Waste Prevention- MSW & C&I

Jamie Pitcairn and Simon Stockwell

Summary of Presentation - MSW• Target• Performance• Socio-economic drivers• Current action• Possible future action – eg waste

legislation consultation• And more?? Think Tank views

MSW Target

To Stop Growth inMunicipal Waste by 2010

• From 2001 to 2006, annual MSW waste growth in Scotland was around 1.5% a year

MSW arisings

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

2001/2 2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7

Mil

lio

ns

ton

nes

Recent Performance

Socio-economic factors (-ve)• Growth in population. Latest figures by the GRO (S)

show that by 2006 Scotland’s population grew to 5,116,900

• Growth in single-person households. 35% of households had one adult (only) in 2006. Projected to be 44% by 2031. [30% in 1996]

• Economic growth• Consumerism – eg cooking time; cost of repair; cost of

new; cost of food; fashion [DEFRA]; consumer credit

Socio-economic factors (+ve)

• Newspaper sales falling

• More on-line billing

• Greater awareness

• Light-weighting etc

• Changes in the economy

What is Scotland doing? – action plan• Packaging• Life-span of products• Food waste campaign• Carrier bags• Unwanted mail• Home (and community) composting• Nappies• Social marketing• Greater re-use

More Planned

Consultation on

Waste Legislation

But what more can we do??

OVER TO THINK TANK MEMBERS

Zero WasteC&I

Commercial and Industrial

• Data not great – waste arisings relies mainly on surveys

• But we know the big generators: eg construction and demolition

• Hard to know overall waste performance. But amount going to landfill is steadily falling – permitted site returns

Waste Data- trends

C & I

(Mt)

C & D

(Mt)

2006 7.64 13*

2005 8.4 10.6

2004 8.9 7.3

*2006 – increase in number of exempt sites

Factors/Issues

• Industry mix. Scotland’s industrial base is changing - composition will change

• Planned economic growth in key sectors• Economic benefit to waste prevention 1 – 3% of

turnover can relate to waste (AEA & Cambridge Econometrics 2006)

• Corporate Social Responsibility (but does this mean anything? Are the right metrics used?)

Current Action• UK Government Landfill Tax. £8/tonne/year escalator.

£2.5 - £32/tonne• Producer responsibility – is this working?• Compulsory Site Waste Management Plans in England.• Envirowise working with Sepa and Planners to

implement SWMP. No real leadership and no clear roles/responsibilities

• Defra waste strategy – Halving C,D&E waste to landfill by 2012

• Programme support – Envirowise, WRAP, NISP

Envirowise Services

• Free advice and support• Advice-line & website• Visits – designTRACK, FastTrack• Publications, events & webinars

• Measurement and Benchmarking

• Carbon calculating tool

Envirowise

• 2006/07 programme activity• 18,000 businesses engaged with the

programme in Scotland– 67,000 web page hits– 2,100 calls to advice line– 320 visits– 26 Key Account Projects

Envirowise

• 2006 Impact Assessment*

• £13m saved by Scottish businesses• 132,000 tonnes diverted• 3,800,000 m3 water saved• 1,900,000 m3 Effluent saved• 55,000 tonnes of carbon

*Databuild – independent assessment

Increasing numbers of businesses want to act on

climate change

Envirowise helped businesses reduce carbon by between

1.1 – 1.6 million tonnes in 2005*

*Defra Impact assessment 2005

Considerations

Business Decisions include:• Proportions of raw materials

»E.g. plastic versus cardboard for packaging

• Proportions of different wastes»E.g. Plastic versus glass for bottles

Confirmed that material and water reductions are important for carbon reduction

Footprint and Resources

• Simple average of footprint from 10 companies from 6 sectors.

Composit carbon footprint

Utilities24%

Transport15%

Materials55%

Waste6%

Decision indicator - Prioritise

• Envirowise has developed a tool to help users think about how to manage their carbon footprint.

• This is only designed as an indicator, not a full-blown footprinting tool.

• Envirowise hopes this will increase understanding and focus on indirect impacts and help prioritise investments.

Conclusions and talking points

• For many sectors, resource use is key to managing carbon

• Getting across the message of indirect energy use and the implications of purchasing and location decisions will be critical

• The data for decision making is patchy, debateable, hard to access

Future Thinking - Data?• National data – needs to be better to

inform policy and decision making• Electronic database of returns• Top 20% of waste creators report data?• Planning & SWMP?

• Poor Business Data - Better data provision to the client company

• Understanding the ‘output’ – help focus attention onto ‘input’

• Agreement with waste management companies

Future Thinking - Targeting

• Specific waste streams: high volumes or high embodied carbon?

• Big companies & big tonnes• Waste prevention plans/reporting arisings• Focus on tonnes not turnover

• Sectors – Construction/Agriculture• Energy from waste?

Future Thinking - Regulation

• Policy Framework – focuses on waste management NOT waste prevention

• Packaging Directive – encourages recycling and re-use not reduction (PRNs)

• C&D – Mandatory SWMPs• Mandatory reporting by all contractors on waste

arisings and disposal• Prime contractors responsible for all waste

generated = reduction in fly-tipping

Clear Messages to Business

• Sustainable Production and Consumption • It’s raw materials, not waste.– Attitudinal change

and messaging – carbon tool, 3 planet living etc.

• Design waste out from the start, not at the end

• Construction• Manufacturing• Packaging

More Planned

Consultation on

Waste Legislation

– includes Waste Prevention Plans

But what more can we do??

OVER TO THINK TANK MEMBERS