Robbie Staniforth, policy manager, Ecosurety, says we need to be really careful in terms of designing targets and building too much capacity around energy from waste, following the recent National Infrastructure Assessment.
In light of the recent National Infrastructure Assessment that was published by the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC), I think it’s good that the advisors to government are starting to offer a balanced approach to incineration as it has been difficult to agree on in the past.
Although energy-from-waste is surely always a better solution to landfill, as a country I believe we need to be really careful in terms of designing targets and building too much capacity. For me, the ideal state is that in 10 years the need for incinerators will be reduced, and so I don’t think it’s the correct approach to be setting up infrastructure and spending millions of pounds of private or public money on facilities, which may not be needed long-term.
For example, Wales are looking at how they could set and reach higher recycling targets, going well beyond EU targets. Creating regimes and associated markets that favour recovery over recycling could well hamper these goals. Seeing the headline “Incinerating Less, Recycling More” in the NIC report was extremely heartening for those of us still finding the need to campaign for movement up the waste hierarchy, never mind towards a Circular Economy.
A tangible example of what could be brewing is demonstrated by the cost of wood PRNs, which are at an all time high. This is a result of government setting a high target, which had been at 22% for several years, to reach what they thought would be the EU Circular Economy Package target
A tangible example of what could be brewing is demonstrated by the cost of wood PRNs, which are at an all time high. This is a result of government setting a high target, which had been at 22% for several years, to reach what they thought would be the EU Circular Economy Package target. At the time I urged caution regarding the increases due to the high volume of wood incineration that occurs. However, I see no evidence that this high wood price has led to greater infrastructure for collection and reprocessing.
As energy-from-waste plants carefully monitor the calorific value of the waste they are burning, it seems logical that wood, and perhaps plastics too, might be a preferred feedstock. This is where a long-term, balanced vision must come from Defra in the Resources and Waste Strategy. Recovering energy from burning wood could well be the best economic and environmental outcome in some cases. However, the analysis must be completed, and intentions made clear by government.
Another key point in the debate is the need to focus more on the quality of recycling. For example, changing the way in which collections in the UK are led from the householder could lead to a jump in the quality of materials, and suddenly the amount of energy-from-waste facilities would drop. Therefore, as a country we need to plan for incinerators after looking at material recycling targets for different industries.
I’m urging that we organise decisions in a hierarchy of importance that is in line with waste hierarchy, which means looking at recycling first. We really only need to be looking at the gap left for energy-from-waste facilities to ensure they are built at the expense of landfill, rather than recycling.
For our industry, I think this is a great opportunity to cut through the energy-from-waste discussion.