Indicator analysis of integrated municipal waste management system. Case study of Latvia

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

Availableonline onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com www.sciencedirect.com Available Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 ScienceDirect ScienceDirect

www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Energy (2018) 000–000 227–234 EnergyProcedia Procedia147 00 (2017) www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

International Scientific Conference “Environmental and Climate Technologies”, CONECT 2018 International Scientific Conference “Environmental and Climate Technologies”, CONECT 2018

IndicatorTheanalysis of integrated municipal wasteandmanagement 15th International Symposiummunicipal on District Heating Cooling Indicator analysis of integrated waste management system. Case study of Latvia system. Case study the of Latvia Assessing the feasibility of using heat demand-outdoor Edgars Kavals, Kaspars Klavenieks, Julija Gusca*, Dagnija Blumberga

temperature function forKlavenieks, a long-term heat demand forecast Edgars Kavals, Kaspars Julijadistrict Gusca*, Dagnija Blumberga Institute of Energy Systems and Environment, Riga Technical University, Azenes iela 12/1, Riga, LV-1048, Latvia Institute ofa,b,c Energy Systems and aEnvironment, Rigaa Technical University, b Azenes iela 12/1, Riga,cLV-1048, Latvia

I. Andrić

*, A. Pina , P. Ferrão , J. Fournier ., B. Lacarrière , O. Le Correc

a

IN+ Center for Innovation, Technology and Policy Research - Instituto Superior Técnico, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisbon, Portugal Abstract b Veolia Recherche & Innovation, 291 Avenue Dreyfous Daniel, 78520 Limay, France Abstract c Département Systèmes Énergétiques et Environnement - IMT Atlantique, 4 rue Alfred Kastler, 44300 Nantes, France Inadequate waste management, associated with dominance of waste landfilling and low resource recovery efficiency, is the major challenge some Unionassociated countries,with incl.dominance Latvia, face. Several legal instruments, such as recovery the European Council Directive Inadequate wasteEuropean management, of waste landfilling and low resource efficiency, is the major 1999/31/EC "Landfill Directive", Directiveincl. 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and Framework challenge some European Union countries, Latvia, face. Several legal instruments, suchofasthe the Council European"Waste Council Directive Directive” oriented towards increasing the 2008/98/EC recycling andofre-use of waste, thereby reducing waste [1]. TheFramework aim of the 1999/31/EC Directive", Directive the European Parliament and of the landfilling Council "Waste Abstract are"Landfill study is to are carry out an towards indicatorincreasing analysis for Latvianand household sector,waste assessing the potential material Directive” oriented thethe recycling re-use ofwaste waste,management thereby reducing landfilling [1]. Theofaim of the and energy recovery, as well as setting cost indicators related to these activities. The results of the study show that the potential study is to carry out an indicator analysis for the Latvian household waste management sector, assessing the potential of material District heating networks are commonly addressed in the literature as one of the most effective solutions for decreasing of the material andrecovery, energy recovery waste These isrelated in the of 3 % high to 15 %results but the costs for waste collection, and energy as wellfrom asfrom setting cost indicators torange theserequire activities. The of average the study show that the potential of greenhouse gas emissions themunicipal building sector. systems investments which are returned through the heat recycling andto landfilling is 16.73 euro per tonnewaste ofand municipal material and energy recovery from municipal isbuilding in thewaste. range of 3 %policies, to 15 % heat but the average for waste sales. Due the changed climate conditions renovation demand in costs the future couldcollection, decrease, recycling andthe landfilling is 16.73 per tonne of municipal waste. prolonging investment returneuro period. ©The 2018 Thescope Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. main of this paper isby to Elsevier assess the feasibility of using the heat demand – outdoor temperature function for heat demand © 2018 2018 The Authors. Published Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ © The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. forecast. The district of Alvalade, located in Lisbon license (Portugal), was used as a case study. The district is consisted) of 665 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Selection and peer-review responsibility of typology. the scientific committee of the (low, International Scientific Conference ) district This is an open access article under the CC period BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ buildings that vary in both construction and Three scenarios medium, high) and three Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committeeweather of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental ‘Environmental and Climate Technologies’, CONECT Selection peer-review under responsibility of 2018. the scientific committee International Scientific renovation scenarios were CONECT developed (shallow, intermediate, deep). To estimate of the the error, obtained heat demand Conference values were and Climateand Technologies’, 2018. ‘Environmental Climate 2018. previously developed and validated by the authors. compared with and results from Technologies’, a dynamic heat CONECT demand model, Keywords: material recovery; energyonly recovery; costs; landfilling; potential; combined indicator The results showed that when weather change is considered, the margin of error could be acceptable for some applications Keywords: recovery; energy costs;20% landfilling; (the errormaterial in annual demand wasrecovery; lower than for allpotential; weathercombined scenariosindicator considered). However, after introducing renovation

scenarios, the error value increased up to 59.5% (depending on the weather and renovation scenarios combination considered). The value of slope coefficient increased on average within the range of 3.8% up to 8% per decade, that corresponds to the decrease in the number of heating hours of 22-139h during the heating season (depending on the combination of weather and renovation scenarios considered). On the other hand, function intercept increased for 7.8-12.7% per decade (depending on the coupled scenarios). The values suggested could be used to modify the function parameters for the scenarios considered, and improve the accuracy of heat demand estimations.

© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and * Corresponding author. Tel.: +371-2677-2850. Cooling.

E-mail address:author. [email protected] * Corresponding Tel.: +371-2677-2850. E-mail address: [email protected] Keywords: Heat demand; Forecast; Climate change 1876-6102 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) 1876-6102 © 2018 Thearticle Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Selection under responsibility of the scientific of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate This is an and openpeer-review access article under the CC BY-NC-ND licensecommittee (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Technologies’, CONECT 2018. Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate 1876-6102 © 2017 The Authors. Technologies’, CONECT 2018. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1876-6102  2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Peer-review under responsibility of the Scientific Committee of The 15th International Symposium on District Heating and Cooling. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Scientific Conference ‘Environmental and Climate Technologies’, CONECT 2018. 10.1016/j.egypro.2018.07.086

Edgars Kavals et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

228 2

1. Introduction The circular economy is a guiding principle to sustainable and prudent management of resources [2], as well as for the reduction of waste deposited in landfills [3]. However, there are also different administrative, economic and political barriers to the successful integration of the circular economy in different sectors of the national economy [4]. The waste management sector is one of the most important sectors that can contribute to or hinder the development of a circular economy. According to Malinauskaite et al. [5] waste management is affected by political (political willingness, regulations, taxes, subsidies, data collection and monitoring), economic (cost-benefit structure, transparency, available funding), environmental (policy, effects to climate and human health), technological and educational factors. An integrated assessment is needed to assess the sustainable management of municipal waste at the national/regional level. In general, when assessing a municipal waste management system, it should be understood that the waste management system is a complex system consisting of many aspects and processes. It includes waste generation, goods/services producers, consumers, waste management companies, energy and resource consumption, waste recovery, landfill sites, legislation, behavioral patterns and many other aspects [6]. Besides, sustainable waste management system is based on processes, not products [7]. The present research is performed in order to find out the potential of municipal waste in Latvia in the context of observing the principles of a circular economy. The aim of this study is to carry out an indicator analysis for the Latvian household waste management sector by assessing the potential of material and energy recovery, as well as setting cost indicators related to these activities. 2. Methodology Within the framework of the study, an integrated methodology has been developed to assess the sustainability of the municipal waste management sector at the regional and national level. The methodology includes two interconnected modules: analysis of the baseline scenario and indicator analysis on material, energy recovery and costs based on methodology proposed by Rigamonti et al. [8]. The baseline scenario includes analysis of the current situation in the field of waste management in Latvia. It also compiles statistical data and analyses data quality. The compilation of statistical data and its quality analysis includes around 500 datasets. The analysis of the indicators includes calculations of material recovery, energy recovery and cost indicators for 11 waste management regions in Latvia, using 1354 datasets. Indicator analysis includes three indicators – material recovery indicator, energy recovery indicator and cost indicator. The material recovery indicator shows the amount of recycled waste in relation to all household waste amounts. To calculate this indicator (see Eq. (1)), data is required for:  Amount of materials from packaging waste as secondary raw materials from packaging waste;  Amount of materials from combustion plants that are, for example, metals after a recycling process, or inert materials derived from fuel ash and intended for use in road building, etc.;  Amount of materials from mechanical and biological pre-treatment process (MBT), such as metals, plastics and various polymers;  Amount of compost produced by traditional composting plants or derived from anaerobic digestion processes [7]. MRI 

Materials from packaging waste  Materials from combustion residues  Materials from MBT plants  compost Total collected municipal waste

where MRI Materials from pac.w. Materials from com. res.

(1)

material recovery indicator, non-dimensional; packaging waste as secondary raw materials recycled from municipal waste, tonne per year; materials that are waste products in the combustion process and which can be used in other fields, tonne per year;



Edgars Kavals et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

Materials from MBT plants Compost Total collected mun.w.

229 3

materials recovered from waste using mechanical-biological treatment methods, tonne per year; compost from municipal waste produced in traditional companies or obtained from anaerobic digestion processes, tonne per year; amount of municipal waste collected during the reporting year, tonne per year.

The energy recovery indicator shows how much household waste is used to recover energy. This indicator covers two important aspects – direct energy recovery, which is thermal energy, and electricity recovered in waste incineration and gasification processes. Electricity and heat from biogas landfills and anaerobic digestion are also included in this section. The other energy source included in this indicator is the incineration of municipal waste in power plants or cement kilns, replacing traditional fuels, as well as biomass produced from biogas and singas from pyrogasification plants. Here it should be emphasized that both the quantity and quality of energy produced should be taken into account, therefore an exergy approach should be used. This means that it includes the maximum amount of work that can be obtained from a specific process or system [8]. Energy recovery indicator (ERI) can be calculated using Eq. (2) [8]:

ERI 

Electricit y re cov ered  Thermal energy re cov ered  Otherenerg y from municipal waste Total energy available

where ERI Electricity recovered Thermal en. recovered Other en. from mun. w. Total energy available

(2)

energy recovery indicator, non-dimensional; electricity from municipal waste, TJ per year; heat from municipal waste, TJ per year; energy related to products not used immediately for energy production but are produced from municipal waste, TJ per year; maximum available energy that could be obtained if all municipal waste was recovered in energy, TJ year.

The Energy Recovery indicator includes:  Energy related to electricity produced from municipal waste;  Energy related to the generated thermal energy from municipal waste;  Energy related to products that are not directly used for energy production but are made from municipal waste – including these products, energy is calculated as the multiplication of the lowest combustion heat produced by the mass of those products;  Maximum amount of energy that can be obtained if all municipal waste were regenerated into energy that can be obtained as the lower combustion heat value for municipal waste and the total amount of generated municipal waste. This indicator is quantitative as the qualitative indicator should also take into account the quality of the energy obtained, which is difficult to determine. The energy recovery indicator reflects the amount of energy recovered from municipal waste attributed to total potential amount of energy if all generated municipal waste were produced into energy. Directive 2008/98 EC provides a framework for the regeneration of municipal waste through waste-to-energy or waste-to-fuel concept. The directive applies only to the treatment of solid municipal waste in special waste incineration plants with an energy efficiency or utility equal to or greater than 60 % for combustion plants authorized before 1 January 2009 and 65 % for installations authorized after 31 December 2008 [9]. According to the directive, the efficiency of municipal waste incineration plants is calculated according to Eq. (3) [9]:

Edgars Kavals et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

230 4

 where Ep Ef Ew Ei 0.97

E p  ( E f  Ei ) 0.97  ( EW  E f )

(3)

annual energy produced as heat or electricity. It is calculated with energy in the form of electricity being multiplied by 2.6 and heat produced for commercial use multiplied by 1, GJ per year; energy input to the system from fuels contributing to the production of steam, GJ per year; energy contained in the treated waste calculated using the net calorific value of the waste, GJ per year; energy imported excluding Ew and Ef, GJ per year; coefficient used for energy losses calculation due to bottom ash and radiation [9].

The cost indicator is necessary to compare management costs per ton of municipal waste. The costs associated with the management, recycling and disposal of municipal waste at landfills depend on many factors – transportation distance, storage life, handling, pre-treatment methods, quantity of landfill, etc. In general, the cost of household waste management could be a good financial instrument to combat the increase of household waste deposited, the increase of municipal waste generated and the increase of the amount of recovered and recycled household waste. The cost indicator can be calculated according to Eq. (4) [8]:

CI 

cos ts of collection  cos ts of treatment  cos ts of disposal collected municipal waste

where CI Costs of collection Costs of treatment Costs of disposal

(4)

costs indicator, euro per tonne municipal waste; costs associated with the collection of municipal waste, euro; costs associated with the treatment of municipal waste, euro; costs associated with the disposal of municipal waste at landfills, euro.

Material recovery and energy recovery indicator is in the range 0–1, where 0 represents the worst scenario (no recycling and energy recovery), but 1 represents best scenario (maximum recoverable material and energy). Multiplying the calculated MRI and ERI indicators by 100 %, a fraction (%) is obtained, which can be explained by the proportion of recovered materials and energy relative to the total potential. Cost indicator unit is euro/t. II = 50 % ꞏ MRI + 50 % ꞏ ERI where II MRI ERI

(5)

integrated indicator, non- dimensional; calculated material recovery indicator, non-dimensional; calculated energy recovery indicator, non-dimensional.

By combining all these components into one common indicator it is possible to evaluate and analyse the waste management system. The integrated indicator is expressed as the sum of 50 % MRI and 50 % ERI, which is applied at a specific cost per region (see Eq. (5)) [8]. So, for the compilation of MRI and ERI, a simple mathematical expression will be used to measure the recovery of energy and materials in general. Both of these indicators are easy to compare since their value is from 0 to 1. In this work, the MRI and ERI weight is the same, however, from the point of view of the waste management hierarchy (in line with Directive 2008/98/EC), the material recovery indicator should be greater "weighting" coefficient, since energy recovery is less prioritized in the waste management hierarchy [8, 9].



Edgars Kavals et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

231 5

3. Results and discussion 3.1. Description of analysed municipal waste management system The analysis of indicators has been carried out for Latvia. In the current situation (according to statistical data for 2016), 410 kg of municipal waste per inhabitant were generated in Latvia, of which only 25.2 % was recycled, while the remaining 74.8 % were landfilled (see Fig. 1) [10].

Municipal waste, tonne

2500000

2000000

1500000

1000000

500000

0

2010

2011

2012

Municipal waste from other sectors (a)

2013

2014

2015

2016

Municipal waste from households

No.

Waste management region

Area (km²)

1

Ventspils

4272

2

Liepaja

6506

3

Piejura

5888

4

Zemgale

5245

5

Riga

304

6

Pieriga

4806

7

Ziemelvidzeme

10557

8

Maliena

7377

9

Vidusdaugava

7505

10

Austrumlatgale

5242

11

Dienvidlatgale

6871

(b)

Fig. 1. (a) Municipal waste generated in Latvia 2010–2016 [11]; (b) waste management regions of Latvia [12].

As shown in Fig. 1(a), the amount of municipal waste generated in 2010 and 2011 was relatively low, due to the fact that after the crisis, the economy, purchasing power and, consequently, the amount of waste generated were at a low level. However, when Latvia began to recover from the crisis, the amount of waste began to increase. It is seen that after 2014, the amount of municipal waste generated outside households has risen sharply, which is mainly due to the construction of the building and its development. There are 10 waste management regions (WMR) in Latvia and the city of Riga (without the status of waste management region) (see Fig. 1(b)), which has a different situation in the field of waste treatment (number of people to be served, technologies used, distances between waste sorting stations and landfills, etc.). 3.2. Indicator analysis The Material Recovery, Energy Recovery and Cost Indicator were calculated for each WMR. The indicators were calculated for 2016, as data for the year 2017 were not collected at the time of study. Data for the calculation of the indicators were taken from the State limited Liability Company "Latvian Environment, Geology and Meteorology Centre" waste report database (database 3A), in which waste management companies – waste landfills, as well as companies that collect and process municipal waste, submit annual reports. The average MRI of Latvia in 2016 was 0.154 and it was determined from all MRI calculated by the WMR and Riga City. This result can also be explained as a percentage of the recoverable tangible value in 2016 (15.4 % of all collected municipal waste was recovered in Latvia in 2016 (Fig. 2(a)). The results of MRI calculations show that the highest material recovery from household municipal waste was in Ziemelvidzeme WMR (0.26 or 26 %) and Ventspils WMR (0.24 or 24 %) as followed by Zemgale WMR (0.23 or 23 % of the collected municipal waste amount). For other WMR this indicator is below 0.2.

Edgars Kavals et al.Procedia / Energy00 Procedia (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy (2018) 147 000–000

0,175

0,154

0,06

ERI

0,102

0,160 0,041

0,050

0,075

0,150 0,100

0,065

0,112

0,113

0,200 MRI

0,261

0,230

0,250

0,08

0,182

0,300

0,240

232 6

0,048

0,04 0,023 0,019

0,02

0,00

0,000

0

0

WMR (a)

0,016 0

0

0

0

WMR (b)

Fig. 2. Indicators analysis results for Latvia in 2016: (a) MRI; (b) ERI.

The results of ERI calculation in 2016 are shown in Fig. 2(b). ERI value is 0 in Ventspils, Piejura, Maliena, Vidusdaugava, Austrumlatgale and Dienvidlatgale WMR because landfill gas is not collected in landfills of those waste management areas. The most efficient energy recovery from household waste was calculated for Liepaja WMR, where the ERI value is 0.065 or 6.5 %, followed by the Ziemelvidzeme WMR where the ERI value is 0.048 or 4.8 %. In Latvia, the average value of ERI was calculated as the average of all ERI estimated by each of the WMR (including those where polygon gas was not collected and ERI value is 0). The average value of ERI in 2016 was 0.016, or 1.6 %. The Cost Indicator shows the cost of municipal waste collection (transport included), recycling and disposal at landfills for tonnage of municipal waste (see Fig. 3(a)). From these costs, the costs related to the collection of municipal waste (17 %), the costs related to the recycling of municipal waste (25.2 %) and the costs related to the disposal of municipal waste at landfill (25.3 %) were determined. Calculation excludes tax-related costs (natural resources taxes, social taxes on wages), salaries and administration costs and profits. Profit in percentage terms cannot exceed profitability of 7 %. [13]. In most of the WMR the CI value ranges from 18 to 20 euros per tonne municipal waste while the Maliena and Dienvidlatgale WMR cost indicator values are about 14 euro per tonne. Maliena WMR also has a relatively low value of CI, as only 3.48 % of the total population of Latvia live in this region, but the amount of collected household waste is the lowest compared to other WMR. However, Ziemelvidzeme WMR has the largest area of all WMR in Latvia but calculated CI value is 19.05 euro per tonne, which is the sixth highest in Latvia. This shows that the Ziemelvidzemes WMR has a well – considered location for a waste landfill and sorting sites, as well as developed waste transportation logistics.

16,73

19,22 13,69

15,00 10,00

21,71 13,85

19,05

19,12

18,01

15,81

20,00

2337

5,23

CI, Euro/t

25,00

19,12

Edgarsname Kavals et al. /Procedia Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author / Energy 00 (2018) 000–000

19,20



5,00 0,00

WMR (a)

25,00

20,00 Riga II, Euro/t

Austrumlatgale

Vidusdaugava

15,00

Piejura

Pieriga

Ziemelvidzeme Zemgale

Latvia average

Liepaja Maliena

Dienvidlatgale

10,00

5,00

0,00 0,000

Ventspils

0,050

0,100

0,150 MAI

0,200

0,250

0,300

(b) Fig. 3. (a) Calculated CI values; (b) aggregated indicators (MRI, ERI, CI).

The aggregated performance of CI, ERI and MRI showed in Fig. 3(b). The chart shows that the value added for ERI/MRI is increasing as the value of CI increases. This is natural because increasing the cost (thereby improving the waste management system, such as newer, more efficient sorting and recycling technologies) will also increase environmental performance, which in this case means the recovery of materials and energy efficiency increases. The highest environmental performance is in the Ziemelvidzeme WMR (0.151 or 15.1 %), Ventspils WMR (0.120 or 12 %) and Zemgale WMR (0.119 or 11.9 %). In assessing the sustainability of waste management system for each WMR, the best result is to achieve the most efficient waste management (more recovered materials and energy) at the lowest possible cost. 4. Conclusion Results show the importance of municipal waste recycling and energy recovery from municipal waste. The calculations of energy and material recovery indicators showed that in the current situation, the energy and material recovery potential in the WMR of Latvia is generally low, which means that the waste management system needs to be substantially improved. The best situation of material recovery and energy recovery from municipal waste

Edgars Kavals et al. / Energy Procedia 147 (2018) 227–234 Author name / Energy Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000

234 8

was determined in the Ziemelvidzeme WMR, but the worst situation in the city of Riga. In order to improve the quality of data and the precision of the study, each AAR should be monitored, which includes data collection, compilation, landfill surveys and various measurements, since the data are difficult to access. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]

Tomic T, Schneider DR. Municipal solid waste system analysis through energy consumption and return approach. J Environ Manage 2017;203:973–87. Zihare L, Blumberga D. Market opportunities for cellulose products from combined renewable resources. Environmental and Climate Technologies 2017;19:33–38. Prieto-Sandoval V, Jaca C, Ormazabal M. Towards a consensus on the circular economy. J Clean Prod 2018;179:605–15. Kirchherr J, Bour R, Kostense-Smit E, Muller J, Huibrechtse-Truijens A, Hekkert M. Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence from the European Union (EU). Ecol Econ 2017;150:264–72. Malinauskaite J, Jouhara H, Czajczynska D, Stanchev P, Katsou E, Rostkowski P, Thorne RJ, Colon J, Ponsa S, Al-Mansour F, Anguilano L, Kryzynska R, Lopez IC, Vlasopoulos A, Spencer N. Municipal solid waste management and waste-to-energy in the context of a circular economy and energy recycling in Europe. Energy 2017;141:2013–44. Klavenieks K, Dzene KP, Blumberga D. Optimal strategies for municipal solid waste treatment – Environmental and socio-economic criteria assessment. Energy Procedia 2017;128:512–9. Seadon JK. Sustainable waste management systems. J Clean Prod 2010;18:1639–51. Rigamonti L, Sterpi I, Grosso M. Integrated municipal waste management systems: An indicator to assess their environmental and economic sustainability. Ecol Indic 2016;60:1–7. European Parliament and Council. Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain directives. Off J Eur Union 2008;312:3–30. Eurostat. Waste generation and treatment (env_wasgt). Available: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/metadata/en/env_wasgt_esms.htm Latvian Environment Geology and Meteorology Center. Summary of the National Statistical Report No.3 - Waste - Overview of Waste for 2016. Riga: LVGMC; 2017. POLSIS. Atkritumu apsaimniekosanas valsts plans 2013.-2020. gadam. Riga: Vides Aizsardzibas un Regionalas Attistibas Ministrija; 2013. The Public Utilities Commission. Methodology for calculating the tariff for municipal waste disposal service. Latvijas Vestnesis 2017;37(5864).