Non-CO2 Greenhouse Gases

Emissions Abatement of Fluorinated Greenhouse Gases
Fluorattujen kasvihuonekaasujen päästöjen vähentäminen

Sampo Soimakallio
VTT Processes, Espoo, Finland
VTT Prosessit, Espoo
Teemu Oinonen
Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland
Suomen ympäristökeskus, Helsinki
Abstract
This paper concerns technical options and costs ofreduction emissions of HFCs, PFCs and sulphur
hexafluoride (SF6) in Finland. Currently, Finnish
emissions of these gases are marginal but are projected to grow five-fold during the next two decades. Most of the forecasted increase is due tosubstitution of ozone depleting refrigerants by
HFCs in refrigeration and air conditioning systems. Cooling systems are also predicted to become more common. This paper is especially focused on dealing with technical measures to reduce
refrigerant emissions by using alternative gases andtechnologies or leakage reduction (containment).
Larger abatement in emissions could be achieved
using alternative refrigerants and technologies, but
their applicability and cost effectiveness is lower
compared to containment measures. Economic impacts on different types of companies due to implementation of reduction options may differ significantly depending mainly on the line of business.

sa, mutta päästöjen ennakoidaan viisinkertaistuvan seuraavan kahdenkymmenen vuoden aikana.
Tämä johtuu pääasiassa yläilmakehän otsonia tuhoavien kylmäaineiden korvaamisesta HFC-yhdisteillä sekä kylmä- ja ilmastointilaitesovellusten
arvioidusta yleistymisestä. Tällöin näiden päästöjen merkitys kokonaisuuden kannalta olisi paljon
nykyistä suurempi. Tässä artikkelissa keskitytään
tarkastelemaan HFC- ja PFC-yhdisteiden sekä rikkiheksafluoridin perusuran mukaisten päästöjen
kehitystä Suomessa sekä erityisesti päästöjen teknisiä vähentämismahdollisuuksia kylmä- ja ilmastointilaitteista. Tarkastellut päästövähennystoimet
on jaettu kahteen ryhmään: vaihtoehtoisten kylmäaineiden tai teknisten ratkaisujen käyttöönottoon
sekä vuotojen vähentämiseen tähtääviin toimiin,joita on arvioitu myös rikkiheksafluoridieristeisten sähkönjakelulaitteiden osalta. Vaihtoehtoisten
kylmäaineiden käyttöön saattaa liittyä turvallisuusongelmia kylmäaineen syttyvyyden tai myrkyllisyyden vuoksi. Näiden ongelmien ehkäiseminen
puolestaan aiheuttaa kustannuksia ja saattaa lisätä
järjestelmien energiankulutusta. Vuotojen vähentäminen osoittautui pääsääntöisesti selvästi kustannustehokkaammaksi menetelmäksi rajoittaa päästöjä kuin vaihtoehtoisten teknisten ratkaisujen käyttöönotto, mutta saavutettu päästövähennys jäi jonkinverran pienemmäksi. Päästövähennystoimien
käyttöönotosta aiheutuvat taloudelliset vaikutukset
erityyppisiin yrityksiin saattavat olla hyvin erilaisia.

Lyhennelmä

1 Introduction
Fluoratuista kasvihuonekaasuista HFC- ja PFCyhdisteet sekä rikkiheksafluoridi kuuluvat Kioton
pöytäkirjassa säänneltäviin kasvihuonekaasuihin.
Näiden voimakkaiden kasvihuonekaasujen päästöt ovat toistaiseksi olleet varsin vähäisiä Suomes-

Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons(PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) are relatively new synthetic compounds which are used indifferent types of industrial purposes. These com125

pounds act as effective greenhouse gases and they
have typically long lifetimes in the atmosphere, butthey are not harmful to stratospheric ozone.
Emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, HFCs, PFCs and sulphur hexafluoride are regulated by the Kyoto Protocol under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change(UNFCCC). Currently, the contribution of HFCs,
PFCs and SF6 to greenhouse gas emissions is marginal, representing some two percentages worldwide and only half a percent in Finland. However,
emissions of these fluorinated gases are expected
to grow rapidly, mainly due to increasing use of
HFCs to substitute ozone depleting substances,such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and halons.
Largest amounts of HFCs are used as refrigerants,
but also as foam blowing agents, aerosol propellants and extinguishants in fixed fire fighting systems. PFCs are to some extent also used as replacements to ozone depleting refrigerants. Worldwide,
however, most of the PFC consumption is due to
use as process gases in semiconductor manufacturing. In Finland this use is minor. The most common
applications of SF6 are to provide electrical insulation in high voltage electrical equipment and to act
as protective gas in magnesium die casting.
In 1990 the Finnish emissions of HFCs, PFCs andSF6 amounted to some 0.05 million metric tons ofcarbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2 eq.), representing some 0.1% of total emissions of all Kyoto
greenhouse gases (fig. 1). The low level of emissions in early 1990s was due to lack of some major
emission sources of HFCs and PFCs, such as primary aluminium industry, HCFC-22 manufacturing
and production of HFCs, PFCs and SF6, in Finland.

Currently, some 75% of total Finnish emissions of
HFCs, PFCs and SF6 are due to HFC emissions
from refrigeration and air conditioning. This contribution is expected to increase to some 90% by
the first Kyoto commitment period and onwards if
no additional emission abatement measures werecarried out (fig. 1). The most part of the projected
emission reduction potential is thus directly connected with refrigerant emissions.
This paper explains how projections were carriedout, and presents the results of an analysis in which
two major types of abatement options (using alternative gases and technologies, leakage reduction)
were compared in terms of their emission reduction potential and costs. The time period consideredextends to 2020. Given the large projected share ofrefrigerant emissions in the future, the paper will focus on measures to limit these emissions from refrigeration and air conditioning systems. Changes
in economic competitiveness of companies resulting from the introduction of these abatement options will also be considered at a general level.
For some of the emission sources present in Finland, quantitative emission reduction scenarios
could not be formulated. This was either due tolack of information regarding the basic parameters
required in modelling, or because viable reduction
measures were not identified. These emission
sources are accounted in scenarios with no additional emission reduction measures. Qualitative
treatment of emission abatement options of thesesources can be found in the final report of this project (Oinonen and Soimakallio 2001), and will not
be considered in this paper.

2 Modelling of emissions and costs
2.1 Baseline scenarios

The situation began to change rapidly around
1994–1995, in concomitance with the phasing-out
and replacement of ozone depleting substances inrefrigeration and air conditioning applications aswell as in some aerosol, foam blowing and firefighting applications. Since the phasing-out ofozone depleting substances is still an on-going process, the observed growth in emissions of HFCs is
expected to continue.
126

An overall baseline scenario was constructed from
20 emission sources covering all sources of HFC,
PFC and SF6 emissions, for which sufficientamount of data was available to produce quantitative emission estimates. Emission scenarios were
not calculated at all for certain minor sources (e.g.
use of SF6 in soundproofing double glazing), because sufficient amount of data was not available.

The refrigeration and air conditioning sector was
divided to suitable categories, and baseline scenarios were calculated for each one by one. These individual categories included domestic and othersmall stand-alone equipment, commercial refrigerating systems, industrial refrigeration (food processing and cold storage as well as other processcooling), ice rinks, professional kitchens, transport
refrigeration, stationary and mobile air conditioning as well as residential and other heat pumps.
Baseline scenarios were also calculated for somemanufacturing processes, products and equipment. These include one component and otherpolyurethane foam, technical aerosols and metereddose inhalers, fixed fire fighting systems, semiconductor manufacturing, magnesium die casting andelectrical equipment.
Emissions were modelled as directly proportional
to activity level and emission factor. Emissions
were calculated for manufacturing/installation,
use and disposal phases of life, if present in Finland. Data on activity levels (for instance, numbersof installed equipment, average charges) were obtained through a number of company surveys carried out by the Finnish Environment Institute in1999 and 2000. Emission factors were based on expert judgement, typically the mid-point value ofranges given in IPCC’s Good Practice Guidance(IPCC 2000) were used. Technological and regulatory changes as well as changes in activity data weremodelled into the baseline scenario, if considerednecessary. For instance, we assumed that legislation
would be extended from CFCs and HCFCs to include mandatory gas recovery of HFC and PFC refrigerants. The basic parameters and assumptions
behind all individual baseline scenarios were reviewed by Finnish experts of relevant fields.
2.2

Reduction scenarios and costs

Scenarios including additional emission abatement options compared to a baseline were calculated for all individual refrigeration and air conditioning sources described in the previous section(excluding commercial stand-alone equipment
and heat pumps) as well as for electrical equipment. For refrigeration and air conditioning

sources, two major types of emission reduction options were considered in the analysis, if applicable:
leakage reduction (containment), and total or partial substitution of fluorinated gases by using alternative substances and technologies. For electricalequipment, only enhanced recovery practices were
examined, because the substitution of SF6 is not inmost cases a viable option.
Measures based on alternative gases and technologies were applied to new systems only due to difficult application to existing refrigeration and air
conditioning systems. Instead, leakage reduction
options as well as extended recovery practices forelectrical equipment were applied to both existing
stock and new systems. Measures were timed to
begin in 2002, if applicable given their technological maturity.
Preliminary assessment of abatement options andcosts were based on a literature review. These assessments were then developed into reduction scenarios and subjected to a review by relevant Finnish experts. Emission factors, cost and other estimates were adjusted if experts provided differing,well reasoned and solidly argued information(Oinonen and Soimakallio 2001).
Possible increase in energy (electricity) consumption and emissions from electricity production due
to adoption of substitutive refrigerant or coolingtechnology were modelled into relevant reduction
scenarios. Emissions from Finnish electricity production were calculated using an average factor of
250 g CO2/kWhe (Lehtilä et al. 1997). Costs fromincreased energy consumption were calculated
based on 0.067 €/kWhe average electricity price forsmall-scale industry (MTI 2000). A discount rateof 4% was used.

3 Technical and economic evaluationof emission reduction options
3.1 Baseline emissions
The overall baseline emissions were projected toreach a level of 1.7 Mt CO2 eq. during the first
Kyoto commitment period and some 2.2 Mt CO2
127

2,5

Emission [Mt CO2 eq.]

2,0

1,5

Other sources
Electrical equipment
Other refrigeration
Stationary and mobile air conditioning
Industrial refrigeration
Commercial refrigeration

1,0

0,5

0,0

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

Figure 1. Emissions according to the baseline scenario (Oinonen and Soimakallio 2001).

eq. in 2020, respectively (fig. 1). Approximately
half of these emissions were projected to take place
due to leakage from commercial refrigeration,
whereas industrial refrigeration accounts for some
20%. The contribution of mobile and stationary air
conditioning was estimated to be some 10% each.
Share of electrical equipment in total emissions of
HFCs, PFCs and SF6 is estimated to be minor (fig.
1). Total emissions of the other sources, including
foam blowing agents, aerosol propellants, magnesium die-casting, semiconductor manufacturing
and fixed fire fighting systems, is expected to double by 2020 compared to the current level (fig. 1).
However, the overall contribution of these emissions is at the same time decreasing from 25% to10%, as mentioned in the first section.
The cost-effectiveness of an emission abatement
option depends directly on costs and achieved
emission reduction following the implementationof the measure. In order to apply relevant option,phases of life of sources that give rise to highest
share of emissions had to be recognised.
Typically, emissions taking place during manufacturing or installation of refrigeration and air condi128

tioning systems are at a level of less than one to five
percent of refrigerant charge. Instead, there aremany differences between different types of systems regarding leakages during operation. The
emissions vary depending mainly on the type ofsystem, conditions of use and quality of components as well as practices used to carry out maintenance. Domestic and other small stand-alone refrigerators equipped with hermetic compressors
are relatively leak tight, and thus emissions during
operation are minor. Instead, medium sized andlarge commercial and industrial refrigeration andair conditioning systems may leak 10 to 30% of
their refrigerant charge per annum. Mobile air conditioning and transport refrigeration systems are
particularly prompt to leakage due to vibration andvariable climatic conditions, for instance.
SF6 leakage from electrical equipment during normal operation is usually at a low level, because thegas is enclosed tightly in the equipment. Furthermore, gas recovery practices have improved resulting in a decrease in manufacture as well as maintenance emissions in relation to gas consumption.
However, we projected that there are still opportunities to improve gas recovery.

3.2 Alternative substances andtechnologies

tems. However, achievable reductions in total
emissions are significant.

Main reasons to use fluorinated refrigerants areconnected to their relatively advantageous thermodynamic properties to provide cooling energy efficiently, cost effectively and safely. Most of HFC
and PFC refrigerants as well as their ozone depleting precursors are non-toxic and incombustible.
Therefore, the evaporator of a refrigeration or air
conditioning system can be installed directly in theplace to be cooled without safety risks, to provide
cooling energy efficiently. Technology of this kindis called direct cooling and it is globally dominant
in refrigeration applications.

Abatement options based on alternative substances
and technologies were analysed for six individualrefrigeration or air conditioning sources (table 1).
Indirect refrigeration using hydrocarbons or ammonia was assumed to be suitable for process cooling, stationary air conditioning and half of the foodprocessing refrigeration. It has to be noted that virtually all currently installed process cooling systems as well as part of stationary air conditioning
systems are based on indirect cooling already, resulting in lower investments and other costs for
substituting the refrigerant. However, we estimated that only 30% of process cooling systems
could use ammonia or hydrocarbons due to safety
and other reasons. Indirect HFC-systems were assumed to substitute direct HFC-refrigeration incommercial and in half of the food processing system installations. We also calculated achievableemission reductions for substituting HFC-refrigerant by isobutane in domestic refrigeration. Carbon
dioxide was assumed to be mature and introduced
to mobile air conditioning systems in 2004, with noenergy penalty.

Most potential substitutes for fluorinated refrigerants are ammonia, hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide. The main difficulties with these refrigerants
are that ammonia is toxic, hydrocarbons are flammable and the thermodynamic properties of carbon
dioxide are complicated.
If ammonia or hydrocarbons are used in applications placed in public areas, appropriate precautions are required. Hydrocarbons can be usedsafely in applications based on direct coolingequipped with a hermetic compressor and relatively small charge of refrigerant. Examples are
domestic refrigerators and small residential heatpumps. Larger refrigeration systems using hydrocarbons or ammonia have to be equipped with secondary loop systems to provide indirect cooling, inwhich cooling energy is brought to target by meansof a heat transfer fluid. Even if secondary loop systems are used, there can be applications where theuse of alternative refrigerants is not a viable option
due to safety or other reasons. In that case, the useof indirect cooling and condensation with HFC as arefrigerant enable minimisation of required HFCcharge.
Using secondary loops instead of direct cooling
may be associated with some disadvantages. Totalenergy efficiency is lower resulting typically in
10–20% higher energy consumption when using
secondary loops compared to similar system using
direct cooling. Besides, investments will usually
increase by 10–30%, and maintenance costs aresome 20% higher compared to direct cooling sys-

Cost effectiveness of evaluated options based onalternative gases and technologies varied between
some 10 and 60 euros per abated ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (table 1). Very high abatement
costs were calculated for domestic refrigeration,
resulting from the virtually non-existing emission
reduction potential for this type of equipment.
3.3 Containment
Emissions of HFCs from refrigeration and air conditioning systems, as well as SF6 from electricalequipment, can be mitigated by paying attention tofactors that may cause the gas to escape from thesystem. Different leakage reduction measures
range from improved system design and selectionof components to use of leak detectors and improved service practices. Containment measures
should also be extended to the decommissioning
phase by recovering the gas, in order to maintainthe benefit achieved during other phases of equipment life.
129Based on literature and expert review, we estimated that, by implementing improved maintenance practices, 40% of refrigerant emissions
could be reduced during the use and disposal of
fixed refrigeration and air conditioning systems.
Sufficient improvement in service practices toreach this target is projected to increase maintenance costs by 50%. In addition, by investing a few
percent more for tightness of refrigerating systems, a total reduction of 60% can be achieved. Despite the fact that gas recovery at disposal was included in the baseline, we estimated that further
20% of disposal emissions could be reduced by the
implementation of improved practices.
Leakage reduction options of the same kind werealso evaluated for transport refrigeration and mobile air conditioning systems, with relevant estimates of costs as well as achievable reductions inemissions. Additional containment measures compared to the baseline were not considered necessary for domestic and other small stand-alone refrigerators, nor for heat pumps, due to the tightnessof these systems.

We assumed that by extending gas recovery and recycling SF6 emissions due to maintenance of electrical equipment could be reduced by 25%.
Cost effectiveness of individual containment options was typically some 15 euros per abated ton ofcarbon dioxide equivalent, but varied between a
few and some 40 €/t CO2 eq. (table 1). Apart fromprocess cooling and stationary air conditioning systems, individual leakage reduction options would
appear to be clearly more cost effective compared tomeasures based on alternatives.
3.4 Overall reduction scenarios andcosts
Individual emission reduction scenarios weregrouped to two sets of scenarios. Reduction scenario 1 contains measures with the highest longterm net reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.
Alternative gases and technologies where chosen
if applicable, except in case of process cooling (seechapter 1.2). Reduction scenario 2 was based oncontainment measures only. Baseline emissions
were halved in both reduction scenarios during the

2,5

Emission [Mt Co2 eq.]

2,0Baseline scenario
Reduction scenario 1
Reduction scenario 2
52 %

1,5
KYOTO 148 – 49 %
1,0

66 %

0,5

0,0
1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

Figure 2. Overall baseline scenario compared with reduction scenarios 1 and 2.

130

2025

Table 1. Cost effectiveness, total cost and emission reductions calculated for various sources and abatement options.
Emission sources and abatement options

Cost
effectiveness[€/t CO2 eq.]

Total cumulative
cost
[M€]

Emission
reduction[kt CO2 eq./a]

KYOTO 1

2020

2012

2020

KYOTO 1

2020

3 678

948

50

76

~0

< 10

Commercial refrigeration (indirect HFC-system)

43

29

181

350

470

770

Commercial refrigeration(leakage reduction)

12

8

51

89

480

650

Food processing and cold storage(NH3/HCs/HFCs)

59

38

27

55

50

90

Food processing and cold storage(leakage reduction)

14

9

7

12

50

70

Process cooling (NH3/HCs)

16

11

3

5

20

30

Process cooling (leakage reduction)

18

11

9

15

50

60

Ice rinks (leakage reduction)

14

8

1

1

< 10

10

Professional kitchens (leakage reduction)

15

9

2

3

10

10

Transport refrigeration (leakage reduction)

9

6

1

2

10

10

Stationary air conditioning (indirect
NH3-/HC-system)

48

34

48

104

90

260

Stationary air conditioning (leakage reduction)

41

28

20

54

60

160

Mobile air conditioning (CO2-system)

21

16

29

48

120

210

Mobile air conditioning (enhanced
HFC-134a-system)

6

5

7

11

110

140

Electrical equipment (enhanced recovery)

2

1

1

1

20

40

*)

29

*)

348

654

830

1 470

10

*)

145

254

780

1 140

Domestic refrigeration (isobutane)

TOTAL
Reduction scenario 1
Reduction scenario 2
*)

43

1*)

13

Average cost effectiveness (weighted by emission reduction potential).

first Kyoto commitment period (fig. 2). Full abatement potential of scenario 2 could almost be
achieved at that time, so it allows some 50% reduction also in 2020. Because options based on alternative gases and technologies were applied to new
systems only, emission reductions begin to takeplace somewhat more slowly, but shall finally godown to 35% of the baseline in 2020 (fig. 2).
Options included in reduction scenario 1 were significantly more costly compared to scenario 2. Av-

erage costs weighted by reduction potential were
43 and 13 €/t CO2 eq. for reduction scenario 1 andreduction scenario 2, respectively (see table 1).
According to Lehtilä and Tuhkanen (1999), implementation of several technical measures to reduce
CO2, CH4 and N2O emissions in Finland down to1990 level would entail average costs of 15 €/t CO2
eq. Leakage reduction compares to these measures
as equally cost effective, whereas alternative gases
and technologies are more costly.
131

3.5 Perspective of companies
Adoption of an emission reduction option may
have an economic influence on many different
types of companies. The impact may be negative or
positive, and is principally directed to the enterprise that adopts the option. However, there are
typically secondary companies that are associatedwith the situation as well.
Different types of enterprises relevant to this examination are manufacturers, importers, contractors, service and waste management companies aswell as enterprises that use products or equipmentthat give rise to emissions. Implementation of acertain emission reduction option may have economic influence on all of these types of enterprises,
although it would be focused on one type only. In
addition, it is complicated to define the direction of
impact for each, as well as the situation between
competitors after adoption.
In this study, we didn’t recognise new emission
abatement technologies that would have been developed in Finland. In fact, many of the measures
were originally developed by foreign or multinational companies, because of industry producing
emissions of fluorinated gases is relatively small in
Finland. In addition, many of the examined newtechnologies for air conditioning especially are
more potential to be introduced in Finland than inmany other countries, due to cool climatic conditions of Finland. This is because of the short season
during which cooling is required, following thatenergy efficiency is less critical a factor compared
to warmer climates.

In 1999, contribution of HFCs, PFCs and SF6 wasapproximately half a percent of total Finnish emissions included in the Kyoto Protocol. This share is
projected to increase to some 2% during the first
Kyoto commitment period.
Currently, as well as in the long run, HFC-emissions due to refrigeration and air conditioning
proved to be the key emission source of fluorinatedgases in Finland. Thus, most part of the emission
reduction potential is connected with leakage of refrigerants coming mainly from commercial and industrial refrigeration as well as stationary and mobile air conditioning systems. These emissions canbe mitigated relatively cost effectively to some extent by implementing additional containment measures. Larger reductions in emissions could beachieved using alternative refrigerants and technologies, but their applicability and cost effectiveness is lower.
If recovery of HFC-refrigerants at disposal of refrigeration and air conditioning systems were not
to be implemented at all, emissions according to
the baseline would increase some 15% in 2010 andsome 30% in 2020. However, cost effectiveness ofevaluated emission reduction options would bebetter in that case. The situation represents a complexity of assumptions and inclusion of regulatory
and technological changes in scenarios.
Basic parameters may be associated with high uncertainty. For instance, emission factors are often
based on expert judgement, as opposed to direct
measurement data. Systematic sensitivity analysis
indicate that the primary sources of uncertainty areemission factors, as well as cost and activity data
(Oinonen and Soimakallio 2002).

4 Conclusions
The principal objective of the project was to gather
information on emission reductions concerningemissions of HFCs, PFCs and SF6. Abatement options were considered generally, but quantitative
analyses were focused on Finland. An importantpart of the study was to examine the influence of
reduction measures on other greenhouse gases, inorder to recognise cost effective options to reduceoverall greenhouse gas emissions.
132

Further examination should include verification ofemission factors and activity data, as well as cost
data and applicability of the reduction options. In
addition, research concerning direct refrigerant
emissions and indirect emissions due to energy
consumption should be integrated to establish thebest options to reduce total emissions. Attention
should also be paid to all other emission sources of
HFCs, PFCs and SF6, which are potentially connected to similar indirect emissions.

Publications and reports made under
the project
Oinonen, T., Soimakallio, S. 2001. HFC- ja PFC-yhdisteiden sekä SF6:n päästöjen tekniset vähentämiskeinot ja niiden kustannukset Suomessa. [Technicaland Economic evaluation of Emission Abatement
Options of HFCs, PFCs and SF6. The Case of Finland. (in Finnish, with English abstract)]. TechnicalResearch Centre of Finland, VTT Research Notes
2099. Espoo 2001. 154 p. + App. 17 p.
Oinonen, T., Soimakallio, S. 2002. Abatement Options
and Costs of Reducing HFC, PFC and SF6 Emissions in Finland. In: van Ham J., Baede A.,
Guicherit R., Williams-Jacobse J. (eds). Non-CO2
Greenhouse Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control Options and Policy Aspects. Pp. 421–426.
Millpress, Rotterdam Netherlands 2002. 714 p.

References
IPCC 2000. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. IPCC National Greenhouse Gas Inventories
Programme. Technical Support Unit. September
2000. (Available also: http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.
or.jp/public/gp/gpgaum.htm).

Lehtilä, A., Savolainen, I., Tuhkanen, S. 1997. Indicators of CO2 Emissions and Energy Efficiency: Comparison of Finland with Other Countries. TechnicalResearch Centre of Finland, VTT Publications 328.
Espoo 1997.
Lehtilä, A., Tuhkanen, S. 1999. Integrated Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emission
Abatement – The Case of Finland. Technical Research Centre of Finland, VTT Publications 374.
Espoo 1999.
Oinonen, T., Soimakallio, S. 2001. HFC- ja PFC-yhdisteiden sekä SF6:n päästöjen tekniset vähentämiskeinot ja niiden kustannukset Suomessa. [Technicaland Economic evaluation of Emission Abatement
Options of HFCs, PFCs and SF6. The Case of Finland. (in Finnish, with English abstract)]. TechnicalResearch Centre of Finland, VTT Research Notes
2099. Espoo 2001. 154 p. + App. 17 p.
Oinonen, T., Soimakallio, S. 2002. Abatement Options
and Costs of Reducing HFC, PFC and SF6 Emissions
in Finland. In: van Ham J., Baede A., Guicherit R.,
Williams-Jacobse J. (eds). Non-CO2 Greenhouse
Gases: Scientific Understanding, Control Options
and Policy Aspects. Pp. 421–426. Millpress, Rotterdam Netherlands 2002. 714 p.

133

The Role of Waste Management in the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Jätehuollon toimenpiteiden merkitys kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämisessä

Tarja Turkulainen, Tuula Mäkinen,
Kai Sipilä, Sami Tuhkanen,
Elina Lohiniva, Allan Johansson
VTT Processes, Espoo, Finland
VTT Prosessit, Espooemissions can be decreased about 2 Mt CO2 eq. byincreasing the utilisation of wastes (i.e. material recycling and waste-to-energy). These measureswould together account for about 25% of the total
emission reduction needed to fulfil the commitments of the Kyoto Protocol in Finland.

Abstract

Waste management options are often very cost-effective measures to reduce GHG emissions because
many measures reduce both methane emissions
from landfills and CO2 emissions from energy production and use. Therefore, waste management options should be taken into account seriously in theportfolio of Finnish GHG mitigation options.

The scope of this study was to study the reduction
potential of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in
the Finnish waste management systems. The project consisted of three sub-projects focused on energy recovery, landfill gas emissions and material
recycling. Projects were carried out in co-operation with researchers from VTT and Finnish Environment Institute.
According to the Good Practice Guidelines for National GHG Inventories published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in2000 so-called First Order Decay (FOD) method
will be taken into use in the Finnish landfill emission inventories in the following years. Thismethod produces a emission profile which is more
realistic than a profile produced with so-called
mass balance method. Countries had earlier a possibility to choose which method is used in emission
inventories but these new guidelines obligate to use
the FOD method especially when there are largechanges in the waste flows. In this study the emissions were estimated by using the FOD method.
According to the results significant reductions in
the Finnish GHG emissions can be achieved withthe help of waste management options. About 1 Mt
CO2 eq. reduction can be achieved by decreasing
the amount of disposed waste by 2010 when compared to the 1990 level. By increasing landfill gas
recovery about 0.6 Mt CO2 eq. reduction could beachieved at maximum. This means that the current
recovery capacity should be tripled. In addition,

134

Tiivistelmä
Tutkimuksessa selvitettiin jätehuollon toimenpiteiden mahdollisia vaikutuksia Suomen kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämiseksi. Tutkimus koostui kolmesta alaprojektista, jotka keskittyivät jätteiden energiakäytön, kaatopaikkakaasujen ja materiaalikierrätyksen vaikutuksiin. Tutkimukseen
osallistui useita tutkijoita VTT:ltä ja Suomen ympäristökeskuksesta.
Suomen kaatopaikkojen metaanipäästöjen arvioinnissa tullaan hallitustenvälisen ilmastopaneelin(IPCC) vuonna 2000 ilmestyneiden ohjeiden mukaisesti siirtymään nykyisestä massatasemenetelmän käytöstä päästöjen aikakäyttäytymisen huomioivaan laskentamenetelmään, joka kuvaa päästöjen kehittymistä huomattavasti realistisemmin.
Aiemmin maat ovat voineet valita kumpaa laskentamenetelmää käytetään, mutta nyt uudet ohjeet
velvoittavat käyttämään tätä ns. dynaamista menetelmää, jos jätehuollossa tapahtuu tai on tapahtunut muutoksia. Tässä projektissa päästöjen kehitystä arvioitiin dynaamisella menetelmällä.
Jätehuollon toimenpiteillä voidaan saavuttaa varsin merkittäviä kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vä-henemiä. Vuoden 1990 tasoon verrattuna kaatopaikkasijoituksen vähentämisellä voitaisiin enimmillään saavuttaa noin 1 Mt CO2-ekv. Päästöjen
vähenemä vuoteen 2010 mennessä. Kaatopaikkakaasujen talteenoton lisäämisellä pystyttäisiin lisäksi vähentämään päästöjä käytännössä enimmillään noin 0,6 Mt, mikä merkitsisi talteenottokapasiteetin kolminkertaistamista nykytasolta. Jätteiden hyötykäytön (materiaalikierrätys ja energiakäyttö) lisäämisellä pystyttäisiin edellisten lisäksi vähentämään päästöjä enimmillään noin 2
Mt. Yhteenlaskettuna nämä vastaisivat noin neljäsosaa kansallisessa ilmastostrategiassa arvioidusta päästöjen vähentämistarpeesta vuonna 2010.
Kustannuksiltaan jätehuollon toimenpiteet ovat
vähennettyjä päästöjä kohti usein hyvin edullisia,koska monet toimenpiteet vähentävät yhdenaikaisesti sekä kaatopaikkojen metaanipäästöjä että
energian tuotannosta ja käytöstä aiheutuvia hiilidioksidipäästöjä. Täten jätehuollon toimenpiteisiin
tulisi kiinnittää myös jatkossa erityistä huomiota,

6

kun tarkastellaan Suomen kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähennystoimenpiteiden valikoimaa.

1 Introduction
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) has published “good practice guidance” fornational greenhouse gas inventories in 2000 (IPCC
2000), according to which also the assessment ofmethane emissions from Finnish landfills will bechanged from present mass balance based method
to “first order decay method, FOD”. This method
estimates emissions more realistically, especiallywhen changes in the composition of waste are going to happen. Earlier each state has had the possibility to choose which method they use, but the
new guideline obliges to the use of FOD method
especially if changes in the composition of thewaste has happened or is assumed to happen in thenear future. In Finland the landfill disposal has significantly decreased in the 1990’s and FOD methodshould be used. Methane emissions from landfills

Mt CO2 eq.

Mass Balance Method
First Order Decay Method

5

4

3

2

1

0
1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

Figure 1. Estimated methane emissions from landfills based on “Business as usual” scenario by Finnish Environmental Institute (Dahlbo et al. 2000). Calculations are made withboth mass balance method and FOD-method.

135

calculated with both models are described in Figure 1.
The first estimations based on FOD-method showthat methane emissions would have been at a samelevel in 2000 as in 1990. Mass balance based
method shows a decrease of 2.5 Mt CO2-equiv. at
the same time period. Mass balance based estimations about the decrease of methane emissions arethus mainly theoretical because of the slow decomposition of the waste, which cannot be assumed tohappen immediately after disposal but rather takes
years or decades. According to the national emission inventory for 1999, the decrease in methane
emissions from landfills has been approximately
1.8 Mt (CO2-equiv.), but new estimations made inthis study show the emission level to be 30% higher
and the estimated decrease thus greater than expected. If FOD-method were used, the Finnish total GHG emissions would change from 77.1 Mt
CO2-equiv. to 76.0 Mt CO2-equiv. in 1990 andfrom 76.2 Mt CO2-equiv. to 77.2 Mt CO2-equiv. in
1999.
If compared to the national climate strategy, even 2
Mt CO2-equiv. extra reduction in GHG emission
level is demanded for other sectors than waste
management if FOD-method is used in the estimation of landfill based emissions. Calculated withthe average reduction costs approximated in thenational climate strategy (30–60 €/t CO2-equiv)
the annual direct costs without taxes would be approximately 60–120 million euro.
Historical information about the disposed waste
and degradation rates of different waste fractions is
also needed in emission inventories based on
FOD-method. This causes extra challenge because
practically statistical data about neither the composition nor the amount of waste disposed is available
before the year 1990. The estimations must thus bedone based on different kinds of indicators, i.e.
population, industrial production and GDP, whichis also acceptable according to the IPCC calculation principles. Additionally no domestic data on
degradation periods is available, and default values
published by IPCC must be used at least in the firstestimates.
136

2 Landfill gas recovery
In this study, methane emissions from landfills
were estimated in three different scenarios:• “present development” scenario, in which theamount of landfill disposed waste equals with“present development” scenario by the Finnish
Environmental Institute• “National Climate strategy” scenario, in which
the amount of landfill disposed waste equals
with “combustion/gasification” scenario by the
Finnish Environmental Institute• “Zero organics in 2010” scenario, in which it isassumed that no organic waste is disposed tolandfills in 2010. The linear decrease in disposed organic waste starts in 2002.
Estimated CH4 emission decrease is about 0.5–1.0
Mt CO2-equiv. from 1990 to 2010 calculated with
FOD method (figure 2), when only the decrease inlandfill disposed waste is considered. The decreaseof 1.0 Mt CO2-equiv. would additionally demand
the total prohibition of landfill disposed organic(biodegradable) waste until year 2010 and minimisation activities should begin in the near future.
Practically this means a significant increase in material recycling, biodegradable waste treatment
and energy recovery.
According to our estimates it is possible to triple
landfill gas recovery from current level and to decrease the amount of methane emissions by about
0.4–0.6 Mt CO2-equiv. by 2010. The amount oflandfill gas collection sites would thus rise from 20
to 50. Estimated annual electricity produced by energy recovery of the gas is 65–105 GWh, and reduction in GHG emissions maximum of 0.05 Mt
CO2-equiv.
Later on in the future, landfill gas production is going to decrease if disposal of organic waste is decreased. Further additional decrease in the amountof landfill-based greenhouse gas emissions would
most probably require oxidation of methane on thesurface of the landfill. These kinds of solutions arealso applicable to small sites. Rough estimates
about GHG emission reduction potential of thismeasure are between 0.1 and 0.2 Mt CO2-equiv. in2010. Figure 2 presents the estimated methane

The effect of landfill gas recovery on GHG emissions in different scenarios
Mt CO2 eq.

3

2,5

2
Business as Usual(Present LGFR)

1,5

1

0,5

National GHG Strategy(Present LFGR)
Zero Organics(Present LFGR)
Business as Usual(Increased LGFR)
National GHG Strategy(Increased LFGR)
Zero Organics(Increased LFGR)

0
1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Figure 2. Methane emissions from landfills in different scenarios and the influence of increased landfill gas recovery. Influence of gas treatment on the surface layer is not included.
LFGR=landfill gas recovery

emissions from landfills and the difference between the selected scenarios.
Estimated costs indicate that landfill gas recovery
is quite economical a way to minimise GHG emissions if compared to e.g. costs estimated in national climate strategy. If recovered gas is flared ina torch, the estimated emission reduction costs areabout 2.5–5.0 €/t CO2-equiv. With energy recovery
the costs are probably lower, and in some cases actually negative. Estimated costs due to oxidationon the surface of a landfill on small sites are about
15–20 €/t CO2-equiv., which also seems to be quite
reasonable.

3 Material recycling
Recycling rates are already quite high for many
materials. In this part of the study the possibilities
and potential for increasing the recycling rate were
estimated and the greenhouse gas emission reduction potential calculated.

The focus was on three kinds of materials.
• The materials, which require lots of (fossil) energy sources when produced from virgin raw
materials. By recycling these materials, theemissions from energy production can be reduced when recycling processes are less energy
intensive.
• The materials, which produce direct GHG emissions in their production processes.
• The materials, which produce emissions in theirdisposal or treatment processes, eg. land fillingof bio-waste.
In this part of the study, the potential greenhousegas emissions from recycling of packaging waste,
paper and fibres, bio-waste, waste from electricand electronic equipment (WEEE) and waste from
scrap vehicles and tyres are considered.
3.1 Treatment of bio-waste
One of the key elements in reducing greenhousebas emissions from landfills is bio-waste, as it almost totally consists of organic matter, which137

t CO2 eq. / t biowaste

GHG emissions from biowaste management options

1,2

Emissions
Avoided emissions from energy production

1
0,8
0,6

Assumption:
excess biogas
replaces fuel oil
use in district heatproduction

0,4
0,2
0
-0,2
-0,4

Landfill

Small-scale
composting

TunnelcompostingStackcomposting

Anaerobic
digestion

Figure 3. Estimated greenhouse gas emissions from the treatment of bio-waste.
Process-related emissions and emissions from the energy production are considered
in composting and anaerobic digestion. Avoided emissions from energy production are
also included in anaerobic digestion.

forms methane when degraded in anaerobic circumstances. Furthermore, the share of bio-waste in
the total waste amount is quite remarkable. Currently biological waste is disposed or composted
and in small amounts digested in anaerobic reactors in Finland.
Figure 3 illustrates the GHG emissions from thebio-waste management options. As it can be seen,
composting is a relatively efficient way to reduce
GHG emissions if compared to landfill disposal.
Some minor methane emissions might anyhow
come from composts if they are not properly maintained and waste is not kept in aerobic circumstances. To avoid this e.g. in tunnel composts, auxiliary air is blown from underneath the waste,
which requires a little amount of electricity and indirect GHG emissions.
In the anaerobic digestion process, waste is kept ina closed reactor in an optimal environment formethane generation. This is why the methane
emissions from the digestion process are avoided.
Produced and recovered amount of biogas is ap138

proximately 3.5 GJ/ton bio-waste, calculated inenergy terms (Pipatti et al. 1996). Some of this energy is used in the process and the rest can be usedin the production of e.g. external electricity and/or
district heat. Anaerobic treatment is thus most favourable option for bio-waste treatment in terms ofgreenhouse gas emissions, because process emissions are avoided and energy content is recovered.
3.2 Other materials
To estimate greenhouse gas emissions from material recycling the following materials were assessed: paper and cardboard, glass, steel, aluminium and plastics (mainly polyethylene). Also
the recovery of slag was included in the estimationof greenhouse gas reduction potential.
Estimated GHG emission reduction potential,
which is achieved by increasing the recycling rates
for studied materials, is 0.5–1 mill. tons of CO2
equivalents by year 2010. Calculations are basedon estimates on emissions and energy consumption in material production and recycling pro-cesses. Recycling and recovery targets from present and prepared EU-directives and national legislation were used as a basis for calculations. Most
targets do not extend beyond the year 2005, and at
the minimum scenario it is assumed that they are
not going to increase. At the maximum scenario recycling targets are increased step by step by year
2020. The lack of information of GHG emissions
from the recycling and manufacturing processes
complicates the estimations. Also shares of materials are very difficult to get from the current waste
statistics, which are mainly named after either
products or industrial processes.
GHG emission reduction potential from material
recycling is separated to small and inhomogeneousmaterial flows. The largest individual reduction is
the utilisation of industrial slag in the production of
cement (max. 0.5 mill. tons of CO2-equiv. by2010). The recycling of construction and demolition waste can be more effective and also the recycling rates of paper, packages and metal scraps canbe increased. The recycling rates for waste fromelectric and electronic equipment are set quite low
in the beginning, and the estimates of the amountof waste are quite uncertain.
Material use in the future has a significant impact
on the composition and amount of waste as well as
on material applicability for recycling. Dematerialization in the society, i.e. decreasing the material
end energy inputs in industrial and societal processes, decreases the amount of waste in general,but technically this kind of development might end
up to light weighted polymer-based compositesthat substitute currently used materials like steel
and glass. Especially because of their technical design, these kinds of materials are difficult to be recovered and/or recycled. Global markets for products and materials complicate the material recycling. Economically operative recycling processes
are difficult to create and maintain if used products
are to be recycled for new products (i.e. closedloop recycling). One trend in the future is also theuse of biologically degradable raw materials like
paper fibres to substitute plastics as raw materials.
Even though the use of renewable materials is not
limited, the generated amount of waste is significant. Increased transport distances both in global
recycling systems and renewable materials can inmany cases, especially in terms of GHG emissions,
reduce or even neutralise the benefits from the system.

4 Energy recovery
According to the national waste plan until 2005,
the waste recovery degree in municipalities is to be
increased from current 40% to 70% by year 2005.
Meeting the goal requires a considerable increasein energy recovery, since with current prices thegoal cannot be met by increasing only material recycling. Recovered fuels (REF) are not necessarily
required in the energy sector because the requirements of RES-E directive can be fulfilled with theuse of wood. However, utilisation of recovered fuels in energy production offers an economical way
to reduce the amount of waste on landfills and to
recover combustible materials, which are unqualified for material recycling. The production and energy recovery of REF will require new manners ofaction and co-operation not only from the technicalpoint of view but also in the entire waste management chain including the local authorities. The
Finnish waste treatment system based on source
separation is presented in Figure 4, the current production and treatment of municipal solid waste infigure 5 and the vision of upcoming reach of thegoal at the Helsinki metropolitan area in figure 6.
Current use and production of recovered fuel aswell as needs for technology development to fulfil
the requirements of waste incineration directive
has been considered in the report of energy recovery sub-project (Lohiniva et al. 2002). Current annual amount of energy recovery is about 300 000
tons of commercial and industrial packaging waste
and additionally 20–50 thousand tons of REF III
from households and municipal waste at the incineration plant in Turku. Dominating techniques at
the moment are incineration of mixed municipal
waste (mass burning), co-combustion in fluidised
bed combustion plants and co-firing by gasification. New investments in flue gas cleaning equipment is needed before year 2005, when EU directive on waste incineration will be applied in all existing plants that use waste fuels. Evidentially mostof our present practices on REF utilisation are thencoming to an end. In addition to energy technology
139

Waste processing 2000 – the Finnish approach

PRELIMINARY SORTING AT SOURCE
Waste
paper

Combustible
Glassware,
aluminium- Bio- Hazardous and miscellaneous waste
and tin cans waste
waste

BiogasRecycling Recycling

Hazardous
waste treatment

Waste
Composting Biowaste processing

Compostproducts

Heat
Electricity

C H P plant

Recovered
fuel
(REF)

Ashes

Landfill

Non-combustible
residual waste

Metals forrecycling

Figure 4. The Finnish waste treatment system based on source separation maximises opportunities for material recycling and energy production.

there is also a great challenge of adding some
0.6–1.5 Mt recycled fuel (15–30 PJ primary energy) annually into our current CHP systems without changing current structure and costs of combined heat and power production. District heatmarkets are already considered as saturated and
new investments on district heating capacity and
REF combustion plants will mainly be made whenold plants are replaced. Typical lifetime of a power
plant is between 30 and 40 years.
Energy recovery both in 2005 and vision to year
2010 is described in more details in the report(Lohiniva et al. 2002). The vision for the year 2010
is based on the option in which the disposal of any
combustible or biodegradable waste to landfills
would be forbidden. This kind of banning cameinto force in the beginning of year 2002 in Sweden.
Figure 7 illustrates the waste-to-energy capacity
options if the ban for organic waste landfill would
be stated in Finland. New plants – based e.g. on
fluidised bed combustion or gasification - utilising
REF could be built next to or to replace existing140

2.8 – 3.0 milj. t/a

Recycling 0.82 – 1.0 milj. t/aEnergy recovery 0.09 – 0.25 milj. t/a

Landfill 1.6 – 1.8 milj. t/aFigure 5. Production and treatment of municipal
solid waste in Finland.

plants in 20 Finnish cities. Both biofuels and REF
in quality classes REF I-III can be used in these
new boilers to substitute e.g. coal. Finnish leading
knowledge on the area of fluidised bed combustionand gasification can be used to create a new com-

WASTE RECYCLING VOLUMES IN HELSINKI– present values and vision to 2005
300

A

A

B

250
41 %

1 000 t

200

34 %

B

7%

A
29 %

41 %

B

17 %
33 %

150

Energy recovery
Material recovery
Landfilling

46 %
29 %
48 %

100
59 %

46 %

64 %

50

30 %

38 %
21 %

18 %

0
Householdwaste

Commercial andindustrial waste

Constructionwaste

A = present values
B = vision 2005
Total recovery 46 % –> 75 %Total waste volume 790 000 t/a,incl. 280 000 t/a combustible

Waste fractions excluded:– municipal sludges– contaminated soil
– hazardous waste

Figure 6. Current production of municipal waste at Helsinki metropolitan area and vision
for the year 2005.

Waste to Energy options*

CFB-gasifier 60 Mwth
BFB-gasifier < 40 Mwth
100 % REF-fluidised bed boiler 70 Mwth
Waste incineration district
heating plant 10-20 Mwth
REF co-combustion in CHP-fluidised
bed boiler*One or several plants in the area
may be possible

Figure 7. Energy recovery options in Finland, if landfill of organic waste is banned.

141

RDF / MSW TREATMENT COSTS – Gate fee
IN VARIOUS PROCESS CONCEPTS
160

640

Energy applications
REF production

140

560

120

480

Fmk / MWh17 € / Mwh 100
80

320

60

240

40

160

20

80

0

Typical landfill cost
– 65 € / t

0
REF-gasifier(60/80 MW) +Coal PC boiler

REF-FB(85 MW)+
Coal PC

REF-heat/
CHP-plant(85 MW)
Helsinki

REF-CHPplant (85 MW)
new CHP load

Massburning(85 MW)
only power

1 Euro = 6 Fmk

Figure 8. The costs of energy recovery are lower than landfill charges with taxes.

petitive technology for REF combustion to avoid
more expensive municipal waste incineration
plants, which are traditionally used in the Central
Europe. All the new technical solutions must fulfil
the requirements of EU directive on waste incineration as well as the one for large-scale combustion
plants. Some special issues concerning e.g. REF
gasification and nitrogen and sulphur emissions
from the main boiler are to be decided in 2002 or
2003.
The main topic in this study has been the description of rational criteria between material recycling
and energy recovery of combustible waste. Directions of the authorities give guidelines on this e.g.
by binding EU directives concerning e.g. packaging waste, waste from scrap vehicles and electricand electronic waste. The national waste plan to2005 sets a target for municipal waste recovery to
70%, fulfilling of which requires significant energy recovery of waste which is unqualified formaterial recycling. Examples of REF energy recovery costs are presented in Figure 8. Unfortunately, in public discussion, and to a certain extent
in National Waste Plan, material recycling and en142

ergy recovery are considered as opposed andexclusionary to each other, although they should
rather be seen as supportive to each other. The mostimportant measures of authorities to realise the recovery target of National Waste Plan are amount oflandfill taxes and harmonising of landfilling fees.
Recovered fuels are mainly composed of paper andcardboard, different kinds of plastics and wood andadditionally of non-combustible parts like glass,metals, cans and minerals. In Finland the main research area has been so called “Finnish model”(Figure 4), in which centralised treatment of waste
takes place at the REF production site where recyclable materials, combustible materials and foreign matter are mechanically separated and different quality of REF is produced. Some sites are already in operation, but the development is still ongoing and results from the long-term tests of demonstration plants are not yet gathered. Additionally, the separation of fibres and plastics has
been studied in so called “Urban Mill” concept, inwhich a paper mill using recycled fibres is integrated as a part of the municipal waste treatment
and energy production services. The annual in-crease of fibre recycling from packaging waste has
been approximated to be 100 000 tons annually if
three Urban Mill plants are to be sited in the Southern Finland.

5 Conclusions and discussion
Estimates of GHG reduction potentials are summarised in table 1. By minimising the landfill disposal it is possible to achieve the maximum reduction of 1 Mt CO2-equiv. from 1990 to 2010 (seealso figure 2). Additional reduction of 0.6 Mt canbe achieved by the recovery of landfill gases,
which means that the amount of gas recovered istripled from the current level. With waste recovery(material recycling and energy recovery) the maximum decrease of GHG emissions is 2 Mt.

Energy recovery from waste would take placemainly in the same boilers as the additional use ofwood as a fuel. This interaction has been taken into
account while performing the studies in the
Climtech projects published in the following publications (Lohiniva et al. 2002, Helynen et al.
2002). Wood waste and combustible municipal
waste are locally generated in different areas. The
greatest decrease of GHG emissions is achieved
when fossil fuels (oil, coal or peat) are substituted inpresent or new boilers. It has been assumed that energy recovery from waste mainly substitutes coaland in a few cases peat. Competition with wood isvery rare. The national programme for the promotion of renewable energy sources sets a target to theincrease in the use of bio-energy by 2.3 Mtoe/afrom 1995 level by 2010 and the use of REF 0.5
Mtoe/a at the same period. In Climtech projects theestimated additional biomass use by 2010 is between 1.2 Mtoe/a (base case) and 3 Mtoe/a (maximum case). Thus, the decrease in GHG emissions
would be 2.8–10.9 Mt CO2/a, and additional decrease from waste management 1.5–3.6 Mt/a.
Costs would be quite reasonable and mainly lessthan 20 €/t CO2.

In the recovery scenario in table 1 three Urban Mill
plants are built in Southern Finland and additional
100 000 tons of fibres are recycled. This amount offibres would be used in the paper industry insteadof energy production, and emission reduction potential in material recycling would increase and respectively decrease in energy recovery. However,net emission reduction potential would be constantin this case.
Costs per reduced ton of GHG emissions of the actions in waste management are usually quite reasonable, because many of the actions simultaneously reduce emissions from landfills, from energy production and use. Therefore, specific attention must be drawn to the waste management options in the future when national action for the reduction of GHG emissions is considered.

Table 1. Estimated decrease of greenhouse gas emissions in waste management in different scenarios
in 2010 (calculated from 1990 emission levels).
Business
as usual

Climatestrategy/
landfilldirective

Prohibition oforganic wasteon landfills 2010

Recovery

Decreasing of landfill waste

0.5

0.7

1.0

1.0

Recovery of landfill gases and increasing
the use of surface solutions

0.6

0.6

0.5

0.5

Increasing energy recovery(substitution of fossil fuels)

0.2

0.6

1.5

1.0

Increasing of material recycling(substitution of primary materials byrecycled materials and energy saving)

0.2

0.4

0.6

1.1

Total

1.5

2.3

3.6

3.6

Action[Mt CO2-eq.]

143

Publications and reports made under
the project
Lohiniva, E., Sipilä, K., Mäkinen, T., Hietanen, L. 2002.
Jätteiden energiakäytön vaikutukset kasvihuonekaasupäästöihin. [Waste-to-energy and greenhousegas emissions]. Espoo: VTT. (VTT Research Notes
2139). In Finnish, English abstract. http://www.inf.
vtt.fi/pdf/tiedotteet/2002/T2139.pdf
Tuhkanen, S. 2001. Jätehuollon merkitys Suomen kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämisessä – Kaatopaikkojen metaanipäästöt ja niiden talteenotto [Mitigation of greenhouse gases from waste management in
Finland – Methane emissions from landfills andlandfill gas recovery]. Espoo: VTT. 46 p. (VTT
Research Notes 2142). In Finnish, English abstract.
http://www.inf.vtt.fi/pdf/tiedotteet/200/ T2142.pdf
Tuhkanen, S., Sipilä, K., Turkulainen T. 2002. Jätehuollon toimenpiteiden merkitys kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämisessä. Projektin yhteenveto.
Espoo: VTT Prosessit. (Tutkimusselostus PRO/
T7502/02). In Finnish. http://www.vtt.fi/pro/climtech/material/jateyhtveto.pdf
Turkulainen, T., Johansson, A. 2001. Jätteiden vaikutus
kasvihuonekaasupäästöissä. Osahanke B: Materiaalikierrätys ja jätteiden materiaalivirtojen kehitys.
VTT Kemiantekniikka. Dno 215-01/KET17.
http://www.vtt.fi/pro/climtech/material/3recycle.pdf

References
Dahlbo, H., Petäjä, J., Jouttijärvi, T., Melanen, M., Tanskanen, J-H., Koskela, S., Pylkkö, T. 2000. Jätesektorin mahdollisuudet kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämiseksi. Helsinki: Suomen ympäristökeskus.
100 s. (Suomen ympäristökeskuksen moniste 197.)
Helynen, S., Flyktman, M., Mäkinen, T., Sipilä, K., Vesterinen P. 2002. Bioenergian mahdollisuudet kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämisessä. [The possibilities of bioenergy in reducing greenhouse gases.
(In Finnish, with English abstract)]. Espoo: VTT.
(VTT Research Notes 2145). http://www.inf.
Vtt.fi/pdf/tiedotteet/2002/T2145.pdf

144

IPCC. 2000. Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty
Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/gp/
gpgaum.htm
Lohiniva, E., Sipilä, K., Mäkinen, T., Hietanen, L. 2002.
Jätteiden energiakäytön vaikutukset kasvihuonekaasupäästöihin. [Waste-to-energy and greenhousegas emissions. (In Finnish, with English abstract)].
Espoo: VTT. (VTT Research Notes 2139).
http://www.inf.vtt.fi/pdf/tiedotteet/2002/
T2139.pdf
Pipatti, R. Hänninen, K., Vesterinen, R., Wihersaari, M.,
Savolainen, I. 1996. Jätteiden käsittelyvaihtoehtojen vaikutus kasvihuonekaasupäästöihin. Espoo:
Valtion teknillinen tutkimuskeskus. 85 s. (VTT Julkaisuja 881.) ISBN 951-38-4520-6
Tuhkanen, S. 2001. Jätehuollon merkitys Suomen kasvihuonekaasupäästöjen vähentämisessä – Kaatopaikkojen metaanipäästöt ja niiden talteenotto [Mitigation of greenhouse gases from waste managementin Finland – Methane emissions from landfills andlandfill gas recovery. (In Finnish, with English
abstract)]. Espoo: VTT. 46 p. (VTT Research Notes
2142). http://www.inf.vtt.fi/pdf/tiedotteet/2002/
T2142.pdf
Turkulainen, T., Johansson, A. 2001. Jätteiden vaikutus
kasvihuonekaasupäästöissä. Osahanke B: Materiaalikierrätys ja jätteiden materiaalivirtojen kehitys.
(In Finnish) VTT Kemiantekniikka. Dno 215-01/
KET17. http://www.vtt.fi/pro/climtech/material/
3recycle.pdf