reuse theme as much as possible

Rechargeable batteries are available from most major electrical stores. These batteries can be recharged and reused numerous times and are good for frequently used utilizations. A number of organizations collect furniture and white goods (e.g. cookers, fridges, microwaves and washing machines). Goods that can be repaired are given to local people in need or sold in local retail outlets. Goods that cannot be repaired are recycled through "repair and overhaul" organizations.

There are few benefits concerning the reuse actions, such as:

Page 20: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

saves landfill space

doesn't use up energy or raw materials as new products are not being made

reduces waste handling and disposal costs

generates an income for charities and other social groups

helps those that need reused items like schools, community organizations and disadvantaged members of the public

creates opportunities for jobs and training.

3.3 The Recycling costs and the importance of the materials purity

“Recycling" means the transformation of a specific material originally made up for a precise aim, to be useful to another purpose. The consumers have the fundamental task to select and differentiate the typology of waste materials, adopting the diversified harvest. In this way the different materials (paper, glass, plastic) can be processed to produce new ones.

It is necessary to carry out a good selection, in order to avoid further technological steps to remove impurities. For example, it is easier (energy-economic-environmental “cheaper”) get the glass from the bottles that from the sand: waste reduction disposal and in parallel resources recovering.

Some representative examples are shown below:

15 plastic bottles for a sweater;

37 drink cans for a coffee factory;

70 drink cans for a pan;

800 drink cans for a bike.

Recycling is the set of strategies to process used materials (waste) into new products. Recycling has a lot of virtuous effects: reducing the consumption of fresh raw materials, reducing energy usage, reducing air pollution (from incineration) and water pollution (landfill), reducing the need for "conventional" waste disposal, and lower greenhouse gas emissions as compared to virgin production (analyzing the whole life cycle). It is important to consider the recycling activity as an "integrated system", because this approach must necessarily operate on the entire production process and not only on the final step of waste disposal. To facilitate recycling of materials is essential the activity made up by citizens of the selective waste collection, which allows the separation of materials by reducing the costs of reprocessing.

In order to comply with the objectives of the European directive 2008/98 and move towards a European recycling society with a high level of resource efficiency, Member States shall take the necessary measures designed to achieve the following targets (specified in the 11th article of the 2008/98/CE):

• by 2020, the preparing for re-use and the recycling of waste materials such as at least paper, metal, plastic and glass from households and possibly from other origins as far as these waste streams are similar to waste from households, shall be increased to a minimum of overall 50 % by weight;

• by 2020, the preparing for re-use, recycling and other material recovery, including backfilling operations using waste to substitute other materials, of non-hazardous

Page 21: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

construction and demolition waste excluding naturally occurring material defined in category 17 05 04 in the list of waste shall be increased to a minimum of 70 % by weight.

The selective waste collection must be the first step in order to then develop the supply chains of materials recovery. An important aspect of recycling is the opening of new markets, where new businesses "recover" recyclable materials for resale as raw materials or semi-processed to the manufacturing companies: this origins new job opportunities.

Concerning these aspects, it can be interesting to take a look to the case of the Italy, where operates the CONAI, the National Packaging Consortium. It is a private consortium of firms working towards the recovery and recycling of packaging issued for consumption on national territory, with the aim of meeting statutory targets. CONAI guarantees target achievement at the lowest economic cost of all the European consortia, working as a market subsidiary.

In order to guarantee the recovery of packaging from public collection, CONAI has stipulated a framework agreement with ANCI, the national association of Italian municipalities, that lays down conditions for the take-back of packaging waste collected by town councils. Within the ANCI-CONAI agreement, the Consortia may stipulate appropriate contracts with municipalities and waste collection service companies for the take-back of used packaging. A number of 7,000 municipalities have signed contracts and 90% of the population is now served within the framework. Since 2000 the quantity of packaging waste from separate collection managed by the consortium system has more than quadrupled.

Purity of the materials

The degree of purity of materials is a very important aspect concerning the recycling. It can be obtained firstly by improving selective collection systems. The materials of a different nature to the material object of differentiation are called "impurities". For example a plastic bag thrown into the garbage bin of the paper is considered an impurity. The same consideration can be explained for a ceramic plate in the collection of glass or a cigarette butt in the organic bin.

The collection system known as "Door to Door" is a typology that allows obtaining high purity of materials, thus requiring less processing post harvest for the materials purification. Although the recycling service is a cost for the municipalities, and the type "Door to Door" is generally more expensive than the traditional systems, it allows a reduction of costs of recycle chain (firstly getting more revenue from the sale of materials characterized by an high level of purity). In addition, the amount of potentially recyclable captured materials is much greater, resulting consequently a lower production of unsorted waste, which is expensively and difficulty recyclable.

Why is it so important to separate our waste properly and throw them in the correct container? There are both economic and environmental. The impurities increase the cost of recycle, due to an increase of energy consumption and time to reprocess in the select platforms. Moreover, after the first purification process the impurities must be sent to other platforms or disposal facilities, increasing the transportation costs. Another important aspect concerns the Municipalities that stipulate an agreement with recycle consortia that fix maximum percentages of impurities in the material object of differentiation: the overcoming of these percentages origin a compensations reduction.

An approach focused on the limitation of impurity to enhance the recycle potential regard not only the citizens in the collection activities but also the packaging producers (safeguarding the environment by embracing the entire packaging lifecycle, from production to end-of-life management). In fact the adoption of environment-friendly packaging has stimulated co-coordinating the recovery and recycling of packaging after use.

Page 22: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

3.4 Energy recovery

The incineration of waste is far from being always performed under the same conditions. It is not our purpose to provide here an extensive coverage of the technology, but a few basic elements are useful to understand some of the issues raised around the thermal treatment of waste. The technology is constantly evolving in order to meet ever stricter environmental standards. Currently, the main technological advances introduced include on the one hand those that increase combustion and energy production efficiency, and, on the other hand, those that improve the efficiency of end-of-pipe emissions control. In all types of furnaces, energy recovery occurs through a boiler located after the combustion chamber or integrated to its exhaust. The boiler uses circulating water to recover the heat from the combustion gases in the form of steam or hot water.

3.5 The disposal of residual fraction

The residual fraction is defined as the fraction of the waste that has not been differentiated and moved to recycle: more developed is the source separate collection systems (combined with the good behaviour of each user), then smaller there will be the quantities of residual waste to be treated/disposed. Member States must define disposal operations as last solution (as the waste hierarchy explains) in the waste management actions. The disposal has to guarantee the protection of the human health and environment. The two methods for the disposal of regulated residual fraction are:

landfill (1999/31/EC)

Incineration

The residual fraction consists of the following main fractions:

wet fraction

dry fraction

The residual fraction called "wet fraction" is composed by materials of animal and vegetable origin, mainly the remains of the kitchen and the table, which are subject to rapid natural biodegradation. This component determines few problems related to sanitation issues and in the first instance to the bad smell. In the category of 'the "wet fraction" all the materials from garden maintenance (mowing, pruning) are also includes The percentage of the “wet fraction” on the total of the households garbage is about 30-40% (very impacting). The “dry residual fraction” includes all the waste that cannot be recycled, such as wax paper, dirty or oily, diapers, sanitary napkins, rags, nylon stockings, plastic toys, bedding for dogs and cats.

The EU countries have agreed on a directive requiring that the amount of biodegradable organic waste deposited in landfills must be decreased by 65% by July 2016 (Council Directive1999/31/EC on the landfilling of waste). The main alternatives to landfilling of organic waste are reactor-based biogas production and composting (aerobic treatment). The Member States must elaborate program to manage the biodegradable waste, defining concrete actions at citizens (separate collection of the biodegradable fraction of garbage, self composting) and plants (anaerobic digestors or composting plants).

In addition to the reduction of biodegradable waste moved to landfill, there is the obligation to waste pre-treatment before the landfilling. The environment Agency defines "treatment" any physical, thermal, chemical or biological process including sorting, that change the characteristics

Page 23: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

of the waste in order to reduce its volume or hazardous nature, facilitate its handling, or to facilitate recovery promote safe disposal. Summarizing, the solutions for the management of the residual fraction should be inspirited by the following two main points that are consistent with regulatory purposes:

minimization of the waste produced and waste disposed

maximization of the recycling (material recovery)

The management of the residual fraction is strongly dependent on the source actions, in particular connected to the reduction of waste production, selective collection and virtuous behaviour of every citizen.

Mechanical Biological Treatment

Downstream of the collection, the residual fraction can be subjected to mechanical biological treatment (MBT), treatment technologies "cold" that exploit the combination of mechanical to biological processes, in order to recover the starting material and recycling stabilize the waste. An MBT system is a type of waste processing based on the combination of mechanical and biological processes, with the aim of recovering the recyclable material and stabilizing the residual fraction. The MBT plants combine a sorting facility with a form of biological treatment such as composting or anaerobic digestion and they are designed to process mixed household waste as well as commercial and industrial wastes.

The components of the mixed waste stream that can be recovered include:

Ferrous metal

Non ferrous metal

Plastic

Glass

Organic matter

The main types of mechanical treatment are:

Grinding

Screening

Magnetic separation

The main types of biological element refers to:

Anaerobic digestion

Composting

Bio-drying

Special machines separate the wet fraction (organic compounds) from the dry fraction (paper, plastic, glass, aggregates, etc.), that (the dry fraction) can be partly recycled and partly used to produce refuse derived fuel (RDF), removing incombustible materials. The wet fraction is bio-stabilized through biological processes, which stands as the compost is not used as fertilizer in agriculture but, being characterized by a reduced fermentability up to 90%, is particularly suitable for various applications aimed at environmental restoration, landscaping and landfill daily cover, without emissions of methane (greenhouse gas about 21 times more powerful than CO2, if released into the atmosphere).

Page 24: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

The wet fraction is treated through the bio-stabilization, that means composting the unselected urban waste which can be mechanically separated into fine organic particles and into coarse waste particles (made by dry and inert parts). This process allows to eliminate the organic part of the waste from the traditional disposal channel (landfill and incinerator), in order to create an environmentally compatible waste management, which is also logistically an economically convenient. With the bio-stabilization process is possible to obtain a particular product, denominated as “poor” compost, which is richer of heavy metals and has lower agronomical characteristics. This process is also important because complies with the EU law 31/99, according to which it is no more possible to dispose the untreated urban waste into landfills.

4 SYSTEM CHARACTERIZATION

4.1 MSW streams

4.1.1. General classification

Municipal solid wastes (MSW) can be divided into different categories (see section 3.1) according to the inherent characteristics related to their composition, hazardous properties, final destination, etc. but from a more practical point of view the most accepted division is the one of the collection system necessary for each MSW stream [Tchobanoglous et al., 1993]. Accordingly, MSW are divided into:

- Ordinary MSW: these are subjected to a typical collection system based on street bins, collection trucks, etc. and need a frequent collection frequency. They are the most abundant solid wastes and include organics, paper and cardboard, packaging, glass, metals and textiles as the main categories, with a weight percentage of more than 95% of MSW.

- Bulky MSW: these are the wastes that cannot be collected by the typical collection systems because of their size, such as old furniture, electrical appliances or big electronic devices such as computers. Although there are few data on their weight percentage, it is assumed to be within 1-5%.

- Hazardous wastes: the number of categories defined as “hazardous” that can be found in MSW streams is extremely high (e.g. batteries, oils, health products, drugs, fireworks, cleaning products, etc.). Few data is available on the weight percentages of these waste in MSW, although a relative range within 0.01 to 1% is assumed.

Detailed information on the main MSW streams can be found at the different Waste Agencies for each country [e.g. Agència de Residus de Catalunya, 2011].

4.1.2. Ordinary MSW

Biowaste

This is the most abundant fraction of MSW. It is composed of kitchen residues, garden trimmings, pruning wastes and other similar organic products. It is characterized by high moisture and organic

Page 25: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

matter content, easy biodegradability and an important potential to produce energy, in form of biogas, or to produce compost [Haug, 1993].

Regarding the organic waste stream, one of the controversies that appear in society is how to collect and store these wastes at home. Recent studies [Puyuelo et al., 2012] based on a massive experimental test involving more than 100 families have demonstrated that the use of the so-called “aerated-system” that uses the combination of compostable bags and perforated bins (Picture 2) is the most suitable to avoid unpleasant odors, flies, leachate, etc. Results have also shown that this system is the best way to prepare the organic materials for a further biological treatment step (especially composting).

Picture 2: The aerated system vs. the traditional system to collect organics at home with optimal results [Puyuelo et al., 2012].

Paper and cardboard

Despite the fact, being different materials, they are often collected simultaneously. Although this fraction is obviously, biodegradable, its main destination is recycling, as its potential to produce new paper is high if the separated selection is properly carried out.

Plastics

Plastics are found mainly in packaging, often in combination with other materials such as paper or cardboard or even in the form of complex combinations such as tetra-pack. Although they can be recycled, sometimes it is difficult to separate the different polymers that compose the plastic material and its destination is energy recovery [Christensen, 2011].

Other ordinary MSW

Glass, metals and textiles are the other main MSW streams. Glass is characterized by high recycling figures all over Europe, whereas metals (especially iron and aluminum, which are the most abundant metals) present high recycling rates as well. All these materials present a long history on recycling experiences even before the modern schemes of separated collection were proposed in Europe. In relation to textiles, old clothes are typically managed by non-profit organizations for their reuse, whereas sanitary textiles such as diapers are just now in the stage of searching for alternative ways of disposal apart from landfilling [EDANA, 2008; Colón et al., 2011].

An average general approximate weight composition of MSW in Europe is presented in Figure 4 [Eurostat, 2011], although specific figures must be consulted for each country or community.

Page 26: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

35%

25%

20%

5%5% 5% 5% Biowaste

Paper & CardboardPlasticsGlassMetalsTextileOther

Figure 4: Average weight composition of MSW streams [Eurostat, 2011].

4.1.3. Bulky and Hazardous MSW

For bulky MSW, since the size of these wastes makes impossible to be collected by standard trucks or street bins, the normal system is a door-to-door collection, although several schemes can be found in Europe, such as their collection on one specific day of the week.

Hazardous waste need a separate collection system to avoid severe environmental impacts. This is, of course, one of the most important challenges that modern societies need to face in the short-term future. Among the MSW hazardous streams, a lot of products of daily use at home can be found [European Commission, 2011]. Their destination is often a “green point” (see section 5.4.2), a place where these products are collected and treated and that can be also used for the collection of bulky materials. Important progresses have been done in the study of eco-designed green points, which have been recently published [CADS, 2011] as seen in Picture 3.

Picture 3: Eco-designed green point [CADS, 2011].

Other options include the management in the specific shops that have collection points for these products once they are used and become wastes. Some specific bulky or hazardous wastes have deserved special attention:

Page 27: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

- Electrical/electronic appliances and devices: new taxes are proposed to help in the materials recycling according to the recently published European Directives 2002/95/EC and 2002/96/EC [European Commission, 2003a; European Commission, 2003b].

- Batteries: a specific Directive (2006/66/EC) and its further amendments have been published in relation to these materials [European Commission 2006]. The Directive introduces measures to prohibit the marketing of some batteries containing hazardous substances. It contains measures for establishing schemes aiming at high level of collection and recycling of batteries with quantified collection and recycling targets. In practice, high rates of collection of these materials have been reached in most of the European countries and, in general, the population is aware of the necessity of separate batteries from other MSW streams.

- Kitchen oils: these materials are often in a diffuse frontier that separates solid wastes from wastewater. It is evident that if they are directly thrown to the sewer systems, they pose an important problem to wastewater treatment plants or, even worse, to rivers or sea, as they are responsible for severe contamination. Recently, some experiences have demonstrated that kitchen oils can be managed by two more environmentally friendly options:

If the amount of oil is low, paper can be used to absorb oil and the final mixture is susceptible to be collected with the organic fraction of MSW. There exist numerous experiences in scientific literature on the biological degradation of oils and fats of animal and vegetal origin, both by composting and anaerobic digestion [Fernández et al., 2005; Ruggieri et al., 2008].

If the amount of oil is considerable (e.g. exhaust fryer oil), this material should be separately collected in a green point. In Catalonia, there are successful cases where mobile green points are used to collect this oil on one pre-announced day of the week [Ajuntament de Mataró, 2011].

4.2 Waste collection systems

Local authorities with responsibility for municipal waste management must define the most suitable collection model for their municipality or group of municipalities. Selected fractions are marked mainly by the need to meet the objectives set by the law, but also involved political, social and economic. The waste collection models currently applied can be classified by [ARC, 2012]:

Type of waste segregation model:

o Multiple fractions: two, three, four or five fractions

o Mixed waste

Location of the collection system:

o Surface containers (pavement and drop-off areas)

o Buried containers

o Door-to-door

o Pneumatic

Each segregation model is combined with one or more collection systems and its collection frequency according to the features and preferences of each municipality (see section 6.1 for a comparative environmental analysis). The collection is a process of reception and temporary

Page 28: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

accumulation of wastes in certain parts of the cities, villages and towns. The collection is often performed with trucks that follow a specific route in order to collect the waste from the different points generated by consumers or citizens. There are many collection systems: door to door, curbside bins, containers, pneumatic systems, underground containers, and so on. Moreover, there are mixed systems which, depending on the waste fraction, can be each time used.

4.2.1 Type of waste segregation model

Models are differentiated by the number and type of segregations at source required of the user. The table below shows some of examples of the different waste segregation models that could coexist:

Figure 5: Examples of types of segregation models in collecting MSW [ARC, 2012].

4.2.2 Location of the collection system

It is distinguish between the types of selective collection, according to the waste inflow and the sorting system. Broadly speaking, it is differentiated between collection in surface containers (pavement and drop-off point), collection in buried containers, door-to-door collection and pneumatic collection. Each system has its advantages and drawbacks depending on the urban context in which is applied. Besides, each system includes several options in the application frequency (daily, two days per week, etc.)

4.2.2.1 Surface containers

Selective collection on pavements or at drop-off points by means of containers on pavements or at the side of roads. Selective collection in surface containers consists of placing containers of different types (depending on the waste fraction collected) on the streets, where people use to deposit their refuse. The containers are emptied periodically, at frequencies adapted to the generation and characteristics of each waste fraction. There are several container systems, none of which are mutually exclusive [González-Torre et al., 2003]:

Page 29: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Household containers/ Curbside Collection consist of bins (typically plastic boxes of small size) allocated to individual families, therefore near enough to the source of waste generation.

Neighborhood containers consist of a number of bins located close to the neighborhood garbage bin. This system typically applies for apartment complexes, where individual families are responsible for delivering their waste to a common container (neighborhood garbage bin).

Zone containers consist of large bins for different waste types located in central areas that serve one or multiple neighborhoods. This system often applies to cases where there is curbside collection for general garbage, but no curbside collection of recyclables.

Green Points are areas that have been specifically designed to collect not only separated items from the particular catchment areas and curbside bins, but also to selectively collect materials not covered by the other systems (hazardous waste, different classes of household electrical appliances, computer equipment and clothes, to name a few).

4.2.2.2 Buried containers

Collection in buried containers involves installing containers below ground level. On the surface only the drop box is visible, where people leave their refuse. There are numerous buried container systems, distinguished basically by the type of container, drop box and elevation system used. The most frequently used elevation systems make use of the collection truck hoist and the hydraulic systems incorporated in each buried container area. The containers can be larger than those used on the surface, as they do not take up room on the public thoroughfare. The installation of buried containers requires considerable initial investment.

Figure 6: Advantages and disadvantages of buried containers collection system [ARC, 2012].

4.2.2.3 Door to door

Using a door-to-door system, all domestic fractions can be collected from the street (final waste, OFMSW, glass, packaging and paper and cardboard), or only certain fractions, at least final waste and OFMSW, with containers for the other fractions. The results of selective collection achieved in municipalities operating door-to-door systems are superior in general, both in the amount collected and the quality of separation (in general between 60 and 80% for selective collection). Implementation of door-to-door collection is simpler in areas with lower population density, where it is easier to identify individuals’ refuse. Implementing DtD collection systems requires a change of habits on the part of the public, which must be achieved through an adequate communication campaign. DtD collection models enable waste generators to be identified and therefore fairer

Page 30: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

control systems to be introduced, such as payment for generation (e.g. payment per bag or payment per bin).

Figure 7: Advantages and disadvantages of door to door collection system [ARC, 2012].

4.2.2.4 Pneumatic

A pneumatic waste collection system consists of a series of drop boxes connected to a suction point via underground pipes. The collection cycle starts when segregated refuse is dropped into the boxes, which may be located inside houses, in common areas in apartment blocks, or in public areas outdoors. The refuse falls due to gravity to the valves installed at lower levels and stored there temporarily. Two systems are used to collect the refuse: static and mobile.

Static system. On a regular basis the refuse stored is emptied out. A central computer coordinates collection. First a depression is created in the pipe network and an air current enters that enables the refuse to be sucked along to a central point. The refuse is conveyed at speeds between 60 and 80 km/h. At the central collection point, the refuse goes into containers and the compressed air is filtered before being released into the atmosphere. The refuse stored in containers is removed by trucks as often as necessary, and taken to the relevant treatment points.

Mobile system. In this system the chutes are connected to containers. Trucks are used to create suction, at certain fixed points, from which different containers can be emptied.

Furthermore, the different fractions to be collected can be dropped into the same box or in different boxes. In the first case, the different fractions must be put into different colored bags so they can be sorted at the plant. Bags must be properly closed and be of sufficient quality to prevent them breaking during suction. In the second case, each valve holds back a different fraction and during suction only valves corresponding to the same fraction opens.

Figure 8: Advantages and disadvantages of pneumatic collection system [ARC, 2012].

Page 31: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

4.3 Waste treatment

Municipal solid wastes (MSW) are categorized in Europe according to the best treatment options in the “waste hierarchy” promoted by the European Union on the basis of the Waste Framework Directive [European Union, 2008a]. This hierarchy includes (see section 3.1 for more details):

1. Waste minimization

2. Recovery

3. Recycling (including composting and anaerobic digestion as biological treatments)

4. Incineration (with energy recovery)

5. Final disposal (landfilling)

Although the two first ones cannot be considered “treatment” options, numerous efforts have been made in this direction. A compilation of successful experiences of waste minimization can be found in the European Environment Agency webpage [EEA, 2011] and it is the main topic of another chapter of this handbook (see sections 3.1, 3.2 and 5.1). In addition to this, the statistics related to the main destinations of MSW streams according to their treatment in Europe can be found in Eurostat webpage [Eurostat, 2011].

Recycling treatments are normally used for those fractions that can be easily converted into raw materials. A wide discussion has already taken place in section 3.3 for the cases of glass, metals, paper and cardboard and plastics.

4.3.1 Biological treatments

Composting

According to Haug [Haug, 1993], composting is “the biological decomposition and stabilization of organic substrates, under conditions that allow development of thermophilic temperatures as a result of biologically produced heat, to produce a final product that is stable, free of pathogens and plant seeds, and can be beneficially applied to land”. This definition highlights the main characteristics of this process, which has been successfully applied to a lot of typologies of organic wastes, including the organic fraction of MSW. It is obvious that the option of a good end product is directly related to the quality of raw materials, which, in the case of MSW, implies a separate collection of the organic fraction [European Union, 2008b].

There are different technologies being applied to the composting of organic wastes, from simple turned piles to more complex reactors with a simultaneous process monitoring. Moreover, the technology is often important in establishing the environmental impacts of the process and the quality of the compost [Colón et al. 2012]. However, the main problem that composting has to face today is the presence of odors in the vicinity of composting plants. This is normally solved by the use of biofilters, which are rather essential in order to perform a low impact composting process [Devinny et al., 1999].

Page 32: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Picture 4: Image of a biofilter in a composting plant.

Anaerobic digestion

Anaerobic digestion is a series of processes in which microorganisms break down biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen to end up producing a mixture of gases mainly composed by methane and carbon dioxide known as biogas. This is the main interest of the process, since it is energetically favorable [AD, 2011]. Anaerobic digestion is a complex process that, when applied to the organic fraction of MSW, it is industrially carried out by using several technologies, which can be divided into:

- Dry/Wet: depending on the solids content.

- Thermophilic/Mesophilic depending on the process temperature.

- One stage/Several stages: if each of the biological/biochemical stages of the process are performed in one single or in several reactors.

Traditionally, anaerobic digestion has been considered the opposite of composting but today these two technologies are complementary in modern waste treatment plants that combine anaerobic and aerobic operations for the production of biogas and compost or in Mechanical-Biological Treatment Plants (MBT) [Àrea Metropolitana de Barcelona, 2011].

Picture 5: Image of a dry anaerobic digester.

4.3.2 Incineration

Incineration of MSW has significantly evolved since the publication of the Directive 2000/76/EC and its posterior amendments [European Commission, 2000]. New stringent regulations are related

Page 33: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

to the exhaust gas treatment with special incidence of dioxins and furans and the fact that energy must be recovered according to an already popular formula based on energy efficiency [European Commission, 2005]. These new regulations have provoked several consequences:

- The closing of existing incinerators, typically uncontrolled with regard to the emissions and with low or no energy recovery.

- The modernization of existing big facilities for the incineration of MSW. Several examples can be found in literature for a complete scheme of a modern incineration plant, including gas treatment operations [WTERT, 2011].

Regardless these changes, incineration is still difficult to be accepted by population.

4.3.3 Landfill

An extensive description of modern landfills can be found in [Tchobanoglous et al., 1993]. Apart from the fact that this is the lowest preferred way to treat MSW, the most important issues related to the environmental impact are the production of leachate and the generation of a gas of similar properties than biogas. In recent years, the energy potential of this landfill gas has promoted the implementation of some cogeneration units to recover this energy, when possible (normally the first five to ten years of a landfill life). Some prestigious institutions have even published models to know the production of landfill gas from MSW disposal [US EPA, 2005]. A newer technology is emerging in which the concentration of methane contained in the biogas is increased through biogas upgrading technologies, in which the carbon dioxide (CO2) is removed. By upgrading, the biogas become comparable to natural gas and can therefore be distributed into the natural gas grid or be used as a source of vehicle fuels. There are a handful of technologies on the market that upgrade biogas, though the CO2 that is removed is released back into the atmosphere. Currently there are some novel processes that are being developed that not only remove the CO2 but also immediately stores it. Two forms of these technologies are under development through the Life+ programme UPGAS-LOWCO2. Through life cycle assessment it was found that in order to produce 1 kWh of upgraded biogas conventional technologies can prevent around 1750 g of CO2 eq., in the form of methane, from being directly released into the atmosphere. Meanwhile, the novel carbon capture and storage technologies perform better and prevent around 1980 g of CO2 eq. from being emitted per 1 kWh of biomethane produced. For more information about these technologies you can access www.upgas.eu and for further information on its environmental impact please see (Starr et al., 2012).

4.3.4 Other treatments

Nowadays, a proliferation of novel technologies exists for the treatment of the different streams that compose MSW or for the mixed MSW stream without previous separation at home. It is still too soon to know if these technologies will finally end up in consolidated treatment options for MSW; however, it is important to keep them in mind as possible alternatives. Among others:

- Autoclaving (e.g. www.ambiensys.es/)

- Plasma (e.g. www.heraholding.com/)

- Gasification (e.g. http://www.gasification.org/)

- Pyrolysis (e.g. www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk/)

Page 34: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

4.4 Economic instruments for waste management

4.4.1 Introduction

Within the wide array of policies that can be applied to waste management, economic instruments are among of the most cost-effective. On one hand, they make it possible to reduce the externalities that society assumes as a whole. On the other hand, they allow a fairer distribution of the costs of waste management.

The application of economic principles such as the shared responsibility principle or the polluter pays principle is not only fair, but it also creates incentives for waste reduction and recycling.

In fact, the Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/CE) points out in several articles (11, 21 and 28), the crucial role of economic instruments in order to reach the goals of an ecologically sound waste management. As it is stated in the preamble (point 42) “waste often has a value as a resource, and the further application of economic instruments may maximize environmental benefits”.

The application of economic instruments in the field of waste management can be undertaken at different levels, depending of which administration has the legislative competence. Below some of the most used economic instruments for waste management are presented.

4.4.2 Taxes on products

Taxes can be applied on the production or consumption of certain products that cause a particularly high environmental impact in terms of waste generation.

The taxation of such products seeks to internalize the environmental costs they cause and to dissuade their demand. Some examples of taxes on products related to waste generation are:7

- Taxes on one-use plastic bags, applied in Iceland, Denmark and Ireland8

- Taxes on batteries, applied in Belgium, Iceland, Portugal and Switzerland.- Taxes on packaging waste, applied in Belgium, Denmark, Hungary, Norway, Poland,

Sweden and Switzerland.- Taxes on disposable cutlery, applied in Denmark.- Taxes on disposable razors and one-use cameras, applied in Belgium.

These numerous and interesting experiences lack a harmonization at European level that with no doubt would make its application more effective.

4.4.3 Taxes on waste disposal and/or incineration

Currently, 20 European countries and regions have taxes on disposal and/or incineration of municipal solid waste (see ). Most of them are applied at a national level, however there are also taxes applied at a regional scale (for instance, in Belgium, Italy and Spain).

7 Most of these instruments are included in the OECD/EEA database on instruments used for environmental policy and natural resources management, available at http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries [27th February 2012].8 This tax caused a reduction of 90% of one-use plastic bags consumed during the first year of application (Killian 2003).

Page 35: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Table 1: Landfill and incineration taxes applied in several European countries and regions9.

Country / Region Year of introduction

Tax rate (€/ton) (year)

Landfilling Incineration

Denmark 1987 63,78 (2011) 44 (2010)

Austria 1990 87 (2009) 7 (2009)

Estonia 1990 12 (2011) -

Flanders (Belgium) 1990 84,9 – 169,8 (2012) 7,9 (2012)

Wallonia (Belgium) 1991 60 (2010) -

Czech Republic 1992 20,5 (2011) -

Netherlands 1995 85,5 (2009) -

Finland 1996 40 (2010) -

Italy (regions) 1996 5,2 – 25,8 (2009) 1,0 – 5,2 (2009)

United Kindgdom 1996 64,06 (2012) -

France 1999 7,5 - 36 (2010) 2,4 – 11,2 (2010)

Norway 1999 35,0 – 57,9 (2011) 7,3 (2009)

Sweden 2000 40,9 (2010) -

Poland 2001 27 (2011) -

Switzerland 2001 9,9 - 33,1 (2009) -

Ireland 2002 50 (2011) -

Catalonia (Spain) 2004 12,4 – 21,6 (2012) 5,7 – 16,5 (2012)

Slovak Republic 2004 0,6 – 8,0 (2011) -

Portugal 2007 4 - 6 (2011) 1,1 – 1,6 (2011)

Lithuania 2012 22 (2012) -

Latvia - 7,1 (2011) -

The experience of the countries where taxes on waste disposal have been applied during a long period of time demonstrates that there is an inverse correlation between the tax rate and the percentage of waste landfilled [IEEP, 2011]. The higher the tax rate, the lower the percentage of waste landfilled. This situation takes place, for instance, in Austria, Sweden, Estonia and Finland. 9 Source: Own elaboration from http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries, IEEP 2011, Hogg 2011 and Fischer 2011.

Page 36: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

However, there are also cases –such as Denmark, Catalonia and France– where a constant tax rate has result in a reduction of waste landfilled [IEEP, 2011, Puig et al., in press].

4.4.4 Waste charges

Local authorities have several economic tools for waste management: establishing high fees for the use of landfills and/or incinerators that they own (particularly on waste that could otherwise be recycled), applying charges for the use of the public space on activities that generate a high amount of waste, applying fee-rebate schemes to foster recycling among members in associations of municipalities [Puig, 2004], giving subsidies for waste reduction and recycling, implementing green public purchasing, etc.

Within these instruments, waste charges stand as the one with a greater capacity of influencing waste reduction and recycling. Waste charges are levied by local authorities to waste generators (households, commercial activities and industries) for the costs of waste collection and treatment. The environmental potential of waste charges derives from the fact that they can potentially encourage citizens to change their behaviour. However, this potential is not inherent to them, but it depends on how they are designed.

In order to create an incentive towards waste reduction and recycling, these charges should be designed in such a way that each taxpayer pays according to the amount and type of waste generated. Besides an ecological justification, this approach is fairer in terms of distribution of costs and is less regressive from a social point of view than a flat rate, due to the correlation that exists between income and waste generation.

This approach is known as “pay-as-you-throw” (PAYT) and it is widely implemented in many European countries (e.g. Belgium, Germany, Austria, Italy, etc.). Most PAYT schemes are implemented in the framework of door-to-door waste collection systems, which consist in collecting the several waste fractions according to a pre-defined schedule at the doorstep of each household or commercial activity. This allows the identification of each waste generator, making it possible to charge them according to generation. There are different PAYT schemes, according to the methodology they use to measure waste generation:

- Pay per bag : in this scheme the municipality makes it compulsory for taxpayers to use standardized bags of a certain characteristics (colour, volume, logo) to deliver waste. These bags are the only ones collected by the municipality and the charge is included in the price of the bag, so that the charge (or variable part of it) is proportional to the number of bags used, that is proportional to the volume of waste generated.

- Pay per can : in this case households and commercial activities have their own bin or container for the delivery of waste, which is collected at their doorstep. The charge depends on the size or frequency of the collection, which can be chosen by the user. There are several alternatives for the implementation of this scheme. One option is that users pay according to the volume of the container and a pre-selected collection frequency. Another option is that they pay according to the number of times that the container is collected, by incorporating a chip or tag in the container and registering the number of times that it is effectively collected. Another variant of pay per can consists in linking the payment to the weight of the waste collected, by installing a weighting system in the collection truck.

PAYT schemes based on the volume of waste collected are technically simpler than those based on the weight of waste. They also tend to encourage a certain compaction of waste, and that users tend to deliver waste only when the bag or bin is full, making waste collection more efficient. Last, there are also PAYT schemes that do no require door-to-door collection, but are based on the incorporation of technological devices to street containers (chamber systems).

Page 37: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

4.4.5. Conclusions

The use of economic instruments to waste management in several European countries demonstrates that they are capable to generate a change in the behaviour of the different economic agents, both at the time of producing or buying goods, and at the time of managing them as waste. Among the fiscal instruments, which present the greater capacity to create incentives towards waste reduction and recycling, are taxes on landfill and incineration, taxes on certain products, and pay-as-you-throw charging schemes. Economic incentives must be consistent with the rest of environmental policies that deal with waste management, in particular with regulations, public investment, research, and awareness campaigns. In fact, it is unreasonable to expect significant advances in the field of waste management without a joint implementation of measures in all these fields.

4.5 System flow diagrams

The following figures show some examples of complete flows diagrams of municipal waste management of three municipalities including quantity and cost. They will be completed with those from section 6.1.2 with the information of the GHG emissions of same municipalities. Different types of waste collection (door to door in Argentona or multicontainer in Cervera) and treatments conducted for mixed waste are observed.

Figure 9: Flow diagram of the municipality of Argentona in 2009 with the annual quantity and cost of MSW.

Page 38: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Figure 10: Flow diagram of the municipality of Calaf in 2009 with the annual quantity and cost of MSW.

Figure 11: Flow diagram of the municipality of Cervera in 2009 with the annual quantity and cost of MSW.

Page 39: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

5 ZERO WASTE METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH

5.1 Waste Prevention

The European Directive on Waste Directive 2008/98/EC lays out the basic principles, definitions, targets and policy related to European waste management in the coming years. It also sets out the waste management hierarchy that has to be applied in Member States (MS). Article 4 of the Waste Directive gives prevention the highest priority order in the Waste hierarchy.

Figure 12: EU Waste Hierarchy10.

Furthermore, article 9 (c) of the Directive states that by the end of 2014, waste prevention and decoupling objectives for 2020 must be set , based on best available practices. As defined in Article 3 (12): "prevention" means measures taken before a substance, material or product has become waste. These measures reduce:

(a) the quantity of waste, including through the re-use of products or the extension of the life span of products;

(b) the adverse impacts of the generated waste on the environment and human health; or

(c) the content of harmful substances in materials and products;

The Directive also requires that MS establish national waste prevention programs by December 2013 and that they either function as separate programs or that they are integrated into their waste management plans or other environmental policy programs as appropriate. In either case, waste prevention objectives shall be defined and the waste prevention measures shall be clearly identified.

Best practices in place

Across Europe, there are currently various waste prevention actions taking place both at the regional and local levels. This section provides different good practices taking place at the moment. These combine both measures and tools set out by Local and Regional authorities waste prevention plans and examples of their implementation.

Spain10 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/index.htm

Page 40: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

The region of Cataluña adopted Law 9 / 2008, 10 July 2008 which modifies Law 6 / 1993 for waste regulations and waste plans: This includes integrating prevention and reduction targets into the waste management programs for municipal areas with set objectives to reduce waste by 10% in 2012 of the 2006 rates. As well, it sets specific objectives to reduce by 2009 the use of single use plastic bags by 30% and 50% by 2012 in respect to those used in 2007. In regards to waste from industrial sources, it sets a reduction target of 5% by 2012 in respect to the 2007 rates. It also outlines the main measures for prevention to be taken at the regional level11. These include:

Implementing measures to regulate the use of single use plastic bags. The use of voluntary agreements to achieve the objectives set out and, in the event that these are not achieved, the commission of a study to implement taxation instruments. This is to be done in conjunction with the promotion of parallel instruments for the promotion of reusable and compostable bags.

The regulation of Advertising and the Distribution of Free Press and non packaging paper in general. This measure sets out to promote specific legislation that regulates the different forms of Advertising, so as to promote prevention of paper waste. This includes the commission of a study for the implementation of fiscal measures for the reduction of the generation of non-packaging paper; campaigns for the responsible use of paper; and the promotion of dematerializing information.

Promoting responsible and sustainable consumption awareness aimed at consumers.

Strengthening technical and financial support aimed at implementing waste prevention projects.

Promoting measures for prevention of organic waste including community and household composting of food waste and collecting food products to support the fight against hunger (Barcelona food banks).

Organizing programs for Preparation for the Repair and reuse of products, especially WEEE and furniture.

Promotion the supply and demand for reusable products such as the clothing or reusable packaging.

Promotion of eco design.

Promoting Deposit Refund and Return system for specific packaging at the regional level.

The Metropolitan Area of Barcelona

The Metropolitan Area of Barcelona has also launched a reusable diapers project for nursing homes. Instead of using disposable diapers, the project entails providing nursing homes with re-usable diapers that are washed as opposed to discarded. It is estimated that some residents need up to six diapers a day. Each used diaper weighs about 0.75 kg. Therefore, a center with 90 residents can generate 400 kg of waste diapers a day12. The Metropolitan Area of Barcelona also published a detailed study on the pilot project run in one of the nursing residences. The Bag Pact establishes collaboration between the Region of Cataluña the distributors and producers of Spain and Cataluña to reduce the consumption of Plastic bags by 50% by 2012 in respect to the 2007 rates13.

The Food Bank of Cataluña Foundation aims at reducing food waste and providing supporting social actions to combat hunger. It collects food from producers and distributers unable to sell all the food goods before their end date as well as provides bins for households to donate non-

11 Fortin J., Dalamaga A. Étude RREUSE pour la prévention   : Fiche de pays: Espagne. Commissionné par l’ADEME. RREUSE, Bruxelles 201012 http://www.amb.cat/web/emma/residus/prevencio/reutilitzacio/material_sanitarihttp://www.bancdelsaliments.org13 Fortin J., Dalamaga A. Étude RREUSE pour la prévention   : Fiche de pays:Espagne. Commissionné par l’ADEME. RREUSE, Bruxelles 2010.

Page 41: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

perishable foods and provides this to the needy rather than having the food expire and be thrown away.

France

In 2004, France established the National Waste Prevention Plan. This plan is regularly updated. Its aim is to make prevention as important as recycling which has become a second nature to French people14. It establishes three general work axes: Mobilizing actors, implementing actions and follow-ups on those actions.

In 2006 in was complemented by a national plan for supporting household composting. The goal of this plan is to reduce by 7% the production of household waste/capita between 2009 and 2014 and to contribute to the aim of reducing by 15% the residual waste going to landfill and incinerated by 2012. It aims to add 100 000 households per year participating in household composting.

Another good practice included operation stop publications: Providing stickers to households that states that they do not wish to receive unsolicited publications (advertising). It is estimated that the impact of this campaign has resulted in the reduction of 14kg of unsolicited advertising per person participating per year15.

The Netherlands

The Netherlands has initiated a carbon-based packaging tax as an incentive to reduce packaging as well as to meet its national targets to recycle 32% of plastic packaging by 2009, 38% by 2010 and increasing to 42% by 201216.

5.2 Recycling

According to the Eurostat data released in March 2012, each person in the EU27, generated on average 513 kg of municipal waste in 2009. The amount generated per person varied from 316 kg in the Czech Republic and Poland to 833 kg in Denmark.

Austria has been crowned top of the European recycling league after statistics published in March 2012 revealed that the country recycles or composts 70% of municipal waste. The UK languishes towards the bottom compared to similar sized nations in the league table of the 27 European Union member states with just 26% of household waste being recycled.

On average in the EU27, 504 kg of municipal waste were treated per person in 2009. Municipal waste were treated in different ways: 38% were landfilled, 20% incinerated, 24% recycled and 18% composted.

Germany, Spain, Italy, France and the United Kingdom, all generated around the same amount of municipal waste per person. The figures show that the amount of municipal waste generated varies significantly across Member States. Denmark, with more than 800 kg per person, had the highest amount of waste generated in 2009, followed by Cyprus, Ireland and Luxembourg with values between 700 and 800 kg per person, and Malta and the Netherlands with values between 600 and 700 kg. Austria, Germany, Spain, Italy, France and the United Kingdom all generated between 500

14 Fortin J., Dalamaga A. Étude RREUSE pour la prévention   : Fiche de pays: France. Commissionné par l’ADEME. RREUSE, Bruxelles 2010. 15 idem16 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/prevention/pdf/Netherlands_Factsheet.pdf

Page 42: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

and 600 kg per person, while Belgium, Portugal, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Bulgaria, Slovenia, and Hungary were between 400 and 500 kg. Values below the 400 kg per person were found in the Czech Republic, Poland, Latvia, Slovakia, Estonia, Lithuania and Romania. Recycling and composting represent half or more of waste treatment in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Sweden.

The treatment methods differ substantially between Member States. In 2009, the Member States with the highest share of municipal waste landfilled were Bulgaria (100% of waste treated), Romania (99%), Malta (96%), Lithuania (95%), and Latvia (92%). The highest shares of incinerated municipal waste were observed in Sweden (49% of waste treated), Denmark (48%), the Netherlands (39%), Luxembourg (36%), Belgium (35%), Germany and France (with 34%). In ten Member States incineration was equal to or below 1%.

Recycling was most common in Germany (48% of waste treated), Belgium and Sweden (both 36%), Slovenia and Denmark (both 34%), Ireland and the Netherlands (both 32%). The Member States with the highest composting rates for municipal waste were Austria (40%), Italy (32%), the Netherlands (28%), Spain and Belgium (both 24%) and Luxembourg (20%).

Recycling and composting of municipal waste together accounted for 50% of waste treated or more in Austria (70%), Germany (66%), the Netherlands (61%), Belgium (60%) and Sweden (50%). In seven Member States less than 10% of waste was recycled or composted (www.clickgreen.org.uk).

Germany

In the early 1990s, Germany realized it had a problem. Landfill capacity was shrinking, yet the amount of packaging waste generated by industry continued to grow. Faced with an impending long term crisis, Germany passed a legislation to help curb the amount of household packaging waste ending up in landfills. At the time, packaging accounted for 25-30% of the waste in European landfills and little was being done by the industry sector to reduce the volume of packaging accompanying their products. Other governments, throughout Europe, saw the wisdom of Germany's plan and in late 1994 the European Community (now the European Union) passed the European Packaging Directive, formally known as the "Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive - 94/62/EC."

The objective was to harmonize national legislation concerning the management of household packaging waste to provide a high level of environmental protection. The goal of the legislation is to prevent the generation of packaging waste in the first place, through educational and fee-based recovery programs.

Following Germany's lead, more countries formed their own national organizations. In total, 32 countries have national packaging compliance organizations that manage their country's packaging recovery programs [www.greendotcompliance.eu].

Freiburg in Germany

"Z’Freiburg in de Stadt/sufer isch’s un glatt" (A German rhyme saying: In Freiburg’s city, it’s clean and pretty), rhymed Johann Peter Hebel over two-hundred years ago. Nowadays, Freiburg’s citizens are doing their best to keep it that way. Recycling of paper, plastics and organic material has been wholeheartedly taken onboard by those living in Freiburg to the extent that the volume of garbage per capita is markedly below state and national average.

The city itself sets a good example by using paper, of which approximately 80% has been recycled. A recycling concept was introduced in 1991, which was supported across all sectors, with even the SC Freiburg soccer team agreeing to support the initiative. Waste avoidance is rewarded by a

Page 43: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

system of incentives: benefits for the use of textile diapers, discounts for collective waste disposal pooling and for people who compost their own green wastes.

The waste disposal management concept of 2008 defines "avoidance before recycling before depositing" as the future strategy. Avoidance and waste separation show us the way out of the "throwaway" society, towards more informed and sustainable consumer behaviour. Since 1994, Freiburg’s partially privatized waste disposal and sanitation company (ASF) has been organizing, in co-operation with schools and Freiburg’s Eco-Station, courses and guided tours, a "Garbage Theatre" for elementary school children, competitions and teaching units, such as "Ideas, not Waste" or "Children and the Agenda 21" [www.fwtm.freiburg.de].

London in the UK

There was a critical need for London to become a more sustainable capital city. Across both public and private sector organizations, the work of harnessing environmental, economic and social opportunities to achieve this goal is already yielding impressive results. By 2016, it is envisaged that London will be a city that will make efficient use of its finite resources and energy. 'Greening' the supply chain plays a critical role in enabling suppliers and customers to adopt better purchasing practices, thereby diverting resources from landfill and encouraging a more holistic approach to waste and recycling.

Former Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone advocated buying recycled goods as an efficient way to help achieve sustainability and in 2001 launched the Mayor’s Green Procurement Code, an innovative support service delivered by London Remade. Supported by the London Development Agency, the Mayor's Code stimulates demand for the purchase of recycled content products by helping businesses and organisations to identify opportunities to buy products manufactured from recycled materials.

The Mayor’s code was launched in 2001. The aim of the programme is to raise the profile of recycled content products and ultimately to help reduce the levels of waste going to landfill. Through the Mayor’s Code, a team of dedicated brokers worked with London based organisations across the public and private sector including all London boroughs and the Greater London Authority, the health sector, schools, small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), corporate organisations, social enterprises, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and many more. The brokerage service helped to source products and still provides information on price and quality to ensure value for money and the quality of service.

Choosing to buy recycled stationery and office equipment is a simple and cost effective way to introduce recycling into the workplace. The benefits of using recycled products were immense and the combined purchasing power of signatories to the Mayor’s Code was officially recognised in the annual purchase report. The 2005 report revealed that signatories to the Mayor’s Code spent a total of £188,171,645 on recycled content products in 2005, a nine fold increase on previous year’s results. This represents 386,532 tones of waste diverted from landfill.

The amount of recycled copier paper purchased by signatories to the Mayor’s Code alone revealed key environmental savings. The equivalent of 84,637 trees have been conserved, electricity savings could heat 2,821 homes for a year, the amount of water reserved could provide 2,942 Londoners with enough water for a year, and the release of 15,925 tones of carbon dioxide emissions has been avoided.

5.3 Municipal Composting

Page 44: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

This subchapter presents basic information that may be of interest to the municipalities on the implementation of composting in their area either by composting plants or using Mechanical Composters.

5.3.1 Objectives of composting in the municipality

The objectives of composting in a municipality are:

The efficient and economical management of organic waste in the municipality and other organic materials in the region

The production of compost suitable for intended use

The economical sustainability of the activity

5.3.2 Materials for composting

Materials from the municipality and the region or desired materials:

The organic fraction of municipal household waste

The green material (yard, parks, hedgerows, grass, etc.) from the region

Agricultural residues, such as plant residues (cotton ginning, rice processing, etc).

Materials with special charge "Gate fee" such as the following:

Expired food from businesses and other activities

Biodegradable organic wastes from industries in the region

Sludge from Waste Water Treatment Plants

Animal waste from livestock operations

Residual winery - processing industries, standardization (juice, citrus fruit), waste extraction

Difficult organic waste from slaughterhouses or mills

Possible other types of biodegradable organic material

5.3.3 Key features and characteristics of composting

The municipal composting, outside the home composting, can include the following:

Mechanical Composters (MC)

The use of a recent technological development on the composting of separated organic from big producers using Mechanical Composters (MC) (pictures 6 and 7) can significantly reduce the cost of organic waste management. This is done because the total waste management cost is zero, with the use of MC (no collection, no transport & in situ use of compost). Big organic producers may be:

Hotels

Hospitals

Camps

Page 45: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Student campus

Catering etc.

It is estimated that the major producers, create more than 20% of the total biodegradable organic wastes in municipalities in EU, and more than 20-25% of the biodegradable organic wastes in the Greek municipalities. The population capacity being served by a MC starts from some households to about 2,700 residents and the cost of procurement of a MC, varies from 30.000 € to 200.000 €. Municipalities should provide significant incentives to big biodegradable organic wastes producers to obtain and operate mechanical composters, launching this way the implementation of schemes Pay As You Throw [Kirkitsos et al., 2011].

Picture 6: Mechanical composter in building Picture 7: Mechanical composter in big biodegradable organic waste producer.

Composting Plants

A municipality may establish, as necessary, whether a small composting plant (with capacity up to 5.000 t/y), or a middle plant (with a capacity of 5,000 to 20.000 t/y), or a large plant (with a capacity greater than 20.000 t/y). Small units (only for pre-selected household biodegradable organic) can serve up to 25,000 inhabitants, medium-sized plant up to 100,000 residents and big plant much larger municipalities. If the unit co-manages other organic materials of the region, there should be designed a larger capacity plant, in order to serve the above populations.

Composting plants can be either open-type, if only process green material or agricultural residues (small and medium plants), or closed-type if process mix biodegradable organic waste with special organic waste, that contain animal byproducts.

The required area for the creation of a composting plant ranges from 0.3 to 1 m2 per annual tons of processing, depending on the overall capacity and composting technology. Two basic figures of a small and a medium sized composting plant are shown in Figures 13 and 14 (www.growingwithcompost.org ).

Page 46: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Figure 13: Indicative floor plan of small composting plant.

Figure 14: An indicative floor plan of mid-composting plant.

It is necessary for the composting area to be covered with concrete or asphalt, with a 2-3% slope in one direction and provision for a leachate collection tank, with simultaneous oxygenation to reuse and minimize leachate and water consumption. The basic equipment of a composting facility is:

Compost Turner

Shredder

Screen

Coverage Material

Central Control Equipment

Laboratory Equipment Measurements

Bagging machine

Page 47: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Control of odors is necessary in a composting plant and should be under strictly defined rules. Organizing the prevention of odors, in the planning stage of the plant can lead to perfectly feasible and affordable monitored circumstances. The ex-post treatment, it is possible to be controlled, but with significantly higher costs. The composting plants products are conditioners which can be used as following:

for seedlings

for transplanting

for pots

regeneration of landscapes

for decontamination of soil disinfection

combating soil fungi, nematodes, etc.

5.3.4 How much composting plants

According to the Hellenic Association of Composting Companies (HACC) an estimation of composting Plant cost presented in Table 2 [HACC, 2012].

Table 2: Indicative investment and operational costs of composting plants.

Capacity of composting

plant

(separated biodegradable organic waste)

Estimated investment cost for closed unit

Estimated Gate fee

Estimated investment cost

for open unit

Estimated Gate fee

5.000 t/y 1,2-1,8 million € ~50 €/t

10.000 t/y 1,5-2,5 million € ~40 €/t

15.000 t/y 5,0-8,0 million € ~80 €/t

30.000 t/y 6,5-9,0 million € ~60 €/t

50.000 t/y 8,0-10,0 million € ~50 €/t

100.000 t/y 10,0-15 million € ~45 €/t

Page 48: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

5.3.5 Separation at Source for effective composting

It is obvious that non-biodegradable materials entering into a composting plant will be unchanged on exit. In the case where, municipal waste materials contain impurities such as glass, plastic film, and non-biodegradable pollutants (heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants - POP8, drugs) which are not visible macroscopically and microscopically but, however, detected in the final product (compost), they lead to a reduction of its value and limit its use.

Therefore, the purity of input materials determines the quality of the final product. The only safe and also affordable method to achieve high quality in the final product is the separation at source (SaS) of biodegradable materials. Without SaS composting plants should have a high cost pre-treatment infrastructure - processing to achieve the purity of materials input, but still can’t easily achieve high purity of the final product (compost). SaS means that brown bins of relatively small volume (80-120 liters), are placed anywhere in the municipality of relatively small volume (80-120 liters), capable to serve a small number of people (10-20 people).

5.3.6 Of course using compostable bags

Recent technological developments in the bioplastics industry have grown to produce bags with raw material identified by the nature and biodegradable by microorganisms, such as corn or potato. This development comes to solve the problem of temporary placement of organic household in housing, instead of challenging conventional polyethylene plastic bags, which were then separated from the compost produced, by increasing the cost of treatment and real risk to pass plastic polymer into compost.

The compostable bags can be easily composted in composting plants, without separation. If in the future the use of bioplastics expands, the production of many other everyday products, as has already began in the U.S. and other countries will be eventually possible. These products after the end of life, can follow the path of composting, as well as organic materials.

5.3.7 Where to put the compost

It sounds a great myth that there is a problem of disposal of the produced compost. Listed below are conservative estimates for the absorption of the compost in a variety of activities which, are currently, covered with a heavy cost in their respective sectors. Estimated compost needs are referred to Greece’s example:

1. Organic matter farmland: The cultivated areas, e.g. in Greece, amounted to about 40 million acres and are in great need of organic matter such as compost. It is estimated that the needed amount of compost is more than 40 million tons per year.

2. Desertified land: 35% of Greek soils have characteristics of deserted land. An indicative amount (Source: World Bank) of compost, which is required to reverse this trend, is about 20 tons per acre per year.

3. Rehabilitation of quarries: There are everywhere and they could absorb hundreds of thousands of tons of compost per year for restoration.

4. Restoration of landfills: Greece for example can absorb hundreds of thousands of tons of compost for many years.

Page 49: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

5. Green Projects: Continuous landscaping can absorb hundreds of thousands of tons per year compost.

6. Regeneration mining: Many "open wounds" can absorb hundreds of thousands of tons of compost for many years. Greece, for example, has many such places such as mines Kozani, Ptolemais, Megalopolis etc.

7. Slopes National Roads: Rehabilitation failures with plantations. Many thousands of tons of compost can be absorbed on an annual basis.

8. Daily coating of landfills: The continuing need for landfills and for coating materials may be covered by the compost produced and absorbed (many thousands of tons annually).

9. Production of substrates: Many thousands of tons of compost can be absorbed to produce substrates in agriculture. Note that, currently imported substrates for the needs of Greek agriculture amounted to more than 60 million € per year.

10. Zero Waste pilot plant: In the framework of the Project Zero Waste a survey has been conducted within the experimental field, with the aim of assessing the positive repercussions of compost application in horticultural crops (i.e. cauliflower) and comparing these results with mineral fertilizer application.

The use of compost should be based on special constraints, as indicated in the relevant legislation, regarding the content of heavy metals or other factors.

5.3.8 Success stories of composting plants

A successful example of municipal composting plants are the relatively small and decentralized 5 units in the province of Darmstadt - Ntimpourgk (Landkreis - Darmstadt - Dieburg) near Frankfurt, Germany, which were created and are being operated by the intermunicipal company «DA-DI-Werk», www. da-di-werk.de [Giokaris, 2011] (Picture 8-10).

Picture 8: Aerial photograph of the composting unit in place Semd.

Page 50: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

The 5 composting plants employ about 50 workers. These units were gradually created during the first years of the decade of 90’, serving the needs of 23 municipalities around Darmstadt with a total population of approximately 290,000 inhabitants and a total area of 660 km2. The population of each of these municipalities ranges from 2,500 to 25,000 inhabitants. These are relatively small units with capacity of 4 to be between 6.500 t/y and 7.500 t/y each, and only the fifth has a capacity of 17.000 t/y of organic compostable material. The total input is approximately 45.000 t/y of imported material and produce about 35.000 t/y compost.

Each composting unit is located at distance of at least 1,000 meters from the municipality so the odors are minimal. Units accept organic waste and prunings from households, as well as those from municipalities. In addition they accept organic residues from agricultural production of the region. The products they produce (compost/conditioners) are sold to residents, especially the farmers of the region as fertilizer. The produced compost is regularly checked for quality by an independent body. Fundamental component of this business is the continuous and effective information and contact with residents, to separate at source the different types of organic materials.

The 5 specific units operate in cooperation with each other in a decentralized system of composting. This has the advantage of mobile machines such as crushing, screening and mixers, can be used on each unit to operate for longer each day and therefore economically. Small units can operate economically with few technical resources.

The less technical tools it uses, the less vulnerable to damage the unit. For units greater than 10.000 t/y biodegradable material, the use of more technical means, which increases the costs, is needed. Moreover, the larger plants need more frequent maintenance, often have significant odor problems, and thus acceptance problems by residents of neighboring villages.

Picture 9: Partial view of installation of the unit composting in place Eschollbrücken.

Picture 10: Different types of compost produced in composting plant in place Weiterstadt.

In these units, the area of each composting place, ranges from 2-4 acres, including other premises (storage products, offices, etc.) and the forecourt area is approximately 5-10 acres.

5.4 Green Points

5.4.1 What is a Green Point (GP)

A Green Point (GP), which can serve max 200,000 inhabitants, is an area of 1-7 acres, where citizens can turn over themselves all their materials and products (see Picture 9).

Page 51: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Sited within the municipality, has a permanent staff and operates with a specific timetable during weekends and holidays.

GP have the necessary equipment and facilities for the separate placement of all potential material of citizens, such as packaging materials, printed paper, pruning, wood, household debris, furniture, clothing, footwear, household hazardous, tires, batteries, bulky, etc.

A green point (GP) is a facility where people can dispose off the waste fractions that are not collected on a regular basis from street containers (that is to say: glass, packaging, carton & cardboard, organic wastes and residual wastes). Therefore, some of the fractions that are collected in GP are, among others, used cooking oils, textiles, electric & electronic waste, fluorescents, chemicals, batteries, etc.

Currently, Barcelona has a network of 37 GP (8 of which are mobile), that collect 20 tons of waste, and has more than half million users per year. Important progresses have been done in the study of eco-designed green points, which have been recently published [CADS, 2011]. The main components of the ecodesigned GP are:

The desks. A modular element that identifies the different types of waste while avoiding direct view of the containers in which are deposited. At the same time, the desks create two different spaces: one in the central space, the input waste and the other in the perimeter area for the collection.

Two prefabricated and transportable modules. The first used as a reception office (fully equipped) and the second a classroom or multipurpose space.

A lightweight cover that protects the site of weather, consisting of 6 "trees" (each made of a column holding the crossbars that support the roof) that support each of the planes that make up: the "tree-covered" GP, making a metaphor of nature.

Finally, a perimeter fence naturalized with climbing plants, helping to integrate the GP on the environment.

The key points of the GP focus on: functionality, sustainability, management and communication.

In terms of functionality, the GP enhances: a clear and intuitive operation, both the operators and the space for users, a clear separation of the input stream (the waste contributed by users) and output (loop for collection managers waste) to the GP, and the multifunctionality of space to accommodate different uses beyond the collection: classroom, exhibitions, events, neighborhood, etc. In addition, the GP is based on a few basic and flexible elements that facilitate the adaptation to different needs and uses.

The strength in terms of sustainable self-sufficiency is the exploitation of endogenous local resources (water and sunlight). Firstly, by collecting and storing rainwater for its application in cleaning the space, toilets, and watering of the vegetated areas. On the other hand, through the use of sunlight to illuminate the GP, and solar thermal for hot water use. Moreover, the GP is designed for its dematerialisation, optimizing the use of materials and prioritizing those of lower environmental impact. Vegetation has been integrated into the perimeter fence, to better control climatic conditions in space, fixing particles and absorbing CO2.

The waste management system is designed to facilitate and encourage public participation. Communication to users is essential to guide them to deposit the waste in an easy way and without confusion. In terms of communication, GP is itself an educational, environmental communication and interactive project, in order to promote the values of waste prevention, recycling and reuse among citizens. Table 3 presents the main characteristics of this case study.

Page 52: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Table 3: Main characteristics of the GP project.

Team SosteniPrA (ICTA-UAB & inèdit), Pich Aguilera architects, Solanas, Gerona Group.

Financing Barcelona City Council

Context Ecodesign of a new model of waste collection point

Improvements achieved for

the street-light

- Use of local endogenous resources (rainwater, solar energy), aiming at self-sufficiency

- Use of recyclable materials- Passive energy systems- Integrated with the urban environment- Pedagogic function - More user-friendly, accessible and simple- Interactive with users

5.4.2 What diverting materials from landfills can be achieved through the operation of GP

According to international experience the diversion of materials from landfills, because of the GP, ranges from 20-30% [Cameron et al., 2004] and can be achieved within 5-10 years if GP is combined with systematic communication actions. For Greece, we could assume that a diversion rate of 3% could be very realistic to achieve in 5-10 years and is also a very conservative estimate.

Page 53: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Picture 9: General view of Green Point in Germany.

5.4.3 Reuse and Green Points

Together with the Green Point, satellite significant parallel actions can be developed in order to increase the effectiveness of GP. These actions are:

Reuse of electrical appliances or parts

Reuse of clothing and footwear

Reuse of children's apparel and toys

Reuse of furniture

Reuse of bicycle

Reuse of books and magazines

Reuse of many household goods (household utensils, playback audio and video, decoration items, gifts, lamps, old tools, paintings, etc.)

Use of special materials

Resale of recovered and commercial products.

Management of hazardous household

Composting of organic household and pruning using mechanical composters.

These actions can be implemented by entities which have either profit or nonprofit social character. These entities will be connected to the GP and obtain these materials and items for their needs. These organizations can create many jobs.

5.4.4 Creates costs for municipalities?

A GP requires, like any investment, preparation, planning, environmental authorization and of course the necessary initial capital. Very schematically an approximate investment and operational cost of a GP, which serves 50,000-200,000 residents is presented below.

Depreciation costs 80.000 €/y: Includes the cost of planning, equipment and vehicles, prefabricated buildings, fencing, sheds, weighbridge, compact loader, equipment, office

Page 54: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

equipment etc. This cost would be co-financed by existing or future national systems under the principle “Polluter Pays”.

Cost of operation 300.000-350.000 €/y: Includes salaries for 6-8 people, repairs, operating expenses, supplies, the promotion for the sale of compost, and basic operating expenses.

Revenue 100.000 €/y: Revenues from the charge of professionals and from the sale of materials and compost, assuming that will be achieved a very conservative recovery scenario (7% of the target material from the area in 5-10 years).

Total cost 280.000-330.000 €/y or about 94-108 €/t (without initial financial cost of funding).

Assuming, that today in Greek municipalities, an indicative waste management cost (collection - transportation & disposal of waste) is around 150-200 €/t, with clearly upward trends for the future, it is understood that a GP can reduce very significantly the existing waste management costs for local authorities.

5.5 Mechanical and Biological treatment

Apart from the usually proposed measures (recycling and home composting schemes) several other waste treatment schemes are considered [Zotos et al, 2009]. Combined plants of mechanical and biological treatment (MBT) have the possibility to treat both mixed MSW and separated streams for the production of recycled materials and depending on the plant type to give RDF, SRF and compost as final product. The three stages of MBT are:

Material separation: Mechanical (or manual) material separation

Biological treatment: Stabilization and reduction of biodegradable MSW volume

Products manufacture: Compost, refused derived fuel, recyclable.

Biological treatment can be aerobic or anaerobic. Basic MBT plants type and consequently the final products from waste treatment are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4: Products from waste treatment.

Technology Products

Mechanical treatment + aerobic composting

Recyclable or/and RDF

Biostabilized material for compost, landfill site cover or soil amendment

Mechanical treatment + anaerobic composting

Recyclable or/and RDF

Biogas for energy production

Biostabilized waste

Mechanical treatment + anaerobic digestion + aerobic composting

Recyclable or/and RDF

Biogas for energy production

Soil amendment material

Page 55: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Mechanical treatment + biological drying

Recyclable (metals)

SRF

In market exists a significant number of waste biological treatment plants which usually combine waste biological treatment with mechanical treatment (MBT). From this point, MBT systems have been developed more than some thermal treatment methods called 'innovative' as pyrolisis, gasification, plasma methods and more innovative (occasionally multistage) systems, which as MBT technology are introduced in the market as new waste management approaches alternatives to the incineration method. Regarding the individual biological treatment methods, aerobic treatment – composting is the most applied process, although methods like anaerobic treatment and biological drying are growing rapidly [Perkoulidis et al, 2011].

Picture 10: MBT plant in Attica (Ano Liosia).

5.6 Anaerobic digestion

Anaerobic digestion is a process taking place spontaneously in anaerobic environments as rice fields, swamps and landfill places. However, anaerobic digestion can also evolve under controlled conditions in special facilities, aiming with this way the maximization of methane emitted, as well as the control of created environmental problems and nuisances (e.g. methane emission and odor)

Organic fraction of MSW is crushed with water addition and is afterwards hydrolyzed. With hydrolysis, organic macromolecules are decomposed in smaller pieces which can more easily biodegradate. Hydrolysis stage is not always necessary and depends on the sub layer kind. After hydrolysis, organic matter fraction continues to specially designed bioreactors where is bacterial decomposed in air absence (anaerobic digestion). Basic digestion gases are: CH4 (45-55%), CΟ2 (40-50%), as many other contaminants (which subsequently must be removed) like Η2S. Methane (CH4)

is usually directly used (after dehumidification and desulphurization) in an electric generator- internal combustion engine pair for electricity production.

In case that the organic fraction is derived directly from the source and not after mechanical separation of the mixed MSW the wateriness residue after digestion can be used as good quality fertilizer. Also water is recycled during the hydrolysis process or is used for crop irrigation. Co-produced thermal energy is used in bioreactors in order to maintain the temperature at an appropriate level of optimum efficiency of fermentation, while the thermal energy surplus can be allocated to external thermal consumers (e.g. industry, district heating, desalination units, etc.).

According the MSW quality and quantity and the local climatic conditions, there are several variations of anaerobic digestion. Although, in all possible cases the following stages are applied:

Sorting process. Organic fraction separation either mechanically or dry sorting at source.

Page 56: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Size reduction. This process provides maximum reaction surface for bacteria and takes places with several ways (cutting, shredding, screw cutting, drum etc.).

Anaerobic digestion. The organic fraction enters the bioreactor where it is subject to bacteria degradation aiming at the final biogas production.

Post-treatment. Residue remains in a digestion (fermentation) condition for 2-4 weeks.

Main part of this technology is the anaerobic fermentation process. A number of variations which have been implemented are outlined below.

Dry batch: MSW are loaded in batches in special airtight chambers, after inoculated with bacterial residue from the previous batch. There, they remain 20-30 days for a total fermentation and biogas production. Instead of MSW stirring, a water recycle is taking place by water pumping and spraying. This method is known with several commercial names (like BEKON, BOCELL etc). Its typical disadvantages are instability and the use of interruptible processes.

Dry continuous: This variation is also known with many commercial names (as DRANCO, VALORGA, KOMPOGAS, etc.).It works with solid material concentrations 20-40% and leads to the treatment of great MSW amounts with a minimum of water content. Anaerobic digestion takes place in the thermophilic area (50-55 o C).

Wet continuous: This variation, also known with the commercial names REFCOM and NIRAS, works with solid concentrations under the rate of 10%, and requires great amounts of water. It is suitable for sewage, manure and industry waste combination. Wateriness residue, after the digestion, is recycled for water conservation. Wet continuous process is not only selected in MSW treatment case and is indicated for co-treatment situations e.g. sewage sludge.

Wet multistage

In this variation MSW are converted into slurry and at first stage digested with a simultaneous volatile organic acid emission. At second step, volatile acid solution is converted into gas by fermentation taking place in a high load anaerobic reactor. Main disadvantage of this variation (also known with commercial names BTA and PAQUES), is its complicated operation.

Semi batch

It is a variation of the dry batch digestion process and contains many sequential fermentation chambers with the bacteria liquid passing through the chambers using pumping and spraying technology. Therefore, a constant gas flow is created which allows the continuous operation of the electric generator- internal combustion engine pair. Fermentation taking place in each chamber longs 20-30 days and MSW are supplied in a concentration of 30-50%. The main disadvantage of this method is the non-constant MSW supply which leads to odor emission resulting by the need for temporary MSW storage.

Page 57: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Anaerobic digestion advantages:

Biogas production, which belongs to renewable energy sources.

In the case that sorting in the source takes place concerning the organic fraction, compost production is possible.

Drastic reduction of the pathogenic bacteria contained in MSW.

Relatively low area demand for the MBT plant.

No greenhouse emissions, air pollution from MBT plant operation are practically zero.

No odor emission

MBT plants do not create visual pollution and degradation of adjacent areas.

Fixed cost of MBT units is low in relation to their lifetime.

.

Disadvantages:

A rather slow process

MSW combustible fraction which cannot be decomposed, must be removed and follow another treatment method.

Electricity recovered from anaerobic digestion is 2 - 2,5 times lower than the similar one in incineration plants.

5.7 Other strategies

5.7.1 Thermal treatment

Energy recovery from waste is closely connected to thermal treatment. MSW thermal treatment represents several procedures which convert solid waste into gaseous, liquid and solid products with a simultaneous thermal energy release. Basic principal in energy production from waste thermal treatment is the heat capture which is produced during the combustion taking place in a thermal treatment plant [Papadopoulos, 2003].

More usually, heat from flue gas is transferred through pipes to the water in the boiler. Water is converted to steam which in turn spins the turbines in order to produce electricity. Heat coming from the steam can be used both in industrial processes and heating [Karagiannidis, 2005].When heat bound in the steam gets released and electricity is produced the whole procedure is called '' combined heat and power'' (CHP) or ''co-production'' [Papadopoulos, 2003].

Co-production is a method for maximum energy efficiency in thermal treatment procedure. Figure 2.7 shows a diagram of the energy balance in a typical MSW thermal treatment plant [Bilitewski, 2008]. Thermal treatment main targets are:

Minimization of the amount of the waste led to landfill sites

Waste stabilization (convertion into less hazardous form)

Page 58: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Exploitation of the waste calorific value for energy recovery (heating, electricity, fuel source)

Environment pollution reduction.

Thermal MSW treatment presents the following advantages:

Great MSW volume reduce (up to 90%)

Great MSW mass reduce (up to 70%)

Can be designed for both low and high MSW amounts.

Energy recovery and further exploitation.

It is competitive to conventional fuels (coal, gas, oil) for electricity production.

Thermal MSW treatment presents the following disadvantages:

High construction cost

High operation cost

Need for qualified personnel employment

Difficulty in produced heat exploitation (especially in small units)

Use of high cost control systems for flue gas quality monitoring

Need for hazardous residues management (fly ash)

Thermal treatment techniques can be categorized as follows:

Incineration (combustion): development of presence, of either stoichiometric oxygen (stoichiometric combustion), or by an excess oxygen (excess – air combustion), in order to achieve a total oxidation of carbon contained in organic compounds, to carbon dioxide.

Pyrolysis: Development of oxygen absence and simultaneous thermal decomposition of the organic waste.

Gasification: Requires the strict compliance of proportions between organic carbon, waste amount and oxygen, in order to achieve an incomplete combustion of the waste organic material and produce synthesis gas composed mainly of carbon monoxide, hydrogen and gaseous hydrocarbons [Antonopoulos et al, 2011].

Plasma technique: Under the influence of very high temperatures, organic fraction of waste is evaporated and forms synthesis gas (carbon monoxide and hydrogen mixture) and flue gas, while the inorganic part is vitrified

Incineration

Combustion as a MSW management method does not represent a new practice. It has a long history as the first thermal waste treatment plant with energy recovery started to operate at 1874 in the city of Nottingham in England [INTUSER, 2008]. Afterwards, during the early decades of the twentieth century a rapid growth of waste thermal treatment application appeared, especially in the United States. These first applications had a minimum or even zero pollution control and released ash, toxic chemical compounds and poisonous gases together with dust and charred paper. Due to their harmful impact on health, these facilities encountered strong public reaction in America.

Page 59: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

However, thermal treatment plants continued MSW combustion ignoring atmospheric quality until year 1967 when the first relevant legislation was adopted. Between this legislation's implementation and the 1980s, 250 plants of thermal treatment closed down, most of them with the reason of unacceptable environmental impact [INTUSER, 2008]. Recently, due to changes at air pollution control technologies, thermal treatment plants are in position to satisfy or even exceed the requirements defined from the environmental legislation framework and have become safer means of electricity generation.

Pyrolysis

Pyrolysis is a relatively new thermal process, used in MSW treatment for the last 20-30 despite the fact that this method exists from the late 19th century. Generally, it is not a widespread MSW thermal treatment, at least at Europe, due to its limited energy efficiency and economic sustainability. However, non European countries, like Japan, are equipped with MSW pyrolisis facilities, which operate for many years with a high efficiency rate. This fact is probably due to the different waste characteristics (e.g. organic matter proportion and calorific value) compared with those of European countries [Lalas et al., 2007].

Pyrolysis is defined as the thermal decomposition (endothermic reaction, opposed to the incineration process) of a material in conditions of absent oxidation agent (e.g. air or oxygen). Practically, total oxygen elimination is rather difficult and conditions of partial oxidation always exist. Waste remain inside steel conductors and do not come in direct contact with the flame, making possible a gas production without their instant burn. Initial reactions of this procedure are endothermic which means that for their implementation, power supply is required either externally or internally, by a controlled combustion of waste which is about to be treated.

Gasification

Gasification is also a relatively new and not widespread, especially in Europe, MSW thermal treatment. Essentially, this method includes the conversion of the waste organic fraction into a mixture of combustible gases through a partial oxidation at high temperatures (400 to 1500 o C) [EEDSA, 2006].

Theoretically, gasification represents the next pyrolysis stage during which, the residual coke from pyrolysis is oxidized at temperatures higher than 800 °C, with the presence of limited (non stoichiometric) oxygen amounts. Gasification, as pyrolysis is a process which can compose either a part (combined with an incineration application) or the total of the MSW thermal treatment [Mavropoulos, 2008]. Final gasification products are [ΕΕDSΑ, 2006]:

Gas, rich in carbon dioxide, hydrogen and saturated hydrocarbons (mainly methane) which can be used as fuel.

Solid residue consisting of coal and aggregates.

Condensed liquid residue which presents a composition similar to the one of the liquid fraction produced after pyrolysis.

Main gasification facility types are:

Vertical fixed bed

Horizontal fixed bed

Multi-hearth technology

Rotary kiln

Page 60: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

5.7.2 LFG utilization

Biogas (organic and inorganic gas mixture) is a basic environmental result of waste treatment systems containing organic anaerobic digestion stages. Its release has significant potential adverse impacts (air pollution, odors, danger of explosions, contribution to the greenhouse effect).

Landfill places and generally anaerobic reactors are one of the most significant CH4 production sources. Typical biogas composition (generated from sewage sludge) is 65% CH4 and 35% CO2, with small hydrocarbons, CO, H2S, PH3, organophosphoric and organic sulfate compounds admixtures. In landfill sites, biogas composition depends on the waste degradation level, reaching up to 60% CH4 - 40% CO2 during the methane generation. Generally, it is influenced by the good space sealing ensuring that ambient air does not enters the waste collection network.

Targets of biogas management are:

Safe gas evacuation from the production site without coming in contact with ambient air, in order to reduce the risk of explosions. Methane creates an explosive mixture in a ratio of 5 to 15% by volume with ambient air (oxygen content: 18-21% by volume).

The limitation of greenhouse gases emissions. Two main components of biogas (methane and carbon dioxide) are compounds that contribute to greenhouse effect and global warming creation. The combustion of the collected biogas achieves the conversion (oxidation) of CH4 to CO2, with a similar impact mitigation concerning the greenhouse effect.

The exploitation of the biogas calorific value, which are a renewable and mild energy source. This implies a further reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by contributing in fossil fuels save.

Anaerobic digestion and biogas, produced in landfill sites, combustion present as a common characteristic with thermal treatments mentioned above, the production of electric and thermal energy. The difference between the applied technologies is that first thermal treatment processes use MSW, or appropriately selected streams of MSW as fuel, while in the latter two methods, a prior biological treatment is taking place (either in anaerobic digestion or in final disposal in landfill sites) and the produced gas is led to an internal combustion machine which is connected to a power generator.

However, it should be noticed that energy exploitation of MSW ( both mixed / residual, and pre-processed waste derived fuels) has acquired a considerable interest, and recent implementation in Greece (April 2010) as the residues from MSW treatment units (either from MBT or from recycling plants) have a significant energy content which is directly usable in appropriate infrastructure.

According to AUTH calculations, even with a prompt implementation of all envisaged MBT plants within period 2010-2013 (highly doubtful for the time being), the organic MSW diversion from the landfill process required, cannot be achieved without a parallel implementation of MSW incineration plants, at least at Attica and Central Macedonia regions [Papageorgiou et al., 2009].

Additionally, biological treatment plants have as final products waste derived fuels, also known as Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF) and Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF), which are expected to be certified as products in the future (according to the relevant standard being adopted by the European Standardization Organization CEN and through the relevant technical committee TC 343).

5.8 Information campaigns

Page 61: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Public consultations show that most people are willing to recycle as long as they are provided with easy to use, reliable recycling services and information about how to use them. The aim of the information campaigns is to promote waste prevention and recycling methods and to stimulate environmental awareness in order to sustain the application of the different waste management options. After identifying the problems in the application of different waste management options, second step is to adjust the awareness raising campaigns in the specific needs.

The information campaigns target different groups that are associated with waste management & recycling issues namely: Competent National authorities and decision makers on waste management issues, the personnel of the local authorities, NGOs, the local industry (including the waste management industry), corporations and commerce federations, the citizens that will have to adapt to the different requirements for the usage of new waste management options.

Below are presented the information campaigns that ensure success and effectiveness evidently.

a) Door to Door information campaigns

Door-to-door information campaigns are implemented in order to provide information to citizens regarding waste prevention methods, recycling of different kinds of waste as well as practical instructions and advantages of home composting.

First of all, a number of households is being selected during door-to-door information and each one fills in a questionnaire. The specific objectives of the questionnaires are a) measuring of public opinion on waste management issues, b) Identification of problems on waste management c) solutions for overcoming the obstacles in the implementation of sustainable waste management. Afterwards, the members of the household are given practical instructions for their active and effective participation in the waste prevention and recycling programs that are being implemented in their area. Extra information about composting programs is usually available in an open phone line which can be created for the needs of the campaign with the aim of supporting the households applying composting.

Door to door information campaigns can be further utilized as a basis of statistical analysis as valuable information can be achieved from the questionnaires. For example, information about the percentage of people that recycle or are willing to recycle can be reached, the desire of getting a composting bin can be expressed, proposals for more effective implementation of waste prevention and recycling programs can be made. Moreover, financial motives and willingness to pay-as-you-throw can also be evaluated via this door-to-door information program. ERS has already implemented door to door information projects for the promotion of prevention, recycling and pay-as-you-throw systems and the most important output indicator was the increase of the recycling rate by 80%.

b) School seminars

School seminars include presentations which have informative character and their objective is the awareness of young population regarding waste prevention, recycling and composting as well as their active and effective participation in waste prevention and recycling programs already implemented in the school or municipality. The presentations are held in schools by educated and educational staff. Main objectives of the school seminars are:

Information, sensitization of children about issues related to environmental protection.

To help children to develop critical thinking about the problem of waste, but also create personal opinion and attitude to solving problems arising from it.

To identify waste prevention, reuse and recycling as a solution to the problem

Page 62: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

To inform children about the recycling programs that are being implemented in their school or municipality

To realize the importance of making recycling a daily habit by everyone

To encourage children to transfer the knowledge gained during the seminar to their family and friends.

Furthermore, the participation of students in the awareness raising campaign can be supported through student competitions. More specifically, students of primary and secondary schools are encouraged to write an essay, propose a business idea, make a painting with a theme regarding waste prevention, recycling, composting e.t.c.

c) Seminars for adults, training for educational staff

For the information and the sensitization of citizens, seminars for adults in the fields of sustainable waste management can be organized by a municipality, with the aid of an NGO. The specific topics of the seminars should include above all a) the current situation on waste management, b) information about the National Legislation for the sustainable waste management, c) information about the recycling and waste prevention programs that are being implemented in the municipality d) practical advices for active and effective participation in the recycling and waste prevention programs that are being implemented in the municipality.

Moreover, training for educational staff on sustainable waste management and home composting can be offered by a municipality with the aid of an NGO. Training for educational staff should include the following information: waste prevention methods e.g. using less material to get a job done, use less plastic bags, actions that directly avoid waste generation such as eco-consumption or reuse e.tc., recycling, home composting, practical advices for the effective and efficient participation in the recycling programs that are already implemented, benefits for the family adapting environmental behavior, learning from the current status in other countries e.t.c.

d) Media productions

Waste prevention, recycling and composting best practices can be further promoted via a series of dedicated media productions including:

Documentaries on best practices

Broadcasted TV shows including technical discussions of the best practices and benefits from waste prevention, recycling and composting

TV spots aiming at raising the awareness of the general public on waste prevention, recycling and composting

These audio-visual productions are reproduced via (local) radio and TV channels.

e) Information campaigns through leaflets and posters

For the dissemination of a recycling or waste prevention program, leaflets can be produced for information, publicity and sensitization purposes. The material of the leaflets should include waste prevention methods, recycling and composting issues and practical advices for the effective and efficient participation of the general public at the waste prevention and recycling programs already implemented in their areas. The leaflets can be distributed to the public through local authorities and NGO’s, as an attachment to the local newspapers and as an informative material to participants in workshops and press conferences organized by the institution which launches the information campaign. Moreover, the leaflets will be delivered to the conferences, stakeholders, events etc.

Page 63: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Additionally, posters can be designed containing information about waste prevention, recycling and composting. Posters of each category can be distributed in local authorities, schools, NGO’s, waste management authorities e.t.c.

f) Dialogue forums, creation of electronic poll, informational hotline

Dialogue forums about waste prevention, recycling and methods for raising public awareness can be organized by local authorities. Forums should focus on co-operations and exchange of experience on the existing situation in waste management, constraints and good examples on waste prevention and recycling applied in other municipalities, on the development and dynamic of waste prevention activities and reuse, on the appropriate methods of training people working at local authorities and institutions to support the extended implementation of the awareness raising campaigns, on the capacity building on management and development of communication projects, on the creation of new necessary structures as well as monitoring and reporting systems inside the public authorities to enhance communication and dissemination activities. Representatives of local authorities, representatives of the sustainable waste management systems, NGOs and also environmental aware citizens should be invited to participate in the forums.

Another method for a successful and effective awareness raising campaign is the organization of a national electronic poll through the filling of website questionnaires in order to assess the awareness level of citizens regarding waste prevention and sustainable waste management issues. The target group of the above activity is the general population. Finally, an informational hotline can be offered to the citizens who are willing to receive extra information about the recycling and waste prevention programs that are being implemented in the municipality, as well as practical advices.

6 ZERO WASTE IMPLEMENTATION IN MUNICIPALITIES

6.1 Environmental analysis based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)

Waste generation and waste management constitutes an environmental problem increasingly important in our markedly consumerist societies and one of the major challenges for municipalities are to collect, recycle, treat and dispose the increasing quantities of waste generated over cities. In addition, there are many important environmental effects of waste management and the way that waste is managed directly affects local and global environmental quality. The waste sector is vital in material and energy recovery. This sector combined with responsible production systems, based on the minimization of resources and energy; along with good waste management systems could achieve more sustainable situations. In recent years there is an increasing interest in the several options for resources and waste management in order to design strategies for integrated, sustainable resource and waste management policies. In this context, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies has been used as an input to decision making, regarding the choice of waste management systems, or strategic decisions concerning resource use as a priority [Cherubini et al., 2008].

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has played and still is playing a role in the task of methodology standardization. Within the ISO 14040 series, several international standards have been published by ISO on the topic of LCA. The central main series is ISO 14040: “Environmental management-Life Cycle Assessment-Principles and framework”: which specifies the main ideas of LCA. These ideas have been elaborated in other international standards and technical reports, e.g., ISO 14041, 14042, and 14043 [Guinée and Heijungs., 2005].

LCA studies the environmental aspects and potential impacts throughout a product’s life, from raw material acquisition through production and use, up to final disposal (from ‘cradle-to-grave’) [ISO

Page 64: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

14040, 2006]. It is probably best known as a tool helping to analyze the life cycle impacts of physical products, but also a methodology which allows analysis of services, such as waste management [Finnveden et al., 1999] and has been proved to be a valuable tool for documenting and analyzing environmental considerations of waste management. Following this frame, the recent Directive 2008/98/EC on waste and repealing certain Directives, introduces the life cycle approach of products and materials to strengthen the measures that must be taken in regard to waste prevention focus on reducing the environmental impacts of waste generation and waste management [Directive 2008/98/EC, 2008]. The structure of a LCA consists of four distinct phases, which contribute to an integrated approach, summarize in Figure 15 [ISO 14040, 2006]:

Figure 15: Methodological framework of LCA: phases of LCA.

The goal and scope definition phase serves to define the purpose and extent of the study, to indicate the intended audience and to describe the system studied as well as the options that will be compared. The second phase on the inventory analysis or LCI consists of obtaining the data of material and energy; and necessary calculation procedures for the quantification of the inputs and outputs of the system-product and the environment over its whole life cycle.

According to ISO 14040, impact assessment is a phase of LCA aimed at understanding and evaluating the magnitude and significance of the potential environmental impacts of the product system and organizes the LCI inputs and outputs into 10-15 specific impact categories (in e.g. abiotic depletion of resources, climate change, human toxicity or acidification) and models the inputs and outputs with a characterization model into an aggregate indicator and characterization factor derived from the model. In example, for the impact category of climate change the characterization factor of Global Warming Potential (GWP) aggregates each greenhouse gas emission to air. For instance, from waste transport or landfilling. Finally, the interpretation phase evaluates the study in order to derive recommendations and conclusions.

During the last 20 years, several studies has been developed to assess the environmental performances of waste management mainly focused on municipal solid waste (MSW) but also in other types of waste as for example industrial or construction wastes [Merete et al., 2002; Ortiz et al., 2009]. The popularity of LCA methodology applied to analyze MSW management strategies is illustrated by the numerous published studies of the life cycle emissions of these systems, as well as by the substantial number of LCA computer models addressing MSW management.

Some of these studies assess impacts for different treatments comprising landfill with or without energy recovery, incineration with energy recovery, composting, anaerobic digestion and/or recycling of paper and cardboard, organic matter, plastic, glass and metals [Finnveden et al., 2005; Moberg et al., 2005; Björklund and Finnveden, 2005; Bernstand et al., 2011; Cherubini et al., 2008; Cleary et al., 2009; Giugliano et al., 2011] generally concluding that, energetically and

Page 65: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

environmentally speaking, the best treatment for packaging materials is recycling and the best one for organic waste is anaerobic digestion [Rigamonti et al., 2010].

Other papers [Iriarte et al., 2009; Consonni et al., 2004a; Güereca et al., 2006; Hong et al., 2006; Rives et al., 2010] are focused on the LCA of single parts of the waste management system such as different waste collection systems, pre-treatment technologies, energy recovery from residual waste and material recycling. Finally, another set of papers are focused on study different MSW management strategies in specific municipalities or countries [Arena et al., 2003; Bovea et al., 2006; Cherubini et al., 2009; Manfredi et al., 2011].

There are ample alternatives for waste management and different strategies may provide different outputs, such as recovered materials or energy [Björklund et al., 2005]. Each municipality should consider what strategy and alternative best suits their needs and specifications (in e.g.: collection systems, distances to facilities, available technologies or legal requirements) which allows on one hand, to recover most quantities of resources and energy, and reduce the environmental impacts derived by the MSW management on the other hand. In this sense, the LCA methodology is a tool widely used and discussed which allows to establish the best strategy to implement but also to establish the potentials and opportunities for improvement.

6.1.1 Waste collection and transport

Waste collection and transport is an environmental service which can help to conserve resources, to protect the environment and to make aware citizens of local environmental policies. Collection and subsequent transport of waste is a very significant part of any waste management system. In fact, collection and transport represent a crucial step in the design of waste management systems. In some way, a system designed appropriately will became successful, while all these systems implemented without planning and “bad designed” will often became a failure. Institutions responsible of waste management have the challenge to implement good systems which provide a good and effective service.

Different ways of collecting wastes exist (see section 4.2 for more details), and their efficiency depends on different factors. Several studies have found correlations between quantities of waste generated and different socio-economic/demographic factors [Dayal et al., 1993]. Other studies found that important factors are the degree of citizen participation and the collection method [Alvarez, 2008], while others indicated that income per capita, cost of residual waste collection, collection frequency and separate curbside collection of organic waste are also crucial parameters that affects the waste collection systems [Gellynck et al., 2011]. Many other factors has been analysed by different authors [González-Torre et al., 2003, Bach et al. 2004, Suttibak et al., 2008, Bouvier et al., 2011].

Waste collection and storage

Collection of MSW produces several types of environmental impact due to the production and use of different types of bags and containers, the use of transport vehicles and the construction, maintenance and demolition of transfer stations. Numerous examples of waste management models are implemented around the world, and in most of them the use of waste containers is extensive. In fact, many different options are possible and in the majority of cases, economic or aesthetic criteria are basic to design these systems.

A recent study [Rives et al., 2010], analyzed and compared the environmental impact associated to different collection systems according to different bins and containers. The comparison was based on factors such as the volume of the containers, from small bins of 60–80 l to containers of 2400 l, and on the manufactured materials, steel and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Also, some

Page 66: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

parameters such as frequency of collections, waste generation, filling percentage and waste container contents, were established to obtain comparable systems.

The methodological framework of the analysis was the life cycle assessment (LCA), and the impact assessment method was based on CML 2 baseline 2000. Results indicated that, for the same volume, the collection systems that use HDPE waste containers had greater impacts than those using steel waste containers. At the same time, those systems using small HDPE bins (60 l or 80 l) had greater impacts than those using big steel containers (2400 l).

Subsequent sensitivity analysis about the parameters established demonstrated that they could change the ultimate environmental impact of each waste container collection system, but that the comparative relationship between systems was similar. From this study, one can conclude that an increase of the number of collection points in the city could increase the amount of waste collected, and this is very interesting for recyclable wastes; but the impact of having lots of containers and multipoints to collect would derive to a greater impacting system.

Transport

The waste transport is the stage that takes place after accumulation of wastes in specific points. Some authors proposed the optimisation of transportation. [Ghose et al., 2006] proposed a model that includes the distribution of collection bins, load balancing of vehicles and generation of optimal routing based on GIS. [Tavares et al. 2009] pointed to a GIS-based model that considers the relief of the terrain when calculating and optimising the fuel consumption of vehicles. Lately, [Vicentini et al., 2009] proposed an innovative and economically viable solution for waste monitoring and handling: a sensorised waste collection container for content estimation and collection optimisation, in order to design and implement a suitable MSW container system considering factors such as the urban characteristics of the city, the season, the population being looked after, and so on. Also, other authors suggested the collection optimisation of MSW using GIS [López Alvarez et al., 2008].

The transport of waste can lead to increase the environmental impacts associated to collection systems depending of the distances between municipalities and treatment plants or landfills. In Figure 16 it has been evaluated the contribution to global warming potential of the inter-city distances related to the selective collection system of the city of Barcelona.

Figure 16: Contribution of inter-city transport in the selective collection systems according to inter-city distance [Iriarte et al., 2009].

Page 67: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

6.1.2. Waste treatment

The waste management industry plays an increasing role in climate change mitigation. All waste management activities have well documented environmental impacts that are different depending on the quantity and composition of waste produced, as well as the type of waste management technology used, and their associated technical specifications. Waste management activities generate emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide of biogenic origin17, carbon dioxide of fossil origin, methane, and nitrous oxide.

GHG emissions from waste can be generated both from their collection and treatment, and also in each of the operations involved in order to recover, recycle, treat or dispose off of them [Gabarrell et al., 2010]. It has also been demonstrated that waste management activities generate potential environmental benefits if managed properly (e.g. energy produced substituting fossil energy sources and production of materials substituting raw products elsewhere in the supply chain) [Gentil et al., 2009a].

The description of all waste types and flows is important since parameters such as carbon content and degradable organic content are important, affecting direct GHG emissions (fossil and biogenic). The waste composition is variable within a local municipality or within any country of study (for example, average municipal solid wastes in Northern Europe contain 23.8% of food wastes and 30.6% of paper and cardboard whereas in Sourthern Europe these fractions represent 36.9% and 17.0%, respectively) [IPCC, 2006]. Additionally, the composition of the waste received at an incinerator or landfill also depends on any recycling schemes introduced in parallel.

A growing issue in waste management is the identification of the best treatment and disposal option for individual waste fractions, comparing the several available technologies (composting, anaerobic digestion, mechanical-biological treatment, landfilling, incineration…). The choice of the most environmentally sound treatment/disposal option for a given waste fraction is a complex task, as many variables considerably influence the results of the environmental assessment, including the chemical composition of the fraction, the specific treatment options used and the energy assumed as input and substituted when energy recovery is practiced [Manfredi et al., 2011].

In order to assess the several treatment options, there are several methodologies available, being the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) one of the most comprehensive and most widely used [UNEP, 2010] (see section 6.1. for more information). When assessing the environmental impacts, one can focus on one or more impact categories. This chapter focuses on Global Warming Potential (GWP), which is measured in CO2 equivalents.

The impact assessment within the LCA methodology is based on the inventory of input and output flows of the system of study, including, among others, the emissions of the degradation/combustion of wastes and the energy/materials consumed along the treatment process. These emissions are later weighted depending on their relative contribution to the impact within each impact category. Here it is important to highlight that some authors consider that all CO2 emissions (both fossil and biogenic) contribute to global warming, whereas other suggest that biogenic CO2 emissions should be considered neutral because they have previously been fixed by plants in a short period of time.

Currently there exist several calculation models and applications that aid in the calculation of the waste sector GWP [Gentil et al., 2009b], such as EASEWASTE (Environmental Assessment of Solid Waste Systems and Technologies) developed at the Technical University of Denmark18, the Waste Reduction Model (WARM) developed by US EPA19 or the Protocol (Protocol for the quantification of greenhouse gases emissions from waste management activities). 17 biogenic carbon is considered as part of the natural carbon balance will not increase the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as opposite to fossil carbon. 18 www.easewaste.dk19 http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/wycd/waste/calculators/Warm_home.html

Page 68: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Recently, a new model has been developed by the Sostenipra Research Group (http://www.sostenipra.cat) with funding provided by the European Commission via the Zero Waste Project (1G-MED08-533) [Gasol et al., 2012]. This new tool names as CO2WM.eu: Carbon Footprint Tool for waste management in Europe provides a means of calculating the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (in carbon dioxide equivalents) emanating from the waste operations of European municipalities.

The Tool in this version is an Excel®-based calculator which, with the input of municipality-specific waste data (or national data as a default), permits the user to obtain a municipality-level carbon footprint of waste treatments, including several treatment options (composting, biomethanization, mechanical-biological treatment, recycling, incineration, landfill & solid recovered fuel preparation), considering current and future scenarios. Figures 17 to 19 shows the GHG emissions from the waste management of three municipalities of Catalonia calculated with the CO2WM.eu.

The emissions of the biological degradation and the combustion of waste may also be obtained from the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories [IPCC, 2006]. These guidelines provide a methodology for yearly accounting of GHG of the following treatment options: solid waste disposal, biological treatment of solid waste (composting and anaerobic digestion) and incineration.

Typically, methane emissions from solid waste disposal sites are the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the waste Sector. In addition to CH4, solid waste disposal sites (SWDS) also produce biogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) and non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs) as well as smaller amounts of nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO). CH4 produced at SWDS contributes approximately 3 to 4 percent to the annual global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions [IPCC, 2006].

In many industrialized countries, waste management has changed much over the last decade. Waste minimisation and recycling/reuse policies have been introduced to reduce the amount of waste generated, and increasingly, alternative waste management practices to solid waste disposal on land have been implemented to reduce the environmental impacts of waste management. Also, landfill gas recovery has become more common as a measure to reduce CH4 emissions from SWDS. Actually, landfill gas recovery constitutes one of the key parameters in waste GHG emission accounting.

There have been some measurements of efficiencies at gas recovery projects, and reported efficiencies have been between 10 and 85 % [IPCC, 2006], although normal recovery rates are considered to be in a range of 40 to 50% [Doka, 2009]. It becomes obvious that the environmental impact of landfilling will greatly depend on this factor, resulting in emission factors approximately between 200 and 1200 kg of CO2eq per ton of landfilled waste.

The calculation of landfill emissions may be obtained not only from the 2006 IPCC guidelines (that provide the IPCC Waste Model) but also from other calculation programs such as the Landfill Gas Emission Model (LandGem) from US EPA20 or the programme GasSIM from the UK21. Another key factor is the content of biogenic carbon, as for incineration and landfilling it controls the amount of energy that can be produced from the fraction and the generated emissions [Manfredi et al., 2011].

20 http://www.epa.gov/ttncatc1/dir1/landgem-v302-guide.pdf21 http://www.gassim.co.uk

Page 69: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Figure 17: GHG emissions from municipal waste management of the municipality of Argentona in 2009 (Catalonia).

Figure 18: GHG emissions from municipal waste management of the municipality of Calaf in 2009 (Catalonia).

Page 70: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Figure 19: GHG emissions from municipal waste management of the municipality of Cervera in 2009 (Catalonia).

Page 71: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

6.2 SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis conducted in the frame of the Zero Waste project is available to download at the following link:

http://www.med-zerowaste.eu/deliverables/SWOT%20Analysis.pdf

6.3 Benefit analysis of waste diversion

In conclusion the implementation of a recycling scheme, with a relatively low investment cost, a much more waste diversion is achieved than by the application of the optimal effective home composting scenario which requires high investment cost.

According to an analysis for the two implemented schemes, the expansion of the packaging recycling programme is firstly proposed, as a directly applicable measure, with a simultaneous phase- introduction and implementation of the domestic and municipal composting.

Regarding biodegradable waste simultaneous home and municipal composting promotion (initially for green waste) is proposed.

Packaging and paper:

o Expansion of the 'blue' bins network ,

o maximizing of packaging recovery

o claiming further subsidies (reward)

o simultaneous collaboration with Recycling company for the relevant infrastructure installation at key points in the municipality

o Placement of separate bins for glass collection and direct cooperation with glass recycling plant

Bulky organic (furniture):

o Reuse

o Initial use in compost creation

Hazardous waste:

o Collection

o Contract with transport and management companies

Reusable and interchangeable end of life products (eg clothes, furniture, toys, etc.) in a green point in the following places :

o In uncontrolled landfill place after its restoration [Karagiannidis et al, 2010]

o In any available building in the city.

Except for the above proposed measures the well known ‘pay-as-you-throw scheme can be considered as an interesting policy in many municipalities [Xirogiannopoulou et al, 2008 and Malamakis et al, 2009].

Page 72: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

REFERENCES

A Sustainable Europe for a Better World (2001), A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development.

Agència de Residus de Catalunya (2011), Waste Catalan Agency. www.arc.cat/en/ (accessed December 2011).

Ajuntament de Mataró (2011), Mataró Municipality website 2011. http://www.mataro.cat/portal/contingut/noticia/2011/03/9666_deixalleria_mobil.html (accessed December 2011).

Alvarez M.D., Sans R., Garrido N. and Torres A. (2008), Factors that affect the quality of the bio-waste fraction of selectively collected solid waste in Catalonia, Waste Management, 28 (2), 359-366.

Anaerobic Digestion Systems Web Site (AD) (2011), http://www.anaerobic-digestion.com/ (accessed December 2011).

Antonopoulos I.S., Karagiannidis A., Elefsiniotis L., Perkoulidis G. and Gkouletsos A. (2011), Development of an innovative 3-stage steady-bed gasifier for municipal solid waste and biomass, Fuel Processing Technology 92, 2389-2396.

Àrea Metropolitana de Barcelona (20110, Ecoparcs. http://www.amb.cat/web/emma/residus/instalacions_equipaments/ecoparcs (accessed December 2011).

Arena U., Mastellone ML., Perugini F. (2003), The environmental performance of alternative solid waste management options: a life cycle assessment study, Chemical Engineering Journal, 96, 207-222.

Asociación Española de Fabricantes de Pasta, Papel y Cartón (Aspapel) (2011), Sostenibilidad y Reciclaje. http://www.aspapel.es/es/sostenibilidad/reciclaje (accessed December 2011).

Bach H., Mild A., Natter M. and Weber A. (2004), Combining socio-demographic and logistic factors to explain the generation and collection of waste paper, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41 (1), 65-73.

Bernstad A., Cour Jansen J. (2011), A life cycle approach to the management of household food waste. A Swedish full-scale case study, Waste Management, 31, 1879-1896.

Björklund A. and Finnveden G. (2005), Recycling revisited-life cycle comparisons of global warming impact and total energy use of waste management strategies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 44, 309-317.

Bouvier R. and Wagner T. (2011), The influence of collection facility attributes on household collection rates of electronic waste: The case of televisions and computer monitors, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55 (11), 1051-1059.

Bovea M.D., Powel J.C. (2006), Alternative scenarios to meet the demands of sustainable waste management. Journal of Environmental Management, 79, 115-132.

CADS (2011), Consell Assessor per al Desenvolupament Sostenible, L’ecodisseny arriba als barris. http://www15.gencat.cat/cads/AppPHP/index.php?option=com_grans_idees&id=3&Itemid=161&lang=es (accessed December 2011).

Cherubini F, Bargigli S., Ulgiati S. (2009), Life cycle assessment (LCA) of waste management strategies: landfilling, sorting plant and incineration, Energy 34, 2116-2134.

Page 73: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Cherubini F., Bargigli S., Ulgiati S. (2008), Life cycle assessment of urban waste management: energy performances and environmental impacts. The case of Rome, Italy, Waste Management 28, 2552-2564.

Christensen T.H. (2011), Solid Waste Technology and Management, Wiley, West Sussex, UK.

Cleary J. (2009), Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste management systems: a comparative analysis of selected peer-reviewed literature, Environmental International 35, 1256-1266.

Clement K., Hansen M. (2001), Sustainable regional development in the Nordic countries.

Colón J., Cadena E., Pognani M., Barrena R., Sánchez A., Font X., Artola A. (2012), Determination of the energy and environmental burdens associated with the biological treatment of source-separated Municipal Solid Wastes, Energy and Environmental Science, in press.

Colón J., Ruggieri L., Sánchez A., González A., Puig I. (2011), Possibilities of composting disposable diapers with municipal solid wastes. Waste Management & Research 29, 249-259.

Consonni S., Giugliano M., Grosso M. (2004a), Alternative strategies for energy recovery from municipal solid waste. Part A: Mass and energy balances, Waste Management, 25, 123-135.

Dayal G., Yadav A., Singh R.P., Upadhyay R. (1993), Impact of climatic conditions and socio-economic status on solid waste characteristics: a case study, The Science of the Total Environment, 136, 143–153.

Devinny J., Deshusses M.A., Webster T. (1999), Biofiltration for Air Pollution Control, CRC Press, Los Ángeles, USA.

Directive 2008/98/EC. On waste and repealing certain Directives. Official Journal of the European Union 2008. L 312: 3-30.

Doka G. (2009), Life cycle inventories of waste treatment industries. Ecoinvent report no. 13, Swiss centre for life cycle inventories.

EDANA-European Disposables and Nonwovens Association (2008), Sustainability Reports. http://www.edana.org/ (accessed December 2011).

Environment 2010, Our Future, Our Choice. The Sixth Environment Action Programme, 2001.

Environmental Data Centre on Waste (2011), http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/introduction (accessed December 2011).

Europe 2005, The ecological footprint. Brussels, WWF.

European Environment Agency (EEA) (2011), http://www.eea.europa.eu/ (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2011), Hazardous Waste. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/hazardous_index.htm (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2008a), Waste Framework Directive, Directive 2008/98/EC. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/legislation/a.htm (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2008b), Green Paper on the management of bio-waste in the European Union. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2008:0811:FIN:EN:PDF (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2006), Directive 2006/66/EC on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/batteries/index.htm (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2005), Non-paper on the background of the development of the Commission proposal on the distinction between energy recovery and disposal of waste in

Page 74: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

municipal incinerators. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/pdf/background.pdf (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2003a), Directive 2002/95/EC on the restriction of the use of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment. http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:037:0019:0023:en:PDF (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2003b), Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE). http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32002L0096:EN:NOT (accessed December 2011).

European Commission (2000), Directive 2000/76/EC on the incineration of waste. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/environment/waste_management/l28072_en.htm (accessed December 2011).

Eurostat (2011), Environmental Data Centre on Waste. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/introduction (accessed December 2011).

Eurostat (2010), Environmental Statistics and Accounts in Europe. Retrieved from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-32-10-283/EN/KS-32-10-283-EN.PDF.

Fernández A., Sánchez A., Font X. (2005), Anaerobic co-digestion of a simulated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes and fats of animal and vegetable origin, Biochemical Engineering Journal, 26, 22-28.

Final Report to the European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional Policy, Evaluation Unit, No 2007.CE.16.0.AT.041. The Potential for regional Policy Instruments.

Finnveden G., Johanson J., Lind P., Moberg A. (2005), Life cycle assessment of energy from solid waste-part1: general methology and results, Journal of Cleaner Production 13, 213-229.

Finnveden G. (1999), Methodological aspects of life cycle assessment of integrated solid waste management systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 26, 173–87.

Fischer C. (2011), Overview of the use of landfill taxes in Europe, in Seminar on Use of Economic Instruments and Waste Management of DG Environment of European Commission, 25th October 2011, Brussels.

Gabarrell X., Escaler I., Font X., Massagué A. and Rieradevall J. (2010), Residus. In Segon informe sobre el canvi climatic a Catalunya, Consell Assessor per al Desenvolupament Sostenible, Barcelona, Spain.

Gasol C.M. and Farreny R. (2012), CO2WM.eu: Carbon Footprint of Waste Management in EU, Inèdit Innovació s.l.

Gellynck X., Jacobsen R. and Verhelst P. (2011), Identifying the key factors in increasing recycling and reducing residual household waste: A case study of the Flemish region of Belgium, Journal of Environmental Management, 92 (10), 2683-2690.

Gentil E., Clavreul J. and Christensen T.H. (2009), Global warming factor of municipal solid waste in Europe, Waste Management and Research, 27, 850-860.

Gentl E.C., Damgaard A., Hauschild M, Finnveden G., Eriksson O., Thorneloe S., OZge Kaplan P., Barlaz M., Muller O., Matsui Y., Ii R. and Christensen T.H. (2010), Models for waste life cycle assessment: Review of technical assumptions, Waste Management, 30, 2636-2648.

Ghose M.K., Dikshit A.K. and Sharma S.K. (2006), A GIS based transportation model for solid waste disposal – A case study on Asansol municipality, Waste Management, 26 (11), 1287-1293.

Page 75: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Giugliano M., Cernuschi S., Grosso M., Rigamonit L. (2011), Material and energy recovery in integrated waste management systems. An evaluation based on life cycle assessment, Waste Management, 31, 2092-2101.

González-Torre P.L., Adenso-Dı́az B. and Ruiz-Torres A. (2003), Some comparative factors regarding recycling collection systems in regions of the USA and Europe, Journal of Environmental Management, 69 (2), 129-138.

Güereca P., Gassó S., Baldasano J.M., Jiménez-Guerrero P. (2006), Life cycle assessment of two biowaste management systems for Barcelona, Spain. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 49, 32-48.

Guinée J.B., Heijungs R. (2005), Life Cycle Assessment, Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.

Haug (1993), The practical handbook of compost engineering, Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, USA.

Hogg D. (2011), Incineration Taxes: Green Certificates, in Seminar on Use of Economic Instruments and Waste Management of DG Environment of European Commission, 25th October 2011, Brussels.

Hong R.J., Wang G.F., Guo R.Z., Cheng X., Liu Q., Zhang P.J., Quian G.R. (2006), Life cycle assessment of BMT-based integrated municipal solid waste management: case study in Pudong, China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 49, 129-146.

Human Development Report (2005), New York, United Nations Development Programme.

Iriarte A., Gabarrell X., Rieradevall J. (2009), LCA of selective waste collection systems in dense urban areas, Waste Management, 29, 903-914.

IEEP (Institute for European Environmental Policy) (2011), The Use of Economic Instruments and Waste Management Performances – Background report for stakeholder meeting, Provisional report.

IPCC (2006), 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds). Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Japan.

ISO 14.040 (2006), Environmental management-life cycle assessment-Principles and framework. International Organization of Standardization, Geneva. Switzerland.

Karagiannidis A., Karkanias C., Samaras P., Klapas M.E., Tzoulis E., Prassa I. (2010) ‘Planning for a low-cost Zero Waste municipality: The strategic priorities of the municipality of Preveza’, Protection and Restoration of the Environment X, 05-09 July, Corfu, Greece (poster presentation).

Killian, S. (2003), Environmental Taxes and the Double Dividend Hypothesis: A Case Study from Ireland, Australian Tax Forum, 18, 347 and following ones.

Kirkitsos Ph., Papatheochari S., Homatidis D., Chrysogelos N., Dalamangas A., Gioka P., Makrinika K. and Dimou A. (2011) The Implementation of schemes Pay As You Pay in Greece. Study within the project LIFE 07/ENV/GR/000271. Ecological Recycling Society, Athens, June 2011.

Loh J., Wackernagel M. (ed.) (2004), Living Planet Report, Cambridge, WWF.

López Alvarez J.V., Aguilar Larrucea M., Fernández-Carrión S., Quero A. and Jiménez del Valle A. (2008), Optimizing the collection of used paper from small businesses through GIS techniques: The Leganés case (Madrid, Spain), Waste Management, 28 (2), 282-293.

Malamakis A., Karagiannidis A. and Perkoulidis G. (2009), Simulation and assessment of alternative pay-as-you-throw scenarios aiming at maximizing municipal waste diversion by the resulting direct promotion of minimization and recovery schemes, Proceedings of the 12th

Page 76: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium (R. Cossu, L.F. Diaz and R. Stegmann, eds), S. Margherita di Pula (Cagliari), Sardinia, Italy, 5-9 October, CD-ROM edition.

Manfredi S., Tonini D. and Christensen T.H. (2011), Environmental assessment of different management options for individual waste fractions by means of life-cycle assessment modeling. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55, 995-1004.

Mavropoulos A. (2011), Waste management 2030+, ISWA.

Merete H. (2002), Life cycle assessment (LCA) of industrial milk production, The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 7 (2), 115-126.

Moberg G, Finnveden G, Johanson J, Lind P. (2005), Life cycle assessment of energy from solid waste-part 2: landfilling compared to other treatment methods. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 231-240.

OECD/EEA (2012), Database on instruments used for environmentally policy and natural resources management, http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries [27th February 2012].

Ortiz O, Castells F, Sonnmann G. (2009), Sustainability in the construction industry: a review of recent developments based on LCA, Construction and Building Materials, 23, 28-39.

Papageorgiou A., Karagiannidis A., Barton J.R. and Kalogirou E. (2009) Municipal solid waste management scenarios for Attica and their greenhouse gas emission impact, Waste Management & Research, 27, 928-937.

Perkoulidis G., Malamakis A., Karagiannidis A., Wittmaier M. and Bilitewski B. (2011), Cogeneration of renewable energy from organic waste in insular settings: A case for the Vietnamese island of Phu Quoc, Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 12, 594-602.

Puig Ventosa I. (2004), Potential use of feebate systems to foster environmentally sound urban waste management”, International Journal of Integrated Waste Management, Science and Technology, 24: 3-7.

Puig Ventosa I., González Martínez A.C., Jofra Sora M. “Landfill and Waste Incineration Taxes in Catalonia (Spain)”, in Kreiser L., Yábar Sterling A., Herrera P., Milne J., Ashiabor H. (Eds.) “Critical Issues in Environmental Taxation”, Volume XI (In press).

Puyuelo B., Colón J., Martín P., Sánchez A. (2012), Study of the optimal storage methods to collect the organic fraction of municipal solid waste at home. The case of Catalonia as example, Waste Management, in press.

Ralph Hall, Introducing the Concept of Sustainable Transport to the U.S. DOT through the Reauthorization of TEA-21.

Rigamonti L, Grosso M, Giugliano M. (2010), Life cycle assessment of sub-units composing a MWS management system, Journal of Cleaner Production 18, 1652-1662.

Rives J, Rieradevall J, Gabarrell X. (2010), LCA comparison of container systems in municipal solid waste management, Waste Management 30, 949-957.

Ruggieri L., Artola A., Gea T., Sánchez, A. (2008), Biodegradation of animal fats in a co-composting process with wastewater sludge, International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 62, 297-303.

Starr K, Gabarrell X, Villalba G, Talens L, Lombardi L. (2012), Life cycle assessment of biogas upgrading technologies. Waste Management, Forthcoming 2012.

Suttibak S. and Nitivattananon V. (2008), Assessment of factors influencing the performance of solid waste recycling programs, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53 (1-2), 45-56.

Page 77: Text format for MSc modules - Zero Waste · Web viewplan products easily reusable, recoverable or disposable with reduced environmental impact; Reduce or eliminate unnecessary packaging,

Tavares G., Zsigraiová Z. and Semiao V. (2011), Multi-criteria GIS-based siting of an incineration plant for municipal solid waste, Waste Management, 31 (9-10), 1960-1972.

Tchobanoglous G., Theisen H. and Vigil S. (1993), Integrated Solid Waste Management: Engineering Principles and Management Issues.,McGraw-Hill, New York, USA.

UNEP (2010), Waste and Climate Change. Global Trends and Strategy framework. Division of Technology, Industry and Economics, International Environmental Technology Centre, Osaka, Japan.

US EPA (2005), LandGEM, The Landfill Gas Emissions Model. http://www.epa.gov/ttncatc1/dir1/landgem-v302-guide.pdf (accessed December 2011).

Vicentini F., Giusti, A., Rovetta A., Fan X., He Q., Zhu M. and Liu B. (2008), Sensorized waste collection container for content estimation and collection optimization, Waste Management, 29 (5), 1467-1472.

Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WTERT) (2011), Waste Incineration Plant Scheme. http://www.wtert.eu/default.asp?ShowDok=13 (accessed December 2011).

Xirogiannopoulou A., Karagiannidis A. and Tchobanoglous G. (2008), Full Cost Accounting as a tool for the financial assessment of Pay-As-You-Throw schemes: A case-study for the Panorama municipality, Waste Management 28, 2801-2808.

Zotos, G., A. Karagiannidis, S. Zampetoglou, A. Malamakis, I.S. Antonopoulos, S. Kontogianni. and G. Tchobanoglous. 2009. Developing a holistic strategy for integrated waste management within municipal planning: Challenges, policies, solutions and perspectives for Hellenic municipalities in the zero-waste, low-cost direction. International Journal of Integrated Waste Management, Science and Technology, 29, 1686-1692.

INTERNET SOURCES

www.clickgreen.org.uk ClickGreen staff, Published Tue 08 Mar 2011, http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/analysis/general-analysis/121999-austria-tops-the-european-recycling-league-table.html

www.fwtm.freiburg.de

http://www.fwtm.freiburg.de/servlet/PB/menu/1144339_l2/index.html

www.greendotcompliance.eu http://www.greendotcompliance.eu/en/about-green-dot.php

Silverstone D., 2006, London Remade, A local actor for recycling, Compendium ACR+

http://www.rreuse.org/t3/fileadmin/editor-mount/documents/100/00139-COMPENDIUM06-Electro.pdf

www.londonremade.com

www.da-di-werk.de

www.growingwithcompost.org

http://renewable-energy-database.com/index/display/article-display/_emailArticle/articles/waste-management-world/volume-11/issue-2/features/waste-management_2030.html

http://reports.eea.europa.eu/briefing_2008_1/en/Supporting_document_to_EEA_ Briefing_2008-01.pdf.