Every major city in Britain with a university student housing quarter experiences this. And yet there is very little within the waste collection industry by the way of planning or systems in place to ensure that the problem of students being irresponsible with their waste, is dealt with effectively at each end of college year.

Student waste is just abandoned at term end.

A surprisingly large proportion the rubbish they throw out, as they hastily clear their accommodation, and dash for home or sunnier climes, ends up strewn on the streets and causing an unsightly environmental health problem for the residents who happen to live next door to student rental accommodation.

In some cities the councils have on occasions launched a initiatives in past years to encourage students, landlords and residents to bag up their rubbish properly as well and even, heaven forbid, recycle as much of their junk as possible.

Inner city areas which tend to become colonised by students in term time, are not the wealthiest. They have troubles enough without having to put up with the mattresses, cookers, microwaves, bin bags torn apart by vermin and shedding rubbish or dumped building materials that student residents tend to discard so uncaringly. It can be quite an annual environmental disaster for a number of weeks in those areas affected.

It’s just that students often don’t care and that even extra skips put out by the council to cope with the problem are reportedly only used by the residents. The students seldom if ever use them.

And, with the student populations of many cities rising to some 30 000 that is the equivalent of the population of quite a sizeble town in its own right.

Strange as it is the current generation of students seem to have so little concern for the local neighbourhood. You’ll see them with Greenpeace stickers on their bags and windows and they often say they care about issues like global warming and “only buy biodegradable products”, but chuck un-bagged rubbish out of the front door without a care for the consequences.

Unfortunately this global concern doesn’t seem to be applied to problems at a more local level, like litter, graffiti and vandalism the things that bother residents the most!

One wonders whether the Universities and colleges should not be doing more themselves. In fact, such has been the concern about student rubbish, that one university has not only provided increased recycling facilities but campaigned for greater awareness. In many colleges student union buildings provide a lot of recycling bins, and similarly and at their halls of residence

The college authorities also find that they have to involve their staff in sorting out the waste collected and then donate items like books, bedding and clothing to local charity shops.

It is strange that so many students see humping rubbish to a responsible place of disposal as somehow beneath their dignity, when the rest of the community finds no such problems. Maybe that is just as well, otherwise waste collection and disposal costs would risk rising greatly or even doubling!

These issues of how to communicate to the student market and how to provide adequate facilities for those living in multi-occupancy housing are currently being looked at by ENCAMS. As part of

Copyright 2009 IPPTS Associates

Two sites in Deeside and Anglesey have been reserveed in the £800m project. Officers say nothing has been finalised and all ideas are being considered. They’re holding talks with residents across the area, beginning at Holyhead on Fri. North Wales

In all 5 main councils have joined forces and invited firms to make plans for waste processing plants like incinerators to cope with waste now put into landfills. They are expecting that the new plant will process more than 150,000 tons of waste a year in a project costing a computed £800m over twenty-five years. Flintshire council is taking the lead among the group made from authorities covering Anglesey, Gwynedd, Conwy, and Denbighshire. The partnership is known as the North Wales Residual Waste Treatment Project ( NWRWTP ).

Councillor Eryl Williams, chair of the NWRWTP’s joint council, declared the Welsh Govt has set target of recycling seventy percent of home waste by 2025, and using a rubbish heap was no longer a choice.

PUBLIC Meetings will b held at a varity of locations – see the original BBC News post.

He stated that they want to hear as many peoples’s perspectives as practical so they are urging any residents who need to know a lot more about the project or need to ask about the project to come along to one of the sessions.

They assert the Deeside processing strategy and location was only used to show a “business case” to secure funds from Welsh Govt. It has agreed to put in £142m over the term of the project. In May, the NWRWTP exposed it’s been in debate with an Anglesey aluminum business about securing a choice to get land on the previous aluminum works near Holyhead for a site.

Other recommended sites may be included as neither the Deeside or Anglesey sites are hard and fast. The bids will be shortlisted till a preferential bidder appears with the winner predicted to be designated in late 2012. A planning application will then be submitted to the most relevant authorities. Work on the plant isn’t predicted to start before 2016. Folks can learn more online and take a role in the consultation through the NWRWTP web site.

Read more at the BBC Article

The only way it is possible to define the zero waste philosophy is to study the schemes which describe themselves as zero waste projects around the world.

However, let me make it clear, nowhere that I know of does it mean literally “zero waste” to landfill. As I said, this is a term coined by politicians rather than waste management engineers.

The “Zero Waste” or “No Waste” goals in the places which were studied by the Green Alliance in 2006, were found to mean in effect no un-recycled waste, and not much more.

Yes, most are articulated as Zero Waste to landfill, however, none of the places in question at that time seemed to be planning an increase in incineration for example, which would reduce the waste tonnage greatly, and some appear to have ruled it out (Canberra, Kamikatusu, New Zealand, Philippines) citing negative public opinion.

Some of the Zero Waste goals have target dates attached (Kamikatsu, Japan, 2020; New Zealand, 2020; San Francisco 2020). For others, “Zero Waste” provides a notional target with some interim targets (Bath, Philippines).

Canberra’s target of no waste by 2010 is acknowledged to mean in practice 95 per cent diversion from landfill.

Those municipalities espousing zero waste will nevertheless be some of the highest recycling rate achievers, and studies appear to show recycling rates are and will be raised to between 37 per cent and 80 per cent

The experience of a Flanders, France experience was thought in 2006 to indicate that household recycling rates of 60 per cent ought to be obtainable in the UK with the right mix of instruments – although until the new UK government was elected in May 2010, it was expected that local authorities would be allowed to charge householders extra for non-recycled (black bag) waste, as way to achieve these high goals. However, the Conservative/Liberal Coalition has already announced that no such an incentive will be allowed by the new UK Government.

A common feature to many of the Zero Waste targeted schemes is rigorous source separation and collection of recyclables, but so far, in no case, does this appear to be mandatory.

In many places zero waste recycling is driven by pricing of landfill (Bath, Canberra, Flanders, New Zealand) and variable charging of householders (Flanders, San Francisco).

All case studies assume that good markets will exist from now onward for most recyclates, although some will always be awkwardly distant (China and India). So, this raises questions as to whether the goal of zero waste is sustainable, in a market sense, or whether recycling will continue to suffer from the recessionary effect on China’s need for imported secondary materials.

The notions of designing out waste, changing the nature of products and making producers responsible for the consequences of wasteful consumption are still not really on the agenda for zero waste advocates, but shouldn’t they be?

Beyond European or European-style agreements on recycling of packaging and WEEE, there seems little real appetite for imposing more biting producer responsibility. The “Cradle to Cradle” concepts of beneficial products and continual recycling of biological and non-renewable materials are being developed, but are not yet necessarily a part of the Zero Waste philosophy in many places.

The UK is well investing heavily to take a lead on waste prevention with large amounts of landfill tax money being channelled into bodies such as WRAP, Envirowise, BREW, and the Centre for Sustainable Design. Let’s hope they will soon be able to produce some truly ground-breaking ideas and initiatives to actually achieve close to what the public must think the politicians and the waste industry mean by zero waste..

Underpinning the philosophy of zero waste is an aspiration for continuous improvement that goes beyond being compliant with legislation, targets or contracts. While practically delivering zero waste is a significant challenge, the desire to do more and do it better is perhaps the most important lesson we can draw from these case studies.

Zero waste had been portrayed as utopian and undeliverable, yet getting as close to it as possible is worth striving for, and the zero waste concept is already delivering results. Let’s hope the backwash from the press and media, and the public when they realise that most of the landfills will stay open, is not too great.

Visit the web-site: www.green-alliance.org.uk .

The amount of waste going to landfill in the United Kingdom has continued to fall in 2009, according to figures from the government environmental department Defra.

Provisional estimates from the department’s survey of municipal waste in England incorporate the first quarter of the 2009/10 financial year and are based on information supplied by local authorities to WasteDataFlow.

To minimise the effects of seasonal fluctuations, comparisons are made between the year April 2008 to March 2009 and the year July 2008 to June 2009, that is, encompassing the provisional results for the quarter April to June 2009.

Total municipal waste decreased by 0.28 million tonnes in the year to end June 2009, to 27.06 million tonnes. A decrease in total household waste was observed, from 24.3 to 24.1 million tonnes, or 1.1%. Waste going to landfill dropped by 3.1% (13.4 million tonnes).

There was also an increase in the household recycling rate, from the average rate of 37.6% between April 2008 and March 2009 to 38.3% between July 2008 and June 2009. The average residual household waste (which is the amount of household waste which is not recycled) decreased from 295 kg per head between April 2008 and March 2009 to 289 kg per head between July 2008 and June 2009.

Defra explained that the data are provisional as not all returns have completed full validation and returns to WasteDataFlow can be revised by local authorities during the scheme year. “There are also seasonal effects on waste arisings and management which means care needs to be taken when assessing trends,” it explained Final figures will be released in the annual National Statistics release in November 2010.

For April to June 2009, all local authorities submitted data to WasteDataFlow and at the time the data were downloaded for this release, all authorities (358) had completed validation.

Between 1.1 and 1.75 million tonnes of plasterboard enters the waste stream each year in the UK, which is not only a waste of resources but also, potentially, an environmental problem.

Scotland’s environment watchdog is hoping to encourage more businesses to increase the amount they are recycling, by confirming that waste plasterboard which has been processed to the correct specification, is no longer classified as waste.

If gypsum comes into contact with biodegradable waste in landfill, toxic and smelly hydrogen sulphide gas is produced. However, if producers separate it for recovery and recycling, it can then be used to replace virgin gypsum in the plasterboard, cement and soil conditioner markets.

To promote the market for quality gypsum recycling, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) has taken the position that where waste plasterboard is processed in accordance with BSI PAS109:2008, it will no longer be regarded as waste.

The recently published BSI PAS 109:2008 “Specification for the production of recycled gypsum from waste plasterboard” specifies minimum requirements for the recycling process itself. It covers the selection, receipt, handling of inputs, specification of product grades and the storage, labeling, dispatch and traceability of the products that are produced from that process.

BSI PAS 109:2008 compliant gypsum which has been recycled to the correct specification and is to be used for plasterboard manufacture, cement manufacture and as soil conditioner, will no longer be regarded as waste by SEPA. This means the subsequent storage, movement and use will not be subject to the requirements of waste legislation, meaning it does not need to be transported by a registered waste carrier or accompanied by a controlled waste transfer note.

Kenny Boag, SEPA’s Head of Waste Policy, said:

“SEPA supports the responsible processing of waste materials into high quality products as part of achieving a Zero waste society. SEPA’s policies on the disposal and recovery of gypsum from plasterboard will reduce pollution from landfilling and will also facilitate the recycling of this valuable resource.”

Iain Gulland, Director of Zero Waste Scotland, said:

“We are delighted that SEPA has adopted the BSI PAS 109:2008. Scotland has a vibrant building industry and SEPA is sending strong signal to industry that it takes the issue of construction waste very seriously.”

To take advantage of this position the local SEPA team must be contacted and a demonstration of compliance with PAS109 must be provided. BSI PAS 109:2008 covers the selection, receipt, handling of inputs, specification of product grades and the storage, labelling, dispatch and traceability of the products that are produced from that process.

Processors and users are not obliged to comply with these terms, but reprocessed gypsum that is not BSI PAS 109:2008 compliant will remain classified as waste.

The full position is available under the category “regulatory guidance” – click here.

Similar intentions have been in place in Scotland for somewhat longer.

The next step will be additional regulations to limit the use of landfill, because the intent is to do much better than current EU wide legislation and targets on waste diversion from landfill.

UK government funded organisation WRAP has funded a newly published report which proposes landfill bans for England and Wales, and UK organisations and residents are being given the opportunity to comment on these ideas right now.

WRAP’s vision is a world without waste, where resources are used sustainably. In their own words; they work with businesses and individuals to help them reap the benefits of reducing waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficient way.

They certainly believe that by limiting or stopping various materials being sent to landfill there would be a net positive effect of these so called “landfill bans” both in the short term to our economy, but also, and in the end more importantly reducing emissions and making our world much more sustainable.

The Waster wonders about the possible negative effects on industry of landfill bans if the way that businesses can use materials becomes much much heavily restricted by the methods allowed for its disposal. Clearly, we have already moved a long way down that road, and no new principles would be established by this, but it is a matter of degree, and at some point our entrepreneurial spirit may be badly affected. In other words when does reasonably “a can do” culture turn into “too difficult” for those people and busineses with ideas, the courage and the spirit, to set up new manufacturing endeavours.

It is reported that climate change benefits and resource efficiency gains are likely to be greatest where landfill bans are coupled with a requirement to sort materials;

The report writers have selected the wastes for which these gains seem most likely to be achieved whilst delivering net benefits to society are:

For more information got to; WRAP report Landfill Bans: Feasibility Research

For organisaions and interreested individuals to comment to Defra on the report; Go to Consultation on the introduction of restrictions on the landfilling of certain wastes.

Also – Why not give us your comment, as well?

Waste Matchers – the re-use project – has announced a new service called the SMILE Network.

The SMILE Network encourages collaboration between businesses through networking events in order to save costs and help the environment.

At these events, businesses can offer items such as surplus products, byproducts, reusable items, office/warehouse space or logistics and acquire similar items from other businesses. All items offered will be either free of charge or below market value.

The first event will take place on 25th March 2010 at the Oriel House Hotel, Ballincollig, Co. Cork (9.00-14.00).

Funded by South Cork Enterprise Board, this event is free of charge and open to business from the majority of sectors.

For more information – including event Programme and Booking Form – Waste Matchers

The United Kingdom (UK) has traditionally used landfill disposal as the main method of waste management. However, it has long been recognised that landfilling is unsustainable due to its long term harmful effects on the environment and public health.

Landfill also places a high long term risk on groundwater quality, which could threaten the availability of clean water for future generations.

Under the European Union (EU) Landfill Directive, and starting in 2006, member nations were required to divert biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) from landfills. The UK has also committed to the EU Renewable Energy Directive, which binds it to sourcing at least 15% of its energy mix from renewables by 2020.

Through the last decade the emphasis was on recycling, and this is still the case, but recycling will only achieve waste diversion up to a point. Therefore, to meet these targets, the UK is developing alternative waste management options as well as planning to achieve considerable deployment of renewables.

Throughout 2009 a number of aspects of UK waste management policy that have been in place for some time came together so that for the first time a genuine shift in the industry could be detected. Investors began to see the wisdom of those that have already anticipated this new vision and have committed to investment in the waste technologies, as many of the smaller more nimbly operators have begun to make profits. Where profit is to be made others will now follow to secure waste contracts for the resource that collected material provides them.

If asked what the single biggest influence on this was during 2009, I would say it as the government’s Landfill Tax escalator policy which meant that for most waste disposers, for the first time, landfill disposal actually became more expensive than recycling. You can argue around the detail here, but I had not before the summer of 2009 witnessed recycling companies able to say they could offer price competitive disposal prices when head to head with the traditional landfill operators.

Another major driving force in UK waste management which is powering the evolution from a disposal problem to a resource optimisation opportunity are the high targets for waste diversion from landfill, and 20 year or longer integrated waste management contracts. These are public/private partnership projects which the UK government is pushing ahead with now in order to achieve those targets.

Here to, we saw a major milestone achieved while the recession was biting the hardest early in 2009. This was the successful planning application, and award of contract, for the £4 billion Greater Manchester Waste PFI Contract, the largest of its kind in Europe, and all built upon stakeholder involvement. However, the Greater Manchester PFI Contract is only the most high profile example of a procurement revolution which probably reached its peak of activity during 2009, and saw similar contracts either largely in place or planned throughout the nation.

The year also saw a number of these projects hit the headlines, and some Energy from Waste schemes being pushed back at planning (Cornwall and Edinburgh for example).

However, the trend continued and accelerated so that for all waste streams and/or locations where re-use or recycling of waste is not viable, energy recovery is being reinforced as the preferred option, with disposal used only as a last resort.

For a long while the major Energy from Waste producer has been from landfills, and it has been landfill gas (LFG) utilisation. However, the relative importance to LFG utilisation as a proportion of total energy from waste production will now be expected to decline.

Each month in the years to come we will see the rollout of new energy from waste (EfW) projects coming on-stream. However, while the adoption of new waste technologies is being supported in the UK by government departments, the perceived high risk for the PFI partnerships, has remained high. 2009 was not good for implementing the more innovative of these.

The increased cautiousness of the banks funding the private element of these projects has come at a very unfortunate time, as it has in my view severely detracted against the bankability of schemes using these new technologies. In fact, 2009 saw the shelving of quite a number of the more adventurous new waste technology options in favour of more traditional incineration technology.

During the year events also reinforced the wisdom of encouraging the use of EfW and other home grown renewable energy source, within the global scene. Most will remember that early in 2009 we saw the deep rationing of natural gas supplies to some European nations which were themselves unconnected with a producer country dispute. This held up supplies during the coldest weather and in a completely arbitrary fashion.

Most now strongly support the benefits of renewable energy for its improved energy supply security, ability to provide climate change mitigation when combined with stiff recycling targets and the highest possible waste diversion, and not least its resource efficiency.

However, good though that may be for waste as an opportunity, the main event of the year was the new found security to the recyclers which came with the attainment of the economic tipping point, whereby landfilling has become more expensive than most forms of main stream recycling activity. From now on the markets in recyclates will operate on a progressively more stable and normal economic basis.

Recycling has always made sense for the environment, but from now on it will also become a natural economically favourable option as well We can also look forward to the future knowing that the landfill tax will rise again in April 2010, taking us further into the new UK era of waste as a resource of opportunity.

He used his speech at a summit of Local Authorities and the waste industry.

Hilary Benn expounded that in principle we need to reconsider how we view and treat waste in the United Kingdom. Why do we send valuable items like aluminum and food waste to dump them in landfill when we will be able to turn them into new cans and replaceable energy?

Why use more resources than we want to in manufacturing?

The idea is that we must now work in partnership to build a zero waste nation – where we scale back the resources we use, reuse and recycle all that we can and only send to the rubbish heap the things that have no other use for.

“To do this every one of us – state, local authorities, firms and patrons – must do our bit. And we must make this moment the turning point on our journey to eliminate wasteful waste.”

In a morning trip to Earls Court, Mr Benn showed his support for an up to date BSI sustainable event standard which is meant to make sure that the events industry considers the social, business and environmental impacts of their events.

Mr Benn continued : “Using new technologies will help us to re-use things, as an example anaerobic digestion that creates power from food and farm waste. And firms can apply the technology at their fingertips to design inventive products that use less resources or contain recycled materials.

“In a decade’s time seventy five percent of household waste will either be recycled or used for energy, and over time this figure will increase further. Targeting for zero waste is how we have to think to make us where we want to be.”

Secretary of State for Communities and Local Central authority John Denham added :

“If we continue to send reusable or compostable waste to dump we are missing a major chance to generate heat and energy and missing a chance to turn that waste into money.

We will be able to save planet while keeping cash in resident’s pockets.

I have lately set out ambitions for councils to play a larger role in tackling global warming and thinking more creatively about waste is just a method to unlock that potential.

Setting out the way in which the UK can become a zero waste country where people can do the decent thing with their waste whether at work, home or on the go, Mr Benn related :

* Britain should more than halve the amount of waste going to landfills in the following ten years, and in the new year the government may consult on what re-usable and compostable items should be controlled from rubbish heap and how a ban will work.

* In 10 years time seventy five percent of household waste will either be recycled or used for energy, and over time this figure will increase even further.

* 6 new Zero Waste Places in parts of Shropshire, Dorchester, Brixton, Newham, Hoxton and Suffolk will be made to develop cutting edge concepts to cut waste in the home, workplace and community.

* A new Zero Waste Places Standard for Local Authorities will also recognize areas which are going above and beyond national waste targets while supporting them with little grants for further development.

* New research out today shows it is possible to steer 500k tons of household waste every year thru re-using it.

* Later on this month a new public campaign will be launched, directed at inspiring folk to reconsider their approach to waste by reducing and reusing the waste they create as well continuing to reuse as much as they can.

* The govt expects Local Authorities to supply a full collection service for all recyclable items by 2020. This should include paper, card, cans, glass and plastic bottles, food and packing.

We’ll encourage Local Authorities in picking up food waste to employ the technology and funding open to them to manage the power of energy from waste.

* Publication of our aims and actions for Commercial and Commercial Waste in Britain .

This can help enterprises to use resources better and inspire them to consider what they do with their waste as well as delivering advantages for the environment.

Actions cover four areas : helping business ; working with the waste management industry ; plugging the information opening ; and inspiring cutting edge approaches.

The contract, which is for five years with a potential extension of up to a further four years, will cover four local authorities: Bristol city council (as lead authority), Bath & North East Somerset council, North Somerset council and South Gloucestershire council. Five bids were invited for the work, but only three received.

The aim of the contract is to ensure that there is sufficient treatment capacity to divert waste from landfill to meet the Authorities’ annual LATS allowances over the period 2011/12 to 2015/16. The award forms phase two of a four phase joint waste management strategy approved by the Partnership in June.

Phase one of the Partnership’s work was source segregation contracts for organic wastes. There is still the possibility that the authorities might opt for incineration as a third stage although there is some uncertainty about this. In the recent local authority elections, the Liberal Democrats won Bristol and they campaigned on the back of not having an incinerator in the region.
MBT solution

Now, New Earth Solutions will be bringing a mechanical biological treatment solution to the West of England with construction of a plant in the Avonmouth area. The plant is to be 200,000 tonnes in size and will be New Earth’s largest development to date. This allows for 80,000 tonnes of merchant capacity.

Of the 120,000 tonnes fed in to the plant, more than 50% will be reduced through losses in mass. Non-ferrous, ferrous and high grade plastics will be recovered, totalling about 15% of the input and about 15% will be used as a compost like output for land. The balance will be used for a biomass refuse derived fuel which could be used in complementary plant near the MBT facility.

Value of the contract has not yet been disclosed but is thought to be about £50 million and the plant is due to be operational in April 2011.

Councillor Carl Francis-Pester, chair of the Partnership’s joint waste management committee, said: “New Earth Solutions will provide the councils with a cleaner, cheaper and more sustainable way to dispose of residual household waste.”

Chris Cox, managing director of New Earth Solutions, told letsrecycle.com: “We are delighted to have been chosen by the West of England Partnership.”
Related links

* New Earth Solutions
* West of England Partnership

Cost of the contract is based on the principle that any contract procured by the Partnership will be operated on a partnership basis with costs shared and allocated on an equitable basis. According to the Partnership, the New Earth Solutions project requires each authority to identify and then commit, on an annual basis, the delivery of a specified volume of waste to the treatment facility.

The Partnership said: “Each authority will have a minimum tonnage assigned to it for each of the initial five years of the contract, in order that the partnership can fulfil its overall minimum tonnage obligations to the contractor. Each authority will commit to pay its share of the contract costs, the pooled haulage costs and the project management and administrative costs in respect of its guaranteed minimum tonnage for the duration of the initial five years of the contract, irrespective of whether it delivers the agreed tonnage or a lower tonnage.

More at LetsRecycle..