current and future recycling potentials for aluminium in austria...material efficiency of al...

1/49

Current and future recycling potentials for Aluminium in Austria

David Laner and Rainer WarringsInstitute for Water Quality and Resource Management

TU Wien

Science to support Circular EconomyVienna, September 19th 2018

2/49

Content

• Aluminium stocks and flows in Austria• Static:

• Al budget for 2010• Dynamic:

• Evolution of stocks and flows from (1964 – 2012) • Future development of anthropogenic resource stock

and supply (1964 – 2050)

• Al cycle from a product perspective• Material efficiency of Al packaging use in Austria

• Management of aluminium packaging in selected European countries

3/49

Aluminium stocks and flows in Austria

4/49

Al-Use in Austria in 2010

0

50

90

80

70

60

40

30

20

10

100

0 80604020 140120 160100 180 200

Stor

age,

was

te, r

ecov

ery

& di

spos

al[%

]

Consumption [kt/a]

Landfill/Oxidation

Recycling

Re-use (incl. exports)

Stock increase

Adapted from Buchner, H., D. Laner, H. Rechberger, and J. Fellner. 2014. In-depth analysis of aluminum flows in Austria as a basis to increase resource efficiency. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 93(0): 112-123.

5/49

Dynamic Model: Al in Austria (1964-2012)

Prim. Production

1964 77.000t

1965 78.000 t

….

….

2012 0 t

Sec. Production

1964 14.000 t

1965 17.000 t

….

….

2012 410.000 t

Rolling

1964 22.000t

1965 21.000 t

….

….

2012 151.000 t

Extruding

1964 10.000 t

1965 9.000 t

….

….

2012 133.000 t

Casting

1964 5.200t

1965 5.400 t

….

….

2012 123.000t

Production and Trade Data

Sector-specific lifetimes

Sector splitratios

Losses

Losses

C [%]Al in final products

Modeled using

MATLAB

incl. uncertainty analysis

Buchner, H., D. Laner, H. Rechberger, and J. Fellner. 2015a. Dynamic Material Flow Modeling: An Effort to Calibrate and ValidateAluminum Stocks and Flows in Austria. Environmental Science & Technology 49(9): 5546-5554.

6/49

Al in-use stock and old scrap

Based on Buchner et al. (2015a)

Al in-use stock Al scrap + EOL Vehicles

360 kg/cap 14 kg/cap.a

1982 - 2012:Per capita stock increased by a factor of 3.8 Per capita scrap amount increased by a factor of 3.4

7/49

Al model: Calibration and plausibility

Plausibility check of the model with independent bottom-up estimates

Individual SectorsConsumption:TransportPackaging

Calibration

Consumption:Buildings

Plausibility

Stock:TransportEl. engineering

Plausibility

Based on Buchner et al (2015a)

8/49

Forecasting Al stocks and flows

Nutzlager

3.0 x 106 [t]

Current in-use stock (2012)

Future final Al demandStock-drivenTransport: Inhabitants, level of motorization, Al content /carBuildings & infrastructure: projected dwelling unitsElectrical Eng. : strategic grid development plan

Input-driven:Mechanical Eng.ConsumerPackaging

Forecast model

Historical model

Transport

Buildings & infrastructure

Electrical Eng.Consumer

Mechanical. Eng.

Packaging

Buchner, H., D. Laner, H. Rechberger, and J. Fellner. 2015b. Future Raw Material Supply: Opportunities and Limits of AluminiumRecycling in Austria. Journal of Sustainable Metallurgy 1(4): 253-262.

9/49

Future stocks and old scrap generation

Buchner et al. (2015b)

360 kg/cap

440 kg/cap

530 kg/cap

14 kg/cap.yr

24 kg/cap.yr

31 kg/cap.yr

10/49

Al self-supply from sec. raw materials

Final Al demand

Self-supply from national old scrapregarding final Al demand

Buchner et al. (2015b)

11/49

Al self-supply – Austrian final Al demand

𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑜𝑜 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑇𝑇𝑠𝑠𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐴𝐴𝑇𝑇 𝑜𝑜𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑇𝑇𝐹𝐹𝑜𝑜

Buchner et al. (2015b)

Increase recyclingrate for Al packaging

40% 75%(2012) (2025)

40%

44%

+35%

67%

+35%

12/49

Quality aspects of Al recycling

Recycling only within certain alloy families or into cast alloysPotential problems caused by unsorted/mixed scrap fractions

Buchner, H., D. Laner, H. Rechberger, and J. Fellner. 2017. Potential recycling constraints due to future supply and demand of wrought and cast Al scrap—A closed system perspective on Austria. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 122: 135-142.

13/49

No separation of transport old scrap

Excess-supply of unsorted Al scrap

Future Al content in cars

Availability of unseparated Al old scrap exceeds national cast Al demand in a (hypothetical) closed system

Buchner et al. (2017)

14/49

Wrap-up: National Al management

• Detailed Al budget to evaluate current Al use and losses (inefficiencies) of the system

• Calibrated dynamic model to investigate Al stock and current and future secondary raw material potentials

• In-use stock increase of 50% and increase of old scrap generation of 120% by 2050

• Potential self-supply will most likely not exceed 40% with respect to final Al demand

• Extreme measures (EOL vehicle export bans, recycling) could raise self-supply by another 27%. Primary metal will still be necessary.

• Quality aspects (e.g. alloy compositions) may become critical for secondary production

• trade as a balancing factor• enhanced sorting and upgrading to avoid quality constraints

15/49

Aluminium from packaging and households

16/49

Focus for research:

„Aluminium recycling“

• Status Quo Al- packaging & houshold goods / MFA

• Market volume, waste quantities, waste flows

• Recovery rates, losses

• EU: Circular Economy Package

• Ecological & economical assessment

• Potential for change: Recovery, EcoDesign

Circular Economy - Aluminium

17/49

Al packaging & non-packaging – Market volume / waste generation

19,200 t 5,900 t

18/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

19/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

20/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

21/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

22/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

23/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

24/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

25/49

27%

73%

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

26/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

27/49

MFA – Aluminium packaging & non-packaging

28/49

• Results

Results

29/49

Results

30/49

Results

31/49

Results

32/49

Results

33/49

• Results:

39% recycling of Al from households

• 26% separate collection

• 8% BA

• 5% mechanical treatment

34/49

• Results:

39% recycling of Al from households

• 26% separate collection

• 8% BA 1.74 kg per t waste input

• 5% mechanical treatment 2.85 kg per t waste input

Results

35/49

• Results:

• Recycling rates are significantly lower than generally assumed

• Recovery becomes more difficult if not separately collected

• Thickness of material has huge influence on recycling rates

• Oxidation

• Small size particles

36/49

Results

37/49

• Conclusions:

Main losses of Al

• through oxidation (10%) during incineration

• limited recovery from subsequent waste treatments (losses 49%)

Improvement

• recovery rates & collection systems

• Eco-design

EU objectives for reuse and recycling: Al in packaging waste

• 50% for 2025, resp. 60% for 2030

38/49

Management of aluminium packaging in selected

European countries

• Evaluation of recycling quantities for Al packaging in comparison to the

projected targets of the EU Circular Economy Package

• Al packaging is recovered through different systems

• selective collection

• deposit refund system (DRS)

• informal collection

• bottom ash of MSWI

• mechanical treatment

39/49

Aluminium packaging in Europe

Selected EU Member States

40/49

Aluminium packaging in Europe

0.75-1.251.25-1.751.75-2.25>2.25

kg / cap

Market volume (kg per capita)

Selected EU Member States

41/49

Aluminium packaging in Europe

<2525-5050-75>75

%

Recycling (%)

Selected EU Member States

42/49

9%

18%

34%

39%

Selected EU Member States

Deposit Refund System

Aluminium packaging in Europe

Losses

56%38%

6%

BE

34%

48%

6%12%

DE

Selective Collection

BA/MBT

41%

37%

22%

SE

6%

72%

22%

NL

68%2%

30%

IT

35%

32%

33%

AT

40%

11%

49%

GB

14%

30%56%

FR

27%

8%65%

GR

24%

0%

76%

CZ

11%9%

80%

PT

Selected EU Member States

42

43/49

• Results:

• Mostly high recycling rates (7 of 11 countries > 50%)

• Al packaging between 0.9 and 2.7 kg/cap

• 2 countries (Sweden, Germany) use a deposit refund system (DRS)

• overall highest rates of collected Al packaging

(selective collection and DRS)

• Other countries with similar or higher recycling rates (Belgium, Netherlands)

do not use DRS, but recover large volumes from bottom ash (BA) treatment

from municipal solid waste incineration (MSWI).

44/49

• Results:

• Low recovery rates = high landfilling rates (50-84%)

• high recycling rates (except Italy) = low landfilling rates (1-3%)

• No overall correlation between consumption and recycling rate

• Germany: low consumption rate (1.4 kg/cap), high recycling rate (88%)

• Portugal: low consumption rate (0.9 kg/cap), low recycling rate (20%)

• UK: high consumption rate (2.7 kg/cap), medium recycling rate (50%)

45/49

• Conclusions:

Objective

• through which system and to what extent Al packaging was recovered?

(reliability of the data was not questioned)

Results

• based on different assumptions

• difficult to compare

46/49

• Conclusions:

Bottom ash recovery from MSWI

• assumption that 100% of the Al in BA is originating from Al packaging

• based on estimations of average recovery yields for non-ferrous (depending

on particle size and degree of separation)

• partly commercial waste in MSWI

• considerable quantities of waste are imported (e.g. NL)

47/49

• Conclusions:

Selective collection & sorting

• proportion of non-Al present materials are unknown

• Italy (67,8% collection, but only 43% of MSW & 25% landfilled)

• partly Al non-packaging & commercial waste

48/49

• Conclusions:

EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy

• need for a uniform and precisely formulated requirement for data collection

• originally intended higher goals for Al packaging (70% for 2025)

Why not realized?

49/49

Thank you!

Contact:Dr. David Laner DI Rainer WarringsE-mail: david.laner@tuwien.ac.at E-mail: rainer.warrings@tuwien.ac.at