Slide background
Empowering Our Communities To Redesign

New zero waste comic released

Middle Pages of Fran's Comic

A new comic has been released by the United Kingdom Without Incineration Network (UKWIN). The comic, titled ‘Everything Goes Somewhere’ features intricate illustration and lettering from Frances Howe, and can be purchased at UKWIN website.

The illustrated comic is a work of art in itself and can be used to communicate the message that incineration has no places in a circular economy where we need to look towards zero waste solutions.

Within the first week of publication, the pamphlet has already sold more than 1,000 copies and is currently being translated into Bahasa Indonesia, making it more accessible across South-East Asia.

For Frances the project took 9 months of work from the conception of the idea to the release, and made up a part of their Masters Degree in Graphic Arts. The project received research and administrative assistance from Zero Waste Europe and UKWIN leading the the publication of this amazing document.

ukwin-comic-cover-1
The front cover of the comic

The illustrator Frances Howe elaborated on their work, saying “My work attempts to generate debate and provoke more questions than it answers. I like working with visual narratives because they provide different ways for people to experience a piece of work. For example, do they focus on the pictures or the text? Do they read it in a linear way or take it in all at once? This makes comics an inherently democratic medium because the viewer has so much choice about how to interact with it.

“I wanted to make comics about extreme energy in general, and waste incineration in particular, because it brings up a lot of topics and questions that are not always easy to discuss; questions about energy, climate change, pollution, social and environmental justice, as well as consumption, capitalism, local democracy and community agency for change.

“My hope is that using a medium such as comics, which encourages freer thought and associations between things, can help people to engage with these topics in a way that gives them more agency to get involved in making change.”

The comics are printed in full colour on two sides of durable A1 card which has been folded down to A4, and can fold out to be used as a poster highlighting the necessity for a move to a zero waste world.

The comics can be purchased from the UKWIN website with discounts available for buying larger quantities.


Wood Waste: Recycle, Bury, or Burn? Jeffrey Morris Gives an Answer.

Wood Yard at Schiller Station
Wood Yard at Schiller Station

Whilst the European Commission is trying to shape a policy for the sustainable use of biomass for energy purposes as part of the revision to the Renewable Energy Directive, new research has shown that the use of wood waste biomass does not fit the sustainability criteria.

Dr. Jeff Morris, expert on cradle-to-cradle and cost benefit analysis is the senior economist and principal at Sound Resource Management Group, Inc., has undertaken research on the life cycle analysis(LCA) of clean wood waste management methods, which has been peer-reviewed and published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology earlier this month.

Sharing his findings with the GAIA and Zero Waste International Alliance networks, Morris explained:

“This LCA shows that wood waste combustion for electricity, heat energy or combined heat and power (CHP) is typically the least preferable management option from a combined climate, human health and ecosystems impacts perspective versus recycling into reconstituted wood products or papermaking pulp, or even versus landfilling with methane capture and flaring or use to generate electricity. Only in the case of replacing high-sulfur-coal burning that uses minimal emissions controls does wood burning for heat energy look slightly better for climate impacts versus recycling the wood wastes.

But even then wood waste burning doesn’t win out versus recycling for overall environmental performance including human and ecosystems health in addition to climate impacts. Wood burning loses versus landfilling with methane capture when wood replaces coal that is not high in sulfur and both the wood and coal burning facilities have better than minimal emissions controls.

In other words, wood wastes burn dirty just as coal does and only get a slight edge against landfilling when wood wastes displace high sulfur coal when both wood and coal are burned in facilities that don’t do much to control their atmospheric emissions.

This LCA does for wood waste combustion what Tim Searchinger, Mary Booth and many others have shown for burning whole trees for power or heat. Whether whole trees or wood wastes from construction/demolition debris or from logging sites, burning wood is not an environmentally friendly source of energy.”

The article is in the Early View area for the Journal of Industrial Ecology and can be downloaded for free until the end of September.

Further reading:

ZWE response to the consultation on bioenergy

Press release

Blog by Mariel Vilella, climate policy campaigner & associate director of Zero Waste Europe for bioenergy.eu


Press Release: Circular Economy can be a game-changer to reach ESR targets

For immediate release: Brussels, September 27 2016

Contact: Mariel Vilella , Zero Waste Europe Climate Policy Campaigner & Associate Director-  mariel@zerowasteeurope.eu

Zero Waste Europe[1] has responded to the consultation on the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) by highlighting the contribution that the waste sector can bring to a low-carbon economy, and calling the European Commission to have higher ambition.

In the response submitted today[2], Zero Waste Europe pointed out that the implementation of the Circular Economy Package could deliver far more GHG emission reductions than the total amount targeted by the implementation of the ESR, if GHG emissions savings from recycling and reduction of waste were accounted for, which shows that there is very significant room for improvement.

Recent research calculated[3] the climate benefit from the optimal implementation of the Circular Economy Package waste targets (2014 version). Assuming the implementation of a 70% recycling, 30% of food waste reduction, and an 80% recycling of packaging waste, the EU would save 190 million/tonnes CO2-eq/year, which would be the equivalent to the total annual emissions of the Netherlands.

In comparison, the overall ESR proposal expects to reduce is 1,000 million/tonnes for the period 2021-2030, an average of 111 million/tonnes per year[4]. This lower figure partly responds to the fact that the ESR is not taking into consideration the recycling and waste reduction related targets from the Circular Economy Package.

In this sense, with the proper accounting methodologies in place, the ESR ambition could be much higher and more coherent with the sectoral policies.

“The Effort Sharing Regulation should set mitigation targets that are consistent with the targets of the Circular Economy Package, making sure that the two sets of policies are coherent. These policies are called to drive the transition across sectors to a low-carbon economy, ensuring actual emission reductions and creative solutions for a long-lasting, inclusive change,“ said Mariel Vilella, Zero Waste Europe Climate Policy Campaigner & Associate Director.

Furthermore, the response highlights that zero waste solutions, alongside climate action in other sectors, will contribute to achieving the global target of a maximum of 1.5 degrees global warming, embracing the principles of conservation of materials, the reduction of toxics, equitable distribution, and access to resources.

The response submitted by Zero Waste Europe is available to download on our website.

Contact: Mariel Vilella , Zero Waste Europe Climate Policy Campaigner & Associate Director-  mariel@zerowasteeurope.eu

NOTES

  1. Zero Waste Europe is an umbrella organisation empowering communities to rethink their relationship with resources. It brings together local Zero Waste groups and municipalities present in 20 EU countries. Beyond recycling, the Zero Waste network aims at reducing waste generation, close the material loop whilst increasing employment and designing waste out of the system. www.zerowasteeurope.eu
  2. Zero Waste Europe’s official response to the ESR consultation: https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/ESRSubmission.pdf_V4.pdf
  3. The Potential Contribution of Waste Management to a Low Carbon Economy, Eunomia/ZWE, 2015. https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/downloads/the-potential-contribution-of-waste-management-to-a-low-carbon-economy/
  4. The EU 2016 Reference Scenario, see here: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/20160712_Summary_Ref_scenario_MAIN_RESULTS%20(2)-web.pdf

Press Release: Germany should work for and not against a Circular Economy in Europe

For immediate release: Brussels, September 16 2016

Zero Waste Europe[1] strongly objects to the Germany’s proposal to postpone recycling targets which are included in the waste package and are one of the flagships of the Circular Economy strategy.

After reporting 65.12% recycling rate on latest Eurostat statistics for 2014, Germany now asks for a target-free Circular Economy Package, arguing that a 65% recycling rate target by 2030 may not be feasible. According to Germany, a new methodology based on national standard loss rates should be tested for 3 years, after which the Commission could come up with “feasible” targets, opening the door for lower targets or no targets at all. This proposal would contradict current legislation which mandates the Commission to propose higher targets after 2014.

The European Commission has acknowledged[2] that recycling targets and separate collection schemes have been the major driver of high recycling rates in many countries, including Germany. Ferran Rosa, Zero Waste Europe’s waste policy officer wondered: “Germany has their own national targets. If it’s positive and achievable for Germany, why wouldn’t they be possible for the rest of Europe? Either their statistics aren’t accurate or they have an interest in low-recycling rates”.

In this regard, Mr Rosa added that “Europe’s recycling leader is also the leading country in Europe for waste imports for incineration. The removal of recycling targets combined with close-to-zero landfill disposal will only serve to feed German incineration overcapacity and push for adding even more incinerators to the already saturated incineration market”.

Zero Waste Europe’s examples of best practices[3] from across the continent have repeatedly proved the feasibility of achieving high recycling rates within a short period of time, supporting local jobs and increased environmental protection.

Germany’s position also rejects the Commission’s proposal of EU-wide minimum requirements for EPR schemes that are meant to drive recyclability and repairability of the products covered by existing or new Extended Producer Responsibility schemes.

“We cannot afford to have the European engine putting the breaks on the Circular Economy. A target-free Circular Economy package with almost no binding measures will not bring the systemic change needed” concluded Rosa.

NOTES

  1.  Zero Waste Europe is an umbrella organisation empowering communities to rethink their relationship with resources. It brings together local Zero Waste groups and municipalities present in 20 EU countries. Beyond recycling, the Zero Waste network aims at reducing waste generation, close the material loop whilst increasing employment and designing waste out of the system. www.zerowasteeurope.euZero Waste Europe
  2. Zero Waste Europe Case Studies: https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/zw-library/case-studies/
  3. European Commission Impact Assessment accompanying Directive Proposal: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:0c4bbc1d-02ba-11e4-831f-01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_4&format=PDF 

ENDS


A vision of the future free from plastic pollution: The EU must rise to the challenge

IMG_20160716_084742

A groundbreaking new global vision for a future free from plastic pollution has been released today by a network of 90 NGOs. The vision lays out 10 principles with the ultimate goal being ‘a future free from plastic pollution’. It represents the first step in a global movement to change society’s perception and use of plastics.

Scientists predict that without urgent action there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by 2050, threatening marine biodiversity and posing a risk to human health. Yet, despite the danger that plastic pollution poses to our planet and to Human well-being, governments and industry have so far failed to face up to the systemic change required to solve the issue.

At the European level, the development of the Circular Economy Package and the EU Strategy on Plastics present a major opportunity to fundamentally tackle the use of plastic and prevent the creation of plastic waste. This cannot be done without policy makers addressing the full life-cycle of plastics from oil extraction and design, to end-of-life.

This is the first time that groups from all around the world have come together to find a common solution to the problem of plastic pollution. It is the beginning of a movement which will lead to governments, cities and companies taking major action to tackle this ever-growing problem” said Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Zero Waste Europe policy officer and coordinator of the European plastics alignment process.

European governments and multinationals need to face up to their responsibility for driving the irresponsible use of plastics and for the resulting environmental damage around the world, which often most affects the most vulnerable globally. It is clear that without a strong and coordinated effort and impetus by policy makers, businesses will continue to use plastic indiscriminately and the pollution will intensify.

The NGOs below call on the European Commission and Member States to strive for ambitious policy changes to lead the way to a future free from plastic pollution.

Want to join this movement? Visit the Break Free From Plastic website and sign up!

logo_epap

 

List of European Signatories

ChemTrust (UK)

European environmental citizen’s organisation for standardisation

Ecologists without borders (Slovenia)

Environmental Investigation Agency

European Environmental Bureau

Fauna & Flora International

Federation for a Better Environment (Flanders)
Friends of the Earth Europe

Health and Environment Alliance

Health Care Without Harm Europe

Humusz (Hungary)

Let’s do it World

Marine conservation society (UK)

Plastic Change (Danemark)

Plastic Soup Foundation (Netherlands)

Surfrider Foundation Europe

Seas At Risk

Surfers against sewage (UK)

Trash Hero World

Zero Waste Europe

Zero Waste France (France)


Press release: A vision of a future free from plastic pollution: the EU must rise to the challenge

logo_epap

 

For Immediate Release: Brussels, 14th of September 2016

 

A groundbreaking new global vision for a future free from plastic pollution has been released today by a network of 90 NGOs. The vision lays out 10 principles with the ultimate goal being ‘a future free from plastic pollution’. It represents the first step in a global movement to change society’s perception and use of plastics.

Scientists predict that without urgent action there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by 2050, threatening marine biodiversity and posing a risk to human health. Yet, despite the danger that plastic pollution poses to our planet and to Human well-being, governments and industry have so far failed to face up to the systemic change required to solve the issue.

At the European level, the development of the Circular Economy Package and the EU Strategy on Plastics present a major opportunity to fundamentally tackle the use of plastic and prevent the creation of plastic waste. This cannot be done without policy makers addressing the full life-cycle of plastics from oil extraction and design, to end-of-life.

This is the first time that groups from all around the world have come together to find a common solution to the problem of plastic pollution. It is the beginning of a movement which will lead to governments, cities and companies taking major action to tackle this ever-growing problem” said Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Zero Waste Europe policy officer and coordinator of the European plastics alignment process.

European governments and multinationals need to face up to their responsibility for driving the irresponsible use of plastics and for the resulting environmental damage around the world, which often most affects the most vulnerable globally. It is clear that without a strong and coordinated effort and impetus by policy makers, businesses will continue to use plastic indiscriminately and the pollution will intensify.

The NGOs below call on the European Commission and Member States to strive for ambitious policy changes to lead the way to a future free from plastic pollution.

 

See the vision statement in video and read more about the project

 

Press contacts

Delphine Lévi Alvarès

Zero Waste Europe

+32 478 71 26 33

delphine@zerowasteeurope.eu

 

List of European signatories

ChemTrust (UK)

European environmental citizen’s organisation for standardisation

Ecologists without borders (Slovenia)

Environmental Investigation Agency

European Environmental Bureau

Fauna & Flora International

Federation for a Better Environment (Flanders)

Friends of the Earth Europe

Health and Environment Alliance

Health Care Without Harm Europe

Humusz (Hungary)

Let’s do it World

Marine conservation society (UK)

Plastic Change (Danemark)

Plastic Soup Foundation (Netherlands)

Surfrider Foundation Europe

Seas At Risk

Surfers against sewage (UK)

Trash Hero World

Zero Waste Europe

Zero Waste France (France)

Enregistrer

Enregistrer


PRESS RELEASE: Concern that flame retardants cause more harm than safety

For immediate release: Brussels, September 08 2016

pasted-image-at-2016_09_08-12_37-pm

There are several different fire safety standards for furniture in Europe. Some standards lead to the use of flame retardant chemicals. Scientific research shows that many flame retardants are hazardous to both human health and the environment, without providing a demonstrated fire safety benefit.

A wide alliance of stakeholders ranging from environmental NGOs to industry, cancer organisations, fire fighters and labour unions are coming forth to raise awareness about the risks and concerns of using hazardous flame retardants in furniture.

Furniture flammability standards that lead to the use of flame retardants bring harmful and potentially harmful chemicals into homes, schools, hospitals and workplaces. Such requirements threaten human health, the global environment, and the recycling of furniture in the circular economy.

“Creating a real circular economy will be impossible for as long as toxic chemicals enter the cycle and are recycled into new products. We have already seen kitchen utensils and plastic cutlery with hazardous flame retardants. Toxics in, toxics out.”  Joan Marc Simon, Executive Director, Zero Waste Europe

There are more effective and less harmful ways to achieve fire safety, without potentially putting the whole population and the environment at risk. The use of smoke detectors is one way of increasing escape time as the fire is detected earlier, without the potential harm from exposure to chemicals.

“Fire fighters have a higher risk than civilians for a variety of cancers, and we know there is a concern flame retardants contribute to increasing that risk. Fire safety can be achieved in other means than using potentially harmful chemicals: smoke detectors and sprinklers are amongst the most effective.” Mikael Svanberg, European Fire Fighter Unions Alliance (EFFUA).

Flame retardant chemicals leak out of products and build up in the environment. They create a toxic legacy that does not disappear over time, but stays in the air, soil and sediments of the oceans – eventually ending up in the food we eat.

“If we can increase fire safety without causing serious harm to humans and nature, we should go for it! In the US, California and Washington states have already scrapped flammability standards which filled household furniture with hazardous chemicals. Europe should follow suit and end this madness immediately.” Tatiana Santos, Senior Policy Officer on Chemicals, European Environmental Bureau (EEB).

The different flammability standards throughout Europe are complicated to comply with and place a costly burden on the producers. Flame retardants increase costs in production, while lowering the quality of products. This is a serious challenge to the furniture sector in Europe, putting jobs and growth at risk.

“As a producer, having to comply with several standards to be able to sell our products on the European market is unbearable. The existing multitude of National Flammability standards are effective barriers to trade in the internal market.” Markus Wiesner, President, European Furniture Industries Confederation (EFIC)

Important steps to eliminate hazardous flame retardants have already been taken through REACH and other regulatory approaches in the EU. It is time for the final step through harmonised safety requirements for furniture that do not lead to the use of flame retardant chemicals.
ENDS
PRESS CONTACT: Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Zero Waste Europe Policy Officer +32 (0) 478 712 633 delphine@zerowasteeurope.eu

LINKS

The Case for Flame Retardant Free Furniture – Policy Paper https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/FRFF_policypaper_080916.pdf

Press Brief for Flame Retardant Free Furniture Launch https://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Press_brief_flame_retardants_launch-8-sept.pdf

Following a successful campaign in the USA, the regulation in California has been changed in order to avoid the use of flame retardant chemicals whilst maintaining a high level of fire safety. Other states are following California’s lead. Here are some useful links:

Chicago Tribune series on flame retardants: “Tribune Watchdog Playing With Fire” http://media.apps.chicagotribune.com/flames/index.html

A short video produced by The Chicago Tribune: “The Truth About Flame Retardants” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb4lFKyVjTc

Boston Globe: “Mass. firefighters seek ban on flame retardants” https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/04/24/firefighters-seek-new-law-ban-flame-retardants/Zzv8aVoRN6WTcpKDIvV4cP/story.html

Portrait of Arlene Blum:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/magazine/arlene-blums-crusade-against-household-toxins.html?_r=1

Politico: Are lobbyists playing with fire?
http://www.politico.eu/article/are-lobbyists-playing-with-fire/

NOTES

Stakeholder Alliance:
An alliance representing a wide range of interests in society has joined forces to fight against the use of harmful flame retardants in furniture.

The alliance gathers industry, environmental NGOs, cancer organisations, fire fighters and the labour union. Members of the alliance are:

  • The European Fire Fighter Unions Alliance (EFFUA)
  • European Environmental Citizens Organisation for Standardisation (ECOS)
  • European Environmental Bureau (EEB)
  • Zero Waste Europe (ZWE)
  • The Cancer Prevention and Education Society (Cancer Prevention)
  • European Furniture Industries Confederation (EFIC)
  • European Bedding Industries Association (EBIA)
  • European Federation of Building and Woodworkers (EFBWW)
  • CHEM Trust – Protecting humans and wildlife from harmful chemicals (CHEM Trust)
  • Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL)