Commissioned to CE Delft by Zero Waste Europe and the Rethink Plastic Alliance, this study assesses the consequences of different approaches to allocating recycled content in plastic. It proves that proportional allocation has the lowest impact on the level-playing field and the largest potential environmental benefits.
Available in English.
Our new study with Equanimator Ltd proves the cost-competitiveness of Material Recovery and Biological Treatment (MRBT)-based approaches for mixed waste treatment. The study found that MRBT costs are lower than costs for incineration, with MRBT becoming even more compelling once incinerators are included in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS).
Available in English.
When considering the urgency of reducing GHG emissions there is a possibility that, despite the aims of the net zero pathways, the cumulative carbon emissions budget will be exceeded. This is due to the risks associated with deploying unproven technologies in some sectors.
This report by Zero Waste Europe and Eunomia allocated a risk factor associated with each intervention and quantified how this influences the likelihood of overshooting the remaining carbon budget. It also attempted to determine whether the overshoot can be reduced by accelerating the adoption model deployed for technological interventions.
Report available in English. Executive Summary available in English, Croatian, and French.
Commissioned by Zero Waste Europe and the Rethink Plastic alliance to the Öko-Institut, this study compares seven scenarios for the future of plastic packaging in the European Union (EU) from a climate perspective, following the projected amounts of recycled plastics needed by 2030.
Available in English.
This study seeks to understand the quantity of residues generated by incineration of waste in the EU, and what happens to those residues – in particular, how much residue may be being landfilled.
Although the report is focused mainly on incineration, it sought to understand the quantity of residues from both incineration and co-incineration when considering ‘all wastes’. The Industrial Emissions Directive distinguishes these according to whether the facility is ‘dedicated to the thermal treatment of waste’ (incineration) or a facility whose main purpose is the generation of energy or production of material products (co-incineration).
Available in English (report and executive summary) and Polish (executive summary only).
Glass production, especially from primary sources, is a high energy-consuming process. One way to effectively reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the repeated production of single-use glass is to retain material in a circular system – e.g. by utilising the cullet from container glass to produce new container glass, i.e. closed-loop recycling, and thereby removing the need to use glass from primary sources.
To understand the current circularity of single-use container glass in different geographical scopes, this study examines the mass flows of single-use glass packaging in four countries: Germany, France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. For each case study, the key limitations to circularity are discussed and the potential to improving glass circularity are explored. The study also reviews other limitations and opportunities the single-use container glass industry is facing, and future developments being considered to overcome these challenges.
Available in English.
To further limit the waste shipped outside its territory, the EU is looking at adopting new waste export bans. In this case, any surplus of waste should be absorbed by intra-EU recycling, prevention, and reuse activities. However, the incineration industry claims that potential waste export restrictions should lead to an increase in the need for incineration capacity.
This study demonstrates that the need for further incineration capacity resulting from new waste export bans is neither necessary nor justified.
Available in English.
Municipal waste incineration is currently excluded from the European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS). If incineration is included, waste companies will have to buy emission credits for each tonne of CO2 they emit when treating household, company, and industrial waste. This additional cost of incineration can act as an incentive for waste prevention and recycling, which will then become more competitive (less costly) than incineration.
A shift of (not biologically pre-treated) waste to landfills should be avoided and is already restricted under the Landfill Directive.
The results of this study, requested by Zero Waste Europe and carried out by CE Delft, show that including incineration under the EU ETS would indeed encourage waste prevention and recycling, yielding both climate and employment benefits.
AVAILABLE IN ENGLISH
This joint paper presents key findings from a review of some of the most commonly cited chemical recycling and recovery LCAs, which reveal major flaws and weaknesses regarding scientific rigour, data quality, calculation methods, and interpretations of the results.
Available in English
Zero Waste Europe and the Bio-based Industries Consortium analyse the untapped potential of biowaste (garden and food waste) in Europe. The first study of its kind details the current generation and capture rates in the EU with dedicated country fact-sheets and municipalities best practice.
Available in English
Zero Waste Europe releases the first ever European study on the state of play and the potential growth for the packaging free shops market. Conducted by Eunomia, in collaboration with Réseau Vrac and the Zero Waste Europe network.
Available in English, Slovenian, Spanish and Hungarian
