february 2008dr. helmut schnurer1 waste management in germany dr.-ing. helmut schnurer deputy...

February 2008 Dr. Helmut Schnurer 1

Waste Management in Germany

Dr.-Ing. Helmut SchnurerDeputy Director General

from 1985 until 2006Head of Waste Management Directorate

at the Federal Ministry for the EnvironmentBonn, Germany


Some Data and Figures (1)• Until 1975: 50.000 uncontrolled landfills in FRG

Most of them closed within a few years and replaced by central waste management facilities (engineered landfills, MSWI)

• Today: High Tech Industry transfers waste to secondary raw materials and energy: – turnover of 50 billion EURO/a– 250 000 jobs

• Invested money 1993-2005:– 9 billion EURO for remediation and closure of > 500

landfills– 3 billion EURO for new facilities to recycle and recover

12.5 Mill t of waste per year (bio waste, RDF)– 7.5 billion EURO for new facilities to pretreate 14 Mill t of

MSW per year

February 2008 Dr. Helmut Schnurer

In details....

Abfallaufkommen 1990 2001

[Mengenangaben in Tonnen]

RestabfallHausmüll (Graue Tonne) 30.460.853 16.466.000Sperrmüll getrennt eingesammelt 3.426.692 2.676.000Summe Hausmüll und Sperrmüll 33.887.545 19.142.000

Wertstoffe Bioabfall und Parkabfälle 1.982.306 7.992.000Altpapier 1.604.758 7.550.000Altglas 1.314.393 3.152.000Leichtverpackungen 0 1.870.000Summe Wertstoffe 4.901.457 20.564.000Summe Haushaltsabfälle 38.789.002 39.706.000

Quelle: Statistisches Bundesamt


MAIN PRINCIPLES / OBJECTVESof German (and European) Waste Policy

• Priority for avoidance, material recycling and energy recovery of waste

• Implementation of extended producer responsibility for products

• Stop landfilling of bio degradable waste• Mandatory pretreatment of solid wastes • Contribution to climate protection• Harmonization within European Union


The new closed substance cycle• Implementing the vision of the 1992 world summit of Rio on

sustainable development Closed Substance Cycle and Waste Management Act 1996

in Germany (China: Circular Economy)• First priority now on substitution of resources (raw

materials for production or secondary fuels for energy; priority should be given to the more environmentally friendly way)

• Recycling must be environmentally sound, economically reasonable and socially viable

• Disposal of wastes only, if recycling or recovery is not possible (problem of enforcement!)

• Steep increase in recycling and recovery quotas in Germany (>>50 %…80% and higher) for many types of waste


Steps of Development (1)

• First: reduce waste for disposal– Inform / motivate citizens and industry– Start of separate collection of recycable waste– Promote reuse (packaging)– Increase gate fee for landfills

• Second: priority for recycling/(recovery)

– Reduce waste going to landfill (no capacities)– Save resources (secondary raw materials/RDF)– Introduce extended producer responsibility

(packaging, batteries, waste oil, scrap cars, WEEE)– Promote composting, paper recycling and others


High standards of recycling(achieving quotas of 50...80 %)

Main fields of actions:• Bio waste for composting / anaerobic digestion• Waste paper• Packaging of all types*• Construction and demolition waste• Batteries*• Waste wood• Industrial waste• End of life vehicles*• Electric and electronic equipment*

(* EPR-regulations in EU)


Bio waste for composting / anaerobic digestion

• Separate collection of 7.3 mil tons of bio waste in 2004

• Composting is only allowed for separately collected bio-degradable wastes (listed)

• Problems with separate collection in cities• 813 facilities for composting• 85 facilities for digestion (wet or dry)• Limited market for compost • Increase of digestion due to promotion of

renewable energy (climate protection)


Waste paper (graphic paper)

• Nationwide separate collection from households and commercial enterprises in bins or containers

• Voluntary agreement by the „paper chain“ to use waste paper as a resource (mainly in other than production of graphic paper)

• One reason: decreasing acceptance of recycling paper in the public

• Recycling rate >80% (no fully closed loop)• Paper fibres cannot recycled for ever


Packaging of all types• German Packaging Ordinance from 1991 covers

• Sales Packaging• Secondary Packaging• Transport Packaging and• any packaging material

• Responsibility for producer, filler or retailer to take back and recycle (extended producer responsibility)

• Establishment of separate collection and recycling systems by industry

• For sales packaging from households and similar sources: Dual System with Green Dot label (at the beginning a monopolistic system)

• Now growing competition by alternative systems• Minimum quotas between 60 and 75% for all packaging

materials (achieved, even for plastics!)


Batteries and Accumulators

• Reduction of hazardous substances (heavy metals) by European regulation (first European product standard for new products)

• Take back obligation for producers, importers and retailers

• Collection system exists for take back at points of sale (retailers)

• System organize transport, sorting and recycling/disposal of collected batteries

• Surcharge on new batteries to finance this system• Collection rate is increasing but should be be further

improved• Recycling of collected batteries >60% • Recycling of car batteries >98%: mandatory deposit

system (appr. 10 $ when buying a new one without giving back an old one)


End of Life Vehicles (ELV)

• European Directive on ELV is implemented• Prohibition to use certain heavy metals (lead,

mercury, cadmium, chromium-6 with certain exemptions) in new vehicles (new product standard)

• Take back obligation by producer or importer• Detailed Requirements for dismantling and

recycling• Recycling and recovery quotas of 85% in 2006 and

95% in 2015 have to be achieved• Need to change the existing techniques (either

more dismantling before the shredder process or sorting out recyclable fractions from shredder light weight waste)


Waste from Electric and electronic equipment (WEEE)

• European Directives on WEEE and RoHS are implemented in Germany

• Prohibition of certain heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg, Cr-6) and flame retardants in new equipment with few exemptions ( new product standard)

• Consumers can give back old appliances without being charged for at municipal collection points (shared responsibility between industry and public waste management authorities)

• Collection must achieve 5 kg per inhabitant and year (nationwide)

• Take back obligation for producers and importers from municipal collection points

• individual solution negotiable for commercially used equipment

• Industry must proof high quotas for reuse, recycling and recovery (up to 80% of collected waste)


Waste wood

• Very large commodity (from demolition, furniture waste, packaging, production of wood products)

• Legal ordinance with requirements and standards for material and energy recycling

• No priority on material or energy recycling (renewable source)

• Prohibition of disposing off waste wood in landfill• Increasingly use for waste to energy due to

promotion of electricity from renewable sources


Construction and Demolition Waste

• Voluntary agreement by industry to reduce the wastes going to land fills by 50% in 10 years (achieved)

• Good results for demolition waste, very good results for road excavation waste and poor results for mixed wastes from construction sites

• Results in 2002 (last year of data evaluation):• Total amount of waste from construction industry (all kinds): 214 mill t,

recycling 186 mill reuse and recycling rate of 87 %• Total amount of demolition, construction and road excavation waste

was 73 mill from which 51 mill t of secondary construction material was produced recycling rate of 70%

• Increasing problems to market secondary construction materials due to conflicts with more ambitious goals for the protection of groundwater and soil (conflicts between different authorities with different legal requirement)

• Balance between environment in different areas, economy and „Circular Economy“ has to be found

• Probably a new regulation – instead of deregulation!


But, not all waste can beavoided,

recycled,or recovered;

at least not presently!

What should be done withthe remaining residual

waste? Landfilling?


Problems with Landfilling

Wastes

Landfill

CPB-Reactor

Landfill gas

Surface water

Water =

Leachate

Barriers


Why landfilling of wastes is not a good solution

• Mixed waste contains organic as well as hazardous substances:• Production of landfill gas (only 50% can be collected and

treated; the remaining 50% are a hazard to climate)• Production of leachate (long term collection and

treatment is necessary – which is expensive)• Engineered barriers will not work for ever but fail in ???

• Landfilling shifts problems only to the future • Remediation of old landfills may be necessary (problem for

future generations) – but how? (examples)• On the long term, landfill is the most expensive „solution“ and

the contrary of sustainability • Landfill of waste, therefore has lowest priority in Germany (and

EU)• Exemptions for inert wastes, if not recyclable



• Third: stop landfilling of untreated MSW, because of

– Opposition from citizens against new sites– High costs for new landfills and aftercare– Old landfills became contaminated sites– Landfilling is the contrary of sustainability– Landfilling adds significantly to the emissions

of climate damaging gases (methane)

New regulations limit the contents of biodegradable material (TOC) and of soluble hazardous substances


Treatment of solid wastes• Balance necessary between proven techniques and promising

new developments has to be found• Proven solution: Incineration

• Efficient energy recovery• Recycling of ashes for construction purposes• Off gas treatment products go for recycling or into underground

storage in deep salt formations (in Germany a means of recycling)

• Alternatives (since 2002): Mechanical-Biological-Treatment• Biological treatment in closed boxes to avoid hazardous emissions• Fraction with low calorific value (<6000 kJ/kg) may be landfilled• Fraction with high calorific potential has to go for incineration with

energy recovery

• German regulations do not decide on technical solution – but request a high standard of immobilisation of wastes, leaving open possibilities for new technologies (create no obstacles)

• Switzerland and Austria have achieved similar goals already in 2000/2004

• European regulation is existent now with similar requirements


Wastes must be treated before landfilling

• Goals:• Organic substances have to be mineralized• Soluble hazardous substances have to be destroyed or

extracted or converted into stable condition

• Solution:• Thermal treatment destroys organic matter• Thermal treatment extracts soluble substances or

transfers them into stable condition• Mechanical-biological treatment (alternative to

incineration) needs thermal treatment for high calorific residues

• Additional advantage: substitution of energy



• Fourth: Consequences of restrictions for landfilling: All MSW

has to be pre-treated since 2005

Regulations do not define the way – but the results:

specifications of pre-treated waste + stringent requirements to protect emissions into air

and water


Integrated Waste Management System

waste

can be avoided

can be recovered

can belandfilled

recycling or energy recovery

landfill

thermal treatment

secondaryraw material

energy

yes

yes

yes

no

no

no


Restmüll SperrmüllLVP HMGAltholzGlasPPKBioabfallGPF

Nutzen: StromWärme

Kohle-substitution

FE-Metalle, Schlacke

Zement-klinker

Deponie 6.945.000 t

8.084.000 t

Schrott (Eisen)SchlackeFilterasche

MVA

StofflicheVerwertung

ca. 50% Input, MBA-Rest

ca. 3% Input Störstoffe

MBA und SBS

752.167 t

Zementwerk

ca. 20% Input, SBS

Grobasche

Sammlung

16.466.000 t

Restmüll SperrmüllLVP HMGAltholzGlasPPKBioabfallGPF

Nutzen: StromWärme

Kohle-substitution

FE-Metalle, Schlacke

Zement-klinker

Deponie 6.945.000 t

8.084.000 t

Schrott (Eisen)SchlackeFilterasche

MVA

StofflicheVerwertung

ca. 50% Input, MBA-Rest

ca. 3% Input Störstoffe

MBA und SBS

752.167 t

Zementwerk

ca. 20% Input, SBS

Grobasche

Sammlung

16.466.000 t

Sammlung

16.466.000 tRESTMÜLL

Kraftwerk

Abfallwirtschaft im Jahr 2001


Waste Management in Germany in 1990

34 Mill tons of MSW

Landfill: 28 Mill tons

Waste Incineration 6 Mill tons


What are the solutions in Germany?• Waste incineration with efficient energy use and stringent

emission control has priority• Mechanical-biological treatment with energy recovery of

the high calorific fraction has second priority• Co-incineration of certain wastes in fossil fired power

plants and cement kilns is used increasingly; ( also secondary fuel to substitute fossil fuel in district heating, paper mill, chemical industry, tyre-production, metal affinery, even food production)

• Anaerobic digestion of organic wastes with energy use of the bio-gas is increasing

• Common denominator: thermal treatment which has achieved political acceptance in Germany, even in the Green Party (pre requisites are limitation to residual waste and stringent emission standards)


Emissions from waste incineration in Germany (per 100 00 t of MSW)

Before 1990

Today

210.000 t NOX410.000 t SO2 180 kg Cd 130 kg Hg 6 g Dioxin

36.000 t NOX 0,9 t SO2 1,2 kg Cd 1,2 kg Hg 0,003 g Dioxin



• Fifth: Solutions in Germany (public and private operators)

• Rely on proven technology: Municipal Solid Waste Incineration (MSWI, mainly grate)

– 73 MSWI facilities are operating presently– Total capacity of 17.9 million tons per year

(65%)

• Mechanical-biological-treatment (MBT)– 66 facilities with 7.2 mill t/y (26%)

• Co-incineration in coal fired power plants and cement kilns

– presently only 2.3 mill t/y, 8%

[Praxis is similar in some other European countries like A, CH, DK, F, NL, S]


„alternative“ Technologies failed (1)

• Thermoselect– One facility built at Karlsruhe– Never reached specifications/continuous

operation shut down loss of 400 mill €

• Schwel-Brenn-Verfahren– Developed by experienced company (Siemens)– Pilot plant al Ulm worked well – First full scale facility started construction but

was not finished due to technical problems and increasing costs

• Gasification at Schwarze Pumpe– Facility worked well with specific wastes– Operation terminated due to not competitive

high operating costs


„alternative“ Technologies failed (2)

• Pyrolysis– Several small sized plants were built– Only one is still operating (technical problems

and how to dispose hazardous tar)

• Plasma Technology– Only experiments and test rigs; no large

facility for waste has been realized

• Katalytic Depolimerisation– Small test rig promises to transfer waste into

diesel– No large facility has proven to be available for

mixed waste

• Deep well injection– In theory an ideal solution for organic sludge– Technical realisation failed


Lessons to be learned

• Established technologies for defined and clean substancies don‘t work autimaticly for heterogeneous wastes MSW = chameleon

• Alternative technologies have to cope with:– Existing stringent emission standards– Warrant reliable continous operation– Verify a complete analysis of inputs/outputs– Proof of reliable costs (invest, operation, maintenance)

• If a solution for managing the arising wastes is needed urgently – proven technology is recommended

• Decision to rely on alternative technology can only be recommended, if disposal of arising wastes will be secured – in case of the new technology system fails


A new Experience: Waste Management contributes to Climate Protection(Research Report 205 33 314 BMU/UBA/Oeko-Institut/ifeu, 8/2005)

• Methane-emissions from dumps are 21-times more effective than CO2

• Out phasing landfills for solid waste in Germany has reduced such gas emissions significantly

• Incineration of organic waste has no impact on climate change• Outphasing landfill and other waste activities contribute to a total

reduction of 46 mill t CO2 equivalents from 1990 until 2005 (which is the highest individual contribution to climate protection in Germany)

• Mayor contributions for reductions aside out phasing of landfills are– MSWI and Co-incineration (substitution of fossil fuel)– Metal recycling– Paper recycling– Glass recycling

• Total reductions from 1990 until 2020 are assumed to be 50 mill t, mainly by not landfilling (76%), MSWI (9%), co-incineration (7%) and material recycling (5%)

• The reduction potential for the old EU (15 MS) could be 134 mill t CO2

equivalents, almost 100 mill t from terminating landfilling!the (USA?)


Landfills are significant emitters

of climate changing gases

26,7

4,8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1990 2001

Treibhausgasemissionen in Mio. Tonnen CO2-Äquivalent

Organic substances in MSW lead to the generation of methane.

Reduction of emissions are possible by:- reduce landfilling of wastes- pre-treatment of wastes- improved gas collection

february 2008dr. helmut schnurer1 waste management in germany dr.-ing. helmut schnurer deputy...

Documents

inerte abflle

of waste per year bio

turnover of

for remediation and

and recover

summe hausmll

of msw per year

landfills3 billion