Slide background
Empowering Our Communities To Redesign

3 Positions the EU Must Take To Stay Clean on the Circular Economy

Live from the United Nations Conference of Parties (COP) to the Stockholm, Basel and Rotterdam conventions – Geneva

There is a group of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) that it is critical to address to ensure we are moving towards a clean circular economy. Although the EU is continuously setting the tone towards more circularity internally, it has clearly lacked ambition and clarity on the issues at stakes in Geneva this week. This post goes through the details of the negotiations around the global regulation framework of the Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) and outlines the positions the EU must take to safeguard a clean future for the circular economy.

A ban on decaBDE without exemptions

On Tuesday, the listing of decaBDE in Annex A of the Stockholm Convention for an immediate ban was discussed. DecaBDE is a toxic flame retardant which is primarily found in the plastics of electronic devices and in some textiles and upholstery. Most countries supported this ban, but several delegations are asking for exemptions to allow for the continued production and use of this toxic POP in certain sectors. The EU in particular is asking for exemptions in the automotive and aviation sectors, despite leading companies in these sectors having already stated that a complete ban would be feasible in a very short time frame (see our latest policy briefing).

End the recycling exemptions for pentaBDE and octaBDE

On Wednesday, the debate turned to the recycling exemptions for pentaBDE and octaBDE which were adopted at a previous COP until 2030. Pakistan, Gabon and Norway in particular held very strong position to end the recycling exemption immediately, to protect the life and health of millions of kids in the global south contaminated by toys and other products made of recycled plastics containing these substances. Canada strongly opposed the immediate termination of the recycling exemptions. EU did not take a clear stand to support Pakistan, Gabon and Norway’s proposal, which is an endorsement by abstention of Canada’s proposal and an incompatible positioning in the context of the clean circular economy that EU is advocating for within its frontiers.

GAIA & Zero Waste Europe delegation meeting with EU delegation leader, Bjorn Hansen Photo by IISD/ENB | Kiara Worth

Impose strong limits on the levels of POPs in waste

Last but not least, an intense debate is currently taking place about the Low POP Content level (The concentration threshold above which wastes are considered POPs waste) of waste containing PBDEs allowed to be exported under the Basel Convention. In the debate, EU’s is defending a weak limit for POPs in waste which can result in toxic waste being exported outside its borders without effective controls, this represents a clear double standard and an irresponsible position.

Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Zero Waste Europe policy officer made an intervention from the conference floor calling on the European delegates to support the immediate end of the recycling exemptions for octaBDE and pentaBDE, and the inclusion of decaBDE in Annex A of the Stockholm conventions which prohibits production, use and recycling of the chemicals, calling for no exemptions to be made

Delphine Lévi Alvarès making her intervention to the conference floor

The intervention argued that such a ban was essential to prevent the recycling of waste which contains toxic chemicals at the ‘expense of the health of children or recycling workers in the informal sector or other end users of such products globally’. Recently released reports such as IPEN’s Toxic Toys have shown that the recycling of products containing toxic chemicals such as octaBDE and decaBDE has resulted in toys made from recycled plastics which contain extremely high levels of these toxic POPs.

Delphine went on to say “To achieve a circular economy, we need to close the loop of materials by building trust in a toxic-free secondary material market so that both producers and consumers are willing to use them.” Increasing recycling in Europe is critical to reduce the use of virgin resources, but this aim cannot supercede the rights of children, recycling workers and other end users to a safe and healthy environment. In addition, authorising the inclusion of these banned toxic substances in recycled products seriously threatens the credibility and economic model of the entire recycling industry.

Zero Waste Europe calls on the EU to support international policies which are consistent with a clean and safe circular economy today, and take a clear stand on banning POPs at the source and against recycling exemptions of POPs containing materials.

 


IPEN PRESS RELEASE: At UN meeting, Canada and Chile stand alone trying to legitimize e-waste dumping and promote recycling of toxic chemical into children’s products

Geneva: Today, at the Stockholm Convention 8th Conference of the Parties, Chile and Canada surprised delegates by proposing to allow recycling materials containing a toxic flame retardant widely found in electronic waste (e-waste). The proposal violates the Stockholm Convention which explicitly prohibits recycling and reuse of substances on its list.

DecaBDE is used in the plastic casings of electronic products and if it is not removed, it is carried into new products when the plastic is recycled. Toxicity studies indicate potential adverse developmental, neurotoxic, and reproductive effects, and DecaBDE or its degradation products may also act as endocrine disruptors.

Ironically, a new IPEN study1 shows that the toxic recycling policy advocated by these countries widely contaminates children’s products. In fact, in Canada all sampled toys made of recycled plastic contained both OctaBDE and DecaBDE.

“How can these countries advocate a policy that potentially poisons children?”said Pam Miller, IPEN Co-Chair. “Recycling materials that contain toxic chemicals contaminates new products, continues exposure, and undermines the credibility of recycling.”

The treaty’s expert committee has warned against toxic recycling and explicitly recommended to eliminate these substances from the recycling streams “as swiftly as possible” noting that, “Failure to do so will inevitably result in wider human and environmental contamination… and in the loss of the long-term credibility of recycling”

The proposed recycling exemption also is tantamount to legalizing electronic waste (e-waste) dumping in developing countries which is cynically described as “recycling.”

“E-waste is the fastest growing waste stream and now it seems these countries want to make it legal and dump even more,” said Tadesse Amera, PAN Ethiopia. “OECD countries already sends us lots of e-waste and now it seems they want to increase our toxic burden – exactly opposite to the treaty’s goal.”

 

Contact:

Bjorn Beeler, IPEN

bjornbeeler@ipen.org

+46 3179 99 474

*******************************

1http://ipen.org/sites/default/files/documents/toxic_toy_report_2017_update_v1_5-final_en.pdf

 

IPEN is a global network of public interest organizations working in more than 100 countries to reduce and eliminate toxic substances.  www.ipen.org   twitter: @ToxicsFree

Press Release


The EU needs to change course for a toxic free world

DecaBDE the chemical subject of our report.

Between the 24th of April and the 5th of May, Zero Waste Europe will be in Geneva, attending the ‘super-COP’ (Conference of the Parties) covering 3 major global conventions on toxics: the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal, and the Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade. At the conference, Zero Waste Europe will be promoting our newest policy briefing opposing exemptions for decaBDE.

The COP will be an important forum for the discussion of policies that could determine the global future of the circular economy.

Despite the significance of this meeting it remains largely unknown, an inaccessible policy arena shrouded in jargon and secrecy. The meeting covered largely by trade journalists rarely makes headlines, but the decisions made here affect the lives of millions of people.

What is worse is that in this largely unreported conference EU delegates and representatives are actively pushing for the implementation of policies which could jeopardise the creation of a clean circular economy in Europe and around the world.

Toxic chemicals, watered down legislation

A significant point of concern for observers of the conference are the substances which are listed to be banned under the Stockholm Convention. These substances include hormone-disrupting chemicals which are extremely resistant to breaking down in the environment. Known as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) many of these chemicals have already been banned under the convention. However whilst the effects of these chemicals on the environment and human health is well documented, when it comes to a chemical used as a flame retardant called decaBDE, the EU has continued to lobby against increasing regulations.

EU delegates at the conference are actively pushing for less stringent regulation and specific exemptions for the recycling of waste containing decaBDE. The position of the EU is significantly weaker than the recommendations from the conventions expert committee which calls for no recycling exemptions and an immediate ban of decaBDE.

Time to act for a clean and safe economy

As recycling increases it is a matter of time before a scandal about toxics in recycled material explodes damaging the image of recycling and of the Circular Economy strategy. For this reason it is imperative to move quickly in the restriction of hazardous substances and organise a proper tracking of polluted waste streams to ensure a reliable and safe secondary market for raw materials.

The EU needs to ensure that their delegates advocate for strong international policies on toxics including decaBDE which fully align with the European Circular Economy. A large proportion of Europe’s electronic waste (WEEE) is exported to countries in the Global South ostensibly to be recycled, however it can often end up in dangerous dumping sites, where toxic chemicals can harm the environment and human health. If the EU continues to argue for these exemptions it will be recycling and waste workers in these countries who will bear the full burden of toxics in our recyclables. The EU needs to be consistent in eliminating toxic chemicals from our products, including those which are going to be recycled and lead the way to a clean and safe economy.

DOWNLOAD THE POLICY BRIEFING


Tell Supermarkets to Stop Using Non-Recyclable Plastic

A new petition asks large supermarket chains in France to stop using non-recyclable plastic in their own-branded milk bottles. The bottles are causing mayhem in recycling plants and stalling the country’s circular economy goals.

What’s in a circle? Well at first glance we might think nothing of it. Its simplicity evokes plainness, but as we look deeper we discover harmony at its core. Harmony in the form of completeness and sustainability. Harmony in the form of collaboration and sharing. Harmony in the form of life as we know it. There’s much more to a circle than meets the eye. Just like with a circular economy.  Although the concept seems simple, creating a truly sustainable economy means careful planning, attention to detail, and that every section of the economy works together in harmony.

While across Europe, the circular economy concept has taken root, the unfortunate truth is that not everyone is entirely on board with circular design.

Recently, Zero Waste France discovered that many of France’s large supermarket chains who stock their own branded milk on the shelves use bottles made from the non-recyclable polymer commonly known as opaque PET. That equates to millions of non-recyclable bottles in the French marketplace alone. And with the implementation of proper recycling methods far from being ready, the presence of opaque PET in recycling centers disrupts the entire process because it can’t properly be identified by current machinery. This has led to the unnecessary allocation of manpower and resources to handle this difficult material, the costs of which fall on the shoulders of the taxpayer.

We can all help solve this problem while also checking one for mother earth by signing Zero Waste France’s petition which aims to stop the usage of opaque PET among supermarket chains in France.

Although a small effort, the signing of the petition not only pinpoints a major sustainable ‘no-no’ in the bottling industry, but also contributes towards the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) system. As a tool that can be used to provide economic incentives for producers to better design their products, EPR schemes are designed to penalize non-circular products, ensuring that the polluter pays, not the people.

The idea behind it is to create a closed-loop economy and incentivize producers to either create products that are durable, reusable, repairable, and recycle or pay the price.

EPR schemes can be one of the essential cornerstones for transitioning to a circular economy, however, it’s clear that there’s much room for improvement regarding their performance and implementation here in Europe.

With your help and support, we’re one step closer to closing the loop on that circle and building a future fit for both the environment and the people living in it.

 

 

 

 

Graph showing results of recent research showing the gap between amount of EU municipal waste eligible under an EPR scheme (70%), and how much is actually covered (45%). Source: Zero Waste Europe, Extended Producer Responsibility: Creating the Frame for Circular Products, January 2017.

 

 

This blog was written by Christopher Nicastro for Zero Waste Europe


The beginning of the end for the plastic bag in Tunisia? – Zero Waste Tunisia

An article from Zero Waste Tunisia, part of the developing Zero Waste Mediterranean network. If you part of, or want to join a zero waste group in the Mediterranean contact us to find out more.

The beginning of the end for the plastic bag?

It’s created in just a few seconds, serves a purpose for a only few minutes and takes more than 400 years to completely breakdown. It is, of course the plastic bag that Tunisians particularly adore for their shopping. However despite this disastrous love affair recent developments, including an agreement between the supermarkets and the government could herald the beginning of the end for the single-use plastic bag.

Plastic bags are a real scourge. In fact, they are harmful to the environment and kill thousands of animals each year. They are dumped our countryside and beaches releasing their poison everywhere and ending up in the soil.

Tunisians consume one billion plastic bags each year, of which 30% (approximately 315 million of them) come from the large supermarkets. Those 315 million bags are equal to 10,000 tons of plastic waste according to the ministry.

In an effort to phase plastic bags out, the Ministry of Local Affairs and Environment has  recently signed an agreement with the supermarket union chamber. This agreement, which was effective from the 1st of March, prohibits the distribution of single-use plastic bags.

The alternative is not difficult to find, in fact we could use the traditional Tunisian basket (the Koffa) or other ecological bags.

The minister describes that approach as “gradual” and which in a few months will result in a total ban on the manufacture and sale of plastic bags in Tunisia.

The idea is to encourage the factories to produce, using the same technologies, reusable bags that will be sold for use several times. It is also about changing the behavior of the consumer to control the use of plastic bags and think about alternative solutions.

The ministry has therefore opted for a progressive approach, in several stages instead of a global and radical approach which will not work.

So, will these plastic bags completely be eliminated by the end of the year? Will the environmental police control this issue, especially outside supermarkets? The coming months will provide an answer.

Find out more about the work of Zero Waste Tunisia on their website, and  get involved in & find out more about zero waste activities in the Mediterranean via our contact form


From waste to taste: Funghi Espresso brings new life to used coffee grounds

By guest blogger Tiffany Fourment

It is estimated that Italians drink 14 billion espressos every year. While many enjoy their daily espresso, they may never consider the waste – an estimated 380,000 tons of coffee grounds – left behind by such a large amount of coffee production. The Italian startup Funghi Espresso has developed an innovative system that closes the loop of coffee production – recycling the waste to create a new product.

The founders of Funghi Espresso

Funghi Espresso was born in 2013 out of an environmental education pilot project that taught children to cultivate mushrooms using coffee grounds as a substrate (the substance that the mushrooms gain nutrients from). The success of this project led to the development of an innovative and sustainable model of resource reuse and production inspired by the principles of Blue Economy. Funghi Espresso collects discarded coffee grounds from bars and restaurants in the territory, and uses them as a substrate for cultivating mushrooms, which are then sold to local restaurants and consumers. Since its inception in 2014, the company has recovered over twelve tons of coffee grounds, and used them to produce over one ton of fresh mushrooms. The process does not stop there – after

use in mushroom cultivation, the now twice-used grounds are repurposed yet again as compost to enrich agricultural soils. The company also produces “Do it Yourself” kits for growing mushrooms at home using the same coffee ground substrate.

Funghi Espresso has been recognized and rewarded for its creative approach in numerous ways, including being selected by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MIPAAF) as one of the 25 most innovative agricultural startups in Italy.

It is a simple, yet brilliant idea; an example of “thinking outside the box” to solve a problem that many people never even realized exists, and create a system of sustainable, local and circular production from which everyone benefits.


Study tour to the Basque Country

The study tour started with an event organised by Zero Waste Europe and the University of the Basque Country (UPV-EHU) in Vitoria-Gasteiz on 28 November. It consisted of an international conference focused on the reduction of costs in waste management for municipalities through the optimisation of separate collection, the reduction of residual waste and the transformation of these fraction into market products. Javier Garaizar, Vice-rector of the Campus of Álava of UPV/EHU opened the conference, followed by Ainhoa Etxeandia, Director of Environment of Vitoria-Gasteiz City Council. Their interventions were followed by Joan Marc Simon, Ferran Rosa, Enzo Favoino, Marco Mattiello, Kevin Curran, Nekane Artola and Ainhoa Arrozpide.
48 participants attended the conference, among which we found civil servants, representatives from companies and environmental consultancies, policy-makers, professors and students of the university, etc. The presentations can be found here.

The afternoon was used to get to know the situation regarding waste management in Vitoria-Gasteiz, thanks to the Zero Waste group Gasteiz Zero Zabor.

The 29 and 30 November were devoted to the tour of good practices of waste management and circular economy. The tour allowed visiting municipalities and counties that have experienced a significant improvement in their separate collection systems. Among these experiences, the tour visited small villages like Leintz Gatzaga or Elburgo that collect and treat bio-waste in the same municipality. The participants also visited the counties of Debagoiena and Sasieta to better know about their waste collection systems (door-to-door, roadside containers with chip or mixed systems) that have made the municipalities in these counties reach 70% and 80% separate collection or more.

On top of the good practices of waste management, the tour visited good practices on circular economy. In this sense, several companies were visited in sectors like gastronomy, fashion or remanufacturing.

At the Restaurant Azurmendi of Eneko Atxa, with a three-Michelin-stars Basque chef, the participants learned about the philosophy of the project and visited the facilities. After this visit, an excellent meal was provided and the participants could learn about the way they manage the bio-waste at the restaurants. Gurpide Elkartea, an association working for the municipality of Larrabetzuko, manages the bio-waste of Azurmendi and of the neighbours of the municipality. In Larrabetzuko they follow the ‘Austrian system’ of composting that involves local farmers in the treatment of bio-waste in decentralised composting sites. This reduces the cost for the municipality, while allow the local farmer to obtain an extra income and have access to good quality compost.

Not far from there, in Zamundio, Cristina Cendoya and Mikel Feijoo of Skunkfunk presented the philosophy of the company and the design of the collection Capsule Zero Waste. After that, the tour went to a facility of the social economy company Koopera where they sort 18,000 tn a year of clothes.

In a totally different sector, the tour also visited Rebattery, a company located in Bergara that remanufactures and recovers batteries. Rebattery manages to give a new life to 60-75% of the batteries they receive and place them again in the market.

The three-day study tour was not only interesting, but the living proof of the current initiatives of circular economy in the Basque Country and the potential for these activities to keep growing. The tour managed to successfully illustrate best practices through all the economic cycle.


Press Release: Six paths to make Extended Producer Responsibility fit for a circular economy

For immediate release: Brussels, January 11, 2017

Prior to the discussions on the waste directives at the European Parliament, Zero Waste Europe releases a position paper outlining the main challenges of current Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes and the solutions to make EPR a key tool for circular economy.

According to recent research (1), EPR schemes only manage to cover 31% of municipal solid waste and even these products which are covered are not necessarily successfully separately collected or recycled. At the same time, in most countries, EPR fees fail to take into account how products are designed, meaning that circularity is not incentivised.

Zero Waste Europe identifies six paths to improving EPR schemes in Europe so that there is a framework for circular products.
These EPR schemes should:

  1. Be expanded to cover more products
  2. Cover the full cost of products at the end of life
  3. Drive eco-design
  4. Support moving up the waste hierarchy
  5. Are agents for closed-loop sectors
  6. Bring greater transparency to waste management

Zero Waste Europe considers EPR schemes a key tool to bridge ecodesign and waste management and calls on to MEPs and Member States to implement the above guidelines.

The current EPR tools are insufficient to meet the level of ambition set by a Circular Economy. Closing the material loops and keeping the value and the embodied energy in the system will require changing responsibilities, incentives and indicators; hence our 6 recommendations.” Said Ferran Rosa, waste policy officer at ZWE.

ENDS

FIND HERE THE POSITION PAPER

Contacts:
Ferran Rosa, Waste Policy Officer, ferran@zerowasteeurope.eu +32 470 838 105
Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Product Policy Officer, delphine@zerowasteeurope.eu +32 478 712 633

NOTES
(1) Zero Waste Europe, Redesigning Producer Responsibility: A new EPR is needed for a circular economy, September 2015


PRESS RELEASE: Valencia’s commitment to introduce a container deposit scheme, a step forward for Circular Economy in Europe

For immediate release: Brussels, November 30, 2016

In an extremely well attended conference held in Valencia on November 29th the regional government of Valencia (Eastern Spain) showed its commitment to forge ahead with the project of creating a law where beverage containers will be sold with a deposit across the whole region. With this law the government aims to reduce litter while significantly increasing the recycling rates for bottles, cans and cartons, which currently stagnates at under 30%.

The region of Valencia, accounting for 5 million inhabitants, is the first in Spain to move in this direction, following the successful examples of Germany and Norway and, more recently, Estonia and Lithuania. The government expects, after the approval in Parliament, to start selling beverage containers with a deposit as of January 2018. Other Spanish regions such as Baleares, Catalonia and Navarra have expressed an interest to follow suit.

Zero Waste Europe congratulates the Valencian government for this commitment to build a circular economy and for the reduction of litter both on land and in the ocean.

Joan Marc Simon, Executive Director of Zero Waste Europe said “Deposit systems have proven to be the most effective tool to implement Extended Producer Responsibility on beverages and we are happy to see Valencia joining progressive regions in Europe in increasing recycling and reducing litter.”


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.


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: 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)

Plastic Bag Free Day 2016 Round-up

The 7th Annual Plastic Bag Free Day 2016 took place on July 3rd, seeing hundreds of actions take place around the world. With scores of organisations and hundreds of citizens taking part in events and awareness raising activities highlighting the environmental impact and hazards of single-use plastic bags.

A joint statement was released by a coalition of organisations including Fundació Prevenció de Residus, Surfrider Foundation Europe, Zero Waste Europe and others calling for the European Member States to take the final step and ban the use of plastic bags, replacing single use options with more sustainable and reusable alternatives.

In Slovenia, campaigners from Ekologi brez meja (Ecologists Without Borders), dressed up in plastic bags taking the form of a dreaded monster ‘bagfoot’ a ‘living humanoid reminder of the countless bags we use each year’ this monster then proceeded to interact with the citizens of Ljubljana.

This action strongly resembled the 8ft plastic monster that was unveiled, by the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA) in Jamaica.

Picture credit to NEPA
Picture credit to NEPA

In Nepal government ministers took the opportunity to announce the resumption of the plastic bag ban in the country. Citing poor monitoring for the failure of a previous ban they stated that there ‘will be proper regulations this time’.

In Cape Town, South Africa the Two Oceans Aquarium offered an exchange of single-use plastic bags for reusable and sustainable shopping bags highlighting the possible alternatives for shoppers who want to avoid plastic bags, the action also served to emphasise the impact that plastic shopping bags have on ocean waste, causing significant problems for sealife.

France saw their previously passed ban on single-use plastic bags coming into force only two days before Plastic Bag Free Day marking a significant landmark in the campaign to eliminate these destructive items from everyday life.

In Kerala, India students gave eco-friendly cloth bags to State legislators with the ultimate aim of reducing plastic waste and providing ‘smart alternatives for plastic-based necessities’.

In New Delhi Chintan organised an awareness campaign surveying residents on the plastics that they use, and looking into possible alternatives and solutions to the problems of plastic waste.

ESDO poster from Dhaka
ESDO poster from Dhaka

In Dhaka the Environment and Social Development Organisation (ESDO) launched electronic posters to raise awareness for the campaign.

These actions represent only a fraction of the total activities which took place around the world calling for a ban for the bag. Considerable progress has been made over the past year by many organisations and campaigners. However, with the recent revelations regarding the impact of ocean plastics on wildlife and human health the issue of plastic waste has rarely seemed more urgent. The success of Plastic Bag Free Day is central to raising awareness of this problem, and pushing for an effective ban on the non-compostable bag!


The Zero Waste Festival, the place to be for zero waste advocates

Zero Waste Europe Policy Officer, Ferran Rosa covers his experience of the Zero Waste Festival in Paris.

From 30th June to 2nd July the first Zero Waste Festival took place in Paris. Organised by Zero Waste France, the festival brought 5,000 participants together in a unique event where policy-makers, entrepreneurs, innovators, waste managers, individuals living a zero waste lifestyle and civil society organisations shared a forum.

The Festival successfully managed to provide a holistic vision around waste, from management and institutional solutions, to consumption patterns and sustainable lifestyles. More than a congress on zero waste, it was truly a Festival, with workshops, conferences, debates, seminars and lots of space to discuss and learn from different experiences, all accompanied with an excellent atmosphere of good music and veggie food.

Zero Waste France was made the case for the need to transition towards Zero Waste from many different angles including: individual consumption and waste generation patterns, municipal waste management, requirements for design, industrial responsibility, and more. In this regards, a wide range of solutions enabling a phase out of the take-make-dispose model were presented, from collective action (Capannori, Parma or San Francisco) to individual engagement to transition (Roubaix, Bea Johnson or Famille Zero Déchet).

Among these solutions, Zero Waste Europe launched its latest campaign, the People’s Design Lab, a collaborative tool allowing citizens to nominate wasteful products that will eventually be, redesigned in design workshops partnering with consumers, producers and designers. On top of that, Zero Waste Europe presented the network of Zero Waste municipalities and the importance of building a network of change-makers at the European level so that municipalities can learn from each other.

The attendance of 5,000 people at the Festival is testament to the success of Zero Waste France’s initiative and that there are plenty of people willing to make the transition happen in France and abroad, and that this number is indeed growing. The Festival didn’t only inspire individuals to finally live a zero waste lifestyle, but also local councillors to re-think their waste management systems and individuals to create a local Zero Waste groups.


The Curse of Sachets in Asia: why western companies should be held accountable

IMG_20160716_084742

Written by Zero Waste Europe Policy Officer, Delphine Lévi Alvarès after experiencing the incredible amount of plastic waste on beaches in the Philippines.

On the morning of Saturday 16th of July some of Zero Waste Europe’s staff took part in their first Philippines beach cleanup. It was only 8am, and a swarm of volunteers were already in action on Freedom Island’s beach, armed with bags and gloves to clear the sand from layers and layers of garbage carried downstream into the Manila bay from all the small canals and rivers crossing the megalopolis.

Our first impression when we arrived at the beach was shocking. It was almost uniformly covered by little used sachets of shampoo, detergent, and instant coffee… an ocean of colours and brands among which many were recognised by the sharp eye of a western consumer. Nescafé, Maggi, Ariel, Palmolive, Colgate, Head & Shoulders, Mentos and many others, directly coming for the marketing brains of American and European multinationals such as Nestlé, Procter & Gamble and Unilever.

Why such a flow of single use sachets in this region of the world, to package the same products that we have in bigger containers in Europe and the US, and how do they end up in the rivers and the ocean? Speaking with our colleagues from South East Asia, we understood that behind the false affordability (the so-called ‘pro-poor’) argument made by the companies manufacturing these products (i.e. that for people with low income it is cheaper to buy these products on a daily basis than buying larger quantities despite the fact that the total cost they will end up paying is higher) there is a more significant marketing argument. Hence the appealing colours and glossy packaging. And even if it’s not part of their strategy, the absence of sound waste collection and management systems in most of the places where people use these sachets leads to massive littering both on land and in waterways increasing their brand’s visibility even more than the market stalls.

Some of the branded plastic waste found on the beach.

Yet the solutions to replace these sachets exist and many Zero Waste groups have been promoting them in front of these brand’s corporate leaders. In low-income areas they should be replaced by dispensers from which people could get one pump of their required product (oil, shampoo, detergent, etc.) in small returnable and reusable containers. It would be even cheaper to buy on a daily basis, because a large part of the product’s price is in the cost of the packaging itself. Improving the waste management systems in these areas is of course of high priority, but in regardless case it’s better to prevent than manage waste, and even more so because these sachets, made of multilayered material, are not recyclable.

The response of the brands to this proposal has been a resounding ”no”.

It is necessary for the producers to take responsibility for the products they put in the market and if they are sold in places where the means to manage this waste are not available they should -at the very least- shoulder the costs of collecting and treating this waste. If they do it in Europe, why can’t they do it in Asia?


PRESS RELEASE: People’s Design Lab launched to redesign wasteful products

For immediate release: Brussels, 05/07/16

logo-pdl-europe

On July 2nd at the Festival Zero Waste in Paris, Zero Waste Europe announced the launch of the People’s Design Lab, an international project aimed at identifying and redesigning poorly designed and wasteful products and pave the way for a Circular Economy.

People’s design lab online platform is targeting products that break too early, that are not repairable, that are toxic, that are not recyclable or for any other reason are unfit for a Circular Economy. The People’s Design Lab enables citizens to take action in highlighting the problems and identifying the zero waste solutions.

The nomination stage of the People’s Design Lab will run from July 2nd to September 2nd and will identify some of the worst designed and most wasteful products. Next, two rounds of voting will choose the products that will be receive close attention in the redesign stage, in which solutions to wasteful design will be proposed.

An example of excess packaging
An example of excess packaging

During the third stage of the project ‘Redesign Workshops’ will be held across Europe and have opportunities for online participation, allowing a wide range of stakeholders (citizens, designers, entrepreneurs, public authorities, etc.) to have their say in how the products are redesigned for a zero waste future. After that, efforts will be made to turn these ideas into reality. This process will aim to tackle to the problem on both the legislative level and by directly engaging companies guilty of producing wasteful products.

Zero Waste Europe, Policy Officer Delphine Lévi Alvarès said: “Waste is just a symptom, if we want to fix the problem we have to focus on the source, creating a world where everything is designed for repair, reuse and recycling. The People’s Design Lab will facilitate the involvement of citizens in highlighting problematic design and finding creative and innovative solutions.”

Examples of badly designed products which have already been submitted include boiled eggs removed from their shells and repackaged in individually wrapped plastic containers, and iMac chargers which are prone to breaking sooner than expected.

The People’s Design Lab takes inspiration from the Little Museum of Bad Industrial Design in Italy, and ‘The People’s Design Lab UK’ where examples of bad design were identified by groups of citizens and attempts were made to redesign the products with zero waste alternatives.

ENDS

CONTACT: Delphine Lévi Alvarès – delphine@zerowasteeurope.eu

The People’s Design Lab – peoplesdesignlab.org


PRESS RELEASE: EU Member States asked to deliver final decisive effort for Europe to break free from single-use plastic bags

  • 2cb7fca5-0f8c-454a-a379-a1ad5341ab34
  • f8c29f25-f08e-42a1-a293-efa5b03849a6
  • 6da27666-4a69-4ed8-906a-545cc011f284
  • Print
  • ca534e9a-d2c7-4362-86e3-de8e86b87de4
  • 32fdc1ae-0b6f-440a-8d42-fb82c6af41a7
  • fa009cfc-ce97-4aa9-9774-82b68ca73b74.jpg
  • c45db122-55f7-42f7-a078-bb81f5d8ea35
  • df77f8b2-33e0-4893-8beb-2f193cb1e1e0
  • 00a368bb-01e9-4592-9c57-c9e19a292f81
  • 48dcc54b-a856-4f9f-bf00-a8e47bbd4bbe

For immediate release: Brussels, July 1, 2016

Only 4 months away from the transposition deadline of the EU Plastic bags directive, environmental NGOs celebrate today the 7th edition of the International Plastic Bag Free Day. 2016 is a pivotal year which will pave the way towards what NGOs hope, a European plastic bag free future.

EU governments have until the end of November to adopt national legislative measures to drastically reduce the use of single-use plastic carrier bags. While many initiatives have popped up locally, some Member States are still lagging behind in engaging in the fight against plastic bag pollution. At the same time, some EU countries such as Italy and France already have, or are planning bans on plastic bags and are paving the way ahead.

More than 100 billion bags are used annually in Europe and most end up in landfills, incinerators or as litter in aquatic environments. In addition to harming the marine environment, producing these bags requires millions of barrels of oil per year. Moreover, plastic bags can take centuries to degrade and are responsible, together with other litter items, for the deaths of an estimated 100,000 marine mammals every year.

collage

The International Plastic Bag Free Day, celebrated over the World on July 3rd, is a unique occasion for Fundació Prevenció de Residus, together with NGOs Surfrider Foundation Europe and Zero Waste Europe, and the undersigned organisations to spread the word that a plastic bag free world is possible and that sound environmental alternatives to single use plastic bags are available.

NGOs ask governments to show ambition and caution, recalling that paper bags and biodegradable bags remain single use options and should be avoided. They call on the European Commission to speed up the two reports promised in the Plastic Bags directive on very-lightweight and oxo-degradable plastic bags, as they are still far too common in the European market. Oxo-degradable bags, in particular, have proven to be extremely harmful for the marine environment, as they break into small pieces impossible to remove.

European citizens expect national governments to seize this opportunity for action. NGOs too call on governments to set an example, and take ambitious action: We are glad that more and more regions, municipalities and Member States are taking on what Italy has started in 2011 with its ban on single use bags. It is now time for all EU Member States to take their responsibilities and stop the plastic bag flow – whether they are used as carrier bags or for the transport of fruits and vegetables- into the environment and eventually into the Ocean”.

ENDS

More information:

www.plasticbagfreeday.org

www.surfrider.eu/en/ban-the-bag

www.zerowasteeurope.eu


Zero Waste Europe AGM 2016

On the weekend of the 23rd and 24th of April, Zero Waste Europe held its Annual General Meeting (AGM) with the participation of most of the members of the ZWE network. Held in Ljubljana, Slovenia, the first ‘Zero Waste European Capital’ and the European Green Capital for 2016, the event was co-hosted by Ekologi Brez Meja, the Slovenian member organisation of Zero Waste Europe.

The meeting opened with introductions from the various member organisation of Zero Waste Europe in attendance. The attendees had produced short ‘posters’ giving an overview of the work that their organisations had been doing.

Poster of Zero Waste Croatia, new member of Zero Waste Europe
Poster of Zero Waste Croatia, new member of Zero Waste Europe

This was followed by presentations from Joan Marc Simon, Director of Zero Waste Europe, on the activities and the financial position of the organisation. Then, the Zero Waste Europe staff gave an overview of their work areas and the upcoming events planned for the year ahead.

The next sessions set out to discuss the upcoming events and work areas for the Zero Waste Europe network with the members breaking off into 3 groups. The groups were split into the themes of ‘Products, Good Design, and Plastics’, ‘Climate, Energy, and Air Pollution’, and ‘Waste Policies and Best Practice’. The result of these discussions was a clear timeline of events and activities planned by the members of Zero Waste Europe, and a vision of how they corresponded to the organisation’s work areas.

The plans were then presented in a plenary session to all of the attendees of the AGM, thus closing the first day of the AGM.

On the second day, the meeting began by discussing issues, problems and opportunities surround

‘Zero Waste Municipalities’. This discussion focussed on the regional and national differences in the use of the term, as well as national legislative implications for these variations. The current process was explained in detail and a number of different options for the future were discussed.

Following the session on Zero Waste Municipalities, the applications from new members were approved. There were 6 new applications in total, from the Centre for Environmental Solutions (Belarus), the Ecological Recycling Society (Greece), the Association for Clean Environment, Let’s Do It Macedonia Macedonia, Friends of the Earth Croatia, Zero Waste Austria and Zero Waste Lithuania. After hearing introductions and having a question & answers session from the participants in attendance, the conference decided unanimously to grant full membership to the Associate for Clean Environment Let’s Do It Macedonia, the Center for Environmental Solutions, the Ecological Recycling Society, and Friends of the Earth Croatia, and to grant Aspirant membership to Zero Waste Austria and Zero Waste Lithuania, with the hope that in the future they will progress to becoming a full member.

The penultimate session was the election of a new member to the Board of Zero Waste Europe. Flore Berlingen Director of Zero Waste France, stood for the position and after a brief deliberation was elected to the Board.

The final session of the AGM was a discussion around Zero Waste Europe’s position on Bioenergy, in advance of the European Commission’s consultation on Bioenergy. This discussion tackled several key questions around the network’s position on different questions. The result of this discussion being the sign-on letter for the Bioenergy Consultation.

The 2016 AGM brought together the majority of Zero Waste Europe’s members for two days of reflection and strategy discussion as well as the approval of future activities, new members, and the election of a new board member. Across the weekend, members shared inspirational stories and ideas, as well as developing a stronger connection between members, facilitating cross-european work over the coming year.

The full minutes for the meeting will be distributed to members shortly.


Network of Zero Waste Towns Meeting in Ljubljana

On Thursday 21st and Friday 22nd Ljubljana, the 2016 European Green Capital, and first Zero Waste European Capital, played host to municipal representatives, entrepreneurs, zero waste campaigners and experts as part of the Network of Zero Waste Towns Meeting.

Erick Oblak opening the Network of Zero Waste Towns Meeting Foto: Maša Kores
Erick Oblak opening the Network of Zero Waste Towns Meeting Photo: Maša Kores

The conference was opened by an introduction to the history of Ljubljana and the implementation of zero waste policies in the city, from Erika Oblak of Ekologi Brez Meja. From the early struggle against the construction of an incinerator and the subsequent referendum, with overwhelming opposition in 1999 to just a few years later, having the neighbouring town of Vrhnika already leading the way with recycling rates as high as 50% as early as 2003.

When in 2012 another incineration plan was proposed, Ekologi Brez Meja with Zero Waste Europe’s support, successfully countered the plan with a zero waste alternative, which has led Ljubljana to being the waste management success story that it is today.

This was followed by Zero Waste Europe, Director, Joan Marc Simon expressing how amazing it was that such significant progress had been made by the city in only 2 ½ years.

The first discussion panel focused on reusable nappies, featuring Elizabeta Zust, from a nursery in Vhrnika that only uses cloth nappies and Hilary Vick, from Nappy Ever After, a nappy laundry service in London. The panel also included Joan Crous from the Eta Beta/Lavanda cooperative in Bologna, Italy, where 1,100 to 1,800 nappies are washed and delivered every day.

The panel covered the environmental and social benefits of reusable nappies as well as technical and commercial difficulties and issues surrounding the issue. This provided highly informative, inspirational and technical discussion by the participants.

Tourism was the focus of the next panel discussion. With Nina Kosin from the Ljubljana Tourism Board opened with a focus on the significance of the Green Capital award for the city, as well as the introduction of reusable crockery at the Christmas market with a deposit scheme in place.

Antonio Esposito spoke about Conka Park, the first zero waste hotel in Sorrento, Italy. With a wide range of initiatives promoting zero waste in the hotel, they have found significant success, and positive reactions from the hotel guests.

The afternoon of the first day covered the topic of food waste. Involving food waste entrepreneur Joris Depouillon from the Food Waste Entrepreneur Network, Laura Chatel, from Zero Waste France, and Albin Keuc, from Food Waste Reduction a Slovenian initiative which has provided 16 DIY tools for food waste reduction.

The participants emphasised the importance of differentiating between ‘food waste’ and ‘food surplus’ with the larger portion remaining fit for human consumption, the highest level of the ‘food waste hierarchy’.

The second day was opened by Zero Waste Europe’s President, from Capannori, Italy – Rossano Ercolini. Before hearing speeches from Zoran Janković, the Mayor of Ljubljana, and Irena Majcen, the Slovenian Minister for the Environment and Spatial Planning, offering their insights on Ljubljana’s success as a environmental leader across Europe.

The keynote speaks for the day was from Paul Connett, internationally renowned campaigner on zero waste, with over 30 years of experience in working on incineration and waste issues. Dr. Connett used his time to speak on zero waste as stepping stone to sustainability. His speech presented an inspiring vision of citizen action for the creation of a world without waste, a sustainable future and a better planet.

Dr. Paul Connett speaking at Network of Zero Waste Towns. Photo: Maša Kores
Dr. Paul Connett speaking at Network of Zero Waste Towns. Photo: Maša Kores

This was followed by a discussion of policies on a local level, with Tihana Jelacic, from Prekom, the Croatian waste management company for Prelog and the surrounding municipalities, who have recently adopted a Zero Waste Strategy, and are working to implement zero waste policies and practices. Stojan Jakin, from Vrhnika, the first Zero Waste Town in Slovenia spoke about how ranking towns by the recycling rates can be misleading when towns like Vrhnika are reducing the amount of residual waste year-on-year despite a less dramatic increase in recycling rates.

Matteo Francesconi, the Deputy Mayor of Capanorri spoke about how Capannori was first launched on the road to zero waste by the anti-incineration fight led by Rossano Ercolini, and now has a holistic approach to waste, with a system that adapts to the local reality and, therefore, integrates local people at every level.

In the afternoon. Mitja Praznik, from Snaga, the waste management company in Ljubljana went into great detail and depth on exactly how Ljubljana has become the best performing capital in waste management in Europe

This was followed by Mariel Vilella, Associate Director of Zero Waste Europe explaining the immense impact which waste management has on climate change, and how current accounting methods downplay this impact. Emphasising that it is time that we harvested this ‘low-hanging-fruit’ when it comes to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions.

The full presentation by Mariel is available online, with visual slides making a strong case for ‘Zero Waste’ as ‘Climate Action!’. The route to moving towards this low-carbon economy through zero waste is detailed in Zero Waste Europe’s recent report, ‘The Potential Contribution of Waste Management to a Low Carbon Economy’. Mariel, made the strong and compelling case that cities are at the forefront of this effort to move away from carbon intensive waste management practices, with cities being uniquely positioned to implement effective and efficient policies.

David Franquesa, then took to the stage to present eReuse, an open source reuse platform for electronic waste, which can be used to dramatically extend the use life of electronic products, as well as ensuring the traceability of the items from reuse through to recycling.

The final speaker at the conference was from the ECO-PULPLAST project which works with the paper industry in Northern Italy to recycle pulper waste from the recycling of paper to make ‘eco-sustainable plastic pallets’. This project has significant support from key players in the paper recycling industry where it forms a major alternative to waste incineration and offers a way to reduce costs.

The conference incorporated a wide range of expertise and experience. With inspiring and informative talks from politicians, industry representatives, social entrepreneurs, activists, and innovator. The focus on local action towards zero waste presented a number of concrete actions which can be taken by different municipalities in following the path to zero waste.


Zero Waste Europe sign international declaration on ‘waste containing nanomaterials’

“Nanoscale Canyons” Brookhaven National Laboratory (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Zero Waste Europe have joined over 80 international signatories in calling for waste containing nanomaterials to be classified as ‘hazardous waste’. Read the press release and full declaration below. 

 

Declaration: Precautionary Approach Critical on Waste Containing Nanomaterials

(Geneva) – In today’s Declaration on Waste Containing Nanomaterials, the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), ECOS, and the Oeko-Institut emphasize the importance of adopting and implementing preventive measures to protect people and the environment from possible hazards of manufactured nanomaterials (MNMs) in waste streams. With the toxicity of nanomaterials still largely unknown, a tight control of waste containing MNMs is crucial.

Over 80 signatories worldwide from civil society groups and research organizations have endorsed the Declaration, demonstrating overwhelming support for the demand to categorize waste containing manufactured nanomaterials as hazardous waste. This is necessary to better control disposal routes of such waste in order to limit human and environmental exposure to MNM. In addition, the Declaration calls for waste reduction at the source, full producer responsibility, and the creation of a public EU nano-product register.

“From creation to use to disposal, there are far too many unknowns to flood the market with unregulated nanomaterials. The precautionary principle must be applied immediately to avoid toxic exposure from nanomaterials, including in waste streams,” says David Azoulay, Director of the Environmental Health Program at CIEL. “The risks are just too great to ignore.”

“A nano-product register at the EU level is necessary for both industry and authorities to identify the origins and destinations of waste flows of products containing MNM,” stresses Andreas Hermann, Senior Scientist at Oeko-Institut.

A report published by the OECD in February 2016, Nanomaterials in Waste Streams: Current Knowledge on Risks and Impacts, underpins the Declaration’s call to limit the potential presence of nanotechnology in waste streams.

The Declaration coincides with the standardization activities on lifecycle and waste aspects of nanomaterials underway within the European Committee for Standardization (CEN). It is also particularly relevant in the context of the Circular Economy discussions within the European Union, as well as other equivalent processes worldwide, such as 3Rs in China and the Sound Material Society in Japan.

The Declaration on Waste Concerning Nanomaterials addresses all relevant actors throughout the value chain of nanomaterials: governments, research institutions, funding agencies, and companies.

ECOS Senior Policy Officer Doreen Fedrigo-Fazio highlights: “Nano content in waste must be taken into account by waste generators. The long delays in revising the REACH Annexes are exacerbated by the absence of waste policy addressing nanomaterials, thus multiplying the challenges.”

The Declaration is one of the outcomes of a three-year collaboration between ECOS, CIEL, and Oeko-Institut working towards expanding the understanding of nanomaterials and bridging the gap between policy and science. It was reinforced by a workshop in Brussels in December 2015 that looked into the lifecycle aspects of nanomaterials.

The Declaration is now open to the public for additional organization sign-ons. As this occurs, an updated list of support for the Declaration will be published in the coming months.

READ THE FULL DECLARATION HERE


The new PPWD; legislating for the past or for the future?

An analysis of the new EC proposal on Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD)

Joan Marc Simon – Director of Zero Waste Europe

On December 2nd the European Commission (EC) presented the new legislative proposal aiming to amend waste directives and move the EU towards a Circular Economy. However if one analyses the text of the proposal on Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD) in detail one wonders whether this proposal is legislating for 2030 or for 2010.

Effective action in the field of packaging is as important as it is urgent. There are many reasons for this;

  • packaging is growing in absolute terms both in volume and in weight. Between 2000 and 2015 the share of plastic packaging has grown 5% annually and is now 25% of the market,
  • most packaging is used only once; 95% of plastic packaging material value is lost after one use cycle,
  • once it becomes waste most packaging (notably plastic but not exclusively) is generally disposed of, not recycled,
  • marine litter is global problem and 80% of it is made of plastic packaging and by 2050 there may be more plastic than fish in the ocean.

Moreover current packaging recycling schemes in Europe are generally inefficient. In a study we published in 2015 we demonstrated that in Europe 70% of the municipal waste is product waste, i.e. not biowaste, 45% of which is not covered by Extended Producer Responsibility schemes which only succeed to separately collect 18% of it. Hence the recycling system is not performing very well and leads to most product waste ending up in the environment, in landfills or in incinerators.

EPR waste graph
Source: Redesigning Producer Responsibility: A new EPR is needed for a Circular Economy, 2015

With this in mind the European Commission presented a proposal in December 2015 aiming to create an “economy that preserves the value added in products for as long as possible and virtually eliminates waste. It retains the resources within the economy when a product has reached the end of its life, so that they remain in productive use and create further value”.

Hence, one would expect that the aim of the amended Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (PPWD) is to go in the direction of increasingly preserving this value that we seem to be so inefficient at maintaining.

If we look into the current proposal from the EC to amend the PPWD we will see that it mainly proposes two things;

Firstly, it suggests that preparing for reuse rates can be counted as contribution to recycling efforts. One can understand the political reasons behind this move, help those countries which will see their recycling rates shrink with the new suggested methodology to account for the targets, but technically it is an objectively bad idea because it mixes apples with pears and will not help bring clarity and legal security to neither the recycling industry nor public authorities. If the EC wants to increase reuse of packaging it is a lot better to set separate preparation for reuse targets altogether.

Secondly, it reduces the targets of preparation for reuse and recycling by an order of 5 to 15 points from the 2014 proposal, although the targets proposed will remain above those of the PPWD directive of 1994. All in all this is to be welcomed but if preparation for reuse is to be counted together with recycling it might well be that many countries will be already meeting the recycling targets today.

However, before ranking the level of ambition of the EC proposal we need to zoom out and ask ourselves a simple but important question; if the aim of this legislation is to contribute to the creation of a Circular Economy which preserves the value added in products as long as possible… are the measures presented the appropriate ones?

Unfortunately the answer is a resounding no. The current proposal would have been appropriate for the discussions we had 10 years ago during the revision of the waste framework directive in which the aim was to “turn the EU into a recycling society” but not in 2016 in the framework of Circular Economy discussions.

Many stakeholders including the EC itself recognise that the real added value of products and resources is in prevention and reuse operations. A very simple example; if we recycle a mobile phone the value of the materials we will extract will not be above €2 whereas if we repair and resell it we have the possibility of getting several hundred euros. In this sense the proposals to amend the PPWD are not legislating for the future but rather for a situation which belongs to the past. Where are the proposals to reduce packaging waste? What about increasing packaging reuse? And deposit schemes? By focusing primarily on recycling the EC commits the same mistake of previous decades; work at the bottom of the hierarchy and ignore the biggest potential benefit which lies at the top.

Another sign that the proposal is legislating for the past is the fact that it does not address current market developments. The fastest growing packaging waste streams are composite packaging (multilayer packaging, pouch-ups, etc) growing at double digits rate yearly. They are difficult to collect and even more difficult to recycle yet completely absent in the directive. On the other hand we see the rise of online shopping which involves a lot of packaging which producers like Amazon put in to the EU market but for which they don’t take any responsibility… on top of evading most taxes these companies get another competitive advantage by passing the responsibility of managing their packaging waste to the public authorities. Where is the action from the EC on this front?
And what about coffee-capsules? They are a problem today which will continue to grow in the coming years and legally speaking they are not even considered to be packaging! We need a proposal that legislates not for the past but for the Europe we will have in 2025 and 2030.

packaging waste
Some typical examples of packaging waste

Essential components to make the PPWD fit for the Circular Economy

If the objective is to build a Circular Economy which preserves the added value in the economy there are at least four instruments that the EC should be considering:

  1. Prevention targets for plastic packaging

We need to stop the growth of packaging waste in Europe. This means that there should be prevention targets which in my opinion do not need address the totality of packaging waste but rather specific waste streams and at the very least have prevention targets for plastic packaging. There are three reasons for this; plastic packaging is the stream with lowest recyclability and the one with lowest recycling rates, it is the fastest growing packaging waste stream and it is a major problem for marine environment and hence human health. Moreover, because of its light weight it is hard to compare with metals, paper and glass and the EC is working on a strategy on plastics which needs to address plastic packaging. Why not start here?

The current PPWD directive already includes prevention targets for single use carrier bags which focus in reducing the units of plastic bags instead of addressing the stream by weight. A similar approach can be used to set prevention targets for plastic packaging.

2. Separate targets for preparation for reuse

If there are targets for recycling, there could also be separate targets for preparation for reuse or any other commitment to have refillables return to Europe. Otherwise there is the paradox that by trying to meet recycling targets by weight member states might decide to dismantle existing packaging reuse schemes. Over the past few decades the market for refillable and reusable packaging in Europe has been inexorably shrinking and without a clear sign and guidance from the EU level nothing encourages governments thinking this process could be reversed or even stopped. The current PPWD already includes good wording on packaging reuse but still lacks the teeth and targets to make it possible.

3. Modulate EPR fees according to ‘circularity’ of products

There should be a clear feedback mechanism that connects waste with product and process design. In a circular economy, waste and inefficient resource use anywhere along the value chain should translate into direct costs for business. In other words, less durable, reusable or recyclable products should be more expensive for the producer and for the consumer than the circular ones. A way to do this is by using modulate fees in the extended producer responsibility schemes as it is being used in some cases such as for paper in France. Luckily the current proposal to amend the Waste Framework Directive already dwells on this option but we need stronger legislation in order to give clear signs and legal security to producers.

4. More and better recycling, but as a last option

Recycling is very important as last stage of a circular economy but it cannot do the job alone. Yes, we need more recycling, yes we need separate targets for recycling, yes we need to have separate recycling targets for composite packaging and yes we need more directly enforceable legal formulations but recycling alone cannot bring about a Circular Economy.

 

To conclude, the effectiveness of the new PPWD will be judged according to two parameters; on one hand the measures to tackle plastic packaging and on the other one the measures to support reusable and refillable packaging. Both currently missing and which will need to be introduced during the co-decision process.

Disruptive legislation in this field will not be easy because of the economic interests that lay behind single-use packaging but if Europe is serious about becoming a circular economy and fighting marine pollution it will need to stop looking at the past and start legislating for the future.

 

This speech was delivered at Packaging & Sustainability Forum, 2/3/16.


Croatian municipalities adopt ‘Zero Waste 2020’ strategy

Croatian municipalities adopt zero waste strategy
Croatian municipalities adopt zero waste strategy

Since 2006 the seven municipalities of the lower Međimurje (The City of Prelog and the municipalities of Kotoriba, Donja Dubrava, Donji Vidovec, Sveta Marija, Goričan and Donji Kraljevec) have been developing a joint waste management system. Organised by the municipally owned company Pre-Kom, waste has been separately collected in the region since 2007. With the region currently ranked top in terms of separate collection within Croatia, it seemed the next logical step was the creation of a society without waste, or the implementation of a ‘Zero Waste Strategy’.

 

Zero Waste 2020 commitments

By the adoption of a ‘Zero Waste Strategy’ the municipalities of the region have committed to meeting the following waste management conditions by 2020:

  • 70% of useful waste to be extracted, processed and recovered (recycling, composting, anaerobic processing, or other acceptable means of useful waste recovery) through separate waste collection.
  • The amount of bulky waste and combined waste will be reduced from the current (2015) level of 98.8 kilograms per capita per year to 50 kilograms per capita per year by 2020.
  • The priorities in the field of waste management (prevention of waste, reuse and recycling) will be reinforced to the fullest extent, waste incineration will be avoided, the amount of waste deposited on landfills will be reduced to the lowest possible level.
  • An analysis of useless waste will be conducted yearly, and an operative strategy and campaigns for further improvement in waste management will be defined based on the results of the analysis.

In addition to the initiated activities in waste management, and according to Waste management plans of municipalities of lower Međimurje, the municipalities commit to start and take part in the following activities:

  • Organising educational sessions related to sustainable development and waste management and to promote the zero waste development strategy.
    Work on projects related to reuse of the collected waste (clothing, shoes, etc.).
  • Promote separate waste collection of biodegradable communal waste and the composting of it.
  • Promote the use of compost given back to users.
  • Promote increasing the amount of households included in the waste management system.
  • Introduce a billing system based on the volume of collected waste.
  • Start projects on all levels of development, or public and private initiatives in order to secure improvement of living standards and sustainable development in their areas.
  • Encourage green construction using environmentally friendly materials.
  • Take part in sustainable mobility (car sharing, walking, bus transport, etc.).
  • Promote new lifestyles (tourism, catering, Fair trade commerce, etc.).

In order to track their progress, the municipalities have formed the ‘Council for Waste Management in Lower Međimurje’ which will track the fulfilment of the goals of the international strategy for “Zero waste”, this council will consist of:

  • The Mayor and municipality heads of ULGs
  • The Director of PRE-KOM.
  • A representative of Zero Waste Europe / Zelena akcija

The president of the Council is a Director of PRE-KOM, and the council will meet at least once every six months.

In adopting a ‘Zero Waste Strategy’ the region of Lower Međimurje will join an international community of municipalities moving towards zero waste. This community includes; New Zealand (the first country in the world to include the Strategy in its national legislation), New Scotia, British Columbia in Canada, Buenos Aires in Argentina, San Francisco in California, Canberra in Australia and many other local communities, regions and cities across the EU.

The municipalities of lower Međimurje are becoming a key example of good practice in waste management, and an exemplary model for other local communities in Croatia and around the world in the struggle towards a zero waste society.

 

Current waste management practices & infrastructure

In the area of lower Mešimurje, mixed communal waste is collected in black containers, biodegradable communal waste is collected in brown containers, bulky waste is collected after a phone call, paper and carton are collected in blue containers or bags, plastics in yellow containers or bags and metal and glass are collected in free bags. Aside from the gathering infrastructure, Pre-Kom. manages a composting plant, a sorting plant and a recycling yard.

Amounts of bulky and mixed communal waste disposed on a landfill per household:

  • 2011 2,888 t — 424 kilograms per household (128.5 kg per capita)
  • 2012 2,801 t — 409 kilograms per household (123.9 kg per capita)
  • 2013 2,794 t — 407 kilograms per household (123.9 kg per capita)
  • 2014 2,862 t — 412 kilograms per household (124.8 kg per capita)
  • 2015 2,299 t — 326 kilograms per household (98.9 kg per capita)

Amount of separately collected, processed and recovered waste:

  • 2011 16.93 %
  • 2012 19.04 %
  • 2013 19.63 %
  • 2014 22.39 %
  • 2015 49.58 %

By completion of the separate waste collection system and by introducing containers for biodegradable waste, Pre-Kom. has already significantly increased the amount of separately collected waste in 2015, compared to 2014. Analysis show an increase in other materials collected separately door-to-door. In 2015, 49,58% of waste has been collected and processed separately, which is a better than EU average of 43%. The results weren’t achieved quickly, they were achieved by continual investments and upgrades to the waste management system.

Considering what has already been achieved, municipalities of lower Međimurje aspire to demonstrate some of the best waste management practices in the world and to lead the way a zero waste society.


Redesign Innovation Jam in Copenhagen

Between 13 & 15 November, 2015, Zero Waste Europe co-organised with The Bridge Productions a Redesign Innovation Jam devoted to plastic.

Multi-disciplinary teams of experts & innovators met in Copenhagen, Denmark, to analyse municipal plastic streams, identify problematic products and redesign processes and products in order to advance towards a zero waste society. In 48 hours, they took on the challenge to re-design a number of products & services that could be delivered in a much more sustainable way to consumers.

The event began with a reception organised in Malmö, Sweden, on Friday 13 November and continued in Copenhagen until 15 November, it brought together participants and experts mainly from Denmark and Sweden although other countries such as UK, Spain, Switzerland, France and Russia were also represented.

A jury of experts awarded the best ‘re-design’ at the end of the weekend.

This is just the first of many redesign innovation jams to come in 2016 which will look into plastics and other waste streams in order to detect those products designed for the dump and offer bottom-up alternatives.

To learn more about the details of this great event watch the following video:

Tackling Plastics – Re-Design Innovation Jam #1 (Copenhagen edition) – by Bridge Productions from Bridge Productions on Vimeo.


Press release: New report finds significant air pollution problems across waste incineration activities

For Immediate release: 27/11/15

A new report released today by Zero Waste Europe has found that waste incineration activities, both in incineration facilities and cement plantsacross Europe, have had serious breaches of emission limits and have experienced other significant technical and legal problems. Across 5 case studies a number of environmental, procedural and technical issues faced by waste incinerators are exposed.

The report, elaborated by consultancy group ENT, investigates 5 cases around air pollution limit breaches in incineration facilities; the Lafarge cement plant in Montcada I Reixac (Barcelona, Spain), Lafarge cement plant in Trbovlje (Slovenia), Ivry waste incinerator in Paris (France), Dargavel waste incinerator (Scotland, UK), and incinerators of Bavaria, Germany.

The report highlights that the emission limits of hazardous air pollutants as designated by the EU Air Quality Directives (AQDs) are significantly higher than recommended safety limits by the World Health Organization (WHO), creating a significant amount of uncertainty and potential safety risks for both the environment and public health. Moreover, the reliance on the principle for “best available techniques” (BAT) favours far higher emission limits than are deemed environmentally and epidemiologically safe by the WHO. Furthermore, the monitoring of air pollution in waste incineration activities are handled by the same facilities, and are therefore not subject to independent monitoring practices.

In the case of the Lafarge Montcada I Reixach cement plant, there is a long history of popular opposition to the plant, with protests taking place in 1975, however more recently in 2006 a petition gained 6,000 signatures opposing a plan to use sludge, bone and meat meal, and plastics as fuel. This opposition delayed the permit for the plant, but it was subsequently granted in 2008. However this began a long series of legal and procedural challenges to the permit, which continues to take place up until the current day.

Further cases such as Dargavel, and the incinerators in Bavaria highlight the instances where the legally defined limits are exceeded. Having potentially hazardous effects on human health and the environment. The case of the cement plant in Trbovlje, Slovenia, has been on the national and European spotlight in the last years, given the complaints from local communities for toxic emissions, odours, and lack of environmental permits.

Mariel Vilella, Zero Waste Europe Associate Director said:How many air pollution incidents do people need to put up with before policy-makers realise that burning waste is not the way forward? Recycling and composting create livelihoods, save money, and protect the environment and public health, while the incineration of waste just keep us away from a truly sustainable Circular Economy.”

The report adds further support to the call for an end to the incineration of waste, as practice which continues to exacerbate climate change and creates damaging and hazardous environmental pollution. Instead Zero Waste Europe calls for the implementation of zero waste policies that prioritize the higher options of the Waste Hierarchy, such as waste prevention, reuse and recycling, including redesign and the implementation of improved Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes, where producers are mandated to work to eliminate their product waste.

The report has been launched in Barcelona, as a start to the International Meeting of Key Struggles around Waste Incineration in Cement Kilns,  This meeting is a follow up from the previous European Gathering that took place in 2014 in Barletta, Italy, and builds up the efforts of the Spanish Network against Waste Incineration in Cement Kilns that has been active for the last 6 years.

END
Read the full report


‘Incineradoras No, Zero Waste Madrid’ in action!

Incineradoras No, Zero Waste Madrid is successfully paving the way for Zero Waste Municipalities in the area of Madrid, in Spain.

 

Since this summer, thanks to the progressive political turn in many municipalities in the area, the network has been able to ally with alternative political parties and pass a motion in at least 4 municipalities calling for zero waste. Moreover, the network has been able to create and develop working groups for the implementation of Zero Waste in various municipalities, as an alternative to the waste management model of municipal waste.

Pile of bottles collected for recycling plant, Netherlands

 

The four municipalities that have already approved the motion are Loeches, Mejorada del Campo, Torres de la Alameda and Velilla de San Antonio. All of them are small municipalities no more than 44km2 and with no more than 23,000 inhabitants. However, they have a lot of environmental problems such as plants for the treatment of sludge from toxic materials, wastewater treatment, the deposit of industrial and dangerous waste, illegal landfills, incinerators and cement kilns burning waste.

 

The approval of the motion brings positive news and hope to the current waste management situation in Madrid. It is a presents a step in the right direction on the way to a Zero Waste reality.

 

The motion in detail

 

The motion recognises the urgent need to stop relying on false solutions, such as lanfills and incinerators. This model effects the environment and the health of the people of neighbouring and nearby municipalities. We therefore need a paradigm shift, and in the motion we ask for:

  1. The creation of a working committee to implement a zero waste model with the participation of local political and civil society groups.
    • The council to be formally required to create a ‘regional waste strategy 2016-2026’ for the City of Madrid. This would replace the current and outdated strategy and set the objective of ‘Zero Waste’ waste management in our region..
  1. An awareness raising campaign should be carried out with citizens participation, where people are informed about the current waste management practice, its impacts, the alternatives, and benefits involved such alternatives.
  2. The municipal waste collection should be evaluated and be run by the municipality and not by external companies. This would include:
    • A study of current and future costs of waste management if it were to be run by the municipality should be conducted. This study should assess its viability and implementation.
    • A review of current waste management contracts and whether they can be modified, to allow a gradual implementation of a zero waste selective collection project.
    • Control and monitoring of the current waste collection to ensure that contracts are enforced, so we would able to confirm that they are not mixing municipal waste and other types of waste (packaging) etc. in its collection.

 

Incineradoras No, Zero Waste Madrid’

 

This Zero Waste Europe member is a network of neighborhood associations, environmental groups, Popular assemblies of 15M, collectives of organic gardens, organisations formed to fight facilities and harmful waste plans, “No Macro-Landfill, Yes Zero Waste” campaign, representatives of political groups and individual zero waste campaigners. Their common goal is the fight against the creation of hazardous waste, against harmful waste facilities and planned facilities primarily located in the Eastern region of Madrid.

 

cartro reciclat

Over the years this network has been a focal point of resistance to environmental damage in the area. It works to submit refutations to waste projects, environmental damage reports, conducting lobbying and organising trainings, rallies and demonstrations aiming to show the popular opposition against these projects.

 

While challenging these facilities, the network has developed, and now promotes an alternative Zero Waste policy to the current waste treatment plans. This should be implemented in all municipalities of the City of Madrid. In this way, Zero Waste Madrid also wants to reach the institutions through the current ‘popular unity’ candidates who are much more open to this project through motions in the municipalities where they are in office.

 

In conclusion, thanks for the wonderful work of ‘Incineradoras No, Zero Waste Madrid’, zero waste is really happening in Madrid!

 


Press Release: New Report Finds, Municipal Solid Waste a Key Sector for a Low Carbon Economy

For Immediate Release 27/10/2015
Download full Press Kit

 

A newly released report has found the waste sector has a key role to play in the development of a low carbon economy and the reduction of greenhouse gases (GHGs). The report will be launched at a press conference, organised by Zero Waste France in Paris on Tuesday the 27th. This report comes in advance of the UN Climate Conference in Paris, which will take place in December.

The report was commissioned by Zero Waste Europe, in partnership with Zero Waste France and ACR+. The report finds that the role of waste prevention and improved waste management can play in reducing GHG emissions and the development of a low carbon economy has previously been significantly understated, partly due to the structure of the national inventories of the UNFCCC.

The report further provides an accurate examination of the true impact of waste management on climate change and carbon emissions. It confirms that actions at the top of the waste hierarchy – including waste prevention initiatives, reuse and recycling – have considerable scope to reduce climate change emissions.

As the report states “A climate friendly strategy, as regards materials and waste, will be one in which materials are continually cycling through the economy, and where the leakage of materials into residual waste treatments is minimised”. For example, recycling 1 tonne of plastic packaging can be a saving of 500 kg CO2 eq, whereas using one tonne less plastic packaging results in avoiding 6 times more emissions (3 tonnes CO2 eq).

In the report 11 key recommendations are made, calling for waste policies to be redesigned in order to prioritise the higher level options of the ‘Waste Hierarchy’ (waste prevention, reuse and recycling) and immediately reallocate climate finance subsidies which are currently supporting energy generation from waste. These recommendations put a strong focus on correcting methodological issues that are currently preventing Member states and the European union from implementing waste policies that are efficient in terms of GHG emissions.

The report shows that in the decarbonising economy required to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change, technologies such as incineration will become less attractive options and ultimately present an obstacle to a low carbon economy.

 

Reactions

 

Mariel Vilella, Zero Waste Europe’s Associate Director said “For far too long the climate impact of waste management has been overlooked. Now it’s clear that waste prevention, reuse and recycling are climate change solutions that need to be fully integrated into a low carbon economy. Both at the EU and international level, it is time to shift climate finance support to these climate-friendly options instead of waste incineration, which in fact contributes to climate change and displaces livelihoods of recyclers worldwide.”

Delphine Lévi Alvarès, Zero Waste France’s Advocacy Officer,said: “With France hosting the COP21 in December, it is a real opportunity to raise decision makers’ awareness about the real impact of waste management on climate change and the extent to which Zero Waste strategies have to be put on the agenda of solutions to climate mitigation supported by the French government.”

Françoise Bonnet, Secretary general of ACR+ said: “Efficiency and smart waste management is key for a low carbon economy. Still, it is only the tip of the iceberg as a much bigger impact can be achieved through resource efficiency and adopting a life-cycle perspective”.

Links

 

Download the full report, executive summary, or technical appendices

Press Contacts

Zero Waste Europe

Mariel Vilella

Associate Director and Head of Climate Policy Programme

The Potential Contribution of Waste Management to a Low Carbon Economy: report cover page

+44 784 7079-154 – mariel -at- zerowasteeurope.eu

Matt Franklin

Communications & Programme Officer

+44 792 337-3831 – matt -at- zerowasteeurope.eu

Zero Waste France

Delphine Lévi Alvarès

Advocacy officer

+33 7 89 85 06 58 – delphine -at- zerowastefrance.org

ACR+

Françoise Bonnet

Secretary general

+32 474 412 653 – fb -at- acrplus.org

The partners

Zero Waste EuropeZero 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

Zero Waste France – Zero Waste France (formerly Cniid – Centre national d’information indépendante sur les déchets) was founded in 1997. As an independently funded NGO and a member of Zero Waste Europe, it has been advocating for waste reduction since then, talking to local and national public officials as well as citizens groups or businesses. In 2014 the organization changed its name to Zero Waste France to emphasize its ambition but also the links with the other groups involved in this issue worldwide. Zero Waste France works closely with local stakeholders – among them its 2,000 members (individuals and groups) to encourage and implement Zero Waste strategies at the local level. www.zerowastefrance.org

ACR+ The Association of Cities and Regions for Recycling and sustainable Resource management (ACR+) is an international network promoting sustainable resource management through prevention at source, reuse and recycling. Through its activities, ACR+ strives to develop the expertise and skills of public authorities in effective waste-product-resource policies. Building on a 20 year experience, ACR+ launched in November 2014, the Circular Europe Network, a multi-stakeholder platform aiming at supporting local and regional authorities in adopting aspiring circular economy strategies. www.acrplus.org

 


Press Release: Study finds Extended Producer Responsibility needs redesign for Circular Economy

For immediate release: 14 October 2015

A new study commissioned by Zero Waste Europe[1] and released today at a conference in Brussels [2] has found that the majority of product waste is not covered by current Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes and calls for the redesigning of producer responsibility in order to move towards a circular economy.

The study published today [3] analyses the waste composition of 15 European cities showing that 70% of municipal solid waste is product waste, and therefore not food or garden waste, and as such could be included under an EPR scheme. However, on average, only 45% of this product waste (by weight) is currently covered by producer responsibility schemes. This means that, on average, EPR schemes only cover 32.5% of total municipal waste, with coverage varying from 14.9% in Copenhagen to 47.6% in Paris. Furthermore, only 18% of product waste is collected separately through an EPR scheme.

Joan-Marc Simon, director of ZWE said “The current interpretation of EPR was useful to increase recycling rates in Europe over last 20 years but it will need updating for it to help move us towards a circular economy. We call on the European Commission to use the upcoming waste package to include incentives to redesign systems and products in order to drive prevention and reuse, foster a serviced-based economy, put recycling as last option and progressively phase out disposal.”

The report makes a series of recommendations to the European Commission. Among these it calls for a broader definition and a more comprehensive approach to producer responsibility which includes the use of economic instruments. The introduction of legally binding eco-design requirements as well as better EPR schemes with full-cost coverage, individualisation, targets for separate collection and considering expansion of the current EPR scope to include more products and incentivise reuse.

The study also finds that existing EPR schemes have been ineffective in driving eco-design, both because of its limited coverage of product waste and the lack of modulation of EPR fees based on eco-design. Zero Waste Europe urges the European Commission to develop minimum European-wide individualisation criteria based on eco-design.

Contact: Joan-Marc Simon, info@zerowasteeurope.eu, +32 2503-49 11

ENDS

***

NOTES:

1. Zero Waste Europe – 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. Launch event for the report – 14.30 – 17.00 – Brussels, Belgium

3. Download the Full Report or Download Executive Summary


Highlights from Zero Waste Week

This year saw a significant growth for Zero Waste Week, held between 7th – 13th of September. What has previously been a national UK based week expanded internationally drawing participants from across the world. The theme for this years Zero Waste Week, was that of ‘Reuse’. One of the ‘3 R’s’, reuse is an essential aspect of any zero waste strategy, and is near the top as one of the ‘most favoured options in the ‘Waste Hierarchy Pyramid’.

Prior to the start of Zero Waste Week 2015, many pledges were received from individuals committing to reducing waste. The website for the week, hosted the pledges from all around the world, including individuals in Poland, Tunisia, Wales, the United States, Mexico, Australia, Germany and many other countries.

Kornelia from Warsaw, Poland said “I started the Zero Waste project in my family in July 2015 and I try to respect all 5 rules of Zero Waste. I write about it on my blog”

Hana from Tunisia said “I pledge to make my own reusable bags”

In the UK, Zero Waste Week was celebrated in Parliament in an Early Day Motion recognising the hard work carried out by founder Rachelle Strauss, and the wide reach and success of the week. The week was further referenced by Kerry McCarthy MP who introduced a bill proposing a reduction on the ‘obscene amounts of food needlessly wasted through the food industry supply chains’, and making this waste available to charities and people in poverty.

#ZeroWasteWeek ideas for reuse
#ZeroWasteWeek ideas for reuse

Klaus from Munich, Germany pledged to “Buy no plastic packaging [and] recycle waste for different uses”

The massive online response to Zero Waste Week meant that many innovative, and exciting zero waste solutions and ideas were presented from around the world. Kate from Plastic is Rubbish, presented a detailed guide of how to safely drink water in China without resorting to plastic bottles.

Over 40 local authorities are on the Zero Waste Week mailing list and 12 councils joined in the week on twitter, and many businesses participated in the week by implementing new schemes and efforts to reduce their waste, collectively making a significant impact on the quantity of waste produced.

The increasing reach of Zero Waste Week stands as an exemplary model for moving towards a zero waste world. With participants in all levels of society, and increasing recognition from national legislative bodies, it seems that zero waste ideas are becoming popularised.

Valerie from Paris, France, pledged to “Avoid every kind of packaging”

Many more exciting events such as ‘repair cafés, smoothie bikes, roadshows, meals made from ‘waste’, swap events, and art projects’ also took place during the week, with a huge response on twitter under the hashtag #ZeroWasteWeek

With the EU currently in the process of preparing a the circular economy package, these efforts should demonstrate the potential and energy for waste reduction in our economy from across Europe, as well as the recognition of the importance of waste within our supply chains.


Boston Builds Solutions

This blog is the second article in our series on “Waste & Climate Solutions” from around the world. We are releasing this series to mark the final push before COP21, and will release a different climate and waste solution across the world for the next 3 days until 27 September. Yesterday we told the story of São Paulo’s household composting schemes which have resulted in a significant reduction in Greenhouse Gas emissions from landfills.

Today, our article looks at the zero waste model of CERO in Boston, where the innovative worker co-operative had provided a strong economic boost for the local community whilst simultaneously working to reduce GHG emissions. Find out how below.


This following article is based on an interview with Alex Papali, an organizer with Clean Water Action and the Boston Recycling Coalition; and Lor Holmes, a cooperative worker-owner and business manager at Cooperative Energy Recycling and Organics (CERO) in Boston.

Imagine a city where all products are reused, repaired, or recycled, and all workers make a family-supporting wage. Where local economic development projects are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and protecting the climate.

Boston, Massachusetts is on its way.

Last year, the Boston Recycling Coalition submitted a set of “Zero Waste Recommendations” to the city government detailing a proposal for Boston to vastly expand their recycling and composting programs, with the ultimate goal of a 90% recycling rate. The final Climate Action Plan adopted a zero waste goal, which the coalition is working to strengthen and implement.

Most of Boston’s garbage is currently burned in incinerators. Garbage incinerators (sometimes falsely named “waste-to-energy facilities) are major contributors to climate change—burning waste emits even carbon dioxide than burning coal to produce the same amount of energy. On the flip side, community-led zero waste solutions like recycling and composting have enormous benefits for clean air and the climate while revitalizing local green economies.

This model is already happening at CERO, a worker-owner zero waste coop in Boston.

While providing family-supporting jobs for the community, CERO works with businesses on separating out materials that can be recovered. They then collect this waste in a truck and bring it to facilities where it can either be recycled or returned to the soil as compost. The COOP diverts thousands of tons of waste per week from being burned or buried, and is still expanding.

CERO’s board members and employees are people like Guadalupe Gonzalez and Josefina Luna, who have been recycling informally for years or decades. Guadalupe Gonzalez used to do backbreaking work, cleaning commercial buildings during the day while picking bottles from the trash at night. She was one of the thousands of underrated recycling workers, earning precious extra money to support her family. Josefina Luna explains that, at CERO, “Now we can earn a living while protecting the environment.”


São Paulo’s commitment to household composting

Zero Waste Solutions to Climate Change

This blog is the first in our series on “Waste & Climate solutions” from around the world. We are releasing this series to mark the final push before COP21, and will release a different climate and waste solution from a different region for the next 4 days until 27 September. This edition covers the municipal composting scheme implemented in São Paulo, which gathered large numbers of participants and was responsible for preventing 250 tons of food waste from going to landfill and thereby preventing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the landfilling of organic waste. To find out more about the ‘Power of Compost’ have a look at our post for International Compost Awareness Week or our report back on our organics management training. Read our second post in the series, on Boston’s worker co-operative recycling company.


Dan Moche, Claudio Spinola and Magdalena Donoso*, September, 2015

 

Although landfills have not always been the main destination for waste in São Paulo, this practice was massively expanded until it reached  a critical situation in 2013. Until then, 100% of the organic waste, 95% of dry waste and 100% of all residual waste would go directly to two specific landfills, the CTL Landfill (Central Waste Treatment Leste) and the Caieiras Landfill.

The motivation to reverse this situation was triggered by changes in legal obligations within the new Solid Waste National Policy (PNRS)i, and the urgency of extending the life of these landfills to save land space in the metropolitan region. Moreover, the solid waste management sector in São Paulo was the second largest source of GHG emissions (Municipal Inventory, 2012), being responsible for the 15.6% of the total GHG emissions in the city, 14% of those coming from landfills. In this way, reducing the contribution of the waste sector to the carbon footprint of the city was critical, and composting was a particularly well-suited opportunity, as studies showed that the practice of composting would potentially decrease 5-10 times the emissions of methane in landfills,ii integrate efforts to reduce leachate while increasing the benefits from retaining organic matter to provide nutrients and improve soil properties in the state of São Paulo.

 

Composting workshop with officials from the city of Sao Paulo
Composting workshop with officials from the city of Sao Paulo

Participatory implementation

The implementation of the Solid Waste National Policy (PNRS) began with citizens participating in 58 events with more than 7,000 participants, which was organised by the Public Administration of São Paulo. 800 delegates elected by thousands of São Paulo citizens and supported by experts and technicians from the authority ad hoc, agreed on the main guidelines as to what to do with the waste generated in the city.

These points formed part of the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan of the city of São Paulo – PGIRS, published in early 2014, and determined the recovery, over twenty years, of 80% of all compostable waste and recyclable waste. Among the approved guidelines, source separation of organic waste, selective collection, composting, mechanical biological treatment (MBT) and promotion of home composting were included.

Delivery of compost kits to selected households
Delivery of compost kits to selected households

“Compost São Paulo”

Home composting began to be encouraged by the government of São Paulo shortly after the publication of the PGIRS in June 2014 by delivering compost bins to houses. In six months, 250 tons of organic waste were recovered.

The project called “Composta São Paulo” handed kits for home composting with worms to 2,006 households in the city of São Paulo. Through a public announcement, the project achieved 10,061 registrations in 40 days on the website, from various regions of São Paulo. Those selected were from 539 apartments and 1,467 houses in eight regions.

“Now I pay a lot of attention to my organic waste and also my neighbours waste. I’m more critical of how much food to buy. I have affection for worms”, said one of the participants in the “Composta São Paulo” 2014 program. 

The delivery of compost bins was accompanied by 135 training workshops for over 5,000 participants. Participants were encouraged to respond to scheduled polls and assume the role of multipliers of home composting.

After two months, the participants were invited to other workshops (88 workshops), where they received advice and techniques for planting in small spaces in order to use the produced compost. The questions and concerns raised were shared and addressed in a virtual community on Facebook. The community of “composters” (comunidad de “composteros”) finished the first year of the project with more than 6,000 members.

Subsequent information gathering on program results indicated that 89% of participants significantly decreased the amount of waste for collection. There were no significant differences in the evaluation of the practice of composting between social classes or between types of housing and only 47 households (2.3%) gave up the activity. Meanwhile, 97% of respondents of a survey to measure the level of satisfaction (1,535 people) were satisfied or very satisfied with the technique, 98% considered it a good solution for organic waste and 86% considered it easy to practice.

Strong economic basis

In its economic analysis, the Municipality of São Paulo found that the costs of delivery of compost, monitoring and technical assistance provided by the local government could be covered through the savings achieved in reducing the collection, transport and disposal of the organic waste in landfills. The study compared the (estimated) costs of collection, transportation and disposal of organic waste in landfills with the (estimated) costs that compost bins, delivery, communication, workshops, etc, would imply. Then, the calculation was made with what was actually spent to develop the above actions in the context of “Compost São Paulo”, working with 2006 households. Considering the “contagious” effect explained below, costs would be matched within 5 years.iii

The communication strategy and the contagious effect

The mayor of Sao Paulo at the first delivery
The mayor of Sao Paulo at the first delivery

Linking the practice of home composting with participation was an important part of the communication strategy developed for this program in terms of the involvement of the population. In addition to the novelty of the composting process itself, and the use of modern techniques of social communication aroused interest in the project, and the desire to “be a part”.

The multiplier effect was immediate. The results of the survey indicated that 29% helped others who did not receive compost bin, to make, install or manage one. Participants witnessed a contagious effect, which attracted 2,525 new people to try to assemble or buy their own composting system.

“We realized that every time we went to throw the waste into the compost bin we felt a deep sense of wellbeing … kind of like we had stopped making the city a dirty place and turned garbage into flowers. We exchanged ideas with other people who were doing composting and they had the same feeling! Composting is therapeutic!”, read the testimony of another participant at the “Composta São Paulo” 2014 program. 

27% of participants donated worms for others to start practice. Also, behavioural changes in other areas also came to light: 84% said they greatly expanded their knowledge of urban sustainability; 96% considered themselves far more diligent in handling properly the waste produced; and 54% said they began to eat a lot more fruits and vegetables.

The new “master composters”: dream big, start small, and act now!

The 2,525 new participants, excited by the project members themselves, are a sign of the potential for citizens to transition from mere objects of public policy to true subjects in the exercise of their citizenship: in this case, transforming themselves from “trained” to “master composters”. By attracting new participants and sharing their learning, project members should be recognized for what they really are:  “master composters”.

On the other end, public managers are called to support what people can build. Just dream big, start small, and act now. Home composting is an empowering tool for public policy, and of collective commitments, with a multiplier effect that encourages responsible behaviour with base on joy, discovery and learning.


* Authors: Dan Moche Schneider, who coordinated the area of ​​organic waste in the PGIRS of Sao Paulo / Claudio Spinola, ideologue and operator of “Compost São Paulo” / Magdalena Donoso, Coordinator for GAIA Latin America

i Obligation to recover waste under the National Solid Waste Policy – PNRS, approved in 2010.  

ii Inacio, Caio de Teves. O papel da compostagem de resíduos orgânicos urbanos na mitigação de emissão de metano. Caio de Teves Inácio, Daniel Beltrão Bettio e Paul Richard Momsen Miller. Embrapa Solos, 2010. 22 p.

iii Calculations estimated by Dan Moche, former Coordinator at the Organic Waste PIGRS of Sao Paulo. Internal economic analysis of the Municipality of Sao Paulo.


“Getting Climate Finance Right” in the Waste Sector

At a historic juncture for climate finance, Friends of the Earth US and the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) have co-edited a report showing that it is possible to get climate finance right.

In the report, which includes work from many global, regional and local organisations including the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA), zero waste solutions are advocated as solid examples of successful climate programs, which should be the focus of further funding. This includes both the Solid Waste Collection and Handling (SWaCH) cooperative from Pune who provide door-to-door waste collection for more than 400,000 households and the Zero Waste Program at Bir Hospital in Nepal, which has reduced dioxin emissions from medical waste incineration by over 90%.

Waste-pickers from SWaCH and the KKPKP in Pune
Waste-pickers from SWaCH and the KKPKP in Pune

Combining the stories of dozens of local and regional groups, this study demonstrates the importance of learning from successful examples of climate finance in looking ahead into the future. With the creation of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which was created to help transform developing country economies by supporting high quality investments in clean energy and climate resilience, it is essential that future projects are able to learn from a critical assessment of previous climate finance projects.

This report comes as the GCF accredited 13 new organisations to administer and distribute funds. Controversially this list included the Deutsch Bank who are the worlds 10th largest backer of coal, having invested €15bn in the industry since 2005, according to the BankTrack network. This decision sparked outrage from over 20 of the worlds leading climate organisations including GAIA, Friends of the Earth US, Action Aid International, and many others. In the statement the groups said they were “tremendously discouraged and disappointed” adding that the fund was at “real risk of losing credibility”.

Previously concerns have been raised around the lack of criteria for the GCF investments. Earlier this year, civil society organisations demanded the GCF approve an exclusion list to ensure that none of this climate investments will end up financing dirty energy sources. In this regard, GAIA and Zero Waste Europe have been actively campaigning against the financing of incinerators by the GCF, Mariel Vilella, Associate Director of Zero Waste Europe said “Given the urgency of the climate crisis, the shrinking pool of public money, the health risks of incineration, and the availability of sound alternatives, waste-to-energy would be a bad investment for the Green Climate Fund”.

The new study consists of 22 examples of successful climate related projects, programs and policies, across three continents; Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The examples were identified by organisations from the Global South and North and follow a comprehensive list of overarching characteristics: all of them are deeply rooted in the local communities, are inclusive and encourage the participation of affected communities; recognize and respect people’s rights, with special attention on gender and relationships/partnerships building; and most importantly, all of them are fully grant-funded, which allowed for flexibility, experimentation and innovation. (See the full list)

One of the case studies featured in report, under the category of ‘mitigation’ is that of the Solid Waste Collection and Handling (SWaCH) cooperative. Based in Pune, India the cooperative is ‘an autonomous social enterprise that provides front-end waste management services’, over 80% of SWaCH members are women from marginalised castes, and as a result of the cooperative worker-members can earn up to three times their previous daily income.

Bir Hospital
Bir Hospital in Nepal have undertaken an effective ‘Zero Waste Program’

It is further estimated that the SWaCH program saves the city an estimated $2.8 million per year in waste collection and disposal costs, and is responsible for preventing 640,000 tons of greenhouse gasses annually. The story and success of the SWaCH workers has been well documented, and more details can be found in the GAIA report on Successes and Lessons from Around the World

The case of the Zero Waste Program at Bir Hospital in Nepal, with no external funding the hospital managed to successfully reduce dioxin emissions associated with medical waste incineration by 90%, whilst increasing the percentage of the total waste stream which is recycled to over 50% , a move which is responsible for supporting hundreds of recycling jobs.

Such incredible achievements were possible through sustained efforts and initiatives from vermicomposting to the redesign of thermometers and other medical technology to use non-mercury alternatives, with the support of the Health Care Foundation and international allies such as Health Care Without Harm. This project carried out with zero budget, demonstrates the huge potential for a GCF funded program which would have the capacity to improve waste management across hundreds of hospitals in the region.

The success of the waste workers of Pune, and Nepal, on comparatively tiny budgets make it clear that the GCF should be doing more to expand and develop such programs and that truly effective climate finance projects include a wide range of factors, which are deeply rooted in affected communities. Only with these lessons of past successes can we hope to make progress towards a strong and effective climate finance model which is equitable for everyone involved.


Slovenian Cement Plant Stops Operations as Environmental Permit Fails Approval

In Trbovlje, Slovenia, the Lafarge-owned cement plant has been ordered to stop operations after it’s been revealed that the plant lacks the necessary environmental permits. Still, the plant has filed a complaint to the Ministry of Environment of Slovenia and it’s expected that it will try to get further permissions, thus the local groups that have been campaigning against the environmental pollution from the plant for years, remain vigilant and under alert.

 

500 pages of legal documents
500 pages of legal documents sent to Eko Krog in October 2013

Eko Krog (Eco Circle) the Slovenian Society for Nature Conservation and Environmental Protection along with local residents, has been fighting the Lafarge plant’s burning of hazardous waste and campaigning on the issue of clean air for over 10 years. Since the beginning of their campaign in 2004, the group have denounced inadequate environmental permits given to the cement plant and have faced complicated legal challenges; on one occasion receiving over 500 pages of legal documents from Lafarge with only 14 days for comment.

 

 

Trbovlje Cement Plant
Lafarge Cement Plant in Trbovlje

 

The Lafarge plant received a permit to burn waste from 2009 to 2011, a period in which the plant burnt all kinds of hazardous and municipal solid waste. Thanks to Eko Krog and their efforts on the legal battle, the Court rejected the permit given to Lafarge and ordered the end of co-incineration of waste in the plant. However, Lafarge did not stop operations at the plant, which has led to Slovenia being subject to EU legal action for its failure to implement a permit system which ‘requires industrial plants to be licensed to verify they meet strict environmental controls’ in line with the IPPC Directive of 2007. In the course of this action, Lafarge has finally resumed operations in this plant, but it’s pursuing new permits.

 

The biggest obstacle to zero waste

Lafarge Waste Incineration Protest
Demonstration against the Lafarge plant in Ljubljana in 2011

In this recently released video, Uroš Marcerl, of Eko Krog, talks about the campaign against the pollution from the incineration of waste in the Lafarge plant. “We’ll never allow this story to repeat itself in the Zasavje region” he says “they’re interested in enormous profits through waste incineration – nothing else”. Erika Oblak from Ekologi Brez Meja (Ecologists Without Borders) says that Lafarge “in the end only care about annual profits”.

Waste incineration in cement kilns has been a growing problem as cement plants have increasingly moved to burning hazardous waste as opposed to producing cement in an effort to grow profits. However, the high level of heavy metals incinerated in the kilns poses a risk to surrounding communities and the environment. Professor emeritus Paul Connett of St. Lawrence University, New York has called waste incineration in cement kilns “the biggest obstacle to zero waste”.

Slovenia is at a tipping point, with more and more municipalities taking up zero waste goals, inspired by Ljubljana being the first EU capital to adopt a zero waste strategy. As municipalities pave the way for a zero waste future and phase out plans to build incinerators, there is a growing threat that the cement industry will increasingly pressure the government to use waste as fuel for their operations, despite obvious impacts on the environment and public health.

Opposition to Lafarge’s waste burning practices is not exclusive to Trbovlje plant in Slovenia. In Montcada i Reixach, Catalonia, the High Court of Justice of Catalonia has rejected the environmental permit given to the Lafarge cement plant to burn waste. The local anti-incineration campaign Montcada Aire Net have been calling for Lafarge to halt their waste burning activities for many years.

Whilst the Trbovlje cement plant continues to operate, so too does Eko Krog continue to oppose incineration in the region, and it is hoped that we will soon see the end of waste incineration in the Zasavje region.

Watch the video for yourself and see what you think:


Time to Redesign Extended Producer Responsibility for a Circular Economy: New study from Zero Waste Europe.

We have now released the full report which is available for download on our website.

Newly released findings of a study commissioned by Zero Waste Europe1 reveal current EPR schemes are lacking in scope and effectiveness.

This study provides clear evidence that Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes in Europe are insufficient. In the Executive Summary, released on Wednesday 15, July, it has been found that despite 70% of municipal solid waste being product waste, only 45% of this product waste is currently covered by an EPR scheme and only 18% of the product waste is collected with existing EPR schemes.

In the full study to be released in October, there will be included a number of detailed and clear recommendations to the European Commission on improving the current EPR mechanisms and implementing truly effective EPR scheme with a broader definition which as the ‘father of extended producer responsibility’ Thomas Lindhqvist stated, would serve as “an environmental protection strategy to reach an environmental objective of a decreased total environmental impact from a product”2.

Summary of total waste, product waste, EPR coverage and EPR separate collection.
Summary of total waste, product waste, EPR coverage and EPR separate collection.

For EPR thinking to fit into the circular economy, the study claims that it is necessary to connect waste managers with producers using economic instruments as well as the introduction of legally binding eco-design requirements that allow for better process and product design.

This study comes at important time for the European Commission who are currently conducting a review of waste policy and legislation. The aim of which is to “help turn Europe into a circular economy, boost recycling, secure access to raw materials and create jobs and economic growth”3. All ambitious targets which will need to incorporate strong EPR protocols to have achieve the desired goals, and move Europe towards a zero waste circular economy.

Joan-Marc Simon, director of Zero Waste Europe said “This study provides new evidence about the potential for improving EPR schemes in Europe and the need to use the upcoming waste package proposal to ensure that producers really take responsibility whilst providing the appropriate incentives to redesign systems and products”. It is clear that whilst EPR schemes across Europe do not manage to reach most producers there is real potential in the current review for their reform, and it is hoped that if the European Commission takes these findings into account. That would be a real step forwards for the circular economy and another step towards a zero waste Europe.

1http://www.zerowasteeurope.eu/downloads/redesigning-producer-responsibility-executive-summary/

2Thomas Lindhqvist, “Mot ett förlängt producentansvar — analys av erfarenheter samt förslag” (“Towards an Extended Producer Responsibility — analysis of experiences and proposals,” in Swedish), 30 April 1992, published by the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources ini “Varor som faror — Underlagsrapporter” (“Products as Hazardous — background documents,” in Swedish), Ds 1992:82. The definition was published in English for the first time in: Thomas Lindhqvist, “Extended Producer Responsibility,” in the proceedings of an invitational seminar at Trolleholm Castle, 4-5 May 1992: “Extended Responsibility as a Strategy to Promote Cleaner Products,” edited by Thomas Lindhqvist, Department of Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund, June 1992.

3http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/target_review.htm


Press Release: Study Finds Extended Producer Responsibility Needs Redesign for Circular Economy

Study Finds Extended Producer Responsibility Needs Redesign for Circular Economy

For Immediate Release: 15, July, 2015

Contact: Joan-Marc Simon info@zerowasteeurope.eu, +32 2503-49 11

***

A new study commissioned by Zero Waste Europe[1] finds majority of product waste not covered by current Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes and calls for redesigning it in order to move towards a circular economy.

Key findings from the new study covering 15 European cities have been published today [2], in advance of the publication of the full study in September. The study shows that 70% of municipal solid waste is product waste (waste that is not food or garden waste) and as such could be included under an EPR scheme. However currently only 45% of this product waste (by weight) is covered by the producer responsibility scheme. Furthermore, only 18% of product waste is collected separately through an EPR scheme.

The full study to be released in September will make a series of recommendations to the European Commission. Among these it will call for a broader definition and a more comprehensive approach to EPR which includes the use of economic instruments. The introduction of legally binding eco-design requirements as well as better EPR schemes with full-cost coverage, individualisation, targets for separate collection and the expansion of the current EPR scope to include more products.

Zero Waste Europe encourages the European Commission to take these findings into account in the up-coming proposal on the waste package[3] which will be presented before the end of the year.

Joan-Marc Simon, director of ZWE said This study provides new evidence about the potential for improving EPR schemes in Europe and the need to use the upcoming waste package proposal to ensure that producers really take responsibility whilst providing the appropriate incentives to redesign systems and products”

Contact: Joan-Marc Simon, info@zerowasteeurope.eu, +32 2503-49 11

ENDS

***

NOTES:

1. Zero Waste Europe – 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. Download Executive Summary

3. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/target_review.htm

IMAGES:

Figure 1: summary of total waste, product waste, EPR coverage and EPR separate collection.

Figure_4_EPR

Plastic Bag Free Day 2015 Global Round-up

Plastic has permeated every corner of our oceans and rivers, leaving virtually no inch of ocean plastic free.1 But all around the world, communities and cities are showing that another way is possible. From Manila to Montenegro, people are saying no to plastic pollution and calling for a world without plastic bags.

Environmental Groups dramatise the effects of single-use plastic bags in Manilla, Philippines.
Environmental groups dramatize the environmental impacts of single-use disposal bags during the celebration of the 2015 International Plastic Bag-free Day in Manila. The groups encouraged the public to choose reusable bags to prevent plastic pollution.

On Friday the 3rd of July groups and organisations from across the world took action for the 6th International Plastic Bag Free Day. The day saw creative events across five continents, in a unified call for reusable, responsible alternatives.

  • Montenegro saw a ‘plastic bag monster’ roaming the streets of Podgorica, the capital city, as Zero Waste Montenegro raised awareness of the environmental impact of single-use plastic bags and informed people of the alternative zero waste solutions. Hungarian campaigners from Humusz held a flashmob and trolley race to from a central square to a nearby market, highlighting the alternative solutions to plastic bags, such as shopping trolleys. In Sofia, Bulgaria, there was a ‘plastic bag free party and fotomarathon’ with theatre, music and drinks. A German group held a film showing of ‘Trashed’ in Konstanz. And in Slovenia a trade in scheme was held, where people could swap 10 disposable plastic bags for a re-usable cotton bag. In addition to having fun and raising awareness, groups in Europe had concrete policy goals. In Europe, groups including; Zero Waste Europe, Fundació Prevenció de Residus, Friends of the Earth Europe, Surfrider Foundation Europe, and the European Environmental Bureau renewed their call for for EU Member States to put into effect the new EU directive to reduce the consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags, and make this policy a reality.

    Bulgaria Plastic Bag Free Party
    Bulgaria Plastic Bag Free Party
  • In Manilla, Philippines, a forum was held by a number of organisations exposing the truth behind many types of ‘degradable’ plastic bags and their impacts on the environment. Sonia Mendoza, President of the EcoWaste Coalition of the Philippines, said “Degradable plastic bags will not help solve our environmental problems concerning waste and pollution, as their use will merely instil and promote further the throwaway attitude and culture that have so permeated modern society,” and called for a ban on plastic bags in the Philippines.
  • Members of the Korea Zero Waste Movement Network worked to raise awareness in front of the Seoul Jongno Tower Saengtegye, encouraging South Koreans to stop using single-use plastic bags, and instead use reusable shopping baskets. And in Hong-Kong and Taiwan groups encouraged people to “Say no to plastic bags!” and reduce their use of disposable bags.
Zero waste campaigners in South Korea raise awareness about disposable plastics.
Zero waste campaigners in South Korea raise awareness about disposable plastics.
  • In Botswana, Somarelang Tikologo (Environment Watch Botswana), called upon the Botswanan government to enforce their levy on plastic bags, which officially came into force in 2006 and use the proceeds to fund environmental activities in Botswana, saying “We also call on the government to use the levy as it was intended to create a cleaner Botswana,”.
  • The Kicking the Bags Out campaign in Zambia lobbied for a plastic bag ban or fee across Zambia as part of a community solution to the issue of clogged drainage systems from plastic bag waste and donated reusable bags to legislators and ministers.
  • In Canada volunteers on Vancouver Island offered reusable bags by donation and held a voluntary plastic bag ban, where shoppers were encouraged not to use single-use plastic bags as part of their daily shop.
  • In Argentina a comedy event was held where monologues highlighted the ‘pointlessness’ of plastic bags.
A 'plastic bag monster' roams the streets of Montenegro's capital.
A ‘plastic bag monster’ roams the streets of Montenegro’s capital.

More and more people on every continent are choosing to take their reusable bags to the shops, and ditching disposable plastics. But we don’t have time to wait for everyone in the world to follow this trend. The disastrous effects that single-use plastic bags are having on our environments, means that we need bold policies to tackle the issue of destructive disposable plastics and begin to move towards a world where single-use plastics are completely eliminated.

Many of the events and actions which took place are available to view on world map at http://www.plasticbagfreeday.org/ where you can read stories, view actions and add any of your own actions which may be missing.

1 Doyle, Christopher, “No part of the ocean untouched by plastic rubbish.” ABC Environment, 11 December 2014.


Press Release: International Bag Free Day – New EU Directive paves the way for a Europe without plastic bags

INTERNATIONAL BAG FREE DAY: New EU Directive paves the way for a Europe without plastic bags

For more information: www.plasticbagfreeday.org

***

Brussels, July 3, 2015 – On International Plastic Bag Free Day, a coalition of environmental and waste prevention organisations [1] urge EU Member States to take measures on environmentally damaging single-use plastic bags in accordance with new EU Directive requirements.

Every year, the average EU citizen uses an estimated 500 plastic bags [2], 92.5% of which are single-use. Around 90 billion single-use plastic bags were used in the EU in 2010 [3]. Plastic bags make up around 40% of all the marine litter across UK waters and the North Sea [4], and a 2009 study showed that in the Bay of Biscay over 90% of waste items found on the seabed were plastic [5]. These petroleum based products contain toxic additives such as endocrine disruptors and carcinogens, which can migrate into marine environments and enter the food chain via marine fauna.

European citizens think it is time to take action. A 2014 survey carried out by the European Commission, found that 92 % of respondents agree that measures should be taken to reduce the use of single-use plastic items, such as shopping bags [6].

There has been recent progress by EU institutions on tackling this issue. In May, a new European Directive, 2015/720/UE,to reduce the consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags entered in to force. The Directive requires Member States to reduce the use of plastic carrier bags with a thickness of below 50 microns by either:

– taking measures to reduce annual average consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags to 90 per person by the end of 2019, and 40 by 2025;

– or by ensuring that by the end of 2018, no more lightweight plastic carrier bags are handed over free of charge to shoppers.

Member states have a 18-month limit to transpose it into their national law.

However, this law allows oxo-degradable bags to continue to be used in Europe despite their disastrous impact on the marine environment, where they degrade into smaller pieces of plastics impossible to remove from the environment.

Joan-Marc Simon from Zero Waste Europe said: “Plastic pollution is a global problem waiting for a global solution. As an international player, the EU should lead by example and not lag behind other countries in reducing usage of single-use plastic bags. The EU has now a target for reduction in the use of plastic-bags, we call on member states to put in place necessary measures to make this a reality.”

Marta Beltran from Fundació Prevenció de Residus said: “Our society can not afford the waste of resources and the environmental, social and economic impacts of plastic bags, including the oxo-degradables bags whose impacts on the trophic chain must be avoided. We want Zero Plastic Bags everyday; it’s time for reusables.”

Meadhbh Bolger from Friends of the Earth Europe said: “Single-use plastic bags are an iconic example of how Europe is stuck in a linear economy, dependent on the continuous extraction of scarce virgin resources for throwaway products. EU decision-makers need to ensure that the new Circular Economy Package makes sure we keep resources in the economy for as long as possible and that reduced consumption, reuse and recycling are the norm across the continent.”

Antidia Citores from Surfrider Foundation Europe said: “29 European cities have already committed to ban single-use plastic bags within our “Ban the plastic bag campaign”. The European directive recently adopted now gives the possibility to EU member states to legally ban single use plastic bags. We now call on Member States, cities and citizens to engage themselves in our campaign and say no to disposable plastic bags which affect so strongly the marine environment.

Piotr Barczak from European Environmental Bureau said: The case of unnecessary plastic bags clearly shows that improving environmental performance and waste management does not rely only on modern solutions, but is often about societal change. Very often we just need to look at the modes of consumption that were present decades ago and that had much less impact on the environment, like, in this case, reusable packaging.

The sixth edition of International plastic bag-free day sees groups from all over the world organising activities to raise awareness on the environmental impact of single-use plastic bags and to demand that governments act to stop marine littering.

The International Plastic Bag-Free Day www.plasticbagfreeday.org is organised by Zero Waste Europe, GAIA and the Fundació Catalana per a la Prevenció de Residus i Consum.

ENDS

[1] Zero Waste Europe, GAIA, the European Environmental Bureau, Surfrider Foundation Europe, Friends of the Earth Europe and the Foundation for Waste Prevention.

[2] European Commission press release: Commission seeks views on reducing plastic bag use

[3] Green Paper On a European Strategy on Plastic Waste in the Environment.

[4] Data taken from the International Bottom Trawl Survey and the Clean Seas Environmental Monitoring Programme by CEFAS.

[5] OSPAR, 2009

[6] European Commission press release, 30th June 2014

[7] Directive 94/62/EC

***

CONTACTS

Joan-Marc Simon, Executive Director of Zero Waste Europe jm.simon@zerowasteeurope.eu , +32 2 503 49 11

Piotr Barczak, Policy Officer on Waste, European Environmental Bureau, wasteresource@eeb.org, +32 (0) 2289 10 97

Antidia Citores, Law and lobbying manager, Surfrider Foundation Europe, acitores@surfrider.eu, +33 6 32 68 90 36

Meadhbh Bolger, Resource use Campaigner, Friends of the Earth Europe, meadhbh.bolger@foeeurope.org, +32 2893 10 34

Marta Beltran, Coordinator of Waste Campaigns, Fundació Prevenció de Residus i Consum, info@residusiconsum.org, +34 676 488 720

To find out more about the international plastic bag-free day see: www.plasticbagfreeday.org

***

NOTES:

Zero Waste Europe 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

GAIA –Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives- is a worldwide alliance of more than 800 grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals in over 90 countries working for a world without waste. www.no-burn.org

Surfrider Foundation Europe is an environmental association, statute 1901, created in 1990 in France (Biarritz). During its existence, it has achieved real expertise in the areas of research, local action, as well as the creation and diffusion of educational tools. Today, it consists of a network of 1,700 volunteers, 10,000 members and 100,000 supporters in forty local offices that are active in twelve European countries. Find out more: www.surfrider.eu

The European Environmental Bureau is Europe’s largest federation of environmental organisations with more than 140 member organisations who gain their membership from the general public. The EEB is guided by the voices of 15 million European citizens, and acts as the ears and voice of its members towards EU decision makers and beyond. http://www.eeb.org/

Friends of the Earth Europe is the largest grassroots environmental network in Europe, uniting more than 30 national organisations with thousands of local groups: http://www.foeeurope.org

Fundació Prevenció de Residus i Consum -Catalan Foundation for Waste Prevention and Responsible Consumption- is a nonprofit organization driven by environmental organizations, universities, companies and municipalities. It promotes campaigns (like the International bag-free day, that begun in 2008 as a Catalan scope and leaded to the annual celebration worldwide) and projects in order to shift to a circular economy and a resource efficiency society. www.residusiconsum.org


Progressive industry calls for an ambitious Circular Economy Policy

A group of progressive industries accounting for more than 2300 companies from all sectors, from multinationals to SMEs, have presented a joint manifesto calling for an ambitious renewed Circular Economy Package. This initiative has been led by De Groene Zaak, MVO Nederland and Circle Economy, but has been supported by other relevant stakeholders, such as the European Environmental Bureau or ACR+.

This manifesto stresses that “circular businesses are currently succeeding in spite of, rather than because of, the regulatory framework” and that further legislative and policy action is needed to bring circular economy. Among their proposals, we should highlight:

  • Strong leadership and political guidance: bringing circular economy means transforming the model of consumption and production we have had for 250. This requires a systemic approach and, thus, the new package should be an “integrated package of government measures providing systemic incentives that encourage companies to implement circular business models.”
  • Maintaineance of the initial targets and introduction of new ones: They recommend keeping the binding targets for recycling and landfilling, and create new ones on reuse. Economic incentives could complement these.
  • Discourage incineration: they recommend introducing stringent criteria to exclude incineration of household waste that can be recycled or materially recovered.
  • Shift on tax burden: the manifesto proposes shifting tax burden from labour to resources, incentivising ‘circular products’ via VAT, etc.
  • Europe’s material footprint, indicators beyond GDP: They “recommend using The Raw Material Consumption (RMC) per capita as a key indicator for resource productivity” and consider that GDP “is an inadequate linear measure of the economy”Circular economy policies need new indicators, such as the Genuine Progress Indicator.
  • Creation of a European Institute for Circular Economy that would be based on existing national examples and could boost economic research, assist policy development, define transition paths, etc.

You can find here their manifesto. Zero Waste Europe supports these measures and would be very glad to see these proposals in the new Circular Economy Package.

 

For more information:

Circle Economy

De Groene Zaak

MVO Nederland

 


Let’s clean up Europe!

Every year, millions of tonnes of litter end up in oceans, beaches, forests and elsewhere in nature. That’s why between 8th and 10th May, we celebrated the clean up Europe day within the campaign “Let’s clean up Europe”. This campaign that takes place annually intends to bring visibility and raise awareness of the problem of littering and its causes, such as poor waste management and unsustainable consumption patterns.

The event took place simultaneously all over the European Union and in five non-EU European States. Year after year, “Let’s Clean Up Europe!” manages to fight littering and to increase consciousness on the origin of the problem and how this affects the ecosystems. Let’s clean up Europe is coordinated by the European Week for Waste Reduction. Here you can find further information on the campaign, the local organizations involved and the actions that were carried out.

clean_eu

The objectionable role of the EU in the international toxics negotiations

The EU has pushed dangerous standards for three toxic flame retardant chemicals widely used in building insulation, upholstery and electronics (HBCD, PentaBDE, and OctaBDE) at the UN Conference to the Basel, the Rotterdam and the Stockholm Conventions that took place from 4 to 15 May 2015 in Geneva.

These three toxic chemicals are listed in the Stockholm Convention for global elimination. They are ubiquitous in the environment globally and can disrupt human hormone systems, creating potential adverse effects on the development of the nervous system and children’s cognitive functioning.

 

pdbe_poster_recycle_symbol_v2_0_2015-cover-1

 

The EU proposal wants to keep these toxic flame-retardants in products and recycled products such as children’s toys, food containers and soft furnishings. The main argument for this move was the protection of the European recycling industry. However, Zero Waste Europe has already argued about the importance to ensure a toxic-free Circular Economy and reinforce product policies that will drive toxics out of the cycles of materials as a way to guarantee quality recycling in the future.

“Without clean production there will be no circular economy. Bridging between products, waste and chemicals legislation is a key aspect to make it work. Keeping this flame retardants is a step back for the circular economy”, said Joan Marc Simon, ZWE’s Executive Director.

 

Precisely, Zero Waste Europe together with FOEE, ChemTrust and the EEB recently called the EU to find the right balance between encouraging recycling and avoiding re-injecting hazardous substances into the economy, and made a joint presentation of some key principles that would ensure clean, effective and sustainable circular economy, including the removal of problematic substances from products at the design stage, the full compliance with chemical legislation for products applying for end of waste criteria, and appropriate marking, amongst other key demands.

 

The EU proposal in the Geneva UN Conference would not only allow toxic recycled products to be used by consumers in the EU, but it would also impact developing countries if wastes were imported there. Thus this move would transfer a toxic burden from the Global North to the Global South where the capacity to deal with contaminated waste is generally limited, potentially increasing health problems and general wellbeing.

Sharad Vittnal Sawant, speaking on behalf of the Rotterdam Convention Alliance (ROCA)
Sharad Vittnal Sawant, speaking on behalf of the Rotterdam Convention Alliance (ROCA)

African countries expressed deep concern regarding the EU’s position in Geneva. “We do not want toxic chemicals recycled into toys for African children and we do not think EU children should be playing with them either,” said Tadesse Amera, PAN Ethiopia. “The EU already sends us e-waste and now it seems they want to increase our toxic burden.”

 

Jindrich Petrlik from Arnika Association said, “As an EU-based public interest NGO we find it shameful to see the EU violating the integrity of the Stockholm Convention, and putting economic interests before human health and the environment. This is poisoning the circular economy.”

 

 

More info, download:

 

New Study: Toxic Toy or Toxic Waste: Old POPs in New Products

http://ipen.org/documents/toxic-toy-or-toxic-waste-old-pops-new-products-summary-decision-makers

Info Graphic: Toxic Recycling: POPs in Recycled & New Products

http://ipen.org/sites/default/files/pictures/Toxic-recycling-POPs-in-new-and-recycled-products_0_0.jpg

 


WALKING THE CIRCLE: The 4 guiding pillars for a Circular Economy

Efficient material management, reduction of toxic substances, energy efficiency and economic incentives.

signatories

The Circular Economy could bring significant environmental, social and economic benefits to the European Union. In order to deliver resource efficiency, job creation, low-carbon prosperity, a healthy environment, clean production and sustainable consumption, it is necessary to take a holistic approach by working across a number of policy areas. Failure to address every aspect of the issue by developing only partial solutions will prevent the EU from enjoying the overarching benefits the circular economy can provide.

This paper highlights four key areas the undersigned NGOs believe must be addressed by the EU institutions to ensure a fully functioning circular economy, and some of the often overlooked benefits that can result.

Resource Efficiency and Zero Waste: the basis of a true circular economy

Although we live in a planet of finite resources, global extraction of resources has been rapidly increasing[1]. The European Union is a net importer of natural resources[2]; from precious metals to the water or land necessary to produce every product we consume. At the same time, our linear economic model results in 50% of Europe’s municipal waste being landfilled or incinerated, generating considerable carbon emissions[3]. Our mismanagement of natural resources causes many environmental problems: climate change, depletion of resources, the release of toxics pollutants and marine litter, to name a few. It is estimated that fully implementing the EU’s waste laws could save up to €72 billion[4].

A true circular economy would reduce both inputs in the form of resources, and outputs, in the form of waste and emissions. The EU circular economy should aim to achieve high resource efficiency, zero waste and zero emissions.

The transition to a circular economy therefore requires fundamental changes across the entire economy based on the following interdependent pillars:

Material management from extraction to waste

Europe needs to radically increase the efficiency with which it manages its material resources, as measured by a continuing reduction in resource use per capita. This can be done by progressively closing the loop with effective product and waste policies.

To tackle Europe’s resource dependency, the EU needs to measure and reduce its material, water, land and carbon footprints. The material footprint (based on Raw Material Consumption, already measured by Eurostat) should be included as an indicator in the European Semester.

Product design is fundamental to reach the goals of the circular economy. Good design can improve product and process performance, phase out hazardous materials, enable and incentivise the repair and reuse of products, and can also ensure the use of recycled and recyclable materials.

Product design-related requirements should be set by the EU in four ways: (1) through the full implementation of the Ecodesign Directive, and also its extension and adaptation to non-energy related products; (2) through the Waste Framework and Packaging and Packaging Waste Directives; (3) through existing tools such as Ecolabel, Green Public Procurement and Energy labelling and (4) through certification and standardisation tools.

A credible long-term zero waste policy is not only crucial in eliminating waste but also in creating a feedback mechanism at the end of life-cycle that allows products to be redesigned and to re-enter the economy, thus preventing them from becoming waste. Therefore, an enforceable waste hierarchy that guides activities towards prevention, reuse and recycle with ambitious targets, while promoting zero landfill and zero incineration is an absolute necessity. In addition, it is necessary to have harmonised definitions and a single measurement methodology to allow Member States to monitor the progress of each of these activities towards the common goal of zero waste.

Toxics, chemicals and health

A circular economy cannot work without clean production. Toxic substances should be avoided at the design stage to allow products and materials to circulate in a closed loop without endangering the quality of materials and the health of citizens, workers and the environment. This requires changing our approach to toxic substances so that in a circular economy, hazardous substances will not hinder the processes of reuse, repair and recycling.

This requires stronger application of REACH, and potentially more product-specific requirements, with the example of the ROHS directive; restricting substances used in new electronic equipment, as a potential model. Stronger regulations are needed to trace and minimise hazardous chemicals in products which endanger the capacity of the product or material to circulate repeatedly in the loop.

When a temporary exemption or authorisation has been granted to enable the continued presence of hazardous substances in products made from recycled material, the material should be labelled and associated with a specific marking.

Energy efficiency

The circular economy can contribute a great deal to Europe’s energy efficiency drive. There is a huge potential in preserving the energy embedded in products and materials and preventing them from becoming waste; far more than can be generated by burning or landfilling them.

New methodologies must be developed to account for, and reward, the preservation of energy embedded in products or materials. Premiums for energy from waste incineration distort markets. Therefore they should not be considered unless there is a level playing field with embedded energy conservation, including taking into account the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from prevention, reuse or recycling during comparison.

This new approach to energy management should be included in the new Energy Union strategy and be incorporated in the renewable energy and climate policies through the clean development mechanism. Although this already exists, it is currently channelling public money to finance infrastructure developments that contradict the very concept of the circular economy.

Instruments: economic incentives

Maximising resource efficiency and keeping materials circulating in the economy should be cheaper and simpler than consuming virgin resources. To facilitate this, the EU needs to change the current economic incentives that drive our linear consumption pattern.

A circular economy will require policies to make it legally and economically viable to sell services instead of goods, to sell durable goods that are repairable, reusable and upgradable, to promote shared or leased ownership, and to have a return or reuse programme. Wasteful practices should be made more expensive than these efficient ones.

To further encourage resource efficiency and zero waste, resource consumption should be made more expensive in comparison with product service, maintenance and repair operations, which should become cheaper. This would mean taxation shifting from labour to resources, especially virgin resources, as this will help to increase employment in Europe and decrease resource use while incentivising businesses to move towards circular production and consumption patterns. Reduced taxes or tax allowances for repair, reuse and refurbishment businesses, and increased taxes on single-use and hard-to-recycle materials are a way to implement this.

In addition, the European Commission should explore the effects, impacts and options of extending minimum legal product warranties. This would oblige manufacturers to bear full responsibility for any product failure during a legally determined period after purchase.

Economic instruments such as incineration and landfill taxes are needed in order to move up the waste hierarchy. Burning and landfilling recyclable or compostable materials should be banned. Public funding, including public procurement and the €300bn Juncker investment plan should be used to fund prevention, reuse and recycling infrastructure as a priority. Deposit and refund schemes are useful for educating citizens on the value of recycling, as well as ensuring the collection of commonly littered items such as beverage bottles, and can be integrated within extended producer responsibility schemes.

Overarching benefits of working on the four pillars

Economic Savings

The circular economy will help reduce costs related to extracting and transporting virgin resources. This will also reduce business resource costs; for example, the EU manufacturing sector could save up to $630 billion per year by 2025 thanks to resource-efficiency measures.[5]

The full implementation of existing EU waste legislation would save €72 billion a year by 2020,[6] and the waste package presented in July 2014 has the potential to increase these numbers significantly.

Job creation
Full implementation of existing EU waste legislation would create over 400,000 jobs.[7] The waste package presented by the European Commission in July 2014 was estimated to create an additional 180,000 direct non-delocalizable jobs by 2030.[8] The thorough implementation of the other three pillars discussed here could increase these numbers significantly.

A shift from taxing labour to taxing resources will lead to reduced labour costs for the employer and/or higher take-home pay for the employee.

The significant investments necessary for creating incineration infrastructure could instead be redirected to developing re-use centres and networks, recycling infrastructure and renewable energy, all of which require more, better quality jobs than incineration and landfilling.

Energy Savings

The circular economy will reduce the energy required for extraction of virgin materials and production. Processes that use secondary raw materials consume considerably less energy than manufacturing from virgin materials. For example, remanufacturing typically uses 85% less energy than manufacturing does.[9] More durable and reusable products and materials will result in longer life-cycles and better retention of the embedded energy of products. Further, this will reduce the need to extract and produce new materials and products, resulting in radical energy savings in extraction and production. As a result, the EU will save energy, increase resource efficiency and will reduce its import dependence on energy from third countries.

Resource Savings

Reuse of products and materials saves a considerable proportion of the resources needed to manufacture goods from virgin materials. For example, UK analysis suggests that remanufacturing saves at least 70% of materials compared to manufacturing new goods.[10]

Climate Change Mitigation

The Circular Economy will represent a significant step towards a low-carbon, resource-efficient economy, advancing towards the EU’s objective for 2050.

The waste package presented by the European Commission in July 2014 was estimated to have the potential to reduce emissions by 443 million tonnes of greenhouse gas between 2014 and 2030,[11] without taking into account the further changes discussed here.

Health & Well-being

Reducing hazardous chemicals in production and in products will consequently reduce the impact on human health caused by close daily contact, or from indirect exposure from emissions into the environment.

Eliminating wherever possible toxic materials at the design stage will make it easier to safely and efficiently reuse, repair and recycle those products.

Europeans will benefit from avoiding emissions caused by burning and burying waste. A reduction in crop loss, respiratory and skin diseases, infertility, certain cancers, metabolic diseases and neurological/mental health issues will result. A recent study of the health costs of certain toxic chemicals estimated an annual cost to the European Union of approximately €157 billion per year[12] and noted that this was an underestimate as only some chemicals and some diseases were included.

Reduction in marine litter

80% of marine litter results from land-based activities[13] and is a consequence of unsustainable production patterns and poor waste management. Marine litter also represents a threat to human and ecosystem health, as plastic particles are known to bioaccumulate up the food chain, and carry dangerous pathogens across oceans to new areas.

Turning our economy into a circular economy is the ultimate solution to this problem. A significant reduction in marine litter will bring about a multitude of benefits. The annual costs from marine litter in Europe have been estimated at between €259 to 694.7 million for the fisheries, tourism and recreation sectors, as well as clean-up costs for coastal municipalities. Less waste in the sea means less marine animals and birds suffering entanglement or ingestion of litter, representing savings of around €12 billion each year.[14]

The costs to the marine environment from marine litter cannot be fully quantified, but considering waste has been found in the bodies of hundreds of species, and the remotest corners of the marine environment, urgent action must be taken to prevent the problem from getting worse.

Stability of supply

Improvement of resource efficiency, by measuring and reducing our material, land, water and carbon footprints will result in member states being less dependent on imports.

The EU could also benefit from improved trade balance due to reduced imports. The Waste and Resources Action Plan estimates them as €110 billion.[15]

Greater security in resource supply, and reduced land and water consumption outside our borders, can lead to improved geopolitical relations across the world.

Agriculture

Closing the nutrients loop would allow vital components such as nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium to return to the soil in the form of compost, effectively capturing carbon and improving crop resilience, along with increasing the water retention capacity of the soil.

Pesticide-free agriculture would allow for job creation, energy savings and potential health benefits.

Conclusion

Taking ambitious steps towards a circular economy would reduce Europe’s use of materials and energy, decrease the amount of hazardous chemicals entering our environment, and ensure a multitude of economic benefits while creating locally-based, stable employment for thousands of Europeans. A circular economy in which we not only use resources and energy more efficiently, but also consume less in total, will benefit the environment and reduce the European Union’s import dependency along with the likely threat of price shocks in the future.

Many of these ambitious steps are achievable in the short-term, and the sooner they are implemented, the greater the benefits will be. Any of these benefits would be enough on their own to commend a policy, but the positive, cumulative effects of each of these changes will be multiplied. Improving our material management will lead to greater energy efficiency, as well as economic, environmental and social benefits for European communities. The EU must not hesitate to spearhead the transition to a circular economy, for the benefit of both people and planet.

Notes

[1]According to the SERI/WU Global Material Flows Database, global extraction has increased by 118% over the past 31 years http://www.materialflows.net/trends/analyses-1980-2011/global-resource-extraction-by-material-category-1980-2011/.

[2] European Environmental Agency, Environmental Indicator Report, 2014, 30.

[3] Eurostat 2014, env_wasmun series reported that in 2013, 41.8% of EU-28 waste was recycled.

[4] Bio Intelligence Service for European Commission DG Environment, Implementing EU Waste Legislation for Green Growth, 2011.

[5] McKinsey & Company, Remaking the industrial economy, 2014.

[6] Bio Intelligence Service for European Commission DG Environment, Implementing EU Waste Legislation for Green Growth, 2011.

[7] Commission Staff Working Document (SWD/2014/0207 final), Impact assessment accompanying the document Proposal for reviewing the European waste management targets.

[8] Commission Staff Working Document (SWD/2014/0207 final), Impact assessment accompanying the document Proposal for reviewing the European waste management targets.

[9] KTN, Supporting Excellence in UK Remanufacturing, 2014.

[10] Next Manufacturing Revolution, The Next Manufacturing Revolution: Non-Labour Resource Productivity and its Potential for UK Manufacturing, 2013.

[11] Commission Staff Working Document (SWD/2014/0207 final), Impact assessment accompanying the document Proposal for reviewing the European waste management targets.

[12] Trasande et al, Estimating Burden and Disease Costs of Exposure to Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals in the European Union, Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, 2015 Apr;100(4):1245-55.

[13] GESAMP, The State of the marine environment ,1991.

[14] Arcadis for European Commission DG Environment, Marine Litter study to support the establishment of an initial quantitative headline reduction target, 2014.

[15] WRAP, http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/wrap-outlines-%C2%A3330bn-economic-growth-potential-eu-smarter-resource-use 2013.