The matter in summary: Researchers at NTNU have examined Norwegian waste management for the past ten years and found that public statistics on recycling are not correct. According to the researchers, in some years we have recovered 40 percent less than what is stated in public statistics. In 2009, 49 per cent of all waste was incinerated, while ten years later the figure had increased to 65 per cent. The researchers believe that we are developing a combustion economy, instead of working towards the big goal of a circular economy. The study only deals with household waste, which makes up 25 per cent of the total in Norway, and the researchers believe that the statistics for all other waste are even worse. The researchers propose legislative changes and new national strategies for the waste sector, including stricter requirements for documentation of the effect of material recycling. The summary is made by an AI service from OpenAI. The content is quality assured by news’s journalists before publication. Your waste drawer is full of various cans. In one of them you throw away the remaining waste – in the other the food waste. And the thought is good. Because that’s how it should be done. But do you really know what happens to your rubbish after it has been sorted? Researchers at NTNU in Trondheim have tried to find out. They have followed the process from start to finish, and have examined Norwegian waste management for the past ten years. The results of the work are published here, and the findings are not only good. Together with colleagues at NTNU, Kim Rainer Mattson has followed the afterlife of our rubbish. Right from when it is delivered and processed, until it ends up as burnt particles in the atmosphere, buried in a landfill, as soil, compost, fertilizer or as materials in new products. Photo: Jøte Toftaker / news – Reason for concern The study shows, among other things, that the public statistics on recycling are not correct. As a result, neither we, politicians nor decision-makers get the right information. In some years, we have actually recovered 40 per cent less than what is stated in public statistics, the NTNU researchers say. In the years 2009 and 2019, Statistics Norway (SSB) reported a material recycling rate of 44 and 41 per cent respectively. It is significantly higher than the figures from NTNU show, which are 28 and 29 per cent. – All this gives cause for concern because it creates a false impression that we are on the right track. That’s what Kim Rainer Mattson says. He is a PhD candidate at the Department of Energy and Process Engineering. If things end up in the bins that shouldn’t be there, this has negative consequences for recycling. Photo: Jøte Toftaker / news More and more are being burned The reasons for the problems are several: insufficient data, imprecise measurement methods and a lack of transparency from the return companies, explains Mattson. In 2009, 49 percent of all waste that was collected and treated was incinerated. Ten years later, the figure had increased to 65 per cent, the researcher continues. – In reality, we are involved in developing a combustion economy, instead of working purposefully with the transition to the big goal which is a circular economy. The NTNU analysis only considers household waste, which makes up 25 percent of the total in Norway. And if the statistics here are bad, according to Matsson, they are absolutely miserable for all the other waste that is created in industry and business. – Then we are a bit deceived Morten Guldal lives in Trondheim. He believes in recycling, and sorts his own rubbish. – I think it is important to recycle if it really has an effect, so we follow up as best we can. But when he is presented with the findings from NTNU, he reacts like this: – It doesn’t sound so good. Then we get a little tricked. This is a job we do, says Guldal to news. Morten Guldal likes to recycle rubbish. Today he has cleaned out the garage and is on his way to the recycling facility at Hegstadmoen in Trondheim. Photo: Jøte Toftaker / news Different concepts and calculations Camilla Skjerpen is a senior adviser in the section for energy, environment and transport statistics at Statistics Norway. She says the NTNU study has a different delineation than the statistics from Statistics Norway, with which they compare. – When NTNU starts from figures with different boundaries from our own, the results will also vary. It concerns, among other things, which waste is included in the calculations. Skjerpen explains that they use the word recycling rate to refer to the amount of waste that is sent for material recycling, and not the amount that is actually recycled. – Statistics Norway’s international reporting obligation in the area of waste requires reporting of quantities that enter the facilities, and not what is actually processed. In Norway, like other countries, we are unfortunately not at the point where we have the opportunity to map the extent of what is actually recovered yet. She further says that it is a wish to get there in the future. Camilla Skjerpen explains that one of Statistics Norway’s tasks is to provide a comprehensive overview of the waste situation in Norway. Statistics Norway publishes several waste statistics, of which household waste is only one of the statistics. Photo: Per Kristian Lie Lowe Taco Friday and rubbish sorting Rubbish sorting is complicated, and therein lies part of the problem. Of the plastic you sort, approximately 50 percent is recycled, the figures from the study show. – You can be clever, but when it is transported to a sorting facility, it gets mixed up with other plastics and becomes contaminated. It is often burned, and there is a lot of waste, says researcher Kim Rainer Mattson. He gives us an example – namely the packaging for tacolefsa: – Here part of the package is plastic and the other consists of composite material. This means that you may be able to recover half the package, but then you have to split it up. One part should go in residual waste, while the other should go in plastic. Not many people know this, and I would not claim that the labeling on the package is particularly good either, says the researcher. Kim Rainer Mattson explains why the stated recycling rate is not necessarily correct. A number of things happen with the rubbish which are not taken into account in the calculations. Therefore, Mattson believes that manufacturers must take more responsibility to make it easier for people to dispose of rubbish correctly. But there are also more people who have to take action. – Furthermore, the authorities must work for increased transparency around how the waste is treated. The requirements for documentation of the effect of material recycling must be stricter. The NTNU researchers propose legislative changes and new national strategies for the waste sector. Everything has to work together. Life cycle emissions of greenhouse gases must be included. The same must be different targets for sorting and recycling. – This way we can get an overall picture of how Norwegian waste policy actually works. Although the numbers speak a little grim, Mattson encourages everyone to sort their trash anyway. Several findings in the NTNU study Statistics Norway uses “recycling rate” as an indicator, or a measure, of how we approach a circular economy. It is not particularly useful for the design of waste policy, the researchers believe. It neither captures energy use along the way, which end products we end up with, or what we replace from the original material. The researchers further believe that the Environment Agency’s calculations of greenhouse gas emissions from the waste system are based on imprecise figures: – The Directorate reports emissions related to waste management in Norway, and does not take into account emissions that occur outside the country’s borders, says Kim Rainer Mattson. 15-20 percent of Norwegian residual waste is sent to Sweden, where it is incinerated. The emissions from Norwegian waste that is burned abroad are not included in the official Norwegian emissions statistics. We also send rubbish that is, for example, stored in Finland or incinerated in Germany. Source: NTNU – Kicking in open doors Norsk Industri organizes private recycling companies in Norway. Here, Gunnar Grini is subject manager for the external environment and branch manager for the recycling industry. He says transparency is not always that simple. – It is probably not always that the companies will be able to prioritize finding all the data that the researchers want, and some information will also be confidential. But our doors are open to the NTNU environment, and we are happy to contribute where we can, he says to news. Gunnar Grini is employed by Norsk Industri, and is branch manager for recycling. Photo: Norsk Industri Grini has the following to say about the study: – When it comes to the main finding, we may feel that the researchers are kicking in open doors. The EU’s new framework directive for waste, which was adopted in 2018, harmonized how the countries must report on material recycling of waste. In the years the NTNU study covers, Norway reported on waste “delivered for material recycling”. From now on, actual material recycling must be reported. This will mean that the reporting will be more demanding going forward, but also that the statistics will be better, explains Grini. He believes this will provide a better basis for assessing how we will achieve the goals in the waste policy going forward. Published 08.10.2024, at 08.44
ttn-69
Believes Norwegian waste policy has failed – recycles less than the statistics say – news Trøndelag – Local news, TV and radio
