DOCSLIB.ORG

Current Situation and Development of Kitchen Waste Treatment in China

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Current Situation and Development of Kitchen Waste Treatment in China View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia Environmental Sciences 31 ( 2016 ) 40 – 49 The Tenth International Conference on Waste Management and Technology (ICWMT) Current situation and development of kitchen waste treatment in China Yangyang Li a,b,*, Yiying Jina, Jinhui Lia, Yixing Chena, Yingyi Gongc, Yuezhong Lidˈ d Jinfeng Zhang a. School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China b, Key Laboratory for Solid Waste Management and Environment Safety (Tsinghua University), Ministry of Education of China, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China c. Key laboratory of thermal engineering, Department of Thermal Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China d. Jiangsu Welle Environmental Co,.Ltd, Changzhou, 213125, China Abstract More than 30 million tons of kitchen wastes (KW) are produced in China every year. Approximately 80% of the collected KW has been directly utilized as feedstuff in pig farms in China, which is facing strict restrictions by China's Ministry of Agriculture due to concerns of foot and mouth disease, and raw materials for illegal extraction of hogwash oil, which is unsanitary and can cause serious illness. In addition, the universal concern on environmental protection, resource utilization and food safety has brought increasing research on KW processing technology. According to the policy perspective on promoting the recycling application and resource saving of KW, developing resource-saving and environment-friendly society as well as circular economy and protecting the ecological environment in both China (FAGAIHUANZI [2010] No. 1020) and other countries, it is required especially in China that the construction of pilot projects should be conducted overall planning and combinational optimization to enhance resource-oriented utilization and harmless treatment of three phases in KW, including oil, solid and liquid phase (FAGAIHUANZI [2010] No. 1020). Because of policy encouragement, environmental concern and economic incentives by local and central governments in China, more diverse methods after thermal pretreatment should be developed as the amount of KW production increases rapidly. Besides, basing on the increasing universal concern on safety, energy and environmental preservation, finding proper disposal methods of KW for energy production, enhancing biogas production and reducing the amount of final residue is extremely important. In this regard, this paper aims at a comprehensive study on current treatment situations of KW in China and suggests several solutions to China’s KW treatment. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (©http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.). Peer-review under responsibility of Tsinghua University/ Basel Convention Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific * Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-10-62794352; fax: +86-10-62797618. E-mail address: [email protected] 1878-0296 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of Tsinghua University/ Basel Convention Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific doi: 10.1016/j.proenv.2016.02.006 Yangyang Li et al. / Procedia Environmental Sciences 31 ( 2016 ) 40 – 49 41 Keywords: Kitchen waste; Thermal pretreatment; Animal feed; Anaerobic digestion; Fertilizer 1. Introduction The production of kitchen waste (KW) significantly increases along with the development of the restaurant industry as well as the increase in consumption in China. Approximately 80% of the collected KW has been utilized as feedstuff in pig farms. However, the direct use of KW as feedstuff is facing strict restrictions by China's Ministry of Agriculture due to concerns of foot and mouth disease1. Owning to their high moisture and salt content, there are two potential problems on the incineration of KW, including extra energy consumption, and generation and release of toxic pollutants to the environment, such as dioxins. Three main reutilization methods for KW collected from formal channels include animal feed via sterilization, fertilizer via composting and bioenergy via anaerobic digestion (AD). KW could be applied to compost and anaerobic process due to their high organic matter content and comprehensive nutrition element. However, the high content of moisture, oil and salt in KW does not favour the compost process, thus restricts their application in fertilizer utilization. Anaerobic digestion, an effective technology that can convert KW to green energy, has been widely used for the treatment of municipal biomass waste in recent years. When KW is treated anaerobically, common problems would appear during conventional AD because of their high oil content and the presence of macromolecular compounds, including the accumulation of lactic acid at an early stage of the digestion process resulting in a sudden pH drop and inhibitory levels of ammonia, sulphide and long-chain fatty acids due to the high protein and fat content2. These factors usually impede digestion stability, thus restricting the application of anaerobic digestion. In addition, the lack of efficient technology for disposal of biogas residues, the secondary pollutant during anaerobic digestion, also limits the application of anaerobic digestion in the recycling of KW. In addition, numerous pre-treatment methods, such as mechanical (e.g. sonication), chemical (e.g. alkali or acid), osmotic (e.g. NaCl treatment, freezing), oxidative (e.g. ozone), thermal and biological (e.g. enzyme) has been proposed to improve the physical and chemical properties of KW to enhance the solubilisation of organic particulates, sterilization effects and promote the subsequent reutilization, such as promote biogas production3, 4. Due to the concern on environmental protection, resource utilization and food safety, domestic and foreign governments have placed increasingly stringent restrictions on KW management, and since 2002, the European Union (EU) has enforced a ban on feeding these mixtures to animals due to the formation of harmful compounds during frying and their return back into the food chain through the animal meat. Recently, Chinese government has promulgated a series of laws and regulations for the disposal and recycling of KW to guarantee the effect of disinfection sterilization, avoid the premise of exogenous pollution and improve the recovery rate of useful resource such as nutrients and lipids. Moreover, Chinese government has published the animal husbandry law for prohibiting the direct utilize of KW as feedstuff in pig farms, and three ministries in China including the Supreme People's Court, Ministry of Public Security and The Supreme People's Procuratorate co-issued the notification about severe punishment by the law on criminal activities of waste cooking oil. Meanwhile, since 2011, four ministries in China including National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development and Ministry of Environmental Protection and Ministry of Agriculture co-issued the notification of carrying out the pilot projects on resource utilization and innocuity treatment of KW. Till now, 100 pilot projects have been nominated and approximately 80% choose anaerobic digestion as the main disposal technique. Among these treatment methods for KW, Each approach has its own characteristic including benefits and drawbacks. In this regard, this paper aims at a comprehensive study on the characteristics of treatment methods of KW in China. In addition, the performance and characteristics of the corresponding products of foreign countries are analyzed in detail. Some key techniques which are adopted in these products are discussed. 42 Yangyang Li et al. / Procedia Environmental Sciences 31 ( 2016 ) 40 – 49 2. Materials and methods KW characterization Table 1 shows the chemical compositions of KW, and the main elements in KW consist of C, H, O, N, S and Cl. The characteristics of KW are closely related to local living standards, eating habits, etc. From table 2, it could be concluded that KW exists a significant spatial variation in composition and character as high moisture content, high lipid content, high organic content and high salinity. In particular, according to investigations carried out in certain cities in China, food waste and bones accounted for more than 90% of KW; the remaining proportions were mainly paper, plastic, etc (table 3). Table 1. Chemical characteristics of KW (unit: %). Parameter C H O N S Cl KW 46.11 6.89 37.80 3.19 0.29 0.21 Table 2. Nutritional characteristics of KW in some Chinese cities (unit: %). Cities Moisture a VS1, b CP2, b EE3, b Oil4, a Salinity5, a Beijing 74.34 80.21 25.86 24.77 3.12 0.36 Tianjin 70.99 85.64 24.30 25.96 2.63 0.70 Chongqing 85.07 92.66 14.45 17.02 1.96 0.24 Suzhou 84.43 82.98 21.80 29.30 3.28 0.70 Hangzhou 74.94 91.50 16.46 24.31 2.09 1.32 a wet basis; b dry basis; 1 Volatile solid; 2 Crude protein; 3 Ether extract. Table 3. Compositions of KW (unit: %). Cities Food waste Paper Metal Bone Wood Fiber Plastic Guiyang 92.09 0.80 0.10 5.20 1.01 0.10 0.70 Shenyang 92.16 0.42 0.08 5.22 1.31 0.12 0.69 Chongqing 94.13 0.31 0 5.24 0.02 0.13 0.19 Wuhan 88.40 2.80 0.20 5.20 1.00 0.30 2.10 3. Results and Discussion 3.1 Potential utilization of KW in China The high nutrition content of KW makes it a good candidate for three main utilization methods, animal feed, fertilizer and methane. (1) Animal feed for KW KW is rich in nutrient and the content is close to typical feed such as corn and soybean, thus, producing animal feed using KW could be an effective reutilization method. However, due to the characteristics of complex sources and complicated compositions for KW, using as raw feed materials usually brings potential security hazards, such as homologous problems, bacteria, heavy metals and toxic and harmful substances.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • GTOG Good Practices
    GOOD PRACTICES ON THE END-OF-LIFE OF GYPSUM PRODUCTS Version 00_19 October 2015 This document provides an overview of the identified practices contributing to an efficient closed-loop supply chain. DEC1. Implement an effective pre-deconstruction audit for gypsum-based systems An essential step for both deconstruction planning and for the quality assurance of the materials is the pre-deconstruction audit, which reduces the uncertainty on what systems will be found when dismantling [1], identifying the range of materials and products expected to be generated from the deconstruction of the existing buildings and structures. Such waste prediction will set the basis for the development of a sound Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP), which in turn, will result in maximising the reduction, reuse, recycling and recovery options of materials, and the potential cost savings associated. An accurate (i.e. minimum deviation between waste foreseen and generated) pre-deconstruction audit (i.e. desk study, site visit, quality assessment of materials, etc.) should cover at least the location, amount, type and cost of gypsum waste (GW) to be generated (this enables the identification of recyclable GW), as well as the expected recycling targets. The Singapore standard SS 557:2010 [2] is an example of good practice in this field. It takes into account issues which affect the environment including a set of procedures to help demolition contractors to maximize recovery of waste materials, known as Demolition Protocol [3]. Another example is the Site Methodology to Audit Reduced Target Waste (SMARTWasteTM), a tool, developed by the Building Research Establishments (BRE), which helps to perform pre-demolition audits by which potential wastes arising can be benchmarked and categorized by source, type, amount, cause and cost [4].
    [Show full text]
  • NFU Response
    Page 1 NFU Response To: Environment Agency Date: 20th January 2020 resourcesframeworks@environment Ref: Waste to Land QP Comments agency.gov.uk Circulation: Contact: Philippa Arnold Tel: 02476 858 856 Email: [email protected] Waste Quality Protocols Review – Anaerobic Digestion Quality Protocol, Compost Quality Protocol, Poultry Litter Ash Quality Protocol - Call for evidence The NFU represents 55,000 members in England and Wales, involved in 46,000 farming businesses. In addition, we have 55,000 countryside members with an interest in farming and the countryside. We welcome the opportunity to respond to this Environment Agency call for evidence. Our interest in the call for evidence is as follows:- - Many of our members receive compost, digestate and poultry litter ash as landspreading materials. Some NFU members are anaerobic digestion (AD) plant operators and composters, and some poultry producers use poultry litter in biomass boilers to create renewable energy. The Quality Protocols (QPs) are important from both the plant operator’s perspective and the user of the resulting material. - QPs are valuable in providing assurance and clarity to farmers that the materials being spread to land are of good agronomic benefit, high quality and safe for the environment. - The NFU believe that QP’s are widely recognised frameworks which work well to produce high quality products from waste materials, without being burdensome. They promote greater recovery and recycling, so any reversion would be a retrograde step and perverse to Defra’s waste objectives. - Any adverse changes or removal of the QPs must not stifle the future growth of the on-farm AD sector, compost sector and markets for poultry litter ash.
    [Show full text]
  • A Benefit–Cost Analysis of Food and Biodegradable Waste Treatment
    sustainability Article A Benefit–Cost Analysis of Food and Biodegradable Waste Treatment Alternatives: The Case of Oita City, Japan Micky A. Babalola Graduate School of Education, Hiroshima University, 1-1-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima, Hiroshima 739 8524, Japan; [email protected] Received: 27 January 2020; Accepted: 23 February 2020; Published: 3 March 2020 Abstract: As the generation of food scrap, kitchen, and biodegradable wastes increases, the proper handling of these wastes is becoming an increasingly significant concern for most cities in Japan. A substantial fraction of food and biodegradable waste (FBW) ends up in the incinerator. Therefore, an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) benefit–cost analysis technique was employed in this study to compare different FBW treatment technologies and select the most appropriate FBW disposal technology for Oita City. The four FBW treatment options considered were those recommended by the Japanese Food Waste Recycling Law: anaerobic digestion, compost, landfill, and incineration, which is currently in use. The fundamental AHP was separated into two hierarchy structures for benefit analysis and cost analysis. The criteria used in these two analyses were value added, safety, efficiency, and social benefits for benefit analysis, and cost of energy, cost of operation and maintenance, environmental constraints, and disamenity for cost analysis. The results showed that anaerobic digestion had the highest overall benefit while composting had the least cost overall. The benefit–cost ratio result showed that anaerobic digestion is the most suitable treatment alternative, followed by composting and incineration, with landfill being the least favored. The study recommends that composting could be combined with anaerobic digestion as an optimal FBW management option in Oita City.
    [Show full text]
  • The Regulation of Materials Under Consideration for an End of Waste Quality Protocol
    This publication was withdrawn on 14 July 2021 We are no longer considering any new waste quality protocols, therefore this RPS can no longer be used. Regulatory position statement 017 The regulation of materials under consideration for an end of waste Quality Protocol Background This position statement sets out advice for our staff and customers on how we regulate wastes whilst they are under consideration for an end of waste Quality Protocol. If a Quality Protocol is developed, this statement will also cover our regulatory position whilst the draft Quality Protocol is considered by the European Commission1. A Quality Protocol identifies the point at which waste, having been fully recovered, may be regarded as a non-waste product that can be used in specified markets, without the need for waste management controls. Quality Protocols have been produced for a range of materials. Further information can be found on GOV.UK. Whilst the development of a Quality Protocol is being considered our position is that the materials covered by this document remain waste until they have been put to their final use in a recovery operation that achieves complete recovery of the waste. However, we consider it appropriate to allow the end-use of materials being considered for a QP to take place under a regulatory position statement rather than a permit because if a Quality Protocol is developed the final use of the material, subject to any conditions and limitations, will not be subject to regulatory control as a waste. This regulatory position statement relates to the final use of waste only.
    [Show full text]
  • Determining Factors of Waste Management in Japan
    Shimamoto K. DETERMINING FACTORS OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN DETERMINING FACTORS OF WASTE MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN Kenichi SHIMAMOTO Konan University, Hirao School of Management, Japan [email protected] Abstract The volume of waste produced is a major concern for Japan and has heightened the interest in waste management and recycling. This paper examines the factors that impact the municipal solid waste per capita and the recycle rate, applying panel data from 2001 to 2014 for each prefecture in Japan. The results first find that regions with a higher share of female population have a lower municipal solid waste per capita and a higher recycle rate, both at significant levels. The second finding is that a higher share of senior citizens population also has a significantly lower municipal solid waste per capita. On the other hand, the results show that higher gross domestic product and higher rate of educational attainment results in greater municipal solid waste per capita and lower recycle rate at a significant level. Results indicated that regions with robust financial indicators have significantly higher recycle rates. 3 / August 2019 August / 3 Keywords: municipal solid waste per capita, recycle rate, gross domestic product per capita, financial strength, demographic variables. 1. INTRODUCTION With the development of economic activities and increase in consumption, there is growing social concern over the increased production of waste and heightened interest in recycling. This social concern and interest also apply to Japan (Ministry of the Environment, 2016). This paper will examine Volume 14 Issue 14 Volume the factors that impact the behaviours concerning waste and recycling.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Incinerator Bottom Ash Document
    Buckfastleigh Community Forum www.community.buckfastleigh.org Neil Smith Chairman, Buckfastleigh Community Forum 31st January 2012 The Environment Agency Board Members Lord Smith, Chairman of the Board Dr Paul Leinster, Chief Executive Chris Howes, Head of Performance and Engagement Mat Crocker, Head of Illegals and Waste Richard Cresswell, Director South West Martin Weiller, Devon and Cornwall Area Manager Ed Mitchell, Director Environment and Business EA Permitting Office via email Dear Board Members and executive officers of the Environment Agency, RE: (i) Environmental Permit Number EPR/WP3833FT, Devonport Energy from Waste CHP & (ii) National issues with regard to due process in the categorisation of Incinerator Bottom ash I am writing as Chairman of the Community Forum in Buckfastleigh, Devon. We are a community group who have serious concerns over the proposals to build and operate a combined EfW CHP incinerator in Devonport, Plymouth. We wish to make both representations and requests for detailed clarification regarding concerns the public have in relation to environmental issues relating to this permit request. This letter of representation relates specifically to issues of due process surrounding the classification and processing of Incinerator Bottom Ash (referred to as IBA, bottom ash, or slag ash). Research on a local issue has unearthed what could be described as one of the greatest environmental policy conundrums currently existing, and demonstrates implications for national policy issues within the context of European legislation. A matter that is of serious and wide enough national interest that it is an appropriate concern of board level accountability. We believe that there is a legal basis to require very clear and public clarification of these issues before any permit at Devonport can be issued.
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Management and Circular Economy (Report Brussels Meeting)
    Meeting at DG ENVIRONMENT 28/06/2018 12.00 – 13.30 Building BU‐5 BRUSSELS List of participants from MIW and IMPEL Projects: Name Surname Project Member State Email Romano Ruggeri IMPEL Italy [email protected] Marina De Gier IMPEL Netherlands [email protected] Jan Teekens MIW Netherlands [email protected] Eva Dalensstam MIW Sweden [email protected] Sascha Grievink MIW Netherlands [email protected] Robert Hitchen MIW UK [email protected] John Tieman MIW Netherlands [email protected] List of participants from DG Environment: - Sarah Nelen (Head of Unit) - Julius Langendorff - Jorge Diaz Del Castillo - Other policy officers (dealing with The Environmental Implementation Review) 1 Agenda: 1. Presentation on the MiW‐IMPEL project 2. Summary outline of the guidance 3. Expectations regarding work on End‐of‐Waste verification systems 4. Possible engagement Commission with MiW‐IMPEL project 5. (Presentation on) Developments at EU level relevant to the project (e.g. Revised WFD, review WSR, Interface WFD and REACH, IED/BREFS and waste prevention/resource efficiency) 6. Governance of enabling eco‐innovations for a circular economy in the MS in relation to the EIR (Environmental Implementation Review) 7. Training activities in the ECA scheme context (Action 4) Results of discussion: Jan and Romano gave a presentation (Annex 1) on the goals and structure of the Project. The outline of the Final Guidance was presented as well. Presentation on the 1. MiW‐IMPEL project The main results of the survey, circulated to assess the implementation by EU Member States of provisions of Article 6 of Directive 2008/98 on End‐of‐waste status, were presented (Annex 2).
    [Show full text]
  • QUALITY PROTOCOL End of Waste Criteria for the Production and Use Of
    QUALITY PROTOCOL End of waste criteria for the production and use of quality compost from source-segregated biodegradable waste (biowaste) Contents Page 1. Introduction 4 2. Producing quality compost from source-segregated 12 biodegradable waste (biowaste) 3. Providing evidence of compliance with the Quality Protocol 14 4. Storage, application and use of quality compost from source- segregated biodegradable waste (biowaste) 16 Appendix A Definitions 18 Appendix B Biowaste types acceptable for the production of quality compost 25 Appendix C Standards and specifications to which this Quality Protocol applies 35 Appendix D Certification and accreditation diagram 36 Appendix E Supply Documentation Template 37 Appendix F Good practice for the storage, handling, application and use of quality compost as an agricultural fertiliser and in soil grown horticulture 38 1 Inside cover: This Quality Protocol was funded by Defra, the Welsh Government and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) as a business resource efficiency activity. It was developed by the Environment Agency and WRAP (Waste & Resources Action Programme) in consultation with Defra, the Welsh Government, industry and other regulatory stakeholders. The Quality Protocol is applicable in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It sets out the end of waste criteria for the production and use of quality compost from source-segregated biodegradable waste (biowaste). 2 Foreword Background Uncertainty over the point at which waste has been fully recovered and ceases to be waste within the meaning of Article 3(1) of the EU Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) has inhibited the development and marketing of materials produced from waste which could otherwise be used beneficially without damaging human health and the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • 000083 Quality Protocol A4 For
    the quality protocol for the production of aggregates from inert waste contents Foreword 3 Introduction 4 Definition of waste 5 Other definitions 5 The quality protocol 6 Factory production control 6 Description of products being provided 6 Reference to the specification requirements for aggregate products 6 Acceptance criteria for incoming wastes 6 Method statement of production 6 Inspection and testing regime including frequency and methods of test for finished product 7 Records 7 Quality statement 7 Information to be provided by the producer 7 Appendix A Example of a flow chart for acceptance and processing of inert waste 8 Appendix B Aggregate properties 9 Appendix C Wastes considered to be inert for the purpose of this Protocol 10 THE QUALITY PROTOCOL PAGE 2 foreword Rulings by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) The purpose of the Quality Protocol is to provide have provided some further guidance on how a uniform control process for producers from which the definition of waste should be interpreted and they can reasonably state and demonstrate that their applied by Member States and have led to the product has been fully recovered and is no longer conclusion that more things are waste and remain a waste. It also provides purchasers with a quality- waste for longer. This has an impact on the use and managed product to common aggregate standards potential use of construction aggregates processed increasing confidence in performance. Furthermore from inert wastes due to the uncertainty of when the framework created by the Protocol provides a the inert waste could be considered to be fully clear audit trail for those responsible for ensuring recovered and no longer a waste.
    [Show full text]
  • PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT Turning Challenges Into Opportunities
    December 2020 PLASTIC WASTE MANAGEMENT Turning Challenges Into Opportunities THE ENERGY AND RESOURCES INSTITUTE Creating Innovative Solutions for a Sustainable Future © COPYRIGHT The material in this publication is copyrighted. Content from this discussion paper may be used for non-commercial purposes, provided it is attributed to the source. This publication does not advocate or criticize any kind of plastic industry. Authors Suneel Pandey, Senior Fellow and Director, Environment & Waste Management Division, TERI Sourabh Manuja, Fellow, Centre for Waste Management, Environment & Waste Management Division, TERI Advisor Dr Syamal Kumar Sarkar, Distinguished Fellow & Program Director, TERI Suggested Format for Citation Pandey,S. and Manuja,S. 2020. Plastic Waste Management-Turning Challenges into Opportunities. New Delhi: The Energy and Resources Institute TERI Press Abhas Mukherjee Rajiv Sharma Published by The Energy and Resources Institute, New Delhi, India FOR MORE INFORMATION Project monitoring cell, The Energy and Resources Institute, Darbari Seth Block, IHC Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003, India | Tel.: +91 11 2468 2100 or 2468 2111 | Fax: +91 11 2468 2144 or 2468 2145 Email: [email protected] | Web: www.teriin.org 2 ∞ Plastic Waste Management: Turning Challenges Into Opportunities CONTENTS 1. PLASTIC WASTE—HOW BIG IS THE ISSUE? ............................................................5 Increasing Plastic Demand ..................................................................................... 5 Increasing Plastic Waste
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Management System
    DRM Aggregate Solutions Ltd Waste Recycling Facility DRM Aggregate Solutions Ltd Whitchurch Drive Ketley Shropshire TF1 5BY Environmental Management System 2020 Prepared by: 4W Environmental Limited, Office 26 Redhill House, Hope Street, Saltney, Chester, CH4 8BU TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number 1.0 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 1.1. Site operator/licence holder 3 1.2 Site history and planning status 3 1.3 Waste management operations 4 1.4 Hours of operation 4 1.5 Waste types and quantities 5 1.6 Staffing and management 5 1.7 Health and Safety 6 2.0 SITE INFRASTRUCTURE 2.1 Access and parking 7 2.2 Notice boards and signs 7 2.3 Site security 7 2.4 Site office 8 2.5 Weighbridge 8 2.6 Fuel storage/ chemical storage/ effluent storage 9 2.7 Drainage 9 2.8 Waste transfer and storage 10 2.9 Vehicles, plant and equipment 10 3.0 SITE OPERATIONS 3.1 Preliminary procedures 11 3.2 Checking in and inspection of loads ` 11 3.3 Waste Processing 12 3.4 Waste collection 13 3.5 Site Closure 13 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, MONITORING AND REPORTING 4.1 Breakdowns and spillage’s 13 4.2 Site inspection and maintenance 14 4.3 Control of mud and debris 14 4.4 Control and monitoring of dust 14 4.5 Odour control 15 4.6 Litter control 15 4.7 Control of pests, birds and other scavengers 16 4.8 Control of Fire 16 4.9 Control and monitoring of noise and vibration 16 4.10 Local receptors 17 4.11 Environment Agency reporting mechanism 18 4.12 Actual or potential non-compliance reporting mechanism 18 4.13 Complaints procedure 18 5.0 SITE RECORDS 5.1 Records 19 5.2 Site Condition
    [Show full text]
  • Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd WRAP Protocol
    Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd WRAP Protocol WRAP Protocol For the Production of Recycled Aggregates At Gill Mill Quarry Recycling & Recovery Centre Standlake Road Ducklington Witney Oxon OX29 7PP Telephone : 01869 331281 Facsimile : 01869 332112 [email protected] www.smithsbletchington.co.uk Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd, Enslow, Kidlington, Oxon, OX5 3AY (Tel : 01869 331281), (Fax : 01869 332112). 1 Version 01/WH/MAY2015 Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd WRAP Protocol Contents 1. Introduction 2. Definitions 3. Factory Production Control 4. The Operations of Incoming Waste 4a) Inert Waste Procedure. 5. Waste Information Form Procedure. 6. Incoming Waste. 6a) Daily record Sheet 7. The Rejection of Waste 8. Production Process 8a) Production Process Flow Diagram. 9. Collection of Recycled Products 10. Testing & Quality Control 10a) Testing Frequency Plan 11. WRAP Protocol Training Sheet 11a) WAMITAB Certificates 12. WRAP Protocol Document Amendment Sheet Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd, Enslow, Kidlington, Oxon, OX5 3AY (Tel : 01869 331281), (Fax : 01869 332112). 2 Version 01/WH/MAY2015 Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) Ltd WRAP Protocol 1) Introduction. This WRAP protocol is Produced by Smiths & Sons (Bletchington) with the guidance of the Environmental Agency and WRAP (Waste & Resource Action Programme) and Defra Guidance for notes. The WRAP Protocol aims to reduce the demand for primary aggregates through promoting the use of alternative resources especially through recycling also without the use of hazardous materials. Objectives and the Quality Protocols are :- i) To provide a uniform control process from which we can reasonably state that the material imported have been fully recovered and are therefore no longer a waste material. ii) To provide customers with a quality managed product to common aggregate Standards / Specifications or in house specifications.
    [Show full text]