MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN ROMANIA “Achievements and Barriers” Dr.eng. Alexei Atudorei ISWA Board Member Representative of ISWA - RDN Southeast Europe, Middle East and Mediterranean 1

ISWA was founded in 1970 and has members in more than 100 countries (National Member Organizations in 41 countries), 1,400 members worldwide and additionally some 100,000 members associated with our National Member Organizations. ISWA’s declared mission is: To Promote and Develop Sustainable and Professional Waste Management Worldwide ISWA achieves its mission through: Promoting resource efficiency through sustainable production and consumption Support to developing and emerging economies Advancement of waste management through education and training Promoting appropriate and best available technologies and practices Professionalism through its programme on professional qualifications. 2

A Regional Development Network (RDN) is a network of at least 3 ISWA National Members who work together on the promotion of sustainable waste management in regions outside ISWA’s traditionally strong areas (a RDN can only be established outside of Western Europe and North America). 3 RDN Members are: Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, Turkey, Israel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Greece, Moldova, Croatia, Macedonia

Regional Development Network Southeast Europe, Middle East and Mediterranean aims are:  Promoting sustainable waste management in the Region,  Networking for solving local problems,  Promoting ISWA and linkage to ISWA programs,  Recruiting members (National Members, Company/Organisation Members, Individual/Student Members and Online Members),  Representing the RDN on the ISWA Board 4

MSW MANAGEMENT IN EU (2012/…2014) 5

6 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPLEMENTED WITH EU, NATIONAL AND PRIVATE FUNDS! RESULTS – 95% to landfills!

7 ISO 9001/2008 LOCAL CONDITIONS ARE VERY IMPORTANT! GOOD PRACTICES Strategies, Planning, Implementation, Evaluation, Improvement X X X

HOW TO REACH THE TARGETS??? CONVENTIONAL/HIGH TECH SOLUTIONS??? The Dilemmas (more or less…) - Mixed Waste - vs. Source Separation, - Wet & Dry vs. Wet + Recyclables/packaging + Rest…. - Landfilling vs. Waste to Energy (WtE), - Recycling vs. WtE, - Composting – Open vs. Enclosed, - Anaerobic Digestion – Dry vs. Wet, - AD vs. Composting, - Landfill Levy vs. ban on OM disposal 8

2013/2015 – 31 counties will implement ISWM systems (classic)! CONCLUSIONS - SOP Environment 2007 – 2013/2015 JASPERS (Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions) Report (UE) “Although there are currently several projects under implementation (mainly for landfill capacity but also related waste management infrastructure) work is progressing slowly. The performance of the solid waste management sector is weak and key challenges include: Institutional arrangements suffer gaps and inconsistencies; Crucial supervision and enforcement capacities remain weak – monitoring and data collection are limited; Lack of coherent planning and weak consultation procedures; county planning is still weak; Focus on investment has obscured cost recovery needs – most local tariffs are insufficient, even to cover recurring costs.” 9

10 Main deficiencies reported in implementing ISWM Systems in Romania : Technical  poor quality of collection:  quantity: lower than expected waste generation;  quality: effectiveness of selective collection;  absence of and / or poorly competent operators to manage the built assets;  poorly developed markets for waste outputs recycling very low: recyclables and compost; Political  tariffs strategies to ensure sustainability not adopted and/or implemented;  investments plans not secured and challenged by competing infrastructures (as incinerators) putting technical and financial sustainability at risk;  no incentives for public awareness and responsibility on selective collection;

11 HOW MUCH IS “GUILTY” THE INFORMAL SECTOR FOR THE RESULTS? INFORMAL SECTOR MOVES FROM DUMPS/LANDFILLS TO CITIES!!! LEGISLATION LAW 99/ implementation

Diverting the biodegradable waste from landfilling Landfill costs vs. landfill rates 12 Population affordability to pay the services?

What is the right approach for a “quick change”? Low cost technology with high effect first !  Investment into separate collection infrastructure and Awareness raising, making separate collection citizen's individual concern  Give financial incentives to waste avoidance! Citizens want to be rewarded for their efforts!  Create financial disincentives for landfilling!  Do first what has the greatest effect !  SEPARATE COLLECTION! Should be implemented and operated by each recycling industry in cooperation with the local operator for collection and transportation of MSW (public or private). 13

KEY SUCCESS FACTORS FOR EFFICIENT WASTE MANAGEMENT (THEORY)  Appropriate Legislative framework  Capacity building to raise expertise  Waste management planning (statistics!)  Business friendly frameworks to encourage investments  Efficient measures for financing, e.g. EPR, fees  Awareness rising to motivate consumers 14

15 Waste is the Face of Inefficiency! Do not fall prey to the past or future! Important is to be totally present! Thank you very much for your attention! Dr.eng. Alexei Atudorei ISWA BOARD MEMBER ARS BOARD MEMBER