Solid Waste Management & Separate Collection of Recyclables Prof. Dr. Marina Franke Global Sustainability / Germany Giovan Reyes Governmental Relations / Mexico Procter & Gamble Mexico City March 14, 2013
Agenda 1. Solid Waste - Data & Trends Composition of waste Total waste, MSW-Municipal Solid Waste, packaging MSW management in Europe Landfilling, Recycling, Recovery of Energy and Biomass 2. Key Elements of Integrated Waste Management Policies Requirements legislation Shared responsibility Government Industry Consumers 2
Agenda cont d 3. Producer Responsibility Systems - Learning from Europe European legislation Packaging Directive and WEEE-Waste of Electric & Electronic Devices Legislation with recycling/recovery quota Advantages of competition vs. monopolies 3
1. Solid Waste Management - Data & Trends 4
Composition of Total Solid Waste in Europe (EU - 25) similar in Mexico Manufacturing Waste, 26% Municipal Solid Waste, 14% Other, 5% Energy Production, 4% Construction and Demolition Waste, 22% Source: EEA data 1992-1997 Mining and Quarrying Waste, 29% 5 5
Europe - Municipal Solid Waste similar in Mexico more organics Western Europe Central/Eastern Europe Organics, 25% Bulky w aste, 4% Other w aste, 25% Organics, 40% Other w aste, 20% Paper, 13% Metals, 3% Glass, 8% Plastics, 8% Textiles, 2% Paper, 25% Metals, 3% Glass, 9% Plastics, 12% Textiles, 3% 6
Packaging in Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) Packaging is about 30% by weight of MSW (50% by volume) Packaging is about 3-4% of total solid waste but there is public & governmental concern! 7
Europe - Municipal Solid Waste - Technologies Prevailing Municipal Solid Waste Treatment Options 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Other Incinerated Composted Recycled Landfilled 0% Poland Turkey Russian Fed Hungary Greece Ireland United Kingdom Iceland Italy Spain Norway Slovakia Portugal Countries France Germany Sweden Belgium Austria Luxembourg Netherlands Denmark Switzerland 8
9 EU Landfill Directive (1999) Reduce organic material on landfill (biowaste, paper, etc.) Landfill only inert materials which have been pre-treated Pre-treat Municipal Solid Waste: - incineration with energy recovery (or Mechanic-Biological Treatment (MBT) similar to composting) All Solid Waste (incl. packaging) to be pre-treated prior to landfilling in the EU
EUROPE Landfilling declines: higher environmental standards closure of full landfills in Western Europe Closure of open dumps in Central- Eastern Europe 10
WtE - Waste-to-Energy Incineration MSW (municipal solid waste) reduced 90% by volume and 70% by weight Legislation: EU Incineration Directive (2000) reduce emissions NO x, SO x, HCl, heavy metals, dioxins / furans More than 300 incinerators in EU with 96% energy recovery (heat, electricity) 11
WtE Incineration and Recycling: Complementary & NOT competing systems WtE recovers energy from waste which cannot be recycled Not all municipal solid waste can be economically and environmentally compatible sorted and recycled Use of un-recyclable waste for WtE WtE goes hand-in-hand with recycling EU Member States with the highest recycling rates, 12 have highest levels of WtE plants
WtE incineration and recycling 13 13
WtE: Complementary in the Energy Production System 50 million tons of MSW annually treated can generate 20 million MWh of electricity (can supply 20 million inhabitants = population of Belgium, Denmark and Lithuania) 50 million MWh of heat (can supply 32 million inhabitants = population of the Netherlands, Hungary, Finland and Malta) 14
WtE: minimizing emissions The Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC introduced the most stringent emission limits ever applied to any single industry 15
16 WtE: Reduces Emissions 16
17 Dioxins 17
PHASE I Integrated Waste Management for Developing Infrastructure Collection & Sorting in Households: 3 fractions 1) Wet biodegradable waste is highest fraction (40-50 %) in Municipal Solid Waste 2) Dry = packaging and other recyclable 3) Rest waste materials (any non-biodegradable and non-recyclables) 18
PHASE II Integrated Waste Management for Devolping Infrastructure Implement sanitary landfilling (eliminate open dumps) Implement biological treatment (composting, biogasification) LATER: Implement waste-to-energy incineration for non-recyclable, nonhazardous solid waste 19
Clear definitions of responsibility between players: Enabling Legislation allows for flexibility Households proper collection of recyclable materials (packaging and other valuable recyclable materials), organics and rest waste consumer education is ESSENTIAL for success Municipalities collection of wet waste for biological treatment (composting, biogas) collection of recyclables (packaging and other materials) landfilling of the residues (later: WtE incineration) 20
2nd edition of our P&G book 21 3 sections: What is IWM Case Studies Computer Model Available in English Spanish Chinese Japanese (partly) April 2001 36
U.S. EPA and U.K. Department of Environment support our IWM LCI book! (Quotes on IWM - LCI book cover) 22
NEEDED: Waste Sorting & Data Data needed (= Waste Diagnostics): reliable sorting analysis of solid waste ingredients (paper, plastics, glass, ORGANICS etc.) Use of data: planning of collection, transport, treatment design of waste management infrastructure and recycling / composting and biogas plants, incinerators voluntary collection goals for recyclables develop recycling markets 23
EXAMPLE: Average Composition of Municipal Solid Waste (% wet weight) Material Low Income Middle Income High Income Industrial Market Shops / Malls Offices Paper 10.99 8.51 13.50 17.91 3.81 15.12 16.66 Glass 3.57 3.57 5.14 1.84 0.20 1.35 1.05 Metals 4.19 5.32 3.91 7.42 0.62 2.03 2.66 Plastic 31.42 32.35 25.71 27.64 9.02 28.09 29.19 Organic 44.82 41.45 49.26 39.23 86.21 48.60 41.57 Other inorganic 4.95 8.41 2.47 5.26 0.11 4.75 8.06 Hazardous 0.06 0.39 0.01 0.70 0.03 0.06 0.81 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 24
2. Key Elements of Integrated Waste Management 25
Legislation Shared Responsibility Life Cycle approach to allow to optimize Reduce, Reuse, Recycle & Recovery (Waste-to-Energy, compost, biogas) ecologically effective, economically efficient Flexibility to implement Integrated Waste Management locally (depending on available infrastructure, waste composition) 26
Shared Responsibility It is essential to Share Responsibilities between -Government / municipalities, - business and - society (incl. consumers) 27
Governments / municipalities Responsibility setting up legislative framework for Sustainable Waste Management - implementing enabling legislation which allows flexibility on waste collection, sorting and recovery according to different regions and needs according to recycling/recovery markets and infrastructure setting up of infrastructure to recover/recycle solid waste and landfill remaining waste Sanitary Landfills, recycling facilities, recovery facilities (e.g. waste-to-energy incineration, composting /biogas) 28
Governments /municipalities Responsibility cont d Introducing a Landfill Tax a levy charged by a public authority for the disposal of waste provides incentives to landfill as little as possible and promotes recycling / recovery levy to be invested in separate collection and recycling /recovery technologies / build waste infrastucture landfill tax increases the costs for landfilling and makes recycling and recovery more economically attractive 29
Governments /municipalities Responsibility cont d Introducing a Landfill Tax cont d the landfill tax is paid for all waste entering a landfill such as municipal solid waste, construction waste, agricultural waste, industrial waste etc. motivates many sectors (not only consumer companies) to separate their waste and invest in recycling and recovery technologies Landfill tax is introduced in 18 European Member States for disposal and is paid per ton of solid waste landfilled 30
Governments /municipalities Responsibility cont d Introduce waste fee for every consumer and introduce Pay-As-You-Throw (PAYT)-programs for consumers Introduce consumer education programs to initiate Pay-as-you-Throw and separate collection of recoverable products and packaging Setting up transparent cost structures of waste management which are market oriented 31
Business Responsibility sustainable innovation on products and packaging; design products and packaging to minimize waste along the lifecycle, maximize recovery and reuse of materials minimize waste from manufacturing, towards zero waste to landfill encourage business partners along the supply chain to join forces proactively engaging in driving recycling and recovery programs (initiate pilot projects to be scaled up later on) 32
Consumer Responsibility participating in sorting and separation of waste (wet dry recyclables rest waste) pay adequate fee for waste collection and management consumers to participate in waste prevention and sorting via Pay-as-you-throw (PAYT)-programs consumers are charged on the amount of non-recyclable waste the better consumers separate recyclables, the less waste fee they pay 33
Consumer Responsibility PAYT (Pay-As-You-Throw)-Schemes - are volume-based, some are weight-based - motivates citizens to separate their municipal solid waste and separately collect valuables (metals, glass, paper, plastics) not only from packaging but all recyclable materials & organic waste to composting /biogas (as soon as infrastructure is available) PAYT schemes are introduced in 17 European Member States for municipal solid waste 34
Joint and Coordinated Actions of all Stakeholders main areas for coordinated actions include: sharing information and knowledge promoting best practice joint recycling and recovery programs (pilot project?) consumer information 35
3. Producer Responsibility systems - Learning from Europe 36
37
38 38
Producer Responsibility Systems - Experience in Germany and Europe from a Monopoly to Competition 39
EU Court Decision for Germany 1999 - EU Court stopped the German Green Dot monopoly and opened the market for competitors 2000 two competitors (VfW, Interseroh) entered the market with a drop of 20% in take back cost 2003 - four competitors: further reduction of packaging fees. 2006 OVERALL competition reduced cost for packaging collection & recycling/recovery systems - costs dropped about 45%! 40
EU Developments on Producer Responsibility Systems 1992 - EU Packaging Directive most WE countries adopted similar legislation as Germany (monopoly organizations) - except UK UK introduced competition between Producer Responsibility systems more than 30 systems are licensed lowest cost per ton collected in Europe relative high collection and recycling rates 41
Benefits of Competition Example: Producer Responsibility for Electric Waste European Directive (legislation) on Waste of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive adopted 2003 effective 2005 42
ERP-European Recycling Platform - a pan-european organization Based on learning from packaging on monopolies vs. Competition: 2002 - ERP was founded by HP, Braun, Sony, Electrolux Objective: minimize cost and maximize efficiency by establishing competition ERP is seen by ECs DG Competition as a role model to establish competition in the waste market 43
Mission of ERP European Recycling Platform maximum flexibility to enable best business practice and to allow mistakes to be corrected www.erp-recycling.org 44
WEEE Electrical Devices 2001 Compliance Schemes 2008 Competing Schemes Single Scheme Uncertain Not relevant 45
0.50 Austria 1 Impact of Competition example Austria * For Small Appliances < 50 cm (HP) 0.40 avg. cost per kg sold 0.30 0.20 ERP Austria Austria 2 Austria 3 0,16 0,16 0,14 0.10 0,11 0,098 0,075 Q205 Q305 Q405 Q106 Q306 Q107 46
Summary of Learning Voluntary Producer Responsibility Programs prepare the market for the process. It s a good learning model. Competition between Producer Responsibility Systems ensure, that producer have a choice (tender process) and can select the best provider. This ensures a continues quality and price pressure on all systems. 47
Summary of Learning Legislation should enable the establishment of competing systems in a country and enable a cross-regional approach. Legislator should have no influence on pricing structures of systems as all commercial aspects should be defined by the market / competition between systems. Legislation needs to define the rules of how several systems work in the market. 48