European Union waste management strategy and the importance of biogenic waste

In the European Union (EU), waste management is almost totally regulated by EU directives, which supply a framework for national regulations. The main target in view of sustainability is the prevention of direct disposal of reactive waste in landfills. The tools to comply with these principles are recycling and material recovery as well as waste incineration with energy recovery for final inertization. The adaptation of the principles laid down in EU directives is an ongoing process. A number of countries have already enacted respective national regulations and their realization shows that recycling and incineration are not in competition but are both essential parts of integrated waste management systems. In the EU, the amount of residual waste available for energy recovery can supply approximately 1% of the primary energy demand. About 50% of the energy inventory of municipal solid waste (MSW) in most EU countries is of biogenic origin, and MSW is to the same extent to be looked upon as regenerative fuel. Hence part of the CO₂ released from waste incineration is climate neutral. In the EU, this share could produce savings of the order of 1% of annual CO₂ emissions if energy from MSW replaced that derived from fossil fuel.     

Nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from waste and biomass to energy plants.

Following the Kyoto protocol with respect to reducing emissions of greenhouse gases emissions, and EU energy policy and sustainability in waste management, there has been an increased interest in the reduction of emissions from waste disposal operations. From the point of view of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, waste incineration and waste co-combustion are very acceptable methods for waste disposal. In order to achieve very low N2O emissions from waste incineration, particularly for waste with higher nitrogen content (e.g. sewage sludge), two factors are important: temperature of incineration over 900 degrees C and avoiding the selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) de-NO(X) method based on urea or ammonia treatments. The more modern selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems for de-NO(X) give rise to negligible sources of N2O.     

Towards a coherent European approach for taxation of combustible waste

Although intra-European trade of combustible waste has grown strongly in the last decade, incineration and landfill taxes remain disparate within Europe. The paper proposes a more coherent taxation approach for Europe that is based on the principle of Pigovian taxation, i.e. the internalization of environmental damage costs. The approach aims to create a level playing field between European regions while reinforcing incentives for sustainable management of combustible waste. Three important policy recommendations emerge. First, integrating waste incineration into the European Emissions Trading System for greenhouse gases (EU ETS) reduces the risk of tax competition between regions. Second, because taxation of every single air pollutant from waste incineration is cumbersome, a differentiated waste incineration tax based on NO_x emissions can serve as a second-best instrument. Finally, in order to strengthen incentives for ash treatment, a landfill tax should apply for landfilled incineration residues. An example illustrates the coherence of the policy recommendations for incineration technologies with diverse environmental effects.     

Municipal waste management in Sicily: practices and challenges

There are numerous problems yet to be solved in waste management and although efforts towards waste recovery and recycling have been made, landfills are still the most common method used in the EU and many other industrialised countries. Thermal disposal, particularly incineration, is a tested and viable alternative. In 2004, only 11% of the annual waste production of Italy was incinerated. Sicily, with over five million inhabitants, is the second largest region in Italy where waste management is now a critical problem. The use of landfills can no longer be considered a satisfactory environmental solution; therefore, new methods have to be chosen and waste-to-energy plants could provide an answer. This paper gives details of municipal solid waste management in Sicily following a new Waste Management Plan. Four waste-to-energy plants will generate electricity through a steam cycle; the feedstock will become the residue after material recovery, which is calculated as 20-40% weight of the collected municipal solid waste.     

Treatment and disposal alternatives for health-care waste in developing countries--a case study in Istanbul, Turkey.

Efficient health-care waste management is crucial for the prevention of the exposure of health-care workers, patients, and the community to infections, toxic wastes and injuries as well as the protection of the environment (Safe Management of Wastes from Health-care Activities. World Health Organization, Geneva). The amount of health-care waste produced in the Istanbul Metropolitan City in Turkey is 30 ton day(-1) in total. The method used for the final disposal of most of the health-care waste of Istanbul is incineration. However, a great portion of the infectious waste is disposed of with the domestic waste into the sanitary landfill because of improper segregation practices applied in the health-care institutions. Therefore the alternatives for the treatment and disposal of health-care waste were evaluated. The technical information related to the available treatment technologies including incineration, microwave irradiation, mobile or stationary sterilization, etc. were also investigated. The capital investment cost, transportation/operational costs for each alternative method and the different locations for installation were compared. When the data collected were evaluated, it was found that separate handling and disposal of health-care waste generated on the European and the Asian sides of the city was the most economic and practicable solution. As a result, it was concluded that the capacity of the Kemerburgaz-Odayeri incineration plant is enough to incinerate the health-care waste generated on the European side of Istanbul, the construction of a new incineration plant or a stationary sterilization unit for the disposal of health-care waste generated on the Asian side was the most effective alternative.     

Comparative study of the methods used for treatment and final disposal of sewage sludge in European countries

Municipal wastewater treatment results to the production of large quantities of sewage sludge, which requires proper and environmentally accepted management before final disposal. In European Union, sludge management remains an open and challenging issue for the Member States as the relative European legislation is fragmentary and quite old, while the published data concerning sludge treatment and disposal in different European countries are often incomplete and inhomogeneous. The main objective of the current study was to outline the current situation and discuss future perspectives for sludge treatment and disposal in EU countries. According to the results, specific sludge production is differentiated significantly between European countries, ranging from 0.1 kg per population equivalent (p.e.) and year (Malta) to 30.8 kg per p.e. and year (Austria). More stringent legislations comparing to European Directive 86/278/EC have been adopted for sludge disposal in soil by several European countries, setting lower limit values for heavy metals as well as limit values for pathogens and organic micropollutants. A great variety of sludge treatment technologies are used in EU countries, while differences are observed between Member States. Anaerobic and aerobic digestion seems to be the most popular stabilization methods, applying in 24 and 20 countries, respectively. Mechanical sludge dewatering is preferred comparing to the use of drying beds, while thermal drying is mainly applied in EU-15 countries (old Member States) and especially in Germany, Italy, France and UK. Regarding sludge final disposal, sludge reuse (including direct agricultural application and composting) seems to be the predominant choice for sludge management in EU-15 (53% of produced sludge), following by incineration (21% of produced sludge). On the other hand, the most common disposal method in EU-12 countries (new Member States that joined EU after 2004) is still landfilling. Due to the obligations set by Directive 91/271/EC, a temporary increase of sludge amounts that are disposed in landfills is expected during the following years in EU-12 countries. Beside the above, sludge reuse in land and sludge incineration seem to be the main practices further adopted in EU-27 (all Member States) up to 2020. The reinforcement of these disposal practices will probably result to adoption of advanced sludge treatment technologies in order to achieve higher pathogens removal, odors control and removal of toxic compounds and ensure human health and environmental protection.     

The environmental and biosecurity characteristics of livestock carcass disposal methods: A review

Livestock mortalities represent a major waste stream within agriculture. Many different methods are used throughout the world to dispose of these mortalities; however within the European Union (EU) disposal options are limited by stringent legislation. The legal disposal options currently available to EU farmers (primarily rendering and incineration) are frequently negatively perceived on both practical and economic grounds. In this review, we assess the potential environment impacts and biosecurity risks associated with each of the main options used for disposal of livestock mortalities in the world and critically evaluate the justification for current EU regulations. Overall, we conclude that while current legislation intends to minimise the potential for on-farm pollution and the spread of infectious diseases (e.g. transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, bacterial pathogens), alternative technologies (e.g. bioreduction, anaerobic digestion) may provide a more cost-effective, practical and biosecure mechanism for carcass disposal as well as having a lower environmental footprint. Further social, environmental and economic research is therefore warranted to assess the holistic benefits of alternative approaches for carcass disposal in Europe, with an aim to provide policy-makers with robust knowledge to make informed decisions on future legislation.     

The practice and challenges of solid waste management in Singapore

This paper presents an overview of the current solid waste management situation in Singapore and provides a brief discussion of the future challenges. Singapore is a small island city-state with a large population, warm climate and high humidity. Over the past two to three decades, rapid industrialization and economic development have caused a tremendous increase in solid waste generation. The yearly disposed solid waste increased from 0.74 million tonnes in 1972 to 2.80 million tonnes in 2000. Solid waste management in Singapore has traditionally been undertaken by the Ministry of Environment (ENV), with the participation of some private sectors in recent years. The hierarchy of solid waste management in Singapore is waste minimization (reduce, reuse and recycle or so-called 3 Rs), followed by incineration and landfill. As land is extremely scarce and only one newly constructed offshore landfill site is available, solid waste incineration has been identified as the most preferred disposal method. Waste minimization, the utilization of incineration ashes, industrial waste management are regarded to be the major challenges in the future.     

Efficiency of energy recovery from waste incineration,in the light of the new Waste Framework Directive

This paper deals with a key issue related to municipal waste incineration, which is the efficiency of energy recovery. A strong driver for improving the energy performances of waste-to-energy plants is the recent Waste Framework Directive (Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives), which allows high efficiency installations to benefit from a status of “recovery” rather than “disposal”. The change in designation means a step up in the waste hierarchy, where the lowest level of priority is now restricted to landfilling and low efficiency wastes incineration. The so-called “R1 formula” reported in the Directive, which counts for both production of power and heat, is critically analyzed and correlated to the more scientific-based approach of exergy efficiency. The results obtained for waste-to-energy plants currently operating in Europe reveal some significant differences in their performance, mainly related to the average size and to the availability of a heat market (district heating).     

Life cycle assessment of a national policy proposal - the case of a Swedish waste incineration tax

At the core of EU and Swedish waste policy is the so-called waste hierarchy, according to which waste should first be prevented, but should otherwise be treated in the following order of prioritisation: reuse, recycling when environmentally motivated, energy recovery, and last landfilling. Some recent policy decisions in Sweden aim to influence waste management in the direction of the waste hierarchy. In 2001 a governmental commission assessed the economic and environmental impacts of introducing a weight-based tax on waste incineration, the purpose of which would be to encourage waste reduction and increase materials recycling and biological treatment. This paper presents the results of a life cycle assessment (LCA) of the waste incineration tax proposal. It was done in the context of a larger research project concerning the development and testing of a framework for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). The aim of this paper is to assess the life cycle environmental impacts of the waste incineration tax proposal, and to investigate whether there are any possibilities of more optimal design of such a tax. The proposed design of the waste incineration tax results in increased recycling, but only in small environmental improvements. A more elaborate tax design is suggested, in which the tax level would partly be related to the fossil carbon content of the waste.     

Paper waste – Recycling,incineration or landfilling? A review of existing life cycle assessments

A review of existing life cycle assessments (LCAs) on paper and cardboard waste has been undertaken. The objectives of the review were threefold. Firstly, to see whether a consistent message comes out of published LCA literature on optimum disposal or recycling solutions for this waste type. Such message has implications for current policy formulation on material recycling and disposal in the EU. Secondly, to identify key methodological issues of paper waste management LCAs, and enlighten the influence of such issues on the conclusions of the LCA studies. Thirdly, in light of the analysis made, to discuss whether it is at all valid to use the LCA methodology in its current development state to guide policy decisions on paper waste. A total of nine LCA studies containing altogether 73 scenarios were selected from a thorough, international literature search. The selected studies are LCAs including comparisons of different management options for waste paper. Despite claims of inconsistency, the LCAs reviewed illustrate the environmental benefits in recycling over incineration or landfill options, for paper and cardboard waste. This broad consensus was found despite differences in geographic location and definitions of the paper recycling/disposal systems studied. A systematic exploration of the LCA studies showed, however, important methodological pitfalls and sources of error, mainly concerning differences in the definition of the system boundaries. Fifteen key assumptions were identified that cover the three paper cycle system areas: raw materials and forestry, paper production, and disposal/recovery. It was found that the outcome of the individual LCA studies largely depended on the choices made in some of these assumptions, most specifically the ones concerning energy use and generation, and forestry.     

Driving forces for import of waste for energy recovery in Sweden.

Between 1996 and 2002, the Swedish import of so-called yellow waste for energy recovery increased. The import mainly consisted of separated wood waste and mixes of used wood and paper and/or plastics that was combusted in district heat production plants (DHPPs). Some mixed waste was imported to waste incineration plants for energy recovery (10% of the import of yellow waste for energy recovery in 2002). The import came primarily from Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Denmark and Finland. We identified six underlying driving forces for this recent increase of imported waste which are outlined and their interactive issues discussed. --The energy system infrastructure, which enables high energy recovery in Sweden. --The energy taxation, where high Swedish taxes on fossil fuels make relatively expensive solid biofuels the main alternative for base load production of district heat. --The quality of the waste-derived fuels, which has been higher in the exporting countries than in Sweden. --The bans on landfilling within Europe and the shortage of waste treatment capacity. --Taxes on waste management in Europe. --Gate fee differences between exporting countries and Sweden. In the future, the overall strength of these driving forces will probably be weakened. A Swedish tax on waste incineration is being investigated. In other European countries, the ambition to reach the Kyoto targets and increase the renewable electricity production could improve the competitiveness of waste-derived fuels in comparison with fossil fuels. Swedish DHPPs using waste-derived fuels will experience higher costs after the Waste Incineration Directive is fully implemented. The uncertainty about European waste generation and treatment capacity, however, might have a large influence on the future gate fees and thus also on the yellow waste import into Sweden.     

Municipal solid waste management in China: a comparative analysis

This paper illustrates an overview of the past and present MSWM strategies in China. A comparison is made with MSWM in China, and other developed and developing countries to identify and analyze the problems of existing MSWM, and evaluate some effective suggestion to overcome the limitations. Rapid urbanization and economic growth are the main factors of increasing MSW generation in China. The generating MSW has 55.86 % food waste with high moisture contain due to unavailable source separation. Chinese MSWM is dominated by 60.16 % landfilling, whereas incineration, untreated discharge, and other treatments are 29.84, 8.21, and 1.79 %, respectively. In 2014, a total of 604 sanitary landfills, 188 incineration plants, and 26 other units were used for MSWM. With the magnitude of timing, the increasing rate of incineration unit and disposal capacity is higher than the landfill. In 2004–2014, the disposal capacity of landfill and incineration is increased from 68.89 to 107.44 and 4.49 to 53.3 million tons, respectively. However, the heating value in the majority of Chinese incineration plants is 3000–6700 kJ/kg and the inappropriate leachate treatment can be found in 47 % landfill sites. A proper taxation system for MSW disposal is not fully implemented in China, which has a negative impact on overall MSW recycling. From the comparative study of MSWM, it is revealed that the source separation MSW collection, high energy recovery from incineration plants, appropriate leachate treatment, effective landfill location and management, increase waste recycling and proper taxation system for MSW disposal are essential to improve MSWM in China.     

International comparative study of 3R and waste management policy developments

Reduce, reuse, and recycle (3R) policies form the basis of waste management and global warming countermeasures globally, so we conducted a comparative study of 3R and waste management policies in the European Union (EU), USA, Korea, Japan, China, and Vietnam. An international workshop for 3R and waste management policymakers was held in Kyoto, Japan, and a bibliographic survey was also conducted to collect data. 3R policies are clearly given priority in the hierarchy of waste management in every country studied. Thermal recovery, which includes power generation from waste heat and methane gas collected from organic waste, is also a priority; this is consistent with the increased use of countermeasures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In the EU, waste management is characterized by practical and effective 3R policies through the development of realistic regulations and by the policymakers??desire to simplify management systems. The policy ideal in China, however, is the development of a circular economy that targets reductions in the amount and hazardousness of waste. Limits on the number of final disposal sites, strategies for procuring resources, and GHG emission countermeasures are closely linked with 3R policies, and further development of 3R policies in parallel with such issues is expected.     

Report: policy drivers and the planning and implementation of integrated waste management in Ireland using the regional approach.

Waste management in Ireland has been dramatically transformed over the past 10 years from over 90% reliance on landfill towards a fully integrated approach. According to the latest EPA National Database Report in 2007 our municipal (household and commercial but excluding construction and demolition) recycling rate was 35% in 2005. This has been achieved through the implementation of 10 regional waste management plans all prepared within a new national planning framework in accordance with the Waste Management Act 1996 and Government policy document 'Changing Our Ways', published in 1998 by the Irish Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The principal drivers of the waste management plans and strategies are the EU Waste Framework Directive (recently revised), the EU Packaging Directive and the EU Landfill Directive. In addition, there were substantial political and environmental drivers due to the relatively poor standard of landfills in Ireland. Strict landfill regulation by the Environment Protection Agency commenced in 1997and led to many closures of poor facilities and new standards of siting design and operation. This has led to very high landfill charges that are only now beginning to stabilize. The key to improving public attitudes to the greatly improving waste management system has been the degree and content of stakeholder involvement programmes. These programmes are now consolidated into a national 'Race against Waste' programme (www.raceagainstwaste.ie). The purpose of the programme is to create awareness and deal with many of the misconceptions in the public mind attached to waste treatment methods especially incineration. Waste management is after all about people.     

An environmental analysis for comparing waste management options and strategies

The debate on different waste management practices has become an issue of utmost importance as human activities have overloaded the assimilative capacity of the biosphere. Recent Italian law on solid waste management recommends an increase in material recycling and energy recovery, and only foresees landfill disposal for inert materials and residues from recovery and recycling. A correct waste management policy should be based on the principles of sustainable development, according to which our refuse is not simply regarded as something to eliminate but rather as a potential resource. This requires the creation of an integrated waste management plan that makes full use of all available technologies. In this context, eMergy analysis is applied to evaluate three different forms of waste treatment and construct an approach capable of assessing the whole strategy of waste management. The evaluation included how much investment is needed for each type of waste management and how much "utility" is extracted from wastes, through the use of two indicators: Environmental yield ratio (EYR) and Net eMergy. Our results show that landfill is the worst system in terms of eMergy costs and eMergy benefits. Composting is the most efficient system in recovering eMergy (highest EYR) from municipal solid waste (MSW) while incineration is capable of saving the greatest quantity of eMergy per gram of MSW (highest net eMergy). This analysis has made it possible to assess the sustainability and the efficiency of individual options but could also be used to assess a greater environmental strategy for waste management, considering a system that might include landfills, incineration, composting, etc.     

The use of LCA in selecting the best MSW management system

This paper focuses on the study of eleven environmental impact categories produced by several municipal solid waste management systems (scenarios) operating on a provincial scale in Southern Italy. In particular, the analysis takes into account 12 management scenarios with 16 management phases for each one. The only difference among ten of the scenarios (separated kerbside collection of all recyclables, glass excepted, composting of putrescibles, RDF pressed bales production and incineration, final landfilling) is the percentage of separated collection varying in the range of 35–80%, while the other two scenarios, for 80% of separate collection, consider different alternatives in the disposal of treatment residues (dry residue sorting and final landfilling or direct disposal in landfill). The potential impacts induced on the environmental components were analysed using the life cycle assessment (LCA) procedure called “WISARD” (Waste Integrated System Assessment for Recovery and Disposal). Paper recycling was the phase with the greatest influence on avoided impacts, while the collection logistics of dry residue was the phase with the greatest influence on produced impacts. For six impact categories (renewable and total energy use, water, suspended solids and oxydable matters index, eutrophication and hazardous waste production), for high percentages of separate collection a management system based on recovery and recycling but without incineration would be preferable.     

Comparative assessment of municipal sewage sludge incineration,gasification and pyrolysis for a sustainable sludge-to-energy management in Greece

For a sustainable municipal sewage sludge management, not only the available technology, but also other parameters, such as policy regulations and socio-economic issues should be taken in account. In this study, the current status of both European and Greek Legislation on waste management, with a special insight in municipal sewage sludge, is presented. A SWOT analysis was further developed for comparison of pyrolysis with incineration and gasification and results are presented. Pyrolysis seems to be the optimal thermochemical treatment option compared to incineration and gasification. Sewage sludge pyrolysis is favorable for energy savings, material recovery and high added materials production, providing a ‘zero waste’ solution. Finally, identification of challenges and barriers for sewage sludge pyrolysis deployment in Greece was investigated.     

A review of waste management practices and their impact on human health

This work reviews (i) the most recent information on waste arisings and waste disposal options in the world, in the European Union (EU), in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OEDC) countries, and in some developing countries (notably China) and (ii) the potential direct and indirect impact of waste management activities on health. Though the main focus is primarily on municipal solid waste (MSW), exposure to bioaerosols from composting facilities and to pathogens from sewage treatment plants are considered. The reported effects of radioactive waste are also briefly reviewed. Hundreds of epidemiological studies reported on the incidence of a wide range of possible illnesses on employees of waste facilities and on the resident population. The main conclusion of the overall assessment of the literature is that the evidence of adverse health outcomes for the general population living near landfill sites, incinerators, composting facilities and nuclear installations is usually insufficient and inconclusive. There is convincing evidence of a high risk of gastrointestinal problems associated with pathogens originating at sewage treatment plants. In order to improve the quality and usefulness of epidemiological studies applied to populations residing in areas where waste management facilities are located or planned, preference should be given to prospective cohort studies of sufficient statistical power, with access to direct human exposure measurements, and supported by data on health effect biomarkers and susceptibility biomarkers.     

Report: treatment of commercial, construction and demolition waste in North Rhine-Westphalia: policy-making and operation options.

This paper summarizes a long-term-investigation of the mechanical treatment of commercial, construction and demolition waste materials in North Rhine-Westphalia in the light of applied operation standards and a disposal ban on untreated waste. It is shown how both the allocation of output materials from mechanical treatment plants and the subsequent treatment channels have changed since enforcement of the ban in 2005. Based on the findings of the investigation, two waste management scenarios offering alternative policies have been defined and are discussed. It is suggested that consistent enforcement of the ban affects both the diversion of waste to incineration and the recovery of materials on a regional scale. On the other hand, potential energy recovery may be fully exploited only insofar as operators of mechanical treatment plants concentrate their business on the production of refuse-derived fuel.