FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Study estimates 3.4 kg of fossil-origin CO₂ per kWh of net electricity exported; four plants burned 735,840 tonnes of plastic.
NEW DELHI, India | 29 October 2026
A new report, The Climate Cost of Burning Waste: The Carbon Intensity of Waste-to-Energy Incinerators in Delhi, and Why It Should Not Be Funded as Climate Action, finds that electricity generated by Delhi’s four operational waste-to-energy (WTE) incinerators carries a high fossil-carbon burden. The joint study done by the National Alliance for Climate and Ecological Justice (NACEJ) and the Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) estimates 3.4 kg of fossil-origin (plastic waste) CO₂ per kWh of net electricity exported – around 4.7 times the Central Electricity Authority’s weighted-average factor for Indian grid electricity and 3.5 times the coal factor used in the report.
Accounting for total stack CO₂ emissions from the incineration of both fossil-derived and biogenic waste could substantially increase the estimated emissions, potentially bringing them to approximately twice the fossil-origin CO₂ emissions reported in this study.
The report examines the WTE incinerators Bawana, Ghazipur, Okhla and Tehkhand, whose combined rated electricity-generation capacity is 84 MW. Drawing on regulatory records, electricity-sector data, CPCB-EPR records and IPCC methods, it assesses fossil-origin CO₂ from plastic combustion against the plants’ estimated electricity output. Delhi offers a relevant case study for other Global South cities where waste is mixed, moisture-rich and often poorly segregated.
|
7,35,840 tons plastic reported as incinerated by four plants in 2023 |
42% plastic burnt as refuse-derived fuel (RDF) feed by the four WTE incinerators |
2.1 million tons estimated direct fossil-origin CO₂ from plastic combustion |
The Carbon Intensity Gap
Estimated fossil-origin CO₂ intensity per kWh of electricity
*The 3.42 figure is an estimate of fossil-origin CO₂ from plastics alone per kWh of net electricity exported; it is not a full life-cycle estimate or a measure of all stack emissions. Grid and coal figures are comparison factors cited in the report.
Plastic combustion is central to the climate cost
The four plants reported processing 735,840 tonnes of plastic in 2023 – roughly 2,016 tonnes per day. The report estimates that plastics made up about 42% of their RDF feed by mass. Burning plastic releases fossil carbon as CO₂ and destroys material that could otherwise be targeted for prevention, reuse or recycling. The study’s direct emissions estimate is equivalent to the annual emissions of about 1.44 million cars, using the report’s comparison.
The “plastic paradox”: burning plastic can generate EPR value
India’s Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) framework recognises WTE incinerators as Plastic Waste Processors, allowing them to generate EPR certificates for quantities of plastic they burn. The report argues this can create a financial incentive for combustion rather than reductions in plastic use, reuse and refill systems, or improved packaging.
A regulatory contradiction
The report also questions the classification of WTE incineration as an “essential environmental service”. CPCB introduced a Blue Category for Essential Environmental Services in 2025 that includes WTE incineration; a separate CFA assessment estimated a Pollution Index of 100/100 for Delhi’s four plants. The index measures pollution potential, not climate emissions.
Very little electricity for a high carbon cost
|
~198 kWh estimated net electricity exported per tonne of raw municipal solid waste |
Less than 1.5% estimated share of Delhi’s total electricity demand supplied by the four plants |
Although this is a Delhi case study, the findings have wider relevance as WTE incineration is promoted across the Global South as a waste-management, energy and climate intervention. The report argues that international climate finance should back measurable emissions reductions and zero-waste systems, not infrastructure that depends on continued waste generation and plastic combustion.
What the report calls for
|
1. Exclude municipal-waste incineration from climate finance, including new and expanded projects. |
2. End carbon crediting for municipal-waste incineration, including reconsideration of Clean Development Mechanism credits. |
|
3. Remove mixed municipal-waste incineration from renewable energy classifications and “Blue” categorisation. |
4. End EPR credits and other incentives that reward plastic combustion; prioritise prevention, reuse, source segregation, recycling, biological treatment and waste-worker integration. |
Delhi cannot burn its way out of a waste crisis. Waste-to-energy plants are incinerating thousands of tonnes of mixed waste every day, including valuable plastics, to generate limited electricity at a significant fossil carbon cost. Calling this ‘green’ or ‘renewable’ energy ignores the carbon being released and the valuable materials being destroyed. We need segregation, waste prevention, reuse, recycling and decentralised composting — not an ever-expanding dependence on incineration.” said Bhavreen Kandhari from Warrior Moms.
“Burning mixed waste in a waste-to-energy (WtE) facility is a clear violation of the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026. The new rules demand four-way source segregation and place energy recovery from incineration at the bottom of the waste hierarchy, as the least preferred option for waste management. Yet WtE plants have become the aspiration of Indian cities, for all the wrong reasons. The reality is worse: India has low per capita waste generation and an even lower combustible waste fraction. WtE operators know that power generation from feeding only combustible, non-recyclable waste would be meagre, so they intentionally burn mixed waste to keep the furnaces going. Most of these plants need more waste than cities produce, and consume more energy than they will ever generate.” said Siddharth Ghanshyam Singh, Programme Manager, Centre for Science and Environment, Delhi.
“Waste incineration is being projected as climate action, but it is among the most carbon-intensive ways to generate electricity. It also displaces the livelihoods of thousands of marginalised waste workers, releases carcinogenic pollutants, leaves toxic residues, and deprives the soil of nutrients. We must stop burning waste forthwith,” said Soumya Dutta, Research Director of the report and Trustee, MAUSAM (Movement for Advancing Understanding of Sustainability and Mutuality), and former Advisory Board member, UN Climate Technology Centre and Network.
“Extracting fossil fuels, producing ever more plastic, and then burning the resulting waste in waste-to-energy plants is an unending cycle that doesn’t solve the problem; it only makes the waste mountains disappear from view. Incineration simply converts that waste into CO2, an invisible gas that continues to warm the planet. Financing these facilities with climate funds is not a Zero Waste solution, and it must stop.” said Anwesha Maharana, co-author of the report and visiting Scientist, United Nations University – Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS)
“Europe moved its waste from landfills to incinerators expecting a climate gain. Twenty-five years later, our waste system emits about as much as before. We have simply traded landfill methane for fossil CO₂ from burning plastic, and we are now paying to undo it, from carbon pricing to stranded capacity. Delhi and other cities should not repeat our mistake” said Janek Vähk, Zero Pollution Policy Manager, Zero Waste Europe.
Link to full report – https://cenfa.org/the-climate-cost-of-burning-waste/
