IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tin/wpaper/20160039.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Incineration or Recycling of Dutch Household Plastics

Author

Listed:
  • Raymond Gradus

    (VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Rick van Koppen

    (PricewaterhouseCoopers)

  • Elbert Dijkgraaf

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam, the Netherlands)

  • Paul Nillesen

    (PricewaterhouseCoopers)

Abstract

The cost-effectiveness of plastic recycling is compared to energy recovery from plastic incineration in a waste-to-energy plant using data for the Netherlands. Both options have specific benefits and costs. The benefits of recycling are the avoidance of both CO2 that otherwise would be emitted during incineration and the production of virgin (new) material. There are significant costs, such as collection costs and recycling costs involved for plastic recycling by municipalities. The benefits of energy recovery from plastic are heat and electricity production leading to fewer emissions in the regular energy production sector, but this requires a waste-to-energy plant with the associated capital investments. Summing all the costs and benefits results in an implicit CO2 abatement price of 172 Euro per tonne of CO2 in case of plastic recycling. In general, this implicit price is much higher than current (or historic) ETS prices, the estimated external costs of CO2 emissions, or alternatives to reduce CO2 emissions (e.g. renewable energy). A sensitivity analysis shows that this conclusion is robust.

Suggested Citation

  • Raymond Gradus & Rick van Koppen & Elbert Dijkgraaf & Paul Nillesen, 2016. "A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Incineration or Recycling of Dutch Household Plastics," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-039/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.tinbergen.nl/16039.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2017. "An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 501-526, November.
    2. Tol, Richard S. J., 2008. "The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 2, pages 1-22.
    3. Dijkgraaf, E. & Gradus, R. H. J. M., 2004. "Cost savings in unit-based pricing of household waste: The case of The Netherlands," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 353-371, December.
    4. E. Dijkgraaf & R. Gradus, 2003. "Cost Savings of Contracting Out Refuse Collection," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 149-161, June.
    5. Miranda, Marie Lynn & Hale, Brack, 1997. "Waste not, want not: the private and social costs of waste-to-energy production," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 587-600, May.
    6. Bel, Germà & Joseph, Stephan, 2015. "Emission abatement: Untangling the impacts of the EU ETS and the economic crisis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 531-539.
    7. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    8. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    9. Timothy K. M. Beatty & Peter Berck & Jay P. Shimshack, 2007. "Curbside Recycling In The Presence Of Alternatives," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 739-755, October.
    10. E. Dijkgraaf & R. H. J. M. Gradus & B. Melenberg, 2003. "Contracting out refuse collection," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 553-570, July.
    11. da Cruz, Nuno F. & Ferreira, Sandra & Cabral, Marta & Simões, Pedro & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2014. "Packaging waste recycling in Europe: is the industry paying for it?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 59755, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Salih Çevikarslan & Carsten Gelhard & Jörg Henseler, 2022. "Improving the Material and Financial Circularity of the Plastic Packaging Value Chain in The Netherlands: Challenges, Opportunities, and Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-23, June.
    2. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2016. "Post Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-103/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. de la Higuera-Molina, Emilio José & Campos-Alba, Cristina María & López-Pérez, Germán & Zafra-Gómez, José Luis, 2023. "Efficiency of water service management alternatives in Spain considering environmental factors," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gradus, Raymond H.J.M. & Nillesen, Paul H.L. & Dijkgraaf, Elbert & van Koppen, Rick J., 2017. "A Cost-effectiveness Analysis for Incineration or Recycling of Dutch Household Plastic Waste," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 22-28.
    2. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    3. Raymond (R.H.J.M.) Gradus & Elbert (E.) Dijkgraaf, 2017. "Dutch Municipalities are Becoming Greener: Some Political and Institutional Explanations," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-086/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    4. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "The Effectiveness of Dutch Municipal Recycling Policies," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 14-155/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Carattini, Stefano & Baranzini, Andrea & Lalive, Rafael, 2018. "Is Taxing Waste a Waste of Time? Evidence from a Supreme Court Decision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 131-151.
    6. Dietz, Saskia & Richter, Magnus & Souren, Rainer, 2017. "Gebührenmaßstäbe als Einflussfaktoren auf die Höhe der Hausmüllgebühren: Systematik und varianzanalytische Untersuchung," Ilmenauer Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, volume 1, number 12017.
    7. Ankinée Kirakozian, 2016. "One Without The Other? Behavioural And Incentive Policies For Household Waste Management," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 526-551, July.
    8. Bel, Germà & Fageda, Xavier, 2010. "Empirical analysis of solid management waste costs: Some evidence from Galicia, Spain," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 187-193.
    9. Cristina M. Campos-Alba & Emilio J. De la Higuera-Molina & Gemma Pérez-López & José L. Zafra-Gómez, 2019. "Measuring the Efficiency of Public and Private Delivery Forms: An Application to the Waste Collection Service Using Order-M Data Panel Frontier Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, April.
    10. Soukopová, Jana & Vaceková, Gabriela & Klimovský, Daniel, 2017. "Local waste management in the Czech Republic: Limits and merits of public-private partnership and contracting out," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 201-209.
    11. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2016. "Post Separation of Plastic Waste: Better for the Environment and Lower Collection Costs," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-103/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Antonio Massarutto, 2019. "Italian waste in the circular economy: A agenda for industry regulators in Italy," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2019(1), pages 9-48.
    13. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2017. "An EU Recycling Target: What Does the Dutch Evidence Tell Us?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 501-526, November.
    14. Friese, Maria & Heimeshoff, Ulrich & Klein, Gordon J., 2020. "Property rights and transaction costs – The role of ownership and organization in German public service provision," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    15. Norimichi Matsueda & Jun’Ichi Miki, 2017. "Contracting-Out Of Household Waste Collection Services In Japan," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 65(02), pages 443-455, May.
    16. Germa Bel & Anton Costas, 2006. "Do Public Sector Reforms Get Rusty? Local Privatization in Spain," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24.
    17. Bertacchini, Enrico & Dalle Nogare, Chiara, 2014. "Public provision vs. outsourcing of cultural services: Evidence from Italian cities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 168-182.
    18. Xavier Fageda & Germa Bel, 2008. "Local privatization, intermunicipal cooperation,transaction costs and political interests: Evidence from Spain," IREA Working Papers 200804, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Apr 2008.
    19. Cecere, Grazia & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 163-176.
    20. García-Valiñas, María de los Ángeles & González-Gómez, Francisco & Picazo-Tadeo, Andrés J., 2013. "Is the price of water for residential use related to provider ownership? Empirical evidence from Spain," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 59-69.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    recycling; incineration; plastics; cost-effectiveness analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tin:wpaper:20160039. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Tinbergen Office +31 (0)10-4088900 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tinbenl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.