1. 1/20 Contribution of waste management to support a cycling society Paul H. Brunner TU Wien

2. 2/20 We need a lot of material! 1400 tons per capita and lifetime of 80 years Source of data: The Society for Mining. Metallurgy and Exploration Foundation

3. 3/20 What do we need it for? ActivityInputOutputStock wastewateroffgassolid waste [t/c.year]][t/c.year][t/c] Nourish/breathing5.70.94.70.1< 0.1 To clean To reside1007.61130 + 1 Transport/comm.1006.41.6210 + 2 00.020.160 Total 192.7 340 + 3 8661 Material turnover in private households

4. 4/20 Activities change rapidly ActivityInputOutputStock wastewateroffgassolid waste [t/c.year]][t/c.year][t/c] Nourish/breathing5.70.94.70.1< 0.1 To clean To reside1007.61130 + 1 Transport/comm.1006.41.6210 + 2 00.020.160 Total 192.7 340 + 3 Effect of the introduction of modern water supply (19 th century) 2 ->60 + 3000 % + 200% + 2000% 28 ->863 ->61

5. 5/20 Activities change rapidly ActivityInputOutputStock wastewateroffgassolid waste [t/c.year]][t/c.year][t/c] Nourish/breathing5.70.94.70.1< 0.1 To clean To reside1007.61130 + 1 Transport/comm. Total 2.7 340 + 3 86 ->8061 00.020.160 10 ->3.606.4 ->01.6210 + 2 19->13 - 100% - 60% - 7% - 30% Effect of introduction of e-mobility (21st century)

6. 6/20 Why changing to CE? ActivityInputOutputStock wastewateroffgassolid waste [t/c.year]][t/c.year][t/c] Nourish/breathing5.70.94.70.1< 0.1 To clean To reside1007.61130 + 1 Transport/comm.1006.41.6210 + 2 00.020.160 Total 192.7 340 + 3 8661 Material turnover in private households 1. Availability?2. Env. Protection!(3. stock)

7. 7/20 Are materials scarce? Quelle: Limits to Growth. Meadows. D.H. et. al.. 1972. p 56 ff resource exponential growth [years] exp. growth 5x larger reserves gold91981292001 mercury131985412013 silver131985422014 zinc181990502022 fuel oil201992502022 copper211993482020 lead211993642036 natural gas221994492021 tungsten282000722044 platinum group472019852057 cobalt6020321482120 iron9320651732145 carbon11120831502122

8. 8/20  import ~11  export ~ 8 Stock = 184+3 4 2 0.3 2.7 1 11 1.5 7 2 0.8 primary production Pedo-/ Lithosphere production consumption waste management disposal 140* [Mio. t] 200020502100 0 350 150 50 100 200 250 300 geogenic iron stock 140 0 0 3 44 200020502100 0 350 150 50 100 200 250 300 anthropogenic iron stock 44 194 344 Recycling reduces scarcity

9. 9/20 (source: ZAR und *Frauenhofer /Umsicht) [t material /t Aluminum ] Ex. Aluminum 26.4 0612182430 Primary production* 4.4 Recycling* 1.2 ThermoRecycling Recycling protects the environment

10. 10/20 High recycling rates are … A. Allesch. TU Wien

11. 11/20 Landfill +2.2 3.2 5.7 1.4 waste  18 Mio t/a  15 Mio t/a change in stock: 2.2 Mio t/a useless materials products (construction) products (paper) products (metals) products (others) Exported waste 1.6 2.8 0.76 18 Flows [Mio t/a] Stock [Mio t] Waste Management in Austria Austrian waste management, 2012 A. Allesch, TU Wien … feasible... Country wide recycling rate of 64 %

12. 12/20 mass [t/cap.yr] Material input 194019601980200020202040 Mean residence time of materials 5 10 15 20 waste today waste in 40 years Material output (wastes) … but not everywhere! Demand Supply 2060 Uniform recycling policy not appropriate!

13. 13/20 G. Kanitschar. TU Wien Economic limits to recycling Materialvalue [€]% of sales price Al0.630.4 Au0.680.5 Ag0.010 Steel 0.030 Sb0.000 Cu 0.070 Epoxy0.00 0 Hg0.000 Be0.000 Total value of waste material 1.421% Hard disc sales price 150.- 100 % Material value of WEEE (ex. hard disk) Can recycling compete on the market?

14. 14/20 Plastic material Plastics stock [kt 1994][% of flow] Packaging plastics 20 Longlasting plastics [% of flow] 80 6.700 Softeneres ~20~80 180 Ba/Cd additives 0~100 4 Lead additives 0~100 27 Flame retardants 0100 34 Toxic materials limit recycling Zero waste is not possible ->WM must supply sinks! Example: what to do with hazardous materials in plastic wastes?

15. 15/20 Recycling cannot prevent dissipation source: Settle & Patterson [Tons Pb/year] 70005000300010000 1*10 -3 1*10 -1 1*10 1 1*10 3 1*10 5 1*10 7 1*10 9 Years before today 10 6-7 [t/year] global Pb production Roman Empire

16. 16/20 Dissipated Roman lead [Tons] 0 20‘000 40‘000 60‘000 80‘000 100‘000 Even at high recycling rates, substances are lost! Recycling cannot prevent dissipation Dissipation of Roman lead

17. 17/20 WM must supply sinks Solid waste sewage Corrosion, erosion, weathering Off-gas (CO 2 et al.) Recycling

18. 18/20 The need for sinks is high! Data: U. Kral et al. 2015

19. 19/20 Conclusions 1. Flows and stocks are growing -> future waste amount will increase! 2. “Cycling economy” and “urban mining” necessary -> improves resource base and env. protection. 3. Recycling: Quality versus quantity -> quality more important! 4. Cycles cannot be completely closed -> sinks are required for the non-recyclables 5.In the long run, all substances end up in sinks -> sinks as scarce resource? ->manage sinks actively! 6. WM is the most important sink for anthropogenic materials -> WTE (org.) and landfills (anorg.) necessary! 7.Future requirements -> New priorities: clean cycles AND safe sinks!

20. 20/20 Recycling is not … the End ….is the final sink