"REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE"...
Friends of the Earth Europe is committed to reversing Europe's "throw-away" culture. We are campaigning to save the Earth's precious natural resources. We firmly believe in reducing the amount of waste produced in the first place, reusing products wherever possible and then recycling materials rather than dumping them in landfill or burning them in incinerators.
Photo: Hnuti DUHA
|
 |
FoEE and EEB campaigned at the European Parliament, Strasbourg prior to a vote on the Waste Framework Directive. Photo credit: Samten Norbù.
THE WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE
The European Union's main waste law is currently being reviewed. This law - called the Waste Framework Directive - forms the basis for waste policy in every EU country.
When the European Commission released its proposal in 2005, it claimed that its revisions to the Waste Framework Directive were intended to prevent waste and move Europe towards being a ‘recycling society’. But the proposals did little concrete to increase recycling and left it up to member states to produce waste prevention plans with no minimum objectives. The Commission also suggested only a three-step waste hierarchy, with re-use, recycling and recovery all given the same priority. Furthermore, the Commission promoted incineration by rebranding it as recovery rather than disposal, which gives it a higher status in the waste hierarchy and even give incineration the same priority as recycling.
The European Parliament voted to support a number of significant improvements in their first reading plenary vote on 13th February 2007. In particular:
- The parliament supported the full five step waste hierarchy.
- The parliament voted to set a binding waste stabilisation target, that all EU countries should stabilise waste production at 2008 levels by 2012, followed by real prevention targets.
- The parliament voted for a binding minimum recycling rate of 50% Municipal waste and 70% industrial and construction waste for all Member States by 2020, with an extra five years for those countries
- Incineration: The MEPs voted to delete the formula that the European Commission had proposed which would rebrand incineration as ‘recovery’.
On 28th June, the Environment Council took a much less environmentally friendly position. The Ministers voted for a 5-step waste hierarchy. But the Council also voted to reclassify municipal waste incineration as 'recovery' rather than 'disposal', pushing it further up the waste hierarchy and giving it a 'cleaner' image. Furthermore, they did not even attempt to reach agreement on the recycling and prevention targets proposed by the European Parliament in its First Reading, resulting in policy that does not back up the waste hierarchy and promotes more waste incineration.
The next steps are, with predicted timing:
- Late 2007/start of 2008: The European Parliament will start its second reading, discussing areas of disagreement between parliament and Member States. There will be a vote in the Environment Committee, followed a second reading vote in plenary.
- Member States will discuss the Parliament’s second reading, and decide whether they agree with it. If not, there will need to be a further compromise process (called conciliation) in order to get agreement.
- Mid-late 2008: The new Directive will be finalised once the European Parliament and EU Member States agree. It will then be translated into national law in all 27 EU Member States.
Why recycling should be promoted over incineration:
RESOURCE EFFICIENCY
Incineration wastes valuable resources such as metals, plastics, wood or biodegradable resources that could otherwise be salvaged through recycling. Every ton of incinerated materials has to be extracted and processed again, increasing environmental damage and dependency of the EU economy on expensive imports. More energy is saved through recycling than is extracted by burning most waste.
CLIMATE CHANGE
Incineration produces greenhouse gas emissions - a typical incinerator converting waste to electricity produces around 33% more fossil-fuel derived carbon dioxide than a gas fired power station. In contrast, recycling saves greenhouse emissions by avoiding the need to extract and process primary resources. A recent UK government-funded study concludes that "UK recycling currently saves between 10-15 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gases per year compared to other waste management options.”
HIGH RECYCLING RATES ARE POSSIBLE
Belgium and Austria are already recycling more than 50% of their municipal waste, while a number of member states still recycle less than 10%. This shows the need to set high EU-wide recycling targets, so that the poor performers catch up.
JOBS
Recycling creates jobs. Recycling 10 000 tonnes of waste creates up to 250 jobs compared with 20 to 40 jobs needed if the waste is incinerated and about 10 for landfill.
INCINERATION AS A BARRIER
The existence of incinerators discourages waste prevention and recycling – as incinerators are inflexible in terms of the quantities needed to operate them, authorities or waste companies are then under pressure to keep filling them with rubbish for years into the future to make sure they operate properly and get they their money back from building them in the first place.
WASTE TRANSPORT
Reclassification of incinerators as 'recovery' could promote export of waste from countries with strict, costly facilities like Germany to those with cheaper ones, like France, Poland and the Czech Republic. This unacceptable transport of waste will also result in an increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
SOUND USE OF EU FUNDS
In central and eastern Europe, the reclassification of incinerators could have particularly adverse effects. It could divert the use of millions of Euros from the EU structural and cohesion funds from sorting and recycling schemes into building new incinerators.
Policymakers Briefing: Read more about Friends of the Earth Europe's concrete demands
| |
 |
 |
“Fouad Hamdan, on the Green Week panel debating the European waste crisis – Brussels, 31 May 2006” |
|
