57
New EU regulation on recycling of municipal waste and separate collection of bio-waste 23 rd October 2018, Resource City Network Workshop, Hamburg Michele Giavini – ARS ambiente srl
New EU regulation on recycling of municipal waste and separate
collection of bio-waste
23rd October 2018, Resource City Network Workshop, Hamburg
Michele Giavini – ARS ambiente srl
• Consultancy on integrated wastemanagement
• Italian Composting Association
• Coordinator of the italian pilot of Seveso
• European Compost Network, ISWA
About myself
Biowaste collection across Europe: #InterrailRecyclinghttp://bit.ly/interrailrecycling
Biowaste in the new Waste Framework Directive
Recycling targets
•Rejects not to be calculated in recycling•These are nationaltargets (averagingfrontrunners and laggards)•65% recycling ~ 75% separate collection•Biowaste collection iskey
Biowaste
•Represents the highest share in MSW recyclables -> has to be collected to achive high recycling targets!
•Does not benefit from EPR schemes -> has to be supported
•Generates the highest environmental impact when landfilled -> has to be diverted
Michele Giavini - CIC
Leaders and laggards
• Countries supporting mandatorysep. coll. of biowaste. Source EEB, status May17
www.compost.it
New WFD and biowaste: key articles
www.compost.it
Art. 22 -biowaste
Art. 11 –recyclingtargets
Art. 3 –definitions
Moreover:
•art. 4 incentives
•Art. 10 TEEP
Biowaste: proposals and amendments over time
Previous text Directive
2008/98/CE
EC Proposal EP Draft
Report Bonafè
May 2016
EP Compromise amendments
Feb 2017
Presidencycompromise text / trilogue comment
Trilogue agreement17 Dec 2017 = final
approved text
•take measures, as appropriate… ,to encourage…•The Commission shall carry out an assessment (done in 2010)
•shall ensure the separate collection of bio-waste where technically, environmentally and economically practicable… and to attain the targets
•Delete TEEP •Mandatory separate collection at source of bio-waste by 31 December 2020
•Delete TEEP•No deadline•including traceability and input-and output-related quality assurance schemes…
EP amendments
notacceptable
Mandatoryseparate
collection of biowaste by 31st December 2023
www.compost.it
Biowaste in the new EU WFD: timeline
2018
• Standardsfor input biowaste
2019
• Calculationmethodfor biowasterecycling
www.compost.it
Biowaste in the new EU WFD: timeline
www.compost.it
2021• Report on the
implementation
2023• Separate
collectionobligation
2024• Consider
setting targetson biowaste
Biowaste in the new EU WFD: timeline
www.compost.it
2025
• 55%recyclingtarget
2027
• MBT notconsideredrecycling
2030
• 60%recyclingtarget
2035
• 65%recyclingtarget
Rejects and recycling calculation
www.compost.it
•Pretreatments and rejects, discussionongoing
•Ecologicalimprovement = quality
Biowaste in the EU: overview
Separate Collection of Biowaste in Europe
Source: European Compost Network, 2017
Municipal biowaste
Source separatedfood waste
•Residential•Commercial
•Large generators(markets…)
Source separatedbiowaste
(commingled food+ garden waste)
Garden waste
Key numbers: food waste generation
•Municipal food waste generation =113 ± 12 kg/capita/year
Source: EU FUSIONS, 2016
Eurostat: biowaste treatment (composting / AD)
91%
9%
Denmark, 2010
Green waste Kitchen waste
30%
70%
Italy, 2014
Green waste Kitchen waste
Just food waste separately collected
CIC data processing, 2016
Separate collection: per capita capture rate
www.compost.it
Data processing CIC, 2016
Estimated generation (FUSIONS)
www.compost.it
Look at local data (e.g. Italy, provinces 2013)
• Best performers: Micro scale data (Municipalities, Provinces) show high capture rates (90-110 kg/capita of just foodwaste)
• Close to the theoreticalmaximum = 90/100%participation rate
Look at cities
• Increasingshare of urbanpopulation
•More difficultto implementsuccessfulbiowasteseparate collectionprogrammes in large cities
Share of urban vs. ruralpopulation, forecasts
(EUROSTAT, 2017)
Successful implementation
Quality
Economics
Participation
(=quantity)
Biowaste collection in large cities
Michele Giavini - CICSource: DECISIVE H2020 project, 2017
Implementation in large cities
Survey
• 6 large cities recentlyimplementing/improving source separation of food waste with a kerbside approach• Source: direct
contact with Municipalities, public data, processing by CIC
Copenhage
n
⚫
A keynote case study: Milan
Comparison of results in large European cities
• Milan: Biowaste is 100% food waste. 5% impurities
• London: only some boroughs
• Munich, Berlin, Hamburg and Vienna: Biowaste contains significant amounts of green waste
• Barcelona: bring-schemes (large road containers), 20% impurities
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Kg
/cap
ita/
year
Comparison of biowaste captures in Europeancities. 2014-2017 data
Garden waste
Food waste
Impurities
Source AMSA Milan, 2015, integrated by CIC
Milan– info
Population (total) 1,331,000
population with food waste collection implemented
1,331,000
% on total 100%
Population density (all city) 7,541
Population density (new trial area)
//
Year of implementation 2014
Type of biowaste:
food waste, single stream, little
amounts of gardenwaste
Source:Residential, commercial
Collection scheme Door to door. Vented pail for kitchen + , 120 l bins
Milan – results
•Residential food wastecollection implementedin 2012-2014.
•Results (2017): 103 kg/capita, ≈30 commercial, 70 residential (source: AMSA 2018).
103 kg FW
Milan – results
•High capturesince the beginning
•Very goodQuality: 5% impurities
•Info
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
City center Outskirts Socialhousing
Average
% N
on
co
mp
ost
able
m
ate
rial
s
After 2 months
After 6-8 months
After 12-14 months
After 18 months and over
Other large cities
Madrid – info
Population (total) 3,182,981
population with food waste collection implemented
255,000
% on total 8%
Population density (all city) 5,266
Population density (new trial area)
20,000
Year of implementation 2017
Type of biowaste:
food waste, single stream, little
amounts of gardenwaste
Source:Residential, comercial
Collection schemeDoor to door. Vented pail for
kitchen + , 120 l bins, 660-2000 l road containers
Madrid– pilot area for FW
• Beginning 1st November 2017
• 17 pioneer areas in 10 districts
• Both schemes in place, door to door / bring banks
• All buildings covered
• 255,000 people + 50 large generators (markets, supermarkets, hospitals)
• Variable population density, from high to very high (>30,000 people/sq.km)
Door to door area
Madrid: campaign
•Door to door delivery
• Informers crew with 84 people
Source: Ayuntamiento de Madrid, link
Madrid: tools
Source: Hazte Eco, link, europapress, link
Madrid: results
• First months : 900-1300 t/month, now 1500 t/month• ≈ 71 kg/capita/year average
• 86% residential, 14% commercial
• 60 kg/ca residential• 10 kg/ca commercial
•Quality: • Still few data• < 20% impurities
New campaign to roll out to all city beginning Nov2018
71 kg FW
Barcelona – info
Population (total) 1,608,746
population with food waste collection implemented
1,608,746 New door to door
area 9,500% on total 100%
Population density (all city) 15,749
Population density (new trial area)
41,304
Year of implementation2010-2014.
Door to door area 2018
Type of biowaste:Food waste, single
stream
Source:Residential, commercial
Collection scheme
Road containers. New area Sarrià: Door to
door. Vented pail for kitchen + compostable bags, 40 l
buckets
Barcelona (Sarrià): campaign
Barcelona (Sarrià): results
• Web page with weeklymonitoring of results: LINK
• Before: 700 kg/week, after: ≈ 7,500 kg/week• ≈ 41 kg/capita/year average,
since the first week.
• Very high quality• Before: 14% impurities• New scheme: < 1%
• Separate collectionincrease• Before: 19%, after: 60%
Real time monitoring of bins and bagsdelivered, throughRFID chip
41 kg FW
Copenhagen - info
Population (total) 613,288 population with food waste collection implemented
521,295
% on total 85%
Population density (all city) 7,099
Population density (test area)
7,099
Year of implementation 2017
Type of biowaste:food waste, single
stream
Source:Residential, commercial
Collection scheme
Door to door. Vented pail for kitchen +
compostable bags, 120 l bins
Copenhagen - collection
Source: Jonas Åbo Mortensen, KØBENHAVNS KOMMUNE
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Ton
bio
affa
ld
Bioaffald - København pr. måned
2015201620172018
Copenhagen - results
• Just food waste, no garden waste
• 1200 tonnescollected in Jan 2018 -> • 26 kg/capita (on
residents who received the caddy)• 38 kg/capita (on
“active” residents, estimation from the Municipality
Source: Jonas Åbo Mortensen, KØBENHAVNS KOMMUNE
26 kg FW
Geneva - info
Population (total)201,813
Canton: 500,000
population with food waste collection implemented
201,813 (Geneva)
Campaign area: 381’000
% on total 100%Population density (alltest area)
2,900
Population density(Geneva)
12,669
Year of implementation2001, new campaign
2017
Type of biowaste:food waste, commingled
Source:Residential, commercial
Collection scheme
Door to door + road containers. Vented pail for kitchen +
compostable bags, 120 l bins + 660 l
Geneva - campaign
• Surrounding municipalities: October 2016
• Geneva city: June 17
Source: Novamont, link
Geneva - collection
Geneva - collection
Geneva - results
• All region (500,000 people): 54,000 t = 105 kg/capita, including• Commercial (≈ 36 kg). • Municipal (69, high percentage of garden
waste > 60%)
• Test area (381,000 people)• Increase +31% municipal biowaste, from
30 to 38.5 kg/ca (just residential), due to the kitchen caddy campaign
Source: République et canton de Genève LINK
38 kg FW
Paris - info
Population (total) 2,241,346 population with food waste collection implemented
130,000
% on total 6%
Population density (all city) 21,000
Population density (test area)
23,000
Year of implementation 2017
Type of biowaste:food waste, single
stream
Source:
Residential(municipal), commercial
(private)
Collection scheme
Door to door. Vented pail for kitchen +
compostable bags, 120 l bins
Paris – pilot area and baseline
•Pilot 2nd and 12nd district:•23,000 people/kmq•about 130,000 people •Baseline separate
collection rate: 18,5% (source: link)
Paris - results
•First results 5 kg/capita/year from just residents, calculated on all population (source: LINK),
• 6,3 kg/capita/year on population whoreceived the bin
•Quality: • Bin check before
collection. Alert with adhesive tape if non compostable bags visibleinside
•Target: 30-35 kg/capita/year, estimated generation 70-75 kg/ca (source: LINK)
6 kg FW
(New York, 2017)
www.compost.it
•CIC trial, 2017•600 households
in StuyTown, •78,000 people/sq.km•Trial results: ≈
20kg/capita/year (60% of generation)
Summary
•Different results•Highest capturefrom residentialfood waste in Madrid an Milan•Very high populationdensity
Population (trial area)
Population
densitykg/capitabiowaste
Kg/capitafood waste
Madrid 255,000 ≈ 20,000 71
71 tot≈ 60
residentialBarcelona (Sarrià) 9,500 41,300 41 41 tot
Copenhagen 521,000 7,100 26 26 tot
Geneva 202,000 12,670105 incl.
commercial≈ 25
Residential
Paris 130,000 23,000 6.36.3
Residential
Milan 1,300,000 7,520 103
103 tot≈ 70
residential
Analysis: the surrounding effect
•Paris stillnotsurroundedby municipalities with biowastecollection
Paris
Source ADEME 2018, LINK
The surrounding effect
Milan
Municipalities WITH food waste collection
YEAR 2010
Municipalities WITH food waste collection
YEAR 2014Milan
The surrounding effect
Lessons learnt
•Pioneer areas -> lower results (e.g. Paris) • In areas surrounded by experiencedmunicipalities, high and quick results (e.g. Milan)•Food waste collection is possible in large cities
with high population density•Door to door scheme with kitchen caddy and compostable bags most favoured option•High importance of campaigns during roll out
and to be repeated•Space for brown bins in buildings can always be
found
