Waste Targets Review – Main elements of the impact assessment Karolina D'Cunha, Michel Sponar DG...
-
Upload
miles-mclaughlin -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Waste Targets Review – Main elements of the impact assessment Karolina D'Cunha, Michel Sponar DG...
Waste Targets Review –
Main elements of the impact assessment
Karolina D'Cunha, Michel Sponar
DG Environment, Unit A2
Outline
Background Methodology Problem definition/Objectives Policy Options Targets setting Proposed Legislation Conclusions
Background
Why new targets?And why now?
1. Review clauses in 3 Directives by 2014
2. Even with full implementation of existing legislation, valuable resources are lost
3. Gap between existing targets and ambition level of the Resource Efficiency Roadmap and the recently adopted 7th EAP
4. Room to do more than existing targets – important benefits to capture
• Waste generation in decline • Strategy to combat food waste in place• Recycling/Reuse increased • Energy recovery limited to non-recyclable waste• Phasing out of landfilling (limited to non-
recoverable waste)• Use of market-based instruments• Implementation of the legislation
By 2020, 'taking into account time derogations provided in existing legislation'
7th EAP Objectives
Methodology
What worked and what didn't?
Ex post Evaluations
Building blocks
What are the main barriers and how to overcome them?
EEA ex post assessment EU Court of Auditors reportThematic strategy reportStudies on Economic
instruments (EPR)Fitness check (packaging)
EEA ex post assessment EU Court of Auditors reportThematic strategy reportStudies on Economic
instruments (EPR)Fitness check (packaging)
What are the main impacts?
Ex-ante evaluation
Impact assessment
Impact assessment
Legislative proposal
Legislative proposal
EEA modelNew modules Questionnaire to all MS + 19
Country visits
EEA modelNew modules Questionnaire to all MS + 19
Country visits
Identification of best practices
Fact sheets, RoadmapsSeminars in 10 MS
Identification of best practices
Fact sheets, RoadmapsSeminars in 10 MS
Stakeholder consultations on targets and EPR
7th EAP Council/EP opinions Country visitsCommittee of Region opinionSME's seminar
Stakeholder consultations on targets and EPR
7th EAP Council/EP opinions Country visitsCommittee of Region opinionSME's seminar
What are stakeholder point of
views?
Quality check IA
Internal consultation
EEA/Eurostat support
Specific contract
Inform
Stakeholder consultation
Model Design
EU Reference Model on Municipal Waste Management:Central Mass Flow Model, and additional operational and assessment modules.
Mass Flows Module
MSW generation projections
Waste prevention and reuse
Financial costsWaste collection and
treatment costs
Recycling, composting & anaerobic digestion
Residual waste treatment: MBT & Incineration
Resource efficiency indicators and
distance to targets assessment, marine litter
Landfill
Collection moduleCalculates the cost of
current collection systems, and potential
additional costs to achieve intended future recycling performance
Prevention module
Ability to constrain waste, and account the
costs of initiativesEnvironmental
impacts Monetised GHG and air
quality emissions
Employment
Problem Definition
"Loss of valuable materials due to improper waste management"
Problem definition
Underlying causes
Objectives
Objectives
but also: Simplification/consistency between targets Improving implementation Creating mid-term certainty
Capture potential benefits:direct savings, access to raw materials, GHG/air emissions reduction, job creation, marine litter reduction, enhanced EU recycling industry
Move towards a "circular economy" by re-injecting valuable resources into the EU economy
by aligning the waste targets with the 7th EAP
Options to achieve the objectives
Options
Basis = Orientations approved in the 7th EAP
Only achievable targets and deadlines Avoid completely new targets No target without clear measurement method
More than 60 options were considered, main rejected options:
Overall targets for prevention or re-use, Recycling targets for industrial, hazardous, mining, commercial waste Maximum targets for incinerationSame economic instruments for all MS
Options retained
Option 1: Ensuring full implementation
Option 2: Measures to simplify legislation, improve monitoring and disseminate best practices
Option 3: Upgraded targets 3.1 Municipal recycling (60% and 70% by 2030)3.2 Packaging waste (80% by 2030 – variant for Alu)3.3 Landfill reduction (25% by 2025, 5% by 2030) 3.4 Combination of 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3:
3.5 Alternative deadlines for groups of MS3.6 More stringent deadlines with time derogations3.7 Option 3.4 + extension of the landfill bans
Target setting
Financial costs (M€ relative to full implementation, EU 28)
Externalities (M€ relative to full implementation, EU 28)
Changes in employment by 2030 relative to full implementation
Stakeholder signals
• COR outlook opinion• 7th EAP • EPR consultation
Main elements of the proposal
Approach
Combination of :
•Improved/increased targets •Measures to ensure proper and full implementation
Prevention, eco-design
• Aspirational objective to reduce food waste by 30% by 2025 (Art 9 WFD)
• Ecodesign
• Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) - minimum requirements (true and full cost concept linking the fees paid by producers to recyclability of the products)
•Separate collection obligation by 2015 (Art 11(1) WFD)
•New separate collection obligation for bio-waste by 2025
•Clarification on measuring
•Definition of municipal waste
New targets – municipal waste recycling
By 2025: no landfilling of
recyclable waste max 25%
landfilling
By 2030 (aspirational): • residual waste
only• max 5% landfilling
Review clauses:• 2018 for inert
waste• 2025 for the 2030
aspirational target
New targets – municipal waste landfilling
New targets – packaging waste recycling
• Clarification on measuring (same as for municipal waste)• Repeal of the recovery and max recycling targets • New target for aluminium
Proposed targets
Simplification, data quality and best practices
Simplification: • Reporting obligations – no more implementation
reports• Definition + additional exemptions for SMEs
Better data:• Quality check report + third party verification of
statistics • National electronic registries (at least hazardous
waste)
Dissemination of best practices:• Minimum conditions for EPR • Early Warning System (next slide)
Early Warning System
1. Every 5 years: identification of MS at risk of not
meeting the targets + recommendations2. If identified as at risk, compliance plan, including
measures listed in Annex VIII
The list of measures in Annex VIII is consistent with: • Ex-ante conditionalities• Country-specific recommendations• Roadmaps discussed with 10 less advanced MS
Conclusions
With the proposed option:•More jobs (around 180,000)•Less GHG (- 443 on the period)•Better access to raw material and positive effect on competitiveness•Direct savings due to better waste management •Reduced marine litter (- 27,5% by 2030)
It will require:•Better governance/political will needed •Best practice dissemination •Involvement of the civil society
Thank you for your attention
More information:http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/target_review.htm