Waste energy in the nordic countries: A case study

Waste To Energy in Sweden - A Study of Sweden’s and Renova’s Operation Anton Avest John Scherman Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona School of Industrial engineering (ETSEIB) Acknowledgments We are grateful for the possibility to research and write about a very interesting and important topic. It has been educational and opened a new interest area for the both of us. We want to thank our supervisor at Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Jordi Olivella. Thank you for the important feedback and also presenting this idea and developing it with us. We also want to thank Lia Detterfelt from Renova. We appreciate that you answered all of our questions on the interview and gave us important insights on the topic. Waste To Energy in Sweden - A Study of Sweden’s and Renova’s Operation 1 Acknowledgments 2 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Purpose and Research Questions 6 1.3 Limitations 7 2 Methodology 8 2.1 Literature Review 8 2.2 Interview 8 2.3 Case Study 8 2.4 Data Analysis 9 3 Findings 10 3.1 Renova 10 3.1.1 Interview with Renova 12 3.1.2 Legislation 14 3.1.3 Business Model 16 3.1.4 Collection of Waste 17 3.1.5 Environmental Policy Instruments 17 3.1.6 Energy Quality 21 3.1.7 Circular Economy 24 3.2 Statistics 26 3.2.1 Sweden 26 3.2.2 Renova 27 3.3 Success factors 29 3.4 Socio-technical Transitions 30 4 Discussion 32 5 Conclusion 34 1 Introduction 1.1 Background A country’s economy is continuously generating municipal solid waste (MSW). The global generation of MSW is estimated to reach 2.2 billion tons per year worldwide by 2025 (Moya D, et al., 2017). The increasing generation of MSW produced by residentials, institutions and industries represents the growing environmental threat, yet its environmental effect is highly determined by how the MSW is dealt with and processed. The grade of which countries convert MSW to energy is dependent on a number of factors within waste management such as the collection system, marketing activities, which technology is used, laws, regulations, EU directives and policies (Covellec et al., 2012). There are a vast amount of different processing technologies available and the different technologies require different prerequisites and in return produce different results. Furthermore, other factors such as waste management from start to finish, business model and the respective country’s prerequisites are significant and important to consider as well. The UN (2019) has set a total circular economy as the ultimate goal, yet the road towards fulfillment is long and every day along the way communities will produce MSW that must be dealt with. Sweden presents leading edge numbers regarding MSW to energy capacity, only the UK and Germany have a larger gross capacity of MSW to waste (Sönnichsen, 2021). This case study aims to disintegrate Renova’s general operation as well as their waste-to-energy plant in Sävenäs to bring enlightenment to the different factors contributing to their successful operation. Another important factor that affects the country’s gross MSW is its ability to operate effectively according to the Waste Management Hierarchy (Figure 1). Figure 1. Waste Management Hierarchy (Axil Integrated Services, n.d) As of today, there are mainly two technologies used for incineration of waste: moving grate boilers and fluidized bed boilers. The moving grate boilers are the most popular one, reaching a usage level of 87% in Europe (Cyranka & Jurczyk, 2016). The processed waste moves slowly in the layer which is then burned in a specific order. First it is dried, then it goes through the pyrolysis/gasification phase. Afterwards, it is moved into combustion and finally burnt out. See figure 2 for the remaining steps and more details. Figure 2. Demonstration of Moving Grate Boilers (Cyranka & Jurczyk, 2016) The facility in Sävenäs receives 550 000 tons of waste every year. Households stand for 50% while companies and other businesses stand for the remaining 50%. The waste is incinerated in four different ovens and is then purified in each respective line. Finally, the energy from the incineration is then distributed into district heating and electricity. Sweden’s WtE operation consists of two different incineration processes: ●Blaze Pan / Moving Grate Boilers: 80% of Sweden’s incineration processes are used with a blaze pan. It is very robust and good according to Lia Detterfelt who works with development questions at Renova. ●Fluidized underlay / Fluidized Bed Boilers: The remaining 20% is using this technique. This results in a good and even combustion. However, it requires pre-treatments, chemicals, pre-sorting and disintegration. The European Commission (2016) has a list of recommended technologies to use in order to achieve a good energy recovery level, more of this is explained in chapter 3.1.6 (Energy Quality): ●Co-incineration in combustion plants: gasification of solid recovered fuel (SRF) and co-incineration of the resulting syngas in the combustion plant; ●Co-incineration in cement kilns; ●Incineration in dedicated facilities: ●The use of super heaters and heat pumps; ○the utilization of the energy contained in flue gas; ○distributing chilled water through district cooling networks; ○and heat through low temperature district heat networks. ●Anaerobic digestion with upgrading of the biogas into biomethane for further distribution and utilization Renova’s choice of technology matches the dominant design in Europe and the positive and negative implications of processing technologies are well documented (e.g. UN Environment programme, IGES, IETC., 2020, The European Commission, 2016). The aforementioned together with the fact that processing technology effectiveness is being highly dependent on contextual factors such as waste composition (Dong, J., Tang, Y., Nzihou, A., Chi, Y., Weiss-Hortala, E., Ni, M., & Zhou, Z., 2018) has resulted in this report having a lesser technological focus and instead taking on a more holistic approach. Renova delivers 30% of the district heating and 5% of the electricity consumption in Gothenburg. Additionally, more than 90% of the waste that Renova receives is recycled into new material or energy. 1.2 Purpose and Research Questions The aim of this study is to find and understand different factors that contribute to Renova’s successful WtE initiative. The analysis focuses on contributional factors within the business model, value chain, culture, collaborations, institutions and policies. By investigating how Renova operates, inspirational guidelines can be acquired for new initiatives in other locations and settings. To achieve the goal, the following research questions were investigated: ●How does Renova's business model work? ●What supporting mechanisms are contributing to the successful operation? ●What can other countries learn from the Swedish approach? 1.3 Limitations ●This paper uses the WtE facility in Sävenäs as the main area of focus. Nevertheless, surrounding and interconnected operations and partnerships are also key to understanding the business. ●This study does not include any financial results but focuses solely on the WtE parameter. ●This study is not intended to compare and analyze different countries. However, some lighter comparisons are made in order to create context. 2 Methodology This case study is built upon a literature review, studying Renova, and a semi-structured interview with a specialist at Renova followed by continuous e-mail contact. A qualitative research method has been chosen in order for the research to have a deeper and detailed report of the Swedish waste to energy system, benefits and weak points. 2.1 Literature Review The literature review was conducted in order to create an understanding of the problem and find points of discussion for improvement. Furthermore, it enables a more objective viewpoint of the case when a wider knowledge base is acquired. Reliable sources such as Scopus, Google Scholar and companies’ websites were used in order to find relevant literature. The research was mainly focused on waste to energy, MSW, Renova, technologies, for MSW and policies. The following keywords were searched upon throughout the research: Waste to energy, Municipal solid waste, Renova, R1 value, environmental policy instruments. 2.2 Interview An semi-structured interview was conducted in order to collect information of what Renova considered to be the most important factors driving their success. The interview was followed up by e-mail which worked both as a communication channel as well as data transfer channel for documents and reports when additional data was needed. 2.3 Case Study The case study is based on Renovas operation in Sävenäs, Göteborg. Renova was chosen as it as of 2020 displays a R1-factor score, explained in more detail in chapter 3.1.6, of 1,28 which is considerably higher than the criterion for being classified as an “energy recovery plant”. Renova engages in several collaborations with customers, academics, bransch leaders as well as engaging in educational efforts, policy lobbying and has a municipal ownership model which together with its long term goal of becoming more sustainable makes them an interesting company to study. The aim of the case study is to obtain up to date information regarding waste to energy processes and success factors and to disseminate the underlying reasons for Renova’s success. Success is defined in this paper as a high R1 factor, which is the main parameter for evaluating the efficiency of a WtE plant (European Commission, n.d.). The case study includes one interview with Lia Detterfelt, a Strategic Developer of Waste and Recycling and their Environmental Impact at Renova which was followed by continuous e-mail communication containing answers to questions and documents. The meeting as well as e-mail communication was organized with her in order to collect more, richer and first hand information from Renova. 2.4 Data Analysis The trustworthiness of this research is crucial. In order to achieve this, a qualitative research method should be assessed based on the following criterias: credibility, confirmability, dependability and transferability (Korstjens & Moser, 2018). Before starting the research, topics were discussed with our professor and supervisor. Continuous feedback was given, ideas and how to move forward was also addressed. As mentioned before, reliable and well known sources were used in order to increase the project’s trustworthiness. 3.1.3 Business Model According to Marcus Linder, a researcher at Chalmers University of Technology, the business model is just as important as the technology used (Linder, 2011). He continues to explain that companies that are engaged in sustainable questions and integrating them into their business model can be more profitable long term. Linder’s statement is also strengthened by Malinauskaite et. al (2017). Other benefits are also stated such as enhancement of the diffusion of renewable energy, increasement of energy efficiency, reduction of the dependence on the EU regarding imported resources. Furthermore, it results in economic opportunities and long term competitiveness (Malinauskaite et. al, 2017). As mentioned, Renova is owned by ten municipalities and the enterprise itself is divided into two parts. The parent company, Renova AB, executes the work with directly assigned contracts with the previously mentioned municipalities, and the affiliated company Renova Miljö AB is in the free market to compete with other similar companies and public services. Their income streams consist of waste transportation from private and public businesses, and treatment of the waste. If the waste is classified as hazardous, a higher price will be required from the responsible organization. Another important income stream is the lending and selling of containers. Furthermore, they have other income streams such as finding valuable items and metals in the waste which are not burned in the process. These are then obtained and organized and finally sold to interested stakeholders. According to Lia Detterfelt, this is a good income stream for Renova. They are currently finishing a facility that will be able to separate zinc and copper from the burnt ash. Furthermore, Renova is also trying to find ways to separate fosfor from the ash. The organization receives no tax money from the government and is solely responsible for their own costs. Renova is continuously investing in improving their facilities in order to reach a higher energy recovery efficiency from the waste. They are active in research projects and development of better equipment that can endure higher temperatures which in turn yields a better effect of the incineration. Below are some examples of projects they are involved in: ●Waste Refinery – a Swedish Excellence Center for optimum conversion of waste material ●Swedish Waste Management R&D Initiatives – projects within the industry association ●Thermal Engineering Research Institute – R&D in fuel-based heat and power production ●HTC – the Swedish Competence Center for high-temperature corrosion ●FRIST – Forum for Risk Investigation and Soil Treatment ●POWRES – interdisciplinary waste R&D in Sweden 3.1.4 Collection of Waste Before the waste reaches the Renova’s WtE facility, hazardous material must be segregated, recyclable material sorted and food waste separated to ensure an efficient and environmentally safe operation. In Sweden, material recycling is a primary concern and the vast majority of the residents separate their garbage at the source. Sweden's inhabitants' awareness and commitment are a crucial element of success in the country's position as one of the world's leaders in sustainable waste management. Food waste, packaging made of metal, plastic, paper, and glass, newspapers, electronics, tires, and batteries are all separated in most Swedish households (Waste management, 2020). This strong and dedicated recycling culture has led to Sweden achieving the 2025 European Union goal for packaging recycling as of 2020, including all subcategories (Statistiska Centralbyrån, 2020). However, a higher rate of source separation will not only enhance the rate of recycling but also result in more efficient and cost-effective trash incineration and biogas production (e.g. Bernstad et al, 2011; Eriksson et al. 2005). This is especially true for the case of Renova as municipal waste, unlike industrial waste, is not sorted by Renova as it is already adequately sorted at collection. This implies that Renova can spend less resources on sorting municipal waste than incumbents with different cultural settings. According to Lia Detterfelt, one of Renova’s main functions is to assist and create good source sorting possibilities as well as communicate the importance of source sorting in the municipalities in which it operates. Although it is hard to quantify the contribution from Renova towards the recycling culture in Sweden, it is evident that it deserves at least partial credit for creating and sustaining the culture. 3.1.5 Environmental Policy Instruments Environmental Policy Instruments (EPI) are strategies or methods used by a nation to force, incite or promote a certain change. Figure 4 displays a spectrum with information based strategies in the far left, incentive based instruments in the middle and directive based regulation to the far right. Historically, Sweden has been very progressive and innovative with regards to implementation of EPI’s and has utilized the diversity in the spectra shown in figure 4. For example, Sweden was one of the first countries to enact environmental fees, including a tax on carbon dioxide emissions in 1991. In 1992, to address acidification, Sweden imposed a charge on NOX emissions from stationary combustion facilities such as power plants as a financial incentive to minimize emissions. The fees on carbon dioxide and NOX emissions boosted demand for emission abatement technologies which resulted in increased innovation (OECD, 2014). With regards to figure 4, fees and taxes such as these would be categorized in between incentive based instruments and directive based regulation. Another protruding example of major importance for the development of the Swedish WtE sector is the ban of sorted combustible and organic waste implemented in 2002. The ban is applied to all waste streams, be it municipal, commercial or industrial (Svensk Avfallshantering, 2018). Figure 5 displays the landfill rate as a percentage of the total national municipal waste that is landfilled. Figure 4. Range of Environmental Policy Instruments (Persson, Å., 2007). Figure 5. Landfilling Percentage per Country (European Environment Agency, 2021) In chapter 3.1.4, the Swedish recycling culture and its implications on Renova’s operation were outlined. It stated that Renova gets to enjoy the advantages of the culture without any considerable effort in return. This culture is not something that has always been but is instead a product of successful use of a diverse set of EPI’s. One remarkably successful initiative that has contributed towards the Swedish recycling culture is the so-called pant system introduced in 1984. The pant system is a can and bottle deposit system that returns money upon recycling. Unlike popular belief, it does not pay money but instead returns money as the consumer pays 1-2 SEK (≈ 0.1-0.2€) depending on the container, upon purchasing the product. It is therefore a form of involuntary tax with a voluntary choice of refund, i.e. it categorizes in between incentive based regulation and directive based regulation in figure 4. As of 2020, 88% of all cans and bottles covered by the pant system were recycled (Pantamera, n.d.). Placed more towards the left in figure 4, i.e. information based strategies, lies Sweden's educational and informational initiatives. There are numerous organizations engaging in educational and informational commitments. For example, there are organizations targeting children specifically with different kinds of games and lotteries (e.g. Materialvärlden, n.d; Sveriges miljömål, n.d.) as well as various informational sources for waste related issues (Sopor.nu, n.d.). There is even a national day on which children across the country gather to pick up litter and clean up the surroundings (Återvinningsgalan, n.d.). One part of Renova’s vision is to contribute towards a more sustainable society through education. They offer education for schools and universities as well as companies (Renova Miljö, n.d.). It is also the educational element in Renova’s vision that is the foundation for why Renova representatives agreed to assist in this study. Municipalities in Sweden are responsible for recycling and disposing of domestic waste, according to Swedish law (Avfall Sverige, 2021). As a result, municipalities play a critical role in fulfilling Sweden's increasing ambition in the waste management field, as well as the objective of a more circular economy. Swedish municipalities are primarily utilizing two different policy instruments: the weight based tariff (WBT) for waste management and special systems (SS) for separate collection of food waste. In the former, i.e. WBT, households pay for each unit of weight or volume of waste they dispose of whereas in the latter, SS, the households separate food waste in a separate container. There is an extensive set of literature regarding policy instruments and their implications on waste collection. Bruvoll et al. (2002) studied the reasons for why people engage in waste separation and found that the absolute majority, 97%, did so because they wanted to help the environment whereas 73 percent also stated that they wanted to feel responsible as well as 88 percent stating that “I should act the way I want others to act”. Such findings may assist in the creation of policies as understanding the fundamentals for waste sorting behavior are the foundation for creating high functioning policies. There is literature regarding tariff based policies (e.g. Bel and Gradus, 2016; Hage et al., 2018; Ålander, 2013) that implies that the WBT policy design could lower waste generation. Even though the WBT has the possibility to lower the generation of waste and increase the rate of recycling, comparative research of WBT and SS has shown that the former is inferior to the latter in encouraging waste producers to move up the waste management hierarchy (Andersson, C., & Stage, J., 2018). This chapter has taken on a holistic view of the EPI’s role in accomplishing change. The focus lies not in providing the definite answer for which EPI’s that performs best, but rather to shed light on the diverse set of tools that are available for policy creators. The examples of the Swedish practices implies that it is the sum of the whole, i.e. utilizing the diverse spectra in figure 4, that creates value. Renova representatives have explicitly pointed out the Swedish population’s ability to sort waste at the source as a major contributing factor to their success and if other nations are to reach the same state, they must carefully consider what policies to use and for which cause. 3.1.6 Energy Quality Sweden’s prominent reputation as a highly efficient WtE actor is largely because of the R1 factor. The R1 factor was introduced by the European commission in 2008 as a method to quantify the efficiency of a WtE plant and award applicants that score 0.60 or 0.65 or above, depending on plant age, the title of being an “energy recovery” plant (H. de Chefdebien, 2010). It is the main parameter in Europe to assess the efficiency of WtE plants. Since its introduction as the main parameter to assess the efficiency of WtE plants in Europe, Swedish plants in general and Renova Sävenäs specifically have continuously obtained the “energy recovery” status by large margins (European Commission, n.d.). To understand why Sweden scores so high, the R1-factor must be disseminated. 𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦= (𝐸𝑝−(𝐸𝑓+𝐸𝑖))/(0.97*(𝐸𝑤+𝐸𝑓)) In which: - Ep = The annual energy produced as heat or electricity. It is calculated in the form of electricity being multiplied by 2.6 and heat produced for commercial use by 1.1 (GJ/year) - Ef = The annual energy input to the system from fuel contributing to the production of steam (GJ/year) - Ei = The annual energy imported excluding “Ew” and “Ef” (GJ/year) - Ew = The annual energy contained in the treated waste calculated using the net calorific value of the waste (GJ/year) - 0.97 = The factor accounting for energy losses due to bottom ash and radiation (CEWEP, 2010) The R1 formula represents the efficiency of the energy recovery process and the efficiency of how energy is being used by clients. Because the formula also takes into consideration the usage of energy, it is highly important to recognize different energy qualities. Electricity is labeled as high quality energy whereas low temperature heat is categorized as low quality. High quality energy such as electricity can be used in energy intensive processes e.g. melting metals or powering a machine, something that a low quality energy source such as low tempered water would be unable to do. This ultimately implies that there are limitations for how energy can be used (Gudmundsson, O., Thorsen, J. E., & Zhang, L., 2013). Sweden has a robust district heating system which distributes tempered water for space heating and domestic hot water (Rydegran, E. 2021). The energy quality required for space heating is only 7% whereas domestic hot water requires an energy level of approximately 15%. This implies that Sweden is using a low quality energy source, tempered water, for an “low quality job” rather than using a high quality energy source such as electricity to produce heat. In this context, Gudmundsson, O. et al (2013) argues that: “It is therefore a complete waste of energy quality to serve these sectors with electricity, which has an energy quality of 100% or by burning fossil fuels in individual gas boilers. The alternative is to deliver low quality heat through the district heating network to end users.”. This implies that the district heating system allows Sweden to use adequate energy qualities for appropriate purposes. When analyzing the reasons for the high R1 score of Swedish plants, it is evident that the district heating system should be held accountable. Interestingly, not all countries have equal opportunity to score an equally high R1 rating due to the nature of the formula together with geographical and climate differences. The “heating degree day” (HDD) factor quantifies the demand for energy to heat in municipalities, something that varies greatly across Europe. For example, colder climates in e.g. Scandinavia naturally demand a higher amount of heat whereas countries in southern Europe naturally have a lower demand due to its warmer climate. Contrasting Finland and Portugal, large differences in the HDD value, 4871.03 and 1007.58 respectively can be seen. This implies that Finland’s demand for heat is almost five times that of Portugal, which by extension affects its possibility to score a high R1 rating (CIWM, n.d.). The implications of the HDD factor stretches beyond the opportunity to use a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plant or Heat Only (HO) plant. It has been statistically proven that the size of a plant stands in direct correlation to its efficiency. Furthermore, statistics show that the size of a plant tends to decrease with a decreasing HDD. Electricity only (EO) plants are found in warmer climates (HDD 2150), whereas CHP and heat only (HO) plants are located in colder climates (HDD > 3350). Despite the data dispersion, all trend lines linking the size of WtE plants to HDD are decreasing as HDD increases, implying that WtE plants in warmer places are larger than those in colder areas, regardless of plant type (Electricity only, Heat only and Combined Heat and Power). 3.1.7 Circular Economy In 2015, Circular Economy was a concept that was encouraged by the European Commission. They proposed recommendations regarding waste legislation which was linked with Circular Economy. The aim was “to stimulate Europe's transition towards a circular economy which will boost global competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and generate new jobs” (European Commission, 2016). The action plan that was proposed included several targets for all members of the EU. These are: ●to reach up to a recycling common target of 65% of municipal waste and 75% of packaging waste by 2030; ●to reduce landfill to maximum of 10% of municipal waste by 2030; ●to prohibit landfilling of separately collected waste through the promotion of economic tools; ●to have clear and simplified definitions, methods and standards for recycling rates all over EU; ●to have concrete forms that promote the close-loop of the re-use material option; ●to stimulate EU towards a sustainable market place by offering greener products and service programs that support recovery and recycling systems These targets are correlated with the waste management hierarchy which means that reuse and recycling is important to consider before considering energy recovery (Malinauskaite et. al, 2017 & Rada et. al, 2018). The European Commission also states that future waste management plans should include reuse and recycling as a priority in order to reduce the risk of “stranded assets”. Furthermore, it is recommended that members of the EU should gradually reduce the public support for energy recovery in regards to mixed waste, alternatively start with incineration taxes (European Commission, 2016 & Malinauskaite et. al, 2017). While WtE is inclined towards a more negative direction in regards to the waste management hierarchy, there is a different approach to it which is more positive in regards to renewable energy point of view. The Renewable Energy Directive has defined biomass as a renewable energy source which means that waste, in their view, is no longer an issue since it is classified as a green fuel for WtE (European Commission, 2016 & Malinauskaite et. al, 2017). Renova also encourages companies to integrate a circular economy thinking into their core business. In the end it should be easy to reuse or recycle, also shown in the waste management hierarchy. As mentioned in chapter 3.1.3, it is important to incorporate sustainability into the business model. As a result, it can be more material efficient and also profitable in today’s market. For example, when designing a product it is important to consider if the materials are hard to break down or consist of rare substances. The product’s longevity is becoming more important and its capacity for reusing, maintaining and repairing. Furthermore, companies are offering lending agreements on their products which helps closing the loop once the product’s lifespan is over. Afterwards, components that are still usable should be disintegrated and used for other products. The next step is recycling the materials that can not be reused. Even at the molecule and atom level it is possible to reuse and recycle. Food waste that is rotten to metan (biogas) is an example of this. Finally, the materials that can not be reused or recycled are put into furnaces for energy recovery. Above points are important to consider in order for a country to be successful when it comes to sustainability and more specifically energy efficiency, recyclability etc. Every stakeholder has a responsibility to help make a country as energy efficient as possible. 4 Discussion Waste to energy is an incredibly complex system to organize. There is not a finalized answer to the world wide issue regarding this complexity and there is a high probability that it never will. The MLP perspective is an excellent tool for analyzing socio-technical transitions, especially transitions linked to sustainability issues, and the very essence of the MLP framework is that transitions are highly dependent on global, regional and local contexts and factors. This implies that a dominant regime in Sweden may or may not be equally successful in another country and setting. Also, the transition i.e. the process of acquiring said regime may be inadequate due to unalignment of the different levels of the MLP framework. As of this, it is important to consider the presented contributory factors to success as guidelines and sources of inspiration rather than the definite answer. As outlined in the chapter 3.1.6, the R1-factor, which is one of the dominant parameters for evaluating the efficiency of a WtE plant, is highly dependent on the synergies between the HDD-factor and a heating plant. Contextual synergies like this cannot be manipulated or altered which ultimately implies that the possibility for two different geographical locations to score equally high, according to the R1 factor, is in fact not equal. This raises the question to whether the R1 factor is actually an appropriate method of quantifying the efficiency of an WtE plant. As waste management strategies are deemed to differ according to the MLP framework due to different contextual settings, the R1 factor may be an insufficient method of evaluation due to its dependency on contextual settings. Similar critique has been presented by several scholars (e.g: Vakalis, S., & Moustakas, K. 2019); Saveyn, H., Eder, P., Ramsay, M., Thonier, G., Warren, K., & Hestin, M., 2016; CIWM n.d.). Notwithstanding the issues of the R1-formula and the implications of a sociotechnical transition, other countries may benefit from drawing inspiration from the operation of Renova and the Swedish regime. Whereas recycling and WtE are two different things in waste management, it has been proven that they are interconnected. A competent recycling culture is not only increasing the actual recycling but is also enhancing source sorting which can be a resource draining activity if done at and by the WtE company. Considering this, it is evident that the recycling culture is a major supporting mechanism for Renova. The educational efforts and continuous lobbying towards different organizations done by Renova explains Renova’s part in creating and sustaining this competent culture which outlines an example of what other companies can learn from Renova. An interesting topic for future study would be to depict what exact role the municipal ownership model plays in Renova’s influence when it comes to lobbying for policies and regulation. Environmental Policy Instruments can be great drivers of development if used correctly. This study has presented and categorized some of the most prominent policy initiatives in Sweden and outlined their impact. The presented policies cover the whole spectrum with information based strategies in the far left, incentive based instruments in the middle and directive based regulation to the far right. The importance of adequately designed policies and the impact of lobbying has proven to be a determining factor of outcome in the past. Historical examples such as the biogas initatives in Brazil (De Oliveira, L. G. S., & Negro, S. O., 2019), biofuel developments in Norway (Fevolden, A. M., & Klitkou, A., 2017) and the Netherlands (Suurs, R. A., & Hekkert, M. P., 2009) display the importance of adequate policies for creating and sustaining innovation which stands in accordance with the findings of this study. Whereas this paper provides recommendations and inspiration of how other companies can become more efficient with regards to WtE, the recommendations are of little or no worth if the stakeholders do not understand the complexity of a socio-technical transition. The implications from a The Multi Level Perspective, which is a well used framework in sustainability transitions, has been presented in this paper. Nevertheless, there are other famous theories such as the Strategic Niche Management by Schot & Geels (2008) that are also recommended to consider. 5 Conclusion This study has enlightened different contributing factors towards Renova’s successful operation. Even though the study is executed with focus on Renova, the majority of the mechanisms supporting and enhancing the operations actually lie outside of Renova’s business. First, the Swedish culture of sorting trash at the source is depicted as a positive factor for Renova’s operation. Renova gets to enjoy the advantages of this culture and should also be given at least partial credit for being part of creating and sustaining this culture. Furthermore, the holistic approach of the study has displayed Sweden's diverse use of different Environmental Policy Instruments to be vital in creating a beneficial setting for Renova to thrive in. Additionally, the high R1 factor of the Swedish WtE plants are the foundation for why Sweden is regarded as a role model when it comes to WtE. When disintegrating the R1 factor, it is evident that geographical and climate differences have a great effect on the outcome of the R1 calculation. Sweden does have an extensive district heating system in place which allows Renova to deliver energy in the form of heat and Sweden's climate also implies a high demand for heat. It is important to remember that it is not Renova that is responsible for the district heating system which further strengthens the previous conclusion that the supporting mechanisms lie outside of Renova’s operation. Important to mention though, Renova boasts excellent figures with regards to WtE efficiency and they do of course deserve credit for this, yet the study indicates that at least the same amount of credit should be given to Sweden's politicians and policymakers. References A Andersson, C., & Stage, J. (2018). Direct and indirect effects of waste management policies on household waste behavior: The case of Sweden. Waste management, 76, 19-27. Avfall Sverige. (2021). Kommunalt Ansvar. Retrieved November 12, 2021, from https://www.avfallsverige.se/avfallshantering/kommunen-ansvarar-for-avfall-fran-hushall/. CIWM (n.d.). Advanced Solutions International, I - The R1 energy efficiency formula. Avfall Sverige. (2019). Swedish Waste Management B Bernstad, A.; la Cour Jansen, J.; Aspegren, H., 2011 Life cycle assessment of a household solid waste source separation programme: A Swedish case study. Waste Manag. Bel, G., Gradus, R., 2016. Effects of unit-based pricing on household waste collection demand: a meta-regression analysis. Resour. Energy Econ. 44, 169–182 C Corvellec, H., Bramryd, T., & Hultman, J. (2012). The business model of solid waste management in Sweden–a case study of two municipally-owned companies. Waste Management & Research, 30(5), 512-518. CEWEP. (2010). 5th CEWEP Congress on Waste-to-Energy. Cyranka M., Jurczyk M. (2016) Energy Recovery from Municipal Waste based on Moving Grate Technology https://doi.org/10.1515/agriceng-2016-0003 D Moyaa D, Aldásb C, Lópeza G, Kaparajuc P. (2017). Municipal solid waste as a valuable renewable energy resource: a worldwide opportunity of energy recovery by using Waste-To-Energy Technologies De Oliveira, L. G. S., & Negro, S. O. (2019). Contextual structures and interaction dynamics in the Brazilian Biogas Innovation System. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 107, 462-481. Dong, J., Tang, Y., Nzihou, A., Chi, Y., Weiss-Hortala, E., Ni, M., & Zhou, Z. (2018). Comparison of waste-to-energy technologies of gasification and incineration using life cycle assessment: Case studies in Finland, France and China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 203, 287-300. E European Comission. (n.d.). Waste framework directive. Trist, E,. 1981. The evolution of socio-technical systems - a conceptual framework and an action research program. University of Pennsylvania Eriksson, O.; Carlsson Reich, M.; Frostell, B.; Björklund, A.; Assefa, G.; Sundqvist, J.O.; Granath, J.; Baky, A.; Thyselius, L., 2005. Municipal solid waste management from a systems perspective. J. Clean. European Environment Agency. (2021). Municipal waste landfill rates in Europe by country. E.C. Rada, M. Ragazzi, V. Torretta, G. Castagna, L. Adami, L.I. Cioca, 2018, Circular Economy and Waste to Energy https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5039237 F G Gudmundsson, O., Thorsen, J. E., & Zhang, L. (2013). Cost analysis of district heating compared to its competing technologies. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 176, 3-13. Geels, F. W., Sovacool, B. K., Schwanen, T., & Sorrell, S. (2017). Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization. Science, 357(6357), 1242-1244. Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental innovation and societal transitions, 1(1), 24-40. H Hage, O., Sandberg, K., Söderholm, P., Berglund, C., 2018. The regional heterogeneity of household recycling: a spatial-econometric analysis of Swedish plastic packaging waste. Lett. Spat. Resour. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12076-017-0200-3. H. de Chefdebien, 2010. R1-formula, 5th CEWEP congress on Waste-to-Energy, Antwerp, I J J. Malinauskaite, H. Jouhara, D. Czajczynska, P. Stanchev, E. Katsou, P. Rostkowski, R.J. Thorne, J. Colon, S. Ponsa, F. Al-Mansour, L. Anguilano, I.C. Lopez, A.Vlasopoulos, N. Spencer (2017) Municipal solid waste management and waste-to-energy in the context of a circular economy and energy recycling in Europe doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.128 K Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). European Journal of General Practice Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24 (1), 120–124. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=igen20 doi: 10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092 L M. Linder (2011) Hur blir företagets miljöengagemang lönsamt? Retrieved December 12 2021, from https://www.mynewsdesk.com/se/renova/pressreleases/hur-blir-foeretagets-miljoeengageman g-loensamt-843232 M Materialvärlden. (n.d.). För pedagoger. Retrieved November 18, 2021, from https://materialvarlden.se/pedagoger/. Miljöutbildningar för företag: Renova Miljö (n.d.). Retrieved November 18, 2021, from https://www.renova.se/produkter-och-tjanster/utbildning/. N N. Sönnichsen, & 27, A. (2021). Europe: Waste-to-energy capacity by country 2020. Statista. Retrieved November 11, 2021, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122082/europe-waste-to-energy-capacity-by-country/. O OECD. (2014). Sweden - OECD. Environmental Performance Reviews. Retrieved November 17, 2021, from https://www.oecd.org/environment/country-reviews/Sweden%20Highlights%20web%20pages 2.pdf. P Pantamera. (n.d.). Retrieved November 17, 2021, from https://pantamera.nu/. Persson, Å. (2007). Choosing environmental policy instruments: case studies of municipal waste policy in Sweden and England (Doctoral dissertation, The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE)). Q R Rydegran, E. (2021). Energiföretagen Sverige - Fjärrvärme. Energiföretagen. Renova. (n.d.). Ledande Miljöföretag inom avfall och återvinning. Fevolden, A. M., & Klitkou, A. (2017). A fuel too far? Technology, innovation, and transition in failed biofuel development in Norway. Energy research & social science, 23, 125-135. S Statistiska Centralbyrån. (2020). Återvinning av förpackningar i Sverige. Suurs, R. A., & Hekkert, M. P. (2009). Cumulative causation in the formation of a technological innovation system: The case of biofuels in the Netherlands. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 76(8), 1003-1020. Salmenperä, H. (2021). Different pathways to a recycling society–Comparison of the transitions in Austria, Sweden and Finland. Journal of cleaner production, 292, 125986. Salmenperä, H. (2021). Different pathways to a recycling society–Comparison of the transitions in Austria, Sweden and Finland. Journal of cleaner production, 292, 125986. Svensk Avfallshantering (2018). Avfall Sverige. Retrieved November 17, 2021, from https://www.avfallsverige.se/fileadmin/user_upload/Publikationer/Svensk_avfallshantering_2 018_01.pdf. Sopor.nu. (n.d.). Återvinn Din Värld. Retrieved November 18, 2021, from https://www.sopor.nu/. Saveyn, H., Eder, P., Ramsay, M., Thonier, G., Warren, K., & Hestin, M. (2016). Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of waste-to-energy. Seville: European Commission. Schot, J., & Geels, F. W. (2008). Strategic niche management and sustainable innovation journeys: theory, findings, research agenda, and policy. Technology analysis & strategic management, 20(5), 537-554. T The history of district heating. (n.d.). The history and heritage U United Nations (2021) Turning to sustainable global business: 5 things to know about the circular economy. https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/06/1093802 UN Environment programme, IGES, IETC. (2020). Waste to Energy Incineration. UNEP & ISWA (2020). United Nations Environment Programme V Vakalis, S., & Moustakas, K. (2019). Applications of the 3T method and the R1 formula as efficiency assessment tools for comparing waste-to-energy and landfilling. Energies, 12(6), 1066. W Waste management. Smart City Sweden. (2020). Retrieved November 11, 2021, from https://smartcitysweden.com/focus-areas/climate-energy-environment/waste-management/. World Energy Council. Waste to Energy (2013). Retrieved December 28, 2021, from https://www.worldenergy.org/assets/images/imported/2013/10/WER_2013_7b_Waste_to_Ene rgy.pdf X Y Z Å Återvinningsgalan. (n.d.). Retrieved November 18, 2021, from http://www.atervinningsgalan.se/page.xhtml?arrangeSubpage=926. Ålander, J., 2013. Economic Incentives to Reduce Waste: The Effect of WeightBased Fee on Household Waste. Stockholm University, Stockholm. Master’s thesis. Ä Ö