From Comment Summary Town Chelmarsh

From Comment Summary Town Chelmarsh Parish Chelmarsh Parish Council discussed the proposals to remove the bring The facility is a well used siteChelmarsh Council back sites.

Church Stretton Town TheWe haveconsultation a well used documentation site in Chelmarsh makes and an argumentwould like for this the facility closure to of Retain banks for items not Church Stretton Council continue.Bring Banks (BB) across Shropshire, as the majority of materials collected at the kerbside. currently being recycled at BB’s, can already be collected at kerbside or taken to a Household Recycling Centre (HRC’s). In our experience Enforce to prevent misuse however, the BB located at the Lion Meadow car park in Church of bring banks. Stretton are well used by residents and appear to fill and be emptied regularly. There has to be a concern therefore, that this natural migration to using kerbside collection and/or HRC’s isn’t entirely evident here and indicates demand for the current BB facilities. The Church Stretton BB currently has provision for the recycling of cartons, metal packaging, mixed glass, mixed paper, textiles and clothing. The kerbside collection service, does not allow for the collection of cartons, textiles and clothing. The Church Stretton Market Town Profile shows that there is an older age profile in the town, when compared to the rest of Shropshire, with all of the age bands over the age of 55, showing a higher percentage than for both Shropshire and England. Over 30% of the Church Stretton population is aged over 65 and 6% over the age of 85. Source: 2011 Census, Office for National Statistics. The closest HRC is 8 miles away in Craven Arms, which for our ageing population is a significant barrier to recycling and also represents a significant number of car journeys to recycle items that can currently be recycled at the BB’s. Part of the argument for closing the BB’s is to reduce the impact on the environment, from the vehicles servicing the sites. We feel that this should be offset however, by the additional householder journeys to HRC’s or the impact on the environment, of these currently recycled materials finding their way back in to landfill, due to the removal of the service. Concerns have been expressed about the possibility of fly tipping in the area increasing, if the service is removed. We believe that Church Stretton has good recycling rates compared to the rest of Shropshire and it is hoped that people who currently act responsibly and recycle, will not resort to fly tipping instead. Nevertheless, there have been incidents of none recyclable, household waste being left at the BB site previously and therefore removal of the service does run the risk of seeing this type of fly tipping, moving to more remote countryside areas around the Strettons. There is a feeling that the current BB is unsightly, given its high profile location in the Town Centre. The Town Council’s desire to support recycling however, has taken precedence over the desire to move the BB to a less conspicuous site elsewhere in the town. That said, if it can be proven that there has been the Shropshire wide reduction in use of BB’s in Church Stretton, then this offers the opportunity to reduce the containers provided, to only those not collected at kerbside (cartons, textiles and clothing). This has the benefit of continuing to support recycling in the town and reducing the impacts mentioned earlier in this response and making the site smaller and less high profile, reducing any negative impact on visual amenity. Finally, the consultation document sets out a problem with inappropriate use of the BB’s by businesses who should have a commercial waste contract to ensure appropriate disposal of their waste. We contest that this is not a valid reason for removing a well used service and better Trade Waste enforcement by Shropshire Council would eradicate this problem. Stronger enforcement under section 34 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 would not only reduce the number of cases of misuse at BB’s, but would ensure that waste stored at business premises is stored appropriately, reducing the impact on the town centre and conservation area in Church Stretton. Clungunford Parish Clungunford Parish Council discussed the proposal on the Bring Bank Kerbside collection is not Clungunford Council consultation at its meeting on 9th January and noted that the banks in sufficient the village were well used and were required as the council believes that kerbside collection is not sufficient. The council therefore Eaton-Under- Thestrongly members object of to this the parish removal council of the read existing the details bring bankyou put station out about in People will fly tip Eaton-Under-Heywood Heywood and Hope thisClungunford consultation with some amazement. You state that removal of the and Hope Bowdler Bowdler Parish Shropshire Council owned bring bank sites will help reduce fly-tipping Council and littering - and will save money. It is the view of the parish council that the closure of the bring banks will increase fly-tipping, not reduce it and will almost certainly result Green Shropshire inGSX higher is the cost environment in clearing network up from ofmultiple the green sites groups rather across than provision People will fly tip NA Exchange andShropshire emptying and of Telford. the bring banks. The council has a sustainablity policy which includes waste Increase frequency that mangement and recycling.The need to increase recycling, this bring banks are includes plastic and tetrapacks, is a vital part of this policy. Removal of maintained the banks could result in a reduction in recycling and an increase in fly tipping.It will cost the council and land owners more to deal with the People will have to make waste dumped. more/longer car journeys In rual areas people will have to make longer journeys to visit the recycle sites and this will increase carbon emissions. The banks need to be checked and cleaned more often and the council should encourage more kerbside recycling. Local communities often help to maintain these banks and wish to continue. We hope that the council will find a way to continue these bring banks. Ludlow Town Council Inferring that removing public access to large and wide ranging How do people without a carLudlow recycle items not collected at the kerbside. recycling bring banks would increase recycling and reduce fly-tipping is a nonsensical idea.

The strategy in your consultation goes against both European and Government policy which states: "The roles of local authorities and the waste sector are critical at this stage of the lifecycle. As a Government we must set clear expectations giving them the confidence to invest in infrastructure to deal with waste and to promote UK recycling. And we must, and will, ensure that local authorites are rescourced to meet new net costs arising from the policies in this Strategy including up front transition costs and ongoing operational costs. There has been insufficient action to drive for better quantity and quality in recycling. We must make it easier for households, businesses and local authorities to recycle". The strategy discriminates against people in our town without ready access to a vehicle as the remaining recycling banks (for a wide variety of materials) will be 9 miles away in Craven Arms. The financial saving would be insignificant considering the potential detrimental impact on the town (in terms of flytipped waste and aesthetics) and its recycling rates. Ludlow Town Council would like to communicate with Shropshire Council regarding environmental impact in the wider context of issues which have been raised through the ongoing development of Ludlow's Community Led Plan. In summary Ludlow Town Council do not support the removal of bring banks from our town. Rushbury Parish At a recent meeting of Rushbury Parish Council, the Councillors Rationalise number and Rushbury Council discussed the proposal detailed in your email below. location of bring banks Whilst we understand the need for financial savings and a cleaner environment, the Councillors expressed concern over the proposals and requested that I communicate these to you. I have looked at the survey and whilst I could respond to this, I could not adequately detail the responses in relation to the Parish Council; hence my email to you. There are currently 3 recycling bins at Rushbury Village Hall. Photo attached from which you will see that the conditions are generally good. I appreciate that this may be more of an exception. The Councillors believe this to be a welcome and used initiative in addition to the kerb side collection for householders. I understand that one of the proposed withdrawal reasons is that the bins are not properly used with incorrect materials being placed in the bins resulting in that bin not being recyclable. However, we do understand and see that the current collection allows for cans, glass and plastics to be stored together with a separate storage of paper and cardboard. This facility is seen to work well in the Rushbury Parish and from what we can see is correctly used. We appreciate the Council’s concerns over the major collection centres and the increase in fly-tipping and littering. We support whatever measures can be introduced to eliminate this. However, is there an opportunity for the more dispersed facilities such as at Rushbury to be maintained whilst the facilities at locations which are causing the issues be withdrawn? Are the vehicles which empty the bring bank bins different to those that service individual households?

I appreciate that if the Rushbury facility is not sufficiently used, then the collection costs need to be reviewed. Likewise, we would also be concerned if the closure of the larger sites results in moving the problem to other centres such as Rushbury, then we would need to rethink. Is there any flexibility in the scale of withdrawals, if this is to proceed? Shrewsbury Summary Need arrangements for NA Friends of the 1. Closure of the sites must not be allowed to result in a reduction of t collection of items not Earth he amount of materials recycled. The assertion that this will be the cas currently served at the e if all sites are completely closed is not convincing. kerbside 2. We agree that kerbside collection is preferable and where that exis ts county wide for some materials it is not true for all. 3. The suggestion that people can go to the main recycling centres inst ead is illogical. The distances for most are considerable and the result would be a massive increase in car journeys which can’t be justified. 4. We are sympathetic to the need to save money where possible so will support removal of bins for materials that can easily be recycled t hrough kerbside collection or at charity shops (clothes) or in store (sm all electrical items). Cartons are the exception and we strongly believ e the existing arrangements for these must be maintained or kerbside collection introduced.

Justification for Removal of Some Bins From our own observations we see that misuse of the sites is a proble m but it is clear that infrequent emptying and management is a contri buting factor. However, we accept more expense cannot be justified s o increased attendance is not possible. For this reason we agree to the removal of bins for the materials that can be easily recycled by other means

The Alternatives for Easily Recyclable Materials We would hope that most would end up being recycled but expect tha t some would end up in the general waste. A publicity campaign to pre Stockton Parish Stocktonvent this Parishhappe nCounciling wil lat b etheir nec emeetingssary. C oonm mtheer c2/1/19ial wa sdiscussedte from v ethery s People will fly tip Norton Council potentialmall busin closureesses i sof n othe do Bringubt p aBankrt of atth eNorton amou nandt br concludedought to th thate sit it'ses bu closuret at leas couldt it is b leadeing to re flycyc tippingled. Cla onmp theing dsiteow andn on around these e thente arearpris ewiths wi lal reductionno doubt r ines theult i servicen much andof th amenitye mater iprovidedal being “ tohi druralden ”communities. amongst gener al waste so a “gentle” approach may bring the best outcome.

The Household Recycling Centres People can be encouraged to use these as an alternative. However, th ere must be a strong caveat that the trip is justified. Short trips with s mall amounts may be ok but longer ones should only be made with a c ar full. Even better is if all trips have other objectives as well. Just sugg esting trips without qualification is unacceptable and at the very least reveals a lack of responsibility by The Council to consider the contribu tion to climate change, increased traffic and air quality.

Cartons Alternative arrangements for recycling these is not being properly add ressed. Suggesting they are taken to Household Recycling Centres is n ot an answer and if nothing more is offered most will end up as gener al waste and be incinerated. Ironically Tetrapak are dedicated to increasing recycling and have tea med up with Veolia to achieve this. We most strongly believe Shropsh ire Council must support this effort and that means either kerbside col lection or the maintainance of these particular bins as at present – or e ven providing a few more sites if appropriate. The argument that ther e are only 26 tonnes collected can be expressed more impressively – t hat weight is equivalent to approximately three quarters of a million c artons which shows the commitment of the people in Shropshire to re cycle these items. As there are only a few sites where cartons are collected keeping thes e would still mean overall costs would be greatly reduced. This expen se must be considered against the reputation of The Council which wil l be reducing recycling for the first time since collections began - if th e carton issue is not properly addressed. We urge The Council to liase with Veolia to bring about kerbside colle ction as the preferred option in view of their commitment with Tetrap ak but if this is not viable then the bins at “Bring” sites should be kept.

Below is the publicity about Tetrapak and Veolia cooperation:- https://waste-management-world.com/a/tetra-pak-veolia-team-up-t o-recycle-all-beverage-carton-components-in-eu

All Cartons Collected to be Recycled by 202520.11.2018 12:48 Tetra Pak & Veolia Team-Up to Recycle All Beverage Carton Componen ts in EU Tetra Pak has joined forces with waste and resource Veolia in a bid to r ecycle all of the components of used beverage cartons collected withi n the European Union by 2025. By Ben Messenger • • • • • veolia packaging Tetra Pak Recycling recycling rate Image © Tetra Pak Das könnte Sie auch interessieren Veolia VP Estelle Brachlianoff Calls for Incentives to Boost Paper Cup R ecycling UK Government Report into Coffee Cup Recycling Conundrum EXTR:ACT to Drive Value for Mulitmaterial Recycling ACE Platform to D rive Carton Recycling Across EuropeStrong Domestic Recycled PET De mand ContinuesPET Recycling Rate Returns to Growth in US & Canada i n 2017 Global packaging giant, Tetra Pak, has joined forces with waste and res ource Veolia in a bid to recycle all of the components of used beverag e cartons collected within the European Union by 2025. According to Tetra Pak the average beverage carton comprises around 75% paperboard, 20% plastic and 5% aluminium foil. However, while t he fibres recovered during recycling have a healthy market when conv erted into high-quality paper pulp for use in both industrial and consu mer products, the same is not true for the recovered polymer and alu minium (PolyAl) mix. Within the scope of the new partnership, the extracted PolyAl will be processed at dedicated facilities and converted into raw materials for applications within the plastic industry. In this way, the overall value o f used beverage cartons is expected to double, making the value chain for collection and recycling more efficient and viable. The Tetra Pak and Veolia partnership will start in the EU and expand to more markets around the world. “All materials from beverage cartons can be fully recycled into someth ing new and useful,” explained Lisa Ryden, Recycling Director, Tetra P ak. “Our approach to recycling involves working with many partners along the value chain, because a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. T he challenge in the EU is to achieve the economies of scale and turn P olyAl into high value secondary materials,” she continued. Laurent Auguste, Senior EVP Development, Innovation & Markets, Ve olia added: “This partnership joins together our resource management expertise and Tetra Pak’s packaging material expertise. We will devel op an environmentally and economically sustainable solution to recycl ing PolyAl, first in the EU, and then Asia, to improve collection, techno logy and processes. “We are proud to embark on this journey with Tetra Pak to sustain and grow beverage carton recycling. At Veolia we work every day to make waste a valuable resource, and are constantly developing innovative s olutions, and investing in technologies, as part of our wider commitm ent to living circular.” Read More Veolia Preferred Bidder for £35m Waste Collection & Recycling Contra ct in Stafford, UK Veolia has been confirmed as the preferred bidder for a 10 year munic ipal waste and recycling collection contract by Stafford Borough Counc il. Veolia to Build £10m High Grade Glass Recycling Plant in St Helens, UK Veolia has teamed up with UK mineral wool insulation manufacturer, Knauf Insulation, in a long term contract to supply high quality recycle d glass from packaging in St. Helens, Merseyside. Veolia Roles Out Nationwide Coffee Cup Recycling Service for UK Offic es With 84% of takeaway hot drink consumers still using disposable cups, Veolia is rolling out its national coffee cup solution to make cup recycl ing possible in offices across.

https://www.packagingnews.co.uk/top-story/tetra-pak-veolia-partne r-recycle-beverage-carton-components-19-11-2018

Tetra Pak and Veolia partner to recycle all beverage carton component s Tetra Pak and Veolia have announced a ‘game-changing’ partnership t hat will enable all components of used beverage cartons collected wit hin the EU to be recycled by 2025.

Tetra Pak and Veolia teams The average beverage carton comprises around 75% paperboard, 20% plastic and 5% aluminium foil. But while the fibres recovered during recycling have a healthy market when converted into high-quality paper pulp, the same is not true for the recovered polymer and aluminium (PolyAl) mix. Within the scope of the new partnership, the extracted PolyAl will be processed at dedicated facilities and converted into raw materials for applications within the plastic industry. Lisa Ryden, recycling director, Tetra Pak said: “All materials from bever age cartons can be fully recycled into something new and useful. Our a pproach to recycling involves working with many partners along the va lue chain, because a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The chal lenge in the EU is to achieve the economies of scale and turn PolyAl in to high value secondary materials.” “With this partnership, we are combining our respective areas of expe rtise to find sustainable solutions for PolyAl recycling” Laurent Auguste, senior EVP development, innovation & markets, Veo lia said: “This partnership joins together our resource management ex pertise and Tetra Pak’s packaging material expertise. We will develop an environmentally and economically sustainable solution to recycling PolyAl, first in the EU, and then Asia, to improve collection, technolog y and processes. We are proud to embark on this journey with Tetra Pa k to sustain and grow beverage carton recycling. At Veolia we work ev ery day to make waste a valuable resource, and are constantly develo ping innovative solutions, and investing in technologies, as part of our wider commitment to living circular.”

Conclusion If the recycling of cartons is continued by either kerbside collection or retaining the bins we accept the removal of bins for other materials is acceptable. There should also be a publicity effort to encourage people to use the appropriate alternative places to take their recycling, if not collected, and to minimise extra car journeys. Welshampton and The Parish Council has discussed the Council’s proposal to remove the People will fly tip Welshampton and Lyneal Lyneal Parish Council Bring Banks at 120 sites. Please accept this response by email rather than the survey as the survey is not appropriate for the Council’s response.

Wem Rural Parish Council does not agree with the proposal to remove the Bring Banks at 120 sites. The Parish Council considers these facilities are important for people who do not have storage facilities at their own homes for all their recycling and some do not have adequate transport to travel to Household Recycling Centres. Bing a rural parish, the Council also considers there would be an increase of fly-tipping in the countryside. Resident PLEASE tell us how the removal of the Bring Back boxes will help to People will fly tip NK Pleasereduce wouldfly tipping you beetc.,. so kind to ensure these comments are included inSurely the final idf there review is no of placeconsultation for waste responses. it just gets left else where. Strikes me that all you are doing is moving litter from one place to another and the cost of collecting from one site goes up as it has to be Resident collectedI have heard from on all Radio over. Shropshire that the recyclinge facilities at the People will fly tip Broseley Thankback of you Broseley for letting Library us know are aboutgoing thisto be flawed closed. plan. I see many people using this including myself. Quite often things have been left outside as bins are full. In my opinion this will only lead to more fly tipping. Please reconsider, many people haven't got cars etc to take it elsewhere. Thank you Resident Very alarmed to hear about this closure proposal. Seems to me it will People will fly tip NK increase, not reduce fly tipping, and certainly reduce recycling. Resident Don't pretend this is a 'saving' - this is a cut. Mismanagement is the Cut management NK major problem therefore the fairest solution would be to cull some Resident Removalexecutive of positions. Bring Banks in Ludlow I feel is inappropriate in this People will fly tip Ludlow civilised age. We are all exhorted to engage more and more with the purchase of consumer goods and many of us will do that out of choice. But we MUST have access to the proper disposal of old items some of which can be re-used or recycled or incinerated. An alternative is that we make unnecessary journeys by car to the Craven Arms Waste Disposal Site. Not efficient use of energy. Or we dump things Resident whereverPlease do wenot canremove in the any countryside. banks which That are creates providing an evena different more To far to nearest HRC Ellesmere expensiveservice than problem. those provided Come on! by Let's kerbside get this recycling right, please.services. Local For governmentinstance drinks in mycarton book banks. is about It is providing too far for appropriate residents like local us services. (Ellesmere rural) to take our cartons to Oswestry.

I cannot see a problem with removing banks which are doubling up with the kerbside services