Northwest Regional Technical Advisory Body
6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
August 2011
North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
For further information on the work of the Northwest Technical Advisory Body, please contact:
Marcus Hudson Chair, NW RTAB c/o Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate County Hall Preston PR1 0LD Tel: 01772 530696
Or visit: www.envirolinknorthwest.co.uk
• 1 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
FOREWORD
This is the 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report produced by the Northwest's Regional Technical Advisory Body (RTAB), a network of local waste planning, disposal and collection authorities, government agencies and business interests representing the Northwest of England.
This has been a particularly challenging year for the RTAB network nationally. With the demise of regional planning bodies and the outgoing regional strategies, a core purpose (and financial support) for these advisory bodies has been removed. That the Northwest RTAB network continues in its work to report, analyse and share information and best practice on sustainable waste management activities, is testament to the continuing recognition and importance given to sustainable waste management, but also to the support, knowledge and enthusiasm of the membership of the Northwest RTAB.
Special thanks are due in particular to the main contributors to this report, to Pam Fleming (Environment Agency), Paul Knott (Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service), Sue Brett (Cumbria County Council), Alethea Evans (Urban Vision Ltd for Greater Manchester authorities), Campbell Latchford (for Cheshire authorities), Dave Ringwood (Warrington BC) and Richard Sharples (Lancashire County Council).
This report continues a similar presentation to earlier reports, across the different waste streams and types of management, which hopefully will assist the reader in making comparisons and seeing the patterns and trends over different years. There are several particularly notable reports in this edition:
An analysis of waste movements and the move towards better self-sufficiency in managing the Northwest's waste (in Chapter 1);
A look at the types of new waste management facilities approved during 2009 (in Chapter 2);
A study of the particular characteristics of waste production in small and medium business enterprises (SMEs) and the public sector, with case studies (in Chapter 4);
A commentary on the state of radioactive waste management which provides information on the major 'nuclear' waste site producers and managers in the Northwest (in Chapter 8).
Turning to the 'headlines' in this report, which updates the picture of waste activity to 2009 in most cases, it is apparent that the improvements we have witnessed for a number of years now in increasingly sustainable forms of waste management continue:
• 1 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
More of the waste we managed in the Northwest in 2009 was our own, almost three-quarters of it, suggesting the policy impetus towards self-sufficiency and the proximity principle is working in this region and elsewhere. Indeed, over 90% of our own waste (non-hazardous, non-inert wastes) was managed somewhere in the region, and three quarters of it in the same sub-region.
Treatment of all waste rose by 20% in 2009, through material recycling, physical treatment, chemical treatement, composting and biological treatment, reflecting the additional waste management capacity coming on stream in the period.
Another 55 built waste management facilities obtained planning permission during 2009, which, alongside municipal waste management facilities to come on stream, will build more treatment capacity, increasing recycling and recovery and continue the diminshing reliance on landfill.
Very little additional landfill capacity was granted during 2009, although the numbers looking to extend time limits on their operations characterises the dramatic fall in waste going to landfill. 2 million tonnes less waste went to landfill in the Northwest in 2009 compared to the previous year, which means that just 40% of waste managed in the region ended up in landfill, this over a period when the total amounts managed were fairly stable.
Many involved in waste management have for some time been looking to 2010 as something of a 'watershed', a time when the increasing financial strictures placed on diminishing amounts of landfilling, alongside planning and other regulatory pressures on unsustainable and polluting practices, and growing markets and margins for recovered and recycled materials and energy, would combine to bring better certainty and security to those investing and operating sustainable forms of waste management.
This report on the Northwest's waste management industry in 2009 would seem to suggest that the early part of the UK recession did not halt or significantly dampen the encouraging trends and gathering pace of previous years. Let us hope that the same momentum has continued as we emerge from recession and look to a sustainable future for waste management.
Already new challenges are emerging with the Government's recently published Review of Waste Policy in England, questions over the abolition of the landfill allowance trading scheme, and uncertainty around the delivery and financing for several major municipal contracts in Cheshire and Merseyside. These matters are sure to occupy our collective thoughts and future monitoring reports moving forward.
I hope you find the 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report both an informative and enjoyable read.
Marcus Hudson Chair, Northwest RTAB Head of Planning, Lancashire County Council
• 2 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
CONTENTS
Page Chapters
1. Overview of Managing Waste in the Northwest 1
2. Management of Non Hazardous and Hazardous Waste 19 at Facilities and Site in the Northwest
3. Municipal Solid Waste 33
4. Commercial and Industrial Waste 43
5. Hazardous Waste 56
6. Agricultural Waste 64
7. Fly-Tipping 65
8. Radioactive Wastes 74
GLOSSARY/ABBREVIATIONS 89
Appendices
Appendix A Supporting Tables to Chapter 1 94
Appendix B Supporting Information and Tables to Chapter 2 104
Appendix C Supporting Tables to Chapter 3 112
Appendix D Supporting Tables to Chapter 4 119
Appendix E Supporting Tables to Chapter 5 123
Appendix F Supporting Tables to Chapter 7 141
• 1 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 1
1. Overview of Managing Waste in the Northwest
1.1 This chapter provides an overview of how the principal hazardous, non- hazardous and radioactive waste streams were managed in 2009; focusing particularly on how much was handled locally, imported or exported. It therefore summarises the extent to which the region is currently self-sufficient in waste management terms. Subsequent chapters provide detailed analysis of the composition of each stream and how it was managed.
1.2 Much of the content of this section updates and expands on material which was first provided in pp.39-43 of the 5th Annual Monitoring Report. The expanded scope of this report is made possible by the considerable improvements which have been made by the Environment Agency to provide fuller, reliable data about waste arisings, movements and fates across the principal waste streams. However some problems remain because of the reach of the transfer note system, affecting the completeness of the data. Data on waste movements which lie beyond its reach are:
Waste that is re-used or recycled at source – this is a specific issue for CD&E waste but may also apply to some chemical and process wastes; Waste spread on exempt sites, with large volumes from anaerobic digestion and composting processes; Waste received at thermal treatment plants – this is a potentially significant omission given the number of consents for these facilities, but data are captured through PPC permit returns and have been incorporated into the analysis that follows; Recyclates separated at transfer stations and MRFs and sent to re-processors and other facilities. Their eventual fate is not recorded consistently; in some cases this is because they are no longer classified as a waste material.
1.3 The structure of the chapter largely follows that of the 5th Annual Monitoring Report to allow comparison of trends, while providing additional detail of certain aspects of the region’s waste management activity. During 2009 following Local Government reorganisation Cheshire was split into two Unitary Authorities, Cheshire West and Chester and Cheshire East. Data has been disaggregated where possible although there are instances where this has not been possible in this report.
Local Management of the Principal Waste Streams
1.4 Broadly the latest data suggest a levelling out of waste arisings following the beginning of recession compared to 2008 data. The total quantity of municipal, commercial and industrial waste managed rose slightly to 12.7 million tonnes, as shown in Figure 1.1 below. The quantity that originated within the Northwest has risen to almost three-quarters (72%) of the waste managed in the region.
• 1 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.5 The analysis continues to be affected by the large quantity (25%) of waste which has no recorded origin. Most of this material was sent to metal recycling sites and the cost of transporting these bulky wastes over long distances suggests that a significant proportion of this material probably originated in the Northwest. This would mean that the region managed more than three quarters of the waste which it produced in 2009. However, there is no statutory requirement for waste operators to inform the Environment Agency of the origin of waste, so there is no easy solution to this problem.
Figure 1.1: Municipal, Commercial & Industrial Waste Managed by Origin (all data in 000 tonnes)1
North West region
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria
Cheshire
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Local N West England UK Unrecorded
1.6 The geographical distribution shows few changes. Warrington continues to manage substantially more waste than it creates, and this also applied in 2009 to Merseyside and Halton. However, this conclusion is affected by the large quantity of scrap metal received from unknown sources and the assumption in the previous paragraph.
1.7 A similar analysis of inert waste suggests a considerable drop in the total managed from 5.8 million tonnes to just over 4.2 million tonnes in 2009. However, this may not be accurate because of the limitations on which wastes are recorded which have been referred to at the start of this chapter. The situation is also complicated by the way material handled by mobile crushing plant is recorded, as this may relate to where the material originated or where any residual material was deposited, even if only temporarily prior to re-sale.
1 For convenience of presentation this analysis excludes just over 6000 tonnes of material which was managed in Greater Manchester and Merseyside and which originated outside the UK.
• 2 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.8 WRAP has published results of a survey of management of construction, demolition and excavation wastes in England in 2008, which suggests that over 60% of these materials were recovered as recycled soils and aggregates (though the proportion which remained on-site is not estimated) while a further 13% was spread on exempt sites. It is likely that the fall of more than 25% in wastes managed reflects a combination of factors; the most likely factors being continued improvement in recycling and on-site re-use and the effect of recession on new building and regeneration projects.
1.9 The pattern of hazardous waste management reflects the existence of a network of individually specialised facilities, most of which have a regional or national catchment. Because the quantities of materials are much smaller than for the other streams this leads to a more dispersed management pattern and substantial levels of imports and exports, both at regional and sub- regional level. Figure 1.2 shows the pattern in 2009 based on a total of 577,000 tonnes of managed waste, which is 6% down on the previous year. However, the cause of this change is not clear.
Figure 1.2: Hazardous Waste Managed by Origin (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West region
Warrington
Merseyside Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria Cheshire
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Local N West England UK Unrecorded
1.10 The Hazardous Waste Interrogator continues to provide a complete dataset in terms of origins and deposits, with only 1% of all movements categorised as “no recorded origin”.
1.11 The proportion of waste which was produced and managed locally fell slightly to 20% of the total, while imports from elsewhere in the region and elsewhere in England accounted for 27% and 42% respectively.
• 3 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.12 The spread of wastes managed between sub-regions shows a few minor changes, with an increase in the quantity managed in Merseyside, but reductions in all other sub regions, most notably in Lancashire and Greater Manchester.
Management of All Wastes – Estimating Self-Sufficiency
1.13 The figures above only tell part of the story of how wastes arising in the Northwest were managed in 2009 as it does not include the wastes produced within the region which were exported to elsewhere in the UK. Returning to municipal, commercial and industrial wastes, Figure 1.3 summarises the levels of sub-regional (managed locally) and regional self-sufficiency (managed locally or somewhere in the Northwest) for each waste planning authority.
Figure 1.3: Comparison of Self-Sufficiency in Managing Locally-Arising Non- Hazardous, Non-Inert Wastes
North West region
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria Cheshire
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Sub-regional Regional
1.14 These results show that the region deals with 93% of the non-hazardous and non-inert waste it produces, and that 74% is managed locally. Merseyside and Halton, and Greater Manchester have the lowest levels of sub-regional self-sufficiency and in both cases this primarily reflects the export of municipal waste to landfills outside the respective sub-regions. This distribution should be regarded as representative as 9% of the material managed in the region has no recorded origin.
• 4 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.15 In summary, the Northwest created 9.9 million tonnes of these wastes of which 9.25 million tonnes were managed somewhere in the region. The remaining 0.65 million tonnes was treated elsewhere in the UK, with the main destinations being to Yorkshire & Humberside (63%) and the West Midlands (21%). A further 3.8 million tonnes of waste was imported and managed in the region but, unfortunately, the origin of most of this material is not known.
1.16 Self-sufficiency performance for hazardous waste management is lower inevitably because so much of these wastes are transferred to specialised facilities spread across the country. Around 20% of the hazardous wastes originating in the region are managed locally, while a further 33% are exported but are managed elsewhere in the Northwest. Unsurprisingly, the two largest urban areas – Manchester and Merseyside – have the highest rates of around 33% and 63% for sub-regional and regional self-sufficiency respectively2. The lowest sub-regional self-sufficiency is 2% for Warrington, its small size having resulted in development of hazardous waste management facilities closer to the principal waste sources in Liverpool and Manchester.
Landfill Disposal of Non-Hazardous, Non-Inert Waste
1.17 In 2008, 4NW commissioned the report Nationally, Regionally and Sub- Regionally Significant Waste Management Facilities which reported that the consented and unused voidspace at non-inert landfill sites in the region was sufficient to meet demand until at least 2025 provided that planning authorities would allow further applications to extend the scale and duration of operations, so that the potential capacity of each site can be fully utilised. Table 1.1 compares the policy position in each sub-regional authority.
Table 1.1. Waste Planning Authority Policy Positions on Landfills
Authority Current Position Location & Status of Current Position Former Cheshire Places the onus on the Adopted Replacement Waste Local Plan County Area developer to substantiate the need for any new site or any extension to a site permit Cheshire East Reduced use of landfill Minerals and Waste Development identified as a key challenge but Framework Core Strategy Issues & no policy position has been Options consultation report (both developed yet authorities). Limited material weight so Cheshire West and No positions on landfill capacity the policy position is defined by the Chester has been proposed Cheshire Waste Local Plan Cumbria Provision of landfill capacity for Adopted Minerals and Waste imported wastes would be Development Framework Core Strategy accepted on a limited scale. A proposal for import on a large scale must be supported by evidence that this would be
2 Sub-regional self-sufficiency is the proportion of waste which arose and was managed within the same sub-region. Regional self-sufficiency as referred to here, is the proportion of locally arising waste which was managed in another sub-region in the Northwest.
• 5 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Authority Current Position Location & Status of Current Position more sustainable than managing wastes closer to where they are created Greater Manchester Provides for continuing Submitted Minerals and Waste Joint operation at and extension of Waste Development Plan Document the principal non-inert sites. No specific restriction on accepting imported waste, but the site operator would have to demonstrate need if applying for any extension to an existing permit Lancashire Proposes term landfilling of non- Submitted Site Allocations and hazardous waste supported at Development Management Policies Whinney Hill only. New Development Plan Document landfilling capacity limited to time extensions at other existing permitted sites Merseyside & Halton Proposes a criteria-based policy Waste Development Plan Document to evaluate applications for inert Preferred Options consultation report. and non-inert sites. Contains Modest material weight and no previous three allocations, two of which plan so formal policy positions defined are mineral extraction sites by Unitary Development Plans which capable of being re-activated as require demonstration of need in line inert landfills with sub-regional or regional forecasts Warrington The “Vision for 2026” Local Development Framework Revised anticipates a substantial Core Strategy. Relatively early in reduction in the amount of consultation so has limited weight wastes imported for disposal but recognises the regional and sub-regional significance of its landfill sites
1.18 Extending the operating life of the region’s principal landfills is an increasingly significant issue as the effects of waste minimisation initiatives combine with rapid improvements in recycling of municipal and business wastes to reduce the rate of deposits substantially below the levels assumed in planning permissions. Time extensions were granted in 2009 for sites at Risley and Fir Tree Farm in Warrington (both interim extensions), Danes Moss in Cheshire East, Lyme and Wood Pits in Merseyside and Distington in Cumbria. Planning applications were also being determined during this period for time extensions at Clifton Marsh and Ellel in Lancashire. The extended consent at Lyme and Wood Pits and the original consent at Arpley in Warrington will expire within two years, showing this situation will persist as deposit rates continue to fall below the annual permitted level.
1.19 In 2008 5.6 million tonnes of non-hazardous waste was deposited in the region’s landfills of which 3.8 million tonnes (68%) was non-inert. In 2009 the corresponding figures were:
Total deposits at non-hazardous non-inert landfills: 3.71 million tonnes, of which
• 6 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Total deposits of non-inert materials: 3.23 million tonnes (65%), and Total deposits of inert material (as fill, or for capping): 0.48 million tonnes, plus Total deposits of inert waste at inert landfills: 1.22 million tonnes, giving Total deposits at non-hazardous landfills: 4.93 million tonnes3.
The final figure represents a 12% drop on the corresponding total from 2008.
1.20 Figure 1.4 summarises the movement of waste into landfills in the region. In 2009 there were 25 landfill sites accepting the quantity of non-hazardous, non-inert wastes shown above. The five largest sites – in terms of materials received – accounted for over half (54%) of all deposits and the top ten for almost three quarters (73%)4.
Figure 1.4: Sources of Waste Deposited in Non-Hazardous Landfills in the Northwest
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
Cheshire Cumbria Greater Lancashire Merseyside & Warrington
Manchester Halton
Within sub-region Within region Elsewhere in England Elsewhere in UK Not recorded
1.21 Figure 1.4 shows no evidence of significant changes to the pattern of wastes compared to 2008, although it has been possible to establish that most of the material with no recorded origin is likely to have originated within the region rather than outside it, thereby improving the level of self-sufficiency. In total 56% of deposits went to landfill in the same sub-region where the wastes were created, while a further 38% were landfilled elsewhere in the Northwest. Leaving aside the material with no recorded origin, only 88,000 tonnes of material managed in the region originated elsewhere in the UK, with the principal sources being the West Midlands (52%), Wales (19%) and Yorks and Humber (14%).
3 This figure excludes a further 209,000 tonnes of material deposited in Cheshire brinefields. 4 The top five, in descending order of deposits were: Arpley (Warrington); Pilsworth South (Greater Manchester); Risley (Warrington); Whinney Hill (Lancashire) and Lyme & Wood Pits (Merseyside).
• 7 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.22 Figure 1.5 presents an analysis of what was deposited and shows it to be dominated by just three categories of material – mixed municipal wastes; sludges and other residues from water treatment waste; and construction & demolition waste (both as fill and engineering material) which collectively accounted for just over 91% of all the material deposited.
1.23 So far this analysis has focused on the waste management challenge facing the Northwest in dealing with its own wastes as well as those which are imported from the rest of the UK. In 2009 waste authorities in the region also exported just over 400,000 tonnes to landfill elsewhere in the country5. The current figure is dominated by the export of almost 330,000 tonnes of MSW from Greater Manchester by rail to Roxby landfill in Yorkshire, although this contract runs only until 2012/13 presently. However, the prospect of using local capacity at Whitehead (Leigh) and Pilsworth (Bury) will enable Greater Manchester to become self-sufficient in non-hazardous disposal to landfill by 2017.
1.24 This movement dominates the region’s waste exports to landfill with the other sizeable, if more modest, movements being: from Halton to the North East; from Merseyside and Wigan to Wales; and from Cheshire to the West Midlands.
Figure 1.5: Proportions of Waste Materials Deposited in Non-Hazardous Landfills
Mixed municipal waste 0% 0% Waste water treatment Mining / quarrying 26% Agriculture / food processing
37% Furniture / paper / cardboard manufacture 0% Inorganic chemical manufacture
Organic chemical manufacture 0% 5% Incinerator bottom ash Waste packaging 0% 2% Not otherwise specified 0% Construction & demolition 1% 1% 28% Clinical / health care / animal
Other
5 Unfortunately a large quantity of waste received at landfill sites in other regions had no recorded origin, and some may have originated in the Northwest. Therefore this figure should be regarded as representative.
• 8 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Treating Non-Hazardous, Non-Inert Waste
1.25 It is very important to define clearly what is meant by treatment to ensure that the data are interpreted correctly and that wastes are not double-counted. The approach adopted here differentiates between those management activities where the principal objective is separating recyclables (which is covered in the next sub-section) and those where the principal objective is recovering value from the waste in another way. Mechanical-Biological Treatment (MBT) and Mechanical Heat Treatment (MHT) typically remove certain recyclables early in the process but their main function is recovering or preparing waste for recovery of value so they are regarded as treatment facilities here.
1.26 There are certain limitations with using the Environment Agency’s datasets for waste planning, as data is primarily collected for operational reporting and this is reflected in the way the site type is recorded. For the purposes of this report, MRFs and composting facilities are evaluated in the section on recycling because their throughput determines performance against EU and national household waste recycling targets; and the same may apply in the future if the review of the Waste Strategy for England results in comparable statutory targets for C&I wastes.
1.27 This part of the analysis is complicated because data on waste received at thermal treatment facilities is recorded via the Pollution Prevention and Control permitting system; however, the analysis has been supplemented by data supplied by the Environment Agency. In the Northwest the only operational facility providing thermal treatment of non-hazardous wastes at present is the municipal incinerator in Bolton. However, this matter will become more significant in subsequent years as an increasing number of consented thermal facilities come into operation.
1.28 Almost 300,000 tonnes of water treatment wastes have been excluded as they are managed at specialised facilities operated solely for this purpose by United Utilities.
1.29 The analysis below follows additional validation of the data to ensure that the results correspond to the definition above as far as possible. For this reason it would be prudent to regard them as indicative results. Figure 1.6 shows that just less than 600,000 tonnes of non-hazardous, non-inert wastes were treated using physical, chemical, physico-chemical and thermal treatment processes in the region.
• 9 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 1.6: Origin of Municipal, Commercial & Industrial Waste Managed at Treatment Facilities (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West
Warrington Arose locally Merseyside & Halton Arose within the region Arose elsewhere in England Lancashire Arose elsewhere in UK
Greater Manchester Imported Not recorded Cumbria
Cheshire
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
1.30 Half of this activity occurred in Greater Manchester – with the Bolton incinerator accounting for 85,000 tonnes out of 298,000 tonnes managed. A further 20% took place in Merseyside and Halton, pre-treatment in the main, with much of this being material handled by Orchid Environmental’s MHT plant in Huyton, and by two facilities which reprocess incinerator ash and plasterboard into fuel stock, typically for use by cement kilns.
1.31 Figure 1.6 shows that 40% of the non-hazardous non-inert waste was treated locally while a further 10% was transferred to another planning authority in the region for treatment. A little over 4000 tonnes was imported from outside the UK, most of which was reported to be municipal-like waste. However, these figures can only be regarded as indicative because 43% of the managed material had no recorded origin.
1.32 Figure 1.7 shows the type of materials that were treated. The predominance of municipal wastes is rather surprising, although this may be explained by the much higher level of recycling of commercial and industrial wastes which was evident in the Environment Agency’s 2009 regional survey of this stream. The total quantity treated will increase over the next 2-3 years as MBT, EfW and other infrastructure to treat MSW and C&I wastes starts to come on-stream.
1.33 Again, these results do not tell the full story6. The region created and treated 295,000 tonnes of its own municipal, commercial and industrial wastes, while exporting a further 66,000 tonnes to treatment facilities elsewhere in the UK. The principal exporters were Merseyside and Halton (38%) and Lancashire (35%). The main destination was the West Midlands which received 60% of the exported waste, with only the South West and Yorkshire receiving modest
6 Note that again this analysis excludes waste water treatment residues which distort the figures summarised in the text.
• 10 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
quantities of waste. Just over a third of these materials were described as aqueous waste as well as modest quantities of ELVs and WEEE. A further 30% was separately collected municipal waste, though there is no indication whether these are actually materials being sent for reprocessing, in which case they would be regarded as being recycled rather than treated.
Figure 1.7: Type of Wastes Managed in Treatment Facilities in 2009
0% Municipal
2% Agriculture & food processing 16% Inorganic chemical processing 0% 5% 1% Organic chemical processing
1% Paint / adhesive / ink manufacture 5% Thermal processes
70% Waste packaging
Not otherwise specified Other
Recycling Non-Hazardous, Non-Inert Wastes
1.34 This is a further area where reporting the origin of waste is not a legislative requirement. It is also complicated because the data provided by the Environment Agency reflects the terminology used by the EU Waste Framework and Landfill Directives insofar as any management of the waste – even if this only involves separating recyclates – is deemed to be treatment, whereas the simple bulking of material is assumed to occur at transfer stations. As a result, open windrow facilities and MRFs are regarded as treatment facilities even though most of the waste they receive contributes to assessment of household waste diversion targets. The analysis below distinguishes between these two types of facility and metal recycling plants.
1.35 Figures 1.8 and 1.9 show the origins of materials passing through recycling facilities other than those which handle scrap metal.
• 11 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 1.8: Origin of Wastes Managed in Composting Facilities (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria
Cheshire
0 100 200 300 400 500
Locally Within the region Elsewhere in England Elsewhere in the UK Unrecorded
Figure 1.9: Origin of Wastes Managed in Material Recycling Facilities (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria
Cheshire
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400
Locally Within the region Elsewhere in England Elsewhere in the UK
• 12 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.36 Of the 482,000 tonnes of waste passing through composting sites, 40% originated locally and a further 44% was treated in another sub-region in the Northwest. However, 14% of the material handled had no recorded origin and, since green waste has limited value, it appears reasonable to assume that this material also originated somewhere in the region, raising the self- sufficiency level even further. Merseyside and Halton treated 37% of waste, with Cheshire and Lancashire each treating 27%, while Greater Manchester and Warrington handled no material7. Again, these figures can be expected to change in the next 2-3 years as food waste composting facilities come on- stream.
1.37 The limited quantities managed in certain authorities suggests that some additional green waste sent to composting sites is not being recorded, possibly because it is being sent to facilities which operate under exemptions. It has not been possible to substantiate this assumption, so Figure 1.8 should be regarded as representative only.
1.38 A total of 972,000 tonnes of material passed through facilities classified as MRFs though it should be recognised that some large recyclers of primarily inert wastes will also have contributed to the quantity of recyclate generated. Self-sufficiency figures are similar to, if slightly lower than, that for composting, with local and regional performance of 31% and 40% respectively. However, a higher proportion (23%) of materials had no recorded origin. Again, any inter-regional movement of these materials are likely to be limited and therefore the true self-sufficiency rate is likely to be higher than indicated above.
1.39 It is not possible to make a comparable analysis of the 2.13 million tonnes of material handled by metal recycling sites as over 95% of these wastes had no recorded origin. Three quarters of the material received was treated in Merseyside and Halton.
1.40 The pattern of movement of recyclates appears imbalanced with only 3,020 tonnes exported, of which 92% was metal waste sent to Yorkshire and Humberside. However, this analysis cannot accurately identify the quantities of recyclates separated at MRFs and transfer stations as the site returns system does not record their arrival at reprocessing facilities.
Managing Inert Wastes
1.41 This analysis of inert waste management should be regarded as indicative only as it excludes material re-used or recycled on construction sites as well as waste sent to exempt sites. Therefore, it cannot be used to estimate the total amount of inert waste generated in the region. The material is assumed to be predominantly from regeneration projects though it contains materials described as “municipal-like”.
7 The zero figure for Greater Manchester it may indicate composting occurs on sites covered by exemptions and which therefore lie outside the reach of the transfer note system, but it has not been possible to substantiate this.
• 13 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.42 The total quantity of inert wastes managed locally was 1.74 million tonnes, with the largest quantities managed in the three most urbanised sub-regions: Lancashire (32%), Merseyside and Halton (30%), and Greater Manchester (20%). Figure 1.10 summarises how these wastes were managed.
Figure 1.10: Inert Waste Management in the Region (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria
Cheshire
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
Inert landfill Non-inert landfill / lagoon Physico-chemical treatment
Composting Material Recycling Facility Metal Recycling
1.43 As data recycled at source is not captured through site returns, this distribution is misleading in that it suggests landfill disposal is still the predominant method, accounting for 61% of material managed, whereas recycling accounted for only 21%. As noted previously, the WRAP Report on this waste stream (using 2008 data for England) estimated that around 43% of hard aggregate, soil and stones were being recycled. Some of this material will appear in the Northwest figures wherever it was transferred between sites, but the significant amount that never leaves the source site is excluded and, if known, would substantially reduce the percentage of waste sent to landfills, but not the actual quantity.
1.44 Figure 1.11 shows that 57% of these wastes were managed in the sub-region where they were created and a further 14% moved into another sub-region. Analysis not detailed here shows these movements were predominantly of inert wastes taken to landfill sites either as void space fill or as engineering material. The analysis should again be regarded as indicative as almost 30% of material had no recorded origin. However, because inert wastes tend to be from construction and excavation projects, they are likely to be bulky and of modest value so there is little movement of them over long distances and the levels of self-sufficiency referred to above should be much higher.
• 14 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 1.11: Origin of Inert Wastes Managed (all data in 000 tonnes)
North West
Warrington
Merseyside & Halton
Lancashire
Greater Manchester
Cumbria
Cheshire
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Locally Elsewhere in region Elsewhere in England Elsewhere in UK Unrecorded
1.45 In addition to the 1.23 million tonnes of waste created and managed locally, a further 90,000 tonnes of locally arising material was exported to management facilities outside the region. Figure 1.12 shows that these movements were quite widely distributed across the UK, although more than 90% of the material moved into regions adjoining the Northwest.
Figure 1.12: Where Locally Arising Inert Wastes Were Managed
East Midlands
18% East of England 1%
Wales London 35% 0%
North East 8%
West Midlands South East 19% 0% Yorks & Humber
19%
• 15 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.46 Movement to landfill disposal predominated, accounting for three-quarters of the exported material, with most sent to non-inert facilities. A further 20% was sent to physical treatment (recycling) facilities.
Managing Hazardous Wastes
1.47 The region produced 477,000 tonnes of hazardous waste in 2009, representing a substantial 12% drop compared to 2008. The largest amounts arose in Lancashire (31%), Merseyside & Halton (26%) and Greater Manchester (21%). Figure 1.13 shows that just under 25% of these materials were managed in the same sub-region where they were produced, while a further 33% remained within the Northwest, giving regional self-sufficiency of 57%. Chapter 5 of this Report provides more detail on the management methods used to deal with locally arising and imported wastes which totalled 577,000 tonnes in 2009. This represents a 6% drop compared to 2008 and continues the fall in hazardous waste managed which has occurred since 2004.
Figure 1.13: Where Locally Arising Hazardous Wastes Were Managed
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0% Cheshire Cumbria Greater Lancashire Merseyside Warrington North West Manchester
Managed locally Managed elsewhere in region Managed outside region
1.48 206,000 tonnes of hazardous waste (43% of the Northwest's arisings) were created in the region and then exported to facilities elsewhere in the UK. Figure 1.14 shows that exports were dominated by movements to the East and West Midlands which accounted for 28% and 24% of this material respectively. Three other regions accounted for a little over 10% each.
1.49 Of the exported material 39% went to recycling facilities and a further 22% to treatment plants, some of which may create secondary products, such as recovered solvents, raising the recycling/re-use rate. Of the remaining material, a further 22% went to thermal treatment facilities with most being used for energy recovery with the remaining 17% sent to landfill. The points below indicate the biggest individual movements.
• 16 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
East Midlands: movements are dominated by a large quantity of hazardous waste water treatment residues that were sent for incineration (this represents 15% of waste exports). The large quantity of waste sent to recycling facilities comprises material from several EWC categories. West Midlands: a range of materials are sent to transfer and eventual landfill disposal with asbestos-containing CD&E waste being the largest proportion. The region also takes a substantial quantity of oil/oil-water mixtures for recycling and recovery. Wales: movements are dominated by export of healthcare wastes and another, large quantity of waste water treatment residues, with both going to incineration facilities. North East: sizeable movements of contaminated CD&E waste to landfill and hazardous municipal material to recycling facilities.
Figure 1.14: Fate of Exported Hazardous Wastes (all data in 000 tonnes)
Wales Yorks & Humber West Midlands South West South East North East London
East of England
East Midlands
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Incineration with energy recovery Incineration without energy recovery Landfill Recycling / re-use Transfer prior to disposal Transfer prior to recovery Treatment
1.50 A substantial quantity of oil and oil/water mixtures is also sent for recycling in the South West region.
Managing Radioactive Waste
1.51 The Northwest is completely self-sufficient in managing High Level Waste (HLW) arisings because all the material is created at the Sellafield complex in Cumbria, where it is stored safely awaiting the development of a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF).
• 17 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
1.52 The Sellafield complex also creates 70% of the UK’s Intermediate Level Waste (ILW), which is also stored at the site pending the development of the GDF. A further 2% of the UK’s ILW is produced elsewhere in the Northwest at the facilities at Capenhurst, Springfields and Heysham. Some of this material, together with the 28% arising elsewhere in the UK, is sent to Sellafield for storage, although some of the originating sites outside the region also store quantities of locally-produced ILW on site.
1.53 The situation is quite different for Low Level Waste (LLW) and Very Low Level Waste (VLLW), with the Northwest accounting for about 40% of these arisings in the UK. Very small quantities of VLLW (equivalent to "dustbin loads") are safely disposed of to unspecified landfills, along with municipal, commercial or industrial waste. Larger shipments can be disposed to authorised landfill sites, such as Clifton Marsh in Lancashire, which primarily takes LLW and VLLW for disposal from the nearby Springfields nuclear fuel fabrication site and also from the uranium enrichment plant at Capenhurst in Cheshire.
1.54 The other LLW disposal facility in the Northwest is the Low Level Waste Repository, which is located near Drigg in Cumbria. This is the only facility of its type at present and therefore it is a nationally important site. Some LLWs that require specialised decontamination are sent to facilities in Dorset, Hampshire and to Workington; but the Repository also receives the residues from these processes. A new vault to be used only for waste storage was opened in 2010 and the site operator is investigating options for minimising the amount of material that the site accepts in the future.
Trans-Frontier Movement of Waste
1.55 The 5th Annual Monitoring Report also included a section on the trans-frontier shipment of wastes, with a specific focus on Waste Electronic & Electrical Equipment. This information was the result of a special analysis undertaken by the Environment Agency which has not been repeated subsequently, and the material presented in the 5th Annual Monitoring Report, therefore, represents the most up-to-date information available.
Data Sources for this Chapter
Appendix A to this Annual Monitoring Report
Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator
Other data has been provided by the Waste Planning Authorities involved in the preparation of this Annual Monitoring Report on behalf of the relevant waste collection and disposal authorities.
• 18 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 2
2. Management of Non Hazardous and Hazardous Waste at Facilities and Sites in the Northwest
2.1 This section of the report draws on the information published by the Environment Agency as the Waste Data Interrogator with additional information provided by Waste Planning Authority representatives of the Northwest RTAB Waste Network in respect of new planning consents. Whilst detailed analysis can be undertaken from the Waste Data Interrogator, this section is generally at basic waste type level.
Key Messages
Including inert, non-hazardous and hazardous waste, a total of 12.7 million tonnes of waste (up from 12.2 million tonnes in 2008) was managed through treatment and disposal outlets in the Northwest.
Landfill continues to play a predominant though diminishing role for disposal with 5.17 million tonnes (down from 7.1 million tonnes in 2008) but now only accounts for 40% of disposals (down from 58% in 2008).
Some 3.7 million tonnes was subject to treatment processes and 2.5 million tonnes were handled through metal recycling facilities including end of life vehicle dismantlers.
Facilities Available
2.2 During 2009 the following numbers of facilities were permitted and available to accept waste from off-site sources:
Table 2.1. Number of Waste Management Facilities Permitted/Available in the Northwest 2009
Landfill 49 sites permitted with 49 accepting waste Land Disposal 10 sites permitted with 3 accepting waste Incineration 10 sites permitted with 9 accepting waste Transfer Station 539 sites permitted with 417 accepting waste Treatment (excl. incineration) 207 sites permitted with 156 accepting waste Metal Recycling Sites 361 sites permitted with 189 accepting waste
• 19 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Transfer Stations
2.3 Transfer stations continue to play a major role in the management of waste with some 6.070 million tonnes passing through the various categories of this type of facility. The Environment Agency classifies Transfer Stations in to five categories, these being:
Hazardous Household, Industrial and Commercial (HIC) Clinical Civic Amenity Sites (Household Waste Recycling Sites) Non Bio-degradable (Inert)
2.4 Table 2.2 below gives the quantities of waste received at each type of transfer station, although it should be noted that not all waste recorded under one category will be entirely made up of waste of that classification. Figure 2.1 which follows shows total waste managed as inert, non-hazardous (HIC) and hazardous for calendar years 2007 to 2009.
Table 2.2. Transfer Sub-regional Totals 2009
Site Cheshire Cumbria Greater Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Northwest Classification Manchester Regional Total Inert 4,167 0 31,340 14,123 0 0 49,630 Household Industrial & 330,003 87,795 1,422,883 779,093 1,572,291 55,651 4,247,716 Commercial Hazardous 206,359 260,790 407,417 136,294 74,774 661 1,086,295 Clinical 682 0 2,065 392 1,218 0 4,357 Civic amenity 61035 50,738 266,000 236,367 63,484 9,603 687,227
Figure 2.1: Waste Managed Through Transfer Stations 2007-2009
• 20 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Metal Recycling
2.5 A total of 2.566 million tonnes of waste was handled by all metal recycling sites, with ferrous metal recycling accounting for almost 95%. Waste associated with end of life vehicles and classified as hazardous increased to 129,738 tonnes reversing the trend of decline shown in previous years.
Figure 2.2: Metal Recycling 2007-2009
Waste Treatment
2.6 The Environment Agency record deposit data for waste treatment under the sub-headings of material recycling, physical treatment, chemical treatement, composting and biological treatment. Table 2.3 below gives the figures for each of the sub-headings. The total amount treated for the year amounted to 3.682 million tonnes (up from 3.06 million tonnes in 2008).
• 21 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table 2.3. Waste Treatment 2009 in 000s Tonnes
Treatment Waste Cheshire Cumbria Greater Lancashire Merseyside Warrington NW Type Manchester Region Material Inert 1 2 51 37 0 0 91 Recovery HIC 117 4 281 137 61 0 600 Haz 0 0 1 8 0 0 9 Total 118 6 333 182 61 0 700 Physical Inert 0 38 70 4 162 1 275 HIC 3 79 371 7 86 9 555 Haz 0 0 21 11 1 1 34 Total 3 117 462 22 249 11 864 Physical- Inert 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Chemical HIC 0 0 106 32 64 17 219 Haz 0 0 89 0 36 0 125 Total 0 0 195 33 100 17 345 Composting Inert 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 HIC 78 27 3 65 122 0 295 Total 78 27 3 65 123 0 296 Biological HIC (All at at 139 100 945 184 4 75 1,447 Waste WWT Water W Treatment Haz Works at 0 0 28 3 0 0 31 (WWTW)) WWT W Total 139 100 973 187 4 75 1,478 Treatment 338 250 1,966 488 537 103 3,682 Total
2.7 All sub-headings show an increase over previous years with the individual figures for the years 2007-2009 shown on the figures below.
• 22 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 2.3: Material Recycling Facilities 2007-2009
Figure 2.4: Physical Treatment 2007-2009
Figure 2.5: Physical Chemical Treatment
• 23 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 2.6: Composting 2007-200
Figure 2.7: Biological Treatment at WWTW 2007-2009
• 24 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 2.8: Long Term Trends in Treatment Process
Incineration
2.8 Environment Agency information for incineration in the Northwest only includes those incineration facilities that accept waste from off-site sources and do not include facilities that burn waste from their own in-house processes.
Table 2.4: Incineration Throughput 2006-2009 (All figures in 000s Tonnes)
Numbers Incineration Type 2006 2007 2008 2009 1 Municipal 104 87 96 85 1 Sewage Sludge 25 23 2 7 2 Hazardous 92 94 83 86 1 Animal By products 45 97 100 87 3 Clinical 18 18 19 19 Co-incineration of 1 47 58 45 43 Hazardous Waste 9 Total 331 377 344 327
2.9 The table also shows the relative importance of such facilities to the region as a means of disposal with only two new facilities being brought on stream since 2006. The figures clearly show that the region treats a relatively small proportion of its municipal waste through this management method, although future plans to utilise capacity at Ineos Chlor in Runcorn will alter this.
• 25 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
2.10 Table 2.5 below lists those incineration facilities in the Northwest together with the capacity figures, which show that no facility has been running at full capacity, with a combined 5% fall in throughput over 2008.
Table 2.5: List of Permitted Waste Incineration Facilities in the Northwest
Annual Site District Incinerator Type Capacity (tpa) GM Waste Bolton MSW 120,000 United Utilities Widnes Sewage Sludge 50,000 Ellesmere Veolia ES Ltd Hazardous Waste 75,000 Port SRM Ltd Heysham Hazardous Waste 15,000 Cement Kiln/Hazardous/Co Castle Cement Clitheroe 175,000 Incineration White Rose Bolton Clinical 8,000 Environmental White Rose Oldham Clinical 8,000 Environmental Northwest Salford Clinical 8,000 Energy Granox Ltd Widnes Animal By-Products 100,000
Landfill
2.11 Table 2.6 below gives detail of the breakdown by the primary classification of inert, non-hazardous and hazardous landfills, as well as showing those sites that have been recorded as making up their figures.
• 26 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table 2.6: Landfill Deposit Data by Sub-region 2009 (Tonnes)
Site Type Waste Type Cheshire East Cheshire West Cumbria Greater Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Warrington
Inert Inert/CD&E 10,319 0 10,002 24,212 0 0 113,530 HIC 0 0 16,199 3,355 0 0 0 Total 10,319 0 26,201 27,567 0 0 113,530 Non - Haz Inert/CD&E 7,714 6,784 61,022 132,535 484,712 200,145 18,297 HIC 140,479 281,078 255,097 611,885 777,981 178,700 1,331,065 Hazardous 0 0 1,589 16,409 2,990 0 5,899 Total 148,193 287,862 317,708 760,829 1,265,683 378,845 1,355,261 Hazardous Inert/CD&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HIC 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 Hazardous 2,530 29,424 0 0 26,387 19,178 0 Total 2,530 29,424 0 0 26,389 19,178 0 Bostock Landfill Minosus Endon Quarry Bennett Bank Harwood Quarry Bent Farm Bromborough Dock Arply Danes Moss Derwent Howe Hazel Knoll Farm Clayton Hall Lyme Woods Pit Fir Tree Farm Maw Green Gowy Landfill Distington Highmoor Quarry Clifton Marsh Randle Island Risley Landfill Eardswick Hall Frodsham Marsh Flusco Pike Lumms Lane Dalton Quarry Wolston D G Hespin Wood Offerton Jameson Road Southworth Quarry Lillyhall Pilsworth South Salt Ayre Fiddlers Ferry Tim Butler Roan Edge Whitehead Plant Thackwood Westby Whinney Hill Withnell Rigby Whitemoss
Non Hazardous Hazardous Landfill Inert Landfill Restricted Landfill Landfill
• 27 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Non-Hazardous Waste Landfill
2.12 The trend continues for the decline in the use of landfill for waste that is biodegradable, although with no new treatment facilities coming on stream in 2009, landfill continued to be the main disposal route for this type of waste.
2.13 This rate of decline should accelerate in future years with major new treatment facilities, particularly for municipal waste.
Figure 2.9: Deposit Trends at Non-Hazardous Landfill 2007-2009
Inert Landfill
2.14 The quantity of waste deposited at inert landfills, which are predominantly construction, demolition and excavation wastes continue the trend with year on year decline. However, the available data does not reflect the true arisings as a significant proportion of this waste can be disposed of at exempt sites, for which no data is available and can also be deposited at non-hazardous landfills, particularly when they are coming to an end and undertaking restoration.
2.15 Historically this type of landfill has been used to beneficially backfill voids created by mineral workings to enable the land to be brought back into use. A number of inert landfills have installed plant that is recycling this material into recycled aggregate further reducing the waste deposited.
• 28 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 2.10: Deposit Trends at Inert Waste Landfill Sites 2007-2009
Hazardous Waste Landfill
2.16 The amount of hazardous waste landfilled continues to decline as does the number of facilities. During 2009, four hazardous waste landfills were available with additionally dedicated cells that accept some Stable Non- Reactive Hazardous Waste (SNRHW) at several non-hazardous waste landfills. These SNRHW cells are usually only a small proportion of the overall waste throughput on these landfill sites, but can distort the reported figures.
Figure 2.11: Hazardous Waste Landfill 2007-2009
• 29 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
2.17 Table 2.7 below illustrates permitted capacity for hazardous waste landfill8, altered to reflect restrictions placed on the operation of the site through planning conditions, the design of the site, implemented capacity, or more appropriate estimates on the available capacity at SNRHW9 cells. In particular, previous figures for non-hazardous waste landfills with a dedicated cell for stable non-reactive hazardous wastes10 have represented void space for the site as a whole, rather than the estimated capacity in the dedicated cell. This can be assumed to be around 30,000 m3, though some of this will have been filled already, and some large sites may have a number of cells.
Table 2.7: Estimated Landfill Capacity, reflecting assumptions on available void space (tonnes) 2009
Greater
Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Merchant 1,500 0 0 155 0 Restricted 0 0 0 0 3,183 SNRHW 0 90 30 30 0 Cell
New Facilities introduced in 2009
2.18 The continued decline of landfilling of all wastes relies on the provision of new facilities to provide the additional capacity, for organic waste treatment, residual waste treatment and Energy from Waste (EfW).
2.19 Table 2.8 below shows the additional number of facilities obtaining planning permission during 2009. Due to construction timescales many of these will not be operational until future years and the operational status of these and any facilities granted in future years should be monitored and form part of future Annual Monitoring Reports.
8 http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/library/data/123744.aspx#North_West 9 'Stable Non-Reactive Hazardous Waste (SNRHW) does not break down or degenerate and cause pollution to the environment. It can include a range of monolithic solidified wastes (wastes in large blocky forms such as those that have been mixed with cement or PFA) or granular solid wastes produced by a variety of treatment plants (such as filter cakes and treated fly ash). Note this part of the landfill only counts for a small capacity of the total Non hazardous landfill’s overall capacity.
• 30 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table 2.8: Additional Waste Management Facilities Permitted 2009
Landfill (new or Waste Planning Transfer Metal Recycling Energy extended Authority Station Facility Treatment Recovery facility) Blackpool 0 0 0 0 0 Blackburn with 0 0 0 0 0 Darwen Lancashire 5 3 4 1 1 Cheshire East 0 0 3 0 0 Cheshire West 1 0 4 1 1 and Chester Cumbria 3 0 8 2 1 Greater 2 1 6 1 1 Manchester Halton 0 0 1 0 0 Merseyside 2 0 3 3 1 Warrington 1 0 0 0 1 Wigan 0 0 0 0 0 Northwest 14 4 29 8 6 Region Total
2.20 Despite over 500 Transfer Stations already existing within the region, 14 new facilities were granted planning consent in 2009. Transfer Stations can vary greatly in the services that they provide, from purely bulking facilities to providing crushing and grading facilities to turn construction, demolition and excavation waste into recycled aggregate.
2.21 One of the most significant trends is the number of treatment facilities being given consent. Within this are facilities for the provision of aggregate recycling, material recycling facilities (MRF) for various waste streams and Anaerobic Digestion (AD) facilities and composting facilities both in-vessel and open windrow.
2.22 Energy Recovery facilities include large scale power generation schemes using solid recovered fuel products from municipal and commercial waste streams together with biomass plants, AD plants and Autoclave/Gasification plants.
2.23 This inter-changeability between facilities can be seen to have a detrimental effect/lead to misconception that a surplus or excess capacity has been provided when in reality the different technologies are not interchangeable and set out to treat different waste streams.
• 31 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
New Landfill Capacity introduced in 2009
2.24 Very little additional landfill capacity was proposed or granted planning permission across the Northwest, reflecting the additional capacity being brought forward in built facilities and recycling and recovery markets growing, as well as the effect of landfill tax. The clear indication is that the reduction in amounts of waste being land filled is having a major effect on the predicted life of existing landfill facilities. Many landfill operators are looking to obtain time extensions to enable them to complete the landfill in accordance with the original planning permission. This trend is likely to continue with new facilities coming on stream to divert more waste away from land filling.
2.25 Some landfill sites are dependent upon mineral extraction to provide further void space and with the down turn in most areas of the extraction industry landfill capacity may not be being created. It is becoming increasingly difficult to predict the actual amount of landfill capacity available and consideration should be given to a fundamental review of landfill capacity within each planning authority area.
Data Sources for this Chapter
Appendix B to this Annual Monitoring Report
Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator
Other data has been provided by the Waste Planning Authorities involved in the preparation of this Annual Monitoring Report on behalf of the relevant waste collection and disposal authorities.
• 32 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 3
3. Municipal Solid Waste
Growth Rates in Municipal Waste Production
3.1 This chapter reviews the progress that the municipal authorities in the Northwest have made in meeting the National Waste Strategy 2007 (WS2007) targets. In previous years it has also included performance against the Regional Waste Strategy (RWS) targets, but with the government’s announcements regarding the removal of the regional tier of governance these figures will cease to be considered, unless targets set at the national level are not available.
3.2 From April 2009 Cheshire County Council ceased to exist, being replaced by two new Local Authorities, Cheshire East Council and Cheshire West and Chester, which amongst other functions now operate as independent Municipal Waste Disposal Authorities. For this report, the last available waste data for Cheshire County Council has been included in the graphs and tables for comparison against the two new authorities.
3.3 Whilst waste data in this chapter was collected in 2009/10 and is termed ‘Municipal Waste’ the government has issued guidance on waste definitions and terms to be used from 2010/11, to bring the UK in line with Europe. For detailed information on the new terms/definitions for future AMR reports see Appendix C.
3.4 Municipal waste management arisings data for the Waste Disposal Authorities in the Northwest for 2009/10 is included in the appendix accompanying this chapter (see end of chapter for details).
Key Messages
Municipal waste growth levels are now well below the Regional Waste Strategy target of 2% by 2006, 1% by 2010 and 0% by 2014. The total quantity of municipal waste peaked in year 2003/4 since when there has been progressive reduction in arisings which is also reflected in Defra figures for England as a whole.
3.5 In 2009/10 municipal waste in total, including non household waste arisings, reduced by 11.2% compared with 2005/6 as illustrated in Figure 3.1. Over the same period household waste arisings, which account for slightly over 90% of municipal waste, reduced by 11.5% which can be seen in Figure 3.2.
• 33 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 3.1: Northwest Municipal Waste Arisings 2005/06–2009/10
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000 000s of tonnes of 000s
1,500
1,000
500
0 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Regular household collection Other household sources Civic amenity sites Household recycling Total household Non household sources (excl. recycling) Non household recycling Total municipal waste
Figure 3.2: Trends in Household and Non-household Waste 2005/6–2009/10
4,500
4,000 3,500
3,000 2,500
2,000
tonnes 000s 1,500
1,000
500
0 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Total household Non household sources (excl. recycling) Non household recycling
• 34 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Household Waste
3.6 Rather than continue to use the regional targets for waste recycling and composting, this report will now focus on the targets within the National Waste Strategy 2007.
3.7 The rate of reduction in household waste has accelerated from 2% in 2006/7 to 4% per annum in 2008/9. However, there would appear to be opportunities for further reduction as household waste arisings per head of population remain significantly higher than the average for England as a whole.
3.8 Under national reporting, waste management authorities are required to report on the number of kilograms of household waste collected per head of population (per capita). This allows comparisons to be made between sub-regions within the Northwest and other regions in England. The household waste arisings in the Northwest, at 482 kilograms per head, are higher than the national average of 457 kilograms per head of population. The target to reduce MSW arisings to below the national average at 2008/9 (529 kg/head of population) by 2020 set out in RS2010 has been achieved.
3.9 There are variations within the Northwest authorities as illustrated in Figure 3.3. Only Blackpool, Blackburn with Darwen and Greater Manchester record arisings below the national average, whilst the highest waste arisings per capita are in Merseyside, Halton and Cheshire East. The underlying reasons for the sub-regional and inter-regional differences are not known. However, the differences are significant in terms of the total quantities of waste that Waste Collection Authorities and Waste Disposal Authorities are required to manage.
Figure 3.3: Household Waste Arisings per Head of Population by Waste Disposal Authority Area
700
600
500 400 300
200 Kg/head of population of Kg/head 100
- Blackpool Blackburn with DarwenCheshire Cheshire East Cheshire West andCumbria Chester Gtr Man Halton Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Wigan
2007/8 2008/9 2009/10
• 35 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Household Recycling and Composting
Key Messages
Despite the rapid rate of increase of recycling and composting the Northwest has not met the 40% household target set by national Waste Strategy 2007 of at least 40% by 2010, 45% by 2015 and 50% by 2020. A target of 55% by 2020 would ensure the achievement of the 225kg per head of waste not re- used, recycled or composted.
The former Cheshire county area continues to maintain the highest level of recycling and composting, with Cheshire East at more than 48% 2009/10 (see Figure 3.4).
Figure 3.4: Northwest Household Waste Recycling and Composting Rates against WS2007 Targets
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
Percent 20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
2000/1 2001/2 2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/152015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 Year
North West Recycled/composted (actual) Recycled/composted (WS2007 target) Regional Strategy 2010 target
3.10 There remains a considerable variation in performance between the sub- regions as illustrated in Figure 3.5. Given that six authorities are now achieving over 40% recycling and composting, the 2015 national target of 45% would appear to be in reach. However, the 50% national target at 2020 may prove more stretching for even the best performing authorities.
3.11 Additional recyclate derived from residual treatment processes is likely to make some contribution when new plants become operational.
• 36 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
3.12 In the national context, the recycling rate for the Northwest region as a whole is 38.5%, an increase of just less than 2% from last year, which remains marginally below the average for England of 39.7% for 2009/10. Only the North East region at 667kg per household produces more residual waste than the Northwest region (658kg per household) with the average for England being 625kg per household.
60.00% 50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
Percentage 20.00%
10.00%
0.00% Blackpool Blackburn withCheshire Darwen Cheshire EastCheshire WestCumbria and Chester Gtr Man Halton Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Wigan
2007/8 2008/9 2009/10
Value Recovered from Municipal Waste
Key Messages
Recovery of value from municipal waste, which includes recovery of energy from thermal processing of waste, remains below target trajectory at 40% for 2009/10, compared to the national Waste Strategy 2007 targets of 53% by 2010, 67% by 2015 and 75% by 2020 (see Figure 3.6).
• 37 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 3.6: Value Recovered from Municipal Waste against WS2007 Targets
80.00%
70.00% 60.00%
50.00%
40.00% Percentage 30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00% 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
Recovered value (WS2007 target) Recovered value from MSW
3.13 Changing municipal waste management methods are illustrated in Figure 3.7. This shows that whilst recycling and composting is progressively replacing landfill, incineration with energy recovery has remained constant with only one facility in Bolton providing this capacity. Although the 2010 target will not be achieved it is likely that the 2015 target may well be met as capacity to recover energy from refuse derived fuels (RDF) is programmed to come on stream prior to this target year.
Figure 3.7: Northwest Trends in Municipal Waste Management Methods 2005/06–2009/10
100%
90%
80%
70% 60% 50% 40% Percentage 30% 20% 10% 0% 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10
Landfill Incineration with EfW Recycled/composted
• 38 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
The Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme (LATS)
3.14 The Waste and Emissions Trading Act 2003 places a duty on waste disposal authorities (WDAs) to reduce the amount of biodegradable municipal waste (BMW)11 disposed of to landfill. It also provides the legal framework for a trading scheme. The scheme allocates tradable landfill allowances to each WDA in England. Within each scheme year (1 April–31 March), WDAs will be able to landfill BMW up to the level of allowances held. The aim is to use LATS to meet the diversion targets set out in Article 5.2 of the Landfill Directive12.
Landfill Directive targets are:
by 2010 to reduce the amount of BMW going to landfill to 75 per cent of that produced in 1995; by 2013 to 50 per cent of the 1995 figure; and by 2020 to 35 per cent of the 1995 figure.
3.15 Authorities that landfill BMW in excess of their allocated allowance in any year will be levied fines of £150 per tonne. In 2009/10 all WDAs in the region landfilled less BMW than provided for in their allowance, with Cheshire East having by far the largest margin. This data is set out in Table 3.1 and illustrated in Figure 3.8.
Table 3.1: BMW Allowances and Surpluses 2009/10
Local Authority BMW BMW Surplus Surplus BMW Allowance Landfilled Allowances Allowance as Allowance 2009/10 2009/10 a Percentage 2010/11 (tonnes) (tonnes) of BMW Landfilled Blackburn with Darwen 29,555 28,436 1,119 3.94% 22,976 Blackpool 35,498 34,400 1,098 3.19% 27,596 Cheshire East 89,896 65,849 24,047 36.52% 79,890 Cheshire West and Chester 77,922 68,058 9,864 14.49% 69,248 Cumbria 110,331 107,495 3,836 2.64% 85,769 Greater Manchester 557,297 473,030 84,267 17.81% 433,232 Halton 33,759 31,118 2,641 8.49% 21,579 Lancashire 258,634 252,005 6,629 2.63% 201,057 Merseyside 350,848 336,259 14,589 4.34% 241,647 Warrington 44,014 36,355 7,659 21.07% 34,215 Wigan 79,008 75,090 3,918 5.22% 61,419
11 Under the LATS scheme BMW has been assessed as 68% of municipal waste by weight and thus 32% is assessed as being non biodegradable. 12 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31999L0031:EN:NOT
• 39 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 3.8: Landfilled BMW 2009/10 and Surplus
600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000
Tonnes 200,000 100,000 0 Blackburn withBlackpool Darwen Cheshire EastCheshire WestCumbria and Ch...Greater ManchesterHalton Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Wigan
BMW landfilled 2009/10 (tonnes) Surplus allowances
3.16 In 2009/10 the region collectively landfilled 1,508,095 tonnes out of its 1,666,762 tonne allocation. The surplus with the region as a whole fell from 287,553 tonnes in 2008/9 to 158,667 tonnes in 2009/10.
3.17 To date the required landfill diversion has been achieved by increased recycling, continuing reduction in waste growth and increasing Landfill Tax. However, the allowances shrink rapidly towards 2013 (Landfill Allowances to 2020 are given in the appendix accompanying this chapter (see end of this chapter for details). Municipal Waste Management Strategies (MWMS) of all WDAs in the Northwest region recognise that residual waste treatment will be required to meet the longer term allowances and targets and the achievement of these medium and long term targets will depend upon the implementation of the MWMSs and timely commissioning of residual treatment plant.
Municipal Waste Strategy Implementation
3.18 Municipal waste strategies in the Northwest are now in an advanced state of implementation and some, including Merseyside Waste Strategy, are in full review. Table 3.2 below summarises the Northwest WDAs’ position on proposals for residual waste treatment (as at March 2010, data supplied by WDAs).
• 40 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table 3.2: Municipal Waste Treatment Arrangements and Future Contract Information
Waste Current Planned PFI/PPP Treatment Landfill Disposal Treatment Residual Contractor/ Products Requirements Authority Capacity Waste Current Project Post Treatment Status Commissionin Capacity g of Residual within WDA Waste Area Treatment Facilities Blackburn None In Preferred bidder Subject to bidder Assumed at or with Darwen procurement to be selected but includes below statutory Borough March/April 201 mechanically allowed under Council 1 separated LATS recyclables, recovered energy and compost like output Cheshire East None None Joint PFI with Not yet known Not yet known Cheshire West and Chester- stalled due to withdrawal of PFI funding Cheshire None None Viridor Not yet known Not yet known West and appointed Chester preferred bidder. Procurement of 200,000tpa capacity MBT has stalled due to withdrawal of PFI funding Cumbria 2 x MBT RDF Assumed at or 2 x 75,000 t/y below statutory capacity level allowed under LATS Greater 640,000 tonne Viridor Laing 275,000 tonnes 105,000 tonnes Manchester s per annum RDF per annum total (5 x MBT facilities 530 tonnes) thermal recovery facility 110,000 tonne s Lancashire None 340,000 tonne Global Soil conditioning Contracted and s per annum Renewables material capacity to 2025 Blackpool (2 x 170,000tp Lancashire 100,000tps a MBT with Limited @2020 integrated AD)
• 41 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Waste Current Planned PFI/PPP Treatment Landfill Disposal Treatment Residual Contractor/ Products Requirements Authority Capacity Waste Current Project Post Treatment Status Commissionin Capacity g of Residual within WDA Waste Area Treatment Facilities Merseyside None Waste Waste Subject to PFI- Currently under and Halton Management Management EfW residues review but likely and Recycling and Recycling to be negligible contract contract Landfill targets awarded to awarded to to be set in handle:: Veolia revised JMWMS 400,000- Environmental 2011 in line with 450,000 tonne Services/20 yr Resource s per annum contract from Recovery including new May 2009 Contract 100,000 tonne MRF at PFI for residual Gilmoss due to treatment yet to open August be agreed. 2011 Resource Resource Recovery Recovery Contract has Contract in £90m PFI final stages of awarded. Final procurement business case in development. EfW with CHP confirmed as treatment route Warrington None 70 to In progress EfW residues Assumed at or 100,000 tonne below statutory s per annum level allowed EfW under LATS Wigan None 120,000 tonne Not yet known Assumed at or s per annum below statutory level allowed under LATS
Data Sources for this Chapter
Appendix C to this Annual Monitoring Report
Defra Municipal Waste Management Statistics 2009/10 available from http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wastats/bulletin1 0.htm
All other data has been provided by the Waste Planning Authorities involved in the preparation of this Annual Monitoring Report on behalf of the relevant waste collection and disposal authorities.
• 42 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 4
4. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE
Key Messages
Commercial & Industrial waste production has fallen overall by 7% from 2006 to 2009.
There has been a step-change in methods of waste management, away from landfill to more sustainable methods, such as recycling. 35% less waste was landfilled in 2009.
Sectors showing growth in the quantities of waste produced include the public sector, retail & wholesale and food, drink & tobacco.
4.1 Data on commercial and industrial waste has to be estimated from survey as there is no alternative routine comprehensive source of this information. The Environment Agency undertook national surveys in 1998/99 and 2002/3. In the absence of any programme of further national surveys, the NW RTAB commissioned a survey on commercial and industrial waste in the NW region in 2006/7.
4.2 This 2006 survey was reported in the 2007, third, and 2009, fourth, editions of this monitoring report. A further analysis of recycling and recovery potential was undertaken in late 2008 and the findings summarised in the 2010, fifth edition, of this monitoring report.
4.3 A further survey was commissioned in 2009 and the results published in February 2010.
4.4 A discussion of some of the key findings in the 2009 survey follows in this chapter, along with a study of some of the key trends via comparison with the 2006 survey.
Background to Commercial and Industrial Waste Surveys
4.5 Due to the nature of the survey sample, it is only possible to analyse trends to sub regional level. The authors have selected key areas where the reader may benefit from further analysis of the data reported in the Northwest of England Commercial and Industrial Waste Survey 2009 and the Study to fill Evidence Gaps for Commercial & Industrial Waste Streams in the Northwest Region of England (May 2007).
• 43 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table 4.1: Commercial or Industrial Sector Designation and Quantities of Waste Produced, as per 2006 and 2009 Surveys
Sector (excludes companies of less C or I 2006* 2009* than 4 employees) (2006 and (mt) (mt) 2009) C&I Both 7.5 7.1 Commercial C 3.75 3.9
Industrial I 3.75 3.2
SME both 6.1 4.9
Food, Drink & Tobacco I 0.5 0.7
Textiles, Wood, Paper, Publishing I 1.1 0.6 Power & Utilities I 0.3 0.4 Chemical / Non-Metallic Minerals I 0.8 0.6 Manufacturing Metal Manufacturing I 0.6 0.4 Machinery & Equipment (Other I 0.4 0.5 Manufacturing) Retail & Wholesale C 1.4 1.7 Other Services C 1.8 1.4 Public Sector C 0.6 0.7
4.6 Two sectors were chosen for further analysis:
1. SMEs were chosen as they produce 69% of C&I wastes in the Northwest. 2. The public sector was chosen as waste generation is increasing, one third of waste is landfilled and recycling is below the regional average.
SMEs as a Waste Producer
4.7 Small & Medium Enterprises can be studied as a sector by analysing the data via number of employees. Companies with less than 250 employees are classified as Small & Medium Enterprises (SME). Companies with over 250 employees are classified as Large Enterprises (LE). The C&I Survey excluded companies of less than 4 employees.
4.8 Of the 7.1million tonnes (mt) Commercial & Industrial waste produced in the Northwest, 4.9mt (69%) are from Small & Medium Enterprises (SME).
4.9 SMEs operate across industry sectors, with the majority in Retail & Wholesale (26%), Other Services (26%) and Chemicals & Non-Metallic Minerals Manufacturing (16%).
• 44 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.1: Small & Medium Enterprise Type by Standard Industry Classification
Food, drink and tobacco Power & Utilities 4% 3% Public sector 4% Retail & wholesale 26% Metal manufacturing 6%
Textiles/wood/paper/publishing 7%
Machinery & equipment (other manufacturing) 8%
Other services Chemical/non-metallic minerals 26% manufacturing 16%
Table 4.2: Waste Management Methods utilised by SME’s and all sector sizes
Waste Management Method SME sector All sectors (%) (%)
Recycled 62 60 Landfill 23 20
Land recovery 5 7
4.10 In 2009, NW SMEs produced 4.9mt of C&I waste, recycling/composting/land recovering accounted for 3.3mt (67%).
• 45 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.2: How Waste Was Managed by SMEs
Incineration without Energy Treatment plant Recovery 1% 2% Land recovery Transfer station 5% 1%
Don't know 6%
Landfill 23%
Recycling 62%
4.11 Across all sectors, recycling/composted/land recovery rates varied from 40% (power and utilities), to 92% (metal manufacturing).
Table 4.3: Recycling Rates per Sector
SME Recycling Rate for Sector Recycling Rate all sectors (%) (%)
Chemical/Non-Metallic Minerals 46 48 Manufacturing Food, Drink and Tobacco 91 86 Machinery & Equipment (Other 72 Manufacturing) 78 Metal Manufacturing 92 93 Other Services 58 60 Power & Utilities 40 72 Public Sector 41 37 Retail & Wholesale 71 73
Textiles/Wood/Paper/Publishing 84 80
• 46 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
4.12 SME recycling rates can be broken down to county/unitary authority level. Recycling rates are similar across all NW authorities, with just one or two anomalies:
Public sector recycling rates are low across all NW authorities (41% average) Chemical/non-metallic minerals manufacturing recycling rates are low across all NW authorities (43% average) Food, drink and tobacco recycling rates are low in Warrington (49%) Power & Utilities recycling rates are high in Cumbria (73%) but low in other NW authorities
4.13 Of the waste currently sent to landfill by SMEs, 15% (117,067 tonnes) is deemed as recyclable and 84% (655,575 tonnes) as possibly recyclable.
Figure 4.3: Recycling Potential of Waste Currently Landfilled by SMEs
Not recyclable 1% Recyclable 15%
Possibly recyclable 84%
Case Study One: SME Trade Recycling Centre
The Northwest’s first Trade Recycling Centre (TRC) has opened in Haydock, offering SME’s an easy and cost-effective way of recycling their waste.
For a small annual membership fee, businesses can use the dedicated recycling centre rather than having to pay for waste to be sent to landfill.
The TRC is located at a wholesaler premises so that businesses can drop off their recycling and pick up their shopping in one trip.
• 47 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Envirolink and WRAP supported the project as part of a consortium with Centrol Recycling Group and Gordon Mackie Associates.
The TRC is based on the successful Household Waste Recycling Centre concept and is designed to help businesses overcome barriers to recycling trade waste.
The facility makes it much easier for SMEs to recycle waste whilst also improving the regions overall recycling rates.
The TRC at Haydock provides recycling for over 28 different waste streams, many of which would have previously ended up in landfill at a considerable cost to both businesses and the environment.
Public Sector as Waste Producer
4.14 In 2009, the public sector produced 0.7mt of waste, an increase of 22% from 2006. This accounts for 10% of the total C&I waste produced in 2009. However when it comes to recycling and recovering value, the public sector is one of the poorest performing sectors in this study.
Waste production has increased by 22% from 2006 to 2009. 32% of waste disposed of to landfill. Recycling has increased from 5% to 37% but remains well below the average of 68% for all sectors.
• 48 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.4: Public Sector Waste Management 2006 & 2009
800,000 Composting Total = 0.7mt
700,000 Incineration with Total = 0.6mt Energy Recovery 600,000 Treatment Plant 500,000 Don't know 400,000 300,000 Transfer Station
Quantity (tonnes) 200,000 Incineration without Energy Recovery 100,000 Landfill 0 2006 2009 Recycling Year
Case Study Two: Environment Agency (Northwest offices)
Aims Zero office waste to landfill by 2015. 20% reduction in total waste arising by 2015 (from 2008/09 baseline).
Progress (January 2011) 85% recycling rate. 19% reduction in waste arising.
Figure 4.6: Waste Disposed of to Landfill with Target to Zero Waste in 2014/15
25,000
20,000 Actual Waste
15,000 Disposed to Landfill
Targets to Achieve 10,000 Zero Waste to (kg) Quantity Landfill 5,000
0
2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2005/06 Year
• 49 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Methods
Continual review of waste contracts. Implementation of food waste contract diverted a significant amount of food waste from landfill to energy recovery. Communicating with staff to instil a recycling culture. Green Office management and support groups formed. Recycling facilities have been improved, individual desk bins removed and centralised disposal points introduced. Waste audits undertaken with senior management. Removal of paper towels and single use plastic cups. Working with suppliers to reduce and remove unnecessary packaging.
The Future
The Environment Agency is now looking to recover value from its residual wastes in order to achieve zero waste to landfill by 2015. They are working hard to reach a position where waste avoidance and recycling is as integrated a part of business culture as Health & Safety has become.
Comparing the 2006 to 2009 Surveys
4.15 There has been a reduction in total waste arising from 2006 to 2009 of 5%. Whether this is due to increased efficiencies or economic conditions remains to be seen in the future. There has also been a change in waste management methods with a move away from landfill to more sustainable methods of waste and resource management.
35% less waste disposed of to landfill in 2009. Increases in recycling, composting, waste water treatment, incineration with energy recovery. Decreases in landfill, land recovery, don’t know, treatment plant, transfer station, incineration without energy recovery.
• 50 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.7: C&I Waste Management Methods 2006 and 2009
Waste Water 100% Treatment 90% Incineration w ith Energy Recovery
80% Composting
70% Incineration w ithout Energy Recovery 60% Transfer Station 50% Treatment Plant 40%
of total Percent Don't know 30% 20% Land Recovery
10% Landfill 0% Recycling 2006 2009
4.16 Figure 4.7 shows that use of landfill has dropped from 2006, as recycling becomes more prevalent. It also shows that the Northwest is heavily reliant on landfill and recycling as waste management methods, accounting for 80% of waste in 2009. Given that landfill use is becoming increasingly expensive, and recycling is dependent on end-market availability and price, this reinforces the need to develop reprocessing capacity and markets for recycled materials.
5% less waste produced in 2009 compared to 2006.
Increases in retail & wholesale, public sector, food drink & tobacco, machinery equipment, power & utilities.
Decreases in other services, textiles wood paper publishing, metal manufacturing.
• 51 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.8: C&I Waste Produced Across Sectors (2006 and 2009)
Total = 7.5mt Total = 7.1mt
Pow er & Utilities 7,000,000 Metal manufacturing 6,000,000 Machinery & equipment (other manufacturing) 5,000,000 Chemical/non-metallic minerals manufacturing 4,000,000 Textiles/w ood/paper/publishing
Food, drink and tobacco
3,000,000 Quantity (tonnes) Quantity Public sector 2,000,000 Other services 1,000,000 Retail & w holesale 0 2006 2009
Recycling and Recovery Potential
4.17 The waste survey included an assessment of whether an individual waste stream had the potential to be recycled or to be processed and energy recovered, if the appropriate facilities were available.
Figure 4.9: Recycling Potential (2006 and 2009)
100% 90% 80%
70% Recyclable 60% Possibly recyclable 50% Not recyclable 40% Currently recycled 30% 20% 10%
0% 2006 2009
• 52 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
4.18 Figure 4.9 shows that recycling has increased from approx 48% to over 60% from 2006 to 2009. The proportion of waste that is recyclable (but not currently recycled) has remained static. The proportion of waste that is possibly recyclable has reduced, as has the proportion of waste that is described as not recyclable.
4.19 Recovery Potential was assessed based upon the calorific value (CV) of the material in question, that is the amount of heat released during the combustion of the material. The CV of standard materials was graded from recoverable (such as paper/card with a CV of 16,900kJ/kg) to not recoverable (such as metal with a CV of 0kJ/kg). Material was graded as potentially recoverable when waste streams were composed of a considerable proportion of a material with a high CV.
Figure 4.10: Recovery Potential (2006 and 2009)
100%
90%
80% 70% Recoverable 60% Possibly Recoverable 50% Not Recoverable Don't Know 40% Currently Recovered 30% 20%
10%
0% 2006 2009
4.20 In the 2006 survey, over 30% of wastes were designated as ‘don’t know’ when asked about the potential to recover energy. In 2009, this had reduced to 10%. There is no single known reason for this difference but it could be a combination of greater awareness within industry, better trained survey staff, or more incentive on industry to divert wastes from landfill. This difference in knowledge can also be seen in the ‘recoverable’ figure which has increased from around 25% in 2006 to around 60% in 2009.
• 53 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Commercial & Industrial Waste Destinations for Disposal
4.21 The 2009 survey reports that 70% of wastes were disposed of within the Northwest. Of that processed outside of the region, 85% had a destination elsewhere in England, 4% in Wales, 6% in Scotland and 4% exported outside the UK.
4.22 The types of waste being processed elsewhere are shown in the following diagram:
Figure 4.11: Waste Management Methods for Wastes Treated Outside of the Northwest
Incineration Composting Land recovery 1% 2% 2% Transfer station Don't know 2% 1%
Landfill 8%
Treatment plant 10%
Recycling 74%
4.23 Recycling is by far the largest waste management activity being carried out outside of the Northwest. Further analysis shows this mainly to be ‘paper and card’ and ‘other animal and vegetable wastes’ as categorised by Substance Oriented Classification (SOC). Some of this activity is a reflection on the location of facilities not available in the Northwest, such as the paper mill at Shotton in North Wales. However some of this activity will also be a reflection on commercial decisions based on price and contracts.
• 54 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 4.12: Wastes Recycled Outside of the Northwest
Data Sources for this Chapter
Appendix D to this Annual Monitoring Report
Northwest of England Commercial and Industrial Waste Survey 2009 (February 2010)
Study to fill Evidence Gaps for Commercial and Industrial Waste Streams in the Northwest Region in England (May 2007)
Both surveys are available via the Publications Catalogue by visiting the website www.environment-agency.gov.uk
• 55 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report Chapter 5
5. HAZARDOUS WASTE
5.1 This section presents a summary of available information on hazardous waste movements and management within the Northwest region, where appropriate presented within the context of the UK situation.
5.2 Further details are available in the appendix accompanying this chapter (see end of this chapter for details), where the information is broken down in more detail by Waste Planning Authority areas. All of the information presented is obtained from the Environment Agency's Hazardous Waste Interrogators for 2008 and 2009.
5.3 The Environment Agency's database records each delivery as a deposit and each movement as an arising. Whilst a number of waste materials are dispatched directly to their point of disposal, other wastes will pass through one or a number of transfer stations or treatment plants on route. Any waste that does not go direct to disposal will arise and be deposited more than once. Consequently the tonnages of materials recorded as arising and deposited will be greater that the actual amount of hazardous waste. Also, during treatment, wastes may undergo losses in weight (through dewatering for example) or gain weight through the addition of treatment additives (such as lime), or may be partially or totally recovered.
What is Hazardous Waste?
5.4 Some types of waste are harmful to human health, or to the environment, either immediately or over an extended period of time. These are called hazardous wastes.
5.5 The Hazardous Waste Regulations 2005 (HWR) and The List of Waste Regulations 2005 (LoWR) came into force on 16 July 2005 and set out the rules for assessing if a waste is hazardous or not, according to the European Waste Catalogue (EWC).
• 56 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Key Messages
577,000 tonnes of hazardous waste was managed in the region in 2008/09 91,000 tonnes of this was landfilled
Relative to the amount of waste produced in the region, the 91,000 tonnes landfilled represents 20% Over 3 million cubic metres of the Northwest's reported void space is found at 1 landfill site in Merseyside, permitted to accept 144 EWC1 waste types (Randle Landfill).
Approximately 2 million cubic metres of the Northwest's reported void space is 1 only available to 42 EWC waste types (at Minosus), the businesses and industry of Lancashire alone produced 247 different types of waste in 2009
Waste Arisings
5.6 477,000 tonnes of hazardous waste was produced by the businesses and industries of the Northwest in 2008/09, a 60,000 tonne reduction on arisings in the previous year (540,000 tonnes in 2007/08). The Northwest had the third highest levels of hazardous waste arisings relative to the other regions in the UK.
55,000 tonnes was sent for incinerated with energy recovery 43,000 tonnes was sent for incinerated without energy recovery 54,000 tonnes was sent for landfill 51 tonnes was sent for long term storage 125,000 tonnes was sent for recycling or reuse 119,000 tonnes was sent to transfer stations 80,000 tonnes was sent for treatment
5.7 This information is broken down further to a sub-regional level in the appendix accompanying this chapter where further information on the type of waste generated in the Northwest can also be found (see end of this chapter for details).
• 57 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 5.1: Hazardous Waste Arisings (tonnes) in the UK (2008/09)
Yorkshire and the East Midlands, 226280 Humber, 387485 East of England, 308679 Wales, 209701
London, 309937 South N Ireland, 10733 West, 373304
South East, 505870 North East, 1058740
North West, Scotland, 104001 476749
Figure 5.2: Arisings in the Northwest by Sub Region (2008/09).
Warrington 8%
Cheshire 18%
Cumbria Merseyside 5% 18%
Greater Manchester
20%
Lancashire
31%
• 58 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 5.3: Waste Arisings within the Northwest (tonnes) 2007/08 and 2008/09
Management of Waste
5.8 577,000 tonnes of hazardous waste was managed in the Northwest in 2008- 0913, a 34,000 tonne reduction on the 611,000 tonnes managed in 2007-08. Relative to the other regions, the Northwest handles significantly more waste through incineration without energy recovery, and long term storage (both of which occur in Cheshire), than any other region. Significant amounts of these tonnages occurred at individual facilities, further details of which are available in the appendix accompanying this chapter (see end of this chapter for details).
5.9 These figures have shown an overall reduction since 2007, though the management of 'Oil and Oil/Water Mixtures' has shown a sustained increase – from 68,000 to 85,000 tonnes.
5.10 There has been a year on year increase in wastes handled by transfer and recycling operations, as could be expected. There was a large reduction in landfilling by approximately 26,000 tonnes, but an increase in long term storage by about 8,000 tonnes. Further information on wastes managed over the past 3 years is available in the appendix accompanying this chapter (see end of this chapter for details).
13 A total of 4.4 million tonnes of hazardous waste was handled by facilities in the UK during this period.
• 59 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 5.4: Trends in Methods of Hazardous Waste Management in the Northwest (tonnes) 2007/08 to 2008/09
Movements
5.11 The Northwest imported 309,000 tonnes of hazardous waste during 2008/09, and exported 154,000 tonnes, making it a net importer of hazardous waste; this is primarily driven by Merseyside and Cheshire.
Figure 5.5: Waste Movements within and beyond the Northwest
150000 100000 50000
0 Waste Exported to other -50000 parts of NW Tonnes -100000 Waste Exported outside
-150000 of the NW
-200000 Waste Imported from other parts of NW Waste Imported from outside of NW
SubRegion
• 60 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
5.12 Figure 5.6 below presents this information to describe the Northwest's interaction with the UKs other Regions.
Figure 5.6: Waste Movements between the Northwest and the other Regions 2008/09
80000 60000 40000 20000 0
Tonnes -20000 Tonnage Exported to -40000 North West -60000 Tonnage Imported from
-80000
…
North West
Wales London
Scotland
South East South North East North
West South
Yorkshire and and Yorkshire
East Midlands East West Midlands West
England of East Ireland Northern
5.13 Of the waste exported from the Northwest, the majority is waste/water treatment, and oil and oil/water mixtures. Of this waste, 33,000 tonnes of waste/water treatment waste was exported to the East Midlands (this represents over half of the total Northwest exports to the East Midlands; 10,000 tonnes of thermal process waste was exported to Wales (nearly all of the exports from the Northwest for this waste class); and 14,000 tonnes of oil and oil/water mixtures were exported to each of the South West and the West Midlands (representing over half of all Northwest exports for this waste class).
• 61 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 5.7: Northwest Imports and Exports of the 20 EWC Hazardous Wastes 2008/09
100000 80000
60000
40000 20000
Tonnes 0 -20000
-40000 imports -60000 exports
Main EWC Categories
5.14 There are significant movements of organic chemical process waste (07), waste/water (19), and oil/water mixtures (13) both in and out of the region. The main fractions of these imported wastes are 26,000 tonnes of 'solid wastes from gas treatment' (190107), 25,000 tonnes of 'other organic solvents etc' (070504), and 11,000 tonnes of 'mineral based non-chlorinated oils' (130205). This contrasts with the main exported wastes which are 39,000 tonnes of liquid combustible waste (190208), 21,000 tonnes of 'lead batteries' (160601), and 15,000 tonnes of 'other fuels' (130703).
5.15 The examples below present details of nationally strategic sites or areas with a 'national' presence for hazardous waste management to illustrate the national nature of the hazardous waste management industry.
The Northwest exports 4,000 tonnes of 'solid waste from gas treatment', all of which is deposited at treatment or transfer stations in the East Midlands and South West. These 2 regions have over 34% of the UK's treatment and transfer capacity, the West Midlands has 59%, the Northwest has less than 1%. Conversely, the Northwest imports 26,000 tonnes of solid waste from gas treatment, mainly from the North East, the West Midlands and Yorkshire, most of which is deposited for long term storage. The Northwest's long term storage capacity represents 98% of the UKs capacity at 1 site, the Minosus facility. A small amount is landfilled in the East Midlands and the South West.
• 62 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Discarded equipment containing chlorofluorocarbons, HCFC, HFC (160211) is generated throughout the UK, but transfer capacity is mainly found in the East of England, South East, and Yorkshire. Well over 2/3rds of recycling occurs in the East Midlands, with the rest occurring in the Northwest, South East, Wales and West Midlands.
Fluorescent tubes and other mercury containing waste (200121) is generated throughout the UK and transfer capacity is relatively evenly distributed, but recycling capacity is primarily in the East of England (28%) and the Northwest (36%). The very limited amounts of treatment occur in the Northwest (44%) and Yorkshire (43%), whilst landfilling takes place almost exclusively in the South West (89%).
Disposal and transfer capacity is relatively evenly distributed for 'construction materials containing asbestos' (170605), given the ability to dispose of this waste in dedicated cells within existing non-hazardous landfills.
5.16 Whilst the wastes may arise from industries clustered in specific locations, or relatively consistently throughout the country, the specialist facilities required to treat them will inevitably be few in number. It may not always be possible to locate them near to the source of waste arisings, particularly given that disposal facilities may be taking a range number of waste types.
Data Sources for this chapter
Appendix E to this Annual Monitoring Report
Environment Agency's Hazardous Waste Interrogators for 2008 and 2009
• 63 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 6
6. AGRICULTURAL WASTE
6.1 Agricultural waste makes up only a small percentage of the total controlled waste deposited in the Northwest. Most natural agricultural wastes, which are generated in large quantities on the farm, can often be put to good use on farms either without the need for a permit or under a waste exemption.
6.2 Natural agricultural wastes include manures, slurries and straw and make up around 96 % of the agricultural wastes produced in the region. If these are put to beneficial use correctly, they should not lead to pollution.
6.3 Non-natural agricultural wastes include discarded pesticide containers, packaging waste, tyres, batteries, veterinary waste, old machinery and oil, and plastics such as silage wrap, bags and sheets. These types of waste cannot be used beneficially on the farm and need to be managed along with the rest of the region’s controlled wastes.
6.4 There are very few methods of collating waste data on agriculture, as much of the sector uses waste management disposal routes, such as exempt recycling and composting facilities with simplified reporting requirements.
6.5 There is a degree of uncertainty about the accuracy of data available to analyse agricultural waste management within the Northwest. Although the data source is the same as for all waste data, agricultural waste involves such small quantities that any underlying problems are exacerbated and the data becomes unrepresentative. For example, waste classified as hazardous agricultural waste accounts for 17.4 tonnes from a total of 476,749 tonnes hazardous waste arising in the Northwest. However, we also know that wastes from agricultural premises have been reported as being of ‘oil and fuel origin’ and of ‘construction and demolition origin’.
6.6 For more information on agricultural wastes visit:
www.defra.gov.uk
www.environment-agency.gov.uk
www.nfuonline.com
Data Sources for this chapter
Environment Agency Hazardous Waste Interrogator 2009
• 64 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Chapter 7
7. FLY-TIPPING
7.1 Fly-tipping is the illegal dumping of waste. It is unsightly, harms the environment and threatens human health.
Key Messages
The number of incidents of fly-tipping in the Northwest declined compared to last year, to approximately 116,000 in 2010.
Spending on clean up and prosecutions reduced compared to last year, to approximately £10 million.
Who deals with Fly-Tipping?
7.2 Both the Environment Agency and Local Authorities have powers to tackle fly- tipping. The Environment Agency investigates the larger scale incidents of fly-tipping, involving hazardous waste and incidents involving organised crime of fly-tippers. These are known as “Big, Bad and Nasty” incidents and are recorded on the Agency's ‘Illegal Sites database’. The Environment Agency also deals with reported pollution incidents relating to waste management activities. These are captured on their National Incidents Recording System (NIRS) database.
7.3 Local Authorities deal with the clear-up of fly-tipping on publicly owned land, including roads and lay-bys – for example the sofa on the side of the road or bags of rubbish at the river. These incidents are captured on the Environment Agency's Flycapture – a web-based, fly-tipping database for England and Wales.
7.4 Flycapture acts as a strategic tool that helps authorities to improve intelligence on fly-tipping and focus resource on fly-tip hot spots. All information presented below is obtained from the Flycapture database, which reports on Local Authority inspections and prosecutions.
7.5 This section presents a summary of available information on fly tipping within the Northwest region between April 2009 and March 2010 (herein referred to as 2009/10). Information for the previous two years is also presented for comparison; prior to 2007/08 information was not recorded consistently across the Northwest so comparisons cannot be made with earlier years.
• 65 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
7.6 In the information below, most terms are self explanatory, but for clarification:
'other single item' refers to an item of furniture or equipment a 'car boot load' is equivalent to about 1 cubic metre or 5 bin bags a 'small van load' is equivalent to about 4 cubic metres or 6-15 bin bags a 'transit van load is equivalent to about 10 cubic metres or 16-30 bin bags a 'tipper lorry' load is equivalent to around 15 cubic metres or up to 20 tonnes of waste.
Number and Distribution of Incidents
7.7 The number of incidents of fly-tipping reduced for the second consecutive year, to approximately 116,000 in 2009-2010.
Figure 7.1: Fly Tipping Incidents in the Northwest 2007/08 to 2009/10
• 66 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 7.2: Fly Tipping Incidents by Sub Region 2009/10
7.8 Figure 7.3 below illustrates the amount of fly tipping in the Northwest, relative to population level. The worst areas for fly-tipping are north Lancashire, east Lancashire, Merseyside, and central Manchester. These areas coincide with the most deprived areas in the Northwest, and include 9 of the top 10 most deprived wards in the UK (Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2007). The areas least affected are all predominantly rural including Cumbria, Cheshire, and the suburbs of Lancashire and Greater Manchester.
• 67 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 7.3: Northwest Fly Tipping Incidents per 1000 of Population 2009/10
• 68 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Types of Wastes Tipped
7.9 By far the most commonly recorded fly tipping incidents in 2009/10 continue to involve household type waste, though there is some variation across the Northwest, with some urban authorities experiencing significant levels of tipping of white goods (59% of fly-tipping incidents occurred in Liverpool) and construction and demolition waste (39% of fly-tipping incidents occurred in Liverpool). The proportions illustrated below have remained relatively consistent over the previous two years. The numbers of incidents involving each waste type have shown a consistent reduction, in line with the overall reduction in fly-tipping, with the exception of black bag commercial and animal carcasses which have both shown a slight increase of around 8%; the tipping of vehicle parts dropped by 65% on 2008/09 levels, helped by the national car scrappage scheme and the End of Life vehicle regulations.
Figure 7.4: Occurrence of Waste Types within Fly-Tipping Incidents 2009/10
• 69 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Size of Incidents
7.10 The most common fly tipping incidents continue to be a small van load or less.
Figure 7.5: Fly Tipping Incident Load Size 2009/10
7.11 There has been a year on year reduction in the numbers of all sizes of incidents, except for 'small van load' which increased in 2009/10, following a reduction in the previous year, though numbers are still considerably lower than those experienced in 2007/08.
7.12 Manchester experiences significant levels of the larger flytipping incidents; 40% of 'significant multiple load' incidents occurring in the Northwest occurred in Manchester, together with 24% of 'tipper lorry loads'. However, whilst this is significantly higher than the rest of the Northwest, it represents a significant reduction on previous year's levels (589 tipper loads in 2007/08 reduced to 440 in 2009/10 and 2,574 significant multiple loads in 2007/08 reduced to 466 in 2009/10).
• 70 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Locations of Fly-Tipping
7.13 The most common location for fly-tipping continues to be back alleys and highways, reflecting the nature of the majority of waste tipped as described above; though Manchester also experiences significant tipping on council owned land and footpaths, and Liverpool experiences significant tipping on the highway (40% of all fly-tipping incidents on the highway occur in Liverpool).
Figure 7.6: Fly-Tipping Incidents by Location 2009/10
Clean Up Costs
7.14 Despite the relatively modest size of the majority of flytipping incidents, the clean up cost is significant. £7.1 million was spent in 2010, down on the £8.8 million spent in 2008. Manchester City Council alone spent £1.7 million in 2009/10.
7.15 40% of these costs are from cleaning up the larger incidents (transit van loads or larger) though these only represent 16% of the total number of incidents.
• 71 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 7.7: Proportion of Clean Up Cost by Incident Size
45000 80
40000 70 35000 60
30000 50 25000 40 20000 15000 30 10000 20 of IncidentsNumber 5000 10
0 0 Average Cost Per incident (£) incident Per Cost Average Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Merseyside Greater Manchester
Number of Incidents Average Clean Up Cost
Figure 7.8: Fly Tipping Incidents and Cost by Sub Region 2009/10
45000 1400000 40000 1200000 35000 1000000 30000 800000 25000 20000 600000 15000 400000 10000 200000 EnforcementCost (£) 5000 0 0 Cheshire Cumbria Lancashire Merseyside Greater Manchester
Sub Region
Number of Incidents Enforcement Cost
Enforcement Activity
7.16 Local Authorities carried out fewer enforcement actions, 79,000 in 2010 compared to 106,000 in 2008, mainly by issuing fewer warning letters. They spent £2.82 million pounds in 2010, similar to 2009 but a reduction of £800,000 on 2008 spending. However, there were 716 stop and searches (a 400 increase on 2009) and 2 vehicle seizures in 2010. Manchester, Liverpool and Blackpool councils each spent between £180-200,000 on enforcement in 2009/10. However, relative to the total number of incidents the Merseyside and Greater Manchester sub regions spent less on enforcement that the other sub regions in 2009/10.
• 72 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Figure 7.9: Fly Tipping Incidents and Enforcement Spend by Sub Region 2009/10
7.17 These enforcement actions resulted in 1011 successful outcomes (down slightly on 1,142 in 2008), including raising £90,000 through 276 fines.
Data Sources for this Chapter
Appendix F to this Annual Monitoring Report
All information has been obtained from the Environment Agency's Flycapture database, which reports on Local Authority inspections and prosecutions.
• 73 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
CHAPTER 8
8. RADIOACTIVE WASTES
Key Messages
The Northwest region hosts a large number of nuclear facilities, both civil and defence that produce and/or manage radioactive waste.
Management facilities for Low Level and Very Low Level radioactive waste operate in the region, but all of the UK’s High Level and much of its Intermediate Level waste is being stored here until circa. 2075 and circa. 2040 respectively, awaiting disposal in a purpose-built Geological Disposal Facility. It seems likely that this will also be hosted in the Northwest.
8.1 The UK has accumulated a substantial legacy of radioactive waste from a variety of different nuclear programmes, both civil and defence related. Some of this waste is already in storage, but most radioactive waste will arise over the next century or so, as nuclear facilities are decommissioned and cleaned- up. There is also the potential for radioactive wastes, especially higher activity, if nuclear new build goes ahead. The categories of radioactive waste that are defined in the UK are:
High Level Waste (HLW) – radioactive waste that is so active that it is self-heating and requires cooling for many years. Intermediate Level Waste (ILW) – sufficiently radioactive to require shielding during its handling and transportation. Low Level Waste (LLW) – has activity levels not exceeding 4 gigabecquerels/tonne (GBq/te) of alpha activity or 12 GBq/te of beta gamma activity. One becquerel is equal to the disintegration of one radionuclide per second. A GBq is 1000,000,000 becquerels. Very Low Level Waste (VLLW) – this is a subset, at the lower end of LLW, which has activity levels below 4 megabecquerels/tonne (an MBq is 1,000,000 becquerels). Low volumes (‘dustbin’ loads) can be safely disposed of to an unspecified destination along with municipal, commercial or industrial waste; high volumes can be disposed of to specified landfill sites.
8.2 The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) is responsible for planning and delivering the management of the UK's radioactive wastes and owns most of the nuclear sites and most of the waste. West Cumbria has, by far, the largest concentration of nuclear facilities in the Northwest and in the UK. The Sellafield-Windscale complex covers an area of approximately four square kilometres and comprises more than two hundred nuclear facilities.
• 74 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.3 Within the Northwest region, there are a unique set of operations (post uranium mining) and principal UK facilities that form the complete nuclear fuel cycle. These major sites form the core of the sector and support around 300 supply chain companies in the region, ranging from major organisations such as Amec, Serco, VT Nuclear Services, Nuvia and Rolls-Royce, down to numerous SMEs. In total, there are around 23,000 civil nuclear employees in the region, representing about half of the total UK nuclear workforce.
8.4 The full list of nuclear industry related sites that are located in the Northwest are set out below and illustrated in Figure 8.1.
Figure 8.1: Location of Major Radioactive Waste Producers in the UK, 2007 Inventory
• 75 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Waste Producers
Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria - dockyard that builds, tests and commissions new nuclear powered submarines, owned by BAE Systems Marine Ltd Capenhurst, near Ellesmere Port, Cheshire West – uranium enrichment plant, owned by NDA and Urenco (Capenhurst) Ltd Eskmeals, Cumbria – weapons and equipment proving, owned by MoD Heysham 1 & 2, Lancashire – electricity generation, owned by British Energy (now part of EDF Energy) Springfields, near Preston, Lancashire – nuclear fuel products manufacture, operated by Westinghouse Electric UK Ltd Sellafield-Windscale complex, Cumbria - owned by NDA
Waste Managers
Sellafield-Windscale complex, Cumbria - owned by NDA Low Level Waste Repository, near Drigg, Cumbria – owned by NDA Clifton Marsh landfill site, near Preston, Lancashire – a wide range of waste disposal including LLW and VLLW, owned by SITA UK Ltd
Note that Sellafield-Windscale is both operating, so producing radioactive waste, and managing their own and other facilities’ HLW, ILW and LLW.
8.5 There are also a large number of non-nuclear industry sites in the region that generate small amounts of radioactive waste, mostly VLLW, some LLW and ILW. These include hospitals, universities, research centres and certain industrial processes.
Northwest Radioactive Waste Producer Sites
Barrow-in-Furness
8.6 The shipyard at Barrow-in-Furness is a designated submarine centre of excellence and a key component of BAE Systems' naval activities. The Devonshire Dock Hall is where the Astute Class of submarine is being constructed. These are Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) nuclear-powered attack submarines and, once deployed, are designed to require no refuelling throughout their full service life - in excess of 25 years. Submarine Solutions, part of BAE, is responsible for the design, build and initial in-service support of the Astutes. These activities require the Barrow site to maintain a nuclear safety case and site licence, in accordance with the Nuclear Installation Act. As the only UK licensed site integrating, constructing and commissioning nuclear reactors, Barrow is uniquely placed to train and develop the nuclear design, manufacturing, construction and commissioning engineers and programme management capability to meet the UK new build market need. In 2009, there were around 5,000 employees.
• 76 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.7 The first of the class, HMS Astute was launched in 2007 and is undergoing sea trials before its commission in August 2010. Boat two, HMS Ambush, is due for launch in December 2010, with commissioning in 2011. Boats three, four and five – HMS Artful, HMS Audacious and HMS Agamemnon - are under various stages of construction. In the last Strategic Defence and Security Review, Government confirmed that they would commit to the construction of a total of seven Astute Class submarines, in a programme projected to last until 2019.
8.8 At the end of their operational service life, nuclear submarines are prepared to be stored safely afloat. This includes adding material into the reactor that stops the nuclear reaction from occurring, removing flammable materials and preserving the submarine against corrosion. The submarine is then defuelled at the earliest opportunity.
8.9 Defuelling is the process in which the uranium fuel elements are removed from the reactor compartment; they are then transported for storage at Sellafield, as they are classed as ILW. The defuelling work and the preparation of submarines for afloat storage have been carried out in Devonport Dockyard for many years.
8.10 Once defuelled, the Submarine Dismantling Project takes over. There are three stages to this project:
Initial Dismantling: any radioactive material on the submarine will be removed. This is mainly metalwork in the reactor compartment that has become radioactive during use. Current estimates for the quantity of ILW arising are less than 100 tonnes per submarine. Interim Storage: this ILW will be placed into ‘interim’ storage on land, until a suitable geological disposal facility is available; this facility is not expected to be available until at least 2040. The radioactive materials are contained almost entirely within the reactor compartment, but these are too big to fit into any future disposal facility, so will need to be cut up, either before or after interim storage. Ship-breaking: the submarine hull, with all the radioactive material removed, will be broken up and recycled where possible.
8.11 The project will also include transporting the waste from the interim storage site to a national geological disposal facility, and for decommissioning and disposing of any dismantling and storage facilities that are developed for the project. This process will be required for the 27 currently operational and decommissioned nuclear submarines, but not for the Astute Class, as it is assumed that the geological disposal facility will be operational by the time they are decommissioned. In 2011, the MoD intends to carry out a public consultation on where to dismantle the submarines and where to store the ILW.
• 77 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.12 There will also be a small amount of LLW arising at Barrow - from the Radiochemistry Laboratory, the Active Drains Shore Facility and the Primary Effluent Tanks – and the MoD assume that it will be sent to the Low Level Waste Repository in Cumbria. Current estimates are that there will be around 80 tonnes of LLW from decommissioning of the site.
8.13 The objective is to decommission the site to brownfield, to enable it to be delicensed for future use as a commercial shipyard or other industrial use. The existing facilities will either be decommissioned to ground slab, or will be decommissioned to the extent that allows re-use.
Capenhurst
8.14 There are two adjacent nuclear licensed sites at Capenhurst: Capenhurst (NDA) and Capenhurst (Urenco). Capenhurst (NDA) was home to a uranium enrichment plant and associated facilities that were originally built to produce highly enriched uranium for defence purposes and then modified to produce low enriched uranium for nuclear reactors. Uranium enrichment operations ceased in 1982 and associated facilities are being decommissioned.
8.15 Many buildings on site have been demolished to create reusable space, while the rest has been upgraded to safely store uranic materials (storage currently projected until 2120) arising from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel at Sellafield and the uranium enrichment process undertaken at the Capenhurst (Urenco) site. The current end state for the site is determined as a licensed site with the potential for restricted re-use.
8.16 Arisings across the site include a very small amount of ILW, which is sent to Sellafield, and large amounts of decommissioning and operational LLW. In the 2007 UK Waste Inventory, it is predicted that 58,468m3 LLW will be consigned to the Repository and 5,505m3 LLW, plus 10,088m3 VLLW, will be sent to Clifton Marsh. Eskmeals
8.17 Initially to test shells, a facility has existed at Eskmeals, on the West Cumbria coast, since 1894. The site is now run by Qinetiq for the MoD and in 2010 employed around 100 people. They specialise in weapons range and accuracy trials, and hard target trials. The fourteen firing locations enable equipment proving over land for short ranges up to 1km and over sea for long ranges up to 49km. The range has an engineering facility with a workshop, a customer business suite and an ammunition compound for explosive and inert storage.
• 78 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.18 From the early 1960’s, depleted uranium tests began. This included test firing of projectiles made up in part of depleted uranium, and the use of ‘hard targets’ for testing the effectiveness of armour plating containing depleted uranium. This particular firing programme is currently suspended, but there are no plans to close the site; therefore, the LLW arisings are stored on site in a variety of formats, prior to intended final disposal to the nearby Low Level Waste Repository. In the 2007 Waste Inventory, it was noted that Qinetiq were in the early planning stage for the first phase of decommissioning, but did not yet know exactly how much LLW and VLLW this was likely to produce. Figures in the inventory include:
2m3 of target debris contaminated with depleted uranium – this waste consists of depleted uranium oxide mixed with small fragments of depleted uranium and metal from targets (there are no large items present). The waste is in slurry form, which is bonded with dry cement mix to absorb water content, and is encapsulated in containers that are an integral part of the waste stream. 1.2m3 of filters with depleted uranium contamination. Waste is stored in containers awaiting disposal to the LLWR. 35m3 of redundant plant and general scrap equipment - metal, wooden support structures, large absolute filters, etc. Waste is stored in containers awaiting disposal to the LLWR.
8.19 In late 2009, the future of the site was in some doubt, because the only access road was in danger of being washed away by storm events. Consultants drew up options to protect the route, including rock armour, building a concrete sea wall and diverting the road, but nothing has been done to date. Copeland Borough Council, which is responsible for coastal protection, has a policy of “no active intervention” at Eskmeals.
Heysham 1 and 2
8.20 There are two adjacent nuclear power stations at Heysham: Heysham 1 and Heysham 2. They are situated on 115 hectares of land next to Heysham harbour on the Lancashire coast. Each site comprises two operating Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactors (AGRs). Heysham 1 became operational in 1983 and is expected to continue generating electricity up to 2014 (although the current owners intend to extend this to 2019); Heysham 2 became operational in 1988 and is expected to continue generating electricity up to 2023. The whole site employs around 1,100 people.
8.21 The Heysham power stations discharge gaseous radioactive wastes, via stacks to the atmosphere, liquid radioactive wastes, via an outfall into Morecambe Bay, and they contain sources of direct radiation. Both LLW and ILW are produced.
• 79 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.22 Waste arisings from Heysham 1, predicted in the 2007 UK Waste Inventory, are based on a closure date of 2014, so the figures will change if closure is postponed to 2019. It is expected that 3,408m3 ILW will be conditioned and stored on site until a suitable repository is available; 6,894m3 LLW will also be stored during the care and maintenance period of decommissioning (around 85 years). Some 6,432m3 LLW operational arisings will be consigned to the LLW Repository.
8.23 From Heysham 2, it is expected that 3,397m3 ILW will be conditioned and stored on site until a suitable repository is available, 10,300m3 LLW will be stored during the care and maintenance period and 7,033m3 LLW operational arisings will be consigned to the LLW Repository. On cessation of generation at both Heysham 1 and 2, the AGRs will be defuelled and the spent fuel will be despatched to Sellafield.
8.24 Heysham was put forward as one of the sites that Government considers suitable for future nuclear power stations. The planned site end state is unknown.
Springfields
8.25 This 83 hectare site is located near Preston, Lancashire, and has been operational since 1946. It provides nuclear fuel to 15 countries for Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors, Magnox and Light Water Reactors, as well as conversion services supplying uranium hexafluoride. Part of the National Nuclear laboratory is also situated on site. Springfields currently employs around 1,500 people and is managed by Westinghouse Electric Company UK Ltd on behalf of the NDA. In March 2010, Westinghouse and the NDA announced that they were at an advanced stage in agreeing long-term arrangements that would give Westinghouse the opportunity to invest significantly in the site to expand capability to produce fuel for Westinghouse AP1000 reactors and increase uranium conversion capacity.
8.26 Both LLW and VLLW wastes arise at Springfields, some operational and some from decommissioning work. The 2007 UK Waste Inventory predicts that over the lifetime of the site, a total of 2,666m3 of LLW will be consigned to the LLW Repository and 384,718m3 LLW/VLLW will need to be disposed of elsewhere. The site operators are currently preparing proposals for an on-site disposal facility.
8.27 Decommissioning of redundant plant and buildings at Springfields began in 1990 and parts of the site have been returned to nature. The current planned end state is a licensed site with the potential for restricted re-use, by March 2031. This would accord with the Site Stakeholder Group aspiration to self manage suitable radioactive wastes by on site disposal, rather than consign waste to Clifton Marsh.
• 80 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Northwest Radioactive Waste Producer/Management Sites
Sellafield-Windscale Complex
8.28 Sellafield is a 262 hectare site close to the West Cumbria coast, which at present employs around 12,000 people, though this is predicted fall rapidly with the advance of decommissioning at the site. Sellafield Ltd operates the site on behalf of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). Sellafield was put forward as one of the sites that Government considers suitable for future nuclear power stations.
8.29 The site has played a pivotal role in the defence and nuclear industry since the 1940s. It encompasses Calder Hall, the first commercial nuclear power station in the world, and Windscale, which comprises three, non-operational Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors. Operations currently cover decommissioning redundant plant, spent fuel reprocessing, nuclear waste management and mixed oxide fuel manufacturing. The Sellafield site also hosts the Central Laboratory, managed by the National Nuclear Laboratory, which is the UK’s largest nuclear research facility.
8.30 Waste management activities across the Sellafield site involve the treatment, processing, disposal and storage of historic legacy materials, as well as current waste arisings from commercial and decommissioning operations. HLW is produced when spent fuel is reprocessed through the site’s Magnox and THORP facilities. This liquid waste is vitrified, i.e. it is converted into a solid glass form, reducing the volume to one third of its original size, enabling safe long term storage before disposal to a geological disposal facility. Most ILW arises on site from fuel element cladding, contaminated equipment, radioactive sludge and plutonium contaminated material, from both historic and current operations. This is put into stainless steel drums, which are then filled with cement grouting before being placed into a special above ground storage facility on site. LLW, some arising on site and some from other sites across the UK, is compacted at Sellafield before transportation by rail to the Repository.
8.31 The site end state for Sellafield is zoned, due to the amount of ground contamination. The inner zone, which includes the Separation Area and the Windscale Piles, is the most contaminated, so it is envisaged that any new disposal facilities or long term storage activities (plutonium and uranium) will be located here, under institutional control. The outer zone will be cleaned up and delicensed, with final site clearance around 2120.
• 81 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Northwest Radioactive Waste Management Sites
Low Level Waste Repository
8.32 The Repository is the UK’s current national low level radioactive waste disposal facility. It is a 98 hectare site, located on the West Cumbria coast, and is one of 19 sites owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). It is managed by LLW Repository Ltd on behalf of the NDA. Established in 1959 on a former World War II Royal Ordnance Factory site, LLW was originally tumble tipped into seven, clay-lined trenches, but is now disposed of in engineered concrete vaults; where possible, the waste is treated, compacted, containerised and grouted before placement in the vault.
8.33 Vault 8 took LLW for disposal and some (higher stacking) temporary storage; but the new Vault 9, due to open in July 2010, only has permission for storage. Whether or not this vault can be authorised by the Environment Agency to take LLW disposals, is dependent on the Repository preparing an Environmental Safety Case (ESC) by May 2011, which satisfies all necessary regulations and clearly demonstrates the long-term environmental viability of the site.
8.34 Since the Repository opened, it has accepted around 960,000 cubic metres of LLW. The majority of waste is from the nuclear industry, but there are also small amounts from non-industry, such as academic research and hospitals. Since introduction of the LLW subset of VLLW14, the NDA and the Repository set up the UK LLW Strategy Group, which has been seeking to promote innovation and value for money, and how to implement the waste hierarchy to create effective waste disposal solutions – this includes seeking disposal routes to divert VLLW from the highly barriered containment at the Repository. There is some controversy that one route suggested is landfill.
8.35 Subject to the detail of the ESC, it is currently planned that new engineered vaults will be constructed in succession until 2060, with final site clearance (of facilities, not removal of radioactive waste) and delicensing around 2080. It is assumed that the site end state will be greenfield.
Clifton Marsh
8.36 The Clifton Marsh landfill site has been accepting LLW and VLLW for disposal since 1986, under authorisations held by the waste producers. In April 2010, the Environment Agency (the national regulator for radioactive waste disposal) will change its policy, so that waste site operators wishing to dispose of VLLW and LLW will need their own disposal authorisations. In November 2009, SITA UK submitted an application for disposal authorisation at Clifton Marsh. In addition to continuing to accept VLLW and LLW from its
14 Policy for the Long Term Management of Solid Low Level Radioactive Waste in the UK, DEFRA March 2007
• 82 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
existing customers, they proposed to seek authorisation to accept these wastes from a broader range of waste producers, principally in the Northwest region. Its activity would be below 200 Bq/gram, unless explicitly agreed with the Agency by prior arrangements.
8.37 In early 2010, DECC advised that each proposal for disposal of low activity waste to landfill would require an Article 37 submission to be made under the Euratom Treaty. Each submission needs to contain an assessment of the potential impact of proposed disposals on other European Member States. Once submission has been made, the Commission will take up to six months to give an opinion. The Environment Agency will not issue an authorisation for the disposal of radioactive waste to landfill until a favourable opinion has been received from the Commission. The determination of the Clifton Marsh submission is still awaited as at July 2011.
8.38 The site will also continue to accept a wide range of other, general waste types, including household and commercial. This general waste will continue to make up over 90% of the waste disposed of at the site, with VLLW/LLW accounting for around 2%. In activity terms, the total volume of radioactive materials disposed of at the site is approximately 2.54 teraBecquerels (a TBq = 1,000,000,000,000 becquerels). The total capacity of the site is 9 million cubic metres and the remaining capacity is in the order of 2.5 million cubic metres.
8.39 The radioactive wastes accepted typically comprise building rubble, soils and steel items such as framework, pipework and reinforcement materials from the dismantling, demolition and clean up of facilities at nuclear sites. Other components include contaminated equipment and protective clothing from facilities where they handle radioactive materials and wastes. Small volumes of radioactive materials may come from laboratories and hospitals.
8.40 The main source of the low activity wastes at Clifton Marsh is the nearby Springfields Fuels complex, and a small volume also arrives from Capenhurst. The majority of these wastes come from operations at these sites, which manufacture fuel for nuclear power stations. In recent years, wastes from decommissioning redundant facilities on these sites have also been disposed of at Clifton Marsh. The site does not and will not accept any ILW, HLW or liquid waste of any kind.
8.41 In June 2009, SITA UK also submitted a planning application to Lancashire County Council to delay the closure of the landfill site from 2012 to 2020. In early 2010, the Planning Committee granted permission for closure to be extended, but only until 31 December 2015. This decision was based on the household, commercial and industrial waste streams disposed to the site, enabling continued landfilling of those sources not able to be recycled. A limit was placed on the overall volumes of LLW/VLLW wastes disposed, to 10,000 tonnes per annum, with not more than 4,000 tonnes per annum originating from sites other than Springfields and Capenhurst or from outside the Northwest region.
• 83 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.42 Once landfill operations cease, the site will be restored, including the removal of buildings and associated infrastructure, to its original use as agricultural grazing land. There will be no public access to the restored site, as it will be dedicated farmland. The first three phases of landfilling, which all contain LLW, have already been restored and are being used for grazing.
Managing Higher Activity Wastes
Where we are now
8.43 Higher Activity Waste includes HLW, ILW and a small amount of LLW that is unsuitable for disposal in the current LLW Repository. Liquid HLW, mostly from reprocessing spent fuel at Sellafield, is stored to cool on site and is then subject to a process of vitrification. Most of the UK's ILW, from operational activities, arises at Sellafield, where it is being made passively safe and placed into storage on site. Small amounts of ILW from other UK licenced sites, including Capenhurst and Heysham 1 and 2, are also transferred for storage at Sellafield. Future decommissioning of all NDA and British Energy sites may give rise to ILW. The destination for this is currently not determined. It is estimated that the Northwest currently stores approximately 84,000 cubic metres of HLW and ILW.
8.44 The regulators and the NDA require organisations that have responsibilities for radioactive wastes to develop plans for their management. These "Integrated Waste Strategies" (IWSs) have to be prepared in a form and to a level of detail that is suitable for consideration by the regulatory bodies. They have implications for the policies in Local Development Frameworks and Regional Spatial Strategies (or any successor policies/framework) throughout the country, including the Northwest.
Where we need to be
8.45 The Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM), an independent committee of experts, set up by Government in 2003, found in their research and consultation process, that higher activity wastes should be dealt with by geological disposal. Other countries (Finland, France, Sweden, Japan and USA) are already characterising their preferred sites for geological disposal, and it should be possible to benefit from their experience. The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico, USA, is the only geological disposal facility that is known to be operational; it is used for the disposal of ILW. No geological disposal facility for HLW or spent fuel has yet been built and operated.
• 84 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.46 The principle of geological disposal is to place waste in an engineered containment facility, deep inside a suitable rock formation, to ensure that no significant quantity of radioactivity ever reaches the surface. There is some debate as to whether this disposal should be phased, i.e. keeps open the option of retrievability for as long as is practicable. It is anticipated that underground vaults and tunnels would be at depths somewhere between 200 and 1,000 metres, depending on geology.
8.47 Disposal would be preceded by safe and secure interim storage until a geological disposal facility (GDF) can be developed. That storage period could be several decades. The Integrated Waste Strategy for Sellafield includes the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s assumptions of key dates; that the facility will be available by 2040, for Intermediate Level Waste, and 2075, for High Level Waste.
8.48 With regard to the size of facility that would be needed, this will be determined by the exact inventory for disposal, the properties of the host rock and the geometry of features within it. Some materials that are not currently classified as wastes, including spent fuel, may come to be regarded as waste in the future. It is estimated that nearly 500,000 cubic metres of packaged wastes, from existing nuclear facilities, may require geological disposal.
8.49 The CoRWM proposals related to legacy wastes. The Committee stressed the uncertainties associated with new nuclear power stations and observed that the public assessment of any proposals should consider a range of issues and build on the CoRWM process. It estimates that extensions to the lives of some existing reactors, and a possible "new build" programme of ten new reactors, would increase the total volume of material for disposal by about 10%, but total radioactivity by a factor of nearly three. Government anticipates that if new nuclear power stations are built, their wastes and spent fuel could be accommodated in the same facility(ies). The NDA advise Government that the 'footprint' (size) of a geological disposal facility is difficult to predict, but that the addition of new build waste to legacy waste could increase the size of a joint facility by around 50%, depending on design and site issues.
8.50 The Government published a White Paper15 on managing higher activity radioactive waste in 2008. This provides a framework, but the details on implementation have not yet been fully determined; however, CoRWM are continuing their work and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is conducting research, as well as setting up the future geological disposal facility Delivery Organisation. Following publication of the White paper, communities in England and Wales were invited to express an interest in entering into discussions with Government about the possibility of hosting a geological disposal facility (GDF) at some point in the future.
15 Managing Radioactive Waste Safely - A Framework for Implementing Geological Disposal, DEFRA, June 2008
• 85 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.51 Three Local Authorities put forward an Expression of Interest - Cumbria County Council, Copeland Borough Council and Allerdale Borough Council. These councils have formed the West Cumbria Managing Radioactive Waste Safely Partnership, along with other relevant bodies such as the Chamber of Commerce and unions. This is an advisory body that will fact find and research public opinion, in order to make recommendations to the councils on whether to take a Decision to Participate in the Government search for a suitable GDF site. This step is due to be decided in early 2012. If they do decide to take part in this process, they could still pull out up until the point where construction is due to begin - probably more than a decade from now.
8.52 Government says that if West Cumbria does make a decision to participate, a Community Siting Partnership would need to be established to build on the work done by the current Partnership. Ongoing Partnership discussions would be coupled with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority looking at a wide range of criteria, including detailed safety, social, environmental and geological assessments to begin to narrow the focus to potentially suitable sites. As part of this process, the British Geological Survey will carry out a high level geological screening of Copeland and Allerdale, using existing information; this research will rule out parts of the area that could not host a GDF due to underlying geology and mineral safeguarding.
8.53 Government policy on the implementation of the siting process is still evolving, but it seems reasonable to assume that the planning system will need to make provision for a staged process, whereby more than one planning permission would be needed, including:-
facilities for storing vitrified HLW for at least fifty years, until it is judged to have cooled sufficiently for emplacement in a GDF; these stores could be built with a 100-year lifetime facilities, with a proposed service life of 100 years or more, for the interim storage of ILW site(s) characterisation boreholes excavation shafts and tunnels, several hundred metres deep, for underground investigations and possibly construction of an underground research laboratory construction of surface facilities and underground GDF(s), that would remain open for at least 100 years, or longer if provision is made for waste retrieval transport links between storage and disposal facilities closure and restoration monitoring facilities
• 86 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
8.54 Following changes introduced in the Planning Act in 2008, the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) came into existence on 1 October 2009. The IPC was intended to make decisions on applications for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects, but with the advent of the new Coalition Government coming to power, the IPC is due to be replaced around April 2012 by the Major Infrastructure Planning Unit. It is not clear if a geological disposal facility proposal would be submitted to this body, but Cumbria County Council considers that this type of decision should be taken at the local level. Further changes to planning policy are due with the consolidated National Planning Policy Framework.
Managing Lower Level Wastes
Where we are now
8.55 The decommissioning of nuclear sites across the UK will generate significant quantities of LLW (and VLLW) – approximately two thirds of this LLW will come from sites in the NW region, mostly from Sellafield. This means that there is substantial need for disposal of LLW in the region. LLW is currently sent to the LLW Repository (LLWR), near Drigg in Cumbria, for burial in engineered concrete vaults. It is estimated that the LLWR will be full by 2050.
8.56 Vault 8, the last vault to have permission for disposal, is now full, including temporary higher stacking of containers. Temporary planning permission for storage, until the end of 2019, was granted in January 2008 for emplacing wastes in a new Vault 9, which will open in 2010. This vault was estimated to provide capacity until 2016, but new methods of managing the waste, greater emphasis on moving waste up the waste hierarchy and more intensive efforts at diverting wastes away from the Repository, mean that the permitted capacity is likely to last for a longer period.
• 87 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Where we need to be
8.57 The Defra policy for the long term management of LLW was published in March 200716. This stated that Government expected the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to develop and publish a plan for the optimal use of the existing LLW Repository, and to assess the extent to which other LLW disposal options might be employed; it also promoted the search for new LLW disposal sites in the UK. A National LLW Strategy Group, led by the NDA and the Repository operator, looked at the options. The UK LLW Strategy for the Nuclear Industry is due to be published in August 2010. Following that, a strategy for non-nuclear industry LLW management will be developed.
8.58 The NDA’s emerging LLW Strategy, together with the proposals of the Repository operator, demonstrate that a very substantial proportion of the wastes that would, in the past, have been consigned to the Repository will be managed elsewhere. In the future it will only be used for those wastes that require management within a multi-barrier containment system. One implication of these initiatives is that less than half of the estimated maximum physical capacity of the Repository site would be likely to be needed for wastes from Sellafield. Previously, it had been understood that an additional Repository would be needed just for those wastes, irrespective of future developments at the existing site.
8.59 Other development proposals, associated with the proposed new methods of managing the waste at the Repository or diverting it to other management methods, are beginning to come forward, such as landfill. However, uncertainties still remain about the volumes of LLW/VLLW arising, when they will arise, the potential for driving some of them up the waste hierarchy and the type of facilities that may be needed.
8.60 It may be that each Local Authority includes a policy in their Local Development Frameworks for radioactive waste management, or at the very least, a clear statement about how such wastes arising within each authority would be managed. This would accord with the Waste Strategy 2007, the emerging UK LLW Strategy for nuclear industry wastes and take account of the potential policy vacuum caused by the revocation of the NW Regional Spatial Strategy (Policy EM14 Radioactive Waste).
Data Sources for this chapter
UK Radioactive Waste Inventory, Defra and NDA, 2007
Policy for the Long-Term Management of Solid Low Level Radioactive Waste in the UK, Defra, 2007
Managing Radioactive Waste Safely – A Framework for Implementing Geological Disposal, Defra, June 2008
16 Policy for the Long Term Management of Solid Low Level Radioactive Waste in the UK, DEFRA March 2007
• 88 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
GLOSSARY/ABBREVIATIONS
Biodegradable Waste is defined as any waste that is capable of undergoing anaerobic or aerobic decomposition, such as food and garden waste, paper and cardboard.
Commercial Waste means waste from premises used wholly or mainly for the purposes of a trade or business, or the purposes of sport, recreation, or entertainment.
Composting is the controlled biological decomposition of biodegradable materials (e.g. garden waste or sewage sludge) under aerobic conditions In order to produce compost, which can be used, subject to quality standards, as a fertiliser or soil improver.
Controlled Waste refers to household, commercial and industrial waste, or any such waste subject to the control of the relevant authority, and requires a PPC permit or waste management licence for their disposal.
Duty of Care is a legal requirement for producers and managers of waste to ensure that waste is carried and managed by appropriately authorised and permitted treatment and disposal routes.
Energy from Waste (EfW) describes thermal or biological processes that recover the energy from waste materials to produce power and heat. It includes thermal treatment processes: incineration, gasification and pyrolysis; as well as anaerobic digestion.
Exempt sites are a range of sites that present low environmental risks as specified by regulations that may accept waste subject to specified limits and notification.
Hazardous Waste means waste defined under the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations and the List of Wastes (Wales) Regulations which came into force July 2005 replacing the Special Waste Regulations.
Household Waste means waste arising from a domestic property, caravan, residential home; premises forming part of an educational establishment, and premises forming part of a hospital or nursing home
Non household Waste refers to the municipal waste that is not household waste including commercial waste and inert waste collected at HWRCs.
Industrial Waste means waste from a factory, and any premises used for the purposes or provision of public transport, postal and telecommunications services, and utilities.
Landfilling/Landraising is the disposal of waste by its permanent deposition in or on the land.
• 89 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) is a facility at which materials. for example, paper, metals, and/or plastics are separated manually or mechanically, from mixed waste streams, and baled and stored for reprocessing.
Mechanical/Biological Treatment (MBT) describes a range of processes that involve mechanical and biological treatment, degradation and sorting of mixed residual wastes into components that can be recycled, composted, used for energy recovery as refuse derived fuel or landfilled.
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is defined as household waste, and any other waste under the control of (i.e. collected by) District Councils, or their agents, acting on their behalf.
Open Gate Sites are those sites which can take waste from any sources or contractors and are not restricted to waste from one producer.
PPC are permitted industrial processes which are regulated under the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000.
Recovery is the recovery of materials or energy, and includes recycling, composting and energy from waste usually through thermal processes, but also Including anaerobic digestion which produces methane for thermal energy recovery.
Recycling is the segregation, collection or recovery of re-useable materials from the waste stream and their subsequent processing into useable products.
Refuse Derived Fuels (RDF) alternatively labelled as solid recovered fuels (SRF) are produced from the treatment of residual waste.
Residual Waste is that material which remains for treatment or disposal after materials have been source separated for recycling or composting.
Restricted User Facilities are Waste management sites in which waste deposits are restricted to one company and may be linked to one industrial process.
Re-use entails the re-use of waste items, for example bottles or packaging.
Special Waste The legal term for hazardous wastes prior to the implementation of the Hazardous Waste (England and Wales) Regulations and the List of Wastes (Wales) Regulations in July 2005.
Trans Frontier Shipment is the international movement of waste which is controlled by international treaty and Trans Frontier Shipment legislation which sets control regimes for hazardous and non-hazardous waste.
Treatment is the physical, thermal, chemical or biological processes, including sorting, that change the characteristics of the waste, in order to reduce its volume or hazardous nature, facilitate Its handling, or enhance recovery.
• 90 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Waste is defined as any substance or object that the producer, or the person in possession of it, discards, or intends to discard.
Waste Data Flow is the Department of Environment and Rural Affairs’ system for recording and publishing municipal waste data.
Waste Minimisation is the process of reducing the quantity of waste generated which requires treatment and/or disposal.
Waste Transfer Station is a facility that is used for the ‘bulking up’ and temporary storage of wastes, by transferring waste materials from smaller receptacles into larger ones without disposing of the waste on site. The waste is then transferred from the site to another facility for treatment or disposal. The process may or may not be combined with the recovery of waste materials.
Abbreviations
BMW Biodegradable Municipal Waste
CA Civic Amenity Site (Also known as Household Waste Recycling Centres HWRCs)
C&D Construction and Demolition Waste excluding excavation waste
CD&E Construction, Demolition & Excavation Waste
C&l Commercial & Industrial Waste
CCN Community Composting Network
CHP Combined Heat & Power
DCLG Department of Communities and Local Government
Defra Department of the Environment & Rural Affairs
DPD Development Plan Document
EA Environment Agency
EfW Energy from Waste
ELV End-of-Life Vehicles
EU European Union
EWC European Waste Catalogue (waste codes)
GDF Geological Disposal Facility
• 91 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
HIC Household, Industrial & Commercial (used in Environment Agency deposit data to include general non hazardous waste)
HWRC Household Waste Recycling Centre
ILW Intermediate Level (Radioactive) Waste
LATS Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme
LDF Local Development Framework
LLW Low Level (Radioactive) Waste
MBT Mechanical Biological Treatment
MRF Materials Recovery Facility
MSW Municipal Solid Waste
MWDF Minerals and Waste Development Framework
MWMS Municipal Waste Management Strategy
NIRS National Incident Recording System
NWCWN North West Community Waste Network
NWDA North West Development Agency
NWRTAB North West Regional Technical Advisory Body
PFI Private Finance Initiative
PPC Pollution Prevention & Control (Regulations)
PPP Public Private Partnership
PPS 10 Planning Policy Statement 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management
RDF Refuse Derived Fuel
RS Regional Strategy
RSS Regional Spatial Strategy
RTAB Regional Technical Advisory Body
RWS Regional Waste Strategy
• 92 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SME Small and Medium Enterprises
SRF Solid Recovered Fuel
TRF Thermal Recovery Facility
VLLW Very Low Level (Radioactive) Waste
WCA Waste Collection Authority
WDA Waste Disposal Authority
WPA Waste Planning Authority
WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
WRAP Waste & Resources Action Programme
• 93 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix A: Supporting Data to Chapter 1
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
Table A.1: Management of Municipal, Commercial & Industrial Wastes – Full Details
Sub-region where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Total Cheshire 753,972 314 23,735 688 29,211 45,967 853,887 Cumbria 1,400 624,480 170 81,908 108 15 708,082 Greater Manchester 10,699 4,473 2,296,693 128,485 66,728 278,727 2,785,804 Lancashire 14,803 5,599 304,794 1,533,809 41,568 139 1,900,711 Merseyside & Halton 31,081 19 33,570 13,421 1,202,181 562,794 1,843,066 Warrington 248 857 45 22,343 280,967 304,460 North West (unspecified) 24,680 1,805 451,745 2,629 101,574 281,719 864,153 East of England 7,756 5,386 500 725 242 65 14,674 East Midlands 17,067 82 13,156 3,588 1,357 681 35,931 Greater London 2,691 278 76 214 3,259 North East 988 4,153 63 981 1,100 65 7,349 South East 3,151 2,214 977 10 1,218 122 7,692 South West 3 4,614 2,884 533 800 55 8,889 West Midlands 25,141 6,445 1,961 6,900 34,323 101 74,873 Yorkshire & Humber 2,659 27 17,726 12,733 19,058 64 52,267 Northern Ireland 28 2,650 12 2,509 5,199 Scotland 5,733 1,138 3,120 1,310 29 11,330 Wales 36,815 5,706 1,503 697 17,796 1,114 63,632 authority Devolved / region English / sub-region West (N Origin Origin not recorded 154,201 25,038 911,050 352,017 1,769,204 13,533 3,225,043
Total 1,084,692 698,780 4,065,451 2,142,376 3,312,631 1,466,372 12,770,301
Table A.2: Management of Municipal, Commercial & Industrial Wastes – Summary
Sub-region where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Total Within sub-region 753,972 624,480 2,296,693 1,533,809 1,202,181 280,967 6,692,102 52% Within region 82,912 12,210 814,871 227,176 261,532 1,169,361 2,568,062 20% Elsewhere in England 56,765 25,613 37,546 25,544 58,099 1,367 204,933 2% Elsewhere in UK 36,843 11,439 5,290 3,830 21,616 1,144 80,161 1%
Wasteoriginated Not recorded 154,201 25,038 911,050 352,017 1,769,204 13,533 3,225,043 25% Total 1,084,692 698,780 4,065,451 2,142,376 3,312,631 1,466,372 12,770,301
• 94 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.3: Management of Hazardous Wastes – Full Detail
Sub-region where waste originated Greater Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Total Cheshire 5,779 3,049 2,566 8,343 12,144 195 32,076 Cumbria 1 4,886 24 2 4,912 Greater Manchester 4,729 382 32,965 39,185 11,116 2,014 90,391 Lancashire 2,451 4,006 8,052 30,391 13,394 1,565 59,859 Merseyside & Halton 7,803 1,978 17,103 10,757 40,994 1,164 79,800 Warrington 138 6 2,153 296 384 726 3,703 East England 235 44 921 775 329 564 2,868 East Midlands 1,349 786 5,462 34,243 3,795 12,065 57,700 London 14 11 2,142 23 22 1,665 3,878 North East 2,133 4,143 3,873 2,885 4,631 76 17,740 South East 279 4 878 1,038 614 408 3,221
South West 96 34 3,231 357 16,562 595 20,875 Where the waste was managed was waste the Where West Midlands 14,022 1,016 7,346 6,724 11,482 8,728 49,319 Yorks & Humber 1,689 2,518 6,700 5,416 5,139 1,198 22,659 Wales 3,541 33 4,502 6,516 4,036 9,025 27,652 Total 44,259 22,897 97,892 146,973 124,645 39,988 476,653
Table A.4: Management of Hazardous Wastes – Summary
Sub-region where the waste was managed Greater Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Total Local 5,779 4,886 32,965 30,391 40,994 726 115,741 20% N West 26,297 26 57,426 29,468 38,805 2,977 155,000 27%
England 86,769 680 57,849 39,662 53,167 3,609 241,736 42% UK 14,676 208 6,372 12,879 24,730 56 58,922 10%
Wasteoriginated Unrecorded 3,367 83 276 1,762 301 0 5,790 1% Total 136,888 5,883 154,889 114,162 157,998 7,368 577,189
• 95 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.5: Self-Sufficiency in HIC Waste Management – Full Detail17
Sub-region where waste originated Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Total Cheshire 753,972 314 23,735 688 29,211 45,967 853,887 Cumbria 1,400 624,480 170 81,908 108 15 708,082 Greater Manchester 10,699 4,473 2,296,693 128,485 66,728 278,727 2,785,804 Lancashire 14,803 5,599 304,794 1,533,809 41,568 139 1,900,711 Merseyside & Halton 31,081 19 33,570 13,421 1,202,181 562,794 1,843,066 Warrington 248 857 45 22,343 280,967 304,460 North West (unspecified) 24,680 1,805 451,745 2,629 101,574 281,719 864,153 East of England 2,187 82 1,893 3,040 81 19 7,301 East Midlands 1,141 32 472 1,018 34 2,696 Greater London 40 7 199 5,791 12 6,048 North East 14,569 5,160 753 2,017 1,258 15 23,772 South East 361 6 16 4 387
South West 1 3 74 10,115 3 10,197 Where the waste was managed was waste the Where West Midlands 82,554 99 19,534 18,964 14,053 1,582 136,786 Yorkshire & Humber 1,564 586 370,468 16,819 15,301 435 405,173 Wales 12,205 18,391 22 16,582 494 47,694 Total 951,506 642,656 3,523,282 1,808,746 1,521,153 1,452,876 9,900,219
Table A.6: Self-Sufficiency in HIC Waste Management – Summary
Sub-region where waste originated Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Total Managed in sub-region 753,972 624,480 2,296,693 1,533,809 1,202,181 280,967 6,692,102 Managed in North West 82,912 12,210 814,871 227,176 261,532 1,169,361 2,568,062
Managed outside North West 114,622 5,966 411,718 47,761 57,440 2,548 640,054 Total 951,506 642,656 3,523,282 1,808,746 1,521,153 1,452,876 9,900,219
Sub-regional self-sufficiency 78% 87% 72% 79% 63% 92% 74% Regional self-sufficiency 88% 99% 87% 98% 97% 99% 93%
Table A.7: Self-sufficiency – The Regional “Balance Sheet” for Municipal, Commercial & Industrial Wastes
Total Wastes Created: 9,990,219
Of which managed in the region: 9,260,165 Of which managed outside the region: 640,054 Imported waste managed in the region: 3,510,137 Total managed in the region: 12,770,301
17 Note that the table has been transposed with the source of wastes in columns and the destination in rows.
• 96 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.8: Material Received in Landfills in the Northwest – Full Details
Sub-region where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Cheshire 215,169 0 8,126 0 10,669 5,498 239,461 Cumbria 0 339,225 901 30,256 0 0 370,382 Greater Manchester 2,217 0 571,330 159,285 94,594 380,227 1,207,654 Lancashire 303 261 111,090 1,020,424 12,021 108 1,144,206 Merseyside & Halton 20,382 19 37,927 12,693 199,312 513,945 784,278 Warrington 102 0 1,302 0 30,394 253,215 285,013 Unspecified (in NW) 24,709 18 3,555 9,529 29 297,529 335,369 East Midlands 7,728 0 929 578 0 512 9,746 London 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 North East 0 1,774 0 0 0 0 1,774 South East 0 0 13 0 0 234 247 South West 0 905 0 0 0 0 905 West Midlands 12,826 103 1 0 31,827 772 45,528 originated waste the Where Yorks & Humber 0 0 12,657 0 0 0 12,657 Scotland 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 Wales 16,665 0 0 0 0 13 16,678 Unrecorded 10,319 0 24,152 29,932 0 113,530 177,933 Total 611,846 342,321 771,982 1,262,697 378,845 1,565,583 4,933,274
Table A.9: Material Received in Landfills in the Northwest – Summary
Sub-region where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington Total Within sub-region 215,169 339,225 571,330 1,020,424 199,312 253,215 2,598,675 56% Within region 47,713 298 162,900 211,763 147,706 1,197,307 1,767,688 38% Elsewhere in England 20,554 2,791 13,599 578 31,827 1,518 70,867 2% Elsewhere in UK 16,665 7 0 0 0 13 16,685 0%
Wasteoriginated Not recorded 10,319 0 24,152 29,932 0 113,530 177,933 4% Total 310,420 342,321 771,982 1,262,697 378,845 1,565,583 4,631,848
Table A.10: Composition of Imported Waste by EWC Chapter
Tonnes received EWC chapter & nature of wastes Non-inert Inert Total Mining / quarrying 67,618 709 68,327 1% Agriculture / food processing 38,001 38,001 1% Furniture / paper / cardboard manufacture 17,761 17,761 0% Leather / fur / textile industry 919 919 0% Petrol / gas / oil processing 6 7 12 0% Inorganic chemical manufacture 90,865 90,865 2% Organic chemical manufacture 6,486 6,486 0% Paint / ink / adhesive manufacture 1,783 1,783 0% Incinerator bottom ash 237,893 1,582 239,474 5% Surface treatments and coatings 1,008 1,008 0% Preparation of metals and plastics 295 295 0% Waste packaging 6,946 3 6,949 0% Not otherwise specified 5,075 5,075 0% Construction & demolition 1,327,259 1,327,259 26% Clinical / health care / animal 11,330 11,330 0% Waste water treatment 1,430,423 34,394 1,464,817 28% Mixed municipal waste 1,752,317 109,547 1,861,864 36% Total 3,668,723 1,473,499 5,142,222
• 97 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.11: Origin of Municipal Commercial & Industrial Wastes Managed at Treatment Facilities – Full Details
WPA were the waste was treated Greater Merseyside & Origin WPA Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington Grand Total Cheshire 934 4,533 123 4,138 624 10,351 Cumbria 48,059 159 20 17 15 48,271 Greater Manchester 548 141,820 61 3,188 302 303,458 Lancashire 1,519 277 609 6,770 1,309 85 10,569 Merseyside & Halton 404 808 36 30,109 117 31,474 Warrington 11,469 11,469 NW (unspecifed) 122 37,924 38,046 East England 805 203 0 2 65 1,074 East Midlands 676 2,864 9 556 169 4,274 London 237 214 451 North East 1,478 55 27 84 65 1,709 South East 368 624 3 629 122 1,745 South West 2,509 513 55 3,077 West Midlands 384 55 1,211 2 851 101 2,604 Yorks & Humber 489 3,390 52 12,584 64 16,578 originated waste the were WPA Northern Ireland 2,383 2,383 Scotland 21 1,112 0 1,184 29 2,346 Wales 205 705 9 3,651 41 4,611 Outside the UK 926 3,201 4,128 Not recorded 15,669 11,266 136,497 61,759 18,020 13,484 256,695 Total 21,999 61,156 455,922 68,871 120,344 27,021 755,314
Table A.12: Origin of Municipal Commercial & Industrial Wastes Managed at Treatment Facilities – Summary
WPA were the waste was treated Greater Merseyside & Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington Total Arose locally 934 48,059 141,820 6,770 30,109 11,469 239,162 40% Arose within the region 2,471 277 6,230 241 46,576 1,143 56,937 10% Arose elsewhere in England 2,721 1,533 11,092 92 15,220 854 31,513 5% Arose elsewhere in UK 205 21 1,817 9 7,218 70 9,340 2% Imported 0 0 926 0 3,201 0 4,128 1%
Waste originated Waste Not recorded 15,669 11,266 136,497 61,759 18,020 13,484 256,695 43% Total 21,999 61,156 298,383 68,871 120,344 27,021 597,775 100% 4% 10% 50% 12% 20% 5%
Note: The highlighted cell has been adjusted to exclude 525,000 tonnes of waste water treatment residues imported to Davyhulme WWTW, but to include 85,000 tonnes of municipal waste managed at GMWDA’s Bolton incinerator.
• 98 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.13: Type of Wastes Managed in Treatment Facilities
WPA where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside North EWC EWC Chapter Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington West code Mining / quarrying 785 785 0% 1 Agriculture & food processing 6,706 8,560 16,247 31,513 5% 2 Furniture / paper / card manufacture 0 0 0% 3 Leather / fur / textile industry 2 54 25 81 0% 4 Inorganic chemical processing 190 7 125 7,423 8 7,753 1% 6 Organic chemical processing 12 1,804 6 2,555 4,376 1% 7 Paint / adhesive / ink manufacture 54 746 51 299 1,151 0% 8 Photographic industry 22 1 23 0% 9 Thermal processes 4 2,471 0 10,170 16,849 29,494 5% 10 Metal coatings & treatments 5 10 42 58 0% 11 Shaping of metals & plastics 14 3 0 22 39 0% 12 Waste packaging 1 412 9,095 140 93 9,741 2% 15 Not otherwise specified 3,139 4,660 62,568 4,289 18,524 1,402 94,583 16% 16 Human / animal health care 45 2 47 0% 18 Municipal 17,594 49,212 212,934 40,525 87,061 8,666 415,992 70% 20 Total 20,925 61,134 298,383 68,695 119,584 26,917 595,637 4% 10% 50% 12% 20% 5%
Table A.14: Origin of Wastes Managed in Composting Facilities – Full Detail
WPA where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside & Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington Total Cheshire 54,386 5,498 59,884 Cumbria 17,969 17,969 Greater Manchester 3,301 3,301 Lancashire 9,621 64,897 74,518 Merseyside & Halton 1,003 54,586 55,590 Warrington NW (not specified) East England East Midlands 182 182 London North East 732 732 South East South West West Midlands 765 765 Where the waste originated waste the Where Yorks & Humber 27 27 Northern Ireland Scotland Wales 8,174 8,174 Not recorded 3,456 567 62,030 66,053 Total 78,320 17,996 3,301 65,464 122,114 287,195
• 99 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.15: Origin of Wastes Managed in Composting Facilities – Summary
Sub-region managing the waste Greater Merseyside & North Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington West Locally 54 18 3 65 55 0 195 40% Within the region 65 18 3 65 60 0 211 44% Elsewhere in England 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0% Elsewhere in the UK 8 0 0 0 0 0 8 2%
Waste origin Waste Unrecorded 3 0 0 1 62 0 66 14% Total 133 36 7 130 177 0 482 28% 7% 1% 27% 37% 0%
Table A.16: Origin of Wastes Managed in Material Recycling Facilities – Full Detail
WPA where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside & Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington Total Cheshire 19,145 70,218 Cumbria 1,400 3,980 842 91 19,363 Greater Manchester 4,148 160,022 4,043 346 6,313 Lancashire 3,427 50,634 186 168,559 Merseyside & Halton 1,198 2,091 54,248 Warrington 128 275 20 3,289 NW (not specified) 65,309 424 East England 6,769 8 521 65,309 East Midlands 8,720 9 2,535 101 7,298 London 24 11,365 North East 241 0 4 22 24 South East 2,783 1,339 South West 10 449 8 2,783 West Midlands 11,654 6 5,986 29 7,889
Where the waste originated Where Yorks & Humber 2,064 1 461 25 1,477 Northern Ireland 28 267 Scotland 0 1,227 112 28 Wales 7,418 438 34 466 Not recorded 48,438 52,772 70,080 56,382 2,550 Total 117,560 3,980 278,165 137,214 61,399 20 227,672
Note: The figure for Merseyside includes an adjustment of +73,000 tonnes of waste handled by the Bidston MRF which was recorded as input to the co-located transfer station (which performs a different management role). It has not been possible to establish whether similar corrections may be necessary in other sub-regions.
Table A.17: Origin of Wastes Managed in Material Recycling Facilities – Summary
Sub-region managing the waste Greater Merseyside & North Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Halton Warrington West Locally 19 4 160 51 72 0 306 31% Within the region 29 4 225 55 73 0 387 40% Elsewhere in England 32 0 0 10 0 0 42 4% Elsewhere in the UK 7 0 0 2 0 0 9 1%
Waste origin Waste Unrecorded 48 0 53 70 56 0 228 23% Total 137 8 438 188 202 0 972 14% 1% 45% 19% 21% 0%
Table A.18: Inert Waste – Management Method
Greater Merseyside Facility Type Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington North West Inert landfill 10,319 10,002 24,211 113,530 158,062 9% Non-inert landfill / lagoon 14,609 61,022 132,536 484,713 200,144 18,296 911,320 52% Physico-chemical treatment 0 37,661 70,546 3,978 162,085 748 275,018 16% Composting 16 1,189 1,205 0% Material Recycling Facility 1,569 2,243 51,257 36,892 91,960 5% Metal Recycling 17,331 20,740 63,837 33,245 167,203 302,357 17% Grand Total 43,827 131,685 342,387 558,828 530,622 132,574 1,739,922 3% 8% 20% 32% 30% 8%
• 100 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.19: Inert Waste – Origin of Materials – Full Details
WPA where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington North West Cheshire 31,172 1,780 4 27,123 752 60,832 3% Cumbria 106,544 891 130 107,565 6% Greater Manchester 135,797 35,888 34,182 1,210 207,077 12% Lancashire 85 43 16,778 460,391 602 55 477,954 27% Merseyside & Halton 539 6,387 573 256,089 72 263,659 15% Warrington 102 965 25,488 146 26,702 2% NW (unspecified 194 49,627 6,900 15,340 15,956 88,017 5% East England 1 1 0% East Midlands 96 34 1 0 131 0% North East 3,834 0 0 3,834 0% South East 0 234 234 0% West Midlands 496 2 64 23 620 1,205 0% Yorks & Humber 220 1,182 4 1,405 0% Scotland 566 18 584 0% Wales 798 65 863 0% Unrecorded 10,319 20,503 128,798 54,936 171,774 113,530 499,859 29% Grand Total 43,827 131,685 342,387 558,828 530,622 132,574 1,739,922
Table A.20: Inert Waste – Origin of Materials – Summary
WPA where the waste was managed Greater Merseyside Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire & Halton Warrington North West Locally 31,172 106,544 135,797 460,391 256,089 146 990,140 57% Elsewhere in region 726 237 76,429 43,495 102,735 18,044 241,666 14% Elsewhere in England 812 3,836 1,279 7 24 854 6,811 0% Elsewhere in UK 798 566 83 0 0 0 1,447 0% Unrecorded 10,319 20,503 128,798 54,936 171,774 113,530 499,859 29% Total 43,827 131,685 342,387 558,828 530,622 132,574 1,739,922
Table A.21: Export of Inert Wastes
How the exported waste was managed Physico- Material Non-inert Physical Chemical Recycling Metal Landfill Inert Landfill Treatment Treatment Facility Recycling North West East Midlands 15,986 0 0 98 16,084 18% East of England 420 36 0 30 486 1% London 13 0 2 9 23 0% North East 7,063 20 0 7,083 8% South East 171 0 54 225 0% West Midlands 16,730 2 10 31 16,772 19% Yorks & Humber 43 2,560 11,270 25 2,787 16,694 19%
Where waste was managed was waste Where Wales 2,710 24,476 5,271 0 111 32,568 36% Total 40,255 2,560 11,498 133 2 2,909 89,934 45% 3% 13% 0.15% 0.00% 3%
• 101 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.22: Management of Hazardous Wastes – Full Detail
Note that in this graphic the axes are reversed to columns show waste origination
Sub-region where waste originated Greater Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Warrington Total Cheshire 5,779 3,049 2,566 8,343 12,144 195 32,076 Cumbria 1 4,886 24 2 4,912 Greater Manchester 4,729 382 32,965 39,185 11,116 2,014 90,391 Lancashire 2,451 4,006 8,052 30,391 13,394 1,565 59,859 Merseyside & Halton 7,803 1,978 17,103 10,757 40,994 1,164 79,800 Warrington 138 6 2,153 296 384 726 3,703 East England 235 44 921 775 329 564 2,868 East Midlands 1,349 786 5,462 34,243 3,795 12,065 57,700 London 14 11 2,142 23 22 1,665 3,878 North East 2,133 4,143 3,873 2,885 4,631 76 17,740 South East 279 4 878 1,038 614 408 3,221
South West 96 34 3,231 357 16,562 595 20,875 Where the waste was managed was waste the Where West Midlands 14,022 1,016 7,346 6,724 11,482 8,728 49,319 Yorks & Humber 1,689 2,518 6,700 5,416 5,139 1,198 22,659 Wales 3,541 33 4,502 6,516 4,036 9,025 27,652 Total 44,259 22,897 97,892 146,973 124,645 39,988 476,653
Table A.23: Management of Hazardous Wastes – Summary
Sub-region where waste originated Greater North Cheshire Cumbria Manchester Lancashire Merseyside Warrington West Managed locally 5,779 4,886 32,965 30,391 40,994 726 115,741 24% Managed elsewhere in region 15,122 9,422 29,874 58,604 37,040 4,938 155,000 33% Managed outside region 23,358 8,589 35,053 57,978 46,610 34,324 205,912 43% Total 44,259 22,897 97,892 146,973 124,645 39,988 476,653 9% 5% 21% 31% 26% 8% Sub-regional self-sufficiency 13% 21% 34% 21% 33% 2% 24% Regional self-sufficiency 47% 62% 64% 61% 63% 14% 57%
Table A.24: Fate of Exported Hazardous Wastes
Region where material was managed East East of South South West Yorks & Not London North East Wales Total Midlands England East West Midlands Humber recorded Incineration with energy recovery 31,929 94 0 1,621 483 5,907 40,035 19% Incineration without energy recovery 2 31 1 31 1,712 15 1 84 4,232 6,110 3% Landfill 28 80 4,175 53 896 6,320 1,563 95 13,210 6% Recycling / re-use 21,653 1,423 88 6,916 949 15,894 10,612 8,603 13,632 79,770 39% Rejected 66 71 12 0 149 0% Transfer prior to disposal 412 594 13 2,554 17 2,633 10,215 2,303 2,005 20,746 10% Transfer prior to recovery 1,216 652 3,776 2,024 404 588 10,394 3,797 920 23,772 12% Treatment 2,394 87 1 1,875 86 849 10,142 5,826 957 22,216 11% Total 57,700 2,868 3,878 17,740 3,221 20,875 49,318 22,659 27,652 95 206,007 28% 1% 2% 9% 2% 10% 24% 11% 13% 0%
• 102 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table A.25: Supplementary Detail: Destination of Exported Hazardous Waste by Material Type (not detailed in the main chapter)
EWC chapter 2-digit code 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Total East Midlands 1 1 408 2,630 474 85 231 154 26 2,759 251 966 16,024 194 16 33,244 239 57,700 28% East of England 24 10 6 360 16 1,293 46 84 590 97 62 234 45 2,868 1% London 0 5 0 984 12 2 2,876 3,878 2% North East 1,502 418 1,380 107 0 112 339 3 3,247 25 1,597 445 4,837 1,023 507 2,200 17,740 9% South East 0 18 0 991 62 1 24 0 218 45 109 455 83 19 1,150 46 3,221 2% South West 38 1,687 98 1 3 0 14,319 130 107 911 896 15 2,639 32 20,875 10% West Midlands 0 9 2 51 1,736 3,323 1,253 235 747 1,869 861 13,989 1,143 1,228 8,804 6,592 662 3,326 3,487 49,318 24% Yorks & Humber 0 1 0 2,049 4,397 3,126 1 12 1,251 278 3,471 229 892 3,880 1,409 587 291 785 22,659 11%
WPA managing waste managing WPA Wales 0 119 4 87 0 10,855 315 54 1,011 81 81 3,265 105 4,856 6,024 795 27,652 13% Unrecorded 95 95 0% Total 1 2 27 2 1,554 4,767 14,412 5,231 334 11,985 4,293 1,239 40,311 1,951 5,062 35,357 14,320 7,241 47,415 10,503 206,007 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 7% 3% 0% 6% 2% 1% 20% 1% 2% 17% 7% 4% 23% 5%
Table A.26: Supplementary Detail: Treatment of Exported Hazardous Waste by Material Type (not detailed in the main chapter)
EWC chapter 2-digit code 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Total Incineration with energy recovery 0 5 1,532 207 1 479 24 40 56 183 37,504 3 40,035 19% Incineration without energy recovery 0 18 0 248 62 24 0 15 35 98 52 42 4,375 1,106 35 6,110 3% Landfill 12 1 116 0 0 8 101 4 12,953 15 0 13,210 6% Recycling / re-use 1 698 368 8,140 2,304 237 11,060 665 81 24,047 541 930 23,230 61 67 2,032 5,311 79,770 39% Rejected 22 0 71 10 47 0 149 0% Transfer prior to disposal 0 8 0 52 1,466 1,631 965 72 626 529 310 1,883 1,003 2,756 4,717 427 520 3,696 84 20,746 10% Transfer prior to recovery 0 1 0 2 804 37 1,000 793 11 176 429 150 6,535 320 895 5,781 8 31 1,742 5,056 23,772 12% Treatment 2,879 1,838 784 15 101 2,669 697 7,351 20 172 1,507 828 2,065 1,275 15 22,216 11% Total 1 2 27 2 1,554 4,767 14,412 5,231 334 11,985 4,293 1,239 40,311 1,951 5,062 35,357 14,320 7,241 47,415 10,503 206,007 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 7% 3% 0% 6% 2% 1% 20% 1% 2% 17% 7% 4% 23% 5%
• 103 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix B: Supporting Data to Chapter 2
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
Table B.1: Summary of New Waste Planning Permissions Granted in 2009
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Blackpool - - - - - B'burn w/Darwen - - - - - Lancashire Redscar Ind Est Morecambe Metals Iron House Farm Hillhouse Bradley’s Sand Pit Preston White Lund Ind Est Rawcliffe Business Park Preston Inert waste /recycling Lancaster Windrow composting Wyre Inert - extension 75,000tpa ELV Green waste AD – C&I waste providing 513,000 18,000tpa 40,000tpa cubic metres- Junction 7 Business Recycling Lives expires 2023 Park Hyndburn Kent Street Preston Tarmac Tyres ELV Leapers Wood Quarry 52,000tpa Carnforth Lune Ind Est Aggregate Recycling Westby Brickworks Lancaster CD&E waste Fylde ELV 55,000tpa Glass recycling 31,000tpa Ellel Crag Quarry Lancaster Miles Fox Skip Hire Aggregate Recycling Salthill Industrial Estate CD&E waste Clitheroe 150,000tpa C&I waste 100,000tpa Holme Road Clayton le Moors
• 104 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Pendle Trading Estate Aggregate recycling C&I waste 30,000tpa CD&E waste 20,000tpa
Cheshire West Peel Environmental Ltd - Peel Environmental Ltd Peel Grab and Shift Ltd and Chester Ince Marsh Resource Environmental Tarvin Sands Recovery Park Ltd Tarvin Soil Washing Plant Ince Marsh RRP Inert CD&E waste n/k cubic metres n/k tpa 95MW EfW – capacity SRF MRF – WEEE 600,000tpa 250,000tpa
MBT – C&I/MSW 100,000tpa
Wood Processing Facility
Cheshire East Cheshire Demolition Brock PLC Moss Lane Macclesfield Eardswick Hall Recycling – CD&E Crewe n/k tpa Hazardous Extension of time Reaseheath College until 2013, no Home Farm Nantwich additional capacity AD – Agricultural waste
• 105 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery - - Bill and Ben recycling - 3C Waste Ltd Brunswick Wharf Danes Moss Congelton Landfill MRF – CD&E/C&I Non hazardous Extension to time limited consent to 2013
Cumbria J Howson - Shanks Waste Sunrise Cumbria Waste North Gateside Farm Management Renewable Ltd Management Kendal Sowerby Woods Cavendish Dock Distington Landfill Dry recyclables/C&I Business Park Barrow Barrow Workington 30,000tpa MBT – MSW EfW – wood Non – hazardous Baling Plant 75,000tpa waste Time extension to 72,000tpa 2010 – no Cumbria Waste Shanks Waste additional capacity Management Management James Cropper Yeathouse Quarry Hespin Wood Carlisle PLC Waste Recycling Frizington MBT–MSW 75,000tpa Burnside Paper Group HWRC – time Community Renewable Mill Bennett Bank extension to 2012 Energy Kendal Barrow EfW Non – hazardous JJC Properties Blackdyke Industrial SRF/Wood/Pape Extension – Park Road Ind Est Estate Silloth r/paper sludge additional Barrow AD – Agricultural waste 9,500tpa 580,000 cubic CD&E 27,000tpa metres 1,500tpa
• 106 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Harry Barker Prop Ltd Greenscoe Quarry Askam in Furness Aggregate recycling CD&E waste Time extension to 2024
Cumbria Waste Management Hespin Wood Carlisle Aggregate recycling CD&E waste Additional 10,000tpa
Cumbria Waste Management Hespin Wood Carlisle MRF –C&I 30,000tpa
T West Wilson Pit Yard Whitehaven Composting –Green Waste 25,000tpa Baling – tyres 1000aat Recycling – plasterboard 2000tpa
• 107 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Thompson Plant Hire Ltd Risehow Ind Est Maryport Composting –green waste 25,000tpa
Greater Viridor Axion Recycling Ltd Viridor/Laing Salford Heat and Viridor Manchester Cobden Street Salford Tenex Road Nash Road Trafford Park Power Whitehead Landfill MSW Trafford Park In-vessel Composting Villiers Street Variation to 25,000tpa Shredder Waste Garden /kitchen waste Salford condition giving no Recycling Plant 50,000 tpa Bio-mass Plant - additional capacity. Viridor 200,000tpa wood waste Bredbury Parkway Viridor 30,000tpa Booth Ventures Ltd Resource Recovery Pillswoth Landfill Asmus Farm Park Stockport Bury Quarry MSW Open windrow Bolton. 15,000tpa composting Inert landfill Green waste 42,000cubic metres 115,000tpa Time limited Temporary permission permission to until November 2011 30/12/2011
Viridor Cobden Street Salford MBT – MSW 100,000tpa (re-application due to design changes)
• 108 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Viridor Bredbury Parkway Resource Recovery Park Stockport MBT-MSW 200,000tpa IVC- garden/kitchen waste 54,000tpa Manchester Tipper Group Agecroft Commerce Park Salford MRF- CD&E waste 100,000tpa
Viridor Exide Batteries Salford Road Bolton IVC- garden and kitchen waste 50,000tpa
Merseyside Intercare Services Ltd - Minerals resource Energos Ltd Cory Environmental Abbotsfield Road Ind Management Ltd Knowsley Ltd Est St Helens Knowsley Ind Est Business Park. Lyme & Woods Pits Hazardous Waste Kirby Kirby Haydock (clinical) 5,000tpa Plasterboard EfW- CHP Non-hazardous 80,000tpa C&I/MSW Time extension 96,000tpa until 2012
• 109 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery St Helens Waste Veolia Environmental Orchid 1,275,000 tonnes Recycling Ltd Gillmoss Recycling Park Environmental Abbotsfield Road Ind MRF for MSW Ltd D Morgan Ltd Est St Helens 100,000tpa Stretton Way Bold Heath Quarry Inert Waste/recycling Huyton St Helens 25,000tpa Biffa Waste Services MHT producing Inert Landfill Pocket Nook Street SRF Total void St Helens C&I/MSW dependent upon MRF – C&I Waste Capacity mineral extraction 90,000tpa increased to but estimated at 120,000tpa 2.44M cubic metres (70,000 increase)
Bioessence Hooten Park. Eastham, Wirral Autoclave/Gassif ication(CHP) C&I/MSW n/k tpa
Halton - - - Ineos - ChlorVinyls Plc Weston Point Weston 95MW EfW SRF 850,000tpa
• 110 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
WDA Transfer Station Metal Recycling Treatment Facility Energy Landfill Facility Recovery Warrington DML Recycling - - - Colliers Industrial Gainsbough Road Waste Services Warrington Moss Lane Rixton Inert waste/recycling Non Hazardous 15,000tpa Reprofiling of existing site. 1.1M cubic metres Expires 2017
Wigan - - - - -
• 111 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix C: Supporting Data to Chapter 3
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
GUIDANCE FROM DEFRA (FEBRUARY 2011): LOCAL AUTHORITY COLLECTED WASTE – DEFINITION OF TERMS FEBRUARY 2011
This note issued by Defra, sets out the background to the change in terminology and definition of ‘municipal waste’ reporting in policy and statistical terms. This has absolutely no bearing on the 2009 data included in this report, but will take affect in the RTAB AMR 7, which draws on data collected in 2010/11.
Previously the term ‘Municipal Waste’ as used in the UK was used in waste policies and nationally reported data to refer to waste collected by local authorities. In fact the definition of municipal waste as described in the Landfill Directive includes both household waste and that from other sources which is similar in nature and composition, which will include a significant proportion of waste generated by businesses and not collected by Local Authorities. In 2010, negotiations with the EU Commission and consultation with the waste community redefined national targets and the effects of this change in relation to the EU Landfill Directive targets. The review of waste policies will clarify any consequences for the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme.
To remove ambiguity, future references to ‘municipal waste’ will refer to the new definition. Therefore there is a need to define a new term to describe the data collected by WasteDataFlow. The agreed terminology arises from Defra’s response to the 2010 consultation on meeting the EU Landfill Diversion Targets in England.
Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste (LACMW)
LACMW refers to the previous ‘municipal’ element of the waste collected by local authorities. That is household waste and business waste where collected by the local authority and which is similar in nature and composition as required by the Landfill Directive. This is the definition that will be used for LATS allowances.
• 112 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW)
All waste collected by the local authority. This is a slightly broader concept than LACMW as it would include both this and non municipal fractions such as construction and demolition waste. LACW is the definition that will be used in statistical publications, which previously referred to municipal waste. WasteDataFlow Statistics
From 2011, statistical releases and outputs from WasteDataFlow will be branded as Local Authority Collected Waste. This reflects the coverage of the data collected. Previous outputs may be found which are described as ‘municipal waste’ but will purely reflect the old description – the data will not have changed and will only cover LA activity. We expect it will take some time for the new terminology to become established.
Table C.1: Municipal Waste Arisings 2009/10
Authority Regular Other Civic Household Totals Non Non Non Total Household Household Amenity Recycling & Household Household Household Household Municipal Waste Waste Sites Composting Waste Waste Residuals Recycling Waste (Household) (excl Recycling) Blackburn with 28,277 1,592 3,613 26,343 60,547 11,054 5,549 5,505 72,323 Darwen Borough Council Blackpool Borough 32,104 2,128 3,658 23,618 61,624 12,907 8,858 4,049 74,649 Council Cheshire East 73,078 8,586 13,425 93,752 189,548 12,720 2 12,717 202,978 Cheshire West and 65,833 7,145 11,753 81,180 169,319 19,378 7,610 11,769 192,109 Chester Cumbria County 118,171 7,629 17,469 111,970 255,342 32,891 26,647 6,244 288,336 Council Greater 528,115 61,853 96,671 361,301 1,069,138 80,553 45,083 35,470 1,171,254 Manchester WDA (MBC) Halton Borough 33,748 3,984 4,571 19,193 62,079 5,540 2,134 3,406 68,203 Council
• 113 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Authority Regular Other Civic Household Totals Non Non Non Total Household Household Amenity Recycling & Household Household Household Household Municipal Waste Waste Sites Composting Waste Waste Residuals Recycling Waste (Household) (excl Recycling) Lancashire County 230,797 30,109 37,921 244,121 543,078 84,240 83,371 869 627,449 Council Merseyside WDA 330,940 39,823 82,927 241,901 706,873 49,495 24,822 24,672 767,662 (MBC) Warrington 47,014 1,553 4,277 40,873 95,007 9,504 1,419 8,084 105,891 Borough Council Wigan MBC 80,195 6,470 13,186 49,628 149,766 10,918 856 10,062 160,972
TOTALS 1,568,272 170,871 289,470 1,293,880 3,362,322 329,200 206,352 122,848 3,731,816
Table C.2: Data for Figure 3.1 Northwest Municipal Waste Arisings 2005/06–2009/10 (data in graph only includes 2006 onwards)
Household Waste From: 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Regular Household Collection 2,571 2,489 2,444 2,385 2,222 2,051 2,021 1,828 1,702 1,608 Other Household Sources 279 251 304 262 240 341 177 186 156 171 Civic Amenity Sites 700 750 752 669 582 519 448 383 338 289 Household Recycling 286 355 445 549 724 907 1,077 1,202 1,269 1,294 Total Household 3,836 3,846 3,945 3,866 3,767 3,818 3,723 3,599 3,465 3,362 Non Household Sources (excl. Recycling) 191 214 258 283 278 119 256 214 178 206 Non Household Recycling 97 123 141 231 258 222 236 239 209 123 Total Municipal Waste 4,125 4,183 4,344 4,380 4,304 4,159 4,215 4,052 3,852 3,692
• 114 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table C.3: Data for Figure 3.2 Trends in Household and Non Household Waste 2009/10 (data in graph only includes 2006 onwards)
Household Waste From: 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Total Household 3,836 3,846 3,945 3,866 3,767 3,818 3,723 3,599 3,465 3,362 Non Household Sources (excl. Recycling) 191 214 258 283 278 119 256 214 178 206 Non Household Recycling 97 123 141 231 258 222 236 239 209 123
Table C.4: Data for Figure 3.3 Household Waste Arisings per Head of Population by Waste Disposal Authority Area
Household Waste per Head of Population (kg) 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Blackpool 475 452 432 Blackburn with Darwen 436 433 426 Cheshire 567 527 n/a Cheshire East n/a n/a 523 Cheshire West and Chester n/a n/a 513 Cumbria 529 526 512 Greater Manchester 510 474 416 Halton 586 531 519 Lancashire 500 481 464 Merseyside 553 542 522 Warrington 536 502 483 Wigan 522 494 488 Regional Average 482 National Average 457
• 115 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table C.5: Data for Figure 3.4 Northwest Household Waste Recycling and Composting Rates against WS2007 Targets
2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2014/15 2019/20 Recycled/ Composted (WS2007 Target) 40% 45% 50% Northwest Recycled/ Composted (Actual) 9.0% 11.0% 13.0% 18.0% 22.8% 27.1% 31.1% 35.6% 38.3% 38.3%
Table C.6: Data for Figure 3.5 Northwest Recycling and Composting Rates by Waste Disposal Authority
2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Blackpool 33.83% 41.13% 43.59% Blackburn with Darwen 33.89% 37.13% 38.33% Cheshire 41.04% 47.97% n/a Cheshire East n/a n/a 49.46% Cheshire West and Chester n/a n/a 47.95% Cumbria 38.51% 42.28% 43.85% Greater Manchester 29.28% 31.58% 33.79% Halton 25.47% 28.60% 30.82% Lancashire 41.24% 43.21% 44.95% Merseyside 29.30% 33.34% 34.13% Warrington 32.77% 37.94% 43.03% Wigan 26.34% 28.14% 33.14%
• 116 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table C.7: Data for Figure 3.6 Value Recovered from Municipal Waste Against WS2007 Targets
2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2014/15 2019/20 Recovered Value (WS2007 Target) 53.00% 67.00% 75.00% Recovered Value from MSW 10.0% 13.0% 16.0% 20.0% 25.3% 29.6% 34.0% 37.7% 41.1% 40.5%
Table C.8: Data for Figure 3.7 Trends in Municipal Waste Management Methods
Northwest Method 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 Landfill 90.0% 86.0% 83.0% 80.0% 74.7% 70.3% 65.9% 62.2% 58.6% 59.2% Incineration with EfW 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 2.0% 2.4% 2.5% 2.9% 2.2% 2.8% 2.2% Recycled/composted 9.0% 11.0% 13.0% 18.0% 22.8% 27.1% 31.1% 35.6% 38.3% 38.3%
Table C.9: Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme Allowances 2008-2020
Data in Tonnes Waste Base yr 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2013 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2020 Disposal 2001/02 Authority Blackburn 49,205 35,450 29,555 26,266 22,976 19,686 18,842 17,997 17,153 16,308 15,464 14,619 13,775 with Darwen Blackpool 55,816 41,593 35,498 31,547 27,596 23,644 22,630 21,616 20,602 19,587 18,573 17,559 16,545 Cheshire 240,469 189613 Cheshire 89896 79937 69925 59913 57343 54773 52203 49633 46637 44493 41923 East Cheshire 77922 69200 60532 51865 49640 47415 45190 42966 40372 38516 36291 West and Chester Cumbria 178,460 130,770 110,331 98,050 85,769 73,488 70,336 67,183 64,031 60,879 57,727 54,574 51,422 Greater 850,010 645,111 557,297 495,265 433,232 371,200 355,277 339,354 323,431 307,509 291,586 275,663 259,740
• 117 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Manchester Halton 43,285 32,417 27,759 24,669 21,579 18,490 17,696 16,903 16,110 15,317 14,524 13,731 12,938 Lancashire 384,059 296,261 258,634 229,845 201,057 172,269 164,879 157,490 150,100 142,710 135,321 127,931 120,542 Merseyside 508,319 370,089 310,848 276,248 241,647 207,047 198,166 189,284 180,403 171,521 162,640 153,759 144,877 Warrington 69,305 51 601 44,014 39,114 34,215 29,316 28,059 26,801 25,544 24,286 23,029 21,771 20,513 Wigan 133,277 95,289 79,008 70,213 61,419 52,625 50,367 48,110 45,853 43,595 41 ,338 39,081 36,823
• 118 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix D: Supporting Data to Chapter 4
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
Table D.1: Data for Figure 4.1 Small & Medium Enterprise Type by Standard Industry Classification
SIC Count Power & Utilities 119 Food, Drink and Tobacco 170
Public Sector 209
Metal Manufacturing 289 Textiles/Wood/Paper/Publishing 347 Machinery & Equipment (Other Manufacturing) 373 Chemical/Non-Metallic Minerals Manufacturing 723 Other Services 1195
Retail & Wholesale 1236
Table D.2: Data for Figure 4.2 How Waste Was Managed by SMEs
Waste Management Weight Method (tonnes) Composting 23,827 Don't Know 313,505 Incineration with Energy Recovery 11,289 Incineration without Energy Recovery 76,654 Land Recovery 246,424 Landfill 1,112,254 Recycling 2,972,379 Transfer Station 49,227 Treatment Plant 72,233
Table D.3: Data for Figure 4.3 Recycling Potential of Waste Currently Landfilled by SMEs
Recycling Potential of Wastes Weight Currently Landfilled (tonnes) Not recyclable 14,397 Possibly recyclable 928,227 Recyclable 169,631
• 119 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table D.4: Data for Figure 4.4 Public Sector Waste Management 2006 & 2009
2006 Quantity 2009 Quantity Waste Management Method (tonnes) (tonnes) Recycling 33,254 272,917 Landfill 378,187 233,399 Incineration without Energy Recovery 51,982 69,380 Transfer Station 45,682 60,631 Don't know 76,490 56,903 Treatment Plant 8,648 31,072 Incineration with Energy Recovery 12,149 15,329 Composting 0 792
Table D.5: Data for Figure 4.5 Waste Disposed of to Landfill, Against Average, 2009
Landfill Sector (tonnes) Food, Drink and Tobacco 42,873 Textiles/Wood/Paper/Publishing 100,273 Power & Utilities 88,247 Chemical/Non-Metallic Minerals Manufacturing 190,212 Metal Manufacturing 15,143 Machinery & Equipment (Other Manufacturing) 85,725 Retail & Wholesale 329,317 Other Services 344,207 Public Sector 233,399
Table D.6: Data for Figure 4.6 Waste Disposed of to Landfill with Target to Zero Waste in 2014/15
2005/06 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 (baseline) Actual Waste Disposed 22,661 7,375 to Landfill (kg) Targets to Achieve Zero 22,661 12,056 8,000 4,745 3,500 1,000 0 Waste to Landfill (kg)
• 120 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table D.7: Data for Figure 4.7 C&I Waste Management Methods 2006 and 2009
Waste Management Methods 2006 2009 Recycling 2657711 4233587 Landfill 2198595 1429400 Land Recovery 876880 499500
Don't know 555400 343724
Treatment Plant 579523 161935
Transfer Station 385615 117153
Incineration without Energy Recovery 159830 104759
Composting 55036 72552 Incineration with Energy Recovery 48679 72488 Waste Water Treatment 15021 44705
Table D.8: Data for Figure 4.8 C&I Waste Produced across Sectors (2006 and 2009)
Sector 2006 2009 Retail & Wholesale 1353477 1737591 Other Services 1848550 1408521 Public Sector 606392 740423 Food, Drink and Tobacco 547057 655175 Textiles/Wood/Paper/Publishing 1098709 617072 Chemical/Non-Metallic Minerals Manufacturing 837806 594206 Machinery & Equipment (Other Manufacturing) 353517 491943 Metal Manufacturing 608007 426848 Power & Utilities 278775 408022
Table D.9: Data for Figure 4.9 Recycling Potential (2006 and 2009)
Recycling Potential 2006 2009 Currently recycled 3,589,846 4,306,139
Not recyclable 674,411 163,123
Possibly recyclable 2,659,302 2,017,921
Recyclable 608,730 592,620
Table D.10: Data for Figure 4.10 Recovery Potential (2006 and 2009)
Energy Recovery Potential 2006 2009 Currently Recovered 48,679 50,401 Don't Know 2,438,176 769,036 Not Recoverable 1,422,142 1,301,483 Possibly Recoverable 1,772,714 626,270 Recoverable 1,850,579 4,332,613
• 121 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table D.11: Data for Figure 4.11 Waste Management Methods for Wastes Treated Outside of the Northwest
Waste Management Method Weight (Tonnes) Recycling 551,239 Treatment Plant 73,564 Landfill 62,611 Don't Know 18,168 Land Recovery 16,609 Composting 14,760 Incineration without Energy Recovery 4,138 Transfer Station 4,044 Incineration with Energy Recovery 3,528
Table D.12: Data for Figure 4.12 Wastes Recycled Outside of the Northwest
SOC subgroup definition of waste Weight (tonnes) Paper & Card 250,215 Other Animal & Vegetable Wastes 153,862 Metallic Wastes 38,180 Plastic 37,949 Used Oil (mineral) 18,321 Household 10,329 Other Mineral Wastes 9,167 Glass 7,705 Food 5,535 Waste From Chemprep 5,048 WEEE and Other Discarded Equipment 2,850 Rubber 2,843 Wood 2,691 Textile 1,885 Sludges (chemical) 1,434 Acid/Alkali 1,228 Solvents 1,004 Batteries 522 Undifferentiated 245 Waste of Naturally Occurring Minerals 166 Residues 61
• 122 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix E: Supporting Data to Chapter 5
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
Table E.1: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Lancashire 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 5416 6725 6516 357 1038 2885 23 775 34243 - - to Imported 11726 11971 6122 1595 3112 5980 96 1352 3807 6491 291 from
Table E.2: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Lancashire 2008/09
Merseyside Cumbria Greater Cheshire Warrington Manchester Exported 10757 24 39186 8639 296 to Imported 13394 4006 8052 4016 1565 from
• 123 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.3: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Lancashire 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 23 2 02 15 03 04 43 0 14 05 1 156 720 06 0 136 49 1814 4 07 2 211 584 3133 20953 15 08 0 235 1105 7440 09 103 104 10 1149 373 222 11 287 93 245 12 603 0 636 13 7 0 1 1793 3957 14 1 30 1678 15 8 421 330 3047 16 43 1 252 877 8015 17 1 14390 0 235 0 18 401 19 14491 8913 542 7324 20 0 0 4367 2559
• 124 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.4: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Merseyside 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 5139 11482 4036 16562 614 4631 22 329 3795 to Imported 16324 8762 19621 8942 3440 5196 4464 2693 3328 4626 501 from
Table E.5: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Merseyside 2008/09
Lancashire Cumbria Greater Cheshire Warrington Manchester Exported 13394 2 11116 12528 384 to Imported 10757 1978 17103 8967 1164 from
• 125 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.6: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Merseyside 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 15 222 02 0 03 23 240 04 0 05 23 7826 06 38 4018 693 07 13228 6200 1248 08 1 44 760 2332 66 09 0 27 8 10 1065 190 11 16 4974 1435 2264 12 175 35 167 271 13 32711 9351 2861 14 36 469 6 15 1 1390 4516 23 16 0 4332 9104 12299 1365 17 10828 1193 851 18 0 525 2 19 18 3786 3948 4372 270 20 1074 5047 18
• 126 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.7: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Cumbria 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 2518 1016 33 34 4 4143 11 44 786 to Imported 6 634 27 13 208 from
Table E.8: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Cumbria 2008/09
Lancashire Cheshire Greater Merseyside Warrington Manchester Exported 4006 3055 383 1978 6 to Imported 24 1 2 0 from
• 127 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.9: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Cumbria 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 02 03 04 05 06 18 07 4 08 5 09 3 10 11 12 48 13 0 2090 14 6 4 15 24 16 0 295 138 17 606 703 18 64 19 29 20 0 1846
• 128 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.10: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Greater Manchester 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 6700 7346 4502 3231 878 3873 2142 921 5462 to Imported 12783 13776 4438 9186 3478 2001 3880 6174 1593 1198 from
Table E.11: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Greater Manchester 2008/09
Lancashire Cumbria Cheshire Merseyside Warrington Exported 8051 4719 17103 2153 to Imported 39185 383 6744 11116 2014 from
• 129 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.12: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Greater Manchester 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 10 2 2671 02 1 1 03 0 56 04 13 2 05 5 0 17 06 147 7587 07 8 1126 3151 08 66 0 83 4517 5657 09 0 3567 818 1847 10 5 723 11 744 5806 12 56 16 258 1625 13 24 31 4501 3973 4753 14 68 2 196 78 15 1 104 450 933 1141 16 1 0 3387 7508 32021 17 17191 0 415 333 18 15630 1358 5 19 97 1558 4385 20 0 10574 2701 788
• 130 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.13: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Cheshire 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 2887 22750 12566 961 687 220 1680 799 13414 to 9 Imported 29365 16095 6482 7205 5175 170 2408 8429 4168 6484 2244 from 58
Table E.14: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Cheshire 2008/09
Lancashire Cumbria Greater Merseyside Warrington Manchester Exported 4016 1 6744 8967 138 to Imported 8639 3055 4719 12528 195 from
• 131 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.15: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Cheshire 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 1 0 51 02 407 0 0 03 0 0 04 1 0 05 1600 2 7 06 846 147 1164 07 248 48464 3986 45 262 08 1467 1018 69 94 09 2 5 10 13 1290 190 7 3 11 71 172 2121 12 74 6 52 13 1771 10290 257 716 14 3746 449 162 15 2229 356 2 16 4255 989 2453 489 17 94 1 6928 18 1369 0 0 19 8911 26089 34 282 660 20 146 433 7069
• 132 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.16: Movements of Hazardous Waste outside the Northwest for Warrington 2008/09
Yorkshire West Wales South South North London East of East Scotland Northern & Humber Midlands West East East England Midlands Ireland
Exported 1198 8728 9025 595 408 76 1665 565 12065 to Imported 675 2375 55 12 225 6 11 21 202 83 from
Table E.17: Movements of Hazardous Waste inside the Northwest for Warrington 2008/09
Lancashire Cumbria Greater Merseyside Cheshire Manchester Exported 1565 2014 1164 195 to Imported 296 6 2153 384 138 from
• 133 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.18: Hazardous Waste Treatment Method by EWC Type in Warrington 2008/09
EWC TREATMENT METHOD Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling Transfer Treatment with Energy w/o Term Recovery Storage 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 3 09 10 11 12 13 14 11 15 16 5 79 17 6928 18 19 20 331 10
• 134 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.19: Hazardous Waste Production by EWC Type across the Northwest
EWC Code Short Class Tonnage 2007 2008 2009 01 Mining and Minerals 33 446 273 02 Agricultural and Food Production 65 65 17 03 Wood and Paper Production 1193 1420 267 04 Leather and Textile Production 299 568 60 05 Petrol, Gas and Coal Refining/Treatment 1183 2172 2087 06 Inorganic Chemical Processes 27944 1368 14895 07 Organic Chemical Processes 53609 50508 42345 08 MFSU Paints, Varnish, Adhesive and Inks 15136 14595 11795 09 Photographic Industry 1406 1145 978 10 Thermal Process Waste (inorganic) 22608 17329 13447 11 Metal Treatment and Coating Processes 9258 9542 8924 12 Shaping/Treatment of Metals and Plastics 4492 4147 3275 13 Oil and Oil/Water Mixtures 68657 67205 84896 14 Solvents 4649 5023 3829 15 Packaging, Cloths, Filter Materials 12237 12418 11250 16 Not Otherwise Specified 92686 101515 95340 17 C&D Waste and Asbestos 93289 93753 49820 18 Healthcare 20090 22009 22063 19 Waste/Water Treatment and Water Industry 121144 88493 79809 20 Municipal and Similar Commercial Wastes 34120 37937 31377 Total 584098 531658 476749
• 135 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.20: Hazardous Waste Management Methods in English Regions 2008/09
Deposit Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Recycling/ Rejected Transfer Transfer Treatment Total Planning with Energy without Term Reuse (D) (R) Region Recovery Energy Storage Recovery (Unknown) 2264 East Midlands 45886 4407 84563 184400 532 14308 45026 83425 462548 East of England 77 8721 47084 93 84747 27 56558 79519 26342 303169 London 7833 11825 43142 19005 14 11820 49786 6997 150421 North East 27918 417 62835 98864 142 12049 24640 870599 1097464 Northwest 15008 91340 64194 27379 120603 288 42677 112066 103637 577191 South East 196 27157 68627 91459 90 18156 36851 99249 341785 South West 4016 14306 96909 88149 0 64103 62880 24948 355311 Wales 6043 7604 1840 123180 92 33417 14712 67746 254634 West Midlands 8152 8838 45182 240 126860 331 90428 107775 156279 544086 Yorkshire and the Humber 28557 12140 41792 84416 50 27020 62621 91743 348339
• 136 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.21: National Hazardous Waste Management by EWC Type 2008/09
Short Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Other Recycling/ Rejected Transfer Transfer Treatment Class with Energy without Term Fate Reuse (D) (R) Recovery Energy Storage Recovery Mining and Minerals 26.8 32.041 6594.3149 3946.21559 378.09304 4411.086 Agricultural and Food Production 1.969 503.174 7.98 164.71246 50.3501 85.298 Wood and Paper Production 2.2 127.29 0.2 339.0266 113.672 665.845 Leather and Textile Production 1.24 43.32 143.452 12.7475 50.483 4.371 Petrol, Gas and Coal Refining/ Treatment 3749.288 379.581 3390.6375 56.42 4552.86085 2230.1737 14268.565 Inorganic Chemical Processes 7.32 1072.7302 980.497 0.1 7184.02537 60.0006 12758.828 2132.9433 58482.88941 Organic Chemical Processes 3719.4282 54118.01434 941.3185 94419.7632 210.4847 22842.51097 33953.43747 868876.9037
• 137 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Short Incineration Incineration Landfill Long Other Recycling/ Rejected Transfer Transfer Treatment Class with Energy without Term Fate Reuse (D) (R) Recovery Energy Stora Recovery ge MFSU Paints, Varnish, Adhesive & Inks 1220.63016 1827.84731 463.72525 22726.16736 2.2004 19429.1278 28527.67155 8770.019 Photographic Industry 2.665 3.1005 0.06 5329.22758 3310.45627 605.14686 1938.552 Thermal Process Waste 56645.1345 (inorganic) 135.88 63.48 4 1290.4 68487.363 8.21 11737.11861 598.35036 6258.84 Metal Treatment and Coating Processes 10.9701 79.6455 1459.5815 10691.90338 38.9517 7351.78835 13452.16813 69766.1991 Shaping/ Treatment of Metals and Plastics 261.456 191.839 3490.6595 1.69 12644.37319 60.4109 9690.17161 6532.79072 27807.432 Oil and Oil/Water Mixtures 27867.93198 3539.2655 1245.33639 0.3 343053.6816 287.96589 54135.36624 169256.0707 139447.021 Solvents 515.12838 4089.18522 12.533 0.816 5094.97939 4.2 3725.68756 5211.76617 220.007 Packaging, Cloths, Filter Materials 1908.293 3780.81881 1809.51038 4.99 5253.09779 94.0002 30220.5431 20071.2005 4325.43192
• 138 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Short Incineration Incineratio Landfill Long Other Recycling/ Rejecte Transfer Transfer Treatment Class with Energy n without Term Fate Reuse d (D) (R) Recovery Energy Storage Recovery Not Otherwise Specified 2321.08003 5506.2856 7055.05382 0.08644 261105.0227 215.152 68892.42783 132117.7574 77765.01727 C&D Waste and Asbestos 0.75 1012.6888 372801.0623 92.627 0.24 734.41647 14.0001 25101.35169 984.99145 64715.6511 Healthcare 3899.86608 89843.85499 0.4997 3109.86239 25159.09091 347.31836 61087.99439 Waste/Water Treatment and Water Industry 101546.8245 16950.4755 109989.6461 26321.719 76940.14497 451.7462 59149.91554 65731.22247 120712.6005 Municipal and Similar Commercial Wastes 265.708 267.21896 1082.05848 94772.07749 62.3527 8016.76132 113529.9287 1354.56169
• 139 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Table E.22: Hazardous Waste Management Capacity by UK Region 2008/09
Region EfW EfW w/o Landfill Long Term Recycled Transfer Treatment Total Waste Storage Capacity North East 27918 417 62835 98864 36689 870599 1097464 Northwest 15008 91340 64194 27379 120603 154742 103637 577191 West 544086 Midlands 8152 8838 45182 240 126860 198203 156279 East 462548 Midlands 45886 4407 84563 184400 59334 83425 South West 4016 14306 96909 88149 126983 24948 355311 Yorkshire and 348339 Humber 28557 12140 41792 84416 89641 91743 South East 196 27157 68627 91459 55007 99249 341785 East of 303169 England 77 8721 47084 93 84747 136077 26342 Wales 6043 7604 1840 123180 48129 67746 254634 London 7833 11825 43142 19005 61606 6997 150421 Total 143688 186754 556167 27712 1021683 966412 1530964 NW as a percentage of UK total 10 49 12 99 12 16 7
• 140 • North West Regional Technical Advisory Body 6th Waste Management Monitoring Report
Appendix F: Supporting Data to Chapter 7
All quantities are expressed in tonnes unless indicated otherwise
Table F.1: Number of Fly Tipping Incidents by Waste Type in the Northwest
Waste Type 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Animal Carcass 642 550 604 408 Green 5029 4547 4135 3247 Vehicle Parts 1905 1460 881 548 White Goods 14991 10468 8321 4482 Other Electrical 3915 3688 3188 1838 Tyres 3912 2980 2115 1793 Asbestos 384 322 330 261 Clinical 226 266 198 148 CD&E 12308 11239 10845 8786 Black Bag – Commercial 2390 2088 2247 1346 Black Bag – Household 40438 31922 27265 20989 Chemical/Oil/Fuel 677 486 439 336 Other Household Waste 73753 59586 54930 46489 Other Commercial Waste 5738 4210 3827 2816 Other 7804 7316 5750 4362
Table F.2: Number of Fly Tipping Incidents by Location in the Northwest
Land Type 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Highway 42095 35332 32800 Footpath 21226 17382 14408 Back Alley 83820 64137 59021 Railway 236 111 137 Council Land 12952 12173 10020 Agricultural 475 398 394 Private Residential 7015 5364 2945 Commercial/Industrial 1800 1647 1389 Watercourse/Bank 291 251 196 Other 4202 4333 3765
Table F.2: Number of Fly Tipping Incidents by Incident Size in the Northwest
Incident Size 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 Single Item 33880 25109 20312 Single Black Bag 6772 5981 1989 Car Boot Load or Less 33745 25738 24389 Small Van Load 58261 49099 50549 Transit Van Load 20758 18321 14444 Tipper Lorry Load 3434 3174 2753 Significant Multiple Loads 3557 3561 1833
• 141 •