Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
4 June 2009
th
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION 2
Purpose 3
Agenda 3
Ground rules 3
TOWARDS ZERO WASTE – THE POLICY AND STRATEGY CONTEXT 3
Presentation 1: Draft Wales Waste Strategy – the political, environmental and social drivers
for producing a new high-level strategy 3
Presentation 2: Towards Zero Waste – the challenges ahead and finding effective
strategies to reduce our ecological footprint through an appropriate hierarchy for waste
management 3
Task 1 - List any issues with the Draft Wales Waste Strategy, problems, concerns, areas of
agreement that the group would like to highlight 3
Yellow 3
Blue 3
Green 3
Grey 3
Black 3
Municipal targets 3
Public engagement 3
Waste facilities 3
Regulation of collection 3
-3-
INTRODUCTION
This workshop held on the 4th June 2009, was designed to give participants an opportunity to
examine, review and discuss the policy and strategy context as well as the content of
“Towards Zero Waste” a draft new, high-level Waste Strategy for Wales.
The event was designed and facilitated by Dialogue by Design Limited, a company
specialising in designing and managing participatory and consultation processes. The
workshop used plenary and small group working, this report is a transcript of the notes taken
on flipchart paper and worksheets completed by participants throughout the day. Each section
starts with an explanation of the task (in the grey box).
This section of the report has been compiled by the facilitators. We have grouped the issues
highlighted by participants at the meeting according to the themes of the consultation
document and the consultation questions. Full details of all contributions made by participants
in the group-working sessions and comments, questions and answers contributed during
plenary sessions can be found on later pages of this report.
Commitment to goals:
Waste reduction
Recycling
Agree that there is good argument for some consistency of approach throughout
Wales, e.g. nationally uniform colour-coded collection boxes for different recyclable
domestic wastes, but there must be some flexibility and a pragmatic approach to
enable LAs to achieve as much as they can. e.g. home composting vs. collecting food
waste; co-mingling vs. kerbside collection – in Caerphilly and Ceredigion despite 80%
and 70% take-up rates respectively, we are nowhere near achieving recycling targets,
yet before we brought in co-mingled collections, annual recycling rates were much
lower
Are we already achieving as much as we can with recycling – secured all the quick
wins? Should we concentrate efforts elsewhere now to avoid diminishing returns on
investment?
While there may be a steady stream of raw materials, there is wide fluctuation in
demands and prices for recyclates, how is the Welsh Assembly Government’s analysis
of these soaring reflected in the strategy?
Waste Infrastructure
What happens if recycling and re-use and minimisation do not deliver and LAs,
constrained by Welsh Assembly Government’s strategy (30% limit) find the residual
treatment facilities aren’t adequate?
Landfill sites for residual waste will still be necessary
There is a long lead-in time for all waste treatment facilities, to address problems
around planning, NIMBY attitudes, long-term investment goals, PFI etc., clear targets
and goals must be set
There is not enough guidance on budgeting for these targets. Will adequate resources
be made available? Choices and different methods of dealing with waste have different
financial implications.
Funding to help realise this strategy should be made available not only for LAs, but for
commercial and social enterprises too
Will the market engagement, outreach, communication, raising public awareness be
centrally coordinated and funded?
Should targets be pooled in hubs? This would be in line with Welsh Assembly
Government’s ideals of collaborative working, and also enable benefits of economies
of scale for shared facilities
Sarah Germain – Project Co-ordinator, Waste Strategy Review Branch, Welsh Assembly
Government, welcomed the assembled group and expressed the Welsh Assembly
Government’s commitment to working with participants during the day, and beyond, to enable
interested parties to gain a thorough understanding of the political and policy context and the
drivers which have prompted the introduction of this new strategy as well as it’s aims,
aspirations and targets. She encouraged participants to contribute their thoughts, concerns,
insights and encouragement today, and follow-up by answering the consultation questions
on-line. Then, the running of the day was handed over to Catrin Ellis Jones, the lead
facilitator. Catrin introduced the day and ran through the meeting objectives, the agenda and
ground rules.
Purpose
• help participants understand the context and drivers for development of a new high-
level strategy
• provide an opportunity for those with a wide range of interest in Wales’ Waste Strategy
to explore together the ideas, aspirations, targets and framework proposals for delivery
contained in the draft document.
Agenda
Ground rules
• Phones off
• Meeting report
• Informal and productive approach to learn from Welsh Assembly Government’s,
Waste Strategy Branch representatives, as well as from one another
• Focus on enhancing the draft strategy and ideas for its eventual delivery
TOWARDS ZERO WASTE – THE POLICY AND STRATEGY
CONTEXT
This was followed by a few minutes for participants to reflect and discuss this contextual
information, before a session of questions and answers.
A: Tyres are one of the priority waste streams banned from landfill. Up to market to find
another avenue. Support may be available for businesses that are able to use or recycle
tyres. Also have Green Jobs sector.
Q: Consultation process – to what extent does it take into account One Waste One Wales and
how will it be amended if fundamental changes to these strategies occur?
A: Work closely with sustainability and climate change teams and share way forward. Totally
driven by climate change and ecological footprint. Climate change strategy is still under
consultation. Prepared to change things if consultation results suggest this but it is believed
that we are close to what is needed based on the evidence.
Q: How much consultation and who has this been with to date?
A: Consultation has been undertaken with CBI, community sector, Environment Agency,
Local Authorities, Sustainable Development Commission.
• There have also been various conferences and future direction papers. Dialogue has
been ongoing since October 2007.
• Also has been a waste forum and policy gateway à rigorous checking process against
other policies and Waste Assembly Government. Scored highly in most areas except
for arts and culture.
Q: Implementation – will there be separate consultation on sector plans and if so, when?
A: Yes, early 2010. Working with stakeholders currently – proposals are radical and want to
ensure that there is understanding of this first.
A: Cost of treating waste used to be half of that of Europe. Strong case therefore well funded
to date, need further funding for recycling – despite cuts, think this will be available. The
Welsh Assembly Government is committed to fund dealing with residual waste. Local
authorities need to find rest of funds to deal with it (find something cheaper than £72 per
tonne of landfill).
Q: How do you seek to achieve sustainability? Is there a protocol for cross-sector work? How
will people buy-in to it?
A: Strategy lists series of indicators – can only deal with waste side but important to embed in
sustainable development. Indicators useful to measure progress. Acknowledge that there is
still a way to go and others will need to follow suit.
Q: £72 per tonne is the driver; however, there is only so much land per area, so what about
the fine of £200 per tonne if this is exceeded?
A: £200 per tonne is threat of fine. Other financial incentives are also available.
Q: When the plan is finalised is this what we’ll work from for the next 40 years?
A: Tried to future proof it and look at EU policy. Have to review every five years (rain check) –
may have to adapt to change but hopefully systems can be designed to deal with future
changes required.
A: As defined by the Environment Agency in waste framework directive. Some case law
agrees / disagrees and WRAP has quality protocols. Issues around what constitutes reuse
and waste. Bulky waste by householder is different to if it was passed onto a charity. It
shouldn’t be regarded as waste if it is positively reused.
The questions were curtailed at this point, as they were pre-empting the content of the next
presentation:
This was followed by a few minutes for participants to reflect and discuss this contextual
information, before a session of questions and answers.
A: Food waste often wet therefore better to use AD rather than incineration. Also better in
terms of carbon footprinting?
Q: Route source separation – what does this mean? Will roadside collection segregation be
more bullish?
A: 80% should be source separated. Will see regarding consultation if co-mingled / mixed in
residual stream or source separated is preferred. Sector plans will be more detailed and may
be more bullish dependent on consultation outputs.
A: £55 million carrot this year and £72 million next year.
• Information on website
• Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and ecological footprinting model
• Engagement with Environment Agency to flesh out difference between two. Should be
subject to challenges.
Previous event highlighted need for education and awareness. The consultation pages outline
evidence documents. It is also important to check that they make sense and most does.
A: Ecological footprinting needs to be looked at more rather than just carbon footprinting.
A: WRAP are looking at compost markets – landscaping have a use for organic matter. Other
outlines include AD residue – if dried this could be used for fuel biomass. Preference is to get
it back to soil (P). Valuable material that we need to find a use for.
Q: Kerb-side sort à lots of money invested for new method – can the Welsh Assembly
Government bring the debate forward quickly?
A: The Welsh Assembly Government’s preferred option is kerb-side sort. Evidence is being
gathered and will be put forward shortly to minister.
Q: Impact of 70% recycling target – would investment be better spent on waste reduction?
A: In short-term the focus is on what Wales can do as do not have control over world
packaging etc. Retailers are doing more regarding packaging – might be a conference in the
future about waste minimisation.
Following these plenary discussions, the first task for groups to consider was introduced:
Task 1 - List any issues with the Draft Wales Waste Strategy, problems,
concerns, areas of agreement that the group would like to highlight
Participants were seated (according to colour coded table plans drawn up by the Welsh
Assembly Government) at five tables of 4-5 people, representing a variety of the broad range
of stakeholder interests associated with waste management. The groups were asked to follow
appropriate guidance to agree allocation of small group roles – discussion manager,
timekeeper, scribe and reporter, who would later feed back in plenary session, the group’s
key points. On some of the tables there was a participant, representing a partner organisation
that had contributed to drawing up of the draft strategy, who also has completed some
facilitation training. This participant offered to act either as discussion manager or as scribe
during this session.
Task sheets completed by the groups (denoted by different colours) are transcribed in full
below.
Yellow
• How were the targets assessed?
• Targets are unachievable because:
• No flexibility for the technologies
• Different needs à geographical location plays a part, so do collection and disposal,
systems are different by the nature of the authority
• Stops innovation
• 70% not achievable because of composition (what is the definition of zero waste?)
• Lack of sector plans before the new strategy
• Prescriptive targets leads to increase in total Municipal Sector Waste e.g. composting
target – food waste would do the same thing
• Financial aspects not considered
• We agree on the two generation approach
Summary
• We have concerns that the targets may not be achievable and not flexible enough to
take into account geographical variations.
Blue
Green
Grey
• Local authorities to have some consistency in material collection but the system needs
to be flexible to accommodate innovation in processing
• Waste systems – consistent level of raw material produced but wide fluctuation in
demands / prices for end ‘products’ (supply and demand).
• Reuse is more efficient than recycling and public perception needs to be improved with
systems available for ‘outlets’.
• Inconsistent interpretation of existing regulation and ongoing changes to there
regulations. Impacts on viability of treatment options. (Stable and consistent approach.)
• Funding shouldn’t just be for LA’s but for private and community enterprises too.
Black
During the plenary feedback session which followed, the lead facilitator invited groups to
contribute the key points they thought most worthy of examination together during this
meeting. These were listed (in the order fed-back) as:
• Municipal targets
• Aspirational
• Consequences for not achieving them
• Achievability
• Geographical variations
• Public engagement
• Capture market through national campaigns
• National campaigns relate to waste facilities (more realism required)
• Waste facilities
• Encourage people to build waste facilities
• What will happen in 2050 to these facilities?
• Targets and capping on Efw (if targets are not achieved then have to go to landfill)
• £ and carbon cost of rural collection
• Regulation of collection
During the lunch break, participants were asked to sign up for the topics listed above, which
were displayed on a wall of the room. Participants were then able to select a topic which they
felt was particularly useful to discuss today, with other interested parties.
Note: Topics examined in detail by the self selected groups are denoted by ü
Task sheets completed by the groups are transcribed in full below within tables.
Additional points discussed on each topic, by everyone during the final plenary, are outlined
beneath the tables.
Municipal targets
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Are they statutory / indicative / • Tell us… preferred option would
aspirational? be aspirational with no
• If statutory what are the consequences
consequences of non- • Needs to be clearly defined
achievement?
• Efw cap: 30% (24/25) will this be
reduced in the longer term?
• Are they achievable? Specifically
food waste
http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/epq/waste_recycling/zerowastebackgroun
d/evidence/?lang=en
• Participation relies on people’s goodwill à consider what influence they can bring to
power.
• Caerphilly (80%) and Ceredigion (70%) participation rates and not near recycling target
yet. These rates are since co-mingled has been brought in. Before this the rates were
much lower.
• Targets appear to be produced before the sector plans.
• No pooling of targets geographically even though local authorities are being asked to
work together.
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Without the sector plans we do • Can we have outline of sector
not know what infrastructure is plans for consideration, before
required or cost strategy concluded
• Only talk about treatment costs – • Need benchmarks for each type
so what about collection, market of operation if methods of working
engagement, communication and are prescribed – this should be
transport costs? How will this be funding.
funded? • Assembly needs resources to
• Need to account for the meet the targets and budgets to
financial costs to the waste assist if variable impact heavily or
industry as a result of the new unforeseen changes
targets • Clear, strong leadership to enable
• No increase in proposed funding long-term planning
to correspond with inflation. • Long term investment by Welsh
• Waste growth strategy – depends Assembly Government, local
on feedstocks authorities do not have the
• Impact on lending for waste financial capacity to deliver the
industry strategy – service costs
• Targets are so severe that will elsewhere. Clear information
impact on competition regarding penalties.
• Concern about delay until 2010 • We need direction NOW
for plans. regarding collection strategies. If
• Need strong leadership to the Welsh Assembly Government
implement / ownership is going to prescribe a particular
collection method LA’s need to
• On costs – planning,
know to enable planning and
infrastructure
funding to make it happen.
• Welsh Assembly Government
to demonstrate understanding
how budgets will be
determined. What is the Welsh
Assembly Government’s
business case to meet these
targets – public private
funding?
• Large scale waste facilities
benefit from economies of scale.
Public engagement
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Non-standard of provisions and • Standardisation: colour
recycling facilities coordination of bins and bags for
various recycling “products”
• Educate public that re-use is even
better still. Such as ‘Car boot
• Public perception ‘landfill is bad, sales’ or ‘re-use sale’
recycling is better’ • Local production, local farming
and retail farmer’s markets / food
miles
• Do we need strawberries all year
• Extensive and unnecessary round?
packaging
• Consumer consumption,
challenging the need. Customer
need or supermarket driven? • Identify more effective ways to
• Wasted money on rubbish interact with the public.
campaigns e.g. ‘Are you green or ‘Interaction, not PR’.
are you mean’ • If you know where it has come
• Public perception of from and how it’s been made
manufacturing process • Simply terms for public use e.g.
• Statistics and figures too ‘Swansea throws away enough
complex for general public to rubbish to fill the Millennium
understand stadium’
• Provide more incentive for public
to recycle e.g. ‘no-claims’
discount, reduction in council tax,
• Meeting the 70% target of vouchers etc.
recycling • Bring sites ‘recycling centre’.
Recycling credits / benefits from
recycling
• Reusing instead of recycling, for
example computers become
outdated and are not reused.
• Fly-tipping, disposal of items into • Provide public service rather than
other people’s land profit driven.
• WEEE regulations, hazardous
waste
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the
draft Wales Waste Strategy issue
• Promote hierarchy • Promote minimisation for the
o Prevention consumer and retailer. Do you
o Minimisation need that item? Do you need
o Reuse that packaging?
o Recycling • Educate public to understand
• There’s too much emphasis on difference between recycling and
the 4 , recycling
th reuse. Need to decide whether
• Life choices are critical repair is viable
• Promote reuse, delayed
purchase, so buy new energy
efficient one, when the old one
packs up and isn’t repairable, not
earlier.
Waste facilities
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Over reliance on large scale • Identify potential local schemes,
waste management facilities e.g. where applicable identify local
CHP users of energy and heat e.g.
registration scheme
• Opportunity for speedy and
transparent development of the
• The sector plan is not developed sector plan
at this moment in time • Developing symbiotic
• Cross sector working relationships i.e. food, energy
and waste
• Development of new markets,
penalties for non compliance
• Lack of development for recyclate • Public sector should be
markets exemplars in developing local
• Public sector involvement in markets for the recycled
developing local markets products.
• More consistency in advice /
regulation
• Sector plans are required for waste plan to enable comment à opportunity for
expedient development of this.
• Cross-sector working might result in clear thinking.
• Develop a clear market and penalty for non-compliance
• Public sector procurement power à if the market is there people will do it.
• EA voice needs to be consistent à same advice and enforcement nationally would help
with this.
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Stipulation of separate food • Do not be prescriptive
waste collection – extra vehicles
(£ and C)
• One size does not fit all!
• Do not be prescriptive on
collection methods
• Pooling of targets
• Information / benchmarking on
waste collection – miles per ton.
Regulation of collection
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Inconsistency across LA’s • Educate the public so they can
understand e.g. comingling
versus blue boxes. Make sure
that decisions are based on
proper information. Develop more
local facilities for collecting
materials, so economic to recycle
OR do we need different targets
for different LA’s e.g. taking
account of what’s (not) cost
effective
• Money back bottles. Post
magazines without cellophane
wrapper – just address label and
bit of tape.
Legislation to enable delivery
Issue / problem / weakness with current Opportunity / idea for resolving the issue
draft Wales Waste Strategy
• Renewable Obligation • They should be available for gas
Certificates (ROC’s) are only production
available for electricity • This is improving, need to be
• Permitting requirements more rational with decision
making, need to be more user
friendly. Advertise the waste
protocols. Work with WRAP more
closely
• Permitting grants – needs more rational decision making between local authorities, the
Environment Agency and the Welsh Assembly Government
• More on the ground help and monitoring is required à the Environment Agency have
talked now it the time for the stick.
• With regards to ‘pay as you throw’ separation is cheaper than throw all together.
Following the group working sessions, each table fed back their key points (as listed above
under each of the tables). The facilitator also asked if they wanted to make any final points,
share significant insights or ask any final questions before the meeting ended.
References to background information on website are outlined below:
Evidence base
http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/epq/waste_recycling/zerowastebackground
/evidence/?lang=en
http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/epq/waste_recycling/zerowastebackground
/appraisals/?lang=en
Participants were invited, after registration and during breaks to add their own ideas to a
“Wall of Big Ideas” to help Wales meet its waste reduction targets. Here are the ideas
contributed by participants attending the consultation event in Aberystwyth:
Change the rules, so that waste that cannot be recycled is sent back to the
manufacturer – to encourage responsible and intelligent design
Producer responsibility and free take back on tyres and gas bottles
Improve manufacturing technology – no recycling required
Have a far more profound input in the school curriculum, and get homes and schools
working together
Read the relevant chapters in “Sustainable Energy – without all the hot air”, by David
JC MacKay (it’s available as free download http://www.withouthotair.com/)
Adopt common template for all to report.
Name Organisation
Gareth Lewis Environment Agency
Beverley Hodgett Central Wales Waste Strategy
Bleddyn Jones Ceredigion County Council
Allison Cann CRAFT
Ray Quant Ceredigion County Council
Ruth Bridgewood CRAFT
David Pearce Dyfed Powys Police
Arwel Pierce Cyngor Gwynedd
Phil Marks Cylch
Emyr Jones The Planning Inspectorate
Daniel John Pembrokeshire CC
Richard Matthews IBERS Aberyswyth University
Andy Rees Welsh Assembly Government
Jason Baldwin Covanta Energy Ltd
Tim Williams Aberystwyth University
Steve Davies Ceredigion CC
Sarah Germain Welsh Assembly Government
Hayley Evans Caerphilly County Borough Council
Stephen Penny Flintshire CC
Julie Taylor Welsh Assembly Government
Alex Welnitschuk Forestry Commission
Dr John Scullion IBERS Aberyswyth University
Louise Pedreschi Flintshire CC
Adam Margetts theARCproject
Martin Peters the ARCproject