Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Table of Contents 1.

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.1.

2.

Waste ............................................................................................................................... 14 2.1.

European Waste Policy .......................................................................................................... 14

2.1.1.

The Waste Framework Directive ............................................................................................. 15

2.1.2.

The Landfill Directive ............................................................................................................... 17

2.1.3.

The Waste Incineration Directive ............................................................................................ 17

2.2.

Waste generation .................................................................................................................. 19

2.2.1.

Waste generation from sectors ............................................................................................... 19

2.2.2.

Generation of municipal solid waste ....................................................................................... 24

2.2.3.

Development of municipal waste generation ......................................................................... 25

2.3.

3.

Structure of the report .......................................................................................................... 13

Waste treatment ................................................................................................................... 26

2.3.1.

50 % recycling of municipal solid waste by 2020 .................................................................... 29

2.3.2.

Diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfills .................................................... 30

2.3.3.

Treatment of municipal solid waste in the partner countries................................................. 34

2.3.4.

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 37

Energy ............................................................................................................................... 38 3.1.

European energy policy ......................................................................................................... 38

3.1.1. 3.2.

Market pull provided by Europe 2020 energy targets ............................................................ 40

Electricity .............................................................................................................................. 43

3.2.1.

Renewable energy in electricity production............................................................................ 43

3.2.2.

National Renewable Energy Action Plans ................................................................................ 47

3.3.

Heating and cooling ............................................................................................................... 51

3.3.1.

Renewable energy in heating and cooling production............................................................ 51

3.3.2.

National Renewable Energy Action Plans ................................................................................ 55

3.4.

Transport .............................................................................................................................. 59

3.4.1 10 percent renewable energy sources in transport ....................................................................... 59 3.4.2 3.5

4.

National Renewable Energy Action Plans ................................................................................ 63

Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 67

Indicators of drivers and barriers for waste-to-energy........................................................ 68

2 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.1.

EU regulation and targets ...................................................................................................... 71

4.1.1.

Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill ...................................................................... 71

4.1.2.

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources.................................................................. 72

4.1.3.

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources in transport.............................................. 73

4.1.4.

Generation of municipal solid waste ....................................................................................... 74

4.2.

Energy infrastructure............................................................................................................. 75

4.2.1.

Coverage of district heating .................................................................................................... 75

4.2.2.

Current reliance on waste-to-energy ...................................................................................... 76

4.2.3.

Dependency on coal ................................................................................................................ 77

4.2.4.

Dependency on gas ................................................................................................................. 78

4.3.

Geography ............................................................................................................................ 79

4.3.1. 4.4.

Demography ......................................................................................................................... 80

4.4.1. 4.5.

Population density ................................................................................................................... 80

Public Opinion ....................................................................................................................... 81

4.5.1. 4.6.

Heating demand ...................................................................................................................... 79

Public opinion on climate change ............................................................................................ 81

Overall drivers for waste-to-energy........................................................................................ 82

Appendix ........................................................................................................................................ 84 Appendix A: Sources of waste generation............................................................................................... 84 Appendix B: Recommendations for breakdown in waste categories ..................................................... 85 Appendix C: Disposal operations ............................................................................................................. 91 Appendix D: Recovery operations ........................................................................................................... 92 Appendix E: The five treatment categories within waste statistics ................................................... 93

3 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

1. Introduction During a year, citizens, organizations and companies in the EU generate 420 million tonnes of waste that can potentially be recovered for energy. And even though the EU is globally leading within waste-to-energy only 50 million tonnes of waste is currently being treated for energy recovery. The remaining fraction is incinerated without energy recovery or simply disposed on landfills. Why is this readily available and even renewable energy resource not being exploited more intensively? And what is the outlook for further exploitation of this resource in the years to come? These are the main questions addressed in this report. Key to the explanation of why waste is not being exploited more intensively for energy purposes is that energy recovery from waste usually requires substantial capital investments for the provision of a suitable infrastructure. Especially when compared to landfills which traditionally has been the alternative treatment of waste – and still is in many countries. Global economic growth, new technological possibilities, a growing focus on resource efficiency and business ingenuity within waste management seem, however, to provide new opportunities for the expansion of energy recovery from waste. Since the turn of the millennia resource prices have been on the rise, and there has been a growing concern that some valuable resources, such as phosphorous and some metals will be depleted. Eventually a lot of these resources end up in waste streams. Modern treatment technologies make it possible to extract these and other resources from waste and reintroduce them into the economy. There is even a potential for modern technologies to up-cycle waste into high value products. Biodegradable waste might, for instance, in the near future become a feedstock for bio-plastics and fine bio-chemicals. This combination of technical capability and increasing resource costs makes waste a valuable resource. An important application of waste as a resource is energy recovery from waste for biogas, fuels, heat or power. The common European waste management and climate change policies are important drivers for the development of the waste-to-energy field. A major trend in waste management regulation has been to push for more prevention, reuse and recycling in order to promote a more circular and resource efficient economy. This trend will impact how the viability of waste-to-energy investments is assessed in each member state. Our assessment is that this trend will affect anaerobic digestion positively while the effect on incineration technologies is more mixed or even negative. It will depend, however, on the value proposition that waste-to-energy can deliver for resource efficiency and the ability of waste-to-energy plants and technology providers to position themselves as key partners in the increasingly circular waste treatment value chain. With some creativity and adaptability this trend will provide opportunities for waste-to-energy. The ambitions of the European climate and energy policy of creating an energy system less reliant on fossil fuels will create a stronger market pull for waste-to-energy technologies, especially for the production of biogas and biofuels. How strong this market pull will be is, however, influenced by the technology and price development for rival renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar and hydro.

4 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

In this report the EU directives and strategies that have the most significant impact on waste-to-energy at the European level are reviewed. Following this review differences across member states with regard to waste streams, waste management systems and energy systems are described statistically in order to assess how incentives embedded in the common regulatory framework will carry through to each individual country. Other factors such as national energy endowments, geography and demography will also affect how attractive energy recovery from waste is for individual member countries and are thus included as well in the evaluation of drivers and barriers in each country to exploit waste as an energy resource in the years to come, cf. box 1 for indicators1 considered. Box 1: Indicators of drivers and barriers for waste-to-energy Factors

Indicator

Description

EU regulation and targets

Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill

% gap to achieve target on diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources Progress on the use of renewable energy sources in transport Generation of municipal solid waste

% gap to achieve 2020 target on renewable energy sources % gap to achieve 2020 target on renewable energy sources in transport Municipal solid waste pr. capita, 2011

Coverage of district heating

% of citizens served by district heating

Current reliance on waste-to-energy

Ratio of biomass/waste to other renewable energy sources in production of electricity

Dependency on imported coal in energy production

Coal as a share of gross inland energy consumption and dependency of imported coal

Dependency on imported gas in energy production

Gas as a share of gross inland energy consumption and dependency of imported gas

Geography Demography

Heating demand Population density

Public opinion

Public opinion on climate change

Mean annual heating degree days Population density Percentage of population pointing to climate change as the most important issue

Energy infrastructure

A score is assigned to each country according to their position on the individual indicators. Countries with many drivers relative to other EU countries are coloured green; countries with fewer drivers are coloured yellow, whereas countries with the fewest drivers are coloured red. The indicators show that the drivers and barriers that countries across Europe have for energy recovery from waste are quite different, and only in some countries drivers are aligned across the identified factors. 1

In chapter 4 the indicators and the arguments for seeing them as drivers for waste-to-energy are described in detail.

5 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

According to the indicators employed in this report the drivers to recover energy from waste are best aligned in Malta, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Cyprus, Estonia, cf. box 2. Box 2: Alignment of drivers for energy recovery High Malta Belgium Denmark Finland Cyprus Estonia

Medium Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Netherlands Germany Italy Sweden Greece Czech Republic Poland United Kingdom Slovakia Austria Ireland

Low Norway Romania France Spain Bulgaria Hungary Slovenia Portugal

Among the COOLSWEEP partner countries drivers and barriers differ substantially. Denmark is among the European countries with the strongest alignment of drivers for energy recovery from waste, while Latvia, Italy, Austria have fewer drivers and especially Norway and Spain have very few drivers for recovering energy from waste.

6 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Denmark Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

The drivers for waste-to-energy in Denmark are many compared to other EU countries. This is mainly due to Denmark’s reliance on waste as a renewable source in energy production. Denmark has a long tradition within waste-to-energy and the infrastructure to serve district heating is already in place and used. Furthermore, Denmark is the country in EU which generates the most municipal solid waste pr. capita and it also has the third highest growth rate, implying that there will be a lasting demand for treatment capacity in the years to come. In overall, Denmark has a comparatively advanced waste management system, where waste is not landfilled but recovered for materials and energy. 54 % of municipal solid waste is already incinerated for energy recovery, whereas only 3 % is being landfilled. Furthermore, Denmark has already fulfilled the 2016 target on diverting biodegradable waste away from landfills. As such, the drivers for more waste-to-energy investments in Denmark are rather few. Looking at the European climate and energy policy, Denmark has especially incentives to invest in future waste-to-energy technologies when it comes to the use of renewable energy sources in transport. Denmark still has some way to go before the target of 10 % renewable energy sources is reached (currently at 3.3 %), creating a drive for future investments in technologies to recover more biogas and biofuels from waste as a part of the solution. In the total energy system, Denmark is dependent on coal in both heat and power production but on the other hand Denmark is a net exporter of natural gas. Moreover, Denmark has a share of 23 % of renewable in total energy consumption giving Denmark an incentive to utilize waste-to-energy to reach the 2020 target of 30 % renewable in energy consumption in Denmark. Furthermore, Denmark has the highest share of waste (1/3) as a source to power production among the partner countries giving a relatively high incentive for waste-to-energy still being an important source to power production. In addition to this, Denmark has as mentioned earlier the third highest coverage of district heating, and a relatively high population density compared to other EU27 countries, which is supportive for energy recovery from waste. Furthermore, a high number of heating degree-days means that Denmark has, looking across the factors taken into consideration, many drivers for further investments in waste-toenergy, compared to other EU countries.

7 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Latvia Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

Latvia has fewer drivers for recovering energy from waste compared to Denmark, but European waste regulation is expected to have a great impact on the waste management system in Latvia and creates a drive for more waste-to-energy in Latvia. In Latvia approximately, three quarters of the total municipal solid waste generated is being landfilled, placing Latvia among the countries which is furthest away from fulfilling the targets on diverting biodegradable waste away from landfills. Latvia is however one of the countries in EU27 which has one of the lowest rates of per capita waste generation and the annual level of total municipal solid waste remained more or less the same from 2002 to 2011. Despite of this, the fact that a high percentage of the waste goes to landfills still creates a drive for future investments in waste-to-energy in order to recover or recycle the biodegradable waste. Furthermore, Latvia has in close cooperation with the European Commission developed a strategic roadmap for improving the waste management system in Latvia2. One of the goals in the roadmap is to implement a landfill tax which will be higher than the tax on incineration so that incineration will be a more attractive waste treatment solution. Therefore, the roadmap creates a drive for future waste-to-energy investments. Related to the energy context, Latvia is highly dependent on gas for energy production. Furthermore Latvia has a high coverage of district heating and a high heating demand because of many heating degree days. All together, these factors create a drive for further investments in waste-to-energy especially if they are considered in the light of the current problems with the waste management system. In the total energy consumption Latvia has a share of 33 % of renewables and is close to reach the target for renewables in energy consumption. Latvia has a high share of renewables for power production with hydro power being the main source. Furthermore, Latvia is the country that produces second most power from biogas across EU27 and it thus close to reach the target on renewable energy sources in transport. All together these factors do not create a drive for further investments in waste-to-energy, and in addition to this, Latvia has a very low dependency on coal compared to the other EU countries, giving no incentive to substitute coal - with a high degree of emission - with renewable sources, e.g. waste, hydro etc. as Latvia is not dependent on coal in the energy production. Looking at all the factors, there are fewer drivers for waste-to-energy compared to Denmark, but in a European context, Latvia is considered to have neither very few nor many drivers for future investments in waste-to-energy technologies, but a medium level of drivers.

2

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/support_implementation.htm

8 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Italy Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

In Italy, the main drive for future waste-to-energy investments comes from European regulations within waste and energy. European waste management regulation creates a stronger drive for Italy to recover energy from waste than for most other EU countries. Even though the degree of landfill has declined steadily, waste is still to a high degree being landfilled in Italy (45 %) whereas only 16 % is recovered for energy. Furthermore, Italy is among the countries being furthest away from reaching the target related to diverting biodegradable waste away from landfills. Diverting more biodegradable waste from landfill creates a drive for more energy recovery and recycling. In addition to this, the generation of municipal solid waste per capita is relatively high in Italy, and even though the level of municipal solid waste generated from 2002 to 2011 has remained unchanged and not decreased or increased, there is a need for treating the large amounts of waste generated. Furthermore, Italy has a relatively high population density, making waste-to-energy investments more beneficial. All together these things create a drive for waste-to-energy investments. European energy policy also creates a drive for further investments in waste-to-energy technologies. Italy is the partner country which is furthest away from reaching the target on renewables in total energy consumption and has thus an incentive to recover more energy from waste. Furthermore, Italy has a share of renewables for power production at approximately 30 %, with hydro power being the main source, while biomass/waste account for 4 % points of the 30 % renewable power production, creating some drive for more power production from waste. On the other hand, Italy is the country that produces second most power from biogas across EU27. Considering the use of renewable energy sources in transport Italy is like Latvia among the best performing countries when it comes to reaching the target of renewable energy sources in transport (currently at 4.7 %), making further investments in waste-to-energy less attractive compared to other EU27 countries. Furthermore, there is also a potential for hydro power to deliver renewable energy needed for transport, e.g. through electric cars or through hydrolysis. Finally, Italy has a high dependency on especially gas in the energy production of both power and heat and also coal in the production of heat, which create a drive for waste-to-energy, as Italy has an incentive to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources. However, looking at the coverage of district heating which is the fourth lowest in EU27 and a very low number of heating degree days, these things do not make a push for further waste-to-energy investments. Therefore, to sum up, the drivers for future waste-toenergy investments in Italy are rather few in Italy compared to the other EU countries.

9 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Austria Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

The number of drivers which may encourage further investments in waste-to-energy technologies in Austria is few compared to other EU countries. Currently the European waste and energy regulation does not create a push for future waste-to-energy investments in Austria. Out of the 11 indicators included in the analysis, only 3 suggest that waste-to-energy might be appealing to Austria in the future: the high generation of municipal solid waste per capita, high dependency on gas as a share of the total energy consumption and the high heat demand illustrated by the annual heating degree days. Even so, the fact that Austria has the second highest recycling level of municipal solid waste in EU27, and this level is sustained by a sound waste management system, offsets the potential for the high rate of waste generation per capita to be seen as a driver for waste-to-energy. Furthermore, the level of municipal solid waste generation per capita has been decreasing from 2002 to 2011, probably due to the countries’ focus on waste prevention, indicating that the Austrian waste management system is slowly moving up the Waste Hierarchy, in which only 3% of waste is landfilled. Furthermore, Austria is very close to fulfilling the national target for the share of renewable energy in the total energy consumption, and this can be considered as diminishing the power of the high dependency on gas as a driver for future investments in waste-to-energy. It is as well important to mention that 70% of Austria’s power generation is from renewable sources, with hydro power being by far the main source. Therefore, the only factor which might drive the development of waste-to-energy in Austria is the high heat demand compared to other countries in the EU27. The possible future developments could be expected in the decentralized waste-to-energy solutions area, considering the low populations density in some parts of Austria, and the overcapacity which already exists in relation to centralized waste incineration plants in cities like Vienna. To sum up, the drivers for waste–to-energy are rather few in Austria. The main drivers are that Austria generates relatively high volume of municipal solid waste, is depended on gas in the energy production and has a relatively high demand for heat. On the other hand, these factors should be seen in close connection with the high recycling rates and the large share of hydro power in the power generation. Giving less incentive Austria has already comparatively much renewable energy in both energy production and transport, while Austria like Denmark already fulfilled the target on diverting biodegradable waste away from landfills.

10 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Spain Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

In Spain, the underlying drivers for future investments in waste-to-energy technologies are very few compared to other EU countries. In overall, Spain has a less advanced waste management system compared to other EU countries. 60% of the municipal solid waste is going to landfills and only 8% is recovered for energy, making Spain the country with the second highest landfill-level among the partner countries. Spain is however increasingly diverting the biodegradable waste away from landfill as stated in the EU targets. Taking these factors into account, future waste-to-energy investments would be beneficial. The generation of municipal solid waste per capita in Spain is however pointing to another direction and the generation of waste has decreased dramatically from 2002-2011 compared to other EU countries, so less municipal solid waste has to be treated. It should be noted though that the decline in waste generation reflects the decline in economic activity as a result of the financial and economic crisis in Spain and if the economy starts to grow again, waste generation should be expected to adopt an increasing trend as well and therefore more waste should be expected to be treated in the future, creating an increasing demand for waste-to-energy investments. This picture however changes when looking at other factors. Spain is a country with a rather low population density making the need for energy recovery from waste less attractive. It should be noted though that the population density varies across the country, making investments in waste-to-energy more beneficial in urban areas such as Bilbao, where the population density is high. In addition to this, Spain also has the lowest number of annual heating degree days among the six partner countries making the need for waste in heat generation low. However, looking at the dependency on especially imported gas but also coal, it seems that Spain is very dependent on both gas and coal in the energy system, creating an incentive for waste-to-energy investments. Spain has however a rather high share of renewables in the total energy consumption and is relatively close to the target on renewables in total energy consumption. Spain’s main share of renewables for power production comes however primarily from hydro power and wind power. Furthermore solar power would be a beneficial source for Spain to rely on in the future. In addition to this, Spain is among the best performing countries when it comes to the target of renewable energy sources in transport, making the production of biogas and biofuels from waste less attractive compared to other EU27 countries. Furthermore, there is also a potential to use hydro power to deliver renewable energy for transport, e.g. through electric cars. In overall, the need for future investments in waste-to-energy technologies seem rather low compared to the partner countries but also the other EU27 countries.

11 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Norway Biodegradable waste from landfill

Renewable energy sources

Renewable Generation of energy sources in MSW transport

District heating

Reliance on wast-toenergy

Dependency on coal

Dependency on gas

Heating demand

Population density

Public opinion on climate change

Drivers

In Norway, there seems to be very few drivers for future investments in waste-to-energy technologies. This is mainly due to the fact that Norway is nearly independent of fossil fuels in the energy system. In fact, Norway is the only European country, which is a net exporter of both coal and natural gas. Norway mainly uses hydro power as the main source for energy. With a share of 65 % of renewables in total energy consumption, Norway has the largest share of renewable energy in its energy system, compared to the EU27 countries. Norway has a very high share of renewables for power production, and is able to produce more hydro power than the country’s total demand. Norway does, however, have the second most heating degree-days compared to EU27 countries. This implies a high demand for heat that could be covered by energy from waste. Norway’s heat production per capita is, however, only approximately 15-25 % compared to similar countries like Finland and Sweden. This is because hydro power covers most of the heat demand through electricity. It should be noted though that biomass and waste are major contributors to the heat production not generated from hydro power, supplying about 72 % (municipal solid waste 44 %) of the heat not generated from hydro power. Whereas Norway’s independence of fossil fuels and the energy infrastructure in Norway are not creating a drive for future waste-to-energy investments, the use of renewable energy sources in transport may potentially create a drive for investments in biogas and biofuel technologies. Norway still has some way to go before the target of renewable energy sources is reached (currently at 4.2 %), which creates a strong drive for producing biogas or biofuels from waste, compared to other EU27 countries. There is, however, also a potential for hydro power to deliver renewable energy needed for transport, e.g. through electric cars or through hydrolysis. Looking at the waste management system, Norway has an advanced management system where waste is not landfilled but recovered for materials and energy. In Norway 56 % of municipal solid waste is incinerated, and only 2 % is going to landfills. Norway is not a member of the EU but has transposed into national law EU directives on environment covered by the EEA agreement, such as the EU Landfill Directive, the Waste Framework Directive, etc. Furthermore, the generation of municipal solid waste per capita is below EU27 average. However, it has a higher growth rate in generation of municipal solid waste than any of the EU27 countries, implying an increased demand for treatment capacity. The overall conclusion is though that Norway is a country where there are only very few drivers for further investments in waste-toenergy compared to other EU countries.

12 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

1.1. Structure of the report The overall aim of this report is to give an overview of drivers and enablers affecting the development of the waste-to-energy field in the 27 EU member states and Norway, with a special focus on the six COOLSWEEP partner countries: Denmark, Austria, Norway, Italy, Spain and Latvia. The report reviews available statistics to uncover differences in key factors such as waste streams, waste management, and energy systems in order to assess their effect on each country’s incentive to invest in waste-to-energy. One of the key findings from this exercise is that these fundamental drivers and enablers are very different across the EU, and even across the six COOLSWEEP partner countries. Chapter 1 reviews waste generation and waste treatment in depth, which is here characterised as the supply side of the production of energy from waste. The chapter also includes a review of European targets for waste generation and waste management in the EU. Chapter 2 reviews energy production systems, which is the demand side, i.e. the market on which waste-to-energy technologies compete with alternative technologies to deliver a significant and reliable supply of renewable energy. The chapter also includes a review of political targets for renewable energy and an assessment of how they will affect the attractiveness of waste-to-energy investments across Europe. Chapter 3 reviews a set of supplemental factors that may influence the attractiveness of waste-to-energy such as natural endowments, existing infrastructure, demography, geography and the public acceptance of energy recovery from waste.

13 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2. Waste The European Union produces approximately 3 billion tonnes of waste every year. Waste is mainly a byproduct of economic activity, and historically volumes have been increasing as the European society has grown wealthier3. As a consequence of increasing commodity prices, improvements in prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery technologies, as well as changes in regulation of waste management in recent years, waste is increasingly treated as a valuable resource for companies and the rest of society. European waste policy is evolving towards a stronger focus on recovering resources from waste. European waste policy pushes for a society where resources in waste should be recovered to substitute for natural resources, and decrease dependency on raw materials. The 7th Environment Action Programme4 proposed by the European Commission in 2012 takes this perspective even further and states that existing targets for prevention, reuse, recycling, recovery and landfill should be reviewed in order to move towards a circular economy, where waste that cannot be eliminated is turned into a resource. Furthermore, while past programmes tended to focus on more specific environmental issues in isolation, the new approach is to analyse how these issues are inter-related and how improvements in one area may generate multiple benefits not only for the environment but also for the economy and society. Even though waste treatment is a highly regulated sector, influenced by legislation at European level, which seeks to push waste generation and waste management across the EU member states in a certain direction, the following section illustrates that there exist great differences across Europe and across the six Coolsweep partner countries. This implies that there exist additional drivers and enablers which may affect how waste management practices will evolve in the 27 EU countries and ultimately influence the countries’ incentive to invest in waste-to-energy technologies. This section will use available statistics to uncover differences in waste generation and waste management in order to assess the countries’ incentive to invest in waste-to-energy technologies.

2.1. European Waste Policy ‘European waste policies have evolved over the last 30 years’5. European environmental policy has been guided by “Environment Action Programmes” since the early seventies. The Environment Action Programmes aim to set up a framework for environmental policy, including waste legislation. The EU is currently updating this framework, and a new (7th) Environment Action Programme (2012-2020) has been proposed by the European Commission at the end of 2012, entitled: “Living well, within the limits of our planet”. In the programme, it is argued that there is potential for improving waste management in the EU to make better use of resources, reduce the dependency on raw materials and lower the impacts on the environment by fully implementing EU waste legislation. Furthermore, it states that existing targets for

3

Being wise with waste: the EU’s approach to waste management, EC, 2010. Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a General Union EAP to 2020, EC, 2012. 5 Being wise with waste: the EU’s approach to waste management, 2010, EC, p. 4. 4

14 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

prevention, reuse, recycling, recovery and landfill should be reviewed in order to move towards a circular economy, where waste increasingly is turned into a resource.6 These goals have been formulated in a 2020 milestone7: “By 2020, waste is managed as a resource. Waste generated per capita is in absolute decline. Recycling and re-use of waste are economically attractive options for public and private actors due to widespread separate collection and the development of functional markets for secondary raw materials. More materials, including materials having a significant impact on the environment and critical raw materials, are recycled. Waste legislation is fully implemented. Illegal shipments of waste have been eradicated. Energy recovery is limited to non recyclable materials, landfilling is virtually eliminated and high quality recycling is ensured”.8 Moving towards a circular economy, eliminating landfilling and limiting energy recovery to non recyclable materials will have great impacts on waste-to-energy investments. Whereas eliminating landfilling may imply a push towards increased waste-to-energy investments, the limiting of energy recovery to non recyclable materials may reduce the future developments within this field. With a push for a circular economy the primary focus is on material recovery through prevention, re-use, up- and recycling, while energy recovery takes a less prominent role. In this context waste-to-energy technologies that result in less material degradation would be expected to gain ground. That could lead to a more prominent role for e.g. recovery of biogas from anaerobic digestion in the years to come.

2.1.1. The Waste Framework Directive European waste policy is organized around The Waste Framework Directive (WFD), which sets the overall framework for EU legislations on waste. The Waste Framework Directive defines waste as “any substance or object which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard”.9 The directive establishes a fivestep Waste Hierarchy, which member states are obligated to implement in their own legislation in order to move waste management up the Waste Hierarchy. This Waste Hierarchy is the cornerstone of European waste legislation, and is presented in figure 1 and box 3 below.

6

Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on a General Union EAP to 2020, EC, 2012, priority objective 2, point 37 and point 38. 7 th The 7 EAP takes its point of departure in one of the flagship initiatives under the Europe 2020 Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive growth. The flagship initiative – A resource-efficient Europe – supports the shift towards a resource-efficient, lowcarbon economy where waste is turned into a resource. One of the building blocks of the flagship initiative is The Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe. The roadmap sets out a framework for the design and implementation of future actions and it outlines the milestones to be reached by 2020. 8 Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, EC, 2011, p.8. 9 Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste, Article 3 (1).

15 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 1: The Waste Hierarchy

Box 3: Levels in the Waste Hierarchy PREVENTION

PREPARING FOR RE-USE RECYCLING

RECOVERY

DISPOSAL

Waste prevention is defined as “measures taken before a substance, material or product has become waste that reduce the quantity of waste (…), the adverse impacts of the generated waste on the environment and human health or the content of harmful substances in materials and 10 products”. Prevention is not seen as a waste management operation as it deals with objects before they can be defined as waste. “any operation by which products or components that are not waste are used again for the same 11 purpose for which they were conceived”. “any recovery operation by which waste materials are reprocessed into products, materials or substances whether for the original or other purposes. It includes the reprocessing of organic material but does not include energy recovery and the reprocessing into materials that are to be 12 used as fuels or for backfilling operations”. Waste management activities are classified as recycling if they include any physical, chemical or biological treatment leading to a material which is no longer classified as waste. “waste serving a useful purpose by replacing other materials which would otherwise have been used to fulfil a particular function, or waste being prepared to fulfil that function, in the plant or 13 in the wider economy”. The fact that the waste should serve a “useful purpose by replacing other materials” distinguishes recovery from disposal operations. According to the WFD, incineration is therefore only classified as a recovery operation if the waste is principally used as fuel or other means of generating 14 energy. “any operation which is not recovery even where the operation has as a secondary consequence 15 the reclamation of substances or energy”. Disposal includes landfilling, backfilling and incineration and co-incineration with low energy recovery

Source: European Commission

10

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste, Article 3 (12) Ibid., Article 3 (13) 12 Ibid., Article 3 (17) 13 Ibid., Article 3 (15). 14 Ibid., Annex II, R1. 15 Ibid., Article 3 (19) 11

16 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Whereas the Waste Framework Directive sets the overall framework for EU legislation on waste, there are two other directives which address issues of specific waste operations: 1) The Landfill Directive and 2) The Incineration Directive. They are mentioned here as they directly or indirectly affect the waste-to-energy field.

2.1.2. The Landfill Directive16 The aim of the landfill directive is to minimize landfilling within the EU in order to prevent and reduce the negative effects of waste landfills on the environment and human health. The focus is to reduce biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills through stringent requirements. The reason behind focusing primarily on the biodegradable waste is related to the degradation process of this fraction, which emits methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. The directive sets targets for Member States to divert biodegradable municipal waste from landfills towards more sustainable methods of waste management, i.e. recycling and recovery. By 2016 the biodegradable municipal waste going to landfill should be reduced to 35 percent of the 1995 level, with intermediate targets of 75 percent of the 1995 level by 2006 and 50 percent by 2009. Sixteen countries have been given a four-year derogation period, meaning that they must meet their targets by 2010, 2013 and 2020. If the Member States fail to comply with the directive and have not been given derogation, they will be financially fined. The landfill directive will be reviewed and possibly revised in 2014 as part of the European Commission’s work programme. It is expected that the directive will be more ambitious in order to divert more waste streams from landfills to recovery and recycling. Such a revision will most likely create a stronger push for energy recovery.

2.1.3. The Waste Incineration Directive17 With the waste incineration directive, the EU introduces measures to prevent or reduce air, water and soil pollution caused by the incineration and co-incineration of waste, as well as the resulting risk to human health. The directive requires incineration and co-incineration plants to have a permit for operation and sets emission limits for certain pollutants released to air and water (such as dust, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, hydrogen chloride, heavy metals, dioxins and furans, etc.). The incineration of waste needs to take place under controlled conditions and at sufficiently high temperatures in order to ensure that hazardous substances are completely destroyed. The further analysis of the emission limits set by the directive is beyond the scope of this report.

16 17

Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste. Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2000 on the incineration of waste.

17 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Together the three directives establish a range of waste management targets and broader goals for the years to 2020. Therefore they are expected to have a strong influence on the waste-to-energy landscape in the EU. In order to evaluate the effects of these directives, an understanding of what has been achieved so far and the progress towards the targets at national level in each of the Member States is necessary. In order to get an understanding of each country’s incentive for future waste-to-energy investments it is necessary to take a closer look at the amounts of waste generated in EU27 and how that waste is treated. The next sections will analyze differences in waste generation and treatment across EU27 countries.

18 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.2. Waste generation In Europe, the generation of waste per capita is close to 5 tonnes per year18. The eight sectors contributing (in very different shares) to the total waste generation in EU27 are: 1) construction; 2) mining & quarrying; 3) manufacturing; 4) households; 5) water & waste management19; 6) services; 7) energy20 and 8) agriculture, forestry & fishing. There are substantial differences in the distribution among sectors across the countries, cf. figure 2. Figure 2: Waste generation by sector, 2010 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Construction Households Energy

Mining and quarrying Water and waste management Agriculture, forestry and fishing

Manufacturing Services

Source: Eurostat.

Furthermore, the sectors’ generation of waste important to a waste-to-energy context varies significantly. Each sector is described in more detail below.

2.2.1. Waste generation from sectors The waste fractions stemming from the sectors are quite different. To get an understanding of the most important waste generation sectors in a waste-to-energy perspective the volume and fractions of waste generated in each of the sectors are described below.

I. Construction The activities within the construction sector were responsible for 35 percent of the total waste generated in the EU. In total, this sector generated 860 million tonnes of waste out of which 95 percent were mineral

18

Eurostat (all kinds of waste included) Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation activities. 20 Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply. 19

19 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

and solidified wastes, comprising fractions like excavated earth, road construction waste, demolition waste, etc. These are all inert materials which do not have potential for energy recovery. Recycling on the other side is considered to be an essential part of reducing the environmental impact of the construction sector in the EU, and the member states have to recycle 70 percent of their construction and demolition waste by 2020 according to the Waste Framework Directive. The recycling operations include reprocessing of construction and demolition waste, reprocessing and recycling of glass waste, asphalt mixing plants using mineral wastes, etc. The EU member states in which construction and demolition waste represented the highest percentage in the total waste generated in 2010 were Luxembourg with 84 percent, Malta with 77 percent and France with 73 percent. In the COOLSWEEP partner countries, Austria generated 26 percent, Denmark 16 percent, Italy 38 percent, Latvia 1 percent, Norway 17 percent and Spain 28 percent.

II. Mining and quarrying This sector is the second largest generator of waste in the EU, with 672 million tonnes generated in 2010, representing 27 percent of the total waste generated in the EU. Similar to the construction sector, the waste fractions generated by mining and quarrying are mainly classified as mineral and solidified waste, which accounts for almost 100 percent. The waste fractions include materials that must be removed to gain access to mineral resources, such as topsoil, waste rock, as well as tailings remaining after minerals have been largely extracted from the ore. As in the case of the construction sector, waste from mining and quarrying does not have potential for energy recovery. The extractive waste must be managed in specialized facilities in compliance with specific rules in accordance with the Directive 2006/21/EC on the Management of waste from extractive industries. In the EU, Bulgaria (90 percent), Romania (81 percent) and Sweden (76 percent) had the highest percentages of mineral waste within their total waste generation quantities in 2010, while partner countries reported substantially lower quantities or no waste generated from this sector: Austria 1 percent, Denmark 0 percent, Italy 0 percent, Latvia 0 percent, Norway 4 percent, Spain 23 percent.

III. Manufacturing Waste generated through manufacturing within EU reached 275 million tonnes in 2010 and thereby 11 percent of the total amount of waste generated in the EU. As manufacturing covers a broad range of subsectors which produce a high diversity of products, the types of waste generated are more varied than in the case of the construction or mining sectors. The mineral and solidified waste fraction represents also here a large part of the total generated waste (35 percent), closely followed by recyclable waste (29 percent) and chemical and medical waste (13 percent) fractions. These three types are of no interest for waste-to-energy since they either do not have energy generation potential, should be treated in another way besides energy recovery according to EU regulation or are already incinerated mainly for neutralization purposes. Besides these waste types, the manufacturing sector generates other three fractions which are relevant for the waste-to-energy field since

20 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe they can be transformed into feedstock: animal and vegetal waste (11 percent), mixed ordinary waste21 (10 percent) and common sludges (1 percent). Among the EU member states, Lithuania has the highest percentage of manufacturing waste (48 percent) in the total generated waste in the country, followed by Slovenia, Slovakia and Norway which all generate the same percentage of manufacturing waste (29 percent) related to their national total waste generation level. In the other partner countries manufacturing waste represents 9 percent in Austria, 10 percent in Denmark, 23 percent in Italy, 25 percent in Latvia and 12 percent in Spain.

IV. Households In 2010 households generated a total of 219 million tonnes of waste, which represented 11 percent of the waste generated in the EU. The vast majority of household wastes were mixed ordinary waste, which accounted for 67 percent of the total, followed by recyclable waste fractions which represented 16 percent of the total waste produced by households. Mixed ordinary waste fractions are of high interest for the waste-to-energy field both in terms of the quantity generated and the calorific value. With much lower generation percentages, but as relevant for waste-to-energy as the mixed ordinary waste, household waste also contains animal and vegetal waste fractions (12 percent of the total waste generated from households). Latvia is the member state which produced the highest percentage (47 percent) of household waste in 2010 in relation to other waste generating sectors at national level, followed by Norway (24 percent) and Lithuania (23 percent). Regarding the rest of the partner countries this percentage was 13 percent for Austria, 12 percent for Denmark, 21 percent for Italy and 17 percent for Spain.

V. Water and waste management The water and waste management sector amounted to 7 percent of the total waste generated in the EU 27 in 2010. The sector produced 175 million tonnes of waste, of which largest shares were mixed ordinary waste (34 percent), mineral and solidified waste (27 percent) and recyclable waste (20 percent). Besides mixed ordinary waste fractions, among the fractions which have potential for waste-to-energy, this sector also produced animal and vegetal wastes (2 percent) and common sludges (7 percent). The country where the amount of waste produced by the water and waste management sector represented the highest proportion (35 percent) within the total amount generated in 2010 is Denmark. Belgium and Ireland follow Denmark, but with noticeably lower percentage values of 25 percent and 17 percent respectively. Within the other COOLSWEEP countries waste from water and waste management amounted for 12 percent in Austria, 13 percent in Italy, 8 percent in Latvia, 9 percent in Norway and 7 percent in Spain.

VI. Service The quantity of waste produced by the service sector amounted to 149 million tonnes in 2010, accounting for 6 % of the total waste generated in the EU. A large part of the waste was represented by recyclable waste fractions (31 percent) from which almost half was paper and cardboard waste. Within the types of 21

Can include waste similar to household waste, mixed and undifferentiated materials, sorting residues.

21 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

waste with relevance for the waste-to-energy field, the service sector amounted to 29 percent mixed ordinary waste, 9 percent animal and vegetal waste and 1 percent common sludges. The rest of the waste comprised mineral and solidified waste (18 percent), equipment (6 percent) and chemical and medical wastes (6 percent), not relevant for waste-to-energy purposes. Austria and Ireland were the EU countries where waste from the service sector represented the highest proportion (36 percent) within the total national generated waste in 2010. They were followed by Denmark (22 percent) and Portugal (20 percent), whereas the percentages for the other partner countries were: 3 percent for Italy, 12 percent for Latvia, 15 percent for Norway and 7 percent for Spain.

VII. Energy The energy sector is similar in terms of the nature of the generated waste within the construction and mining & quarrying sectors. The activities within the energy sector generated in 2010 almost 86 million tonnes of waste (3 percent of the EU total) out of which 96 percent were mineral and solidified waste. The rest (4 percent) includes mixed ordinary waste, animal & vegetal waste, recyclable waste and chemical & medical waste, each accounting for 1 percent of the total waste generated by the energy sector. The Member States producing the highest percentages of waste from the energy sector compared to other fractions in 2010 were Estonia (35 percent), Hungary (18 percent) and Greece (16 percent). The COOLSWEEP countries either generated this waste type at much lower rates or it reported no waste generation within the energy sector: Austria 1 percent, Denmark 3 percent, Italy 2 percent, Latvia 2 percent, Norway 0 percent and Spain 2 percent.

VIII. Agriculture, forestry and fishing This is the sector which produced the lowest percentage (2 percent) of waste within the EU in 2010, approximately 39 million tons. The majority of waste (83 percent) was of animal and vegetal nature, meaning that its value can be recovered through waste-to-energy technologies. As mentioned previously another potentially valuable fraction is mixed ordinary waste, but this represented only 2 percent within the agricultural sector. Lithuania and Romania both had the highest (8 percent) percentage of agriculture waste within their national waste mix in 2010, closely followed by Slovakia (6 percent). Looking at the partner countries, Austria reported 2 percent, Denmark 1 percent, Italy 0 percent, Latvia 5 percent, Norway 2 percent and Spain 4 percent.

22 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

The waste most suitable to be used for waste-to-energy is generated by 5 out of the 8 sectors, namely: manufacturing, households, water and waste management, service and agriculture, forestry and fishing. The 3 other sectors generate mostly mineral waste, which cannot be transformed into feedstock for energy generation. Even within the 5 listed sectors the generated waste mainly suitable for waste-to-energy technologies is covered by the fractions animal & vegetal waste, mixed ordinary waste and common sludge, which together amounted to 420 million tonnes in EU in 2010. Data for the applied treatment of this waste is only available for the fractions animal & vegetal waste and mixed ordinary waste. In 2010, 342 million tonnes of waste comprising these 2 fractions was treated; 14 percent through incineration for energy recovery, 35 percent through recovery other than energy, 10 percent through incineration for disposal and 41 percent was sent to landfills. This clearly indicates that there is room for improvements in waste management operations within Europe, and waste-to-energy technologies can be a solution both for this and for fulfilling the EU resourceefficiency objectives. In the following, the treatment of one specific waste fraction; municipal solid waste, will be covered more thoroughly. European waste management policies have set targets for the treatment of municipal solid waste, e.g. 50 % target on recycling and diversion of biodegradable waste from landfills. In order to get an understanding of the volume and the potential for waste-to-energy, when taking the targets in European waste management policies into consideration, the following section will take a closer look at municipal solid waste and how this fraction is treated in the EU.

23 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.2.2. Generation of municipal solid waste The definition of municipal solid waste applied in the EU 27 Member States varies, reflecting diverse waste management practices. Eurostat defines municipal waste as being “mainly produced by households, though similar waste from sources such as commerce, offices and public institutions are included. The amount of municipal waste generated consists of waste collected by or on behalf of municipal authorities and disposed of through the waste management system”.22 In 2011, approximately 500 kg of municipal solid waste was generated per capita in EU27. With roughly 700 kg pr. capita, Denmark generated more municipal solid waste per capita than any other country in the EU. Among the COOLSWEEP partner countries Austria and Italy also generated more than the average in EU27, while Spain and Norway generated a little less than average and Latvia significantly less than average in EU 27, cf. figure 3. Figure 3: Generation of municipal solid waste pr. capita 2011 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 Denmark

Luxembourg

Cyprus

Ireland

Germany

Netherlands

Malta

Italy

Austria

France

United Kingdom

EU 27

Finland

Spain

Greece

Norway

Portugal

Belgium

Sweden

Slovenia

Lithuania

Hungary

Bulgaria

Latvia

Romania

Slovakia

Czech Republic

Poland

Estonia

0

Source: Eurostat

The variation of waste generation across the partner countries is mostly a reflection of differences in living standards across the countries.23 The living standards in Denmark are higher than in Latvia, and therefore more waste is generated per capita in Denmark compared to e.g. Latvia.

22

Municipal waste - Reference Metadata, Eurostat, (http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_SDDS/EN/env_wasmun_esms.htm), accessed August 2013 23 According to Eurostat another aspect explaining differences in the level of municipal solid waste generation is the fact that the concept of municipal waste includes different waste streams in different municipalities. Especially, the extent to which wastes generated by offices and small businesses are included differ from municipality to municipality. So, different levels of municipal waste generation can reflect different attitudes to the generation of waste, but also differences in the organisation of municipal waste management. This must be taken into consideration, when discussing levels of municipal solid waste generated across countries.

24 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.2.3. Development of municipal waste generation One of the milestones in European waste policy is that waste generated per capita should be in absolute decline by 2020. Figure 4 below illustrates the generation of municipal solid waste per capita in the EU countries from 2002 to 2011. A look at how the waste volumes per capita have evolved from 2002-2011 illustrates that Denmark and Norway have increased the generation of waste over the period, whereas Italy and Latvia have had approximately the same volume since 2002, and Spain and Austria have managed to turn their generation of waste per capita from an increasing trend to a declining trend around 2003 and 2006 respectively. The total generation of municipal solid waste in the EU27 has declined slightly from 2002 to 2011, cf. figure 4. Figure 4: Development in generation of municipal solid waste pr. capita, 2002-2011, index 100 = 2002 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Estonia

Bulgaria

Spain

Hungary

United Kingdom

Ireland

Austria

Romania

Germany

Belgium

EU27

Sweden

Netherlands

France

Cyprus

Italy

Slovenia

Latvia

Luxembourg

Malta

Portugal

Lithuania

Finland

Poland

Czech Republic

Slovakia

Denmark

Greece

Norway

0

Source: Eurostat

A closer look at the year to year development of waste generation shows that the amount of municipal solid waste generated per capita started to decline between 2006 and 2008. This indicates that the decline observed for EU 27 from 2002 to 2011 reflects the decline in economic activity as a result of the financial and economic crisis. When the European economy starts to grow again, waste generation should be expected to adopt an increasing trend as well. One thing is how much municipal solid waste is generated. Another, and very important matter, is how the waste is treated. The treatment of municipal solid waste varies significantly across the EU. This will be described more thoroughly below.

25 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.3. Waste treatment In order to analyze each country’s incentive to invest in waste-to-energy technologies, it is important to get an understanding of how municipal solid waste is currently being treated across the EU. Each Member State has reported the treatment of municipal solid waste according to five overall treatment operations: • • • • •

Material recycling Composting Energy recovery Incineration for disposal Landfilling

Across the EU, approximately 40 percent of municipal solid waste is recovered for materials and composted. 20 percent is recovered for energy and the remaining 40 percent is being disposed or landfilled, cf. figure 5. Figure 5: Municipal solid waste treatment by category, 2011 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Material recycling

Composting

Energy recovery

Incineration for disposal

Landfill

*Note: The total treatment of municipal solid waste is not equal to 100 %, due to the effects of import and export, weight losses, double-counting of secondary wastes (e.g. landfilling and recycling of residues from incineration), differences due to time lags, temporary storage and increasingly the allocation of pre-treatment such as mechanical biological treatment. This may even lead to a higher amount treated for a certain year.

Source: Eurostat

The figure above illustrates that the treatment of municipal solid waste varies significantly across countries. A number of countries landfill less than 10 percent of their municipal solid waste; namely Belgium,

26 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Germany, Netherlands, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Austria. This group of countries mainly uses their waste as a resource, either for material recycling, composting or to recover energy through incineration. Energy recovery is mainly a North European phenomenon. Norway, Sweden and Denmark incinerate more than 50 percent of their municipal solid waste and recover energy from it. Latvia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Romania, Cyprus, Greece, Malta and Bulgaria still landfill more than 70 percent of their municipal waste. Taking all these differences into consideration it is possible to group all the EU27 countries and Norway into two main categories; 1) Energy recovery and 2) Landfilling. These categories illustrate what countries are good at recovering energy from waste and what countries are lagging behind and still landfill large amounts of their municipal solid waste, cf. Box 4 below. Box 4: Country classification according to major waste treatment method 24

Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, Germany , Austria and France. Bulgaria, Malta, Greece, Cyprus, Romania, Lithuania, Slovakia, Latvia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Spain, Estonia, Portugal, Poland, Slovenia, United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy and Finland.

Energy Recovery Landfill

Even though a large part of the EU27 countries still landfill large amounts of their municipal solid waste, the development of the percentages of waste treated through different methods shows that landfilling and incineration for disposal is in overall decline in EU27, cf. figure 6 below. Figure 6: Development in treatment of municipal solid waste, EU27, 2002-2011, % 80 60 40 20 0 -20 -40 2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Energy recovery

Material recycling

Incineration for disposal

Landfill

2009

2010

2011

Composting

Source: Eurostat

24

Germany deviate from the other countries in the “Energy Recovery” box as Germany primarily incinerates waste for disposal or with such low energy recovery that it cannot be classified as energy recovery.

27 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Furthermore, incineration for energy recovery has experienced the most positive development from 2002 to 2011 increasing more than 60 percent indicating that waste has become a more important energy resource now than before. As already described in the beginning of this chapter it is expected that the evolution of the waste-toenergy field at European and National levels will be influenced by EU waste policy in general. Two specific binding targets are in particular expected to influence future waste-to-energy investments: 1. By 2020, member states should recycle 50% of their household or similar waste; 2. By 2016 (2020) the biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills should be reduced to 35% of the 1995 levels, 50% by 2009 (2013) and 75% by 2006 (2010). The two targets address both the treatment methods and the percentages of treated waste. An increased focus on recycling may divert waste streams from incineration to other practices classified as recycling, thus reducing the waste volumes available for energy recovery. This is an issue that is being discussed extensively in Denmark. At a European level this trend will however, be offset by the efforts to reduce biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills. The biodegradable fraction of municipal solid waste is very hard to prevent incineration or anaerobic digestion of this fraction may be one of the viable ways of treating it. Each country’s performance on the above mentioned binding targets are described more thoroughly below.

28 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.3.1. 50 % recycling of municipal solid waste by 2020 The Waste Framework Directive25 sets the target Table 1: Recycling in EU, 2011 for EU Member States to recycle 50 percent of Germany Austria their municipal waste by 2020. Four countries have already reached this target, while eleven countries recycle between 30 and 50 percent of their municipal solid waste. The remaining fourteen countries are further away from reaching the targets as all of them recycle less than 30 percent of their municipal solid waste. There are also significant differences across the six COOLSWEEP partner countries in the share of recycling of municipal solid waste. Austria recycles second most with 59 percent, whereas Latvia only recycles 10 percent. Both Denmark and Norway are quite close to the target with 43 and 40 percent respectively, while Italy and Spain still have some way to go from the approximately 30 percent recycling these countries experienced in 2011.

25

Belgium Netherlands Sweden Luxembourg Denmark Norway EU27 United Kingdom France Ireland Finland Slovenia Italy Spain Estonia Poland Hungary Portugal Lithuania Cyprus Greece Czech Republic Latvia Slovakia Malta Bulgaria Romania

62 59 56 51 48 47 43 40 39 39 37 36 35 34 32 29 26 23 22 20 20 20 18 17 10 10 10 6 1

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste

29 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.3.2. Diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfills The landfill directive sets a target for member states to divert biodegradable municipal waste from landfills to more sustainable methods of waste management, i.e. recycling and recovery. Landfilling being less an option in the future creates an incentive for member countries to treat the biodegradable waste on a more efficient way, e.g. by increasing the energy recovery from biodegradable waste. The size of the biodegradable waste fraction of municipal solid waste is not directly measurable26. It is estimated, however, that the share of biodegradable waste in total municipal solid waste is between 35 percent and 50 percent in the EU27. Forecasts for the development of municipal solid waste and biodegradable waste show that from 2008 to 2020, the increase in municipal solid waste is estimated to be 8 percent (from 250 to 271 million tonnes municipal solid waste), whereas the increase in biodegradable content is estimated to 10 percent (from 88 to 97 billion tonnes municipal solid waste).27 The evolution of the quantity of the generated biodegradable waste may be an important aspect both in the assessment of the evolution in the quantity of municipal solid waste generated and in its possibilities for treatment. By 2020 landfill of bio-waste is projected to be declining with close to 60 percent from 2008 to 2020 leaving landfill as only the fourth most used treatment method after composting, mechanical-biological treatment and incineration. Home composting and anaerobic digestion are foreseen to experience the most positive development with a future increase of 150 and 350 percent respectively.28 In figure 7 below, the percentage of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills compared to 1995 is illustrated.

26

While the amount of separately collected biodegradable waste fractions (mainly bio-waste, paper and cardboard) can be measured directly, the share of biodegradable municipal waste in the mixed municipal waste has to be estimated. The information from the countries and region reveals different methodologies and assumptions. 27 Assessment of the options to improve the management of bio-waste in the European Union, EC, 2010 28 Ibid.

30 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 7: Percentage of biodegradable municipal waste landfilled compared to 1995 – countries without derogation period 0,8 0,7 0,6 0,5

2006

0,4

2009

0,3

2010 Target 2006

0,2

Target 2009 0,1

Target 2016 Sweden

Spain

Netherlands

Luxembourg

Italy

Hungary

Germany

France

Finland

Denmark

Belgium

Austria

0

Source: European Environment Agency (EEA)

The figure shows that Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden already reached the 2016 target in 2006. Finland and France are close to reaching the 2016 target, while Hungary and Spain reached the 2009 target in 2009. Italy is close to the 2009 target in 2010. It should be noted that Norway has implemented the EU Landfill Directive as part of the European Economic Area agreement. However, there are no available data for Norway on landfilling of biodegradable municipal solid waste. However, Norway does not landfill municipal solid waste, following the landfill ban that was introduced in 2009. 29 Sixteen countries have been given a four year derogation period. Figure 8 below illustrates the percentage of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfill in those sixteen countries.

29

Municipal waste management in Norway, EEA, 2013

31 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 8: Percentage of biodegradable municipal waste landfilled compared to 1995 – countries with derogation periods 160% 140% 120% 100% 2006

80%

2009 60%

2010

United Kingdom

Slovenia

Slovakia

Romania

Portugal

Poland

Malta

Lithuania

Latvia

Ireland

Greece

Target 2020 Estonia

0% Czech Republic

Target 2013

Cyprus

20%

Croatia

Target 2010

Bulgaria

40%

Source: European Environment Agency (EEA)

Nine out of the sixteen countries (among them Latvia) did not reach the 2010 target in 2010. These nine countries still need to reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills in order to meet the 2010 target. To sum up Cyprus, Greece, Czech Republic, Malta, Latvia, Poland, Italy, Lithuania and Portugal are especially challenged in reaching the 2016 (or 2020) target of diverting biodegradable municipal solid waste from landfills and thereby having most incentives for investments in waste-to-energy, cf. figure 9 below.

32 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 9: Percent missing to fulfil target on diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfill, 2009/2010 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% -40%

Cyprus Greece Czech Republic Malta Latvia Poland Italy Lithuania Portugal Romania Slovakia Spain Hungary Ireland Bulgaria Finland France Slovenia Estonia United Kingdom Luxembourg Netherlands Sweden Denmark Austria Belgium Germany

-60%

*No data available for Norway.

To gain more insight into the waste treatment operations in each of the six partner countries, the next section will look further into how the treatment of municipal solid waste changed from 2002 to 2011 in each of the partner countries.

33 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.3.3. Treatment of municipal solid waste in the partner countries30 Figure 10: Treatment of MSW in Denmark

The development of municipal solid waste treatment practices in Denmark is illustrated in figure 10. Municipal solid waste is increasingly being recycled, and Denmark is close to fulfilling the target of 50 percent recycling by 2020.

100 80 60 40

Denmark has a long tradition for energy recovery through incineration. This is illustrated in the figure as the main waste treatment operation in Denmark is energy recovery.

20 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

Incineration for disposal Composting

Figure 11: Treatment of MSW in Norway

Landfilling of waste suitable for incineration was banned in 1997 in Denmark and the level of landfilling is thus close to zero.

Development in treatment of MSW in Norway The development of municipal solid waste treatment operations in Norway is illustrated in figure 11. Even though the level of recycling has not increased in the later years, Norway is close to fulfilling the target of 50 percent recycling by 2020.

100 80 60 40

In 2010 Norway’s energy recovery through incineration increased dramatically. This may be explained by the incineration tax which was abrogated in 2010.

20 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

30

Development in treatment of MSW in Denmark

Incineration for disposal Composting

Landfilling of biodegradable waste was banned in 2009 and the figure shows that in 2011 the level of landfilling is close to zero.

Based on Eurostat data.

34 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 12: Treatment of MSW in Italy

Development in treatment of MSW in Italy The development of municipal solid waste treatment operations in Italy is illustrated in figure 12. The level of material recycling is increasing steadily and it is expected that Italy will reach the EU target on recycling by 2020.

100 80 60

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Landfilling of municipal solid waste is decreasing steadily as well and Italy is coming closer to the landfill targets. In 2002 Italy landfilled more than 60 percent of the country’s municipal solid waste. In 2011 only approximately 40 percent of its municipal solid waste was landfilled.

Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

Energy recovery and composting have increased slightly from 2002 to 2011.

40 20 0

Incineration for disposal Composting

Figure 13: Treatment of MSW in Spain

Development in treatment of MSW in Spain

100 80

The development of municipal solid waste treatment operations in Spain is illustrated in figure 13.

60

The level of municipal solid waste treatment in Spain has not changed dramatically between 2002 and 2011.

40 20 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

The picture is the same as it was in 2002 and Spain is thus rather far from reaching the EU targets on both 50 percent recycling and the landfill targets.

Incineration for disposal Composting

35 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 14: Treatment of MSW in Austria

Development in treatment of MSW in Austria The development of municipal solid waste treatment operations in Austria is illustrated in figure 14. Austria is the only partner country which has managed to reach the 2020 targets of 50 percent recycling already.

100 80 60

Austria has a long tradition of material recycling. This has to do with the separate collection policy which was introduced in 1992.

40 20 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

Incineration for disposal Composting

Figure 15: Treatment of MSW in Latvia

Furthermore, a landfill ban was introduced in 2004, and thus explaining why landfilling declined dramatically in 2004 and incineration increased.

Development in treatment of MSW in Latvia

100 80

The development of municipal solid waste treatment operations in Latvia is illustrated in figure 15.

60

Latvia is lagging behind all the other 5 partner countries and is far from fulfilling the target of 50 percent recycling and the landfilling targets.

40 20 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Landfill Energy recovery Material recycling

A small increase in material recycling can however be identified in the figure.

Incineration for disposal Composting

36 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

2.3.4. Conclusion Waste management practices differ substantially among the member states despite the common regulatory framework set by EU waste policy. At some degree, these differences can be explained by varying initial waste management methods and by the fact that some front runner countries started the valorisation of waste before the introduction of related EU policies or even went beyond the minimum requirements. Even so, all the countries have to reach a set of legally binding treatment targets by a specifically set deadline, and the fact that a large part of them are still behind in the process is a clear driver for investing in technologies which have the potential to help them move their waste treatment practices up the waste management hierarchy. Even though the practices of prevention, re-use and recycling of waste have priority over energy recovery and landfill according to EU policy, it was illustrated that large amounts of waste are still sent to landfills in many of the countries. This might be explained by difficulties in changing public behaviour and perception, and the costs implied by the recycling infrastructure. In countries with advanced waste treatment systems the utilisation of waste-to-energy is an integrated part of the system. Taking this into account, the waste-to-energy technologies may be regarded as the natural and necessary step of those countries going from landfilling towards higher levels in the waste hierarchy. Investments in waste-to-energy technologies are often of significant volume. However, waste-to-energy can generate revenue streams, which will improve the business case for moving up the waste hierarchy away from landfill. The next section will review the energy production systems, i.e. the market on which waste-to-energy technologies compete with alternative technologies to deliver a significant and reliable supply of renewable energy. Current energy infrastructures play an important role, when looking at how energy from waste can be integrated. Furthermore, it is important to understand how the European energy policy influences the potential for further investments in waste-to-energy technologies. The most influential targets for wasteto-energy in the European energy policy is therefore highlighted and described in more detail below.

37 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3. Energy The European economies are dependent on a secure, reliable, cost-effective and climate friendly supply of energy. Waste-to-energy technologies can provide part of this supply. Whether waste-to-energy is the most secure, reliable, cost-effective and climate friendly supply of energy will, however, depend on available energy alternatives in each EU Member State. Some countries have abundant natural energy resources, such as coal, gas, oil, wind, sun or water reservoirs. In these countries, the cost-benefit of recovering energy from waste may look quite different compared to countries less endowed with natural resources. This chapter will review sources used for energy production (heat, electricity and transport) across EU27 and the COOLSWEEP partner countries. Availability of cheap and reliable energy will – all else being equal – make investments in energy from waste less attractive. If the alternative is a fossil fuel, however, ongoing efforts to establish a well-functioning European quota system for carbon dioxide emissions and 2020 targets for renewable energy will make waste-to-energy investments more attractive. Hence, this chapter includes a review of political targets for renewable energy and an assessment of how they will affect the attractiveness of waste-to-energy investments across Europe.

3.1. European energy policy Targets set for climate and energy in the European energy policy are important drivers for further developments of and investments in waste-to-energy. 2020 targets for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, increased energy consumption from renewable sources, energy efficiency and sustainable transport are all factors that must be taken into account when looking at potentials for waste-to-energy. The European energy policy has three main objectives: sustainability, competitiveness and security of supply. 31 In the coming decades the European energy system will gradually make a transition from a fossil fuel base to a renewable fuel base. And this transition will be a driver for waste-to-energy technologies. The three main objectives are set in The EU Climate and Energy Package32 adopted in 2009. The policy package is legally binding and is designed to ensure that the EU meets its climate and energy targets for 2020. These targets, of which the first three are known as the 20-20-20 targets, set four key objectives for 2020: 1. 2. 3. 4.

A 20 percent reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels; Raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20 percent; A 20 percent improvement in the EU’s energy efficiency; At least 10 percent of transport final energy consumption to come from renewable energy sources.

The first target of reducing the EU greenhouse gas emissions with 20 percent provides a basis for a stronger market pull for waste-to-energy technologies in Europe. As part of their strategy for meeting this target, member states can substitute coal and other fossil fuels with biomass and waste for electricity and

31 32

Green Paper – A European Strategy for Sustainable, Competitive and Secure Energy, EC, 2006 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/package/index_en.htm, accessed August 2013

38 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

heat production. Greenhouse gas emissions can also be reduced by promoting the use of biofuels to replace gasoline and diesel in transport. The second target raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20 percent is also considered a positive driver for waste-to-energy – especially in countries being far away from their national target. Replacing fossil fuels with renewables will create a stronger market pull for a range of renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar and waste. Surely the market pull for energy from waste will depend on the costs associated with an expansion of the capacity relative to the price of other renewables. Target number three is set to improve the energy efficiency with 20 percent33. The Energy Efficiency Directive34 establishes a common framework of measures for the promotion of energy efficiency within the Union in order to ensure the achievement of the 20 percent headline target on energy efficiency. The direct effect of this target will be to decrease total demand for energy in Europe, which will have a negative effect on demand for energy supply to the energy grid from waste. The directive does, however, promote high-efficiency cogeneration and district heating and cooling due to its high potential for saving primary energy. Efficient district heating and cooling refers to a “district heating and cooling system using at least 50 percent renewable energy, 50 percent waste heat, 75 percent cogenerated heat or 50 percent of a combination of such energy and heat”35. Member States shall bring into force laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with the Energy Efficiency Directive by 5 June 2014. One effect of this will be a stronger market pull for industrial symbioses and other means of exploiting excess heat generated in industry, e.g. through co-incineration of waste and other fuels. A report has identified a number of ‘hot spots’ in Europe, where the excess heat is especially abundant.36 Further exploring ways to promote the use of waste heat in for example these hot spots will help to improve energy efficiency in general. Thus, the energy efficiency target will have both negative and positive effects for the waste-to-energy field. The fourth target is that by 2020 10 percent of transport final energy consumption comes from renewables. It is expected that a significant share of this target will be met by expanding the use of biofuels. There is a tremendous potential for production of sustainable biofuels from agricultural waste and the biodegradable fraction of municipal solid waste. The technology has not fully matured though, and the extent of market penetration of biofuels will depend on the ability to cut costs of production.

33

The target is defined as a maximum of 1474 Mtoe primary energy or 1078 Mtoe final energy consumption in 2020. Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency. 35 Ibid., Article 2 (41). 36 Heat roadmap Europe 2050 – Second pre-study for EU 27, Euroheat & Power, 2013. 34

39 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3.1.1. Market pull provided by Europe 2020 energy targets The Europe 2020 energy targets establish a sustained market pull in the coming years for renewable energy, including energy from waste. The market pull will, however, differ across member states due to differences in national endowments and political priorities, as well as how ambitious national targets have been set. Biodegradable waste is a renewable energy source. For that reason waste is also relevant when having a closer look at the target regarding 20 percent share of energy consumption from renewable energy sources. The Renewable Energy Directive37 establishes a common framework for the promotion of energy generation from renewable sources by setting mandatory national targets for its share in the gross final consumption and in the transport sector (target 4 explored below). Within the directive, the energy from renewable sources is defined as “energy from renewable non-fossil sources, namely wind, solar, aerothermal, geothermal, hydrothermal and ocean energy, hydropower, biomass, landfill gas, sewage treatment plant gas and biogases”38. Furthermore biomass is defined as the “biodegradable fraction of products, waste and residues from biological origin from agriculture (including vegetal and animal substances), forestry and related industries including fisheries and aquaculture, as well as the biodegradable fraction of industrial and municipal waste”39. The European target of a 20 percent share of final energy consumption from renewable sources by 2020 is an aggregate of individual targets for each member state. Based on their national target, member states draft national action plans for the expansion of their capacity for renewable energy. Every two years the European Commission publishes a Renewable Energy Progress Report, which assesses the progress in the expansion and use of renewable energy within member states towards the 2020 renewable energy targets40. From 2004 to 2011 the share of renewable energy sources in energy consumption has increased from 8.1 percent to 13 percent in EU27. Some countries have made significant progress and have more than doubled the share of renewable energy in final energy consumption, including Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Hungary, Netherlands and United Kingdom. However, many of these countries (as are others) are still some distance from reaching their individual 2020 target, cf. figure 16.

37

Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. 38 Ibid., Article 2 (a). 39 Ibid., Article 2 (e). 40 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/reports/2011_en.htm, accessed August 2013.

40 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 16: Percentage of renewable energy in final energy consumption* 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Norway Sweden Latvia Finland Austria Estonia Portugal Denmark Romania Lithuania Slovenia Spain Bulgaria EU27 Germany Greece Italy France Poland Slovak Republic Czech Republic Hungary Ireland Cyprus Netherlands Belgium** United Kingdom Luxembourg Malta

0

2011

2004

2020 target

* Overall RES share (%) with aviation cap adjustment including flexibility mechanisms ** Data are preliminary; Eurostat's estimates Source: Eurostat

Among the partner countries Austria, Denmark, Spain and Italy have experienced a significant progress from 2004 to 2011, while Latvia and Norway have not seen the same progress. They have however already high renewable energy levels. Figure 16 also shows that among the Member States, the highest share of renewables in gross final energy consumption in 2011 was seen in Sweden (46.8 percent), while Latvia, Finland and Austria each reported that more than 30 percent of their final energy consumption was derived from renewables. Estonia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Romania, Sweden and partner country Norway have either reached or are close to reaching the 2020 targets. By contrast, France and United Kingdom seem to be especially challenged in reaching their targets since they need to increase their share of renewables in final energy consumption by at least 10 percentage points. The remaining partner countries need to increase their share from approximately 3 (Austria) to 7 percentage points (Denmark and Latvia) to reach their targets leaving those countries with modest to low incentives for waste-to-energy compared to other EU27 countries. Based on this specific target France and United Kingdom together with Malta, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Belgium, Cyprus, Ireland and Greece seem to be furthest away from reaching their individual targets and for that reason having the most incentives – compared to other EU27 countries – embedded in their national target to replace fossil fuels with energy from waste as one of the renewable options available, see figure 17.

41 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 17: Percent missing in 2011 to fulfill 2020 target of renewable energy sources

Malta United Kingdom Luxembourg Netherlands Belgium Cyprus Ireland France Greece Italy Germany Poland Slovakia Hungary Czech Republic Slovenia Spain Denmark Portugal Latvia Finland Bulgaria Lithuania Romania Austria Sweden Norway Estonia

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

In the following, the overall picture on renewable energy sources will be analyzed further looking at energy to electricity, heat and transport respectively.

42 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3.2. Electricity The market for electricity is an important driver for waste-to-energy. Electricity is produced from a range of sources and gross electricity production is close to 5 times larger than the production of heat in EU27. Therefore, most Member States will have to substitute solid fuels, gas and oil for renewable energy, including waste-to-energy, in the production of electricity in order to reach the overall 2020 targets described above.

3.2.1. Renewable energy in electricity production Looking at renewable energy in electricity it is worth noticing that all the partner countries have a higher share of renewable energy in electricity than the EU27 average. Especially Norway stands out as it produces more electricity from renewables than the country needs for consumption. Other countries with a high degree of renewables in electricity consumption (more than 30 percent) are Sweden, Portugal, Romania and Slovenia. Figure 18: Percentage of produced renewable energy in electricity consumption 120 100 80 60 40 20

EU27 Norway Austria Sweden Portugal Latvia Denmark Spain Romania Slovenia Finland Italy Germany Slovak Republic Ireland France Greece Bulgaria Estonia Czech Republic Netherlands Lithuania Belgium* United Kingdom Poland Hungary Luxembourg Cyprus Malta

0

2004

2011

*Data are preliminary; Eurostat's estimates Source: Eurostat

From 2004 to 2011 the share of renewable energy in electricity consumption has increased from 14.2 percent to 21.7 percent at EU27 level. Some countries have made significant progress increasing the share of renewables in electricity consumption with more than 10 percentage points, including Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, cf. figure 18. Among the remaining partner countries Austria, Italy and Norway have experienced increases between 4 and 7 percentage points from 2004 to 2011, while Latvia has seen a minor decrease in the period

43 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

considered. Latvia is however the country with fourth highest share of renewables in electricity consumptions in EU27 with 44.7 percent.

Renewable energy mix in electricity production It is possible to break down renewable electricity consumption by source, by looking at the production of electricity. Table 2 below shows how different types of renewable energy sources, e.g. biomass and waste, have contributed to the total share of renewables in production of electricity. This information will provide insight into what renewable alternatives, energy from biomass and waste will most likely compete with in increasing the share of renewables in electricity.

44 This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Table 2: Electricity production, 2011, (million tonnes of oil equivalent) Gross electricity production, mtoe

2011 EU-27 + Norway Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Greece Spain France Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom Norway

295,7 8,0 4,4 7,6 3,0 52,9 1,1 2,4 5,1 25,3 48,8 26,2 0,4 0,5 0,5 0,4 3,1 0,2 9,7 6,0 14,1 4,6 5,4 1,4 2,5 6,3 12,9 31,9 11,1

Gross electricity production - share of EU27 + Norway, 2011 (%)

Nuclear energy

Solid fuels

Gas

Oil

100,0 2,7 1,5 2,6 1,0 17,9 0,4 0,8 1,7 8,6 16,5 8,9 0,1 0,2 0,2 0,1 1,0 0,1 3,3 2,0 4,8 1,5 1,8 0,5 0,9 2,1 4,4 10,8 3,8

26,4 52,1 31,6 32,1 0,0 17,6 0,0 0,0 0,0 19,6 78,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 43,6 0,0 3,7 0,0 0,0 0,0 18,8 38,2 52,6 31,6 40,2 18,6 0,0

24,7 3,7 53,4 53,4 39,7 42,7 85,1 25,2 52,0 14,9 2,7 14,7 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 18,0 0,0 18,9 7,8 85,3 18,6 39,7 32,6 12,1 20,7 0,8 29,3 0,0

21,2 29,6 4,0 4,6 16,5 15,1 5,3 54,2 23,3 29,1 5,1 49,2 0,0 49,5 49,2 48,8 30,1 0,0 63,5 20,7 4,5 28,1 13,4 3,1 12,4 13,6 1,5 39,9 3,2

2,1 0,3 0,3 0,1 1,3 1,1 0,4 0,8 9,9 5,2 0,6 6,5 96,2 0,0 3,9 0,0 0,4 100,0 1,3 1,5 1,5 5,1 1,2 0,1 2,0 0,6 0,5 1,0 0,0

Gross electricity production, share by source, 2011 (%)

Renewable energy, share of total production, 2011 (%)

Renewable Other energy 25,4 14,2 10,6 9,9 42,5 23,1 9,2 19,8 14,7 31,1 13,6 29,3 3,8 50,5 42,2 51,2 7,9 0,0 12,5 70,0 8,7 48,3 26,8 26,1 20,7 33,2 56,9 11,3 96,7

0,1 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,5 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0 0,3 0,0 0,0 4,7 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,3 0,3 0,0 0,0 0,1

Biomass / waste, share of total production, 2011 (%)

Solar energy

Hydro power

Wind power

Biomass / waste

Other

Industrial waste

Wood

Biogas

MSW

1,4 2,5 0,2 2,5 0,1 3,1 0,0 0,0 1,0 3,0 0,4 3,5 0,2 0,0 0,0 1,0 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,3 0,0 0,6 0,0 0,8 2,4 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0

14,2 2,9 8,7 3,8 0,0 4,8 0,3 2,6 7,6 12,0 9,7 16,3 0,0 47,4 30,3 45,7 0,6 0,0 0,1 59,6 1,9 23,9 24,3 23,6 15,4 16,9 44,3 3,1 95,3

5,2 2,5 1,7 0,4 27,8 7,9 2,9 16,0 5,6 14,4 2,2 3,2 2,4 1,1 8,8 1,4 1,7 0,0 4,5 2,8 2,0 17,3 2,2 0,0 0,0 0,6 4,0 4,2 1,0

4,4 6,4 0,1 3,1 14,6 7,2 6,0 1,2 0,5 1,8 1,3 4,3 1,2 1,9 3,0 3,1 5,5 0,0 7,8 7,4 4,8 6,1 0,3 1,7 2,9 15,6 8,6 3,8 0,4

0,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,1 1,9 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,4 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0

0,1 0,6 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,3 0,0 0,0 0,2 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,5 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,1 0,0

2,1 3,4 0,1 1,9 8,7 1,9 6,0 0,5 0,0 1,0 0,3 0,8 0,0 0,2 2,2 0,0 4,2 0,0 3,5 5,3 4,4 4,6 0,3 0,8 2,3 14,7 6,4 1,5 0,2

1,2 0,8 0,0 1,0 1,0 3,5 0,1 0,8 0,4 0,3 0,2 2,0 1,2 1,7 0,9 1,2 0,6 0,0 0,9 0,9 0,3 0,3 0,0 0,9 0,4 0,2 0,0 1,5 0,0

1,0 1,5 0,0 0,2 4,9 1,6 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,5 0,8 1,5 0,0 0,0 0,0 1,9 0,6 0,0 3,3 0,8 0,0 1,1 0,0 0,0 0,1 0,7 2,1 0,7 0,2

Source: Eurostat

45

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Table 2 illustrates significant differences in the production of electricity in EU27. In EU27 nuclear energy, solid fuels (e.g. coal), gas and renewables contribute approximately one quarter each to total electricity production. The aggregate for EU27 is however not very representative of the national energy systems. At national level the energy system typically has one dominant source. Norway and EU Member States41 are divided according to their main source for electricity production, cf. Box 5. Box 5: Main source to production of electricity Nuclear energy Solid fuels Gas Renewable energy

France, Slovakia, Belgium, Hungary and Slovenia Poland, Estonia, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Germany and Romania Netherlands, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania and United Kingdom Norway, Austria, Sweden, Latvia, Luxembourg, Portugal, Denmark, Finland and Spain

Most notably is it that five out of six partner countries rely mainly of renewable energy sources in the production of electricity, while the remaining partner country, Italy, mainly relies on gas, cf. Box 5. In EU2742 25.4 percent of electricity production is renewable. The main renewable source is hydro power, which produces 14.2 percent of the overall electricity in the EU. Next are wind power (5.2 percent) and biomass/waste (4.4 percent), while solar (1.4 percent) and other sources (0.2 percent) are less exploited. The countries mainly using biomass/waste as a renewable source to production of electricity are Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Portugal and Estonia all with a share from biomass/waste above 6 percent. The remaining partner countries all use biomass/waste as a source to electricity production to a lesser degree than EU27 average ranging from 0.4 percent in Norway to 4.3 percent in Italy. Finland and Denmark have approximately 15 percent of their electricity production from biomass/waste indicating years of experience in this type of energy production. The remaining countries rely more on other renewable sources, i.e. hydro and wind power. Countries with a high degree of other renewable sources than biomass/waste may be less inclined to invest in energy from waste. They are endowed with other natural energy resource, and already have other systems in place. On this basis, we argue that countries with the strongest drive for further connecting energy from waste to the power grid are Hungary, Estonia, Netherlands, Poland, Finland, Belgium, Denmark and United Kingdom. The remaining partner countries seem to have fewer incentives for further exploring the possibilities in waste-to-energy, cf. figure 19 below.

41 42

Cyprus and Malta are left out here, since they rely almost entirely on oil in the production of electricity. EU27 is here including Norway.

46

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 19: Biomass/waste as a share of renewable resources in production of electricity, 2011

Hungary Estonia Netherlands Poland Finland Belgium Denmark United Kingdom Czech Republic Cyprus Germany Sweden Italy Slovakia Portugal Austria France Lithuania Slovenia Ireland Luxembourg Spain Latvia Greece Romania Bulgaria Norway

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

*No data available for Malta.

Biomass mix in electricity production It is possible to further break down biomass/waste, which reveal further differences, cf. table 3 above. One observation is that industrial waste hardly contributes as a source to electricity production. Another observation is that wood waste is mainly used in Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Estonia, Austria, Portugal, Netherlands and Belgium all with more than 3 percent of electricity production from wood waste. The three main countries using biogas to production of electricity are Germany, Italy and Latvia, who all use more than 1.7 percent of biogas in the production of electricity. Finally, the main contribution from municipal solid waste in production of electricity – above 2 percent – can be seen in Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden. Municipal solid waste as a source in electricity production in the remaining partner countries varies from none in Latvia, to 1.5 percent in Italy. This indicates that municipal solid waste is not in general exploited as a resource for production of electricity in Europe. However, Denmark and Netherlands get 5 and 3.3 percent of the total electricity from municipal solid waste respectively, which is equal to what solar energy generates in the countries that have installed most solar energy capacity. That indicates that municipal solid waste is a substantial renewable resource for future electricity production.

3.2.2. National Renewable Energy Action Plans The National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP) give more insight into what renewable energy sources the partner countries will expand in the coming years, in order to meet the national targets for renewable energy in 2020.

47

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

In EU27, electricity production of biomass/waste is not a widely exploited resource. Among the partner countries, Denmark is an exception. In Denmark one third of the renewable renewable electricity stems from biomass/waste. According to Denmark’s National Renewable Energy Action Plan, biomass is also a priority for the future expansion of renewable energy capacity. Biomass is the renewable that is planned to increase the most towards ds 2020. The remaining partner countries only plan to expand biomass/waste in their electricity production moderately. Instead, these countries plan for an expansion of solar power, wind power or both. The National Renewable Energy Action Plans for each of the COOLSWEEP partner countries are described below. Figure 20.1: Denmark – sources to Figure 20.2: .2: Gross production of electricity from RES – renewable electricity, 2011 expected development from NREAP 250 200

35%

150 65%

100 50 0

Wind power

2010201120122013201420152016 2017201820192020 Hydro Solar Wind Biomass

Biomass / wastes

The renewable energy sources to Denmark’s production of electricity lectricity are approximately two third from wind and one third from biomass/waste. Denmark’s action plan shows that biomass/waste as a source in production of electricity is expected to be more than doubled. Wind will also expand, while solar solar power will increase, but remain at a rather low level in 2020 compared pared to wind and biomass/waste. biomass/waste

Figure 21.1: Spain – sources to Figure 21.2: .2: Gross production of electricity from RES – renewable electricity, 2011 expected development from NREAP 600 6%

10%

500 400

46%

300

38%

200 100 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Solar energy Wind power

Hydro power Biomass / wastes

Hydro

Geothermal

Solar

Wind

Biomass

The renewable energy sources to Spain’s production of electricity are 46 percent from wind, 38 percent from hydro, 10 percent from solar and 6 percent from biomass/waste. Spain’s action plan shows that solar power as a source in production of electricity iss expected to be 4-fold in the future, while wind and biomass/waste double their

48

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

contribution to renewable production of electricity in the future.

Figure 22.1: Italy – sources renewable electricity, 2011 6% 15%

to Figure 22.2: .2: Gross production of electricity from f RES – expected development from NREAP 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

12%

11% 56%

2010201120122013201420152016 2017201820192020 Solar energy Wind power Other

Hydro power Biomass / wastes

Hydro Wind

Geothermal Biomass

Solar

The renewable energy sources to Italy’s production of electricity are approximately 60 percent from hydro and 1015 percent wind, solar and biomass/waste. Italy’s action plan shows that biomass/waste and wind as a source in production of electricity is expected to be more than doubled. The main focus area though seems to be solar power, which is planned to increase almost 6-fold 6 in the future.

Figure 23.1: Latvia – sources to Figure 23.2: .2: Gross production of electricity from RES – renewable electricity, 2011 expected development from NREAP 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

2% 4%

94%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Hydro power Biomass / wastes

Wind power

Hydro

Geothermal

Solar

Wind

Biomass

The renewable energy source to Latvia’s production of electricity is almost exclusively hydro power. Latvia’s action plan indicates that other sources will receive more attention towards 2020. Both biomass/waste and wind as a source in production of electricity icity are expected to approximately 16-fold 16 in the future, future while solar power is expected to increase 4-fold, fold, though from a very low level.

49

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 24.1: Austria – sources to Figure 24.2: .2: Gross production of electricity from RES – renewable electricity, 2011 expected development from NREAP 4%

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

11%

85%

20102011201220132014201520162017 2017201820192020 Hydro power Biomass / wastes

Wind power

Hydro

Geothermal

Solar

Wind

Biomass

The renewable energy source to Austria’s production of electricity is mainly hydro contributing with 85 percent. The share from biomass/waste is 11 percent. percent. Austria’s action plan shows that solar and wind power as sources in production of electricity are expected to attract most attention increasing 350 and 250 percent respectively.

Figure 25.1: Norway – sources to Figure 25.2: Gross ross production of electricity from RES – renewable electricity, 2011 expected development from NREAP 1500 1%

1200 900 600

99%

300 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Hydro power

Wind power

Hydro

Wind

Biomass

The renewable energy source to Norway’s production of electricity is almost exclusively hydro power. Norway’s action plan shows that wind power as a renewable source in production of electricity is expected to attract most attention increasing 15-fold, fold, though from a very low level. Hydro power will remain more or less unchanged, while biomass as a source to production of electricity is expected to increase 70 percent towards 2020. However, this is again from a very low level.

50

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3.3. Heating and cooling The market for heating and cooling is also an important driver for waste-to-energy. Although the gross production of heat is only one fifth of the production of electricity, biomass/waste is an important source for production of heat. Increasing the share of biomass/waste in the production of heat is a way to reduce the use of solid fuels and gas and thereby also increase the total share of renewable energy sources. Furthermore district heating and cooling is on the agenda in EU. The Energy Efficiency Directive requires Member States to adopt policies which encourage exploring possibilities for using efficient district heating and cooling systems. Added together these things are positive drivers for waste-to-energy in EU.

3.3.1. Renewable energy in heating and cooling production Four out of the six partner countries have a very high degree of renewables in heating and cooling consumption, cf. figure 26. Latvia, Norway, Denmark and Austria all have twice the share of renewables in heating and cooling consumption compared to the EU27 average. Other countries with a high degree of renewables in heating and cooling consumption (more than 30 percent) are Sweden, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Portugal and Lithuania. The remaining partner countries, Italy and Spain, have a renewable energy share in heating and cooling consumption below EU27 average at 11 and 13.5 percent respectively. Figure 26: Percentage of renewable energy in heating and cooling consumption

EU27 Sweden Estonia Latvia Finland Norway Portugal Lithuania Denmark Austria Slovenia Romania Bulgaria Greece Cyprus France Spain Poland Czech Republic Hungary Germany Italy Slovak Republic Malta Luxembourg Ireland Belgium* Netherlands United Kingdom

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

2004

2011

*Data are preliminary; Eurostat's estimates Source: Eurostat

From 2004 to 2011 the share of renewable energy in heating and cooling consumption has increased from 9.5 percent to 15.1 percent at EU27-level. Some countries have made significant progress increasing the share of renewables in heating and cooling consumption with more than 10 percentage points, i.e. Denmark, Estonia, Austria and Sweden, cf. figure 26. Among the remaining partner countries Latvia, Spain, Italy and Norway have experienced increases between 2 and 9 percentage points from 2004 to 2011. 51

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Energy mix in heat production It is possible to break down renewable heating and cooling consumption by source, by looking at the production of heat43. Table 3 below illustrates how different energy sources, e.g. biomass and waste, have contributed to the total production of heat. One thing especially worth noting is that biomass and waste is currently the only real alternative to fossil fuels indicating a significant potential for waste-to-energy in the production of heat.

43

Although data are not available for heating and cooling conclusions regarding heating are judged to also apply to countries needing cooling instead of heating.

52

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe Table 3: Heat production, 2011 (million tonnes of oil equivalent) Gross heat production, mtoe 2011 EU-27 + Norway Belgium Bulgaria Czech Republic Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Greece Spain France Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Slovakia Finland Sweden United Kingdom Norway

59,4 0,9 1,4 2,9 3,2 11,2 0,5 .. 0,1 .. 3,7 5,2 .. 0,6 1,1 0,0 1,2 .. 3,4 1,9 7,4 0,5 2,4 0,2 1,0 4,4 4,3 1,4 0,6

Gross heat production, share by source, 2011 (%)

Biomass/waste, share of total production, 2011 (%)

Gross heat production share of EU27 + Norway, 2011 (%)

Solid fuels

Gas

Oil

Biomass / waste

Other

Industrial wastes

Wood

Biogas

MSW

100,0 1,5 2,3 5,0 5,3 18,8 0,9 .. 0,1 .. 6,2 8,8 .. 1,0 1,8 0,0 2,0 .. 5,7 3,2 12,5 0,8 4,0 0,4 1,8 7,5 7,2 2,3 0,9

28,3 0,0 39,0 62,2 23,5 32,8 16,8 .. 98,1 .. 7,1 0,7 .. 1,0 0,5 0,0 6,8 .. 11,2 3,4 81,9 0,0 25,6 57,3 25,5 33,6 7,3 12,5 1,1

42,4 80,2 48,6 29,8 26,3 47,5 46,9 .. 0,0 .. 62,1 58,0 .. 81,2 57,8 88,5 83,7 .. 73,9 38,3 10,1 88,2 64,0 29,5 46,3 22,5 10,5 84,8 2,9

6,1 1,9 5,3 1,1 1,8 1,1 5,5 .. 1,9 .. 15,5 26,4 .. 2,0 2,1 0,0 0,5 .. 4,8 6,6 1,9 11,6 8,3 1,3 12,1 5,1 3,7 2,8 6,4

20,7 10,1 0,4 4,9 46,0 17,1 30,8 .. 0,0 .. 15,3 14,6 .. 15,8 17,1 11,5 7,4 .. 10,1 50,8 5,8 0,0 2,1 11,5 10,7 35,8 68,1 0,0 71,7

2,6 7,8 6,7 2,1 2,5 1,5 0,0 .. 0,0 .. 0,0 0,3 .. 0,0 22,5 0,0 1,5 .. 0,0 0,9 0,3 0,2 0,0 0,4 5,5 3,0 10,4* 0,0 17,9

0,8 0,7 0,0 0,3 0,0 2,2 0,0 .. 0,0 .. 0,0 0,0 .. 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,2 .. 0,0 0,8 0,8 0,0 0,0 0,9 0,4 0,4 0,4 0,0 15,9

11,9 0,8 0,4 2,4 26,8 4,0 30,8 .. 0,0 .. 0,0 4,6 .. 15,1 17,1 7,7 5,3 .. 1,4 42,1 4,6 0,0 2,0 8,1 9,7 33,2 48,0 0,0 11,8

1,0 0,7 0,0 0,2 1,0 0,5 0,0 .. 0,0 .. 0,0 6,7 .. 0,7 0,0 3,8 0,4 .. 0,1 0,5 0,3 0,0 0,1 2,6 0,3 0,2 1,9 0,0 0,4

7,0 8,0 0,0 1,9 18,3 10,4 0,0 .. 0,0 .. 15,3 3,3 .. 0,0 0,0 0,0 1,5 .. 8,6 7,3 0,1 0,0 0,0 0,0 0,3 2,0 17,8 0,0 43,6

* Sweden derives 10.2 pct. of its heat from heat pumps. Source: Eurostat

53

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe Table 344 shows significant differences in the production of heat in EU27. In EU27 three main sources cover more than 90 percent of the total production of heat. That is gas (42.4 percent), solid fuels (28.3 percent) and biomass/waste (20.7 percent). The aggregate for EU27 is not representative of the national energy systems. At the national level most often the energy system has one dominant source. The EU27 member states45 can roughly be divided according to their main source for heat production, cf. box 6 below. Box 6: Main source to production of heat Greece, Poland, Czech Republic and Slovenia Solid fuels Luxembourg, Portugal, United Kingdom, Hungary, Latvia, Belgium, Netherlands, Romania, Gas Biomass/waste

France, Italy, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Germany, Estonia, and Slovakia Norway, Sweden, Austria, Denmark and Finland

Three of the six partner countries rely mostly on biomass/waste, i.e. Norway, Austria and Denmark, in the production of heat, while the remaining partner countries rely on gas. The table above indicates that the knowledge and experience with producing heat from biomass/waste is mostly found in Norway, Sweden, Austria, Denmark and Finland.

Biomass mix in heat production It is possible to further break down biomass/waste, which reveal further differences, cf. table 3 above. One observation is that wood (and other solid) waste is the main source of biomass/wastes in heat production with a share of 11.9 percent. Next follows municipal solid waste (7 percent), while biogas (1 percent) and industrial waste (0.8 percent) are less exploited. Another observation is that wood waste is mainly used in Sweden, Austria, Finland, Estonia and Denmark all with more than 25 percent of heat production from wood waste. The main countries using municipal solid waste in production of heat – above 10 percent – are Norway, Denmark, Sweden, France and Germany. Municipal solid waste as a source in heat production in the remaining partner countries varies from 0 percent in Latvia, 3.3 percent in Italy to 7.3 percent in Austria. There are two interesting observations regarding the less exploited sources – biogas and industrial waste. Namely Italy and Norway stand out on using biogas and industrial waste respectively as sources to heat production. However, the production of heat in Norway is rather limited. To sum up biomass/waste is an important resource in heat production and is for now the only real alternative to fossil fuels. Municipal solid waste as a resource is a very important resource to heat production in some countries. This observation implies that municipal solid waste – and production of heat from it – can be further developed in countries which currently only to a limited degree use municipal solid waste in the production of heat.

44 45

It should be noted that there are no numbers available for Spain. Ireland, Spain, Cyprus and Malta are left out here, since they have not reported any production of heat.

54

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

3.3.2. National Renewable Energy Action Plans The National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP) give more insight into which renewable energy sources the partner countries will expand and produce heat from in the coming years, in order to meet the national targets for renewable energy in 2020. In EU27 biomass/waste iomass/waste is an important alternative resource to solid fuels. Biomass/waste is also seen as an important renewable resource in all the partner countries being the most used renewable source for heat production. The general picture extracted from the NREAPs NREAPs is that alternative sources like heat pumps and solar heat are prioritised towards 2020. However, the alternatives are in general at very low levels, hence, biomass/waste is also in 2020 seen as the most important renewable source in heat production. The NREAP of each COOLSWEEP partner country is described below. Figure 27.1: Denmark – sources to Figure 27.2: .2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected renewable heat, 2010, NREAP development from NREAP 200 150

9%

100 91%

50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Geothermal

Biomass

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Heat pumps

Denmark’s action plan shows that solar and heat pumps will increase approximately 50 percent as a source to production of heat. Especially solar is though from a very low level. Biomass/waste for heat will only see a minor increase towards 2020, but will still till be the most important renewable source to heat production.

55

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 28.1: Italy – sources renewable heat, 2010, NREAP

to Figure 28.2: .2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected development from NREAP 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0

3% 6% 33% 58%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Geothermal

Solar

Biomass

Geothermal

Heat pumps

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Italy’s action plan shows that the two main sources to production of heat - biomass/waste and heat pumps - will approximately double as a source to heat production. Solar for heat on the other hand is expected to increase 1414 fold towards 2020, but from a rather low level.

Figure 29.1: Austria – sources to Figure 29.2: .2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected renewable heat, 2010, NREAP development from NREAP 300 3% 1% 3% 250 200 150 93%

100 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Geothermal

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Geothermal

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Austria’s action plan shows that heat pumps and solar energy will more than double (from very low levels) level as sources to production of heat. Biomass/waste for heat on the other hand is expected to remain more or less unchanged towards 2020, but still being by far the most significant source to heat production.

56

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 30.1: Spain – sources to Figure 30.2: .2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected renewable heat, 2010, NREAP development from NREAP 350 300 30%

250 200 150

70%

100 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Solar

Geothermal

Biomass

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Spain’s action plan shows that geothermal and heat pumps will increase approximately 250 and 350 percent respectively as sources to production of heat. This is though from a more or less non-existent non existent level. The two main sources to heat production are expected to see opposite developments. Biomass/waste for heat is expected to increase less than 50 percent towards wards 2020, while solar energy as a source seems to decrease approximately 50 percent.

Figure 31.1: Latvia – sources to Figure 31.2: .2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected renewable heat, 2010, NREAP development from NREAP 500 400 300 100%

200 100 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Biomass*

Geothermal

Solar

Biomass

Heat pumps

Latvia’s action plan showss that heat pumps are expected to increase 4-fold 4 fold as sources to production of heat, while solar energy is expected to double – both from more or less non-existing existing levels. Biomass/waste Biomass/wast for heat on the other hand is expected to remain in more or less unchanged towards 2020 still leaving biomass/waste as the main source. *excluding bioliquids

57

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 32.1: Norway – sources renewable heat, 2010, NREAP

to

Figure 32.2: Gross production of heat from RES – expected development from NREAP 200 150

24%

100 76% 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Biomass

Heat pumps

Biomass

Heat pumps

Norway’s action plan shows that thee two main renewable sources to heat production are expected to see minor increases. Biomass/waste for heat is expected to increase 6 percent towards 2020, while heat pumps as a source are expected to increase 25 percent.. Both sources are though from a rather low level.

58

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3.4. Transport Transport is another area, where energy from waste can play an important role in reaching the EU 2020 target and thereby be an important driver for waste-to-energy. The final energy consumption in transport is approximately 400 Mtoe pr. year (compared to 240 Mtoe in electricity and 50 Mtoe in heat), so the perspectives in substituting a minor share of the consumption with biofuels seem promising.

3.4.1 10 percent renewable energy sources in transport The EU Climate and Energy Package adopted in 2009 a target for each Member State; renewable energy sources (including biofuels, hydrogen or ‘green’ electricity) must account for at least 10 percent of all fuel used in transport46 by 2020. The Renewable Energy Directive established a set of sustainability criteria47, according to which biofuels and bioliquids can only be taken into account for the purpose of reaching the national and European targets for renewable energy consumption if: •

• • •

Greenhouse gas emission savings from the use of biofuels and bioliquids shall be at least 35 percent compared to a reference fossil fuel (from 1 January 2017 the emission savings should be 50 percent and from 1 January 2018 the savings should be 60 percent); They are not made from raw material obtained from land with high biodiversity value; They are not made from raw material obtained from land with high carbon stock (e.g. wetlands, continuously forested areas) or land that was peat land; They have been obtained through environmentally-friendly agricultural practices.

However, it should be mentioned that biofuels and bioliquids from waste and residues, other than agriculture, fisheries and forestry residues, need to fulfil only the criteria related to the greenhouse gas emission savings. Looking at renewable energy in transport it is worth noticing that all the partner countries except Denmark have a higher share of renewable energy in transport than the EU27 average. Among the member states, the highest share of renewables in transport consumption in 2011 was seen in Sweden (8.8 percent), while Austria, Poland, Germany and Spain each reported that more than 5 percent of their transport consumption derived from renewables.

Figure 33: Renewable energy in transport, 2011, %

46

Land transport, e.g. for rail and road transport. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, Article 17 47

59

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

12 10 8 6 4 2

EU27 Sweden Austria Poland Germany Spain Latvia Italy Netherlands Hungary Norway Lithuania Denmark** United Kingdom Ireland Romania Slovenia Luxembourg Greece Czech Republic France Finland Slovak Republic Portugal Bulgaria Belgium* Estonia Cyprus Malta

0

2011

2004

2020 target

*Data are preliminary; Eurostat's estimates **2011 data are national statistics from The Danish Energy Agency Source: Eurostat

From 2004 to 2011 the share of renewable energy in transport consumption has increased from 1.0 percent to 3.8 percent at EU27-level. Some countries have made significant progress increasing the percentage of renewables in transport consumption with more than 5 percentage points, i.e. Sweden, Austria, Poland and Spain. Among the remaining partner countries Latvia, Italy, and Norway have experienced increases between 3 and 4 percentage points from 2004 to 2011. Biomass/waste is defined as a renewable source, giving member states the possibility of advancing towards the target by increasing the production of biogas and biofuels from biodegradable waste fractions, or by increasing the use of electricity from renewable sources in electric cars. The further away the countries are from reaching the 10 percent target of renewable energy in transport the more urgent the need is to expand the share of renewable sources such as biomass/waste in transport. On this basis, Malta, Cyprus, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Bulgaria, Portugal, Slovakia and Finland have the strongest incentives for waste-to-energy, cf. figure 34 below.

60

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Figure 34: Percentage points missing in 2011 to fulfill 2020 target of renewable energy sources in transport

Sweden

Austria

Poland

Germany

Spain

Latvia

Italy

Netherlands

Hungary

Norway

Lithuania

**Denmark

United Kingdom

Ireland

Slovenia

Romania

Luxembourg

Greece

Czech Republic

France

Finland

Slovak Republic

Bulgaria

Portugal

Belgium*

Estonia

Malta

Cyprus

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

*Eurostat estimate ** Based on national data from The Danish Energy Agency

Renewable energy mix in transport It is possible to break down renewable transport consumption by source. Table 4 illustrates how different kinds of renewable energy sources, e.g. renewable electricity consumption and biofuels, have contributed to the total share of renewables in transport in 2011. This information gives insights to the current status of biofuels compared to renewable electricity and also information about what countries are using biofuels today.

61

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Table 4: Renewable energy sources in transport, 2011, % Total Non-road RE renewable Road RE electricity energy in electricity consumption transport, consumption in transport 2011 Sweden Austria Poland Germany Spain Latvia Italy Netherlands Hungary Norway EU-27 Lithuania **Denmark United Kingdom Ireland Romania Slovenia Luxembourg Greece

8.8 7.6 6.5 6.1 6.0 4.8 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.2 3.8 3.7 3.5 2.9 2.8 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.8

1.7 2.4 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.0

Czech Republic

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1

Biofuel in transport for which compliance with the sustainability criteria is demonstrated Other of which compliant biofuels Article biofuels in 21* transport 2.3 4.9 0.0 5.2 0.0 6.2 0.0 5.6 0.0 5.7 0.0 4.0 0.4 3.8 3.0 1.4 0.0 4.1 0.0 2.7 0.2 3.2 0.0 3.5 3.3 0.0 2.8 0.0 2.7 0.0 1.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.7

0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 France 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Finland 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 Slovakia 0.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 Bulgaria 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 Portugal 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 Belgium 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 Estonia 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 Cyprus .. .. .. .. Malta .. .. .. * Biofuel from waste, residue and non-food cellulosic material. Count 2 times. ** National data from the Danish Energy Agency indicates that biofuels in transport is at 3.3 percent in 2011 Source: Eurostat

0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 .. ..

62

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

One notable observation is that the most common source to renewable energy in transport is by far biofuels. Poland, Spain, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Hungary and Latvia all have more than 4 percent of other compliant biofuels48 in transport. The remaining partner countries are also having their main renewable source from compliant biofuels with Italy and Norway standing at 3.8 and 2.7 percent respectively. However, Denmark has not reported any use of compliant biofuels in transport in 2011. Another observation is that there seems to be only two countries of relevance when looking at biofuels made from waste, namely Netherlands and Sweden, who both registered more than 2 percent use. A final observation is that renewable electricity in transport for the time being is not really an integrated part of the transport consumption. Worth mentioning is though that Austria, Norway and Sweden are the main users of non-road49 renewable electricity both reporting more than 1 percent, while Latvia is more or less the sole user of renewable electricity to road transport reporting above 0.5 percent use. To sum the progress towards the 2020 target is slow, and biofuels seem to be a key renewable option to expand and develop further in order to reach the target.

3.4.2 National Renewable Energy Action Plans The National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP) give more insight into which renewable energy sources the partner countries will expand in the coming years, in order to meet the targets for renewable energy in transport in 2020. In EU27 biofuels are currently the main priority. That also applies in most partner countries, where biofuels (especially biodiesel) is the area with most attention towards 2020. However, a couple of countries (Spain and Latvia) seem to put more attention to develop renewable electricity – though from a very low level. The NREAP of each COOLSWEEP partner country is described below.

48

Those fuels meeting the set of sustainability criteria described above, and which are not from waste, residue and non-food cellulosic material 49 Rail transport, etc.

63

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 35.1: Denmark - Consumption Figure 35.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport of RES energy in the transport sector sector – expected development from NREAP 1000 800 26%

31%

600 400

43%

200 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Bioethanol

Renewable el.

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Denmark’s action plan showss that both bioethanol and biodiesel are expected to increase 8-fold 8 towards 2020 as sources to consumption of transport, while renewable electricity as a source to transport consumption is expected to steadily increase to 2.5 times the level in 2010. The development in all areas is though from a very low level.

Figure 36.1: Italy - Consumption of RES Figure 36.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport energy in the transport sector sector – expected development from NREAP 500 14%

400

13%

300 200 73%

100 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Italy’s action plan showss that bioethanol is expected to increase 4-fold fold as sources to consumption of transport in 2020, while renewable electricity and biodiesel as a source to transport consumption are expected to steadily double towards 2020 leaving biodiesel as the main renewable source in transport. tr

64

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 37.1: Austria - Consumption of Figure 37.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport RES energy in the transport sector sector – expected development from NREAP 200 175 11%

34%

150 125 100

55%

75 50 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Bioethanol

Renewable el.

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Austria’s action plan showss that bioethanol, bioethanol, biodiesel and renewable electricity all are expected to increase 50 percent as sources to consumption of transport in 2020 leaving biodiesel as the main renewable source in transport.

Figure 38.1: Spain - Consumption of Figure 38.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport RES energy in the transport sector or sector – expected development from NREAP 400 300

5% 13%

200 100

82%

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Spain’s action plan showss that renewable electricity is expected to increase 3.5-fold 3.5 fold (from a rather low level) as a source to consumption of transport in 2020, while bioethanol and biodiesel as sources to transport consumption are expected to approximately double towards 2020 leaving leaving biodiesel as the main renewable source in transport.

65

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy waste in Europe

Figure 39.1: Latvia - Consumption of Figure 39.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport RES energy in the transport sector sector – expected development from NREAP 250 200

7%

33%

150 100

60% 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Bioethanol

Biodiesel

Bioethanol

Renewable el.

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Latvia’s action plan showss that renewable electricity is expected to double as a source to consumption of transport in 2020, while only minor increases are expected in bioethanol and biodiesel as a source to transport consumption towards 2020 leaving biodiesel esel as the main renewable source in transport.

Figure 40.1: Norway - Consumption of RES energy in the transport sector, 2010, NREAP

Figure 40.2: .2: Consumption of RES energy in the transport sector – expected development from NREAP

250 200

33%

150

67%

100 50 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Biodiesel

Renewable el.

Norway’s action plan shows that biodiesel and renewable electricity are expected to continue being the sources to consumption of transport in 2020, both increasing close to 2.5-fold 2.5 fold towards 2020 leaving biodiesel as the main renewable source in transport.

66

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

3.5 Conclusion The energy systems vary significantly across EU27 despite the common regulatory framework set by EU energy policy. These differences can to a large extent be explained by natural resources available and by initial choices on how to generate the energy needed in the countries. Initial investments in an energy system infrastructure are substantial, so some inertia will be present when looking to develop a country’s already well established energy system. Although the EU target on improving the energy efficiency will decrease the demand for energy the political targets for renewable energy is a positive driver for waste-to-energy, which have the potential to more than equal out the ‘negative’ effects of energy efficiency. Many countries are still quite some distance from reaching their targets. Especially regarding renewable energy in transport where the progress so far has been limited. Using biodegradable waste to production of heat and biofuels seems very promising, since the renewable energy alternatives currently are rather limited in these areas, whereas the alternative renewable resources in production of electricity are readily available. To conclude waste-to-energy is a natural and to some degree a necessary step towards a secure, reliable, cost-effective and climate friendly supply of energy. Below, the report will look more into the incentives for waste-to-energy investments across EU, with a special focus on the partner countries.

67

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4. Indicators of drivers and barriers for waste-to-energy While the developments on waste and energy explored in previous chapters are obviously key to the understanding of what incentives countries have for adopting waste-to-energy technologies in the coming years, this chapter outlines some other broader societal drivers that also can influence adoption of and investments in waste-to-energy technologies. The analysis in this chapter is built around four factors which affect the attractiveness of waste-to-energy technologies in a country. Each factor is defined by indicators which quantify the performance of each country in relation to them. The following is a short description of the four main factors. I. EU obligations and public pressure The amount of generated municipal solid waste is included as well as indicators that assess the degree of fulfilment of targets in EU policy on diversion of biodegradable waste going to landfill, on energy from renewable sources in general and in transport. II. Energy infrastructure Indicators on dependency on coal and gas in energy production is included to show the need for countries to have a secure and climate friendly energy supply, and the preference for self-sufficiency in a world of scarce energy commodities. An indicator on the coverage of district heating grids is included to show the differences in heating infrastructure, which is the immediate distribution network for heat generated from waste at heating plants and combined heat and power plants. Another indicator on current use of biomass/waste for energy purposes is included to assess the differences among countries in the current reliance of waste-to-energy – differences that are believed to have an impact on future incentive to use waste-to-energy. III. Geography An indicator on mean heating degree days is also included to uncover the countries’ individual heating demand, as both infrastructure and heating demand may have implications for the business cases for waste-to-energy in those countries. IV. Demography An indicator on population density has been included, as concentration in population leads to higher volumes of waste in an area, which will increase the costs of landfill, and bring down waste treatment costs.

68

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

IV. Public opinion Furthermore, an indicator focusing on EU citizens’ perception of the importance of climate change and how the citizens perceive waste-to-energy technologies is included, as these preferences are considered to affect framework conditions and the prioritisation of public waste-to-energy investments in that country. Box 7: Indicators of drivers and barriers for waste-to-energy Factors

Indicator

Description

EU regulation and targets

Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill

% gap to achieve target on diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources Progress on the use of renewable energy sources in transport Generation of municipal solid waste

% gap to achieve 2020 target on renewable energy sources % gap to achieve 2020 target on renewable energy sources in transport Municipal solid waste pr. capita, 2011

Coverage of district heating

% of citizens served by district heating

Current reliance on waste-to-energy

Ratio of biomass/waste to other renewable energy sources in production of electricity

Dependency on imported coal in energy production

Coal as a share of gross inland energy consumption and dependency of imported coal

Dependency on imported gas in energy production

Gas as a share of gross inland energy consumption and dependency of imported gas

Geography Demography

Heating demand Population density

Public opinion

Public opinion on climate change

Mean annual heating degree days Population density Percentage of population pointing to climate change as the most important issue

Energy infrastructure

The indicators considered in this report are summarized in box 7, above. A further description of the indicators can be found below, where each indicator will be presented together with a ‘score’ to all EU27 countries and Norway.

69

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

The score will be assigned according to each indicator’s drive for waste-to-energy. Countries with many drivers will be given a green colour, countries with fewer drivers will be given a yellow colour and countries with few drivers will be marked with red colours, cf. box 8.

Box 8: Drivers of waste-to-energy High Medium Low

In the end of the chapter, a table presenting the overall picture for all indicators in EU27 and Norway will be presented. Below, each indicator will be described more thoroughly.

70

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.1. EU regulation and targets 4.1.1. Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill As mentioned in the chapter on waste, the EU Landfill Directive from 2006 established a target stating that by 2016 the biodegradable municipal solid waste going to landfill should be reduced to 35 percent of the 1995 levels, with intermediate targets of 75 percent by 2006 and 50 percent by 2009. Furthermore, in the EU Commission’s Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe from 2011 waste is viewed as a resource. The Commission recognizes the opportunity for resource efficiency at the intersection of waste and energy sectors and states that this is achievable through “increase use of biodegradable waste for bioenergy”.50 As a consequence, landfilling will be less an option in the future, which creates an incentive for member countries to increase the energy recovery from biodegradable waste in order to reach the targets. An indicator measuring how far Member States are from fulfilling the target of reducing biodegradable municipal solid waste going to landfill has been included. However, due to a four-year derogation period to a number of countries, the performance for countries with derogation periods has been measured against the target of reducing to 75 % of 1995-levels by 2010. As shown in table 5, three of the partner countries are ahead of their targets, with Austria performing 50 percent better than the target requires. Two partner countries are behind the target, with Latvia has an 11 percent point gap to the target.

50

Table 5: Percent missing to fulfil target on diversion of biodegradable municipal waste from landfill, 2009/2010

Country

Cyprus* Greece* Czech Republic* Malta* Latvia* Poland* Italy Lithuania* Portugal* Romania* Slovakia* Spain Hungary Ireland* Bulgaria* Finland France Slovenia* Estonia* United Kingdom* Luxembourg Netherlands Sweden Denmark Austria Belgium Germany Norway

Percent missing to fulfil target on diversion of biodegradable municipal solid waste from landfill 59 % 33 % 22 % 21 % 11 % 9% 7% 6% 5% 0% -2% -3% -4% -8% - 11 % - 11 % - 12 % - 18 % - 23 % - 30 % - 34 % - 45 % - 48 % - 49 % - 50 % - 50 % - 50 % NA

*: Countries with a four year derogation period, i.e. performance measured against the target of reducing to 75 % of 1995-level by 2010

Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, EC, 2011, p.24

71

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.1.2. Progress on the use of renewable energy sources As noted in the previous chapter on energy, The Table 6: Percent missing in 2011 to fulfill 2020 EU’s Renewable Energy Directive sets a target of 20 target of renewable energy sources percent renewable energy to be achieved by 2020. In this regard, biomass is defined as renewable, giving member states the possibility of advancing towards that target by producing biogas and biofuels from the biodegradable waste fractions, or by using the biodegradable waste fractions in incineration plants. And the larger the gap the larger the incentive will be. The partner country with greatest gap – and thereby an incentive to utilise waste-to-energy technology – is Italy, with a gap of 33 percent, while Norway has the smallest gap of 4 percent.

Country EU27 Malta United Kingdom Luxembourg Netherlands Belgium Cyprus Ireland France Greece Italy Germany Poland Slovakia Hungary Czech Republic Slovenia Spain Denmark Portugal Latvia Finland Bulgaria Lithuania Romania Austria Sweden Norway Estonia

Percent missing in 2011 to fulfil 2020 target of renewable energy sources 35 % 96 % 74 % 74 % 69 % 69 % 58 % 58 % 50 % 36 % 33 % 32 % 31 % 31 % 30 % 28 % 25 % 25 % 23 % 20 % 17 % 16 % 14 % 12 % 11 % 9% 5% 4% 4%

72

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.1.3. Progress on the use of renewable energy sources in transport Table 7: Percentage points missing in 2011 to As noted in the previous chapter on energy, The fulfill 2020 target of renewable energy sources in EU’s Renewable Energy Directive sets a target of 10 transport Percentage points percent renewable energy in transport to be missing in 2011 to fulfil achieved by 2020. In this regard, biomass is defined as renewables, giving Member States the possibility of advancing towards that target by increasing the production of biogas and biofuels from the biodegradable waste fractions or by increasing the use of electricity from renewable sources in electric cars (presumed that a sufficient infrastructure is in place). The longer the countries are from fulfilling the target, the higher incentives they have for waste-to-energy investments.

Country

EU27 Malta Cyprus Estonia Belgium* Bulgaria Portugal Slovakia Finland France Czech Republic The partner country with the largest gap – and Greece incentive to utilise waste-to-energy technology – is Luxembourg Denmark, with a gap of 6.5 percent, while Austria Slovenia has the smallest gap of 2.4 percent. Romania Ireland United Kingdom Denmark Lithuania Norway Hungary Netherlands Italy Latvia Spain Germany Poland Austria Sweden

2020 target of RES in transportation 3.8 % 10.0 % 10.0 % 9.8 % 9.7 % 9.6 % 9.6 % 9.6 % 9.6 % 9.5 % 9.4 % 8.2 % 8.0 % 7.9 % 7.9 % 7.8 % 7.1 % 6.5 % 6.3 % 5.8 % 5.5 % 5.4 % 5.3 % 5.2 % 4.1 % 3.9 % 3.5 % 2.4 % 1.2 %

73

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.1.4. Generation of municipal solid waste The EU Commission has in its 7th Environmental Action Programme put forward the target that waste generated per capita should be in absolute decline by 2020. While this indicates that the potential mass of waste available for energy recovery might also be in decline in the future, the obligation in the Landfill Directive to divert municipal solid waste from landfill will ensure that a considerable mass of waste will in fact still be available for energy recovery, also in the future. However, large differences exist between countries in their generation of municipal solid waste, thereby indicating different business potentials in waste-to-energy in these countries. An indicator has been included, that measures the amount of municipal solid waste generated per capita in each country. The rationale behind using this indicator is that the incentive for using wasteto-energy technologies is higher in countries that generate more waste. As shown in table 8, the COOLSWEEP partner countries vary greatly, with Denmark generating more than twice as much waste as Latvia, giving Denmark the most incentive to utilise waste-toenergy technologies.

Table 8: Generation of municipal solid waste per capita, 2011 Country EU-27 Denmark Luxembourg Cyprus Ireland Germany Netherlands Malta Austria Italy France United Kingdom Finland Spain Greece Portugal Norway Belgium Sweden Lithuania Slovenia Hungary Bulgaria Romania Latvia Slovakia Czech Republic Poland Estonia

Kg/capita annually 500 719 687 658 623 597 596 583 552 535 527 518 505 498 496 487 483 464 460 442 411 382 375 365 350 327 320 315 298

74

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.2. Energy infrastructure 4.2.1. Coverage of district heating Incineration for electricity and heat is a major waste-to-energy technology. However, the economic viability of that technology to a given country depends on the infrastructure installed to channel the produced electricity and heat to the final energy consumers. Capital expenditures for the establishment of district heating infrastructure are high, which inhibit deployment of waste-to-energy technologies in many regions. Therefore, an indicator on the percentage of citizens served by district heating, as a district heating grid allows the waste incineration plant to channel its residual heat to floor space heating in citizens homes or other buildings. In this sense, a well developed district heating grid is seen as giving higher incentives to waste-toenergy incineration than a less developed one. As seen in table 9, data again shows that the partner countries are positioned very differently on their possibilities to exploit the residual heat from waste incineration, with Latvia having the most extended district heating grid serving 64 percent of its population, while the grid in Norway only serves 1 percent.

Table 9: Percentage of citizens served by district heating, 2011 Country EU27 Lithuania Latvia Denmark Estonia Finland Sweden Poland Czech Republic Slovakia Austria Romania Bulgaria Slovenia Germany France Italy Netherlands United Kingdom Norway Belgium Ireland Greece Spain Cyprus Luxembourg Hungary Malta Portugal

Percentage of citizens served by district heating 67 % 64 % 61 % 54 % 50 % 48 % 41 % 38 % 36 % 21 % 19 % 17 % 15 % 12 % 7% 5% 5% 1% 1% -

75

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.2.2. Current reliance on waste-to-energy Existing infrastructure for incineration of Table 10: Biomass/waste as a share of renewable biomass/waste will make waste incineration a resources in production of electricity, 2011 Percentage of total viable solution. Expertise and experience with the renewable resources technology will already be present in the country, Country so risks associated with investing in waste-toEU27 17.5 % energy will be smaller. An indicator on the share of biomass/waste in the total electricity production from renewable sources is included, to reflect the notion that path dependence is at play in relation to countries’ incentive to start using or increasing the use of waste-to-energy technologies for electricity. As seen in table 10, data shows that the partner countries are positioned quite different in the share contributed from biomass/waste to total renewable electricity production. Of the partner countries, Denmark’s share is highest at 34.4 percent, while Norway has the smallest at 0.4 percent.

Hungary Estonia Netherlands Poland Finland Belgium Denmark United Kingdom Czech Republic Cyprus Germany Sweden Italy Slovakia Portugal Austria France Lithuania Slovenia Ireland Luxembourg Spain Latvia Greece Romania Bulgaria Norway Malta

70.0 % 65.7 % 62.2 % 55.1 % 47.0 % 44.7 % 34.4 % 34.2 % 31.6 % 31.3 % 31.0 % 15.1 % 14.7 % 14.0 % 12.6 % 10.6 % 9.5 % 7.1 % 6.6 % 6.2 % 6.1 % 5.7 % 3.8 % 3.7 % 1.2 % 1.1 % 0.4 % -

76

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.2.3. Dependency on coal As illustrated in the chapter on energy, coal is the largest input in many countries’ electricity and heat production. However, with the increased demand for energy commodities and pressure to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, pressure is mounting to shift energy production from fossil fuels in favour of renewable energy sources. A challenge associated with this shift to renewable sources is that of ensuring a stable energy supply as some renewable sources depend on natural factors and their incidence. A shift from coal to waste-toenergy technologies is one option to achieve carbon emission reductions, lower import of energy resources and secure as well as stabilise energy supply. An indicator which assesses the current reliance on (imported51) coal in energy consumption has been included. This dependency on coal supplies will create an incentive for cultivating alternative sources of supply, including deployment of wasteto-energy technologies. As shown in table 11, the partner countries vary largely in their dependence on (imported) coal in their energy consumption. Denmark is the partner country which relies most on coal, whereas Austria, Spain and Italy all use approximately 10 percent of coal in their energy production. The least dependent partner country is Norway, who – as the only partner country – is a net exporter of coal.

Table 11: Dependency on coal, 2011

Country EU27 Estonia Bulgaria Greece Germany Romania Slovakia Slovenia Denmark Finland United Kingdom Ireland Hungary Austria Spain Portugal Italy Netherlands Sweden Belgium France Lithuania Latvia Luxembourg Cyprus Poland* Czech Republic* Norway* Malta

Coal as a share of gross inland energy consumption 17 66 42 28 24 22 21 20 17 16 15 15 11 10 10 9 9 9 5 5 4 4 3 1 0 53 42 3 -

51

Countries importing less than 50 % of the coal used in gross inland energy consumption (+ bunkers) have been deemed to have less incentive for waste to energy than countries with a higher dependency of imported coal. These countries are marked with a “*” in table 11.

77

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.2.4. Dependency on gas As shown in chapter 3 on energy, gas plays a major role in energy production. In the EU27, 21 percent of electricity and 42 percent of heat is produced from gas. At Member State level, large differences can be traced in the individual countries’ dependence on gas for energy production. Only approximately two third of the European gas consumption is covered by gas from the EU and dependence from imported gas is growing. As demand for gas increases, the risk of supply failure is rising. An alternative to natural gas is biogas produced from e.g. biodegradable municipal or industrial solid waste, from sludge, or residues from agriculture and fisheries. If biogas is refined into biomethane, it can be injected into the natural gas grid. For countries using gas in their energy mix, stability of supply is needed. Countries which are highly dependent on (imported52) gas face greater consequences if the supply is interrupted. This dependency on (foreign controlled) gas supplies will create an incentive for cultivating alternative sources of supply, including deployment of wasteto-energy technologies.

Table 12: Dependency on gas, 2011

Country EU27 Lithuania Hungary Italy Latvia Ireland Slovakia Belgium Austria Spain Luxembourg Germany Portugal Czech Republic France Greece Bulgaria Poland Slovenia Finland Estonia Sweden Cyprus Netherlands* United Kingdom* Romania* Denmark* Norway* Malta

Gas as a share of gross inland energy consumption

As shown in table 12, the partner countries vary greatly in their dependence on gas in their energy consumption. Italy, Austria, Latvia and Spain rely on gas to a higher degree than many other countries, while Norway and Denmark are net exporters of gas.

23 38 37 37 30 30 27 25 23 23 23 21 19 16 14 14 14 13 10 9 8 2 0 42 35 31 20 17 -

52

Countries importing less than 50 % of the gas used in gross inland energy consumption (+ bunkers) have been deemed to have less incentive for waste to energy than countries with a higher dependency of imported gas. These countries are marked with a “*” in table 12.

78

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.3. Geography 4.3.1. Heating demand A country’s incentive to use waste incineration for electricity and heat generation is of course guided by the demand for heat. To express the differences among countries in heat demand across heat sources, an indicator on heating degree days is included, as heat demand is determined by the climatic conditions in those countries. A high number of heating degree days expresses a high demand for heat. As seen in table 13, Norway has the highest number of annual heating degree days among the partner countries at 5,646, while Spain has the lowest with 1,842.

Table 13: Mean annual heating degree days, 1980-2004 Mean heating Country degree-days EU27 Finland Norway Sweden Estonia Latvia Lithuania Poland Austria Czech Republic Denmark Slovakia Germany Luxembourg Romania United Kingdom Slovenia Hungary Ireland Netherlands Belgium Bulgaria France Italy Spain Greece Portugal Cyprus Malta

3,254 5,850 5,646 5,444 4,445 4,265 4,094 3,616 3,574 3,571 3,503 3,453 3,239 3,210 3,129 3,115 3,053 2,922 2,906 2,902 2,872 2,687 2,483 1,971 1,842 1,663 1,282 782 560

79

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.4. Demography 4.4.1. Population density One factor influencing waste generation is the density of population in a given area. When the population density increases, land becomes a scarcer resource, which will make landfill a less attractive option. And as the population density of an area increases, so does energy demand and waste generation, which will make energy recovery from waste more attractive relative to landfill. In densely populated areas, waste generation is also concentrated geographically, prompting increased waste treatment capacity. An effect of this is that the costs on collecting the waste decreases, influencing the business case of wasteto-energy in a positive direction. An indicator on population density on a national level has been included to compare the population densities of the different countries, in order to assess what incentives the individual countries have as a result of their population density. As seen in table 14, the partner countries vary greatly in population density, with Italy having the highest at 201.5 inhabitants per km2 and Norway having the lowest at 16.2.

Table 14: Population density, 2011 Country EU27 Malta Netherlands Belgium United Kingdom Germany Italy Luxembourg Czech Republic Denmark Poland Portugal Slovakia Hungary France Austria Slovenia Romania Cyprus Spain Greece Bulgaria Ireland Lithuania Latvia Estonia Sweden Finland Norway

Inhabitants per km

2

116.9 1,318.6 494.5 364.3 256.8 229.0 201.5 200.4 135.9 129.7 123.2 114.5 110.1 107.2 103.0 102.2 101.9 93.0 92.3 92.0 86.4 67.5 66.9 48.3 33.1 30.9 23.0 17.7 16.2

80

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.5.

Public Opinion

4.5.1. Public opinion on climate change Public scepticism towards waste-to--energy technologies due to fear of dioxins and other air pollutants and other environmental damages has been holding investments in waste-to-energy back in some regions and countries.

Table 15: Percentage of population pointing to climate change as the most important issue, 2010

Public opinions on waste-to-energy have not been polled specifically, which makes it hard to quantify differences between the EU countries. As a proxy we include the results from a recent Eurobarometer on how high climate change ranges on the public agenda across the EU.

EU27 Luxembourg Denmark Malta Sweden Slovenia Germany Spain Belgium Cyprus Latvia Lithuania Poland France Austria Finland Slovakia Netherlands United Kingdom Romania Czech Republic Greece Italy Bulgaria Hungary Estonia Ireland Portugal Norway

If climate change abatement is high on the public agenda, acceptance of waste-to-energy technologies would arguably be higher, as they are a means of decreasing the dependence on fossil fuels in the energy system. As seen in table 15, countries vary significantly in their assertion of climate change as an important issue, with highest importance attributed in Denmark and lowest in Italy53.

53

Country

Percentage of population pointing to climate change as most important issue 20 % 34 % 31 % 30 % 30 % 25 % 25 % 24 % 24 % 23 % 22 % 21 % 20 % 20 % 19 % 19 % 18 % 18 % 18 % 16 % 16 % 15 % 15 % 15 % 14 % 14 % 13 % 7% -

Data for Norway are not available

81

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

4.6. Overall drivers for waste-to-energy The indicators above show the individual key drivers influencing countries’ incentive to use and invest in waste-to-energy technologies. In the box below, the countries’ drivers are summarised based on the individual indicators. While it is acknowledged that incentives can be much more complex and intertwined, than what is presented and argued for here, it is however believed that the summary below provides a reasonable perspective on a country’s overall drive for waste-to-energy investments.

Demography

Public opinion Public opinion on climate change

Number indicators with "high incentive" (green)

Geography

Population density

Dependency on inported gas in energy production

Dependency on imported coal in energy production

Current reliance on waste-toenergy

Coverage of district heating

Energy Infrastructure Generation of municipal solid waste

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources in transport

Progress on the use of renewable energy sources

Diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill

EURegulation and targets

Heating demand

Box 9: Drivers for waste-to-energy

6 6 6 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1

Malta Belgium Denmark Finland Cyprus Estonia Luxembourg Lithuania Latvia Netherlands Germany Italy Greece Czech Rebublic Poland United Kingdom Slovakia Austria Ireland Portugal Slovenia Hungary Bulgaria Spain France Romania Norway

82

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Based on the incentives traced from the individual indicators the incentives that countries across Europe have for energy recovery from waste are quite different. According to this indicative account the overall incentive to recover energy from waste is comparably higher in Malta, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Cyprus and Estonia. Across these countries a few observations are worth mentioning as the most common drivers for waste-to-energy. The target on renewable energy in transport is further away from being reached in these countries compared to other countries. Furthermore the citizens in these countries in general rate climate change as more important than other countries do. Finally, the rate of waste as a renewable source compared to other renewable sources in the production of electricity is higher than in countries with less incentive for waste-to-energy. The remaining partner countries have either medium or low incentives for waste-to-energy, when looking at the indicators included in the report. Latvia, Italy and Austria seem to have medium incentives for wasteto-energy. A few factors are common across these countries, e.g. the countries are performing quite well on the target on renewable energy in general and in transport. Furthermore the countries are to a lesser degree dependent on coal in their energy production compared to other countries and they currently do not rely on waste to production of electricity to the same degree as other countries. Finally, the citizens in Latvia, Italy and Austria do not rate climate changes as important as the countries with high incentives. The partner countries with low incentives are Spain and Norway exhibiting some of the lowest incentives among all EU27 countries.

83

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Appendix Appendix A: Sources of waste generation54

54

Manual on Waste Statistics, Eurostat, 2010, p.22

84

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Appendix B: Recommendations for breakdown in waste categories55 Chemical and medical wastes Spent solvents: These are hydrocarbons, fluorocarbons, chlorinated carbons; organic halogenated, nonhalogenated solvents, including organic washing liquids; and organic fluorinated refrigerants. They are used in chemical industries as reaction agent and in extraction processes, cleaning processes in mechanical engineering and surface treatment and appear almost exclusively in the manufacture of chemicals, chemical products, basic pharmaceutical products and preparations, and rubber and plastic products (item 9 of Section 8 of Annex I of the Waste Statistics Regulation). To a lesser extent, this type of waste can also be generated during the fabrication of metal products and during recycling. Separately collected fractions of spent solvents can be generated by almost all economic activities, including private households. Acid, alkaline and saline wastes: These are inorganic acids (like hydrochloridric, sulphuric, phosphoric, nitric acids); alkaline like calcium ammonium, sodium hydroxide and inorganic salts mainly from the manufacturing of acids or alkaline and salt slags or solid slags. They mainly originate from surface treatment in metallurgy and equipments sectors and inorganic chemical processes. In general, acids and alkaline are hazardous except lime mud and degreasing waste without dangerous substances (like oil, heavy metals or cyanides). Saline waste is dangerous when containing dangerous substances like heavy metals, arsenic or oil. Used oils: These wastes are mineral-based, synthetic oils and biodegradable engine oils. This category includes engine, gear, hydraulic and lubricating oils, oils for insulation and heat transmission; emulsions from metal surface shaping and residues from tank cleaning. They originate both from the refining process and from the mechanical engineering and maintenance of vehicles in all sectors. Most used oils are collected and treated by a small number of collectors and treatment facilities. Because of the hazards involved, these facilities are monitored and data coverage is relatively good with regard to the quantities collected. Problems of comparability arise when used oils are mixed with other substances such as emulsions for metal surface shaping and residues from tank cleaning. All used oils are hazardous. Chemical wastes: These are solid or liquid spent chemical catalysts; off specification products and wastes like agro-chemicals, medicines, paint, dyestuff, pigments, varnish, inks and adhesives, including related sludges; chemical preparation waste like preservatives, brake and antifreeze fluids, waste chemicals; tars and carbonaceous waste like acid tars, bitumen, carbon anodes, tar and carbon waste; fuels, emulsions, sludges containing oil, like bilge oil, waste fuels oil, diesel, petrol, waste from oil water separator; aqueous rinsing and washing liquids, aqueous mother liquors; spent filtration and adsorbent material like activated carbon, filter cakes, ion exchangers. They mainly originate from the chemical industry and from various industrial branches producing and using chemical products. They are hazardous when containing toxic chemical compounds, oil, heavy metals or other dangerous substances. 55

Manual on Waste Statistics, Eurostat, 2010, p.25

85

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Industrial effluent sludges: These wastes are sludges and solid residues from industrial waste water treatment including external/physical treatment; solid and liquid wastes from soil and groundwater remediation; sludges from boiler cleaning; wastes from cooling water preparation and cooling columns; and drilling mud. Waste water treatment takes place in many industrial manufacturing sectors. Industrial effluent sludges are hazardous when containing oil and heavy metals. A problem of comparability among countries might arise when local units are used as statistical units, as the waste water treatment processes might not be geographically isolated and the sludges might not be attached to the primary activity. Sludges and liquid wastes from waste treatment: These wastes comprise different types of sludges and liquid wastes from waste treatment facilities. They include wastes from the physico/ chemical treatment of hazardous wastes, liquids and sludges from the anaerobic treatment of waste, landfill leachate and effluent treatment sludges from oil regeneration. Sludges and liquid wastes from waste treatment are hazardous and non-hazardous. Healthcare and biological waste: These wastes comprise only biological waste from the healthcare of animals and humans. They mainly originate from clinics and hospitals, including veterinary activities, but can also be produced by industries generating healthcare and biological products as production wastes and in lower quantities by all industrial sectors as they all have first-aid kits. Healthcare and biological waste is hazardous when infectious. Recyclable wastes Metallic wastes, ferrous: These wastes are ferrous metals (iron, steel) and alloys. They include wastes like mill scales from the iron and steel industry, metal filings, turnings and particles from metal processing, construction and demolition waste, discarded moulds from ceramic production, metals from mechanical treatment and shredding of waste, and metals removed from waste incineration slag. The ferrous metal wastes covered by category 06.1 (List of Wastes) are non-hazardous. Metallic wastes, non-ferrous: These wastes are non-ferrous metals (aluminium, copper zinc, lead, tin, etc.) and alloys. They include wastes like metal filings, turnings and particles from the processing of non-ferrous metals, hard zinc from galvanising processes, cables, construction and demolition waste, components from end-of-life vehicles dismantling and metals from the mechanical treatment and shredding of waste. Nonferrous metal wastes covered by category 06.2 are non-hazardous. Metallic wastes, mixed ferrous and non-ferrous: These wastes are mixtures of ferrous and non-ferrous metals and alloys or unspecified metal wastes. They include mixed metals from construction and demolition, mixed metals from separate collection (e.g. metal packaging) and unspecified metal waste from the agricultural sector. Mixed metal wastes covered by category 06.3 are nonhazardous.

86

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Glass wastes: These wastes can be waste from glass packaging; glass waste from the production of glass and glass products; and waste glass from sorting and recycling processes. Glass waste occurs in a small number of production sectors (construction and demolition, recycling of end-of-life vehicles and electrical, electronic equipment and glass manufacturing) and also as a result of the separate sorting by businesses and households, but can be generated by all sectors as consumption residues or packaging. Glass wastes are hazardous in case of glass powder (particle size relevant) and when containing heavy metals. Paper and cardboard wastes: These wastes are paper and cardboard from sorting and separate sorting by businesses and households. This category includes fibre, filler and coating rejects from pulp, paper and cardboard production. These wastes are largely generated by three activities: separate collection, mechanical treatment of waste and pulp, and paper and cardboard production and processing. All paper and cardboard wastes are non-hazardous. Rubber wastes: These wastes are only end-of-life tyres which come from the maintenance of vehicles, and end-of-life vehicles. All rubber wastes are non-hazardous. They can be generated in all sectors. Plastic wastes: These are plastic packaging; plastic waste from plastic production and machining of plastics; plastic waste from sorting and preparation processes; and separately collected plastic waste. They originate from all sectors as packaging waste, from sectors producing plastic products and from separate sorting by businesses and households. All plastic wastes are nonhazardous. A distinction should be made between plastic wastes and mixed packaging (mixed and undifferentiated materials, items 36/37). Wood wastes: These wastes are wooden packaging, sawdust, shavings, cuttings, waste bark, cork and wood from the production of pulp and paper; wood from the construction and demolition of buildings; and separately collected wood waste. They mainly originate from wood processing, the pulp and paper industry and the demolition of buildings but can occur in all sectors in lower quantities due to wooden packaging. Wood wastes are hazardous when containing hazardous substances like mercury or tar-based wood preservatives. Textile wastes: These wastes are textile and leather waste; textile packaging; worn clothes and used textiles; waste from fibre preparation and processing; waste tanned leather; and separately collected textile and leather waste. They originate from only a small number of activities: the leather and fur industry, the textile industry, the mechanical treatment of waste and separate collection. All textile wastes are non-hazardous. Waste containing PCB56: These wastes are oil-containing PCB (e.g. hydraulic oil, insulation and heat transmission oil from transformers); PCB containing components from post-consumer products; construction and demolition wastes containing PCB (e.g. sealants resin-based floorings). They originate 56

Polychlorinated biphenyl

87

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

from the construction and demolition sector, the mechanical treatment of waste, the manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products, and in lower quantities by all sectors still discarding PCBcontaining components (e.g. batteries). All wastes containing PCB are hazardous. Equipment Discarded equipment: These wastes are discarded electrical and electronic equipment (e.g. small and large household equipment, IT equipment, electric tools) and fluorescent tubes. Batteries and end-of-life vehicles are excluded from this category (...). They can be generated by all economic sectors and need to be separately collected in accordance with EU directives on electrical and electronic equipment. Discarded vehicles: These are all kinds of end-of-life vehicles. They originate from businesses and households. Discarded vehicles are hazardous when containing dangerous substances (e.g. cooling liquids, engine oil or fuel, chlorofluorocarbons from air conditioning). Batteries and accumulators wastes: These wastes mainly originate from households although they can be produced in lower quantities by all sectors. Batteries and accumulators are hazardous when containing dangerous substances; e.g. nickel, cadmium, mercury, lead and unsorted batteries and accumulators wastes. Animal and vegetal waste Animal and mixed food wastes: These wastes are animal and mixed wastes from food preparation and products, including sludges from washing and cleaning; separately collected biodegradable kitchen and canteen waste, and edible oils and fats. They originate from food preparation and production (agriculture and manufacture of food and food products) and from separate collection. Animal and mixed waste of food preparation and products are non-hazardous. Vegetal wastes: These wastes are vegetal wastes from food preparation and products, including sludges from washing and cleaning, materials unsuitable for consumption and green wastes. They originate from food and beverage production, and from agriculture, horticulture and forestry. Vegetal wastes are nonhazardous. Animal faeces, urine and manure: These wastes are slurry and manure including spoiled straw. They originate from agriculture. Animal faeces, urine and manure are non-hazardous. Mixed ordinary wastes Household and similar wastes: These wastes are mixed municipal waste, bulky waste, street-cleaning waste like packaging, kitchen waste, and household equipment except separately collected fractions. They 88

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

originate mainly from households but can also be generated by all sectors in canteens and offices as consumption residues. Household and similar wastes are non-hazardous. Mixed and undifferentiated materials: These are unspecified and mixed waste without any general waste source. This category covers not only mixed packaging but also mainly residual categories from different branches of industry (food production, textile industry, combustion plants, surface treatment of metals and plastics, etc.). These residual categories are often used for nation-specific waste codes. Mixed and undifferentiated materials are hazardous when containing heavy metals or organic pollutants. Sorting residues: These wastes are sorting residues from mechanical sorting processes for waste; combustible waste (refuse derived fuel); and non-composted fractions of biodegradable waste. They mainly originate from waste treatment and separate collection. Sorting residues from demolition activities are excluded. They are hazardous when containing heavy metals or organic pollutants. Common sludges Common sludges: These are waste water treatment sludges from municipal sewerage water and organic sludges from food preparation and processing. They mainly originate from households and industrial branches with organic waste water (mainly pulp and paper as well as food preparation and processing). They can also occur in waste water treatment plants or in the anaerobic treatment of waste. All common sludges are non-hazardous. Comparability can be problematic between countries using different statistical units as they will not assign the waste to the same economic sector. Mineral and solidified wastes Mineral waste from construction and demolition: These are concrete, bricks, and gypsum waste; insulation materials; mixed construction wastes containing glass, plastics and wood; and waste hydrocarbonised road-surfacing material. They originate from construction and demolition activities. They are hazardous when containing organic pollutants. Other mineral wastes: These are waste gravel, crushed rocks, waste sand and clays, muds and tailings from extractive industries; blasting materials, grinding bodies, sludges, particulates and dust from the manufacture of glass, ceramic goods and cement; casting cores and moulds from the casting of ferrous and non-ferrous pieces; linings and refractories from thermal processes; and asbestos materials from all branches (asbestos processing, cement, brake pads etc.). They are hazardous when containing asbestos, oil or heavy metals. Combustion wastes: These are wastes from flue gas cleaning (desulphurisation sludges, filter dust and cakes, fly ashes); slags, drosses, skimmings, boiler dusts, and ashes from thermal processes. They originate from any thermal and combustion process (power stations and other combustion plants, thermal metallurgy, casting of ferrous and non-ferrous pieces, manufacture of glass and glass products, 89

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

manufacture of ceramic goods, bricks, tiles and construction products, manufacture of cement, lime and plaster). Combustion wastes are hazardous when containing organic pollutants, oil and heavy metals. Soils: These wastes are soils and stones that originate mainly from construction activities, the excavation of contaminated sites and soil remediation. They are hazardous when containing organic pollutants, heavy metals or oil. Dredging spoils: These are wastes that mainly come from the construction and maintenance of water projects, dredging and subsurface work. They are hazardous when containing heavy metals or organic pollutants Solidified, stabilised or vitrified wastes; Mineral waste from waste treatment and stabilised wastes: These are wastes from the incineration and pyrolysis of waste (bottom ash, slag, fly ash, sands from fluidised beds, boiler dust, filter cake from gas treatment); mineral fraction from the mechanical treatment of waste; and wastes from treatment processes that solidify waste, stabilise or neutralise dangerous substances by a chemical reaction or vitrify waste in a thermal process. The wastes are hazardous when containing organic pollutants or heavy metals, or when only partly stabilised.

90

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Appendix C: Disposal operations57

D1 Deposit into or on to land (e.g. landfill, etc.) D2 Land treatment (e.g. biodegradation of liquid or sludgy discards in soils, etc.) D3 Deep injection (e.g. injection of pumpable discards into wells, salt domes or naturally occurring repositories, etc.) D4 Surface impoundment (e.g. placement of liquid or sludgy discards into pits, ponds or lagoons, etc.) D5 Specially engineered landfill (e.g. placement into lined discrete cells which are capped and isolated from one another and the environment, etc.) D6 Release into a water body except seas/oceans D7 Release to seas/oceans including sea-bed insertion D8 Biological treatment not specified elsewhere in this Annex which results in final compounds or mixtures which are discarded by means of any of the operations numbered D1 to D12 D9 Physico-chemical treatment not specified elsewhere in this Annex which results in final compounds or mixtures which are discarded by means of any of the operations numbered D 1 to D 12 (e.g. evaporation, drying, calcination, etc.) D10 Incineration on land D11 Incineration at sea(∗) D12 Permanent storage (e.g. emplacement of containers in a mine, etc.) D13 Blending or mixing prior to submission to any of the operations numbered D1 to D12(∗∗) D14 Repackaging prior to submission to any of the operations numbered D1 to D13 D15 Storage pending any of the operations numbered D1 to D14 (excluding temporary storage, pending collection, on the site where the waste is produced)(∗∗∗)

57

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste, Annex I, p.23.

(∗) This operation is prohibited by EU legislation and international conventions. (∗∗) If there is no other D code appropriate, this can include preliminary operations prior to disposal including pre-processing such as, inter alia, sorting, crushing, compacting, pelletising, drying, shredding, conditioning or separating prior to submission to any of the operations numbered D1 to D12. (∗∗∗) Temporary storage means preliminary storage according to point (10) of Article 3.

91

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Appendix D: Recovery operations58 R1 Use principally as a fuel or other means to generate energy(∗) R2 Solvent reclamation/regeneration R3 Recycling/reclamation of organic substances which are not used as solvents (including composting and other biological transformation processes)(∗∗) R4 Recycling/reclamation of metals and metal compounds. R5 Recycling/reclamation of other inorganic materials (∗∗∗) R6 Regeneration of acids or bases R7 Recovery of components used for pollution abatement R8 Recovery of components from catalysts R9 Oil re-refining or other reuses of oil R10 Land treatment resulting in benefit to agriculture or ecological improvement R11 Use of waste obtained from any of the operations numbered R1 to R10 R12 Exchange of waste for submission to any of the operations numbered R1 to R11(∗∗∗∗) R13 Storage of waste pending any of the operations numbered R1 to R12 (excluding temporary storage, pending collection, on the site where the waste is produced)(∗∗∗∗∗)

58

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste, Annex II, p.24

(∗)This includes incineration facilities dedicated to the processing of municipal solid waste only where their energy efficiency is equal to or above: — 0,60 for installations in operation and permitted in accordance with applicable Community legislation before 1 January 2009, — 0,65 for installations permitted after 31 December 2008 (the formula to calculate the energy efficiency of a plant has been excluded here because it goes beyond the purposes of this report) (∗∗) This includes gasification and pyrolisis using the components as chemicals. (∗∗∗) This includes soil cleaning resulting in recovery of the soil and recycling of inorganic construction materials. (∗∗∗∗) If there is no other R code appropriate, this can include preliminary operations prior to recovery including pre-processing such as, inter alia, dismantling, sorting, crushing, compacting, pelletising, drying, shredding, conditioning, repackaging, separating, blending or mixing prior to submission to any of the operations numbered R1 to R11. (∗∗∗∗∗) Temporary storage means preliminary storage according to point (10) of Article 3.

92

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Appendix E: The five treatment categories within waste statistics59 Item 1: energy recovery (R1) To be classified as an energy recovery operation, the incineration of waste must meet the following criteria: •

The main purpose of the operation must be to use the waste as a means of generating energy, replacing the use of a source of primary energy.

•

The energy generated by, and recovered from, the combustion of the waste must be greater than the amount of energy consumed during the combustion process (net energy production).

•

The surplus energy must effectively be used, either immediately in the form of the heat produced by incineration or, after processing, in the form of electricity.

•

The greater part of the waste must be consumed during the operation and the greater part of the energy generated must be recovered and used.

R1 includes incineration facilities dedicated to the processing of municipal solid waste under the condition that their energy efficiency is equal to or above the level set in Annex II of the Waste Framework Directive and referred to as R1 energy efficiency formula.

Item 2: waste incineration (D10) Disposal operation D10 Incineration on land covers the incineration of waste where the main purpose of the incineration is the thermal treatment of waste in order to reduce the volume and the hazardousness of the waste, and to obtain an inert product that can be disposed of. This primarily includes incineration plants dedicated to the thermal treatment of wastes by oxidation or other thermal treatment processes (e.g. pyrolysis, gasification or plasma processes), with or without recovery of the combustion heat generated. The most common examples are: • municipal solid waste incineration plants (unless they fulfil the energy efficiency standards set in Annex II of the Waste Framework Directive); • hazardous waste incineration plants; • sewage sludge incineration plants; • incineration plants for clinical waste; • incineration plants for animal carcasses. D10 also covers the incineration of waste in co-incineration plants where the waste undergoes thermal treatment rather than being used as a fuel. Item 2 does not cover: • the use of waste as fuel for energy production (Item 1). Item 3: recovery (other than energy recovery) (R2 to R11) Item 3a: recycling

59

Manual of Waste Statistics, Eurostat, 2010, p.37

93

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme

Drivers for waste-to-energy in Europe

Item 3b: backfilling In Item 3, are included all operations which may lead to the recovery of waste, apart from energy recovery and preparatory treatment operations. The R-codes covered by Item 3 differ considerably with regard to their level of specification. While some operations are quite specific, others are very general and cover a wide range of waste types and activities. They can be divided into four different groups: •

five operations deal with the recovery of clearly defined, specific waste streams (solvents (R2), metals (R4), acids and bases (R6), pollution abatement components (R7), catalysts (R8), and waste oils (R9));

•

two operations cover the reclamation and recycling of all organic substances (R3) and inorganic substances (R5) which do not belong to one of the specific waste streams above;

•

a specific code covers the use of waste as fertiliser or soil improver in agriculture or for other ecologically beneficial purposes (R10);

•

a specific code covers recovery of secondary waste from recovery operations (R11).

Item 4: landfilling (D1, D5, D12) Item 4 comprises the deposit of waste on landfills within the meaning of Directive 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste. This includes: •

landfills for inert waste, non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste above ground;

•

landfills for the underground storage of waste.

Item 4 does not cover the following treatment operations: •

the use of waste for underground storage, where it fulfils the criteria for recovery (Item 3b);

•

the use of inert waste for redevelopment and construction purposes on landfills, where it fulfils the criteria for recovery (Item 3b);

•

temporary storage of waste;

•

sea-bed insertion, impoundment or deep injection of waste (Item 5).

Item 5: other forms of disposal (D2, D3, D4, D6, D7) Item 5 summarises other methods of disposal such as land treatment (D2), deep injection (D3), impoundment of waste (D4) and the release of waste into water bodies (D6 and D7). These disposal methods can be used only for a limited range of waste types. However, the quantities of waste can be considerable, with many tonnes of sludge being involved, depending largely on geographical conditions.

94

This Project is funded by the European Union under the 7th Framework Programme