3. Santiago/Chile 14 November 2014
Global Waste Management Perspectives and Extended Producer Responsibility
Santiago/Chile 14 November 2014
Hermann Koller
ISWA Managing Director

4. Contents
Global situation and approaches in waste management
Organisation and financing in waste management
Extended Producer Responsibility
Challenges and possible solutions for Chile

5. 1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
Global Waste Market
The global waste market of MSW (Municipal Solid Waste), including collection and recycling, is estimated to € 310 billion per year, which equals the GDP of Denmark. And the sizeable informal sector is not included in this number.
The generation of waste amounts to 4 billion tonnes per year total, of which 1,9 billion tonnes household
World wide in the waste management sector the number of employees is app. 40 million people – half informal

6. 1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
The amount of waste generated worldwide in one year is enough to bury the entire area of Munich under 130 metres of waste
Notes:
Area 31,000 ha
Density of waste100kg/m³

7. What do we do with the waste on a global scale?
1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
What do we do with the waste on a global scale?
70 % landfilled or open dumps
10 % incinerated
20 % recycled
→ This produces circa 1 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalents rising to 3 billion tonnes in 2030 mainly from landfills.

8. Consequences Loss of resources Emissions
1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
Consequences
Loss of resources
Emissions
Missed employment opportunities
Destruction of natural resources
Public and urban health risks, epidemics
Illegal trade
Ocean litter

9. 1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
What we want to see

10. And what we do not want to see
1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
And what we do not want to see

11. 1. Global situation and approaches in waste management
Shares of landfills, energy recovery and recycling in different countries
Sources: (1) Eurostat Analysis by M. Bauer and N.J. Themelis 5/25/09, (2) World Waste Survey, Veolia and Cyclope 9/06

12. Financing Options - Overview
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
Financing Options - Overview
Tax system
For any waste type
For special purposes (e.g. landfill tax for contaminated site remediation)
Fee system
In general (e.g. certain fee and charges for residual waste per container, per household, per square metre living space, …)
For specific purposes (e.g. bulky waste, integrated disposal fee for refrigerators, fluorescent tubes, packaging, …)
Deposit System
For certain waste types (e.g. refillable glass or plastic bottles)
Full cost system (all services covered)
For certain waste types (e.g. Producer responsibility driven systems for packaging, electric/electronic waste)
Additional Cost system
For certain waste types (stakeholders share costs involved for packaging waste) 12

13. Different waste types are financed by different means
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
Different waste types are financed by different means
Residual
waste
Bio
waste
Hazardous
waste
Bulky
waste
Non packaging
Paper
Metals
Packaging
waste
Electrical and
electronic
equipment
Cars
Batteries
System
operator
Communities
Dual System
Waste fees/taxes (fee per household, per emptying, per bin, …)
Financing
Method
Fees on weight or unit
Lebensministerium – wie Sich BMU nennt - als Aufsichtsbehörde:
Ziele der EU Richtllinie
Hat volkswirtschaftliche Sinnhaftigkeit und Effizienz im Gesetz verankert
Wirtschaft:
Geringe Kosten und Rechtssicherheit
Aber auch: bequeme Sammlung, weil IG-Verpackungen. -> Zielkonflikt
Konsumenten:
Einfache, bequeme Sammelsysteme
Kostengünstig (Müllgebühr + Lizenzentgelte) -> Zielkonflikt wie oben
Kommunen: Restmüllentlastung – Machtverlust als Nachfrager
Kooperationsmodell und Schnittstellen zu den Sammelsystemen
Entsorgungswirtschaft:
Erfolgreiche Auftragnehmerschaft im Wettbewerb, Planungs- und Investitionssicherheit
Systembetreiber:
Erforderliche Gestaltungsfreiheit, Effizienz und Wettbewerbsfähigkeit
Nicht erwähnt: Politik, Medien, Wissenschaft/Forschung, Umweltgruppen Investoren
Obliged companies
(Extended producer responsibility)
Financed by
Consumers/Citizens

14. Main Cost Factors Collection targets (set by law)
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
Main Cost Factors
Collection targets (set by law)
Actual collection quantities
Kind and performance of collection system
Prices for collection, sorting, and recycling services
Prices for treatment services (recovery, landfill)
Revenues from recycled materials
Cost allocation principles (full/incremental cost)
Other legal requirements (e.g. communication and monitoring requirements)

15. Landfill cost versus Landfill rates in European countries
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
Landfill cost versus Landfill rates in European countries 15

16. 2. Organisation and financing in waste management
Costs for waste managements vary according to the services provided and standard of waste management
Serbia
€30/person/annum, 5% recycling rate, no energy recovery
Hungary
€60/person/annum, 15% recycling rate + energy recovery
Belgium
€185/person/annum, 75% recycling rate + energy recovery

17. What are the costs of bad waste management ? Here are some…….
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
What are the costs of bad waste management ? Here are some…….
Health – epidemics, malaria, dengue fever, typhoid, cholera, respiratory diseases, black soot emissions, dioxin emissions, poisoning Environment - pollution of water tables, air quality, C02 emissions, HFC emissions, greater resource extraction Economic – damages to tourism, urban quality (house prices), business investment Social – waste scavengers, child labour, crime, urban degradation

18. The European focus is on waste minimisation and resource management
2. Organisation and financing in waste management
The European focus is on waste minimisation and resource management
Landfill directive
No untreated waste on landfills
Recycling or recovery of any waste type
Only inert waste after treatment allowed for landfilling
Producer responsibility
Organisational change through producer pays principle
Producers are responsible for products when they become waste and have to fulfil the goals set by law
Costs of waste management measures have to be taken by producers

19. What is Extended Producer Responsibility?
Product Life Cycle
Design/construction
Producer Responsibility
Production
Distribution
Extended Producer Responsibility
Utilisation
End-of-life
Reuse
Waste treatment
Recycling
Source: ei:ee

20. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) as a suitable and proven tool
Applied in EU waste politics to specific waste types:
Packaging and Packaging Waste
Batteries and Accumulators
End of life Vehicles, tires
Waste Electronic and Electrical Equipment WEEE
EPR aims to recover and recycle resources and reduce landfilling volumes
Establishment of national compliance systems to manage recovery and recycling and collect industry fees
Producer committment to recycling and compliance costs leads to improved design and construction
Recyclability is becoming a product quality criteria

21. EPR – Different approaches in Europe
3. Extended Producer Responsibility
EPR – Different approaches in Europe
Source: Spasova, B., Lund University 2014, EXPRA

22. Guidance for successful EPR schemes
4. Challenges and possible solutions for Chile
Guidance for successful EPR schemes
Definition, scope and objectives should be clarified
Responsibilities should be shared and clearly defined along the whole supply chain
Ensuring fair competition, with sufficient control and equal rules for all
Independent clearing house, especially in case of competing Producer Recovery Organisations (PROs)
In line with the polluter pays principle, the design and implementation of an EPR should make sure that the full costs related to the end of life of products are covered
Transparency is required on performances and costs

23. Key success factors for efficient waste management
4. Challenges and possible solutions for Chile
Key success factors for efficient waste management
Appropriate Legislative framework including clear responsibilities for all stakeholders
Schedule and goals for implementation
Capacity building to raise expertise
Waste management planning
Business friendly frameworks to encourage investments
Efficient measures for financing, e.g. EPR, fees
Awareness rising to motivate consumers
Monitoring

25. An international perspective on EPR legislation in Chile
Seminario AMUSA: “REP tarea de todos”
Santiago de Chile, November 14, 2014

26. Content Overview of Extended Producer Responsibility
Law project to promote recycling: El proyecto de ley de fomento al reciclaje
Comments on the legislation
Some lessons learned
Next steps?

27. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is, according to OECD (2001), an environmental policy approach in which a producer's responsibility, physical and/or financial, for a product is extended to the post- consumer stage of a product's life cycle. A wide range of EPR models have been implemented globally.

28. Core recommendations of the OECD
Chile is a member of the OECD since May 2010
OECD recommends the implementation of EPR, leading to:
Increased collection and recycling rates
Reduction of public spending on waste management
Reduction in overall waste management costs
Design for environment (DfE) innovations
Realities of informal waste collection and treatment in developing countries must be considered in EPR design
OECD workshop on EPR, Tokyo, June 2014

29. ? ? ? ? Overview of EPR landscape worldwide V Proposed/Expected
EPR or Product Stewardship in Place
Zimbabwe
Zambia
Yemen
Vietnam
Venezuela
Vanuatu
Uzbekistan
Uruguay
United Kingdom
U.A.E.
Ukraine
Uganda
Turkmenistan
Turkey
Tunisia
Togo
Thailand
Tanzania
Tajikistan
Syria
Switz.
Sweden
Swaziland
Suriname
Sudan
Sri Lanka
Spain
South Africa
Somalia
Solomon Islands
Slovenia
Slovakia
Sierra Leone
Senegal
Saudi Arabia
Rwanda
Russia
Romania
Qatar
Portugal
Poland
Philippines
Peru
Paraguay
New Guinea
Papua
Panama
Pakistan
Oman
Norway
Nigeria
Niger
Nicaragua
New Zealand
Netherlands
Nepal
Namibia
Mozambique
Morocco
Mongolia
Moldova
Mexico
Mauritania
Malta
Mali
Malaysia
Malawi
Madagascar
Macedonia
Lux.
Lithuania
Libya
Liberia
Lesotho
Lebanon
Latvia
Laos
Kyrgyzstan
Kuwait
S. Korea
Taiwan
N. Korea
Kenya
Kazakhstan
Jordan
Japan
Jamaica
Italy
Israel
Ireland
Iraq
Iran
Indonesia
India
Iceland
Hungary
Honduras
Haiti
Guyana
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea
Guatemala
Greenland
Greece
Ghana
Germany
Georgia
Gambia
Gabon
French Guiana
France
Finland
Fiji
Ethiopia
Estonia
Eritrea
Equatorial Guinea
El Salvador
Egypt
Ecuador
East Timor
Dominican Republic
Dijbouti
Denmark
Czech Rep.
Cyprus
Cuba
d’Ivoire
Cote
Costa Rica
Congo
Dem. Rep.
Colombia
China
Chile
Chad
Republic
African
Central
Cape Verde
Cameroon
Cambodia
Burundi
Burma
Burkina
Faso
Bulgaria
Brunei
Brazil
Botswana
Bolivia
Bhutan
Benin
Belize
Bel.
Belarus
Bangladesh
Bahamas
Azerbaijan
Austria
Armenia
Argentina
Angola
Algeria
Albania
Afghanistan
Western Sahara
Bosnia &
Herz.
Serbia
Montenegro
Croatia
Alaska
Texas
Utah
Montana
California
Arizona
Idaho
Nevada
Oregon
Iowa
Colorado
Kansas
Wyoming
New
Missouri
Minnesota
Nebraska
Oklahoma
Dakota
South
Washington
Arkansas
North
Louisiana
Hawaii
Illinois
Ohio
Florida
Alabama
Wisconsin
Virginia
Indiana
Michigan
Mississippi
Kentucky
Tennessee
Pennsylvania
Carolina
West
New Jersey
Maine
York VT MD NH CT
Delaware
Massachusetts RI
United States
Canada
Territory
Yukon
Territories
Northwest
Nunavut
Columbia
British
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
Brunswick
Scotia
Nova
Edward
Island
Prince
Newfoundland
& Labrador
Australia
Singapore ? ? ? ? V

30. Law project to promote recycling: El proyecto de ley de fomento al reciclaje

31. Legislative procedure and status
The Government of Chile has introduced legislation containing extended producer responsibility policies which are consistent with OECD recommendations.
An EPR framework law project was signed in August 2013.
The reworked legislation under the new government (now called “Ley de Fomento al Reciclaje”) was submitted to the Chilean House of Representatives on August 5, 2014 under the simple urgency rule.
Once the legislative process of the EPR-law has concluded, drafting of regulations will be required to give effect to the law.

32. Supreme decrees to follow
A regulation shall establish the procedure for working out the supreme decrees to establish products subject to EPR, targets and other associated obligations for each priority product This will include: a) A general economic and social impact analysis b) Consultation with an extended operating committee created by the Ministry c) A public consultation phase, which shall include the opinion of the Advisory Council of the Ministry of the Environment Supreme decrees will be subject to the approval the Council of Ministers for Sustainability

33. Objectives and scope of the Law
Make value recovery from waste a priority in Chile’s waste management strategy
Introduce EPR as an economic mechanism to increase the recycling rate of packaging and products for at least 9 categories of goods set by the Ministry of Environment (article 9):
Packaging
Lubricating oils
Tires
WEEE/light bulbs
Batteries
Vehicles
Newspapers and magazines
Expired medicines
Pesticides

34. Central rules of the new legislation
This law places the obligation for product responsibility on the first company to put a priority product on the market (“producer” as per art. 3)
The “Ley de fomento al reciclaje” will:
Create cradle-to-grave responsibility: The waste producer is responsible for the handling of the waste, from its creation to its recovery and/or disposal.
Put in place the principle of “the polluter pays”: The producer of waste is responsible for the costs associated with its handling.
Obligate every producer and importer supplying the market in Chile to declare the quantities/tonnages of obligated materials and finance their recycling process – either on its own or through a collective management system.

35. Industry responsibilities
Register the quantity of obligated products supplied into Chile in national database
Organize and finance the collection of priority products waste in all the national territory
individually (self-compliance)
through an authorised collective management system
Deliver their waste to a manager authorised to process it unless the producer handles the waste itself
Solid household or comparable waste shall be delivered to an authorised manager
The penalties for infringements of the law range from significant fines (up to 10 times the waste management costs) to temporary prohibition of sale of the priority product

36. Industry responsibilities
The Ministry of the Environment may also require through supreme decrees:
Labelling
Information to distributors or marketers, managers and consumers, including an itemisation of waste management costs on the receipt or invoice.
These costs shall be maintained throughout the entire marketing chain.
Design and implementation of strategies for communication and raising awareness
Design and implementation of waste preventive measures
Separate collection at source and selective waste collection

37. Role of municipalities
The legislation states municipalities may be allowed to sign agreements with collective management systems and provide enough area for the installation and/or operation of storage sites.
Producers can contract directly with operators to provide recycling services
Municipalities can help producers meet their legal obligations by:
Helping to identify the most effective recycling solutions for their communities
Incorporating new recycling services within their existing and future waste management contract
Facilitating the implementation of new recycling services and facilities
Educating and encouraging their citizens to sort recyclables from waste

38. Comments on the legislation

39. General remarks Chile should be commended for its proposal on EPR
Chile‘s approach to formulating a general framework EPR law followed by product specific regulations reflects international best practices
It recognizes the need to involve the informal recycling sector
It introduces other supporting mechanisms that will make EPR more effective and efficient
The list of “priority products” noted in the legislation would make Chile one of the leading EPR jurisdictions in the world
Agreeing on general framework for EPR is not easy.
Working out product specific regulation through decrees is even more difficult

40. Key planning data needed for all stakeholders
Robust data on quantities and waste characteristics of priority products
Understanding of Chilean recycling preferences and behaviors
Effectiveness of alternative recycling collection approaches under Chilean conditions
Key recycling program operating data
Participation rates
Material capture rates
Material recovery rates
Capital & operating costs
Market demand and prices for recovered materials

41. Data needed to prepare for:
Basis for setting targets
Timeframe to cover entire national market and to reach targets
Scope of priority products to be included
Municipal and industrial & commercial waste?
Product size restrictions (WEEE, packaging, tires, pesticides)?
Business exemptions/de-minimis provisions
“taking into account their status as small or medium-sized enterprises”
Other specific requirements on producers (labelling, itemizing costs on invoices, communications, waste prevention)
Waste management characteristics of the used priority products

42. Keys lessons learned

43. Key lessons learned
You cannot simply copy and paste a collective management model from another country
Need a solid Chilean fact base to ensure that the requirements of the regulations which follow the legislation are achievable
Training and motivating citizens to properly sort priority products for separate collection is the key to success
Most successful national programs build a common recycling “brand”
Ensure that the regulations and collective system financing schemes encourage recycling program effectiveness and efficiency
Regional programs provide economies of scale
Test many different program elements to learn what works best in Chile

44. What could be the next steps?

45. Use these results to help define the best way of recycling in Chile
Next Steps?
Develop mechanisms for cooperation between producers & municipalities
Test different household collection techniques within AMUSA:
Use of different containers for collecting recyclables door-to-door
Increase the frequency of recycling collection
Compare door-to-door collection with drop off points
Collect recyclables from multi-family buildings
Segregation of glass from other materials
Audit the waste and the recycling streams
Test recycling away-from-home: schools, offices, retail, public spaces
Support these efforts with a strong promotion & education campaign
Use these results to help define the best way of recycling in Chile

46. Contact information
Derek Stephenson
Director Global Solutions
Im Zollhafen 2-4
50768 Cologne, Germany
Phone:
Mobile:

47. ¡Muchas Gracias!