OTROS CONVENIOS Y ACUERDOS DE COLABORACIÓN

of waste generated or emissions of GHG. The model includes a wide range of parameters for waste quantities, waste composition, waste management, methane recovery, emission factors, etc. Some of these parameters are more uncertain than others. The results pre- sented in this paper should therefore be interpreted carefully as the result may change if another set of parameters are applied.

The model includes 27 countries which all have different waste management conditions, and for some countries it may have been easier to collect detailed information than for oth- ers. However, it should be kept in mind that the objective is to show the consequences for Europe, which is why many of the assumptions on emission factors, methane recovery etc. are European rather than national data. This should also be seen as a strength of the model: the GHG emissions have been estimated using a similar approach for all 27 countries which should make the estimations more suitable for comparisons.

In this section, we present a limited number of sensitivity analyses. The first one is the level of methane recovery rate as it has turned out to have a substantial influence on the net GHG emissions. The second analysis is based on a different economic baseline scenario, namely the one for the OECD Environmental Outlook.

8.1. Methane recovery rate

A 20% limit in recovery of methane from landfills is assumed in accordance with the IPPC Guideline. However, this limit is considered a technical limit in 2006. An alternative sce- nario was set up using a maximum recovery rate of 30% by 2020. Data was extrapolated from 20% in 2006 to 30% in 2020 for all EU-15 countries and the EU-12 countries with high recovery rates. In the remaining cases, a 20% maximum is assumed in 2020 and 30% in 2030. Table 8.1 provides an overview of the assumptions in the baseline scenario and in this sensitivity analysis scenario.

Table 8.1 Methane recovery rates assumed for the New EU-12 in the baseline scenario and sensitivity analysis

Countries Baseline scenario

Maximum CH4 recovery of 20%

Sensitivity analysis scenario Maximum CH4 recovery of 30%

BG, LT,PL, SK, RO Methane recovery starts in 2013

at 2%. 20% reached in 2020

Extrapolation from 20% in 2020 to 30% in 2030

CZ, EE, LV Extrapolated to 20% If 20% is reached, extrapolation to

30% in 2030

HU Extrapolated to 20% in 2020 Extrapolation from 20% in 2020 to

30% in 2030

CZ, SI 20% reached in 2006 Extrapolation to 30% in 2030

Furthermore, the emissions have been modelled using the recovery rates reported by the countries to UNFCCC. As shown in the Annex of EEA (2007), nine Member States have methane recovery rates between 38% and 72%13.

The results of these two scenarios are shown in Figure 8.2 in comparison with the baseline scenario (max 20% recovery). In the 20% scenario, the net emissions decreases more

steeply from 2007 and end as a negative value of nearly 900 000 million tonnes of CO2-

equivalents in 2020. In the scenario that follows the country reports, we see a steeper de- crease in net emissions from 1993. In 2010 the net emissions become zero and reach a negative value of nearly 12 million tonnes in 2020.

Figure 8.2 Net emissions of greenhouse gases at different levels of methane recovery, EU-27

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 M il li o n to n n es C O 2-eq (+ e mi ssi o n s) / (- savi n g s) Max 20% CH4 recovery Country reports to UNFCCC Max 30% CH4 recovery

8.2. OECD Baseline scenario

As part of the preparation for the next OECD Environmental Outlook, the OECD has pro- jected the global economic development for the period 2005-2030 (OECD, 2006).

The OECD baseline scenario includes a projection for ‘Europe’ only. Table 8.2 shows the growth rates for the OECD baseline scenario and the DG TREN baseline scenario pre- sented in section 3. The projection of waste generation and GHG emissions presented in this paper is based on the DG TREN baseline scenario.

The OECD baseline scenario assumes a continuation of recent rapid growth rates for the first five years. After 2010 the economic growth is assumed to decelerate. In comparison the DG TREN baseline has lower short-term growth rates for the EU-27 and slightly higher after 2010. There are, however, considerable differences between the EU-15 and the 12 new Member States.

Table 8.2 GDP annual growth rates

Coverage Source 2005-10 2010-20

EU-27 DG TREN 2.0% 2.3%

EU-15 DG TREN 1.8% 2.1%

EU-12 DG TREN 3.8% 4.3%

Europe OECD 2.5% 2.1%

We have estimated the generation of municipal waste using the OECD baseline and keep- ing other model parameters constant. The growth rates for the private final consumption is assumed to be 0.1% lower than the GDP growth rates. In this analysis not all countries’

waste generation will be affected, only the ones where the waste generation is explained via the economic activity variables (see Table 4.2 and 4.3). The result is shown in Table 8.3. For the EU-27 the generation in the ETC/RWM baseline is projected to be 0.7% lower than the OECD baseline in 2010 and 1.6% higher in 2020. This result covers the fact that more waste will be produced in the ETC/RWM baseline due to higher growth rates in the new Member States.

Table 8.3 Comparison of municipal waste generation in the ETC/RWM and the OECD Baseline scenario

2010 2020

ETC/RWM projection, million tonnes _{290 336}

OECD baseline, million tonnes _{292 331}

EU-27

Difference, % _{-0.7% 1.6%}

ETC/RWM projection, million tonnes 248 280

OECD baseline, million tonnes 253 286

EU-15

Difference, % _{-2.0% -2.1%}

ETC/RWM projection, million tonnes 42 56

OECD baseline, million tonnes 39 45

EU-12