Is the Circular Economy Act part of the problem or part of the solution on the way to a circular economy?

by Dr. Ing. Alexander Gosten

Abstract

For more than 30 years, the Waste Management Act has been regularly amended. The original objective was characterized by ensuring hygiene, concern about environmental hazards and impacts of waste. The "Act to Promote Circular Economy and to Ensure Environmentally Sound Management of Waste ( is the leading set of regulations for waste management. The relevant objectives of the Act are now:

1. The conservation of natural resources

2. Protection of people and the environment in the management of waste.

The focus and the requirement have thus changed significantly. In spite of all the amendments, the author believes that the circular economy has not evolved as necessary to achieve a circular economy. The article attempts to identify obstacles and possible approaches to circular economy.

According to the author, the fu ture circular economy will only distinguish between " and "unused resources" and waste. The current secondary raw materials ("used resources") of the waste law will be the primary raw materials of tomorrow. In the future, too, there will be waste that must be disposed "harmlessly".

The core of the KrWG includes the implementation of the waste hierarchy, which starts at the top with "waste prevention." For the Circular Economy, however, a product hierarchy is needed instead of a waste hierarchy. Waste is part of the cycle.

Recycling is a central concept of the KrWG. However, recycling is only a tool to achieve the Circular Economy, not the goal itself. Instead of a quota for the use of the " new metrics should be introduced as a measure of success. One of the reasons given for the need for recycling is the finite nature of resources. Although the criticality of individual resources has been systematically studied for decades, the results on this are not taken into account in the KrWG. In order to substitute more resources in the future, the existing limits of chemical concentrations for handling waste, among other things, must be critically questioned. The circular economy must not place higher demands on secondary raw materials than on primary raw materials. The entire issue of the plausibility of chemical concentration limits must be turned upside down.

The KrWG thinks from the collection and its organization. It should be thought from the secondary raw material, the product of t he reprocessing process. On the way to the Circular Economy, the question arises as to whether the KrWG should be transferred to a product law, which should consequently no longer be located in the Ministry of the Environment, but in the Ministry of Economics.

Get full article here [external link]

published: , 7|2022
Keywords: Policy Tax Instruments, Sustainability, Climate

Alexander Gosten
Berliner Stadtreinigung