report recycling in balkan region

HSWMA & SeSWA

July 2013

Aida Anthouli, Konstantine Aravossis, Rozy Charitopoulou, Bojana Tot, Goran Vujic

[OPPORTUNITIES & BARRIERS OF RECYCLING IN BALKAN COUNTRIES: THE CASES OF GREECE AND SERBIA]

OPPORTUNITIES & BARRIERS OF RECYCLING

IN BALKAN COUNTRIES:

The cases of Greece and Serbia

Authors

Aida Anthouli D-Waste Expert, Member of the Board of HSWMA

Konstantine Aravossis Assistant Professor, N.T.U.A, President of HSWMA

Rozy Charitopoulou, Dr. - Ing. Director of Hellenic Recycling Agency, Member of the Board of HSWMA

Master in Environment Engineering, General Secretary of SeSWA

Goran Vujic Professor, University of Novi Sad, President of SeSWA

Contributors & Reviewers

We would like to thank the contributors and reviewers for their constructive, valuable support and helpful

suggestions: Antonis Mavropoulos, Elias Ordolis - AFIS S.A., Panagiota Vagena - Sofia Houma -

Re-Battery AE, and Marios Skarvelakis.

Websites: www.eedsa.gr, www.seswa.rs E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]

With the support of .

Financed under the ISWA Project Grant 2012.

LEGAL NOTICE

Reproduction, photocopying, unauthorized selling or transmission by magnetic or electronic means of this publication in whole

or parts are strictly prohibited. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use must be prior granted by HSWMA,

SeSWA, and ISWA. Violation of copyright will result in legal action, including civil and/or criminal penalties, and suspension of

service.

CONTENTS

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction: A Recycling World ............................................................................................................................... 2

2. Recycling in the Region ............................................................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Recycling in EU .................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Recycling in Balkan Countries (Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro) ................................................... 7

2.2.1 Bosnia & Herzegovina ................................................................................................................................ 10

2.2.2 Croatia ....................................................................................................................................................... 10

2.2.3 Montenegro .............................................................................................................................................. 11

3. Analysis of the Existing Policies & Legal Framework ............................................................................................... 12

................................................................................................................ 12

3.2 Legal Framework for Waste Management and Recycling in Greece and Serbia .............................................. 15

3.2.1 Overall strategy, Policy & Legal Framework in Greece .............................................................................. 15

3.2.2 Overall strategy, policy & Legal Framework in Serbia ............................................................................... 18

4. Production & Management of Municipal Solid Waste ............................................................................................ 21

4.1 Municipal Solid Waste Management in Greece ................................................................................................ 21

4.2 Municipal Solid Waste Management in Serbia ................................................................................................. 26

5. Production & management of Recycling Streams ................................................................................................... 37

5.1 Management of Recycling Streams in Greece ................................................................................................. 37

5.5.1 Package and Packaging Waste ................................................................................................................... 39

5.5.2 Motor oil residues ..................................................................................................................................... 50

5.1.3 End of Life Vehicles .................................................................................................................................... 52

5.1.4 Portable batteries & accumulators ............................................................................................................ 54

5.1.5 WEEE - Waste of Electronic and Electrical Equipment .............................................................................. 58

5.1.5 Used Tires .................................................................................................................................................. 62

5.1.6 Construction & Demolition Waste Systems............................................................................................... 64

5.2 Management of Recycling Streams in Serbia .................................................................................................... 65

5.2.1 Actors in the national-private sector ......................................................................................................... 71

6. Stakeholders in Recycling ........................................................................................................................................ 84

6.1 Recycling Stakeholders in Greece ..................................................................................................................... 84

6.2 Recycling Stakeholders in Serbia ....................................................................................................................... 86

7. Preconditions for Successful Implementation of Recycling Policies ....................................................................... 89

7.1 Challenges, Problems, Gaps and Barriers of the Recycling in Greece ............................................................... 89

7.2 Challenges, Problems, Gaps and Barriers of the Recycling in Serbia ................................................................ 92

Gaps for Policy and Policy and Policy Implementation Measures ...................................................................... 93

8. Opportunities in the Recycling Waste Industry ....................................................................................................... 96

8.1 Opportunities in the Recycling Waste Industry in Greece ................................................................................ 96

8.2. Opportunities in the Recycling Waste Industry in Serbia ................................................................................ 97

9. Recommendations for Policy & Mechanisms in the Financial Crisis Situation ........................................................ 99

9.1 Recommendations and Important Measures for Policy in Greece ................................................................... 99

9.2 Recommendation and Important Measures for Policy in Serbia .................................................................... 101

10. Success Stories/Good Practices in the Region ..................................................................................................... 104

10.1 Success Stories - Good Practices in Greece ................................................................................................... 104

Afis .................................................................................................................................................................... 104

10.2 Success Stories - Good Practices in Serbia .................................................................................................... 104

Cluster "Recycling South" ................................................................................................................................. 105

Recycling and Service Coverage in Belgrade .................................................................................................... 106

11. Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................................... 109

Greece ................................................................................................................................................................... 109

Serbia .................................................................................................................................................................... 109

12. Sources/References ............................................................................................................................................. 113

LIST OF FIGURES & TABLES

FIGURES

Figure 1: MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT IN EU (2011) ................................................................................................................... 4

Figure 2: TREND IN GENERATION OF MUNICIPAL WASTE IN EUROPE .............................................................................................. 5

Figure 3: MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT EUROPE ..................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 4: Recycling Performance in Europe (% of the total MSW Generated), Source: Eurostat, 2012 ............................................ 6

Figure 5: Packaging Recycling Rate (2010) ........................................................................................................................................ 6

Figure 6: Total turnover of recycling of seven key recyclables in the EU. Source: EEA ..................................................................... 7

Figure 7: GDP and residual Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) ................................................................................................................ 9

Figure 8: European legislation on waste management ................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 9: Waste hierarchy pyramid ................................................................................................................................................. 15

Figure 10: Country and waste profiles of Greece & Serbia .............................................................................................................. 21

Figure 11: MUNICIPAL WASTE GENERATED IN GREECE .................................................................................................................. 23

Figure 12: Municipal waste in Greece by treatment ....................................................................................................................... 23

Figure 13: Average Greek MSW composition (YPEKA, 2011) .......................................................................................................... 24

Figure 14: Geographical and temporal variation of MSW composition in GREECE, ........................................................................ 24

Figure 15: Uncontrolled active dumpsites in Greece (2011) ........................................................................................................... 25

Figure 16: Map of identified landfills in Serbia ................................................................................................................................ 28

Figure 17: Quantity of municipal solid waste, expressed in kg capita-1 day-1 ................................................................................ 29

Figure 18: Influence of seasonal variation on generated waste quantities ..................................................................................... 29

Figure 19: Daily amount of municipal solid waste expressed in kg per capita ................................................................................ 32

Figure 20: Municipal waste morphological composition for Republic of Serbia ............................................................................. 32

Figure 21: The role of PROs (adapted from [29]. ............................................................................................................................. 37

Figure 22: Organogram of HRA ........................................................................................................................................................ 39

Figure 23: HERRCO Recycle bin ....................................................................................................................................................... 39

Figure 24: Material Recovery Facility .............................................................................................................................................. 40

Figure 25: Number of bins and corresponding tonnage collected packaging waste from 2005 - 2009 .......................................... 40

Figure 26: Location of the 24 Recycling facilities in Greece as of 2009 ........................................................................................... 40

Figure 27: Percentage of the different producer categories ........................................................................................................... 41

Figure 28: Composition of recovered materials of the Attica recycling plant ................................................................................. 43

Figure 29: The number of registered producers of packaging and packaging waste, 2002-2011 ................................................... 44

Figure 30: Packaging waste collected in Greece, 2009-2011, per material and totally. .................................................................. 44

Figure 31: Total packaging waste and printed paper collected, 2006-2011. ................................................................................... 45

Figure 32: Collection centre ANTAPODOTIKI ANAKYKLOSI .............................................................................................................. 45

Figure 33: Collection centre AB Vassilopoulos ................................................................................................................................ 45

Figure 34: The number of registered producers of oil packaging waste, 2003-2011 ...................................................................... 46

Figure 35: Put on the market and collected quantities for each material of oil packaging, 2011 ................................................... 46

Figure 36: Recycling of paper in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) ................................................................................ 47

Figure 37: Recycling of plastic in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) ............................................................................... 47

Figure 38: Recycling of glass in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) .................................................................................. 48

Figure 39: Recycling of wood in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) ................................................................................ 48

Figure 40: Recycling of aluminium in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) ........................................................................ 49

Figure 41: Recycling of steel in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) .................................................................................. 49

Figure 42: Recycling of packaging waste in Greece in the period of 2006-2010 (in tons) ............................................................... 50

Figure 43: Composition (average) of collected packaging waste .................................................................................................... 50

Figure 44: The number of registered producers of motor oil residues, 2004-2011. ....................................................................... 51
file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551346file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551347file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551355file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551356

Figure 45: Put on the market and collected quantities of motor oil, 2004-2011 ............................................................................ 52

Figure 46: Treatment site of EoLV ................................................................................................................................................... 52

Figure 47: Typical collection site of EoLV ........................................................................................................................................ 52

Figure 48: Collection of wastewater separately .............................................................................................................................. 53

Figure 49: EoLV collected for 2004-2010. ........................................................................................................................................ 53

Figure 50: Percentage of reuse, recovery and recycling of end of life vehicles ............................................................................... 54

Figure 51: AFIS collection point ....................................................................................................................................................... 54

Figure 52: The number of registered producers of batteries, 2005-2011 ....................................................................................... 55

Figure 53: Put on the market and collected quantities of batteries, 2005-2011 ............................................................................. 55

Figure 54: Percentage of Recycling of Portable batteries in Greece in the period 2006-2011 (in tons) .......................................... 56

Figure 55: Site DYDESIS.................................................................................................................................................................... 57

Figure 56: Pb-oxide batteries .......................................................................................................................................................... 57

Figure 57: The number of registered producers of batteries, 2004-2011. ...................................................................................... 57

Figure 58: Put on the market and collected quantities of batteries, 2005-2011. ............................................................................ 57

Figure 59: Treatment facilities for WEEE ......................................................................................................................................... 58

Figure 60: Collected quantities over the period 2006-2009 (kg). .................................................................................................... 58

Figur .......................................................................................................................... 59

Figure 62: Number of registered producers in the years from 2004-2009 ...................................................................................... 59

Figure 63: The number of registered producers of WEEE, 2004-2011 ............................................................................................ 60

Figure 64: Put on the market and collected quantities of WEEE, 2005-2011 .................................................................................. 60

Figure 65: Quantities of WEEE treated, and collected from householdes, 2005-2010 ................................................................... 61

Figure 66: Bin for the collection of lighting fittings ......................................................................................................................... 62

Figure 67: Bin for the collection of bulbs ......................................................................................................................................... 62

Figure 68: The number of registered producers of WEEE, 2009-2011 ............................................................................................ 62

Figure 69: Put on the market and collected quantities of WEEE, 2009-2011 .................................................................................. 62

Figure 70: Put on the market and collected quantities of used tires, 2004-2011. .......................................................................... 63

Figure 71: Destinations of tires collected in Greece 2006-2011 ...................................................................................................... 64

Figure 72: Packaging & packaging waste management system in accordance with the Law on waste management .................... 71

.......................................................................... 72

.............................................................................................................. 96

Figure 75: Collected tonnes of portable batteries from AFIS ........................................................................................................ 104

Figure 76: Containers for different types of waste ........................................................................................................................ 107

TABLES

Table 1: Waste Management Data - Estimated Overview ................................................................................................................. 8

Table 2: Share of Recycled waste .................................................................................................................................................... 10

Table 3: Targets of the Waste Framework Directive ....................................................................................................................... 13

Table 4: Recycling and recovery targets under Serbian legislation ................................................................................................. 19

Table 5: General information on waste management in the Republic of Serbia ............................................................................. 27

Table 6: Number of identified landfills in Serbia by criteria ............................................................................................................ 27

Table 7: Daily and annually projections of generated municipal waste quantities per capita ........................................................ 28

Table 8: Composition of MSW based on housing conditions (as % of total category weight)......................................................... 30

Table 9: Morphological analysis results projected on the municipality of Novi Sad ....................................................................... 33

Table 10: Municipal collection programs ........................................................................................................................................ 34

Table 11: Operating PRO systems in Greece during 2012 ............................................................................................................... 38

Table 12: Results of the blue bin projects in Greece ....................................................................................................................... 41

........................................................................................................... 42
file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551374file:///F:/Aida%2026.06.13/EEDSA/Projects/Pragmatopoiisima/ISWA%20Grant%202011/Report/Report%20Final_06.08.13.docx%23_Toc363551384

Table 14: Results of the collection system ELTEPE in the years 2006-2007 .................................................................................... 51

Table 15: AFIS collection points ....................................................................................................................................................... 54

Table 16: Collection points in all Greece ......................................................................................................................................... 59

Table 17: Quantities of WEEE treated, and collected from householdes, 2005-2010 ..................................................................... 61

Table 18: Collection amounts of tires in Greece.............................................................................................................................. 63

Table 19: Destinations of tires collected in Greece 2006-2011 ....................................................................................................... 63

Table 20: Estimated quantities of packaging waste ........................................................................................................................ 66

Table 21: The total amount of recovered packaging waste again by the operators ....................................................................... 66

Table 22: Amount of recovered packaging waste by type and operators ....................................................................................... 66

Table 23: Total generated MSW / Total generated special waste streams ..................................................................................... 69

Table 24: Estimated amount of collected waste ............................................................................................................................. 74

Table 25: "Recycling Backyards" National Strategy ......................................................................................................................... 76

Table 26: Plastic Processors and Recyclers Comparison Summary ................................................................................................. 82

....................................... 106

1 | P a g e

Executive Summary

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Notwithstanding their many differences, countries of the Balkan region share some similar characteristics,

especially regarding the culture of their inhabitants, as well as problems and experiences deriving from a

longstanding neighbouring and a common history.

These common features can be met as well in local recycling policies and their application. Relative experiences,

successes, problems, and questions are worth a closer and more serious investigation in order to help recycling in

the area, and promote environmental protection.

Especially countries that recently have started their recycling efforts, and have little experience from local projects,

can greatly benefit by paradigms, success stories and failures identifying in that way their own sustainable

recycling solutions that truly apply to related countries. Moreover, it can strengthen cooperation between

neighbouring countries in the spectrum of interconnectivity and globalisation, and bring financial, environmental,

and social benefits in the Balkan area. A common perception of the situation in recycling, and conclusions deriving

from such investigation, could empower, in a European framework, proper environmental policy making, and later

application, in its foundations.

For the reasons above, this report takes a closer look in recycling in the Balkan region, focusing in Greece and

Initially, this report presents the reason why recycling is a major issue globally, and describes the EU framework

under which Balkan countries establish their recycling future. After a short description of recycling status in other

Balkan countries like Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro, the current waste and recycling situation

is elaborated in next chapters. Finally, opportunities and barriers are elaborated, while successful case studies and

conclusions are presented in the final chapters.

More in particular the report focuses in key-areas:

Analysis of Policies and Legal Framework

Performance targets and current results in recycling

Identification of the relative recycling markets and stakeholders

Challenges, Problems, Gaps and Barriers of Recycling in the countries

Opportunities and Recommendations

Successful applications and case studies

2 | P a g e

Opportunities & barriers of Recycling in Balkan Countries: The cases of Greece and Serbia

1. INTRODUCTION: A RECYCLING WORLD

Recycling by definition is to use discarded and unwanted products to create new products. Recycling has the dual

benefit of saving scarce landfill space and limited natural resources. Recycling is a weapon in the battle for saving

the environment.

Recycling can be considered to be any action which collects, separates or processes solid waste or materials that

would otherwise become solid waste; and processes or returns them to use either as raw materials or products.

Through recycling, natural resources and energy can be saved and pollution reduced.

It is virtually impossible to give a decisive answer to question whether recycling is more important in the sphere of

industrial or municipal waste, since in both cases significant technical, environmental and economic effects are

obtained. The most important effects out of them are certainly: drastic reduction of quantities of industrial and

municipal waste that must be disposed to sanitary waste areas, by which the period of waste area use is prolonged

and the process of exploitation of natural resources and emissions from waste area is slowed down.

When individuals, institutions and businesses recycle, less trash is disposed of in landfills. Waste reduction and

recycling activities help to extend the lifespan of landfills. More importantly, recycling also helps to save energy

and natural resources which would otherwise be needed to create new products out of virgin materials. There are

energy, pollution reduction and natural resource benefits associated with recycling which are evident in all of the

stages of consumer product development.

Recycling works best if a market for the recycled materials exists or can be created, and had been favoured by

rising prices for many secondary and primary materials in recent years. It was evident though that recycling

markets seems to suffer in times of economic crisis.

RECYCLING IN A GLOBALISED WORLD

Never was the world so interconnected, and in such framework, recycling has become a globalised business with

environmental, societal, and health parameters. Recycling characterises an era of different thinking about what is

considered waste, with both positive and some negative aspects.

Today there is an increased demand on materials especially due to rising of the developing world. As a

consequence recycling, as a provider of valuable materials, is playing a more significant role, and the need for

recycling materials is increasing1.

Of course recycling practices do not bring only positive results; negative effects of illegal shipping of waste, and

poor environmental framework in countries/receivers exist in a great degree.

Also there is the phenomenon of immigration of scavengers, where people from less developed countries enter

the informal sector in progressed countries, particular in recycling, increasing in many cases recycling rates. But on

the same time there are putting further health, environmental, and financial burden and risk in the recycling chain.

Recycling is also favoured by the increase of global environmental awareness & implementation of international

treaties that support environmental protection & recycling.

1 ISWA Presidential Advisory Committee, C. Scharff

3 | P a g e

1. Introduction: A Recycling World

Today there are also human & international networks that facilitate information sharing and organisation of

systems for exchanging and selling of materials.

Strong drivers make recycling an important issue in the global economies. Such drivers are for example the

increasing waste volumes, which demand efficient solutions of treatment, while at the same time it is important to

save the contained precious materials.

Last years there has been improved regulatory implementation, there is a shift away from landfill towards recycling

and recovery, and there are regulatory pressures and legislative support for recycling. Also there is a growing

public concern, a need for a clean image, and of course there is the economic value of recycling.

Lately there has started the discussion on the importance of ensuring the quality of recycling products2, and not

only quantities. It is not irrelevant the recent decision of China to raise environmental standards of recycled

materials imported, it indicates a trend that should be considered.

CONSTRAINTS

As all business recycling encompass various constrains. Recycling is not an easy case and this because of the

different parameters that have to be considered when applying the business scenario. First of all is a relative new

business in such an organised form. Secondly, the materials themselves are many and in many forms. There are

various stakeholders, many legal, many illegal and the managing chain may change many countries, material can

change forms, legislation status in countries involved probably is different, and there are many parameters to be

considered including, social, environmental, and economic.

Some more constraints3 include:

- Varied interpretations of legislation - Weak implementation of legislation in some countries - Continued dependence on landfill, which is also the characteristic of Balkan countries, including Greece up

to today - Recycling is expensive for certain types of waste - Problems deriving from financial crisis - Economic downturn affects market prospects - Illegal waste dumping - Downcycle of materials

In the above framework cooperation between nations and exchange of experiences and transfer of knowhow is

essential for the successful implementation of national and global policies on the recycling field.

2 C. Velis and P. Brunner, "Recycling and resource efficiency: it is time for a change from quantity to quality", Waste Management Research,

June 2013

3 D-

4 | P a g e


2. RECYCLING IN THE REGION

Balkan countries are either already part, or future members of the EU. In this sense they are all aiming in becoming

part of the vision of o European recycling society. Some are closer to this target; some have a long way to cover,

either way recycling efforts have already started in the region and there are numerous challenges to be addressed.

recycling state in EU and some of the Balkan countries like Romania, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and

Montenegro.

2.1 RECYCLING IN EU

Rapid increase in volume and types of solid and hazardous waste as a result of continuous economic growth,

urbanization and industrialization, is becoming a burgeoning problem for national and local governments to ensure

effective and sustainable management of waste.

Waste generation in the European Union, as in the most of the world, is still increasing. Regarding waste

treatment, although recycling and diversion from landfilling is increasing the latest years, Municipal waste

Treatment in several countries of the EU-27 still relies in a great degree on landfills. However trends show that

landfilling will be further reduced in the future, and recycling and composting of waste will be covering a great

degree of the waste practices.

FIGURE 1: MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT IN EU (2011)

Europe, like much of the industrialized world, is using an increasing amount of materials. The average annual use

of material resources in EU-27 is around 16 tons/person. Regarding other figures, the overall trend in waste

generation, including hazardous waste, is upwards. The total waste generation in EU-27, including Turkey, Norway,

Iceland, and Croatia reaches 3 billion tons (2006), while total hazardous waste generation reaches 88 million tons

(2006). The total municipal waste generation accounts for 260 million tons (2008), while the per capita municipal

generation is about 524 kg/cap (2008), while there are large differences between countries4.

4 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Waste_statistics

5 | P a g e

2. Recycling in the Region

FIGURE 2: TREND IN GENERATION OF MUNICIPAL WASTE IN EUROPE

FIGURE 3: MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT EUROPE

Recycling has numerous environmental benefits including diverting waste away from landfill, thereby avoiding

pollutant emissions. It also helps meet the material demands of economic production, preventing the

environmental impacts associated with extracting and refining virgin materials5.

5

6 | P a g e


FIGURE 4: RECYCLING PERFORMANCE IN EUROPE (% OF THE TOTAL MSW GENERATED), SOURCE: EUROSTAT, 20126

FIGURE 5: PACKAGING RECYCLING RATE (2010)

Apart from environmental benefits, recycling brings also economic and social benefits.

Revenues from recycling are substantial and growing fast. From 2004 to 2008 the turnover of seven main

categories of recyclables (glass, paper & cardboard, plastics and the above mentioned metal groups) almost

aw materials and a decline in

6 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/data/wastemanagement/recycling

24%

37%

0%

14%

23%

45%

12%

32%

17%15%

18%20%

16%

9%

3%

26%

18%

7%

28%

30%

15%

11%

1%

43%

4%

20%

36%

25%27%

34%

3%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

EU

(2

7 c

ou

ntr

ies)

Be

lgiu

m

Bu

lgari

a

Cze

ch

Re

pu

blic

De

nm

ark

Ge

rman

y

Est

on

ia

Ire

lan

d

Gre

ece

Sp

ain

Fra

nce

Italy

Cyp

rus

Latv

ia

Lith

uan

ia

Lu

xe

mb

ou

rg

Hu

ngary

Malta

Ne

the

rlan

ds

Au

stri

a

Po

lan

d

Po

rtu

gal

Ro

man

ia

Slo

ve

nia

Slo

vakia

Fin

lan

d

Sw

ed

en

Un

ited

Kin

gd

om

No

rway

Sw

itze

rlan

d

Cro

atia

2010

7 | P a g e


commodity prices during the economic downturn the turnover of recycling declined sharply at the end of 2008 and

in the first half of 2009 but seems to have recovered somewhat since then7.

FIGURE 6: TOTAL TURNOVER OF RECYCLING OF SEVEN KEY RECYCLABLES IN THE EU. SOURCE: EEA8

Also employment linked to material recovery has also increased. People working in the recycling sector reached

from 422 inhabitants per million in 2000, to 611 in 2007.

With recycling, there is less use of virgin materials, and there is an opportunity for decoupling of material use from

economic growth. Also, resources are kept in a close-loop process and represent a more circular, instead of a linear

economy, where resources are depleted & wasted. Finally there is less use of virgin non-renewable resources.

Through recycling EU maintains secure supplies of rare or precious metals that are necessary for the production of

new technologies, (ex. e-mobility, information & communication technologies & renewable energy). Important

also is the creation of green job, through recycling. 301,000 people were employed in the recycling sector in EU in

2007 versus 174,000 in 20009.

2.2 RECYCLING IN BALKAN COUNTRIES (BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA, CROATIA, MONTENEGRO)

Initiatives are under way in Croatia, Romania, Serbia and BiH to reduce waste in landfills. Much of the region's

waste ends up in landfills.

While governments across the region have not established integrated systems of waste management, they are

working to implement recycling programmes and are researching ways to use waste for energy production or

biowaste composting.

7 ETC/SCP, "Green economy and recycling in Europe", June 2011

8 http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/total-turnover-of-recycling-of

9 in a green economy, 2008

8 | P a g e


Croatia is doing better with waste management than some EU countries, such as Romania and Bulgaria, but it must

achieve better results.

Country has not developed a national strategy, obligating municipalities to establish waste sorting systems that will

meet the demanding European objectives.

In Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), just 5 percent of waste is recycled. According to the Statistic Agency of BiH,

around 67 percent of the population makes use of public municipal waste services, while the rest, settled in rural

areas, do not have any waste management. Last year BiH deposited 1.4 million tonnes of waste in landfills. There

are no economically viable systems for their collection.

An overview of the amount of waste generated (including specifically for PET and Plastic Bags) is given in the table

below.

TABLE 1: WASTE MANAGEMENT DATA - ESTIMATED OVERVIEW10

Croatia 2008 BiH 2009 Montenegro 2009 EU 27 2009

Population 4,417,000 3,840,000 620,145 493,000,000

Quantity rMSW [tonne] 1,800,000 1,493,000 193,000 167,000,000

Quantity rMSW [kg/inhab] 408 388 311 338

Quantity of PET [tonne] 44,000 50,000 3,018,600

[kg/inhab] 10 13 6

[pcs/inhab] 332 434 200

PET Collection [tonne/yr] 22,000

PET Recycling 18,200 500 1,360,000

PET Recycling 41% 1% 48

Plastic bags [tonne] 2,200 3,400,000

Plastic bags [kg/inhab] 0.6 7

Plastic bags [pcs/inhab] 29 338

10 Anonymous, 2012

9 | P a g e


FIGURE 7: GDP AND RESIDUAL MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE (MSW) 11

The development of waste from beverage packaging as well as from plastic bags is different from other municipal

wastes. While the quantity of municipal waste is more or less connected to the economic situation of a national

economy measured in GDP the quantity of one way beverage packaging (mostly PET and metal cans) has increased

rapidly even in regions where GDP remains low.

Despite these low figures for total MSW generation, Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia & Herzegovina generate large

quantities of PET-bottle waste, estimated to range between 7 to 13 kg/inhab/yr which amounts to more than 300

bottles per resident per year. In comparison Austria, Germany and Europe as a whole generate approximately half

this amount of PET bottle waste at 5 to 6 kg/inhab/yr respectively less than 200 bottles.

In addition to the high amount of PET waste generated, the amount of plastic bags is also very high, which would

correspond to approximately 900 bags per resident per year. For Bosnia & Herzegovina a quantity of 21,600 tonnes

of PE plastic bags is reported which corresponds to approximately 600 bags per resident per year.

Reuse of packaging material has been encouraged in Croatia since the recent introduction of a tax system imposed

on producers and importers of packaging waste. Otherwise the reuse of packaging material such as glass bottles is

not reported in SEE. It seems that most of the refillable glass bottles have been replaced by one-way-plastic-bottles

in recent years.

The recycling of waste is not widely practiced in the SEE region only around 5-15% of MSW is recycled. This is

significantly lower than the average reported across the EU27 of 60.5%. The table below gives an overview of the

relative amounts of the different materials that are recycled12

.

11 Anonymous, 2012

12 Anonymous, 2012

10 | P a g e


TABLE 2: SHARE OF RECYCLED WASTE13

Croatia (2008)

Bosnia & Herzegovina (2007)

Serbia (2010)

EU 27 (2008)

Proportion of Municipal Waste Recycled 14% 60% 3% (metal) 67.7% (metal)

Glass 22%

11 | P a g e


Each producer/importer of beverages must fulfil targets for the share of refillable packaging, depending on the

type of product. The target is 25% for alcoholic beverage containers (excluding beer which is 75%), wine bottles,

juice and water bottles.15

2.2.3 MONTENEGRO Even though waste data in Montenegro is not well developed, it is clear that waste is a significant problem.

Improper disposal, usually at simple waste dumps (both legal and illegal) is a significant source of air, soil, and

surface and groundwater pollution. Recycling is not typically carried out, with a few small exceptions, and there are

no proper waste recycling facilities. However for the year 2006 a quantity of 49 tonnes of separate collected

plastics is reported.

A projection of future waste quantities forecasts about 10,000 tonnes per year of plastic packaging waste which

includes PET beverage bottles as well as other plastic packaging like foils, bottles, buckets, etc. 16

15 Anonymous, 2012

16 Anonymous, 2012

12 | P a g e


3. ANALYSIS OF THE EXISTING POLICIES & LEGAL

FRAMEWORK

3.1 THE S WASTE MANAGEMENT POLICY

EU waste policy has evolved over the last 30 years through a series of environmental action plans and a framework

of legislation that aims to reduce negative environmental and health impacts and create an energy and resource-

efficient economy.

-2012) identified waste prevention and management as one

of four top priorities. Its primary objective is to ensure that economic growth does not lead to more and more

waste. This led to the development of a long-term strategy on waste. The 2005 Thematic Strategy on Waste

Prevention and Recycling resulted in the revision of the Waste Framework Directive the cornerstone of EU waste

policy.

Waste Framework Directive regulates waste management in the EU along with a number of subordinated and

complementary laws related to treatment methods or waste streams.

FIGURE 8: EUROPEAN LEGISLATION ON WASTE MANAGEMENT

The revision brings a modernised approach to waste management, marking a shift away from thinking about waste

as an unwanted burden to seeing it as a valued resource. The Directive focuses on waste prevention and puts in

place new targets which will help the EU move towards its goal of becoming a recycling society. It includes targets

for EU Member States to recycle 50% of their municipal waste and 70% of construction waste by 2020.

A) LANDFILL DIRECTIVE

Article 5 of the Landfill Directive states that Member States should set up a national strategy for the

implementation of the reduction of biodegradable waste going to landfills by means of recycling, composting,

biogas production or materials/energy recovery. This strategy should ensure that not later than five years after the

date of implementation biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced to 75% of the total

amount of biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1995. After eight years this must be reduced to 50% of this

13 | P a g e

3. Analysis of the Existing Policies & Legal Framework

amount, and after 15 years to 35%. Member States that landfilled more than 80% of their collected municipal

waste in 1995 may postpone the attainment of the targets by a period not exceeding four years.

Municipal waste is defined in the Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) as "waste from households, as well as other waste

which, because of its nature or composition, is similar to waste from household". However, the precise definition

of biodegradable municipal waste varies from Member State to Member State.

The main motivation for these targets and measures was to reduce the production of methane gas from landfills,

inter alia, in order to reduce global warming. And they should also aim at encouraging the separate collection of

biodegradable waste, sorting in general, recovery and recycling.

The Report from the Commission on the national strategies for the reduction of biodegradable waste going to

landfills points out that all the strategies promote composting, recycling of paper and energy recovery. Most

strategies stress the importance of using source segregated organic waste to obtain good quality compost.

B) THEMATIC STRATEGY ON THE PREVENTION AND RECYCLING OF WASTE

The Thematic Strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste refers to the report on national strategies, and

points out that there is no single environmentally best option for the management of biowaste that is diverted

from landfill. It concludes that management for this type of waste should be determined by the Member States

using life-cycle thinking.

It expressed the intention to produce guidelines on applying life-cycle thinking to the management of biowaste, to

communicate these guidelines to Member States and to invite them to revisit their national strategies.

It also announced the adoption of compost quality criteria under the end-of-waste provision proposed for the

Waste Framework Directive and to bring the biological treatment of waste under the scope of the IPPC Directive

when it is revised.

Finally, it foresees a revision of Council Directive 86/278/EEC on the protection of the environment, and in

particular of the soil, when sewage sludge is used in agriculture.

C) WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

The Waste Framework Directive 2006/12/EC has been revised. On 17 June 2008, the European Parliament adopted

a legislative resolution in which it approved the Council's Common Position as amended. This step marks the

adoption of the revised Directive in second reading and the end of the negotiations.

RECYCLING TARGETS

The New Waste Framework Directive sets new targets for recycling, and expects Member States to set up separate

collection to ensure high quality recycling. By 2015 separate collection should be set up at least for paper, metal,

plastic and glass.

In particular the new targets of the Waste Framework Directive are described in the following table:

TABLE 3: TARGETS OF THE WASTE FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

New targets

2015 Separate collection: At least for paper, plastic, metal and glass

2020 Recycling rates of 50% for household and similar wastes (at least for paper, plastic, metal & glass)

2020 70% for construction and demolition waste

14 | P a g e


According to the Directive Reuse and Recycling should reach the minimum of 50% by 2020, for household and

possibly for similar waste. This concerns at least paper, metal, plastic and glass. Other targets include the Landfill

diversion for biodegradable waste, as well as packaging recovery and recycling

The Directive introduces a five-step waste hierarchy where prevention is the best option, followed by re-use,

recycling and other forms of recovery, with disposal such as landfill as the last resort. EU waste legislation aims to

move waste management up the waste hierarchy.

BIOWASTE TREATMENT

The new Waste Framework Directive foresees in its article 22 specific provisions on biowaste. Member States are

obliged, as appropriate, to encourage the treatment of biowaste following the waste treatment hierarchy by

promoting separate collection with a view to the composting and digestion of bio-waste, by taking measures for

the treatment of bio-waste in a way that fulfils a high level of environmental protection, and by stimulating the use

of environmentally safe materials (e.g. composts) produced from biowaste.

In a crucial clause, the Commission is asked to carry out an assessment on the management of bio-waste with a

view to submitting a proposal if appropriate. In this assessment the opportunity should be examined of setting

minimum requirements for biowaste management and quality criteria for compost and digestate from bio-waste.

It is envisaged that this could end up in a Communication or in a specific bio-waste Directive or Regulation. It is

clear that this constitutes the point of departure for this study.

Article 11 introduces reuse and recycling targets. Bio-waste however is not included in the waste types that are to

be collected separately or for which recycling targets have been established. However, Member States are allowed

and encouraged to include more waste streams, to promote high quality recycling. To this end they can set up

extra separate collection schemes of waste where this is technically, environmentally and economically practicable

and appropriate to meet the necessary quality standards for the relevant recycling sectors. By 31 December 2014

at the latest the Commission itself shall examine the existing measures and targets and shall consider setting

targets for other waste streams.

The new Waste Framework Directive introduces an important new element on energy recovery through anaerobic

digestion of biodegradable -hazardous

Framework Directive 2006/12/EC this was limited to application of this waste for use in farming. The new Waste

installations for composting for this material do fall under the restrictions and obligations of the environmental

permit for recycling activities while competing installations for bio-methanisation and energy recovery are

exempted.

END-OF-WASTE CRITERIA

Article 6 specifies that certain specified waste shall cease to be waste when it has undergone a recovery, including

recycling, operation and complies with specific criteria to be developed in accordance with the following

conditions:

- the substance or object is commonly used for specific purposes ; - a market or demand exists for such a substance or object; - the substance or object fulfils the technical requirements for the specific purposes and meets the existing

legislation and standards applicable to products; and, - the use of the substance or object will not lead to overall adverse environmental or human health

impacts.

15 | P a g e


The measures relating to the adoption of such criteria and specifying the waste shall be adopted using the

comitology procedure. End-of-waste specific criteria should be considered, among others, at least for aggregates,

paper, glass, metal, tyres and textiles.

FIGURE 9: WASTE HIERARCHY PYRAMID

Where criteria have not been set at Community level, Member States may decide case by case whether certain

waste has ceased to be waste taking into account the applicable case law.

D) PACKAGING DIRECTIVE

The Packaging Directive (94/62/EC as amended by 2004/12/EC) among other provisions sets minimum recycling

targets for paper and board packaging waste. Compliance with the Packaging Directive thus directly affects the

amounts of biodegradable waste landfilled or incinerated, and thus also compliance with the Landfill Directive.

However, it does not affect recycling of bio-waste as defined in the Waste Framework Directive.

In other words, compliance with the Packaging Directive makes it easier to comply with the Landfill Directive

without having to increase the amounts of bio-waste that are recycled.

All other things being equal, it can be concluded that the Packaging Directive provides a negative incentive for the

recycling of bio-waste as defined in the Waste Framework Directive.

However, the Packaging Directive does provide some positive incentive as well, to the extent that some countries

include cardboard packaging within the management of biowaste through composting and anaerobic digestion.

For example, some anaerobic digestion plants treat a waste stream which includes dirty card, whilst some

composting plants treat card which is collected alongside biowaste. If there are increasing returns to scale in

biowaste treatment, this

biowaste management.

3.2 LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING IN GREECE AND SERBIA

3.2.1 OVERALL STRATEGY, POLICY & LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN GREECE Greece is a full member of the European Union and therefore has to adjust its legislative framework to comply

with the European legislation. In most environmental issues, including waste management, the drive to implement

new stricter laws stems from the EU. To a large extent, European legislation is incorporated well to the national

law and the legislative framework for waste management can be considered sufficient and well elaborated.

Problems usually arise at the level of implementation.

Waste planning start

dumping. At that point there was not taken into consideration the future need for waste treatment facilities, in

16 | P a g e


order to move from sanitary landfills to integrated waste management solutions, and as a consequence the

ndfills (70 in

mainland, 11 in Crete and 43 in rest of the islands). During realisation of the works the planning was proven

Solid Waste Management (RPSWM -

RPSWM specify the objectives of the National Planning, set targets at a regional level, and reveal SWM projects for

the coming years. RPSWM define the Operational Modules through which relevant bodies (FoDSA and Municipal

Authorities) will be called to manage projects of collection and integrated solid waste management. Countrywide,

the overall projected Managing Units amount to 81. Since 2005 some RPSWM have been reviewed, but their

application has encountered problems as a whole, both in terms of financing and in terms of social opposition and

appeals. The Law 3852/2010 known as "Kallikratis" anticipates the combination of FoDSA of each region on a single

Association.

Today there are 79 Landfills (XYTA) in Greece; most of them will be considered illegal after 2012, as they cannot be

turned into Sanitary Landfills (XYTY), and many are in construction phase.

National Planning was aiming in the closure of all illegal sites in Greece, and the coverage of all population with

Sanitary Landfills, until 21/12/2008. This was the date given by the European Court that condemned Greece for its

negative environmental results of insufficient waste management. But this deadline was not reached. In December

2010, Greek authorities brought a plan to the European Commission, stating that all illegal landfills will be closed

by June 2011, and will be decontaminated within 2012. Today (July 2013) most of the targets are met with a small

number of illegal landfill sites (10-20) operating until the end of the year

The Ministry of Environment, Energy and Climate Change as it has been renamed and restructured in 2010,

-ordination and advice on the

main environmental policy areas. Also, the Ministry of the Interior has particularly important responsibilities

regarding solid wastes and local solid waste management (SWM), as part of its role in supervising local authorities.

Regarding the diversion of Biological Municipal Waste (BMW) from landfilling, ten years after the adoption of the

EU landfill directive (99/31/EEC) Greece still relies on landfills for the disposal of over 80% of its waste. The

Directive sets stringent standards on the design, construction, operation and aftercare of landfills and introduces a

compulsory framework for the calculation of landfill costs and charges, based on full cost accounting, including the

costs for restoration and monitoring after the end of the useful life of the landfill. These provisions are defined in

the Ministerial decree 29407/3508 (JMD 1572B, 16-12-2002) which transposed, practically through an exact

translation, the directive into national law. Very recently, in 2012 the European Waste Framework Directive

(98/2008) was introduced in National Law (Law 4042/2012) and regulated many topics of national concern, as will

be analyzed further in the following Chapters.

Also following the EU legislation, which sets as a major goal the Waste Prevention and Recycling in the last few

decades, recycling processes become more and more important due to increase of waste production. At the same

oducer Responsibility -

expectations for solving waste management problems. As a matter of fact, EPR is considered by scholars, as an

des all the

manufacturing phase and its impacts.

17 | P a g e


The EPR concept is incorporated in Greece into the Law 2939/2001, which sets the legal framework for recycling of

packaging waste and other products and transposes the EU Directive 94/62/EEC.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING

The first Waste Framework Directive (75/442/EEC) in Greece was adopted in 1975 and established general rules for

the management of waste. It was amended in 1991 by Directive 91/156/EEC, and has been incorporated into

Greek Legislation, through three Joint Ministerial Decisions (JMDs), which: defined the terms and measures for

Solid Waste Management (SWM) (69728/824); provided detailed technical specifications for SWM facilities

(114218/97), equipment and procedures; and outlined the general directions of SWM policy in Greece

(113944/97).

In 2000, the National Plan for SWM became a legal text, as a JMD, which sets the priorities and gives directions for

the sustainable management of solid wastes of the country. In 2002, initiated the update of the National Plan,

aiming at: the redrafting of the Prefectural Waste Strategies according to the Regional Strategies that where

developed for promoting integrated SWM; the elaboration of integrated SWM systems for the 13 Regions of

Greece; the management of Uncontrolled Waste Disposal Sites (UWDSs) and their gradual elimination and

restoration; and the development of modern sanitary landfills, covering the entire country by the end of 2008. This

goal is still not achieved, since some of the Regional Strategies have not been conducted (eg for Peloponnese) yet,

due to changes in the local government.

During the period of 2002 2003, the MEECC focused also on the transposition of the EU Legislation on waste

management into the National Legal System and, thus, issued new JMDs, including JMD 29407/3508/2002 on

measures and terms for sanitary disposal (harmonization with the EU Directive 99/31/EC) and JMD

50910/2727/2003 on measures and terms for SWM. Still, there is more to be done, since only recently the new

Strategic Planning for Waste Management for Greece is tendered.

The application field of Law 2939/2001 (harmonization with the

-of-life vehicles,

waste batteries and accumulators, catalysts, used tyres, wastes from electrical and electronic equipment, oils and

waste oils, and demolition and construction wastes. This law obligates the economic actors to organize or

participate in systems of alternative waste management, in order to achieve specific quantitative recycling and

recovery targets. During 2004-2005 the establishment and the operation of individual Recycling Systems for

different byproducts (tyres, electrical supplies, batteries etc) were introduced by Presidential Decrees. So far the

5/2006 for used oils, tires, batteries, end of life

vehicles and waste electrical and electronic equipment have been issued. The last waste stream that was

- 6259/2010).

In 2003 J.M.D. 37591/2031/2003 concerning healthcare waste was published. Accordingly healthcare units have to

issue rules of procedure concerning hazardous medical waste. In the same year the J.M.D. 50910/2727/2003 on

measures and terms for solid waste management - national and regional planning management, in complete

compliance with the European Waste Framework Directive 91/156/EEC is issued. Basic principles and targets for

solid waste management together with the specifications for national and regional planning are set there. The last

amendment for the management of waste from hospitals and other hygienic interest was published in 2012

(J.M.D. 146163/2012). The most recent legislative regulations are J.M.D. 13588/725/2006 for hazardous waste, the

MD 8668/2007 on the approval of Hazardous Waste National Planning and the Law 3536/2007 were the legal form

of Waste Management Authorities is defined. During 2009 the M.D. 8111.41/09/2009 on measures and terms on

port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues in compliance with the provisions of the

18 | P a g e


3.2.2 OVERALL STRATEGY, POLICY & LEGAL FRAMEWORK IN SERBIA Long-term strategy of Republic of Serbia in the area of environment protection shall mean the improvement of

sustainable environment management. Key steps shall include strengthening of the existing and development of

new measures for establishment of integrated waste management system, further integration of environmental

policy into other sector policies, acceptance of extended individual responsibility for environment and more active

participation of public in decision making processes.

The National Waste Management Strategy shall be a fundamental document providing requisites for rational and

sustainable waste management at the Republic of Serbia level. The Strategy has to be supported by large number

of implementation plans for management of specific waste streams (biodegradable, packaging and other).

Establishment of economic instruments and financial mechanisms shall be necessary in order to provide for the

system for national and international investments into long-term sustainable activities. Also, the Strategy shall

consider needs for institutional strengthening, legislation development, regulations implementation at all levels,

education and development of public awareness.

LINKS TO OTHER STRATEGIC DOCUMENTS

The Government adopted the National Program of Integration (NPI) in October 2008, which is a basis of legislative

work plan of the Government till 2012, which the Strategy on the EU Accession of Serbia marked as the year when

Serbia is ready to take over obligations emanating from the EU membership.

The National Sustainable Development Strategy (Official Gazette of RS, no. 57/08) was adopted by the

Government in May 2008. The aim of the Republic of Serbia Sustainable Development Strategy is to balance three

pillars, three key dimensions economic growth, environment protection and social balance creating one coherent

entity supported by corresponding institutional framework. In March 2009, the Government adopted also the

Action Plan for implementation of National Sustainable Development Strategy.

The Strategy of Energy Development in the Republic of Serbia by 2015 (Official Gazette of RS, no. 44/05) and

Regulation on the establishment of a Programme for implementation of the Strategy of Energy Development of the

Republic of Serbia by 2015 in the period 2007-2012 (Official Gazette of RS, no. 17/07, 73/07 and 99/09) define

energy development priorities.

The Regional Development Strategy of the Republic of Serbia for period 2007-2012 (Official Gazette of RS, no.

21/07) was adopted in January 2007. This document treats regional development in Serbia, for the first time in a

comprehensive and consistent manner all created problems and disparities and suggests a series of measures

for their mitigation and solution.

Strategy of Cleaner Production Introduction (Official Gazette of RS, no 17/09) was adopted by the Government in

March 2009, and it is the elaboration of strategic documents, especially of the National Sustainable Development

Strategy and National Environmental Protection Programme..

The Decision on the Establishment of the National Environmental Protection Programme (Official Gazette of RS,

no. 12/10) defines strategic objectives of the environmental protection policy, as well specific objectives for

protection of environmental media (air, water, soil) and influence of certain sectors on environment (industry,

energy, agriculture, mining, traffic, etc.)

LEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RECYCLING

New legal framework for waste management was established by the enforcement of a set of laws in the area of

environmental protection (2004), including new laws which regulate waste, i.e. packaging and packaging waste

management (2009). These laws provide conditions for establishment and development of integral waste, i.e.

19 | P a g e


packaging and packaging waste, management system. Basic regulations which govern waste management in the

Republic of Serbia are the following:

1. Law on Ratification of the Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste and its Disposal (Official Gazette of FRY, International Agreements, no. 2/99

2. Law on Environmental Protection (Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, no. 135/04 and 36/09) 3. Law on Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (Official Gazette of RS, no. 135/04) 4. Law on Environmental Impact Assessment (Official Gazette of the RS, no. 135/04 and 36/09) 5. Law on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (Official Gazette of RS, no. 135/04) 6. Law on Waste Management (Official Gazette of the RS, no. 36/09) sets forth types of waste and its

classification, waste management planning, stakeholders, obligations and liability with regard to waste management, specific waste streams management, requirements and procedures for the issuance of permits, transboundary waste movement, reporting, waste management financing, supervision and other relevant aspects of waste management. Waste management consists of a set of activities of joint interest which comprise implementation of prescribed action plans to be carried out within waste collection, transport, storing, treatment and disposal, including supervision of the aforesaid activities and responsibility for waste management facilities upon closure thereof.

7. Law on Packaging and Packaging Waste Management (Official Gazette of RS, no. 36/09) sets forth environmental requirements which packaging must meet in order to be marketed; packaging and packaging waste management, reporting on packaging and packaging waste, economic instruments, as well as other relevant issues with regard to packaging and packaging waste management. The Law also regulates imported packaging, produced, i.e. marketed packaging, as well as packaging waste generated in the course of business activities on the territory of the Republic of Serbia, regardless of its origin or purpose, and used packaging material.

The Decree on establishing a plan to reduce packaging waste for the period 2010-2014 (Official Journal RS

88/2009) defines the targets for recovery and recycling.

TABLE 4: RECYCLING AND RECOVERY TARGETS UNDER SERBIAN LEGISLATION

General targets

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Recovery [%] 5,0 10,0 16,0 23,0 30,0

Recycling [%] 4,0 8,0 13,0 19,0 25,0

Specific recycling targets

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Paper / cardboard [%] 0,0 0,0 14,0 23,0 28,0

Plastic [%] 0,0 0,0 7,5 9,0 10,5

Glass [%] 0,0 0,0 7,0 10,0 15,0

Metal [%] 0,0 0,0 9,5 13,5 18,5

Wood [%] 0,0 0,0 2,0 4,5 7,0

MANAGEMENT OF OTHER PRODUCTS (OLD VEHICLES, TYRES, CONSTRUCTION WASTE ETC)

Rulebook on the manner and procedure of end-of-life vehicle management ("official gazette of the republic of

Serbia", no. 98/2010). This Rulebook shall apply to vehicles and end-of-life vehicles, including built-in components

and materials regardless of the manner in which the vehicle is serviced or repaired during its use and whether or

not the vehicle is equipped with components that the manufacturer shipped or other components installed as

spare parts.

Rulebook on manner and procedure of waste tires management Management of waste tires is a set of measures that include collection, transportation, storage, and treatment of

waste tires. Management of waste tires is conducted in such manner as to ensure the protection of human health

and the environment. Waste tires may not be disposed of in landfill. For 2010 the recycling of waste tires shall

comprise 70% and use for energy purposes 30% of the total quantity of waste tires collected in the previous year.

20 | P a g e


The recycling of newly-created waste tires from this Rulebook's entry into force to 31 December 2010 shall

comprise 70% and use for energy purposes 30% of the total quantity of waste tires collected in the previous year.

Rulebook on manners and procedures of used batteries and accumulators management ("Official Gazette of the

Republic of Serbia", No. 86/2010). This Rulebook shall set forth the content and appearance of labels on the

batteries, button cell batteries and accumulators according to the content of hazardous material, manners and

procedures for waste management of batteries and accumulators, as well as devices with built-in batteries and

accumulators.

21 | P a g e

4. Production & Management of Municipal Solid Waste

4. PRODUCTION & MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL

SOLID WASTE

In the tables below the country and waste profiles of Greece & Serbia are presented, in order to provide with a fast

comparison of the national status focused in waste management.

FIGURE 10: COUNTRY AND WASTE PROFILES OF GREECE & SERBIA17

4.1 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN GREECE

Greece is a member of the European Union (EU) since 1981. Since then, the country has to meet great challenges

in order to confront problems of insufficient waste management, and reach the same level of environmental

protection as the most progressed EU member-states.

Waste management in Greece is one of the most complicated problems the country has to face. Several

parameters make decision making, planning and implementation a difficult task, both from environmental,

political, legal and social perspective18

.

17 Waste Atlas. Access July 2013, http://www.atlas.d-waste.com/

18

22 | P a g e


Also the European Court of Justice has condemned Greece several times for not succeeding to meet the

requirements set by the EU19

.

Nevertheless Greece has done some positive steps during the last decades in matters of environmental protection

and sustainable waste management.

First of all there has been the integration of EU legislation in the Greek laws. Secondly, in matter of strategy, there

has been the adoption of the Green Growth Strategic Action Program (2010-2015). Also there has been a

successful operation and established experience of 9 recycling systems, most of which have brought satisfactory

results. Due to the operation of the systems, there has been an increase in the recycling rates, even though still

there are low in comparison to other EU countries and refer mostly to the material recycling (In Greece organic

recycling is still very low, about 1%).

Among other actions, Greece has straggled to close its illegal landfills. Some pilot projects on Pay As You Throw

(PAYT) schemes exist, and there are currently industry initiatives to reduce packaging material.

Regarding expected actions in the field of waste management, several waste facilities have entered in tendering

phase which are in Peloponnese, Western Macedonia, Serres, Ilia & Aetoloacarnania, and 2 more have been

announced in Attica and Patra.

Regarding biowaste management, there is a target of 5% separate collection of biowaste by 2015, which by 2020

will increase to 10%. Also there has been an introduction of landfill tax of untreated waste which will take effect

Of course there are still remaining many issues to be solved and improved. In spite the efforts still some illegal

landfills exist, and Waste Management in the Greek islands is not considered satisfactory, as there is lack of

infrastructure, as well as lack of recycling programmes.

Waste management responsibility and liability in Greece is at local level and lies within the competence of the

Municipalities. They are responsible for the collection, transport, temporary storage, reload, recovery and disposal

of waste.

Generated household waste in Greece was reported to be near 5,197,519 tonnes/year20

.

In Greece there is not yet a strategy for the prevention of waste, and the amount of municipal waste generated per

capita in Greece increased between 1995 and 2009. After 2009, due to the economic crisis, it is experiencing a

decline. Until 2009, Greece had one of the highest annual growth rates, of municipal waste generated, reaching

3.3%21

.

Below there are the figures presented by Eurostat, as from 2013.

19 Abeliotis, K., Karaiskou, K., Togia, A., Lasaridi, K., 2009. support systems in solid waste management: a case study at the national

126.

20Hellenic Statistical Authority, http://www.statistics.gr/portal/page/portal/ESYE/PAGE-

themes?p_param=A1501&r_param=SOP06&y_param=2010_00&mytabs=0

21http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics#Municipal_waste_generated_by_country

23 | P a g e


FIGURE 11: MUNICIPAL WASTE GENERATED IN GREECE22

MSW quantities in Greece grew from 3.9x106 tonnes in 1997 (the first year for which relatively reliable data exist)

to appr. 5.3x106 tonnes in 2011, at a rate of 3.4% annually (estimation YPEKA, 2011). The BMW content is

estimated at 60%, comprising of 40% putrescibles (dropping in urban areas) and 20% paper, with an increasing

tendency (Figure 1). Data illustrating the temporal and geographical variation of waste composition in the country,

according to the few studies carried out up to now, are summarised in Figure 2. The lack of accurate waste data, as

well as the different methodologies used to define the waste composition, is a basic problem complicating any

SWM planning in the country.

FIGURE 12: MUNICIPAL WASTE IN GREECE BY TREATMENT

Currently Greece has no incineration capacity, neither source separation of biowaste. The country relies heavily on

landfilling for the disposal of about 81.1% of its waste, the rest being recycled by both the formal and informal

sector (18.9%) and MBT treated in the Ano Liossia plant, in Athens.

22 Source: Eurostat 2011 http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_wasmun&lang=en

Municipal waste in Greece by treatment

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2004 2006 2008 2010

kg

pe

r c

ap

ita

Recycling and

composted

Incinerated

Landfilled

Source: Eurostat, 2012

24 | P a g e


FIGURE 13: AVERAGE GREEK MSW COMPOSITION (YPEKA, 2011)

FIGURE 14: GEOGRAPHICAL AND TEMPORAL VARIATION OF MSW COMPOSITION IN GREECE23,24

For the main calculations as used in many studies for the Recycling sector the following basic data are used:

Collection coverage reaches 100 %

Generation of MSW was increasing, until 2009. Currently, a significant decrease in generation per capita, due to financial crisis. The annual per capita MSW production is taken as 457 kgr

23 Gidarakos, E., Havas, G., Ntzamilis, P., 2006. Municipal solid waste composition determination supporting the integrated solid waste

management system in the island of Crete. Waste Management 26, 668679.

24 Papachristou, E., Ntarakas, E., Mpellou, A., Sfetkos. Ioannidou, Alivanis, K., Petridis, G., Savvidis, I., 2002. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis

of Municipal Solid Waste of Thessalonica. In: Proceedings, 1st Congress of Hellenic Solid Waste Management Association, Athens, 28/2/2002

2/3/2002. YPEXODE, 2003

MSW Composition - Greece, 2011

Putrescibles (organic)

40%

Paper

29%

Metals

3%

Wood

2%

Glass

3%

Plastics

14%

Inert material

3%Other

6%

Putrescibles (organic)

Paper

Plastics

Glass

Metals

Wood

Inert material

Other

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Putrescible Paper Glass Plastics Metals Other

Waste category

Fra

cti

on

(%

by

we

igh

t) (

%ti

Athens -1984 Thessaloniki -1987

Heraklion -1987 Rhodes -1989

Athens -1991 Chania -1991

Kos -1991 Kalamata -1992

Naxos -1993 Xanthi -1993

Athens -1997 Pilea -1998

Thessaloniki -1998 Crete -2004

25 | P a g e


The MSW production in the Attica Prefecture accounts for 39% of the total produced MSW in the country, followed by the 16% production in the Prefecture of Central Macedonia (9% in the Thessaloniki area)

The highest percentage (40%) of MSW accounts for putrescibles

The main recycling actions aim at a) the reduction of the overall waste volume that is landfilled and b) reduction of the CO2

The existing MSW treatment facilities (2012) include:

79 landfills in operation, some Regions either have no landfill, or their number is not enough

4 landfills to be completed

28 Materials Recovery Facilities for packaging waste (covering 80% of population) - export of sorted recyclables due to limited capacity

4 MBT plants of approximately 580.000 t/y

6 Plants for recycling of used motor oils

8 plants for the treatment and recycling of WEEE (one of them for refrigerators)

6 plants for treatment of Pb-batteries

115 facilities for the treatment of end of live vehicles and collection points

5 plants for the recycling of used tyres So far, the main pillars of waste management include the actions to optimize the landfill capacity in the country

(there are still 20-30 uncontrolled dumpsites reported, February 2012), expand the MBTs and enforce the recycling

activities. Furthermore, the new Regional Waste Management Plans are scheduled and tendered with

ermal treatment)

as well as the use of new financial instruments (PPP-Public Private Partnerships).

According to the data presented in 2011, there had been in 2011 in Greece still 395 uncontrolled dumpsites, of

which 90 active and 305 inactive (not used). The 90 sites are listed in the map below.

FIGURE 15: UNCONTROLLED ACTIVE DUMPSITES IN GREECE (2011)

26 | P a g e


4.2 MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IN SERBIA

Serbian government and the professional public community are under constant pressure concerning how to

achieve goals for waste management as soon as possible and harmonize policy with official policy. Many experts

from the European Union state that mistakes made by developed cou

report recycling in balkan region

Documents

hswma seswa

recycling world

legal action

policy legal

board of hswma master

cases of greece

legal notice reproduction

waste management