Memorandum submitted by the Environment
Agency (Waste 30)
SUMMARY
The Environment Agency welcomes the opportunity
to provide evidence to respond to the Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs Committee inquiry into the Government's Waste Strategy.
We support the leadership provided by Government
through publication of the Waste Strategy for England. It recognises
that a range of actions need to be taken across society to achieve
more sustainable waste and resource management. We need to see
similarly strong leadership through the delivery phase to ensure
that those actions are effectively brigaded, prioritised and resourced.
The Waste Strategy Board will need to put in place effective systems
for monitoring delivery of the Strategy, informed by the Waste
Stakeholder Group. Crucially, Government needs to ensure it has
the right range of delivery mechanisms and that the responsibilities
of delivery bodies are clear. This is particularly important for
non-municipal waste, which is not within the control of local
authorities, and where the drivers for change are arguably less
explicit and more vulnerable to market forces.
1. IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE
STRATEGY
1.1 The Strategy sets a clear direction
of travel for the sustainable management of England's waste. It
identifies a wide range of actions that need to be taken by Government
and its delivery bodies to deliver change in conjunction with
business and local communities. Those actions are grouped under
the six key headings of pricing framework, effective regulation,
resource efficiency, infrastructure investment, local and regional
governance and shared responsibility. Further detail is provided
in the high level implementation plan identifying timeframes and
lead delivery bodies for each of 94 actions.
1.2 It will be essential to ensure that each
of the delivery bodies is clear about the outcome to be achieved
and is equipped to deliver within the timescale. Ongoing review
of the effectiveness and impact of delivery is essential, as is
coordination of the work of the delivery bodies to avoid gaps
or duplication.
1.3 The Waste Strategy Board has been established
with membership from across Government, the LGA and ourselves
to oversee implementation of the Strategy, provide robust challenge
and identify the further steps that may be needed to ensure it
is effectively delivered. We welcome the decision to appoint two
non-executive members to broaden the composition of the Board.
It is essential that the Board is of sufficient status to drive
action across Government and secure buy in from the wider business
community.
1.4 We believe that effective stakeholder
engagement is crucial to implementing the Strategy successfully
and welcome the establishment of a new forum to take this forward.
In particular we would like to see a focus on waste produced by
industry and commerce where the delivery landscape is more complex
and where further or more innovative interventions may be needed
if we are to see more sustainable resource use and responsible
waste management. Early indications are that the signalled increase
in landfill tax could result in a significant shift away from
landfill but in order to maximise the potential benefits of this,
other measures may be needed to ensure that alternative recovery
and disposal options come on stream.
1.5 Our principal role is to regulate the
waste management industry, ie those who transport, recover or
dispose of waste. Increasingly we also work upstream with waste
producers to reduce their waste and its impacts and we have a
crucial role in tackling waste crime. We also provide data and
information to support national, regional and local government
on strategic waste planning.
1.6 The Strategy sets the national policy
framework for waste management development but it is the spatial
planning system that defines, in broad terms, the scale and nature
of waste management facilities needed regionally and locally.
Regional planning bodies and waste planning authorities prepare
spatial development plans that must reflect National Planning
Policy and, on waste in particular, Planning Policy Statement
10 Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (PPS10).
1.7 We consider it necessary to strike an
appropriate balance between the need for communities to take responsibility
for their own waste and the need for some waste streams to be
planned and provided for at a regional or supra-regional level.
PPS10 also acknowledges that some waste streams may need consideration
at the National level. We welcome the move towards this for hazardous
waste in the Waste Strategy along with plans for National Policy
Statements on waste infrastructure set out in the Planning White
Paper Planning for a Sustainable Future.
1.8 Successful delivery of the national
policy framework is dependent on regional planning bodies and
waste planning authorities being bold and producing good quality
spatial plans that meet the requirements of PPS10 and provide
more certainty for potential investors in waste management infrastructure
and to local communities. For regionally significant (strategic)
facilities the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) should identify
in broad terms what is needed and where it needs to go. Waste
planning authorities need to identify sites or suitable areas
in their plans to accommodate what is identified in the RSS as
well as their own local needs. We believe that identifying sites
or suitable areas in spatial plans will help encourage developers
to make applications for new facilities in appropriate locations,
and should help the timely determination of those applications.
The Waste Strategy Board will need to monitor progress in this
area.
2. THE ROLE
OF REGULATION
2.1 We welcome the Strategy's recognition
of the crucial role that effective regulation plays in protecting
the environment and public health and in encouraging resource
efficiency. We welcome the focus on achieving effective regulation,
which delivers its aims without imposing undue costs on business.
2.2 We have already made significant progress
in simplifying our regulatory systems and ensuring we act in a
proportionate and risk-based way, minimising costs to business.
We are pleased that the Strategy recognises the importance of
what we have achieved so far, and the need for continued joint
working in this area.
2.3 The Strategy also acknowledges that
it is vital to ensure compliance with the regulatory framework.
We endorse the Strategy's focus on better and earlier engagement
with stakeholders to encourage compliance and prevent pollution.
We agree that we need to focus enforcement effort on activities
with the greatest potential environmental impact and on maintaining
a level regulatory playing field.
2.4 We support the Strategy's proposals
to develop an action plan to deal with illegal waste activity.
Unfortunately, we cannot use our charging income to tackle waste
crime, and our work in this important area will be limited unless
we are properly funded. We also need to ensure that appropriate
sanctions are available and that the courts recognise the seriousness
of waste crime. We believe that further work is needed to put
in place an effective regime covering export of recyclable ("Green
List") waste in recognition of the increasing importance
of international markets in achieving domestic recycling targets.
3. THE CLASSIFICATION
OF WASTE
3.1 Waste is defined by the European Waste
Framework Directive and its meaning has been clarified in recent
years through a series of legal judgements. The lack of clarity
has fuelled debate and disagreement, often at the expense of identifying
better options for managing waste and minimising its impacts.
Greater consensus is now emerging across Europe, driven by the
production of guidance from the European Commission and negotiations
on the revised Waste Framework Directive.
3.2 We have focused our efforts on clarifying
the law and easing the regulatory burden on waste. We have done
this by adopting regulatory positions for low risk waste recovery
activities and developing, with WRAP, quality protocols that define
when key waste streams can cease to be waste. We estimate that
quality protocols for Tyres, Pulverised Fuel Ash, Flat Glass &
Waste Vegetable Oil will between them have the potential to bring
5.5 million tonnes of waste back into productive use with a value
of £262 million over 10 years.
4. FINANCIAL
INCENTIVES
4.1 It is clear that much depends on the
key fiscal measures, in particular acceleration of the Landfill
Tax Escalator, which we welcome. This should help move towards
the point where landfill is no longer the cheapest option for
most waste. This strong economic signal is necessary to drive
investment in new technologies.
4.2 Increasing costs for landfill and variable
household charging may lead to an increase in illegal activity,
however, and it is essential that we and local authorities have
the necessary powers and resources to tackle this problem.
5. THE ROLE
OF COMPOSTING
5.1 We are pleased that the Strategy seeks
to limit and reduce the volumes of biodegradable waste being landfilled.
More needs to be recycled, treated and recovered to maximise its
value as a resource and minimise its impact on the environment.
This applies to biodegradable waste from all sources—not
just municipal or household waste. We welcome proposals to allow
local authorities to pilot variable charging for household waste.
The current debate could usefully be informed by a comparison
of the increasing cost of landfill versus the true cost of recycling,
set within the context of what households pay for other essential
utilities.
5.2 We believe that both composting and anaerobic
digestion have an important role in achieving this diversion from
disposal to recovery and in controlling emissions of greenhouse
gases. However, we need to ensure these activities are located,
operated and regulated in a way that minimises the impact on the
environment and local amenity. For example, much can be done to
minimise the impact on local communities and hence opposition
to new facilities by composting food waste using in-vessel technology
and ensuring green waste composting is carried out in acceptable
locations. There is also a need to ensure that there are sufficient
facilities available to meet the growing demand so that the effective
operation of existing plants is not undermined.
5.3 In particular, local authorities need
to consider the impact of their chosen collection method on the
quality of inputs to, and hence the value of, the outputs from
the treatment process. The importance of this has been highlighted
in the Quality Protocol for compost that we produced jointly with
WRAP and with the support of the composting sector.
5.4 The final destination for composted
material also needs to be considered, particularly as it is likely
to be competing with industrial wastes that have traditionally
been applied to land. Work is underway on assessing the land bank
available for the spreading of organic materials.
6. WASTE MINIMISATION
6.1 We welcome the priority given in the
Strategy to waste prevention and the acknowledgement that all
parts of society have a role to play in reducing the amount of
waste and its environmental impact. We agree that producers, retailers
and consumers must take a greater share of the responsibility.
6.2 We welcome the creation of a new Products
and Materials Unit within Defra to identify and catalyse improved
environmental performance of products throughout their life cycle.
The commitment to publish a progress report on delivery in Spring
2008 is an encouraging indication of the urgency and importance
attached to this area of work.
6.3 We support the Government's continued
commitment to producer responsibility obligations. It is right
that businesses should be required to take financial responsibility
for the environmental impact of products they place on the market.
6.4 We would like to see a review of the
effectiveness of current and proposed producer responsibility
legislation. In particular, we would like to see a greater focus
on reducing the impact of products and minimising waste production,
rather than on simply increasing recycling rates. In the decade
that producer responsibility legislation has been in force for
packaging in the UK, recovery rates have more than doubled. However,
there has not been a reduction in the amount of packaging used
or packaging waste discarded. We consider it timely to review
the Packaging Essential Requirements Regulations in order to make
it easier for the enforcement bodies to take action against companies
that are using excessive amounts of packaging.
6.5 Further, we would like to see a model
developed for effective producer responsibility legislation, along
modern regulation principles, that builds on best practice.
6.6 We expect that the future implementation
of the Batteries Directive will reduce the proportion of batteries
going to landfill, an outcome we welcome. However, the legislation
is unlikely to have a significant impact on the number of batteries
used. We would like to see Government come forward with proposals
aimed at promoting viable environmentally preferable alternatives
to batteries.
6.7 We note proposals to establish with
the paper industry an agreement to reduce paper waste and increase
paper recycling, building on existing agreements for newspapers,
magazines and direct mail but extended to office papers, free
newspapers, catalogues and directories. The voluntary agreement
in relation to addressed direct-marketing material has had only
a modest impact on the amount of material distributed. We think
that Government could be more ambitious in this area. Moving quickly
to an opt-in system would more rapidly curb this growing waste
stream.
7. CLIMATE CHANGE
7.1 The Waste Strategy concentrates on lowering
future methane emissions by reducing landfill of biodegradable
waste. We strongly support this but it only addresses part of
the problem. We would have liked to see equal emphasis on reducing
methane emissions from waste already landfilled and from the (albeit
reducing) biodegradable element that will be landfilled in future.
7.2 If we are to deal with the overall issue
of present and future emissions of greenhouse gases from landfill,
then the proposals in the Waste Strategy must be taken forward
as part of an overarching strategy for the future of landfill
in this country. Such a strategy would need to consider how to
deal with closed landfills, many of which do not have the necessary
infrastructure to monitor and collect landfill gas and whose operators
may not now have the financial resources to do so. It could also
help clarify the numbers, types and location of landfills needed
in future.
8. ANAEROBIC
DIGESTION
8.1 Anaerobic digestion is well established
in this country as a means of treating and recovering sewage sludge.
We think that it may have a particularly useful role in treating
and recovering food wastes from commercial and industrial as well
as household sources. We support the Government in its wish to
encourage local authorities and businesses to consider further
use of anaerobic digestion.
8.2 As with other treatment processes it will
be essential to control the quality of inputs and outputs as well
as the process itself. We are currently working with WRAP to develop
a quality protocol for digestate from the process. This would
enable operators to produce digestate to a certified quality standard
free from waste regulatory controls.
9. INFRASTRUCTURE
AND NEW
TECHNOLOGIES
9.1 The spatial planning system needs to
plan for an adequate number and type of waste management facilities
reflecting Government Policy and targets in the Waste Strategy.
As the Waste Strategy acknowledges we have made considerable progress
in diverting waste away from landfill in recent years and increasing
the recycling and composting of waste. However, as a number of
recent reports have pointed out, on municipal waste alone there
is a need for a step change in the actual provision of alternatives
if we are to meet our biodegradable municipal waste diversion
targets under the Landfill Directive. The right climate for investment
needs to be maintained, including ensuring there is regulatory
certainty. We welcome the work of Defra's Waste Infrastructure
Development Programme (WIDP) on this area.
9.2 Active management of the local authority
procurement pipeline and support for local authorities through
a network of WIDP transactors should help deliver critical infrastructure
more quickly over the next few years. We would encourage Government
to ensure this also facilitates investment in infrastructure for
non-municipal waste, and would emphasise the importance of monitoring
the delivery rate of new infrastructure.
9.3 Waste Strategy recognises the role of
energy recovery from waste, that cannot be sensibly recycled,
as part of a balanced energy policy. It envisages energy recovery
technologies (including anaerobic digestion) accounting for 25%
of MSW by 2020 (down from 34% in Waste Strategy 2000). England
and Wales currently has an operational design capacity of 3.8
million tonnes per year of MSW in 18 incinerators. In addition,
local authorities have given planning consent for a further capacity
of 1.5 million tonnes. We support the recovery of energy from
waste as part of the waste management and disposal hierarchy where
it does not undermine opportunities to re-use and recover resources.
9.4 Energy from waste plants are subject
to regulatory controls that are tighter than applied to any other
industrial sector. Permits for incinerators are only issued if
they meet stringent controls to minimise pollution of the environment,
impact on human health and the effects on the amenity of the locality.
9.5 The UK increasingly relies on export
markets to ensure value is recovered from waste. Government needs
to ensure it understands those markets and the impacts of market
changes on the UK's ability to recover its waste. We consider
further work is urgently needed in this area.
Environment Agency
November 2007
| 
