ETAT DE L ART DE LA COLLECTE SÉPARÉE ET DE LA GESTION DE

Transcription

1 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 1 ETAT DE L ART DE LA COLLECTE SÉPARÉE ET DE LA GESTION DE PROXIMITÉ DES BIODÉCHETS 1 General and regulatory context general global regulatory context responsibilities and organization of household waste management public policies to develop biowaste management financing of waste management requirements for separate collections technical organization and costs of household waste management household waste management general organization technical points costs of household waste management biowaste collection Development of biowaste collection for households collection of biowaste from households biowaste treatment data national data and variation representative Examples separate collection for big producers local management of biowaste historic background global approach data ABSTRACT... 33

2 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 2 1 GENERAL AND REGULATORY CONTEXT 1.1 GENERAL Map of the country, demographic data, political organization, Climate characteristics Demography: 60.6 million inhabitants on km², or a density of 201 per square kilometer. Population is mainly concentrated in flat and coastal areas. Two towns have more than 1 million inhabitants (Rome, 2.7 million and Milan, 1.3 million) followed by four citis over 500,000 inh (Naples, Turin, Palermo and Genua). The Milan conurbation (called Grande Milano ) is the 1 st Italian one and the 5 th in Europe, with over 7 million inhabitants on 12,000 km 2 distributed among 9 provinces and 2 regions. On the other hand, mountain regions such as Valle d Aosta (in the north) and Basilicata (in the south of Italy) have the lowest population density (37 and 60 inh/sq km). Political organization: Unitary Parlamentary Republic Climatic conditions: Most of the inland northern regions have a climate variously described as humid continental or temperate. The coastal areas of Liguria and most of the peninsula south of Florence generally fit the Mediterranean stereotype. Conditions on peninsular coastal areas can be very different from the interior's higher ground and valleys, particularly during the winter months when the higher altitudes tend to be cold, wet, and often snowy. The coastal regions have mild winters and warm and generally dry summers, although lowland valleys can be quite hot in summer. 1.2 GLOBAL REGULATORY CONTEXT Chapter s aim: Define the legislation s main guidelines and underline the legal obligations that encouraged developing biowaste s management RESPONSIBILITIES AND ORGANIZATION OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE MANAGEMENT What are the guidelines directing waste management (including eventually Biowaste Directive)? Background: The founding instrument about waste dates back It classified waste (municipal, special, hazardous waste) and management options, which were basically disposal activities. The first waste national framework regulation including a hierarchy of waste management options was issued in 1997 (d.lgs 22/97) and setting separate collection targets to be met at provincial level (up to 35% by 2003). Current regulation Currently, the Italian waste framework regulation is represented by the d.lgs 152/06 (amended in December 2010 in order to enforce the Waste Framework Directive on Waste, 2008/98/EC). The following updated separate collection target were set and referred to each of the ATOs (Optimal Territorial Unit, often corresponding to the Provinces, although some Regions have regulated it differently, e.g. with ATOs including more Provinces, as e.g. in Tuscany and Pidmont): 35% by 31/12/2006

3 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 3 45% by 31/12/ % by 31/12/2012 Such targets can be considered strong drivers for recovery of biowaste (foodwaste and green waste), if we consider that at least % in weight of the municipal waste produced in Italy is represented by biowaste (often, higher percentages may be found in Southern Italy). This implies that much of the efforts to reach the goal should be done by implementing specific collection schemes for organic materials. The Decree states that Regions must adopt plans and measures to encourage separate collection of organics. Also, it gives a clear definition of the way separate collection of organics must be rolled out, by means of either i) containers (buckets, bins) or ii) biodegradable bags complying with norm EN 13432:2002 on compostability (usually, such biobags, made of bioplastics or paper, are used as liners of the rigid containers in order to prevent leaking and dirt). Hence the normal polyethylene bags are explicitly banned from being considered by Municipalities and waste contractors as the standard bag adopted for separate collection. Another significant driver pushing source segregation of biowaste can be found in the National decree 13 th January 2003 no. 36/03 Enforcement of the European Directive no. 1999/31/CE on Landfill of waste. Scope of the decree is to identify operative and technical requirements for waste disposal and landfill construction and management. Although mainly issued to landfill management, the decree explicitly refers to the necessity to divert biowaste from landfill. Art. 2, (comma 1 letter i)) of the decree defines biodegradable waste: every waste which naturally undergoes aerobic or anaerobic decomposition processes, like for instance foodwaste, green waste, paper and cardboard. The decree sets then the following targets of Biodegradable Municipal Waste Diversion to be reached: biowaste disposed to landfill < 173 kg/inhabitant per annum by 27/03/2008 biowaste disposed to landfill < 115 kg/inhabitant per annum by 27/03/2011 biowaste disposed to landfill < 81 kg/inhabitant per annum by 27/03/2018 According to art. 5 (par. 2) each Region must put in force a Regional Programme for the reduction of biowaste disposal to landfill by means of specific actions at each level of waste management, particularly stressing biowaste recycling through aerobic and anaerobic processes. Further provisions set by the decree concern the obligation of pre treatment of residual waste (what remains after separate collection) before landfilling and the prohibition of disposing waste with Lower Heating Value (LHV) > kj/kg. With Law no. 13/09, the above said provisions are regulated through the definition of the following deadlines: the obligation of pre treatment, deriving directly from the Directive 99/31/EC, becomes statutory by 30th June 2009, while the prohibition of delivery for waste with LHV> kj/kg by the 31st December 2009 (recently extended to the 31 st january 2013).

4 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 4 Is there any limit for waste accepted in landfill or in incineration (definition, limit in organic material)? According to the decree no. 36/03, only pre treated waste can be accepted in landfill; furthermore, subsequent technical regulations set specifications for different kind of waste to be met. Again, as previously stated, only municipal waste with a LHV < kj/kg can be disposed to landfill, although entry into force of this provision, which is not derived from the Landfill Directive, has been postponed. Regional plans must be provided (and periodically updated) in order to reduce biodegradable waste disposal down to the targets fixed by national regulation (see previous question). At present, there is no acceptance at incinerators and non conventional thermal treatment sites (pyrolisis, gasification) that may affect inclusion/exclusion of organics from the waste thereto destined What do the specific regulations about organic waste say? What are the regulatory interdependencies between the different streams? A specific set of measures are referred to Biowaste management, in order to encourage proper collection and management. In fact, according to d.lgs 152/06 (art. 182 ter) biowaste must be either collected unpacked or contained within compostable bags certified according to CEN13432:2002 method local authorities must adopt measures aimed at encouraging biowaste separate collection and recovery, and at making use of environmental safe products deriving from biowaste recovery There are no specific regulations on collection frequencies and instruments in National Acts and regulations, although quite frequently Regions and/or Provinces adopt guidelines for separate collection in order to support proper implementation of schemes. Separately collected Waste (including biowaste) must be treated according to a recovery (R) option. What types of waste are included in the definition of «household waste» (limit of «public service )? According to d.lgs 152/06, art. 184, household waste is represented by: a) domestic waste, including bulky waste, produced by households b) non hazardous waste produced by economical activities with quantitative limitations and with composition that is similar to household waste (this is defined at local level, and normally includes waste from retail shops, offices, some institutional waste as the one from schools, etc.) c) road sweeping; d) any kind of waste abandoned on public areas; e) green waste produce by parks, gardens and cemeteries; f) waste deriving from exhumations and other cemeterial activities

5 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 5 Which structures are competent to collect and treat the several waste streams? Municipal or inter municipal authorities are in charge of waste collection, which can be managed by public or private companies. Recovery/disposal operations of all waste streams can be carried out by any public/private companies which operate under a specific permit; although in principle facilities dealing with MSW should be subject to planning, it is quite common to have private initiatives not covered by planning above all in the field of composting. Which are the tools allowing planning waste management and what scale do they apply to, appreciation of planning imposed by EU, aims and level of application? Regional and provincial plans for waste management are obligatory according to d.lgs 152/06. Regional plans in particular must provide: a view of current regional waste management kind, source and amount of waste produced in each Province separate collection targets (complying with national targets) current state of existing facilities for the recovery/disposal of waste an evaluation of new waste collection systems and waste treatment needs in accordance with the selfsufficiency principle guidelines for siting of new waste treatment facilities regional strategies for integrated waste management an estimation of the costs related to waste recovery and disposal a programme for the reduction of biowaste disposal to landfill, complying with diversion targets established by Directive 99/31/EC on Landfilling a programme for waste reduction a plan for the reduction and management of packaging waste and other specific flows of special waste Existing national observation systems (surveys, studies, databases ) ONR, the National Observatory on Waste, instituted according to the current framework regulation, is in charge of collecting and monitoring all data related to waste and packaging management, and to set up targets and actions aiming at reducing waste production. Besides, ONR shall monitor the evolution of waste management in Italy, taking advantage of a network of regional and provincial observatories. ISPRA is the Italian national environmental protection agency in charge of coordinating national surveys on waste management. Every year, ISPRA publishes a report on waste production, separate collection, recovery and disposal, providing comparative data for each item. What is the waste prevention policy? Pending the adoption of a national waste prevention plan (deadline is 12 december 2012), some regions have issued local plans which provide targets and actions aimed to reduce waste production. Main actions and most promising practices refer to biowaste (i.e. home composting, donation of non tradable food products to charity institutions), packaging, informatisation of bureaucracy, management of end of life electric and electronic equipments, cloth (washable) nappies, promotion of tap water instead of bottled water.

6 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 6 Which streams should be separately collected? Italian public structures are obligated to settle a sorted collection of household packaging in application of Directive 94/63/CE and WEEE according to Directive 2002/96/CE. As for Municipal Waste, obligation of separate collection of at least paper, metals, glass and wood by About household organic waste, national waste framework regulation encourages separate collection and recovery, but without any obligation. In fact, since a 65% separate collection target is stipulated for Municipal Waste, collection of organic fraction factually becomes a must in order to meet that goal. Are there some minimal collection frequency? (Some different answers can occur inside a country) According to national waste frame regulation, Regions are in charge of setting separate collection criteria, which must take into account technical, economical, environmental and heath issues. Both regions and provinces usually include those criteria in their waste management plans, in form of guidelines for those subjects who are in charge of the collection of waste. Traditionally a typical collection frequency of 3 times/wk was adopted for mixed garbage in North Italy, becoming 6 times/wk in South Italy. When separate collection of organics is rolled out, collection frequencies typically become 2 times/wk for organics and once/wk for residual waste in North Italy, whereas 4 times/wk organics and 2 times/wk residuals are more typical for South Italy. What are the means to control that regulatory requirements are respected? Depending on the type of requirement, several institutions have monitoring responsibilities: local waste observatory offices collect and monitor waste production data and separate collection at provincial level, in order to verify the compliance to national targets regional environmental protection agencies (ARPA) are in charge of monitoring the fulfillment of requirements included in permits for waste treatment/disposal facilities PUBLIC POLICIES TO DEVELOP BIOWASTE MANAGEMENT Background: public action, effects on recycling. Separate collection targets introduced in the national regulation (first act in 1997, with a 35% separate collection target, followed by the current waste framework regulation requiring 65%) together with landfill regulation (ban of non pre treated waste to landfill and biowaste diversion target) have been important drivers which stressed recycling. Even though at national level MSW separate collection has reached only 33.6% in 2009 (latest available data), this is the average result of municipalities, provinces and regions in which separate collection schemes haven t been introduced yet (especially, but not only, in some Southern areas) and areas in which 65% has been already

7 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 7 trespassed, even at provincial level (Treviso, Pordenone, Novara, etc). Spot results in single Municipalities may be much higher, in the range 70 80%, with some Municipalities even achieving 90%. Biowaste (kitchen and garden waste) is by far the most important waste fraction in terms of separate collection (see figure below, Frazione Organica ) in terms of amounts collected (over 3.7Mt in 2009, with a per capita collection of 62kg ranging from 32kg in the South, to 93kg in the North of Italy) and growth over time. Fig. 1 share of different waste streams in separate collection. Profile (source ISPRA) Encouragement for domestic and proximity management? Home composting is generally recognized as one of the main actions to reduce waste production, and is encouraged by some municipalities by means of a reduction of waste fee to those families who compost their food and garden waste at home (after signing an agreement, a family is usually trained and possibly supplied a composter for free or at a reduced charge). As for proximity composting, small composting plants projects can have access to a simplified permit, consisting in a communication to local authorities about plans to build and run a plant, which shall comply to a set of technical specification contained in D.M. 05/02/98 Individuation of non hazardous waste undergoing simplified recovery procedures. By way of an example, small scale composting of garden and park waste only, with a capacity of less than 1000 tpy, is exempted from the obligation on paving. Moreover, some of the technical guidelines for biowaste recovery provided by some Regions include relaxations from requirements in terms of environment protection for small plants (to a degree which depends on the amount/type of organic waste and the distance from households; typically smaller plants with a sufficient distance from nearest dwellings are exempted from the need for an invessel or indoor composting stage with subsequent odour treatment, even if they process fermentable materials as food waste and sludge). Support policy: financial and technical support Some regions provide financial support (free grants or loans) for the implementation of separate collection schemes and recycling facilities. Some grants can be provided by the Ministry for the Environment or ISPRA for feasibility studies or surveys on waste collection and management.

8 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 8 For Southern Regions, an important support often comes from EU Structural Funds which are normally used to cover part of the investment costs for waste management facilities. Technical assistance from institutions is not generally provided, but sometimes it is included in Regional Policy, e.g. in the case of the Obserevatory on Composting of Region Veneto, which is mandated to monitor and give technical support to all regional organic waste recovery facilities. Taxations (including penalties in case of non application of sorting instructions) Penalties: Local Authorities can apply penalties to citizens which do not properly follow separate collection instructions. No general data are available on the application of such penalties, although in the case of kerbside (door todoor) systems, those proving to be the only ones able to meet the 65% target, the case for fines is quite uncommon (people tend to behave properly) Recycling facilities can refuse waste containing an excess of improper material; this represents an indirect penalty, since the higher fees for disposing such waste increase the overall cost of waste management then transferred by Municipalities to households The National Packaging Consortium, born under the national regulation on waste in order to encourage the recycling of packaging waste, has set a granting scheme for municipalities which perform separate collection of such materials. Grants are in reverse proportion to waste purity and are different for different packaging materials On the opposite side, some Municipalities apply a waste fee reduction (normally in the range 5 20%) to families performing home composting of their organic residues FINANCING OF WASTE MANAGEMENT How is the public service funded? (Funding by producer responsibility schemes, public aids, providing services, taxes, fees, PAYT, how do they work? ) (Very important topic in order to understand differences and difficulties, as it is one of the main levers to develop biowaste management.) The public service is basically funded by household taxation. A double taxation system is present, the first (applied by some 85% of municipalities) consisting in a tax whose amount is proportional to household size (m 2 ) that contributes (together with the other municipal incomes) to pay the collection/disposal service; the second one (15% of municipalities) is a pay as you throw fee, which should fully cover the actual cost of the service and should be measured on the actual amount of waste produced by each citizen. Normally, implementation of a PAYT system is able to cause a further increase of separate collection of around 10% more, even in those Municipalities where high rates are already achieved without PAYT and just by means of kerbside collection In addition, the National Packaging Consortium grants the municipalities which carry out the separate collection of packaging waste (glass, paper&cardboard, plastics, wood, etc) providing a fee proportional to the quality and quantity of waste separately collected, which should help cover the cost of collection.

9 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page REQUIREMENTS FOR SEPARATE COLLECTIONS Biowaste s definition? Biowaste is defined by d.lgs 152/06 as the separately collected biodegradable waste from garden and parks, food waste produced by households, restaurants, catering services, shops and food industry. Targets, means to control regulation s application? The following updated separate collection target were set and referred to each of the ATOs (Optimal Territorial Unit, roughly corresponding to the Provinces): 35% by 31/12/ % by 31/12/ % by 31/12/2012 No specific obligation is stipulated for biowaste collection, even though it is strongly recommended ( encouraged ) by national waste framework regulation. Furthermore, it is key to axchieve the mandatory separate collection target Local waste observatory offices collect and elaborate waste separate collection data at provincial level, in order to verify the compliance to national targets Compulsory norms for compost/ compost quality/ systems for quality assurance for compost? In Italy, compost holds the legal status of product if it complies to requirements set out by the national law on fertilizers (d.lgs 75/2010) which considers two types of compost: green compost (produced from parks and gardens waste only) and mixed compost (produced from all kinds of biowaste and biodegradable waste in general; it s worth noticing, anyway, that al such materials must be source separated, i.e. mixed does not mean from mixed MSW ). The same law defines more stringent quality criteria for compost applicable in organic farming. Compost can be certified by the Italian Composting Association on a voluntary base. Cat.2 and 3 Animal by products (apart from catering waste, i.e. food waste coming from households, canteens, restaurants, whose treatment falls under common requirements of national legislation) can be composted according to requirements of EC regulations 1069/2009 and 142/2011. Tab. 1: Compost standards Parameter unit Green Compost Mixed compost moisture content % ph 6 8,5 6 8,5 Organic C % d.m HA+FA % d.m. 2,5 7 Organic N %Ntot (d.m.) C/N 50 25

10 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 10 Cu mg/kg d.m Zn mg/kg d.m Pb mg/kg d.m Cd mg/kg d.m. 1,5 1,5 Ni mg/kg d.m Hg mg/kg d.m. 1,5 1,5 CrVI mg/kg d.m. 0,5 0,5 Tl mg/kg d.m. 2* 2* Plastic, glass, metals 2 %d.m. 0,5 0,45 mm Inerts (Stones) 5 mm %d.m. 5 0,05 Salmonellae MPN/25g Assenti Assenti E.coli UFC/g Germination index (30% dilution) % 60 *For compost from input mixtrues coming from algae and seaweeds Strengths and weaknesses of national regulation Strengths: Separate collection targets, prevention policy increasingly defined, clear definition of requirements to meet to have compost as a product, restrictions for landfilling, Weaknesses: failing to meet separate collection targets only implies some weak extra charges on the Landfill Tax (a few Euro/t). 2 TECHNICAL ORGANIZATION AND COSTS OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE MANAGEMENT 2.1 HOUSEHOLD WASTE MANAGEMENT Chapter s aim: Get a precise idea on waste management s technical organization (every waste stream) by showing a few key figures GENERAL ORGANIZATION What kind of treatment for residual waste? NOTE: although residual waste is generally considered as the municipal waste not separately collected, we understand that this and the following questions refer to the total MSW produced.

11 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 11 Municipal Solid Waste treatment in 2009: 36,9% direct landfilling (still the main option, although forbidden according to national regulation on landfills), 33,6% recycling, 20,7% Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT, followed by some material recovery, use of RDF, landfilling of rejects), 8,8% incineration. MBT is aimed at biostabilising the organic matter still present in residual waste; moreover several facilities recover a secondary fuel from high LHV value fractions and/or dry materials for recycling. Compost is only produced from the recovery of separately collected organic fraction ( t of kitchen+green waste in 2009, 11,7% of MSW). Principal key figures: kg/psn/year for residual household waste (MSW), biowaste (distinguish garden waste and kitchen waste or mixed biowaste), packaging, paper? National variation rates for different schemes) The charts below show national collection statistics based on 2009 data and 2 exemplifications of waste collection data where a door to door (kerbside) collection scheme is present (Province of Treviso, 69% separate collection, inhabitants) and in case of road container collection (Province of Firenze, 38% separate collection, inhabitants). Other SC = other separately collected materials; RHW = residual waste Fig. 2: MSW collected in 2009 in Italy. kg/psn/year Italy 353, ,1 28,2 10,2 5,6 11,2 12,3 Biowaste* Paper Glass Plastic Metal Wood Other SC RHW * green waste and kitchen waste Fig. 3: MSW collected in 2009 in the province of Treviso Door to Door collection 120,0 100,0 102,16 kg/psn/year 80,0 60,0 40,0 69,3 48,6 54,2 46,7 20,0 9,8 12,8 10,9 9,8 0,0 Kitchen waste Green waste Paper Glass Plastic Metal Wood Other SC RHW

12 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 12 Fig. 4: MSW collected in 2009 in the province of Firenze. Road container collection 300,0 250,0 243,7 kg/psn/year 200,0 150,0 100,0 50,0 0,0 59,1 Kitchen waste 15,6 Green waste 101,8 27,0 12,0 4,7 14,6 6,7 Paper Glass Plastic Metal Wood Other SC RHW Notably, not only does door to door collection imply a much higher percentage of separate collection, but also it implies a remarkably lower total amount of MSW collected than collection by means of road containers (this latter, as a matter of fact, implies passive assimilation of important amounts of industrial waste which may be delivered in the large volume containers). On account of higher separate collection, better quality, reduction of total MSW amounts to be dealt with, minimization of residual waste, and also possible savings on i) disposal and ii) collection of residual waste (reduced frequency for its collection, see further on) kerbside collection is increasingly adopted across Italy, factually replacing collection by means of road containers also in those Regions (as Emilia Romagna and Tuscany) where road containers have long been the primary option. Kerbside collection, including separate collection of food waste, has long been adopted also in densely populated areas, starting around the mid 90 s in the big Commuters towns around Milan. Salerno (South Italy) pop , is steadily around 70 75% separate collection since it rolled out kerbside collection including food waste, started in At present, many neighborhoods are covered also in large towns, e.g. 60% of the population in Turin, and stepwise implementation is foreseen in all largest Cities (including Rome, Naples). Milan recently adopted the official plan to insert separate collection of food waste for 100% of the population, starting in late 2012 and covering the whole town by early Rate of energy recovery/ material recovery Energy recovery rate in 2009: no official data on energy recovery from municipal waste. In 2009, 14,3% of MSW were delivered to incineration facilities (considering both direct incineration and incineration after MBT of dry fractions or secondary fuel), most of which are actually incinerators with no or only a low energy recovery (not meeting the requirements of Directive 2008/98 to be classified as energy recovery facilities ). Recycling rate (recyclable and organic material) (tons destined to recycling plants reported to total amount of household and similar waste) in 2009: 33,6 %. How do the different collections work (bring systems, recycling centers, frequencies, percentage of population having this kind of collection, )? Residual Household Waste Collection: Traditional collection 3/wk in North Italy, 6/wk in South Italy. Frequencies decrease to 1/wk and 2/wk when kerbside collection of food waste is rolled out, thanks to remarkably lower percentages of organics in residual waste; in some Districts, the particularly low percentages of organics in

13 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 13 residual waste, and concurrent implementation of a PAYT system based on the number of pick ups for bags or carts, further cuts the average frequency, even down to once every 2 months. In kerbside schemes, most typically residual waste is collected by means of bags, and a semi transparent bag is often used to check composition of residual waste (which pushes further separate collection of recyclables). Sometimes, a wheelie bin (cart) is used, instead. When organics are collected by means of road containers, their relatively low captures leave a high percentage of organics in residual waste, therefore typically there is no reduction of frequency for collection of residual waste. Recyclables sorted collection: The following chart reports the percentage of municipalities in which dry recyclables have been separately collected. Tab. 2: Recyclables sorted collection in 2009: % of municipalities involved North Center South Italy % of municipalities Organic fraction (kitchen and green waste) 86,5 59,9 52,6 72,4 Paper and cardboard 98,6 93,2 94,0 96,6 Glass 99,8 89,3 93,9 96,6 Plastic 97,8 87,8 93,4 95,2 Wood 79,5 52,5 28,6 59,9 Metals 92,1 75,7 75,3 84,7 WEEE 92,3 69,1 69,3 82,1 Textiles 49,8 44,3 22,6 40,5 Batteries, drugs, inks, solvents, 94,1 80,1 54,1 79,6 Other bulky wastes 67,4 15,3 48,6 55,1 Dry fractions separate collection: Collection is performed generally once a week, kerbside (door to door) or by means of road containers. In kerbside schemes, normally bags are used for the lightweight materials (plastics, metals) carts are common for glass, paper may be collected by carts, or in throwaway paper boxes Biowaste sorted collection: Garden waste: In general, when kerbside schemes are rolled out, garden waste is not collected alongside food waste, and must be delivered to bring sites (Civic Amenity Sites, i.e. the Decheteries ) by the producers. In some cases, collection services guarantee a doorstep collection in spring and summer, or on demand (this latter may imply an extra charge for the service). In schemes where collection is performed by means of road containers, garden waste is normally collected alongside food waste, although large volumes are to be taken to the bring sites. Kitchen waste: in kerbside schemes, kitchen waste is collected on itself (with no garden waste) by means of smallvolume buckets (for detached houses, terraced houses, and groups of houses with up to 4 5 families) or carts (in high rise buildings). Collection of food waste alone implies the use of small volume, cheap open lorries with no compacting system (see figure 1) In schemes adopting road containers food waste is collected commingled with garden waste, which requires the use of packer trucks.

14 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 14 Typically, the frequency for collection varies between 1 and 4 times a week depending on the area (higher frequencies in South Italy) the season, on the specific features of the site (i.e. touristic area, old town centres, etc ) Figure 1: an open lorry Sorted collection of bulky refuse (except on bring sites): In general, bulky waste must be delivered to bring sites by the producers. However, it is quite common that Municipalities also implement a collection at the doorstep on demand. Bring sites: A bring site is an arranged area, guarded and closed, where households can bring their bulky waste and all other waste (except for residual and kitchen waste) by sorting it in several different containers in order to get the materials recycled or treated. Although no data are available on the amount of bring sites in Italy, they are quite common (most Municipalities have one) and are even mandatory according to some Regional Acts TECHNICAL POINTS Generally, what is the pre collection equipment for the different kinds of waste: type of containers (bags, bins, boxes, skips), volumes, (Questions from the ADEME, maybe quite uninteresting, but some general ideas could be useful.) Door to door collections: Residual waste: PE bags Dry recyclables (paper, glass, plastic): bags or carts Kitchen waste: buckets (7 10 l) for management in the kitchen; larger buckets (up to l) or carts ( l) for delivery at the kerb (buckets used for single households or small groups of households in order to save time on pick up; carts used for high rise buildings in order to serve more households with one single pick up). It is most common the use of biobags (either bioplastics or paper) to make the system comfortable and increase captures, which maximizes separate collection and diversion from landfills, and allows a sharp reduction of collection of residual waste

15 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 15 Road containers collection: Road containers (ranging from 1,1 to 3,2 m3) for each type of dry and wet recyclable and for residual waste Collection equipment (kinds of vehicles) Door to door collection: Open lorries (see picture) for food waste and paper Packer trucks (compactors) for lightweight compactable recyclables (plastics, metals) Refuse collection vehicles (rear loading compactors), equipped with container lifting mechanisms (used in the rare case of collection by means of carts), for residual waste. Road container collection Typically, side loading compactors for both recyclables (including organics) and residual waste. Sometimes, use of small volume satellite vehicles for areas with tough access conditions. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES Strengths: Well established systems (kerbside schemes) for optimized separate collection, providing technical guidance for other Municipalities where the system still must be implemented Kerbside collection generally acknowledged as the way forward since the late 90 s, when the National EPA (then ANPA, now ISPRA) published a Handbook for separate collection 1 in order to provide guidance to Municipalities for cost optimised and effective separate collection Kerbside collection is much appreciated by citizens (customer satisfaction analyses showing evidence) Operational optimization (in specific, thanks to reduced frequency for collection of residual waste, and cheaper collection of food waste thanks to use of cheap open lorries) entails overall savings, hence a lowe cost for Municipalities and households Weaknesses: Still many Municipalities lagging behind the deadlines to achieve the separate collection targets Collection by means of road containers implies increases of MSW arisings due to improper deliveries of industrial waste Shifting to kerbside collection made sometimes slower by huge investements on road containers and sideloading compactors in past years 2.2 COSTS OF HOUSEHOLD WASTE MANAGEMENT Chapter s aim: 1 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza, La raccolta differenziata, aspetti progettuali e gestionali, Manuale ANPA. Published by ANPA (now ISPRA), Rome, 1999

16 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 16 Understanding the economical mechanisms that encourage (or do not) to settle a specific biowaste management. Understanding the connections between the economical actors. The aim of this chapter is not to compare costs between countries, as the used methods are generally incomparable. Overall global public expenditure on waste, how is the expense covered? (Give an idea about the amounts and the economic actors) The overall estimated costs for waste management in Italy in 2009 were about This roughly gives an average cost of 120 Eur/person. The unit cost tends to be reasonably higher in Central and South Italy on account of the higher frequencies for collection, although in many Southern areas this is factually outweighed by the reduced landfill/disposal fees. In Central Italy, the higher cost is also influence by the wider adoption of road containers, which i) increase the total waste amounts to be dealt with ii) increase the reliance on disposal and iii) do not allow reduced frequency for collection of residual waste (as it would on the contrary be possible with kerbside collection) The waste budget is basically collected by Municipalities by means of the Waste Tax (TARSU) whereas in areas where a PAYT system is adopted, this is normally collected by the waste contractor. Municipalities (or waste contractors) then have to pay the gate fees for processing, recycling, composting and disposal. The National Packaging Consortium CONAI grants Municipalities the revenues for the amounts of separately collected packaging waste; such revenues of course decrease the total cost of waste management, hence they cause savings on costs transferred to households by means of the waste tax or through PAYT systems. Which stakeholders have a financial role (State, local authorities, fee payers, tax payers, companies )? Citizens: by means of the waste tax or pay as you throw fee. Local authorities: they collect the waste budget through the tax; also, they cover the part of the budget exceeding the incomes from waste tax (where applicable; this is quite frequent in South Italy, whereas typically in North Italy the waste tax provides for a sufficient coverage of total costs of waste management) National Packaging Consortium: contribute with financial support to dry recyclables collection, through some unit prices granted to each tonne of separately collected packaging waste (such prices vary with i) type of packaging and ii) purity of collected materials) Provinces, Regions and State (not systematically and by means of specific calls): financial support for new waste treatment facilities and waste separate collection projects. What does household waste management cost (per inhabitant or per household)? What portion is linked to biowaste management? Explain the method of calculation (we don t want to know the fee that is paid but the real costs) A calculation carried out by ISPRA (data 2009) based on the data of a sample of more than 60% of municipalities allows to summarize in the following chart the cost of integrated waste management in Eur/person.year. Collection Transp Residual Recyclables Other costs of the service Treatment Disposal Other Collection Treatment Common Capital TOTAL

17 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 17 North 21,45 25,89 2,98 23,12 9,03 22,30 6,79 111,56 Center 32,60 42,08 2,59 17,65 3,69 24,54 16,89 140,04 South 41,97 34,01 3,25 18,07 3,22 8,57 2,24 111,33 Italy 27,41 30,84 2,94 21,05 6,86 20,44 8,23 117,77 The cost for collection of biowaste may be in the range 5 to 20 Eur/person, depending on collection frequencies, density of population (lowest costs in highest densities) and other concurrent specific issues. The cost for treatment is typically around Eur/t for food waste, Eur/t for green waste, hence, considering the specific captures, it may give a unit cost of around 4 5 Eur/person for food waste, 1 4 Eur/person for green waste. As a matter of fact, it normally represents the total treatment cost for recyclables, since packaging waste normally gets a revenue and does not imply a cost (lower costs for treatment of recyclables in Central and South Italy are related to the lower percentage of Municipalities collecting organics separately, hence the average dedicated cost seems lower) Costs of collection and treatment (See if national statistics exist (collection of residual waste in /inhab. Or /t, treatment in /t, ). If not so, give representative examples.) See above for costs of collection. Cost of collection Is lowest where kerbside collection of food waste is implemented, thanks to remarkably reduced collection frequencies. A 1/wk collection round may cost around 10 Eur/person.year, which should be doubled or trebled where no separate collection or poorly performing separate collection of food waste is implemented. The cost of treatment, may be typically ranging from Eur/t (MBT including costs for landfilling) to Eur/t (incineration). Such costs may be (also remarkably) lower in Regions where EU or state funds are used as an infrastructural aid, which of course decreases the cost component related to financial costs of anticipated capital expenditures (Cap.Ex.) Is there a nation wide method to calculate and compare costs of waste management? Environmental Declaration Forms provided by municipalities should contain data con waste management costs. Theoretically this should allow the calculation and comparison of the costs of waste management. Unfortunately, EDFs are often incomplete, making it necessary to cross check the information with other sources, and to carry out statistical estimations. In any case, the total cost assessment in Eur/person is progressively becoming the reference cost assessment method, in place of the old and biased assessment in Eur/t (which was distorting the assessment in favour of those systems producing more waste, as typically it is with collection by means of road containers) Costs of treatment for residuals waste and for biowaste in /t (distinguish kinds of biowaste) Green waste treatment cost: typical gate fees at composting plants range from 20 to 40 /t Kitchen waste gate fee depends on a number of factors (technology adopted, size of the plant, specific costs of disposal of rejects, etc ), typically ranging from 80 to 95 /t. Lower fees can be applied by large facilities (down to /t).

18 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 18 At national level, treatment cost for residual waste is around /t for incineration and /t for MBT. 3 BIOWASTE COLLECTION Chapter s aim: Focus on biowaste sorted collections 3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF BIOWASTE COLLECTION FOR HOUSEHOLDS Development of biowaste collection (development of tons collected, of inhabitants having the possibility of biowaste collection) always distinguish garden waste, kitchen waste and mixed biowaste. (Give a very general idea of the development of biowaste collection and describe the levers for this development). In the following chart, the development of biowaste (kitchen and garden waste) over the last 5 years (up to 2009, last validated National data) is shown. Roughly 58% of biowaste collected in 2009 was represented by kitchen waste, and 42% by garden waste. Since 1993, the overall collection has increased by some 14 times. Fig. 5 Biowaste collection in Italy between 2005 and 2009 (data source ISPRA) Kt/y Besides a general increase in public opinion sensitivity to environmental matters, drivers for separate collection can be found in regulatory targets and in national policies which are stressing integrated waste management (i.e. the waste hierarchy) and minimization of impacts deriving from landfilling. Moreover, separate collection is stimulated by the growth of organic recovery facilities, which can take advantage by the increase of interest for compost (the organic amendment of soils is recognized as an important action against soil desertification and climate change, therefore its use is also subsidized in some Regions within local Rural Development Plans) and, when considering anaerobic digestion facilities, by the possibility of an additional income from the production (subsidised) of renewable energy. Problems that occurred and found solutions?

19 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 19 Dirt and leakage was of primary concern at the start of early separate collection schemes. In this respect, the use of biodegradable bags (paper or bioplastics) has steadily been on key tool to optimize the system. What are the trends for future development of biowaste collection? Necessarily, in order to meet 65% separate collection targets, biowaste collection should be further increased in Italy, above all in Southern areas; at first sight, separate collection levels must double with respect to 2009 data and, considering the current ratio of collection of the diverse fractions, biowaste collection should pass from t/y to some t/y even though other factors should be considered as, for example, waste prevention policies which hopefully should bring to a reduction of the overall household waste production (thereby increasing the percentages of separately collected materials relative to total waste amounts) What are the positions in the country about the place of home composting versus biowaste collection? Home composting and biowaste collection coexist in Italian policies, the first considered as a waste prevention option, the second an action towards a sustainable management of the waste produced. Both are being consistently promoted, and the National Composting Association (CIC) themselves are widely promoting home composting as a way to maximize sustainability in biowaste management. Home composting plays a role which may be two fold: 1. it replaces separate collection in some small Municipalities and rural areas, where kerbside collection suffers from issues with scaling or the higher costs of going door to door 2. it blends with separate collection in all other situations, i.e. those Municipalities where separate collection captures most of food waste, but still leaves room for those households who own a garden and want to do home composting. In any case, despite incentives and wide promotional campaigns, home composting typically is adopted by 20 to 40% of the households, hence separate collection is fundamental in order to maximize captures and diversion from landfills Communication : used tools / levers? Which scales (is there a nation wide communication, local, regional )? Are there satisfaction surveys / number of communicators engaged when starting a biowaste collection? Communication aiming at training citizens on a correct separate collection is mainly in charge of municipalities, provinces and companies which perform waste collection. National institutions and environmental associations usually deal with awareness campaigns. Satisfaction surveys ( Customer satisfaction analyses ) are often run by Municipalities in order to ascertain the support to schemes and specific problems incurred by households. Such surveys typically prove a wide support to schemes (the percentage of people dissatisfied is typically shrunk to around 5%) 3.2 COLLECTION OF BIOWASTE FROM HOUSEHOLDS Types of housing concerned by biowaste collection (which kind of biowaste), how does it work in high rise buildings? Where biowaste doorstep collection has been implemented, both individual houses and high rise buildings are involved. In the latter case, each family has to deliver food waste in a common bin, which is placed at the kerb the collection day.

20 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 20 Type of collection (bring sites, door to door, ), frequency? Types of biowaste collected/ not collected (ex. VFG)? Voluntary participation or obligation? If exemption exist, on what criteria? Garden waste: In general, when kerbside schemes are rolled out, garden waste is not collected alongside food waste, and must be delivered to bring sites (Civic Amenity Sites, i.e. the Decheteries ) by the producers. In some cases, collection services guarantee a doorstep collection in spring and summer, or on demand (this latter may imply an extra charge for the service). In schemes where collection is performed by means of road containers, garden waste is normally collected alongside food waste, although large volumes are to be taken to the bring sites. Kitchen waste: in kerbside schemes, kitchen waste is collected on itself (with no garden waste) by means of smallvolume buckets (for detached houses, terraced houses, and groups of houses with up to 4 5 families) or carts (in high rise buildings). Collection of food waste alone implies the use of small volume, cheap open lorries with no compacting system. In schemes adopting road containers food waste is collected commingled with garden waste, which requires the use of packer trucks. Typically, the frequency for collection varies between 1 and 4 times a week depending on the area (higher frequencies in South Italy) the season, on the specific features of the site (i.e. touristic area, old town centres, etc ) Collection by means of road containers is typically run on voluntary basis, whereas kerbside collection is typically considered as an obligation: the use of personal bags/receptacles and the concurrent use of transparent bags for residual waste pushes households to deliver all recyclables/compostables in the proper stream. All food waste is targeted, including meat and fish, which, in the case of kerbside collection, maximises captures and diversion from landfills, minimises percentages off organics in residual waste, and makes it possible to reduce collection frequencies for residual waste Importance of this kind of biomass in comparison to biomass from agriculture? In 2004, Eurobserver estimated the following potential biomass production in Italy from agriculture: manure and slurry: t/y crop residues: t/y The numbers are one order of magnitude higher than the potentially targeted biowaste from households. However, such biomass is seldom (if ever) processed in order to produce a soil improver or a potting mix, hence they typically cover different possible uses/destinations than those from separately collected biowaste. Technical equipment for collection and pre collection of biowaste (kind of vehicles the most used, for example partitioned lorries, drum lorries, side loading lorries, kind of bins), in order to understand the kind of organization (distinguish different setups)

21 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 21 Kerbside Road containers Notes Food waste In house management Small bucket + biobags Small bucket + biobags Receptacles for delivery Buckets (up to 4 5 households) Carts (high rise buildings) Into large volume containers permanently on the roadside Type of vehicle Open lorry Compactor Garden waste In house management n.a. n.a. Receptacles for delivery Bags or carts (different from receptacles for food waste) Into large volume containers permanently on the roadside Type of vehicle Compactor Compactor In the case of kerbside collection, this may have a seasonal calendar (with reduced frequency, e.g. fortnightly or monthly) or may be collected on demand. Alternatively, garden waste may be delivered directly to Civic Amenity Sites. In the case of road containers, garden waste is collected together with food waste Most common containers for biowaste : volumes, types (bags, buckets, different sized bins, with ventilation or without, ), problems that occurred? As already stated, containers are sharply different for kerbside collection and collection by means of road containers. In both cases, anyway, it is typical that Municipalities supply households with a small bucket (and often, biobags) for in house management. The number of ventilated buckets is increasing, since they cause evaporation of excess water (early trials, run in 2002 by Scuola agraria, showed evaporation in the region of 20% of total weight), thereby benefiting to 1. households (less dirt and spillage) 2. Municipalities (lower tonnage delivered to treatment sites) 3. treatment sites (at a same tonnage, they may serve more Municipalities, and face less problems related to excess moisture of input materials) In kerbside schemes, food waste is then delivered into larger buckets (in the case of detached houses or a low number of households, up to l) or in carts (in the case of high rise buildings, serving a larger number of households) In bring schemes (road containers) food waste is delivered directly into the large volume containers (up to 3,2 m 3 ) The main concern was related to dirt and leakage, and this was addressed in an effective way by means of the use of biobags; this may be made of either bioplastics or paper, nowadays by far the largest share of the market is covered by corn starch based materials. An ongoing ban on polyethylene shoppers at outlets and any retail shop, which has them progressively replaced by reusable bags or compostable bags, is further supporting the use of such biobags as a tool for separate collection.

22 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page BIOWASTE TREATMENT Capacity of treatment plants (scale of variation, average capacity)? Ownership (proportion of public/ private/ agriculture)? Proportion of digestion/ composting? Regulations about odors? According to last official data (2009), about 73% of kitchen waste produced was treated in composting facilities, and 27% in anaerobic digestion (mainly integrated anaerobic+aerobic plants). Some 280 composting facilities, and 20 operating AD plants There are no official data on the ownership of the plants. According to a study of Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza in 2009, public and private composting facilities were equally represented, with around 15% of the plants run by mixed public/private companies. What is the technical level of composting plants/ variation? (simple windrows, automatic and confined process, ) Is the digestate composted? Green waste composting plants are mostly represented by small facilities (about 60% with a throughput capacity <5.000 t/y; only 6% with a throughput capacity > t/y ) with a low technical level (mostly turned windrows, to a lesser extent static aerated piles). As for the other composting plants, more than 50% of them have a throughput capacity over t/y; 45% of biowaste is treated in different kinds of reactors (mainly biocells, but even biotunnels, biocontainers, ), while 55% in static piles or turned windrows. Digestate is composted in almost all AD facilities. Only 2 of them directly apply digestate to soil without an aerobic step. Specific regulations on treatment units? (Ministry of agriculture asked to add this question because there is in France a specific permitting process for waste treatment plants, depending on quantities and kind of waste that is treated. This process requires for example a public enquiry for larger plants in order to obtain the permit. They seemed to be worried about competition with treatment plants in other countries. ) In Italy, waste (and biowaste) treatment is submitted to permission by the competent local authority, no matter how large is the plant. Composting activity without a permit can only be performed in case the material does not fall under the regulation of waste (i.e. home composting). What is the normal range of durations of treatment contracts?/ What kind of waste is composted/ digested with other biomass (from industry, agriculture)? / Information about organic matter transported from other regions/ other countries? / Which kind of organization/ partnership? who invests? / Is there competition between different kinds of use of biomass (back to soil in agriculture/ renewable energies, digestion, production of bio ester)? These questions have been added by the ministry of agriculture. In France, there are regions that have problems to find enough wooden garden waste for composting units. Does this exist in other countries, for which kind of

23 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 23 waste? There were also questions about growing corn (in Germany) and putting it into digestion plants instead of using digestion units for biowaste. Composting and AD plants mainly treat kitchen and garden waste from domestic origin; to a lesser extent (less than 20%) sewage sludge and organic waste from food industry. No information on significant amounts of biowaste treated abroad (and viceversa) are available. Who uses composts and digestates (solid, liquid, composted, )? what kind of markets? Which part of compost production is used for formulating soil improvers or growing media? The markets for compost in Italy are the following: 70% application to farmland 30% used for the production of soil improvers and growing media for gardening and landscaping According to a research carried out by the Italian Composting Association, compost is sold at different average prices depending on its destination, ranging from 10 /t for application to farmland up to 120 /t when packed and sold in supermarkets, possibly blended with peat or other fertilizers. Being a waste according to italian regulation, digestate has no market today. The few facilities which do not turn it into compost apply digestate on farmland under specific authorisations released by local authorities. Regions in the country that particularly need organic matter in their soils? Or regions with problems (too much organic matter is produced locally)? Tipically, regions of southern Italy (Sicily in particular) are facing soil desertification. Principal outlets for other products (electricity, heat, oil, )? From the AD sector, mainly electricity sales. In 1 case, district heating. Produced energy s pricing: until 31 st December 2012, AD plants can have access to a granting mechanism based on Green Certificates or (for plants <1MWe) an all inclusive tariff of 28 cents/kwh sold to the electricity network. The tariffs are guaranteed for a 15 year period counting from a facility s starting. A new granting scheme is being released for renewable energy producing plants will be started up from 1 st January At the moment, there are no incentives for methane upgrading. 3.4 DATA NATIONAL DATA AND VARIATION Biowaste collection : quantities according to the kind of biowaste Qui indicazioni quantitative (in kg/ab/a) su sistemi di raccolta congiunta FORSU + verde e separati.

24 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 24 Se di aiuto, alcuni dati di RD a livello regionale: Trentino (70,85 kg/ab/a FORSU, 32,38 verde); Veneto (66,56 kg/ab/a FORSU, 53,98 verde); Piemonte (51,45 kg/ab/a FORSU, 30,31 verde); Emilia Romagna (41,35 kg/ab/a FORSU, 72,03 verde). Seasonal variations of quantities (according to kind of biowaste, regions, kind of housing, ) (The important point in this question is to find solutions to seasonal variations because they are difficult to manage for the collection service.) DA FARE Degree of optimization of collection, indicators, for example: (to discuss: Enzo, Josef) recovery rate (quantities of biowaste of separate collection/ total production of biowaste (measured by waste sorting) diversion rate (quantities of biowaste of separate collection/ total waste collection set out rate of containers (benchmark examples?) filling rate of containers (examples?) filling rate of collection vehicles (These questions about indicators on degree of optimization may seem curious. In France, biowaste collection suffers from a big lack of optimization, and often, very few people participate. Just give here the principal results (for example in most cases, more than x % of containers are set out at each collection). Quality of biowaste (quality of sorting, composition of biowaste) control of quality during collection (bins not collected due to bad quality)? A research performed on behalf of the Italian Composting Association by IDECOM on 964 Kitchen waste samples over the last 10 years coming from different territories characterised by different collection schemes, showed that separate collection of the organic fraction by means of road containers brings to a FORSU characterised by an average non compostable fraction of 6.15% which, compared to doorstep systems (with a non compostable fraction of 2.56%), makes it more vulnerable to inaccurate disposals. Clear differences can be envisaged between collection systems in which biodegradable bags for organic waste are distributed to families for free and systems not organised under this aspect. In this case, the distribution of biodegradable bags reduces the average amount of impurities of some 2 percentage points (in doorstep systems) or 4 percentage points (in case of road containers). Again, the presence of a full doorstep collection system (i.e. all the recyclable fractions and residual waste) allows to obtain an average non compostable content in FORSU of 1.82%, versus a 3.94% content when kitchen waste is the only fraction collected doorstep. A last outcome refers to the effectiveness of periodically renewed communication campaigns to families involved in waste separate collection. According to the kitchen waste quality standards considered by Veneto regulation (class A = kitchen waste with non compostable fraction lower than 2.5% by weight, class B = kitchen waste with

25 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 25 non compostable fraction between 2.5% and 5%, class C = kitchen waste with non compostable fraction higher than 5%; see also section 6.5 of this Report), a progressive worsening of kitchen waste quality is expected in absence of campaign updates. According to the research, from a start point where a prevalence of class A (63% of the samples) and B (37%) FORSU, after 3 years a prevalence of class 3 (53% of the samples) was observed, followed by class B (31%) and class A(16%). The main outcomes of the research are illustrated in the following graphs. Fig. 6 Distribution of rejects (non compostable materials) in 964 kitchen waste samples (source, IDECOM CIC). Fig. 7 Average non compostable material content in kitchen waste referred to the collection system (source, IDECOM CIC). Cassonetto stradale

26 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 26 = road container; Porta aporta = doorstep; %scarto= % of non compostable rejects) Fig. 8 Average non compostable material content in kitchen waste referred to the free distribution of biodegradable bags for the collection of the organic fraction (source, IDECOM CIC). Legend: dark blue block = kitchen waste collected in road containers; biodegradable bags distributed to families for free; red block = kitchen waste collected in road containers; biodegradable bags not distributed to families; yellow block = kitchen waste collected doorstep; biodegradable bags distributed to families for free; light blue block = kitchen waste collected doorstep; biodegradable bags not distributed to families) Tab. 2 Average profile of kitchen waste quality evolution after the last communication campaign in 19 homogeneous territories (source, IDECOM CIC) % 2007 % Class A* Class B* Class C* Total *according to the standards considered in Veneto s regulation (DGR 766/2000 and DGR 568/2005)

27 Questionnaire Italy biowaste in Europe 28/05/2012 page 27 Fig. 9 Average composition of kitchen waste rejects (non compostable materials, MNC) on 109 samples (source, IDECOM CIC). Plastica = plastic; Vetro = glass; Metallo = metals; Inerti = Inerts; Altro = other) Quality of compost? Source separated biowaste leads to the production of a compost which complies to national law on fertilizers. There are no national statistics available on non compliant compost referred to different kind of separate collection. What can be stated is that, based on the differences in biowaste purity, doorstep collected biowaste has a lower treatment cost than road container collected one, due to the lesser intensive refining and lesser rejects production REPRESENTATIVE EXAMPLES STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES Strengths:??? Weaknesses:??? 3.5 SEPARATE COLLECTION FOR BIG PRODUCERS (Same questions as for household biowaste, with particular point on technical organization, used equipment (biotanks with refrigeration ), sanitary or logistic requirements (give examples)) Collection of food waste from big producers may follow 2 different organizational patterns: 1. in small Municipalities, typically the service is included in ordinary collection of food waste from households. Hence, frequencies are the same, whilst container are reasonably bigger in size (normally, carts are adopted) 2. in large cities, a dedicated service is normally considered, with increased frequencies (up to daily collection) on account of a. economies of scale, which make it possible to plan and run a dedicated collection round