PowerPoint Presentation

, . , , - , , .

. 0878 577973 0888577973 sidjimov@bamee.org 044 662216

, Transparency in waste management network development for the organizations concerned for the improvement of waste management system on municipal level

www.bamee.org

2009-2014 . www.ngogrants.bg.

. , . . , , , , . , . .

selective waste collection . - - , , . - . , " ". , , , . .

selective waste collection , . .

" , " -

, ( ), . - 3% 27% .- 1. 2. , . . .3. 4. :- , , . - - 5. , , ,

,

: , , , , , . : , , , , . : , , . , , . : , , , . : , , .

- . , 2014-2020 .

50 : http://www.prewaste.eu/.

- - 70%. : 6 . 300 , 25 , :

- - .- , , - () .- - () - - , , , , - ", "- : 2% , 75% 70% - '' . , , , , . : (150 //) (180 //).

, 300 , 220 150 // 71% 2010 . , , 225 ( 2.4 /) 2010., :- 36 , , - 189 :1/3 , 55-60 1/3 , 1/3 , :- 2.5-3.76 120 '' / ( )- 15 - 20 / ( ) - / , -.

30% 70% ( '') , . , , , , , - - .

(LIPOR), , , . , . 2010 . 10 027 , 71,8 .

, , , , . , (39 %), - , , (29 %). , - . , ,

2005 . , , , . 2010 . 50 60 % 20 %. 60 % 40 %. 50 % ( 40 %, ) 5,16 .

() - , . , .

, : , ; , 1 1 ;

, . . , .

. . , : , ; ;

( ) , . , .

- :

.. , . . . . () , . , . (), . . , . , , / .

, , 25- 50- , 0.69 25 1.04 50 . 2 . 52 , 1 50 . . 1. : , , ; . , / .

Albairate, Navigli . 1997 - - . . : ( ). 80% . . 20% , 100% . , . . , . 1 . . .

, . . . , .

, . . . - . Sittard, , 75% . 2002 ., 41%, 23%.

/ .

, , , .

, . .

.

Haarlemmermeer . . 80- 142 240- 215 .

- , . -

. , , . . , . .. . / .. . .. . , , , , .

. . !- , - , , , () - , , .

1. :a. ( )b. ( )2. () ( )3. , , (), (),

The use of tax instruments in the area of waste management is an increasingly popular option to create incentives that help to achieve better prevention and selective waste collection results, ensure appropriate allocation ofwaste management charges, and guarantee that tax collection is effective.Landfill taxes

, , . 3 :1. (AT, BE, DE, DK, LU, NL, SE);2. (FI, FR, IE, IT, SI, UK); 3. (BG, CZ, GR, HU, LT, LV, PL, PT,RO, SK, CY, EE, ES). , 3 40 60% , 1 2 . EE, SK and LT 3 . .

() ! Austria, where use has been made of both a tax and a landfill restriction; and - Waste may only be landfilled if its total organic carbon contents (TOC) is lower than 5%, which effectively bans the landfilling of untreated municipal waste (a higher rate of 87 per tonne applies to non pre- treated waste,Germany, where no landfill tax is in place, and where the major effect on landfill has come through a ban.

- -

17 () . , . 3 (AT, FI, IE) . 16 , 15 , 9 , 6 . ( . : () / . range from 40 (Miravet and Rasquera Municipalities, Catalonia, Spain) to up to 2,415 (for a large 1,100l bin in Stuttgart, Germany); range from 0.65 for a 17 litre bag (Argentona Municipality, Catalonia, Spain) to 5.50 for a 70l bag (for bags over and above standard volume collected, Stuttgart, Germany); . (120l or 140l only, for comparison purposes) range from 0.50 (in the context of a scheme combining volume and frequency elements, Ribeauvill, France) to 4.20 (north Helsinki, Finland); and range from 0.17 (Slovakia) to 0.36 (Sweden). -

COUNTRY CASE STUDIES

3.3.4.1 PAYT IN AUSTRIAMain features of PAYT in Austria - Waste management fees in Austria must be based on the size of a households residual waste bin and the frequency of emptying. Fees for the collection and treatment of household waste must also correspond to the costs of the services rendered, as opposed to being profit-oriented. As permitted by law, most municipalities have formed waste management associations through which the collection and treatment of all waste is facilitated. - The following three methods for calculating waste fees provide some or no financial incentive to reduce waste generation:There is only one waste bin size (240 l) and every emptying costs 9.72;The annual fixed price is 22, and every emptying of a 240 l container costs 1.80; andThe annual fixed price is 0.29 per litre of waste bin (69.60 for a 240 l bin) and every emptying costs 7.90.In Austria true PAYT schemes are only provided for single-family houses, with waste collection and treatment fees for apartment buildings being determined by apartment size (m) as opposed to the size of the waste container.

3.3.4.2 PAYT IN FINLANDMain Features of PAYT in FinlandUnder the Finnish Waste Act of 1996, municipalities must provide for the collection and disposal of household waste. As such, they may levy a waste management charge covering not only the collection of waste, but investments in, and operation of, waste treatment facilities. Whilst PAYT schemes in Finland are not legally mandated, charges for municipal household waste are primarily determined by the quantity and type of waste being disposed of, as well as the frequency of collection. However, the charge must also be of enough significance to serve as a deterrent to waste production and encourage recycling.20 In addition to a weight-based waste charge, an annual fixed fee is applied based on house type (e.g. single family home, apartment block). Residents also have the option of disposing of waste at collection points, though access to these collection points also incurs the levying of a fixed fee.21Impacts of PAYT Schemes in FinlandOn average, the annual fixed waste management fee for a single family house is 159, with the collection and treatment of a 240l bin averaging 6 per emptying, and a 600l bin averaging 9.50. The charges also vary depending on the type of waste disposed of. For example, residents who compost waste at home realise large savings over those who separate their compost from household waste for separate collection, and those who do not separate compost from household waste.22

PAYT IN GERMANYIn Germany, there is a legal obligation for all citizens to utilize the local waste management system in order to dispose of household waste. While there is no federal legislation requiring the use of PAYT schemes, some federal states waste legislation mandates that waste fees should promote waste prevention and recovery (e.g. 8 of the Berlin Waste Law or 6 of the Waste Law in Saxony-Anhalt). PAYT schemes in Germany encompass bin volume-based systems, sack volume-based systems, frequency-based systems and weight-based systems, with the majority of local disposal systems being volume- and frequency-based. The household subscription cost is comprised of an annual fee for waste collection dependent upon bin volume, as well as the frequency of collection. The fee levels differ regionally depending on the waste disposal capacities and the population serviced by the local disposal system.24

PAYT IN IRELAND

National legislation passed in 2003 mandated the transition from the previous fixed rate waste disposal charge to a weight/volume-based charge by 1 January 2005. Local authorities and waste collectors that have not yet transitioned to PAYT schemes continue to charge a flat-rate for waste disposal services.27 Three systems of PAYT/PBU schemes are observable throughout Ireland, namely volume-based systems, tag-based systems and weight-based systems. The waste collection sector in Ireland is almost completely privatised; companies establish contracts with households and determine pricing, and only a limited direct role is played by the local authority.28 Local authority waste services do compete in this market in a range of counties.Local Case StudyA notable example of the successful implementation and operation of a PAYT/PBU is the case of county Monaghan, which in 2003 transitioned from a fixed rate bin charge to a weight-based charge and kerbside recycling. In the first year of the scheme, waste sent to landfill fell by 25%, and by 40% in 2005. This reduction in waste production has been attributed primarily to an increase in recycling rates, and to home composting of organic waste and greater vigilance about bin contents.30

. ( , ). . - . , , / . - , - . - . !!! . ( ) . , , ,

.

- : . ( , , ) . . . . . . .MSW Charging - Overseas Experience

Country/ CityAsiaTaipeiCharge according to water consumption since 1991 before the Bag systemBag system started in 2000Free collection for recyclablesRenowned for their (No plastic bags on the street)arrangement for which residents carry their bags and line up on street every night to wait for the garbage trucks to arrive and pick up their waste.Further investigation is required as the Bag system seems only to apply to the low-rise areas and not multi-storey buildings2. KoreaFlat rate before 1995Bag system after 1995Waste generation reduced by 16.6% and recycling rate increased from15.7% to 43% in 8 years from 1994 to 2001.3 BeijingFlat rateUrban households living under the poverty line are exempted from the fee4. SingaporeFlat RateBulky waste disposal are arranged separately.5. JapanWaste collection systems vary from place to placeTokyo collects household waste for free in general while waste separation is encouraged (no information on latest development).Some places charge according to quantity, some adopt a fixed rate approach and some adopt a mixed approach.MSW Charging - Overseas Experience

North AmericaNorth America1. New YorkCityHidden charge through local property taxIncorrectly sorted waste will not be collected2. SeattleFor low-density apartments, households are charged based on their bin size(Bin system).In the case of high-density apartments, different arrangement is made and the building owners are charged3. SanFranciscoBuildings with 5 or fewer units (50% of residential units) under the PAYT (pay as you throw) bin programmeBin system is not applied to residential buildings with large number of households.4.Vancouver/CanadaFlat rate (for fixed number of bins or bags) plus charge for additional arrangement.MSW Charging - Overseas Experience

Europe1. TheNetherlandsFlat rate, bag system, and charging by actual weight are all usedSome municipalities collect municipal waste charge on the size of the household or frequency of collection, some use the pay by bag system and one or two by weightDifferent nature and set-up of the local community and accommodation may require different charging arrangements2. MilanCombined flat rate and waste weightA fixed charge based on the type and size of the property and a variable charge based on the amount of the waste collected from each household3. SwedenBin systemHouseholds are charged on their utilities bill on the size of the binsAustralia & New Zealand1. SyndeyBin systemA base fee for a standard set bins and additional charge for extra bins for each household2. Christchurch/New ZealandBag systemEach property is allocated with 52 rated-funded bags each year with extra bag at $5 each. -

, . , ; ; , , . : , ; ; ; , , .; ; ; .

: , , ; , ; , , , , , ; ; (), (, , .); , ; , , ; ; - ; .

- ; ; , , , ; ; , ; , , , .

? ? / / / / / - / / //VALORLUXECOTRELECOTRELSDK - / / /