Final report LIFE+ LIFE Project Number LIFE07 ENV/CY/000081 Final Report Covering the project activities from 01/01/2009 to 30/6/2011 Reporting Date 30/9/2011 LIFE+ PROJECT NAME or Acronym Environmental Policy Support Tool for Recycling in Islands Data Project Project location Nicosia-Cyprus Project start date: 01/01/2009 Project end date: 31/12/2010 Extension date: <30/06/2011 > Total budget € 878,272 EC contribution: € 433,636 (%) of eligible costs 50% Data Beneficiary Name Beneficiary Cyprus Ministry of Interior Contact person Mr Marios Panayides Postal address CY-1453 Nicosia, Cyprus Telephone 00-357-22806454 Fax: 00-357-22806481 E-mail [email protected]Project Website www.eng.ucy.ac.cy/rept
Transcript
Final report LIFE+
LIFE Project Number
LIFE07 ENV/CY/000081
Final Report Covering the project activities from 01/01/2009 to 30/6/2011
Reporting Date
30/9/2011
LIFE+ PROJECT NAME or Acronym
Environmental Policy Support Tool for Recycling in Islands
Data Project
Project location Nicosia-Cyprus
Project start date: 01/01/2009
Project end date: 31/12/2010 Extension date: <30/06/2011 >
1. Table of contents 1. Table of contents .................................................................................................................... 2
2. List of key-words and abbreviations .................................................................................... 3 3. Executive summary ............................................................................................................... 4 4. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 7
5. Administrative part ................................................................................................................ 8 5.1. Description of the management system ........................................................................ 8 5.2. Implemented actions to organise/co-ordinate the project .......................................... 11
5.2.1. Signing of Partnership Agreements between partners and the MOI .......... 11
5.2.2. Plan of Action ...................................................................................................... 11
5.2.3. Monitoring and Reporting of work progress ................................................. 11
5.2.4. Organisation of project meetings ..................................................................... 12
5.2.5. Participation in the kick-off meeting for the LIFE+ 2007 projects in Athens 5.2.6. Internal meetings ............................................................................................... 13
5.3. Evaluation of the management System ....................................................................... 13
6.1.2. Action 2 - Project Management and Reporting to EC .................................... 22
6.1.3. Action 3 - Assessment of Present Conditions ................................................. 22
6.1.4. Action 4 - Evaluation of the Implementation of the Relevant EC Directives in the Participant Member States..................................................................... 24
6.1.5. Action 5-Identification of constraints and obstacles .................................... 26
6.1.6. Action 6- Preparation of an automated decision support tool (DST) for the formulation of recycling policies in islands .................................................... 30
6.1.7. Action 7- Implementation of the pilot project ............................................... 36
6.1.8. Action 8- Dissemination and Training............................................................. 39
6.3.4. Innovation and demonstration value .............................................................. 55
6.3.5. Long term indicators of the project success ................................................... 56 6.4. Dissemination issues .................................................................................................... 57
6.4.1. Dissemination: overview per activity.............................................................. 57
6.4.3. After-LIFE Communication plan ...................................................................... 64 7. Comments on the financial report....................................................................................... 64
7.1. Costs incurred ............................................................................................................... 64 7.2. Accounting system ....................................................................................................... 66
During Action 1 a kick-off meeting with all the project beneficiaries was organised on
January 14, 2009 where the basic responsibilities of each participating beneficiary
were thoroughly discussed and clarified and the timetable for the execution of work
was finalized. In addition the beneficiaries agreed on the communication processes,
reporting and coordination of the project. During this meeting the Steering Committee
was formed and the specifics of its operation were agreed upon. The composition as
well as its exact role can be found both in the kick-off meeting minutes and the
monitoring protocol of the REPT project. These documents were appended to
Annexes 7.2 and 7.6 of the Inception Report respectively.
After the kick-off meeting a short press conference was carried out for the media (tv
and press) were a presentation of the project was given and questions were answered.
This Action was successfully completed according to the proposed schedule and no
problems were faced. The deliverables of this Action comprise the Agreed Plan of
Action as well as the Agenda and Minutes of the kick-off meeting and they have been
included in Annex 7.2 of the Inception Report.
6.1.2. Action 2 - Project Management and Reporting to EC (1/1/09-31/6/11)
Information on the project management activities can be found in Chapter 5 of this
Report.
6.1.3. Action 3 - Assessment of Present Conditions (15/1/09-31/8/09)
This Action involved the recording and assessment of the present conditions
concerning the recycling of the selected waste streams in the participating countries.
This Action was based on the following tasks/methodology set by UCY:
Task 1: Identification of data sources.
This task involved the identification all the possible sources of information for the
selected waste streams in each participating country. Each Green Dot organization,
Final report LIFE+ 23
which is responsible for the collection of the relevant data, with the assistance of the
PMT identified the possible sources and the actions necessary for their acquisition.
Typical data sources include the participating country‟s relevant authorities and the
Green Dot organizations themselves.
Task 2: Data collection
During the kick-off meeting it was decided that a preliminary data collection activity
would take place during the first months of the project aiming to collect data, evaluate
the appropriateness of the identified sources and identify obstacles and constraints.
During the introductory meetings in each of the four participating countries a number
of relevant authorities and involved organizations were also present in order to get
informed about the activities of the REPT project and discuss on how the collection of
data could be assisted by each organization.
Task 3:Data Analysis
These data were collected by the PMT and a preliminary evaluation of the quality,
format and volume of the selected data was carried out in order to assess their
suitability for use in the project‟s following Actions. After that the PMT has revised
the data needs of the project and compiled a detailed list of the required data from all
the participant countries. This list was discussed with all partners to be finalized. The
results of this task were discussed in the 2nd
Steering Committee meeting and a final
decision on the data collection was taken by all partners. The data collection activity
continued in the following months. In addition, the four Green Dot organizations
assisted the PMT by compiling a short report regarding current recycling practices in
their own counties. The information gathered was used by the PMT in order to
produce the final report on the recovery and recycling
practices/technologies/techniques applied for the selected waste streams, in the
participant countries. This comprises the deliverable of this Action and is attached as
an Annex to the Inception Report (Annex 7.4).
Through the implementation of Action 3 a number of constraints and problems were
identified that made the project beneficiaries aware of the exact limitations and
availability of data in each country:
1. Some difficulties, related to the availability and compatibility of data, were evident.
Especially for the financial data (i.e. operational costs) these were not readily comparable due to the different practices applied in each country. Some differences
were apparent not only in the collection methods but also in the various streams and
the other parameters of the cost. The project‟s associated beneficiaries have agreed to
report the specific cost data in a specific format for each cost parameter and efforts have been made towards this direction. All the information and data collected as well
as the exact characteristics and problems faced in each country have been reported in
Action 3 Deliverable. Through the already available collected data the general trend
was evident; recycling in islands is more expensive as compared to the mainland for the cases of France and Greece.
2. Difficulty in the collection of the necessary data regarding the recycling of Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). The difficulty lies in the fact that
the WEEE management in the participating countries (except Cyprus and Malta) is
not carried out by the participant Green Dot organizations (i.e. HERRCo and Eco-
Emballages) but by other collective systems that are not participating in the project
Final report LIFE+ 24
partnership. The project partners have communicated with these additional
organizations and have secured their support to the project. However, so far, the
collection of the necessary data from these organizations is proving to be slow.
Due to this fact, a small delay was noticed in the completion of Action 3
deliverable so as to incorporate the relevant data into the relevant deliverable (see
Table 2 in this report).
3. Cost data could not easily be found from the WEEE organisation schemes in
Greece and France who consider this information as confidential. For the case of
France, however, some useful conclusions could be drawn regarding the increased
costs for the recycling of WEEE on the islands. In addition cost estimations are not
yet available for Malta whose WEEE collective scheme has just recently been
awarded the appropriate operation permit by the relevant authority, however, this
has not been organised yet.
4. In Cyprus, Green Dot Cyprus is responsible for the WEEE collection system,
however, as there are no real data yet (the system for the treatment of WEEE is
currently in its initiation stage) the data that have been collected are based on their
estimates. According to Green Dot Cyprus, these estimates are the best available
data in Cyprus concerning the three WEEE streams examined within the
framework of the REPT project (cooling equipment, CRT screens and fluorescent
lamps) as during this stage they almost have all the relevant costs contracted to the
operators.
The completion of Action 3 of the project was not affected by these difficulties since
its aim was to collect and report on the available information in the current recycling
practices and schemes in each participating country. The current situation was
reported, while, the already available information and constraints identified assisted in
the implementation of the next project Actions.
Action 3 was carried out according to schedule and has been concluded on time (with
only a few days delay) according to the proposed timetable (see Table 5 on Project
Progress below and Figure 9).
6.1.4. Action 4 - Evaluation of the Implementation of the Relevant EC Directives in the Participant Member States (30/6/09-30/11/09)
This Action involved the evaluation of the implementation of the PPW and WEEE
Directives in the project participating countries. The implementation of this Action
involved the completion of the following tasks:
Review of the EC Directives:
This task involved the review of the PPW and WEEE Directives in order to record
their requirements, their set targets and proposed methods. Furthermore, a
bibliographical review was carried out to present the status of recovery and recycling
in the EU as a whole.
Final report LIFE+ 25
Presentation of the status of each participating country:
At this stage a presentation of the legislative measures related to PPW and WEEE in
each country was carried out as well as the policies and measures implemented. The
recovery/recycling stakeholders in each country were identified and the role of each
one described. Finally an evaluation of the achievements of each country was carried
out and the results were correlated to the country‟s targets.
Comparative assessment of Directives implementation:
In this Section a comparative Assessment of the implementation of the two Directives
in the participating countries has been attempted. The comparative assessment focused
on:
the Legislative and Practical level
the Impact of the EC Directives on Production, Recycling and Recovery
Assessment of the Applicability of the PPW Directive in small island member states or
member states that include islands
One of the main targets of the REPT project is to asses, to the extent possible, the
applicability of the PPW Directive in island member states or member states that
include islands. In order to achieve that, a comparative assessment was carried out
between the participating countries, at two levels:
- between island member states and mainland member states
- between chosen islands and mainland of member states including islands.
The comparative assessment was based on a set of technical indicators that were
considered adequate to allow for the extraction of conclusions i.e. island population
and density, legislation and measures, PPW production, recycling and recovery.
The analysis and processing of data for each participating country proved to be a slow
process due to the many different methods used by the four countries for acquiring and
presenting the data.
During the implementation of this Action two main obstacles were faced:
1. Compatibility of data for the four participating countries was an issue to be
solved in this action. In order for a meaningful comparative assessment to be
carried out, the data presented for each country had to be comparable. In order to
achieve homogeneity of data, 2007 was set as a base year since it is the year with
the latest available Eurostat data. This solution had one main drawback: Malta
had limited data available for this specific period, however estimations were
made based on 2006 data (that were available) to solve this issue. Another issue
is the limited implementation of the collective recycling schemes in Cyprus and
Malta. Since the collective recycling schemes in these countries were
implemented after 2005 the degree of target implementation till the base year
(2007) is low. The reader has to keep in mind that recycling achievements have
increased significantly in years 2008 and 2009 and this is explained in the
relevant deliverable.
2. The evaluation of the applicability of the relevant Directives in island member
states or member states including islands was based only on Technical
parameters. The Cost and Cost – Benefit factors were not assessed since they are
addressed in Action 5 of this project. As a result, the whole picture regarding the
applicability of the directives could not be shown in this report.
Final report LIFE+ 26
Due to the additional literature review required, Action 4 was completed with a two
month delay as reported in our last Progress Report.
The Deliverable of this Action (Evaluation of the Implementation of the Relevant EC
Directives in the Participant Member States) was included in Annex 7.2 of the
Progress Report. Comparison against the project‟s objectives and time schedule is
indicated in Table 5 and on the Report‟s Gantt-chart (Figure 9).
This study has identified some interesting results regarding recycling in islands and
reinforces some of the already known issues:
Due to different parameters applied in islands i.e. low populations, population
density etc, different recovery/recycling measures are promoted in islands than
in the mainland.
The implementation of recycling in islands does not always follow the
financial rules of the market so that recycling is carried out (for political social
or other reasons) despite the fact that is not financially viable.
Recycling in islands is not as effective as in the mainland and due to the
aforementioned issues, it is kept at low levels.
The exact outcomes of this Action, comparative assessment and conclusions are
analytically reported in Action 4 deliverable that has been submitted with the Progress
Report (April 2010).
6.1.5. Action 5-Identification of constraints and obstacles (1/10/09-26/2/10)
This action involved carrying out an extensive analysis, in the form of a technical and
financial analysis of the present recycling practices and technologies used in each of
the participant member states for each of the selected waste streams. The
implementation of this Action involved the following tasks:
Technical analysis of present waste management conditions of the selected waste
streams: a technical analysis was implemented for each participating member
state;
Economical analysis of present waste management conditions of the selected
waste streams from participating member states: an economical analysis was
implemented for each participating member state;
Environmental cost benefit analysis of the selected waste streams from
participating member states: an analysis was implemented for each participating
member state;
Carrying out of a constraint analysis for each participating member state.
One deliverable in which all the above mentioned areas were covered has been
prepared for this Action that is appended in Annex 8.2.1. The report prepared follows
for each waste stream the following structure:
Description of Best Available Techniques (collection, sorting, treatment).
Technical description of collection and treatment measures used in
participating countries.
Cost analysis for the operations.
Identification of environmental cost (environmental impact) of each step of
collection and treatment for each country.
Identification of constraints and obstacles for the implementation of cost
effective and sustainable schemes in each member state.
Final report LIFE+ 27
The choice of structuring the report in a way that focuses on specific waste streams
was based on the following rationale:
It allows for data to be more compatible with Action 6: Development of
Decision Support (DST) for recycling in islands.
The grouping of costs per waste stream and then in recycling components i.e.
collection, transport, sorting etc. makes the integration of this data into the
DST more straight forward.
It allows for a more straightforward comparison between member states and
different practices.
In relation to the methodology followed for Action 5 implementation the following
definitions are given:
Geographical scope
The study refers to the four countries participating in the REPT project: Cyprus,
Greece, Malta and France. However, since the specific data available for the four
countries were limited, the study also utilizes mostly generic data obtained through
literature. As a result, the data and results may be equally applicable to other countries
and regions with similar characteristics (i.e. population size, population densities,
country area etc).
Base year
Data used in the report refer mainly to the years 2007 and 2008, which are the latest
year for which comparable data between the participating countries were found.
Functional unit
The main functional unit used for the presentation of the results of this study is the
metric tonne. All cost references are made as €/tonne of the selected waste streams and
environmental impacts are also expressed per tonne i.e. CO2 emissions per recovered
tonne of waste.
Waste streams
The study deals with seven different waste streams both from PPW and WEEE
categories.
Packaging paper and carton from the municipal waste stream
Packaging plastic from the municipal waste stream
Packaging glass waste
Packaging metal waste
Cooling equipment (fridges and air conditioners)
Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) screens
Fluorescent lamps
Assumptions
In the cost analysis and environmental impact analysis, Directive compliant
technology is assumed i.e. Directive 1999/31/EC on landfills, Directive
2000/76/EC on waste incineration, and Directive 2001/80/EC on the
limitations of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion
plants.
Final report LIFE+ 28
For each waste stream, a system process tree was prepared that sets the individual unit
processes associated with the recycling of the specific waste stream. The cost and
environmental analysis was then carried out based on each system process tree and the
processes that applied on each participating member state. The process trees for the
waste management of the various waste consist of four main process types: collection,
transport, sorting, treatment.
Collection: refers to the use of vehicles and personnel to collect the waste from
its source. Two main collection types are considered: curbside collection and
bring-in schemes.
Transport: involves the use of vehicles transport waste from one process to
another i.e. from sorting facility to export center.
Sorting: involves the sorting of waste in a sorting facility or a Material
Recovery Facility (MRF). Sorting may involve separation of specific waste
streams i.e. glass, paper, metal from a mixed stream of waste or the separation
of a single waste stream into different grates and the removal of contaminants.
Treatment: is any process that changes the characteristics of a waste to make it
less of an environmental threat.
Generic system process diagrams for PPW and WEEE are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
Figure 2: Generic system process diagram for PPW
Figure 3: Generic System process diagram for WEEE
Final report LIFE+ 29
In relation to the data to included in Action 5 deliverable, data regarding the practices
used for collection and treatment for each selected waste stream from each
participating member state were obtained through the outcomes of Actions 3 and 4,
data regarding economic values were obtained through literature review and some
information and analyses obtained by the compliance schemes participating in the
REPT program. More precisely data collected from Green Dot (Cyprus) Public Co.
Ltd, Green Dot Malta Ltd, HE.R.R.Co from Greece and Eco-Emballages from France
(compliance schemes in each country were responsible for collecting data from
governmental and private sources for each selected waste stream). Qualitative and
quantitative data regarding environmental externalities for the recycling processes
were obtained through literature review. Additional sources used for the collection of
the data included EU and national reports regarding waste management in the
participating member states and international literature on waste management.
Some conclusions that can be drawn from Action 5 implementation related to the
constraints faced by islands in the establishment of recycling schemes for PPW and
WEEE are the following:
Population in most islands presents large seasonal variations attributed to
tourism that affect waste and energy planning.
Increased collection cost due to lower utilisation of collection equipment.
Increased overheads due to inelastic nature of many overheads and inevitably a
higher per unit allocation of overheads.
Increased sorting cost due to the small scale of operations and the high fixed
cost for sorting units.
Small size does not justify automations that can lower costs as they do in larger
countries.
Lower prices for recyclable materials due to small quantities for the case of
small islands.
Increased transportation cost due to distances from recycling plants and the sea
transport.
Recycling in islands is not always efficient due to low volumes, increased costs
and high environmental impacts while, this is not the case for the mainland.
The implementation of this Action was proved to be more challenging than originally
thought, resulting in a delay of its fulfilment. In fact it was completed in a draft form
since July 2010 and it was finalised after the pilot implementation of the DST in June
2011.
The delay was attributed to the following obstacles:
1. The delay in the implementation of Action 4 was transferred in the
implementation of this Action since the same personnel by N&A were working
on both Actions.
2. During the proposal stage as well as during the conclusion of the proposal
revision phase it was expected that Green Dot systems in each country would
have adequate data on costs for the various treatment systems applied for each
step of the recycling process. However, it turned out that due to the fact that in
some countries there are more than one systems involved in recycling or even
that private contractors carried out some of the recycling processes, actual cost
data were very limited (due to confidentiality reasons).
Final report LIFE+ 30
3. This caused a significant delay since the project team had to carry out an
additional literature review activity in order to get adequate cost data for every
recycling process of the selected waste streams (glass, metal, paper, plastic,
CRT screens, fluorescent lamps and cooling equipment), in each country.
Reliable cost data for each process were very scarce in literature and, in some
cases, the project team had to resolve the issue in carrying out estimations and
assumptions in order to complete the Action.
4. The analysis and processing of data in order to produce comparable data in
each participating country also proved to be a slow process due to the many
different methods used by the four countries for acquiring and presenting the
data. A great deal of conversions between parameters such as distance, weight,
cost etc. had to be carried out in order to produce data and parameters
comparable among countries.
5. The assessment of the environmental impacts of recycling was also a
challenging task. The project team aimed at carrying out a detailed
environmental impact assessment by assessing the greater number of
parameters possible from each process and waste stream. For this reason a
lengthy data collection process took place. During this process the working
team soon realized that quality data on a microscale that was needed were not
readily available. For example, data on the emissions to water resources during
the recycling of cooling equipment were not available in literature for all
processes (collection, pretreatment and treatment). This also made the
comparison among the environmental impacts of waste streams impossible to
carry out for al parameters. As a result, more time than anticipated was spent
on this activity and fewer environmental parameters were finally included.
However, with the completion of Action 5, the project team has managed to
develop a methodology for the incorporation of enough data in the DST tool
that can allow for a comparison between the financial and environmental
impacts of different recycling processes for each waste stream.
The report for this Action is found in Annex 8.2.1. Comparison against the project‟s
objectives and time schedule is indicated in Table 5 and on the Report‟s Gantt-chart
(Figure 9).
6.1.6. Action 6- Preparation of an automated decision support tool (DST) for the formulation of recycling policies in islands (1/10/09-28/2/11)
Action 6 according to the project proposal aimed at the development of a
computerised DST that will:
Estimate quantities of WEEE and packaging waste based on population data
and economic activities (i.e. services).
Forecast the future quantities to be managed by correlating packaging/WEEE
quantities to population growth and expansion of economic activities. This is
based on the assessment of current conditions and mathematical equations.
Calculate the quantities of dangerous substances that can potentially be
transferred into the environment if waste are not separated and managed
properly for present and future quantities.
Final report LIFE+ 31
Provide national authorities with cost and environmental analyses of specific
recycling schemes.
On the basis of the above, prepare „what-if‟-scenarios for the elaboration of
WEEE and Packaging Waste Directives.
The running version of the DST was finalised following our 5th Steering Committee
meeting that took place on March 18 in Athens and data for the participating countries
have been inserted in the DST. Intense work and close collaboration among the project
beneficiaries characterise the period following the EC visit of the Commission and of
the Monitoring Team in October 2010. Following the six-month extension of the
project screenshots and relevant worksheets so as to indicate the progress in the DST
development were sent to the project monitoring responsible Dr. Christina Marouli.
No particular constraints were noticed during this stage apart from the fact that the
delays occurred in Actions 4 and 5 have also been transferred in this Action since
Action 6 is at a large extend, data fed from Action 5.
Infact, the first discussions for the development of the tool started very early (i.e.
November 2009) and the project beneficiaries had the opportunity to discuss on the
requirements of the tool during the 3rd
SC meeting on January 22, 2010 and additional
internal meetings. Issues related to the additional effort that was required for the
implementation of this Action that could not be predicted when writing the proposal
and during its revision phase were the following:
The innovative character of the DST namely the combination of technical,
economic and environmental parameters, the complexity to define them in a
form appropriate to start programming.
Close and persistent cooperation and brainstorming between the seven project
beneficiaries and in depth search in literature, bibliography and various
information sources were required due to the non-existing experience in
Europe in these aspects, namely the prototype DST for recycling in islands.
In addition to the limited cost data that were identified for Action 5 above,
environmental parameters were of utmost importance for the design of the
DST and additional time was required for their collection and assessment
resulting in a delay of the DST actual design.
All the above mentioned issues were successfully solved given the six-month
extension that was accepted towards the end of the initial proposed project duration
(i.e. December 2010). The DST is well thought out, according to the project‟s
objectives and fully operational. It is accompanied by a technical users manual and an
explanatory of the calculations that were considered for the DST development and in
which some datasets (related to some assumptions and data used by the development
team during the DST implementation phase) are also provided in order to assist the
user in implementing the DST. This explanatory infact comprises part of the DST
manual (it is provided in the last three pages of the manual. The DST as a deliverable
is included in the usb provided with this Final Report. The DST manual has also been
appended in Annex 8.2.2.
Final report LIFE+ 32
The DST functions and layout are discussed below:
DST functions & layout:
The DST is a software application consisting of:
A database
Programs performing calculations
Programs creating reports
The DST database stores in its tables:
1. Real data required to perform projections on waste quantities and quantities of
environmental parameters.
2. Predicted data which are the results of equations.
3. Waste management schemes (which are called scenarios and they consist of a
sequence of processes) which are used to show the financial and environmental
results of a specific process.
Programs performing calculations
The calculating programs handle the data kept in the database tables; these programs
mainly perform calculations for future projection of waste quantities and
environmental parameters. Calculating programs are used to perform the “what-if”
scenarios: The user is able to run different scenarios and compare the results (waste
quantity, dangerous substances, total costs) which appear in reports.
Reporting programs The reporting programs present the results of the calculations in preview mode and the
user has the option to print the report or export it in one of many file formats.
Structure of the application
The following data are used as input for all calculations, projections and reports:
Population data for an island referring to the base year
Yearly production per capita for each waste stream
Processes
Scenarios
Scenario
The following diagram presents the main structure of the scenario.
Figure 4: Structure of the scenario
Final report LIFE+ 33
The scenario has as its main input the waste quantity produced in a year in an island.
This waste quantity applies to all waste stream types defined by the user (e.g. paper,
plastic, metal, fluorescent lamps etc.).
When a user runs a scenario for a specific island, the applications produces four main
categories of results:
Waste quantities processed
Total emissions
Energy consumption
Total cost of the scenario
Figure 5: Scenario form
Waste quantity produced
The application keeps waste quantity data for 20 years (base year + 19 more years).
The base year designates the year in which real data exist and is universal for all
islands defined in the application. The waste quantity for the base year and for the next
19 years is calculated according to population data and the yearly production per
capita.
Process
The results produced by the scenario are produced according to the way the process is
formulated. The following diagram presents the main structure of the process.
Final report LIFE+ 34
Figure 6: Structure of the process
For each process the user must define the following main types of input:
The percentage of the quantity processed
The cost / ton (in Euro/ton) of the waste processed
The list of environmental parameters involved in the process
The emission rates for each environmental parameter
Figure 7: Process form
Final report LIFE+ 35
User interface
The main screen of DST provides access to all available features of the application.
The user has the following main options:
View/edit the stored real data of existing islands.
Create new island(s), new country(ies); enter population and waste data for the
base year; run the projection for waste quantities.
Create new processes; edit the properties of existing processes
Create new scenarios for an island by putting in sequence existing or new
processes
Run a scenario and check the results through the available reports.
Update the properties of a process; run the scenario and check how the altered
properties of the process affects the results of the report
Besides these main options, the user may also:
Insert new environmental parameters in the list of environmental parameters
Create new waste streams / waste stream types
Change the base year which is used as the starting point for projections.
Edit the fuel consumption for each type of vehicle
Figure 8: Main form of the application
Through the island form, the user enters the data to be used as input for calculations
and projection of waste quantities. The DST application uses this form to present the
results of calculations for the island (projection of population and waste quantities).
Online support
Through the REPT project website on-line support is provided to any stakeholder
willing to make use of the DST or create new scenarios. UCY is responsible for
responding to particular requests related to the use of the DST or technical issues
related with its implementation and could provide information on the running of
specific scenarios or communication details with stakeholders that have run scenarios
of similar characteristics, relevant national authorities for the collection of data etc.
Final report LIFE+ 36
This support will continue to be provided for at least 5 years following REPT
completion as this is considered a safe timeframe regarding the applicability of the
DST.
Comparison against the project‟s objectives, expected outcomes and the time schedule
are indicated in Table 5 and on the Report‟s Gantt-chart (Figure 9).
6.1.7. Action 7- Implementation of the pilot project (1/2/10-31/5/11)
Action 7 - Implementation of the pilot project is related to the application of the DST
in the REPT participating countries. UCY was responsible to run a number of
scenarios for the participating countries in close collaboration with all the local
associated beneficiaries and the project management team. This action was also
associated with the development of the relevant database that includes representative
example processes and island datasets for each country according to the DST functions
explained in the previous paragraphs for Action 6. Action 7 is also directly linked to
the presentation and dissemination of the DST through the organization of relevant
workshops in the participating countries and provision of the relevant training to local
public authorities that were involved in the DST implementation phase.
In specific training was provided to representatives in the following local authorities
for each country:
Cyprus: Department of Environment of the Ministry of Agriculture,
Natural Resources and Environment
Malta: Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA)
Greece: Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change
The first input from each country was requested at the beginning of February 2011
through an email requesting from the participating countries to provide their data and
feedback for processes to be included in the DST (through the provision of example
excel data sheets to be completed). Scenarios included in the DST database were
created by the local Green Dot organizations participating in the project from each
country in close collaboration with the relevant stakeholder that was trained. The
organization o training sessions in the participating countries was also combined with
the organization of a workshop for the presentation of the DST and the main project
outcomes to a number of relevant organizations from each country including private
organizations running collective schemes for PPW and WEEE, public and local
authorities, environmental consultancies and academic institutions etc. More
information about the organization of these workshops is provided in Section 6.4. No
training session and workshop for the DST presentation were organized in France due
to the communication policy of Eco-Emballages under their new agreement since the
1st of 2011 affecting their communication policy towards French stakeholders and
forcing them to cancel the last project dissemination activities. However, Eco
Emballages participated in the project implementation phase through providing
relevant data regarding French islands (Martinique and Reunion island). Reports were
then produced by the DST referring to the scenario of Reunion island.
Final report LIFE+ 37
The scenarios created and examined within the framework of Action 7 include the
following:
1. „Bring site collection glass + door to door collection‟. Réunion island, France.
2. „Bring system collection paper-glass-PMD‟, Syros, Greece.
3. „Recycling of TVs and Monitors‟, Cyprus.
4. „Recycling of Paper‟, Cyprus.
5. „Recycling of Paper‟, Malta.
Exact information for the processes included for each scenario examined is provided
through the DST database, while, information is also given in Action 7 deliverable.
Action 7 deliverable has been included in Annex 8.2.3 of this report.
Action 7 activity is characterised by extensive e-mail and telephone communication
among the project beneficiaries as well as between the project beneficiaries and the
training participants and workshop attendants.
The log of the main activities that took place within the framework of Action 7 is
shown in Table 3 below:
Table 3: Main activities that took place within the framework of Action 7
Activity Date Comments/justification
First input requested by the REPT participating countries for the scenarios to be included in the DST
9/2/11
Email sent by N&A requesting from the participating countries to provide their data and
feedback for processes to be included in the DST (through the provision of example excel data sheets to be completed)
Confirmation of participation of the Department of Environment in the DST training in Cyprus
15/3/11
Telephone communication
between the PMT and email sent by MOI on 28/3/11
Confirmation of participation of Malta Environment and Planning Authoriry (MEPA) in the DST training in Malta
9/3/2011 Email sent by Green Dot Malta
Confirmation of participation of the Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change in the DST training in Greece
12/4/2011 Email sent by HERRCo
Extraction of results for the France scenario included in the DST based on the data provided by Eco Emballages and for the first scenarios for
the other participating countries
24/3/2011
Emails sent by UCY (a) to the French stakeholders and (b) to the rest of the project beneficiaries
Training in Malta 6/4/2011 The list of participants at the DST trainings and workshops along with their contact
Workshop in Malta 5/4/2011
Training in Cyprus 7/4/2011
Final report LIFE+ 38
Workshop in Cyprus 8/4/2011 details have been appended in Annex 8.3.5. Training in Greece 15/4/2011
Workshop in Greece 14/4/2011
Last corrections for the scenarios included in the
DST
10/5/2011
Email communication between the project beneficiaries and training participants until 10/5/2011
Finalised DST following bug corrections identified during the DST implementation phase 1/6/2011
The DST also became available online following this date and usbs included the DST were provided to the workshops/training participants through the
project beneficiaries
General conclusions drawn by the reports extracted through the implementation stage
include the following:
Export and transhipment of waste characterise all islands for which
scenarios have been included in the DST and this is associated with
increased costs and increased emissions. The cost for the collection and
transfer of materials within the islands may be also significant depending
on the exact collection method applied (e.g. kerbside, door-to-door, bring
system collection, hooks, pallets etc). Sorting in most cases, with only the
exemption of Syros where transhipment to Attiki was preferred, takes place
on the islands and this also results in an additional cost for PPW and
WEEE management. However, through the sale of sorted materials some
revenues may be apparent for the collective management schemes
implemented in the countries. Environmental impacts in terms of emissions
produced were also evident for the collection, transfer and sorting of
materials within the islands; however, the most significant emissions are
associated with exports and transhipment of waste for the treatment or sale
of materials. Minimal are the emissions resulting from the disposal of
residual to landfills.
The implementation of the EC Directives on the management of PPW and
WEEE resulted in the collection and management of increased quantities to
be recycled. This trend is also evident to EC islands and especially member
state islands such as Cyprus and Malta who have to achieve the same
targets as the rest EC countries, while their implemented results cannot be
masked by the results of the whole country as this is the case for islands
that are part of other countries containing both mainland and islands.
As it was also evident through the DST implementation in the four islands,
this can be applied in order to examine:
Scenarios with multiple waste streams such as the scenarios run for
Greece and France,
Scenarios in order to examine particular PPW and WEEE waste
streams such as the case of the two scenarios examined for Cyprus and
the scenario examined for Malta.
Final report LIFE+ 39
The DST provides the flexibility to adopt and examine each particular
scenario based on the existing available data, the implemented schemes in
each island or country or examine the applicability of the implementation
of a particular scheme based on the already existing processes that have
been included in the DST database for the four countries making it a useful
tool for the involved stakeholders including collective scheme
organizations, local and public authorities in order to assist decision
making in waste management related activities.
Comparison against the project‟s objectives, expected outcomes and the time schedule
are indicated in Table 5 and on the Report‟s Gantt-chart (Figure 9).
6.1.8. Action 8- Dissemination and Training (1/1/09-30/6/11)
Information about this Action is provided in paragraph 6.4.
3 Assessment of Present Conditions 15/1/09-31/8/09
A report on the recovery and recycling practices /technologies/ techniques applied for the selected
waste streams, in the participant countries
31/8/09
4/9/09
A week long delay was incurred in order to incorporate some last minute data and information
provided.
Collection of the relevant legislation and policies applied in the participant
countries;
31/8/09
4/9/09
Collection and archiving (inventory) of the required data and information regarding recycling of the selected waste streams in the participant
countries;
31/8/09
4/9/09
4 Evaluation of the Implementation of the Relevant EC Directives in the Participant Member States
30/6/09-30/11/09
Collection of the relevant legislation and policies applied in the participant
countries and the EU
- - Completed in Action 3
Evaluation of the degree of implementation of the EC directives
30/11/09 31/01/10 The delay was due to the obstacles faced as mentioned in paragraph 6.1.4
Report on the Evaluation of the Implementation of the Relevant EC Directives in the Participant Member States
30/11/09
31/01/10
5 Identification of constraints and obstacles
1/10/09-26/2/10
Technical analysis of waste management in participating
countries
26/2/10
30/6/11
The implementation of this Action was proved to be more challenging than originally thought,
resulting in a delay of its fulfilment. The delay is attributed to the obstacles mentioned in paragraph 6.1.5. The draft form of this deliverable was available since July 2010 and it was finalised after
Economical analysis of waste management in participating countries
26/2/10
Final report LIFE+ 48
Environmental analysis of waste management in participating countries
26/2/10 the pilot implementation of the DST.
Reports on the three types of analysis 26/2/10
6 Preparation of an automated decision support tool (DST) for the formulation of recycling policies in islands
(1/10/09-28/2/11)
A CD-ROM containing the computerized model (with all of its components), developed as a software application
28/2/11 14/3/11
The dates indicated for the completion of Action 6 refer to the initial finalised DST form as additional minor corrections and bugs were identified during the DST implementation phase while some additional clarifications were made in the users manual before the final form of the DST with all
the included scenarios from the implementation phase was inserted in the usbs that were disseminated with the project completion. Insignificant delay was noticed for Action 6.
Users manual 28/2/11
14/3/11
7 Implementation of the pilot project 1/2/10-31/5/11
Report on the results of the implementation of the DST.
31/5/11 31/5/11 Completed on time following the DST
implementation phase.
8 Dissemination and Training 1/1/09-30/6/11
Cyprus Introductory Meeting 28/02/2009
27/2/09 The initial proposed date for the introductory events to take place in all countries was proved as very optimistic since representatives of the PM team should participate in all the events/meetings. Therefore it was more practical to have these meetings more widespread. This fact did not affect at all the smooth implementation of the project.
France Introductory Meeting 28/02/2009
9/3/09
Malta Introductory Meeting 28/02/2009
5/5/09
Greece Introductory Meeting 28/02/2009
9/4/09
Project Website 15/02/09 April 2009
Even though the website was ready since March 2009 due to some technical problems at UCY this could only become available in April. Since the
Final report LIFE+ 49
beginning of its operation this is frequently updated in order to include the latest actions and completed deliverables of the project while it is
also provided with a visitors counter and on-line technical support for the DST.
Leaflets – first version
Not Specified
February 2009 Between July 2009 and March 2011 no leaflets were produced due to the constraints identified for
the implementation of Actions 4, 5 and 6 and due to the fact that dissemination activities (i.e. workshops and conferences were not active during that period)
Leaflets – second version July 2009
Posters September 2009
Leaflets – third version March 2011
Leaflets – fourth version June 2011
DST training and workshops 31/03/11
Malta, 5-6 April 11
Cyprus, 7-8 April 11
Greece, 14-15 April 11
Minor delays were noticed so as to organise
the training sessions and workshops in two
consecutive days for each country convenient
for both the organisers and attendees.
Project‟s Final Conference 30/6/11 17/6/11
Accomplished according to the proposed schedule and following the completion of all project Actions
Agenda and minutes of the technical workshops in the participant countries
31/03/11 29/4/11 Agenda was prepared before the workshops while the minutes were prepared following the completion of all events
Agenda and minutes of the Final Conference
30/6/11 30/6/11 Accomplished on time following the Conference conclusion
9 Project Monitoring 1/1/09-30/6/11
Monitoring Protocol
15/01/09 31/3/09 Some delay was noticed in the identification of the monitoring indicators however this delay has not
affected the project implementation. The proposed monitoring indicators have been used in this report in order to monitor project‟s progress.
10 After-LIFE Communication Plan 1/6/11 - 30/6/11
After-LIFE Communication Plan
30/6/11 15/9/11 Accomplished within the three month period
required following the project conclusion
Final report LIFE+ 50
Figure 9: Project Progress Gantt Chart
Progress report LIFE+
51
6.3. Analysis of long-term benefits
6.3.1. Environmental benefits
a. Direct / quantitative environmental benefits
Through the main objective of REPT mainly the identification of constraints and
obstacles faced by islands and particularly island member states in the
implementation of successful recycling schemes for PPW and WEEE streams the
project aims to assist in the identification of optimum solutions in order to achieve
the targets set by the relevant EC Directives on an island basis. The DST
implementation examples that have already been included on the DST database
provide an indication of the quantified environmental impacts resulting from
current waste management schemes implemented in the four participating
countries in REPT. As shown from the project outcomes and the DST
implementation recycling schemes in islands in order to implement the EC
Directives and achieve their targets is frequently associated to increased emissions
per ton of waste material collected resulting mainly from the export/transhipment
of waste so as to send the collected materials for sorting or recycling.
Environmental impacts in terms of emissions produced were also evident for the
collection, transfer and sorting of materials within the islands. Minimal are the
emissions resulting from the disposal of residual to landfills.
Through the long-term implementation of Best Available Techniques and
identification of the most environmentally friendly scenarios that take into
consideration transport and export/transhipment expenses and emissions, the
expenses of establishing sorting facilities on the islands in combination with their
total consumed energy and produced emissions and the associated emissions and
expenses that relate to the materials collection and by the examination of options
relating to the direct reuse of the recovered materials, their sale and recycling,
significant emissions reductions, energy savings and additional environmental
benefits will be achieved.
b. Relevance for environmentally significant issues or policy areas (e.g.
industries/sectors with significant environmental impact, consistency with
6EAP or important environmental principles, relevance to the EU legislative
framework (directives, policy development, etc.)
REPT project actions are expected to contribute to the achievement of the
European environmental objectives by facilitating the implementation of the PPW
and WEEE Directives in island member states as well as islands that comprise part
of larger EU countries such as Greece and France. The project can provide
significant environmental added value for the sustainable management of PPW
and WEEE particularly focusing on islands through encouraging the
implementation of cost effective and environmentally friendly waste management
options for recovery and recycling.
In addition, REPT objectives are directly related to „waste prevention and
management‟ which is one of the four top priorities of the EU's Sixth Environment
Final report LIFE+ 52
Action Programme. The EU is aiming for a significant cut in the amount of
rubbish generated, through new waste prevention initiatives, better use of
resources, and encouraging a shift to more sustainable consumption patterns.
Recycling and Reuse is one of the three principles of the EU‟s approach to waste
management following Waste Prevention while the third and last option is the
Improvement of Final Disposal and Monitoring. Through the encouragement of
successful management schemes in islands reuse and recycling of PPW and WEEE
are enhanced and islands are expected to contribute significantly towards this
direction given also the fact that their high touristic activity results in significant
increases in the amount of waste produced especially with regard to PPW. The
policies defined by the relevant public authorities directly influence the
organizations running collective compliance schemes for PPW and WEEE and
local authorities who are responsible for the implementation of the various
recycling techniques and processes including sorting, collection, management and
transport.
6.3.2. Long-term sustainability
a. Long-term / qualitative environmental benefits
The project provides significant environmental added value for the sustainable
management of PPW and WEEE particularly focusing on islands through
encouraging the implementation of cost effective and environmentally friendly
waste management options for recovery and recycling and through this aims at
achieving long-term environmental benefits.
Since recycling related to the particularities of islands has not received significant
attention in the EU, the project aims to stress the particular environmental issues
faced with regard to implementing waste management schemes in islands and in
specific for the cases of PPW and WEEE and bring together countries that have to
cope with those problems. Through the revealment of those problems in EU level,
REPT aims at making these issues more visible in an effort to make them
considerable when setting new legislation and policies with regard to waste
recycling or develop particular policies that give priority to recycling in islands.
The long-term use of the DST by the relevant stakeholders and decision makers
will assist in identifying the most environmentally friendly scenarios and available
techniques, while, potential funding opportunities can be sought within the
following years in order to incorporate updated environmental information given
the fact that the implementation of recycling schemes in islands is expected to
significantly increase and expand to more waste streams. The project is finally
related to achieving long-term environmental benefits related to the
implementation of environmentally friendly waste management schemes in islands
that take into consideration the general principles of the EU's approach to waste
management starting from waste prevention that is closely linked with influencing
consumers to demand greener products and less packaging, recycling and reuse
and finally the improvement of final disposal and monitoring.
Final report LIFE+ 53
Also the project may have a spin-off effect in the implementation of successful
recycling schemes in other islands not examined within the REPT framework or
schemes focusing on other waste streams including for example other categories of
PPW and WEEE or other waste categories such as batteries, end of life vehicles,
HERRCo (www.herrco.gr) also contains a link to the project‟s website. 100 project
posters were also printed, distributed and located to a number of key areas in Greece
such as the HERRCo central offices, recycling centres in Elevsina, Heraclio, Patra and
a number of municipalities collaborating with HERRCo. 100 third version leaflets
were printed and distributed at the workshop and training that took place in April
while the remaining leaflets were provided to the collaborators of HERRCo including
local organisations, public authorities, private contractors etc. Finally 200 final version
leaflets were printed and are disseminated by HERRCo while the usbs with the DST
were sent to the participants of the Greece workshop and training.
France: The first version of French-English leaflet was printed in 80 copies. These
were distributed to: WEEE compliance schemes, Ministry of Environment, Ministry
of Overseas Territories, Environmental Agency, local
managers of Eco-Emballages in Corsica, some members of
PRO Europe, visitors of Eco-Emballages (directly given to a
Greek group for instance, but also at disposal in the premises
of Eco-Emballages). More than 300 second version leaflets
and 20 posters were printed in total. Internal dissemination
with notice board and leaflets at disposal also takes place (as
shown in the pictures appended to the Inception Report).
Approximately 200 leaflets were distributed to the visitors of
the “Festival du Vent” that took place in Calvi, Corsica, from
29 October to 1st November 2009. This festival is an annual
event that brings together art and the environment. Eco-Emballages is a partner of this
festival, thus, they took this opportunity to inform locals about the REPT project.
A letter of information, together with a REPT leaflet (second version of leaflet) was
sent to all local stakeholders in the French overseas
territories (including local authorities,
recyclers, French Environment and Energy
Management Agency – ADEME). Approximately
100 letters (and leaflets) were sent. A list of
addressees of the letter is included in Annex 7.3.4
of this report. A copy of the letter of information
sent on November, 4, 2009 is also included in
Annex 7.3.4 of the Progress Report.
The REPT project was also presented in two meetings. The first one was for a PRO
Europe WEEE workshop in London (PRO Europe WEEE Working Group, April 27,
2009) and the second time was to a Greek group (representatives of local authorities
and WEEE organisation) visiting Eco-Emballages in May 2009.
Within 2011 the contribution of France to the REPT dissemination activities was
limited due to the fact that since January 2011, Eco-Emballages started working under
a new agreement from the French government since January 1st 2011 affecting their
communication policy towards French stakeholders. As a result, driven by this
domestic situation, Eco-Emballages was forced to cancel the last part of Action 8
“Dissemination and Training” forecasted until June 2011. Eco-Emballages decision
affected the last dissemination activities that were to take place in France namely:
Final report LIFE+ 61
The workshop in which the DST and the project would be presented to a number
of relevant stakeholders / organizations as well as the training session with
stakeholders on the use of the DST.
The two latest versions of the project leaflets (March 2011 and June 2011) were
not reproduced / disseminated in France.
No articles for publication in relevant press and newsletters in France were
produced during 2011.
Therefore, the DST will not be actively promoted in France; however, Eco Emballages
expressed their commitment to respond to any inquiry of the French stakeholders
following the project implementation. France, however participated in the REPT Final
Conference that took place in Nicosia on 17 June 2011 and have provided their data
for the DST implementation phase to the Project Management Team and no other
activities were affected by this decision.
All the above mentioned dissemination material from all countries as well as all the
presentations from the introductory and additional events have been included in the
project΄s website.
Technical workshops and DST training provided
Following the DST development the organisation of technical workshops and trainings
to specific local public authorities that would contribute to the project implementation
phase were conducted. Workshops aimed at targeting a wider group of stakeholders
involving among others local island authorities and organisations operating collective
waste management systems or generally dealing with waste management,
environmental consultancies, relevant public authorities and academic institutions.
The workshop in Cyprus was attended by nearly 40 participants the workshop in
Greece by 16 persons and the one in Malta by 11 participants. In each training session,
2 participants from each public authority namely the Department of Environment for
Cyprus, Malta Environment and Planning Authority for Malta and the Ministry of
Environment, Energy and Climate Change were trained on the DST implementation and a discussion followed on the exact scenarios included for each country as well as the insertion of the specific data for each scenario examined.
Supporting documentation regarding the implemented workshops and trainings in the
participating countries is provided in Annex 8.3.5 including the relevant agendas for
the workshops and the supporting minutes that also include the list of the attendants
for each workshop/training and additional relevant documentation such as invitations,
banners etc. Pictures from these events are also available through the project‟s website
and presentations are provided in an electronic form.
The outcome from the workshops that targeted a wider group was pleasing. The
participants and particularly local authorities and organisations were positive to use
the DST that would also assist them to better organise data collection that would allow
for better management. They also suggested that the DST could become publicly
available through the project‟s website so that they can directly use it to create a
number of processes and order to examine particular scenarios related to PPW and
WEEE management. The participants were also satisfied by the fact that the DST can
be adjusted for each particular scenario and by the fact that changes in the already
inserted parameters can be made. The participants were also encouraged to discuss
Final report LIFE+ 62
particular waste scenarios and create new scenarios so as to understand the exact
operation of the DST and its functionality. Some recommendations were also provided
that allowed for the finalisation of the DST following the organisation of the
workshops. A particulate interest on the outcomes of the REPT project activities on
the conclusions drawn particularly for the case of islands was also evident.
Following the workshop organisation and training in Malta an article was published in
the GreenPak electronic newsletter, April 2011 related to the DST workshop and
training that took place in Malta on 5 and 6 April 2011. This is also included in Annex
8.3.5 of this Report.
Final Conference
The project‟s Final Conference took place on 17 June 2011 at Holiday Inn Hotel in
Nicosia, Cyprus. A number of international speakers and participants were present at
the Conference as the project beneficiaries made use of their remaining budget
allocated for travel so as to cover the expenses of a number of participants from
abroad. Through the direct collaboration of the participating Green Dot organizations
with other PRO Europe members it was evident that other countries were interested in
the outcomes of REPT and that was the main reason driving the project beneficiaries
to also invite foreign participants to the Conference. In specific, apart from the main
project beneficiaries‟ participants the following persons representing additional Green
8.2.3. Action 7 Deliverables – Report on the results of the DST Implementation
8.3. Dissemination annexes
8.3.1. 3rd project’s leaflet
8.3.2. 4th project’s leaflet
8.3.3. Paper and page of the final program showing participation in the Thirteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, Italy 3-7 October 2011
8.3.4. USBs including the DST and the Conference presentations
8.3.5. Supporting documentation on the implemented workshops and DST trainings (agendas, minutes, attendants, banners, publications etc)
8.3.6. Supporting documentation on the Final Conference (agenda, invitation, banner, minutes, attendants, publications, videos etc)
8.3.7. Layman’s Report
8.3.8. After Life Communication Plan
8.4. Financial annexes
8.4.1. Certificates for the beneficiaries who do not recover VAT
8.4.2. Photographs of all purchased equipment with the LIFE logo clearly evident
8.4.3. Auditors report using the standard reporting format
