waste management in poland challenges in view of eu...

Waste management in PolandChallenges in view of EU requirements and legislative changes; public opinion and prospects

September 2011

Content

Introduction 5Theoriginoftheproblem 6 1. EUlawrequirementsandthenationallegislation 11 1.1.ThestrategicgoalsoftheEuropeanUnionandPoland 12 1.2.ThekeyrequirementsoftheEUlaw 14 1.3.WastemanagementlegislationinPoland 17 1.4.Mainobligationsoflocalgovernmentsinthecontextof theamendedActonmaintainingcleanlinessandorderin municipalities 23 2. Thecurrentsituationandtheprospectsforthedevelopment ofwastemanagementinPoland 29 2.1.Generationofmunicipalwaste 30 2.2.Municipalwastedisposal 35 2.3.Goalsandforecastsconcerningchangesinwastemanagement38 2.4.Theexistingandplannedwastetreatmentinstallations 40 3. Casestudy–awelldevelopedwastemanagementsystem- theexampleofStockholm 47 3.1.MunicipalwastemanagementinSweden 48 3.2.WastemanagementinStockholm 50 3.3.Someexamplesofthermalwastetreatmentprojects implementedbyFortum 53 4. ThermalwastetreatmentplantsinPoland 59 4.1.Thenecessitytoincreasethewastetreatmentcapacity 60 4.2.Benefitsandeconomicincentivesforthermalwastetreatment 63 4.3.SelectedaspectsofaZTPOKconstructionproject 66 5. Waste–asocialproblem 77 5.1.Introductiontothesurveyandsummaryoftheconclusions 78 5.2.Opinionsonthecollectionanddisposalofwasteintheplace ofresidence 80 5.3.Opinionsaboutaccessibilityofwastecontainersandthecosts ofcollectionandtransportofwaste 81 5.4.Wastemanagementhabitsofcityinhabitants 82Conclusion 87Listofillustrations 92Listofabbreviations 93Glossary 95Listofselectedwastemanagementlegislation 97Reportpreparation 98Sources 99

Waste management in Poland Challenges in view of EU requirements and legislative changes, public opinion and prospects 3

We are pleased to present to you a report prepared jointly by Deloitte, Fortum and 4P research mix, a report that describes the current state and the prospects of waste management in Poland in view of European Union requirements and national legislative changes.

Municipal waste management is one of the most badly neglected and at the same time one of the most urgent environmental issues for Poland. The waste management system currently in place is not tight enough (what means that quantity of waste produced is greater than the quantity of waste collected), does not cover all people living in Poland and results in an excessive percentage of waste disposal to landfill when, at the same time, there is insufficient modern infrastructure and capacity for mechanical-biological and thermal treatment of waste. The progress achieved so far in separate waste collection at source, recovery of energy and raw materials and recycling is not satisfactory.

The issue of proper waste management, in the context of changing legal environment and the necessity to meet EU requirements, will pose a significant challenge to local governments in the nearest future. Municipalities will be required to take over greater responsibility for the functioning of the waste management system, including construction, maintenance and operation of waste treatment installations necessary to reduce the amount of landfill waste and to raise the level of waste recovery and recycling.

In order to meet modern environmental protection requirements and to achieve the adopted targets, Poland must make a dramatic qualitative change in the organisation and methods of waste management. The changes will not be possible without close cooperation of all stakeholders, that is, local governments, the public and businesses with proper experience and know-how. The waste management sector provides also a number of business opportunities, including logistics as well as waste treatment with energy and materials recovery. Whereas the attitude of the public is of primary importance for the reduction of waste generation and achieving appropriate levels of recycling.

Success in waste management will not only require local governments to be professional in the way they manage their network of service providers. They will also have to be very competent in engaging in dialogue with the public with the view to inducing desirable behavior and building confidence in local authorities and the activities they undertake in this area.

In this publication, we have focused on analysing the above mentioned issues in Poland against the background of the achievements and selected experience of other EU member States, in particular Sweden. The analysis of the EU legal requirements, the national legislation and the current condition as well as prospects for the development of waste management in Poland have been supplemented with a case study of a well-developed waste management system based on the example of Stockholm and with the results of a public opinion survey carried out among inhabitants of the 7 largest Polish cities concerning waste collection and management. We have selected these 7 cities for the survey since, in our view, it will be these urban areas that will face the biggest challenges in connection with the reform of municipal waste management system.

We hope that with this publication we will contribute to raising the awareness of the importance of these issues and of the challenges and opportunities related to the changes planned in the area of waste management. The issues that we have decided to tackle may become a starting point for planning and initiating the necessary action and for continuing the dialogue between local authorities, the public and companies operating on the waste market.

Introduction


The advance of urbanisationCities constitute an integral element of our planet’s landscape. The civilisational progress, achieved with the effort of human hands and minds, changed their character, size, forms of spatial development, transport, it affected the relations between people, the comfort of life. Over the last decades, the pace of development has significantly increased. This also applies to urban areas. Just by looking closer at the global urbanisation statistics, we should be able to realise how big is the scale of the phenomena we have to face. If in the 1960s about 25% of people lived in cities, nowadays this number exceeds 50%. It is estimated that by 2050, 66% of the world population will live in cities. Already in 2009, in Poland more than 60% of the population lived in cities.

Together with the migration of people motivated by economic and social factors, cities keep growing and become metropolises which, in turn, begin to have their own problems such as ensuring the best possible public transport infrastructure, supply of water and energy, waste management or insufficient number of jobs. These problems are directly linked with the challenges faced by central administrations, local governments as well as organisations operating in the economic sphere – businesses, or social sphere – non-governmental organisations. The answer which, after its adaptation to the specific conditions, may offer an effective solution for any organization, regardless of the type of its activity, is a well-thought-out and consistently implemented sustainable development strategy.

The need for sustainable developmentThe term “sustainable development” was used for the first time in the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development “Our Common Future”. According to the authors of the report, sustainable development is “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. What does it mean in reference to an organism such as a city? In simple words, it can be said that it means in-depth understanding of the multifaceted economic, social and environmental context of a city and aiming at its development through seeking harmony with each of these three areas. A more detailed interpretation of the concept of sustainable development of cities was given during a meeting of the United Nations Environment Programme in Melbourne in 2002. Ten principles were then formulated, the so called Melbourne Principles for Sustainable Cities, which provide guidance for cities as to the desirable direction of change on the road towards sustainable development. Considering the diversity of city structures in the world, these principles do not provide a fixed framework and guidelines, but rather give holistic advice in order to help decision makers realise how many different elements are contained in the concept of sustainable development. Both the general aspects have been tackled there, such as for example, the necessity to formulate a comprehensive strategy, a transparent management system or cooperation network, as well as individual aspects from the sphere of economy (ensuring long-term economic safety), society (fostering local values and history, developing the involvement of local population) and environment (minimizing the environmental pressure of the city population).

The origin of the problem

6

Undoubtedly it is difficult to create one list that would include all the aspects of the sustainable development of cities. Their complexity as well as the systems that operate within their structures, make drafting a sustainable development strategy and setting priorities a complex task, one that requires an individual, almost “personal” approach. This abundance of environmental, social and economic aspects of cities offers a great chance related to the synergy effect, that is, combining various systems in an innovative way, so that they enhance one another and bring positive change on the road towards sustainable development.

The example of Stockholm In order to better understand the value of synergy, it is worth having a closer look at the Stockholm district of Hammarby Sjöstad, one of the most often quoted examples of sustainable urban planning. The houses there are heated with the heat generated from biofuels, incinerated waste and solar panels placed on rooftops. For cooking the inhabitants use biogas generated during sewage treatment process. The approach to waste management is also comprehensive. Easy to burn municipal waste is put into containers connected with a collection station with special pipes. That is where waste collection tracks come and carry the collected waste to the waste incineration plant (a combined heat and power station using municipal waste as fuel). Separate containers are used for paper, metal, plastic and glass so as to facilitate recycling. Hazardous waste is, in turn, sent for safe treatment. And that is not all. The district designers have optimised the public transport (in Stockholm, the share of public transport, bicycles and walking in everyday commuting to and from work is 93%, which is a European record), car-pooling, that is, short-term car hire, has been popularised, big green areas have been designed, a rich variety of sports and cultural activities have been offered to the inhabitants. Hammarby Sjöstad is one of the most impressive sustainable communities ever created.

In 2010, the European Commission awarded Stockholm the title of the European Green Capital. The award is given for activities of the city aimed to protect natural environment and improve the quality of life of its inhabitants. One of the elements taken into consideration by the Jury was the modern waste management system. Obviously, many more positive examples could be given. For instance, Copenhagen is famous for restricting car transport and an impressive network of bicycle paths, Curitiba in Brasil has a very well developed bus transport system and one of the highest recycling ratios in the world. What is the situation of Polish cities against this background? Unfortunately, we still have a long way to go before we have a sustainable city, that is, a healthy community where it is pleasant for people to live. Few Poles do not complain every day about the time they waste in traffic jams1 and, even though, we may not realise that, every year in our cities we produce almost 9 million tons of municipal waste (more than 70% of all municipal waste produced in Poland), the majority of which is transported and deposited on landfills without recovering the energy or materials they contain.

1 Deloitte Raport o korkach w 7 największych miastach Polski [Report on traffic congestion in the 7 biggest Polish cities], which includes estimates of economic costs of traffic congestion.


The requirement for modern waste management By ratifying the Accession Treaty in 2003, Poland took on a number of commitments which, in the area of protection of human life and environment, include achieving strategic targets concerning waste management, such as reduction of landfill municipal waste and increase of recycling levels as well as preparing certain selected raw material waste fractions for reuse.

Currently in Poland, in spite of many years of efforts to build modern municipal waste treatment installations (such as, e.g. installations for thermal and mechanical-biological treatment of waste), which constitute an indispensable element of a modern comprehensive waste management system, still most of the municipal waste collected over the year is deposited on landfills. In Poland there is only one operating installation for thermal treatment of municipal waste, located in Warsaw, in Targówek district. Whereas in the “old” member states there are several hundred such installations. They are developed, modernized, new ones are constructed and their presence is not contested by local communities as people realise the benefits of such a method of waste disposal, that is, incinerating it, while recovering electricity and heat. These incinerating plants are often located in big cities (e.g. Paris, Vienna, Stockholm) and play the role of installations necessary for the reduction of the amount of waste and for landfilling only limited amounts of pre-treated secondary waste. We may try to reduce the amount of generated

waste; however, with the projected growth of GDP and the current production and consumption patterns, it is forecasted that, at least until 2020, the amount of municipal waste requiring treatment will grow. In view of the depletion of natural resources and the necessity to preserve the areas of natural and landscape value, with the limits of emission to water and to atmosphere getting stricter and stricter, the mechanical-biological and thermal methods of municipal waste treatment, with usable materials separated at source and recycled, are some of the basic solutions, vital for creating a modern and comprehensive waste management system. In Polish conditions, building of such a system also provides an opportunity to use significant EU funds for this purpose.

The main problems of municipal waste management in Poland:

1. The most popular way of waste disposal in Poland is landfilling (approximately 78% of the municipal waste collected in 2009). Several hundred landfill sites must be closed down and recultivated because they do not meet the required technical and legal standards;

2. Poland lacks modern infrastructure for treatment of municipal waste (such as sufficient number and capacity of installations for mechanical-biological and thermal treatment of waste). A problem that needs to be solved is disposal of waste during the transition period, between closure of landfill sites and launching of waste treatment installations;

3. So far Poland has made little progress in sorting and separate collection of waste at source, including hazardous waste that appears in the flow of mixed municipal waste, and in materials recovery and recycling;

4. The waste management system is not tight enough. Not all inhabitants, especially in rural areas, are included in an organised system of municipal waste collection and some undesirable phenomena occur: grey economy, illegal waste disposal and handling of waste at home (e.g. burning it).

8

Legislative changes The issues related to municipal waste management in Poland, its model, its financial, legal and technological aspects, and first of all, the proposed direction of changes, are currently the subject of a very hot debate between the central government, local authorities, non-governmental organisations and companies operating on the market of collection, transport, treatment and recycling of waste. The direction of changes has, to a great extent, already been decided after the adoption by the parliament of the Act of 1 July 2011 on the amendment to the act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities and to some other acts. This Act has already provoked an emotional response on the part of local governments and businesses, regardless of the detailed solutions which will be set forth in the secondary legislation, because of the scope of changes it has introduced, and in particular, the mandatory assumption by the municipalities of the obligation to handle the waste and the introduction of the so called “garbage tax”.

When preparing the outline for the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, the Ministry of Environment (MEnv) advocated the introduction of such a waste management system that is in place in other EU member states, apart from Poland and Hungary. During a public presentation of the proposed changes, the Minister of Environment, Prof. Andrzej Kraszewski, used the word “revolution”, expecting that the Act would result in: (i) making the system tight, (ii) solving the problem of illegal waste disposal, (iii) effective supervision over the quality of waste management, and (iv) eliminating the uncertainty as to the provision of waste flow to the planned thermal waste treatment plants. There have also been a number of critical opinions, particularly from the private companies, which for the last 20 years, have given shape to the market of waste collection and transport and invested in the construction of various installations, for instance, sorting plants or alternative fuel production. The critics of the adopted solutions point to the new tax and express their fear of the limitation of competition and excessive power given into the hands of administrative officials. The MEnv is currently working on the amendment to the Act on waste and the Act on management of packaging

and packaging waste. The adoption of these two acts planned for 2011 will make it possible to fully transpose into the Polish law the EU directives on waste management.

The waste management targets for Poland are set forth in the National Waste Management Plan adopted by the Council of Ministers on 24 December 2010, covering the years 2011-2014 and outlook for the years 2015-2022 (KPGO 2014). Whether the new legislation will give momentum to effective waste management in Poland, consistent with the adopted targets and guidelines, will depend, largely, on local governments themselves, on the efficiency and comprehensiveness with which they will implement the new system. Municipalities are obliged to prepare detailed solutions, adapted to their local conditions, and to adopt the appropriate resolutions (e.g. on the level and manner of collecting charges for waste management from property owners) within 12 months from entering into force of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, that is from 1 January 2012. This is not a long period of time – especially for the biggest cities – if we consider the whole list of duties taken over by local governments and the challenges related to achieving the waste management targets that Poland has taken upon itself.

Issues of key importance for local governments:

1. How to engage in effective dialogue with the public and how to involve the inhabitants in proper handling of waste, including sorting of municipal waste at source?

2. What priorities should be adopted with respect to investment needs, including insufficient capacity of the regional waste treatment installations? What should be the amounts and the sources of funding for such investment projects?

3. How to effectively manage the cooperation network of services and technology suppliers and how to use the knowledge and experience of these companies in order to solve local problems? How to be effective in using the best practices and methods of waste management developed in more advanced countries?

4. What budget and organisational structures should be provided to achieve the adopted waste management targets, including the inspection of contracts with waste handling companies and creating an effective information policy?


1. EU law requirements and the national legislation

On joining the EU in 2004, Poland has become a subject of the supranational regional policy. The cohesion policy involves a significant part of the EU budget and thanks to the projects implemented with the financial support from the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Funds, Poland has a chance for faster development and for reaching convergence with other EU member states.

One of the important aims of the EU policy is to implement the principles of sustainable development where protection of the environment and rational use of resources are the main priorities. On the other hand, one of the most important elements of the EU environmental policy, included in the action plans for the protection of environment, is waste management. The operational targets here include transformation towards low carbon economy, elimination of waste generation at source and support for efficient use of natural resources by promoting their reuse, in particular – their recycling.

The issues of environmental protection and waste management have been reflected in the strategic documents both at the EU level (Lisbon Strategy 2000, Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy 2006, Community Strategic Guidelines 2007-2013, The Sixth Environment Action Programme of the European Community 2002-2012 and the Europe 2020 Strategy) as well as at the national level (National Development Strategy 2007-2015, National Strategic Reference Framework 2007-2013, National Reform Programme 2008-2011, Long-term National Development Strategy “Poland 2030. The Third Wave of Modernity”, Medium-term National Development Strategy together with the ten integrated national strategies, and the National Reform Programme for the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy as well as the National Waste Management Plan 2014).

Europe 2020 StrategyThe Europe 2020 Strategy is a new long-term EU social and economic development programme, which has replaced the Lisbon Strategy, implemented since 2000, modified five years later. The new strategy highlights the need for joint action of the member states to overcome the economic crisis and to implement reforms enabling them to face the challenges of globalisation, ageing societies and the growing need for rational use of resources.

In order to achieve the above goals, three basic, mutually reinforcing priorities have been proposed:

• smart growth, that is growth based on knowledge and innovation;

• sustainable growth, that is transformation towards low carbon economy, efficient in the use of resources and competitive;

• inclusive growth, that is fostering a high-employment economy delivering economic, social and territorial cohesion.

1.1. The strategic goals of the European Union and Poland

Implementing the principles of sustainable development, protection of the environment and efficient use of resources are important goals of the EU policy reflected in the EU law and the documents which set the strategic direction for development, such as the Europe 2020 Strategy.

12

The main instruments to achieve the goals of the Europe 2020 Strategy are the National Reform Plans prepared by all EU member states as well as the Seven Flagship Initiatives prepared by the European Commission.

The flagship initiative no. 3 is Resource Efficient Europe, including activities that should lead to decoupling economic growth from the use of resources, support the shift towards a low carbon economy which makes better use of the potential offered by renewable energy sources. This project is expected to develop a vision of structural and technological changes by 2050 that will make the EU economy environmentally friendly and at the same time resilient to climate change.

The National Reform Programme for the Implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy The National Reform Programme for the Implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy (NRP) is a document describing the way in which Poland is going to respond to the challenge it will face. The structure of NRP assumes co-relation between the Polish development goals and the priorities set forth in the Europe 2020 Strategy. At the same time, the NRP is not only a tool for implementing the Europe 2020 strategy but, first of all, it is an instrument which, by taking into consideration the specific nature of the Polish situation and the specific challenges Poland faces, responds to the national barriers to growth.

NRP proposes action focusing both on catching up (in the section “Infrastructure for sustainable growth”) and on gaining new competitive advantage for the Polish economy (sections: “Innovation for smart growth” and “Activity for inclusive growth”). Within Infrastructure for sustainable growth, a set of activities and tasks should be highlighted including Development and modernization of environmental protection infrastructure related to the flagship initiative Resource Efficient Europe. For the year 2011, it has been envisaged that the Ministry of Environment will continue the reform of the waste management system, including the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities and the amendment of the Act on waste, which will allow the full transposition of the provisions of the European Parliament and the Council directives on waste management.


Framework DirectiveThe Framework Directive consolidated the EU legislation on waste management by unifying the earlier provisions, it introduced precise legal definitions and gave priority to the principle of reducing the impact of the generated waste on the environment. The Directive obliges the member states to take action to support waste recovery and emphasises the importance of the so called separate collection of waste “at source”.

The Directive introduced a hierarchy of the methods of waste management in order to ensure that individual member states would promote the solutions that are best for the environment. For some streams of waste it is possible to depart from this hierarchy if it is justified by applying the life-cycle methodology which takes into account the total impact connected with the manufacturing and the management of waste.

The waste management hierarchy describes the actions from the most to the least preferable:

1. Reduction – means action taken before a given material, product or substance becomes waste, in order to reduce the volume of waste or its harmfulness;

2. Preparation for re-use – means any process as a result of which substances, products or materials which are not waste are re-used for their original purpose;

3. Recycling – means any process of recovery as a result of which waste is converted into materials or substances re-used for their original purpose or for any other purpose, including organic recycling. It does not include energy recovery and converting waste into fuel;

4. Other recovery processes, including energy recovery – means primarily thermal treatment of waste with the recovery of electricity and heat as well as converting waste into fuel;

5. Environmentally sound disposal – means any other process of waste management which is not recovery, compliant with environmental protection requirements, e.g. landfill of waste.

1.2. The key requirements of the EU law

Directive on waste (Framework Directive)

Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Official Journal L312 of 22.11.2008)

Directive on the landfill of waste (Landfill Directive)

Directive 99/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste (Official Journal L 182 of 16.07.1999)

Directive on the incineration of waste

Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2000 on the incineration of waste (Official Journal L 332 of 28.12.2000.

Directive on packaging and packaging waste (Packaging Directive)

Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste (Official Journal L 365 of 31.12.1994, pp. 10-23, amended by the Directives 1882/2003/EC, 2004/12/EC, 2005/20/EC)

Table 1.1. The key EU legislation regulating waste management issues

Source: EU, author’s compilation

The key legislative acts regulating the waste management issues at the EU level include: the Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (the so called Framework Directive), Directive 99/31/EC on the landfill of waste (the so called Landfill Directive), Directive 2000/76/EC on the incineration of waste and Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste (the so called Packaging Directive).

Figure 1.1. Waste management hierarchy

Source: Author’s own compilation

Most desirable

Least desirable

Prevention

Preparing for re-use

Recycling

Other recovery, including energy recovery

Disposal

14

The Directive obliges the member states to ensure the appropriate level of environmentally sound disposal and recovery of waste, and in particular it imposes the following time limits for meeting these requirements:

• By 2015 to introduce separate collection of waste, at least such as metal, paper, plastics and glass;

• By 2020 to ensure the re-use and recycling of the following fractions of municipal waste: paper, metals, plastics and glass at the level of minimum 50% by weight;

• By 2020 to ensure the re-use, recycling and other ways of utilising the materials, including backfilling operations using non-hazardous construction and demolition waste, at the level of minimum 70% by weight.

In addition, the Directive also describes two basic principles of waste management which should be reflected in the legislation of individual member states:

• Principle of self-sufficiency and proximity – member states, individually or in cooperation, establish an integrated and adequate network of installations for recovery or disposal of mixed municipal waste with the use of appropriate methods and technology ensuring high level of protection of the environment and public health;

• “Polluter-pays” principle – stating that the costs of waste management must be borne by the original waste producer or by the current or previous waste holders.

The Framework Directive also includes a number of detailed regulations concerning the procedures for disposing of certain groups of waste (especially hazardous waste, biodegradable waste, waste oils and packaging waste).

Landfill DirectiveThe Landfill Directive sets forth the general rules for reducing the environmentally negative impact of the landfill of waste, especially preventing the emission of methane, the most harmful of the greenhouse gases and pollution of ground water and soil during the lifetime of the landfill. The Directive sets operational and technological requirements for landfills as well as the required effects in reduction of the landfill of biodegradable waste.

Among other things, the Directive states that member states set up national strategies for the reduction of biodegradable waste going to landfills, including measures leading to the achievement of the adopted reduction targets, by means of, in particular, recycling, composting, biogas production and materials/energy recovery.

The Directive has set the following targets for the member states:

• not later than five years after the transposition date laid down in the Directive, that is by 16 July 2006, biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced to 75% of the total amount (by weight) of biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1995.

• not later than eight years after the transposition, that is by 16 July 2009, biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced to 50% of the total amount (by weight) of biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1995.

• not later than 15 years after the transposition, that is by 16 July 2016, biodegradable municipal waste going to landfills must be reduced to 35% of the total amount (by weight) of biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1995.


A 4-year derogation of the above mentioned deadlines has been introduced for those member states (including Poland) which in 1995, or the latest year before 1995 for which EUROSTAT data is available, put more than 80% of their municipal waste to landfill.

Whereas under Art. 6 of the Landfill Directive, Poland is obliged to take measures in order to ensure that only waste that has been subject to treatment is landfilled, that is, waste that has been subject to appropriate physical, thermal or biological processes, including sorting, which change the properties of the waste to reduce its volume or hazardous properties, make it easier to handle or assist recovery.

In addition, the Directive obliges the member states to ensure that all of the costs involved in the operation of a landfill site, including the estimated costs of the closure and after-care of the site for a period of at least 30 years be covered by the price to be charged by the operator of that site.

Directive on the incineration of wasteDirective on the incineration of waste introduces some rigorous conditions for operation and emission levels for thermal waste treatment plants in order to reduce, as much as possible, the negative effects of emissions caused by incineration of waste. The Directive also states that the heat produced during the incineration process should be recovered as far as practicable.

Packaging DirectiveThe Packaging Directive proposes reduction of the weight and volume of packaging and obliges the member states to prevent the generation of packaging waste, to introduce programmes for return or collection from the users and from waste sorting, of packaging waste and to implement systems for recovery or re-use of the packaging within the limits set forth in the Directive.

16

Poland, as an EU member state, is obliged to harmonise its law with the EU requirements, which, in the area of waste management, imposes, inter alia, the obligation to reduce the volume of landfill waste and to achieve appropriate levels of preparation for re-use, recovery and recycling of the selected fractions of municipal waste.

The principles of disposal of individual types of waste, responsibilities of local government as regards waste management and the legal instruments enabling the achievement of the targets set in the National Environmental Policy and in the National Waste Management Plan 2014, covering the years 2011-214 with outlook for the years 2015-2022 (KPGO 2014), all that is defined in a number of normative acts of the statute rank as well as in executory regulations issued by the relevant ministers. Parts of these acts implement the EU policies and practice into the Polish legislation, following the principle that the original waste producer and holder of waste should dispose of it in a way that guarantees high level of environmental protection and that the EU member states shall create legal instruments enabling the implementation of the above mentioned goals.

The waste management systems of individual local government units are based on the acts of local law, which set out the principles and priorities concerning the management of waste at the level of municipalities [gmina], counties [powiat] and provinces [województwo], also in a manner consistent with the following acts of Polish law: Act Law on environmental protection, Act on municipal government, Act on municipal services management, Act on waste, Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, Act on packaging and packaging waste, Act on public finance and other acts listed in the “List of selected waste management legislation” attached to this report.

According to the provisions of the Act on municipal government, the municipality’s own tasks include meeting the collective needs of the community which include issues such as maintaining cleanliness and order, maintaining sanitary facilities as well as waste landfill sites and disposal of municipal waste.

As far as municipal waste management is concerned, the role of the local government has been described, primarily, in the provisions of the two acts: Act on waste and the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities. Adopting amendments to these acts, together with passing of the Act on packaging and packaging waste, will enable full transposition of the EU directives described above into the Polish law.

Act on wasteThe Act on waste is an act of law of primary importance for waste management in Poland. First of all, it sets the main principles for this area, by introducing the hierarchy of waste management into the Polish law. According to the contents of the Act, whoever undertakes action which causes or may cause generation of waste, should plan, design and carry out such action so as to: (1) prevent generation of waste or reduce the volume of waste and its negative impact on the environment during the manufacturing of products, during their use and after the completion of their use; (2) provide for waste recovery in accordance with the principles of environmental protection if generation of waste could not have been prevented; (3) provide for the disposal of waste in accordance with the principles of environmental protection if the generation of the waste could not have been prevented and of waste which could not have been recovered.

1.3. Waste management legislation in Poland

The responsibilities of local governments concerning waste management are set forth primarily by the provisions of two acts of parliament: Act on waste and Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities.


The Act also provides that the management of waste cannot take place in a manner inconsistent with the provisions on environmental protection whereas the holder of waste is obliged to handle the waste in the manner consistent with the waste management principles, environmental protection requirements and the waste management plans. The waste management plans are adopted at the national level by the central administration (Council of Ministers), and in the regions – by local government units.

The current provisions of the Act on waste state that the mandatory municipality’s own tasks with respect to waste management include the following:

• To ensure that all the inhabitants are covered by an organised system of collection of all types of municipal waste;

• To create conditions for the operation of a system of separate gathering and collection of municipal waste;

• To ensure the construction, maintenance and operation, on its own or jointly with other municipalities or companies, of installations and equipment for recovery, disposal of municipal waste or to provide conditions for construction, maintaining and operation of installations and equipment for recovery and disposal of municipal waste by entrepreneurs;

• To initiate and facilitate the creation of points for collection of waste electric and electronic equipment, designating sites where collection of used equipment from inhabitants can be carried out and undertaking information and educational activities with this respect;

• Obligations related to joint preparation of the waste management plan, serving the purpose of meeting the targets set forth in the national environmental policy and implementing the principles of the proper management of waste.

The Act on waste also precisely defines the competence of individual bodies pertaining to issuance of permits for carrying out business in the area of: collection or transport of waste, recovery or disposal of waste, decisions ordering removal of waste from places not designated for their landfilling or storage.

The provisions of the Act on waste apply to entities that generate at least 0.1 ton of hazardous waste, obliging them to obtain a decision approving their programme for hazardous waste management. Entities that generate not more than 0.1 ton of hazardous waste or less than 0.5 ton of other waste are obliged to submit to the competent authorities information about the waste they generate and the way in which they manage this waste. If an entity generates more than one ton of hazardous waste or more than 5 thousand tons of other waste, it should apply for a permit.

One must remember, however, that on entry into force of the provisions amending the Act on waste (introduced with the Act dated 13 May 2011 on the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities and certain other acts, see Sejm Print No. 3670), as of 1 January 2012, the detailed tasks of municipalities in the area of waste management shall be described in full in the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, which will be discussed further down in the report. On the other hand, the tasks of the local government at the province level will not change, as they will still be obliged, as part of their own tasks, to construct, maintain and operate installations and equipment for recovery and disposal of waste, including hazardous waste separated from municipal waste.

The amendment of the Act on waste planned for 2011 will transpose into the Polish law the Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (the Framework Directive). The draft of the Act on waste, prepared on the basis of the [...] adopted by the Council of Ministers on 8 July 2010, refers to the 5-tier waste management hierarchy and to the main principles for managing waste: the self-sufficiency and proximity principle and the “Polluter pays” principle. The draft of the Act on waste provides new definitions of the selected terms important for waste management: it defines the individual categories of waste, provides examples of measures that can be used to prevent generation of waste, differentiates recovery from waste disposal and explains the details of individual methods of waste disposal (e.g. preparing for re-use, separate collection, recycling, thermal treatment of waste).

18

StakeholdersCurrent system

(current legal situation)Target system (amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness

and order in municipalities)

Property owners

Every property owner is obliged to sign a contract for the collection of waste with a company holding a license for carrying out business activity in the area of collection and transport of municipal waste.

Property owners will be obliged to pay a fee to the municipality for management of waste. The fee will either be a fixed amount to be paid by a household or it will be a product of the rate set by the Municipality Council and the number of people living on the property, the amount of water used or the area of the premises.

Entities collecting or disposing of waste

Entities collecting waste are obliged to provide the municipality authorities with information about the contracts signed with property owners. In addition, these companies are obliged to submit to the municipality authorities reports on the management of municipal waste.

In the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, the license for carrying out business activity consisting in collection and transport of waste will be replaced with an entry into the register of regulated business activity. The entry into the register will be made on the basis of a declaration filed by the business. Business interested in carrying out business activity of collection and transport or disposal of waste will participate in public tenders organised by municipalities and will sign appropriate contracts for the provision of these services with municipalities.

Municipalities

Municipalities shall be obliged to maintain register of contracts between property owners and companies. If a property owner fails to sign a contract with a company, the municipality should carry out the so called substitute performance (charge the property owner with a fee imposed by way of a decision and arrange the collection of municipal waste from such owner). If within the area of a municipality no companies carry out municipal waste collection activity, the municipality is obliged to organise a waste collection system for all its inhabitants.

Municipalities will be obliged to organise the collection of municipal waste from the owners of inhabited properties and, in addition, make a decision concerning collection of waste from uninhabited properties where municipal waste is still generated. In particular, municipalities will be obliged to organise a public tender for collection of municipal waste or a tender for collection and disposal of such waste. The municipality council, by way of resolution, will set the charges for the management of waste. When setting such charges, the volume of generated waste will be taken into account as well as the costs of operating the system of municipal waste management (that is, the costs of collection, transport, recovery and disposal of waste, the costs of creating and maintaining the points for separate collection of waste and the administrative costs of the system).

Table 1.2. The current and the target system of waste management in Poland – selected duties of the stakeholders


Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalitiesOn 1 July 2011, after considering the amendments proposed by the Senate, the Sejm adopted the Act amending the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, which describes the tasks of municipalities related to the management of waste in the municipality area, the duties of property owners and the conditions for carrying out business activity consisting in collection of waste.

Regardless of the ultimate shape of the detailed solutions that will be described in the executory regulations issued to the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, it is already

possible to say that it will introduce significant changes in the management of waste in municipalities. Taking into account the importance of these changes for the local government we have discussed these issues in detail in the following section of the report.

The summary of the selected duties of property owners, entities collecting or disposing of waste and those of the municipalities in the current and the future waste management system in Poland, as provided for by the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, is presented in the Table below.


In the context of achieving the strategic goals of Poland with respect to waste management, under the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, municipalities have been obliged to the following:

1. To reduce the mass of biodegradable waste sent to landfill:

• by 16 July 2013 to no more than 50% by weight;

• by 16 July 2020 to no more than 35% by weight;

relative to the mass of waste generated in 1995; and

2. To achieve by 31 December 2020:

• The level of recycling and preparation for re-use of the following fractions of municipal waste: paper, metals, plastics and glass of at least 50% by weight; and

• The level of recycling, preparation for re-use and recovery with the use of other methods of construction and demolition non-hazardous waste of at least 70% by weight.

As regards the issue of reducing the mass of waste sent to landfill, attention should also be drawn to the requirements of the Regulation of the Minister of Economy dated 12 June 2007 (Journal of Laws of 2007, No. 121, item 832) setting the criteria for allowing waste, other than hazardous or inert waste, to be landfilled. In accordance with the Regulation, as of 1 January 2013, it will not be possible to landfill waste from group 20 (municipal waste together with separately collected fractions) and that with selected codes from group 19 (including non-hazardous waste from mechanical treatment), with the total organic carbon content higher than 5% of dry matter, and the gross calorific value higher than 6 MJ/kg of dry matter.

Act on packaging and packaging waste The Act on packaging and packaging waste, transposing the provisions of the Packaging Directive, sets the required annual recovery levels for packaging in general and for recycling of packaging in general and for individual types of packaging. These requirements are presented in the table below, for the years from 2010 and from 2014, respectively.

The existing system of waste management imposes an obligation on every entrepreneur who releases packaged products on the market to ensure the appropriate level of recovery and recycling of packaging waste. The entrepreneurs who fail to achieve the required levels are obliged to pay the product fee calculated with reference to the difference between the required and the achieved levels of recovery and recycling. Entrepreneurs may fulfill the above duties on their own or by vesting it in a waste recovery organisation.

However, the current system does not ensure the actual implementation of the Packaging Directive provisions, with the particular danger that Poland will not achieve the levels of recovery and recycling of packaging waste required for 2014. In spite of the fact that the provisions concerning management of packaging waste have been in operation in Poland since 2002, some businesses still fail to fulfill their duties imposed by those provisions. That was the reason why the MEnv decided to start work on the new Act on the management of packaging and packaging waste, which would cover all the issues related to packaging management, so far regulated by two acts: the Act on packaging and packaging waste and the Act on the obligations of entrepreneurs with respect to the management of certain waste and on

Type of packaging

2010 2014

% level % level

recovery recycling recovery recycling

Total packaging 53% 35% 60% 55%

Plastic packaging 18% 22.5%

Aluminumn packaging 45% 50%

Steel packaging, including steel sheet

33% 50%

Paper and cardboard packaging

52% 60%

Household glass packaging except ampules

43% 60%

Wood packaging 15% 15%

Table 1.3. The annual level of recovery and recycling required under the Act on packaging and packaging waste

Source: Act on packaging and packaging waste

20


product fee. The MEnv expects that the change of the law will make it possible to undertake the action necessary to avoid the financial penalties for failure to fulfill the obligations in this respect imposed on Poland as a member of the EU.

It is assumed that recovery and recycling of waste will be growing in significance because of the increasing prices of raw materials and energy. Packaging waste is generated at all levels of the supply chain (manufacturing, logistics and sales), but first of all, it is generated in households by consumers as end users of products. KPGO 2014 points to the necessity to increase the mass of packaging waste collected separately in households and to the following ways of preventing the generation of packaging waste: (i) the ecological design criterion in product development, (ii) extended liability of manufacturers, (iii) extension of product lifetime, reducing the mass of packaging and increasing the share of re-usable packaging, and (iv) environmental system of packaging marking for consumers.

The key legal requirements for waste managementThe analysis of the above mentioned legal acts indicates the significant increase of the requirements for waste management in Poland to be introduced in the coming years. These requirements have been presented in the diagram below.

In addition, the KPGO 2014 sets additional waste management targets to be achieved in the years 2012, 2014 and 2016, respectively:

• To reduce the number of landfill sites for non-hazardous and inert waste where municipal waste is sent, from 520 existing as on 31 December 2008 to maximum 200 landfill sites in 2014 and to recultivate the closed down sites;

• To reduce the share of landfill municipal waste in all generated waste, from 86.6% in 2008 to 60% in 2014;

• In 2012, to collect 25% of the used portable batteries and accumulators, and to achieve the collection level of 45% in 2016.

50% redukcji odpadówbio-degradowalnych

w stosunkudo1995r.

Pac

kagi

ngB

iod

egra

dab

le

was

te

Raw

mat

eria

ls

was

te

2010 2012 2013 2014 2020

To reduce to 35% the biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill sites in comparison to the mass of such waste generated in 1995.

To reduce to 50% the biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill sites in comparison to the mass of such waste generated in 1995 .

To reduce to 75% the biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill sites in comparison to the mass of such waste generated in 1995.

Waste landfilling criteria:- Total organic carbon (TOC) max. 5% of dry matter- Loss on ignition (LOI) max. 8% of dry matter- Gross calorific value max. 6 MJ/kg of dry matter

60% of recovery annually 55% of recycling annually of the total volume of packaging

53% of recovery annually and35% of recycling annually of the total volume of packaging

To prepare waste for re-use and recycling: paper and cardboard, plastics, metals, glass minimum 50% by weight

Figure 1.2. Key legal requirements for waste management in Poland


Sanctions and financial penaltiesAs far as sanctions in waste management are concerned, it should be indicated that as a result of failure to fulfill the obligations under the EU and national law, financial penalties will be imposed which, indirectly, may also affect the inhabitants. In the current legal situation, failure to reduce the mass of biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill is threatened with the penalty from 40 to 200 thousand PLN, depending of the extent of the default. Whereas failure to organise the system for separate collection of waste is threatened with the penalty in the amount between 10 and 40 thousand PLN.

In future, the provisions setting the above mentioned sanctions will, if the amendment is adopted, be transferred from the Act on waste to the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities. The appropriate bodies will be able to impose a financial penalty on entities participating in the municipal waste management system, including businesses and municipalities. However, due to the extended vacatio legis, the majority of penalty-related provisions will enter into force only on 1 January 2013.

An additional sanction are the financial penalties that may be imposed on Poland as a result of failure to fulfill the obligations set forth in the European law. In particular, the obligations related to the reduction of landfill waste under the Directive on landfill of waste (Art. 5). This Directive, however, does not explicitly state that a member state may be penalized for not implementing its provisions into the domestic law.

In this respect, a penalty is imposed following the general procedure, that is, in particular, under Art. 260 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (formerly: Art. 228 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community). Under this provision, the European Commission may, in a situation when a member state fails to fulfill its duties (e.g. those imposed by a directive) apply to the Court of Justice of the European Union for imposing a financial penalty on such a state in the form of a lump sum or a penalty payment. The Commission may specify the amount of such a penalty, taking into account the gravity of the infringement and the state’s financial ability. The Court may sustain the case brought by the Commission, may, while sustaining it, change the amount of penalty, or it may dismiss the case.

The Commission issues the guidelines including the amounts of penalty for which it will apply in case of an infringement. The guidelines are updated every three years. Currently, the lump sum penalty for Poland amounts to 4 163 000 Euro whereas the penalty payment, calculated, inter alia, taking into account the member state’s GDP, according to the data of the Ministry of Environment, may range from 5,043 to 302,592 Euro per day in case of failure to fulfill the obligations related to environmental protection.2

2 Julia Majewska, Ministry of Environment, Department of the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment, Treatment of Municipal Waste – the accession committments, legal regula-tions, 21 February 2011.

22

The system for managing municipal waste in municipalitiesThe aim of the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities is to create a modern system for municipal waste management in municipalities, covering all the owners of properties located in the municipality area. The authors of the legislation have obliged municipalities to create a system for collection of municipal waste from owners of inhabited properties (inhabited by natural persons). Property owners will no longer conclude contracts for the collection of waste directly with the companies operating on this market but they will pay a fee for waste management to the municipality. The amount of the fee and the obligation to pay by an individual property owner will either be connected with the number of people living on the property, with the amount of water used or with the area of the premises, or it will be a lump sum paid by every household.

On the other hand, it will be a task of the municipality to select the companies that will actually collect municipal waste from property owners. The selection will be made by a public tender carried out in accordance with the Public Procurement Law, taking into account the provisions of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities. There will be a principle of selecting one company per municipality. However, if in a municipality with more than 10 000 inhabitants, an appropriate decision is taken by the municipality council by way of resolution (local law), the municipality area may be divided into sectors from which waste will be collected by companies selected in separate public tenders. As a result of winning a tender, the company will sign a contract with the municipality for collection of municipal waste from property owners.

With respect to uninhabited properties, the municipality council may decide, by way of resolution (local law), to include such properties in the organised system for municipal waste collection, if such waste is generated on such properties. In such a case, the amount of fee will depend on the number of waste containers collected from the property.

The time, the frequency and the method of paying the fees will be set by municipality councils. The councils will also prepare sample declarations for property owners to submit in order to determine the fee due for waste management. It should be noted here that failure to submit such a declaration will result in setting the waste management fee by a decision of the municipality executive body. In the same way, this body will also impose the amount due for payment in case of failure or partial failure to pay the fee.

On the other hand, if the municipality failed to fulfill its obligations in this respect, the property owner will have the right to hand over the waste to the appropriate companies at the municipality’s cost.

The conditions for carrying out business in the area of collection and disposal of municipal wasteAs a result of the amendment, the business activity in the area of collection and disposal of waste will become a regulated business activity within the meaning of the Act on freedom of economic activity, which means that carrying out such an activity will depend on obtaining an entry in the register of regulated activity. The register will be maintained by the municipality executive body with the jurisdiction over the place of waste collection. Municipalities will be obliged to create the appropriate registers within three months from the entry into force of the amended Act.

1.4. Main obligations of local governments in the context of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities

The amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities introduces significant changes related to the management of waste by local governments. The MEnv expects the amendment to result in: making the system tight and solving the problem of illegal landfill, effective supervision of the quality of waste management and ensuring the provision of waste flow to the planned waste treatment plants.


The Act also provides that the company collecting municipal waste from property owners will have to meet the following requirements:

1. To have the equipment making it possible to collect municipal waste from property owners and to keep it in good repair;

2. To maintain the proper sanitary condition of the vehicles and equipment for collection of municipal waste from property owners;

3. To meet the technical requirements concerning the equipment of vehicles for collection of municipal waste from property owners;

4. To provide proper location and equipment of the storage and transport depot.

It is worth noting, however, that in accordance with the amended Act, companies collecting municipal waste from property owners which on the day of entry into force of the amended Act will hold a permit for collecting municipal waste from property owners, will be able to carry out their business activity in this field without obtaining an entry into the register for 12 months after the entry into force of the amendment.

If on the day of entry into force of the amended Act, it is the municipality organisational units that collect municipal waste from property owners, such units will have to meet the requirements imposed on the companies carrying out such business activity under the amended Act within 12 months from its entry into force.

It should be added here that the Act introduces a number of reporting duties for entities providing services within the organised municipality waste management system. The activity of such entities will be supervised and failure to fulfill the obligations imposed by the Act may result in imposition of an administrative financial penalty.

Other tasks of the municipality In accordance with the provisions of the above mentioned act, the tasks of municipalities include also:

• Ensuring cleanliness and order in the municipality area and creating conditions necessary for their maintenance;

• Creating conditions for performing works related to maintenance of cleanliness and order or ensuring the performance of such works by forming appropriate organisational units;

• Including all property owners in the municipality area in the organised waste management system;

• Ensuring the construction, maintenance and operation by the municipality or jointly with other municipalities of regional stations for treatment of municipal waste;

• Ensuring the achievement of the appropriate levels of recovery and recycling of waste;

• Establishing a system for separate collection of municipal waste, at least with reference to the following materials: paper, metals, plastics, glass and biodegradable municipal waste;

• Establishing points for separate collection of municipal waste in a way that provides easy access to them for all inhabitants;

• Supervising the proper performance of tasks vested in companies carrying out business in the area of municipal waste collection;

• Undertaking informative and educational activities addressed to inhabitants;

• Setting, by way of a municipal council resolution, the principles for maintaining cleanliness and order in the municipality area, the so called Regulations for Maintaining Cleanliness and Order in the Municipality;

• Carrying out annual analyses of the condition of municipal waste management;

• Verifying the municipal waste management market and the technical and organisational capabilities of municipalities.

24

Syst

em g

ospo

dark

i odp

adam

iD

osto

sow

anie

do

Ust

awy

Curr

ent

situ

atio

n

Financial Legal

Technical Organisational

Change management(key aspects)

Waste management system

Ad

apta

tio

n t

o t

he

Act

Act enters into force – 01.01.2012

Adopting the updated Voivodeship Waste Management Plans

Adopting the relevant resolutions, incl. on collection of fees and adaptation of the regulation for maintaining cleanliness and order in the municipality

6 months

Resolutions enter into force together with the obligation to collect waste from property owners

12 months

18 months

Figure 1.3. Time limits for adapting the waste management system to the requirements of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities


Challenges for local governments related to the change of the waste management systemWhether the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities becomes a driving force for the effective waste management in Poland will depend, largely, on local governments themselves, on the efficiency and comprehensiveness with which they will implement the new system. Municipalities are obliged to prepare detailed solutions, adapted to their local conditions, and to adopt the appropriate resolutions (e.g. on the level and manner of collecting fees for waste management from property owners) within 12 months from entering into force of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, that is from 1 January 2012. This is not a long period of time – especially for the biggest cities – if we consider the whole list of duties taken over by local governments and the challenges related to achieving the waste management targets that Poland has undertaken.

Below we present the time limits for adapting the waste management system at the local governments’ level to the requirements of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, concerning in particular the updating of WPGO [Voivodeship Waste Management Plan] and the adoption of appropriate resolutions by the municipal council, including resolutions on collection of fees for waste management and modifying the Regulations for maintaining cleanliness and order in the municipality.

In connection with the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, local governments will have to re-define their goals and priorities with respect to waste management, introduce organisational changes in order to get prepared to fulfilling the new obligations and to prepare a detailed timetable for the months immediately following the coming into force of the Act.


In the table below we present a list of selected key issues to be dealt with by local governments in connection with the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities.

This list applies in particular to cities with a large number of inhabitants where the scope and the scale of the required changes will be the greatest.

Area Decisions or action to be taken

Waste

management

strategy and

goals

Defining the strategy and setting goals in the area of waste management for provinces, regions and municipalities as well as

deciding on the necessary action to achieve these goals

Coordinating the municipality goals with the goals at the regional level and the main assumptions for the updating of the WPGO,

including:

- Stating whether a big municipality (over 500 thousand inhabitants) will be an independent region for the purposes of waste

management

- Decision whether implementing certain tasks requires formation of an inter-municipality organisation

Division of municipality into sectors

Organisation of separate collection – decision on the scope of collection of certain waste fractions at source with economic

justification

Preparing an outline of the Regulations for Maintaining Cleanliness and Order in the Municipality

Municipality

budget and

fees for waste

management

Estimating the real volume of waste generated in the municipality

Estimating the budget needed for the implementation of the waste management tasks (taking into account the costs of collec-

tion, transport, recovery and disposal of waste, the costs of establishing and maintaining the points for separate collection and the

administrative costs of the system)

Setting the rates of the fees for waste management

Preparing the sample declarations

Checking whether the actual number of people living on the property or the amount of water used or the area of the premises

disclosed by property owners are correct

Organisation of

public tenders

and checking

the actual

implementation

of the

procedures

Consultations with companies

Defining the requirements for the providers of the services of collection, transport, recovery and disposal of waste (preparing the

tender terms and conditions as well as the assessment criteria), including:

- The decision whether one sector should be serviced by only one company

- The decision whether the fee system should also include properties where business activities are carried out

- The decision whether public tenders should be organised separately or jointly for the services of collection and disposal of waste

Organisation of tenders

Procedures for checking the quality of the services provided by the companies

Installations for

waste disposal

An analysis of the number, the capacity and the location of landfill sites, decision on closing the sites that do not meet the

environmental standards and their recultivation

An analysis of the shortages and needs as regards the number and the capacity of the waste disposal installations in the province,

region and municipality, including consultations with companies

An estimate of the necessary expenditure on the new installations and an analysis of various options of financing them (own funds,

EU subsidies, debt financing, PPP); taking into consideration the effect of financing on the level of municipality’s debt

Organisational

issues

Defining the best organisational structure

Locating the unit / office responsible for waste management in the structure of the office

Describing the tasks at the level of a department / job

Organisational regulations and administrative documents

Systems for monitoring the adopted targets and reporting systems, including IT systems

Information

policy

Practical implications of introducing the new system for the inhabitants and businesses

Information campaign on the ways of disposing of waste (including waste sorting at source)

Effective communication on the waste management policy and the planned installations

Table 1.4. Key decisions to be made and action to be taken by local governments

26

The necessity to implement the amended law and to achieve the adopted waste management targets

The EU regulations place emphasis on the protection of the environment and efficient use of resources. In the area of municipal waste management, the priorities include reduction of waste generation, recycling and recovery of energy from waste. When joining the EU Poland made a number of commitments which, in the area of waste management, include: reduction of the volume of landfill waste, including biodegradable waste and increasing the level of recycling and preparation for re-use of the selected fractions of municipal waste (paper, plastics, metals and glass).

The adopted changes to the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities and the planned amendment of the Act on waste in 2011 as well as the adoption of the Act on packaging and packaging waste will make it possible to fully transpose the most important waste management directives into the Polish law. The important changes to the Polish system of waste management , following the model already in operation in other European countries (except Hungary), including the increased role and responsibility of local governments, are introduced by the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities. Apart from the normative acts in the form of acts of parliament, the targets to be achieved in the area of waste management have been set in the KPGO 2014 and the WPGO, whose updating is planned by 30 June 2012.

The role of local governments will be of key importance for the effective implementation of the amended provisions and for the achievement of the adopted targets. It is expected that municipalities, equipped with the new legal instruments, will organise the collection of municipal waste from all their inhabitants and will contribute to the improvement of the quality of waste management in Poland.


2. The current situation and the prospects for the development of waste management in Poland

Generation of waste in Poland as compared to the rest of EuropeMunicipal waste is the waste generated in households (with the exception of end of life vehicles) and the waste that does not contain hazardous waste generated elsewhere which is similar to the waste generated in households in its nature or composition. The sources of municipal waste are mainly households and infrastructure facilities (commerce, services, crafts, education, industry in the part related to staff facilities, other).

In 2009 all the EU members states produced more than 256 million tons of municipal waste, of which the six biggest countries generated more than 185 million tons (72.1% of all the total waste). Poland, producing 12.1 million tons of waste per year ranked 6th in the amount of waste generated in 2009, behind the countries with greater population.

Germany18.8% (48.1 m Mg)

France13.5% (34.5 m Mg)

United Kingdom12.7% (32.5 m Mg)

Italy12.7% (32.5 m Mg)

Spain9.8% (25.1 m Mg)

Poland4.7% (12.1 m Mg)

Other EU member states 28.0% (71.5 m Mg)

Diagram 2.1. Production of municipal waste in the EU in 2009

Source: Eurostat

0

150

300

450

600

750

900

kg/p

erso

n

Euro

pean

Uni

onDe

nmar

kCy

prus

Luks

embu

rgIre

land

Mal

taTh

e Ne

ther

land

sAu

stria

Germ

any

Spai

nIta

lyFr

ance

Unite

d Ki

ngdo

mPo

rtuga

lBe

lgiu

mSw

eden

Finla

ndBu

lgar

iaGr

eece

Slove

nia

Hung

ary

Rom

ania

Lithu

ania

Esto

nia

Latv

iaSlo

vakia

Czec

h Re

publ

icPo

land

Diagram 2.2 The amount of generated municipal waste per inhabitant in the EU countries in 2009

Source: Eurostat

2.1. Generation of municipal waste

30

The difference in the amount of generated municipal waste between Poland and the biggest EU member states is not only the result of the difference in the size of population. The amount of municipal waste generated in Poland (38.1 million inhabitants) in 2009 was two times lower than in Spain (45.9 m inhabitants), almost three times lower than in Italy (60.2 m inhabitants), the United Kingdom (61.8 m inhabitants) and France (64.5 m inhabitants) and four times lower than in Germany (81.9 m inhabitants). This disparity comes, to a great extent, from the lower level of economic development and the lower level of wealth and consumption of people living in Poland as compared to those countries. As a result, the indicator of the amount of generated municipal waste per inhabitant in Poland in 2009 was 316 kg, whereas in the other five biggest EU countries it amounted to 526-587 kg, with the EU average of 512 kg.

The level of economic development and consumption in Poland does not, however, explain the fact the amount of generated waste per person is the lowest in the whole EU, lower also than that of the countries with lower GDP per capita, such as Bulgaria or Romania.

The statistical data on the amount of generated waste may be affected by the waste management system currently in force in Poland. Unlike in the most EU countries, in Poland, similarly as in Hungary, the owner of the municipal waste is, according to the law, the property owner or a company holding a license for carrying out business activity of collection and transport of municipal waste. Municipalities are obliged to organise a system for municipal waste collection only if in a given municipality there are no companies collecting waste from property owners. The companies, in turn, are obliged to send information to municipality authorities about the contracts concluded with property owners and to submit reports on the management of municipal waste and municipalities must keep record of such contracts.

The practice has shown, however, that the current system is not effective and that it has contributed to some undesirable practices in waste management, such as:

• Lack of contracts for collection of waste resulting in illegal disposal of waste by property owners by putting it in illegal disposal sites or disposing of it at home (e.g. burning it);

• Companies understating or failing to disclose the actual amount of waste they collected and disposed of;

• Lack of sufficient supervision by municipalities over the effectiveness of the collection and quality of the disposal of municipal waste.

The above shortcomings of the system are one of the reasons why the amount of generated municipal waste is estimated by GUS [Central Statistical Office] on the basis of the actual amount of collected municipal waste (10.1 m tons in 2009); another reason being the fact that the organised waste collection system does not cover all the people living in the country (78.1% of the Polish population in 2008 according to KPGO 2014). Taking into account the practices described above and the shortcoming of the current waste management system it is difficult to say to how accurately the GUS estimates reflect the actual amount of municipal waste generated in Poland.


Description of waste generated in PolandOut of the total amount of municipal waste generated in Poland in 2008 (12.1 m tons), as much as 45.2% was generated in big cities (over 50 thousand inhabitants), 26.1% in small towns (below 50 thousand inhabitants), and 28.7% in rural areas. If we compare it with the population of individual regions, we may see that the generation of waste per capita is much higher in cities (370 kg/person) than in rural areas (234 kg/person).

Place of generation

Population Municipal waste generated in 2008

thousand people

% thousand Mg % kg/person

Big cities (>50 thousand inhabitants) 14 180 37.2% 5 473 45.2% 386

Small towns (<50 thousand inhabitants) 9 110 23.9% 3 154 26.1% 346

Rural areas 14 850 38.9% 3 474 28.7% 234

Total 38 140 100.0% 12 101 100.0% 317

Table 2.1. Places where municipal waste was generated in Poland in 2008

Source: KPGO 2014

Diagram 2.3. Composition of municipal waste generated in Poland in 2008

Source: KPGO 2014

Paper and cardboard12.6%

Glass10.1%

Metals2.3%

Plastics12.7%

Bulky waste3.3%

Kitchen and garden waste

32%

Mineral waste3.9%

Fraction < 10mm8.5%

Textiles2.7%

Wood0.4%

Hazardouswaste

0.7%

Other categories4.0%

Multi-material waste2.2%

Waste from green areas4.5%

Poland holds the 6th place in the EU if we look at the total volume of generated municipal waste and, paradoxically, the last place in the amount of waste per inhabitant. The actual amount of waste that is generated may, however, increase when the Polish waste management system becomes tight.

Out of the total amount of waste generated in Poland in 2008 the biggest group was kitchen and garden waste (32.1%), plastics (12.7%), paper and cardboard (12.6%) and glass (10.1%), whereas metals (2.3%) and wood (0.4%) accounted for a relatively small percentage of the total amount of waste. If we compare the structure of municipal waste by type depending on the place of its production, we can see that in big cities the share of paper and cardboard is significantly bigger (19.1%) compared to small towns (9.6%) and rural areas (5.0%). The situation is similar if we look at plastics, whose share in total waste in big cities (15.2%) is much higher than in rural areas (10.3%).

32

Biodegradable waste is waste that may undergo anaerobic or aerobic decomposition with the support of microorganisms. KPGO 2014 treats the following as biodegradable municipal waste:

• Paper and cardboard,

• Clothes and textiles from natural fabrics (50% of municipal waste of this group),

• Waste from green areas,

• Kitchen and garden waste,

• Wood (50%),

• Multi-material waste (40%),

• Fine fraction < 10mm (30%).

In the total mass of municipal waste generated in Poland in 2008, the biodegradable waste was estimated at 6.6 m tons and constituted 54.7% of all waste. The share of biodegradable waste in cities is higher and constitutes 57.0% of all waste compared to 48.8% in rural areas.

Table 2.2. Municipal waste composition in Poland by place of its generation in 2008

Source: KPGO 2014

No. Type of waste

Waste generated

Totalthousand Mg

In big cities (>50 th.

inhabitants)thousand Mg

In small towns (<50 th.

inhabitants)thousand Mg

In rural areasthousand Mg

1 Paper and cardboard 1 521 1 045 303 173

2 Multi-material waste (40%) 160 54 50 57

3 Kitchen and garden waste 3 889 1 582 1 157 1 150

4 Fraction < 10mm (30%) 309 69 65 176

5 Textiles (50%) 163 62 63 37

6 Wood (50%) 22 6 5 11

7 Waste from green areas 549 292 167 91

Total biodegradable waste 6 613 3 111 1 809 1 694

% of all municipal waste 54.7% 56.8% 57.3% 48.8%

8 Multi-material waste (60%) 241 81 75 85

9 Fraction < 10mm (70%) 721 161 151 410

10 Textiles (50%) 163 62 63 37

11 Wood (50%) 22 6 5 11

12 Glass 1 216 546 323 347

13 Metals 279 146 49 85

14 Plastics 1 534 831 346 357

15 Mineral waste 468 173 89 206

12 Hazardous waste 89 41 20 28

13 Other categories 486 173 142 170

14 Bulky waste 268 142 82 45

Total other municipal waste 5 488 2 362 1 345 1 780

% of all municipal waste 45.3% 43.2% 42.7% 51.2%

Total municipal waste 12 101 5 473 3 154 3 474


Generated vs. collected municipal wasteThe estimated amount of municipal waste generated in Poland in 2009 was 12.1 m tons. The amount of municipal waste actually collected in the same year was 10.1 m tons. This means that the waste collected accounted only for 83.4% of the estimated amount of the generated municipal waste. The difference reaching 2.0 m tons results mainly from the fact that only 78.1% of the Polish population is covered by the organised system of municipal waste collection.

In 2009, privately owned companies collecting waste collected 57.9% of municipal waste as compared to 57.7% in 2008. At the same time, public sector collecting companies collected 40.3% of waste (42.3% in 2008), whereas the remaining 1.8% of waste was collected by entities with mixed ownership between the private and public sector.

The five most populated provinces (mazowieckie, śląskie, wielkopolskie, małopolskie and dolnośląskie) in 2009 generated 54.7% of the total generated municipal waste and collected 55.7% of the total collected municipal waste. In these provinces, except for the Małopolskie Province, the average amount of collected municipal waste per inhabitant was higher than the national average of 264 kg/person, which results from the location of big cities, where this value exceeds 400 kg/person (except for Łódź).

Voivodeship

Population Municipal waste generated Mass of collected municipal waste

thousand people

%thousand

Mg%

kg / person

thousand Mg

%kg /

person

% of generated

waste

Lower Silesia 2 877 7.5% 1 064 8.8% 370 990 9.8% 344 93.0%

Kujawy-Pomerania 2 069 5.4% 646 5.4% 312 524 5.2% 253 81.1%

Lublin 2 157 5.7% 477 4.0% 221 332 3.3% 154 69.6%

Lubuskie 1 010 2.6% 366 3.0% 362 318 3.2% 315 87.1%

Łódź 2 542 6.7% 834 6.9% 328 634 6.3% 249 76.0%

Małopolska 3 298 8.6% 914 7.6% 277 765 7.6% 232 83.7%

Mazovia 5 222 13.7% 1 875 15.6% 359 1 557 15.5% 299 83.0%

Opole 1 031 2.7% 316 2.6% 306 268 2.7% 259 84.8%

Podkarpacie 2 102 5.5% 416 3.5% 198 359 3.6% 171 86.3%

Podlasie 1 190 3.1% 347 2.9% 292 247 2.5% 207 71.0%

Pomerania 2 230 5.8% 787 6.5% 353 699 7.0% 314 88.8%

Silesia 4 641 12.2% 1 652 13.7% 356 1 394 13.9% 300 84.4%

Świętokrzyskie 1 270 3.3% 259 2.1% 204 207 2.1% 163 80.0%

Warmia-Masuria 1 427 3.7% 402 3.3% 282 324 3.2% 227 80.4%

Wielkopolska 3 408 8.9% 1 084 9.0% 318 898 8.9% 264 82.8%

West Pomerania 1 693 4.4% 616 5.1% 364 539 5.4% 318 87.5%

Total 38 167 100.0% 12 053 100.0% 316 10 054 100.0% 264 83.4%

Table 2.3. Municipal waste generated and collected in 2009 by voivoidship

Source: Municipal waste management in the Mazowieckie Province in the years 2007-2009, WIOŚ [Provincial Inspectorate for Environmental Protection] in Warsaw, 2010

34

Waste disposal in Poland compared to the rest of EuropePoland is one of the countries where modern methods of waste disposal are used only to a limited extent. In 2009 as much as 78.2% (7.9 m tons) of the mass of the municipal waste collected in Poland was deposited on landfill sites. 14.1% (1.4 m tons) was recycled, 6.7% (673 thousand tons) was biologically treated, and only 1.0% (101 thousand tons) of the collected municipal waste stream was thermally treated, that is, incinerated with energy recovery. Just to compare, among the 5 biggest EU countries, between 0.4% (Germany) and 52.0% (Spain) of waste goes to landfill, whereas from 8.8% (Spain) to more than 33.6% (France and Germany) of the collected waste is thermally treated.

The above data clearly shows that municipal waste handling in Poland differs greatly from the recommendations included in the waste management hierarchy, where landfilling is treated as the last and the least desirable method of waste disposal.

The above data clearly shows that municipal waste handling in Poland differs greatly from the recommendations included in the waste management hierarchy, where landfilling is treated as the last and the least desirable method of waste disposal. Thus it is necessary to “reverse, as quickly as possible, the monoculture of municipal waste disposal based on landfilling and to implement modern systems of their comprehensive management, including installations for waste incineration and recovery of energy included in it”3.

3 Tadeusz Pająk, Droga do gospodarki odpadami zgodnej z wytycznymi Unii Europejskiej – pokazana na przykładzie projektów spalarni w Polsce [Road to waste management consistent with EU guidelines – on the example of incineration plants projets in Poland], Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano Pelloni, Waste Management. Volume 1. East European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010.

Diagram 2.4. Municipal waste disposal in individual EU member states in 2009

Source: Eurostat

38.2%

78.2%

20.3%

1.0%

23.7%

14.1% 17.9%

6.7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Landfilling Thermal treatment Recycling Biological treatment

Euro

pean

Unio

n

German

y

Austri

a

The N

etherl

ands

Swed

en

Denmark

Belgi

um

Luks

embu

rg

Franc

eIta

ly

Finlan

d

United

King

dom

Spain

Portu

gal

Irelan

d

Slove

nia

Esto

nia

Hunga

ry

Polan

d

Greece

Czech

Repu

blic

Slova

kia

Cypr

us

Latvi

a

Lithu

ania

Malt

a

Roman

ia

Bulga

ria

2.2. Municipal waste disposal

Municipal waste disposal in Poland consists, mainly, in landfilling (78% of the mass of the waste collected in 2009), whereas the modern methods of waste disposal, such as recycling, thermal or biological treatment are used only to a limited extent.


Trends in waste management in PolandIn the years 2007-2010 a decrease in the amount of waste deposited on landfills can be noticed with simultaneous increase in the use of other methods of waste disposal, first of all recycling, however, the progress so far cannot be deemed sufficient. The percentage of landfill waste fell from 90.2% in 2007 to 78.2% in 2009, and at the same time, the percentage of recycled waste grew from 3.6% to 6.7%.

Out of the 10.1 m tons of municipal waste collected in 2009, 9.3 m ton (92.2%) was mixed waste, whereas 789 thousand tons (7.8%) of waste was collected separately. It is characteristic that the mass of waste collected without sorting fell from 9.6 m tons in 2007 to 9.3 m tons in 2009, whereas the amount of waste collected separately at the same time grew from 513 thousand tons to 789 thousand tons, which may signify a gradual growth of the importance of the separate collection of waste.

2007 2008 2009

thousand Mg

%thousand

Mg%

thousand Mg

%

Unsorted household waste 6 695 66.4% 6 428 64.0% 6 364 63.3%

Unsorted waste from commerce, small businesses and institutions

2 348 23.3% 2 405 24.0% 2 379 23.7%

Unsorted waste from municipal services 527 5.2% 521 5.2% 522 5.2%

Total unsorted collected waste 9 570 94.9% 9 354 93.2% 9 265 92.2%

Separately collected waste 513 5.1% 683 6.8% 789 7.8%

Total collected waste 10 083 100.0% 10 037 100.0% 10 053 100.0%

Table 2.5. Mixed and separately collected municipal waste in Poland in the years 2007-2009

Source: KPGO 2014

Table 2.4. Municipal waste treatment in the years 2007-2009

2007 2008 2009

thousand Mg

%thousand

Mg%

thousand Mg

%

Landfilling 9 098 90.2% 8 693 86.6% 7 859 78.2%

Recycling 580 5.8% 895 8.9% 1 421 14.1%

Biological treatment 363 3.6% 386 3.8% 673 6.7%

Thermal treatment 41 0.4% 63 0.6% 101 1.0%

Total collected waste 10 083 100.0% 10 036 100.0% 10 054 100.0%

Source: GUS

36

In 2009, most (63.3%) of the mixed municipal waste was collected from households. Another important source of this type of waste (23.7%) was commerce, small businesses, offices and institutions. Waste from municipal services, such as street cleaning or maintenance of parks or cemeteries accounted for 5.2% of the total mass of collected municipal waste. Similarly most (68.8%) of the separately collected municipal waste, in 2009, came from households (mainly glass waste). Separately collected waste from shops, small businesses, offices and institutions constituted 17.6% (mainly paper). Whereas waste from municipal services accounted for 13.6% of the amount of separately collected municipal waste (mainly biodegradable waste).

In 2009, the following amounts of waste were collected separately for recycling: 199 thousand tons of glass, 151 thousand tons of paper and cardboard and 100 thousand tons of plastics, which together accounted for 57.1% of all separately collected waste. In addition, 164 thousand tons of biodegradable waste was collected and 104 thousand tons of bulky waste. When analysing which materials are most often recycled in Poland, it should be noted that compared to 2008, the amount of separately collected plastics grew by 21.1% and glass – by 14.2%, whereas the amount of paper and cardboard only by 4.5%.

Diagram 2.5. Separate collection of municipal waste in Poland in 2009

Source: GUS

Glass25.3%

Paper and cardboard

19.1%

Plastics12.7%

Biodegradable waste20.8%

Bulky waste13.2%

Other8.9%


The waste management targets in PolandThe detailed targets for the management of municipal waste in Poland, consistent with the EU guidelines and the national regulations, have been gathered in the National Waste Management Plan 2014 covering the years 2011-2014 with an outlook to the years 2015-2022 (KPGO 2014):

• To include the whole population in the organised system of municipal waste collection and the system of separate collection of waste by 2015 at the latest;

• To reduce the volume of biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill:

o in 2013 up to no more than 50%,

o in 2020 up to no more than 35%

relative to the mass of waste generated in 1995;

• To reduce the mass of landfill municipal waste to the maximum of 60% of waste generated by 2014;

• To reduce the number of landfill sites from 520 in 2008 to 200 in 2014;

• To achieve, by December 2014, the level of recovery of minimum 60% and recycling at the level of minimum 55% of packaging waste;

• To prepare waste materials for re-use and recycling, at least such as paper, metal, plastics and household glass and, as much as possible, waste of other origin similar to household waste at the level of minimum 50% of their mass up to 2020;

• To collect in 2012 25% of used portable batteries and accumulators and in 2016 to reach the level of 45% in the collection of this type of waste;

• To collect 4 kg per capita per year of waste electric and electronic equipment from households.

KPGO 2014 also points to the waste management targets that require regular monitoring; they have been presented in the Table below.

Table 2.6. Waste management targets requiring regular monitoring according to KPGO 2014

Source: KPGO 2014

No. Indicator UnitBase year

Value of indicator in the base year

Year for target to be achievedIndicator value to be achieved

1Number of landfill sites for waste other than hazardous and inert where municipal waste is deposited

yearnumber

2008520

2014200

2Percentage of municipal waste landfilled in relation to municipal waste generated

year%

200886.6%

201460%

3Level of reduction in municipal bio-waste landfilledMaximum bio-waste landfilled in relation to that generated in 1995

year%

million Mg

1995100.0%

4.38

201350%2.19

202035%1.53

4Percentage of portable batteries and accumulators collected separately in relation to those placed on the market

year%

--

201225%

201645%

2.3. Goals and forecasts concerning changes in waste management

Main waste management targets in KPGO 2014:

• To maintain the trend of separating the increase in the amount of generated waste from the economic growth expressed in GDP;

• To increase the share of recovery, recycling in particular, of glass, metals, plastics and paper and cardboard as well as recovery of energy from waste, in accordance with the requirements of environmental protection;

• To reduce the volume of landfill waste;

• To eliminate the practices of illegal dumping of waste;

• To create and launch a data base of products, packaging and waste management (BDO).

38

In addition, KPGO 2014 adopts a number of detailed objectives or guidelines concerning:

• Hazardous waste (containing PCB, asbestos, waste oils, medical and veterinary waste, used batteries and accumulators, waste electric and electronic equipment, end-of-life vehicles as well as superfluous warfare agents and waste explosives);

• Packaging waste (made of plastics, aluminium, steel, paper and cardboard, glass and wood); and

• Other waste (end-of-life tyres, waste from construction, repairs and demolition of buildings and infrastructure, municipal sludge and non-municipal biodegradable waste).

Forecasts regarding changes in waste management in PolandAccording to the KPGO 2014, the total amount of municipal waste generated in the years 2011-2020 will be growing at the rate of 1.8% per year up to the level of 12.8 m tons in 2013 and 14.5 m tons in 2020. A growth is also forecasted in the amount of biodegradable municipal waste from 6.3 m tons (51.2% of all municipal waste) in 2010 to 6.9 m tons (54,0%) in 2013 and 7.6 m tons (52,1%) in 2020.

In accordance with the Landfill Directive, Poland must reduce the amount biodegradable municipal waste deposited on landfill down to 75% of the amount of waste in 1995 (4.4 m tons) in 2010, to 50% in 2013 and to 35% in 2020.

The implementation of the above mentioned Directive will result in the reduction of the maximum volume of biodegradable municipal waste sent to landfill to 3.3 m tons in 2010, 2.2 m tons in 2013 and 1.5 m tons in 2020. Thus the amount of waste that will have to be disposed of in a manner other than landfilling will increase from 3.0 m tons in 2010 to 4.7 m tons in 2013 and more than 6.0 m tons in 2020. It will be impossible to dispose of this waste in a manner consistent with the EU requirements without increasing the municipal waste processing capacity based on modern technology.

Parameter Unit 2010 2013 2020

Municipal waste produced* thousand Mg 12 384 12 835 14 524

Biodegradable municipal waste produced thousand Mg 6 346 6 933 7 574

Share of biodegradable municipal waste produced % 51.2% 54.0% 52.1%

Level of reduction of biodegradable municipal waste allowed for landfilling** % 75.0% 50.0% 35.0%

Biodegradable municipal waste produced in 1995 thousand Mg 4 380 4 380 4 380

Biodegradable municipal waste allowed for landfilling*** thousand Mg 3 285 2 190 1 533

Biodegradable municipal waste not allowed for landfilling thousand Mg 3 061 4 743 6 041

* estimated (2010) and planned (2013, 2020) amount of waste produced based on KPGO 2014** limits of landfilling in force from 16 July of a given year *** amounts calculated to simplify the limits in force from 1 January of a given year

Table 2.7. Requirements for landfill of biodegradable municipal waste in the years 2010, 2013, 2020

Source: Deloitte based on KPGO 2014

Meeting the EU requirements related to the management of municipal waste poses a significant organisational and investment challenge for our country. Solving these issues calls for efficient governance, use of modern technology and involvement of substantial funds.


The existing waste treatment installations in PolandKPGO 2014 points out that at the end of 2009, the total capacity of thermal waste treatment plants (ZTPOK), mechanical-biological treatment plants (MBT) and composting plants amounted to just over 1.1 m tons per year. That was made up by the following:

90 composting plants, 11 MBT plants, 3 waste fermentation plants and 1 incineration plant in the Targówek district in Warsaw.

Location of installation in each voivodeship is presented on the map below.

Figure 2.1. Types and number of municipal waste treatment installations in Poland as on 31 December 2009

Source: KPGO 2014

7

6

2

1

4

1

9

7

5

7

1

7

1

3

2

1

3

1

4

8 1

1

1

3

Pomerania Voivodeship

Warmia-Masuria Voivodeship

Podlasie Voivodeship

Mazovia Voivodeship

Lublin Voivodeship

Podkarpacie VoivodeshipMałopolska Voivodeship

Silesia Voivodeship

Opole Voivodeship

Lower Silesia Voivodeship

Lubuskie Voivodeship

West Pomerania Voivodeship

Wielkopolska Voivodeship

Kujawy-Pomerania Voivodeship

Łódź Voivodeship

Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship

3

10

39

37

10

10 16

39

13

29

19

41 15

38

26

13

1223

14

30

13

21

1412

12

58

1716

57

26

30

Composting plants for green waste and separately collected organic waste, fermentation plants

Mechanical-biological treatment plants for unsorted municipal waste

Incinerating plants for unsorted municipal waste

Sorting plants for separately collected mixed municipal waste

Landfill sites for non-hazardous and inert waste where municipal waste is deposited

2.4. The existing and planned waste treatment installations

40

Type of installation No. of installationsTotal processing

capacitythousand Mg

Average processing capacity

thousand Mg

Composting plants for green waste and separately collected organic waste

90 602 7

Municipal waste incineration plants 1 42 42

Fermentation plants 3 52 17

Mechanical biological treatment plants 11 412 37

Total installations (excl. sorting plants) 105 1 108 11

Sorting plants, incl. 173 2 227 13

Total installations 278 3 335 12

Table 2.8. List of municipal waste treatment installations in Poland as on 31 December 2009

Source: KPGO 2014

Apart from the waste treatment installations, at the end of 2009, there were also more than 520 landfill sites for depositing non-hazardous and non-inert municipal waste. The information included in KPGO 2014 shows that the available capacity of landfills meeting the requirements amounted to 69.6 m tons (116 m3). However, many of the currently operating landfill sites do not meet the environmental standards and will have to be closed in the near future.

The planned waste treatment installations in PolandIt will be impossible to dispose of the projected amount of waste in a manner consistent with the EU requirements, including, among other things, the necessity to reduce the mass of the landfill municipal waste to maximum 60% of the generated waste by the end of 2014, with the planned reduction of the number of landfill sites to 200 in the same year, without constructing and launching a number of new installations in the coming years. The Plan indicates that the most desirable types of installation are: plants for thermal treatment of municipal waste (ZTPOK) and plants for mechanical and biological treatment of waste (MBT). In addition, the KPGO 2014 clarifies that incineration plants are preferred in the case of waste management regions with at least 300 thousand population, whereas MBT are recommended for smaller areas. More information on this subject is presented in section 4.1 of this report, The necessity to increase the waste treatment capacity.

The capacity of the existing waste treatment installations in Poland is not enough to dispose of the waste in a manner consistent with the EU requirements. It is necessary to build and launch a number of new installations, in particular thermal and mechanical-biological treatment plants.


The binding provincial waste management plans (WPGO) present the investment plans related to municipal waste management. This information indicates that after 2014, there is a plan to reduce the number of operating landfills to 200-224 sites. Within the period covered by individual WPGOs there are plans to build or modernise: 87-97 composting and fermentation plants, 28-30 MBT plants (with processing capacity of 1.2 m tons) and 27 sorting plants (with processing capacity of 1,8 m tons).

The total processing capacity of the planned 11 thermal waste treatment plants amounts to about 2.4 m tons per year. Whereas the total investment expenditure for projects with a ZTPOK as their main element has been estimated at PLN 8.1 billion, with the funding for most of them planned with significant involvement of EU subsidies under the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment. Detailed information about the individual planned incineration plants has

been presented in section 4.1 of this report, The necessity to increase the waste treatment capacity.The binding waste management plans indicate that the construction of incineration and MBT plants will provide the additional processing capacity of about 3.6 m tons within the next few years. In 2013 it will be necessary to dispose of minimum 4.7 m tons, and in 2020, more than 6.0 m tons (see Table 2.7) so it may be necessary to build additional installations, apart from the ones mentioned above. The demand may be even higher if it turns out that, together with the amendment of the law and including the whole population in the organised waste collection system, the actual amount of generated municipal waste increases. It is estimated that as much as 2 m tons of waste may surface in the country as a result of the municipalities taking over the ownership of the waste.

Voivodeship

LandfillsComposting plants and

Fermentation plantsMBT plants Sorting plants

NumberCapacity

million m3

Number

Total processingcapacitythousand

Mg

Number


Mg

Number


Mg

Lower Silesia 22 b.d. 7-12 b.d. 2-4 90 1 21

Kujawy-Pomerania 11 6 11 53 - - - -

Lublin 18 13 - - 10 383 10 662

Lubuskie 19 b.d. 8 61 6 143 6 405

Łódź 22 1 16 176 - - - -

Małopolska 8 11 8 80 8 294 8 218

Mazovia 15 b.d. - - - - - -

Opole 17 0 5-10 132 - - - -

Podkarpacie 7 3 2 146 - - 2 445

Podlasie 5-15 b.d. - - - - - -

Pomerania 9 b.d. 7 b.d. 1 200 - -

Silesia 0 - - - - - - -

Świętokrzyskie 5-15 b.d. 8 b.d. - - - -

Warmia-Masuria 15 5 - - 1 120 - -

Wielkopolska 12 4 15 b.d. - - - -

West Pomerania 15-19 b.d. - - - - - -

Total 200-224 b.d. 87-97 b.d. 28-30 1 230 27 1 751

Table 2.9. List of planned municipal waste treatment plants in Poland according to the binding WPGOs

Source: WPGOs

42

The currently binding WPGOs were adopted in the years 2007-2010. Under the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities they will have to be updated within 6 months from the Act’s entry into force, that is by 30 June 2012 at the latest. The updating of the waste management plans will be vital for the proper assumption of the new duties under the amended law by local governments. As part of the WPGO updating process, the waste management areas will be re-defined and the necessary regional waste treatment installations and the investment needs related to them will be listed. In this connection, it will be necessary to hold consultations with the companies operating on the market in order to use the existing processing capacity and assets as much as possible and to learn about the intentions of the business community vis a vis the planned installations. An important element of the development of the waste management system will be the process of consulting local communities, for instance regarding the location of the new regional installations.

Disposal of waste in cement plantsCement plants have significant potential for waste disposal, as waste may be used there to generate heat necessary for the production of clinker. Recently, almost all cement plants have been thoroughly modernised and, as a result, they are able to incinerate different types of waste, while observing the admissible air pollutant emission levels. Currently in Poland there are 11 cement production plants, with full production cycle, which, in 2009, generated 35% of the heat needed for their clinker production by using alternative fuels. This percentage is systematically growing, but it is still low when compared to other European countries.

Estimates show that with the annual production of clinker at the level of 13 m tons and assuming that 50% of heat is generated from alternative fuels with average calorific value of 20 GJ/ton, it would be possible to incinerate over 1.1 m tons of waste in Polish cement plants. Unfortunately, so far, because of the lack of processing capacity of the few existing plants producing alternative fuels in Poland, almost 50% waste of high calorific value used in cement plants (approx. 230 thousand tons in 2008) is imported, mainly from Germany (221 thousand tons).


Key challenges and identified problems of waste management in Poland

Waste management is one of the most urgent environmental problems in Poland, and the challenges the country faces result from the reality facing the EU requirements and the targets included in the Polish law and in the KPGO 2014. The key challenges and identified problems that the Polish waste management system must address include the following:

• The great majority of municipal waste is still landfilled (78% of collected municipal waste in 2009);

• Unsatisfactory progress in separate collection of waste, including hazardous waste appearing in the flow of mixed municipal waste and the low percentage of recycled waste (14% of collected municipal waste in 2009);

• Insufficient number and processing capacity of modern thermal (ZTPOK) and mechanical-biological (MBT) waste treatment installations;

• About 300 landfill sites for municipal waste must be closed down by 2014 and recultivated, mainly because they do not meet the technical and legal requirements. A problem that needs to be solved is how to dispose of waste during the so called transition period, that is, in the period between the closure of the landfill sites and launching of waste treatment plants;

• The waste management system does not cover the whole population – according to the KPGO 2014, only 78% of the inhabitants of Poland were included in the organised waste collection system in 2008;

• The system is not tight – in most municipalities there is a problem of uncontrolled waste dumps (92% in the sample of municipalities inspected by NIK [Supreme Audit Office], April 2010).

• Increase in mechanical sorting of mixed municipal waste (from the level of approx. 300 thousand tons in 2005 to 1.8 m tons in 2009) driven by a 39% lower charge for depositing waste on landfill, with a limited nature of the sorting;

• Failure to fulfill the packaging waste disposal duties by some businesses;

• Lack of legally defined requirements for mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) of mixed municipal waste;

• Lack of a system for collecting expired medicines from households;

• Ineffective system of monitoring the observance of regulations pertaining to environmental protection inspectorate and the penalties system set by the Act on waste currently in force;

• Lack of sufficiently credible data on waste management, both at the regional and the national level, resulting from inaccurate recording of waste and lack of proper waste management planning;

• Lack of a central data base on products, packaging and waste management.

The Polish waste management system looks particularly weak when compared to the developed countries of the EU, where more advanced forms of waste disposal prevail and recycling reaches the level of more than 30%. In Poland in the recent years, the percentage of landfill waste has been falling while the amount of recycled waste has been growing, yet the progress in this respect has so far been unsatisfactory. Solving the identified problems will require: (i) efficient change management as well as the proper management of the new waste management system by municipalities equipped with new legal instruments, (ii) construction of new waste processing capacity with the application of modern technology which will require substantial expenditure and (iii) cooperation of all the stakeholders, including the executive authority and local governments, entrepreneurs operating on the market of collection and disposal of municipal waste as well as the general public.

The few positive aspects of the current situation include the fact that Poland, with a lower level of affluence and consumption as well as waste generation per capita than the developed EU member states, will have to make less effort to reduce the production of waste. By using the experience of those countries, cooperating with the private sector and using EU funding, Poland has a chance to implement the new system efficiently, following the model solutions and learning the lessons from the mistakes made by others.

44

3. Case study – a well developed waste management system - the example of Stockholm

Today, the Swedish municipal waste management system is one of the best developed in Europe. In 2009, in Sweden approximately 4.5 m tons of municipal waste was generated, which accounts for 1.8% of the total mass of municipal waste produced in the EU. Sweden holds the 14th place in the EU in terms of the mass of generated municipal waste and 15th place in terms of municipal waste production per capita.

The population of Poland is four times bigger than Sweden’s, yet, in 2009, the mass of waste generated in Poland was only 2.7 times bigger than in Sweden. This results from the fact that an average Swede produced 53% more waste than an average Pole, which was caused, among other things, by the lower level of economic development in Poland. In Sweden, in 2009, the amount of collected municipal waste per capita was 485 kg and was significantly higher than the average for Poland and slightly lower than the EU average, which, at that time, reached 316 kg and 512 kg, respectively.

In Sweden, the waste management system involves almost all inhabitants, which can be seen by the high percentage of collected waste as compared to generated waste (99.0% in 2009), which in Poland at the same time was only 83.4%.

Unit Sweden Poland

Population thousand people

9 256 38 136

Municipal waste generated thousand Mg

4 486 12 053

Municipal waste treated thousand Mg

4 441 10 053

Ratio of treated municipal waste to generated municipal waste

% 99.0% 83.4%

Municipal waste generated per capita kg/person 485 316

Municipal waste treated per capita kg/person 480 264

Table 3.1. Comparing waste management in Sweden and in Poland in 2009

Source: Eurostat

3.1. Municipal waste management in Sweden

There are 30 years of experience between Swedish and Polish waste management. In the 1970s, the statistical data for the Nordic countries were similar to the current Polish data, that is to say, 70-80% municipal waste was deposited on landfills and the economy was based mainly on fossil fuels.

48

Recycling35.7%

Biological treatment13.9%

Thermal treatment

48.9%

Landfilling1.4%

Recycling14.1%


Thermal treatment1.0%

Landfilling78.2%

48.9% of collected municipal waste, 35.7% recycled, 13.9% biologically treated. Only 1.4% of collected municipal waste was landfilled.

At the end of 2009, in Sweden, there were 29 thermal waste treatment plants where approx. 4.7 tons of waste was incinerated, including about 47%, that is, 2.2 m tons of municipal waste. As the output of the incineration process, the Swedish incineration plants generated, in total, 13.9 TWh of energy, including 12.3 TWh thermal energy and 1.6 TWh electricity.

Unlike in Sweden, in Poland landfilling is still the most popular way of waste disposal. Out of the10.1 m tons of collected municipal waste, as much as 78.2% was landfilled, 14.1% was recycled, 6.7% was biologically treated and only 1.0% was incinerated.

Diagram 3.1. Comparing the methods of waste management in Sweden and in Poland in 2009

Source: Eurostat

Sweden

Poland


Recycling 6.4%

Biological tratment 14.1%


Landfilling 38.4%

Sorting33.1%

Landfilling5.4%

Recycling19.9%



In 2009, 416 thousand tons of municipal waste was collected in Stockholm, and a statistical inhabitant of the Swedish capital produced approx. 490 kg of municipal waste. To compare, the mass of municipal waste collected in Warsaw amounted to 732 thousand tons. In 2009, a statistical inhabitant of Warsaw produced about 427 kg of municipal waste, 15% less than a statistical inhabitant of Stockholm.

In Stockhom, 73.8% of collected municipal waste was thermally treated with energy recovery, 19.9% was recycled, and only 0.9% was biologically treated. 5.4% was sent to landfill. In Stockhom there are about 85 thousand waste collection points, approximately 275 thousand waste containers are used.

In Warsaw, in 2009, in total 71.5% of municipal waste was sorted and landfilled. Sorting is an intermediate stage of waste disposal process and, although we do not have information about the achieved level of materials recovery, a significant part of the sorted municipal waste stream was eventually landfilled. 6.4% of waste recycled, 14.1% was composted and treated in other ways, and only 7.9% was incinerated in the only incineration plant in Poland, in the Warsaw district of Targówek.

The Stockholm municipal authorities spend annually about Euro 50m on waste management. This budget covers three main areas of activities related to municipal waste management system:

• Collection and transport of waste;

• Disposal of waste; and

• Development, administration and information processing related to waste management.

Stockholm municipal authorities spend approximately 1/3 of the budget funds for each of these areas. The Stockholm waste management system is essentially a self-financing non-profit activity. It is funded from the obligatory fees paid by property owners for waste management and it does not require any subsidies.

Diagram 3.2. Comparing the methods of waste management in Stockholm and in Warsaw in 2009

Source: Fortum, Warsaw City Hall

Stockholm

Warsaw

3.2. Waste management in Stockholm

Stockholm authorities spend a total of about 50 million EUR annually on waste management including municipal collection, transportation and waste management as well as system development and administration.

50

The city of Stockholm does not cover the costs of recovery and recycling of packaging waste. These costs are already included in the price of products purchased by consumers,. Manufacturers pay the money for covering recovery and recycling costs directly to the system or indirectly, through the so called recovery organisations.

The city of Stockholm owns the waste produced in its area. Thanks to that, the Stockholm authorities can develop their regional waste management appropriately. The city contracts companies collecting and disposing of waste. Thus Stockholm is able to guarantee a stable flow of waste for waste treatment plants. In Stockholm, 20 companies concluded contracts with the city for collection of waste: five for direct collection, one for biowaste collection, fourteen for bulky waste collection.

Thermal treatment of waste in StockholmThe Stockholm authorities spend 17 m Euro annually for the management of waste. This money is used for incineration, gasification, composting and disposal of ashes. Out of this amount, 10 m Euro per year is spent on incineration.

The thermal waste treatment plant in Högdalen has been used since 1970 for incinerating, inter alia, municipal waste collected in the area of Stockholm and neighbouring municipalities. The incineration plant produces heat and electricity. Over the years of operation the plant has been modernised a number of times. It is owned by Fortum Varme company, whose shareholders are Fortum (50% of votes) and the city of Stockholm (50% of votes). The plant has 141 employees and 50 contract workers.

The plant incinerates annually 700 thousand tons of waste, including 500 thousand tons municipal waste and 200 thousand tons industrial waste. The average calorific value of municipal waste collected in Stockholm is 25 MWh/ton (9 MJ/kg), and of the industrial waste 3.3 MWh/ton (12 MJ/kg).

The plant receives waste not only from Stockholm but also from the 25 neighbouring municipalities. Stockholm supplies about 47% (235 thousand tons) of municipal waste incinerated by the plant annually. The area serviced by the plant is inhabited by 1.8 m people. The Högdalen plant has the total capacity of 300 MW, including 70 MW electricity and 230 MW heat gross.

Parameter Unit Högdalen

Shareholders%

Fortum 50% City of Stockholm 50%

Year of plant start-up year 1969

Employees:

Full-time person 141

Contractors person 50

Total person 191

Waste processing capacity thousand Mg/year 700

Electricity capacity MW 70

Heat capacity MW 230

Electricity production GWh/year 500

Heat production GWh/year (TJ/year) 1 700 (6 120)

Waste treated in 2009

Municipal waste Thousand Mg 500

Industrial waste Thousand Mg 200

Area covered by plant activity

Number of municdipalities supplying waste

# 25

Total population of municipalities supplying waste

thousand people 1 800

Table 3.2. Basic information about the Högdalen plant

Source: Fortum

In 2009 the plant generated about 2 200 GWh of energy, including 500 GWh electricity and 1 700 GWh heat. The heat generated by the Högdalen plant satisfies the needs of approximately 80 thousand households, and the generated electricity – the needs of approx. 200 thousand households.


The Högdalen CHP uses the modern technology of flue gas condensation which makes it possible to generate 15-20% more heat. Thanks to applying this technology, the incineration plant in Stockholm produces 320 GWh of additional heat per annum.

The Högdalen plant meets the very strict standards concerning emission of pollutants into the air and water. Comparing the actual emissions from the Högdalen plant to the atmosphere in 2009 with the binding European standards shows very good results. For most substances the actual emissions did not exceed 10% of the levels allowed by the European standards, and only the emission of NOx are at the 84.4% of the level allowed by the standards.

Over the last 20 years the Högdalen CHP has contributed to a significant reduction of greenhouse gases in Stockholm:

• over 70% carbon dioxide;

• over 95% sulphur dioxide;

• over 80% nitrogen oxide.

Stockholm – European Green Capital 2010In 2010, the European Commission awarded Stockholm with the title of the European Green Capital. It is an award honouring the action undertaken by a city for the protection of natural environment and improvement of the quality of life in urban areas. One of the elements assessed by the Jury was the modern waste management system and sustainable urban planning ensuring long-term positive effects. The fact of awarding Stockholm with this title confirms the positive assessment of the Stockholm waste management system, which may be a model for other cities to replicate. The competitor to the title included such cities as: Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Oslo, Hamburg or Munich. Currently Stockholm organises visiting programmes offering training in urban planning, sustainable development, waste management or efficient transport.

84.4%

10.0% 4.7%

10.0% 9.3% 2.0% 0.1%

10.0%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Standard Actual emissions

Nitrog

en ox

ides

Ammonia

Sulph

urDus

t

Hydro

chlor

ic ac

id

Merc

ury

Heavy

meta

ls

Dioxine

s

Diagram 3.3. Comparing the actual emissions to the air from the Högdalen plant in 2009 with European standards

Source: Fortum

52

Fortum currently has two thermal waste treatment plants under construction: Brista 2 is being built in Sigtuna, about 50 km from Stockholm, the other plant is located in Kaipeda in Lithuania.

Plant Brista 2The completion and launch of the thermal waste treatment plant Brista 2 is planned for the fourth quarter of 2013. The cost of the construction is estimated at Euro 200 m. The incineration plant will produce competitive district heat for the people living in the northern part of Stockholm as well as electricity. The partners in this project are: Fortum Varme (85% share) and the Sollentuna municipality (15% share). The plant will be able to process 240 thousand tons of waste per year, including 72 thousand tons of municipal waste and 168 thousand tons of industrial waste. The total gross capacity of the plant will be 81 MW, with 21 MW electricity and 6 0 MW heat (including heat recovery from the flue gas condensation process). The plant will generate 164 GWh of electricity and 468 GWh of heat per year. It will have 20 employees and additional contract workers as well as external service providers.

Plant in KlaipedaThe plant in Klaipeda will start operations in the second quarter of 2013. The construction cost is estimated for approx. EUR 123 m. The partners in the project are: Fortum with 95% share and Klaipeda Energy company with 5% share. The incineration plant will be able to use, in total, 260 thousand tons of waste per year, with 180 thousand tons of municipal waste and 80 thousand tons of industrial waste. The total gross capacity of the plant will be 90 MW, with 20 MW electricity and 70 MW heat (including heat recovery from the flue gas condensation process). The plant will generate 156 GWh electricity and 546 GWh heat per year. It will have 32 employees and additional contract workers as well as external service providers.

3.3. Some examples of thermal waste treatment projects implemented by Fortum

Source: Fortum

Figure 3.1. Architectural rendering of the Brista 2 plant

Figure 3.2. Architectural rendering of the plant in Klaipeda

Source: Fortum


Table 3.3. The parameters of the selected Fortum’s thermal waste treatment plants

Parameter Unit Brista 2 Klaipeda

Construction cost EUR million 200 123

Planned opening 4th Q 2013 2nd Q 2013

Shareholders Fortum 85% Sollentuna Municipality 15%

Fortum 95% Klaipeda Energia 5%

Employment people 20 32

Waste processing capcity

Municipal thousand Mg 72 180

Industrial thousand Mg 168 80

Total thousand Mg 240 260

Plant capacity

Electricity capacity MW 21 20

Heat capacity MW 60 70

Total MW 81 90

Energy production

Electricity production GWh/year 164 156

Heat production GWh/year (TJ/year) 486 (1 684) 546 (1 966)

Source: Fortum

54

A typical solution used for a thermal waste treatment plantBased on the many years of experience, Fortum has developed a model for a typical thermal waste treatment plant, using the best available technology (BAT). Satisfactory economy of scale is ensured by a plant with processing capacity of approx. 250 thousand tons of waste connected to a district heating and electrical grids, with the following parameters:

Incineration plants following the model proposed by Fortum are approximately 15% more efficient in terms of heat production. This is possible thanks to the application of the flue gas condensation process. The modern plants built by Fortum do not cause any nuisance for the people living in the vicinity of the plant.

Fortum implements their investment projects under various project formats, with a possible contribution of EU funds:

• Fortum investment projects funded from the company’s own funds and an investment loan (corporate finance);

• joint-venture with a public partner;

• in the PPP or multi-annual license format.

In cooperation with municipalities, Fortum may be responsible, among other things, for:

• design, construction, financing, operation, maintenance and potentially – for co-ownership of thermal treatment installation for municipal and industrial waste;

• paid acceptance of municipal waste;

• production and sale of electricity and heat;

• disposal of ashes and slag;

• sale of the recovered and recycled materials.

Technology:mass burning on reciprocating grate, horizontal boiler 60 bar / 420 C°, combined heat and power generation, flue gas condensation system;

Processing capacity: approx. 250 thousand Mg of waste per year;

Waste flow: 32 Mg/h;

Availability: over 7 800 hours / year;

Electricity capacity: 20 MW;

Heat capacity: 50+8 MW;

Electricity generation: 140 GWh / year;

Heat generation: 410 GWh (1 476 TJ) / year;

Capital expenditure: EUR 120-150 m;

Operating costs: EUR 5-7 m;

Manning:32 emloyees (including 20 employees working shifts and 12 daytime employees) and additional contracted workers as well as external services providers;

Development time:36-40 months (from preparing a detailed engineering project to commercial operation).


The

Figu

re b

elow

sho

ws

a te

chni

cal d

iagr

am o

f a t

ypic

al in

cine

ratio

n pl

ant

for

mun

icip

al a

nd in

dust

rial w

aste

usi

ng t

he s

olut

ion

appl

ied

by F

ortu

m, s

how

ing

all t

he

impo

rtan

t co

mpo

nent

s of

the

pla

nt a

nd h

ow t

hey

are

rela

ted.

Tab

le 3

.4.

A t

echnic

al d

iag

ram

of

a ty

pic

al w

aste

inci

ner

atio

n p

lant

usi

ng

the

solu

tio

n a

pp

lied

by

Fort

um

Sour

ce: F

ortu

m

Was

te b

unke

r

Boi

ler

Fuel

oil-

Wat

er d

emin

Ash

es

Turb

ine

Com

bust

ion

air

Sla

gbu

nker

Gra

b cr

ane

Sup

ply

to b

oile

r

Feed

wat

er-

Aux

iliar

ybu

rner

s

G

Rec

eivi

ng o

f w

aste

Hig

h pr

essu

re s

team

Low

pre

ssur

e st

eam

Con

dens

ate

Dis

trict

hea

ting

Rea

ctor

Bag

hou

se

filte

r

Que

nch

Flue

gas

co

nden

sor

Lim

esto

ne

Car

bon

Lye

NH 3

B2

Scr

ubbe

r

Mun

icip

alW

ater

sup

ply

Air

preh

eate

r

56

Comparison of Poland to the well developed EU member states highlights the big untapped potential of municipal waste in our country

There is a distance of 30 years of experience between Sweden and Poland in implementing modern waste management solutions and technologies. In Sweden, about 4.4 m tons of municipal waste is collected annually, of which, in 2009, 36% was recycled and 1% was landfilled. In Poland, about 10 m tons of municipal waste is collected, of which in 2009 14% was recycled, and 78% was deposited on landfill sites. In Sweden there are several (more than 20) thermal waste treatment plants (ZTPOK), in Poland – only one small waste incineration plant. In Sweden, approx. 15% of energy is produced from waste, whereas in Poland only 0.1%. There are also some similarities, e.g. with regard to the district heating system, as both in Poland and in Sweden, 50% of thermal energy used to heat flats and houses is centralised in district heating systems.

All this highlights the untapped potential for economically profitable and environmentally friendly waste management in Poland. While trying to use this potential, it is worth drawing from the best practice, tested technologies and experience of the companies that have been successful in implementing investment projects and providing services on the waste management market.


4. Thermal waste treatment plants in Poland

4.1. The necessity to increase the waste treatment capacity

In view of the depletion of natural resources and the need to protect the areas of natural and landscape value as well as the more and more strict laws on emission of pollutants into water and air, the methods of thermal or biological-mechanical treatment of municipal waste, from which usable materials have been separated at source and recycled, are among the basic solutions vital for the creation of a modern, comprehensive waste management system. In the Polish conditions, building of such a system also entails a possibility to secure EU funding for this purpose.

Regional waste treatment installationsIn accordance with the KPGO 2010, the Voivodeship waste management plans (WPGO) have defined the waste management regions to be serviced by municipal waste disposal plants (ZZO). In the WPGOs adopted in the years 2007-2010 and currently binding, 123 municipal waste management regions have been defined, of which 37 regions have the population over 300 thousand, 70 regions have the population between 150-300 thousand and 16 regions – below 150 thousand.

The amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities defines a municipal waste management region as an area, set forth in WPGO, populated by at least 150 thousand people, where a municipality with more than 500 thousand inhabitants may also constitute a region. The Act introduces an obligation to update the existing WPGO within 6 months from the entry into force of Act, that is, by 30 June 2012 at the latest, whereby changes may be introduced into the current division of provinces into municipal waste management regions. As a result of the WPGO updating, the regional installations and processing capacities for municipal waste treatment will be re-defined.

In accordance with the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, the regional waste treatment installation is defined as a ZZO with processing capacity sufficient for accepting and treatment of waste from the area inhabited by at least 120 thousand people, fulfilling the requirement of the best available technology (BAT), ensuring:

• Thermal treatment of waste; or• Mechanical-biological treatment of unsorted

municipal waste and separating from such waste the fractions that can be recovered partially or in full; or

• Separate treatment of the collected green waste and other bio-waste and converting them into products of fertiliser properties or products for enhancing plant production; or

• Landfill of waste produced in the process of mechanical and biological treatment of unsorted municipal waste and the residue from municipal waste sorting with the capacity enabling acceptance of waste for not shorter than 15 years.

Poland urgently needs to increase its municipal waste treatment capacity. Any delay in building the regional waste treatment installations will jeopardise the achievement of the waste management targets adopted for the years 2013 and 2014.

60

The main commitments of Poland in the area of waste management consist in reducing the amount of waste deposited on landfill sites, including biodegradable waste, and increasing the level of recycling and preparation for re-use of selected fractions of municipal waste (paper, plastics, metals and glass). In addition, under Art. 6 of the Landfill Directive, Poland is obliged to take measures in order that only waste that has been subject to treatment, that is, subject to appropriate physical, thermal, chemical or biological processes, including sorting, that change the characteristics of the waste in order to reduce its volume or hazardous nature, facilitate its handling or enhance recovery, will be deposited on landfill sites. What is particularly difficult is to reduce the amount of biodegradable waste sent to landfill and pre-treatment of the whole volume of waste prior to its landfilling. This is connected with the necessity to build new installations and introduce waste treatment technology that would make it possible to reduce the negative impact on the environment.

The information presented in Chapter 2 of this report shows that Poland does not currently have the infrastructure for treatment of municipal waste with the capacity sufficient for fulfilling the EU requirements and meeting the waste management targets adopted in the KPGO 2014. The ZZOs, including the regional waste treatment installations, should become the foundations of the modern waste management in Poland. In most cases, the construction of the regional waste treatment installations is at the stage of documentation preparation or construction. As part of the process of WPGO updating, it will be necessary to carry out a review of the existing and planned municipal waste treatment installations in individual municipalities, regions and provinces, including consultations with business in the process. The change in legislation will force municipalities to reserve additional processing capacity for treatment of municipal waste (including mechanical and biological treatment, thermal treatment, composting, sorting), which should significantly reduce the risk related to the flow of waste sent to individual installations and thus accelerate the process of taking investment decisions by entrepreneurs.

Plannned thermal municipal waste treatment plantsKPGO 2014 treats thermal waste treatment as the preferred treatment method for unsorted municipal waste for waste management regions with at least 300 thousand people. In the smaller regions, the basic method of unsorted waste treatment is mechanical and biological treatment. Currently in Poland there is only one small installation for thermal waste treatment (ZUSOK) located in the Warsaw district of Targówek, which in 2010 incinerated 39 thousand tons of waste. Whereas the experience of the ‘old’ EU member states, for instance, as in the example of Stockholm described in Chapter 3, thermal municipal waste treatment plants (ZTPOK) are of key importance for the proper operation of the waste management system in big cities.

The total processing capacity of the planned Polish thermal waste treatment plants is approx. 2.4 m tons per year. The total capital expenditure for the projects whose main components are ZTPOK has been estimated at 8.1 billion PLN, with most of the funding planned to include the EU subsidies under the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment [POIiŚ].


No. City

Processing capacity

Project cost estimate (*)

EU subsidy estimate

Project procurementthousand

Mg / yearPLN million

PLN million

% of project

costStatus of EU-grant application

1 Warszawa 265 590 n.d. n.d.Project not applying for EU subsidy in the programming period 2007-2013

Traditional

2 Kraków 220 792 372 46.9% Subsidy agreement signed Traditional

3 Łódź 200 857 337 39.3% PPP

4 Poznań 240 1 071 352 32.9% PPP

5 Gdańsk 250 539 296 55.0%Application for EU subsidy planned for 2014-2020 financial perspective

Traditional

6Ruda Śląska (GZM)

500 1 699 1 129 66.5%Application for EU subsidy planned for 2014-2020 financial perspective

PPP

7 Szczecin 150 576 255 44.3% Subsidy agreement signed Traditional

8"Bydgoszcz, Toruń"

180 620 340 54.8% Subsidy agreement signed Traditional

9 Białystok 120 652 210 32.2% Traditional

10 Koszalin 120 403 198 49.2% PPP

11 Konin 120 314 155 49.2% Traditional

4 PPP projects 1 060 4 030 2 016 50.0%

7 remaining projects 1 305 4 083 1 627 39.9%

Total 11 projects 8 113 3 643 44.9%

Table 4.1. Selected planned thermal waste treatment plants in Poland

(*) The financial data refers to the whole project of which ZTPOK is the main component

Sources: List of individual projects for the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment 2007-2013, updated in August 2011; Ministry of Regional Development, Department for Individual Projects’ Preparation; www.zusok.com.pl; Fortum; Presentation „System gospodarki odpadami dla Miasta Poznania. Koncepcja realizacji projektu w formule PPP” [“Waste management system for the city of Poznań. A concept for the implementation of the project in the PPP format”] of 16.06.2011, B. Sajnaj

Apart from the planned 11 ZTPOKs, several other cities in Poland are considering the construction of similar installations. Because of that and because of the fact that the data in the table are of preliminary and approximate nature, subsequent updates of the information on the planned waste incineration plants in Poland should be expected. Experts emphasise that the currently planned installations and thermal waste treatment processing capacity are not sufficient for the needs of a country that produces more than 12 m tons of municipal waste4 annually. Assuming that ultimately 1/3, that is, about 4 m tons of municipal waste

4 How many waste incineration plants does Poland need? For an Internet portal wnp.pl: Henryk Skowron, PhD, of the Engineering Consulting Bureau, Tadeusz Pająk, PhD, Department of Power Engineering and Environmental Protection of the AGH University of Science and Technology in Kraków.

produced in the country will be subject to thermal treatment, it means that 16 incinerating plants will be needed with the capacity of 250 thousand tons per year.

62

In the “old” EU member states, there are hundreds of thermal waste treatment plants. These installations are extended, modernized, new ones are built and their operation is not contested by the local communities, as everyone is aware of the benefits drawn from such a way of waste disposal, that is, burning it while recovering the electricity and heat. Such incineration plants are often located in big cities (e.g. in Paris, Vienna, Stockholm) and play the role of installations vital for the reduction of significant amounts of waste and for depositing on landfill sites only small amounts of pre-treated secondary waste.

The main benefits of the thermal treatment of waste include:• A comprehensive solution for disposal of different

types of municipal waste in a manner that is environmentally friendly and safe for people’s health;

• Contributing to the fulfillment of EU directives concerning the methods of disposing of municipal waste, including the reduction of landfilling of biodegradable waste and achieving the required recovery levels;

• Facilitating the reduction of emissions of CO2 and other substances harmful for the environment – modern incineration plants emit 10-20 times less ashes, dioxins, sulphur and heavy metals than is allowed by UE standards;

• Meeting the strict environmental standards related to noise emissions, vibration, soil and ground water pollution or impact on flora and fauna.

• Combined production of significant amounts of electricity and heat, treated partly as renewable energy, reducing the use and transport of traditional fuels such as coal;

• Potential re-use of post-processing waste, especially slag in road construction;

5 To compare, in 2010, the Turów Power Plant, with 7% share in the national production of electricity, burnt about 10 m tons of lignite and produced about 10 TWh of electricity.

6 To compare, according to the data of URE [Energy Regulatory Office], the total consumption of natural gas in Poland in 2010 amounted to 14.4 billion m3. Foreign gas supplies, amounting to approx. 10.1 billion m3, were supplemented with the gas from domestic sources in the amount of 4.2 billion m3.

• Achieving economic results in municipal waste disposal better or comparable to other methods, with the assumption that it is possible to sell the heat generated in the process and that the support mechanisms such as energy certificates of origin and gate fee remain stable;

• A positive stimulus for the economy and an important source of income for engineering, construction companies and equipment suppliers as well as a source of taxes and jobs for the people in the city or region during the operation of the installation.

4.2. Benefits and economic incentives for thermal waste treatment

Plants for thermal treatment of municipal waste, popularly called incineration plants, are vital elements of a modern waste management system in big cities. Their main advantage is the environmentally friendly manner of disposing of waste which is a local fuel used for combined generation of electricity and heat.

Municipal waste – energy potential for Poland:• Assuming that ultimately 1/3, that is, approx. 4 m tons of municipal waste

generated in Poland will be treated thermally and adopting the parameters of a typical incineration plant with processing capacity of 250 thousand tons, we will receive 2.2 TWh of produced electricity and approx. 6.5 TWh (23,6 PJ) of heat per year5.

• 4 m tons of municipal waste have the energy value comparable to 1.3 billion m3 of natural gas6.

• Average calorific value of 1 kg of municipal waste ranges between 8 and 14 MJ/kg and is similar to the calorific value of the lignite available in Poland;

• Plastic is the most calorific type of waste. Its calorific value is comparable to heating oil. A plastic bottle left on a landfill site will take even 500 years to decompose;

• From one plastic bag it is possible to recover enough energy to power a 60W bulb for 10 minutes. Electricity generated from the 7 billion plastic bags used annually by Poles would be enough to power 60W bulbs for ten minutes, in 7 billion houses on Earth;

• It takes about 20 buckets of garbage to heat a 60 m2 flat for 24h, with the outside temperature of -15OC.

Source: Fortum, Deloitte


Support mechanismsModern and environmentally friendly installations for municipal waste treatment enjoy various types of support mechanisms across Europe, including subsidies or additional charges for less environmentally desirable ways of waste disposal according to the hierarchy set by the Framework Directive.

The economic incentives for construction modern thermal municipal waste treatment plants in Poland, available on the condition of using appropriate technology and meeting certain requirements, include:

• EU subsidies for co-financing of qualifiable costs of the construction of an installation granted under POIiŚ [Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment] during the programming period 2007-2013. It is also expected that funds will be allocated for similar activity in the 2014-2020 financial perspective;

• Certificate of origin for energy from renewable sources (the so called green certificates);

• Certificate of origin for energy from highly efficient co-generation (the so called red certificates);

• Fees for the use of natural environment, in particular, fees charged for depositing waste on a landfill site.

In order to obtain a grant for co-financing the construction of a ZTPOK, it is necessary to meet a number of formal requirements defined in the guidelines prepared by the Ministry of Regional Development [MRR] and Jaspers, in particular, for income generating projects, to demonstrate the existence of the so called financing gap, that is, a difference between the capital expenditure and the discounted net revenue from the undertaking.

The detailed conditions for recognizing the energy as generated from renewable sources and from highly-efficient co-generation have been set in the relevant regulations issued by the Minister of Economy and the Minister of Environment on cancellation of certificates of energy origin, on highly efficient co-generation and on treatment of municipal waste. For instance, a key condition for having part of the produced heat and electricity recognized as generated from a renewable source is the achievement of a fixed amount of at least 42% share of the energy from the chemical fraction of biodegradable waste treated at a ZTPOK.

An important economic mechanism justifying the decision to direct the flow of municipal waste not to a landfill site but to modern thermal treatment plants are the fees charged for depositing waste on landfill sites (the so called marshal’s fee [gate fee?])tzw. opłata marszałkowska). The diagram below shows the historical evolution of the amount of this fee in the years 2006-2011 on the basis of the announcement of the Minister of Environment on the amount of fees for the use of natural environment and the planned rate of these fees on the basis of the draft Regulation of the Council of Ministers on fees for depositing waste on landfill sites dated 4 February 2011.

66.32

15.39

75.00

100.00 104.20

107.85

140

160

180

200

15.71

60.00 61.5064.08

14.47 20.0 20.50 21.36 22.1135

4045 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Municipal waste e.g. Unsorted municipal waste (20 03 01)

Non-hazardous waste after mechanical treatment (19 12 12)

Non-hazardous and inert waste. e.g. slag and ashes (19 01 12)

14.17

Diagram 4.1. Fees for depositing waste on landfill sites in the years 2006-2015

Sources: Announcements of the Minister of Environment on the amount of fees for the use of natural environment (years 2006-2011); Draft Regulation of the Council of Ministers on fees for depositing waste on landfill sites dated 4 February 2011 (years 2012-2015)

64

What attracts attention in the Draft Regulation of the Council of Ministers, is the planned further increase of the fee for depositing waste on landfill sites up to the target level of 200 PLN per ton in 2015 and standardization of fees for unsorted municipal waste (20 03 01) and mechanically treated non-hazardous waste (19 12 12). The significant difference (about 39% in the years 2009-2011) in the rates of fees for landfilling unsorted municipal waste and mechanically treated waste has led to a great increase in the volume of the waste sent to landfill after the so called mechanical sorting, from the level of about 300 thousand tons in 2005 to 1.8 m tons in 2009; and it is a common belief that part of this volume is a result of a pathological practice of bogus waste sorting by some fraudulent companies7.

In spite of the existence of the supporting mechanisms, Poland has been having difficulties in implementing the biggest projects of constructing modern waste treatment installations for years. One of the reasons has been the uncertainty related to ensuring the proper flow of waste for the planned thermal waste treatment plants, unacceptable for private investors and financial institutions.

7 National Chamber of Waste Management, Assessment of the draft Regulation of the Council of Ministers on fees for depositing waste on landfills, 17 August 2010.


4.3. Selected aspects of a ZTPOK construction project

In the Polish conditions, the key challenges related to the construction of a ZTPOK include:• To reconcile the interests of different stakeholders

(municipalities, local community, private companies, financial institutions, etc.);

• A complex investment process, including the necessity to obtain a number of administrative decisions and permits;

• Availability and quality of waste as well as the local heat market;

• Stability of the support mechanisms, including the sale price of energy certificates of origin and the rate of fees for depositing waste on landfill sites (gate fee);

• Combining the public-private partnership (PPP) format with co-financing of qualifiable project costs from EU funds;

• Attitude of the environmental NGOs and public acceptance.

Stakeholders’ requirementsAs the illustration below shows, thermal waste treatment projects have a number of stakeholders and involved entities and for this reason require a lot of consultation and negotiation in order to develop the best consensual solutions, adapted individually to every project. Under the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, it is the municipalities that play the leading role here by ensuring the construction, maintenance and operation of regional waste treatment installations, either their own or owned jointly with other municipalities.

The main groups of stakeholders in a ZTPOK project and their selected requirements include:

1. Municipality or municipalities forming a union and the local community:• A positive balance of the economic costs and

benefits of the project,• The safety of relations with the other party to the

transaction,• Possible off-balance-sheet treatment of the project,• Service affordability and certainty of municipal

waste collection,• Installation that is environmentally friendly and safe

for human life;

Construction of a thermal waste treatment plant is a complex investment project which requires efficient management and detailed consideration of the financial, technical and legal issues over a long-term perspective. The success of such an undertaking depends, among other things, on very careful preparation of all documents, carrying out consultation, defining the scope of cooperation and the requirements regarding the private sector (general contractor, technology suppliers, possibly also installation operator and investor), and securing public acceptance for the project.

Landfill sites

Plants for thermal treatment of municipal

waste (ZTPOK)

Recipients of slag and

recovered raw materials

The public

Local community

Legislative and executive

bodies

Municipality or union of

municipalities

Non-governmental organisations

Heat and electricity distributors

International financila

institutions and commercial

banks

General contractor and subcontractors

Investors

Municipal waste

suppliers

Technology suppliers

Installation operator

Figure 4.1. ZTPOK stakeholders


66

2. Private investors:

• A possibility to expand geographically and to increase business diversification;

• A long-term, stable contract,• A possibility to generate additional income,• A satisfactory return on the invested capital;

3. General contractor and sub-contractors, technology suppliers and the installation operator;

4. Suppliers and recipients of materials, energy and services;

5. International financial institutions and commercial banks:

• A project consistent with the binding law and environmental standards, including BAT;

• Credible partners and clear principles of cooperation between the public and the private sectors,

• Security of the investment project: assessment of the rights of the private partner, assignability of rights and claims,

• Verified and bankable financial model of the project,

• Protection of the lender’s rights in case of contract termination;

6. National bodies implementing EU funded projects and managing the granting of EU funds:

• Achieving the goals of the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment,

• Meeting the requirements set by the Ministry of Regional Development and the Jaspers guidelines,

• A positive balance of the economic costs and benefits of the project,

• Project sustainability.

Investment processConstruction of a thermal waste treatment plant is a complex investment project which requires efficient management and detailed consideration of the financial, technical and legal issues over a long-term perspective. The proper and diligent carrying out of the investment process requires efficient management, from preparation of the necessary documents and analyses, through market consultations, through tender procedures, negotiating the commercial and financial terms in order to conclude the relevant contracts, to construction work and monitoring of the commercially operating

installation. If the project is co-financed from the EU funds, the project will also have to be verified both at the national and at the European Commission level.

The work at the project implementation stage involves:

• Concluding contracts with suppliers and recipients of materials, energy and services (supply of municipal and industrial waste, collection of electricity and heat, collection and transport of slag and ashes, collection of recycled materials, maintenance services, etc.);

• Obtaining or transferring the necessary administrative decisions and permits;

• Preparing the building permit design and the detailed design;

• Commencing and carrying out construction works;

• Interim inspections and final acceptance of works and handing the installation over for operation.

Obtaining or transferring the necessary administrative decisions or permits includes, in particular:

• Administrative decisions related to the impact of the installation on the natural environment (obtaining the decision on the environmental conditions for approval for project implementation and the relevant permits, e.g. integrated permit, gas and dust emission permit, water permit for discharge of wastewater into water or ground and waste generation permit);

• Obtaining the building permit;

• Obtaining license for electricity generation under the Energy Law Act;

• Possibly, obtaining license for heat generation and approval for the heat tariff from URE [Energy Regulatory Office] under the Energy Law Act (a clear assessment whether it is necessary to obtain a heat generation license and to submit the heat tariff for URE approval may only be possible after verifying the technological parameters of a project).


Availability and quality of wasteSo far, projects related to thermal treatment of municipal waste have been burdened with uncertainty as to availability of waste flow. This issue has been eventually solved by the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities. According to the new legislation, municipalities will become owners and holders of municipal waste, which will enable rational planning and managing of the waste disposal system. Municipalities or unions of municipalities will be able to guarantee the flow of waste to a ZTPOK throughout the whole economic lifetime of the plant, including the period of debt financing and the duration of the contract with the private investor if such were to be involved in the project.

It is particularly important to adjust the municipal and industrial (if used) waste processing capacity and the technical parameters of the planned installation to the local conditions, that is, to the planned target waste management system and to the quality of the waste available in the region in which the ZTPOK will operate. The changing preferences of manufacturers and consumers as well as the planned changes in waste

management, connected with separate collection and recycling will affect the calorific value of the municipal waste sent to the incineration plant. In particular, separate collection of the light packaging waste will lower whereas separate collection of bio-waste will increase the calorific value of the waste. The above mentioned factors require such design of the installation that it can work with optimal performance within the set range of calorific values throughout the lifetime of the plant.

Selecting the model for project implementation and sources of financing Selecting the scheme of project implementation is an important issue. Municipalities or unions of municipalities may select the best model, from traditional implementation in the form of a public tender and then operating the installation themselves to various forms of private sector involvement, taking into consideration, inter alia, local conditions of the project, availability of funding as well as their own competence or the competence of municipality owned companies to manage complex investment projects. Depending on the selected solution, the responsibility and the role of the public and private sectors will vary.

Figure 4.2. Selecting the model for implementing a ZTPOK project

Project components

Determine public authority

competences

What am I allowed to do?Legal constraints? Political reality?

Define sector and/or

project needs

What do I want to do?

Speed? Efficiency? Needs? Innovation?

Determine who should do what

Desired partnership structure

Optimal mix of public and private involvement in project delivery

Design

How are we going to pay for it?

Who can and should do what?

Who should bear what risks?

Build Finance Operate Maintain Own

Traditional procurement

PPP scheme (DBFOM)

A joint-venture

Source: Partnering for value, Structuring effective public-private partnerships for infrastructure, A Deloitte Research Study.

68

The costs of constructing a ZTPOK constitute an important part of expenditure, even in the budgets of the biggest Polish cities. The available forms of financing include both, such that are characterised by the on-balance-sheet treatment of the projects from the local government point of view (direct investment loan from international financial institutions and commercial banks as well as municipal bonds) and such that, with the appropriate transaction structuring may not affect debt public indicators (revenue bonds, leasing or PPP).

Taking into account a slowdown in revenue increase, accumulation of capital expenditure and the necessity to maintain the required public debt indicators, city authorities more and more often consider alternative methods of financing and implementing investment projects, such as: public-private partnership or a joint venture, implemented together with a private partner. It is important, however, that the criterion of the off-balance-sheet treatment of a project should not be the only one that determines the selection of given method of financing.

It is worth noting that on entering into force of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, that is on 1 January 2012, when fulfilling their tasks related to ensuring the construction, maintenance and operation of the regional municipal waste treatment plants, municipalities will, first of all, be obliged to select the entity that will build, maintain and operate the regional waste treatment installation, by way of public tender or following the principles set in the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities or the Act on licenses for construction works or services. Only when such procedure is unsuccessful, a municipality will be able to fulfill the task of building, maintaining and operating a regional municipal waste treatment plant on its own.

Projects implemented in the public-private partnership format differ from the traditional public procurement in the following aspects:

• Long-term, even 20-30-year cooperation based on an agreement between a public entity and a private partner;

• Taking into account all the costs and benefits of the project throughout the lifetime of the plant;

• Transfer to the private partner of selected risks related to the task implementation, such as design, construction, financing and availability of the installation, which play a decisive role in generating the value added by the project;

• Possible remunerating the private partner for availability of the services of certain quality and adjusting the payment if the required availability and the specific service parameters are not achieved;

• Financing a significant part of the project costs by external financial institutions.


Fig

ure

4.3

. A

n e

xam

ple

of

a p

roje

ct s

truct

ure

und

er t

he

DB

FOM

mo

del

Fina

ncia

l in

stitu

tions

Inha

bita

nts

Col

lect

ion

and

tran

spor

t co

mpa

nies

Reci

pien

ts o

f pr

oduc

ts

Pena

lties

for

low

qu

ality

of s

ervi

ce

PPP contract (DBFO/M)

Reve

nue

from

sal

e of

:-

Hea

t-

Elec

tric

ity-

Gre

en a

nd r

ed c

ertifi

cate

s-

Reco

vere

d an

d re

cycl

ed m

ater

ials

Loan

ag

reem

ents

Gat

e fe

e

Fees

for

man

agem

ent

of m

unic

ipal

was

tei

Inve

stor

sO

wn

capi

tal

and/

or

subo

rdin

ated

deb

t

Gen

eral

C

ontr

acto

r

Subc

ontr

acto

rs

Mun

icip

ality

or

unio

n of

mun

icip

aliti

es

Spec

ial P

urpo

se V

ehic

le

Coo

pera

tors

Contract (EPC)

Supp

ort

agre

emen

t

Ope

rato

r (*

)Contract (O&M)

Fees

for

colle

ctio

n an

d tr

ansp

ort

of w

aste

Sour

ce: A

utho

r’s

own

com

pila

tion

(*) R

ole

of t

he O

pera

tor

may

be

play

ed d

irect

ly b

y th

e SP

V

Usi

ng t

he P

PP fo

rmat

or

a lic

ense

for

ZTPO

K im

plem

enta

tion

may

brin

g ad

ded

valu

e bu

t is

com

plic

ated

and

requ

ires

the

loca

l gov

ernm

ent

to b

e pr

oper

ly p

repa

red.

M

unic

ipal

ities

tha

t de

cide

to

impl

emen

t th

e pr

ojec

t us

ing

the

desi

gn -

bui

ld -

fina

nce

- op

erat

e –

mai

ntai

n (D

BFO

M) m

odel

sho

uld

cons

ider

, am

ong

othe

r th

ings

, the

fact

th

at, p

arad

oxic

ally,

whi

le t

he c

onst

ruct

ion

of t

he p

lant

, in

this

mod

el, u

sual

ly g

oes

smoo

thly,

the

pre

para

tion

of a

ppro

pria

te a

naly

ses,

ten

der

docu

men

tatio

n, c

arry

ing

out

the

nego

tiatio

ns a

nd g

ettin

g to

the

com

mer

cial

and

fina

ncia

l clo

sure

of t

he t

rans

actio

n is

a lo

ng a

nd c

ompl

ex p

roce

ss. A

n ex

ampl

e of

a p

roje

ct s

truc

ture

and

the

con

trac

tual

re

latio

ns b

etw

een

the

part

ies

invo

lved

, in

the

DBF

OM

mod

el a

re s

how

n in

the

dia

gram

bel

ow.

70

Ex-ante analyses, Market consultations

Announcement of procedure

Negotiations

Selection of the private partner

Application for funding

Assessment of application

at the national and Jaspers level

Financing agreement

Transfer of application to the EC

Assessment of application by EC

Decision of EC

Financial closure

Application update

Procedure for selection of

the private partnerApplying for EU funding

Figure 4.4. An example of a hybrid project procedure

Source: Ministry of Regional Development

Combining the PPP format with EU fundingThe implementation of the so called hybrid projects, combining the PPP format with EU funding is particularly long and complex. If the competitiveness of the private partner selection process is ensured, combining the two formats makes it possible to use all of their benefits. EU funding makes unprofitable public undertaking attractive for private partners, whereas public services remain affordable for the people. At the same time, the public entity benefits from the efficiency and experience of the private sector.

Implementation of a project using the hybrid model requires, in fact, a two-path approach, one for the selection of the private partner, the other for applying for EU funding, e.g. following the diagram presented below, which assumes the public entity applying for EU funding before the commercial closure of the project. It is also possible to apply for EU funding after the commercial closure of the project, which helps avoid the risk of overfunding, yet makes it more complicated to submit private partners’ bids and extends the whole investment process (the project will not be implemented until the application review is completed and the amount of subsidy is confirmed).


Combining the PPP format with the use of EU funding in ZTPOK projects makes it necessary, on the one hand, to carry out a detailed risk analysis, the so called Public Sector Comparator, and to demonstrate the Value for Money, whereas on the other it requires the fulfillment of certain MMR [Ministry of Regional Development] and Jaspers requirements and guidelines related to POIiŚ [Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment] and revenue-generating projects, including demonstrating the existence of the so called financing gap. The calculation of the financing gap, that is, a difference between the capital expenditure and the discounted net revenue, which determines the level of a possible EU subsidy, significantly complicates the process of project preparation. For a hybrid project, this calculation resembles an equation with several unknowns, whose solution is only possible by the method of successive approximations (iterations). It is worth noting here, that EU funding fills only part of the financing gap (maximum up to 85%), and the rest of it has to be filled by the public entity, because the private partner will not cover the expenditure which he will not be able to recover from the income. The EU regulations make it also necessary to monitor the level of income generated by the project, which, in turn, may mean that the financing gap may need to be re-calculated and, in some cases, the subsidy may have to be returned.

A separate issue is a very strictly prescribed time for implementation of a project co-financed by the EU. Under the current financial perspective 2007-2013, the deadline for qualifying expenditure, that is, for accounting for all capital expenditure, is 15 December 2015. By that time, the public entity must conclude the selection of the private partner, who, in turn, must ensure the financial closure of the transaction, design, build the plant and hand it over for operation. For this reason and because of the complexity of the investment process of preparing and building a waste incineration plant, it is already clear that some ZTPOK projects in Poland will apply for EU funding only under the 2014-2020 financial perspective.

„Vicious circle” of subsidy calculation

Unknown revenues

Unknown amount of subsidy

Unknown amount of private

financing

Unknown amount of

loan/financial costs

Unknown price of services (gate fee)

Unknown financing gap

Source: Osiągnąć więcej wydając mniej – projekty hybrydowe w praktyce, Łukasz Piekarski, Michał Czarnecki, Departament Przygotowania Projektów Indywidualnych Ministerstwa Rozwoju Regionalnego, Forum PPP Nr 1(14)/2011 [To achieve more while spending less – hybrid projects in practice], Łukasz Piekarski, Michał Czarnecki, Ministry of Regional Development, Department for Individual Projects’ Preparation, PPP Forum No. 1(14)/2011

Figure 4.5. “Vicious circle” of calculating the amount of subsidy for a hybrid project

72

Taxation issuesBelow we address some selected issues related to taxation of the activity consisting in thermal waste treatment that should be taken into consideration at the project preparation stage:

• Standard CIT rate - 19%, no special tax breaks or discounted rates for entities doing business in thermal waste treatment;

• Tax losses can be carried forward into subsequent years, following the principle that a loss must be settled, at the latest, in the fifth year after the tax year in which it occurred and that in a given year 50% of the amount of loss from previous years can be settled;

• In principle – deducting the subsidy income from the taxable income and at the same time excluding the costs financed with the subsidy (including depreciation of new assets in the part financed with the subsidy) from the cost of revenue;

• Implementing an investment project in the PPP format or a license format – detailed tax regulations favouring this form of activity;

• Taking into consideration the VAT claims for the public entity and the private partner, including a possibility to apply a reduced VAT rate (currently 8%) to selected services connected with removal and treatment of waste.

During the construction and operation of a ZTPOK it is necessary to take into account the VAT settlement. From the point of view of local government units (JST), the amount of VAT-related fiscal burden may be of great importance (in principle, VAT listed on the invoice is a cost for a JST). Depending on the type of a project and the manner of its implementation, there may be solutions that would make it possible to reduce this burden. In case of applying for EU funding it is also important whether VAT may or should be treated as a qualifiable project cost.

For a potential private partner it is of fundamental importance to be able to settle the VAT in a smooth and expedient manner at the project implementation stage. Investment projects generate a lot of calculated tax which is paid on purchase of goods and services. Quick and timely refund of these payments from the tax office has an impact on the cash flow of the company implementing the project.

Public acceptanceThe acceptance of the local community in which an incineration plant is to be built is often a critical factor determining whether a plant will be built in a given location or not. Carrying out public consultations is an indispensable element of an investment process, in particular, necessary to obtain a decision on the environmental conditions for approval of an investment project. Since in Poland there is only one operating incineration plant ZUSOK located in the Warsaw district of Targówek, Polish local authorities find it difficult to assess the level of public acceptance for a ZTPOK. In the general opinion, incineration plants are perceived in the context of big landfill sites or big combined heat and power plants, which may evoke negative associations and the NIMBY (“not in my back yard”) syndrome.

In western Europe, where such plants are carefully blended with the architecture of the cities and do not stand out in the landscape, the situation is different. Modern incineration plants meet very strict technical and environmental standards, and the logistics at such plants is organised in such a way so as not to be a nuisance for the neighbourhood.

Therefore, already at the very early stage of implementing an incineration plant project, local authorities with a better understanding of the needs of the municipality and the region should engage in a dialogue with the inhabitants, which should begin the process of gaining public acceptance. The Polish society acts rationally and has the ever greater awareness of the issues related to rational waste management, which can be seen from the results of a survey carried out among inhabitants of the 7 biggest cities in Poland, presented in Chapter 5 of the report. As part of their activities, local governments should first present the arguments showing local benefits, whereas all the arguments related to legal and technical aspects may be presented at a later stage (e.g. reduction of the consumption and long-distance transport of fossil fuels and emissions of


substances affecting the natural environment, which accompany the coal-fueled production of electricity and heat). People usually need some time to think certain arguments over and should not be forced to act fast. The knowledge may be transferred in various ways: by organising press conferences, by the radio, television but also through reports and by publicising the experience of the more developed markets. It is also advisable to present the results of monitoring of an operating plant to the public.

Municipal waste constitutes energy potential and a valuable source of green energy that can be used in Poland

Poland can no longer delay the increase of waste processing capacity, and especially, the construction of ZTPOKs, which are an indispensable component of a modern waste management system in big cities. Municipal waste is a valuable local fuel which can be used for the combined production of electricity and heat which is environmentally friendly and energy efficient. The amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities which eliminates the uncertainty as to the availability of the waste flow as well as the existence of support mechanisms in the form of EU subsidies under POIiŚ, the green and red certificates for the produced electricity and heat and fees for depositing waste on landfill, all this creates favourable climate for such projects.

Construction of a ZTPOK is a complex project which requires efficient management and detailed consideration of the financial, technical and legal issues over the long-term perspective. Municipalities or their unions should consider the scope and the terms of cooperation with the private sector, which, with the appropriate experience and know-how, may help in successful implementation of incineration plants projects whereas the cooperation between local governments and private companies may bring tangible benefits for both parties.

Among the currently planned 11 ZTPOKs in Poland, with the total processing capacity of about 2.4 m tons per year, 4 are planned for implementation in the PPP format, and the remaining 7 in the form of a traditional public tender for the design and construction of the installation. The total capital investment for the projects with a ZTPOK as their main element has been estimated at the level of 8.1 billion PLN, with the financing of most of them planned with a significant contribution of EU funding under POIiŚ. The processing capacity for thermal waste treatment and the investment needs in this respect are, however, greater than that.

74

5. Waste – a social problem

Developing a concept of modern waste management requires a number of activities carried out simultaneously in a number of areas. The most important areas of waste management include:

• organisation, that is, management and regulation activities of the central and local governments;

• infrastructure, that is, construction of modern waste treatment plants, i.e. plants for thermal treatment of waste with energy recovery, mechanical and biological treatment plants (MBT), composting plants, modern landfill sites meeting the EU environmental requirements as well as equipment and waste logistics;

• waste management, that is, applying various processes of preparing waste for re-use, waste recycling, organic recycling, recovery and use of substances, materials or energy from waste;

• people, that is, the area including the activities of inhabitants related to manufacturing and reducing the production of waste, disposing and sorting of household waste.

The new sustainable waste management system in cities is, first of all, a serious social change – at the level of awareness and attitudes which will translate into actual activities of people living in cities. Effective waste management is possible, inter alia, by creating in households a new culture of handling waste.

It consists of the following elements:

• reflection about the volume of waste generated in households and undertaking action aimed at reducing this volume;

• general acceptance and applying of waste sorting at source, that is, at home;

• publically approved custom of disposing of waste in accordance with waste disposal rules, that is, in appropriate places (this applies in particular to disposing of bulky waste, batteries, medications, electronic equipment, waste for recycling, clothes, waste paper, glass, metals, plastics).

The public opinion survey presented further down in the report, carried out in the biggest agglomerations in Poland: in Warsaw, Kraków, Łódź, Wrocław, Poznań, Gdańsk and Katowice, complements the analyses describing the current condition and prospects for the development of waste management. The survey helps us learn about the views and attitudes of people living in these cities on various aspects of the waste management process.

The table below presents the basic data concerning the 7 biggest Polish cities whose inhabitants participated in the survey.

City

Population Municipal waste collected

million people

% thousand Mg % kg / person

Warszawa 1 714 4.5% 733 7.3% 428

Kraków 755 2.0% 302 3.0% 400

Łódź 742 1.9% 230 2.3% 310

Wrocław 632 1.7% 260 2.6% 411

Poznań 554 1.5% 250 2.5% 451

Gdańsk 457 1.2% 184 1.8% 403

Katowice 309 0.8% 134 1.3% 434

Total 7 biggest cities 5 163 13.5% 2 093 20.8% 405

Total Poland 38 167 100.0% 10 054 100.0% 264

Table 5.1. Population and volume of the collected municipal waste in the 7 biggest cities in Poland in 2009

Source: GUS [Central Statistical Office],City Halls

5.1. Introduction to the survey and summary of the conclusions

78

The subject of the study has been the awareness, the needs and the readiness of people living in big cities to become part of a modern waste management process. The questions also concerned the experience, observations and satisfaction of the people with the current organization of collection and disposal of waste in cities. The inhabitants have also been asked to evaluate the action of local governments and the central government with respect to waste management. Another aspect under study was the support for legal changes leading to the improvement of waste management quality and to eliminating the illegal waste dumping.

The results of the survey will allow us to verify the statement that the sources of the very poor condition of waste management in Polish cities are not only the weak legal solutions and infrastructure. Another barrier to sustainable management of waste may be the low level of awareness and involvement of people. The fact that the survey has been carried out in several cities at the same time makes it possible to compare the results obtained in individual cities.

The conclusions will make it possible to relate the attitudes of the population of Polish cities to the opinions and attitudes of the inhabitants of the cities considered the waste management leaders – to the best practices in this area. Stockholm – the European Green Capital 2010 – is a reference point here. We hope that the results of the survey studying the opinion of people living in the biggest Polish cities will become an important element in the discussion over the human aspect of waste management, in the context of a challenge that is posed by the need to educate and stimulate people to more active participation in the organization of a modern system for managing municipal waste.

The inhabitants of the biggest Polish cities have a pragmatic approach to the issue of waste and its management

The problem of waste management has recently received a lot of publicity in the media. Some of the media reports sound really alarming. However, the people living in the biggest agglomerations approach the problem without strong emotions. The results of the survey carried out among the inhabitants of the 7 biggest Polish cities, Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Wrocław, Łódź, Gdańsk and Katowice, show, on the one hand, lack of any alarming phenomena connected to dumping of waste, on the other hand, they point to great openness for cooperation on waste management. Generally speaking, in the 7 biggest Polish cities people have a much better opinion of the organisation of waste collection (77% positive marks) than of the organization of its disposal (only 32% positive marks).

The great majority of people living in big cities have a good opinion of the modern methods of waste disposal, such as modern incinerating plants, recycling, composting or biodegradation. What they do not trust are landfill sites (only 15% positive marks). The opinions expressed by the respondents show that slightly more than 1/3 of families engage in some sort of activity to improve waste management. The most frequent one is waste sorting (41%), the least frequent – sorting and disposing of medications in special dedicated containers (29%). The problem that is noticed by the inhabitants of big cities is dumping of waste against the rules – to somebody else’s container or into a place not dedicated to this purpose. Over the last year 75% of respondents have come across such phenomena. People are much better motivated to sort waste by infrastructure solutions (accessible containers) and financial benefits than by educational campaigns, although they too, according to 53% of respondents stimulate the positive behaviour. There are visible differences in the assessment depending on the city. Generally, the people of Poznań have the highest opinion of their waste management system.


5.2. Opinions on the collection and disposal of waste in the place of residence

The inhabitants of the seven biggest cities in Poland, Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Wrocław, Katowice, Gdańsk and Łódź, in great majority (77%) positively assess the organisation of the collection and transport of waste in their city ( “rather well” – 62%, and “very well” an additional 15%). Critical assessment has been expressed by 19% of respondents. The relatively most critical are the inhabitants of Łódź – 25% of negative assessments; the least – the inhabitants of Poznań – only 11% of negative asessments.

Taking into consideration the demographic characteristics, relatively the most critical are the people aged 30-39; the least – the youngest ones (aged 18-30): 28% compared to 12% of negative assessments. The frequency of giving a negative assessment of the quality of waste transport services is influenced by the education and gender of the respondents – the least critical are the people with elementary education (13% of negative assessments). Women are often more critical than men: 24% compared to 13% of negative assessments.

A much worse assessment than that given by the people to the organisation of waste collection and transport, has been the assessment of the “organization of sorting and treatment” of waste in their city. The waste treatment process is assessed negatively by more than half of the respondents (55% of negative assessments compared to 32% positive). In this respect, relatively, the most critical are the inhabitants of Wrocław (62% negative assessments) and Katowice (60%); and the least – the inhabitants of Poznań – only 36% of negative assessments. From the demographic point of view, relatively, the most critical are the people aged 30-39; the least – the oldest respondents, over 65 years of age: 65% compared to 44% negative assessments. The respondents with elementary education are the least critical in their assessment of waste treatment – 47% express negative opinions.

How do you assess the organisation of the collection and transport of waste in your city?

82%

72%

74%

85%

72%

81%

81%

77%ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

How do you assess the organisation of sorting and treatment of waste in your city?

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 30%

28%

28%

52%

29%

29%

35%

32%

The inhabitants of the 7 biggest cities in Poland have a positive opinion on the collection and transport of waste, worse about its sorting and disposal.

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

80

5.3. Opinions about accessibility of waste containers and the costs of collection and transport of waste

Most of the inhabitants of the cities under survey do not have to travel far to their nearest waste sorting containers. Those who do not own a house usually do not know the cost of the waste collection and transport service.

Are there waste sorting containers close to the place you live?”

66%

54%

61%

70%

66%

66%

56%

62%ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

What is the cost of waste collection and transport in your household

39,2

32,8

40,0

38,2

47,0

41,4

39,8

39,7

Średnia (w PLN)

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

In big cities, most people notice the availability of waste sorting containers. 62% of the population of the cities under survey say that containers for waste sorting are available within a short distance from their home (2-3-minute walk). However, more than 1/3 of them do not have such containers close by. Among the respondents, 37% say that they do not have such access.

Among the people who have easy access to waste sorting containers – in 78% of cases there are more than two types of containers. In 15% of cases – there are only two containers (for unsorted municipal waste and for “sorted” waste).

The awareness of the costs of waste collection and transport is not common among the city inhabitants under survey. More than half of the respondents (53%) are not able to say what is the monthly cost of collecting waste from their home. Such knowledge is much more common among middle-aged people (40-50 years of age) than among those in other age groups. Those who do know the cost of waste collection, on average, mentioned the cost of almost 40 PLN per month. On average, the cost of waste collection is the highest in Łódź (47 PLN), the lowest in Wrocław (33 PLN). What is more, more than half (56%) of the respondents think that the fees are at an appropriate level, whereas 27% perceive them as too high.

44% of respondents would agree to a fixed fee (depending on the amount), and 26% of them would not like such a solution (30% have no opinion on that).

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Average (in PLN)


Engaging the inhabitants of big cities in the process of modern waste management is a great challenge for city authorities. The biggest Polish agglomerations and the people living there are, without a doubt, the leaders of the whole process, but even here there is still a lot to be done. The habits related to the production and sorting of waste in households need to be changed. In the survey, a question has been asked about people’s observations with respect to habits in their environment pertaining to important issues of waste sorting and reduction of waste generation. Slightly more than 1/3 of people can see around them some examples of behaviour supporting effective solutions to the household waste issue. In the biggest cities, the most popular behaviour optimising the management of waste include: sorting waste at home (41%) and using

5.4. Waste management habits of city inhabitants

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%

Świadome ograniczanie produkcji odpadów

39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%

Wyrzucanie odpadów budowlanych do specjalnych kontenerów

Oddawanie zużytego Sprzętu RTV i AGD do specjalistycznych punktów odbioru i recyklingu

Segregacja odpadów w domu

Wyrzucanie śmieci do pojemników do segregacji

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%

Wyrzucanie baterii do odpowiednich pojemników

Wyrzucanie leków do odpowiedniego miejsca

38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%


39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%





ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%



38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%


39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%





ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%



38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%

The inhabitants of big cities support rational waste management with their behaviour, although these activities could be more widespread. The problem of illegal waste dumping is evidently noticed.

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%


39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%





ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%



38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%


39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%





ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%



38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%

53%

36%

28%

46%

28%

30%

58%

35%


39%

35%

30%

56%

36%

32%

37%

36%





ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 48%

30%

41%

69%

42%

30%

31%

41%

43%

34%

35%

75%

47%

24%

32%

40%

46%

42%

29%

41%

30%

33%

23%

33%

47%

33%

33%

47%

36%

25%

43%

35%



38%

26%

30%

32%

22%

29%

30%

29%Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Disposal of building waste

to special containers

Disposal of batteries to special

containers

Disposal of medicines to the

right place

Sorting waste at home

Using the containers for

sorted waste

Consciously reduction of

waste production

82

the containers for sorted waste (40%), and, further down the list, – conscious reduction of the volume of waste (36%). Among the cities, Poznań definitely stands out, in a positive way, the habit of sorting waste is the most popular here – according to 69% of the people surveyed, those around them do sort their waste at home.

People living in big cities clearly see the problem of illegal waste dumping. 35% of all the inhabitants of the cities under survey say that they “regularly” come across illegal waste dumping, and a further 40% – have seen it several times. Only 23% of the respondents have never witness such a practice. Those who come across this problem most frequently are the inhabitants of Warsaw (as much as 45% of them regularly come across this practice); the problem is the least frequently seen by the inhabitants of Gdańsk (22%).

Did you come across illegal waste dumping in the last year (to someone else’s container, to forest, to illegal landfill)?

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 39%

31%

45%

26%

36%

26%

22%

35%

32%

43%

37%

35%

47%

47%

36%

40%

25%

22%

17%

34%

15%

25%

39%

23%

4%

5%

5%

1%

2%

3%

2%

1%

Did you come across burning of waste in households in the last year?

Regularly

Several times

I did not notice

Hard to say

14%

11%

7%

13%

6%

15%

7%

10%

17%

31%

33%

28%

17%

28%

15%

27%

66%

57%

59%

56%

68%

53%

76%

61%

4%

1%

1%

3%

8%

4%

2%

3%ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 39%

31%

45%

26%

36%

26%

22%

35%

32%

43%

37%

35%

47%

47%

36%

40%

25%

22%

17%

34%

15%

25%

39%

23%

4%

5%

%

5%

1%

2%

3%

2%Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)


Why you don’t agree to have a modern waste incineration plant built in your district?

4%

9%

26%

31%

40% 40%

31%

26%

9%

4%

Would you agree to have a modern waste incineration plant built in your district?

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 80%

59%

73%

75%

76%

82%

68%

73%

13%

36%

23%

22%

17%

13%

29%

22%

7%

5%

3%

3%

8%

4%

3%

4%

Yes

No

Hard to say

73% of people have declared that they would agree to have a modern waste incineration plant built, provided that all the environmental and safety standards were met, among other things, the plant should have modern air cleaning filters and should generate electricity and heat for the community. 22% would be against the construction of such a plant. Relatively most often such approval has been declared by the inhabitants of Kraków (82%) and Katowice (80%), the least frequently -- the inhabitants of Wrocław (59%). Those who would not be willing to agree to construction of a modern incineration plant in their district, are often people who live in city centres, who think that it is not a good location for an incineration plant (40% of those who would not agree). The rest – of those who would not agree – most often justified their view by the fear of foul odour (31%) and air pollution (26%).

Relatively, the greatest number of the opponents of waste incineration plants are among the oldest respondents (in the group aged 65 or more there are 26% of those who oppose such a solution); however, generally the age, or gender do not really influence the attitude towards incineration plants. Having secondary or higher education is usually accompanied by slightly lower support for incineration plants).

5.5. Approval or lack of approval for the construction of an incineration plant in the neighbourhood

Almost ¾ of people have declared that they would agree to have a modern waste incineration plant built in their district, whereas only 15% accept depositing waste on a landfill site.

Lack of approval for incinerator in city center, near to people

Emitation of odours

Air pollution

Devastation of environment

Health risk

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

84

Assessment of various methods of waste treatment and disposalThe respondents have been asked about their approval for various methods of treatment and disposal of waste. The highest approval has been granted to “modern waste incineration plants” – as much as 71% have a positive attitude towards them. Composting and biodegradation is approved by 67% and 60% respectively. Recycling is positively viewed by 64% of respondents. The lowest level of approval has been expressed for the landfill of waste. This method of waste disposal is approved by only 15% of the inhabitants of big cities.

17%

23%

12%

21%

12%

13%

16%

15%

53%

62%

60%

63%

55%

66%

59%

60%

Nowoczesne spalarnie Kompostowanie

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 73%

53%

67%

70%

60%

62%

62%

64%

77%

67%

65%

71%

75%

80%

76%

71%

66%

67%

72%

69%

73%

56%

56%

67%

Biodegradacja Składowanie na wysypiskachRecykling

Opinions of methods of treatment and disposal of waste

17%

23%

12%

21%

12%

13%

16%

15%

53%

62%

60%

63%

55%

66%

59%

60%


ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 73%

53%

67%

70%

60%

62%

62%

64%

77%

67%

65%

71%

75%

80%

76%

71%

66%

67%

72%

69%

73%

56%

56%

67%


17%

23%

12%

21%

12%

13%

16%

15%

53%

62%

60%

63%

55%

66%

59%

60%


ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 73%

53%

67%

70%

60%

62%

62%

64%

77%

67%

65%

71%

75%

80%

76%

71%

66%

67%

72%

69%

73%

56%

56%

67%


17%

23%

12%

21%

12%

13%

16%

15%

53%

62%

60%

63%

55%

66%

59%

60%


ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 73%

53%

67%

70%

60%

62%

62%

64%

77%

67%

65%

71%

75%

80%

76%

71%

66%

67%

72%

69%

73%

56%

56%

67%


Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Modern waste

incineration plantsComposting plant Recycling

Biodegradation Landfill of waste


79%

68%

74%

76%

76%

72%

75%

74%

51%

54%

54%

46%

60%

49%

56%

53%

Dostępność pojemników do segregacji

Brak opłaty za odbiór śmieci segregowanych

ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 66%

69%

57%

68%

65%

61%

69%

63%

71%

70%

66%

76%

60%

58%

68%

66%

66%

79%

78%

79%

78%

70%

69%

76%

Możliwość sprzedania surowców odzyskanych w wyniku segregacji

Akcje edukacyjneNiższa opłata za segregowanie śmieci

Encouragement to segregate waste

79%

68%

74%

76%

76%

72%

75%

74%

51%

54%

54%

46%

60%

49%

56%

53%



ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 66%

69%

57%

68%

65%

61%

69%

63%

71%

70%

66%

76%

60%

58%

68%

66%

66%

79%

78%

79%

78%

70%

69%

76%



79%

68%

74%

76%

76%

72%

75%

74%

51%

54%

54%

46%

60%

49%

56%

53%



ogółem (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83) 66%

69%

57%

68%

65%

61%

69%

63%

71%

70%

66%

76%

60%

58%

68%

66%

66%

79%

78%

79%

78%

70%

69%

76%



Opinions on what could persuade people to sort wasteThe inhabitants of big cities can see two main elements motivating them to proper management of waste at home: proper infrastructure and financial incentives. As the best motivation for waste sorting people have most often indicated the availability of containers for sorted waste (76%) and lack of charge for collection of sorted waste (74%). Further down the list they have mentioned – lower fees for sorted waste (66%) and the possibility to sell the materials recovered from sorted waste (63%). The respondents have appeared the least convinced that educational campaigns may persuade people to sort their waste, although still more than half of them believe such methods may be effective.

Availability of containers for

sorted waste

Lack of charge for collection

of sorted waste Lower fees for sorted waste

Possibility of selling materials

recovered in the result of waste

segregation Education campaigns

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

Total (n=1400)

Gdańsk (n=122)

Kraków (n=203)

Łódź (n=204)

Poznań (n=150)

Warszawa (n=465)

Wrocław (n=171)

Katowice (n=83)

79%

75%

86

Conclusion

Waste management systems in developed countries involve the public, private capital and modern technologyThe complexity of the structures and systems of the contemporary world is the reason why designing a sustainable development strategy and setting the priorities become difficult and require different approach in individual countries, regions and cities.

Implementation of the sustainable development principles, protection of the natural environment and efficient use of resources constitute important elements of the EU policy, reflected in the EU law and the documents defining the strategic directions for development, such as the Europe 2020 Strategy. EU regulations emphasise the environmental protection and the efficient use of resources. In the area of municipal waste management, priority is given to reduction of waste generation, recycling and recovery of energy from waste with the reduction of waste landfill.

Developing a concept of modern waste management requires a number of activities carried out simultaneously in several areas. The most important areas of waste management include: (i) management and regulation activities and those related to the organisation and control of the system, (ii) technology and infrastructure, (iii) collection, transport and disposal of waste and (iv) activities of the people related to manufacturing, reduction of waste generation and waste sorting. Modern trends in waste management, effectively implemented by the developed EU member states, go in the direction of greater involvement of the public and the private sector and applying modern technology in order to minimise the generation of waste, for recycling and waste treatment. Private capital is used to supply the necessary infrastructure and to provide the services of waste collection, transport and disposal.

Thermal treatment with energy recovery

Minimising waste generation and preparing

for re-use

Disposal on landfill sites Recycling

Future

Municipalities

Public-Private Partnership

Private sector

The public

Shareholders’ axis

Technology axis

Present

Figure 6.1. Modern trends in the municipal waste management

Source: Own compilation based on „W Warszawie o paliwie nie funkcjonującym w percepcji społeczeństwa” [In Warsaw on a fuel absent from public perception”, Jacek Sobański, Nowa Energia 2(20)/2011


Poland is at the begining of the road towards sustainable waste managementMunicipal waste management is one of the most neglected and the most burning environmental problems of Poland. By ratifying the Accession Treaty in 2003, Poland has made a number of commitments which, in the area of waste management, include reduction of waste sent to landfill, including biodegradable waste and increasing the level of recycling and preparation for re-use of selected fractions of municipal waste (paper, plastics, metals and glass).

The main problems of municipal waste management in Poland relate to the following phenomena:

1. The most common method of waste disposal in Poland is landfilling (about 78% of the volume of municipal waste collected in 2009). Several hundred of landfill sites must be closed and re-cultivated;

2. Poland does not have modern infrastructure for the management of municipal waste (installations for mechanical and biological or thermal treatment of waste). The issue that needs solving is the disposal of waste during the transition period, after the landfill sites are closed and before the installations become operational;

3. So far Poland has made little progress in sorting and separate collection of waste at source and in materials recovery or recycling;

4. The waste management system is not tight enough. Not all people, especially in the rural areas, are covered by the formal municipal waste collection system; some undesirable practices appear: the grey zone, illegal dumping sites, disposing of waste on one’s own.

Polish waste management system looks particularly poor when compared to the developed EU member states, where the more advanced waste disposal methods predominate and where recycling reaches the level of 30%. The difference between Poland and those countries stems from their 30 years of experience in implementing modern waste management solutions and technologies.

The few positive aspects of the current situation include the fact that Poland, with a lower level of affluence and consumption as well as waste generation per capita than the developed EU member states, will have to make less effort to reduce the production of waste. By using the experience of those countries, cooperating with the private sector and using EU funding, Poland has a chance to implement the new system efficiently, following the model solutions and learning the lessons from the mistakes made by others.

Local governments should prepare for sweeping changes forced by the amended legislationThe issue of proper waste management, in view of the changing legal environment and the necessity to meet the EU requirements will become a great challenge for local governments in the near future. The core of the waste management reform in Poland is the amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, which introduces important changes to the Polish waste management system, based on the systems operating in other European countries (except Hungary), including greater responsibility of local governments. In addition, in 2011 there are plans to amend the Act on Waste and to adopt the Act on packaging and packaging waste, which will make it possible to fully transpose the most important EU directives in the area of waste management into the Polish legal system.

88

The necessary changes will not be possible without close cooperation of all the stakeholders, that is, local governments, the public and businesses with proper experience and know-how. Municipalities will be required to assume more responsibility for the operation of waste management system, including the construction, maintenance and operation of municipal waste treatment installations, necessary to reduce the volume of landfilled waste and to increase the level of recovery and recycling.

Success in waste management will not only require local governments to be professional in the way they manage their network of service providers, but also to be very competent in engaging in dialogue with the public with the view to inducing desirable behaviour.

In order to effectively manage their relations with the public and the service providers network, local governments can8:

• Set goals, define values and create trust in their own activities;

• Allocate the tasks and create a system of incentives;• Monitor the achievements and effectiveness of

cooperation;• Be pro-active in change management.

It is expected that municipalities, equipped with new legal instruments, will organise the collection of waste from all their inhabitants and will effectively contribute to the improvement of waste management in Poland.

8 Stephen Goldsmith, William D Eggers, Governing by Network, The New Shape of the Public Sector, Brooklings Institution Press, Wahsington, D.C., 2005

Local governments

Companies The public

EU requirementsNational legislation

Waste mnagement targets

Provision of services: waste collection / waste sorting at source

Contra

cts fo

r coll

ectio

n and

disp

osal

of w

aste

/

monito

ring t

he qu

ality

of se

rvice

s

Organising and managing the system /

fees for waste management

Figure 6.2. Cooperation between local government, the public and companies in the target waste management system in Poland



What is the attitude of the public?The survey carried out among the inhabitants of the 7 biggest Polish cities, Warsaw, Kraków, Poznań, Wrocław, Łódź, Gdańsk and Katowice confirms that the public has a pragmatic approach to the issue of waste and waste management. The survey results show, on the one hand, lack of any alarming facts connected with waste collection and transport, on the hand, they indicate great openness to cooperation in the disposal of waste. People much better assess the organisation of waste collection (77% positive assessments) than the organisation of waste treatment (only 32% positive assessments).

People living in big cities, in great majority, positively assess modern methods of waste disposal, such as modern incineration plants, recycling, composting or biodegradation. It is worth noting that almost ¾ of them have declared that they would agree to have a modern waste incineration plant built in their district, whereas only 15% of them accept depositing waste on landfill sites.

People generally appreciate the gravity of the problem, realise the necessity to sort waste at source, to recycle and to use modern methods of waste treatment. Emphasis should be placed on stimulating desirable behaviour (by providing access to infrastructure, proper system of facilities and incentives) and on building the authority and confidence in local government in this respect.

Municipal waste offers energy potential and provides a valuable source of green energy that can be used in Poland The waste management sector offers a number of business opportunities including both logistics and waste treatment, with energy and materials recovery. Taking into account the population of Poland (38 m people), average number of people in a household (3 people) and the estimated monthly waste management fee paid by one household (30 PLN/month), we get the annual size of the municipal waste market in Poland exceeding PLN 4.5 billion. It reflects the order of magnitude of waste management fees which will be collected nationally by municipalities from the public to cover the costs of collection, transport and disposal of waste as well as the costs of organisation, development and administration of the system.

Poland urgently needs to increase the municipal waste processing capacity, such as installations for mechanical and biological waste treatment (MBT) and thermal waste treatment (ZTPOK). Any delay in the construction of the regional waste treatment installations may jeopardise the achievement of the waste management targets for the years 2013 and 2014. Here particularly important is the construction of ZTPOKs, which, with great processing capacity at their disposal, will become a key component of the planned waste management systems in big cities (more than 300 thousand inhabitants). The amendment of the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities, which eliminates the uncertainty with respect to the waste flow availability and the existence of support mechanisms in the form of EU subsidies under the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment, of green and red certificates for the generated electricity and heat as well as fees for depositing waste on landfill sites provide favourable environment for this type of investment projects.

90

Municipal waste is a valuable local fuel which may be used for environmentally friendly and energy efficient combined generation of electricity and heat in Poland. The average calorific value of 1 kg of municipal waste ranges from 8 to 14 MJ/kg and is similar to the calorific value of the lignite available in Poland. If we assume that ultimately 1/3, that is, about 4 m tons of municipal waste generated in Poland will be thermally treated and if we take the parameters of a typical waste incineration plant with processing capacity of 250 thousand tons, we will get approx. 2.2 TWh of electricity and 6.5 TWh (23,6 PJ) heat generated annually. 4 m tons of municipal waste has the energy value comparable to 1.3 billion m3 of natural gas, which accounts for about 13% of the annual import of gas to Poland.

Among the currently planned 11 ZTPOKs in Poland, with the total processing capacity of approx. 2.4 m tons per year, 4 are to be built under the PPP model, and the remaining 7 following the traditional public tender for the design and construction of the installation. The total capital expenditure for the projects with a ZTPOK as their main component, has been estimated at the level of approx. PLN 8.1 billion. However, according to experts, the necessary thermal waste treatment processing capacity and the investment needs in this respect in Poland are even greater.

Construction of a thermal waste treatment plant is a complex investment project which requires efficient management and detailed consideration of the financial, technical and legal issues over a long-term perspective. Municipalities or their unions should consider the scope and the terms of cooperation with the private sector, which, with the appropriate experience and know-how may help in successful implementation of incineration plants projects whereas the cooperation between local governments and private companies may bring tangible benefits for both parties.

It is expected that by developing investment projects, infrastructure and services in the area of municipal waste management it will be possible to create new jobs both in the private sector and in the local government administration. The availability of EU funding in the current and the future financial perspective as well as the interest of technology suppliers, construction companies installation operators, investors and financial markets in infrastructure projects provide a unique opportunity for Polish regions and cities to make up for the decades of backwardness in developing modern waste management systems.


List of illustrations

Figure 1.1. Waste management hierarchy 14

Figure 1.2. Key legal requirements for waste management in Poland 21

Figure 1.3. Time limits for adapting the waste management system to the requirements of the amended Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities 25

Figure 2.1. Types and number of municipal waste treatment installations in Poland as on 31 December 2009 40

Figure 3.1. Architectural rendering of the Brista 2 plant 53

Figure 3.2. Architectural rendering of the plant in Klaipeda 53

Figure 4.1. ZTPOK stakeholders 66

Figure 4.2. Selecting the model for implementing a ZTPOK project 68

Figure 4.3. An example of a project structure under the DBFOM model 70

Figure 4.4. An example of a hybrid project procedure 71

Figure 4.5. “Vicious circle” of calculating the amount of subsidy for a hybrid project 72

Figure 6.1. Modern trends in the municipal waste management 87

Figure 6.2. Cooperation between local government, the public and companies in the target waste management system in Poland 89

List of illustrations

Table 1.1. The key EU legislation regulating waste management issues 14

Table 1.2. The current and the target system of waste management in Poland – selected duties of the stakeholders 19

Table 1.3. The annual level of recovery and recycling required under the Act on packaging and packaging waste 20

Table 1.4. Key decisions to be made and action to be taken by local governments 26

Table 2.1. Places where municipal waste was generated in Poland in 2008 32

Table 2.2. Municipal waste composition in Poland by place of its generation in 2008 33

Table 2.3. Municipal waste generated and collected in 2009 by voivoidship 34

Table 2.4. Municipal waste treatment in the years 2007-2009 36

Table 2.5. Mixed and separately collected municipal waste in Poland in the years 2007-2009 36

Table 2.6. Waste management targets requiring regular monitoring according to KPGO 2014 38

Table 2.7. Requirements for landfill of biodegradable municipal waste in the years 2010, 2013, 2020 39

Table 2.8. List of municipal waste treatment installations in Poland as on 31 December 2009 41

Table 2.9. List of planned municipal waste treatment plants in Poland according to the binding WPGOs 42

Table 3.1. Comparing waste management in Sweden and in Poland in 2009 48

Table 3.2. Basic information about the Högdalen plant 51

Table 3.3. The parameters of the selected Fortum’s thermal waste treatment plants 54

Table 3.4. A technical diagram of a typical waste incineration plant using the solution applied by Fortum 56

Table 4.1. Selected planned thermal waste treatment plants in Poland 62

Table 5.1. Population and volume of the collected municipal waste in the 7 biggest cities in Poland in 2009 78

List of tables

Diagram 2.1. Production of municipal waste in the EU in 2009 30

Diagram 2.2 The amount of generated municipal waste per inhabitant in the EU countries in 2009 30

Diagram 2.3. Composition of municipal waste generated in Poland in 2008 32

Diagram 2.4. Municipal waste disposal in individual EU member states in 2009 35

Diagram 2.5. Separate collection of municipal waste in Poland in 2009 37

Diagram 3.1. Comparing the methods of waste management in Sweden and in Poland in 2009 49

Diagram 3.2. Comparing the methods of waste management in Stockholm and in Warsaw in 2009 50

Diagram 3.3. Comparing the actual emissions to the air from the Högdalen plant in 2009 with European standards 52

Diagram 4.1. Fees for depositing waste on landfill sites in the years 2006-2015 64

List of diagrams

92

List of abbreviations

Abbreviation Full name

BDO Data base of products, packaging and waste management

cogeneration Combined production of heat and electricity. Detail conditions for recongnising energy as produced in cogeneration have been set forth in the Act – Energy Law

DB Design - Build

DBFOM Design - Build - Finance - Operate - Maintain

DBO/M Design - Build - Operate - Maintain

EBRD European Bank for Reconstruction and Development

EC European Commission

EIA Environmental impact assessment

EIB European Investment Bank

EPC Engineering, Procurement, Construction

EU European Union

EUR Euro, official currency in 17 European Union member states

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GJ Gigajoule

GUS Central Statistical Office (Główny Urząd Statystyczny)

GWh Gigawatthour

GZM Metropolitan Association of Upper Silesia (Górnośląski Związek Metropolitalny)

i.a. Inter alia

i.e. That is

IRR Internal rate of return

Jaspers Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions

kg Kilogramme

km Kilometer

KPGO National Waste Management Plan (Krajowy Plan Gospodarki Odpadami)

LGU Local government unit

m Meter, Million

m2 Square meter

m3 Cubic meter

MBT Mechanical biological treatment of waste

ME Ministry of Economy

MEnv Ministry of Environment

Mg Ton

MJ Megajoule

MRD Ministry of Regional Development

MWDP Municipal Waste Disposal Plant

MWh Megawatthour

N.d. No data

n/a Not applicable

NFEPWM National Fund of Environmental Protection and Water Management

NIMBY „not in my back yard”

NPV net present value

O&M operation and maintenance

Operator Entity responsible for operation of the installation


Abbreviation Full name

pc Piece

PJ Petajoule

PLN, zł Zloty, official currency in Poland

POIiŚ Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment (Program Operacyjny Infrastruktura i Środowisko)

PPP Public-Private Partnership

PWMP Provincial Waste Management Plan

TFEU Treaty on Functioning of the European Union

Th. Thousand

TJ Terajoule

TMWTP Thermal Municipal Waste Treatment Plant

TSMWTP Thermal Solid Municipal Waste Treatment Plant

TWh Terawatthour

URE Energy Regulatory Office (Urząd Regulacji Energetyki)

WCP Waste collection point

94

Glossary

Term Definition

Biodegradation Biologically stimulated decomposition caused by natural factors, reducing the level of environmental pollution, taking place under aerobic conditions (aerobic digestion) or anaerobic conditions (methane fermentation)

Biowaste Waste from gardens and parks, food and kitchen waste, waste from caterers, restaurants, retail premises and comparable waste from food processing or food selling establishments

Disposable income Part of income that household has for disposal, to use it for consumption, investment or savings.

Waste management Collection, transport, recovery and treatment of waste, including also supervision over such activities and over places of waste treatment, as well as activities involving acting as a dealer or broker of waste

Waste management also Waste management in the above sense together with waste generation

Composting Natural process of decomposition of organic matter by microorganisms, under controlled conditions in the presence of oxygen (air), in the appropriate temperature and humidity

Installation A stationary technical piece of equipment or a set of such pieces of equipment linked technologically

Waste storage Temporary keeping or gathering of waste before its transport, recovery or treatment

Mechanical-biological treatment of waste

Processes of comminution, screening, sorting, classification and separation of waste (usually unsorted municipal waste) into fractions that may be used in full or in part as source of materials and/or energy and into the biodegradable fraction, appropriate for biological treatment under aerobic or anaerobic conditions.

Best available technique, BAT Most effective and advanced stage in the development of a technology and methods of carrying out a given type of activity, used as the basis for emission limit values designed to prevent or eliminate or, where that is not practicable, generally to reduce emissions and their impact on the environment as a whole in accordance with the Act – Environmental protection Law of 27 April 2001.

Waste processing Physical, thermal, chemical or biological processes, including sorting, which change the properties of the waste to reduce its volume or hazardous properties, which make it easier to handle or assist recovery

Waste Any substance or object which the holder discards, intends to or is required to discard

Residual waste odpady balastu

Waste remaining after subjecting municipal waste to recovery or treatment other than landfilling

Municipal waste Waste generated in households and the waste that does not contain hazardous waste, generated elsewhere, which is similar to the waste generated in households in its nature or composition

Municipal waste from the municipal services sector

a) waste from municipal green areas and cemeteries maintenance, b) waste from curbside waste bins and from mechanical and manual street and square cleaning

Medical waste Waste generated in the course of providing health services and carrying out medical research and experiments

Hazardous waste from the stream of municipal waste

Waste generated in households defined in the hazardous waste list, that is: solvents, acids, alkalines, photographic solutions, agrochemical waste of the 1st and 2nd class of toxicity (very toxic, e.g. herbicides, insecticides), fluorescent tubes and other mercury-containing waste, equipment containing chlorofluorocarbons, paints, fats, printing ink, adhesives, binders and resins containing dangerous substances, detergents containing dangerous substances, cytotoxic and cytostatic medicines, batteries and accumulators, waste electric and electronic equipment containing dangerous components, wood containing dangerous substances

Inert waste Waste which does not undergo any significant physical, chemical or biological transformations; it does not dissolve, burn or otherwise physically or chemically react, biodegrade or adversely affect other matter with which it comes into contact in a way likely to give rise to environmental pollution or harm to human health; its total leachability and pollutant content and the ecotoxicity of its leachate are insignificant and, in particular, do not endanger the quality of any surface water or groundwater

Packaging waste Under Art. 3 paragraph 3 of the Act on packaging and packaging waste (Journal of Laws of 2001 No. 63, item 638 as amended), packaging waste means all packaging, including reusable packaging withdrawn from use, constituting waste within the meaning of the Act on waste, excluding packaging production residues

Biodegradable waste Waste that may be degraded by microorganisms under aerobic or anaerobic conditions

Waste from cleaning streets or squares

Waste from cleaning streets or squares and from emptying curbside waste bins

Bulky waste Waste which cannot be collected as part of the normal municipal waste collection system because of its size, including waste electric and electronic equipment

Household waste Waste including waste from households and the so called “infrastructure objects” (commerce, services, crafts, education, industry in the part related to staff facilities, other), including unsorted municipal waste and separately collected waste and bulky waste as well as waste electric and electronic equipment

Green waste Grass, leaves, withered flowers and branches from maintenance of lawns, home gardens, allotments, recreational areas, parks cemeteries, roadside trees, etc.

Waste recovery Activities that do not pose a threat to human life or health or to the environment, consisting in using the waste in full or in part or leading to recovery and use of substances, materials or energy from waste

Energy recovery Thermal treatment of waste with the purpose of recovering energy


Term Definition

Re-use Action consisting in using products or their parts which are not waste again for the same purpose which they originally served

Waste holder Anyone who is actually in possession of the waste (waste producer, another natural person, legal person or organisational unit). It is understood that the holder of the ground surface area is the holder of the waste on the property

Waste broker Anyone who arranges the recovery or disposal of waste on behalf of others, including such entity that does not take physical possession of the waste

Entrepreneur Natural person, legal person or organisational unit which is not a legal person but which is granted legal capacity under a separate act, carrying out business activity on its own behalf

Processing Processes of recovery or treatment of waste, including pre-processing prior to recovery or treatment

Preparing for re-use Checking, cleaning or repairing recovery operations, by which products or components of products that have become waste are prepared so that they can be re-used without any other pre-processing

Waste recycling Any recovery operation by which substances or materials are reprocessed into materials or substances whether for the original or other purposes, including organic recycling except for energy recovery

określony w wojewódzkim planie gospodarki odpadami obszar liczący co najmniej 150 000 mieszkańców; regionem gospodarki odpadami komunalnymi może być gmina licząca powyżej 500 000 mieszkańców

Waste management region An area defined in the provincial waste management plan, with the population of at least 150 000; a waste management region may also be a municipality with the population over 500 000

Regional municipal waste treatment installation

A waste disposal plant with processing capacity sufficient for accepting and treatment of waste from the area inhabited by at least 120 thousand people, fulfilling the requirement of the best available technique (BAT), referred to in Art. 143 of the Act dated 27 April 2001 – the Law on environmental protection, ensuring thermal treatment of waste; or a) mechanical-biological treatment of unsorted municipal waste and separating from such waste the fractions that can be recovered partially or in full; b) separate treatment of the collected green waste and other bio-waste and converting it into products of fertiliser properties or products for enhancing plant production; c) landfill of waste produced in the process of mechanical-biological treatment of unsorted municipal waste and the residue from municipal waste sorting with the capacity enabling acceptance of waste for not shorter than 15 years in the amount not smaller than that generated in the installation for mechanical-biological treatment of unsorted municipal waste

Separate collection of waste Collection in which a given stream of waste includes only certain types of waste with the same properties and the same nature in order to facilitate the treatment of waste

Landfill site A building object designated for depositing waste

Waste incineration plant A plant or a part of a plant for thermal treatment of waste with or without recovery of the generated heat, including installations and equipment used for the process of thermal treatment of waste together with flue gas cleaning and emission into the atmosphere, with monitoring and control of the processes and with installations for receiving, pre-processing and storing of waste delivered for thermal treatment and with installations for storing and processing of substances produced as a result of the incineration and flue gas cleaning

Thermal treatment of waste a) combustion of waste through its oxidation; b) other processes of thermal waste treatment, including pyrolysis, gasification, plasma waste processing, provided that the substances produced during these thermal waste treatment processes are then incinerated

Waste treatment Process other than recovery, even if a secondary effect of such a process is recovery of substances or energy

Property owner Includes co-owner, perpetual usufructor as well as an organisational unit and person holding real property in administration or use as well as other entities holding real property

Waste producer Any person whose activity or existence results in the production of waste (primary waste producer) and any person who carries out the initial processing, mixing or any other activities causing a change in character or composition of this waste

Preventing waste generation Measures taken in respect of a product, material or substance, before they become waste, reducing: a) the volume of waste, also by re-use or extending the product life, b) negative impact of generated waste on the environment and human health or c) content of harmful substances in the product and in the material

Waste collection Any action, including but not limited to, placing in containers, sorting and storing of waste which aims at preparing the waste for transport to the recovery or treatment sites

Union of municipalities Specific corporation under public law formed by municipalities self-governments on the basis of the provisions of the Act on municipal self-government dated 8 March 1990, by way of agreements subsequently approved by the municipalities’ councils, for the purpose of jointly carrying out public tasks

96

List of selected waste management legislation

Short name Full name with place of publication

DIRECTIVES

Directive on waste (Framework Directive)

Directive 2008/98/EC, of the European Parliament and the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives (Official Journal L312 of 22.11.2008)

Directive on landfill of waste (Landfill Directive) Directive 99/31/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste (Official Journal L 182 of 16.07.1999)

Directive on waste incineration Directive 2000/76/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 4 December 2000 in the incineration of waste (Official Journal L332 of 28.12.2000, pp. 91-111)

Directive on packaging and packaging waste (Packaging Directive)

Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste (Official Journal L 365 of 31.12.1994, pp. 10-23, amended by Directives 1882/2003/EC, 2004/12/EC, 2005/20/EC)

LEGAL ACT

Act Environmental Protection Law Act dated 27 April 2001 Environmental Protection Law (Journal of Laws of 2008, No. 25, item 150 as amended)

Act on providing information on the environment and its protection

Act dated 3 October 2008 on providing information on the environment and its protection, on participation of the public in the protection of the environment and on environmental impact assessments (Journal of Laws of 2008, No. 199, item 1227)

Act on municipal self-government Act dated 8 March 1990 on municipal self-government (Journal of Laws of 2001 No. 142, item 1591 as amended.)

Act on municipal services Act dated 20 December 1996 on municipal services management (Journal of Laws of 1997, No. 9, item 43, as amended.)

Act on waste Act dated 27 April 2001 o odpadach (Journal of Laws of 2010 No. 185, item 1243 and No. 203, item 1351 and of 2011 No. 106, item 622 and No. 117, item 678)Planned amendment of the Act in 2011(Draft Act on waste dated 5 July 2011sent to the Permanent Committee of the Council of Ministers)

Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities

Act dated 13 September 1996 on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities (uniform text Journal of Laws of 2005 No. 236, item 2008 as amended.)Act dated 1 July 2011 on amending the Act on maintaining cleanliness and order in municipalities and certain other acts.

Act on packaging and packaging waste

Act on obligations of entrepreneurs with respect to management of certain waste and on product fee

Act dated 11 May 2001 on packaging and packaging waste (Journal of Laws of 2001, No. 63, item 638 as amended.)

Act dated 11 May 2001 on obligations of entrepreneurs with respect to management of certain waste and on product fee (Journal of Laws of 2007 No. 90, item 607, as amended.)

It is planned that a new act will be passed in 2011, covering all the issues related to packaging management, governed so far by the acts mentioned above (Draft Act in packaging and packaging waste management dated 27 May 2011 sent for public consultations)

Act on international movement of waste Act dated 29 June 2007 on international movement of waste (Journal of Laws of 2007, No. 124, item 859)

Act on waste electric and electronic equipment Act dated 29 July 2005 on waste electric and electronic equipment (uniform text Journal of Laws of 2005, No. 180, item 1495, as amended.)

Act on batteries and accumulators Act dated 24 April 2009 on batteries and accumulators (Journal of Laws of 2009 No. 79, item 666 as amended.).

Act on product fee Act dated 11 May 2001 on obligations of entrepreneurs with respect to management of certain waste and on product fee and on deposit charge (uniform text Journal of Laws of 2007, No. 90, item 607)

Act on protection of competition and consumers Act dated 16 February 2007 on protection of competition and consumers (Journal of Laws z 2007, No. 50, item 331 as amended.)

Act Public Procurement Law or PZP Act Act dated 29 January 2004 Public Procurement Law (Journal of Laws of 2010 No. 113, item 759, as amended.)

Act on public-private partnership or PPP Act Act dated 19 December 2008 on public-private partnership (Journal of Laws of 2009 No. 19, item 100 and of 2010 No. 106, item 675)

Act on licenses for construction works or services or Act on licenses

Act dated 09 January 2009 on licenses for construction works or services (Journal of Laws of 2009, Nr 19, item 101 as amended.)

Act Energy Law Act dated 10 April 1997 Energy Law (uniform text Journal of Laws of 2006, No. 89, item 625 as amended.)

Act on public finance Act dated 30 June 2005 on public finance (Journal of Laws of 2005 No. 249 as amended.)


Report preparation

Jarosław DąbrowskiDirectorFinancial AdvisoryDeloitte Poland

Łukasz BeresińskiManagerFinancial AdvisoryDeloitte Poland

Halina FrańczakDirectorMarketing and PR DepartmentDeloitte Poland

Piotr GórnikDirector of Production and DistributionFortum Power and Heat Poland

Peter LiebscherExpert in thermal waste treatmentFortum Corporation

Per NylundPromotion & Business Development ManagerFortum Corporation

Barbara Frątczak-RudnickaResearch Consultant4P research mix

Assistance on content related to legal, tax, corporate social responsibility and sustainable development issues

Arkadiusz SzulepaManaging Associate, legal advisorDeloitte Legal, Pasternak i Wspólnicy Kancelaria Prawnicza sp.k.

Łukasz RutkowskiSenior AssociateDeloitte Legal, Pasternak i Wspólnicy Kancelaria Prawnicza sp.k.

Ewa GrzejszczykSenior ManagerDeloitte Doradztwo PodatkoweDeloitte Poland

Tomasz SiekManagerDeloitte Doradztwo PodatkoweDeloitte Poland

Jacek KuchenbekerManagerRisk Management DepartmentDeloitte Poland

98

Sources

1. Eurostat, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/

2. Główny Urząd Statystyczny [Central Statistical Office], http://www.stat.gov.pl/

3. Krajowy Plan Gospodarki Odpadami 2014, Warszawa 2010, Schedule to Resolution No. 217 of the Council of Ministers dated 24 December 2010 (KPGO 2014)

4. Krajowy Plan Gospodarki Odpadami 2010, Warszawa 2006, Schedule to Resolution No. 233 of the Council of Ministers dated 29 December 2006 (KPGO 2010)

5. Wojewódzkie Plany Gospodarki Odpadami (WPGO, in force as on 31 May 2011):

6. Europe 2020 Strategy, European Commission, 3 March 2010.

7. Krajowy Program Reform na rzecz realizacji strategii „Europa 2020”, Council of Ministers, 26 April 2011

8. Główny Inspektorat Ochrony Środowiska [Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection], http://www.gios.gov.pl/

9. Krajowa Izba Gospodarki Odpadami [National Chamber of Waste Management], http://www.kigo.pl/

10. Polska Izba Gospodarki Odpadami [Polish Chamber of Waste Management, http://www.pigo.org.pl/

11. Informacja o wynikach kontroli gospodarowania w gminach wybranych województw stałymi odpadami komunalnymi, w tym zwłaszcza ulegającymi biodegradacji,

Najwyższa Izba Kontroli [Supreme Audit Office] , Katowice April 2010.

12. Ewaluacja Gospodarki Odpadami Komunalnymi w Polsce, Instytut Gospodarki Surowcami Mineralnymi i Energią Polskiej Akademii Nauk [Mineral and Energy Economy

Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences], study by a team of authors, edited by Joanna Kulczycka, PhD and Elżbieta Pierzyk-Sokulska, PhD, Eng Kraków 2009.

13. Gospodarka odpadami komunalnymi w województwie Mazowieckim w latach 2007-2009, WIOŚ [Provincial Inspectorate of Environmental Protection] in Warsaw, 2010.

14. Communication from the Commission SEC(2005) 1658, Application of Article 228 of the EC Treaty. Communication from the Commission SEC(2010) 923/3, Application of

Article 260 of the TFEU. Communication from the Commission SEC(2010) 1371, Application of Article 260 (3) of the TFUE.

15. List of individual projects for the Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment 2007-2013, Ministry of Regional Development, updated August 2011.

16. Wytyczne dotyczące rozliczenia obowiązku w zakresie ograniczenia ilości składowanych odpadów komunalnych ulegających biodegradacji, Ministry of Environment, Waste

Mangement Department, Warsaw, December 2008.

17. Wytyczne dotyczące wymagań dla procesów kompostowania, fermentacji i mechaniczno-biologicznego przetwarzania odpadów, Ministry of Environment, Waste

Mangement Department, Warsaw, December 2008.

18. Guide to Cost Benefit Analysis for Investment Projects prepared by Directorate General Regional Policy dated 16 June 2008.

19. Wytyczne w zakresie reguł dofinansowania z programów operacyjnych podmiotów realizujących obowiązek świadczenia usług publicznych w ramach zadań własnych

jednostek samorządu terytorialnego w gospodarce odpadami, prepared by Ministry of Regional Development dated 2 March 2010.

20. Wytyczne w zakresie wybranych zagadnień związanych z przygotowaniem projektów inwestycyjnych, w tym projektów generujących dochód, prepared by Ministry of

Regional Development dated 15 January 2009.

No. Voivoidship Date of adoption Planning period

1 Dolnośląskie 30 April 2009 2008-2011 / 2012-2015

2 Kujawsko-Pomorskie 03 July 2008 2008-2010 / 2011-2014

3 Lubelskie 27 October 2008 2008-2011 / 2012-2015

4 Lubuskie 30 March 2010 2009-2012 / 2013-2020

5 Łódzkie 31 March 2008 2008-2011 / 2012-2015

6 Małopolskie 24 September 2007 2007-2014

7 Mazowieckie 15 October 2007 2007-2011 / 2012-2015

8 Opolskie 31 March 2008 2007-2010 / 2011-2014

9 Podkarpackie 26 May 2008 2008-2011 / 2012-2019

10 Podlaskie 28 December 2009 2009-2012 / 2013-2020

11 Pomorskie 26 October 2009 2007-2010 / 2011-2014

12 Śląskie 29 April 2009 2009-2010 / 2011-2018

13 Świętokrzyskie 20 September 2007 2007-2011

14 Warmińsko-Mazurskie 26 June 2007 2007-2010 / 2011-2014

15 Wielkopolskie 31 March 2008 2008-2011 / 2012-2019

16 Zachodniopomorskie 16 June 2009 2009-2012 / 2013-2018


21. Guidelines for preparation of environmental investment projects co-financed from Cohesion Fund and European Regional Development Fund in the years 2007-2013

prepared by Jaspers.

22. Obwieszczenia Ministra Środowiska w sprawie wysokości opłat za korzystanie ze środowiska [Annoucements of the Minister of Environment on fees for using the

environment] (including 2011 fees, dated 4 October 2010, Monitor Polski [Official Gazette] No. 74 Item 945)

23. Draft Regulation of the Council of Ministers on fee for depositing waste on landfill sites dated 4 February 2011.

24. Współspalanie paliw alternatywnych w przemyśle cementowym – zrównoważony rozwój i Paliwo alternatywne na bazie sortowanych odpadów komunalnych dla

przemysłu cementowego, Publikacje Stowarzyszenia Producentów Cementu, http://www.polskicement.pl/

25. Tadeusz Pająk, Droga do gospodarki odpadami zgodnej z wytycznymi UE – pokazana na przykładzie projektów spalarni w Polsce, in: Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano

Pelloni, Waste Management. Volume 1. East European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010

26. Luciano Pelloni, Realizacja projektów w dziedzinie gospodarki odpadami: Pierwsze kroki, in: Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano Pelloni, Waste Management. Volume 1. East

European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010

27. Marek Gębski, Gunther Neumann, Urszula Krygowska, Wymoga dyrektywy europejskiej w sprawie składowania odpadów – wdrożenie w wybranych krajach na przykładzie

Polski, in: Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano Pelloni, Waste Management. Volume 1. East European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010

28. Andreas Beyer, Trudności na drodze do realizacji instalacji termicznego przekształcania odpadów w Polsce, in: Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano Pelloni, Waste

Management. Volume 1. East European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010

29. Wolfgang Melon, Potencjalne modele finansowania zakładów termicznego unieszkodliwiania odpadów w Polsce, in: Karl J. Thome-Kozmiensky, Luciano Pelloni, Waste

Management. Volume 1. East European Countries, TK Verlag Karl Thome-Kozmiensky, 2010

30. Krzysztof Siwek, Director of the Department for Individual Projects Preparation, Ministry of Regional Development, Fundusze Europejskie w spalarniowych projektach PPP, 4

November 2010.

31. PPP and Waste Management in Practice, The City of Sztokholm and Fortum Experience, Thermal waste treatment – from plans to implementation, Szczecin, 19 October

2009

32. Swedish Waste Management 2010, Avfall Sverige

33. Łukasz Piekarski, Maciej Czarnecki, Wydział Partnerstwa Publiczno-Prywatnego, Departament Przygotowania Projektów Indywidualnych Ministerstwa Rozwoju Regionalnego,

Osiągnąć więcej wydając mniej – projekty hybrydowe w praktyce, Forum PPP - magazyn inwestycji publicznych,No. 1 (14) / 2011

34. Interview with Prof. Andrzej Kraszewski, Minister of Environment, Forum PPP - magazyn inwestycji publicznych, No. 4 (13) / 2010

35. Marcin Bejm, Weronika Tokaj, Kluczowe Wymogi Prawa Unijnego dotyczące prowadzenia gospodarki odpadami, Forum PPP - magazyn inwestycji publicznych, No. 4 (13) /

2010

36. Marcin Bejm, Paulina Biłda, Bolączki Obecnego Systemu Gospodarowania Odpadami, Forum PPP - magazyn inwestycji publicznych, No. 4 (13) / 2010

37. Bartosz Korbuz, PPP a fundusze UE w inwestycjach z zakresu gospodarki odpadami, Forum PPP - magazyn inwestycji publicznych, No. 4 (13) / 2010

38. Danuta Król, Recykling energetyczny odpadów komunalnych, presentation of 7 June 2011

39. B. Sajnaj, System gospodarki odpadami dla Miasta Poznania. Koncepcja realizacji projektu w formule PPP, 16 June 2011.

40. Jacek Sobański, W Warszawie o paliwie niefunkcjonującym w percepcji społeczeństwa, Nowa Energia, No. 2 (20) / 2011

41. Jerzy Majcher, Odpady, odpady, odpady – kłopot, czy dobry interes?, Nowa Energia, No. 2 (20) / 2011

42. Thomas Norman, Więcej energii elektrycznej z odpadów, Nowa Energia, No. 2 (20) / 2011

43. Inwestycje TPOK – jak budować akceptację społeczną, Nowa Energia, No. 2 (20) / 2011

44. Stephen Goldsmith, William D Eggers, Governing by Network, The New Shape of the Public Sector, Brooklings Institution Press, Wahsington, D.C., 2005

45. Raport o korkach w 7 największych miastach Polski [Report on traffic congestion in the 7 biggest cities in Poland], Deloitte, Targeo, January 2011.

100

This publication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, Deloitte Global Services Limited, Deloitte Global Services Holdings Limited, the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Verein, any of their member firms, or any of the foregoing’s affiliates (collectively the “Deloitte Network”) are, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your finances or your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. No entity in the Deloitte Network shall be responsible for any loss whatsoever sustained by any person who relies on this publication.

Deloitte provides audit, tax, consulting and financial advisory services to public and private clients spanning multiple industries. With a globally connected network of member firms in 140 countries, Deloitte brings world-class capabilities and deep local expertise to help clients succeed wherever they operate. Deloitte’s 182 000 professionals are committed to becoming the standard of excellence.

Deloitte’s professionals are unified by a collaborative culture that fosters integrity, outstanding value to markets and clients, commitment to each other, and strength from diversity. They enjoy an environment of continuous learning, challenging experiences, and enriching career opportunities. Deloitte’s professionals are dedicated to strengthening corporate responsibility, building public trust, and making a positive impact in their communities.

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee, and its network of member firms, each of which is a legally separate and independent entity. Please see www.deloitte.com/pl/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms.

Fortum’s purpose is to create energy that improves life for present and future generations. We provide sustainable solutions that fulfil the needs for low emissions, resource-efficiency and energy security, and deliver excellent value to our shareholders. Our activities cover the generation, distribution and sales of electricity and heat as well as related expert services. Fortum is a Finnish energy company – one of the biggest producers and distributors of energy in Scandinavia. It is also the fourth largest generator of heat in the world. Apart from Finland, Sweden and Norway the company’s investments are located in the Baltic countries, Poland and Russia. Our investments combine the improvement of energy efficiency and the reduction of the emission of harmful substances. Due to this more than 86% of the energy produced by our company within the European Union was free of CO2. Fortum currently employs more than 10 500 persons worldwide. In 2010 our turnover exceeded 6.3 bln EUR, with a 1.7 bln EUR profit. Fortum’s shares are quoted on NASDAQ OMX Helsinki.

Research company 4P research mix was established in 2003 on initiative of pioneers and boosters of researches in Poland, who for today actively participate in creation of standards in marketing researches. within the framework of work for industry organizations.4P research mix is carrying on qualitative and quantitative researches in whole range: from methodology through realization in the field to analysis and recommendation. Company is specialized in researches ad hoc and tracking researches fitted to business goals of clients in areas: new products development, market’s segmentation, price researches, estimation of the demand, researches of brand and communication, shopper marketing, satisfaction and loyalty examination and researches of medical market.

© 2011 Deloitte Poland, Fortum, 4P research mix

waste management in poland challenges in view of eu...

Documents