ISWA White Paper on Waste and Climate Change

by Site Administrator 3. August 2010 17:07

December 2009

 

The International Solid Waste Association (ISWA) White Paper on Waste and Climate Change puts forth the technologies and mechanisms which can transform the waste sector into a net global reducer of GHG emissions, and making the necessary commitments to assist this change

 

ISWA White Paper on Waste and Climate Change (PDF - 4Mb)

 

ESCC Land Raise - Say NO to ‘Waste Mountains’ in Our Villages

by Site Administrator 1. May 2010 07:15

Article from Chiddingly Parish - 7 Hills News (Spring 2010)

The newsletter of Chiddingly Parish Council

 

Say NO to ‘Waste Mountains’ in Our Villages

 

East Sussex County Council (ESCC)) are planning to build ‘land-raise’ waste sites in the Low Weald.  One of these sites is in Chiddingly Parish.  These sites will receive municipal solid and commercial waste including food, wood, plastics, glass and metal.  Decomposition of these materials will produce methane, carbon dioxide and ‘leachate’ that, despite many assurances, in my opinion will eventually find its way into local rivers and water courses.

 

I have been campaigning to put a stop to these waste mountains as I believe:

 

  • They are unsightly

 

  • They occupy a large amount of land that could be put to better use

 

  • They harbour vermin and encourage seagulls

 

  • They often smell

 

  • They produce leachate

 

  • They require at least 72 HGV trips per day causing even more highway congestion and additional CO2 emission

 

In order to ensure ESCC really understood how much opposition there is to land raise 11 Parish Councils formed an Action Group (PCAG) to fight the principle of land raise. This Group promoted and organised a public meeting on 23rd January where over 400 people, supported by 2 MPs and 10 District Councillors, clearly demonstrated their disapproval of the proposals to members and Officers of ESCC.

 

The PCAG continue to lobby MPs, County Councillors and other organisations to ensure that ESCC consider the many other options to land raise. We also liaise with and support a number of individual action groups that have been set up in each of the affected parishes to campaign against their own particular sites.

 

For more details contact your Parish representative on this Group, Guy Baigent (01825 890373).

 

We don’t need Waste Mountains; there are many other methods available to dispose of it. Why didn’t ESCC consider even more useful waste to energy schemes – e.g. combustion, pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion?

 

What can you do to help to ensure a waste mountain doesn’t end up on your doorstep?

 

Make sure you’re part of the Waste Hierarchy.

 

Reduce Reuse Recycle

 

Reduce – lobby your MP to ensure the next Government makes it a priority to obtain agreement by manufacturers to reduce their packaging. Next time you grocery shop – leave the unnecessary packaging at the checkout.

 

Reuse – donate unwanted items to charities or use websites like FreeMesa.org for the larger items.

  

Recycle – you all know already!

 

Composting – get a composter, a Green Cone or Green Johanna food waste digester from as little as £9.95 from Wealden District Council (01892 602626 email: recycling@wealden.gov.uk).

 

At present ESCC are working their way through the 2000+ objections before publishing their ultimate strategy later in the year.

 

Barby Dashwood-Hall

Wealden District Councillor.

01323 844374

 

Extended Producer Responsibility - ESCC starting point for Zero Waste

by Administrator 25. January 2010 09:06

One of the primary goals of a zero waste policy must be the concept of 'Extended Producer Responsibility' (EPR)


The aim of EPR is to send responsibility for wasted resources back up the production chain and thereby encourage producers to prevent pollution, reduce resource and energy use at each stage of the product life-cycle through changes in product design and process technology.

 

Enforcement is either by a mandatory system that is enacted by state or national governments, or a voluntary system whereby industry takes the initiative.

 

Making producers pay for the waste (wasted resources and post consumer waste) and pollution they generate will create an incentive to incorporate a broader range of environmental considerations into their product design and choice of materials. This in turn reduces consumption of resources at the various stages of the life-cycle of a product or package.


The 3 key elements are:

 

  • extending responsibility for the product to the manufacturing stage

 

  • the producer's responsibility is physical and/or financial - producers either physically take back and recycle their products or pay a third party to do so

 

  • guidelines are usually set by government and require specific recycling rates, define what counts as recycling, and require data collection and reporting to ensure compliance

 

EPR has already demonstrated a major impact on the waste hierarchy as well as on product and package design. Furthermore, this impact has spread well beyond the borders of the countries that have EPR policies in place.

 

The major drivers for EPR have come in countries experiencing severe shortages of landfill capacity (sound familiar ?)

 

Nevertheless, environmental benefits go well beyond reducing pressure on this type of disposal facility. Well-designed EPR programmes encourage both reduced use and recycling of resources. They result in reduced energy and materials consumption, along with reduced pollution.

 

To summarise EPR is a key instrument in achieving sustainability.

 


Additionally the other types of producer responsibility are:

 

  • Liability - responsibility for environmental damage caused by the product in question

 

  • Economic responsibility - covering all or part of costs for collection, recycling or final disposal of products manufactured and may charge a special fee (incurred by consumers)

 

  • Physical responsibility - manufacturer is involved in physical management of the products or of the effect of the products. This can range from developing the necessary technology, to managing the total "take back" system for collecting or disposing of products he has manufactured for which a fee may be incurred

 

  • Ownership - assuming both physical and economic responsibility

 

  • Informative responsibility - responsibility for providing information on the product or its effects at various stages of its life cycle. Take-back schemes generally combine both economic and physical responsibility

 

As an immediate starting measure ESCC needs to look into 'take back' schemes for supermarkets so that the used-packaging could be returned with a weekly supermarket visit and deposited in the supermarket mandatory re-cycling bins

 

Once the supermarkets are forced to 'take back' excessive packaging then there will be an immediate re-assessment of their product packaging for the benefit of everyone

 

Don’t forget that you can also - Initiate Legal Action.

 

Consumers can take action under Statutory Instrument 2003 No. 1941, Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 2003 by contacting their local trading standards officer.

 

For example, Schedule 1, Sec. 1 states: Packaging shall be so manufactured that the packaging volume and weight be limited to the minimum adequate amount to maintain the necessary level of safety, hygiene and acceptance for the packed product and for the consumer;

 

There may also be grounds for action under the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 if the packaging misrepresents the product

 

So the urgent message to ESCC is start implementing relatively simple measures to reduce waste immediately - this means NOW and not in a further 10 years

 

Although simple, these measure will have an enormous impact further down the waste chain because if supermarkets cut their packaging then it doesn't have to be disposed of later. Also they don’t take 10 years and an army of costly ESCC employees to implement!

Has ESCC Investigated Zero Waste Solutions

by Administrator 18. January 2010 11:02

It would seem as though just about everyone is striving for 'zero waste solutions' except ESCC, who have re-visited a proposal they first put forward 10 years ago for Land Raise. It was a bad idea then and now 10 years later it is still a bad idea! What precisely have they done in the interim period?

 

Conversion Technologies

 

Conversion Technologies (PowerPoint Slide Show)

Conversion Technologies (Text Version)

 

The following are worth reading from Peter Jones:

 

4th Green Chemistry & the Consumer Symposium (PDF)

Waste - the Way from Recession

Achieving the Low Carbon Future

Resource Efficient Economy (PDF)

 

The question that ESCC has to answer is

 

What investigation & assessment has ESCC made in the last 10 years into 'zero waste solutions'

 

Please provide all documentation so that the work can be subject to a peer review