Dialogue Meeting on Waste Recycling

1

• Dialogue Meeting on Waste Recycling
• EU Legislation and CEE examples of implementation

Beata Wiszniewska, REC Istanbul, 20 June 2008
2
EU Framework Waste Legislation

• Directive 2006/12/EC of the European Parliament
  and of the Council of 5 April 2006 on waste (this
  is the codified version of Directive 75/442/EEC
  as amended)
• Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991
  on hazardous waste,
• Decision 2000/532/EC establishing a list of
  wastes,
• Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European
  Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on
  shipments of waste
• Commission Communication of 2005 Taking
  sustainable use of resources forward A Thematic
  Strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste
  

3
EU legislation on waste management operations

• Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on
  the landfill of wasteDirective 2000/76/EC of
  the European Parliament and of the Council of 4
  December 2000 on the incineration of waste
• Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament
  and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port
  reception facilities for ship-generated waste and
  cargo residues - Commission declaration

4
EU legislation on specific waste stream

• Hazardous Waste (Controlled management of
  hazardous waste, Basel Convention on the control
  of transboundary movements of hazardous waste)
• Waste From Consumer Goods (packaging and
  packaging waste, pcbs and pcts, spent batteries
  and accumulators, waste oil, end-of-life
  vehicles, motor vehicles, pvc, waste electrical
  and electronic equipment)
• Waste From Specific Activities (management of
  waste from the extractive industries, ship
  dismantling, removal and disposal of disused
  offshore oil and gas installations, use of sewage
  sludge in agriculture, port infrastructure
  facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo
  residues, titanium dioxide )
• Radioactive Waste And Substances (shipments of
  radioactive waste supervision and control,
  shipments of radioactive substances, situation in
  1999 and prospects for radioactive waste
  management, management of spent nuclear fuel and
  radioactive waste )

5
Estonia Basic facts

• Population 1.4 million
• High number of municipalities 242
• Municipalities - in charge of organising
  collection, transport and disposal of municipal
  waste.
• Often, lack sufficient human and financial
  capacities to deal with waste management
  responsibilities.

6
National Policy Documents

• National Environmental Strategy (1995) waste
  prevention, reduction favoured
• National Waste Management Plan (2003 2007)
  full transposition of EU legislation, targets for
  different waste streams, institutional set-up
• Waste Act (2004)
• - shifts the responsibility for prevention of
  waste generation and collection of generated
  waste to the producers
• - ban on deposit of untreated waste (including
  mixed municipal waste) in landfills
• - ban on deposit of whole used tyres
• - ban of landfilling unsorted MSW (sorting is
  when municipalities have implemented separate
  collection).

7
Transposition of the Waste Landfill Directive

• Through several laws and regulations
• No National Strategy for Reduction of BMW but
  there is an Action Plan for Treatment of BMW
  until 2013
• Targets for BMW reduction stricter than the WLD
• New landfills have IPPC permits
• Inspection and control powers are exercised on
  national level
• Municipalities - inspection and control powers
  regarding environmental rules established by
  local councils
• Regional and local authorities received
  additional jurisdiction allowing for a more
  multi-stakeholder approach to waste management.
• Measures to meet the technical requirements of
  WLD - design, operation, closure and after-care
  of landfills

8
Waste Generation and Treatment

• From 2000 on there is a tendency of relative
  decoupling MSW generation and MSW landfilling due
  to
• Recycling of separately collected fractions
• Recycling of fractions sorted out from mixed
  municipal waste in sorting facilities and
• Implementation of the packaging act and increase
  of recycled packaging.

9
Management of Municipal Waste 2001-2005

• Landfilling slowly decreasing now stabilized
  at 66
• Recovery slowly increasing
• Conclusion as of 2007 in order to meet WLD
  targets one incinerator has to be built in the
  country.

10
Waste Collection

• Rural municipality or city council issues a
  regulation establishing
• the waste subject to transport
• the areas
• the frequency and time of transport and
• the limits of the transport fees sufficient to
  cover the cost of establishment, operation,
  closure and aftercare of waste treatment
  facilities.
• Local Authority - in charge of selecting waste
  collection and transport operators.
• Not all waste generators are covered by waste
  collection services summer houses, small
  enterprises

11
Closing of Landfills a Success

• Figures
• Until 1991 - gt 300 landfills
• 1996 282
• 2004 - 37
• 2007 16
• Ideally 8-9 regional landfills!
• Transport and convenience main factor for
  optimizing the number!
• 4 new landfills full compliance with WLD!

• Factors of Success
• Took place after the transposition of the WLD
• Understanding of authorities on municipal and
  county level of the importance of the problem
• Significant financial support by the
  Environmental Investment Centre
• Clear tasks and responsibilities
• Appoint operators and immediately close those
  without clear ownership rights.

12
Targets for generation and landfilling of
municipal waste and BMW

• Economic instruments for diverting MSW from
  landfill
• - User charge for municipal waste (paid by
  generators) increase is a sensitive issue
• - Pollution charge (landfill tax) (paid by
  operators) Rate is fixed in advance (EUR) 1999
  0.10 2000 0.12 2001 0.15 2002 0.18 2003
  0.21 2004 - 0.26 2005 1.92 2006 7.8.

13
PPP in Waste Management. The case of Jõelähtme
landfill near Tallinn.

• Owner - public-private company Tallinn Landfill
  Ltd, owned 35 by Tallinn City and 65 by a
  private company.
• Investments for the first phase of landfill
  construction by the owner was approx. EUR 9.6
  million.
• The City of Tallinn and the EU ISPA programme
  supported the project with additional 6 MEUR -
  access road to the site and a sewage system.
• Total cost of the project until its end was
  approx. 60 MEUR.

14
Investment and Charges

• High investment costs - reflected in relatively
  high disposal fees which have to cover all costs
  related to operation of the new landfills
  including closure and aftercare costs.
• In 2006, charges appr. 40 EUR/t (monthly 4-8
  EUR/household).
• Fee includes
• operational costs
• landfill charge (tax) 7.8 EUR/t for new
  landfills and 15 EUR/t for older landfills, not
  in compliance with EU requirement.

15
Stakeholder Involvement and Cooperation Factors

• Stakeholder involvement in legislative process
  as early as possible all policy documents go
  through public hearing Estonian Waste Management
  Association (EWMA) provides input
• Cooperation among stakeholders through EWMA (42
  stakeholders)
• Cooperation between municipalities - not
  sufficient in the past several years. Free to
  cooperate and group themselves since 1998 but
  possibility not used. Now municipalities are
  given more incentives to cooperate and pool
  resources for a better waste management. A good
  example for that is the Central Estonia Waste
  Management Centre.
• Structures have different organisational forms
  non-profitorganizations or business companies.

16
Successful Regional Waste Management Solution
Central Estonian Waste Management Centre (to be
completed)

• Good cooperation between 10 municipalities
• They are the owners of the new landfill
• The form is a non-for-profit organization
• Designed a common system of transport.

• Landfill location
• No serious problems with municipalities
  understanding of the safety of modern landfills,
  job creation, extra infrastructure.
• Study tours useful to show how a modern landfill
  looks like
• Closing an old landfill and building a new one
  positive step
• Sometimes opposition came from local people
  because of misinformation. Therefore a public
  awareness campaign is important!
• Legal procedures should be followed carefully.

17
Useful Links

• ETC web site http//waste.eionet.europa.eu/ and
  the WasteBase http//waste.eionet.europa.eu/waste
  base
• European Environmental Agency http//www.eea.europ
  a.eu/themes/waste
• EU Waste Policies http//ec.europa.eu/environment/
  waste/index.htm

18
Thank you for your attention.