Jane Davidson, environment minister, WAG

 We must stop thinking of waste as something we need to dispose of and start thinking of it as a resource

 
Jane Davidson, environment minister, WAG 

The WAG is encouraging the 22 local authorities in Wales to make use of amendments to the waste database WasteDataFlow to report a range of end markets for recovered material – as opposed to just one destination as was the case in the past.

The mechanism to do this will be also be available to councils in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland when it comes into effect to report data for the period October to December 2010. This data will be made available in March 2011.

The WAG had previously considered proposals to make local authorities legally obligated to report end markets for material to encourage transparency and encourage material to be reprocessed locally.

However, plans tabled by Assembly Member Nerys Evans in February 2008 were criticised for the potential cost involved and loss of competitive advantage (see letsrecycle.com story).

The new amendments to WasteDataFlow have no binding obligation for councils to report the outcomes.

A spokeswoman for the WAG told letsrecycle.com that councils would be “encouraged” to make use of the opportunity as there is “no big stick” in the form of penalties backing up the initiative.

Environment minister Jane Davidson, who had supported Ms Evans’ attempts to drive councils to reveal end markets, welcomed this latest move to encourage councils to offer greater transparency over their recycling.

She said: “We must stop thinking of waste as something we need to dispose of and start thinking of it as a resource. By keeping as much as possible of this waste in Wales local authorities can generate much-needed funds, while Welsh industries won’t need to look overseas for raw materials.

“It is still better to recycle overseas than to landfill at home. But it is greener and makes more financial sense to process recycling here in Wales where Welsh local authorities, businesses and jobs can benefit.”

Reporting

Proposals for greater transparency around recycling appeared again in the Wales Municipal Waste Sector Plan – which is intended to feed into the Towards Zero Waste strategy for Wales. In the Sector Plan, it was identified that there was a need for local authorities to “report more accurately”.

Under the previous WasteDataFlow system, councils had to report the final destination of their waste which was categorised by facility type. However, under the new system, councils will be able to put a company and site name against the end location for the material in the question.

The WAG, Environment Agency Wales and the Welsh Local Government Association are working closely with local authorities to help them to make the most of the new system.

In its response to the government’s call for evidence for the review, which ended last week (October 7), the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee (LARAC), said it believed that local authorities were generally best placed to decide how to deliver waste services in their area, which it claimed fitted well with the government’s localism agenda

Giving councils powers to fine residents for failing to recycle was among the measures suggested by LARAC

But, it warned that a combination of reduced targets for individual councils, financial constraints and the separation of waste from carbon drivers could reduce recycling service provision.

“Unless these issues are addressed by the government, ‘localism’ without appropriate drivers will reduce the incentive for some communities to increase recycling,” LARAC said.

The issue of how councils can improve their recycling performance in the current economic climate and how the waste review will impact on this is set to be one of the key topics addressed at next month’s LARAC Conference and Celebration Awards, which are being held in Liverpool on November 3 and 4.

Writing to the body’s members this week, LARAC chair Joy Blizzard said: “There is little sign that life in the public sector is going to get any easier, which is why the entire focus of LARAC 2010 is how to deliver recycling in the most efficient way possible.”

Powers

In its response to the review, LARAC said that, among the new powers government should consider for councils were to be able to make charges for waste management and recycling services, which it claimed would make the decision on charges “locally democratically accountable”.

It also highlighted the role that additional powers could play in achieving the waste review’s aim of minimising illegal waste activity, claiming that: “To fully embrace a zero waste concept suitable sanctions are needed against those that continue to undermine LA’s and local communities recycling efforts.”

“In this respect, additional powers would be welcomed that encourage recycling, perhaps for use of the fixed penalty scheme for failure to recycle, or to place correct materials in the correct bins.

“Local authorities would use these powers only as a last resort, however,” it added.

LARAC said that, in this area, the government should also give councils new powers to “sequester” revenues from enforcement actions, alongside a general increase in penalties for environmental crime.

Incentives

In its response, LARAC also advocated that the government should take an approach to incentives for recycling which would reflect its philosophy of localism.

It claimed that, in light of this, “local authorities are best placed to respond to local needs, perceptions and opportunities, and should be given powers to respond to these, including powers to choose what incentives are most appropriate for their communities”.

The coalition has been a strong supporter of the ‘carrot’ rather than the ‘stick’ approach for incentives, endorsing the US-devised recycling rewards scheme RecycleBank (see letsrecycle.com story), while also proposing to remove councils’ ability to run ‘pay-as-you-throw’ schemes (see letsrecycle.com story).

LARAC gave qualified support for the government’s approach, stating that: “In general LARAC support the concept of ‘rewards’ as a motivational tool but recognises that they do not incentivise everyone. There is also a danger that such schemes may become incentives for people to consume more.”

The association has already expessed its concern over the government’s apparent support for one scheme ahead of alternative ways of encouraging recycling (see letsrecycle.com story)

Concerns

Among the areas of concern or in need of action that LARAC also highlighted in its response were:

• To define ‘zero waste’ fully to avoid confusion with ‘zero waste to landfill’ – LARAC said the term ‘working towards zero waste’ would be more appropriate;
• The need for further measures to encourage investment in waste treatment and recycling as PFI comes to an end;
• Support for using skills and knowledge from private sector organisations and local communities to undertake roles traditionally carried out by public sector bodies – such as incentivising groups to bring fly-tippers to justice;
• Changing licencing for civic amenity sites to encourage their use for trade waste as well;
• Ensuring that any voluntary producer responsibility deals are monitored and reviewed to make sure they are not compromised by ‘freeriders’;
• Removing regulatory barriers to re-use and developing re-use networks;
• Making sure waste policy is “more closely aligned” with policies on health promotions and social exclusion – such as a link between healthy eating and food waste reduction.

LARAC’s response also sees it echo concerns raised by other local authority figures about the effect that a move away from alternate weekly collections could have on both council costs and recycling rates (see letsrecycle.com story).

When the government published the terms of reference for the waste review in July 2010, it said it would work with councils to increase the “frequency and quality” of collections (see letsrecycle.com story).

But, in its response, LARAC warned that “any imposed move away from systems such as AWC, back to traditional weekly residual waste collections would not only raise significant budget pressures at a time where reducing the fiscal deficit is a key priority, but would also go against the localism agenda and could only have a detrimental effect on waste minimisation and recycling rates.”

The government is set to publish the first results of the waste review next spring.

The research, which was carried out by environmental consultancy Axion Consulting, aims to help WRAP understand the recycling outlets for flat panel displays (FPDs), as there are currently no automated commercial processes in the UK and Europe.

However, due to an increased uptake in items, WRAP anticipates that the number of FPDs in the WEEE waste stream will rise “dramatically” in the next few years, requiring a suitable recycling outlet.

In particular the trial looked at the presence of mercury in the cold compact fluorescent light in the ‘backlighting’ system for LCD TVs, laptop computers and desktop monitors. The existence of this mercury means that end-of-life FPDs are classed as hazardous waste.

The study took the form of four demonstration trials. The first looked at the manual disassembly of FPDs, then the shredding of FPDs, the optical sorting of shredded FPDs using TiTech optical sorting technology and mercury decontamination.

The manual disassembly, which took place at Bruce Metals in South Yorkshire, was intended to remove the mercury content from the FPDs. The stripping of the items also allowed the researchers to investigate the potential harm and exposure of workers in a commercial operation.

Mercury

Mercury remained a key issue throughout the trial, with it being stated that there were a number of backlight breakages in the manual disassembly element of the trial. And, as the trial was undertaken without significant time pressures, it was suggested that a commercial operation would face a higher level of backlight breakages.

The conclusion of the WRAP study highlighted that employees at an FPD recycling facility would be subjected to levels of mercury “higher than is acceptable”. However, it suggested that this could be reduced with personal protective equipment and local extract ventilation.

Furthermore a suitable washing medium to remove mercury from the FPD items could be not found in the trial, with results from the large-scale trial proving inconclusive. And, even under laboratory conditions, there was an uncertainty as to whether mercury could be completely washed from the shredded FPDs.

In a bid to improve on this, the researchers then used Aqua Regia – a strong acid – to attempt to remove mercury from the FPDs. The acid removed more than the water washing technique but only 56% of mercury added to the shredded material could be accounted for in output fraction.

The research concluded that more work would need to be done to establish a wash capable of removing high levels of mercury in a commercial process, as well as a greater understanding of where the washed mercury goes and alternative methods for its removal.

Facility

Addressing the potential for delivering a large-scale FPD recycling facility, the research states that a 20,000 tonnes-a-year capacity facility would potentially cost £3.798 million to develop, which would be capable of processing five tonnes of FPDs each hour.

It said the plant could consist of:

• A three-shaft shredder;
• 8mm flip-flop sieve to remove the fines;
• Mercury washing stage to recovery mercury;
• Dryer to dry the shred prior to separation;
• Air ballistic unit to remove the thin films;
• Magnet to remove ferrous metals;
• Eddy current system to remove non-ferrous metals and circuit boards;
• TiTech x-tract machine to remove glass/film composite; and
• TiTech PolySort to separate polymers

However, the study claimed that there were issues relating to capture rate of plastics found in FPDs, with near-infrared sorting equipment used in the trial unable to detect a commercial viable level of the black plastics present in the FPD items.

Source: www.letsrecycle.com

We are soon to take delivery of a number of new gas powered Fork Lift Trucks which are recorded to have zero waste emissions through a recycling valve system which prevents the release of unburned gas.  We try to reduce the impact we have on the local environment where ever possible.

Brand new state of the art offices and high-tec training room underlines the company’s proven commitment to the training and development for all staff. 

Celtic Recycling’s continuous development of skills and experience is one of the reasons that Celtic Recycling has such a commendable record in Health and Safety. 

Storage, dismantling and recycling will be just some of the services on offer at the Newport site. We would however, be more than happy to listen to customer needs with regards to hazardous and non-hazardous waste recovery and disposal. 

Planning permission for phase 2 is close to being granted which will see additional warehouse space for processing large electrical equipment with crane capacity of up to 120 tonnes. Queensway Meadows Industrial Estate is strategically located near Junction 24 of the M4, with excellent road links to the motorway network.  

Please feel free to contact Iain Kerr – Newport Depot Manager with any questions iain.kerr@celtic-recycling.co.uk 

Click here to view the location map

Alan Matthews is a chartered Health and Safety practitioner. Alan’s previous employer was AREVA T&D SPL, Stafford. Whilst at AREVA Alan was the senior health and safety advisor for the Ormonde off-shore wind farm project. In recent years Alan has been involved in health and safety issues on a variety of projects ranging from engineering, construction and major water utilities projects.

Alan will be responsible for ensuring that Celtic Recycling maintain and build on their current excellent standards of health and safety throughout all their undertakings.

In the coming weeks Alan will be setting in place an audit programme for site based activities. This will help form the building blocks for the company’s process of continuous improvement.

Peter O’Rourke has been involved in the waste industry for over 10 years having worked as a HGV, Car, PSV and Plant Instructor for a training provider in Swansea, South Herts Waste training assessor and Group training manager for the Verdant group facilitating the training requirements of over 800 staff.

Peter is now employed as Waste Management Coordinator running the Aberthaw site and facilitating the control and safe movement of wastes within the Company.

The group – which campaigns on behalf of a number of reprocessors and social enterprises for better quality of recyclables- claims that definitions to date have been confusing.

CRR calls for “clearer” recycling terminology

It is now suggesting the terms ‘kerb-sorted’ and ‘MRF-sorted’, which denotes when recyclables are sent to a materials recycling facility (MRF), to differentiate between what it sees as the two main collection methods.

The body – which has been a firm advocate of sorting recyclables at the kerbside – hopes that the new terminology will counter the perception by some that householders have to put more effort in when putting out recyclables which are then sorted at the kerbside.

For instance, it says that the word ‘commingled’ is often used to describe material which is destined for a MRF when this material is often sorted at the kerbside instead.

Mal Williams, chair of the Campaign for Real Recycling (CRR), said: “There has been some confusion of terms in the past and as more and more people and organisations tune in to the need for quality in recycling, clearer terms are needed.

“Nearly all householders put their recyclables in a receptacle of some kind outside the house and there is a subsequent need for sorting of the material. That much is common to almost all systems and the effort from the householder is much the same.

“We make the point that some systems allow for quality control and feedback at the kerb, which results in better quality material. It seems logical to us to say ‘kerb-sorted’ and ‘MRF-sorted’, which neatly describes both the systems and the materials in one go, and this is what we recommend.”

Aylesford

The new terminology was welcomed by Andrew Perkins of Aylesford Newsprint, which is an indirect member of the CRR through its membership of the Paperchain campaign.

“We certainly know the difference when we see the tonnage. Calling it simply by where the sorting takes place is logical and appropriate. Industry bodies such as CIWM should be leading in coining suitable, everyday terminology for these now universal activities. There is too much misunderstanding at the moment.”

Joy Blizzard, chair of the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee, added: “This is a helpful suggestion and I hope it will bring some clarity to an issue that has been surrounded by a lot of complex terminology.”

Source: www.letsrecycle.com

The number of single use carrier bags used in Wales looks set to plummet under Welsh Assembly Government proposals announced today (June 4) to introduce a seven pence charge for them from Spring 2011.

 However, campaign groups have attacked the proposal, claiming existing voluntary agreements and recycling initiatives would have a better environmental impact than the planned tax.

Wales proposes 7p charge for single-use bags

The announcement of proposals for the tax on single-use carrier bags come as the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) looks to reduce the over 400 million carrier bags currently distributed in the retail sector in the country.

Welsh environment minister Jane Davidson will today launch a second consultation on the proposed tax today (June 4) at the Hay Festival for literature and arts, in a bid to gauge responses to the proposed seven pence charge.

Under the proposals, a seven pence charge would be placed on bags from Spring 2010. It had been anticipated that the WAG would look to introduce a tax of between five and 15 pence per bag under a four-month consultation launched in June 2009 (see letsrecycle.com story).

Consultation

The second round of consultation, which closes on August 2 2010, is also seeking views on whether there should be exemptions for certain types of bags used to carry unpackaged food or pharmacy medicines and whether there should be a voluntary agreement with retailers to ensure profits from the charge are passed to environmental or community projects.

Commenting on the proposed charge, Ms Davidson said: “Carrier bags are an iconic symbol of the throwaway society in which we live. Whilst I know that reducing our use of single use carrier bags is not going to solve all our environmental problems, the charge delivers an important message about the need for us to live much more sustainable lives.

“I believe the seven pence charge is high enough to encourage consumers to change their shopping habits but not so high that it will stop impulse shopping or create a significant burden when we have forgotten reusable bags.

“I am confident that the Welsh public will embrace the carrier bag charge and see it as positive step towards preserving our beautiful countryside and helping Wales to reduce its carbon footprint.

A study undertaken by environmental consultancy AEA in October 2009 claimed that there was “good evidence” for Wales to introduce a charge, and added that the WAG should follow an example set by the Republic of Ireland with its Plastax Levy in 2002 (see letsrecycle.com story).

Reuse

Responding to the WAG proposal, the Carrier Bag Consortium (CBC) – an alliance of carrier bag manufacturers – hit out at the proposed levy and claimed that the Welsh Assembly Government was “ignoring the science” by proceeding with plans for the charge.

A spokesman for the organisation told letsrecycle.com: “We don’t believe that there is any such thing as a ‘single-use’ carrier bag, as is claimed by the Welsh Assembly Government, as we know from Defra statistics that 80% are reused at least once for something or other, for things like bin bags.”

The spokesman also pointed to a voluntary agreement put in place by WRAP with retailers over the past two years, which saw single-use carrier bag distribution fall by 48% compared to 2006 levels (see letsrecycle.com story).

“We know the number of bags being wasted and we know that people have been made to think about whether they need a bag, which is the primary principle for the tax being given by the Welsh Minister,” he said.

Furthermore, the spokesman identified the growing number of recycling points at major supermarkets, which he said now totalled “over 3,000″, which allow shoppers to deposit used bags into a dedicated container for recycling. The spokesman stressed: “What this will do is not help the environment at all.”

Source: http://www.letsrecycle.com ]]> http://www.celtic-recycling.co.uk/blog/2010/06/wales-proposes-7p-charge-for-single-use-bags/feed/ 0 http://www.celtic-recycling.co.uk/blog/2010/06/celtic-recyclings-steve-bishop-welsh-3-peaks-challenge/ http://www.celtic-recycling.co.uk/blog/2010/06/celtic-recyclings-steve-bishop-welsh-3-peaks-challenge/#comments Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:06:50 +0000 admin http://www.celtic-recycling.co.uk/blog/?p=200 Celtic Recycling’s Commercial Director Steve Bishop will be attempting the Welsh 3 Peaks challenge in aid of Ty Hafan.

The family hospice for young lives.

Welsh environment minister Jane Davidson has given her backing to the drinks can recycling campaign Every Can Counts and encouraged businesses and public sector organisations across Wales to follow the example set by the scheme.

Environment minister Jane Davidson with members of the IPS Green Team promoting the Every Can Counts campaign

The campaign, which was launched in October 2008, is aimed at capturing both steel and aluminium beverage cans away from households and is run by aluminium recycling sector trade organisation, Alupro with backing from WRAP, UK Can Makers and Beverage Can Recycling Europe. 

Its intention to help capture 30,000 tonnes-a-year of aluminium beverage cans and 8,000 tonnes-a-year of steel beverage cans, was endorsed in England by former minister for waste and recycling Jane Kennedy in February 2009 (see letsrecycle.com story).

The Every Can Counts campaign is working with the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and government-funded resource management service Envirowise Wales to roll-out the scheme in Welsh public sector organisations.

Envirowise is promoting the campaign as part of its public sector waste minimisation campaign (PSWMC), which is funded by the WAG and encourages sustainable waste management practices.

Under the arrangement, the campaign is trying to get all public sector organisations in Wales to work towards reducing waste generated as a result of their day-to-day operations.

Envirowise is managed by AEA Technologies and Serco Limited, however, a contract to manage the service is currently being re-let following the merger of existing waste and recycling programmes into one delivery body under WRAP in April 2010 (see letsrecycle.com story).

Campaign

Ms Davidson visited the offices of Identity and Passport Service (IPS) in Newport, South Wales on Monday (May 24) to show her support for the drinks can recycling campaign.

The IPS has adopted the Every Can Counts campaign to complement its existing recycling programme and encourage recycling among its 365-strong staff, with funding from the PSWMC enabling it to produce promotional material to share throughout the organisation.

Ms Davidson, said: “I am very impressed by the recycling efforts of the Identity and Passport Service and would like to congratulate the staff on their achievements so far.”

She added that the scheme exemplified what could be achieved by workplace recycling and said: “I hope their success will encourage other organisations to take their recycling efforts to the next level.”

Rick Hindley, of Every Can Counts, said: “The range of programmes we are now working with demonstrate the flexibility of Every Can Counts and how it can effectively increase the pro-environmental behaviour of employees. It’s extremely positive to witness how the Identity and Passport Service is implementing the programme and to see it making a difference straight away.”

And, Ms Davidson said that the forthcoming ‘Towards Zero Waste’ strategy, which is set to be published next month, would look to build on recycling away from the household in order to reach its proposed target of recycling or composting 70% of municipal waste by 2025 (see letsrecycle.com story).

She explained: “Later this spring I will be launching our waste management strategy ‘Towards Zero Waste’ which will set out our ambitions of becoming a high recycling country by 2025 and a zero waste country by 2050. Dramatically improving recycling at work wll be key to helping us achieve these ambitions.”

England achieved a 38.8% household waste recycling rate for the year ending September 2009, according to the latest quarterly data published by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

The recycling rate in England hit 38.8% for the year ending September, although the rate of its increase has slowed

The figure is drawn from data for the second quarter of 2010 (July to September 2009) submitted to the government’s waste database WasteDataFlow, which showed a 42% household waste recycling rate for the quarter. 

When taken as a 12-month view to limit the impact of seasonal fluctuations, this represents a 38.8% recycling rate, which is a 0.5% improvement on the rolling year for July 2008 to June 2009, where England achieved a 38.3% recycling rate (see letsrecycle.com story).

Furthermore, the latest rolling year figure is a 2.8% improvement on the same period for 2007/08.
The data also shows that the total municipal waste generated in England decreased by 0.44 million tonnes (1.6%) for the year ending September 2009 compared to the same period the year before. This meant that municipal waste arisings fell from 27.33 million tonnes to 26.89 million tonnes over this period.

In addition, household waste arisings also fell over this period, which dropped from 24.3 million tonnes in 2007/08 to 23.9 million tonnes – a decline of 1.7%. Furthermore, waste to landfill decreased by 5.0% from 13.8 million tonnes to 13.1 million tonnes.

The average residual household waste per person decreased from 295kg for the financial year (April 2008 to March 2009), to 284kg per head between October 2008 and September 2009.

The best performing regions for the rolling year were Eastern England (43%) and the East Midlands (45.2%). These two areas were also the best performing regions for the previous quarter.

Slow

When looked at in a wider context, Defra is aiming for England to achieve an average 40% household waste recycling target by 2010, which was set out in the Waste Strategy for England 2007, a target is matched by those for municipal waste set by the devolved governments.

However, the provisional data shows that the continual 3% improvement needed each quarter for England to obtain the 40% recycling goal slowed, as the rate only rose by 2% compared to the same quarter the year before.

At the current rate, with 3% progression achieved in the final two quarters of 2009/10, England would reach a 40.25% recycling rate once all the returns for the 2009/10 financial year have been collated. However, if the next two quarters follow the rate of progression shown in quarter two and only increase by 2% compared to the same quarters the year before then the rate would be 39.75% for 2009/10.

The slowing of the rate of increase between the quarters in England comes as Northern Ireland reported that its municipal and its household waste recycling rates increased by only 1% in the past two quarters rose by 1% compared to the same quarters the year before. This was compared to an average 3% increase for the quarters before (see letsrecycle.com story).

And, publication of the results comes as the Scottish environmental watchdog SEPA warned that the slowing of its own municipal waste recycling rate during 2008 means that it would be “challenging” to hit its own 40% target for 2010 (see letsrecycle.com story).

Data covering the third quarter of 2009/10 (October to December 2009) for English councils is expected to be published by Defra on August 5 2010. The results can be subjected to revisions by local authorities during the course of the year. Fully audited final figures for 2009/10 are expected to be published in November 2010.