Agenda

1. Life Cycle Assessment based Tools for the Development of Integrated Waste Management Strategies for Cities and Regions with Rapid Growing EconomiesJan den BoerEmilia Szpadt, Johannes JagerTechnische Universität Darmstadt Institute WAR (Institute for Water Supply and Groundwater Protection, Wastewater Technology, Waste Management, Industrial Material Flows and Environmental Planning)

2. Agenda • Introduction of LCA-IWM • The need for WM planning tools • Sustainability assessment tool • Applications and difficulties

3. LCA-IWM within EU research Programme EU 5th Framework Programme1998-2002 Research Programme: Environment and Sustainable Development (EESD) Key-action “The City of Tomorrow and Cultural Heritage” 4.1 Sustainable city planning and rational resource management LCA-IWM 4.1.2 Improving the quality of urban life

4. Consortium 12 Partners representing 9 European States EU Member States: Germanythe NetherlandsAustriaLuxemburgSpain Greece EU Accession States: Poland, Lithuania Slovakia

5. Consortium • Project coordinator: TU Darmstadt, Institute WAR • Project partners: 8 Universities and 4 Consultancies • Involved Municipalities: • Barcelona, Reus (Spain) • Wroclaw (Poland) • Nitra (Slovakia) • Xanthi (Greece) • Kaunas (Lithuania) • Time frame: • 2002 - 2005

6. Targeted user:waste management decision maker (planner) inEU Accession Countries and South European Regions Objectives of LCA-IWM: • Develop decision support for: • Planning of new • Optimisation of existing waste manag. systems • Two tools are proposed: • Waste Prognostic model • Criteria and quantitative indicators for assessment of the • environmental, • economic • social performance • of integrated waste management strategies

7. Why waste prognostic model is needed Data sources: Williams, P.T., Szpadt, R., 1999 Factors to be analysed in the model: product/packaging design, socio-economic indicators, consumption patterns etc.

8. Why waste management planning tools are neededCase study: Poland selective collection – app. 2% of MSW; the rest landfilled Over 1000 landfills Acute capacity problems (over 80% of yearly WM spendings)

9. Why waste management planning tools are neededCase study: Poland bottom lining5% accord. EU standards 25% - one layer lining 70% no isolation leachatecollection 20% of all landfills gas installation 10% of landfills 10 plants – el. motor

10. Why waste management planning tools are neededCase study: Poland • Agreed with the EU transitional periods: • Packaging directive – 5 years • Landfill directive – 3 years • Polish Waste Law: • … the next urgent step is to develop waste management plans … • at regional level: by June 2003 • at the county level by December 2003 • at the commune level by June 2004

11. Waste management assessment model Scenario 1 Energy Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Energy Incineration Incineration Incineration Compost Mech.-Biol. Pretreatment Composting Landfill Landfill Landfill Landfill Scenario 4 Energy Mech.-Biol. Pre-treatment Cementkiln Scenario 5 Energy Materials Compost Composting Mech.-Biol. Pretreatment Recycling Landfill

12. Assessment tool – first phase • Development of the model • Modular system • General structure agreed upon • Input and output parameters of all modules are identified • Determination of criteria and indicators • Environmental, Economic & Social • LCA-approach • Few, simple and transparant

13. Assessment tool structure Prognostic model INVENTORY Waste generation economic indicators environm. indicators social indicators Temporary storage module 1 Temporary storage module n ASSESSMENT Collection module 1 Collection module n economic criteria environm. criteria social criteria Transport module 1 Transport module n AGGREGATION Treatment module 1 Treatment module n Impact Products: energy and secondarymaterials reference scenario 1 scenario n reference scenario 1 scenario n reference scenario 1 scenario n Credit module 1 Credit module n Material / energy flow (waste, products Information flow (emissions, costs) Impact Impact LEGEND

14. LCA approach Assessment tool – first phase Environmental criteria and indicators Group 1) Based on the EU recycling and recovery targets and reduction of waste landfilling Group 2) Based on general objectives of WM with regard to protection of human health and the environment protection Recovery/recycling quotas

15. ? Few Simple Understandable Relevant Assessment tool – first phase Group 2 - LCA Impact Categories • Baseline impact categories (CML method): • Depletion of abiotic resource • Impacts of land use (land competition) • Climate change • Stratospheric ozone depletion • Human toxicity • Ecotoxicity: • Freshwater aquatic ecotoxicity • Marine aquatic ecotoxicity • Terrestrial ecotoxicity • Photo-oxidant formation • Acidification • Eutrophisation

16. Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods:CML Eco-Indicator UBA Etc. Use of nature Nutrification Resource consumption Smog formation Inventory Impact assessment Results Aggregation Impact categories Area CO2 Global Warming Potential SO2 Environmental Impact NOx Acidification PCDD/F Human toxicity Pb Hg PCB Nat. gas Crude oil Reference Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Water cons Screening/Streamlining LCA BOD COD etc. Environmental Impact Dominance analysis Waste Management relevance

17. Incineration Compost Mech.-Biol. Pretreatment Composting Landfill Landfill Relevance verification through full LCA modelling Assessment tool – first phase Darmstadt, basic Scenario: only landfill Credits: Darmastadt, current Scenario: Energy Energy Secondary materials: Plastics (DSD) GlassPaper Metals Recycling Credits: Energy, FertilisersPaper, Metals, Plastics, Glass Landfill

18. Time horizon Assessment tool – first phase Relevance determination (CML)

19. Social acceptance Social sustainability Social function Social equity Costs allocation Benefits distribution Quality of employment Perceived risk Wasteminimisation Odour, Noise Visual impact Private and urban space consumption Waste valorisation Local employment creation minimisation Assessment tool – first phase • Social criteria and indicators How to quantify? How to combine?

20. Assessment tool - second phase • Establishing relation of inventory data to indicators to criteria • Quantification of standard module inventory data • Combination of modules • Aggregation

21. Application of results • Verification phase in the involved municipalities • Composition of a Handbook • Tools and Handbook freely available for European municipalities

22. Difficulties • Europe wide consortium • Standard LCA-software too general • Country specific cost calculation • Aggregation and quantification of social indictors and criteria • Should social impacts of crediting modules be accounted for? • Choice of technology • Aggregation/integration of economic, environmental and social results

23. Thank you for your attention!