MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT IN CENTRAL EAST EUROPE

1. MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENTIN CENTRAL EAST EUROPE Robert L Nemeskeri Head of the REC Business & Environment Programme Venice International University May 19, 2005

2. Content of lecture • M(S)WM Considerations • Recent and current studies • Status and forecast • Policies • Resources management • WM specific risks • Practical measures towards urban sustainability

3. Important considerations related to MSWM • Waste vs. resource (economics, waste hierarchy, IPP) • Communal, industrial and hazardous wastes in M(S)W • Volume and composition (biodegradables, organics, recyclables, etc.) • Waste generators, WM services and their results • Well-off vs. poor communities • Where we are and where we/to go (MSW scenarios) • MSW Management options (revisiting hierarchy, practicality) • Barriers and drivers to sound MSWM • Environmental health impacts or risks of MSWM • Complex macro- and microeconomics of M(S)WM • Strategic planning for MSW systems development and management

4. MSWM relevant studies and waste info management • ETAP – JRC/IPTS, DG Research, DG Environment – clean(er) technology diffusion, techno-economics • DG Environment – environmental policies, strategies • EUROSTAT – waste info collection and provision • EEA – ETC RWM – waste management and waste policy analyses; LCA, MFA, SFA • UN – sustainable consumption (and production), security, economics • OECD – economic instruments • Local/national studies – risks, economics, management, financing

5. TEOWASTE • Evolution of waste generation and management in EU Accession Countries (2003-2004) • MSW and selected industrial streams • Waste indicators: MSW collected, landfilled and/or incinerated • Environmental and social impacts • Scenarios on volumes and management • BUT! no real conclusions (IPTS et al vs. REC)

6. Slovenia Slovakia Total: 38 MT Romania Enlargement countries: 360kg/capita EU: 505kg/capita Poland Malta Lithuania Latvia Hungary Estonia Czech Republic Cyprus Bulgaria 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 MSW: kg/capita Current Situation: MSW collection

7. Current waste composition

8. Current waste management practice

9. Landfill density (installations per 10 000 km2)

10. General boundary condition matrix for MSWM total organic paper/cardboard glass metals plastics hazardous other

11. Drivers of change for MSWM in future • Various regulations (at both national and EU level) are expected to be the main driving force behind the future improvements • Standards and technology development will also play an essential role • So will the cost of each management option • And, perhaps, the social recognition of close correlation between sound waste/resource management and the quality of life

12. ET BAU Scenarios BAU = business as usual ET = climate change policies and business

13. WM legislation and policies The Framework Directive on WasteDisposal (75/442/EEC1): • Calls for Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that waste is recovered or disposed of without risk to the air, water or soil, without creating a nuisance in the form of odours or noise, and without adversely affecting the countryside. • Requires Member States to establish an integrated waste management strategy based on the principles stipulated in the Directive, including clearly defined time scales and responsibilities. • Requires Member States to issue permits to companies engaged in waste disposal or recovery. The permits must include requirements regarding such matters as disposal techniques and methods, sites, technical requirements and security precautions. • Establishes provisions for inspection and monitoring of waste management in the Member States, and lays down requirements for reporting to the European Commission and the public.

14. Waste Hierarchy • Prevention and minimization of waste generation • Re-use of products • Recycling of waste and reuse of materials • Recovery of waste and reuse of materials • Use of waste as source of energy – biogas and incineration • Safe landfilling or utilization of final residues Desirability

15. Key principles • The principle of best available technology not involving excessive costs (this relates to the establishment of a network of waste disposal and treatment facilities). • The principle of proximity of treatment and disposal to the source of waste. • The principle of self-sufficiency in waste disposal (reliance on national waste disposal/treatment facilities to avoid transboundary movement of waste). • Application of the polluter pays principle to the disposal of waste to ensure that the cost of disposing of waste is borne by the producer or by the holder of waste. • Duty of care for producers of waste. + Precautionary principle!

16. Daughter directives and decisions • Landfill Dir. 99/31/EC • Packaging and Packaging Waste Dir. 94/62/EC • Incineration Dir. 2000/76/EC • Hazardous Waste Dir. 91/689/EEC • Council Decision 93/98/EEC on the control of trans-boundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal (Basel Convention) • Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Dir. 2002/96/EC • Restriction of Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment Dir. 2002/95/EC • End-of-Life Vehicles Dir. 2000/53/EC • Batteries and Accumulators Containing Dangerous Substances Dir. 91/157/EEC • Disposal of PCBs and PCTs Dir. 96/59/EC • Disposal of Waste Oils Dir. 75/439/EEC • Dir. on Waste from the Titanium Dioxide Industry 78/176/EEC • The Sewage Sludge Directive 86/278/EEC • Agricultural use of Sewage Sludge Dir. 91/692/EEC • Decision 2000/532/EC Establishing a List of Waste

17. Other MSWM relevant policies On EU, national and local levels: • Waste economic instruments (e.g., waste user and/or disposal charges - per capita, volume, household or property value based -, package excise tax, non-compliance fines) • Environmental financing to municipalities/utilities, WM companies, other systems developers • Environmental control policies, e.g., on noise, smell, pollution of air, water and soil, and public health protection

18. Resources management • What are the resources? Classifications (do not forget human capabilities, time, information and land!) • Why do we need to manage resources? Economics, social development, life support systems • How to approach this complex field? Learning & doing • Multidimensionality: policy, methodology, management practices, resources economics, environmental and public health risks, energy and waste management, current works

19. Main resource policies and actions • 6th EAP • IPP and ETAP and performance targets • IPPC/BAT and other directives • Lisbon Strategy • Thematic strategies for RM and Waste • EEA Topic Centre on Resource and Waste Management

20. RM assessment methodologies • Life cycle analysis (LCA) – cradle to grave or cradle to cradle • Material flow analysis (MFA) - economy/EU-wide MFA, relevance to EU statistics, relevance to policy, challenges/uncertainties • Substance flow analysis (SFA) – for specific chemicals/agents • Environmental accounting

21. Variety of complementary MFA approaches

22. The challenge of RM, and of WM!

23. Uncertainties • Structure and volume of industrial metabolism • Disparity of resource use • Implications of physical growth • Shift to renewables • Progress on decoupling

24. Domestic and Import Material Requirement

25. RM practices • Resource/economic/environmental/landuse - Planning • Eco-efficiency • Factor 4 and 10 • Innovation/R&D • Zero emission

30. Waste and resource management impacts and risks • Environmental impacts of polluting land, groundwater, rivers and lakes and coastal areas, emissions to the air, toxic substances • Public health and comfort questions (e.g., noise and smell, besides epidemics from septic and toxic releases or contacts) and their consequences, including loss in property values • Financial and economic risks when investing into development

31. Critical view on the current state of municipal waste management in CEE, SEE, EECCA • Zero control of inputs: MSW = hazwaste? – environmental and public health risks • No capacity/hesitance to systemic and procedural improvements towards meeting new legislation (ignorance, lack of resources and over-politicized issues) • No suitable concept for land remediation • No effective policy and market pressure to resources management • Special challenges with incineration

32. Critical view on the current state of municipal waste management in CEE, SEE, EECCA (2) Management capabilities in the municipal framework (financial and technical) Management capabilities in the regional framework Management capabilities in the national framework Questions of DEMOCRACY, OWNERSHIP, PLANNING & MANAGEMENT

33. Current instruments Taxes paid on every breath we takeZero accountability of the utilization of taxes No price on waste collection correspond to real costs of handling waste safely No discipline, no enforcement – some instruments cannot work No successful waste reuse incentives for the population and for the industry

34. Current financial instruments Under-financed and poorly managed municipalities Government/Ministries tend to provide assistance to “politically correct” electorates via their funds and programs Pre- and post-accession instruments (+/-) Private sector and PPPs! (+/-)

35. Future WM approach – practical steps • HISTORIC WASTE • Mapping up MSWM correctly, including the illegal dumps • Assessing the potential risks • Remediation of sites according to high standards (for low/manageable long term risks) • Integration on program/project levels with the new WM systems being planned and built

36. Future WM approach – practical steps (2) • CURRENTLY GENERATED WASTE • No1 – Minimization (sustainable consumption and production) • No2 – Separate collection, storage, recycling-reuse (real WM including composting at household level whenever possible) • No3 – Thermal treatment while energy recovery • No4 – Safe disposal of residues • + Much higher utilization of PPPs! and cooperation in small regions and regions!!

37. Future Financing – practical steps (3) • Strengthened financial and technical management for regions and municipalities • Absorption of Cohesion and Structural Funds • Sound use of earmarked taxes and WM costs, including fines, through environmental fund and other instruments • Market monitoring and moreover: creation! for material reuse • WM is good business when MARKET exist – private sector

38. Conclusions • Today = Poor state and slow development. Tomorrow = ??? …whatever we are aiming at and building inside the EU? • New legislation and policies exist, and the suitable economic and financial instruments are known • Planning and management and society-wide value shift is necessary Let’s take the Challenge! 

39. Thanks for the attention! rnemeskeri@rec.org