Sustainable and efficient Packaging Waste Management - Experiences from Austria Budapest, 24 February 2009 1 © Hermann Koller
Contents 1. Legal Requirements 2. Political Considerations 3. Operation of the System 4. Results and Experiences Confidentiality Clause: This document including an oral presentation is exclusively intended for a certain addressee. Underlying analytical data and oral explanations may have to be added to the document in order for the latter to be regarded as complete. Any disclosure of the information it contains to third parties, in any form whatsoever, even in an extracted form, shall only be permissible upon prior written consent of the author. The author assumes liability for the correctness and completeness of information only in compliance with a relevant contractual relationship. 2 © Hermann Koller
Austria: Facts & Figures l Capital: Vienna l Area: 84, 000 km² l Population: l GNP 20061): 257. 9 billion € l GNP per inhabitant 1): l Household waste (MSW)2): 3. 4 mio. tons 27. 5 mio. m³ l Packaging waste 3): 1. 1 mio. tons app. 135 kg/cap*a 8. 2 mio. 31, 140 € per July 2007; Statistics Austria Federal Environment Agency, 2006 3) Federal Ministry of Environment, 2006 1) 2) 3 © Hermann Koller
1. Legal Requirements Different Targets and Quotas are set – Minimum recycling quotas for companies not participating in an authorized collection and recyovery scheme (set in the Packaging Ordinance) – National recycling quotas (set in the Packaging Ordinance) – Recycling quotas for authorized collection and recovery schemes (set by the Ministry of Environment) 4 © Hermann Koller
1. Legal Requirements Collection/Material Recycling 2007 Household system: quota set/reached, in % * Goal for material recycling quota for plastics, compounds, wood, textiles and ceramics, packaging on a biological basis and metals: > 35 % 5 © Hermann Koller
1. Legal Requirements Collection/Material Recycling 2007 Industrial/commercial system: quota set/reached, in % * Goal for material recycling quota for plastics, compounds, wood, textiles, ceramics and metals: > 40 % 6 © Hermann Koller
2. Political Considerations No ecological reasons to implement deposit system in Austria The situation in Austria ● EU directive and the national packaging ordinance have been implemented successfully ● Only 5. 8% of littering are packaging, and only 0. 45% of littering are beverage packaging ● Vienna has Europe-wide the most insignificant share of littering waste ● Return rate in Austria is nearly 90% without deposit (this is more than in countries with deposit) ● Existence of enough and appropriate capacities for recycling of metals and plastics 7 © Hermann Koller
2. Political Considerations No reasons to implement a deposit system in Austria from economic point of view A deposit system established parallel to an existing dual system, causes high cost for establishing and running the system leads to an additional separate mass stream via supply chains without any cost saving on the dual system causes confusion among consumers and leads to complicated separate collection some cans and bottles may disappear from the landscape, but measures against littering have to be taken anyway. 8 © Hermann Koller
2. Political Considerations The Sustainability Agenda as the Austrian Approach l The Austrian Industry and Politics have agreed to reach the following goals: – Recycling of PET beverage packaging at an amount of minimum 50% – Bottle-to-Bottle recycling for PET (2007: 6, 000 tons) – 30% share of recycling materials in cycle PET bottles – Beer mainly in refillable bottles – 80% quota for refill or recycling of beverage packaging – Continuos consumer information concerning refillable products – Support the use of returnable systems at big events – Preparation of annual implementation report 9 © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System Comprehensive range of bins for separate collection are available for households 10 © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System Sorting Plants for lightweight packaging and metal packaging Input Collection PET HDPE buckets HDPE Lightweight Packaging Mixed plastic fraction LDPE foils PET PS/PP Fe -> Shredder MSW Metal packaging only MSW Metal sorting Legend: Fe packetised Al packetised Magnet Eddy current separator MSW Shredder Fe shreddered Al shreddered 11 Shredder Lightweight packaging output fractions in bales Metal output fractions © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System New fractions for the separate collection Option 1 Plastic bottles Lightweight packaging Option 2 (mixed collection) Metal packaging Plastic bottles and metal packaging 12 © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System New plastic-sorting-plant in Vienna: fully automated sorting of plastic-bottles Sorting capacity: up to 4 tons per hour Fully automated sorting via near infrared sensors and compressed air valves 13 © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System New Bottle to Bottle Recycling Plant 14 © Hermann Koller
3. Operation of the System Marketable Products 15 © Hermann Koller
4. Results and Experiences Landfilled packaging waste quantities dropped down: 1990/91, 1994, 1998, 2001, 2004 1) “Ordinance on targets“: Ordinance establishing targets for the prevention and recycling of waste from drinks packaging and other packaging materials Note: I= Range for actual landfilled volumes Sources: Prognos AG, 1995; Austrian Ministry of Environment, 1998; Amendment of “ordinance on targets”, 2000; FHAnalytik Gmb. H, 2002; FHAnalytik and TB Hauer, 2006 16 © Hermann Koller
4. Results and Experiences Separate collection reduces CO 2 emissions 6, 000 Savings: 980 [kg CO 2 equivalents / t packaging] 5, 000 4, 000 Increase: 30 3, 000 2, 000 Savings: 1, 659 Savings: 1. 239 Savings: 1, 158 Total Savings: 297 1, 000 894 kg CO 2 equiv / t or 607, 177 t CO 2 equiv / a Total CO 2 emissions Austria 2005: 93. 3 Million t 0 Wood Glass Paper Plastics Compounds Metals Total No separate packaging collection: Collection, transport, waste treatment (scenario Austria 1998: mainly landfilling), energy production (substitution of energy recovery of packaging), primary production of raw materials Separate packaging collection via ARA System: Collection, sorting, transport, recycling, recovery, energy production (substitution of energy recovery of MSW) Savings of greenhouse gas emissions 17 © Hermann Koller
4. Results and Experiences Official Packaging Waste Data for Austria Source: Eurostat, Environmental Data Centre on Waste (http: //epp. eurostat. ec. europa. eu/portal/page? _pageid=3155, 70491033, 3155_70521316&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL#end) 18 © Hermann Koller
4. Results and Experiences Comparison Recovery Targets in EU Countries Austria Source: Eurostat, Environmental Data Centre on Waste 19 © Hermann Koller
Efficient Recovery Schemes Show Best Results Source: Eurostat, Environmental Data Centre on Waste 20 © Hermann Koller
4. Results and Experiences Since 1993. . . l Collection and recovery of approx. 10 million tons of packaging – that corresponds to approx. 36 medium-sized landfills l All quotas set by the Austrian Packaging Ordinance, the EU Directive and the Ministry of Environment have been reached l 90 % of the Austrians are convinced of separate waste collection and try to collect packaging separately. 21 © Hermann Koller
Скачать презентацию Sustainable and efficient Packaging Waste Management — Experiences
7a093ba6fa48eb5d5d2c8daa61d79b75.ppt