prop · GQ03117d3 · 2003-05-16 00:00:00 — According to the Governments proposals for interim targets relating to food waste, the quantity that undergoes biological treatment is expected to rise from the current figure of approximately 140,000 to 350,000 in the year 2010. This is a national interim target. In municipalities where commitment is strong and the scope for achieving natural nutrient cycles is good, superior results are expected. In municipalities where conditions are less favourable, a lower level of recovery and recycling is acceptable. Biological waste from food companies should also be included in these processes. However, this does not apply to waste that contains contaminants or pollutants and thus cannot meet appropriate standards for use in cultivation. does it apply to food waste that is mixed with other waste. To bring about biological waste that is consistently of a high enough quality to be usable for food-crop cultivation after treatment, low concentrations of environmental toxins and contaminants are essential. This calls for highly developed collaboration throughout the chain from the farm to the kitchen. There also needs to be cooperation between all the parties who sort waste, municipalities with responsibility for waste collection and the end users of compost or decayed organic waste. Facilitating biological methods, which are often relatively costly and laborious, also requires policy instruments of various types to ensure actual use of such methods when they are environmentally justified. The Swedish EPA estimates that attaining the foodwaste objective will represent additional annual costs of some million. This sum consists largely of the extra expense of containers, bags and collection, which will be covered by municipal waste-disposal charges. One support measure advocated by the Government is extended tax exemption on propellants composed of biogas derived from biological treatment processes. This tax exemption will apply up to and including 2006. At present, renewal of this exemption must be approved by Commission. Another aspect of recovering phosphorus and other plant nutrients is the question of increased use of sewage sludge in agriculture. The EPA has proposed objectives for restoring phosphorus to farmland from sewage sludge, and the Swedish Government is working on this issue. The Governments assessment: waste incineration with energy recovery is a method of managing the kind of waste that is not suitable for material recovery or biological treatment. intended for incineration should be well separated, classified and checked. Hazardous waste should not be transported for incineration mixed with other waste. Moreover, waste that is suitable for material recovery or biological treatment, or not combustible, should be separated. The Government intends to instruct the Swedish EPA, in consultation with the , to investigate the scope for regulating in more detail the requirements in the concerning, and inspections of, waste consigned to incineration. Efforts to reduce the formation of dioxins and, as far as possible, eliminate dioxin emissions should continue. Fly ash, which consists largely of dioxins, should be managed and disposed of in such a way as to minimise the risk of emissions. incineration is set to increase over the next few years as a result of the bans on landfilling of separated combustible waste. The advantages are that more energy can be extracted from the waste and that the environmental impact from methane-gas emissions and leachate from landfills will diminish. For waste incineration to contribute to sustainable environmental life-cycle management, however, the quality of the waste incinerated is essential. A report from the Swedish EPA shows that few analyses are being carried out to check whether this waste contains hazardous and non-combustible components, or whether it is such that material recovery would be a better solution. The Government considers that better routines are required to inspect waste consigned to incineration. The EPA is therefore being instructed, in consultation with the , to investigate how new provisions can be worded. Discharges of toxic substances from waste incineration, including heavy metals, have been decreasing sharply for several decades. The new waste-incineration requirements may, according to the EPA, result in a further reduction in the quantities of dioxins released into the atmosphere. Conversion of Swedish waste incinerators will result in a decrease in dioxin formation and, by the same token, a reduced quantity of dioxin in fly ash. The EPA is being instructed to survey sources of emissions of unintentionally formed dioxins, and it will provide guidance on precautionary measures to be taken in the disposal of this ash. Tax on incinerated waste The Governments assessment: a commissioner should be appointed with the task of submitting proposals as to the possible legal technicalities of a tax on waste that is incinerated and assessing whether it is advisable to introduce a tax of this kind or whether, instead, other financial instruments are to be recommended. The commissioner should also assess what tax rate is appropriate with reference to the desired control effects. It is often difficult for methods of dealing with waste, such as reuse, material recovery and biological treatment, to compete financially with waste incineration. At the same time, extending waste incineration, biological treatment and material recovery alike is a prerequisite for attaining the Governments objective of discouraging landfilling of waste. One way of attempting to balance these priorities is to impose a tax on waste incineration. A commission on waste tax has found both good reasons for and risks entailed by such a tax. At present, there is insufficient documentation for a decision to introduce a tax on waste that is incinerated. Further analyses are needed for an assessment of whether such a tax is the best method of steering waste management in a desirable direction. The Government therefore wants to appoint a commissioner to investigate whether a tax on incineration of waste should be introduced and, if so, when this would be appropriate and what the tax rate should be. deposition in landfills disrupts natural cycles and creates environmental problems in the form of leachate containing toxic substances, and emissions of methane which affects the climate from degradation processes. To boost environmental life-cycle management, a ban on landfilling of separated combustible waste has been in force since 2002. There is also a requirement that combustible waste be stored and removed separately from other waste. A ban on landfilling of organic waste will come into force on 1 January 2005. Bans on landfilling of separated combustible waste and organic waste The Governments assessment: the 2002 ban on depositing separated combustible waste in landfills should be retained. The option of granting exemption from the ban is only a temporary solution. Further measures may need to be taken to eliminate landfilling with exemption in its present-day form. When the ban on depositing separated combustible waste in landfills came into force, there was a marked shortage of capacity to dispose of the waste other than in landfills. Consequently, the Government introduced an option for county administrative boards to grant exemption from the ban. This exemption applies for a year at a time, and the county administrative boards are estimated to have granted, or be planning to grant, exemptions for roughly 1,600,000 of combustible waste. The EPA expects this quantity to decrease continuously over the next few years, especially in the light of the current extensions in capacity for both waste incineration and biological treatment. A forecast based on the county administrative boards reports shows that the ban on landfilling of combustible waste will largely be implemented in the course of the period 200406. The Government considers that the exemption option, in its present form, should be retained only in the short term and abolished as soon as this is deemed feasible. In the longer term, exemption will be granted only in exceptional, individual cases. No rise in tax on exempt landfilling of waste The Governments assessment: no special tax should, at present, be imposed on landfills of the kind of waste covered by an exemption from either of the bans on landfilling, relating to separated combustible and organic waste. Under the (1999:673), which came into force in 2000, a tax of was imposed per tonne of waste deposited or stored for a period exceeding three years. The purpose of this tax is to boost financial incentives to treat waste in a way that is superior in terms of the environment and natural resources. To date, the tax rate has been raised on two occasions and is now per tonne. In the EPAs view, combustible waste deposited under exemptions should be liable to a tax of an additional per tonne. This would support the bans on landfilling of combustible and organic waste, and effect a switch to other methods of waste management. However, the Government considers that there are reasons to wait and see what the effects of the recently adopted rise in the waste tax will be. In the years immediately ahead, there will be a need to build up capacity for waste disposal. Landfilling of waste in isolated settlements The Governments assessment: the option of granting exemption for individual landfills is sufficient. The Government finds no reason to use the option of granting exemption for landfilling of waste in isolated settlements under the Landfill Directive. The EU Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) was adopted in 1999. It forms the basis of Swedish regulations relating to landfilling of waste. The provisions of the Directive include the environmental requirements to which landfill sites should be subject. The member states can choose to exempt landfill sites in isolated settlements from certain parts of the directive. However, the Government chose instead to introduce an option of issuing exemptions for individual landfills. A general exemption, based on the definition of isolated settlement in the Directive, would affect only two Swedish landfill sites and reduce scope for imposing environmental requirements. On the one hand, individual exemptions are not dependent on geographical location; on the other, an assessment is based on the sites impact on health and the environment. Although municipalities in sparsely inhabited areas may find it difficult to dispose of waste in their own landfill sites and be obliged to transport it to larger municipalities, this is often environmentally justified. Surveys show that collected waste can be shipped long distances without substantial impact on energy consumption or the environment. However, the Government considers it important to reduce, as far as possible, the shipments that nonetheless occur and their environmental impact. management part of societys infrastructure A smoothly functioning system for disposing of waste is an essential element in the infrastructure of society. It is comparable to the electricity and water supply or the transport network. The infrastructure of waste management comprises collection, transport and various means of waste disposal. Household, public-sector activities and companies all depend on municipal or private actors offering a workable system of waste management. Several major changes have affected waste management in the past decade. During the 1990s, producers assumed responsibility for packaging, waste paper, tyres, vehicles and electronic products. The result has been a sharp increase in recycling of waste, but the changes have also led to dissatisfaction among municipalities and households because of the lack of clarity regarding responsibility, and to littered recycling depots. At the same time, the previously municipal waste management has been opened to market actors, and this has resulted in new roles with respect to waste collection and disposal. These changes have been implemented at the same time as the technical requirements to which landfills are subject have been made more stringent and bans on the landfilling of certain types of waste have been introduced. The Government sees a need for several aspects of waste management to be reviewed. Producer responsibility for packaging and collection of hazardous waste needs developing further. In addition, the division of responsibility among different parties should be clarified. Knowledge about waste can also be accumulated in a better way. The Government sees these changes as important means of promoting a further shift to sustainable environmental life-cycle management. The Governments assessment: waste management should be seen as part of societys infrastructure. The Government therefore considers that the Swedish EPAs functions include monitoring waste-management capacity and methods, and working for waste management to take place in an efficient and, for consumers, simple . However, this does not mean that the municipalities, producers and other parties responsibility diminishes. In recent years, major changes have taken place with respect to waste management. The need for further development makes it necessary for the state to increase its commitment in this sector. This should be effected through increased responsibility on the EPAs part. The EPAs remit emphasises the agencys responsibility for providing an impetus in the shift to sustainable waste disposal. To date, this work has largely been restricted to the ecological dimension of waste management. This task should be expanded to include monitoring of waste systems capacity and efficiency. Nevertheless, it is important to point out that the EPAs responsibility should be confined to monitoring and observing the development of waste management. Responsibility for ensuring that the systems for collection and disposal of waste function properly should be borne by municipalities, producers, operators and other parties. Formation of a council for waste issues The Governments assessment: a council to deal with waste issues should be set up in the Swedish EPA, to advise and assist the EPA in the implementation of waste policy and broaden consultations with various parties. There are many stakeholders in waste management. A forum for both public and private parties to discuss waste-related issues is needed. The Government therefore wishes to set up a council for waste issues to enable public agencies, producers and municipalities to discuss various issues, such as the bans on landfilling of combustible and organic waste, present-day collection systems and producer responsibility for new product categories. The purpose of setting up this council is not to create a new public agency as such, but to establish an organisation to coordinate work relating to waste. The council should work for a simple, efficient system of waste management. It should perform an advisory role and assist the EPA in the implementation of waste policy. Representatives of central parties in the waste sector should, in particular, be included but the business sector, consumers and voluntary organisations should also be represented. Boost to municipal, regional and national waste planning The Governments assessment: the instrument of waste planning should be reinforced at municipal, regional and national level. The planning should be aimed at laying down clear strategies for attaining objectives in the waste sector. The planning should also be used to enhance knowledge of waste quantities and flows, and of disposal capacity. The EPA is to be charged with drawing up a national waste plan. The responsibility of the county administrative boards will be strengthened, and municipal waste planning will be adapted to prevailing conditions. To date, waste management has taken place almost exclusively at municipal level. Most municipalities previously had their own landfills for disposing of their inhabitants waste. Nowadays, the municipalities are no longer solely responsible for ensuring that there is sufficient capacity and infrastructure to deal with waste. The new requirements concerning waste management and disposal call for effective coordination in large areas. The Government therefore considers that regional and national waste planning needs developing as well. The principal function of waste planning is to serve as a policy instrument that translates the national environmental quality objectives and other objectives relating to waste into practical action. The waste plans should serve as decision-making agencies documentation for new measures in the waste sector, and also to guide businesses considering decisions on investments for waste disposal. plans should contain facts about the volume of waste, capacity for its disposal and overall strategies for the work. The activities involved in waste planning at national, regional and municipal level differ in nature and, in part, in purpose. However, they have much in common and it is therefore important for the various levels to be capable of functioning in chain fashion. The municipalities practical responsibility for waste management has been progressively reduced, but the Government considers that they still have a key function to perform in order for waste systems to work properly. To its residents, a municipality is often the natural point of contact when they have views on waste management, regardless of who is formally responsible for the waste. It is important for the municipalities to maintain their local overview by means of waste planning. To permit control of the quantities and flows of waste in the municipality, overall municipal planning responsibility should continue to apply to all waste that arises in the municipality, and not only to waste for which the municipality is responsible in terms of collection and disposal. New requirements concerning treatment of waste require collaboration across municipal borders. Long-term strategies, technically complicated and expensive treatment methods and fulfilment of regional objectives are factors that indicate the need for regional planning. Today, many municipalities are already collaborating regionally to devise municipal waste plans. The county administrative boards role in planning work should be strengthened so as to enable them, for example, to initiate consultations on future waste-treatment capacity. The Government is very much in favour of other voluntary regional forms of collaboration that may also involve the business sector. There is a need for clear strategies of waste management at national level as well. The Government considers that a national waste plan should be developed. This should contain overall strategies, long-term policy instruments and details of a division of responsibility for the attainment of the various objectives. The plan should also include a report on the quantities of various categories of waste, and a follow-up of the workings of waste collection: this concerns, above all, the level of services to households. How waste should be treated and the environmental impact of waste management should also be covered. The EPA will be charged with drawing up a national waste plan by . Clarification of the waste owners responsibility The Governments proposal: the responsibility incumbent on every waste owner should be spelt out in the Swedish Environmental Code. It involves an obligation to ensure that waste is managed in a that is acceptable from the health and environmental points of view. The regulation should serve to remind the parties concerned that, under other regulations, producers and municipalities are already or may at some future date become obliged to manage waste, or that in some cases waste should be managed by the municipalities. The environmental legislation contained in the Environmental Code includes various rules relating to the waste sector. One is that all those who produce waste private individuals and businesses alike must have sufficient knowledge to avoid adverse environmental impact. The Code also contains requirements that every party must conserve energy and resources, for example through reuse and recycling. The Swedish Environmental Code thus applies to every member of the community. Responsibility for waste that arises in the course of commercial activities is regulated only in the general rules of consideration. This has proved to result in a lack of corporate awareness of the responsibility they actually bear for disposing of their own waste in an acceptable . Municipal responsibility for household waste, for example, does not entail ensuring that there is capacity for disposal of other waste. The Government considers that clear responsibility combined with requirements concerning knowledge of resource efficiency may result in an increase in material recovery, and therefore proposes that this responsibility be clarified in the statutory provisions. Under the proposed provision, an owner of waste must ensure that it is managed in a that is acceptable with respect to its health and environmental impact. The proposed provision is not, however, restricted to waste that has arisen in the course of commercial activities. Instead, it focuses on all those who produce waste. This clarification of the legislation should be supplemented by the provision of guidance and information to businesses concerning the implications of the Environmental Code and ways in which companies can address waste issues. Producer responsibility for packaging and waste paper The Governments assessment: statutory regulation of producer responsibility for packaging and waste paper should be retained. Responsibility and obligations for collection of packaging and waste paper should be clarified for all the parties involved. Producer responsibility for packaging and waste paper was introduced in October 1994, and means that producers are responsible for collecting and disposing of discarded products. The purpose of producer responsibility is to induce producers to modify their products, making them more ecoefficient, so as to minimise environmental load and resource consumption as a whole. The intention is also for products to be designed in such a way as to permit their reuse or recycling. A commission of inquiry has reviewed producer responsibility, especially in the packaging sector. In general, this showed that the objectives of producer responsibility for packaging and waste paper have largely been attained. This applies both to recycling levels and to environmental purposes, such as resource conservation and reduced volumes of waste landfilled. The commission also found that the level of current recovery is macroeconomically justifiable. The commission found some shortcomings in the system. First, consumers lack sufficient scope for participating in the systems. Secondly, there are unclear points concerning the responsibility and obligations of various players in the sector. There is, for example, uncertainty in the interplay between producers and municipalities regarding the issue of who is to run, own and develop the systems. Producer responsibility meant that a number of materials companies were formed. These engage private or municipal entrepreneurs to collect and dispose of the waste. The materials companies operations have a bearing on several spheres of municipal decision-making, such as municipal waste planning. In the Governments view, producer responsibility has largely fulfilled its purposes and entailed a valuable link between product and waste management. It should therefore be retained, but needs developing further. One measure sought by the Government is clarification of the division of responsibility in the areas where unclear points persist.