WRAP report points to fall in MRF and AD gate fees

Feedback from a range of local authorities and MRF operators interviewed for the research found that a growing number of local authorities are receiving payment – or being charged zero gate fees – for their recovered materials.

This confirms what letsrecycle.com first reported in May 2011 (see letsrecycle.com story) – an issue which at the time was causing concern among MRF operators.

Marcus Gover, director of closed loop economy at WRAP, said: The message in the Gate Fees Report is that there are cost-effective waste management options other than landfill which also deliver greater environmental benefits.

We have seen a substantial decrease in MRF gate fees since the previous report, with some local authorities telling us that they are now receiving revenues of up to 15 to 20 per tonne for their recovered materials, rather than being charged gate fees. This reflects the additional MRF capacity in the market, and buoyant recovered material prices.

Another notable change compared with last years report is that the median gate fee for AD appears to have dropped considerably – by around 13 per tonne with some operators suggesting that AD gate fees might fall further.

However, Mr Gover said this had to be treated with some caution as the AD industry is still relatively young this finding is based on quite a small sample.

WRAPs report summarises gate fees charged for a range of alternative waste treatment, recovery and disposal options together with an analysis of the factors likely to influence future gate fees, and comparison with last years report. The survey covers England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Local authorities and waste management companies were contacted during December 2010 and January 2011.

Findings

The study found that gate fees for similar waste management options vary substantially, both across and within regions.

Notwithstanding these variations, the summary information from the survey indicates that:

• Median gate fees for waste recycling options are substantially lower than those for waste disposal routes.
• For organics treatment facilities, open-air windrow (OAW) median gate fees are lower than those for anaerobic digestion (AD) and in-vessel composting (IV). These, in turn, are lower than median gate fees at mechanical biological treatment (MBT) facilities.
• The median AD gate fee for separate food waste, is lower than the median IV gate fee for food only, but is comparable to the IV gate fee for mixed food and garden waste.
• Landfill gate fees including the landfill tax are broadly comparable to gate fees for EfW and MBT.

Compared with last years gate fees report WRAP found that:

• The cost of disposal to landfill including the landfill tax has increased.
• Gate fees at MRFs have fallen substantially and many local authorities surveyed are either not paying gate fees or are receiving net revenue for their recovered materials.
• For AD facilities, the median gate fee is substantially lower by around 13 per tonne.
• OAW gate fees are little changed, as are IV gate fees for mixed food and garden waste.