TALLINNA LINNAS TEKKIVATE OLMEJÄÄTMETE TAASKASUTAMISE TÕHUSTAMISE UURING PARIMATE PRAKTIKATE NÄITEL

The report assesses the volume and composition of municipal solid waste in Tallinn, evaluates current collection models, and compares the environmental impact of different waste treatment scenarios. It identifies significant contamination in bio-waste and packaging streams and argues that a centrally managed waste service model is most effective for achieving recycling goals, despite legislative restrictions in Estonia. Life cycle assessments indicate that mass incineration is more environmentally beneficial than landfilling or mechanical-biological treatment (MBT) due to energy recovery and the avoidance of fossil fuels.

• In 2012, Tallinn generated approximately 202,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste, which equates to roughly 500 kg per person annually.
• The composition of municipal waste in Tallinn in 2012 showed that biodegradable waste accounted for approximately 53% and packaging waste for about 48%.
• Analysis of mixed packaging waste shows that the composition depends heavily on the container design; for example, containers with small openings (used by EPR) resulted in a stream where glass packaging made up over 63%.
• Separately collected food waste in Tallinn is significantly contaminated with other waste, including plastic bags and general municipal waste, often because general waste containers are full.
• The report argues that a central waste management model, such as the one implemented by the Tallinn Waste Centre (Tallinna Jäätmekeskus), is the most effective for coordinating services and motivating separate collection, although recent Estonian law changes restrict such 'in-house' arrangements.
• Life cycle assessment (LCA) results show that mass incineration of mixed municipal waste is the most environmentally positive scenario for global climate change, acidification, and eutrophication compared to landfilling or MBT, as it replaces fossil fuels (oil shale and natural gas).
• Landfilling is identified as the most negative waste treatment option across all analyzed environmental impact categories.
• The report recommends that Tallinn should consider implementing anaerobic digestion for food waste to produce biogas, as this has a significantly lower environmental impact than composting.

APA

Stockholm Environment Institute (2014). TALLINNA LINNAS TEKKIVATE OLMEJÄÄTMETE TAASKASUTAMISE TÕHUSTAMISE UURING PARIMATE PRAKTIKATE NÄITEL. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4530.pdf

Chicago

Stockholm Environment Institute. TALLINNA LINNAS TEKKIVATE OLMEJÄÄTMETE TAASKASUTAMISE TÕHUSTAMISE UURING PARIMATE PRAKTIKATE NÄITEL. 2014. https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4530.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=Stockholm Environment Institute |title=TALLINNA LINNAS TEKKIVATE OLMEJÄÄTMETE TAASKASUTAMISE TÕHUSTAMISE UURING PARIMATE PRAKTIKATE NÄITEL |date=2014 |url=https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4530.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{stockholmenvironmentinstitute2014tallinna, author = {{Stockholm Environment Institute}}, title = {{TALLINNA LINNAS TEKKIVATE OLMEJÄÄTMETE TAASKASUTAMISE TÕHUSTAMISE UURING PARIMATE PRAKTIKATE NÄITEL}}, institution = {Stockholm Environment Institute}, year = {2014}, url = {https://www.sei.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/4530.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }