banner small

Trade bodies wary of rushing landfill ban proposals

Trade bodies wary of rushing landfill ban proposals

Recycling trade associations have raised concerns about how quickly government proposals for material-specific landfill bans would be introduced given the need for relevant treatment infrastructure.

The trade associations called for long lead-times to allow necessary infrastructure to be developed
The trade associations called for long lead-times to allow necessary infrastructure to be developed
Speaking to letsrecycle.com, the Association for Organics Recycling (AfOR), aluminium recycling trade body Alupro and the British Glass Manufacturer's Confederation welcomed, in principle, proposed bans for food and garden waste, aluminium and glass.

However, they claimed any bans would need to have long-lead times in order to allow relevant treatment infrastructure to be developed to handle the extra material being diverted from landfill.

The consultation on potential bans, which was launched last week (March 18), identified nine materials as potentially facing landfill restrictions: plastics; glass; wood; food and garden waste; waste electrical and electronic equipment; paper and card; textiles; and, metals (see letsrecycle.com story).

And, research published by the Waste & Resources Action Programme alongside the consultation suggested that it could take between seven and 10 years for adequate infrastructure to be developed to handle the diversion of material caused by the bans (see letsrecycle.com story).

Commenting on the proposals, Rick Hindley, executive director of Alupro, said: “The principle of a landfill ban is obviously good, it makes sense, but we are concerned about how quickly it can be introduced.

“We need to have the infrastructure in place to provide an alternative to landfill and in the UK that really means recycling facilities.”

Glass

British Glass has voiced concern that the proposals could lead to a further dip in the quality of glass collected
British Glass has voiced concern that the proposals could lead to a further dip in the quality of glass collected
Echoing, Mr Hindley's comments, the British Glass Manufacturers' Confederation, which represents UK glass producers and recyclers, also indicated the need for treatment capacity to be in place if glass is to be subjected to restrictions.

Rebecca Cocking, recycling manager at British Glass, said: “Our opinion of it is that the concept of landfill bans is good to drive up recycling if the infrastructure is in place to be able to handle the materials being collected in a manner that is able to supply the required end markets.”

In addition, Ms Cocking pointed to a number of glass-specific concerns that could arise if restrictions were introduced, such as, councils may also adopt commingled glass collections – a perennial point of contention for the trade body.

She said: “There is concern that the introduction of landfill bans for glass could lead to all glass being collected as one to cut down on cost of collection if this did happen the only end market would be aggregate.

“There is a concern that some collections may be introduced without considering all of the above and that the term landfill bans for glass could lead to some of the existing collection streams being contaminated with other forms of glass. If this was to happen then the quality issue we are currently experiencing will become worse.”

Organics

Jeremy Jacobs, managing director of AfOR, claimed that landfill bans for food and garden waste could act as a catalyst for long-term investment in the organics recycling sector.

He said: “It is great, as far as we are concerned we need binding targets which can be set out and clear so operators are in a position to plan ahead. And, from a financial point-of-view, to make projects bankable, there needs to be a plan which says after this date, no biodegradable waste will go to landfill.”

However, he questioned whether all materials faced the same issue with regards to adequate infrastructure being developed to cope with the bans and claimed that the organics sector could be aptly prepared in five years' time.

“If we look at Germany they did it in two and a half years, and we are saying it will need 10 years and if that occurs then I don't think it will ever happen,” he said.

Wood

Also commenting on the speed with which potential bans would be introduced, the Wood Recyclers' Association (WRA) welcomed a proposed ban for the material and urged the government to “press ahead” with the proposal.

Peter Butt, secretary of the WRA, said: “The WRA has long voiced its support for a ban on the land-filling of wood, which has proved effective in a number of EU countries. We therefore welcome this study, the aims of which are entirely compatible with recent government strategy documents in both England and Wales.”

“Whether a landfill ban would stand on its own, or whether it should be combined with other measures, needs careful thought. But in either case, we see a need to press ahead and bring in a ban sooner, rather than later.”

Textiles

Responding the potential landfill ban for textiles, the Textile Recycling Association (TRA) explained that it was an “interesting and complex” issue.

Alan Wheeler, national liaison manager at the TRA, told letsrecycle.com: “We are not surprised that the government have suggested bringing in restrictions on the landfilling of biodegradable textiles as they are a growing waste problem. We currently buy over two million tonnes of textiles annually and around half this amount ends up in landfill sites.

Mr Wheeler said the TRA would be fully consulting with its members on the proposal and will feed the results through to Defra.

Register for free to comment

Subscribe to receive our newsletters and to leave comments.

The Blog Box

Back to top

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest waste and recycling news straight to your inbox.

Subscribe