1. What results can be used by decision makers and how ? - Lessons learnt in Germany Integrated Waste Management & Life Cycle Assessment Workshop & Conference Jürgen Giegrich Integrated Waste Management & Life Cycle Assessment Workshop & Conference Prague 13.-14. April 2004 Jürgen Giegrich

2. LCA and policy making 1.Beverage container study I (product LCA) 2.LCA in waste management (tyres, refrigerators) 3.LCA for graphical papers (mass flow analysis) 4.LCA for recovery options of waste oil 5.Ecological and economic evaluation of recovery options for light weight packaging 6.LCA on waste from sewage treatment plants 7.Beverage container study II (product LCA) 8.Screening LCA for waste management options of hazardous waste (solvents, electroplating sludge, iron cast sands, oil separator waste) 9.LCA of waste management options for organic waste 10.LCA of co-fermentation of organic waste with sewage sludge List of publicly commissioned LCAs in Germany with waste management focus (since 1993):

3. LCA and policy making The German Ministry of Environment needed arguments for the political discussion: To identify the environmentally most favourable recycling option for used oil. Scientifical support for the political decision making of implementing the EU waste oil directive into national legislation. Objective

4. LCA and policy making Scenarios: 1.Regeneration: Multi-step distillation, as practised in the mineral oil refinery Dollbergen (MRD). The plant produces base oils and fuel oils as by-products. 2.Fuel processing, as practised in the Baufeld mineral oil refinery in Chemnitz. The plant produces fuel oils, as specified in DIN 51603-4 3. High-pressure gasification, as practised in the Sekundärrohstoff-Verwertungszentrum Schwarze Pumpe (SVZ). The plant produces methanol and electricity. 4.Direct combustion in cement works replacing standard fuels used in normal operation

5. LCA and policy making Impact categories Global warming (Cancerogenic pollutants: As, Cd, Cr-VI, Ni, PCDD/F, BaP as As-Equivalents) (represented by hydro carbons in water effluents) (Fossil energy ressources as Raw-Oil-Res.-Equiv.) Summer smog Acidification Nutrification (terrestrial) Human toxicity Eco toxicity Resource consumption (CO 2, CH 4 N 2 O as CO 2 -Equivalents) (NO x, VOC as NCPOCP) (SO 2, NOx, HCl, HF, NH 3 as SO 2 -Equivalents) (NO x, NH 3 als PO 4 3+ -Equivalents)

6. LCA and policy making Equivalency system Recovery system System boundary Used Oil Regeneration base oil flux oil energy Thermal use of by products Exploitation Mineral oil base oil flux oil energy Refinery fuel oil

7. LCA and policy making Results of Impact assessment: Global warming 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 1 Base oil2 Fuel oil3 Methanol4 cem. work Impact of recovery Impact of substituted equivalency system kg CO 2 -Equiv. per 1 ton of recovered used oil

8. LCA and policy making Results of Impact assessment: Resource consumption 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1 Base oil2 Fuel oil3 Methanol4 cement work Impact of recovery Impact of substituted equivalency system kg ROE-Equiv. per 1 ton of recovered used oil

9. LCA and policy making Normalisation Grouping UBA Valuation method (according to ISO 14042) Verbal argumentative interpretation Calculation of the magnitude of the category indicator results relative to reference values (specific contribution). In this case, the total inventory of resource consumption and emissions in Germany was used as a reference. Normalisation unit: Person equivalency value PEV Ranking the impact categories in a given order of hierarchy, such as very high, high, medium, and low priority.

10. LCA and policy making Normalisation and ranking Person equivalent value 17.4 kg NCPOCP/a Summer smog Global warming 13,024 kg CO 2 -Eq/a Ranking „ecological priority“ C medium A very high 73.3 3.5 cancerogenic risk potential Hydro carbons in effluents fossil resources Acidification Eutrophication, terrestrial Human toxicity Eco toxicity Resource consumption C C A medium medium very high B B high kg SO 2 -Eq/a kg PO 4 3+ -Eq/a 5.7 g As-Eq/a 52 g/a 2,382 kg RO-Eq/a

11. LCA and policy making 1 Base oil 2 Fuel oil 4 Cement work nnnnn nnnn Valuating the recovery options 3 Methanol  The number of squares shows the difference difference to the most beneficial option (marked by  ) in each case 1 square corresponds to 5.000 PEV (rounded) – Ranking: n „very high“, n „high“, n „medium“, Global warming Summer smog Acidification Eutrophication Human toxicity Eco toxicity Resource consumption nnnnn nnnn nnnnnn nnnnn  n      nn n nn n nn nnnn nnn nnnnnn nnnnn nnnnnn n nnnnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnn

12. LCA and policy making Title: LCA for recovery options of waste oil Objective: Comparison of different recovery options for waste oil; mainly comparison of reprocessing versus energy recovery (e.g. in cement kilns) Political Consequences: German Government used the results of the LCA in the court case against Germany not complying with the waste oil directive. The directive states that waste oil must be reprocessed if facilities exist. The LCA results showed that some impact categories were in favour of energy recovery in cement kilns. No result of the court case known by now. commissioned by: BMU/UBA conducted by: ARCADIS, IFEU year: 1997 - 1998 Similar study commissioned by the State of Lower Saxony conducted by ÖKOPOL; 1997

13. LCA and policy making The federal states have the legal obligation to set up waste management plans for their area. The Environmental Ministry of Northrhine-Westphalia established plans for different waste streams: Assessment of the environmentally better treatment option for all waste streams from sewage treatment plants in Northrhine - Westphalia (with the emphasis on sewage sludge) as a basis for the federal state waste management plan. Objective

14. LCA and policy making landspreading in agriculture recultivation of degraded land incineration dr.drying compos- ting sewage sludge 3 % m d benefit: substitution of primary resources, products, processes de-watering auxiliaries, energy sewage, waste sewage, waste sewage, waste sewage, waste sewage, waste Input from the environment (mineral and fossil resources) Output into the environment (emissions to air, water, soil) System boundary

15. LCA and policy making 0 1 2 3 4 primary energy use, fossil in GJ / t DS transport transfer de-watering drying distribution soil form. auxiliary m. landfilling NP-fertilizer P-fertilizer K-fertilizer Ca-fertilizer Mg-fertilizer lignite electricity agricultural recovery recovery of degraded land incineration Parameter: primary energy use of the treatment options recovery using wet sludge credit (mineral fertilizer) recovery using de- watered sludge credit (mineral fertilizer) soil formation mono incineration credit (electricity) co-incineration in lignite power plant credit (lignite)

16. LCA and policy making agricultural use use for degraded landmono incineration (fl. bed)co-incineration (power plant)  greenhouse effect (A)  summersmog (C)  eutrophication (terrestr.) (B) eutrophication (aquat.) (C)   acidification (B)  cancerogenic risk (air) (A) (repr. human tox.) mercury (air) (B) (repr. human tox.)    particles (B) (repr. human tox.)   lead input to soil (C)     cadmium input to soil (B)  fossile resources (C) mineral resources (D) phosphate       landfill space (D)  e deutungSpez. Beitrag: 1 Quadrat entspricht 250.000 EDW (gerundet); Ökologische B sehr groß (A)groß (B)mittel (C) gering (D) Unterschiede, die bei weniger als 125.000 EDW liegen werden durch Punkte  kenntlich gemacht, die Anzahl der Punkte weist auf die Rangfolge hin.

17. LCA and policy making agricultural use use for degraded landmono incinerationco-incineration  greenhouse effect (A)    summersmog (C)    eutrophication (terrestr.) (B) eutrophication (aquat.) (C)   acidification (B)  cancerogenic risk (air) (A) (repr. for human tox.) mercury (air) (B) (repr. for human tox.)     particles (B) (repr. for human tox.)o  fossile resources landfill space (D)   Spez. Beitrag: 1 Quadrat entspricht 10.000 EDW (gerundet); Ökologische Be deutung Unterschiede, die bei weniger als 5.000 EDW liegen werden durch Punkte  kenntlich gemacht, die Anzahl der Punkte weist auf die Rangfolge hin. sehr groß (A)groß (B)mittel (C) gering (D)

18. LCA and policy making Conclusions of the study: ä Agricultural recovery should be limited to the sludges with the lowest content of contaminants and in parallel a high content of available phosphate ä In any other cases Incineration should have priority, while co-incineration should be accompanied by a highly efficient mercury scrubbing system ä Use of sludges on degraded land should be avoided because it is connected with environmental disadvantages in all cases (exception: some applications with high quality demands for compost products)

19. LCA and policy making Title: LCA of waste from sewage treatment plants Objective: Comparison of different recovery and disposal options for sewage sludge, sand residues and bulky organic waste Political Consequences: The Ministry of Environment of NRW decided to incinerate sewage sludge completely based on the LCA results. Voluntary agreements with water treatment companies had been signed to shift from cheaper land spreading to incineration; LCA results were used by the Ministry to convince the companies. Follow-up study should by made after 5 years. commissioned by: MUNLV of NRW conducted by: IFEU year: 1997 - 1999 Similar study commissioned by the State of Schleswig-Holstein conducted by IFEU; 2000 Similar study commissioned by the State of Bavaria conducted by BIFA; 2000

20. LCA and policy making The German Bundesrat took the following decision (29 May 1998): The collection and recovery of used packaging material should be reconsi- dered in order to ensure that only those types of packaging waste are integrated in the Dual System (DSD) which are environmentally and economically acceptable Objective

21. LCA and policy making

22. Options for recovery and disposal abbreviation status quo of recoverySQ optimized status of recoverySQopt SORTEC (recovery)SORTEC disposal (30 % incin./ 70 % landfill)Bes30/70 disposal by incinerationBes100

25. LCA and policy making Concluding Table

26. LCA and policy making Title: Ecological and economic evaluation of recovery options for light weight packaging (LWP) Objective: Environmental and economic evaluation of the current status of recycling of different waste streams (article based) for LWP in Germany. Comparison of status quo, near-future situation and SORTEC technology with corresponding final disposal options (landfill, incineration, MBT) Political Consequences: The study had been triggered by the Bundesrat (council of Länder) to modify the German packaging regulation (e.g. small packaging out of Duales System). Federal Government and Länder used the study to support their point of view in political documents; no agreement. commissioned by: BMU/UBA, BLAK conducted by: HTP,IFEU year: 1998 - 2000

27. LCA and policy making LCA of plastic material in household waste by UBA and Plastic Industry Association (2001-2003) LCA of plastic material in household waste by UBA and Plastic Industry Association (2001-2003) LCA of co-incineration in industrial plants by MUNLV of NRW (2002-2004) LCA of co-incineration in industrial plants by MUNLV of NRW (2002-2004) List of ongoing LCA projects for the public sector: LCA of different waste collection systems by MUNLV of NRW (2003-2004) LCA of different waste collection systems by MUNLV of NRW (2003-2004) Evaluation of overall achievements of waste policy in Germany during the last 15 years and future perspectives by BMU/UBA (2003-2004) Evaluation of overall achievements of waste policy in Germany during the last 15 years and future perspectives by BMU/UBA (2003-2004) Up-date of LCA for sewage sludge treatment in North Rhine-Westphalia by MUNLV of NRW (2003-2004) Up-date of LCA for sewage sludge treatment in North Rhine-Westphalia by MUNLV of NRW (2003-2004)

28. Final remarks LCA is the only tool for waste management questions which address the whole system. So far in Germany there was no political or legal need to use LCA at the level of municipalities, counties or companies. LCA has a system perspective and cannot easily address local aspects. As a consequence LCA can only support local decisions and other procedures and tools are needed. It took 10 years, various examples of application and some supporters to introduce LCA more generally in German policy making.

29. LCA and policy making