DOCSLIB.ORG

Work Package 3 Quantification of Costs and Benefits

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Work Package 3 Quantification of Costs and Benefits COLLECTORS Work package 3 Quantification of costs and benefits ASSESSMENT OF SOCIO ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE OF 12 SELECTED CASE STUDIES T. VAN LEEUWEN Copyright © 2020 COLLECTORS PROJECT Disclaimer The sole responsibility of this publication lies with the authors. The European Union is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No 776745. 1 TECHNICAL REFERENCES Grant Agreement N° 776745 Acronym COLLECTORS Full Title Waste collection systems assessed and good practices identified Work Package (WP) 3 T. van Leeuwen (PNO Consultants) M. Siebenlist (PNO Consultants) Authors S. Alnajar (PNO Consultants) J. Hardjopawiro (PNO Consultants) Document Type Deliverable Deliverable 3.2: Assessment of socio economic and financial Document Title performance of 12 selected case studies Dissemination Level Public DOCUMENT HISTORY Version Date Partner Author v1 10-04-2019 PNO T. van Leeuwen v2 24-07-2019 ACR - v3 08-10-2019 WF, ACR, VTT - v4 04-12-2019 ACR, VTT, LDE - v5 29-01-2020 PNO T. van Leeuwen v6 (final) 13-03-2020 PNO T. van Leeuwen 2 SUMMARY This deliverable is part of the European Horizon 2020 project COLLECTORS and provides the financial assessments of 12 COLLECTORS case studies; focusing on 5 paper and packaging waste (PPW) cases, 5 waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) cases and 2 construction and demolition waste (CDW) cases. The report is part of Task 3.2 and will highlight the financial flows for the assessed waste collection practices. The financial and economic assessment is carried out by means of a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). CBA strives to estimate positive and negative effects of a project or policy on the welfare of the region or country in which it is located and thereby provides insight into the financial performance of the waste collection systems. The assessment is initially performed from the perspective of the municipality, but ultimately broadened in order to include relevant costs and benefits further up the waste value chain. The CBAs for the COLLECTORS project have been conducted in accordance with the EC CBA guidelines (Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects, European Commission, December 2014). It is possible and quite common to also include environmental aspects in a CBA. However, the COLLECTORS project has a dedicated deliverable on the environmental performance of the cases – the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) performed in Task 3.1. To prevent double-counting of environmental performance, it is decided to restrict the CBAs to the financial assessments of the CBA. The CBA approach and waste stream scope varies per waste stream and is explained in the sections below. For each waste stream different case studies are selected based on their geography, waste production, tourism, GDP and population density. For this reason, the cases are not directly comparable, as they serve as a good practice in their specific context. Data were provided by stakeholders (interviews or questionnaires) and published data (i.e. in, regional, national or European reports). However, it is important to mention that financial information on the waste collection systems often covers (price-)sensitive information, which is not publicly available or, in some cases not even documented. This means that certain parts of the assessments were made under data uncertainty, especially with regards to financial information. The results and evaluation of the assessment should therefore be understood as preliminary insights into the economic performance of these waste collection systems. In the PPW assessment it was found that it is possible to achieve high performing separate waste collection while maintaining acceptable fees for citizens. However, local authorities are largely dependent on national incentives such as financial contributions from EPR schemes, revenues from sold materials and tax savings or incentives. In the WEEE assessment it was found that PRO’s face many financial challenges; the EEE get smaller and more complex while less valuable materials are used resulting in an less material recovery potential; and competition grows between PRO’s resulting in reducing fees. Despite these challenges all studied cases managed to increase their WEEE collection, however not all were found to have a positive FNPV. The CDW assessment concludes that while separate collection systems can be introduced relatively easily and without large investments, they are largely dependent on the local recycling value chain and gate fees. From the municipal point of view, transport costs and gate fees are the two crucial parameters; meaning that lower gate fees in combination with a nearby demand for recycling will result in the favourable financial option. As CDW consist of many different sub-waste streams, it was found that the options and outcome varies per waste stream. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Technical references ............................................................................................................................................... 2 Document history ................................................................................................................................................... 2 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Table of contents .................................................................................................................................................... 4 List of abbreviations ............................................................................................................................................... 8 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.1. Project background ............................................................................................................................... 9 1.2. The COLLECTORS project....................................................................................................................... 9 1.3. Aim of this report ................................................................................................................................ 10 1.4. Cost Benefit Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 10 1.5. Case study selection ............................................................................................................................ 11 2. Background of the Case Studies ................................................................................................................... 13 2.1. Background of the PPW study ............................................................................................................. 13 2.2. Background of the WEEE study ........................................................................................................... 20 2.3. Background of the CDW study ............................................................................................................ 28 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 30 3.1. Cost Benefit Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 30 3.2. Data sources and overall assumptions ................................................................................................ 31 3.3. Sensitivity analsyis and evaluation ...................................................................................................... 35 4. Paper and Packaging Waste ......................................................................................................................... 39 4.1. Project and reference case.................................................................................................................. 39 4.1.1. Project rationale ............................................................................................................................. 39 4.1.2. Reference case ................................................................................................................................ 41 4.1.3. Shifts in the Financial Flows ............................................................................................................ 41 4.1.4. Project definition ............................................................................................................................ 46 4.2. Cost-benefit analysis Parma ................................................................................................................ 46 4.2.1. Project definition Parma ................................................................................................................. 46 4.2.2. Identification of costs and benefits for PPW collection in Parma .................................................. 49 4.2.3. CBA Results Parma .......................................................................................................................... 53 4.2.4. Sensitivity analysis .........................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bijlage 3A Samenwerkingen
    Aan de gemeenteraad van Tubbergen Inlichtingen bij Zaaknummer De raadsgriffier 3974 Mevrouw H.J.M.J. van Limbeek-ter Haar Bijlagen: 1 Onderwerp Verzenddatum: 5 januari 2018 Raadsbrief 2017 nr. 47 Geachte raadsleden, Waarover gaat deze brief? In onze vergadering van 19 december 2017 hebben wij het navolgende onderwerp besproken: Opheffing Bedrijfsvoeringsregeling Twentebedrijf Ons besluit Wij hebben in die vergadering besloten: In te stemmen met het voorstel om de Bedrijfsvoeringsregeling Twentebedrijf op te heffen Korte toelichting Op 27 oktober 2016 is besloten de rechtspersoon Twentebedrijf voorlopig niet met taken te vullen. Dit besluit over een andere ontwikkelroute Twentebedrijf betekende op hoofdlijnen het labelen van bestaande samenwerkingen, het uitbouwen van bestaande samenwerkingen, en het verder brengen van nieuwe samenwerkingsinitiatieven met de merknaam Twentebedrijf. Er is niet langer een meerwaarde voor de bestaande, aparte rechtspersoon Twentebedrijf, waartoe eerder besloten is. De deelnemers aan de regeling stemmen in met het voorstel om de Bedrijfsvoeringsregeling Twentebedrijf op te heffen. Het opheffen van de regeling is een feit wanneer de colleges, respectievelijk het dagelijks bestuur, van twee derde van de deelnemers daartoe besluiten. Inmiddels is gebleken dat sowieso twee derde van de deelnemers met de opheffing heeft ingestemd. Nadere toelichting Het besluit van 27 oktober 2016 over de ontwikkelroute Twentebedrijf betekent op hoofdlijnen het labelen van bestaande samenwerkingen, het uitbouwen van bestaande samenwerkingen, het verder brengen van nieuwe samenwerkingsinitiatieven via coalitions of the willing met als perspectief het ontwikkelen van productieve (4K’s) samenwerkingen. Op 12 juli 2017 hebben wij in onze bestuursvergadering, via een voortgangsbericht van de Kring van Twentse secretarissen, kennis genomen van de voortgang op een aantal samenwerkingen en initiatieven.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Framework for the Assessment and Management of Sustainable Innovation
    CASI-F COMMON FRAMEWORK FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT OF SUSTAINABLE INNOVATION Mobilisation and Mutual Learning (MML) Action Plans: Mainstreaming Science in Society Actions in Research This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for Research, Technological Development and Demonstration under grant agreement no 612113. Organisation responsible for the Project start date: deliverable January 2014 UNIMAN Duration: Authors: 42 months Rafael Popper Guillermo Velasco Coordinating organisation: The University of Manchester ARC Fund - Applied Research and Communications Fund, Bulgaria Monika Popper Futures Diamond Dissemination level: Public Date of delivery 2017 How to cite this report Popper, R., Velasco, G. and Popper, M. (2017). CASI-F: Common Framework for the Assessment and Management of Sustainable Innovation, CASI project report. Deliverable 6.2. Corresponding author [email protected] Important note In order to further increase the impact and outreach of CASI-F, the authors have agreed to publish several verbatim extracts of Section 5 of this report as part of Chapter 3 of the following CASI Annual Policy report edited by The University of Manchester: • Popper, R. and Velasco, G. (eds.) (2017). Sustainable Innovation Policy Advice, CASI project report. Deliverable 7.2. ISBN: 978-0-946007-34-9 © European Union, 2017 Photos: ©Shutterstock, ©Freepik, ©Unsplash Reproduction permitted, provided the source is acknowledged. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the position or opinion of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on its behalf is responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this publication or for any errors that may remain in the texts, despite the care taken in preparing them.
    [Show full text]
  • SUSTAINABLE REPAIR SERVICES the Products Can Be Claimed at the Ser- Rough Cost Estimates Have Been Project 3: 22/2008* Project 4: 21/2008* Vice Point
    PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT FIGURES/DATA/FACTS REPAMOBIL 1 SUSTAINABILITY LABEL 4 PROJECT PARTNERS FOR EASY-TO-REPAIR PRODUCTS Project 1 FORSCHUNGSFORUM RepaMobil, Graz 2007 1/2008 ■ This project aimed to mitigate exi- Graz University of Technology participa- bile receiving point. The optimum ■ The experience of repair technicians Project Coordinator: Matthias Neitsch sting market barriers in the field of hou- ted in the project. Five service providers variant for service providers also tells us that electrical and electronic Arge Abfallvermeidung, Ressourcenscho- nung und nachhaltige Entwicklung GmbH, sehold-related product-service systems – of the repair network Graz contributed consists in a mobile service point appliances are increasingly designed in Joanneum Research Forschungsgesellschaft- especially repair services – by means of experience from practice. In addition to with their own vehicle and Repa - such a way that repair becomes more mbH / Institut für Nachhaltige Techniken new organizational structures. The crea- a social repair shop, participants inclu- Mobil staff. This model should be and more difficult. The sustainability und Systeme – JOINTS tion of service points at locations with ded small enterprises working in the combined with the virtual variant. label aims to motivate manufacturers Photo: die umweltberatung Project 2 high customer frequency is to bring fields of electronics, EDP, and bicycle to reverse this trend and have their Wiederverwendbarkeit von Elekro(nik)- repair services closer to the customer. repair.
    [Show full text]
  • MEASURES of WASTE PREVENTION Waste Prevention Programme of the City of Graz
    : Igor Yaruta - Fotolia.com Image MEASURES OF WASTE PREVENTION Waste Prevention Programme of the City of Graz CITY of GRAZ Environmental Office | Schmiedgasse 26/IV | 8011 Graz Phone +43 316 872-4302 | www.umwelt.graz.at Measures of waste prevention Waste Prevention Programme of the City of Graz CITY of GRAZ Environmental Office Department for Waste Management Controlling Kaiserfeldgasse 1/4 │ 8011 Graz Contact: [email protected] :Prepared by Association for Waste Prevention A‐8020 Graz, Puchstrasse 41 Contact: Berthold Schleich [email protected] Introduction Dear Reader! Waste. Everyone produces it, every day and in ever rising amounts. Currently, 560 kilograms are produced per person per year in Graz, and the trend is increasing. Measures for waste prevention are more in demand than ever before, as growing amounts of waste pollute our air, our water, the animals and the soil. Due to new technologies and the merging of creative approaches with the economy, we now have numerous chances and opportunities to no longer treat our waste as an annoying left-over, but as a precious raw material. We can use this resource sensibly, or even more sensibly, not produce it in the first place. Whether it’s an old cooking spoon, yesterday’s newspaper, an empty can of goulash, or a used plastic bag; whether it is worn-out furniture, bicycles, electric devices or the 50s dress with a floral design – for many, not needed things, there are just as many possibilities to re-use, re-design, exchange or simply to repair and pass them on. On the one hand, this catalogue shows what the City of Graz already offers in the areas Reduce, ReUse and Recycle.
    [Show full text]
  • 'EQUAL Opportunities for All': Delivering the Lisbon Strategy
    EQUAL opportunities for all Delivering the Lisbon Strategy through social innovation and transnational cooperation European Commission EQUAL opportunities for all Delivering the Lisbon Strategy through social innovation and transnational cooperation European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities Unit B.4 Manuscript completed in October 2008 Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission may be held responsible for the use that may be made of the information contained in this publication. 1 2 3 1 : © Carl Cordonnier Daily Life 2 : © Carl Cordonnier Daily Life 3 : © Carl Cordonnier Daily Life For any use or reproduction of photos which are not under European Communities copyright, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holder(s). Equal Website: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/index_en.cfm Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union Freephone number (*) : 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed. A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server (http://europa.eu). © European Communities, 2008 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Cataloguing data as well as an abstract can be found at the end of this publication. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008 ISBN 978-92-79-10153-3 DOI 10.2767/5913 Printed in Belgium PRINTED ON WHITE CHLORINE -FREE P A P ER Foreword Just as companies in the business world invest five per cent of their budgets in research and innovation to maintain their competitive edge, the European Social Fund (ESF) has been allo- cating five per cent of its budget to trying out new policy approaches and improving delivery systems.
    [Show full text]
  • SK Plasticfreedanube
    PlasticFreeDanube Macro plastic waste in and along the Danube © BOKU / Sebastian Pessenlehner European Regional Development Fund PlasticFreeDanube Project Facts Duration: 1 October 2017 – 30 September 2020 5 Project partners, 18 strategic partners Funding programme: Interreg V-A Slovakia-Austria 2014-2020 Budget: EUR 1.23 Mil. / EU-Funding (ERDF): EUR 1.05 Mil. Page 2 Pictures: Creative Commons CC0 / Pixabay PlasticFreeDanube Project Partners Lead Partner – Institute of Waste Management (ABF-BOKU), University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Austria Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and River Research (IWA), University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna (BOKU), Austria via donau – Austrian Waterway Company, Austria RepaNet o.z., Slovakia PISAS – Polymer Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Slovakia Donau-Auen National Park, Austria Page 3 Pictures: Creative Commons CC0 / Pixabay Strategic Partners Austria Federal Ministry of Sustainability and Tourism (BMNT) Generation Blue Austrian Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT) City of Vienna, MA 45 – Water Management Regional Government of Lower Austria Environment Agency Austria Environmental Association of Lower Austria Environmental Education Austria Page 4 Strategic Partners Slovakia Association of the municipalities Horného Žitného ostrova (ZOHZO) Vodohospodárska výstavba, štátny podnik V srdci Európy, o.z. (NGO) Enviwork, s.r.o. Slovak Chemical Society SEA – Science and Education Agency ENVIDOM – Association
    [Show full text]
  • Indeling Van Nederland in 40 COROP-Gebieden Gemeentelijke Indeling Van Nederland Op 1 Januari 2019
    Indeling van Nederland in 40 COROP-gebieden Gemeentelijke indeling van Nederland op 1 januari 2019 Legenda COROP-grens Het Hogeland Schiermonnikoog Gemeentegrens Ameland Woonkern Terschelling Het Hogeland 02 Noardeast-Fryslân Loppersum Appingedam Delfzijl Dantumadiel 03 Achtkarspelen Vlieland Waadhoeke 04 Westerkwartier GRONINGEN Midden-Groningen Oldambt Tytsjerksteradiel Harlingen LEEUWARDEN Smallingerland Veendam Westerwolde Noordenveld Tynaarlo Pekela Texel Opsterland Súdwest-Fryslân 01 06 Assen Aa en Hunze Stadskanaal Ooststellingwerf 05 07 Heerenveen Den Helder Borger-Odoorn De Fryske Marren Weststellingwerf Midden-Drenthe Hollands Westerveld Kroon Schagen 08 18 Steenwijkerland EMMEN 09 Coevorden Hoogeveen Medemblik Enkhuizen Opmeer Noordoostpolder Langedijk Stede Broec Meppel Heerhugowaard Bergen Drechterland Urk De Wolden Hoorn Koggenland 19 Staphorst Heiloo ALKMAAR Zwartewaterland Hardenberg Castricum Beemster Kampen 10 Edam- Volendam Uitgeest 40 ZWOLLE Ommen Heemskerk Dalfsen Wormerland Purmerend Dronten Beverwijk Lelystad 22 Hattem ZAANSTAD Twenterand 20 Oostzaan Waterland Oldebroek Velsen Landsmeer Tubbergen Bloemendaal Elburg Heerde Dinkelland Raalte 21 HAARLEM AMSTERDAM Zandvoort ALMERE Hellendoorn Almelo Heemstede Zeewolde Wierden 23 Diemen Harderwijk Nunspeet Olst- Wijhe 11 Losser Epe Borne HAARLEMMERMEER Gooise Oldenzaal Weesp Hillegom Meren Rijssen-Holten Ouder- Amstel Huizen Ermelo Amstelveen Blaricum Noordwijk Deventer 12 Hengelo Lisse Aalsmeer 24 Eemnes Laren Putten 25 Uithoorn Wijdemeren Bunschoten Hof van Voorst Teylingen
    [Show full text]
  • Toewijzingen Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds Overijssel 2E Kwartaal 2017
    Toewijzingen Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds Overijssel 2e kwartaal 2017 ALMELO 40016819 Concertkoor Sursum Corda Almelo 1.550 Overijssel uitvoering Stabat Mater van A. Dvorák 40016819 Concertkoor Sursum Corda Almelo 1.000 Fonds Kleine Culturele Initiatieven uitvoering Stabat Mater van A. Dvorák 40016873 Toonkunst Almelo 525 Overijssel uitvoering Mis van Herman Finkers en andere werken 40016873 Toonkunst Almelo 1.000 Bredius Fonds uitvoering Mis van Herman Finkers en andere werken 40016904 Stichting Museum voor Heemkunde Almelo 2.500 Overijssel filmportretten Het Verzet Kraakt Totaal ALMELO 6.575 ARNHEM 40016937 Stichting Muziek bij de Buren 7.500 Overijssel festival Muziek bij de Buren Overijssel 2017 Totaal ARNHEM 7.500 DALFSEN 40016813 Cigarbox Henri & The New American Farmers 1.300 Fonds Kleine Culturele Initiatieven musical Join the cigarbox revolution 40016853 Historische Vereniging Ni'jluusn van vrogger 1.000 Wim en Nini H. Fonds publicatie TOENDERTIED 40016853 Historische Vereniging Ni'jluusn van vrogger 500 Overijssel publicatie TOENDERTIED 40016943 Stichting Landschap Overijssel 3.000 Overijssel symposium Groene Parels van Overijssel. Verhaal van historische landschapsparken Totaal DALFSEN 5.800 DEVENTER 40015942 Stichting Met Man en Muis 500 Overijssel theaterproducties over de oorlog en de Jodenvervolging 40015942 Stichting Met Man en Muis 700 Fonds Kleine Culturele Initiatieven theaterproducties over de oorlog en de Jodenvervolging 40016855 Stichting ID Theatre Company 5.000 Overijssel theaterproductie ID 40016870 Stichting Deventer
    [Show full text]
  • D6.4 Social Innovation in Environment and Climate Change
    SI-DRIVE Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change SOCIAL INNOVATION IN ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE: SUMMARY REPORT POLICY FIELD ENVIRONMENT D6.4 ENVIRONMENT June 2017 Project acronym SI-DRIVE Project title Social Innovation: Driving Force of Social Change Grand Agreement number 612870 Coordination TUDO – Technische Universität Dortmund Funding Scheme Collaborative project; Large scale integration project Due date of deliverable 06/2017 Actual submission date 06/2017 Start date of the project 1st January2014 Project duration 48 month Work package WP 6 Environment Lead beneficiary for this deliverable AIT Authors Doris Schartinger, Beatrix Wepner, Thomas Andersson, Qammar Abbas, Desislava Asenova, Zoya Damianova, Adriana Dimova, Viorel Ariton, Chris Hannum, Sencer Eker, Antonius Schröder, Marthe Zirngiebl Dissemination level Public (PU) This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 612870. CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................. 1 2 The SI DRIVE Project ............................................................................................ 4 2.1 Theoretical framework ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.2 Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Overijsselaars Gezocht
    Overijsselaars gezocht Inhoud 1. Overijsselaars gezocht ............................................................................. 7 Inleiding ................................................................................................................................... 7 Vormen van onderzoek ............................................................................................................ 8 Vastleggen van gegevens .......................................................................................................... 9 Is er al onderzoek gedaan? ..................................................................................................... 10 Genealogie en internet ........................................................................................................... 12 Archiefbewaarplaatsen in Overijssel ....................................................................................... 13 Archiefbezoek: hoe gaat dat? ................................................................................................. 15 Literatuur ............................................................................................................................... 16 Online verwijzingen ................................................................................................................ 16 2. Het begin van het archiefonderzoek ...................................................... 17 Inleiding ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tubbergen Hellendoorn \
    Gemeente / Gemeente Losser Tubbergen Hellendoorn \ f e rn c c n I e gemeente Din kelland R /j S S C H - Ho / 1 6 f^ ^ GEMEENTEWERDEN College van Gedeputeerde Staten van Overijssel Postbus 10078 Dai 8000GB ZWOLLE ontv.: - 3 APR. 2008 Routing 1 1 jBijL: | Afdeling: PBC Uw brief van: OhTnufnmer:"TOOF073B5r Bezoekadres: Burg. Hoogklimmerstraat 2, Denekamp Uw kenmerk: Behandeld door: dhr. E.C.B. Hoitink Denekamp, 31 maart 2006 Doorkiesnummer: 0541-854 182 Bijlage: Onderwerp: verzoek uittreding Plusregio Twente Geacht college, De besturen van de gemeenten Dinkelland, Hellendoorn, Losser, Rijssen-Holten, Tubbergen en Wierden hebben besloten om uw college met toepassing van artikel XIX, vierde lid, van de Wijzigingswet Wgr-plus, te verzoeken om te bewilligen in uittreding uit de Plusregio Twente van genoemde gemeenten. Wij verzoeken u ons een nadere en redelijke termijn te gunnen voor de onderbouwing van ons uittredingsverzoek. Wij vertrouwen erop u hiermee vooralsnog voldoende te hebben gemformeerd en zien uw reactie met belangstelling tegemoet. Hoogachtend, neester en Wethouders van Dinkelland, Burgemeester en Wethouders van Hellendoorn, spgetaris, ft De burgemeqster, De secretaris, De bupgemeester, )rs. A.BAM. Darner Mr. F.P.M. Willeme Drs. J. van der Noordt Ir^JJ. van Overbeeke neester en Wethouders van Losser, Burgemeester en Wethouders van Rijssen-Holten, smeester, De s^retaris_ De Drs. mr. B. Koelewijn Burgemeester en Wethouders/tan Tubbergen, rgemeester en Wethouders van Wier _De secretaris, Dett rgenpeester, retaris, De ^r0femee(gter,
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Background Analysis Pp6 Styria
    REGIONAL BACKGROUND ANALYSIS PP6 STYRIA Contribution to Interreg Europe Project SUBTRACT Author: Dr. Ingrid Winter Office of the Regional Government of Styria Directorate 14 Water Management, Resources and Sustainability Department Waste and Resource Management [email protected] www.abfallwirtschaft.steiermark.at 30.04.2020 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Regional Overview ................................................................................................................ 3 Geographical Coverage and Population.............................................................................................................. 3 Waste Management................................................................................................................................................ 4 Legislation and Responsibilities .......................................................................................................................... 4 Municipal Waste Collection ................................................................................................................................ 6 Municipal Waste Streams and Treatment .......................................................................................................... 6 Reuse Activities – Historical Outline ................................................................................................................... 8 Public Perception of Reuse ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]