Donate

Publications type: Study

Materials or gases? How to capture carbon

This study explores mixed waste sorting as a cost-effective strategy for substantial reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from waste incineration, challenging the viability of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS). Comparing Leftover Mixed Waste Sorting (LMWS) and CCS, the study suggests LMWS as a swift, economical approach for municipalities and incineration operators to achieve significant GHG reductions, offering flexibility and avoiding excessive costs linked to CCS. The ‘low-regret’ nature of LMWS is highlighted, aiding Member States in meeting recycling and climate targets while reducing incineration capacity.

Available in English.

Economics of reuse for street vendors in india

India’s thriving street food sector, currently reliant on single-use plastics (SUP) for packaging, faces a pressing need for sustainable alternatives.

This report by Searious Business, the National Hawker Federation (NHF), and Zero Waste Europe delves into the economic feasibility of a novel reuse system tailored to Indian street food vendors.

While SUP has long been affordable and accessible, it poses substantial environmental challenges, particularly concerning petrochemical production and post-use disposal. The report conducts a robust cost-benefit analysis to address these concerns, comparing the current SUP system with the proposed reuse system. The study’s key objectives encompass an extensive evaluation of the financial implications, costs structures, and potential benefits associated with both systems, emphasising a focus on commonly used street food packaging items – including plates, bowls, cups, and takeaway containers.

Available in English

Enough is enough: The case for a moratorium on incineration

This report by Zero Waste Europe highlights a critical concern surrounding the surplus waste incineration capacities in the European Union. This comprehensive study reveals a troubling pattern of annual growth in waste incineration capacity, with a surplus reaching 60 million tonnes in 2020 and the potential to soar to a staggering 220 million tonnes by 2023. The report underscores the urgent need for EU-wide measures and recommends a reevaluation of incineration’s position in the waste hierarchy, potentially reclassifying it as a disposal operation, to foster more sustainable waste management practices throughout the region.

Executive summary available in English, Italian, and Bulgarian.

Full report available in English.

Assessing Climate Impact: Reusable Systems vs. Single-use Takeaway Packaging

In this study authored by Zero Waste Europe, Reloop, and TOMRA, and produced by Eunomia Research & Consulting Eunomia, reusable take-away packaging demonstrates its potential for significant greenhouse gas emission reductions compared to single-use alternatives. The study examines various packaging types, including cups, burger boxes, bowls, pizza boxes, and sushi containers, highlighting emissions reduction potential with efficient return and washing systems.

The study identifies breakeven points, such as return rates for bowls and coffee cups to match single-use carbon footprints. Envisioned in 2030, the study foresees efficient collection, washing, and redistribution of reusable packaging, emphasising its role in a cleaner and sustainable future. These findings guide effective reusable system implementation, stressing emissions reduction and design importance, encouraging large-scale trials for validation and refinement.

Executive summary available in English, French, Italian, Croatian, and Ukrainian.

Full report available in English.

Unveiling the Complexities: Exploring LCAs of Reusable Packaging in the Take-Away Sector

As the EU considers reuse targets in the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulations (PPWR), this Eunomia Research & Consulting report highlights the lack of transparency from industry leaders in shaping the discussion around reusable packaging. In many cases, influential studies promoting single-use packaging have been found to exhibit biases against reuse due to funding interests and cherry-picked scenarios. The report evaluates three Life Cycle Assessments, highlighting the importance of transparent methodology and accurate assumptions in understanding the true potential of reusable take-away packaging.

Download the full joint report by Reloop and Zero Waste Europe below.

Full report available in English.

Executive Summary available in English and Croatian.

 

The economics of reuse systems

After elimination, the widespread uptake of reusable packaging has the highest potential to reduce plastic production. This view is sustained by a recent shift in legislative focus in the European Union’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and the United Nation’s Global Plastic Treaty to end plastic pollution. However, several brands and industry associations have been hesitant to wholeheartedly embrace reusable packaging.

The study by Searious Business and Zero Waste Europe examines 3 packaging categories in an open loop system (so not within one location), in Spain as an archetype country: 1) food containers for takeaway food, 2) secondary transport packaging and 3) beverage bottles. The results show that reuse packaging will only become even more economically viable in the next few years and providing faster return on investments.

Executive summary available in English, Estonian, Montenegrin, Ukrainian, and Polish.

Full report available in English, German, French, Spanish, Dutch, and Italian.

Decarbonisation of Single-Use Beverage Packaging

Commissioned to Eunomia Research & Consulting by Zero Waste Europe, this study builds upon Eunomia’s previous investigation into materials decarbonisation pathways in the report “Is Net Zero Enough for the Material Production Sector?”.

Focussing on the four materials with the greatest emissions globally, the study found that each will have great difficulty in reducing GHG emissions in line with a 1.5°C future by 2050, particularly if mass consumption continues and increases. Whilst studying the global material picture provides valuable insights; policymakers may find it more useful to have the same approach applied at the product level. Therefore, this study delves into the Net Zero pathways of aluminium, PET, and glass when utilised in beverage packaging within the EU, evaluating their potential performance within a cumulative GHG emissions budget that aligns with the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5°C.

Full report available in English. Executive summary available in English, French, and Latvian.

Nothing left behind: modelling Material Recovery and Biological Treatment’s contribution to resource recovery and fighting climate change

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.

Is net zero enough for the materials sector?

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.

Incineration and residues in the EU: quantities and fates

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).

How Circular Is Glass?

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.

Waste trade and incineration – debunking an unnecessary alliance

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.

Waste Incineration under the EU ETS – An assessment of climate benefits

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

Bio-waste generation in the EU: Current capture levels and future potential

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

Packaging Free Shops in Europe – An initial report

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

© Zero Waste Europe - Privacy Policy - Cookie Policy - Design by Noiza