Leading by example

Greg Vogt, Managing Director of ISWA, explains why he believes Europe is a leader in waste management.

The International Solid Waste Association (ISWA) is a global network of waste management professionals, with a strong following of members based in the EU. In part, ISWA's goal is to gather those people with common interests in the waste industry from different region of the world so as to allow for good networking and sharing of experiences. Those who join ISWA appreciate case studies and real world examples of waste management practices so they can draw conclusions and ascertain what works and what doesn't.

Currently, an interesting aspect of the waste sector is the EU legislative model and how it is viewed by other regions of the world. I find it to be a powerful example of leadership when judged by its success to affect change in human behaviour and waste practices.

In brief, through national level adoption of EU legislation, the framework for significant change in practice and standards has been set.  And with that framework, a transition period is currently in place for the next two or three decades in which the Member States will strive to adopt practices that resemble those already in place in Germany and to a lesser degree in Denmark and Austria. Several thematic approaches are included, but a principal theme is the shift away from the landfill model in favour of waste prevention, waste reduction, recycling, composting, incineration or waste-to-energy as the new model and the new hierarchy for Europe.

As the shift away from landfilling is coming about through "top-down" legislation, the situation becomes a model approach towards accomplishing change in waste management planning. Where the political will is strong, and you have the support of the technical sectors, the approach appears to be on track to achieve its early goals.  Adequate capital funding being pushed forward to bring in or construct new facilities also helps support the process.

There will be some regions or countries that will take a little longer for implementation, but this is to be expected during the transition period.  For example, several Southern and Eastern European countries are in the planning stages for changing what today is primarily waste management through landfilling. In my view, what has already been accomplished is a mental change, or acceptance of the change in practices. Yes, delays and the need for time extensions will occur as siting, construction and start-up operations for large waste management facilities take several years.

However, there will of course be obstacles that the EU entities will have to face in terms of adopting this new model and reducing the amount of waste that is sent to existing landfills. One obstacle, perhaps as an interim approach, is the need for modern, engineered landfill capacity, which not only provides the necessary environmental performance, but also costs significantly less to build, own and operate than alternative technologies. The second will be in finding the financial resources to build and operate the waste handling facilities that EU legislation favours, namely composting, digestion, waste-to-energy and advanced sorting and recycling plants.

Targeting Recycling
The EU recycling targets are ambitious on one hand, yet achievable on the other. With the 50 percent recycling target for household waste and the 75 percent target for construction and demolition waste, a fascinating change in performance will be needed for some regions and countries. There are already two or three countries at that level or just about to reach it. This demonstrates the targets can be reached with the right will, the right change of behaviour and with capital funding. To me this is a tremendous model for the waste management sector on a very large scale. It demonstrates a form of leadership and allows others to examine how the approach might be transferred to their regions or countries. Clearly, such an approach costs a lot, there's a large, in-kind shift of resources away from other public needs, but if you want to get it done, it can be done.

There are several inherent challenges when attempting to reach higher and higher levels of recycling. For example, capturing the bio-waste portion of the waste stream that has high organic content and has value as a resource if used correctly. Collection unit costs are relatively high for separation programmes, and local participation is essential for success. As the composition of the waste changes, our industry must adapt so that collection and recycling programmes continue to work well. You can imagine the kinds of adjustments needed when, for example, millions of mobile phones and hundreds of thousands of plasma TVs come into the waste stream. Difficult to recycle waste components constitute the need for some lag time to have our programmess catch up. 

Future Priorities
One of ISWA's current priorities is to promote a raising of the standard of waste management globally. There is a concern of waste practitioners that in many large pockets of the world waste management practices are well below what we commonly use as the minimum standard for health and safety purposes.

Another priority is to raise awareness about waste quantities present in the seas. Waste reaches waterways and oceans in various ways. Legal and illegal disposing of wastes to the seas is not monitored or enforced at basic levels. Sustainable waste practices point to organised waste collection, subsequent reuse or recycling of waste materials where practical and managed disposal of residuals. Using waterways and seas as disposal points is unacceptable, and in part, this problem can be tackled by having adequate facilities at hand on land.

Another notable priority would be waste trafficking. From time to time, case examples have arisen to demonstrate that trafficking of waste (oftentimes hazardous and problematic waste being shipped to other countries where environmental protection standards may be lower or not enforced, or both) continues to occur. This is unacceptable.

Legislation against waste trafficking usually exists on a country by country basis and international agreements such as the Basel Convention provide a framework for enforcement. Better waste management options and practices at the larger ports is one starting point for improvements. Recognition that waste dumping is a legal offense will also be helpful.

The Global Situation

For several global regions, ISWA has a concern with the effort required to achieve a basic level of sanitation and public health. In the realm of waste management, this includes rapid collection of waste, proper storage and/or transfer facilities, and finding a suitable disposal facility as opposed to the use of open dumping areas. Globally, the number of open dump sites stretches into the hundreds of thousands, and our expectation is that nearby ground water sources or waterways are not being adequately protected. Clearly, ISWA promotes the closure of such global dump sites. In many situations, it makes sense to develop an interim approach for replacing local dumps through the use of sanitary landfills or engineered landfills as a way to address the immediate problem of public health and sanitation. We believe this message of an interim approach is essential for making progress and based on some of the success stories we hear about, it appears the word is getting out. 

Education, training, and the transfer of engineering technology for sanitary landfills is improving. In some cases, funds from donor organisations (such as AID and the World Bank) may be linked to development of modern waste management facility construction and related equipment. Essentially, new, modern landfills are being sited and constructed, but the pace is slow. Therein lies one of our concerns. The improvements for waste management systems may be moving too slowly, particularly with regard to how much waste is being produced.

It is encouraging to see the debates and discussions about waste management when I visit events in developing countries. The concepts of waste prevention and waste minimisation are now within the planning process, along with the development of sustainable recycling programs.  

Publishing the recycling goals of different countries around the world and showing the success rate is also helping. Common examples are found where a municipality began at measuring a recycling rate of 10 percent and then once attention and resources were put to the challenge, the recycling rate raised to 20 percent or 25 percent over time. Now numerous municipalities can demonstrate recycling rates achieved of over 50 percent.  In the EU, of course, this is the regional target, country by country. This is a tremendous model for other countries to follow.

I recall a presentation a few years ago describing the situation in Israel. Twenty years ago or so it relied on low standard landfills for most of its waste disposal, similar to what one might call a developing country waste management practice. Strong legislation was then put into effect, similar to EU requirements and coupled with strict enforcement. More than 100 open dumps were closed in a short time, and measures were taken to design and construct large regional sanitary landfills to handle much of the waste flow. Also, recycling targets of at least 25 percent were set forth which have been achieved. Lastly, it began to implement other waste approaches (processing, anaerobic digestion, composting) as a means to reduce reliance on the landfills. I would say Israel has an interesting success story for other small countries to look at.