“Real” recyclers considering changes to buying strategies

And, they have warned that unless quality of UK recyclables does not improve, they could be forced to use recovered materials from overseas.

” If we don't do it here, we'll do it elsewhere as this is a global market. “
– Andy Doran, Novelis Recycling Novelis Recycling, the largest aluminium can reprocessor in Britain, and the major paper mill Aylesford Newsprint, addressed the community recycling sector's annual conference in Birmingham on Thursday to update them on the campaign.

Novelis
Andy Doran, national manager of Novelis Recycling, revealed that his company is considering buying more material from Eastern Europe, because it is of higher quality, rather than opting for UK cans.

He said: “If we don't do it here, we'll do it elsewhere as this is a global market – my company is a global company. They don't want UK cans – they say we'll buy more cans from Poland – I have to fight to keep the balance.”

At the moment, his company is paying £840 per tonne for collected aluminium cans provided they have less than 7% contamination levels.

He suggested that so many loads are now arising that do not meet the quality standards required that Novelis could start to pay less money for poorer quality material, perhaps as early as Spring 2008.

“What we want to work with is a more differentiated price structure,” he said. “We're considering moving to a quality-based system.”

Aylesford
Chris White, commercial manager of Kent-based paper mill Aylesford Newsprint, also hinted at the possibility of a future in which UK paper mills buy recovered material from abroad.

In the week before publication of the new English waste strategy, Mr White said central government was incentivising local authorities into larger contracts pushing for higher tonnages of collected materials, rather than encouraging quality materials suitable for UK markets.

He said: “We could be looking at following what they're doing in America, spending money sorting already-sorted materials. We could have to start our own collections again, put out our own boxes. We've done it before, we can do it again. Worst case, we could have to import recovered paper.”

Mr White revealed that an independent report comparing the environmental impacts of source-separated versus commingled collection systems, funded by WRAP, could be published by the end of the year.

Campaign
The Campaign for Real Recycling was launched this Spring as a response to the increasing number of local authorities running commingled collections, where recyclable materials are collected mixed from households, to be separated at materials recycling facilities (MRFs).

Andy Moore, of the Community Recycling Network UK, explained that the campaigners were not completely opposed to commingling of all materials, but it believed certain materials should be kept separate from each other. “It's a pro-quality campaign, not necessarily an anti-MRF or commingled – discreet mingling may be appropriate,” he said.

Along with public support for greater separation of materials at the kerbside, the campaign wants to institute carbon footprinting as a central plank of local authority reporting on recycling and waste diversion efforts.

The campaigners have gained funding from PaperChain for a second year, but said they were being careful that their campaign does not provoke anti-recycling stories in the national press. Mr Moore revealed that the campaign backers will meet in July to consider the possibilities of taking their message to the national media as well as raising awareness in Parliament.