Councils cannot rely solely on recycling to meet targets

The study, entitled 'Well Disposed; responding to the waste challenge' says that investments in often controversial disposal technologies that convert waste into energy or fuel are set to have the most significant impact on landfill reduction.

However, the report warns that if schemes already planned for 6.4 million tonnes of waste are delayed by even two years, England would exceed its landfill allocation by 13% and incur £140 million in penalties which would be picked up by the taxpayer.

Commenting on the report's findings, the chairman of the Audit Commission, Michael O'Higgins, said: “You only have to look in your own bin to see that not everything you throw away can be recycled, so we've got to find somewhere other than landfill to put it.

'We must keep up the pressure to reduce, reuse and recycle but if we are to avoid being heavily fined for failing to meet the 2013 target then we must also push ahead with the treatment plants that are in the pipeline,” he added.

Treatment

The study, which was based on a survey of the UK's waste disposal authorities – as well as additional research – identified six million tonnes of additional treatment capacity that was planned by local authorities.

It warned that if all the capacity was delayed by one year, due to problems in areas such as securing sites, securing council consensus for proposals and contract procurement, the UK would use 1% more than its EU landfill allocation in 2013.

And, it indicated that, if this was allied to a higher-than-expected waste growth and recycling and composting of municipal waste not increasing from its current level of 30% to 45% by 2020, the UK would exceed its 2013 landfill allowance by around 20%.

This is the second high-profile study warning that the 2013 landfill diversion goal could be missed, following an internal Defra report which claimed that the UK would miss its target by as much as 10% (see letsrecycle.com story).

At the same time, the report explained that, even if the UK met its overall target for landfill diversion in 2013, councils that exceeded their own landfill allocations could face fines of up to £2 million, with the cost likely to be passed onto council tax payers.

LGA

Responding to the reports emphasis on developing new waste treatment capacity, the chairman of the Local Government Associations' (LGA) environment board, councilor Paul Bettison, repeated his call for the government to return money paid by councils in Landfill Tax (see letsrecycle.com story) – claiming that this would help to develop the facilities needed.

“Councils are pulling out the stops to deliver projects that will deal with waste. But the reality is the Government has hit the council taxpayer with a £1.5 billion bill over the next three years by going back on its undertaking to refund money raised through landfill tax to local authorities,” he said.

“This is cash that could be used to build the facilities that are needed to divert waste away from landfill.”

He added: “There remain many barriers to building the waste disposal plants that the country needs. The Government should at least join local councils in making the case for these new facilities. Ultimately the cost of not dealing with our waste mountain will be higher in the longer term if we do not start to take action now.”

Value 

However, despite its emphasis on new facilities being developed, the report also warned that these might not be delivered at the best value-for-money for councils.

In particular, it identified that: “Few councils generate enough waste alone to justify building an incinerator with energy recovery of the most efficient scale; and few partnerships are able to achieve the maximum benefits of coordination and scale.

“Business cases for new investment are based on uncertain future values of landfill allowances and levels of landfill tax,” it added.

And, it stated that: “Long term investment decisions may be proved obsolete by adoption of more advanced technologies or by changes in regulation or public opinion”, while “the amount of new infrastructure that is needed in a relatively short timescale may result in higher prices.”

As a result, the report recommended that waste disposal authorities explore other avenues, including trading in LATS as an alternative to building new plants, or considering smaller-scale treatment projects as a “complement or alternative” to large-scale PFI-funded projects.

Northumberland

In the wake of the report's publication, Northumberland county council outlined its confidence that the facilities being developed as part of its 28-year PFI waste management contract with SITA UK, signed in December 2006 (see letsrecycle.com story), meant it was on track to meet it landfill diversion goals.

The council's head of waste management, Paul Jones, pointed towards the refurbishment of its household waste recycling centres, the new West Sleekburn MRF and extensions to a Teeside energy-from-waste facility.

He said this meant that: “These new facilities will enable Northumberland to increase its recycling rate to over 45% and by using non-recyclable waste as a fuel to generate electricity will reduce our reliance on landfill disposal for household waste to around only 8%.

“Northumberland is therefore well on track to meet and exceed the Government's recycling and landfill diversion targets, and is well placed to avoid the hefty fines that other local authorities could face if they continue to rely on landfill disposal,” he added.