Memorandum submitted by the Composting
Association (X18)
1. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1.1 A substantial number of biological treatment
facilities need to be established by 2020 to manage the projected
quantities of biodegradable municipal waste diverted from landfill
to meet the Landfill Directive Article 5 targets.
1.2 The development of new treatment capacity
is severely impeded by the ability of the local Waste Planning
Authorities, Environment Agency and State Veterinary Service to
grant sequential permits in a timely manner. The processes are
unacceptably long with often contradictory aims, as there is no
co-ordination or centrally developed logic between them.
1.3 Provisional estimates suggest that there
will be a short-fall in biological treatment capacity capable
of processing catering wastes of three million tonnes a year by
2010. It is therefore probable that the UK will not only fail
to meet its obligations under the Landfill Directive, but other
Government initiatives, such as the development of Sustainable
Communities, seem likely to suffer.
1.4 Delays to the introduction of revised
licence exemptions have placed considerable uncertainty on small
scale composting operations. Revisions have been due for almost
five years. This delay is unacceptable and the Association strongly
urges Government to introduce them as a matter or priority.
1.5 There is considerable legislative uncertainty,
especially pertaining to the role mixed waste biological treatment
facilities may play, and whether composted materials may be spread
on land without falling under a waste framework. These are issues
that require urgent clarification. Without it, they are impeding
strategic waste planning as they are placing unacceptable risk
on the private and public sectors.
1.6 There is an urgent need to translate
Government's waste policies and strategies into practice. In order
to facilitate this, The Composting Association proposes that Defra's
Waste Implementation Programme be extended to enable it to act
as a cross-departmental authority in order to streamline the different
parts of Government involved in the waste permitting and delivery
processes.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 The House of Commons Environment, Food
and Rural Affairs Committee seeks evidence in its inquiry into
whether the United Kingdom is on target to meet its commitments
under the Landfill Directive. Its focus will be on the performance
of the Government and what measures may need to be implemented
to address the challenges of the Directive.
2.2 This paper sets out the response of
The Composting Association. The Composting Association is the
United Kingdom's membership organisation, promoting the sustainable
management of biodegradable resources. It actively promotes the
use of biological treatment techniques and encourages good management
practices throughout the industry. By advocating a suitable regulatory
and economic framework, the Association works to ensure the long-term
sustainability of the biological treatment industry. It currently
has over 700 members including compost producers, local authorities,
consultants, technology suppliers, compost users, academics, other
membership organisations and individuals. Given that it represents
the majority of compost producers in England, it welcomes the
opportunity to comment on the draft document.
2.3 In drafting this response, the Association
has consulted with its members. It welcomes the opportunity to
discuss any of the points raised in this response.
3. THE NEED
FOR BIOLOGICAL
TREATMENT CAPACITY
3.1 Over 60% of household waste is biodegradable
(Strategy Unit, 2002). The majority is suitable for treatment
in a biologically based process, including:
— Composting—a process that is
well established and produces a valuable product: compost.
— Anaerobic digestion—a process
that is widely employed in other industry sectors (eg sewage treatment)
and is a source of renewable energy (methane) and a digestate
that can be beneficially applied to land.
— Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT)—a
combination of processes that aims to recover value from, and
reduce the quantity of, mixed residual wastes. The biodegradable
wastes are subjected to a composting or anaerobic digestion type
process, where the resultant material may be used in either a
thermal treatment process, applied to land under certain circumstances,
or landfilled.
3.2 A large range of composting and biological
treatment systems exist in the market place. They will play an
increasingly important role as the UK strives to divert substantial
amounts of biodegradable municipal waste away from landfill. Large
capital investments need to be made before 2010. As these have
such long lead-in times, financing and planning decisions need
to be made now.
THE CHALLENGES
AHEAD
3.3 At present, somewhere in the region
of two million tonnes of organic materials are composted across
the UK (Source: The Composting Association, based on 2001-02 survey),
with the majority (80%) comprising green wastes at open-air windrow
facilities.
3.4 In order to meet the Landfill Directive's
Article 5 targets the Composting Association has provisionally
estimated that somewhere in the region of 18 million tonnes per
annum of additional biological treatment processing capacity will
be required across the UK by 2020 to compost the food and green
waste elements of the household waste stream[63]The
majority of these new facilities will need to be in England.
3.5 Following the Foot-and-Mouth disease
epidemic during 2001, the Animal By-Products Regulations (ABPR)
mandate that biological treatment facilities processing catering
(food) wastes be approved by the State Veterinary Service before
the compost or digestate may be spread on land. Since its introduction
in July 2003 only 14 facilities have been granted approvals (Source:
SVS). Provisional estimates suggest there will need to be an estimated
treatment capacity of around five million tonnes per annum by
2010. Given the current rate of consents there will be an estimated
shortfall of three million tonnes per annum by 2010, or over 150
facilities.
4. CURRENT IMPEDIMENTS
Permitting new facilities
4.1 Establishing new facilities requires
sequential approvals from more than one government body:
— Planning Permission by the Local
Planning Authority.
— Waste Management Licence by the Environment
Agency.
— Veterinary Approval by the State
Veterinary Service (where catering wastes and animal by-products
are treated).
4.2 In theory it should be possible to obtain
all three consents in about 12 months if there are no objections,
however, the actual timescales are often much longer (greater
than two years). Reliable statistics do not exist within Government
on the time taken to gain the respective consents, which makes
strategic planning for both the public and private sectors difficult.
4.3 Sometimes the specific criteria demanded
by the three regulatory bodies conflict with each other, therefore
there is an urgent need for clarification and streamlining of
the respective permitting processes.
4.4 Imminent revisions to land use planning
guidance for waste (Planning Policy Statement 10) in England should
provide an opportunity to address some of these issues, although
on its own it will be insufficient to meet the challenges of the
Landfill Directive.
4.5 At present, the State Veterinary Service
is a function of DEFRA. Proposals are underway to change its status
to that of an executive agency during 2005 in order to improve
its ability to deliver Government's policies on animal health
and welfare. However, there is a danger that permitting of biological
treatment facilities will be under-resourced and there will be
a discontinuity in waste policy development, specifically for
those wastes that fall under the Animal By-Products Regulations
(ABPR).
Delayed legislation
4.6 The biological treatment industry has
been challenged over the past few years by changing legislation
that has made the delivery of long term waste strategies difficult.
There are a large number of small scale composting sites (estimated
to be in excess of 300) that operate under an exemption to a waste
management licence. Most of these are operated by farmers and
community schemes, with some under contract to local authorities.
4.7 DEFRA has been conducting a review of
the exemptions for approximately five years. To date, these have
yet to be published, despite calls by previous Select Committee
inquiries (Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, 2001).
Current proposals seem likely to affect the operation of a large
number of exempt sites; therefore further delays are causing unacceptable
uncertainties for composters and local authorities alike.
4.8 DEFRA has recently undertaken an informal
review of waste permitting with a view to simplifying procedures
and ensuring that regulatory control is proportionate to environmental
risk. Although priorities have now changed, the biological treatment
industry would still benefit greatly from a streamlined approach
that improved waste permitting and provided a better interface
between the land use planning and veterinary approval regimes.
The Association therefore urges DEFRA to continue with its review
of waste permitting to better facilitate the development of new
waste facilities in order to meet the aims of the Landfill Directive.
LEGISLATIVE UNCERTAINTIES
Mechanical Biological Treatment
4.9 There is much current interest by Local
Authorities in Mechanical/Biological Treatment (MBT) Plants. In
many European countries they are employed solely to pre-treat
residual wastes prior to disposal in landfill or thermal treatment
plants (eg Germany). In some countries restricted applications
to land are also allowed under a waste permitting scheme (eg in
Italy for landfill restoration).
4.10 As MBT plants treat residual (mixed)
wastes, the outputs are more likely to be contaminated with impurities
such as glass, plastics and heavy metals. In developing its Thematic
Strategy on Soils, the European Commission has proposed that MBT-derived
material remains a waste with restricted end uses.
4.11 Some local authorities are viewing
MBT plants as a "one stop shop", to meet both their
Landfill Diversion targets as well as their recycling targets,
which has significant implications with regard to developing European
policies.
4.12 The Scottish Environmental Protection
Agency (SEPA) has recently announced that outputs from MBT plants
will remain a waste and may only be used under a waste permit
for the restoration of landfill sites or the reclamation of contaminated
land (SEPA 2004).
4.13 The Association urges DEFRA to provide
clear, unambiguous guidance to the biological treatment industry
and local authorities as to whether the outputs from MBT (or other
mixed waste treatment plants) may be applied to land, and if so,
under what circumstances.
Recovery of wastes
4.14 The Composting Association and Waste
and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) have done much work to assist
the development of sustainable markets for composted materials,
including the introduction of the British Standards Institution's
Publicly Available Specification for Composted Materials (BSI
PAS 100). At present this is an area of legislative uncertainly:
criteria to define when biologically treated waste ceases to be
classed as a controlled waste and can be marketed as a product
do not exist.
4.15 This impacts, not only on market development,
but also on waste planning and permitting. The Association urges
Government to establish clear guidelines to define when controlled
wastes treated in biological systems can be classified as products.
Overlap between regulatory regimes
4.16 At present there is some uncertainty
in the overlap between different regulatory regimes: for example,
Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control and Waste Management
Licensing; Land Use Planning, Licensing and Veterinary permitting.
These grey areas are creating confusion as well as impeding the
development of new treatment infrastructure. In implementing the
Landfill Directive, Government needs to set in place mechanisms
to resolve inconsistencies and provide clarity for industry.
5. POTENTIAL
SOLUTIONS
5.1 DEFRA and the Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister (ODPM) are working closely to co-ordinate the revision
of Planning Policy Guidance for Waste and guidance on the development
of Municipal Waste Management Strategies by local authorities.
This is welcomed; however, on its own it is insufficient to address
the challenges faced by the public and private sectors in meeting
the Landfill Directive targets.
5.2 There is an urgent need to translate
Government's waste policies and strategies into practice.
5.3 Since its inception in June 2003, DEFRA's
Waste Implementation Programme (WIP) has done much good work in
providing tools for local authorities to develop and execute their
waste strategies, as well as providing a central waste data collection
centre and the demonstration of new waste treatment technologies.
5.4 The WIP, in conjunction with WRAP, has
a specific remit to assist England deliver Waste Strategy 2000
and the recommendations stemming from the Strategy Unit report.
It has a unique role in Government in that it translates waste
policy into practice. At present it is addressing some of the
problems faced by local authorities, but this does not extend
to land use planning or the permitting procedures faced by the
private sector.
5.5 The Composting Association proposes
that WIP's function is extended to enable it to act as a cross-departmental
authority in order to streamline the involvement of different
parts of Government in the waste permitting and delivery processes.
This is shown schematically in Figure 2.
5.6 For example, it could develop the following:
— Tools for local authority planning
officers and elected members to help them increase their knowledge
and understanding of waste treatment technologies to enable them
make informed decisions.
— Work with waste planners by providing
support and advice to ensure specific reference to the appropriate
waste treatment facilities are made in the development of the
new Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Schemes.
— Data collection on the time it takes
for sequential waste permits to be granted. This could be dovetailed
into the existing data collection unit within WIP.
— A mechanism to ensure that guidance
on the implementation of the three permitting regimes (land use
planning, permitting and veterinary approvals) are congruent.
Where inconsistencies and conflicts arise, the WIP should liaise
with the regulatory authorities and industry on a proactive basis
to identify problems and seek timely solutions. This may involve
other Government departments, such as the Cabinet Office's Regulatory
Impact Unit.
5.7 Some of these functions could be modelled
on the ROTATE programme set up within WRAP and form a part of
WIP's existing Local Authority Support Unit.
5.8 To achieve this, funding for WIP for
a second three-year period will need to be secured.
5.9 Unless urgent and co-ordinated action
is taken to translate waste strategies into practice it is probable
that the UK will fail to meet its obligations under the Landfill
Directive. Other Government initiatives, such as the development
of Sustainable Communities, also seem likely to suffer.
6. REFERENCESDavies,
P (2003) The State of Composting in The UK. The Composting
Association, Wellingborough. ISBN 0-9532546-6-6.
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (2001)
Fifth Report Delivering Sustainable Waste Management.
Strategy Unit (2002) Waste Not, Want Not.
Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (September
2004) Composting Position Statement.
6 October 2004
63 This excludes other biodegradable wastes, such a
paper and card, fines and some textiles that cannot be recycled. Back
| 
