Towards Zero Waste. practice and adaptations to the regulatory context for separate collection and management of residuals.

Transcription

1 Towards Zero Waste practice and adaptations to the regulatory context for separate collection and management of residuals Enzo Favoino Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza Osservatorio Verso Rifiuti Zero, Capannori

2 Towards Zero Waste practice and adaptations to the regulatory context for separate collection and management of residuals Enzo Favoino Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

3 Zero waste is a travel, not a destination

4 On the agenda Planning in a changing regulatory scenario (intensive) separate collection in large cities: feasible? After reduction and separate collection: amount and composition of residual waste Fine-tuning the options for residual waste

5 The regulatory context: drivers from EU env policy Revised WFD waste hierarchy + recycling targets + prevention programmes Packaging Directive recycling targets Landfill Directive diversion targets for biodeg waste + oligation for pretreatment

6 Landfilling in kg/inh.y (EU-15)

7

8 Decoupling! GDP, Waste Time

9 EP resolution of 20 April priorities for 7th EAP (the EP) Takes the view that the 7th EAP should provide for full implementation of waste legislation, including compliance with the waste treatment hierarchy while ensuring coherence with other EU policies; considers that it should set more ambitious prevention, re-use and recycling targets, including a net decrease in waste generation

10 EP resolution of 20 April priorities for 7th EAP (the EP) Takes the view that the 7th EAP should provide for full implementation of waste legislation, including compliance with the waste treatment hierarchy while ensuring coherence with other EU policies; considers that it should set more ambitious prevention, re-use and recycling targets, including a net decrease in waste generation

11 ready effect actions (Community level) Home composting Sustainable event management (e.g. no throwaway dishes/cutlery) Tap water Cloth (washable) nappies De-assimilation!! (get the big containers off the road!)

12 What does it take to get there? intensive kerbside incl. food waste + PAYT intensive kerbside, incl. food waste 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 %

13 Best Recycling Municipalities, pop < 10,000 inhabitants 9 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

14 Waste management in Italy? 3 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

15 The new European Map Economist 2010 * 7 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

16 Salerno 150,000 inhabitants Pilot project covering 30,000 inhab., July 2008 Extension in 5 steps, completed in September 2009 Separate collection= 75 % Organics 50%! Florianopolis october 28, 2010 Patrizia Lo Sciuto Slide by Enzo Favoino 14 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

17 Turin Pop. 909,000 Separate collection = 42% 404,000 inhabitants with collection at the doorstep ( kerbside ) - Waste separation in neighbourhoods with kerbside, incl. food waste = 59% - Waste separation in neighbourhoods without kerbside (road containers, 3,2 m 3 ) = 25% 11 Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

18 bespoke food waste collection: Food waste in residual waste Municipality % Food waste 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

19

20

21 Cost optimisation (Lombardy, 1500 Cost of collection (green bars) Municipalities) and cost of treatment/disposal (blue bars) Euro/person

22 TOOLS AND STRATEGIES TO CUT COSTS Tool Details Applies where.. Reducing pickup time Hand pick-up of small receptacles much faster than mechanical loading food waste collected separately from garden waste, in small receptacles Reduction of the frequency for collection of Residuals Effective systems to collect biowaste make its percentage in Residuals less than 15 % captures of biowaste are increased Use of bulk lorries instead of packer trucks Bulk density of food waste is much higher (0.7kg/dm3) than garden waste tools for collection of food waste prevent deliveries of garden waste

23

24 Sent to recycling residuals

25 organics Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza What is left in residuals? Prov. Lucca Capannori Categorie merceologiche % (peso/peso) % (peso/peso) Materiale organico da cucina; 25,12% 14,84% Materiale organico da giardino; 9,16% 4,36% Giornali (quotidiani e riviste); 5,09% 0,95% Cartone ondulato; 6,12% 0,06% Cartone teso; 2,49% 0,27% Imballaggi cellulosici poliaccoppiati; Altra carta (non imballaggio e non 0,98% 1,46% giornali e riviste); 5,68% 9,77% Imballaggi flessibili in alluminio; 0,28% 1,07% Imballaggi rigidi in alluminio; 1,00% 0,00% Imballaggi in acciaio; 1,20% 9,35% vetro; 2,11% 1,26% Imballaggi flessibili in plastica; 8,76% 1,60% 15% x 20% = 3% 15-20% paper nappies Imballaggi rigidi in plastica (bottiglie 2,08% 0,61% Imballaggi rigidi in plastica (non bottiglie e flaconi); Imballaggi poliaccoppiati in 1,96% 1,17% plastica; 0,64% 1,91% Altra plastica: sacchi neri; 4,83% 0,61% Altra plastica: non imballo; 2,88% 8,05% Imballaggi in legno; 0,72% 5,75% Tessili e cuoio; 9,08% 17,30% Materiali inerti, 0,22% 2,64% Pannolini; 6,07% 13,65% RUP; 0,30% 0,30% Sottovaglio < 20mm. 3,25% 3,05% TOTALE 100% 100% 15-25% plastics

26 The Landfill Directive,99/31 mandates reduction of biodegradable municipal waste to be landfilled Separate collection of paper / organics is key Also, it mandates pretreatment of the waste to be landfilled

27 Basic flow-sheet Cold treatment of residual waste Residual waste Screening Coarse materials (low moisture, low fermentability Small size materials (high moisture; high fermentability) 60% Landfilling Biological stabilisation 20% Water + CO2 Stabilised waste 20%

28 Reasons for development of MBT Flexibility is important Not much dependent on throughputs Same process technologies as composting/ad Double-duty sites Modular adaptation to increased separate collection Fairly Good economies of scale Suitable also at low capacities (down to a few ktpa) Rural districts Delivers results (in terms of reduction of biodeg waste to landfills) in a comparatively short time Passive aeration, low-tech on site MBT may produce prompt improvement of landfill conditions in developing WM systems

29 Basic flow-sheet Cold treatment of residual waste 20% rejects Residual waste Screening Coarse materials (low moisture, low fermentability Small size materials (high moisture; high fermentability) screening, hand and optical sorting, extrusion Biological stabilisation Water + CO2 Material recovery Stabilised waste 20%

30

31

32 Optical sorters

33 extrusion

34 MBT Capability Product Recovery Recovery Performance Recovered Product MBT Recovery Rate (%) Corrugated Cardboard, Kraft Board and Mixed Paper 75% PET Clear, PET Other, HDPE Coloured and HDPE Opaque 90% Ferrous Metal and Non-Ferrous Metal 95% Glass Easily 25%;high rates possible Other products that can be recovered by MBT Compost/Compost-like organics (typically 20% to 35% of input MSW) Solid recovered fuel (SRF)

35 Organics in residual waste 50,00% 45,00% 40,00% 35,00% 30,00% 25,00% 20,00% 15,00% 10,00% 5,00% 0,00% 39,02% 13,45% 9,19% 4,20% MEDIA PRIULA anno 2000 MEDIA PRIULA anno 2002 MEDIA PRIULA anno 2003 PRIULA anno 2007

36 in the end of the story 70%+ sep collection ACHIEVABLE No increase of waste arisings (rather, the contrary) ACHIEVABLE Further reduction of env footprint of landfills ACHIEVABLE, by means of biological stabilisation - another 20% process loss Further recovery of materials from reisiduals ACHIEVABLE, another 30-35% recovery Only 40 % (or so) of residuals to be landfilled as a stabilised material 12 % of MSW!! Aren t we getting damn close to zero?

37 Eskerrik asko! Enzo Favoino Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza