ISWA Main Sponsors:

MSW Webinar Series

Part I: Introduction to Organic Waste Management

& Treatment Options

Mitigating SLCPs from the Municipal Waste Sector

http://waste.ccac-knowledge.net/

Presenters

2

Marta Vila

Marco Ricci

Michele Giavini

•ARS ambiente srl

•CIC – Italian

Composting

Association

•ISWA

•CIC – Italian

Composting

Association

•Urban Ecology

Agency of Barcelona

BIOWASTE: KEY FIGURES

FROM THE PRESENTERS

4Source: European Compost Network, updated by authors

Current status of biowaste management in Europe

Map focusing on food waste only

Italy: High captures with ISSO

• The Italian intensivesource separation oforganics (ISSO):maximisation offoodwaste capturerate through intensivededicated kerbsidecollection

• Central Europe: lowercapture rates,collection of co-mingledfood and garden waste,home composting forsmall municipalities.

•High Food Waste amount sent to

composting and AD

•Low amount left in the residual

•Low Food Waste amount sent to

composting and AD (mainly green

waste)

•High amount of Food Waste left in

the residual

Italy: key figures

More than 30 million people with Intensive

Source Separation of Organics (ISSO) out of 60

million

4,500,000 tonnes/y biowaste composted, 250

plants

Recently: Milan is the megacity with the highest

capture rate of quality food waste across the

world

– 1,300,000 people

– 81% people in multifamily buildings

– High population density 7,500 people/sqkm

– 90 kg/capita.year of food waste only

– Less than 5% contamination

– Video: link

Catalunya: mandatory since 1993 Waste Law

A little walk through the history...

Where do we come from: mass “composting”, poor quality “compost”, bad

odours and leachates...

7

In 1993, a new Law is

approved, obligating to

set up the separate

collection of the organic

waste in >5.000 inhab

municipalities.

In 1996, the first

composting plant was

opened and separate

collection of biowaste

started.Source: Waste Agency of Catalonia. F Giró 2013

Mandatory source separation + objectives in the programs + economic

support +landfill/Incineration tax+ infrastructure planning =

8

Source: Waste Agency of Catalonia. F Giró 2013

Waste

Law

Waste Law

inforce

Landfill

Tax

Incineration

Tax

Ley de

Residuos

Subsidies 45,7 M€

Waste

Law

9

More than 7 Million people have a container or a door-to-door collection

service (95% of the population) in 2012.

Each inhabitant participates to the separate collection of the organic

fraction, on average, with 144 daily grams. (52 kg/y)

Impurities weighted average is about 14,7%, but…

Catalunya: key figures

Source: Waste Agency of

Catalonia. M Pous 2013

303 OFMSW/dat.hab

7,5% impurities

70% Separate Collection

(2011)

139 g OFMSW/day.hab

15,3% impurities

36% Separate Collection

(2011)

· 150 municipalities > 200

g/ hab.day

· 135 municipalities < 7%

impurities

WHAT’S BIOWASTE?

10

BioWaste definition

11

Biowaste from municipal waste comprises plant remains from green

areas, gardens, food and kitchen waste from households, restaurants,

caterers and local retail.

Normally, biowaste is divided in two

categories:

1. Kitchen or food waste: OFMSW

(Organic Fraction of Municipal

Solid Waste) (from households,

restaurants, canteens, food stores,

etc.)

2. Green or vegetable wastes from

public or private gardens. These

are further categorized into little-

sized garden waste that can be

sometimes included in the previous

fraction, and larger woody scraps or

pruning with different characteristics.

Source: Guía para la implantación de la recogida separada y

gestión de biorresiduos de competencia municipal. 2012. Link

Different biowaste streams - generators

Source separated

food waste•Residential

•Commercial

•Large

generators

(markets…)

Source separated

biowaste

(commingled

food + garden

waste)

Garden waste Agroindustrial

scraps

(Organic fraction

from

mechanically

selected MSW)

12

Food waste generators in municipalities

The main sources of OFMSW are:

Domestic biowaste: generated in our houses, usually

kitchen wastes and little garden green waste...

Biowastes generated by economical activities: from

generators comparable to households to large

commerces. Grocery trade such fruit and vegetable

shops, bars and restaurants, markets and

supermarkets, canteens (schools, businesses,

hospitals...)

Normally come from:

Food handling or cooking

Expired food

Surplus products that have not been sold or consumed.

13

Organic waste sources

14

Organics in MSW across the world

Source: The World Bank, What a Waste, link

BioWaste main characteristics

16

The organic fraction is the most unstable stream of all municipal

solid wastes, due to high water contain (about 80% in weight) and

readily degradable organic matter (carbohydrates, proteins and fats).

It has a pretty high density, but also variable, between 0,6 and 0,8 t/m3,

which makes it high weight - low volume, with a low compactability.

Source: Guía para la implantación de la recogida separada y gestión de biorresiduos de competencia municipal. 2012.

Link

Biowaste Green waste – Prunings

Humidity High ( 85%) Low ( 40%)

Organic Matter 85% 80%

Organic Nitrogen 5,50% 1,20%

C/N Ratio 17 32

Density 0,8 t/m3 0,4 t/m3 (shredded)

Odors/Leachates Yes No

Generation Constant (but not uniform in

type and composition)

Seasonal

BENEFITS OF ORGANIC

DIVERSION

18

Benefits of Biowaste diversion

19

Separate collection of biowaste

converts a

WASTE into a RESOURCE

Impacts Benefits

Source: Waste Concern, Bangladesh

Atmospheric

pollution

Soil, groundwater

and surface water

pollution.

Health and pest

problems

(Mosquitoes, flies,

rats…)

Open dumping practiced in most of the cities, is the cheapest and easier solution for them, but…

Also open burning of waste one of the largest sources of air pollution some cities +carcinogens emissions.

Photos: Waste Concern

Environmental & health problems due

to unmanaged waste in Urban areas

Depletion of Organic matter

in soil of Rural areas

COMPOST

Short-lived Climate Pollutants and organic fraction of

MSW Short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs) are agents that have short atmospheric

lifetimes and a quick warming influence on the climate.

The key SLCPs emitted from the municipal solid waste (MSW) sector are:

– Methane (from landfills and dump sites): from the decomposition of the organic fraction

– Black carbon (e.g. from open burning of dump sites)- Black carbon is a byproduct of incomplete combustion and a component of particulate matter.

Dhaka, Bangladesh (Photo

source: Stratus Consulting)

In Europe , major contributor to GHGs from inappropriate management of MSW

(4 to 11% of total GHGs come from landfills)

Benefits of Biowaste diversion

23

Besides the direct

benefits of not

landfilling organic

wastes, with the

associated methane

reduction, biowaste

separate collection

and composting /

anaerobic digestion

results in other

important benefits.

Source: Guía para la implantación de la recogida separada y gestión de biorresiduos de competencia municipal. 2012. Link

Soil

protection

Production /

Energy

savings

Sustainable

use of

resources

Combating

climate

change

Use of compost

Replacing the use of mineral fertilizers (N,

P, K) and other amendments (avoids CO2

and GHG and saves energy)

√ √ √

Recovery and contribution of organic

matter and nutrients contained in

amendment

√ √

Siequestration of Carbon in soil √ √ √

Biodiversity Increase √

Resilience of soils √ √

Erosion reduction √ √

Biological activity support prevention

of “desertification” √ √

Slow release of N sources √ √

Improve the land working √ √ √ √

Soil water retention increase √ √ √

Substitution of pesticides √ √ √

Substitution of peat √ √ √ √

Production and use of the Biogas (obtained on anaerobic digestion process)

Substitution of fossil fuels √ √ √

Benefits of Biowaste diversion

24

Some Data

Methane Production in landfills 100-150 kg CO2 eq/tonne

But not only this…

Replacement of mineral fertilisers 30-50 kg CO2 eq/tonne

Peat replacement 300-400 CO2 eq/tonne

C sequestration 11 to 326 kg CO2 eq/tonne

Benefits of Biowaste diversion

25

Indicadors de recollida selectiva

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

PaP Residu Mínim 5 cont (FORM) 5 cont

(no100%FORM)

Bicompartimentat

%re

collida s

ele

ctiv

a

Rec Sel paper-CartróRec Sel VidreRec Sel Plàstic f ilmRec Sel Plàstic rígidRec Sel BricsRec Sel Metalls FeRec Sel Metalls No Fe

26

Separate collection

indicators

DtD

(Biowaste)

Wet

Dry

(Biowaste)

5 fractions

(Biowaste)

5 fractions

(not 100%

Biowaste)

Bicomparti

mented

(Biowaste)

Total net separate

collection57% 23% 34% 19% 23%

Separate collection indicators

Different collection systems

present different grades of

separation.

Models where BioWaste is

not fully implemented

present the lowest grades of

separate collection, both

global and nearly all of the

fractions.

Example of impact assessment (SIMUR)

27

Impact Indicators- WWP

Models that destine fraction remainder to MBT or directly to the landfill and don’t have

total collection of Biowaste avaliable have a bigger affectation to the GWP

(Cálculo: inventario de emisiones gestión (+clasificación y caracterización mediante metodología de ACV)

28

Impact Indicators - WWP Emisions due to the whole model

Source: http://www.arc-cat.net/en/publicacions/pdf/agencia/programes/progremic/simur_resum.pdf

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

29

Key boundary conditions for biowaste collection

programmes: landfill gate fee, legal framework citizen

sensitization

30

1-Legal framework

(drivers, obligations, bans)

2-Treatment cost (landfill gate fee)

4-Collection system

3-Public awareness and

involvement

Biowaste collection

Key boundary conditions for organics collection

programmes. 1- Legal framework

Clear obligation for Municipalities, District and citizens (waste producers)

need to be defined

Economical instrument can act as incentives or penalities towards

producers and stakeholders so to steer them toward recycling (targets)

Bans on disposal & obligation drive MSW from disposal to separate

collection and material recycling

The goods obtained from biowaste recycling need to be addressed by

proper legislation

– Legislation on compost and fertilizers

– Legislation on Digestate and fertilizers

– A clear framework for biogas production and use

31

The regulatory context: drivers from EU

env policy

32

Revised Waste Framework Directive

– waste hierarchy

– Recycling/reuse targets

– prevention programmes

Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC)

– diversion targets for biodeg waste

– obligation for pretreatment

EU Climate Change Programme

EU Soil Strategy

Targets of the EU Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC)

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

125%1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

Year

„Fast“ Countries

(Germany, Austria,

Benelux, Poland,...)

„Slow“

Member-Countries

(EU-10, UK, Spain)

34

Implementing Directive 99/31(and art. 11 of WFD - material recovery targets!)

Obligation on separate collection

– NL: compulsory schemes for separate collection

– AT: obligation upon households to either take part in separate collection or to compost in the backyard

– GER: KrW-AbfG revised in 2012 separate collection for all municipalities

– Catalunya (Spain): ley 6/93 compulsary for all Municipalities with a pop. > 5000; Now, compulsory for all municipalities

– SK (Act 24/04): Garden Waste to be separately collected by 2006; biowaste by 2010

Pros/contra:

– On Municipalities (e.g. NL) – may be deceived with poor performing / lowparticipation systems

– On households (e.g. AT) – very effective, if stringent control possible

– May require phased implementation

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Vimercate

Villasanta

Varedo

Trucazzano

Trezzo s/A

Rosate

Paderno D.

Novate M.

Monza

Misinto

Melegnano

Lainate

Desio

Corbetta

Cologno M.

Cinisello B.

Castano P.

Buccinasco

Brugherio

Biassono

Arese

Albiate

Albairate

Source: Provincia di Milano 1998

Germany NL

BIOWASTE INSIDE Residual waste

Key boundary conditions for organics collection

programmes: 2- Disposal costs and landfill gate fee

Biowaste and organics are the main reason for landfill environmental

impacts

Rising disposal cost makes all alternative option (i.e. separate collection

and recycling) economically attractive

Landfill taxes can be designed to promote/rise funds for separate collection

schemes for biowaste

Long-term trend makes the disposal of waste more cost-intensive (even

with incineration + energy recovery)

36

Drivers for landfill diversion

Landfillbans / taxes

Increasingpopulation

• Raising land price and lessavailability fornew landfills

Poor landfillacceptance by

citizens

Environmental policies and regulations

38

Implementing Directive 99/31(and art. 11 of WFD - material recovery targets!)

Bans on biodegradables to landfills (e.g. BR, US)

– Most stringent provisions

– May lack flexibility

– Requires codified thresholds for acceptance at landfills

Targets for sep collection / composting / recycling

– Specific biowaste processing targets (e.g. Sweden)

– General recycling + composting targets (IT & UK)

– Result-oriented + flexible

Key boundary conditions for organics collection

programs: 3-citizen awareness

The collection systems must be user-friendly (bring r pick-up schemes?)

Public awareness and communication campaigns are part of the game!

Introducing separate collection change in habits, behaviors

Doing separate collection change in everyday live (5 min/day)

inform, convince and involve

Public awareness is a key element of separate collection schemes and it must

be conceived (and budgeted) like other advertising initiatives (f.ex. on health,

education, politics, etc.)

39

Teaching HC in schools

Different tools for public awareness and involvement

Teaching HC in schools

Different tools for public awareness and involvement

What BW we can

collect

User-friendliness

Collection schemes.

Advantages/Disadvan

tatges

Other

42

Key boundary conditions for organics collection

programs: 3- collection

Key boundary conditions for organics collection

programs: user-friendliness

Option 1 Option 2

43

Collect biowaste more frequently than residual waste

Different ways to collect biowaste

• “VGF” (Vegetable, Garden, Fruit or

“GFT”):

only uncooked food residues

NL, B, sometimes D, A

• “Biowaste” (“biogene Abfälle”):

food waste + yard waste

D, A

• “Food waste”:food residues including cooked stuffs (e.g.

meat, fish)

I, E, UK, SW

.

Best practise approach for FOODWASTE collection –

Italy/Spain/UK

Foodwaste collected separately from garden waste

– Cooked food and meat&fish included in SS

– High frequency (1, up to 4/wk)

– Clean and comfortable (bags&caddies)

– FW bins taylored to HH size (from bin to wheely-bin)

– Vehicles: cheap open lorries

Gardenwaste:

– Delivered to Municipal Collection Centers

– Door-to-door at low frequency (1/month; on demand; seasonality)

– Homecomposting

Residual waste: with low content of organic waste

– Lower frequency (1/week up to 1 /month)

– Possibly charged through PAYT fees

ORGANIC WASTE

fruits and vegetables

meat

fish and seafood

uneaten food from your

plates and dishes

bread

eggs shells and dried fruits

tea bags and coffee

grounds

corks

used napkins

garden waste (leaves,

weeds and branches)

NappiesSeparate plastic

bag

Make the system easy … starting from the

kitchen

www.compost.it

Key element:

Bring schemes collection at road containers or bring-banks

Take-up schemes collection at the curbside or door to door

The type of collection scheme chosen will be the key-element for :

amounts of biowaste diverted from residual/mixed MSW

quality of the biowaste (i.e. contamination by non-compostable materials)

participation rates

50

ISWA Main Sponsors:

ISWA Main Sponsors:

ISWA Main Sponsors:

Key element:

Bring schemes collection at road containers or bring-banks

Take-up schemes collection at the curbside or door to door

The type of collection scheme chosen will be the key-element for :

amounts of biowaste diverted from residual/mixed MSW

quality of the biowaste (i.e. contamination by non-compostable materials)

participation rates

54

55

Specific amounts of biowaste collected for different

schemes (Catalonia)

Resuming: tools for intensive SS of foodwaste:

Buildings up to 6 families (HH)

Compostable bags vented kitchen-caddy 20-30 liter buckets

Buildings with Flats/appartments

Compostable bags vented kitchen-caddy 120/240 liter HDPE wheelbins

Collection tools appropriate for separate collection of

food waste for commercial activities (big producers)

vented kitchen-bin (6-10lt) Bucket (20-30 lt) Wheelbins (120-240 lt)

For offices and small businesses

with a kitchen-cornes

For bars and coffe-shopes For restaurants, canteens, schools, supemarkets, etc.

What we do when the separation is incorrect?

Communication with citizen: inform and check

The effects of source separation of organics in

boosting collection of other recyclables

Introducing separate collection of biowaste puts attention also on other

recyclables

Normally the collection of packaging waste and bulky waste strongly gets

enhanced

(residual waste collection must be lowered)

59

The effects of source separation of organics in

boosting collection of other recyclables

60

Simplify collection of residual waste

Residual waste composition with different schemes for biowaste collection

www.compost.it

Source: ISWA Study Tour 2013, Sweden, M. Ricci

Question time

63

OVERVIEW BIOWASTE

TREATMENT STRATEGIES:

COMPOSTING, AD, MBT

64

Treatment options

Mixed,

unsorted MSW

Mechanical sorting

(shredding,

screening)

Dry recyclables

Source

separation by

citizens

Clean Organic

fraction

Dirty Organic fraction

Biostabilization

Composting Anaerobic

digestion

Post -

compostingAnaerobic

digestion

(Dry

recyclables)

MBT

COMPOSTING

67

Composting: basic operational steps

Pre-treatment

Preparing mixture

Active Composting Time (ACT)

Curing

Screening

Composting at different scales

Source: Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza, link, integrated (Surabaya method + Waste Concern)

Home composting 2

Decentralized plantsModular industrial plants Centralized industrial plants

Home composting 1 Community based

composting

Composting technology: boundary conditions

Compostingtechnology

Landfill gatefee

Land price

Tolerance toodor nuisance

Transportationcost

Compostmarket value

Biowastequality

Availability ofbulking agents

Two key factors: compost value, land price

M. Giavini, personal calculations and elaborations on Waste

Concern data

-$40

-$30

-$20

-$10

+$0

+$10

+$20

+$30

100 300 500 700

Dif

fere

nce

de

cen

tral

ize

d v

s.

cen

tral

ize

d (

colle

ctio

n+

tre

atm

en

t,

US$

pe

r to

nn

e)

Land price ($/sqm)

Dhaka: difference in total costs, decentralized vs. centralized

-30 $/t (decentralized compost: free, centralized: 30$/t)

0 $/t (both decentr. And centr. @30 $/t)

+30 $/t (decentr: 60, centr: 30)

+60 $/t (decentr: 90, centr: 30)

Decentralized composting

Valuable practice also in urban

areas, in lower middle income

countries

– Dhaka, Bangladesh: Waste

Concern case study (rickshaw

collection, barrel composting

for slums, decentralized small

composting facilities)

– Surabaya, Indonesia:

Takakura Home Method

(home composting with

aerated baskets, decentralized

small composting facilities)

Better described in webinar part 2

72

ANAEROBIC DIGESTION

73

Anaerobic digestion: basic operational steps

Source: DEFRA, link, adapted

Biomethane

Liquid fraction to sewage

treatment

Aerobic composting

Digestate

Anaerobic digestion at different scales

“Biogas

backpack”: linkHousehold AD for

home cooking: link

AD and agriculture: “energy

crops”

Large scale AD for source separated food

waste (or for mechanically sorted organic

fraction)

Anaerobic digestion technology: boundary conditions

Anaerobic digestion

technology

National subsidies

• Feed In Tariffs

• Renewable Obligations

• Renewable Heat Incentives

• Biomethane Incentives / biofuel for transportation

• Etc…

Digestate market value

• National End of Waste policies

• Agricultural / MSW derived digestate

Availability of sewage treatment

plants

Opportunity of district heating

Type of Biowaste

• Collection scheme (only food waste / commingled with garden waste)

• Type of bags (compostable / non compostable)

• Source separated / selected from MSW

Chang

Mai

Decentralized small scale AD? Also in urban areas…

Household AD in urban areas:

– India ARTI and others

– Dar es Salaam, Tanzania:

ARTI TZ, SimGAS

– See EAWAG reports

77

…Though most municipalities do not support the initiatives, neither financially nor ideologically,

many private investors are convinced that this rather new treatment option will solve the urban

waste problems and also produce energy…. Y. VOEGELI AND C. ZURBRÜGG, EAWAG, link

Insights: EAWAG report, link , link and linkM. WAFLER

Source:

HEEB (2009)Source: VOEGELI &

LOHRI (2009)

MECHANICAL – BIOLOGICAL

TREATMENT

78

Mechanical – Biological Treatment: MBT

Mixed,

unsorted MSW

Mechanical sorting

(shredding,

screening)

Dirty Organic fraction

Biostabilization

n

Anaerobic

digestion

(Dry recyclables)

MBT

MBT: key features

PROS CONS

Quick and prompt solution after

implementing nation-wide landfill

bans

Centralized solution; may not be

feasible in transitional megacities

in developing countries, with high

transportation cost

Can be easily converted to

treatment of selected OFMSW in

the future when its collection will

be implemented

The biostabilized product is not

quality compost. Can be used

mostly for land reclamation in one-

off application.

Can include advanced automatic

sorting lines for recovering dry

recyclables (MRBT)

Don’t encourage citizens in doing

separate collection

MBT as a transition

Landfilling

MBT

Compostingfor source separatedorganics

Anaerobicdigestion

MRBT for the residual

Landfill bans / taxes

Subsidies for

renewable energy

Drivers for landfill diversion

Landfillbans / taxes

Increasingpopulation

• Raising land price and lessavailability fornew landfills

Poor landfillacceptance by

citizens

Environmental policies and regulations

What next?

Landfillbans

Source separation oforganics and composting

Incineration

MBT

Cross border

shippingGermany,

1993UK, 2010

Northern Italy,

1999

Many other

places

What’s changing?

1960

1980

2011

2025

Source: United Nations, link

Urban and rural population as percentage of

world population (Population Division of the

Department of Economic and Social Affairs of

the United Nations Secretariat, 2007).

Think about all possible solutions

for urban areas and particularly

transitional megacities

Don’t focus only on large and

centralized facilities. Key factors:

– Urban land price

– Compost market value

This will be addressed particularly

in Webinar Part 2.

Question time

89

WEB RESOURCES

90

ISWA knowledge base

91

http://www.iswa.org/media/publications/knowledge-base/

Additional sources

Hyperlinks inside these slides

CCAC MSW website

– Resource Library: More than 150

selected reports, guidelines, info

sheets

– Databases Directory: 32 databases,

50-500 documents each!

SSWM : Mainly solutions for low income

countries, with open source copyright:

– Composting: link

– AD: link

– Landfill management: link

92

Our organizations links

Urban Ecology Agency of Barcelona: www.bcnecologia.net

Waste Agency of Catalonia: ARC www.arc-cat.net

European Compost Network: ECN www.compostnetwork.info

SCOW Project www.scow-biowaste.eu

CIC- Italian Composting and Biogas Consortium www.compost.it

ISWA : www.iswa.org

ARS ambiente www.arsambiente.it

93

Thank you

For any further information from the

presenters:

– Marco Ricci: ricci.eco@gmail.com

– Marta Vila: vila@bcnecologia.net

– Michele Giavini:

giavini@arsambiente.it

94

95

Your feedback is welcome, please take the time to fill

in this quick questionnaire

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/9QM5MDM