M Giavini - Successful policies food waste collection in sardinia region - ISWA 2012

Successful Policies Supporting Residential Food Waste Collection: the Case Study of Sardinia, Italy Christian Garaffa, Novamont Spa, Italy Michele Giavini, Ars Ambiente srl, Italy Giovanni Maria Motzo, Novamont Spa, Italy CONTACT Christian Garaffa Novamont Spa Via Fauser, 8, 28100 NOVARA (NO) - Italy Tel: +39 0321 699693 Fax: +39 0321 699600 E-mail: christian.garaffa@novamont.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2003, the Sardinia Region of Italy experienced a very low separate collection rate, averaging 3,8%. In the beginning of 2004, the Region decided to implement a new regulation based on a carrot and stick approach, offering a combination of economic incentives and penalties to municipalities in order to stimulate their adoption of separate food waste collection.

This regulation introduced in the initial phase a 30% surcharge on the standard landfill tipping fee for the municipalities not implementing food waste source separation, and a 30% reward for the ones beginning the new collection scheme, linked to a specific target: percentage of food waste collected, 10% minimum, and its quality, less than 5% impurities. In the following years these values were adjusted, raising the penalties and lowering the rewards, as the regional system evolved towards high participation by the municipalities.

The effects of this system on the regional average in separate collection rate were impressive; in four years almost every municipality in Sardinia had implemented food waste collection. The regulation then introduced new targets to be achieved in terms of food waste capture: 15% of total municipal waste, and overall recycling rate up to 60%. Particular issues tackled were the quality of food waste collected, in terms of compostable materials, and the funding set up in order to provide citizens with compostable bags for collection.

By the end of 2010, the regional recycling rate (R.R.) reached 44,9%, allowing Sardinia to achieve the same high performances of the northern Italy Regions, where food waste collection schemes were already fully established.

A peculiarity of Sardinia is the very high food waste capture rate achieved, averaging 25% of total waste collected, with some municipalities getting to 38%; this is certainly related to the intensive kerbside collection adopted, but also to the habits of citizens in these Mediterranean areas, who are typically more oriented to the consumption of fresh vegetables and home made foods.

This incentive scheme was intended to push the municipalities in the first phase, using penalties from the majority of municipalities to pay for the first pioneers adopting separate collection; this way, it is self-sustaining and doesn’t need much financial support from the regional government.

This system is therefore a simple and effective approach, acting as a case study for other areas in

which food waste collection schemes are still lagging because of lack of incentives and regulations pushing for performance.

INTRODUCTION The Situation in 2003 Waste management in Sardinia up until 2004 was highly dependent on landfills, with recycling rates barely approaching 5% on total municipal solid waste. Official data reported Sardinia being the second to last Region in the recycling ranks in 2003, with an average of 3,8% source separation for recycling. That year, Veneto scored 42,1%, with many municipalities enacting best practices and reaching 60% and higher. At that time, national targets stated by Italian decree 22/97 required 35% by the end of 2003.

It’s important to highlight the impressive results achieved in the same year by the municipality of Cabras, about 9.000 inhabitants on the west coast of Sardinia; in 2003, it was the first village on the island to implement source separation of food waste with the typical ISSO (Intensive Source Separation of Organics) scheme that is already in place in the northern regions. In a couple of months, it achieved a 64% average, with monthly peaks of over 70%.

Up until 2003, the collection and recycling scheme based on Conai (Consorzio Nazionale Imballaggi, the national packaging council which sets up fees and incentives for packaging collection) wasn’t fully operating in Sardinia, because there were too few facilities for packaging recycling; thus, almost all collected recyclables were sent by ship to the Italian peninsula for recovery.

In 2003, before the startup of the new scheme which pushed food waste collection, disposal of residual waste was based on 10 landfills (Bono, Cagliari, Carbonia, Macomer, Olbia, Oristano, Ozieri, Sassari, Serdiana, and Villacidro), receiving 74,2% of total residual waste with an average tipping fee of 72,32 €/Mg. The other 25,8% was sent to 2 incinerators (Cagliari and Macomer).

The Radical Change in 2004: the Penalty and Incentive Scheme In 2004, the Regional Government of Sardinia decided it was the time to push waste management on the island towards a new direction. Some legislative drivers were in place, such as the national recycling rate target (35%), the Regional Waste Management Plan that urged the introduction of separate food waste collection, and the new national regulation introducing a gradual ban on the delivery of putrescible waste to landfills (D.Lgs. 36/2003). But most of all, the positive results from municipalities on the “continent” (that’s the way Sardinian people call the rest of Italy) made the Regional Authority realize that it was time to start a new era in recycling.

Another incentive was the increasing pressure on local landfills, caused by the rise in waste production that was typical of those years (now we know that after 2003 overall waste per capita topped at a certain level without rising anymore). To cope for this, an urgent decree was made to reopen an old landfill near Cagliari, stating in the same act that separate collection schemes should start soon to reduce landfilled waste.

The “milestone” act was Decree 15/32 of March 30th, 2004, titled Guiding Act for the development of wet/dry separate collections in the regional territory.

This act clearly stated that the best way to spread source separation of food waste in the region would be to intervene on the tipping fees, noting that: - Municipalities implementing virtuous behaviours should be rewarded for their efforts, which become an advantage for the whole community, since that food waste can be recovered for compost production; - Municipalities not introducing source separation schemes are causing imbalances and damages related to the continuous search for new disposal sites, and so should be duly penalized.

- Simply, this act introduced:

-

A 30% surcharge on the standard landfill and incineration tipping fee for residual waste, applied to municipalities not implementing food waste source separation; - A 30% reward on the tipping fee, calculated on food waste quantities delivered, for municipalities beginning the new collection scheme, linked to a specific target (in percentage of food waste collected, 10% minimum; and its quality, less than 5% impurities).

An outstanding and somewhat risky decision was made in that act: in 2004, composting facilities for food waste treatment were lacking on the island, but the Region decided to give priority to the implementation of food waste collection schemes even without treatment possibility for the collected organic fraction. The decision allowed delivery of food waste in the same landfills as the residual or unsorted waste, but with the 30% discount applied to those cases. It was risky, because citizens could have argued that the new collection was a meaningless effort, if food waste had been mixed together with residual in the same landfill. Instead, it pushed the building of new composting facilities quite rapidly on the island.

Municipalities without source separation of food waste

e 30% overcharg Unsorted MSW

Sta

Municipalities with source separation of food waste

Landfills and incinerators

sal g fee for dispo Standard tippin

t ard nd

ing ipp

fe e

fo

os isp rd

€

al

Buffer deposit

Residual MSW

Source separated food waste

€ €

Regional Government

€ Discounted

tipping fee ( 30% less tha n standard)

Composting facilities

Figure 1 –The incentives and penalties scheme implemented in Sardinia during the initial phase.

Further modifications The first phase of the penalty and incentive scheme was in place during the period of June 1st, 2004 to July 1st, 2006; then, the Regional Government decided to improve it by raising penalties to 40% and obliging municipalities to implement food waste collection on their whole population in order to get the discounted tipping fee. The minimum food waste to be collected in order to gain incentives was raised to 15%.

From the beginning of 2008, the discounted fee decreased to 20%, from the previous 30%, and access to it was granted only to municipalities reaching 40% source separation, further raised to 50% in 2009.

Again in 2009, a further incentive was granted by introducing a special 40% discounted fee for municipalities reaching very high source separation (60%).

Later, in the end of 2009, another act stated that the penalty scheme should be extended in order to achieve higher results, and introduced a key provision; the obligation to use certified compostable bags for food waste collection. With act 44/56 of December 14th, 2010, the Region granted a € 800.000 benefit to municipalities reaching 50% source separation rate, to be used for the purchase of certified compostable bags to be delivered to citizens, in order to improve the quality of compost produced in the newly built plants.

Period

Penalty

Discounted fee

Access criteria (min. % of food waste collected)

June 2004 – May 2005

30%

30%

5%

10%

30%

30%

10%

5%

40%

30%

15%

5%

€ 5,16/Mg

20%

15%

5%

€ 5,16/Mg

20% (40% if total R.R. > 60%) combined with other advantages in regional funding

June 2005 – June 2006 June 2006 – Jan 2008 2008 2009

15%

Access criteria (max impurities in food waste collected)

-

Access criteria (population involved in the collection) Accepted also with partial implementation Only with total implementation Only with total implementation Only with total implementation Only with total implementation

Access criteria (min. % total source separation) 40% 50% (40% for municipalities > 30.000 inhabitants)

Only for collection 50% (40% for with biodegradable Only with total municipalities > 2010 € 5,16/Mg 15% and compostable implementation 30.000 bags according to inhabitants) UNI EN 13432 Only for collection 10% applied to residual 60% (50% for with biodegradable waste sent to landfill Only with total municipalities > 2011 € 5,16/Mg 15% and compostable (30% if sent to implementation 30.000 bags according to incinerator) inhabitants) UNI EN 13432 2012 Currently in definition phase Table 1 – Gradual modifications for the penalty and incentive scheme since its implementation in Sardinia.

20% (40% if total R.R. > 60%) combined with other advantages in regional funding

There are some other examples of incentive and penalty schemes applied on tipping fees. At the European level, the most important example can be found in Catalunya, Spain, where the regional law 15/2003 introduced on January 1st, 2004 an additional tax on the tipping fee for disposal in landfills (€ 10/Mg) and incinerators (€ 5/Mg). In this case, it was actually a tax which was collected by the Region; most of this money is directed to composting facilities to improve their efficiency and to keep their tipping fees low.

In Lombardy, the Province of Lecco introduced in 2002 (d.g.p. n. 234 of Sept 19th, 2002) a modulation scheme by which 2% of the tipping fee at incinerators is diverted to municipalities collecting less residual waste, calculated per capita (i.e. less than 115 kg/inhabitant, excluding July and August).

Generally speaking, in Italy there are many situations where some modulation criteria are applied on the tipping fees, aimed at boosting separate collection; typically, this is possible where ATO (Ambito Territoriale Ottimale, an authority operating at a provincial scale whose tasks include coordinating and regulating fees for waste treatment plants) are in place and operating.

The choices that apparently led Sardinia Regional Government to set up the incentive and penalty scheme can be summed up in the followings: a) Target for reaching a turning point in recycling rates by using a modern scheme aligned with best practices in waste management systems; b) Avoid emergencies (as an important remark, in the period 2005-2009 as many as 3 landfills were closed after reaching their maximum volume of waste, without any particular problems), and plan a new strategy for the future of disposal facilities. Detailed waste management plans allowed for a multifaceted approach to the changing needs for waste treatment facilities, caused by increasing quantities of recyclables. Particularly, new composting facilities for food waste processing were built;

c)

Reach the targets established by European and national legislation (Decree 36/2003) about limits on biodegradable waste to be landfilled.

RESULTS The approach of Local Authorities Local Authorities in the beginning phase of the incentive and penalty scheme used a manifold approach, depending on the environmental sensibility of local municipal administrators. Generally speaking, these are the highlights: - Small Municipalities were the first to implement ISSO, probably because of their favorable territory features (prevalence of single-family housings, low population density), which fit well with kerbside collection; - The expiration date of the contract between the Municipality and the private hauler played a major role, because they were mainly based on the collection of huge quantities of unselected residual waste. According to this, Municipalities with later contract expiration dates were more penalized; - Municipalities preferred to implement kerbside collection on all MSW fractions (food waste, plastic, glass, paper, residual), rather than set up a minimal food waste collection just to have access to incentives; - For food waste, the adopted scheme was based on collection with small volume containers dedicated to food scraps only, excluding yard trimmings (home composting was incentivized instead), ashes and agricultural domestic scraps (which is important in rural areas and small municipalities). This kept overall expenses for sending them to composting low.

The source separation scheme introduced in Sardinia was the typical ISSO based on the following key features: - Collection of food waste with biodegradable compostable bags, small buckets to be kept in the kitchen, larger bins (30 liters for small housings, 120 liters for the others) for kerbside delivery; - No collection of yard waste mixed with food waste; - Collection frequency: 3 times a week for food waste (2 times a week in some municipalities during winter; 3 times a week is the standard in summer because of high temperatures), once a week residual waste; - Collection vehicles: small lorries with just one driver who also picks up the waste kerbside - Other recyclables collected in separate streams (paper and cardboard, glass and cans, plastic packaging), once a week or fortnightly.

Statistics According to the official statistics published on the annual Waste Management Report by the regional Environmental Protection Agency, the number of municipalities in Sardinia collecting more than 15% food waste on total MSW jumped from just a few in 2004 to 322 in 2009, out of 377 (figure 2).

400 350 322

350 300 272

300 234

250

271 248 Food waste > 10% on total MSW

189

200

Food waste > 15% on total MSW

150

100

96

80

50 0 2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Figure 2 – Number of municipalities having access to the discounted fee for food waste treatment, collecting more than 10% of total MSW (criteria up to July 2006) and 15% requirement after July 2006.

The average regional source separation rate has risen steadily since 2005, as displayed in fig. 3: according to latest reports it was 44,9% in 2010. This result is quite impressive, especially looking at data related to the end of the 90s, when Sardinia had a source separation rate of 0,9%.

Total disposal at landfill in 2010 was 14,16%, compared to 71,06% in 2000.

A lot of best practices can be highlighted according to 2010 data: the municipality of Ussassai (less than 2.000 inhabitants), achieved the highest source separation rate at 86,6%, a master even at the national level; many others are close or above the national target of 65%, even among the biggest cities (Capoterra 68,5%, Oristano 65,3%, and Nuoro 61,1%). Looking at food waste capture rates, the regional average is 19,1% of the total MSW collected, or 94,5 kg/inhabitant/year, but the average for just municipalities that have implemented food waste collection is 25%, and we easily see many getting to 30% of total MSW collected. Some even reach as high as 38%.

Figure 3 – Source separation rate in Sardinia (blue line), disposal in landfill (green), MBT facilities (red)

Figure 4 – Trend in disposal and recovery options in Sardinia, 1998-2010.

Recycling facilities Table 2 highlights how the Sardinian scheme pushed planning and construction of new composting facilities. Currently, 11 of them are operating, comparing to the total lack for food waste composting capacity of 2003.

Municipality

Capoterra (CA) Tempio (OT) Arborea (OR) Sassari Olbia Ozieri (SS) Villacidro Macomer (NU) Carbonia Quartu (CA) Nuoro Osini (OG) Serramanna (VS)

Owner

Cacip Unione Comuni Alta Gallura Consorzio I Prov. Oristanese Comune di Sassari Cines Consorzio ZSI Chilivani - Ozieri Villaservice Consorzio ZI Macomer Comune di Carbonia Promisa ASI Consorzio Industriale Provincia Ogliastra Cisa

Villasimius (CA) Dolianova (CA)

Unione Comuni Parteolla

Capacity Food waste + Yard scraps [Mg/year] 73.000 23.000 20.000 17.000 13.000 10.800 59.600 9.500 n.a.

4.000 n.a.

7.000 15.000 Currently not operating Currently not operating

Total Notes: Facilities highlighted in green should undergo renovation in a short time Facilities highlighted in yellow are currently being built Facilities highlighted in pale blue are currently in renovation Table 2 – Facilities treating food waste in 2012.

Capability for Food waste [Mg/year] 73.000 23.000 20.000 12.000 11.900 7.200 44.700 9.500 n.a.

0 n.a.

5.200 12.000

Current capability for food waste [Mg/anno] 73.000 23.000 20.000 0 11.900 7.200 44.700 9.500 n.a.

0 n.a.

5.200 12.000

206.500

Looking at other recyclables, the Conai scheme has recently developed a lot, following a steady increase in single stream materials collected, with new facilities for recycling built. Currently:

-

All glass is shipped to the Italian peninsula recycling facilities; A little part of plastic packaging is recycled on Sardinia in local industries manufacturing recycled plastic items, while the major part is shipped to the peninsula; - As for paper, the most important quantity is recycled in a paper mill on Sardinia, the rest being sent to the peninsula.

Percentages of recycling effectively performed in Sardinia have been oscillating in the years, with a continuous increase; presumably, the achievement of higher targets for collected quantities of packaging to be recycled will allow for building new recycling facilities in Sardinia in the next years, especially for plastics and glass, which would cut transportation costs.

Given the unchanged number of incinerators in Sardinia (Cagliari and Macomer), and the continual reduction in residual waste allowed for landfills, 53,5% of residual waste in 2009 was disposed in landfills, and 46,5% in incinerators (in 2003 those percentages were 74,2% to landfill and 25,8% to incineration).

This allowed for the closure of some landfills that reached maximum acceptable waste volume. In 2009, 7 landfills were still operating (Bono, Carbonia, Macomer, Olbia, Ozieri, Sassari, and Villacidro); the average tipping fee was 94,99 €/Mg, including VAT and surcharge, compared to 114,08 €/Mg for incinerators.

The end phase and possible optimizations Looking at fig. 5, it’s clear that the incentives and penalties system helped the spread the ISSO source separation scheme on almost the whole region, making it possible to approach the goals for the final phase. According to recent data, the balance fund is gradually depleting because municipalities accessing incentives are much more than the ones still in penalties (fig. 6).

Now the Regional Government has to decide whether to keep incentives going using its own funds, or end the system completely having almost reached its targets.

2006

2010

Figure – Source separation rate in single municipalities in Sardinia: comparison between 2006 and 2010. The darker green indicates values > 60 %.

Figure 6 – Trend of penalties (blue) and incentives (red), € , 2005-2010

Should a possible criticism to this scheme be made, it would be for not keeping the penalty at a high level in the latest years (since 2011 it’s only 5,16 €/Mg); a different approach could have given a major boost to the few municipalities that still have not implemented ISSO. Currently, for different reasons (e.g. the expiration date of the contract, legal arguments, or fears of introducing ISSO in densely populated areas), just 4 municipalities out of 377 (Cagliari, Sassari, Olbia, and Iglesias) have still not implemented ISSO; by the way, they are all large municipalities with high populations.

It’s clear that, having reached the target of the startup for intensive source separation in the whole region (and acknowledging that management schemes involve tenders for private companies for hauling), the incentive/penalty scheme in the near future will increasingly have to address the quality of the collected recyclables, and look at improving neglected negative aspects. The main targets can be summed up in the following: a) Overcome the high dependence on landfill as a disposal system, moving towards more advanced treatment options according to the Best Available Technologies, with a particular consideration of the logistics, because of local territories (difficult geography); b) More responsibility given to Private haulers who win tenders with Local Authorities, introducing pay as you throw schemes and setting precise targets in terms of recycling rate, and letting the hauler pay the disposal tipping fees (currently, the local authority pays the tipping fee for the disposal of residual waste without reference to the recycling rate achieved); c) More control on the waste delivered kerbside by citizens, in order to achieve a higher quality for all source separated recyclables. This must involve effective and widespread communication and education campaigns for citizens, aimed at giving clear, simple and coherent messages; d) Overcome management decisions made by single municipalities, moving towards aggregations of local authorities.

CONCLUSION The Sardinian incentive and penalty scheme is now a reference for other regions, as an example of how to push source separation of food waste without using public funds.

By the end of 2010, the regional separate collection rate reached 44,9%, allowing Sardinia to get to the same high performances of the northern Italy Regions, where food waste collection schemes were already fully established.

A peculiarity of Sardinia after this regulation is the very high capture rate of food waste achieved, averaging 25% of total waste, with some municipalities getting up to 38%; this is certainly related to the intensive kerbside collection adopted but also to the habits of citizens in these Mediterranean areas, who are typically more oriented to the consumption of fresh vegetables and home made foods.

This incentive scheme was intended to push the municipalities in the first phase, using penalties from the majority of municipalities to pay for the first pioneers adopting separate collection; this way, it is self-sustaining and doesn’t need financial support from the regional government. In the final phase of these incentives, when almost all the municipalities had reached the targets, the Region decided to keep the rewards for some time, gradually reducing them until the collection schemes are even across the Region. The system is therefore a simple and effective approach, acting as a case study for other areas in which food waste collection is still lagging because of lack of incentives and regulations.Also, 30% of food waste collected on total MSW can be set as a target for Mediterranean regions, where more home-cooking habits can lead to higher targets in captures.

REFERENCES C. Garaffa, Luca Mariotto, A. Miorandi, C. Roverato: Evolution of a collection scheme in 15 years: quality and efficiency in the North Italian experience. EU Waste Management 2010, Cologne, 8th9th of June 2010, Proceedings.

Regione Sardegna - ARPAS, Rapporto sulla gestione dei rifiuti urbani in Sardegna, 2005-2010 WRAP, Waste and Resources Action Programme: Performance analysis of mixed food and garden waste collection schemes – Final report, 2010.

Regione Sardegna: Premialitá 2007 – 2013 RAOS - Rapporto Annuale degli Obiettivi di Servizio anno 2009 obiettivo di servizio III – Gestione dei Rifiuti Urbani. Allegato n. 5 alla Delib.G.R. n.

10/45 del 12.3.2010.

M. Giavini, C. Garaffa, M. Centemero, G. Ghiringhelli: Statistical Analysis of Residential Food Waste Capture Rates in Italy at Municipal and Regional Level. Presented at ORBIT 2012, Rennes, France.