English Report From Green Living in Europe
Waste in
Hamburg and Bergen
Recycling, reuse, and distance
heating are all important elements in environmental politic. Hamburg was
elected as the greenest city of 2011 in Europe, but in which extent are the
city and its citizens using these factors? What can a small city located on the
west coast of Norway learn from the million town Hamburg? Everything can get
better, so what can the greenest city of 2011 do to improve their environmental
situation? These questions are interesting to discuss because of the ongoing
global warming and because it is important that the different countries in the
world help each other to solve this world wide problem.
Hamburg is a
typical example of a city that has gone through, and is still in, a period of
urbanization. Most of the citizens is located around the city center were most
of the people also work. With 1, 8 inhabitants living in the city, there are
produced a lot of waste. Almost every household in Hamburg have their own
sorting system, but in different sizes. Some households only sort biological
waste and paper, while others also sort metal, plastic and glass. The
possibilities for recycling in Hamburg are fantastic: They have as much as 13
abilities were waste is reformed to new objects. In addition to these, Hamburg
has four huge refuse destructors. One of them, the largest and most famous
one,
is located in Stellingen west from Hamburg. Here are both normal waste and
biological waste brought in large trucks, and it is burned into ashes that
could be used for building materials to for instance streets. The environmental
situation at the refuse destructor was in 1973 not very good. The different
emissions were extremely high, and the pollution was not sustainable at all.
This got better for each year, and only 17 years later, all of the emissions
were considerable improved. Here are some good examples:
-
Chlorine emissions were reduced from 100 mg/Nm3
to 10 mg/Nm3
-
Dust emissions were reduced from 150 mg/Nm3
to 10 mg/Nm3
-
Sulphur emissions
were reduced from 1000 mg/Nm3 to only 50 mg/Nm3
Such large constructions cost a
lot of money, not just to build, but also to operate. The refuse destructors in
Hamburg actually have more capacity than there is waste in the city. If the
destructors run low on garbage, the city will lose a great amount of money.
Therefore, they import waste from other countries, especially Great Britain.
This leads to another environmental problem: Large trucks carrying waste the
whole way from Great Britain is causing high CO2 emissions which is
not sustainable for our environment. The only good argument the lecturer at the
refuse destructor had to this, was that the trucks would drive anyways.
Some of the waste that is burned
at the refuse destructors are also used to warm up houses by distance heating,
but according to the lecturer, Hamburg has a far better potential than what is used
now.
To understand the waste situation
in Hamburg, it is a good idea to look at the different parts of the city. St.
Pauli and Hafencity are two pretty different places in the same city. While
Hafencity is a modern area with up-to-date houses and new values, St. Pauli has
a lot of older, dilapidated houses. It is easy to spot out the differences in
the two districts, not only at the architecture, but also at the people who
live there. It is obviously an huge difference in how much money the city has
spent at Hafencity in proportion to St. Pauli. This also comes to the surface
when we look at the waste situation. Modern values says that everything have to
be “green”, and a rich district like Hafencity would off course follow these by
having a functional waste system. While there is a lot of garbage at the
streets in St. Pauli, you would have difficulties finding as much as a plastic
bag at the clean streets in Hafencity.
Bergen has a lot to improve, but plans are already
made to make the situation better. The city has a plan, which is making an
underground waste system. With this system, there will be less CO2 emissions
by cars carrying waste. The waste system will bring the waste to the refuse
incinerator where it will be burned, and hopefully used for distance heating.
Distance heating is also something Bergen has to improve. It is just in a small
scale, but the potential is much bigger. Like in Hamburg, Bergen is also carrying
trash, but the other way; Bergen is paying Sweden to burn dangerous waste. This
is also causing big CO2 emissions from large trucks, which is a
problem for the environment. In Bergen, not as many households have sorting
systems like in Hamburg. People’s thoughts about sorting are different in the
two cities. While in Hamburg most people want to help the environment by
sorting metal, glass, paper, bio and others, people in Bergen think too less
about it, and throw it all in the same garbage. However, paper sorting is usual
in Bergen, and a lot of households also sort bio waste. Both Hamburg and Bergen
are recycling bottles, in a system where you get money back if you bring it
back to the shop. This is a simple trick that is well known all over the world:
Treatment.
The city of Hamburg has come far
in the process of being an environmental friendly city, but there is a much
larger potential, especially in the districts that is not as rich as Hafencity.
Hamburg could use more distance heating, and improve the situation in for
instance St. Pauli by setting up new trash cans. Bergen has a lot to learn from
Hamburg, especially when it comes to recycling in general and recycling
stations. The people in both cities have to be more conscious about the whole
environmental situation. It is only this way we could make a change.
Posted by Andrea
