Waste streams and waste sites

Thomas OrmondRegierungspräsidium Darmstadt

Land Hessen, Germany

Waste streams and waste sites – Structure of the presentation

• Facts on illegal waste streams

• IMPEL‘s activities in the field

• The Waste Sites project

• Current and future activities for „Waste Sites II“

• Lessons to be learned?

Facts on illegal waste streams

(From BBC Images 2010, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10846395 )

Facts on illegal waste streams (2)• Overall growth of waste trade: 18M t iron scrap, 11.5M t

waste paper, nearly 4M t plastic waste exported from EU in 2011, increase by factor 2 (scrap) and 6.5 (plastics) since 1999

• Particular growth rates in generation of food waste + WEEE

• Illegal trade: 1% of all waste shipments illegal? (= 2.8M t/a)

• Up to 41% of all WEEE unaccounted for = illegally exported? (= 3.4M t/a)

• Main destinations for illegal shipments: Eastern Europe (ELVs , batteries, scrap), West Africa (WEEE), China (plastics)

• Overall non-compliance rate reported in (targeted) IMPEL waste inspections 2008-10: approx. 25%

• In some countries involvement of organized crime

IMPEL activities in the field of illegal waste shipments

• Enforcement Actions III project (2012-14):1,500 waste inspections in March-Oct. 2012 by inspectors in 21 countries; 420 violations detected (e.g. 63 breaches of export ban)

• Special projects for collaboration with third countries: EU-Africa, EU-Asia

• IMPEL-TFS Prosecutor Project• Waste Sites I + II• Others

The Waste Sites project (2011-2012)

Photo Schwärzel: Illegal WEEE storage near Darmstadt (DE) 2007

Aims of the project Better understanding of

- problematic waste streams (esp. WEEE, ELVs + their components, plastic waste and a few others) and - the role of upstream waste sites in them

Exchange of best practices concerning such waste sites

Guidance on site identification, inspection and follow-up

Field Guide on inspections

Handbook

(later merged into „Manual“)

Better collaboration between relevant agencies (environmental licensing + inspection, police, customs …) at national and international level

Project participantsProject team of “Waste Sites I”:• Germany (lead country): Thomas Ormond, Kirsten Göbel• Latvia: Lilija Dukalska• Netherlands: Piet ten Brink• Slovenia: Bojan Počkar• Sweden: Pär Kollberg, Mattias Lindgren• UK: Barry Sheppard

Further participantsAustria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Finland, Portugal; Norway

Project schedule “Waste Sites I”• Late 2010: Adoption of ToR, formation of project team

(met 5 x in 2011-2012 , in Frankfurt, Liverpool + Stockholm)• Feb./March 2011: Questionnaires about problematic waste sites,

licensing, monitoring, guidance needs etc; 13 replies from 11 countries; summary

• April-June 2011: Assessment of existing guidance ; 33 fact sheets + summary

• 26-27 Sept. 2011: Expert workshop in Frankfurt/Main with 33 participants from 12 EU MS + Norway, EU Commission; waste authorities, police, prosecutors, customs etc.

• Jan.-Nov. 2012: Drafting of “Waste Sites Manual” (originally “Handbook” + “Field Guide”)

• Sept. 2012: Test inspections in some countries• Dec. 2012: Adoption of Manual and project report by IMPEL

General Assembly

Some results (1)• Problematic waste streams: WEEE, ELVs , lead-acid

batteries , tyres + plastic waste (in most participating countries)

• Waste sites involved in illegal traffic are in particular:1) Storage + collection points (for WEEE, ELVs etc.)2) Sorting + recycling facilities (for plastic + mixed waste)

• Permit requirements varying in Member States, often “de minimis” rules + exemptions

• Inspection practice varying according to risk + for other reasons

Some results (2)

• Existing guidance focuses mostly on bigger + licensed facilities

• “Waste stream approach” + proactive strategies followed in some countries (UK, NL, SE) but not in others

• Important strategy elements: Economic understanding, global perspective, contact to dealers + site operators, international + inter-service cooperation, information of the public ...

Main product: Waste Sites Manual

•

Best practice examples UK: Cases of export of mixed household waste from

recycling facilities in the UK: Intelligence-led approach to waste streams and collaboration with shipping lines led to site closures, prosecution of offenders + overall reduction of illegal exports

NL: Waste-chain approach, frequent + targeted inspections, pro-active involvement of enforcers, collectors + traders reduce illegal trade

DE + AT waste databases help to classify waste + distinguish it from non-waste

SE: Frequent use of helicopters to identify waste sites, webcams during inspections to facilitate expert support

Best practice examples

ELV site in the North of Sweden (Photo Norrbotten County Board)

Follow-up = Waste Sites IITerms of Reference (adopted Dec. 2012) Objectives:• Promote cooperation + exchange of best practices• Stimulate practical application of Waste Sites Manual• Translation of Manual• Spread use of “waste stream approach” by tests /

joint inspections• Explore best practices of proactive strategies (media

campaigns, communication with business associations, traders, shipping lines ...)

Project plan Waste Sites II• Duration 2013-2014

• Participants:– DE (lead country), NL, BE, FI, SE, SI (project team), – RO, possibly BG + others (for joint inspections)

• Products:– Joint inspections DE-RO + SE-FI (Oct. 13), BE-NL (Nov. 13),

others planned for 2014– Workshop (April 2014)– Translation (SI, DE) and update of Waste Sites Manual– Final project report (autumn 2014)

• Synergies with Enforcement Actions III project

Lessons to be learned?Some points for discussion

Why are there illegal waste streams and how will they develop in future?

In how far can authorities stop or reduce the illegal traffic with waste?

What is the role of waste sites in this traffic? What information (or “intelligence”) do inspectors need for

effective controls of waste sites and waste transports? What proactive measures are most important for getting a

better grip on waste streams? In how far can the new Commission proposal for amending

the WSR improve the situation and what other measures might be useful?

Thank you for your attention!

Contact: thomas.ormond@rpda.hessen.de