?? The CCS Debate: Should public funds be used for Building CCS on Incinerators ????

In the midst of the ongoing debates on Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a crucial question arises regarding the selection of projects suitable for public funding support. One particular subject under scrutiny is waste incineration, prompting a thoughtful examination of its inclusion in such funding initiatives.

In 2017, the EU published its Communication - The role of waste-to-energy in the circular economy. The paper recommended phasing out EU funding for waste incineration projects. Since then the EU policy on waste incinerators has changed dramatically. Among the first exclusions were the Regional Fund and Cohesion Fund, followed by the Just Transition Fund. A few years later, the Commission also left incinerators out of the EU landmark proposal to finance ESGs -?the Sustainable Finance Taxonomy.

In fact, the EU has recognized investment in waste incineration as non-compliant with the RRF in its technical guidance on "Do No Significant Harm".

This raises an important question: Should CCS policies be aligned with other EU funding policies? I argue that yes, they should, for the following reasons:

1.Minimising the generation of waste and the subsequent treatment via incineration is a key goal of the EU's Circular Economy Action Plan. Introducing CCS on incinerators might inadvertently create a lock-in effect, particularly when capacities should ideally decrease over time. This could hinder the implementation of more effective waste prevention measures by portraying incineration as low-carbon or even carbon-negative, thus prolonging reliance on this approach.

Furthermore, recent studies have shed light on a concerning aspect of waste incineration – a substantial portion of what is incinerated is, in fact, recyclable, and recycling offers significantly higher greenhouse gas (GHG) benefits. Reports by Eunomia, Reloop, and by ZWE have underscored this reality, emphasizing the potential of recycling in achieving circular economy objectives.

So what's the best way to decarbonise?

An alternative approach to decarbonisation can be achieved through Material Recovery and Biological Treatment (MRBT) or Mixed Waste Sorting (MWS). These processes effectively extract a significant portion of materials e.g. plastic and metals from the waste stream, contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions without the need for waste incineration and CCS.

In light of these arguments and the evolving policies favoring waste minimisation, better waste prevention strategies, and MRBT/MWS technologies, the suitability of utilising public funding for CCS on incinerators warrants a thoughtful and critical evaluation.

?? Relevant Links:

1. CCS for incinerators? An expensive distraction to a circular economy: https://zerowasteeurope.eu/library/ccs-for-incinerators-an-expensive-distraction-to-a-circular-economy/
2. Carbon capture from biomass and waste incineration: Hype versus reality: https://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/2022/biomass-and-msw-ccs-report/

#Sustainability #CircularEconomy #WasteManagement #ClimateAction #PublicFunding #CCS #Incinerators #EU #ClimateChange #Recycling #GreenFuture