From Adoption to Implementation Experiences in the EU

1. From Adoption to ImplementationExperiences in the EU Bill Duncan, ASSURRE EU Research Center Workshop, Prague 13 April 2004

2. EVOLUTION OF LEGISLATION Waste disposal Resource recovery Waste management Sustainable development Shipment Regulation Legislation for treatment methods Development of Recycling targets 6th EAP Hazardous Materials Product Streams Development of Source Separation

3. Waste Management Policy Community Waste Management Strategy COM(96)399, 30.7.96) Framework legislation Waste Framework Directive(Dir. 91/156/EEC) Directive on hazardous waste (Dir. 91/689/EEC) Regulation on shipment of waste (Reg. (EEC) 259/93) Waste Treatment operations Incineration of waste (Dir. 2000/76/CE) Landfill of waste (Dir. 99/31/EC) Specific Waste Streams Waste oils (Dir 75/439/EEC) Sewage sludge (Dir. 86/278/EEC) Batteries(Dir. 91/157/EEC & 93/86/EEC) Packaging (Dir. 94/62/EC) PCBs (Dir. 96/59/EC) End of life vehicles(2000/53/EC) Electric & ElectronicWaste (2002/96/EC ) Construction and Demolition Waste PVCStrategy Biodegradable Waste IPPC 96/61/EC

4. WASTE PRODUCTION 1985-2000 - NL

5. HOUSEHOLD PACKAGING IN France Source : ADEME

6. Ratio of tonnes of municipal waste per million ecu household expenditure Portugal 90 80 Germany 70 Greece The Netherlands 60 Luxembourg Spain France 50 Denmark Iceland 40 Sweden 30 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 ECO-EFFICIENCY AND MATERIAL FLOWS Few countries have succeeded in reducing the amount of waste they generate g:/aia/indicators/slides/the yir1999 presentation

7. NEW PARADIGM • Waste disposal as such is an old issue. Now, it is important to look at the eco-efficiency of producing, using, and recovering resources across their full life cycle. • How do we decouple the increase in quality of life from growth in waste generation • How do we make smarter use of materials and energy by using them more efficientlyand reducing the environmental impacts

8. BUT !!! • Legislation in place today deals with problems perceived yesterday • There is still unfinished business to deal with.

9. IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGE • Packaging • WEEE • ELV • Batteries TREATMENT SPECIFIC PRODUCT SPECIFIC Dir. Landfill  Dir. Incineration 

10. LANDFILL 99/31/EC • Progressive product bans from 2003 • Progressive biowaste reduction from 2008-11-16 INCINERATION 2000/76/EC • New plants 28/12/02 • Existing plants 28/12/05

11. 12 Member States – Packaging Waste PER MATERIAL - YEAR 2000 No figures for DK – LU – FIN - SW

12. 100,000 tonnes 79,842 60,911 60,0% Possible Recycling targets 56,908 Tonnes on the market +51% 55,0% EU average: +39% 52,0% 49.0% Recycled tonnes F = 42.2 SP = 38.9 I = 38.4 UK = 36.7 1998 2000 2008 CHASING TARGETS

13. END-OF-LIFE VEHICLE DIRECTIVE • By 2006 recovery of ELVs must be a minimum of 85 % by weight, 80 % through re-use and recycling. • By 2015 this increases to 95 % with a minimum of 85 % by re-use and recycling. • Over the next decade perhaps 1,500 new dismantling plants for ELVs will be built in Western Europe. • Dismantling will move from a spare-parts to a raw-materials business.

14. WASTE ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT • August 2004 : Deadline for Member States to implement directives into domestic law • August 2005 : Collection systems must be operational, treatment and financing systems in place and obligations enter into force • December 2006 : First collection and treatment targets to be attained « DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN ! »

15. BATTERIES – PROPOSED NEW DIRECTIVE • Automotive + Industrial : landfill/incineration ban • Portables : collection targets & collection schemes • Min 80% threshold for Nicad Proposed measures • - Minimum efficiencies: lead acid : 65% of weight • Others : 55% • Nicad : 75% • + all cadmium Recycling targets Timing • Time limit : 4 years Financing • Visible fee for first 4 years

16. PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY • For all the merits of producer responsibility, the Commission considers that there are limits to its application. • Not all waste streams are appropriate to be addressed in this way. • Addressing smaller waste streams may involve significant resources for a relatively limited environmental benefit. • This Thematic Strategy should make an important contribution to clarifying the applicability of producer responsibility in different circumstances.

17. USE TIME WISELY • Learn by doing • Test alternatives • Progress by phases • Monitor & Adjust

18. COMPLIANCE SCHEME COSTS *Model based on 1000 units each of glass, plastic, metal, cardboard and composite packaging Fees in 2000 Excl. VAT

19. YOUR DON’T MANAGE…. • Develop & agree your own data • Look forwards not backwards • Seek out trends • Build your own model

20. IT IS YOUR MONEY • Be flexible & pragmatic • Be cost conscious • Encourage competition • Avoid rigid hierarchies • Resist a « one size fits all » approach

21. METHODOLOGY NOT IDEOLOGY • Reuse v Recycling Germany • Cans v bottles Denmark • Good v Bad Germany

22. DONT FORGET THE DEMAND SIDE • Seek out & develop sustainable recycling targets • Encourage & support entrepreneurs in recovery operations • Materials recycling, organic recovery and energy-from-waste all contribute to reduce the environmental impact of waste • Stimulate demand, develop options across the EU

23. COMMUNICATE EARLY & OFTEN • Involve Stakeholders early • Sell the benefits of change • Explain the approach & methodology • Clarify their role • Use good science in support • Test for understanding & acceptance

24. SUMMARY - KEY TRENDS • Move from prescriptive to strategic approach • Simplification, alignment, integration of policy • Harmonized programmes for environmental impact reduction • Increased use of sound science + economic analysis • Stronger focus on implementation • Major concern – « SUSTAINABILITY »

25. Please visit our websitewww.assurre.org Rue du Luxembourg 19-21 B-1000 Brussels Tel.: 32 (0)2 772 52 52, Fax: 32 (0)2 772 54 19 management@assurre.org www.assurre.org