old things and new things on Waste: Article by Edo Ronchi 2003 and ISTAT data updated to 2009 on waste collection in Italy
A21Gavorrano Dear Blog readers,
Scartabellanto network we have found two documents that appear to be of help to fuel our discussion on waste management.
The first article was written by Edo Ronchi (minstro Environment in the Prodi and D'Alema governments from 17 May 1996-25 April 2000.
Holder
Legislative Decree 5 February 1997 No 22
Implementation of Directive 91/156/EEC on waste, 91/689/EEC on hazardous waste and 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste. ( Ronchi Decree) Text coordinated ( updated, most recently, the Law of 15 December 2004, published in Official Gazette No. 302 December 27, 2004).
The one below is an article that analyzes the state of the art in 2003 (things were not going well).
Please read the last lines del'articolo.
Where we talk about the RDF (refuse derived fuel) and sizing of incineration / Cogenenrazione.
As second point, to get us a bit 'on the moral (?) Will also attach the 2009 ISTAT data on waste collection in Italy in the 116 provincial capitals.
There is a slow improvement of the collection Differennziata and a decrease in production of waste (compared to the last two years), but .... it seems that everything depends on the crisis and not by lifestyles and consumption more sustainable.
There is a strong risk that the crisis is over you (Re) start doing worse than before as before.
not we instead try to ensure that this crisis will guide us towards lower impact lifestyle?
How?
ISTAT said the report on page 1 the results of Pordenone:
"... Among the first is that by launching Pordenone, in 2009, the system
curbside collection reached 76.7% (starting from 46.3% in 2008) "
Then you can do?
Mah!
Good reading
TEXT 1:
Adapted from: Edo Ronchi (2003). ECOLOGY AS SECOND MODERNITY 'and other writings. Roma, Ediz. ISSI
reform waste management (July 2001)
The publication of the report waste in 2001, edited by ANPA and by the National Observatory on Waste provides information and considerations for a review of waste management reform initiated by the DL 22/97. There, for reasons of space, these notes only to waste.
The prevention and reduction of waste is considered a priority in the reform: the data say that this is probably part of this reform not implemented. The amount of municipal waste, in fact, continues to grow in 1999 reached 28.4 million tons, an increase of 5.7% compared to 1998 (the highest increase in recent years), an increase of 5% in the North, del3, 9% in Central and 7.8% in the South
The sharp increase in the South reflects the data more accurate and controlled from commissarial: then, rather than a true increase, it would more reliable data derived only from the MUD of duels.
The trend of waste generation follows GDP growth and household consumption: the planned decoupling is not succeeding at all, indeed, the growth of waste in 1999 is more
intense than economic and consumption.
It is true that this is a common problem across Europe that, in 1999, the per capita production of municipal waste in Italy, amounting to 492 kg / inhabitant per year, still below the European average, equal to 507 kg per capita per year. However, it remains the fact that on this crucial issue, the reform has not had the desired effect. Why? Why was not implemented or was still way too low: in particular, should be highlighted three shortcomings: the lack of promotion of economic instruments
, the lack of information campaigns and consumer awareness and delays in activating the tariff (all provisions contained in Decree Law 22/97).
Among economic instruments, in addition to traditional incentives and disincentives, practically absent, I remember the environmental certification of product and production process, not yet widespread that, by intervening on the life cycles of products, could lead to a reduction in waste.
The information campaigns could increase consumer awareness and help to focus on products with packaging for smaller units product and also
to greater attention to waste.
TARSU with the replacement rate at full cost them more responsible citizens, producing less waste, they would pay less (with tax waste, however, are charged regardless of the amount of waste they produce).
In 2000 only 206 municipalities have adopted the rate (113 in Trentino Alto Adige, 27 in Emilia Romagna, 10 in Lombardy, Marche 8, 47 in the Veneto region and one in Tuscany). After the final extension are obliged to apply the tariff by 2003, only those municipalities, more than 5000 inhabitants, which in 1999 had a level of coverage costs, guaranteed by TARSU, over 85%, others with deadlines later (2005 with coverage between
55 and 95% and 2008 for all others). The average rate of recovery was in 1999 , 81% in North and Central was 83% in the South is 69%. This means that if the citizens would pay the bills with the actual costs of waste management, these bills would increase by 19% on average and more than 30% to Sud.Questi costs, of course, citizens will pay the same, although in another way, with taxes and other municipal taxes.
I never tire of saying that this trick has negative effects on prevention and a modern integrated waste management.
The introduction of the fee should be accelerated. Municipalities that exceed or, worse, go further.
reform promotes integrated waste management carried out first and give priority to the reuse and recycling of materials. This involves the development of separate collection of waste required to be available from homogenous commodity streams for recycling.
In this setting, the energy recovery should be limited to the residual waste, the dry portion, having a good calorific value. Final disposal in landfill shall cover the waste only in marginal quantities, not recoverable and therefore the only remnants of recycling and energy recovery.
In 1999 74.4% municipal waste was disposed of in landfills (the European average and around 65%), with a significant improvement of less than 5.5% compared to 1997, the year of initiation of the reform, but still with an excessive and far from the objective of making such a residual form of final disposal. Overall, activities were launched to recover 25.6% of municipal waste, of which 7.2% to incineration plants (almost all with recovery
energy) and 18.4% recovery of materials. The increase in recovery (5.5%) relates to the incineration only slightly (0.6% more since 1997) and is almost all due to the increase recovery of materials. Coincides, in fact, substantially increasing the collection which went from 9.04% in 1997 to 13.1% in 1999 (and about 15% in 2000). With regional differences that are significant: from 17% in '97 to 23% in '99 to the North, from 6.3% to 9% in the center and only 1, 4% to 2% in the South
The reform is the goal to be achieved, as provincial average of 25% by 2001 and 35% by 2003. The target of 25% has already been achieved, early in 1999
the following provinces: Novara, Varese, Como, Sondrio, Milan, Bergamo, Cremona, Mantova, Lecco, Lodi, Vicenza, Treviso, Padova, Bolzano, Piacenza, Reggio Emilia, Lucca.
If it is already been achieved, with two years early, in 17 provinces, means that the objective and practicable. The system of recycling and waste collection and party: the paper has increased from
782mila tonnes in 1205 to 97 tonnes in '99, the 643mila to 726mila glass and plastic from 96 thousand to 160 thousand.
The organic fraction had the highest increase: from 598mila tons to 1126 tons.
CONAI The system for the recovery of packaging is started with positive results: the recovery of packaging paper and paperboard rose from 40% in '98 to 47% in 2000, the glass from 72% to 75%, the plastic from 17% to 28% and aluminum by 12% to 30%. But it goes too slow and difficult to reach, within the national territory, 35% recycling by 2003.
First for significant delays in the South. The management commissioner, by orders of emergency in Campania, Puglia, Calabria and Sicily, is helping to launch the collection: the first significant results are due to arrive in 2001.
There are, however, hidden fundamental difficulties that remain in the South: a system dependent almost exclusively from landfills, the local presence of organized crime in this system has played a role, the low coverage of costs and artificially low costs with little room to make investments, disorganization and widespread inefficiency of management. To overcome these limitations will require a stronger management, well
oriented and determined the Commissioners, without giving space or to demagoguery or to return to the past.
More generally, to keep up, where he is progressing well and to keep the race where the collection and well established, and must ensure continuity of policy choice in this direction at central, regional and local levels.
Guidelines contradictory, confused, or worse signs of reversing, could jeopardize the success of the reform in a very delicate and crucial phase: the system starts, but not yet consolidated.
help many to strengthen the system, the introduction of a special rate for the proportion of waste sent separately to the collection. To introduce a preferential tariff and the tariff should be introduced in order to link the costs to the amounts and charge higher costs conferred on the quantity supplied of such, not differentiated. Moreover, while the disposal of this as a pure cost, packaging materials are withdrawn from the consortium CONAI with a fee and quality compost has a market
expansion. And, instead, people are still paying the same way and the same figures, and those that make the collection, and those who do not make it.
Further improvements may come from the rationalization of management, overcoming the excessive fragmentation of management systems organized by field and passing the optimal direct management by a worrying number of municipalities, with management entrusted to real companies, public, private or mixed, but more efficient and truly committed to promoting the collection point. For energy recovery, without thinking that the alternative to the priorities of the collection, could have significant improvements actually promoting the production and use of RDF (refuse derived fuel).
There is only 15 active installations RDF production from the dry fraction, still too few.
The production of RDF allows you to retrieve a further part of metal and glass, to have a fuel as it is safer and more power and energy to have a system
more elastic. The CDR, in fact, it may be, under certain conditions of environmental safety, also used in non-dedicated facilities (power plants and cement plants), reducing the number of new incinerators or their size so that, in future, to fully develop the collection differentiated, we do not find an excess of capacity for incineration, while ensuring that this excess brakes or reduce the waste collection and recycling of materials.
TEXT 2: ISTAT 2009 URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
Waste In 2009, the municipal waste collection in the 116 provincial capitals amounted to 604.3 kg per
inhabitant. Compared to 2008 there was a decrease of 1, 5% of total waste collected,
confirming the downward trend already recorded in 2007. This decrease relates, in particular,
waste collection (-4.2% in 2009 compared to 2008), while continued growth of the collection
differentiated, but at a rate lowest since 2000 (+5.1% in the last year): the collection has reached
, in 2009, 30.4% of the total. (
The provincial capitals of the Centre continue to be major producers of waste with
660 kg per capita. The following are common in the Northeast with 640, 602 with those of the islands, those of South and
North-west with 555 kg per capita. In all areas the collection is lower than in
2008. The major variation is equal to -3.5% in the municipalities of the North-west.
In 2009, municipalities with the highest amount of municipal waste collected are: Olbia (1,114 kg per inhabitant),
Massa (872), Rimini (858), Lawn (823), Forlì (821), Ravenna (809), Pisa (803) and Lucca (801). Municipalities
of Isernia (440 kg per inhabitant), Avellino (430), power (422), Tempio (420), Belluno (396),
Villacidro (376) and Lanusei (305) are those where the collection is minimal .
collection service is now present in all municipalities provincial capital. 98
are those in which, at December 31, 2009, was served the entire population. Municipalities collect the Northeast
average 44.5% of municipal waste in a different way, those of the North-west
39.7%, 26.9% those of the Centre, those in the South and 20.4% common Islands just 13.5%.
for all divisions are recorded increases compared to 2008, the highest of which is equal to +3.9 percentage points in the boroughs of South
capitals are 26 municipalities to have achieved the goal imposed by the legislation 50%
separate collection in 200916. Of all the first is that by launching Pordenone in 2009 system
curbside collection reached 76.7% (starting from 46.3% in 2008). The following are common
Piedmont Novara, Verbania and Asti, where good performance is recorded for several years
and the percentage of collection is established between 65 and 73%. In fifth place is the town of Avellino
, with 62.9% of municipal waste collected separately by
made the jump right in 2009. The largest gains last year, there are, besides Avellino,
also in Oristano, Caserta, Frosinone.
Municipalities in which, in 2009 there are still 10% lower rates are: Syracuse, Messina,
Iglesias, Palermo, Enna, Catania, Taranto, Trapani Vibo Valentia (Table 5).
in 2009 is almost unchanged the average composition of waste collection for total
provincial capitals: 35.2% consists of paper, 31.7% from green waste, organic and
wood, 12.4 from 11% glass, 9% from other voice (including bulky sent for recycling, packaging materials
mixed WEEE - Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment -, inert
sent for recycling, textile waste, etc..), the 5.9% from plastics, metals by 2.7% and 0.2% from
selective collection of used batteries, lead batteries, toxic waste and flammable and drugs.
In the provincial capitals were collected separately in 2009 on average 65 kg per capita
(-1.1% compared to 2008) paper and cardboard. In the municipalities of the Northeast
this value is equal to 80 kg per capita, down to 77 kg per capita in the central states, 76 in the capital city of North-west,
to 41 in the South and those of just 27 kg per capita in the Islands. The trend from 2008 is
down in central and north, up in the communities in the South Island. The municipality in which
you collect larger quantities of paper and board Prato (172 kg per capita), while Syracuse is the common
where it collects in less (only 5 kg per capita). Even
glass, such as paper, is collected in a different way in all provincial capitals:
in 2009 were collected on average 23 kg per capita (+5.8% compared to 2008). In this case, is the
north-west to contribute more to the Italian average figure, with 36 kg per capita, in the north-east if they collect
32, Centre 19, 12 in the South and the Islands only 9. For plastics, whose collection has been active in differentiated
2009 in all provincial capitals, the average amount collected is equal to 11 kg per capita
. We are going from 17 kg per inhabitant in the provincial capitals of the Northeast at 5 kg per capita of
Islands. Compared to 2008 there is an increase of 14.5%.
The quantities of metals (including aluminum) collected on average in the provincial capitals
is equal to 5 kg per capita, 9.2% less than in 2008. Above-average values \u200b\u200bare reported in
common in the Northeast (10 kg per capita), while lower values \u200b\u200bare recorded in the municipalities belonging
the other areas. It is quite stable over time the separate collection of hazardous waste,
equal to 0.4 kg per capita, amount unchanged since 2001.
In 2009, the collection of green waste, organic and wood was equal to 58 kg per capita, in
steady increase since 2000. Compared to 2008 the increase is equal to 12.3%. The variations are more common in the South
record (+71.2%) and Islands (+36.7%) thanks the start of the collection
door to door in several municipalities including Caserta, Avellino, Frosinone, Oristano Carbonia. Finally,
collect 22 kg per capita (+7.2% compared to 2008) of other types of waste in a different way
including bulky sent for recycling, WEEE, packaging materials mixed textile waste, inert
initiated recovery.
In 2009, the 12 major provincial capitals (those with more than 250 000 inhabitants) were collected
average 603 kg of waste per inhabitant, compared to 606 kg collected in smaller capitals.
The decreasing trend in recent years has been more common in older (-2.3% compared to
2008), so that in 2009 for the first time the collected waste per inhabitant is higher in small municipalities
. The percentage of recycling, however, continues to be higher in the municipalities of
small size (35.4%), well 9.9 percentage points more than the large municipalities where the indicator is
25.5% (Figure 13 ).
Among the largest municipalities, those who collect the greatest amount of municipal waste Catania (746 kg per capita
), Venice (721 kg per capita) and Florence (680 kg per inhabitant). None of large municipalities
reached the target of 50% to collection. The highest percentages are recorded for
Verona (44.7%), Torino (42.3%), Milan (37.1%), Florence (36.6%), Bologna (33.8%) and Venice
( 33.1%). Taillights are the two major provincial capitals of Sicily, Palermo and Catania
, for which the collection is respectively equal to 5.5% and 6.8% (Figure 14).
The composition of the collection is different between small and large municipalities. In the former, prevalent
continues to be the collection of organic waste (81 kg per capita) than other types
probably thanks to wider distribution, in small towns, collection systems
door to door. The collection of green waste, organic and wood
in municipalities with population of more than 250 thousand inhabitants amounts to 35 kg per capita. Among other types, in both cases, the
amount of paper and board separately collected is equal to 65 kg per capita, the amount of glass collected is
average 21 kg per capita in the small and 25 large municipalities, for plastics
the quantities collected are respectively 9 and 12 kg per capita, to the metal 4 and 6 kg per capita
Waste 
then from the windows of the flat Maremma Biblio fills the heart and inspires the soul ... 
4. ACTIVATION OF FOCUS GROUP ON WASTE 
Although many of us have brought examples of good practice by which some municipalities (including ITALIAN!) Have been able to achieve this important step as a prelude to the fare. 
Dear blog visitors, was a way to impact, in fact we did a re-styling of the Blog, but only added and updated some links that we suggest you visit. 
AEA crisis freezes the CO2 in Europe and in 2009 the "27" near goal - 20% 
