Proper waste management can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU

Currently, EU waste management lowers EU annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by around 1%, in contrast with global waste management which is a net emitter. As much as 83% of the EU emissions saving is driven by highly successful metal waste management. This largely offsets the emissions from managing major waste types such as plastics, textile and biowaste, as their recycling rate is relatively low - they often tend to end up in mixed waste, an important contributor to emissions.

These are some of the main findings published in the scientific paper "Comprehensive assessment of environmental and economic impacts of the entire EU waste management system", a research collaboration between the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission and the Technical University of Denmark.

The study bridges a gap between generated and collected waste, considers all waste streams, and applies Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC). It quantifies the environmental impacts across 16 categories (e.g. climate change, particulate matter, ozone depletion) and the economic costs linked to the treatment and disposal of all 16 waste types. Finally, the authors also identify areas for improvement.

The study highlights the need for more efforts to reduce misallocations of recyclable waste to mixed waste. It provides a valuable tool for assessing scenarios, making investment decisions, and advancing the EU's circular economy objectives.

Quantifying waste generation

Data on the amount of waste collected in the EU is monitored by Eurostat. In this context, it is key to monitor how much waste is generated to assess whether sorting (household and non-household) waste and its collection are effective.

To give an example for household waste: when an individual drops a plastic tray in the mixed waste container instead of in the appropriate one, the material will not be recorded as plastic waste collection. In the end, about 50% of the waste generated by householdsends up in the mixed bin.

All in all, the amount of waste separated and collected properly, at household level but not only (this also happens with many other waste streams such as construction and demolition waste, commercial and agricultural waste, etc.) is much lower than what is actually generated. In other words, many recyclables are not correctly separated and collected.

For plastic waste, the statistics monitors plastic packaging recycling only, of which 41% is currently separately collected and sent for recycling. Around 22% of the post-consumer textile waste is separately collected and sent for recycling . Less than half of the biowaste generated in 2017 in the EU was separately collected and sent for recycling.

Greenhouse gas emissions of waste management in the EU

The study found that waste management in the EU saves 17 kg CO2-eq per each tonne of waste managed, i.e. about 34 million t CO2-eq. annually. This is a mere 1% saving when compared to the total annual GHG emissions of the EU economy (ca. 3800 million t CO2-eq. in 2020), though in contrast when compared to the rest of the world where waste management incurs net GHG emissions. For comparison, the UN estimates about 250 kg CO2-eq. emitted per tonne of municipal wasteglobally managed.

While management of metals saves emissions, the management of other waste types needs targeted improvements.

Critical waste streams that need policy attention from a GHG emission perspective

Plastic, biowaste, mineral waste, textile, sludge, other hazardous waste, non-hazardous chemical wastes, and soil are the material streams for which the GHG emissions from management far exceed the GHG savings associated with their recycling or other forms of recovery.

Plastic, biowaste, and textile waste have low collection rates leading to high amounts of misallocation in the mixed waste. In turn, the collected mixed waste becomes a significant contributor to GHG emissions due to misallocation of recyclables and subsequent GHG emissions originating at landfills and incinerators where it is mostly disposed of.

From a cost perspective, all materials incur net societal costs except for metals, for which margins for improvement also exist (notably in terms of scrap quality management). Mineral waste, biowaste, and plastic waste are the most expensive to manage. The study's conclusions highlight the need for improving the collection and sorting of waste, particularly for plastics, textiles, and biowaste.

Costs of waste management in the EU

The study finds that the societal cost - inclusive of internal costs, related to the different steps of waste management, and environmental external costs, which were monetised - of the waste management system is EUR 68 per tonne of waste managed, corresponding to EUR 136 billion annually or EUR 304 per citizen.

This means that waste management in the EU is still far from achieving a positive net benefit: the societal value extracted from waste does not compensate for the societal costs incurred for managing it. The only materials for which a net societal cost benefit is achieved are metals.

For comparison, the UN estimates the societal costs of (municipal) waste management globally at about EUR 149 per tonne managed, which is more than twice the EU's entire waste management cost. While the EU performs better than the rest of the world, a truly sustainable circular system would achieve positive net benefits at societal level as the material would be recirculated in the economy, and its value maintained.

Life Cycle assessment and costing

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Life Cycle Costing (LCC) methodologies were used to account for the impacts and costs throughout the entire life cycle of the waste, from the moment waste is generated to the moment it is disposed of, including all related treatments and their emissions (e.g. collection, transport, sorting, incineration, recycling, landfilling). On top, the methodologies account for the savings achieved through virtuous management: when waste is recycled, new material is produced that replaces virgin materials, which otherwise are extracted and produced. This translates into environmental savings (e.g. GHGs) and cost savings (revenues from material sale). Similarly, when waste is used for energy, environmental and cost savings also occur.

Where does EU legislation stand regarding recycling?

Managing waste is one of the key elements of the EU's environmental policy. The EU has many laws to address different types of waste. Key among these are the new Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) and the Single-Use Plastics Directive. Both set ambitious targets for the recycling and reuse of plastic packaging, underscoring the EU's commitment to significantly reducing plastic waste. This legislation not only aim to minimise environmental damage but also promote sustainable practices across industries.

The EU's agenda extends beyond plastics, including with the upcoming Circular Economy Act which aims to establish a Single Market for secondary raw materials, increase the supply of high-quality recycled materials and stimulate demand for these materials in the EU. This initiative reflects a broader commitment to transition towards a circular economy, where waste is minimised, and resources are used and reused efficiently.

Meanwhile, the EU Waste Framework Directive mandates Member States to implement separate collection systems for biowaste and textile waste, setting the stage for achieving a recycling target of 65% of municipal waste by 2035.

Related content

Comprehensive assessment of environmental and economic impacts of the entire EU waste management system

Waste and recycling

Public consultation on the Circular Economy Act

Details