On 17 July, the Commission published its proposal to reform the EU ETS (COM(2026) 616). Municipal waste incineration, covering installations above three tonnes per hour, would face phased surrender obligations rising from 25 per cent of emissions in 2031 to 100 per cent in 2034, with a conditional member state opt-out to 2035. This is a delay compared with the 2028 start date foreseen in the current directive. With allowance prices near EUR 80 per tonne, below the EUR 100-plus levels some national carbon schemes were designed around, the reform reflects Europe's wider push to protect industrial competitiveness by softening the cost of carbon.
The Nordic systems differ: Sweden's larger plants sit inside the ETS, Denmark stacks national taxes on top of it, and Norway splits between ETS-covered plants and a national tax based on a default fossil factor. Yet the direction has been common. Over the past two years, Geminor has seen increased sorting, systematic measurement of plastic content and price differentiation favouring low-plastic waste across the region.
"A price on incineration alone was never going to deliver a green transition," says Kirstie Jones-Apeland, Director of Innovation & Sustainability at Geminor. "This reform covers one part of a complex picture for waste management. The same review obliged the Commission to look at landfill too, and the industry still needs to know how those emissions will be measured and brought into the equation.”
"The Nordic incentive is built on paying for real emissions. That is what has driven the focus on removing plastics upstream," says Ralf Schöpwinkel, Chief Commercial Officer. "The commercial question now is whether a weaker European signal redraws the map. Will plastic-rich waste streams flow towards markets with no carbon cost, and what does that mean for waste availability and gate fees in the Nordics? In a market this fragmented, cross-border overview becomes a competitive advantage in itself."
The proposal leaves a series of strategic questions open for plant owners, municipalities and waste producers across the region:
- Will Nordic governments revisit their national carbon trajectories now that Brussels is moving more slowly than assumed?
- How strong will the Nordic position be against the other large markets, notably Germany, BeNeLux and the UK, through the phase-in period?
- Through the 2031–2034 ETS phase-in, waste-to-energy supplying district heating remains eligible for free allocation, before this is phased out towards 2040. Does that give Nordic combined heat and power plants a real advantage, and for how long?
- Will the sorting and price differentiation trends of recent years continue, or stall?
- What does a softer signal mean for operators that moved ahead of regulation, with plastic-free fuel strategies and carbon capture investments?
The proposal must still pass the Parliament and the Council, and national schemes face their own reviews. Until then, the direction of the Nordic market will be set by how firmly governments hold to their decarbonisation commitments. Geminor is now conducting a deeper analysis of the consequences for the Nordic market.