Waste incineration significantly contributes to landfilling, shows Zero Waste Europe report

14 Sep 2022 --- Zero Waste Europe (ZWE) has sent a call to action to the EU regarding the rules for incineration residues and misinformation on its relation to landfills. It reports that waste incineration ends up in landfills more often than is documented, and amendments should be made to create a unified measuring system.

Differing opinions on waste incineration’s effects on the environment have been shown. Some define incineration as a “recovery activity,” while others argue its immense contributions to landfills. 

ZWE recently released a report linking municipal waste to “significant quantities of hazardous and non-hazardous residues, much of which are landfilled.” This report follows suit of other reports over the years pleading for reform in incineration tactics. 

The report acknowledges that incineration eliminates landfills. Yet, these recent findings tell that the EU creates between 11.3 and 16 million metric tons of incineration residues that are landfilled annually. Of that, 6.4 metric tons is municipal waste. The ZWE requests a consistent means of measuring waste across countries to have more uniform requirements. 

“Contrary to the industry narrative, waste incineration generates large quantities of hazardous and non-hazardous residues that often are landfilled, or used in ‘backfilling’ operations that in any case fill some landfill space, and incur substantial costs of handling,” says climate, energy and air pollution program coordinator at ZWE Janek Vahk, who spoke to PackagingInsights.

 ZWE asks for the EU to reform municipal waste incineration to reduce its role in landfills. The waste problem
All waste combustion generates 28.4 to 31.8 million tons of residues annually, equivalent to 12.6% and 14.1% municipal solid waste, according to the study. 

Incineration residue can be classified into three categories: bottom ash, fly ash and flue gas. Bottom ash has been reported as a non-hazardous material. However, the evidence presented also calls bottom ash insufficiently regulated and subtly hazardous. 

“The report aimed to show that incinerators produce huge quantities of residues that often need to be landfilled. So the industry argument that incineration replaces landfilling is not true,” tells Vahk. 

The incineration of municipal waste creates over 12 million tons of bottom ash and two million tons of air pollution control residues which “is about 23% of the 61 million tons of municipal waste incinerated in UE in 2020.”

Bottom ash is repurposed to build roads and other construction-related materials, while air pollution control residues are used to fill up salt mines. This repurposing of the ash allows countries to say it has circular applications. “We are concerned about calling filling salt mines with toxic residues as recovery since it’s not,” expresses Vahk.

Reusing incineration residues is called recovery activities in some instances. However, ZWE uncovered that describing it as such may lead to waste movement across boundaries disguised as a recovery operation.

In a ZWE report earlier this year, they “raised 15 concerns for public health and safety relating to the use of incinerator bottom ash residues in ‘circular’ applications.” 

PackagingInsights has reported on companies’ incinerations methods being harmful and misleading information regarding their practices. 

Finding loopholes
ZWE found that countries reported treating waste incineration from R1 incineration (energy recovery) differently from mechanical biological treatment. The different treatment was done by excluding R1 when calculating the quantity of landfilled waste they contributed. 

“The issue is that residues from R1 type of incineration are not counted as landfilled even if they are due to the loophole in the current landfill directive,” notes Vahk.Incineration is regarded as beneficial to some while detrimental to others. 

The landfill directive allows companies to deduct all residues from waste incinerators classed as R1 – including ashes and slags sent to landfills. Being able to do so rewards using R1 incineration as a “landfill minimization option,” the study says. 

“We know landfills are filled with bottom ashes in many countries, for example in Germany and Switzerland, but they are not called so… This is a loophole. If something is landfilled, it should be called so.”

Call to action
The purpose of the published research was to jolt the EU into action and regulate incineration waste. 

“We need to find the best solution for managing residuals; if biological stabilization after sorting mixed waste is the best solution, then this should be recognized by EU law. We should change the current target from 10% landfilling to zero landfilling of untreated waste,” Vahk voices. 

ZWE maintains that minimizing landfills should be done by reducing, reusing, separating, recycling, collecting and redesigning packages that end up in landfills, not incurring them. 

They “call for the equality of treatment to require that all residues resulting from the recovery operations of municipal waste that are subsequently landfilled are treated fairly.”

They prompt the EU to amend the target to exclude the residues from mechanical biological treatment or include all residues from incineration – both R1 and D10 (disposal incineration) – which are landfilled. As well as for the EU to re-specify the landfill target, having it replaced by a target to cap residual waste generation to ensure that the management of residual wastes delivers the most beneficial outcome. 

ZWE believes these actions will be pivotal in revising waste directives to minimize all “leakages” of resources from circular management instead of simply redirecting such leakages from landfills to incinerators. 

“We want to draw attention to the fact that we need to start talking about a residual waste target as we need to minimize both landfilling and waste incineration.”

By Sabine Waldeck