the northern european approach to (practically) zero waste...-> bio-waste solutions, material...
TRANSCRIPT
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE 1
Torben Kristiansen, Vice President Waste & Contaminated Sites, COWI A/S Denmark
Northern European Approach to practically zero waste
2016 Macao International Environmental Co-operation Forum & Exhibition
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE 2
1. Introduction
1. Introduction
2. "Zero landfill": An approaching reality in Northern Europe
3. Example: Waste management in Denmark
4. Integrated Waste management – Which elements are critically important, - and where are the "battle fields"?
5. How can waste management technologies best be used? – And how can they best be organized?
6. Prospects of the future Northern European / EU Waste Management – Concluding remarks
7. Questions
Outline of presentation
3
The "zero landfill" scenario: How this is approaching a reality in Northern Europe
2. The zero landfill approach in Northern Europe
› Landfilling is unacceptable: Lack of land, environmental risk, public opposition, loss of development opportunities, high dependency on limited groundwater resource,
› Resource efficiency: Loss of material and nutrient resources into landfills and incinerators -> bio-waste solutions, material recovery (Circular Economy) & energy recovery
› More than 100 years of using "advanced waste treatment": Waste-to-energy, AD, source separation & recycling, composting.
› New emerging technologies: e.g. enzymatic treatment and sorting of residual (REneScience)
› Strong regulatory and policy approach: EU and national policies, directives, laws and regulations for Circular Economy, Rare Earth Minerals, Resource Efficiency, Material supply safety for EU industry, landfill taxes/levies, standards for recycled aggregates etc.
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
4
› 5.7 million inhabitants
› 43,000 sq km
› 5 Regions
› 98 Municipalities:
› Responsible for management of all waste
› Provide MSW collection/disposal services
› Organise treatment capacity
› Issue instructions on treatment and disposal of all waste
› Co-operates in Inter-Municipal Waste Management Associations on Waste Treatment and Disposal
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
C&D waste
Industrial waste
Commercial waste
Household waste
Recycling
WtE
Landfill
1.9 mill.
2.4 mill.
2.2 mill.
2.7 mill.
Total waste generation 2011: 9.2 mill. tonnes
Example: Waste management in Denmark 3. Example: Waste management in Denmark
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
5
Treatment and disposal of municipal & commercial waste
Now: › Around 25 Inter-Municipal Waste Associations/Companies
Associations owned by Municipalities and operated as independent "utilities" having boards with elected councilors
› All member municipalities are represented in the Boards
Future: › Reduced number of associations (mergers in progress)
› More involvement from private sector
Recycling:
› Major part by private enterprises, however also some Public Waste Associations are involved
Collection and transport
› > 80 % household waste collected by private contractors
› Almost all commercial waste collected by private contractors
Example: Waste management in Denmark 3. Example: Waste management in Denmark
380 km
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
State tax
Tipping fees
Typical total costs for a household: 300 – 350 Euros/year. 6
Euro/tonnes 1987 1993 1998 2014
Energy from Waste
(combined heat and
power
5 21 28 44
Energy from Waste
(heat recovery only)
35
Landfill Disposal 5 26 45 64
Recycling/Sorting/
Composting/AD
0 0 0 0
Euro/tonnes 2012
Incineration 17
Landfill Disposal 49
Anaerobic Digestion 80
Composting garden waste 45
Tax on waste = less landfill + more recovery 3. Example: Waste management in Denmark
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
Source: Renosam 2006, www.renosam.dk
More 100 years ago: Dumps are a health threat
4. Integrated waste management
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE 7
Waste treatment HK (2014), AUS, EU/EEA & USA
Incineration Landfilling
4. The zero landfill approach in Northern Europe
SEPTEMBER 2015
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE 8
53
44
63
13
2
-
34
54
37
USA2013
AUS2011
HK2014
Ref: US EPA 2013: http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/2013_advncng_smm_fs.pdf
CEWEP/EUROSTAT: http://www.cewep.eu/information/data/graphs/m_1415 AUS Dept of Env: http://www.environment.gov.au/topics/environment-protection/nwp/reporting/national-waste-generation EPD HK: http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/data/stat_treat.html
Most effective way to achieve landfill diversion targets?
9
Source: European Commission 2006
2016
2009
2006
Northern European success towards zero landfill. Torben Kristiansen
High use of WtE Limited or no use of WtE
4. The zero landfill approach in Northern Europe
Integrated Waste Management
10
IWM is critically important for the success of any multi-streamed waste management system for the purpose of meeting particular environmental, economic, resource or carbon policies.
Integrated waste management is the art of being well-organised and successful in waste management and is supported by a number of enabling mechanisms such as:
1. Fiscal incentives (waste tax, tax on natural resources, tax on carbon emissions, incentives for green energy, etc.)
2. Regulation and enforcement (permitting, licensing, reporting, audits, waste data reporting systems, access to district heating networks, access to power supply etc.)
3. Standards supporting markets for recovered materials (compost, recycled aggregates, end-of-waste products etc.)
4. Good organisational structure (public/private) and clear roles and responsibilities for all stakeholders (waste generators, authorities, transporters, recyclers/treatment plants etc.)
5. Integration of relevant sector policies: Waste – energy – environment - resources
4. Integrated waste management and the battle field of SWM
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
The "battle fields" in IWM
11
In Northern Europe / EU the typical battle fields are:
1. Municipal/public waste utilities vs. private contractors/PPP operators
2. National/regional government vs. local government/municipalities
3. Established technologies (WtE/MBT) vs. emerging technologies (AD, Enzymatic treatment, single stream recovery technologies etc.)
4. Waste sector vs. energy sector (access to market, cost of recovered energy)
5. Waste/energy sector vs. agricultural sector (quality of bi-products to farmland, access to bio-waste, alternative fuel markets etc.)
6. Municipality vs. small commercial/retail (freedom of choice, waste flow control)
7. As energy becomes fossil-free, WtE will become "dirtier"
4. Integrated waste management and the battle field of SWM
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
..winners and loosers..
SEPTEMBER 2015 THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
12
4. Integrated waste management and the battle field of SWM
Winners Loosers
Private waste contractors get more market access
(Some) Municipal loss of waste flow control
Waste producers enjoy lower tariffs for some services
Municipality stuck with non-profitable services
Investors can buy/build waste infrastructure for profit
Public loss of control of waste infrastructure incl. treatment capacity
Increased market for waste collection contractors (multiple waste streams, longer haulage)
Higher entry barrier for new technologies/solutions for special waste streams due to loss of flow control
Lowest gate-fee facilities (incl. haulage) increase volume
Higher gate-fee facilities (incl haulage) loose volume due to "waste tourism"
Big (economies of scale) Small / local solutions
Technical approaches to "zero waste"
13
5. How can technologies best be used?
› Material recovery:
› Source separation of recyclables
› Co-mingled collection + central sorting
› Reuse/repair
› Clean /dirty MRFs
› Volume reduction /bio-stabilisation:
› MBT / Bio-drying
› Nutrient recovery:
› Aerobic - Composting
› Anaerobic/AD + nutrient recovery
› Enzymatic nutrient recovery
› Energy recovery:
› Mass burn to energy
› RDF/SRF fuel substitution
› AD/biogas/landfill gas/fuel production MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
14
5. – And how can infrastructure and services best be organised?
› Revenue from sale of energy, recyclables, compost etc?
› Cost of disposing residues, rejects etc?
› Capital costs (conditions of financiers)
› Risk premiums (Commercial conditions/risk profile)
› Non-profit/profit?
› Dividends to shareholders?
› Taxation, VAT, green levies
› Build up of capital/residual value?
› Lean staffing/mechanisation
› Fixed/variable costs
› Operational robustness
› Design strategy (low O&M or Capex?)
› Market conditions, supply/demand
Gate fees vary greatly in Europe. Why?
Source: RenoSam 2006, Denmark
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
15
6. Concluding remarks
› Large scale landfilling is unsustainable. Northern European practice of only 3-8% to landfill sets the trend (need better and more comparable waste statistics)
› Increased pressure from resource, carbon and energy policies result in push for closed loops for materials and nutrients. Energy recovery from remaining residual waste only
› Less need for WtE capacity in Northern Europe. Need to define "recycling quality"
› As energy supply becomes fossil-free (wind, solar, hydro etc.), energy from waste will be less desirable as it changes classification from "clean" to "dirty" energy.
› Continued liberalization of the waste market, less direct waste flow control and more indirect control via regulation, tenders and fiscal tools. More emphases on truly integrated waste management: We must be even better organized and regulation will be more complex!
› More cross-sectoral approach: waste – energy – agriculture – resources (the biomass fight etc.)
› Benchmarking and push for lower waste tariffs to balance profits in liberalized market
Prospects of the future Northern European / EU Waste Management
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
Thank you!
Torben Kristiansen, M.Sc. Civ. Eng
Vice President Solid Waste
COWI A/S, Denmark
www.cowi.com/waste
+45 29162522
16
COWI is a leading European and global consulting group providing state-of-the-art services within engineering, environmental science and economics.
COWI has more than 6,500 employees worldwide including Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Spain, Belgium, UK, Greenland, Turkey, Mozambique, Zambia, Tanzania, Oman, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, India, South Korea, China, USA, & Canada.
9 JUNE 2011 Northern European success towards zero landfill. Torben Kristiansen
7. Questions?
MARCH 2016
THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
SEPTEMBER 2015 THE NORTHERN EUROPEAN APPROACH TO (PRACTICALLY) ZERO WASTE
17