Implementing and optimising separate collection: operational and economic issues. The regulatory context: drivers from EU env policy

Transcription

1 Implementing and optimising separate collection: operational and economic issues Enzo Favoino Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza The regulatory context: drivers from EU env policy Revised WFD hierarchy + recycling targets + prevention programmes Packaging Directive recycling targets Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodeg + obligation for pretreatment EU Climate Change Programme EU Soil Strategy What does it take to get there? Development of source separation of bio in the EU intensive kerbside incl.. food + PAYT intensive kerbside, incl.. food separation Road containers + kerbside (doorstep) for a few dry recyclables (paper) additional systems, organics included trhough containers on the road additional systems, containers on the road for dry recyclables > 80 % 70 % 50 % 40 % 20 % Obligations for bio management NL: compulsory schemes for separate collection AUT: obligation upon households to either take part in separate collection or to compost in the backyard GER: KrW-AbfG separate collection widely diffused Catalunya (Spain): ley 6/95 compulsory for all Municipalities with a pop. > 5000 (recently extended to cover all Municipalities) SK (Act 24/04): Garden Waste to be separately colelcted by 2006; bio by 2010 Targets SWE: 35% composting target ITA, UK: recycling targets acting as drivers Best Recycling Municipalities, pop < 10,000 inhabitants In separate collection, what does OPTIMISED mean? High captures Good quality (low % of impurities) Avoid increase of arisings Allow for cost optimisation Contribute to fulfilling diversion targets of the Landfill Directive 9 1

2 The paradigm - keep control on collection, make participation highest Against the paradigm - lose control on collection, make participation lowest Biobins (carts) for food some issues The use of biobins may imply high deliveries of garden Bins require mechanical loading Low density implies adoption of expensive packer trucks or high costs for transport Reduced frequency of collection is therefore considered to save money This impairs captures of food fairly high percentages in residual organic (%) 60 ROM DK GR LTV ESP LUX NL 40 BUL CH HU SLO 33 EI FIN FR AUT MSW Bio Paradigm for optimisation Buckets litres hand-picked saves time collection time per pick-up point: at high-rises, carts adopted to serve households with one single pick Biodegradable bags Help keep containers clean The bags + a relatively frequent collection make it an user-friendly system Highest captures, lowest percentages of organics in residual Residual may be collected at a much lower frequency saves money! 5 2

3 0 Seminar Bio Sofia2013, April 2013, Bulgaria Food in residual Municipality % Food Altivole 7,82 Arcade 8,24 Breda di Piave 7,61 Casale sul Sile 9,42 Castello di Godego 8,05 Cessalto 6,30 Conegliano 9,40 Cornuda 7,19 Giavera del Montello 6,88 Collection of garden at Civic Amenity Sites (Municipal Recycling Centres) at the doorstep less frequent than food lower cost, higher participation in home composting programmes Packaging paradigm for optimisation There s no one stop shop solution different trucks for different materials Tackle different materials according to their specific density/compactability Multi-material being dismissed Paper collected on itself (high captures, best quality) Glass collected on itself (best quality; also, simple/cheapest collection, it breaks hence packer trucks not needed, open lorries much cheaper) Plastics + cans increasingly tackled through combined collection (lightweight and compactable materials, they need packer trucks) Purity VS Population Collection at the doorstep Province capitals (larger towns, with high-rise buildings) Purity , Road containers (bring banks) Population

4 Is management more difficult somewhere? The new European Map Economist 2010 * 3 7 Salerno 150,000 inhabitants Separate collection= 75 % Organics 50%! Florianopolis october 28, 2010 Patrizia Lo Sciuto Slide byenzo Favoino 14 Captures (kgs/person.wk) Costs of MSW management some general remarks 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 1,08 26/11-2/12 1,46 3/12-9/12 1,59 10/12-16/12 1,66 17/12-23/12 1,46 1,49 24/12-30/12 31/12-6/1 1,80 07/01-13/1 1,68 14/01-20/1 1,75 21/01-27/1 1,82 28/01-03/2 Increased cost of disposal Landfill Directive Incineration Directive + IPPC Anyway cost of collection may by itself be comparatively low similar to commingled MSW collection Savings on disposal KG/abitante 4

5 INFA-VHE report (Germany, 2004) costo procapite COSTO PROCAPITE ( /ab.*anno) % RACCOLTA DIFFERENZIATA 131,00 117,90 31% 45% 53% 66% 78% 99,00 96,00 95,50 CONSORZIO CONSORZIO ITALIA NORD VENETO TVTRE PRIULA 131,00 117,90 99,00 96,00 95,50 31% 45% 53% 66% 78% Italia, Nord e Veneto: dati 2006 (fonte Rapporto Rifiuti 2007 APAT - ONR) Consorzio Priulae Consorzio TvTre: costi dati % RD stima anno % 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% % raccolta differenziata Mixed MSW Residuals Bio R+B Difference to mixed MSW Rural area kg/inhab/y % coll/week 1 0,5 0,5 1 coll/cost ( inhab/y) 9,4 5,93 4,63 10,56 12% treat./cost ( /inhab/y) 27,5 16, ,25-19% treat./cost ( /t) total cost ( /inhab/y) 36,9 22,18 10,63 32,81-11% Urban area kg/inhab/y % coll/week 1 0,5 0,5 1 coll/cost ( (inhab/y) 17,88 14,56 5,27 19,83 11% treat./cost ( /inhab/y) 33,75 28, ,13-8% treat./cost ( /t) total cost ( /inhab/y) 51,63 42,685 8,27 50,96-1% Cost optimisation (Lombardy, pop. 10M, 1500 Municipalities) Euro/person Cost of collection (green bars) and cost of treatment/disposal (blue bars) TOOLS AND STRATEGIES TO CUT COSTS Tool Details Applies where.. Reducing pickup time Reduction of the frequency for collection of Residuals Use of bulk lorries instead of packer trucks Hand pick-up of small receptacles much faster than mechanical loading Effective systems to collect bio make its percentage in Residuals less than 15 % Bulk density of food is much higher (0.7kg/dm3) than garden food collected separately from garden, in small receptacles captures of bio are increased tools for collection of food prevent deliveries of garden Thanks for your attention Enzo Favoino enzofavoino@alice.it +39 (335)