House of Commons - Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Select Committee on Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Eighth Report

APPENDIX: VISIT TO DENMARK

The Committee undertook a three-day visit to Denmark in March 2003 to learn about the Danish approach to waste management, because Denmark is often held up as an example of a country with a successful sustainable waste management system for all kinds of waste.

Danish Environmental Protection Agency

The Committee spoke to Christian Fischer, Head of the Household Waste Division and Lene Bjerg Kristensen from the Copenhagen EPA.

STATISTICS

Of all waste produced in Denmark in 2001, 63% was recycled, 25% was incinerated with energy recovery, 10% was landfilled and 1% went for special treatment. However, recycling of construction and demolition waste accounts for a large part of the recycling figure. When household waste alone is considered, 30% was recycled, almost 60% was incinerated and just over 10% was landfilled. Mr Fischer told the Committee that, except for paper and glass, Denmark does not usually source recycled materials from households as they are too dirty and contaminated with other materials. He said that recycling rates were much higher in other sectors.

HISTORY - REASONS FOR CHANGE

Until the 1980s, Denmark still relied heavily on landfill. The shift from landfill was precipitated by concerns over groundwater pollution, particularly because all of Denmark's drinking water comes from groundwater. There was also little remaining space to site new landfills and the country relied heavily on imported fuel and was eager to find alternative energy sources.

However, we were told that one of the reasons Denmark could adapt to a new system was that there was already a basic infrastructure that could deal with all kind of waste, that is, incineration with energy recovery, landfill and disposal of hazardous waste. This infrastructure needed to be in place before they could adapt to changed priorities.

POWERFUL LOCAL GOVERNMENT

The Danish waste model is based on the premise that waste management is a public sector task[93] and depends on a combination of legislation and taxation. The national government formulates nation-wide waste plans and is responsible for national legislation and economic instruments. Municipal and regional councils are in charge of the practical administration of waste management. They must ensure there is sufficient capacity to deal with all the waste that is produced. This is possible because municipalities direct waste from all sources to the treatment or disposal site of their choice and waste producers must comply. For commercial waste, the waste producer hands the waste to an approved carrier (there are a number of approved carriers in each municipality so there is a degree of choice), and the carrier then transfers the waste to an approved treatment plant (there is no choice of treatment plant). Both the carrier and the treatment plant must submit information to the Environment Protection Agency

Since 1992, all landfill sites have had to be owned by municipal authorities (except that some industries may operate landfill sites solely for their own use). Most incinerators are owned by municipalities or groups of municipalities. This public ownership and the fact that municipalities control where and how waste is disposed of (recycling is mainly privately run) mean that there is effectively no competition between landfill sites or incinerators. There is currently a debate about whether the waste sector should be liberalised. Industry would prefer to send its waste to the cheapest plant and not necessarily the one chosen by the municipality. Some industry figures are in favour of liberalisation as a matter of principle and say they would accept higher waste management costs provided there was competition.

There are a number of laws which promote the waste hierarchy. Waste that can be recycled or burnt is banned from landfill. The paper and glass fractions of household waste must be collected separately for recycling (collection may be either via kerbside schemes or through local bring sites and other waste fractions are also often collected). Construction and demolition waste must be separated into separate fractions at source, in order that as much as possible may be recycled.

GRADUATED WASTE TAX

The EPA attributed much of Denmark's success in moving waste up the hierarchy to its graduated waste tax, which is highest for waste going to landfill at 375 Danish krona per tonne (DKK/t), lower for incineration with energy recovery (all waste incinerators in Denmark recover energy) at 330 DKK/t and zero rated for recycling. The tax is on top of any fee charged by operators of the waste management facility.

The difference in that tax on landfill and incineration is such that some companies 'mine' combustible waste that was landfilled before the ban and incinerate it, in order to claim the rebated landfill tax.

Revenue from the waste tax was 1.1 billion DKK in 2001. There is some discussion about how this revenue should be used; at present 75 million DKK goes to support recycling and the development of clean technologies and the rest goes into the waste budget.

WASTE AND ENERGY POLICIES COORDINATED

Since the 1960s, there have been district-heating systems in many Danish towns, including Copenhagen. These were originally based on oil, but the fuel crisis of the 1970s promoted a switch to coal, gas and alternative fuels including waste. Any new incineration plant requires the approval of the Energy Agency and since the mid-1990s it has required that incineration produce electricity as well as heat. Waste incinerators currently provide 10% of Denmark's heat supply and 3% of its electricity. The Environmental Protection Agency checks that sufficient waste is available for each plant, but equally looks to ensure there is no over-capacity lest there be less motivation for recycling. As a result, incineration capacity relative to total waste arisings is stable, even though new incinerators are being built or existing ones expanded to cope with increases in the amount of waste produced. Planning permission for new incinerators is a matter for the local councils rather than the EPA. The whole process (from seeking permission to coming online) usually lasts between four and six years, including appeals, for a new incinerator. 60% of the plants already meet the requirements of the European Union Waste Incineration Directive.

Incineration

The Committee visited Vestforbrænding, a waste treatment company owned by 21 municipalities. It treats the waste of 800,000 inhabitants in 22 municipalities (the 21 co-owners and one other). The company's main business is incineration: 65% of the waste it deals it is burnt. However is also recycles 30%, landfills 4% and 1% goes to specialist hazardous waste treatment. In 2001, the waste incineration produced 1,066,000 MWh in district heating and 108,000 MWh of electricity production. The waste burnt replaces about 165,000t of fuel oil. The company charges industries a fee of 200DKK/t for handling the waste (the waste tax is added to this charge but goes direct to national government). This fee covers the nets costs of treatment once the income from heat and power generation has been deducted. The company expects its cost to decrease as it moves from five lines to two and accordingly expects to drop its fees to about 100DKK/t excluding tax.

Environmental performance is monitored by the Environmental Protection Agency and emissions are controlled. For example, dust is removed by an electrostatic filter, oxides of nitrogen are reduced to nitrogen gas using ammonia and dioxins are bound using lime and active carbon. Where possible, waste products are sold on as raw materials to other companies, but at present the fly ash and flue gas cleaners are exported to Norway for landfill. However the company and the EPA are working on ways to stabilise or recycle this waste as well. We were told that, although fifteen or twenty years ago there were "tough discussions" with people living close to the plant, the incinerator is accepted now. The EPA told us that this was largely because the incinerators were local, so people accepted that it was their waste that was being treated and that useful products - district heating and electricity - were generated.

For a new plant, it takes about seven or eight years between permission first being sought and operation. This includes two years discussing alternatives, two years to obtain the necessary planning permission and licensing and three or four years building the plant.

Recycling - household waste

The Committee visited a municipal recycling centre and a block of flats whose residents voluntarily separate their domestic waste.