Omkostninger og økonomiske sikkerhedsstillelse ved deponering af affald

Summery and conclusions

This report has been prepared for the purpose of Danish implementation of the Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste, as the report in particular deals with the implementation of the Directive’s articles on financial security or any other equivalent for costs in relation with the planning, construction, operation, closure and after-care of landfills.

It has been the purpose of the project to investigate options and types of security and to determine the costs that must be included to comply with the requirements of the directive.

Background

According to the Article 10 of the Council Directive 199/31/EF on the landfill of waste, it shall be ensured that all costs involved in the setting up and operation of a landfill site, including as far as possible the cost of the financial security and the estimated cost of closure and after-care of the site for a period of at least 30 years shall be covered by the price to be charged by the operator for disposal of waste (the landfill fee).

In Article 8 of the Directive, it is also stipulated that a landfill permit is not issued, if the applicant, before adequate provisions, by way of financial security or any other equivalent to ensure that the obligations (including after-care provisions) arising under the permit are discharged and that the closure procedures required by Article 13 are followed. This security or its equivalent shall be kept as long as required by supervision and monitoring of the site in accordance with Article 13 d).

The basis has been that the security shall include all unpredictable costs resulting from environmental impacts from the time where the first load of waste has been received on a landfill site to the expiry of the after-care period. Furthermore, all predictable costs in connection with closure and after-care shall be included. When calculating the size of the costs, differentiation is made between four different categories of waste for which individual calculations have been made.

It is assumed that a landfill is divided into separate cells that are handled individually as to security. For each cell, the security must cover both the operational phase and the closure as well as the after-care period. The operational phase for a landfill cell is here assumed to last 10 years; the closure is assumed to take place within a short period at the end of the operational phase. The after-care period is in general assumed to last 30 years.

According to Article 8, a, iv) of the Directive, Member States may declare, at their own option, that security does not apply to landfills for inert waste. In consideration of the character of inert waste as waste which is not expected to lead to contamination of the environment, an after-care period of only 5 years has been assumed for inert waste.

Risk aspects

At first, critical aspects at the landfill of waste are described with a view to estimating the size of the costs to be covered by the security. The risk profile and scenarios on damage at different landfill categories are described. It is concluded that for  landfill cells for non-hazardous waste, a certain risk exists for fire and explosion and of vegetation damage on adjacent areas. Otherwise, the largest risk for damage is related to groundwater contamination which might happen both at landfills for hazardous waste and for non-hazardous waste.

Predictable and unpredictable costs

Costs that are found relevant to security are divided into predictable and unpredictable costs, as both the character of the costs and the relevance of the security type depend on the predictability. The predictable costs are in particular connected to handling of leachate and to monitoring, whereas unpredictable costs cover different damage situations as described above.

The cost levels have been calculated on the basis of a number of assumptions on the design and operation of landfill cells for the different waste categories. The size of both predictable and unpredictable costs at the landfill of different waste categories is shown in the table below. The costs are a result of calculations covering the whole lifetime of a landfill cell. Furthermore, the size of typical landfill fees in force is mentioned to throw the calculated costs into relief.

It can be found from the table that the calculated predictable costs account for a considerable part of the typical landfill fees, which in it self is not a problem as the predictable costs should be included at determination of the fees.

Furthermore, it can be found that the unpredictable costs are nearly negligible compared to the typical landfill fees. However, this only applies at an average consideration of all landfills. For a single landfill, the costs at a damage can be considerable and be hard to defray. This fact among others points to the advantage of establishing a common joint and several security system to meet different damage situations.

Different types of security

After the above description of technical aspects at landfills and determina­tion of the size of costs, different types of security are described. Inequalities in risk profiles and aspects on competition legislation for private and public landfill owners are discussed.

The suitability of the different security types is assessed with respect to coverage of predictable and unpredictable costs at the landfill of waste.

With respect to the unpredictable costs it can be concluded that both an arrangement based on environmental insurance and a pool arrangement seem workable at the landfill of waste, with the reservation, however, that it has not been clarified whether an insurance arrangement corresponding to the need can be established.

Thus, it could be considered to establish a pool arrangement with compelled membership and contribution, but in such a way that the administrative organ of the pool is authorised to replace (part of or all of) the payments by an insurance arrangement to the extent that a corresponding coverage can be obtained.

Individual saving in a pool seems to be the most ideal type of security with respect to the predictable costs. Payments are formally separated from payments for coverage of the unpredictable costs.

Consequences for fee determination and cash flow

The consequences from the security for the individual landfill types have been analysed, in particular with respect to the fee level and the extent of security. The analyses take their point of departure at a standard landfill cell with an area of 2 hectare and a waste volume of 200,000 m³.

Any additional costs on the landfill site resulting from the requirement of classification of the waste in accordance with Annex II of the Directive are not included in the calculations.

It can be concluded that the landfill fee will only rise moderately as a result of the requirement that the fee must cover savings for coverage of predictable and unpredictable environmental costs.

The fee increase (fee incl. waste tax) varies from 2 % for an inert waste landfill to 9 % for a non-hazardous waste landfill. The fee increase for hazardous waste has been calculated to DKK 28 per ton which must be seen in relation to the fees being paid today (DKK 700-1.100 per ton).

Furthermore, it appears from the calculations that considerable amounts must be saved countrywide just to defray the predictable costs arising during the after-care period. If a fund is established for the administration of this money, after a number of years the total size of the pool will be approx. one billion DKK, calculated on the basis of the assumptions made in the report.

Administration and decision-making on security

If a common pool arrangement is chosen, a monitoring organ will be needed to ensure that the required security is available at any time. This monitoring organ can consist of the competent authority, typically the Council, which already performs environmental supervision at the landfills. It seems reasonable to link the environmental supervision to the monitoring of the security as this monitoring demands detailed knowledge of the operational and environmental conditions of the landfill.

If a common joint and several security system is chosen to meet predictable and unpredictable costs, it should be administrated by an overall controlling organ. The membership of such a pool arrangement is mandatory for any landfill owner as long as the landfill is in the operational phase and has not been closed and properly after-cared. Furthermore, there must be a joint and several liability towards the relevant costs among the members of the pool at any time.

Parties behind the pool arrangement could consist of landfill owners, competent authorities and the Danish Environmental Protection Agency. The pool must have a board, composed of representatives from the various parties. The chairmanship could lie with the Danish Environmental Protection Agency.

Furthermore, the pool arrangement could include an advisory service for the members on the basis of experience gained, with respect to reduction of the risk for unpredictable environmental effects. Such an advisory function could assist in keeping the expenses of the pool at a low level.

In case of a pool arrangement, the board decides in what cases payments should be made from the pool for coverage of environmental effects. The decision should be made on the recommendation from the actual competent authority, which through detailed knowledge of the actual landfill recommends possible remedial actions to be financed by the pool.

 

[Front page] [Contents] [Back] [Next] [Top]