to read the full report - Ecolateral by Peter Jones

Evaluation of 

Opportunities for 

Converting Indigenous UK 

Wastes to Fuels and 

Energy 

Report to the National Non-Food Crops Centre 

This project was managed by the NNFCC and 

funded Report/proposal by DECC. to (name of company) 

Restricted Commercial 

Restricted Commercial 

ED Numbers 

ED45551 

Issue Number 

Issue Number 1 

Date 2007 

July 2009

2 

Evaluation of Opportunities for Converting Indigenous UK Wastes to Fuels and Energy 

AEA/ED45551/Issue 1 

Title Evaluation of Opportunities for Converting Indigenous UK Wastes to Fuels 

and Energy 

Customer National Non-Food Crops Centre (NNFCC) 

Customer reference 09/012 

Confidentiality, 

copyright and 

reproduction 

Copyright AEA Technology 

This proposal is submitted by AEA Technology in response to an invitation 

to tender from the NNFCC “Review of technologies for gasification of 

biomass and wastes in the UK”. It may not be used for any other purposes, 

reproduced in whole or in part, nor passed to any organisation or person 

without the specific permission in writing of the Commercial Manager, AEA 

Technology plc. 

File reference M:\Projects\Consultancy\NNFCC\Report 

Reference number ED45551 

AEA Energy & Environment 

The Gemini Building 

Fermi Avenue 

Harwell International Business Centre 

Didcot 

OX11 0QR 

t: 0870 190 6036 

f: 0870 190 6318 

AEA is a business name of AEA Technology plc 

AEA is certificated to ISO9001 and ISO14001 

Author Name Louise Evans, Shoko Okamura, Jim Poll, Nick Barker 

Approved by Name Pat Howes 

Signature 

Date 04.09.2009



3

4 



1 Executive Summary 

Main Conclusions 

The UK has a large resource of waste materials that could be used for renewable energy. 

Data on municipal solid waste composition and arisings is very good; however data for industrial and 

commercial arisings is poor. 

Processes that deliver heat, or combined heat and power with a high heat to power ratio, give excellent 

greenhouse gas abatement potential. To maximise the benefit installations need to be sized to match the 

energy demand, rather than the tonnage of waste, resulting often in smaller installations in a multiplicity of 

locations. These will require the use of fuels with consistent properties such as graded wood chip, or 

solid recovered fuels. Processes for the production of these fuels should be regarded as important 

enabling technologies. Their technical development should be supported as should their introduction in to 

the market as a traded commodity such through the development of standards and codes. 

Anaerobic digestion for the treatment of food and other wet organic waste is technically viable and has 

substantial environmental benefits when the product gas is used to fuel combined heat and power 

installations or is cleaned for injection into the natural gas distribution system. There is however a 

potential barrier to future progress due to the constraint on land availability for the disposal of the 

digestate posed by its nitrogen content, in additional to its economic feasibility in a number if situations. 

Combustion remains the default technology for energy generation. Gasification processes are less 

developed but those that burn the product gas in a boiler seem to be a robust option with some 

advantages over conventional combustion. 

Considerable work is currently underway to develop and demonstrate the production of transport fuels 

from biomass and waste using gasification. It is likely to be several years before these technologies 

make an impact on the UK market. 

The production of pipeline gas by gasification and methanation shows great potential but there is little 

data on the benefits of the process in particular the use of the high grade heat available from the 

methanation reactor. 

The majority of thermal gasification and pyrolysis processes require regularly sized, consistent feedstocks 

underling the importance of the development of a market for traded waste fuels. 

NNFCC can make a very useful contribution by building on its strengths in information provision and 

communication with stakeholders. 

The NNFCC tasked AEA with delivering an Evaluation of Opportunities for Converting Indigenous UK 

Wastes to Fuels and Energy. Such a study requires an investigation of the UK waste arisings by type 

and by region, combined with an in depth consideration of the technologies available to convert such 

wastes and how their adoption might best be encouraged. 

This study is an important element in developing the NNFCC’s position with regard to waste utilisation 

options. The findings will enable the NNFCC to develop an appropriate and effective insight into the 

waste situation and market in the UK, and how it might be used as a resource to derive energy and fuels.



The NNFCC’s current focus is materials and energy from crops, and as a proportion of the UK’s waste 

arisings originate from agricultural activities, the opportunity therefore exists to develop a strong and 

coherent position on the utilisation of these wastes to generate energy and fuels. 

To fulfil the objectives of the task set for this study we therefore need to understand a number of aspects 

of the current and future waste industry. The most important are 

• the character and extent of the waste resource, 

• the status of those energy technologies with improved resource efficiency, and, 

• the benefits that their adoption might bring. 

• Following the review of technologies we considered what role NNFCC might have in realising 

the benefits. 

1.1 The character and extent of the waste resource 

In this study the wastes that have been identified as having the potential for conversion to fuels and 

energy have been subdivided as follows: 

• Municipal solid wastes (MSW) 

• Commercial and industrial wastes (C&I) 

• Construction and Demolition (C&D) 

• Bio-Solids (Sewage Sludge) 

• Agricultural 

o Wet residues 

o Dry residues 

• Forestry Residues 

The total UK waste arisings of all types were estimated to be 335 million tonnes in 2004 and 307 million 

tonnes in 2005. This includes nearly 100 million tonnes of minerals waste from mining and quarrying, and 

220 million tonnes of controlled wastes from households, commerce and industry. Household wastes 

represent about 9 per cent of total arisings. 

Historically, waste arisings have been shown to grow in line with, or even above, the level of economic 

growth. However, the continuation of this trend is now considered to be unsustainable, and thus the sixth 

Environment Action Programme 1 set an objective to achieve a decoupling of resource use from economic 

growth through significantly improved resource efficiency, dematerialisation of the economy and waste 

prevention. 

The premise of this study is that much of the waste that is currently disposed of through conventional 

incineration or to landfill could be used more efficiently as a feedstock for more efficient generation of 

heat and power, pipeline gas, or the production of transport fuels. 

To investigate this we first consider each waste resource from the viewpoint of its origin then from the 

perspective of its content of material that could be used for fuels. 

Municipal Solid Waste comprises a very large range of materials, and total waste arisings are 

increasing. Recycling initiatives decrease the proportion of waste going straight for disposal, and the 

level of recycling is increasing each year. Most growth forecasts use a growth rate of 0.75% per annum. 

Commercial and Industrial waste is also comprised of a very large range of materials. Overall levels of 

industrial waste are decreasing, while levels of commercial wastes are increasing. Again, recycling 

initiatives decrease the proportion of waste going straight for disposal, and the level of recycling is 

increasing each year. Growth rates have been taken as 1% per annum for commercial waste, and 0% 

per annum for industrial waste. 

1 The Sixth Environment Action Programme of the European Community 2002-2012, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/newprg/index.htm 

5

6 



Construction and Demolition waste is largely comprised of mineral waste, with small amounts of wood, 

plastics and metals. Most investigation of this waste stream has focused on recycling the mineral 

proportion into aggregate. Of the three controlled waste streams this one produces the greatest tonnage 

of waste, but has little or no fuel content. 

Bio-solids are produced from waste water treatment sites, as the main by-product. Data quality is 

generally good and in 2004/5 1.72 Mt of dry bio-solids was produced. Estimates are that this will increase 

to 2.5 Mt by 2030 due to an increasing number of households and tighter waste water and pollutions 

controls through legislation. 

Agricultural residues include manures and slurries, and straw and poultry litter. Levels of available 

straw (after traditional uses) for 2006 were estimated to be 2.9 million tonnes for the UK, while poultry 

litter with an energy content of 37 million GJ was produced. Manures and slurries from cattle were 

estimated to produce a total, collectable, 9.9 million kilograms per day of volatile solids, pigs 669 

thousand kilograms per day of volatile solids and fowls 1.8 million kilograms per day of volatile solids. 

Accurate current and future arisings are difficult to predict as the sector is highly dependent on weather, 

farming practices and markets. Residues are usually recycled to land apart from poultry litter, that is 

already approximately 50 percent is committed to energy from waste plants, and a small proportion of 

cereal 

Forestry residues arise from forests and woodlands, primary processing co-products and arboricultural 

work. Total available forestry residues in the UK are estimated to be 1,987,000 odt per annum, although 

it is unlikely this full amount could be realised for energy, and the data quality is generally uncertain. 

Some future estimations show an increase of material available, but no significant changes are expected. 

Not all waste is suitable as a renewable fuel and some waste streams contain only a proportion of 

material that could be used as fuel. Figure 1 illustrates the total quantities of waste from each of the 

streams above and the total content of materials that could be used for energy.



Total MSW 

34,400,000 tonnes pa 

Total C&I 


Total C&D 


Bio-solids 


Figure 1 Total Waste Arisings for the UK 

Estimated Food 


Estimated Paper and 

board 


Estimated Wood from 

all waste sources 


Agricultural Residues 

Total Manure 12,400,000t pa 

Straw 2,912,000t pa after 

traditional uses have been taken into 

account 

Forestry Residues 

1,987,000 odt pa 

After traditional uses have been taken into 

account 

As is apparent from these figures there is a very substantial amount of potential fuel available in the 

waste arisings from the UK. Clearly not all of these are immediately available for energy production and 

many factors can influence the amount of renewable energy that waste can contribute: 

• recycling is increasing rapidly and will reduce the availability of wood and paper; 

• pressure to reduce landfill to meet EU directives may result in take up of the more proven options 

of mass burn combustion with energy recovery, and composting, rather than more innovative 

approaches that could offer a higher energy return but require time to become established; 

• the Renewables Obligation could drive cleaner waste resources toward electricity generation 

rather combined heat and power and other more resource efficient applications. 

7

8 



These factors and how waste is collected and used generally are controlled to an overwhelming degree 

by legislation and incentives. The European Commission determine the broad direction of policy and 

further directives and UK legislation determine the detail of its execution. 

The main measures that will shape the industry and encourage the generation of energy are: 

The Renewables Obligation – rewards electricity generation from electricity for clean biomass wastes 

and CHP from all biomass wastes. 

Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation – will create a market for renewable transport fuels. 

Future heat incentives – will reward the production of heat and CHP from renewable waste. 

The Landfill Directive – sets legally binding targets for diversion from landfill of organic material from 

MSW, national legislation imposes financial penalties for non compliance. 

Waste Framework Directive – revised and updated it places an emphasis on carbon-efficient resource 

recovery and requires the bio-waste fraction of MSW to be collected separately to enable composting and 

digestion. 

The long term impact of these measures on the flow of waste materials and the proportion diverted to 

energy is not clear at present. 

1.2 The status of those energy technologies with 

improved resource efficiency 

An energy system based on the use of wastes and biomass is built up as a chain of several operations. 

Waste is collected, processed and delivered to a generating plant where it can be converted to heat, 

power or transport fuels. Each step is delivered by a different sector with its own priorities and 

constraints. 

The technologies that have been explored within this study are: 

• Processes for the manufacture of solid recovered fuels and other manufactured fuels. 

o Mechanical Biological Treatment 

o Mechanical Heat Treatment 

o Wood chips and pellet fuels 

• Technologies for the conversion of waste to energy products. 

o Combustion technologies 

o Anaerobic Digestion 

o Hydrolysis 

o Gasification 

o Pyrolysis 

Examining the processes that would offer a high energy return from the waste fuel we found that this 

could be achieved either from application in heat and CHP, or the use in advanced processes such as 

gasification and pyrolysis. Both cases require fuels that have improved properties and consistency 

compared with the raw state. Consequently we investigated processes for the manufacture of fuel 

products from waste streams as a key enabling technology. Manufactured fuels can offer the following 

benefits 

• Consistent properties that can be defined and used in contracts making the material a tradable 

commodity. 

• Physical and biological stability that makes longer term storage possible and can even out 

unbalances between the constant supply of waste and the seasonal demand for energy. 

• An opportunity to manage the properties of the fuel to achieve optimum performance from the 

energy technology.



We have identified the following manufactured fuels on sale or planned in the UK. 

• Solid recovered fuels. These fuels are produced from mixed wastes from the municipal and 

commercial stream by separating the high heating value components. 

• Graded waste wood fuels. Waste wood is collected from industry and amenity centres and 

graded depending on the level of contamination. The grades are then chipped and sold to a 

specification. 

• Clean grade wood chips from virgin materials. Wood residues for forestry and sawmills are 

chipped and potentially dried to meet a specification. 

• Domestic grade wood pellet fuel from saw mill by-product. Sawmill residues, in particular 

sawdust, is dried and compressed through a die into small cylinders. This fuel is clean, free 

flowing and suitable for small scale combustion appliances. 

• Industrial grade pellet from forestry, cereal processing residue and clean waste wood. 

This is similar to the domestic pellet but has a higher ash content and larger size. 

• Thermochemical fuels. These are chars and pyrolysis oils produced close to the point of 

arising. We also include torrefaction, or high temperature drying in this category. 

Following a review of the area our conclusions were as follows; 

• Processes are commercially available for producing fuels from MSW and C&I waste using the 

heat from composting as the energy for drying. 

• Processes for the production of fuels using thermal energy to dry and sterilise waste are currently 

being demonstrated and may offer advantages in providing a more consistent product that is 

biologically stable for longer periods. 

• Standards for fuels derived from MSW are being developed but are not as yet widely used. 

• The production of graded wood waste fuels has expanded rapidly in the last three years. 

Standards and codes are being adopted by the industry which is aiding acceptance and 

development. 

• Clean wood fuels are becoming widespread and standards and codes are being adopted by the 

industry. 

• Fuels prepared using pyrolysis and torrefaction have been proposed but as yet are not 

implemented commercially. 

• There is no technical constraint for the development of this sector although there are some non 

technical barriers remaining concerned with the adaptation of codes and standards. 

The wide variation in the physical and chemical properties of the various waste streams has led to many 

processes being developed and proposed. For example, the only energy recovery solution for the 

majority of wet wastes is anaerobic digestion - for dry wastes thermal processes such as combustion are 

more suitable. Given the wide differences in the technologies we chose to treat the conversion 

technologies in three categories; combustion, thermochemical processes, and biological processes. 

9

10 



Combustion, or incineration is by far the most common method of extracting energy from solid waste in 

most European countries, in either untreated form or as a prepared fuel. 

Our conclusions following a review of the area are as follows; 

• Combustion is a well established technology and the main technical challenges have been 

addressed. Whatever the difficulties with the properties of the fuel engineers have developed 

robust solutions that have been proven to work commercially at most scales. As a result of this, 

combustion remains the default technology for heat and power against which all new, more 

innovative, options must be measured. 

• There seems to be a combustion solution for all waste fuels. 

• There remains however significant technical uncertainty surrounding the impact of the 

composition of the waste on the performance of the heat exchange surfaces, particularly fouling 

and corrosion. 

• Other barriers remain, such as the largely negative public perception of such sites in some 

countries, notably the UK. 

• There are countless examples of combustion practice worldwide on which to draw. 

The technologies available for conversion of waste to heat and power are more widespread than those for 

conversion to transport fuels, although work is ongoing on advanced conversion for liquid biofuels. 

Combustion gasification and pyrolysis all use heat to break down the structure of the feedstock so that 

the chemical energy can be released either as heat or a fuel product. The conditions in the reactor 

determine the products. 

When combustible waste enters a high temperature environment it will first dry and then decompose into 

volatile gas and char components. 

Gasification processes use a limited supply of oxidant; usually air, to maintain both combustion 

and reducing reactions in the same reactor. Most of the energy in the fuel is transferred into the 

calorific value (CV) of the gas leaving the reactor. This gas can be burned separately in a boiler, 

engine or gas turbine. Alternatively it can be converted by a synthesis reaction to methane for 

injection to the Natural Gas Grid or liquid fuels for transport. 

In a pyrolysis process there is no oxygen and the char and volatile gas remain largely 

unchanged. The energy in the waste is retained in the CV of the gas and char removed from the 

reactor. 

There are a number of perceived advantages that are often quoted by gasification and pyrolysis suppliers 

as solutions for perceived weaknesses in the current market leader – incineration. These claims with our 

comment are shown in the Table 1 below. 

Table 1 Claims for gasification/pyrolysis with comments 

Incineration Gasification/pyrolysis Comment 

Large (Regional) size and fuel 

demand suppresses recycling. 

Small volume of hazardous 

and toxic fly ash. 

Bulky residual ash can be 

used as a aggregate. 

Can be built economically at the 

smaller sizes that can be 

integrated into local schemes. 

This remains to be 

demonstrated, but is probably 

true. 

No dioxin found in fly ash. This seems to be valid. 

Some options give low volume 

compact ash. 

Valid. Some incinerators can give 

low volume slag like ash but at a 

very high energy cost for ash 

melting.




Poor electrical efficiency and 

lack of suitable heat loads 

gives poor resource use 

efficiency. 

Some options can give very high 

electrical efficiencies. Smaller 

sizes can match heat loads 

better. Particularly as these are 

often independent of the power 

supply. 

Electricity and or heat only. Some options can be used to 

generate gas or transport fuels. 

Very few demonstrations of high 

electrical efficiency. Lack of 

enthusiasm for CHP. 

Installations in wood waste 

sector now making progress. 

True at very large scale. 

Following our review our conclusions were as follows; 

• Gasification technologies are being developed but often encounter severe technical difficulties 

when attempting the step of using the gas for power generation in an engine or gas turbine. 

• The robust approach of firing the gas in a boiler is proving reliable and a worthwhile innovation. 

These units can be produced in smaller sizes than conventional incineration and can be matched 

to heat loads in CHP and process heating applications to give potentially the best GHG 

abatement potential. 

• Gasification as a pre-treatment is likely to become more popular in cofiring as generators seek to 

increase the proportion of biomass in coal fired utility boilers. 

• There are few commercial pyrolysis plant operating on waste. 

• The use of gasification at very large scale for the production of transport fuels or pipeline 

methane is attracting increasing attention and is potentially an efficient use of resources. 

Biological processes for waste include anaerobic digestion for the production of methane fuel gas and 

the hydrolysis and subsequent fermentation to ethanol fuels of the hemi-cellulose and cellulose fractions 

of lignocellulosic materials. 

Following our review of these technologies our conclusions were as follows; 

• Anaerobic digestion processes are technically viable and available for most wet waste feedstocks 

including sewage bio-solids. 

• Using a proportion of food waste is important to the economics of anaerobic digestion due to its 

high gas generation potential and gate fee. Manures are bulky and have poor gas potential. 

• Digestate disposal is becoming difficult due to constraints in nitrogen sensitive areas. 

• Composting is a lower cost alternative to AD but does not produce energy and can be regarded 

as a competitor to AD. It is popular with waste managers due to the cost and its status as a 

recovery, rather than a disposal process. Disposal of compost to land suffers from the same 

constraints as AD digestates. 

• Hydrolysis and subsequent fermentation to alcohol fuels of the hemicellulose and cellulose 

fractions of lignocellulosic materals is still at the research stage although there are plans for 

demonstration plants in the EU and USA. These are likely to be co-located with conventional 

grain ethanol facilities. 

• Feedstocks are limited at present to clean wood and agricultural residues. 

• We question whether it should be a priority for the UK at present where clean residues are 

relatively expensive and could potentially be used in more efficient ways. 

1.3 Risks and barriers to deployment 

The risks and barriers that are faced when adopting novel technologies can be considerable. In the table 

below we first identify the main risks in deploying the technologies described above we then describe in 

more detail those that we have classed as high or medium. 

11

Table 2 Summary of Technologies and the Risks and Barriers towards adoption. 

12 



Colour of red, yellow or green signifies the risk status of the technology: red is high risk, yellow is medium risk and green is low risk. 

Risks 

Technology Technical Social and Planning Financial Regulatory 

Mechanical and 

Biological 

Treatment (MBT) 

Mechanical and 

Heat Treatment 

(MHT) 

Low Medium 

Not as divisive as an 

incinerator but still subject of 

concern as a waste 

technology. 

High 

Demonstration projects only at present. 

Combustion Low to medium 

Many commercial installations, 

however the materials handling aspects 

have proved troublesome in the UK and 

there is a lack of experience. 

Agricultural residues and poor quality 

wood fuels may give high ash contents 

that lead to problems with boiler fouling. 

Wastes regulated under WID will need 

extensive emissions monitoring 

equipment. 

Medium 

Not as divisive as an 

incinerator but still subject of 

concern as a waste 

technology. 

High 

High where used to produce 

electricity on a regional basis 

as it will be perceived as an 

incinerator irrespective of its 

efficiency or recycling 

credentials 

Medium 

Requires revenue from sale of 

fuel but market not well 

established. 

Fuel is still classed as a waste 

which may give problems with 

sale and use, and hence 

price. 

Standards and agreed 

specifications are needed to 

make the fuel product a 

traded commodity. 

Medium 

Requires revenue from sale of 

fuel but market not well 

established. 



sale and use, and hence 

price. 

Standards and agreed 

specifications are needed to 

make the fuel product a 

traded commodity. 

Medium 

Track record of delays in 

planning for waste projects 

are a disincentive. 

Wood and agricultural 

residues are normally OK in 

normal circumstances 

Medium 



sale and use, and hence price. 

The legal status needs to be 

clarified. Standards would help 

to clarify definitions. 

Medium 



sale and use hence a reduced 

price. 

The legal status needs to be 

clarified. Standards would help 

to clarify definitions. 

Medium 

Receives subsidy via the 

Renewables Obligation. 

Waste incineration directive 

compliance is usually 

necessary. 

Co-firing waste in a utility boiler 

is difficult as it would require the 

reclassification of the whole 

station as an incinerator 

Fly ash may contain dioxin and 

be classed as hazardous waste.



Technology Technical 

Risks 

Social and Planning Financial Regulatory 

Anaerobic Digestion Low 

Medium 

Low 

Medium 

Established mature technology with Not as divisive as an 


operating commercial plant in incinerator but transport of 

Renewables Obligation at an 

existence. 

slurries in rural areas is a 

enhanced rate of 2 ROCs under 

Limited experience in UK. Recent major issue and focus for 

the banding arrangements. 

incentives may stretch UK suppliers. opposition, as may be large 

Policy may change under 

Poor reputation from Holsworthy scale transport of food wastes. 

installations lifetime although 

experience. 

current practice is to maintain 

Sensitive to feedstock composition, 

the financial position of existing 

can be poisoned by trace elements. 

plant. 

The installation is classed as a 

waste management operation 

and subject to regulation as 

such which brings additional 

costs and responsibility. 

Digestate disposal is an 

important consideration and a 

change of rules could materially 

affect the operating costs of the 

installation or even prevent 

operation. 

Hydrolysis High 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

The technology remains innovative Process should be no more The combination of 

Would require additional 

with only small demonstration and difficult to implement than a expensive processing and the subsidy from Renewable 

pilot projects built so far. 

biomass power plant. need for good quality transport fuels obligation. 

Feedstocks are currently limited to 

feedstock means that product 

clean wood and agricultural 

will be more expensive than 

residues. Contamination from other 

imported ethanol for some 

sources could damage fermentation 

time. This may make it 

process. 

unsuitable for use in the UK. 

Gasification High 

Medium 

High 

Medium 

Local 

Very few operating commercial plant Likely to be located on an Poor track record of 

for power or CHP. 

Significant residual risk in gas 

cleaning for power production. 

industrial site where impacts 

can be minimised. 

gasification technologies. 



13 

Status of ash product is unclear 

under Waste Incineration 

Directive due to high carbon 

content.

14 



Technology Technical 

Risks 

Social and Planning Financial Regulatory 

Gasification High 

High 

High 

Medium 

Regional Very few operating commercial plant Where process is used Poor track record of 


for power or CHP. 

to produce electricity gasification technologies. Renewables Obligation. Status of 

Significant residual risk in gas on a regional basis as it 

ash product is unclear under Waste 

cleaning for power production. will be perceived as an 

Incineration Directive due to high 

Substantially lower risk for gas untried form of 

carbon content. 

combustion in boilers and process 

units. 

incinerator. 

Gasification Medium 

Low 

Medium 

Medium 

National Little experience of biomass For syn gas production Poor track record of 


gasification for this application but at large scale on a gasification technologies but Renewable transport fuels 

substantial coal experience. petrochemical complex. developers are likely to be obligation. Risk for change in long 

Closely allied to refinery practice. 

substantial and have track 

record of delivery. 

lead time for build. 

Pyrolysis all scales High 

High 

High 

Medium 

Operating commercial plant in Where process is used Few suppliers and uneven Receives subsidy via the 

existence for oil production little to produce electricity at track record. 


experience in energy generation. a regional scale where 

it may be perceived as 

an untried and unsafe 

incinerator. 

Low for syn gas 

production or thermo 

chemical fuel 

production where it will 

be perceived as 

another industrial 

process.



1.4 Green house gas balances 

Life cycle analyses of waste to energy chains are complex and contain a range of factors that are not 

always obvious or apparent. As part of this work we carried out analyses for a selection of routes for food 

waste and wood waste using the Defra / Environment Agency BEAT tool. We also reviewed other work 

by the Environment Agency. Our conclusions are as follows: 

• Heat applications are the most beneficial in terms of GHG abatement followed by CHP where the 

heat load is high. 

• Transport fuel production by means of gasification is predicted to be mid range. Methanation 

should be very beneficial if the high grade heat from the exothermal reaction is fully used, 

however we have no data on these systems at present. 

• Electricity production comes lower in the hierarchy as do biological transport fuel processes and 

low heat load CHP. 

• Those applications that have the highest GHG benefit, such as industrial boilers and smaller 

CHP, are those that tend to use fuels that have consistent properties that can be stored to match 

fuel supply with energy demand. These findings reinforce our conclusion that solid recovered 

fuels and other manufactured fuels are essential to the recovery of energy from waste at high 

levels of efficiency. 

• AD schemes score well due to the avoidance of methane emissions from landfill however this is 

mitigated to some extent by nitrous oxide emissions from land spreading of digestate. 

1.5 Challenges, issues and the role of NNFCC 

Throughout this report we have identified areas of uncertainty, and specific challenges that need work if 

the full potential of energy from waste is to be realised. These are set out in the table below. Most of 

these are concerned with building business confidence in the links between each of the technology steps. 

Not all of this work will come under NNFCC’s remit but a significant amount is concerned with 

coordination of stakeholders and the provision of information to the market. 

Those topics we feel are most appropriate for NNFCC initiatives are as follows: 

• Improve quality of policy and investment decision making by developing an understanding of the 

fit between SRF properties and energy production technologies. What properties does each of 

the technologies require? 

• There is a wide difference in the benefits brought by various waste to energy chains and it is 

important that policy support those that contribute the most. NNFCC could add value to current 

and future work by developing an evidence base for the design and implementation of policy and 

a hierarchy of uses for each class of resource based on environmental and social benefits 

including life cycle GHG impact. 

• To maximise the benefits of using waste for energy we will need to change current practices 

across a wide range of stakeholders. NNFCC could add value by developing an understanding of 

15

16 



the relative timeframes of structural changes and technology developments necessary to 

maximise implementation. 

• Develop a better market understanding of the impacts of increased energy usage on alternative 

and existing markets for straw and other residues. 

• Municipal and solid waste is being managed using more sustainable technologies. There is 

interest in developing these technologies on one site, so that recycling, separation technologies 

or mechanical and biological treatment and anaerobic digestion is all integrated. NNFCC could 

examine the potential energy benefits in such trends and the impact they may have on energy 

recovery from waste in general. 

1.6 System Overview 




constraints. The waste management industry prioritises safe and reliable disposal and has in the past 

selected technologies that guarantee this. 

Better matching of resources and end use should result in improved resource use efficiency and GHG 

mitigation as CHP installations can be sized to match heat loads and higher added value products are 

produced in cost effective installations that can use economy of scale. 

With the exception of conventional incineration all of the energy technologies require the feedstock to be 

treated to ensure a measure of consistency of composition and properties. In our opinion the conversion 

of waste components to consistent fuels will be a major factor in enabling more efficient alternatives to be 

deployed.



Figure 2 Material and energy flows and appropriate technology 

Arisings Fuels Local scale 

applications 

MSW 

Bio Solids 

Commercial & 

Industrial 

wastes 

Forestry 

Residues 

Agricultural 

Residues 

Solid recovered 

fuels 

Graded waste 

wood fuel 

Clean grade chips 

Domestic grade 

pellets 

Industrial grade 

pellet 

AD for 

CHP and 

grid 

injection 

Commercial 

CHP and 

District heat 

Individual heating 

installations 

AD for 

CHP 

Regional scale 

applications 

Electricity only and 

CHP (incineration) 

Industrial CHP 

Methanation for 

grid 

Electricity only 

Biological 2 nd 

gen biofuel 

17 

National scale 

applications 

Gasification for 

Transport Biofuel 

Gasification 

and 

Methanation for 

pipeline gas 

Utility co 

firing

18 

Evaluation of Opportunities for Converting Indigenous UK Wastes to Wastes and Energy 


Table of contents 

1 Executive Summary 4 

1.1 The character and extent of the waste resource 5 

1.2 The status of those energy technologies with improved resource efficiency 8 

1.3 Risks and barriers to deployment 11 

1.4 Green house gas balances 15 

1.5 Challenges, issues and the role of NNFCC 15 

1.6 System Overview 16 

Glossary 20 

2 Introduction 22 

3 UK Waste Arisings 26 

3.1 Waste Categories Investigated 26 

3.2 Data Sources and Quality 27 

3.3 Overall waste arisings in the UK 28 

3.4 Growth Rates and Future Arisings 29 

4 Arisings by Waste Type 30 

4.1 Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) 30 

4.2 Commercial and Industrial Wastes (C&I) 36 

4.3 Construction and Demolition (C&D) 41 

4.4 Bio-solids 45 

4.5 Agricultural Residues and Waste 50 

4.6 Forestry Residues 58 

4.7 Conclusions 67 

5 Arisings of components suitable for energy 69 

5.1 Waste Wood 69 

5.2 Food Waste 75 

5.3 Tallow 79 

5.4 Textiles Waste Arising 81 

5.5 Paper Waste Arisings 82 


6 Waste Management Legislation and Incentives 88 

7 Solid recovered fuels and other fuels manufactured from waste 95 

7.1 Technologies for manufacturing fuels 96 

8 Supplying Energy from Waste by Combustion 108 

8.1 Process Description 108 

8.2 Review of UK and international waste combustion practice 112 

8.3 EfW Potential 121



8.4 Conclusions for Combustion Technologies 123 

9 Biological Processes 126 

9.1 Anaerobic Digestion (AD) 126 

9.2 Composting - an alternative to Anaerobic Digestion 137 

9.3 Hydrolysis and fermentation of lignocellulose (Biological 2 nd Generation Biofuel) 

140 

9.4 Conclusions for Biological Processes 143 

10 Thermochemical processes for generating energy 144 

10.1 Gasification 145 

10.2 Pyrolysis 160 


11 Potential GHG Reductions 166 

11.1 Scenario 1: Food Waste 167 

11.2 Scenario 2: Wood Waste 170 

11.3 Other, recent GHG life cycle analyses 171 

12 Recommendations and NNFCC’s role 172 

Appendices 

Appendix 1 Further information on Waste Arisings 

Appendix 2 Waste Legislation 

Appendix 3 MBT Methods 

19

Glossary 

20 



Term Definition 

AD Anaerobic Digestion 

BERR Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform 

BFB Bubbling Fluidised Bed. 

BFM British Furniture Manufacturers 

BSE Bovine spongiform encephalopathy 

C Controlled waste 

C&D Construction and Demolition 

C&I Commercial and Industrial 

CA Civic Amenity 

CAD Centralised Anaerobic Digestion 

CEN European Committee for Standardisation 

CFB Circulating Fluidised Bed 

CHP Combined Heat and Power 

CLO Compost Like Output 

CNG Compressed Natural Gas 

CPI Centre for Process Innovation 

CSL Central Science Laboratory 

CV Calorific Value 

Defra Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 

DTI Department for Trade and Industry 

EA Environment Agency 

EfW Energy from Waste 

EPRL Energy Power Resources Limited 

EU European Union 

EU-ETS European Union Energy Trading Scheme 

F Fluidised bed burners 

FAME Fatty Acid Methyl Ester 

FDF Food and Drink Federation 

FIRA Furniture Industry Research Association 

FYM Farm Yard Manure 

G Grate burner 

GDP Gross Domestic Product 

GHG Green House Gases 

IPPC Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control 

LHV Lower Heating Value 

MBM Meat and Bone meal 

MBT Mechanical Biological Treatment 

MHT Mechanical Heat Treatment 

MSW Municipal Solid Waste 

NC Non-controlled waste 

NNFCC National Non Food Crop Centre 

NVZ Nitrate Vulnerable Zones 

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister 

odt Oven Dried Tonnes 

OSR Oil seed rape 

pa Per annum 

PAHs Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 

PCBs Poly Chlorinated Biphenyl



PPC Pollution Prevention and Control 

R21 Recycling in the Twenty First Century 

RCEP Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 

RDA Regional Development Agency 

REEIO Regional Economy Environment Input Output Model 

RESTATS Renewable Energy STATisticS database for the UK 

ROC Renewables Obligation Certificate 

RTFO Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation 

SEERAD Scottish Executive Environment Rural Affairs Department 

SEPA Scottish Environment Protection Agency 

SME Small and Medium sized Enterprises 

SNG Substitute Natural Gas 

SRF Solid Recovered Fuel 

SWMP Site Waste management Plan 

Syn-gas Synthesis Gas (comprising principally hydrogen and carbon 

monoxide and used as a feedstock for chemical synthesis.) 

TC Fuels Thermochemical Fuels (fuels prepared from pyrolysis or torrefaction 

products) 

TRADA Timber Research and Development Association 

UK United Kingdom 

USA United States of America 

UWWT Urban Waste Water Treatment 

VS Volatile Solids 

WGs Working Groups 

WID Waste Incineration Directive 

WIP Waste Implementation Programme 

WRAP Waste and Resources Action Programme 

Wt Weight 

GJ Giga joules 

ha Hectares 

kg Kilograms 

kT Kilo tonnes 

Mt Mega tonnes 

MW Mega Watts 

t Tonnes 

TWh Tera Watt hours 

21

22 



2 Introduction 

The Prime Minister announced at the Labour Conference in September 2008 that he wants the current 

target of a 60 percent cut in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, to be raised to 80 percent. He also called 

for an end to the dictatorship of oil and a transformation in our use of energy. Cuts of this magnitude 

imply a step change in the energy infrastructure of the country, and the generation of energy and fuels 

from waste sources can play a major role in delivering this step change. 

The National Non-Food Crops Centre (NNFCC) is the UK's national centre for the development and 

support of renewable materials, technologies and fuels. It was established in 2003, and has already done 

considerable work to establish supply chains and markets for these products. 

The NNFCC does not currently have a defined policy on waste. In order to develop this, it needs an upto-date 

picture of the current waste situation, and the opportunities for utilising this waste to generate 

energy and fuels. 

The NNFCC has tasked AEA with delivering such a study, which is an important element in developing its 

position in this area. The findings will enable the NNFCC to develop an appropriate and effective insight 

into the waste situation and market in the UK, and how it might be used as a resource to derive energy 

and fuels. The NNFCC’s current focus is materials and energy from crops, and as a proportion of the 

UK’s waste arisings originate from agricultural activities, the opportunity therefore exists to develop a 

strong and coherent position on the utilisation of these wastes to generate energy and fuels. 

Sustainable development is a cause for increasing concern within the waste sector. The main concerns 

are focussed around: 

• global warming methane gas from landfill sites; 

• natural resource depletion, and; 

• local environmental pollution to land, water and air. 

The outcome of these concerns has been the recognition at international, European and national levels 

that large-scale reliance on landfilling of waste is unsustainable. This has resulted in the introduction of 

legislation at both European and national levels that promotes a waste treatment hierarchy that places of 

waste prevention and minimisation as the most desirable option and disposal to landfill the least. This 

hierarchy is set out in the well known diagram below.



Figure 3 Waste hierarchy 2 

In the current waste hierarchy, energy generation is one form of recovery. Such a classification 

recognises that many of the other options are, at present, more resource efficient than the technologies 

used to produce energy from waste. However, it is recognised that such classifications may alter in the 

future as technologies that have better resource efficiencies become available. This report identifies these 

technologies, outlines their potential and explores the barriers that may stand in the way of adoption. 

Anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis and gasification are typical of these technologies and have the potential to 

be more resource efficient ways of extracting energy and higher value products from waste. This can be 

in the form of electricity, combined heat and power, methane for transport fuel or grid injection, chemicals 

and liquid transport fuels. Although progress has been identified in the UK and elsewhere these 

technologies remain technically less well developed than conventional methods and may demand a 

degree of upstream fuel preparation that will be innovative in the UK. 

To fulfil the objectives of the task set for this study we therefore need to understand a number of aspects 

of the current and future waste industry. The most important are 

• the character and extent of the waste resource, 

• the status of those energy technologies with improved resource efficiency, 

• the demands they place on upstream waste management, 

• and the benefits that their adoption might bring. 

Our report is therefore structured as follows: 

Waste Arisings 

It is important to establish a baseline for the arisings of waste in the UK, particularly on a regional basis, 

as many of the potential solutions will require stable, locally sourced feed stocks for a considerable 

number of years. 

Total arisings for the three categories of controlled wastes are well recorded, for Municipal Solid Waste 

(MSW), Commercial and Industrial waste (C&I) and Construction and Demolition waste (C&D). Within 

these categories the composition proportions have been the focus of a number of studies, particularly for 

MSW. Wastes that do not fall within these categories are less well recorded and studied, and 

consequently less accurate arisings figures are generated. 

2 Image taken from Waste in Context, Select Committee on Science and Technology Sixth Report, July 2008, 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200708/ldselect/ldsctech/163/16305.htm 

23

24 



The waste arisings chapters have been set out as follows: 

• Chapter 3: UK Waste Arisings 

A summary of the UK waste categories in general and sub-categories frequently cited as suitable 

for conversion. 

• Chapter 4: Waste Arisings by Type 

A discussion of arisings on a regional basis of the main waste categories including MSW, C&I, 

C&D, Bio-solids, Agricultural Residues and Forestry Residues. 

• Chapter 5: Arisings of components suitable for energy 

An exploration of the waste materials commonly quoted as suitable to recover energy, but spread 

over a range of waste streams, including waste wood, waste food, tallow, textiles and paper and 

board. 

• Chapter 6: Waste Management Legislation and Incentives 

Legislation and incentives that affect the generation and treatment of wastes. 

Technology Options 

Chapters 7 to 10 describe how the waste can be converted to energy. They cover processes that supply 

heat, electricity, transport fuels and methane for injection to the national transmission system. These 

technologies are available at a range of sizes that make them suitable for many locations and end users. 

The physical and chemical properties of the waste often determine the solution used for waste 

management. For example, at the moment the only energy recovery solution for the majority of wet 

wastes is anaerobic digestion. For dry wastes (e.g. waste wood) thermal processes such as combustion 

are the best solution at present. 

The technology chapters have been set out as follows: 

• Chapter 7: Solid recovered fuels and other fuels manufactured from waste 

Processes and products that transform waste into consistent tradable products. 

• Chapter 8: Energy from Waste using conventional thermal processes 

Combustion for heat, combined heat and power and power only. Also co-firing with coal in a 

utility boiler. 

• Chapter 9: Energy from Waste using Biological Processes 

Anaerobic Digestion to produce power, CHP and gas for injection into the national gas grid, with a 

comparison to composting, and the hydrolysis and fermentation of lignocellulosic material to 

produce alcohols for transport fuels. 

• Chapter 10: Gasification and Pyrolysis processes for the generation of energy 

Thermal gasification for subsequent methanation and injection into the national grid at both high 

and low pressures and gasification and pyrolysis for conversion to transport fuels or methane. 

Each chapter gives a brief description of the main technologies, with an indication of technical status, 

scale of operation, risks and barriers to deployment and by-products. Following this description we 

discuss the UK market situation and give examples of domestic and international practice. The rationale 

for the content is given below 

Chapter 11 considers two different waste materials, food waste and wood waste, and explores the GHG 

savings that could be achieved if they were converted to energy rather than disposed of in the current 

way. 

Chapter 12 sets out our proposals to NNFCC for their possible future role in this area. Throughout the 

report we identify areas of uncertainty, and specific challenges that need work if the full potential of 

energy from waste is to be realised. We believe NNFCC are ideally placed to contribute in a number of 

ways to facilitate these changes.



System Overview 




constraints. 

With the exception of conventional incineration all of the energy technologies require the feedstock to be 

treated to ensure a measure of consistency of composition and properties. In our opinion the conversion 

of waste components to consistent fuels will be a major factor in enabling more efficient alternatives to be 

deployed. We have therefore included a chapter describing the technologies used to manufacture these 

fuels. 

Technical status 

The waste management industry prioritises safe and reliable disposal and has in the past selected 

technologies that guarantee this. Whilst for completeness we describe these more conventional solutions 

this report, concentrates more on wastes as a resource from the point of view of energy and looks in 

more detail at those technologies with higher levels of energy efficiency. 

Scale of operation 

We consider that energy conversion technologies fall into three broad categories depending on their scale 

of operation: 

Local, where the output is typically less than 2 MW and supplies small premises and industries. 

These operations are suitable for bulky or wet wastes or for smaller energy users that can use 

clean feedstocks that do not bring with them additional costs for regulatory compliance or 

pollution control equipment. Typical technologies in this category are anaerobic digestion, and 

combustion for heat and small CHP. 

Regional where the output is typically less than 50MW and supplies major users, district heating 

networks and national electricity and gas networks at the distribution level. These operations are 

suitable for most wastes and include traditional incineration of municipal wastes. Other 

technologies would be industrial scale CHP using combustion or gasification, merchant power 

stations and gasification and subsequent methanation for injection into the natural gas distribution 

network at low pressure. Fuel supplies will typically be upgraded waste fuels and agricultural 

residues. 

National, where the output is typically over 50MW and supplies transport fuel and grid connected 

synthetic natural gas and electricity. They are major infrastructure projects located on industrial 

complexes. The need to transport and store large quantities of fuel restricts the choice to 

relatively dense products. Co-firing at a utility coal fired station also comes in this category. 

Risks and barriers 

Innovative processes in the waste management market face a wide range of technical and non technical 

risks and barriers to deployment. For each technology we discuss these and the relationship with the 

technical status. 

Examples of UK and international practice 

Many countries are ahead of the UK in implementing new technologies and there is much to learn. 

Consequently we describe examples that demonstrate the application of new or strategically important 

technologies for energy from waste. 

25

26 



3 UK Waste Arisings 

In this chapter we bring together the current overall estimates of how much waste is produced annually in 

the UK, its composition and source. These basic figures are fundamental to an understanding of the 

energy potential of the waste resource and the types of technologies that could be used to access it. We 

also discuss future trends and a methodology of waste categorisation that is more appropriate for energy 

use. 

3.1 Waste Categories Investigated 

The UK Government and the EU commonly group waste arisings into the following categories: 

• Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 

• Commercial and Industrial (C&I) 


• Bio-Solids (previously known as Sewage Sludge) 

• Agricultural Wastes 

• Dredged material 

• Minerals (Mining and Quarrying) 

While this level of breakdown is useful for identifying quantities and trends, it does not provide a break 

down for many of the waste streams that are of particular interest for this study. 

In this study the wastes that have been identified as having the potential for conversion to fuels and 

energy have been subdivided as follows: 

• Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) 

• Commercial and Industrial wastes (C&I) 


• Bio-Solids (Sewage Sludge) 

• Agricultural 

o Wet residues 

o Dry residues 

• Forestry Residues 

Mineral and dredging wastes have not been covered, as these waste streams have no practicable 

content that would be available for conversion to energy or fuels. 

A range of waste materials that are highly suitable for energy but their arisings are dispersed over several 

categories. An emerging trend is to combine resources from several streams as feedstock for an energy 

plant. We have considered these dispersed arisings as a set of new subcategories. These are: 

• Food waste – arising from MSW and C&I waste 

• Wood waste – arising from MSW, C&I waste and C&D waste 

• Tallow – arising from C&I waste 

• Textile – arising from MSW and C&I waste 

• Paper and board – arising from MSW and C&I waste. 

In the following Sections these waste streams and materials have been described in terms of a definition, 

the composition of each stream, and the arisings by region.



3.2 Data Sources and Quality 

The information on waste arisings in this study has been obtained for a wide range of sources, such as 

the surveys conducted by the Environment Agency (EA) in England and Wales, and the Scottish 

Environmental Protection Agency in Scotland, National Agricultural Surveys, publicly available reports 

from the UK Government and Devolved Administrations, as well as many reports and surveys carried out 

by waste action groups. The specific data source is detailed and referenced at the point of discussion. 

Across the UK information on different types of waste is collected for a variety of reasons, and so data for 

one type of waste may not be directly comparable with another type. For example data on MSW arisings 

is collected from the point of view of the source of arisings and management of the waste. Meanwhile 

some commercial and industrial wastes have data collected only from waste that has been treated, as the 

treatment facility is registered. So there are waste arisings potentially going unrecorded. It would be fair 

to say that, understandably, waste data has always been collected from the point of view of disposal as a 

nuisance rather than as an energy resource. 

The UK Government has recognised that a lack of information on the arisings of specific waste streams 

and their growth rates is hampering both the development of an effective waste strategy for household 

and other waste streams and the ability to measure and monitor progress effectively. Consequently, as 

part of the Waste Implementation Programme (WIP), work on obtaining better data is being taken forward 

jointly with the Environment Agency to provide a sound evidence base for improved waste management 

policy development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation at both national and local levels. 3 

The first part of WIP, which has already been implemented, is Waste Data Flow, which will provide 

quarterly data on arisings and management of municipal solid waste. The next phase is the Waste Data 

Strategy, which will include data on both commercial and industrial waste and construction and demolition 

waste, and started to produce data during 2007. A central principle of the data strategy is that costly 

surveys should be replaced wherever possible by better use of administrative data. In particular, better 

use should be made of data received by the Environment Agency from waste operators as part of their 

permit requirements. The final phase will address agricultural, forestry, fishing, mines and quarries 

wastes, bio-solids and dredging spoils. 

Large scale industrial sites are covered by PPC (Pollution Prevention and Control permit), and the 

Environment Agency has a list of all of these sites, which include large scale incinerators and waste 

treatment facilities. PPC also covers recycling facilities, such as paper mills. The PPC thresholds for 

treatment plants (chemical, biological, thermal) are 10 tonnes per day for hazardous waste and 50 tonnes 

per day for non-hazardous waste. Waste management licences cover facilities with lower capacities. 

The Environment Agency collect data from all facilities that have a waste management license. As these 

include all landfill sites, then good quality data on the amount of waste landfilled is available. However, 

there are a number of gaps in the data on amount of material recycled. For example: 

• Paper merchants are exempt from Waste Management Licensing and are not required under 

the regulations to provide data. 

• Not all paper mills are covered by PPC, and PPC facilities currently do not have to provide 

data on the inputs of materials processed (if the paper mill is registered as an accredited 

reprocessor under the Packaging Regulations, then data on the amount of packaging 

processed are available) 

• No data are collected on green list wastes (such as paper), which are exported for recycling 

from England and Wales (however, data on exported packaging are available). 

3 Delivering Data for Monitoring Waste Strategy 2007, Defra 2008, 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastedatahub/download/delivering_data_for_monitoring_wastestrat07.pdf 

27

28 



There is also little data on the amount of C&D waste used at licensed exempt sites (sites which are 

registered as exempt from waste licensing requirements). 4 However, changes in PPC requirements 

mean that all sites will have to provide data on waste inputs, and proposed changes will require reporting 

of data on the amount of C&D waste used at registered exempt sites. These changes will improve the 

quality of data on the amount of waste recycled when they have been fully implemented, and together 

with other changes, should improve the overall quality of data on arisings of both C&I and C&D waste by 

2012. 

3.3 Overall waste arisings in the UK 

The most recent and accurate UK wide estimates for waste arising are for 2004 and 2005. The total 

figure for 2004 is 335 million tonnes of waste, 5 while estimates for 2005 put the figure at 307 million 

tonnes of waste. 6 Figure 4 shows the estimated proportion produced by each sector. This includes nearly 

100 million tonnes of minerals waste from mining and quarrying, which is not subject to control under the 

EU Waste Framework Directive, and 220 million tonnes of controlled wastes from households, commerce 

and industry (including construction and demolition wastes). Household wastes represent about 9 percent 

of total arisings. 

Figure 4: Arisings of waste in the UK in 2004 

Estimates shown in the chart are mainly based on data for 2004 except for estimates of bio-solids which 

relate to 2005 and construction and demolition waste which relate to 2002/03. The figure for construction 

and demolition wastes includes excavated soil and miscellaneous materials as well as hard materials, 

such as brick, concrete and road planings. 

4 Registered Exempt sites are sites which are notified by the site operator as being exempt from waste management licensing (though not exempt from 

waste regulation) and where this exemption has been placed on the public register by the Environment Agency. 

5 Key facts about Waste and Recycling, Defra, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/kf/wrkf02.htm 

6 Defra Environmental Statistics, www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/download/xls/wsr_data_2006.xls



Wastes from mining, quarrying, and dredged material contain no usable material and will not be 

considered further in this report. 

Waste from the agriculture sector represents less than 1% of total arisings. This waste, which excludes 

manures or straw, and covers items such as packaging, silage plastics and unused pesticides, came 

under the same legislative controls as other controlled wastes in May 2006. The arisings of manure and 

slurry were estimated as 45 million tonnes in 2002/03. If this waste is included in total waste arisings, 

then the total amount of waste produced in the UK in 2004 was 380 million tonnes. 

Other wastes, which include forestry wastes and fishing wastes, represent about 1% of total waste 

arisings. 

Table 3 presents the most recent published data for arisings of MSW, C&I waste and C&D waste in 

England, Wales 7 , Scotland and Northern Ireland. The total arisings of these waste streams is 236 million 

tonnes per annum. England produced 79% of the total arisings of these waste streams, and MSW 

represents about 15% of these waste streams. 

Table 3: Waste arisings (‘000,000 tonnes) in the UK 

England Wales Scotland 8 Northern 

Ireland 

Total 

MSW 28.5 9 1.8 10 3.0 1.1 11 34.4 

C&I waste 67.9 12 5.3 13 7.8 1.6 14 82.6 

C&D waste 89.6 15 12.2 16 11.8 5.0 17 118.6 

Total 186.0 19.3 22.6 7.7 235.6 

3.4 Growth Rates and Future Arisings 

In order to plan for future waste management requirements, it is clearly important to be able to estimate 

future waste arisings. These can be determined by applying growth rates to the estimates of current 

waste arisings. 

Historically, waste arisings have been shown to grow in line with, or even above, the level of economic 

growth. Consequently, if this trend continues, a 3% pa. growth in waste would result a doubling of waste 

arisings in 20 years. However, the continuation of this trend is now considered to be unsustainable, and 

thus the sixth Environment Action Programme 18 set an objective to achieve a decoupling of resource use 

from economic growth through significantly improved resource efficiency, dematerialisation of the 

economy and waste prevention. 

7 A new survey to determine C&I waste arisings in Wales is currently being conducted; the findings are expected to be published by Summer 2009. 

8 Waste Data Digest 8: Key facts and trends. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, 2008 

9 Defra - http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/bulletin08.htm 

10 Municipal Waste Management Report for Wales, 2007-08. Statistics for Wales, October 2008 

11 Municipal Waste Management Northern Ireland 2005/06 Summary Report, December 2006 

12 Environment Agency 2006 – Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2002/03 

13 Environment Agency Wales, http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/aboutus/organisation/35675.aspx 

14 Commercial & Industrial Waste Arisings Survey 2004/05. Environment & Heritage Service, March 2007 

15 Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England, 2005; Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste. Report for 

Department for Communities and Local Government by Capita Symonds Ltd, in association with WRc plc, February 2008 

16 Survey on the arising and management of construction and demolition waste in Wales in 2005-06. Environment agency Wales 

17 Construction and demolition waste survey. Environment and Heritage Service (EHS), 2004 

18 The Sixth Environment Action Programme of the European Community 2002-2012, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/newprg/index.htm 

29

30 



4 Arisings by Waste Type 

In this Chapter we consider the total arisings for the major wastes and residues on a national and regional 

basis. We discuss these in this chapter according to their origin. 

The waste streams considered are: Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW); Commercial and Industrial wastes 

(C&I); Construction and Demolition (C&D); Bio-solids; Agricultural residues, both Wet and Dry residues, 

and; Forestry Residues. 

The regional subdivisions used were the 9 regional development areas for England, as well as the 

devolved regions of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Where reliable information is available, the 

disposal route used by each region for the wastes and residues has also been discussed, although there 

is little information for many waste streams. 

4.1 Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) 

4.1.1 Definition 

Municipal Solid Waste, commonly referred to as MSW is waste collected by, or on behalf of, a local 

authority, which has a legal duty to manage such wastes. MSW is comprised of: 

• household waste 

• civic amenity waste 

• recycling centre arisings 

• street litter 

• fly-tipped waste 

• commercial waste collected by local authorities. 

52% 

10% 

10% 

4% 

24% 

Figure 5 Sources of Municipal Waste 

Non-household sources 

Other Household 

sources 

Household recycled 

Civic amenity sites



4.1.2 Composition 

As MSW comprises largely of household wastes, a considerable range of materials are included, for 

example food waste, garden waste, plastics, metals and paper are commonly present. In addition 

domestic hazardous and toxic waste may also be present, such as medication, paints, fluorescent tubes, 

spray cans, and batteries to name only a few. Table 4 shows a detailed breakdown of constituent 

materials, taken from a survey conducted in Wales, which could be considered typical of the UK. 19 

Table 4 Composition of MSW 

Waste Category Weight Weight 

Suitable for thermal processes 

(‘000 tonnes) (%) 

Newspapers and magazines 147.3 9.0 

Recyclable paper 34.0 2.1 

Cardboard boxes/containers 84.4 5.1 

Other paper and card 79.2 4.8 

Refuse sacks and carrier bags 20.5 1.3 

Packaging film 22.1 1.3 

Other plastic film 3.0 0.2 

Dense plastic bottles 27.1 1.7 

Other packaging 24.3 1.5 

Other dense plastic 22.2 1.3 

Textiles 30.3 1.8 

Shoes 5.9 0.4 

Disposable nappies 37.7 2.3 

Wood 46.3 2.8 

Carpet and underlay 23.9 1.5 

Furniture 24.3 1.5 

Other miscellaneous combustibles 59.8 3.6 

Total 

Suitable for composting or thermal 

692.3 42.2 

Garden waste 

Suitable for AD or composting 

208.7 12.7 

Kitchen waste 257.1 15.7 

Other organics 34.3 2.1 

Total 

Not suitable for energy recovery 

291.4 17.8 

Packaging glass 87.0 5.3 

Non-packaging glass 8.1 0.5 

Ferrous food and beverage cans 27.8 1.7 

Other ferrous metal 51.6 3.1 

Non-ferrous food and beverage cans 5.6 0.3 

Other non ferrous metal 7.7 0.5 

White goods 13.9 0.8 

Large electronic goods 3.1 0.2 

TVs and monitors 4.8 0.3 

Other WEEE 10.9 0.7 

Lead/acid batteries 3.7 0.2 

Oil 1.0 0.1 

Identifiable clinical waste 2.7 0.2 

Other potentially hazardous items 5.0 0.3 

Construction and demolition waste 85.9 5.2 

Other MNC 45.3 2.8 

Fines 86.0 5.1 

Total 450.1 27.3 

As can be seen there are substantial quantities of material that are suitable for energy use either by 

thermal processes or anaerobic digestion. 

19 The composition of municipal solid waste in Wales. Report by AEA for the Welsh Assembly Government, December 2003. 

31

32 



4.1.3 Current Arisings on a National and Regional basis 

MSW currently represents approximately 9% of total waste arisings. Final estimates of municipal waste 

arisings and management for England and the regions in 2007/8 were published in November 2008. 20 

Table 5 shows the arisings of MSW in each of the English regions in 2007/08. The South East has the 

highest arisings, followed by London. The latest MSW arisings data for Northern Ireland, Scotland and 

Wales are also shown below in Table 5, and allow an overview of the UK MSW arisings to be presented. 

Table 5: MSW arisings in the UK by region and Country in 2007/08 

Region MSW Arisings 

(‘000 tonnes) 

East Midlands 2,413 

East of England 3,034 

London 4,154 

North East 1,512 

North West 4,052 

South East 4,563 

South West 2,929 

West Midlands 2,984 

Yorkshire and Humber 2,865 

England - Total 28,507 

Northern Ireland 1,100 21 

Scotland 3,000 22 

Wales 1,800 23 

UK - Total 34,400 

Although the recycling rate has increased (see Table 6), 62% of MSW arisings in England are currently 

landfilled. 24 

Table 6 MSW Recycling Rate 

Year England 

(Wt %) 

Wales 

(Wt %) 

Scotland 

(Wt %) 

Northern 

Ireland 

(Wt %) 

2000/01 12.3 - - - 

2001/02 14.0 8.4 - - 

2002/03 16.0 12.5 8.0 - 

2003/04 19.0 17.7 12.1 - 

2004/05 23.5 21.7 17.5 18.2 

2005/06 27.2 25.5 24.4 23.2 

2006/07 30.6 29.9 28.5 25.5 

2007/08 34.0 33.6 Report due in Report due in 

* Not published yet 

2009* 2009* 

A significant proportion of MSW is now recycled. The increase in the recycling rate is due to both 

Government recycling targets and the need for local authorities to meet the 2010 target for landfilling 

20 Defra Statistical Release 352/08, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/archive/mwb200708_statsrelease.pdf 

21 Municipal Waste Management Northern Ireland 2005/06 Summary Report, December 2006 


23 Municipal Waste Management Report for Wales, 2007-08. Statistics for Wales, October 2008 

24 Results from WasteDataFlow http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/bulletin.htm



biodegradable waste. The increase in recycling rates is mainly due to the introduction of kerbside 

collection schemes for dry recyclable materials (paper, glass, metal and plastic) and garden waste. 

Increasing the recycling rate to the 2020 target of 50% will require large-scale collection of food waste 

from households; the England waste strategy promotes this because of both landfill gas reduction and 

energy recovery if food waste is treated using anaerobic digestion. 

Table 7 shows the arisings and management of MSW in each of the English regions in 2007/08. This 

table illustrates the considerable variations in the pattern of waste management as a result of population, 

socio economic factors and policy. For example, London has the lowest recycling rate in percentage 

terms but has a high tonnage, while the South West has the highest percentage rate but lower tonnage 

A total of about 10 million tonnes of MSW arisings in England were either recycled or composted in 

2007/08. 

Table 7 Management of MSW in English regions in 2007/08 

Region MSW Arisings 


Recycled or 

Composted 

(Wt %) 

Energy 

Recovery 

(Wt %) 

Landfilled 

(Wt %) 

East Midlands 2,413 40 7 53 

East of England 3,034 40 2 58 

London 4,154 22 22 56 

North East 1,512 29 13 58 

North West 4,052 36 2 62 

South East 4,563 37 12 51 

South West 2,929 41 - 59 

West Midlands 2,984 32 30 38 

Yorkshire and Humber 2,865 30 10 60 

England - Total 28,507 34 11 55 

Northern Ireland 1,100 28 - - 

Scotland 3,000 32 2 66 

Wales 1,800 33 1 65 

UK- Total 34,407 127 - - 

The amount of waste which is landfilled will reduce due to both further increases in recycling rate and the 

increasing capacity for waste treatment which will enable local authorities to meet the 2013 and 2020 

targets set by the Landfill Directive (this will also increase the percentage of waste which has energy 

recovered from it). 

4.1.4 Growth Rates and Future trends 

The growth in household waste (and hence MSW) is due to two key factors: 

• An increase in the number of households, and 

• Growth in waste produced per household due to increased consumption. 

Waste minimisation and re-use initiatives 25 aim to tackle the growth in waste produced by a household. 

However, even if these initiatives were to reduce the growth in waste per household to zero, then arisings 

of household waste would still increase as a result of an increase in the number of households. 

25 International Waste Prevention and Reduction Practice: Final Report. Report by Enviros for Defra, October 2004. 

33

34 



One European study has assessed the factors affecting household consumption, and the effects on the 

environment (resource use, energy use and waste). 26 Another European study developed a model which 

assesses the effects of food, recreation, ‘infotainment’, care, clothing, and housing on waste growth and 

used this to model four scenarios which all assumed continued economic growth but had different future 

lifestyles. 27 The results of both showed that waste continued to grow - sometimes considerably higher 

than GDP growth rate, sometimes in line with GDP growth rate, and sometimes at lower than GDP growth 

rates. 

Data on MSW arisings from a number of European countries from 1997 to 2003 indicate that in some 

countries (e.g. Belgium and the Netherlands) waste arisings are growing more slowly than GDP growth. 28 

The data also suggests that countries that have higher MSW recycling rates are seeing lower growth 

rates in MSW arisings; this may be because the impacts due to many years of publicity/education 

information on waste awareness and recycling are now becoming noticeable. However, this trend does 

not appear to be evident in either France or Germany. 

Figure 6 shows that the arisings of MSW in England increased from 24.6 million tonnes in 1996/97 to 29.4 

million tonnes in 2002/03. This represents an average growth rate of about 3% per annum. However, 

there has been little growth in arisings since then; the overall arisings of 29.1 million tonnes in 2006/07 

were lower than the arisings of 29.4 million tonnes in 2002/03, and the arisings in 2007/08 reduced to 

28.5 million tonnes, which was lower than that in 2001/02. 

Million tonnes of MSW 

35,000 

30,000 

25,000 

20,000 

15,000 

10,000 

5,000 

0 

1996/97 

1997/98 

1998/99 

1999/2000 

2000/01 

2001/02 

2002/03 

Year 

2003/04 

2004/05 

2005/06 

Figure 6: MSW arisings (‘000 tonnes) in England 1996/97 to 2007/08 

Although MSW arisings grew at an average of 3% per annum from 1997/98 to 2000/2001, the average 

rate of growth since then is now averaging less than 1% per annum. There are a number of possible 

reasons for this lower growth rate: 

• Waste minimisation campaigns (these usually take at least 5 years to show any noticeable effect) 

• Lower arisings of garden waste collected due to a combination of dryer summers and an increase 

in the amount of material that is home composted 

• Restrictions placed on the types of waste taken to the household waste recycling centres. 

2006/07 

26 Household Consumption and the Environment. European Environment Agency Report 11/2005. 

27 Scenarios of Household Waste Generation in 2020. Report by Joint Research Centre for the European Commission, June 2003. 

28 Eurostat - ec.europa.eu/eurostat 

2007/08



There are a number of predictions for future MSW arisings: 

• A model created by the Future Foundation in 2006 assessed the impact of lifestyle changes on 

household waste arisings in the UK. 29 This model has a base case scenario in which waste 

quantities grow at an average of over 2% per annum from 2005 to 2020. 

• Another model by Oakdene Hollins in 2005 predicted future waste arisings based on national 

waste strategies and the need to meet various legislative targets. 30 This model has a base case 

growth rate of 2% per annum from 2005 to 2020. 

These models predict average growth rates of between 1% and 2% per annum, and the Waste Strategy 

2007 developed four growth scenarios for MSW in order to assess a range of possible future outcomes to 

2020: 

1. 2.25% per annum reflecting recent trends in growth in consumer spending; 

2. 1.5% per annum in line with national waste growth in the five years to 2004/05; 

3. 0.75% per annum, in line with current projections of household growth and reflecting more closely 

national waste growth in the five years to 2005/06; and 

4. 0% growth, representing the possibility that waste growth will be decoupled from household and 

economic growth. 

It is unlikely that scenario 4 (0% growth) will occur due to Government policy regarding future house 

building (even if a waste minimisation programme reduces the level of growth of waste in a household to 

0%, the arisings of MSW will increase because of the increase in the number of houses). 31 It is also 

unlikely that scenario 1 (2.25% growth) will occur due to the emphasis on future waste minimisation in the 

new national waste strategy. Consequently, most growth forecasts use growth rates for MSW of 0.75% 

per annum as this reflects Scenario 3 in the national waste strategy, and this growth rate has been used 

to estimate future arisings of this stream. 

One type of waste that is now covered by European and UK legislation with the aim of reducing the 

amount sent to landfill is biodegradable waste. The intention here is to reduce the uncontrolled release of 

greenhouse gas emissions into atmosphere. The Landfill Directive also requires waste to be pre-treated 

prior to disposal. This has significant implications for energy applications as such waste will be available 

as a segregated feedstock, potentially advantageously pre-treated. 

4.1.5 Conclusion 

In total the UK produced 34.4 million tonnes of MSW in 2008. UK local authorities have significant targets 

to meet in terms of recording information, segregating and recycling the waste and landfill diversion. 

Largely due to these requirements on the local authorities this waste stream is one of the best recorded 

and understood. 

There has been little growth in the volume of MSW produced in the UK since 2002, thought to be due to a 

combination of recycling schemes, reduced garden wastes due to dryer summers and increased controls 

on disposals accepted at civic amenity sites. 

MSW contains a wide range of materials, although this range is decreasing as recycling initiatives 

become more wide spread and more material diverse. Although recycling rates continue to increase 

each year overall, 62% of MSW is still currently landfilled in England. 

29 

Modelling the Impact of Lifestyle Changes on Household Waste Arisings in the UK. Report by the Future Foundation and Social Marketing Practice 

for Defra 2006. 

30 

Quantification of the Potential Energy from Residuals (EfR) in the UK. Report by Oakdene Hollins for The Institution of Civil Engineers and The 

Renewable Power Association, March 2005. 

31 Opinion of internal AEA expert. 

35

36 



Most growth forecasts use growth rates for MSW of 0.75% per annum as this reflects Scenario 3 in the 

national waste strategy. This suggests that MSW will be a stable source of feedstock for energy in the 

foreseeable future. 

Increasing the recycling rate to the 2020 target of 50% will require large-scale collection of food waste 

from households; the England waste strategy promotes this because of both landfill gas reduction and 

energy recovery if food waste is treated using anaerobic digestion. This is a significant opportunity to 

recover renewable energy. 

4.2 Commercial and Industrial Wastes (C&I) 


Commercial and Industrial wastes are those arising from premises used for industry, trade or business. 

In 2002/3 Industrial and Commercial waste in England totalled 68 million tonnes. Of this about 38 million 

tonnes was attributable to industry and 30 million to commerce. 


The individual sector that produced the most waste was the retail sector, which generated nearly 13 

million tonnes of waste. This was followed by food, drink and tobacco manufacturing, and the professional 

services and other businesses, both producing more than 7 million tonnes, and the coke, oil, gas, 

electricity and water industries at just over 6 million tonnes. 

Table 8 Commercial and Industrial waste arisings 2002-3 for England and Wales 

Type of Industrial Waste C&I Arisings 


Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products 1,800 

Food, drink and tobacco 7,200 

Textiles, leather goods 1,200 

Wood and wood products (inc. furniture) 2,000 

Publishing, printing and recording 2,200 

Production of coke, electricity, oil, gas and water 6,200 

Manufacture of metals, fabricated metal and 

machinery and equipment 

7,700 

Manufacture of motor vehicles and other transport 

1,500 

equipment 

Other non-metallic mineral products 2,300 

Retail, including motor vehicles, parts and fuel 12,800 

Hotels, catering 3,400 

Transport, storage and communications 2,200 

Commercial business, finance, real estate and 

7,200 

computer related activities 

Public administration and social work 1,400 

Chemical and other 5,300 

Education 1,900 

Miscellaneous 1,500 

Total 67.9



This demonstrates that industrial and commercial wastes contain a vast range of materials, and that 

discussing them as a single homogenous mass can be misleading. Table 9 gives more detail about the 

possible content of commercial and industrials wastes, based on an Environment Agency survey covering 

England and Wales. 

Table 9: Composition (‘000 tonnes) of commercial and industrial waste in England 

Commercial Industrial Total 

Chemicals 1,942 5,692 7,634 

Metallic 604 2,727 3,330 

Non-metallic 8,651 5,181 13,833 

Discarded equipment 262 88 350 

Animal & plant 2,152 4,143 6,295 

Mixed/general waste 15,569 6,056 21,625 

Common sludges 154 761 915 

Mineral wastes 987 12,939 13,926 

Total 30,320 37,587 67,907 

Table 9 shows that: 

• Mixed/general waste is the largest category, representing 32% of total C&I arisings (a figure 

of 37% was determined for the survey in Northern Ireland), and 50% of commercial waste 

arisings 

• Mineral wastes represent about 20% of total C&I arisings. This includes 6 million tonnes per 

annum of ash from pulverised coal fired power stations, of which about 3 million tonnes is 

currently being recycled. 32 

• Non-metallic wastes represent about 20% of total C&I arisings. This category includes 

recycled paper/cardboard, and over 85% of the total arisings of this category are recycled. 

32 The current classification of pulverised fuel ash as a waste is the main reason why only about 50% of it is currently recycled. The Waste Protocols 

Project is currently considering whether the ash could be classified as a product for specified recycling uses 

37

38 



4.2.3 Current Waste Arisings 

Table 10 shows the arisings of commercial and industrial waste in each of the English regions in 2002/03. 

London and the South East had the highest arisings of commercial waste, and Yorkshire and Humber 

had the highest arisings of industrial waste. 

Table 10: Arisings of commercial and industrial waste by English Region and Country in 2002/03 

Region Commercial 

Waste 


Industrial 

Waste 


Commercial and 

Industrial Waste 


East Midlands 2,322 5,171 8,093 

East of England 3,308 3,256 6,564 

London 5,604 1,902 7,507 

North East 1,199 3,400 4,599 

North West 3,833 4,502 8,335 

South East 5,271 3,581 8,852 

South West 2,967 2,589 5,556 

West Midlands 3,019 4,246 7,265 

Yorkshire and Humber 2,797 8,339 11,136 

England - Total 30,320 37,587 67,907 33 

Northern Ireland - - 1,600 34 

Scotland - - 7,800 35 

Wales - - 5,300 36 

UK - Total - - 82,600 

Figure 7 demonstrates that the amount of commercial and industrial waste sent to landfill in 2002/03 was 

lower than that landfilled in 1998/99. There has been a small increase in energy recovery since 1998/99, 

but most of the reduction in the amount of waste which was landfilled from 1998/99 is due to the increase 

in the amount which was recycled. Such a development is likely due to the increases in landfill tax (this 

will increase to £48/tonne by 2010/11). As indicated in Figure 7, 42% (about 29 million tonnes) of 

commercial and industrial waste was recycled in England in 2002/03. 

Table 11 Arisings of commercial and industrial waste in England 

Year Commercial 

Waste 




Total Waste 


2002/03 30,300 28,700 59,000 

1998/99 23,700 36,000 59,700 

33 Environment Agency 2006 – Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2002/03 

34 Commercial & Industrial Waste Arisings Survey 2004/05. Environment & Heritage Service, March 2007 


36 Environment Agency, Wales, http://new.wales.gov.uk/resilience/other-responders1/env-agy-wales/?lang=en



Figure 7 Management of commercial and industrial waste in England 

Table 12 Recycling rates for commercial and industrial waste in English Regions in 2002/03 

Region Commercial 

Waste 

(Wt %) 

Industrial 

Waste 

(Wt %) 

Commercial and 


(Wt %) 

East Midlands 37 44 42 

East of England 38 45 41 

London 41 54 44 

North East 34 49 45 

North West 32 37 35 

South East 30 35 32 

South West 35 45 40 

West Midlands 40 50 46 

Yorkshire and Humber 44 55 52 

England – Total 37 47 42 

Northern Ireland - - 24 

Scotland - - - 

Wales - - 62* 

* recycled / reused 

Table 12 shows that: 

• Information from Scotland is not available, and that from Wales and Northern Ireland is not 

split between commercial and industrial. 

• The overall recycling rate for industrial waste (47%) is higher than the overall recycling rate 

(37%) for commercial waste 

39

40 



• The South East had the lowest recycling rates for both commercial waste and industrial 

waste 

• Yorkshire and Humber had the highest recycling rates for both commercial and industrial 

waste, and London had the second highest recycling rates for both streams. 

Most commercial and industrial waste is collected by private sector waste management companies, such 

as Sita, Veolia and Viridor. Local authorities have a statutory obligation to collect C&I waste, but they 

generally only collect from a proportion of small businesses. Collectors also provide services to collect 

recyclable materials, such as paper; this allows businesses to demonstrate that their waste has been 

sorted in order to comply with the requirements of the Landfill Directive. 

The majority of the waste which is not recycled is currently landfilled in landfill sites operated by private 

sector companies; however, the increases in landfill tax, particularly the announcement in the 2009 

budget that landfill tax will increase to £72 per tonne by 2013 will provide further encouragement to 

private sector companies which are currently developing options for treatment plants which will recover 

energy from this waste. 

4.2.4 Growth Rates and Future Arisings 

The two surveys of arisings of commercial and industrial waste were conducted by the Environment 

Agency in 1998/99 and 2002/03. Table 11 shows that although there was little change in overall arisings, 

the arisings of commercial waste has increased whilst the arisings of industrial waste have decreased. 

This is due to a shift in employment away from manufacturing industry and towards a service-based 

economy. 

The lack of yearly data on the arisings of commercial and industrial waste makes it difficult to predict 

future arisings using historic trends. One projection estimated an average annual growth rate of 2% per 

annum for both commercial and industrial waste in the South East from 2005 to 2020. 37 Another 

projection has been calculated using the Regional Economy-Environment Input-Output (REEIO) model 

which was developed by Cambridge Econometrics for the Environment Agency and the Regional 

Development Agencies. The model integrates economic growth of 50 commercial and industrial sectors 

with a set of key environmental pressures that include waste arisings. After accounting for the impact of 

future increases in land tax, the model predicted that growth would be approximately 1.3% each year, and 

rise to 84.5 million tonnes by 2020, as shown in Table 13. 38 The reduction in the proportion of industrial 

waste predicted is due to both the decoupling measures aimed at industrial waste and the expected 

continued shift towards a service based economy. 

Table 13 Predicting C&I Waste arisings with the REEIO Model 

Commercial and Industrial 

Waste 

Proportion of Commercial 

Waste 

Proportion of Industrial 

Waste 

2002/03 

67.5 million 

tonnes 

2019/20 

84.5 million 

tonnes 

% growth per 

annum 

1.3% 

42% 53% 2.5% 

58% 47% -2.5% 

Another estimate of future arisings used information from four Regional Assembly Strategy reports (East 

Midlands, East of England, South East and North West which, between them, are estimated to account 

37 

Model for future waste management capacity needs in the South East. Report by ERM for South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA), 

September 2005. 

38 

Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment of the Review of England’s Waste Strategy. Defra, March 2006.



for about 40% of overall arisings) to estimate that commercial and industrial waste arisings in the UK 

would increase from 83 million tonnes in 2001 to 94 million tonnes by 2020 (based on Environment 

Agency data for 1998/99). 39 This is equivalent to an average growth rate of 0.8% per annum for the 

overall waste stream, which is lower than the estimated average growth rate of 1.4% determined using 

the REEIO model. 

It is likely that commercial and industrial waste arisings will grow at different rates, due to continuing shift 

towards a service based economy and the waste minimisation activities and future increases in landfill 

tax. Based on the sources above, and industry expert opinion, the subsequent predictions used here 

have assumed an average growth rate of 1% per annum to estimate future arisings of commercial waste, 

and 0% per annum for industrial waste as it is unlikely there will be any growth in the arisings of industrial 

waste. 


Commercial and Industrial wastes arise from industry, trade or business activities. Although the contents 

are similar to MSW, the relative proportions of material content vary. Disposal of this waste stream is not 

the responsibility of the local authority, and consequently information on arisings and disposal is limited. 

However it is clear that this waste stream produces considerably more waste than MSW, totalling 82.6 

million tonnes in 2003. 

Information from the Environment Agency shows that most of this waste stream is disposed of to landfill, 

although a significant proportion, much larger than for MSW, is recycled. 

4.3 Construction and Demolition (C&D) 


Construction and demolition waste arises largely from the demolition of buildings and structures, e.g. 

residential, commercial and transport systems. 


Such waste usually contains a high proportion of minerals – demolished brick, concrete, cement and 

mortar. Minerals are not biodegradable or combustible. Two options exist for its disposal, removal to 

landfill, or recycling to aggregate. A further component is a proportion of wood waste, which is readily 

combustible or biodegradable over time. 

Arisings of wood waste from this waste stream often go unrecorded as only material suitable for 

aggregate recycling is recorded. In addition the wood waste generated is almost invariably treated in 

some way, chemically or painted or otherwise contaminated, which may be classified as hazardous under 

present legislation and may have to be dealt with in specially designated facilities. For more information 

on this subsection, please see the later section on wood waste. 

4.3.3 Current Arisings 

There is little data on the amount of C&D waste arisings. This will change in years to come as the PPC 

requirements mean that all sites will have to provide data on C&D waste inputs by 2012. 

39 Quantification of the Potential Energy from Residuals (EfR) in the UK. Report by Oakdene Hollins for The Institution of Civil Engineers and The 

Renewable Power Association, March 2005. 

41

42 



Table 14 shows the estimated arisings of C&D waste in the UK by English Region 40 and by Country. The 

waste will contain a mixture of mineral waste, soil, wood and plastics. 

Table 14 C&D Waste arisings in the UK, 2005 

Region Construction and 

Demolition Waste 




London 8,034 








Northern Ireland 12,200 41 


Wales 5,000 43 

UK – Total 118,600 

A breakdown of the disposal routes for C&D waste arisings is shown in Table 15. 40 As can be seen a 

significant proportion of the material is already recycled, almost all of this will be mineral waste that is 

crushed and used as aggregate, displacing virgin aggregate. 

Table 15 Regional arisings and management (‘000 tonnes) of C&D waste in England 

Region Recycled Used on Exempt 

Site 

Landfilled Total 

East Midlands 5,591 733 3,497 9,821 

East of England 6,031 1,683 3,839 11,553 

London 4,846 2,041 1,147 8,034 

North East 1,881 804 2,130 4,815 

North West 6,721 1,958 2,666 11,345 

South East 6,615 2,513 5,117 14,245 

South West 4,030 2,017 3,435 9,482 

West Midlands 4,918 2,911 2,011 9,840 

Yorkshire and Humber 5,806 7856 3,906 10,497 

England –Total 46,439 15,445 27,748 89,632 

Northern Ireland - - - 12,200 

Scotland 50% 44 - - 11,800 

Wales 29% 56% 15% 5,000 

40 Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England, 2005; Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste. Report for 


41 Survey on the arising and management of construction and demolition waste in Wales in 2005-06. Environment Agency, Wales. 


43 Construction and demolition waste survey. Environment and Heritage Service (EHS), 2004 

44 Internal AEA estimate from AEA expert.



4.3.4 Future Arisings 

Three surveys of arisings of construction and demolition (C&D) waste in England have been conducted 

since the year 2000. The findings are summarised in Table 16. 

Table 16: Estimated arisings (million tonnes) of construction and demolition waste in England 

2001 2003 2005 

Recycled aggregate and soil 43.3 45.4 46.4 

Landfilled at landfill sites 23.2 29.1 27.8 

Used at Registered Exempt sites 22.4 16.4 15.4 

Total 88.9 90.9 89.6 

A comparison of the estimates for 2001, 2003 and 2005 shows that the total arisings of C&D waste are 

similar. The amount of C&D waste which is recycled has increased from 49% in 2001 to 52% in 2005, 

but this increase is not statistically significant. The amount of material used on Registered Exempt sites 

has fallen by 7 million tonnes since 2001, and the amount of waste landfilled at landfill sites has increased 

by 4.5 million tonnes since 2001. 45 

The data in Table 16 show that there has been little growth in C&D arisings since 2001. Another 

projection estimated an average annual growth rate of 0% per annum for construction and demolition 

waste in the South East from 2005 to 2020. Consequently, an average growth rate of 0% per annum has 

been used to estimate future arisings of this stream. 

4.3.5 Conclusions 

Construction and demolition waste is the largest of the three controlled waste streams, with the UK 

producing an estimated 118.6 million tonnes in 2005. 

The majority of the waste is mineral, bricks, concrete, etc, and as such can be crushed and used to 

displace virgin aggregate. A significant proportion will be soil, which can be reused as soil or also used to 

displace virgin aggregate. However this waste stream will also contain a proportion of wood and plastics 

that could be used for energy production. Although it is possible to recycle or recover many of these 

materials, in practice this is not often done due to the level of contamination and the diverse nature of the 

sources. 

Data on arisings of this waste stream is currently very limited, however this situation should improve in the 

near future with the reporting requirements of the PPC becoming widespread. 

4.3.6 Predicted Future Arisings for MSW, C&I and C&D 

Table 17 gives the summary arisings of Municipal Solid Waste, Commercial and Industrial Waste and 

Construction and Demolition Wastes by country in the UK. For all countries in the UK significantly more 

construction and demolition waste is produced than any other waste stream, while MSW waste arisings is 

the smallest waste stream of the three controlled categories. 

45 Sites exempted under the terms of Paragraphs 9A(1) and/or 19A(2) of Schedule 3 to the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 as 

amended by the Waste Management Licensing (England and Wales) (Amendment and Related Provisions) (No.3) Regulations 2005 (SI 

No.2005/1728); ‘Paragraph 9A(1) sites’ are registered exempt sites where exemption holders are permitted to spread up to 20,000 m³/ha of certain 

specified waste materials including soil, rock, ash, some sludges, dredgings or C&D waste for land reclamation /restoration / improvement purposes or 

agricultural improvement. Paragraph 19A(2) sites are registered exempt sites where exemption holders are permitted to use certain specified waste 

materials including C&D waste, excavation waste, ash, clinker, rock, wood or gypsum in connection with recreational or infrastructure projects, 

excluding land reclamation. 

43

44 



Table 17 Waste arisings (‘000,000 tonnes) in the UK 

Year England Wales Scotland 46 Northern 

Ireland 

Total 

MSW 28.5 47 1.8 48 3.0 1.1 49 34.4 

C&I waste 67.9 50 5.3 51 7.8 1.6 52 82.6 

C&D waste 89.6 53 12.2 54 11.8 5.0 55 118.6 

Total 186.0 19.3 22.6 7.7 235.6 

Using the prediction figures discussed in preceding sections, Table 18 shows the estimated arisings of 

municipal solid waste, commercial waste, industrial waste and construction and demolition waste in 2010, 

2015 and 2020. These have been produced using the tonnage arisings shown in Table 18 (assuming a 

baseline year of 2005) and the average growth rates for each of these waste streams determined in this 

section of the report: MSW growth at 0.75%, Commercial waste at 1%, Industrial waste at 0% and C&I 

waste at 0%. The total arisings of these waste streams in the UK is estimated to rise from 236 million 

tonnes in 2005 to 246 million tonnes in 2020 due to the growth in the arisings of both municipal solid 

waste and commercial waste. 

Table 18: Estimated future UK waste arisings (‘000,000 tonnes) 

Year 

2005 2010 2015 2020 

Municipal Solid Waste 34 36 37 38 

Commercial Waste 37 39 41 43 

Industrial Waste 45 45 45 45 

Construction and Demolition Waste 119 119 119 119 

Total 236 239 242 246 

The projections of future arisings shown in Table 18 have not considered the potential impacts the current 

economic situation may have on future waste arisings. The arisings of some waste streams could reduce 

over the next few years due to the following factors: 

• Municipal solid waste - Reduction in MSW growth rate due to fewer houses being built, 

together with continuing waste reduction activities and less spending per household 

• Commercial waste - Reduction in C&I growth rate, and this could become negative as the 

number of commercial businesses reduces (the financial situation is anticipated to have more 

impact on the commercial sector than the industrial sector due to the reduction in the number 

of jobs in the retail and banking sectors). 

• Construction and demolition waste – reduction in number of buildings being demolished to 

start new construction/development projects. 

Waste arisings for all of these streams could fall over the next few years, but should begin to increase 

again as economic recovery occurs. 

46 

Waste Data Digest 8: Key facts and trends. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency, 2008 

47 

Defra - http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/bulletin08.htm 

48 

Municipal Waste Management Report for Wales, 2007-08. Statistics for Wales, October 2008 

49 

Municipal Waste Management Northern Ireland 2005/06 Summary Report, December 2006 

50 

Environment Agency 2006 – Strategic Waste Management Assessment 2002/03 

51 

Environment Agency Wales, http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/aboutus/organisation/35675.aspx 

52 

Commercial & Industrial Waste Arisings Survey 2004/05. Environment & Heritage Service, March 2007 

53 

Survey of Arisings and Use of Alternatives to Primary Aggregates in England, 2005; Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste. Report for 


54 

Survey on the arising and management of construction and demolition waste in 

Wales in 2005-06. Environment agency Wales 

55 

Construction and demolition waste survey. Environment and Heritage Service (EHS), 2004



4.4 Bio-solids 


Sewage is the wastewater collected from homes, industrial premises, offices and commercial premises 

and carried through the sewerage system to a wastewater treatment works. The residual component, 

once the clean water has been discharged back into waterways, is the bio-solids, (also known as sewage 

sludge). 


Sewage is mostly water, including drainage waster from car parks, roads and other areas of concrete or 

tarmac. Sewage contains about 3% solid waste, which reduces to under 1% once it has been screened 

(i.e. all the grit, fats, soil, sanitary and contraceptive waste are removed) at the sewage treatment works. 

Human waste forms a relatively small proportion of the total volume of sewage. 56 

Sewage goes through several treatment processes at a waste-water works before it is returned to river or 

the sea in a condition such that no significant pollution or environmental degradation occurs. The main 

by-product of any sewage treatment works is bio-solids. 

The treatment and disposal of bio-solids is subject to various regulations. The two most relevant pieces 

are the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWT Directive), and the Sludge (use in agriculture) 

Regulations 1989. The Directive details controls for the treatment and disposal of bio-solids, and was the 

legislation that banned disposal at sea, the option that was widely practiced, before 1998. The Sludge 

Regulations control the spreading of this material on land. In addition there is the Safe Sludge Matrix 

from 2001, a voluntary agreement that ensures bio-solids is applied only to certain crops and plants. 57 

Sludge from secondary treatment and Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is still very high in water content (>90% 

in most cases) and is therefore often subjected to further dewatering before final disposal. The 

dewatering decreases the volume of sludge and hence the cost of transport considerably. Such 

processes include centrifugation (which can increase the solid content to 24-30%, producing a sludge 

cake); belt/filter pressing (which can decrease the volume to 10-20% of the un-pressed sludge); and 

thermal drying (which increases the sludge solids to 80-95% and results in sludge in the form of dust or 

pellets). These processes are used in particular in larger sewage treatment works where the cost of 

disposing of large volumes of high liquid content sludge is prohibitive. 

4.4.3 Current Arisings 

Information on the quantity of UK bio-solids arising, and the methods of disposal are release by Defra, up 

to 2005. 58 Since 1989/90 the level of arisings has increased to 1.4 million tonnes as a result of the 

UWWT Directive and hence wastewater requiring more treatment. 59 

The UK produces some 11 billion litres of waste water every day, which goes to around 9,000 sewage 

treatment works around the country before the treated effluent is discharged to inland waters, estuaries 

and the sea. 56 

56 

Sewage Treatment in the UK, Defra 2002, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/quality/uwwtd/report02/pdf/uwwtreport2.pdf 

57 

Sewage Sludge, Defra, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrsewage.htm 

58 

e-Digest Statistics, Defra 

59 

Council Directive 91/271/EEC Urban Waste Water Treatment, 1991, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/consleg/1991/L/01991L0271- 

20031120-en.pdf 

45

46 



Table 19 Bio-solids Arising in the UK (‘000 dry tonnes) 57 

Region 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

England and Wales 941 1137 1249 1280 1221 1369 

Scotland 97 N/A 113 113 113 140 

Northern Ireland 34 N/A 28 29 34 - 

Total 1,072 - 1,390 1,422 1,368 - 

Table 20 shows the sewage waste arising by UK region in dry weight. 60 The bio-solids arising by English 

region is difficult to calculate since the water companies who produce it operate across regions that do 

not correspond to the divisions of the development agencies in England. Therefore the bio-solid arisings 

have been reported according to the water company regions. 

Table 20 Estimated bio-solids arising by English and Welsh water companies in 2000 61 

Region Dry Solids 


United Utilities Water 258 

Welsh Water 86 

Yorkshire Water 154 

Anglican Water 180 

Wessex Water 82 

Southwest Water 56 

Northumbria Water 65 

Severn Trent Water 262 

Thames Water 325 

Southern Water 136 

Total 1,605 

60 Most figures relating to sewage sludge (biosolids) are quoted in terms of dry solids. This is due to the variable water contents of the sludges. 

Quoting data as dry solids allows comparison between sludges. However, it must be remembered that water is always present in biosolids or sewage 

sludge. If sewage sludge is 10% dry solids, 90% of the volume will be water and this will also represent a considerable weight. 

61 Ofwat 2004, Utilities Summary of Outputs, http://www.ofwat.gov.uk



Figure 8 Geographical representation of the operating areas of the water companies in England and Wales. 62 

Another source of information are the individual water companies, but the level of information reported 

varies company by company. 

4.4.4 Current Disposal Options 

There are a number of options available for the disposal of bio-solids, each of which are used to a varying 

degree, as illustrated in Figure 9. Although bio-solids are predominantly disposed of to land currently, 

this situation may change as discussed below. 

Application to land 

Bio-solids are predominately recycled to land, acting as a fertiliser. 63 This is a flexible solution for the 

wastewater operators as agricultural sites can be changed or sourced relatively quickly in order to meet 

changing operational needs. 

Application of bio-solids to land that is being reclaimed is also practiced, as it can help to restore soil 

nutrients and stability. Bio-solids can be incorporated into spoil to increase the stability, creating a soil 

64,65, 66 

that contains nutrients enough to support plant growth. 

62 Con29DW, Drainage and Water Enquiry, http://www.drainageandwater.co.uk 

63 Thames Water 25 year Sludge Strategy, 2008, http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-54091C65-CAD380F4/corp/sludge-strategy.pdf 

64 The Beneficial Use of Sewage Sludge in Land Reclamation, 2004, Water UK, 

http://www.water.org.uk/static/files_archive/2Sludge_for_Land_restoration_briefing_Notes_v2_march_15.doc 

65 Beneficial Effects of Biosolids on Soil Quality and Fertility ADAS Research review 2001-2002 – Environment ADAS Ltd. www.adas.co.uk 

66 Wastewater treatment and use in agriculture - FAO irrigation and drainage paper 47 M.B. Pescod 1992 

Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations www.fao.org/ 

47

48 



However disposal to land may reduce in coming years as legislative and practical constraints limit this 

route. 67 The available land bank may reduce due to a reluctance to have food products grown on land 

treated with this waste, although the growth of energy crops would provide a (small) mitigating land 

availability. 67 The impact of the Nitrates Directive (Nitrate Vulnerable Zones Regulations) may be a 

reduction in the volume of sludge that can be applied in certain areas. 

Landfill 

A small amount of sludge is disposed of to landfill, which is largely used only as a fall back option as it 

can be used at very short notice. 56 This route is not sustainable in the longer term and the costs 

associated with it are increasing as landfill tax levels go up and void space is reduced. In addition, due to 

the high water content of bio-solids only a limited number of sites are willing to accept it due to the 

potential impact on the landfill sites’ leachate management programme. 

Incineration 

Incineration is the second largest disposal route, generally used by the larger treatment works. 56 The 

heat generated is often used on site to meet the heating needs of the process, i.e. to dry the bio-solids, 

and generate electricity. Several stages of cleaning of the flue gases are incorporated within the process 

to ensure they meet EU emission limits set by the Waste Incineration, the Integrated Pollution Prevention 

and Control (IPPC) and the Landfill Directives. 68 The calorific value of bio-solids is dependent on the type 

of material, its water content (the degree of dewatering) and the concentration of organic matter present, 

solids content, calorific values and biomass contents vary according to the type of treatment. 

Incineration is a relatively expensive option, so it is only of interest in areas where alternative disposal 

methods are not available or the cost of transportation is prohibitive. 

Incineration of bio-solids involves burning the sludge at 600-900°C to destroy the organic content, leaving 

a residue of mineral ash for final disposal (usually to landfill or controlled waste re-use such as land 

reclamation). The net calorific value of dried bio-solids, i.e. its energy content after deducting the heat 

required to evaporate the remaining water is around 23MJ/kg of volatile solids. 69 

Co-incineration 

The bio-solids, either as dewatered cake, but generally as dried pellets, can be burnt in adapted (WID 

compliant) plants, often co-fired with coal. It is possible to burn bio-solids with municipal waste, however, 

the burner design system must be capable of handling both fuels. 

67 Thames Water 25 year Sludge Strategy, 2008, http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-54091C65-CAD380F4/corp/sludge-strategy.pdf 

68 Waste Incineration Directive http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2000:332:0091:0111:EN:PDF, Integrated Pollution 

Prevention and Control, original legislation, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31996L0061:EN:HTML, Landfill Directive 

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:1999:182:0001:0019:EN:PDF 

69 Sewage Sludge Disposal: operational and environmental issues, Bruce A.M. and Evans, T.D., Foundation of Water Research, 2002.



20% 

1% 

11% 

4.4.5 Future Arisings 

4% 

64% 

Farmland 

Landfill 

Incineration 

Land reclamation/restoration 

Other 

Figure 9 Disposal of bio-solids in 2004 70 

The volumes of bio-solids created are increasing, through increased population, and through increased 

levels of treatment of municipal sewage, and at times dedicated industrial effluent treatment plants run by 

the water companies. The increase is also in part due to the increased levels of sewage treatment 

required through tightened Regulations. 71 

In 2004-5 1.72 Mt of dry bio-solids were produced. Work carried out internally in AEA has estimated that 

this will increase to 2.5 Mt by 2030 due to changes in industry practice brought about by legislation 

relating to requirements for improved treatment practices. 

One water company, Thames Water, have estimated the future arising of bio-solids until 2021, and 

extrapolated further to 2035. 72 The prediction is for a steady increase in their production of bio-solids year 

on year. 

The volume of bio-solids available for conversion into fuels and energy is likely to increase in future years, 

due to increasing populations in some areas, and decreasing opportunities to utilise traditional disposal 

methods in all areas of the UK. 

70 

Sewage sludge arisings and management 1986/97 – 2005, Defra. 

71 th 

Determining sludge production from wastewater treatment, Clode, K., Khraisheh, M., Ballinger, D., 2008, 13 European Biosolids and Organic 

Resources Conference and Workshop. 

72 

Thames Water 25 year Sludge Strategy, 2008, http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xbcr/SID-54091C65-CAD380F4/corp/sludge-strategy.pdf, 

based on Local Authority growth projections, taking in consideration such variables as new development and housing density until 2021, and then 

linearly extrapolated to provide best future estimates to 2035, with no specific allowance been made for additional sludge arising from currently 

unknown changes in legislation treatment standards, customer behaviour or other factors, such as impact of Local Authority waste strategies. 

49

50 



4.4.6 Conclusions 

Bio-solids are the product of the waste-water treatment works. Even after several stages of treatment it is 

still largely comprised of water. 

Increasing waste-water legislation, and increasing population in the UK, results in increased volumes of 

bio-solids: up to 1,368,000 dry tonnes in 2004. Much of this waste is ultimately recycled to land as a 

fertiliser but this use will be restricted in the future due to tighter regulation of nitrogen application to 

agricultural land in some sensitive areas. 

4.5 Agricultural Residues and Waste 


Agriculture produces a variety of residues, but only limited waste. The distinction is made between 

controlled wastes and uncontrolled resides. Wastes are items such as chemicals, plastic, containers and 

other packaging, and controls on this waste stream were introduced in May 2006. Agricultural waste is 

too heterogeneous and widely dispersed to provide an easy feedstock. Agricultural residues include 

animal manures and slurry, and crop straws and husks, which rarely leave the confines of a farm, and 

therefore are not recorded. Such residues are generally homogeneous which makes them a more 

realistic potential feedstock. Manure and slurry spread at the place of production, for the benefit of 

agriculture, is not considered to be waste under the current regulations. In 2005 the European 

Commission judged that livestock effluent would fall outside the classification of waste if it were 

subsequently used as a soil fertiliser. 73 The application of these residues to land is a traditional practice 

that helps to replenish nutrients, and reduces the amount of artificial fertiliser that would otherwise be 

applied. 

However, agricultural residues can lead to air, land and water pollution if not managed properly. Farm 

slurries are many times more polluting than human sewage and when not correctly managed can cause 

serious environmental damage, particularly by adulterating watercourses and producing odours. Heavy 

fines can be imposed on farmers for pollution of watercourses with animal slurries. In addition traditional 

disposal methods are increasingly leading to problems. Defra now advise against general spreading of 

slurry for example, due to concerns about the loss of ammonia to the air. Such concerns are a major 

driver to re-evaluate the methods for treating and disposing of farm wastes and residues. 


Agricultural residues can be subdivided into two categories: 

• Wet residues are animal slurries and farmyard manures that have a solid content of under 15%. 

• Dry residues include straw, husks and processing waste, as well as poultry litter from poultry 

reared for meat. 

73 European Court judgment, Case C-416/02 European Commission v Kingdom of Spain, 

http://europa.eu.int/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!CELEXnumdoc&lg=en&numdoc=62002J0416.



Wet Agricultural Residues 

Wet farm residues are characterised by the livestock and waste reception and collection methods, which 

are largely consistent throughout the UK. 

Farm slurries are derived from three major sources: cattle, pigs and egg-laying poultry. In addition to 

animal effluent, other sources of wet farm residues include parlour/dairy/vegetable washings, waste milk, 

bio-solids and silage effluent. Currently the majority of these residues are recycled to land. 

Slurry accumulates and must be managed wherever animals are housed, a particular issue during the 

over wintering of animals indoors, or in milking parlours and egg production facilities. Slurry handling 

systems usually consist of floor scrapers to move the slurry into channels from which it is pumped into a 

storage tank or lagoon. Sophisticated systems also use a separator to remove the fibrous portion of the 

slurry for sale as a compost base, while the more basic systems allow natural settlement. The type of 

system used is relevant because it can dramatically affect the level of solids collected. 

Livestock Numbers and Residue Arisings 

The key aspect to utilising livestock slurry and manures is that they must be collectable, and in practice 

this limits the utilisation of the residue to when the animals are housed. When the animals are on pasture 

fields, especially during the summer months, the manure is dropped onto the field and is unavailable for 

collection. In addition the type of bedding material used will affect the characteristics of the manure or 

slurry produced. Common bedding materials include straw, wood chips, sand, or compost. 74 

Further, the collectable proportion of wet residues is already widely used as a fertiliser, as discussed 

above, and so availability is also an issue. 

The UK estimates of livestock residues vary considerably, as these residues are rarely collected or 

regulated for disposal by third parties. They are estimated from the number and distribution of livestock, 

and these will change as livestock farming changes each year. The most recent Environment Agency 

figure for agricultural wet waste was 45 million tonnes, while work performed by AEA generated the 

considerably higher figure of 67-88 million tonnes produced annually. 

The diagram below illustrates the quantity and type of residues from typical UK livestock, and the 

proportion each produces of slurry and farmyard manure (FYM). 

Quantity ('000 te) 

40000 

35000 

30000 

25000 

20000 

15000 

10000 

5000 

0 

15,124 

18,142 

34,423 

4,481 

4,901 

2,467 

FYM 

Slurry 

4,276 4,036 

Dairy Beef Pigs Poultry Sheep 

Figure 10 Slurry and FYM in UK, by main livestock categories 

74 Dairy Waste Anaerobic Digestion Handbook, by Dennis A. Burke P.E., June 2001 http://www.mrec.org/pubs/Dairy%20Waste%20Handbook.pdf 

UK 

51

52 



Although there is considerable variation in the residue output of livestock, as it is species dependent, age 

and type of animal dependent, and residue collection system dependent, some generalisations can be 

made: 

• Where cows are housed, usually for part of the winter, and for regular portions of each day if it is 

a dairy herd, the slurry is usually collected mixed with straw, using a scraper system. Slurry is 

collected on around 18% of beef cattle farms, and 66% of dairy cattle farms. The addition of 

straw will alter the total solid composition, as will the type of housing system in use. Rinsing of 

the area is not common, so dilution of the slurry with water is minimal. 75 

• Most pigs are housed for the majority of their lives, often 100%, making collection of their 

residues viable. However variation in the types of housing, and methods of farming mean that 

there are large variations of total solids and organic dry matter. Larger pig farms usually collect 

the waste as a liquid slurry, at a high dilution. Other methods include the use of a scraper system 

which produces a higher dry content. 75 

• Egg laying poultry do not use bedding, and therefore their residues are quite wet and count as 

wet residue. In contract poultry raised for meat will use bedding, often sawdust and wood 

shavings, and considerable time elapses before the residue is collected, permitting significant 

drying to occur. Thus these residues are considered to be dry residues. 

• Sheep are largely un-housed, so it is not possible to collect their residues. For this reason they 

have not been considered any further in this report. 

Livestock can be grouped according to the category of animal and the type of collection system that is 

likely to be used. Such a scaling system has been used previously to estimate the potential methane 

yield of agricultural residues for Defra. 76 These scaling factors can be applied to the total number of 

livestock, to begin to estimate the regional arisings of residues. 

The total current livestock numbers are detailed in Table 21, and have been taken from the Farm Surveys 

of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Further breakdown of the numbers can be found in 

Appendix 1, where more detailed categorisation has been used. 77 

Table 21 Livestock numbers for the UK, on a regional basis. 

Cattle Pigs Total Fowls 

Region 

(‘000 head) (‘000 head) (‘000 head) 

East Midlands 519 418 24,178 

East of England 220 1,066 25,312 

North East 286 85 2,428 

North West 965 160 8,263 

South East inc. London 461 259 9,867 

South West 1,804 480 18,316 

West Midlands 760 235 16,602 

Yorkshire and Humber 583 1,239 14,408 

England - Total 5,598 3,943 119,374 

Northern Ireland 1,623 402 16,322 

Scotland 1,897 457 8,308 

Wales 1,323 25 5,836 

UK - Total 10,440 4,828 150, 000 

75 Feedstocks for Anaerobic Digestion, AD-NETT Report 2000. 

76 Assessment of Methane Management and Recovery Options for Livestock Manures and Slurries, 2005, AEA for Defra. Figures calculated from 

English data. Applied uniformly here to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. 

77 June Survey of Agriculture and Horticulture (Land use, livestock and labour on agricultural holdings at 1 June 2008) England – Final Results, Defra, 

Published 20 November 2008. Welsh Agricultural Statistics 2007, http://wales.gov.uk/topics/statistics/publications/was2007/?lang=en, 2008 June 

Agricultural and Horticultural Census for Scotland, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/06/19154131/1 , The Agricultural Census in Northern 

Ireland, 2008 http://www.dardni.gov.uk/da1_09_25820__08.09.160_agricultural_census_in_ni_-_results_for_june_2008_amended.pdf.pdf



Livestock manure is principally composed of organic matter that if stored in an anaerobic environment will 

decompose to produce methane. The level of methane production depends on the quantity and quality of 

the manure, and on the environment, i.e. the proportion that decomposes anaerobically. 

Table 22 details the manure generation characteristics of the various categories of livestock as discussed 

above. The amount of Volatile Solids is closely related to the quantity of dry matter produced in the 

manure. 

Table 22 Animal manure generation characteristics 76 

Animal Proportion of the 

year housed 

Proportion of 

waste collected 

as slurry 

Volatile Solids 

kg/head/day 

Dairy cow 59% 66% 3.48 

Other cattle 

(excl. calves) 

50% 18% 2.7 

Calves 45% 0% 1.46 

Dry sow 100% 35% 0.63 

Sows plus litters 100% 75% 0.63 

Fattening pig 

(20 – 130kg) 

90% 33% 0.49 

Weaners 

(

54 



Currently the majority of these residues are recycled to agricultural land. The high water content makes 

large scale transportation unfeasible, and so utilisation for energy or fuel generation would likely be at a 

local scale. 

Dry Agricultural Residues 

There has been much interest in the use of dry agricultural residues for energy for some time. The UK 

Government (then Department of Energy) supported a significant programme in the 1980s-early 1990s to 

examine the potential and support demonstration projects. Two main dry agricultural residues were 

identified as: poultry litter and straw. 

Straw 

Straw is available from cereal and other 'combinable' crops such as oil seeds. The recent report by CSL 

for NNFCC gives a broad description of the straw market. 78 It is produced seasonally and is localised to 

arable farming areas. Straw is produced during crop harvest and often remains on the ground after the 

passage of stage one collection – the seed crop. It must then be collected and baled in a second 

handling stage. For an estimation of regional crop area potentially generating straw, by crop type and 

region of the UK please see Appendix 1. 

The three main types of straw that are available in the UK are barley, wheat and oil seed rape (OSR). It 

is common for barley and oat straw to be consumed almost entirely by the livestock industry as part of the 

winter diet with additional straw used for bedding, so this must be borne in mind when considering the 

following figures. Cereal straw is also used to protect some crops, such as carrots, against frost and to 

keep others, such as strawberries, off the ground. OSR straw is not suitable for either of these uses. 

Other potential industrial uses for straw are for paper-making, or in the production of industrial fibre, 

including constructional board manufacture. 79 Straw can also be used as a feedstock for power 

generation, as is the case at the EPRL Power station in Ely (see later chapter). OSR straw is popular for 

combustion, as it burns fiercely due to the presence of residual oilseeds. To moderate this, such straw is 

mixed with cereal straws to contain this volatility at lower levels. 

To prevent deterioration during storage, crops are generally harvested dry, i.e. moisture content below 

15% and, as straw is usually harvested immediately after harvesting the associated cereal or oilseed 

crop, its moisture content will be around the same. During poor weather, however, the crops may be 

harvested at higher moisture contents, meaning the straw will be wetter, or the straw may spoil in the 

field, reducing that year’s yield. 

Straw is harvested over a short period (typically around 70 days), and for the remainder of the year 

storage is required. This storage may be done in Dutch barns or in stacks on the field. There will usually 

be some losses in dry matter during storage, mainly due to degradation of biomass. This loss is 

estimated to be around 10-20% of dry matter. Straw stored in the open (piles of bales in the field) can 

also be damaged by rainwater and the outer bales in the stack may rot and be lost. Problems can be 

avoided by choosing the storage sites carefully. If stored damp and under cover, some self-heating can 

occur – a potential fire hazard. 

A number of estimates for the quantity of straw available across the UK have been made, however in 

reality it varies from year to year, depending on the harvest and on alternative market demand for straw. 

Existing traditional agricultural uses such as livestock bedding and feed, animal feed compounding, crop 

protection and composting consume significant and varying amounts of straw each year. 80 

78 

National and Regional Supply/demand balance for agricultural straw in Great Britain, Copeland, J., Turley, D., Central Science Laboratory for the 

NNFCC, 2008. 

79 

ETSU New and Renewable Energy: Prospects in the UK for the 21st Century: Supporting Analysis. 

80 

ETSU BM/04/00056/REP/3 (1999) Energy from Biomass: summaries of the biomass projects carried out as part of the Department of Trade and 

Industry’s New and Renewable Energy Programme Volume 5: Straw, poultry litter and energy crops.



The Carbon Trust’s biomass study for 2003 estimated straw production to vary between 10 and 12 million 

tonnes per annum of which around 25% would be available for use in future energy solutions. 81 The 

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP) report indicated an availability of 24 million tonnes 

in 2002. 82 The Biomass Task Force, provided an estimate of 3-4.5 million tonnes of straw available for 

energy generation per annum. 83.84 The most recent report by the CSL in 2008 estimated that 60% of 

straw could be recovered from the field, approximately 2.75 – 4 t/ha, and of this 4.9 million tonnes would 

be available for non-traditional uses in Great Britain, once operational and future straw burning Power 

Stations had been taken into account (total straw arising 11.9 million tonnes). 

Most of these figures refer only to England and Wales. Work for SEERAD indicated that most of the 

straw in Scotland has a ready market and there is no or very little surplus in Scotland. 85 

The straw arising figures below have used the assumption of 3.5 tonnes of straw produced per ha in the 

UK, together with an availability of 25% for non-traditional uses (such as future energy solutions and 

fuels) as described in the Carbon Trust report. 86 

Using the above assumptions, an estimation of the straw arisings can be made, as well as the amount of 

straw that might be available for non-traditional uses such as energy generation and transport fuels. 

81 Biomass sector review for the Carbon Trust, 2005, Paul Arwas Associates and Black & Vetch Ltd. 

82 Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 2004, Biomass as a renewable energy source, www.rcep.org.uk/biomass/Biomass%20Report.pdf 

83 According to Defra Statistics the amount of land on which cereals were harvested varied from 3,014,000 to 4,026,000 ha over the pass 20 years. As 

the yield of straw varies from 3-4 t/ha, this translates into a range of just over 9Mt just over 16Mt of straw produced in the UK per annum. The 

availability of straw for energy will then depend on the market for alternative use, but is typically about a third of the total available. See: 

www.defra.gov.uk/esg/publications/auk/200/3-2.xls 

84 Biomass Task Force report to Government, October 2005. 

85 MLURI, SAC and AEA Technology 2003 Energy from Crops in Scotland. Timber and Agricultural residues Technical Annex. 

86 J Nix Farm Management Handbook, 3 rd Edition 2005. 

55

56 



Table 24 Prediction of straw arisings and availability for non-traditional uses. 

Year 

Region Straw Estimation 


2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

East Midlands Total Straw 

Straw available non- 

2630 2673 2564 2513 2606 

traditional use 658 668 641 628 651 

East of Total Straw 1951 2035 1915 1899 1980 

England Straw available nontraditional 

use 488 509 479 475 495 

North East Total Straw 


478 491 471 456 472 


North West Total Straw 


266 298 272 262 267 


South East Total Straw 1451 1473 1408 1388 1423 

and London Straw available nontraditional 

use 363 368 352 347 356 

South West Total Straw 


1236 1290 1207 1186 1217 


West Midlands Total Straw 


923 955 909 890 927 


Yorkshire and Total Straw 1444 1514 1436 1383 1450 

Humber Straw available nontraditional 

use 361 378 359 346 363 

England Total Straw available nontraditional 

use 2595 2682 2546 2494 2586 

Scotland Total Straw 


1551 15889 1493 1428 1463 1638 

traditional use 388 397 373 357 366 410 

Wales Total Straw 


144 153 139 130 

traditional use 36 38 35 32 

Northern Total Straw 125 123 126 120 112 

Ireland Straw available nontraditional 

use 31 31 31 30 28 

UK - Total Straw available nontraditional 

use 3049 3149 2984 2912 

As can be seen from the above data, there is potentially considerable resource available without 

disturbing traditional markets. Dry straw has an energy content of around 18GJ/dry tonnes, which is 

independent of straw type. 

Availability 

Agricultural residues are generally large in volume and bulky to transport. As such transportation costs 

usually prohibit movement of these residues significant distances. High density straw bales are an 

exception but it remains a low value commodity and any facility intending to make use of these residues 

would ideally be constructed near to a significant supply of resource and so would be at local or regional 

scale.



In terms of straw, the CSL Report identified that Wales and Scotland have straw deficits, while England is 

a net exporter of straw once regional livestock demand had been subtracted from the arisings. In addition 

the conversion of straw to energy products would remove the straw from the fields, removing a nutrient 

source (see Appendix 1 for the cost quantification of this nutrient source). The decision whether to sell 

straw is a balance between the price, soil type and suitability for reincorporation, timing for the next crop 

and the cost of replacement fertiliser. 

Poultry Litter 

The vast majority of poultry raised for meat, broilers, are farmed using intensive farming methods, with the 

use of bedding. This enables easy collection of the residues produced, which are commonly high in solid 

content with little liquid present. The litter is also usually high in ammonia. 80 The fresh manure is 

approximately 75% water, but dries considerably over the time it spends in the enclosed house. 87 

Bedding materials are usually wood shavings, shredded paper or straw, which become mixed with 

droppings. 

Traditionally poultry litter was applied to the land as a fertiliser, but as with cow and pig slurry, the rise in 

poultry production and the decreasing availability of land mean that the potentially deleterious 

environmental impacts are being recognised and the traditional litter disposal methods are being 

discouraged. Poultry litter is considered a waste under the Waste Incineration Directive (WID), and 

therefore any plant that utilises this resource must be compliant with the requirements of WID. 

It is estimated that each fowl has the equivalent output of 0.036 kg/day (litter plus excreta), with a dry 

matter content of 70%. 88 The calorific value of poultry litter is between 8.8 89 and 15 GJ/t and the moisture 

content varies between 20-50%, 90,91 i.e. a calorific content that is about half that of anthracite coal (32-35 

MJ.Kg). 

Using the litter output estimation of 0.036kg/bird/day and assuming a calorific value of 9 GJ/t estimations 

of the regional output of poultry litter and its potential energy content are made in Table 25. 

Table 25 Total Fowl Numbers raised on bedding, by region for the UK 

Fowls raised on Energy Content 

Region 

bedding 

(GJ) 

East Midlands 17,361,450 5,625,110 

East of England 22,853,361 7,404,489 

North East 2,133,092 691,122 

North West 5,809,647 1,882,326 

South East inc. London 5,857,657 1,897,881 

South West 12,363,066 4,005,633 

West Midlands 13,688,062 4,434,932 

Yorkshire and Humber 11,888,774 3,851,963 

England - Total 91,955,109 29,793,455 

Northern Ireland 13,923,000 411,052 

Scotland 5,388,040 1,745,725 

Wales 4,303,711 1,394,402 

UK - Total 115,729,164 37,496,249 

87 

From http://ohioline.osu.edu/b804/804_3.html 

88 

Poultry Manure (litter and Excreta) in England and Wales in Relation to the Regional Electricity Companies, ADAS, 1993, 

http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file14939.pdf 

89 

Estimated average calorific values of fuels – 2004, BERR, http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file19273.xls 

90 st 

ETSU R-122: New and Renewable Energy: Prospects for the UK for the 21 Century, Supporting Analysis. 

91 

Poultry litter as a fuel, World’s Poultry Science Journal, 49, 175-177, Dagnall, S., 1993. 

57

58 



The estimated poultry litter resource in the UK is around 1.3 million tonnes as a significant proportion of 

birds are free range, and there will still be considerable spreading to land occurring. 92 Approximately half 

of the 1.3 million tonnes is already committed to EPRL (Energy Power Resources Limited) energy from 

waste plants, generally from the largest commercial poultry farmers. Such plants are at Thetford, Eye 

and Westfield, the centres of the UK poultry industry (see later for more information). 


Controlled agricultural wastes such as sacks, chemical residues etc are too heterogeneous to be a viable 

feedstock. 

Agricultural residues have a large potential to be utilised for energy. The residues split into two types – 

dry residues that can be utilised through combustion, and wet residues that have the potential to be 

utilised through AD. In both cases, the data for total arisings do not represent availability for energy as 

significant amounts of these materials are used in traditional applications. In addition arisings are 

seasonally dependent, straw only arises for a short period in late summer and must be stored, slurries 

and manures are largely available only when animals are wintering, or in enclosed spaces. These two 

factors make the availability of residues for energy uncertain and a function of market conditions at any 

one time. 

We were unable to find information on the impact that the step change in deployment implied by the 

Renewable Energy Strategy would have on alternative uses. This may have detrimental effects on some 

affected sectors that will not be offset by the increases energy business. 

4.6 Forestry Residues 


Woodland covers an estimated 2.8 million hectares in the UK mainland, of which 1.57 million ha is conifer 

and 1.17 million ha broadleaf. 93 On the UK mainland, the highest proportion of woodland is in Scotland, 

49%, England has 41% and Wales has 10%. Northern Ireland has a woodland area of 56,997 ha. 94 


Forestry residues are defined as those parts of a tree left on the forest floor after harvesting and not 

recovered for commercial purpose. Such material originates from forests and woodlands, as primary 

processing co-products and from arboricultural arisings. 

Forest and woodland residues include: 95 

• Harvesting residues: tips of stems (a diameter of less than 7cm) and side branches. 

• Small round-wood: small stems removed from side branches with a diameter of 7-14 cm. 96 

• Poor quality wood: trees large enough to be used for timber, but of such poor quality they would 

otherwise be left on site or sold as firewood. 

92 st 

ETSU R-122: New and Renewable Energy: Prospects for the UK for the 21 Century, Supporting Analysis. 

93 

Addressing the land use issues for non-food crops, in response to increasing fuel and energy generation opportunities, NNFCC 2008, 

http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/metadot/index.pl?id=8253;isa=DBRow;op=show;dbview_id=2539 

94 

Forest Service, 2002. Facts and Figures, http://www.forestserviceni.gov.uk/factfigures01-02.pdf 

95 

About Woodfuel, Forest Research, 2003, 

http://www.eforestry.gov.uk/woodfuel/pages/AboutWoodfuel.jsp#Primaryprocessingcoproducts 

96 

Although it could be argued that small round-wood is not a forestry residue but a product. In the reference cited small round-wood is included to 

show the maximum potential availability. Availability of this resource will depend on price and market conditions.



By utilising the above resources from currently under managed woodlands, as outlined in the Forestry 

Commissions Wood Fuel Strategy (2006), 97 these woodlands could contribute significantly to the arisings 

of forestry residues available for conversion to energy or transport fuels. 

A potential disadvantage that would need to be accounted for is the negative effects of removing this 

material from a forest, which if removed in excess could result in a decline in soil quality and structure, a 

decline in water quality and a decline in carbon sequestration. 98 

Production from commercial forestry systems is usually more complex than for annual or perennial energy 

crops, since the composition of the biomass obtained is a mixture of the above. 93 

The figures used in this section are based on a detailed report by McKay et al. (2003), the Forestry 

Commission for the DTI, published in 2003. Any detailed information on the methodology used to 

calculate the forestry residue arising is available from this report. McKay et al. (2003) does not provide 

forestry residue data for Northern Ireland and this is therefore collected from other sources. 

Figures in ‘oven dried tonnes’ (odt) are often quoted in this area. This refers to wood that is completely 

dried (i.e. zero moisture content). In reality it is very difficult to produce such wood, particularly from virgin 

residues and wood fuel is typically available at a range of moisture contents. To overcome issues that 

variable moisture content creates for the comparison of wood (and other biomass) fuels, characteristics 

such as calorific value are often quoted for odt. 

4.6.3 Current arisings 

The map of Great Britain from RESTATS shows the resource availability of forestry residues. As the 

arising data for forestry residues shows in the latter section of this chapter, a vast amount of forestry 

residue exists in the UK. However the availability of the resource is an issue since it is already marketed 

to other industries and any remaining residue left on the ground contributes to effective forestry 

management through decomposition and soil nutrient maintenance. Therefore this chapter provides the 

forestry residue arising data, however they are not necessary available for energy projects. 

97 A Woodfuel Strategy for England, Forestry Commission, 2006, 

http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fce-woodfuel-strategy.pdf/$FILE/fce-woodfuel-strategy.pdf 

98 Forest Residues, Cranfield University, Ian Truckell, http://www.cranfield.ac.uk/sas/naturalresources/research/projects/forestresidues.jsp 

59

60 



Figure 11 Resource map of forestry residues for the UK (oven dried tonnes per annum) 

(Source: RESTATS 99 – This Yield map was created for the EU funded AMOEBA project. For forestry by-products, residue factors 

from management activities, related to hectares of crop, were used to derive details of the available biomass. The information is 

presented here in oven dried tonnes of material per acre and not per hectares) 

The data below gives an estimation of the present annual operationally available resource by UK region, 

i.e. the quantity that would be possible to make available at roadside, from within the Forestry 

Commission and private sector area, without considering existing industries that use these sources. 100 

99 Final report September 2004, RESTATS: Renewable Energy Statistics Database for the United Kingdom, www.restats.org.uk/index.htm 

100 McKay H, Hudson J.B. and Hudson R.J (2003) Wood fuel resource in Britain: main report (FES B/W3/00787/REP/1, DTI/Pub URN 03/1436, 

http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file15006.pdf. Additional reports supplied by the Forestry Commission, derived from their website, 

http://www.eforestry.gov.uk/woodfuel/pages/Results.jsp



Table 26 Annual production of potential operationally available forestry residue by UK region within the 

Forestry Commission and private sector area (not considering existing industries.) 

Region Forestry and 

Woodland 

Residue (odt pa) 





South East and London 94,994 



Yorkshire and Humberside 63,285 

England Total 618,432 

Scotland 848,345 

Wales 607,701 

Northern Ireland 101 83,860 

UK Total 2,074,478 

Although arising data is available for round-wood with diameters 

greater than 7cm, these are more likely to be used for products and 

they are not included in this report as a forestry residue. 

These estimates do not take economic feasibility into account. For example, resource is not excluded on 

the basis that it may be too expensive. The actual availability is likely to change over time, dependent on 

a host of factors - including financial support, infrastructure and incentives, transportation costs, 

accessibility, harvesting costs, timber prices, and prices of competing co-product markets. 

In a separate estimate the Forestry Commission estimate that, of the total available resource, 10% of the 

small round-wood and 100% of poor quality stem-wood, stem tips and branches could be made available 

to new wood fuel projects without serious disruption to existing wood-using industries. 97 These 

percentages are applied in the latter part of this chapter to calculate the available forestry residues in the 

presence of existing industries. 

The figures in Table 26 allow a comparative assessment of the forestry and woodlands residues available 

for regions in the UK. However regional strategies may provide a better understanding of the most recent 

data on the arisings from specific regions, and several regions have produced such strategies. The 

criteria and assumptions used for the various strategies differ, which makes direct comparisons difficult, 

and thus it has not been attempted here. 

An alternative method to establish forestry residue is to use estimates of residue production per hectare. 

The two key types of woodland give rise to different levels of residue: 102 

• Conifer residue: approximately 1.5 odt per hectare per annum (odt/ha pa) 

• Broad-leaved residue: approximately 0.4 odt per hectare per annum (odt/ha pa). 

Using these assumptions gives a similar, although higher, estimate of woodland residues, as compared to 

Table 26. This is likely due to the wider scope of such an estimate – unlike that of McKay et al (2003), it 

includes forests managed by government departments, such as the Ministry of Defence and woodland 

owned by non-governmental organisations. 

101 

Northern Ireland data derived using an alternative method estimated from the assumption of the residue available relative to the forestry area as 

specified in Table.28. 

102 

'UK industry wood fuel resource study: England, Wales and Scotland 

61

62 



Table 27 Forestry residue arisings in the UK, based on total area of 2.8 M ha, and estimates of residue/ha pa 93 

Residue 

Broad-Leaf 

Residue 

Conifer 

Total 

Residue (odt 

pa) 

Broadleaf Conifer 

Region (‘000 ha) (‘000 ha) (odt pa) (odt pa) 

England 757 367 302,800 550,500 853,300 

Wales 127 158 50,800 237,000 287,800 

Scotland 


293 1,048 117,200 1,572,000 1,689,200 

Ireland 103 15 56 595 83,265 83,860 

UK - Total 1,177 1,573 470,800 2,359,500 2,830,300 

The report by McKay et al (2003) does not provide the equivalent data for Northern Ireland, hence the arising data for Northern 

Ireland in Table 26 has been estimated using the above method. 

4.6.4 Primary processing co-products 

Definition and Composition 

The process of converting trees into usable wooden products creates considerable wastage. 

Approximately 50% of the volume of stem wood that is sold to sawmills is usually converted into timber 

products such as planks, batons, etc. 100 The remainder is commonly called co-product and can include 

bark, chips, off cuts and sawdust. Such co-products are normally sold, used for a variety of different 

purposes including paper and panel boards manufacture. Hence these products often already have an 

existing market. However, it is anticipated that 10% of all co-products would be available as fuel sources 

without major effects on existing industries. 

Current Arisings 

Table 28 outlines the primary processing co-product arising in Great Britain. It can be seen that 

approximately 2% is used as wood fuel, most of which is used by the sawmills themselves. The latest 

figures indicate that 83% of co-product is consumed by the panel board industries. 

Table 28 Proportions of primary processing co-products sold for further use. 100 

Sold to Wood Processing 

Industries 

Other Sales 

Weight Co-product Weight Co-product Weight 

Co-product (odt pa) 

(odt pa) 

(odt pa) 

Sawdust 158,742 Sawdust 12,890 Sold as bark 95,664 

Slabwood 1,039 Slabwood 48 Burnt for heat 11,931 

Peeled 

Peeled 

Disposed 

Chips 487,570 Chips 12,161 rubbish/burning 797 

Unpeeled 

Unpeeled 

Total co- 

Chips 63,652 Chips 5,411 products 859,002 

Other 5,203 Firewood 2,941 Other 953 

Exploring the arisings at a regional level produces the following results: 

• Almost half (47%) of the co-product originates from Scottish mills, with 34% from England and 

19% from Wales. 

• Within England there are striking contrasts in arisings with the West Midlands accounting for 35% 

of English production and 12% of British output but the neighbouring East Midlands producing 

less than one tenth of the table below. 

103 Forest Service, 2002. Facts and Figures, http://www.forestserviceni.gov.uk/factfigures01-02.pdf



Table 29 Regional arising of co-products 104,105 

4.6.5 Arboriculture Arisings 

Region 

Sawmill Co-product 

(odt pa) 








Yorkshire and Humberside 18,969 



Wales 165,783 

Northern Ireland 100,000 

UK - Total 958,900 

Definition and Composition 

Arboriculture sources of wood residues include the products of felling, thinning and pruning of trees, and 

include residues from maintenance of trees in roadside and public areas throughout the UK. Arboricultural 

arising data does not exist for Northern Ireland. 

The residues are usually left on-site in the form of chippings or removed to landfill. Only a small 

proportion is currently used for energy end markets. 

The estimations of arboricultural arisings are based on a questionnaire analysis of arboricultural 

companies, tree officers and local authorities. 100 Total values for stem wood, branch wood, wood chips 

and foliage produced and subsequently sold was gathered. This information was scaled up by multiplying 

the respondent average by the total number of contractors in each region. 


The South East, including London, contributes about 25% of the English resource, while Yorkshire and 

Humberside and the East Midlands also have substantial arisings: these three regions provide in total 

more than half the arisings in Britain. As with the other resources, actual availability of forestry residues 

will be dependent on the prices offered for wood fuel end uses in comparison to those being offered by 

competing markets. 

104 The data is taken from About Woodfuel, Forest Research, 2003. The data is derived from the 2000 Annual Sawmill Survey and the co-incident 

Biennial Sawmill Survey carried out by the Forestry Commission Economics and Statistics Unit (McKay et al 2003). It is based on a voluntary survey 

where the data from the response is scaled up to national scale, which is a source of error. 

105 The Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development Report into Renewable Energy and Alternative Land Use Northern Ireland Assembly, 2007, 

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/agriculture/2007mandate/reports/390708R.htm 

63

64 



Table 30 Aboricultural arisings for Great Britain. 

Total Arboricultural Non-marketed Aboricultural 

Regions 

Arisings (odt pa) 

Arisings (odt pa) 

East Midlands 63,451 50,636 

East of England 46,656 37,357 

North East 15,525 11,133 

North West 39,445 25,979 

South East 157,344 119,160 

South West 34,830 27,012 

West Midlands 15,445 7,115 

Yorkshire and Humber 72,329 23,814 

Scotland 16,146 12,448 

Wales 11,000 6,841 

Great Britain - Total 472,171 321,495 

Due to the voluntary nature of providing this data the above figures should be taken as an estimate. 

Figure 12 illustrates the relative proportion of material produced from these activities. 

53% 

4% 

20% 

23% 

Foliage 

Wood chips 

Branch w ood 

Stem w ood 

Figure 12 Arboricultural arisings by the material produced (odt/annum) 

Potential Forestry resource, without serious disruption to existing wood using industries 

It is estimated that if all existing forests were actively managed for timber production and material not 

suited for use by existing markets (e.g construction and board manufacturers) was recovered, 1.9 million 

odt of wood from coniferous forest and 2.3 million odt of wood from broadleaved forest could be 

harvested each year, giving a total current forestry biomass resource of 4.2M odt. 93



It should be noted though that this figure ignores environmental constraints such as long-term site 

sustainability, and physical and economic constraints such as cost of harvesting and extracting this 

material from the forest. 

Making several assumptions on market availability allows the availability of arboricultural arisings to be 

calculated, without serious disruption of existing wood using industries. 100 

Assumptions on available arisings: 

• 10% of the small round-wood 

• 100% of poor quality stem-wood, stem tips and branches 

• 10% of sawmill product 

• On average, 70% of arboricultural arisings 

• 100% of material from clearance of utilities and roadside maintenance 

The total potential operationally available forestry residue quantity in Great Britain, in the absence of 

competing markets, is 3.12 million odt per annum. The main material is small round-wood, followed by 

sawmill co-product (potential to contribute around 1.03 and 0.86 million odt per annum respectively), with 

arboricultural arisings providing about 14% of the total. Approximately equal quantities are available in 

England and Scotland but the composition is substantially different. Arboricultural arisings form the major 

element in England though sawmill co-product, small round-wood, and branches are all significant 

components. In Scotland and Wales, small round-wood and sawmill co-products are the dominant 

resources with all other resource streams playing only a minor part at the moment. It may be argued that 

small round-wood is in fact a product and not a residue, however it has been considered that 10% of 

small round-wood may be available for use without serious disruption to existing wood using industries, 

hence it is included within the arisings data. 100 

Table 31 Current potential operationally available forestry residue resources by region, taking into account 

competing markets 

Total Forests 

and Woodlands 

(odt pa) 

Arboricultural 

arising 

(odt pa) 

Region 

Sawmill Coproduct 

(odt pa) 

East Midlands 39,940 7,664 50,636 98 

East of England 45,123 24,577 37,357 107 

North East 21,689 50,615 11,133 83 

North West 53,678 37,899 25,979 118 

South East 50,888 22,191 119,160 192 

South West 77,911 27,204 27,012 132 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

23,102 100,460 7,115 131 

Humberside 35,654 18,969 23,814 78 

England - Total 347,985 289,579 301,933 939 

Scotland 302,392 403,538 12,448 718 

Wales 157,707 165,783 6,841 330 

Great Britain - Total 1,987 

Total 

(‘000 odt pa) 

Future Arisings 

Information presented here is an approximation of all British forests and woodlands. There is great 

uncertainty about the future climate and the response of forests to that climate. 106 This applies to both 

direct effects (e.g. in the absence of nutrient and water limitations, growth is expected to increase due to 

106 Forestry Commission, 2002, National Inventory of Woodland and Trees http://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/pdf/niengland.pdf/$FILE/niengland.pdf 

65

66 



increased CO2 and temperature) and indirect effects (e.g. higher winter temperatures are expected to 

increase the fecundity of deer and reduce tree growth through increased browsing). 

In addition harvesting and thinning plans are not binding and will be influenced by a range of factors: 

policy related, practical and commercial. These are likely to have significant consequences for future 

forestry residue resources even though they cannot be quantified at the moment. 100 

• Forestry residue forecast 

Forestry residue in the form of small round-wood, poor quality stems, branches, tips and foliage 

from traditional forestry is expected to remain relatively stable at just under 2 million odt per 

annum up to 2020. 

• Private Sector residue forecast 

Small round-wood, poor quality stems, stem tips, branches and foliage together increase to 1.35 

million odt by 2012-2016, followed by a slight decrease 1.3 million odt to 2020. 

• Public Sector residue forecast 

Available biomass from the public sector is about half that predicted for private sector. 

Considering small round-wood, tips, branches and foliage (there is no equivalent category to poor 

quality stems in the public sector), the prediction is that total biomass remains around 617k odt pa 

across Great Britain for 2007 – 2016, after which it falls slightly to reach 599k odt per annum by 

2021. 

Table 32 Summary of future Woodland Arisings across Great Britain, private and public sector. 

Country Forecast Period Total Arising 

(odt pa) 

Scotland 2007-2011 931,062 

2012-2016 1,033,598 

2017-2021 1,019,815 

Wales 2007-2011 274,794 

2012-2016 260,346 

2017-2021 242,563 

England 2007-2011 664,083 

2012-2016 669,653 

2017-2021 637,862 

Northern Ireland 107 2020 21,000 – 30,000 

• Primary processing co-products forecast 

o The proportions of smaller and poor quality arisings are expected to remain stable in the 

near future. However the availability of larger dimension material is expected to increase 

substantially. For example, stem-wood of 18+cm diameter is forecasted to increase from 

3.8 million odt per annum in 2003-2006 to 5.4 million odt per annum in 2017-2021. 

Assuming that the sawmilling sector uses this resource, co-product will increase 

proportionately. 

o In addition there is some indication that, compared to the present harvest, the form of 

larger dimension material is poorer than in material that will reach felling age in the next 

20 years or so years. Conversion efficiency is therefore expected to fall with a 

concomitant increase in co-product unless saw-milling technology can make parallel 

improvements. 

o In Northern Ireland the forecast for 2020 is 50,000 – 200,000 odt pa, depending on 

whether a minimum or maximum scenario is pursued. 

107 Assessment of the potential for bioenergy development in Northern Ireland, AEA, 2008, 

http://www.detini.gov.uk/cgi-bin/downutildoc?id=2314.



• Arboricultural forecast 

Although operationally available arboricultural arisings cannot be forecast with any certainty, it is 

estimated that it is unlikely to change dramatically. However, it is expected that arboricultural 

arisings will increase. This can be found in more detail Appendix 1. 

4.6.6 Conclusions for Forestry Residues 

The UK has considerable natural wood resource, one that is not fully exploited at the moment and thus 

there is considerable room for use of this material in future energy solutions. However, traditional and 

existing markets must be borne in mind, as must market conditions that will affect the cost of such a 

resource. In addition the environmental implications of removing significantly more natural wood arisings 

from land, and the impact this may have on future land quality and embedded carbon need further 

assessment. 

The figures discussed here are the maximum practicable resource. For such quantities to be available a 

market for the product must exist and funding or incentives would be needed to set up the equipment and 

storage necessary. Currently there are limited supply chain connections, thus this quantity of wood could 

not be brought to the market in a short timeframe. 

The availability and feasibility of using wood based fuels is dependent on the policy framework. One such 

recent example of the Woodfuel Strategy for England (2006) has a target to bring an additional 2 million 

tonnes of woodfuel to the market, annually by 2020 from forestry residues supported by other sources 

such as arboricultural arisings and recovered wood. All the wood resource described above is clean, 

untreated wood, and is therefore eligible as biomass fuels under the current legislation, and are exempt 

from the Waste Incineration Directive. 

4.7 Conclusions 

Waste, both controlled wastes and biological residues, represents a massive potential resource in the UK. 

Although significant amounts of such materials are already recycled, especially from MSW waste 

streams, or recycled onto land, as with many agricultural residues, a considerable amount of waste still 

exists and disposing of it is a challenge. 

Much of the residual waste that is disposed of through incineration or to landfill could potentially be more 

efficiently utilised, and may be a feedstock for the generation of energy or transport fuels. 

Summary of Waste Arisings 

• Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is comprised of a very large range of materials, and total waste 

arisings are increasing. Data quality is good, and in 2007/08 the UK MSW arisings were 344 

million tonnes. Even if the level produced by each household were to remain constant, the 

increasing number of households will result in increasing arisings. Recycling initiatives decrease 

the proportion of waste going straight for disposal, and the level of recycling is increasing each 

year. Most growth forecasts use a growth rate of 0.75% per annum. 

• Commercial and Industrial waste (C&I) is also comprised of a very large range of materials, with 

levels at 83 million tonnes in 2002/03. Overall levels of industrial waste are decreasing, while 

levels of commercial wastes are increasing. Again, recycling initiatives decrease the proportion 

of waste going straight for disposal, and the level of recycling is increasing each year, although in 

general recycling is not as advanced as for MSW. Growth rates have been taken as 1% per 

annum for commercial waste, and 0% per annum for industrial waste. 

67

68 



• Construction and Demolition waste (C&D) is largely comprised of mineral waste, with small 

amounts of wood, plastics and metals. Most investigation of this waste stream has been 

concerned with recycling the mineral proportion into aggregate. Of the three controlled waste 

streams is produces the greatest amount, estimated at 118.6 million tonnes of waste in 2005. 

• Biosolids are produced from waste water treatment sites, as the main by-product. Data quality is 

generally good and in 2004-5 1.72 Mt of dry bio-solids were produced. Estimations are that this 

will increase to 2.5 Mt by 2030 due to an increasing number of households and tighter waste 

water and pollutions controls through legislation. 

• Agricultural residues include the wet residues of manures and slurries, and the dry residues of 

straw and poultry litter. Levels of available straw (after traditional uses) for 2006 were estimated 

to be 2.9 million tonnes for the UK, while poultry litter with an energy content of 37 million GJ was 

produced. Manures and slurries from cattle were estimated to produce a total, collectable, 9.9 

million kg/day of volatile solids, pigs 669 thousand kg/day of volatile solids and fowls 1.8 million 

kg/day of volatile solids. Accurate current and future arisings are difficult to predict as the sector 

is so dependent on weather, farming practices and markets. Apart from poultry litter, where 

approximately 50% is already committed to energy from waste plants, the residues are recycled 

to land. 

• Forestry residues arise from forests and woodlands, primary processing co-products and 

arboricultural work. Total available forestry residues in the UK are estimated to be 1,987 odt per 

annum, although it is unlikely this full amount could be realised for energy, and the data quality is 

generally uncertain. Some future estimations show an increase of material available, but no 

significant changes are expected.



5 Arisings of components suitable for 

energy 

Chapter 4 presented an overview of the waste arisings by origin across the UK. In this chapter we 

discuss those components that are commonly cited as suitable for energy and fuel solutions. 

Each of the waste types discussed here is a subsection of, and a combination of, those already detailed 

above. The arisings presented here therefore do not represent additional arisings, but rather double 

counting. 

Many of these streams are to some degree already collected separately and used directly for energy or 

being traded as fuel. This is a tendency that will increase as demand for renewable fuels increases as a 

result of the Renewables Obligation and Renewable Heat Incentive. 

Immediately identifiable arisings that could provide a biomass resource include: 

1. Wood residues: forestry (e.g. thinnings), virgin and treated wood processing waste, used wood. 

2. Agricultural residues: dry residues such as straw, husks and poultry litter, and wet residues such 

as manures and slurries. 

3. Municipal solid wastes including refuse derived fuels, kitchen wastes and garden wastes. 

4. Industrial and commercial wastes which include food and drink processing residues, tallow, meat 

and bone meal, pulp and paper sludges and liquors, textile residues, recovered vegetable oils. 

Those waste materials that have adequate data available, have been discussed. The pulling together of 

information from different waste streams allows a comprehensive picture of the total resource to be given. 

5.1 Waste Wood 

Background 

In this section the arisings of treated and post-consumer waste wood are evaluated. Clean waste wood 

from untreated wood processing is included in the section on forest residues and not included here. 

Each year in the UK it is estimated that over 7.5 million tonnes of wood waste is produced, approximately 

1.8% of total UK waste arisings. Of this over 80% is landfilled, 16% recycled and reused, and energy 

recovered from 4%. 108 Taking into account recent economic developments and the slowing of the 

economy, it is likely that this amount will fall in the short term. Indeed there are already reports that wood 

recyclers are dropping the fees they charge to take in wood, as the levels being disposed of go down. 

The decrease is most noticeable from the construction sector, and is believed to be having a knock on 

effect on the chipboard and wood panel producers. 109 

The markets for virgin untreated wood have developed rapidly in recent years due to the expansion of 

biomass heating in particular. The use of waste wood has not developed in a similar way. Treated waste 

wood includes anything that has had a surface coatings applied to it such as paints and varnishes or 

impregnation with preservative. The Waste Incineration Directive (WID) requires that combustion of wood 

waste containing heavy metals or halogenated hydrocarbons must meet strict emissions limits; cleaner 

wood is excluded for the purpose of combustion, but mixtures are usually regarded as contaminated for 

the purposes of combustion. Thus it is possible to recover energy in the form of power and heat from this 

contaminated wood, but pollution abatement must be installed to ensure the emissions limits are not 

108 Carbon Balances and Energy Impacts of the Management of UK Wastes, Defra R&D Project WRT 237, ERM, 2006, 

http://www.resourcesnotwaste.org/members/conf-application-form/Carbon&Waste(ERM).pdf 

109 Wood recyclers slash gate fees, 04-02-2009, Lets recycle.com, 

http://www.letsrecycle.com/do/ecco.py/view_item?listid=37&listcatid=217&listitemid=10989 

69

70 



exceeded. 110 Waste wood could potentially become a valuable energy resource, but the market lacks 

tight specifications for the quality of wood sourced. 111 

One of the main barriers to utilisation of this resource is that the types and volumes of waste wood are 

largely unknown. 112,113 Treated and post-consumer waste wood is generated from a number of different 

sources: 112 

• Municipal solid waste (all waste collected under local authority contracts) 

• Industrial wood processing (such as furniture manufacture, including kitchen, office, exhibition or 

shop fitting furniture), 

• Industrial waste, 

• Commercial and business waste (e.g. from refurbishment), 

• Construction and demolition waste and 

• Packaging and pallets. 

Data sources 

The data used to compile this chapter is taken from sources such as Defra, the Environment Agency and 

WRAP (Waste and Resource Action Programme), in particular the 2005 WRAP report by Nikitas et al. 

which was identified as the most authoritative work to date, and reviews and ranks all previous sources. 

These comprehensive reviews and surveys of specific sectors have been used and extrapolated from to 

generate a picture for regions of the UK. This method provides estimates but there is a danger in putting 

too much reliance on it – there are big uncertainties and there are also likely to be large variations with 

time, depending on economic activity, particularly if large companies leave the UK or change their 

business. 

Packaging waste does not come under any specific waste stream and so is covered briefly in Box 1. 

Box 1. Packaging waste 

Packaging waste is not a specific waste stream, but arises from municipal, commercial, industrial 

and construction waste streams. The most significant type of waste wood arisings are those from 

pallets, but in addition packaging waste wood is also generated from cases, boxes, crates, cable 

drums, casks and barrels. All of these categories are largely made from softwood. 

Waste wood from packaging in the commercial and industrial sector was estimated to generate 

arisings of nearly 900,000 tonnes in 1998. Important quantities of packaging waste are also 

believed to arise on construction sites. 

Data on wood packaging waste across the different waste streams is available from Timcon 

(Timber Packaging and Pallet Confederation). The estimated total tonnage in the UK for 2004 was 

about 1.4 million tonnes in 2004. However, this data is taken from Prodcom, based on survey 

samples of UK manufacturers, and presumably importers and exporters. Timcon’s view is that this 

data is of poor quality. 

110 The potential use of waste wood in the North East as an efficient biomass fuel source , K Coombs, 

http://www.northwoods.org.uk/files/northwoods/publications/Northwoods_WasteWoodFuelSource.pdf 

111 The environmental regulation of wood, Environment Agency, http://www.environmentagency.gov.uk/static/documents/Business/ps005_2077240.pdf 

112 Review of wood waste arisings and management in the UK, 2005, Nikitas et al, Published by WRAP. 

113 ‘Waste wood as a Biomass Fuel’ – Defra, April 2008, ‘UK Biomass Strategy’ – Defra, May 2007



5.1.1 Municipal Wood Waste 

Municipal wood waste comprises of disposal by households; for example, furniture, fencing, decking, 

wood cuts from DIY, garden wastes and wood packaging. Wood waste from the municipal stream is 

usually mixed with other waste and rarely available as a clean source. It would need to be separated, 

cleaned and processed before it would form a useful wood fuel source, unless it goes to mass burn 

incineration. 

Estimation of waste wood in the municipal waste stream is difficult as the data represents all household 

waste and rarely specifies the quantities of specific fractions. However a number of compositional studies 

have been performed and are used below. 


Considering the available compositional data for MSW waste streams in 2005, the estimate percentages 

shown in Table 33 were established. 

Table 33 Waste wood and furniture waste as a percentage of MSW waste streams 

Household Collection 

Bulky waste collections 

Civic Amenity Site waste 

Waste wood Furniture 

1.11% (Wales) 

1.91% (rest of UK) 

0.06% (Wales) 


6.03% 37% 

12.53% (Wales) 


5.86% (Wales) 


Collection round nonhousehold 

waste 0.6% 0% 

Applying these percentages to the most recent overall tonnages for MSW in the English Regions, Wales, 

Northern Ireland and Scotland to provide an estimate for the waste wood arising in tonnes (and where 

possible values for English regions) yielded the following results: 114 

Table 34 Estimate of wood content of MSW in the UK for 2003/4, excluding furniture 

Wood Arisings (‘000 tonnes) 

Waste Stream England Northern 

Ireland 

Scotland Wales UK 

Household Collection 356 12 38 12 418 (39%) 

Bulky Collections 37 1 7 2 47 (4%) 

Civic Amenity 498 23 37 13 572 (54%) 

Non Household Collection 22 0 3 2 27 (3%) 

Total Wood in MSW 913 37 85 29 1,065 

Clearly the dominant source of municipal wood is the Civic Amenity Sites, which in 2003/4 accounted for 

over half of the arisings, due to the presence of garden waste at CA sites. 

Furniture in Municipal Waste 

It has not been possible to identify a suitable percentage for wood composition for furniture in the MSW 

waste stream. The figures below also include coverings, surface treatments and glass. 

114 More up to date data is of MSW arising is available, however not in the detailed waste streams within MSW required for the calculation here. 

71

72 



Table 35 Estimate of furniture waste in MSW in the UK for 2003/4 

Wood Arisings (‘000 tonnes) 

Waste Stream England Northern 

Ireland 

Scotland Wales UK 

Household Collection 34 1.1 3.6 0.7 39 (6%) 

Bulky Collections 230 6.9 43 11.5 291 (49%) 

Civic Amenity 236 11.1 17.7 6.1 271 (45%) 

Non Household Collection 0 0 0 0 0 

Total Wood in MSW 500 19 64 18 602 

Applying the waste wood arisings for 2003/4 to the waste arisings for that year (England, 29,114 

thousand tonnes) yields an arising figure of 3.13% for general waste wood and 1.72 for waste furniture 

wood. 115 These percentages have been applied to the most recent MSW arisings to give an alternative 

arisings figure, and yield the estimates in Table 36. 

Table 36 Estimation of Waste Wood arisings by region using 2007/-8 MSW figures 

Region Wood Waste (excl. 

furniture) 


Furniture Waste 


East Midlands 76 42 

East of England 95 52 

London 130 71 

North East 47 49 

North West 127 70 

South East 143 79 

South West 92 50 

West Midlands 93 51 

Yorkshire and Humber 90 49 

England - Total 892 513 

Northern Ireland 34 19 

Scotland 94 52 

Wales 56 31 

UK - Total 1,076 584 

5.1.2 Construction and Demolition Waste Wood (C&D) 

Data for C&D waste is largely concerned with achieving aggregate recycling, and therefore includes only 

mineral waste. The Environment Agency estimate that 4 million tonnes of waste wood arise from the 

construction industry every year. 116 Construction and demolition waste is usually classed as one 

category, but waste wood may arise from a number of different waste streams: 117 

• Construction 

o off-cuts from structural timbers, 

o timber packaging, scaffolding, cladding, etc. 

Wood is likely to be untreated or uncontaminated. 

115 Defra e-Digest Statistics for 2007/8, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/archive/mwb200708.xls 

116 Defra “Waste Wood for Biomass” quoting the study by Nikita et al (2005). They note that this figure is an average of the maximum and minimum 

estimates which are 7.9 million tpa and 2.2 million tpa respectively for the UK. 

117 Remade Scotland (2004) Woodwaste Arisings in Scotland Assessment of Available Data on Scottish



• Demolition 

o Used structural timber, floorboards, joists, doors and frames etc. 

Wood is likely to be treated, painted, coated or varnished, all are ‘contaminated’. 

• Refurbishment - this would be a combination of the above 

• Destruction 

• Scaffolding 

Remade Scotland indicates that the specific types of waste wood from construction and demolition waste 

include: 

• cable drums 

• coated material 

• cladding 

• dimension timber 

• doors and door 

frames 

• fences 

• flooring 

• framing timbers 

• pallets and fencing 

• panels and engineered 

wood composites using 

adhesives 

• piles 

• poles 

• solid wood 

• stakes 

• window frames 

Traditionally much of this waste was disposed of in skips on site and was poorly segregated. However, 

there have been advances in segregation and recycling of construction and demolition waste through the 

introduction of the Site Waste Management Plans (SWMP) in April 2008 for sites greater than 

£300,000. 118 Small sites (under £300,000) still continue to skip the majority of their waste, most of which 

goes to landfill. Segregation is often more difficult on such sites due to the lack of time and resource to 

undertake this activity. 


There are only a few data sets available for arisings of waste wood from C&D, and these have been 

evaluated by Nikitas et al (2005). (See Appendix 1 for an evaluation of these sources.) 

Taking 1.5% as the minimum value of C&D waste arisings that are waste wood, and assuming a 

maximum value of 12.44% as the upper limit (although this includes excavation waste, hence the 

reduction to 7.22% as 42% of the C&D waste was established as excavation waste) produces the figures 

detailed in Table 37. 

Table 37 Estimated waste wood arisings (excluding reclaimed wood) from the C&D waste stream. 

UK Arisings of waste wood 


England Wales Scotland Northern 

Ireland 

Total C&D waste arisings 88,900 5,000 6,300 900 101,100 

Minimum Estimate (1.5%) 1,330 80 90 140 1,640 

Maximum Estimate (7.22%) 6,410 360 450 70 7,290 

Average 3,870 220 270 40 4,400 

The above figures take no account of reclaimed wood, which is a further 634,000 tonnes for the UK, 

yielding a total of 5,034,000 tonnes. However it is unlikely that reclaimed wood would be available for 

energy generation. There is a very significant difference between the minimum and maximum estimates, 

demonstrating the degree of uncertainty in the data, and the need for more detailed arisings figures to be 

generated. 

118 Defra 2008. Non-statutory guidance for site waste management plans. 

UK 

73

74 



5.1.3 Commercial and Industrial Waste Wood (C&I) 

The main sources of wood waste originating within the C&I waste stream are off cuts and wastes from: 

• Furniture manufacture 

• Manufacture of products for use in construction e.g. roofing timbers, joists, floorboards, doors and 

windows 

• Wood waste during manufacture of wooden packaging 

• Wood wastes from waste wooden packaging 

• Utility poles 

• Railway sleepers. 

A number of surveys have been conducted on specific industries within the C&I waste stream by 

organisations such as the Environment Agency, British Furniture manufacturers (BFM), FIET, FIRA and 

TRADA. These data sources have been assessed by Nikitas et al (2005) and, in general, were rated as 

being of poor quality. 

The total C&I waste wood arisings were estimated to be 4,481,000 tonnes. General waste wood arisings 

were identified as the largest source of arisings, with the second largest contribution from panel board 

manufacture (which accounts for a quarter of all wood wastes arising from the C&I sector, but it is 

believed that much of this figure is consumed within the industry to generate process heat). 

25% 

12% 

1% 1% 

4% 1% 

56% 

Other C&I w ood w aste 

Railw ay Sleepers 

Utility Poles 

Furniture Manufacture 

Panelboard Manufacture 

Construction Industry 

Product Manufacture 

Wooden Packaging 

Manufacture 

Figure 13 Waste wood arisings for C&I type activities 

Future Arisings for all waste streams 

The WRAP report by Nikitas et al (2005) is also the best source of predictions of future arisings of waste 

wood. A simple model forecast for the various waste streams up until 2015 was generated and the 

results shown in 

Table 38 shows estimations for the future waste wood arisings , taking into account the relevant 

legislations and targets such as the Landfill Directive, the Packaging Directive, the Landfill Tax and the 

Aggregates Levy.



Table 38 Estimations of future Waste wood arisings from various waste streams. 

Year 

MSW arisings 

(‘000 tonnes, 

no furniture) 

MSW furniture 


C&D 


C&I 


2008 1,147 648 5167 6,612 

2012 1,217 688 5271 6,678 

2015 1,273 719 5351 6,729 

Conclusions 

The UK produces a large quantity of waste wood, arising from a variety of waste streams. The specific 

data quality is largely poor. Overall it is estimated that over 7.5 million tonnes of waste wood are 

generated each year. The limiting factors for the use of waste wood are the presence of any 

contaminants and the difficulty in sorting and segregating mixed waste streams to provide wood in the 

form and quantity required. Most, if not all, of this wood will have been treated in some way, so if it is to 

be used for energy or fuels this must be done in a WID compliant facility. 

In addition there are alternative existing markets for wood waste. These include: 

• Use in panel board manufacture 

• Use to make horticultural surface products 

• Use to make animal bedding 

• Combustion in small scale wood burning boilers 

• Incineration with or without the recovery of energy 

Any large-scale effort to encourage the use of waste wood for energy or fuels generation will need to take 

these established uses into account. 

The wood recycling industry has significantly increased in size since 1996, when less than 200,000 

tonnes of waste wood was recycled. All of the companies conducting either wood waste collection or 

sorting of the collected wood to produce products suitable for recycling are private sector companies. 

The amount of wood which was recycled in 2008 was 2.0 million tonnes, of which 1.1 million tonnes was 

used in panel board manufacture and 0.4 million tonnes was sent to biomass energy recovery facilities. 

5.2 Food Waste 

Background 

This section contains waste arising data for food waste, which has been split into food waste arisings 

from households and food waste arisings from the commercial and industrial sector. For each of these 

two sectors data is provided for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. 

Food waste amounts to 18-20 million tonnes each year, for which 6.7 million tonnes is discarded from UK 

households. The commercial and industrial sector contribute 1.6 million tonnes from retailers, 4.1 million 

tonnes from food manufacturers and 3 million tonnes from food service and restaurants. 119 

The proportion of food waste currently captured is low across the UK, most is sent to landfill. 

Correspondingly there is scope for further collection and utilisation of food waste. 120 Indeed, the Landfill 

Directive requires increasing collection up to 2020. Such waste could potentially be converted into 

compost, anaerobically digested and the gas collected, or, more exceptionally, thermally treated. 

119 Non-Household Food Waste, WRAP, http://www.wrap.org.uk/retail/food_waste/nonhousehold_food.html 

120 Hogg. D, Barth. J, Schleiss. K, and Favoino. E , 2007, Dealing with Food Waste In the UK, Eunomia Research and Consulting for WRAP. 

75

76 




Predictions of future food waste arisings are difficult to make due to the significant amount of pressure 

and campaigns in operation at the moment, such as some councils collecting segregated food waste, and 

the WRAP ‘Love Food, Hate Waste’ campaign. However such campaigns generally take 5 years to have 

an impact, so the likelihood is that any decrease in arisings will be small over the next few years. 

5.2.1 Household Food Waste 

Household waste is a sub-section of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). This waste is almost exclusively 

household food waste, but may contain a minor amount of commercial and industrial waste included 

where refuse collections include mixed domestic and commercial properties. 

Typical composition figures for MSW have been used to provide an estimate of food waste arisings. The 

report ‘Dealing with Food Wastes in the UK’ published in March 2007 quantified the amount of food waste 

from households, and have been used here to calculate regional food waste arisings. 120 

England 

• Data from Defra’s 2007/08 MSW figures (WRAP report used 2004/05 data). 

• Food waste composition level: 17.5% 

Northern Ireland 

• Data from 2007/2008. 121 

• Food waste composition level: 19%. 

Scotland 

• Most recent data from SEPA’s 2006/2007. 122 


Wales 

• Data from 2007/2008. 123 


It is worth noting that the levels of food waste predicted above is in line with the numbers the Welsh 

Assembly Government (WAG) is releasing, but the local authorities in Wales are finding these quantities 

are over-estimated, as cautioned against in the background section above. Estimations of food waste are 

shown in Table 39 below. 

121 Municipal waste Management Report – Northern Ireland 2007/08, http://www.ni-environment.gov.uk/waste/municipal_data_reporting.htm 

122 Waste Data Digest 8 Data Tables (2006/07) http://www.sepa.org.uk/waste/waste_data/waste_data_digest.aspx 

123 Municipal Waste Management Report 2007/08, http://new.wales.gov.uk/statsdocs/env/sdr177-2008.pdf



Table 39 Food waste from households by region (2007/08) using the appropriate composition level. 

Region Quantity of 

Household waste 


Quantity of Food 

Waste 


East Midlands 2,185 382 

East of England 2,841 497 

London 3,342 585 

North East 1,268 222 

North West 3,599 630 

South East 4,242 742 

South West 2,644 463 

West Midlands 2,662 466 

Yorkshire/Humber 2,504 438 

England - Total 25,287 4,425 

Northern Ireland 928 176 


Wales 1,542 277 

UK – Total 30,752 5,417 

5.2.2 Industrial and Commercial Food Waste 

The Waste Strategy 2007 defines commercial and industrial waste as follows: 124 

• commercial waste: waste arising from wholesalers, catering establishments, shops and offices 

(in both the public and private sectors) 

• industrial waste: waste arising from factories and industrial plants. 

The data for food waste arisings from commercial and industrial waste sources is limited and it has not 

been possible to provide a breakdown of food waste arisings from commercial and industrial sources 

across the different regions of each country. The analysis below focuses on the food waste element in 

the mixed waste streams, together with kitchen and canteen waste, where it has been identified 

separately. 

England & Wales 

In 2002/03 the Environment Agency undertook a survey of Commercial and Industrial business across 

England and Wales, which gathered data on the types and quantities of waste, of which food waste was 

one, and the disposal or recovery methods. 125 Although this data is now relatively old, the survey has not 

been repeated for England, and a new survey is currently underway in Wales, but not yet published. 

Scotland 

In November 2008 a report by Napier University into Scotland’s Commercial and Industrial waste was 

published, which estimated that there are 2.73 million tonnes of mixed waste (similar to household waste) 

from commercial and industrial sources of which 16.7% was food waste. 126 

Whilst other data and information is available regarding Commercial and Industrial waste in Scotland, the 

focus of these is often across business sectors, for example in the Waste Data Digest. This means that 

the necessary level of detail to provide a realistic estimate of overall food waste arisings is not possible. In 

124 Waste Strategy for England, Defra, http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/waste/strategy/ 

125 Environment Agency, National Waste Production Survey 2002 

126 McLaurin. L, Darby. P, and Raeside, R. (2008) Estimation of commercial and industrial waste produced in Scotland in 2006. Final report to the 

Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA). Centre for Statistics, Napier University. 

77

78 



comparison the Napier University Report provides an indication of the different waste streams within the 

commercial and industrial sector and also includes compositional analysis for the mixed waste. 

Table 40 Industrial and Commercial Food Waste for England, Wales and Scotland 

Country Commercial Industrial 

Total 

(‘000 tonnes) (‘000 tonnes) (‘000 tonnes) 

England 127 6,067 4,121 6,189 

Wales 125 211 51 262 

Scotland 126 - - 457 

Note: Totals do not calculate correctly due to rounding 

Other studies 

Other studies have been undertaken, which focus and specific geographical areas or industry sectors. 

While reference to these is not helpful in providing an overview for each country, these reports would be 

able to provide a more detailed picture for specific areas. 

• Research undertaken for Defra and the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) provides a snapshot of 

food waste arisings across FDF members in 2006. 128 It was conducted at 236 sites, by 

organisations with a combined turnover of £17bn. 129 The survey included data on packaging 

waste, mixed waste and food waste – shown in Table 41. Further food waste arising will be in the 

mixed food and packaging waste, however the composition of this waste stream was not 

considered by the study. 

Table 41 Unmixed food waste arisings from FDF members in 2006 

Country / RDA Food Waste 


Advantage West Midlands 205 

SWRDA 111 

London 23 

EMDA 98 

Yorkshire Forward 47 

EEDA 27 

SEEDA 23 

NWDA 25 

One North East 13 

England - Total 571 

Northern Ireland 3 

Scotland 13 

Wales 18 

UK - Total 605 

• A study was conducted for the East of England Regional Assembly area, and published in May 

2008. 130 The study considered both green waste and food waste arisings, with a particular focus 

on the latter. It examined the future requirements for an increased number of facilities to treat 

separately collected bio-wastes from municipal and commercial and industrial waste streams. It 

considered waste arisings, availability, current treatment capacity and its spatial distribution, 

127 http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/wrindustry.htm 

128 http://www.fdf.org.uk/ - FDF members cover a third of the turnover for the food and drink sector. 

129 http://www.fdf.org.uk/publicgeneral/mapping_waste_in_the_food_industry.pdf 

130 Summary Report Regional Biowastes management Study: 

http://www.eera.gov.uk/GetAsset.aspx?id=fAAzADMANwB8AHwARgBhAGwAcwBlAHwAfAAwAHwA0



technologies available, the current treatment technology gap, assumed waste growth and growth 

in the capture of bio-wastes. This study provides a detailed analysis of the Regional position, 

however many regions have not undertaken such studies, and whether they do so in the future 

will depend on the regional priorities. 

Conclusion 

The UK produces significant amounts of food waste, the potential value of which is only just being 

realised. While MSW food waste arisings are considerable, estimated to be 5.4 million tonnes, 

Commercial and Industrial food waste arisings are estimated to be even higher at 6.9 million tonnes per 

annum. 

WRAP, whose recent campaign ‘Love food, hate waste’ focused on household food waste, have 

identified that when food waste collection schemes are set up the volume collected is often significantly 

less than that anticipated – believed to be due to people reducing their food waste once they can see how 

much is being wasted. 

5.3 Tallow 131 

Background 

Tallow is an animal fat obtained by rendering animal carcases and waste from the food industry and as 

such its arisings would be considered under industrial waste arisings. Rendering is the process by which 

animal carcases and trimmings are crushed and heated to drive off the water, sterilise the material and 

allow the fats (tallow) and meat and bone meal (MBM) to be separated. Rendering is an energy intensive 

process and the industry has traditionally used some of the tallow it produces as fuel. 


The size of the UK tallow arisings is dependent on UK meat production, which effectively limits the tallow 

available to the UK to around 250,000 tonnes per annum, from 2 million tonnes of animal waste. The 

industry processes the by-products of approximately 2 million cattle, 10 million pigs, 14 million sheep and 

800 million chickens annually. The amount of tallow produced in the UK has been stable for a number of 

years, and is unlikely to change significantly in the foreseeable future. 

Estimates of the amount of tallow produced range from 200kT per annum to 290kT per annum depending 

on the definition of what is included and the reference year. 132 The consensus is that 220 – 240 kT is 

available in principle for industrial use. 

Currently all tallow produced is used for some economic purpose. None is disposed to landfill. The main 

uses are dictated by the category of tallow under the Animal By-products Regulations: 133 

Category 1 can only be used for burning or fuel production 

Category 2 can be used for industrial applications 

Category 3 can be used for human contact (e.g. in soaps and cosmetics). 

This influences the current uses: burning of (mainly category 1) tallow in boilers by the rendering industry 

to raise process heat and the use of category 2 and 3 tallow by the oleochemicals and soap industry. A 

breakdown of these uses is shown in Figure 14 (Uniqema 2008), demonstrating that 43% of the tallow is 

used as a fuel source, and 33% for industrial applications. These figures exclude exports. 

131 Advice on the Economic and Environmental Impacts of Government Support for Biodiesel Production from Tallow, Report for the Department of 

Transport, 2008. 

132 Argent Energy, 2008; CIA2008; UKRA 2008; Uniqema 2008. 

133 See Chapter 2 for an explanation of these terminologies. 

79

80 



Burning 

33% 

Pow er Generation 

3% 

Biodiesel 

7% 

Food 

8% 

Animal Feed 

16% 

Oleochemicals and 

soap 

33% 

Figure 14 Uses of tallow in the UK (kT p.a.) 

This is a rather different balance than found when considering the EU as a whole, where a much greater 

portion of the available tallow goes into animal feed. 134 

Energy and Fuels from Tallow 

The end uses for tallow are changing, as the incentives for the production of biodiesel have made this 

feedstock attractive for fuel production. With a fixed amount of tallow available on the market, this can 

only be obtained by diverting tallow from existing applications such as burning or oleochemical and soap 

production. 

Tallow derived biodiesel is an established procedure. In the UK tallow bio-diesel is produced through the 

FAME processes by Argent Energy in Motherwell at their 45 kT per annum capacity site (supplied with 

both tallow and used cooking oil). Their Ellesmere Port plant is currently under construction with a future 

capacity of 150 kT. 135 

Tallow biodiesel has a higher cetane number than plant oil biodiesel, resulting in cleaner and more 

efficient burning in diesel engines. However, it also has a higher cloud point because of the high levels of 

saturated fatty acids. This means that tallow biodiesel tends to crystallise out at low temperatures 

creating problems in engines. Used neat (100%) tallow biodiesel would not meet the European standard 

for biodiesel. However, when blended at low percentages into conventional diesel the mixture meets 

relevant fuel quality standards. 

Conclusion 

Tallow is a long established by-product of the rendering process, with constant volumes produced in the 

UK. Currently all tallow is used for some commercial purpose – traditionally high quality tallow was used 

in the chemicals and cosmetics industries, while low grade tallow was burnt for heat. The introduction of 

tallow for bio-diesel has already had a disruptive effect on traditional markets. 

134 EFPRA 2008, http://www.efpra.eu/content/default.asp?PageID=21 

135 Argent Energy 2008, http://www.argentenergy.com/articles/news/article_51.shtml



5.4 Textiles Waste Arising 

Background 

It is estimated that more than 1 million tonnes of textiles are thrown away every year, most of which is 

post-consumer waste. At least 50% of the textiles that are thrown away are recyclable. However, the 

proportion of textile wastes reused or recycled annually in the UK is only around 25%. 136 Besides postconsumer 

waste, post-industrial waste arises during yarn and fabric manufacture, the garment-making 

processes and from the retail industry. Textile waste arises as standard in two waste streams: MSW and 

C&I. 


Several sources have identified the proportion of textile waste in MSW as approximately 1.9%. 137 

Meanwhile C&I textile arisings are estimated to be 1-2% of the waste stream in Section 4.2. 

Table 42 Estimated textile waste arising in the UK by region in (‘000 tonnes) 

Region Textiles 

Textiles Total 

(1.9% of MSW) (1.5% of C&I) 

East Midlands 46 121 167 

East of England 58 98 156 

London 79 113 191 

North East 29 69 98 

North West 77 125 202 

South East 87 133 219 

South West 56 83 139 

West Midlands 57 109 166 

Yorkshire and Humber 54 167 221 

England - Total 542 1019 1560 

Northern Ireland 20 24 44 

Scotland 65 80 145 

Wales 34 117 151 

UK - Total 661 1239 1900 

Current Disposal Methods 

At present, the majority of post-consumer textiles are collected by charities such as The Salvation Army, 

Scope and Oxfam. Such collectors sort the material, selling it on to merchants in the appropriate sectors. 

The Open University Household Waste Study shows that there has been a year on year increase in the 

proportion of households served by kerbside recycling collections for textiles: 16.8% in 2002, 29% in 2005 

and 44.7% in 2008. 

Some post-industrial waste is recycled as part of in-house procedures. This is more common in the yarn 

and fabric-manufacturing sectors. The rest, aside from going to landfill or incineration, is sold to 

merchants via textile reclamation factories that can handle a huge tonnage of textiles. The main routes for 

the material are: 

• High quality second hand clothes and shoes are resorted for sending to charities in the UK 

and use in developing countries. 

• Lower quality textiles which are worn out are processed within the factory to produce 

industrial wiping cloths. 

136 Textile recycling information sheet, Waste Online, http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/InformationSheets/Textiles.htm, Analysis of household 

waste composition and factors driving waste increases - Dr. J. Parfitt, WRAP, December 2002. 

137 Open University Household Waste Study, Jones, A., Nesaratnam, S., Porteous, A., 2008, Defra: 1.9%, National Household Waste Arising Survey: 

1.8% after recycling 

81

82 



• Other textiles are further graded for fibre reclamation by pulling the threads of the textile and 

using it to produce new clothes and blankets, and also mattresses. 

Textiles have an average GCV of 16MJ/kg and the stream is therefore viable for Energy from Waste 

projects. However due to the already existing market in recycling and the complexity involved in sorting 

MSW it could be difficult to utilise this as a separate feedstock. 

Textile waste is considered to be a high priority product within Defra’s Product Roadmap scheme due to 

the high environmental and social impact - accounting for 5-10% of UK environmental impacts, partly due 

to the UK’s high consumption of clothing. 138,139 


A simple forecast for textile waste arising can be modelled on the assumption that the proportion of textile 

in C&I waste and MSW remain constant applied to the MSW and C&I waste forecasts. Such a prediction 

suggests that for the UK the total textile arisings will be 1,944,000 tonnes in 2010, rising to 2,042,000 

tonnes by 2020. 

Conclusion 

Textile wastes, estimated to be nearly 2 million tonnes from both MSW and C&I waste streams, are a 

waste stream where significant environmental benefits can be delivered through simple reuse. Only 

when textiles are very badly damaged or soiled does energy recovery and similar solutions become 

advisable. 

5.5 Paper Waste Arisings 

Background 

The UK consumes between 12 and 13 million tonnes of paper and board each year. 140 The main sources 

of waste paper and board arisings are from households (MSW) and from the Commercial and Industrial 

(C&I) waste stream. The paper/card waste arising from the Construction and Demolition (C&D) sector is 

considered to be negligible (any arisings would be from packaging used for construction materials). 

Municipal Solid Waste Arising 

Paper and cardboard is estimated to be 21% of the total arisings of MSW. 141 Such an estimation leads to 

the arisings from the MSW figures for 2007/08 in Table 43 142 

138 EU Commission, Environmental Impact of Products, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ipp/pdf/eipro_report.pdf 

139 Defra, 2008, Product roadmaps- Clothing, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/consumerprod/products/clothing.htm 

140 http://www.paper.org.uk/information/pages/statistics.html 

141 The Composition of Municipal Solid Waste in Wales. Report by AEA for the Welsh Assembly Government, December 2003 

142 e-Digest Statistics about: Waste and Recycling, Defra, 2008, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/index.htm Waste Data Digest 8: 

Key facts and trends. SEPA, 2008, http://www.sepa.org.uk/waste/waste_data_menu/waste_data_digest.aspx, Welsh Assembly Government, 2008; 

Municipal Waste Management Report for Wales 2007-2008; Environment & Heritage Service, Municipal Waste Management Northern Ireland 2005/06 

Summary Report.



Table 43 Paper and board waste arising in MSW in the UK 

Region 

Paper and Cardboard 


East Midlands 507 

East of England 637 

London 871 

North East 318 

North West 851 

South East 958 

South West 615 

West Midlands 628 

Yorkshire and Humber 602 



Scotland 722 

Wales 378 

UK - Total 7,309 

5.5.1 Industrial and Commercial Waste Paper 

Paper and card are often source separated by Industrial and Commercial premises to some degree. 

Table 44 lists the sectors that produce the most paper and board waste. 143 The publishing, printing and 

recording sector produces the most paper and card from the industrial sector, but the total arisings of 

separately identified paper and card from the commercial sector are over twice those from the industrial 

sector. The total arisings of separately identified paper and cardboard in C&I waste are 8.6 million 

tonnes. 

143 Defra 2006, Industrial and commercial waste arisings by business sector and waste type, 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/index.htm 

83

84 



Table 44: Paper and board arising as a segregated stream from Industrial and Commercial sectors, 2006. 

Sector description Paper and 

cardboard 


I Food, drink and tobacco 262 

I Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products 568 

I Publishing, printing and recording 1,331 

I Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products; cleaning 

159 

products, man-made fibres etc; rubber and plastic products 

I Manufacture of office machinery, computers, electrical, radio, 

television and communication equipment; medical and optical 

instruments and clocks 

82 

Total Industrial 2,656 

C Retail - motor vehicles, parts and fuel; wholesale; other retail 3,642 

C Travel agents, other business, finance, real estate and 

1,183 

computer related activities 

C Transport, storage, communications 328 

C Social work and public administration 291 

C Miscellaneous 201 

Total Commercial 5,976 

I: Industrial sector, C: Commercial sector 

The other source of paper/cardboard is from mixed/general category of C&I waste, approximately 31% of 

C&I arisings. This has been found to contain approximately 34% paper and card by weight, yielding 

about 7.1 million tonnes. 144 In total the arisings of paper and card in C&I waste is 15.7 million tonnes. 

This represents 23% by weight of total C&I arisings, and Table 45 gives estimates for the corresponding 

regional arisings. 

Table 45: Paper and board waste arising from C&I. 

Region 

Paper and Cardboard 




London 1,861 










Wales 1,794 

UK - Total 19,000 

144 Determination of the Biodegradability of Mixed Industrial and Commercial Waste Landfilled in Wales for the Environment Agency, SLR, 2007, 

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Research/biodegwals_1913611.pdf



Recycling 

Table 46 shows that the recycling rate for paper and card has increased from 34% in 1995 to 71% in 

2007. 145 The UK collected 8.5 million tonnes of paper for recycling in 2007, but as it only has capacity to 

produce about 5 million tonnes of paper and card products, and thus 4 million tonnes of collected material 

is exported for recycling. 146 

Table 46: Paper and board recycling rates for the UK, accounting for imports and exports 

Year 1995 2000 2005 2007 

Recycling rate (Wt %) 34 41 62 71 

Forecast 

Assuming that there is no increase in the proportion of paper and board arisings in MSW and C&I wastes, 

then the predictions of general waste increase can be used to estimate that MSW paper and board waste 

will have risen to 7.6 million tonnes by 2010 and 8.0 million tonnes by 2020, and C&I paper and board 

waste will have risen to 19,320,000 tonnes in 2010 and 20,240,000 tonnes by 2020. Total estimated 

arisings of paper and cardboard in the UK will be about 28.2 million tonnes per annum in 2020. 

Conclusion 

There has been considerable interest in paper and board as a potential feedstock for the generation of 

energy. This waste stream is predicted to increase over the coming years, and as such should be a 

stable feedstock. 


A number of materials are of particular interest for future energy and fuels production. Most are extracted 

from bulk, collected waste streams. These are: 

• Waste wood extracted from MSW, C&I and C&D waste streams, including all wood packaging 

waste. A large proportion of the wood will have been treated with a preservative, or similar, and 

therefore the waste must be used in a WID compliant site. Total UK MSW wood waste arisings 

are estimated to be 1.06 million tonnes, based on good quality data, while both C&D and C&I 

data sources are of poor quality, but estimations are that C&D arisings were 4.4 million tonnes, 

and C&I arisings were 4.48 million tonnes. 

• Food waste is a major waste stream, with a total of 18-20 million tonnes generated each year. Of 

this 6.7 million tonnes is from UK households, while the commercial and industrial sector also 

contributes to the food waste stream, with 1.6 million tonnes from retailers, 4.1 million tonnes 

from food manufacturers and 3 million tonnes from food service and restaurants. 

• Tallow is a product of the rendering industry, and all UK production, currently estimated to be 

250,000 tonnes per annum, is already used for some commercial function. Use of this material 

for alternative purposes, e.g. bio-diesel production, is already occurring and is disrupting 

traditional markets. 

• Textile waste arises mainly from MSW and C&I waste streams, estimated to be 1.9 million tonnes 

each year in the UK. Reuse of high and medium quality textiles offers significant environmental 

benefits, only when textiles are very badly damaged or soiled does energy recovery and similar 

solutions become advisable. 

145 Recovery and recycling of waste paper and board: 1993 – 2007, Defra, 2008, 

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/waste/download/xls/wrtb20.xls 

146 Key industry facts 2007. Confederation of Paper Industries, 2008. 

85

86 



• Paper waste arises largely from MSW and C&I waste streams, and totals between 12 and 13 

million tonnes of recoverable paper and board each year, of which 7.3 million tonnes is from 

MSW, 2.7 million tonnes from industry and 6 million tonnes is from commercial waste. However 

much paper and board is thrown away in general waste so the total C&I waste may be 19 million 

tonnes. It is estimated that arisings of this waste material will increase by a small amount in the 

future. 

The potential for these fuels are summarised in Table 47



Table 47 Summary of biomass based wastes arising across the UK (‘000 tonnes). 

Region MSW Wood 

Waste (inc. 

furniture) 

C&D Waste 

Wood 

C&I Waste 

Wood 

MSW Food 

Waste 

C&I Food 

Waste 

87 

Textiles 

MSW and 

C&I 

MSW Paper 

and 

Cardboard 

C&I Paper 

and 

Cardboard 

East Midlands 76 - - 382 - 167 507 1,510 

East of England 95 - - 497 - 156 637 1,727 

London 130 - - 585 - 191 871 1,861 

North East 47 - - 222 - 98 318 1,058 

North West 127 - - 630 - 202 851 1,917 

South East 143 - - 742 - 219 958 2,036 

South West 92 - - 463 - 139 615 1,278 

West Midlands 93 - - 466 - 166 628 1,671 

Yorkshire and Humber 90 - - 438 - 221 602 2,561 

England - Total 892 3,870 - 4,425 6,189 1560 5,986 15,619 

Northern Ireland 34 40 - 176 - 44 223 368 

Scotland 94 270 - 539 457 145 722 1,219 

Wales 56 220 - 277 262 151 378 1,794 

UK - Total 1,660 4,400 4,481 5,417 6,908 1900 7,309 19,000 

Tallow has not been included in the above table as all production is currently utilised.

88 



6 Waste Management Legislation and 

Incentives 

Legislation and incentives are the most important drivers controlling waste management policy. Waste 

Framework Directives from the European Commission determine the broad direction of policy and further 

directives and UK legislation determine the detail of its execution. 

The Renewables Obligation, Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation and future heat incentives will shape 

the industry and encourage the generation of heat both directly and by separation and manufacture of 

biomass fuel products. 

The main areas of legislation that national and regional waste strategies need to consider are the Waste 

Framework Directive, Environmental Permitting and the Landfill Directive. 

Waste Framework Directive 

Entered into force December 2008 

The European Commission published a revised Waste Framework Directive (2008/98/EC) in November 

2008, and the UK has 2 years to transpose this into law. This Directive sets a revised framework for 

waste management in the EU, and aims to encourage re-use and recycling of waste as well as simplifying 

current legislation. The main points of the Directive are: 

• A five-step hierarchy of waste management options, with waste prevention as the preferred 

option, and then reuse, recycling, recovery (including energy recovery) and safe disposal, in 

descending order. The Directive classifies "energy efficient" incineration as recovery in an 

attempt to reduce consumption of fossil fuels. 

• Measures to encourage prevention of waste. Member States must design and implement 

waste prevention programmes, and the Commission is set to report periodically on progress 

concerning waste prevention. 

• Requirements for a 50% target for household recycling and reuse and 70% target for nonhazardous 

construction and demolition waste, both of which must be reached by the UK by 

2020. 

Some departure from this hierarchy is permissible to deliver the best overall environmental outcome as justified 

by life cycle thinking. 

The Directive also deals with the issue of 'end of waste', clarifies the idea of recovery, disposal and byproduct, 

defines the conditions for mixing hazardous waste, introduces an "environmental objective" and 

moves towards establishing technical minimum standards for certain waste management operations. 

The current EC Waste Framework Directive (75/442/EEC) requires the disposal, recovery, treatment, 

transport and collection of ‘controlled waste’ streams such as MSW, Hazardous Wastes, C&I and Inert 

wastes. 

Landfill Directive 

Entered into force July 2001 

The European Commission Landfill Directive of 1999 (1999/31/EC) was passed into English and Welsh 

law in 2002, and Scottish law in 2003. This aims to prevent, or minimise, the negative effects on both the 

environment and human health caused by landfilling of wastes.



One highly relevant aspect of this Directive to the production of fuels and energy is the requirement that 

the amount of biodegradable MSW sent to landfill in the UK to be reduced: 

• to 75% of 1995 levels by 2010, 

• to 50% of 1995 levels by 2013, and 

• to 35% of 1995 levels by 2020. 

Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) 147 

Entered into force April 2008 

Environmental permitting combines Pollution Prevention and Control (PPC) 148 and waste management 

licensing into a single system for England and Wales. Many facilities for waste or residue heat, power or 

fuel production will need to be licensed under these regulations, although there are lower size limits below 

which no license is required. For further information on whether or not a facility comes under EPR the 

operator should consult the Environment Agency which licenses most EPR sites. 

EPR covers a very wide range of industrial activities, but the main activities covered by these regulations, 

and of relevance regarding the use of waste or residual biomass as a fuel, are: 

• Burning of any fuel or waste (in any type of plant) 

• Gasification and pyrolysis of any fuel or waste 

The requirement to apply for and hold a relevant permit applies whether the material is processed in a 

dedicated facility, intermittently or as an admixture. Permits are issued for the plant as operated in the 

permit application. Variations in operation require a variation in the permit, so that changes in the fuel 

used in biomass plants will require a variation in the permit. 

The Waste Incineration Directive (WID) 

Entered into force December 2002 

For waste combustion this licensing will also include consideration of the Waste Incineration Directive 

(WID). This Directive sets out stringent emissions limits from waste combustion. The WID applies to 

incineration and co-incineration plants. Co-incineration plants include those plants where waste is used 

as a fuel or where it is disposed of at a plant where energy generation or production is the main purpose. 

149 

A plant will only be an incineration plant or a co-incineration plant if it burns waste as defined in the Waste 

Framework Directive (WFD). This definition is extremely broad and there are, in effect, very few 

circumstances where by-products, co-products or residues are not classified as wastes. 150 

Agricultural and forestry residues are not defined as wastes and as such the WID will not apply to their 

combustion. However, there are many wastes that contain biomass whose treatment is not so clear cut. 

In particular the treatment of the combustion of waste wood for the purposes of WID is complicated. 

Current Environment Agency guidance 151 is that all waste wood is a waste, but the combustion of certain 

types of untreated waste wood (i.e. waste wood that has not been treated with preservatives or coatings) 

is exempt from WID. However, the combustion of wood waste that contains halogenated hydrocarbons 

147 

The EPR are available from: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/uksi_20073538_en_3#pt2-ch1-l1g12 and guidance is provided on 

http://www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/63143.aspx 

148 

For further guidance on PPC see http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/ppc/regs/index.htm and http://www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/63432.aspx 

149 

Defra, Environmental Permitting Guidance: The Directive on the Incineration of Waste, 2008. 

150 

The EC has provided guidance on the definition of waste: CEC: COM(2007) 59 final COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE 

COUNCIL 

AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the Interpretative Communication on waste and by-products 

151 EA (2008) The environmental regulation of wood, Position Statement. www.environment-agency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/ps_005_2077240.pdf 

89

90 



or heavy metals will come under WID, as will the combustion of any source of waste wood that might be 

contaminated with either of these sets of chemicals. 

WID sets out details including the operating conditions, including gas temperatures and residence times, 

limits on emission levels for a range of substance to air and water including dioxins and the monitoring 

requirements on these substances. 

Renewable Energy Directive (RED) 

Published June 2009 

The RED, which came into EU law in April 2009, is designed to help states progress towards meeting the 

EU 2020 target of 20% energy derived from renewable sources. The target for the UK is 15%. 152 Within 

the RED biomass is defined to include the biodegradable fraction of industrial and municipal wastes and 

residues from agriculture and forestry. 

There are two areas of RED that are important to wastes and residues; these are the conditions provided 

for biofuels and those for biomass heat and power: 

Biofuels: Among other things the RED brings in sustainability requirements and reporting 

requirements for biofuels. Guidance on these will be provided by the EC by early 2010. Biofuels 

produced from waste and residues (other than agricultural, aquaculture, fisheries and forestry 

residues) are exempted from some of these sustainability requirements. The RED requires a 

greenhouse gas emission savings from biofuels of at least 35%, but it also states that the contribution 

made by biofuels produced from wastes and residues and the lignocellulosic component of biomass 

will be considered to be twice that made by other biofuels. This is a strong driver for the use of 

wastes and residues and for the development of processes using the lignocellulosic components of 

biomass. 

In addition in the calculation of default values for biofuels (Annex V), the Directive states: “Wastes, 

agricultural crop residues, including straw, bagasse, husks, cobs and nut shells, and residues from 

processing, including crude glycerine (glycerine that is not refined), shall be considered to have zero 

life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions up to the process of collection of those materials.” These default 

values will be subject to review. This simplification is positive for the use of straw and other harvest 

residues for energy that would have higher greenhouse gas emissions allocated from cultivation and 

alternative use under a full life cycle analysis. It would be more negative for manures and food 

wastes that would expect to be allocated a strong emissions reduction credit for avoided methane 

emissions from alternative disposal routes. 

Finally Member States may encourage the use of biofuels which give additional benefits, including the 

benefits of diversification offered by biofuels made from waste and residues. This adds up to a 

considerable number of additional incentives to encourage the development of biofuels from wastes 

and residues. 

Biomass heat and power: In 2009 the Commission will examine whether or not to introduce 

sustainability requirements for all biomass for energy (including biomass for heat and power) similar 

to those for biofuels. The European Commission published the summary report of responses to its 

recent consultation on the requirement for sustainability criteria for biomass for energy (other than 

biofuels or bioliquids). This will provide input to the Commission's follow-up report planned for 

December 2009. 153 

An action plan for the implementation of the RED within UK law needs to be prepared by 30 th June 2010. 

152 Proposed Directive http://ec.europa.eu/energy/climate_actions/doc/2008_res_directive_en.pdf 

153 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/consultations/doc/results_public_consultation_biomass_sustainability_scheme.pdf



Renewable Energy Strategy (RES) 

Published July 2009 

As part of the implementation process for RED the UK Government has produced a draft Renewable 

Energy Strategy. The current draft introduces a number of measures that are of relevance to wastes and 

residues, including the Renewable Heat Incentive. 154 It also recognises the importance of energy from 

waste for the UK and discusses measures to encourage WID-compliant combustion and raising 

awareness of the benefits of bioenergy including energy from waste. In addition it also introduces the 

concept of sustainability for bioenergy, discusses the potential for imports and discusses the potential for 

building biomass and waste supply chains in the UK. 

Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) 

Entered into force April 2008 

The Government’s Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), which came into effect in April 2008, 

has since been amended following the conclusions of the Gallagher Review released in July 2008. The 

RFTO now requires road transport fuel suppliers to ensure that, by 2013, 5% of total road transport fuel 

supply in the UK is made up of renewable fuels, equivalent to around 2.5 billion litres of fuel per annum. 

These targets work on a volume basis, and therefore encourage use of the cheapest feedstocks for the 

generation of biofuels, commonly sugar and starch crops. It is recognised that these biofuels are not the 

most effective for Greenhouse Gas emissions reduction, and the long term policy is to introduce second 

generation biofuels with higher GHG savings potentials. GHG savings compared with petrol or diesel are 

typically 40-70% for biodiesel from oil seed rape and 30-70% for bioethanol from wheat, compared to 

savings of 86-93% estimated for second generation biofuels. 

The UK Biomass Strategy 155 

Published May 2007 

The Biomass Strategy indicates that biomass will have a central role to play in meeting the EU target of 

20% renewable energy by 2020, and will likely have a more regional focus than the current energy 

networks. The Strategy covers the biomass generated as waste and residues, including agricultural 

residues, both wet and dry; forestry and horticultural residues; biodegradable content of MSW; 

biodegradable content of Commercial and Industrial waste. 

It will be necessary to increase the supply from organic waste materials such as manures and slurries, 

source-separated waste biomass and waste-derived solid recovered fuels. In particular faster growth in 

the development of AD is desired, including examination of how and whether economic or fiscal 

instruments can facilitate increased use of AD. 

The Biomass Strategy introduced a number of key initiatives that are relevant to biomass wastes and 

residues, including the Biomass Energy Centre web site; 156 the Biomass Capital Grants Scheme; 157 a 

review of the approach to Anaerobic Digestion 158 and a Woodfuel Strategy, which aims to bring 2 million 

green tonnes of wood (including forestry residues) onto the market by 2020. 

Proposed Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) 

Proposed in the 2008 Energy Bill 

154 

In fact firm proposals for the Renewable Heat Incentive are introduced in the Heat and Energy Saving Strategy launched by the Government in 

February 2009. 

155 

The UK Biomass Strategy, www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/energy/renewablefuel/pdf/ukbiomassstrategy-0507.pdf 

156 

See: http://www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk/portal/ 

157 

For further information see: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/uk/energy/fund/ 

158 

This has lead to a commitment of £10M for the Environmental Transformation Fund to fund AD projects in England. 

91

Under consultation in 2009 

92 



The Renewable Heat Incentive is likely to apply to the generation of renewable heat at all scales, through 

a range of technologies including biomass, solar hot water, air- and ground-source heat pumps, biomass 

CHP, biogas produced from anaerobic digestion, and biomethane injected into the gas grid, although it 

will potentially be banded by size and technology. 

The scheme would be paid for by the introduction of a levy on suppliers of fossil fuels for heat, 

administered by Ofgem. Such suppliers largely supply gas currently, but it would also include suppliers of 

coal, heating oil and LPG. DECC currently expect the RHI to be in place April 2011. 

Renewables Obligation (RO) 

Entered into force in April 2002 

Consultation on the Renewables Obligation Order 2009, published December 2008 

The Renewables Obligation aims to support and encourage the increasing adoption of renewable 

electricity in the UK. It requires licensed electricity suppliers to source a specific and annually increasing 

percentage of the electricity they supply from renewable sources. The current level is 9.1% for 2008/09 

rising to 15.4% by 2015/16. 

A Renewables Obligation Certificate (ROC) is a green certificate issued to an accredited generator for 

eligible renewable electricity generated within the United Kingdom and supplied to customers within the 

United Kingdom by a licensed electricity supplier. Originally one ROC is issued for each megawatt hour 

(MWh) of eligible renewable output generated, but the update to this system in April 2009 introduced a 

banding. 159 

The targets for the RO are linked to the targets that the UK is committed to through the European Union’s 

Renewables Directive. This proposes that Member States adopt national targets for renewables that are 

consistent with reaching the overall EU target of 22.1% of electricity by 2010. The proposed UK share of 

this target is for 10% of electricity consumption to come from renewables eligible under the directive by 

2010. 

To demonstrate that they have met their share of the RO, suppliers must obtain certificates for renewable 

power supplied. These certificates (Renewable Obligation Certificates - ROCs, and SROCs in Scotland) 

are issued to generators in accordance with the metered output of eligible renewable electricity they have 

supplied. The certificates may be sold on to any supplier, with or without the electricity, and suppliers 

must redeem certificates with Ofgem (the Electricity and Gas Industries Regulator) at the end of each 12 

month Obligation period to demonstrate their compliance with the obligation. 

Climate Change Levy (CCL) 

Entered into force in April 2001 

The Climate Change Levy (CCL) 160 is a levy on non-domestic energy supply in the UK, which is offset by 

a reduction in employer’s national insurance contributions. The CCL is under the management of the 

HMRC. Accreditation is carried out via Ofgem. 

Under the CCL non-domestic electricity customers are required to pay the levy as follows: 

• 0.47p/kWh for electricity, 

• 0.164p/kWh for gas, 

• 1.02p/kg (equivalent to 0.15p/kWh) for coal and 

159 Bioenergy Review for the Environment Agency, Draft Report, January 2009. 

160 For more information see the HMRC web site: http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/



• 0.105p/kg (equivalent to 0.07p/kWh) for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). 

The CCL has a number of exemptions, including fuels used by domestic users, fuels used by the 

transport sector, fuels used for the generation of other forms of energy (e.g. electricity generation) or for 

non-energy generation (e.g. the use of “fuels” as carbon sources for other purposes, such as a reductant 

in metal smelting). In addition there are various ways that the cost of the levy can be reduced. For 

example, there is an 80% discount from the CCL for sectors that agree to targets for improving their 

energy efficiency or reducing carbon emissions by specified deadlines (“climate change agreements” 

(CCA)). 161 

There are various other exemptions but that most relevant to energy from waste is that electricity from 

renewable sources is exempted from the CCL. To qualify, suppliers of renewable electricity must obtain 

Renewables Levy Exemption Certificates (“Renewable LECs”). These are issued in respect of eligible 

renewable output and are used to prove that the electricity supplied is from renewable sources. 1 MWh 

of renewable power is equal to 1 LEC. If this supply is then made to a non-domestic customer it will not 

attract CCL payments. Guidance on the HMRC web site indicates that exempt renewable sources 

include municipal and industrial wastes and agricultural and forestry residues, as explained in Box 2 

Box 2 Rules for Levy Exemption certificates (LECs) for waste and biomass under the CCL 

LECS for waste fuelled generating stations 

The regulations allow for LECs to be granted for 50% of the electricity from power stations fuelled by 

waste. If the operator considers that the proportion of renewable energy content of the waste is higher 

than 50% and he can provide sufficient evidence to Ofgem then more than 50% may be claimed. 

LECs for Biomass power generation 

To claim LECs the biomass power station operators must provide the following information to Ofgem: 

o The proposed % of biomass 

o Full details of the biomass content showing proportions of each category by weight 

o The CV (MJ/kg) of each category of feedstock, giving details of how this was obtained. 

o A description of facilities for storing biomass 

o Details of the supplier(s) of biomass, including names and addresses and a copy of 

extracts of contracts that detail the biomass content and contract duration. 

European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) 

Introduced in 2005 

1 st Trading period: January 2005 – December 2007 

2 nd Trading period: January 2008 – December 2012 

The EU ETS 162 is an EU wide scheme intended to help meet the EU’s GHG reduction targets under the 

Kyoto Protocol. The scheme creates a price for carbon through the establishment of a market for carbon 

emission reductions. The EU ETS is currently in its second phase, which runs from 2008-2012. The 

scheme operates through the allocation and trade of greenhouse gas emissions allowances throughout 

the EU – one allowance represents one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent. A cap on the total amount of 

emissions allowed from all the installations covered is set by each Member State in their ‘national 

allocation plan’ or NAP. The allowances are then distributed within Member States to the qualifying 

installations. In the UK, the ETS is implemented via UK Regulations that are regulated by the 

Environment Agency for England and Wales, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in Scotland 

and Department for the Environment and Heritage Services in Northern Ireland. 

161 

These sectors are: aluminium, cement, ceramics, chemicals, food and drink, foundaries, glass, non-ferrous metals , paper, steel, and 20 or so 

smaller sectors. 

162 

For more information on the Eu ETS see the Defra web site: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/climatechange/trading/eu/index.htm and the 

Environment Agency’s NatRegs site: http://www.netregs.gov.uk/netregs/62975.aspx 

93

94 



Currently the energy, iron and steel, mineral process and pulp and paper industries are covered by EU 

ETS. All installations carrying out activities in these areas are required to hold a GHG emissions permit, 

which will require the installations to monitor and report emissions in accordance with a plan that has 

been approved by the Regulator. 

A site becomes liable under the EU ETS when the sum of the site’s rated combustion capacity exceeds 

20MW (thermal). 163 Once over this limit the site’s CO2 emissions are capped and strict monitoring is 

required. Emissions are required to stay within the cap or the site will need to trade carbon. Biomass or 

waste boilers are included towards the total site limit. Therefore an operator cannot reduce the site’s 

generating capacity under EU ETS by substituting biomass or waste fuelled plant for fossil fuel plant. 

However, CO2 emissions from biomass are rated as zero under EU ETS, which means that any carbon 

emissions resulting from the biomass will not count towards the site’s emissions. This may help a site 

meet its limit for GHG emissions and be able to trade any surplus. 

The relevance of this to waste for energy is that the biomass content of waste will also be rated as zero – 

and for high biomass wastes this is a considerable advantage, provided the biomass content can be 

easily demonstrated 

In addition a third phase, running from 2013, is in planning. One of the proposals under consideration is 

to set an emission target for sectors not covered by the current ETS (e.g. the buildings, transport and 

waste sectors). In addition the next phase may include other emissions as well as CO2. 

163 According to Defra’s guidance: ‘the EU ETS Directive expressly states that the burning of municipal waste and hazardous waste is not treated as a 

“combustion installation” for the purposes of the EU ETS. Where primary purpose of incineration is the provision of energy using a fuel derived from 

waste, then the installation is a “combustion installation” under the medium definition.’



7 Solid recovered fuels and other fuels 

manufactured from waste 

Each energy conversion technology is limited in the range of fuel types that it can accept and places 

demands on the preceding steps in the chain, in terms of fuel quality, properties and composition. 

Technologies are being introduced in the UK and elsewhere that transform waste components from their 

raw form to standard fuels with a defined specification. Manufactured fuels can offer the following 

benefits: 

• Consistent properties that can be defined and used in contracts making the material a tradable 

commodity. 

• Physical and biological stability that makes longer term storage possible and can even out 

unbalances between the constant supply of waste and the seasonal demand for energy. 

• An opportunity to manage the properties of the fuel to achieve optimum performance from the 

energy technology. 

These fuels are in many ways the key to using waste in a diverse range of energy technologies that offer 

higher resource use efficiency and enhanced greenhouse gas reduction potential when compared to 

traditional combustion with energy recovery. They allow CHP installations to be sized according to the 

heat load and processes to manufacture transport fuels and methane to be operated at an economic 

scale. 

We have identified the following manufactured fuels on sale or planned in the UK. 

• Solid recovered fuels. These fuels are produced from mixed wastes from the municipal and 

commercial stream by separating the high heating value components from the residues remaining 

after conventional recycled products have been removed. The material contains both biological 

and non-biological matter. They are supplied dried and either shredded for short distance and 

short term transport or compressed into pellets for longer distances and storage times. 

• Graded waste wood fuels. This sector is growing rapidly as wood fired power plants are built to 

take advantage of the reformed Renewables Obligation. Waste wood is collected from industry 

and amenity centres and graded depending on the level of contamination. The grades are then 

chipped and sold to a specification. 

• Clean grade wood chips from virgin materials. Here wood residues for forestry and sawmills 

are chipped and potentially dried to meet a specification. 

• Domestic grade wood pellet fuel from saw mill by-product. Sawmill residues, in particular 

sawdust, is dried and compressed through a die into small cylinders approximately 6mm in 

diameter and 10 mm long. This fuel resembles cattle feed or cat litter and is clean and free 

flowing. Several small scale combustion appliances have been developed to take advantage of 

the properties of this fuel. The high energy density means that it can be transported economically 

regionally, nationally, and internationally. 

• Industrial grade pellet from forestry, cereal processing residue and clean waste wood. 

This is similar to the domestic pellet but has a higher ash content and larger size. 

• Thermochemical fuels. These are chars and pyrolysis oils produced close to the point of 

arising. Supplied either separately or as a slurry mix, the increased energy density extends the 

economic transport distance for local to national. These fuels are not currently produced but 

have been proposed as a feedstock option for large gasification processes producing 2 nd 

generation biofuels or Substitute Natural Gas (SNG). We also include torrefaction, or high 

temperature drying in this category. 

95

96 



7.1 Technologies for manufacturing fuels 

7.1.1 Mechanical / biological processing of MSW to Solid Recovered Fuel 

(SRF) 

C & I waste 

MSW 

Process Description 

Mechanical/biological treatment (MBT) encompasses a wide range of technologies aiming to process 

solid waste by a mixture of mechanical and biological separation. 164 It is not a new technology, and 

mechanical sorting and biological treatment processes have been used for many years in municipal 

waste management. 

MBT plants produce a solid recovered fuel (SRF) product from the drier, higher calorific value fractions of 

municipal and commercial waste. The first step is aerobic digestion, or fermentation, of solid organic 

material (composting) with the produced heat drying the waste. It is then mechanically sorted to produce 

a fuel product that contains mainly paper and plastic. Additional fractions are produced that are suitable 

for recovery and recycling such as metal, glass and plastic, whilst the remaining waste is stabilised as a 

pre-treatment to landfill. 

Commercial status 

MBT is commercially available in most countries in the EU, and in the UK there are a number of 

operational sites, these are listed below. 

Table 48 Risks and barriers for MBT 

Level of Risk Comment 

Technical Low Operating commercial plant in existence. 

Established mature technologies. 

Social & Planning Medium Not as divisive as an incinerator but still subject of 

concern as a waste technology. Waste transport 

is always a primary concern of residents in the 

locality. 

Financial Medium Requires revenue from sale of fuel but market not 

well established. 

Fuel is still classed as a waste which may give 

problems with sale and use and hence price. 

Standards and agreed specifications are needed 

to make the fuel product a traded commodity. 

Regulatory Medium Fuel is still classed as a waste which may give 


The legal status needs to be clarified. Standards 

would help to clarify definitions. 

Focusing on one site to give a detailed example of the processes used, the Frog Island site in east 

London is a recent development using the proprietary Ecodeco process. This process first shreds the 

waste, then dries it for up to 15 days using the heat from the composting biomass to reduce its moisture 

164 Mechanical Biological Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste. Prepared by Enviros Consulting Limited on behalf of Defra as part of the New 

Technologies Supporter Programme, 2007. 

Mechanical/Biological 

Treatment (MBT) 

SRF



content. The dried waste is then sorted, initially using screen separation, to produce a fuel product (about 

50% of the input weight, 15-18 MJ/kg), a metal product (which is recycled), and a residue product (which 

is landfilled). Equipment such as magnetic separators and eddy current separators are used to recover 

both ferrous and non-ferrous metal for recycling. Table 49 shows the typical mass balance for the biodrying 

process. Alternative methods are the Herhof Process, the 3R-UR process and the Draco Process. 

Table 49 Mass balance (Wt%) for bio-drying plants 

Fuel product 

Eco-deco % 

50 

Recyclables (metal) 5 

Process loss (water vapour from drying of input 25 

waste) 

Residue – glass/stone 165 and fines 20 

Total 100 

Figure 15 Frog Island Ecodeco plant 

The following examples of operationally active MBT sites in the UK contain a range of processes. The 

organic fraction is usually further processed, frequently using AD or composting; recyclable materials 

such as metals are removed and recycled while materials such as glass may be recycled or may be 

ground and added to the organic compost like output (CLO) fraction. 

165 The glass/stone stream could be further processed to produce a product suitable for recycling as an aggregate 

substitute. 

97

98 



Table 50 MBT Plants in the UK 166 

Name and Location Volume Operational 

Bursom Industrial Estate 

MBT plant in Leicester 

150,000 tonnes p.a. 

The organic fraction is processed 

with AD (at Wanlip, see later) 

2004 

New Earth Solutions in 

Poole, Dorset 


The organic fraction is 

composted, producing 9000 

tonnes/yr. 

2006 

Frog Island, Rainham, 

Shanks Group Plc, East 


2006 

London Waste Authority The material bio-dried before 

being biologically treated and 

sorted. After removal of glass, 

metals and aggregates the 

remainder is used as SRF. 

Jenkins Lane, Newham, 

East London Waste 


2007 

Authority, Shanks Group The process requires bio-drying 

Plc 

before materials are refined for 

energy recovery. 

Earth Tech in Stornoway, 

Western Isles 

21,000 tonnes p.a., 

Uses AD for the source separated 

waste and composting for the 

residual waste (see later) 

2006 

Civic Environmental 

Systems in 


2003 

Durham 

Commercial development scale 

Ellington, 

40,000 tonnes p.a. of fine, pre- 2006 

Northumberland graded material 

Shanks Ecodeco plant in 

Dumfries and Galloway 

60,000 tonnes p.a. 2006 

At least six MBT plants are currently under construction or have planning permission already granted: 

• A site that will be operational within a few months is the 250,000 tonnes/yr site at Waterbeach in 

Cambridgeshire. Alongside this the composting capacity of the facility will double to 100,000 

tonnes/yr. 167 

• Two sites in Lancashire are under construction, one in Leyland near Preston, the other at 

Thornton near Blackpool. These will use the Global Technology (3R-UR) process and have a 

combined capacity of over 300,000 tonnes per annum of household waste. 

• Southwark MBT plant, intended to process 87,500 tonnes per annum and to be operational by 

2011. The site will produce SRF (solid recovered fuel) to be burnt at the nearby SELCHP EfW 

plant in Lewisham. 168 

• A site near Colchester, Essex has been granted permission for throughput of 250,000 tonnes per 

annum, with an attached AD plant capable of handling 50,000 tonnes/yr. 169 

166 

Mechanical Biological Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste, 2007, Defra Brief, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/pdf/mbt.pdf 

167 

ENDS Report, 389, June 2007, p.17, 

http://www.endsreport.com/index.cfm?action=report.article&articleID=17363&q=MBT%20plants&boolean_mode=all 

168 

ENDS Report 397, Feb 2008, p.17, 

http://www.endsreport.com/index.cfm?action=report.article&articleID=18636&q=MBT%20plants&boolean_mode=all



• The potential Westbury MBT plant in Wiltshire has been given planning permission for a 45,000 

tonnes per annum site that is now due to open in 2011. 170 

• Bioessence have received planning permission for a 400,000 tonne per annum plant in 

Merseyside as a pre-treatment step for a pyrolysis/gasification technology to generate 40 MW of 

electricity. The plant is scheduled to start operating in 2011. 171 

Further sites that are planned, but do not yet have planning permission are a plant in West Sussex that 

will use the Haase process, a plant in Norwich, Norfolk which would use the Dranco process and a plant 

in Manchester using the BTA process. 

In addition the INEOS Chlor incinerator site discussed above plans to receive the 275,000 tonnes of 

stabilised fuel waste from five MBT and AD sites in Manchester. The contract was announced in January 

2007, and funding was secured April 2009. 172 

Internationally, MBT is a well established technology, with many operational facilities using a range of the 

processes described above. Several of the larger scale ones are detailed below in Table 51. Some of 

the sites also convert this fuel to electricity on site. 

Table 51 Examples of best practice large scale international facilities that convert MSW into SRF. 

City 

Year 

Capacity 

tonnes/yr 

Luebeck, 

173 2005 150,000 

Germany 

Corteolona, 

Italy 174 

Eastern 

Creek, 

Australia 175 

2004 60,000 9MW 

2004 175,000 176 1.5 MW 

Lauta, 

177 2004 225,000 20MW 

Germany 

Generation 

Capacity Comments 

1.9MW This site uses the Haase process to sort 

electricity, the waste into SRF fuel, inerts, 

2.3MW recyclables and an organic rich fraction, 

heat which is processed further using AD. 

This site is operated by Ecoenergia S.r.l. 

and uses the ‘Ecodeco’ process 

technology. The SRF produced is used 

to produce electricity. 

The facility is currently being expanded 

to 220,000 tonnes/annum. It utilises the 

3R-UR process and produces three 

products; metals for recycling, a fuel 

product, and an organics rich product 

which is converted to compost like 

products onsite. 

This plant is part of the regional waste 

plan for Upper Lusatia, Lower Silesia 

(RAVON). The plant uses SRF derived 

from the local area. 

169 ENDS Report 393, October 2007, p.20, 

http://www.endsreport.com/index.cfm?action=report.article&articleID=17938&q=MBT%20plants&boolean_mode=all 

170 Wiltshire Approves Hills MBT Plant, 23 March 2009, LetsRecycle.com, 


171 Plan to develop 40MW gasification plant on Merseyside. News item at www.newenergyfocus.com, 28 January 2009. 

172 News item at Greater Manchester Waste Disposal Authority - http://www.gmwda.gov.uk/news.htm 

173 173 Visit by AEA staff to Luebeck Plant, June 2008 

174 Ecogergia, http://www.ecoenergia.it/ecoenergia_ing/its_termocorteolona.html 

175 Eastern Creek in Sydney – A member of AEA visited this plant in 2007 

176 Energent Capital, http://www.emergentcapital.com.au/globalrenewables/ 

177 Lauta, http://www.industcards.com/wte-germany.htm 

99

100 



Utilising SRF in isolation for energy generation is not common in the UK. There are currently two sites 

that use this material. Slough Heat and Power in Berkshire is a CHP plant with a generating capacity of 

101MW. This site takes up to 100,000 tonnes of material each year – a combination of clean wood waste 

and SRF as one of its boiler systems is WID compliant. The second site at Allington, in Kent which takes 

500,000 tonnes per annum of minimally treated SRF to produce 43MW electricity from two large bubbling 

fluidised bed boilers. 178 

There are several industries where making use of SRF is already established, usually for the generation 

of heat. Cement kilns are one such industry, the paper industry is the other. 166 The British Cement 

Association reports that all but one of the 15 cement kilns in the UK use SRF. 

7.1.2 Mechanical / Heat Treatment of MSW to solid recovered fuel 

C & I waste 

MSW 

Mechanical Heat 

Treatment (MHT) 


Mechanical Heat Treatment (MHT) is a term that is used to describe configurations of mechanical and 

thermal, including steam, based technologies. The purpose of these processes is to separate a mixed 

waste stream into several component parts, to give further options for recycling, recovery and in some 

instances biological treatment. The processes also sanitises the waste by destroying bacteria. The basic 

flowchart for a Mechanical Heat Treatment process 179 is shown below in Figure 16. 

SRF 

Figure 16 Flowchart representing Mechanical Heat Treatment 

178 http://www.kentenviropower.co.uk/default.asp 

179 A description of MHT processes can be found in “Mechanical Heat Treatment of Municipal Solid Waste”, published by Defra in 2007.



The most common system being promoted for the treatment of MSW using MHT is based around a 

thermal autoclave. The development for use with MSW started in the early 1990’s, and a number of 

patents have been issued. 

A second type of MHT system is a non-pressurised heat treatment process, where waste is mixed to a 

slurry with water and then heated in a rotating kiln prior to mechanical separation. This process requires 

a pre-treatment stage, which includes the use of a shredder. 

Both the autoclave process and the non-pressurised treatment processes have the following effect on the 

waste: 

• Biodegradable materials, including paper and card, are broken down into a high biomass fibre for 

which the main use is as a fuel product; 

• Glass bottles and tins have their labels removed as the glue disintegrates under the action of the 

heat; 

• Plastics are softened, and labels are removed. Certain types of plastics are deformed by the heat, 

but remain in a recognisable state, whereas other plastics soften completely forming hard balls of 

dense plastic. 

Both processes produce product streams (fibre product, plastic, etc) using well-established mechanical 

processing techniques (screening, density separation, magnetic separation, eddy current separation). 

The resulting outputs are relatively clean ‘hard’ recyclables (tins, glass and plastics with no labels and 

most of the food waste removed) a fibrous material from the breakdown of paper, card and green/kitchen 

waste constituents, and a reject fraction. 

Both systems heat the waste to temperatures in the range of 120-170°C, which is sufficient to destroy 

bacteria present in the waste. This has benefits in terms of storage, transport and handling of the outputs 

as they are sanitised, and are free from the biological activity that may give rise to odour problems. There 

is also a significant volume reduction in the waste. 

Table 52 shows the typical specification of a mechanical heat treatment plant. About 15-20% of the input 

waste is landfilled. 

Table 52: Typical specification of a mechanical heat treatment process 

Product stream Wt % of input MSW 

Fibre product 60-65 

Metal products 4-5 

Mixed plastic product 7-12 

Aggregate substitute product 4-8 

Landfilled 180 15-20 

Total 100 

Other products from the process 

Suppliers of MHT plants claim that these plants can recycle up to 20% of the input waste. However, whilst 

established markets for the metal products are available, the total level of recycling achieved will depend 

on the availability of markets for both the mixed plastic product and the aggregate substitute product. If 

these markets are not available then these products will be landfilled. 

Commercial status 

Some demonstration projects are operating under the Defra Waste Innovation Programme, such as the 

Huyton MHT site in Merseyside. 

180 The landfilled reject stream is mainly other combustible materials. 

101

102 



Table 53 Risks and barriers for MHT 


Technical High Demonstration projects only at present. 

Social & Planning Medium Not as divisive as an incinerator but still subject of 

concern as a waste technology. 

Financial Medium Requires revenue from sale of fuel but market not 

well established. 

Fuel is still classed as a waste which may give 




Regulatory Medium Fuel is still classed as a waste which may give 

problems with sale and use hence a reduced 

price. 



There are a number of suppliers of autoclave based MHT technology in the UK. Sterecycle 181 have 

constructed a 100,000 tonnes per annum autoclave facility at Rotherham, which is currently treating 

residual MSW from three local authorities and has received planning approval to double the capacity to 

200,000 tonnes per annum. 182 

The Huyton MHT site in Merseyside uses a Mechanical Heat Treatment technology developed by Orchid 

Environmental, designed to process 80,000 tonnes/yr of MSW. 183 The site, which began operation in 

June 2008 as a demonstration plant, uses a low heat process, together with air and moisture to separate 

waste and convert the organic fraction into fuel pellets. This site is part of the DEFRA Demonstrator 

Programme, but suffered a fire in 2008. The pre-treated waste is mixed with water, and this is then fed 

into a drum, which is heated using hot air. 

Graphite Resources obtained planning approval in 2005 for an autoclave plant at the Derwenthaugh 

(Gateshead) Eco-Parc, which will process 300,000 tonnes per annum of mainly commercial waste. Plant 

construction was delayed due to financing issues, but the plant is now being constructed, and is 

scheduled to begin operating in the autumn of 2009. 184 

Planning permission was received by Estech (now part of VT group) for a plant in Herefordshire in 2004, 

but construction was delayed when the planning approval was challenged, and whilst this has now been 

resolved, the plant is unlikely to be operational until 2012. VT group have received planning permission 

for a 100,000 tonne per annum autoclave in Wakefield as part of a waste treatment site which will also 

include an anaerobic digestion facility, and hope to secure financial close for this project during 2009. 185 

Orchid Environmental have received planning permission from Flintshire county council to build a 160,000 

tonne-a-year capacity mechanical heat treatment facility at Flintshire, Deeside. 186 This site would aim to 

mainly treat commercial and industrial waste, and has plans to develop up to six similar projects over the 

next two years. 

181 

http://www.sterecycle.com/ 

182 

Yorkshire autoclave plant to double capacity. News item at www.letsrecycle.com, 20 January 2009 

183 

Defra Factsheet, Merseyside WDA/Orchid Environmental, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/dem-programme/pdf/MWDA.pdf 

184 

Information at www.graphiteresources.com 

185 

VT Group wins planning go-ahead for Wakefield PFI. News item at www.letsrecycle.com, 28 November 2008. 

186 

Green Light for £20 million Flintshire MHT plant. News item at letsrecycle.com, 15 December 2008



7.1.3 Standards for Solid Recovered fuels 

There is considerable pressure for solid recovered fuels from MBT and MHT treatment plant to be 

regarded as products rather than waste. This has resulted in the setting up of a CEN Technical 

committee to develop a suite of standards for the characterisation and analysis of these products - 

TC343. The Work Programme for TC 343 is allocated to 5 Working Groups: 

• WG1 Terminology and Quality Assurance 

• WG2 Fuel specifications and classes 

• WG3 Sampling, sample reduction and supplementary test methods 

• WG4 Physical/Mechanical tests 

• WG5 Chemical Tests 

The mandate for this standardisation work is given as: - 

“fuels prepared from non-hazardous waste to be utilised for energy recovery in waste incineration or coincineration 

plants regulated under Community environmental legislation”. 

The current status is that all Technical Specifications for CEN 343 have now been submitted to formal vote and 

are expected to be come into use as full standards in 2011. 

7.1.4 Preparation of wood chips and pellets 

Wood from forestry operations 

Wood fuel currently comes mostly from thinning operations where small diameter trees are felled, and 

even smaller diameter branches and material from the harvesting of timber logs that is too small to be a 

primary product. These are chipped either as part of the harvest operation or are taken to the roadside 

for chipping, or for delivery as small round-wood logs for chipping at the users facility. 

The latest installations under the Bioenergy Capital Grant Scheme have shown a marked preference for 

logs as they store without degradation for a long period, and so can be regarded as a good strategic 

reserve, and provide a guaranteed clean fuel with no debris. 

Branch wood and tops, so called brash, could be used as fuel but contains a higher proportion of ash, 

needles and debris and so is currently not extracted in any quantity. As demand increases then this 

situation may change, but use of brash would likely require some engineering modifications to boilers to 

cope with the increased ash. 

For smaller installations the quality of chip in terms of its size and moisture is critical to the reliable 

operation of the unit. The type of chipper used and the way in which the material is stored plays an 

important part in guaranteeing good quality feedstock. Drum chippers produce the best quality and cut 

chip product should be stored under cover. 

Pellet production from sawmill by-product 

Sawmills generate large quantities of sawdust that can be converted in to pellet fuel. Pellets are small 

cylinders of compressed wood manufactured in the same type of machine as cattle feed and cat litter. 

They are free flowing clean and convenient to use. Over the past decade clean wood pellets have 

transformed the small scale wood heating market with a range of boilers and room heaters designed 

specifically for pellets. 

The best example of pellet production is the Balcas Sawmill in Northern Ireland. This installation was 

built with grant aid from the Bioenergy Capital Grant Scheme, and comprises a 2.7 MWe CHP installation. 

The fuel for the CHP is taken from the poor quality bark and slab wood whilst the sawdust is dried using 

the heat rejected from the steam cycle. The dry sawdust is compressed in to pellets at the rate of 40,000 

tonnes per annum. An additional installation is being built by Balcas in Scotland that will deliver 100,000 

tonnes of pellets per annum. 

103

104 



Through the Balcas project several thousand homes and businesses in Ireland have converted to wood 

pellet heating, also facilitated by energy grants available from Sustainable Energy Ireland. 

Experience from Austria suggests that wherever pellets are introduced they result in an increased uptake 

of wood heating and dominate the small boiler market. 

Graded waste wood chip 

Following the building of the two major power projects at Lockerbie and Wilton a market has grown to 

supply waste wood in chipped form to an accepted quality standard. In both cases wood recycling 

companies have set up dedicated reception and sorting centres at the power plant. In these centres the 

wood is sorted to remove contaminated material, shredded and chipped to a size distribution set by the 

power plant owner. 

The above examples deal with virgin wood, that has not undergone any treatment. Use of waste wood is 

more challenging as it will likely have been chemically treated with preservatives, and so can only be 

used in WID compliant plants. We understand that E.ON have plans the build five power plant each 

25MWe fuelled by waste wood. 187 

The recycled wood industry is growing rapidly as pressure to remove organic material from waste streams 

increases at the same time as the demand for renewable fuels. 188 Operators are becoming more 

experienced and are able to supply a range of fuel specifications depending on the degree of 

contamination and source. 189 

7.1.5 Standards for wood based fuels 

The rapid growth of biomass energy applications in Europe and the increases projected as a result of the 

Renewable Energy Directive have created a need for a suite of standards for the characterisation and 

analysis of wood fuels. These have been developed on an accelerated timetable by CEN Technical 

Committee 355. The remit for this group to develop standards for all forms of solid biofuels in Europe, 

including wood chips, wood pellets, briquettes, logs, sawdust and straw bales. 

These standards allow all relevant properties of the fuel to be described, and include both normative information 

that must be provided about the fuel, and informative information that can be included but is not required. As well 

as the physical and chemical characteristics of the fuel as it is, CEN 335 also provides information on the source 

of the material. 

The Work Programme for TC 335 contains 30 Work Items, which are allocated to 5 Working Groups (WGs): 

• WG 1 Terminology, descriptions and definitions 

• WG 2 Fuel specifications, classes and quality assurance 

• WG 3 sampling and sample preparation 

• WG 4 Physical and mechanical test methods 

• WG 5 Chemical test methods 

All Technical Specifications for CEN 335 have now been published. 

CEN 335 includes solid biofuels originating from the following sources: 

• Products from agriculture and forestry; 

• Vegetable waste from agriculture and forestry; 

• Vegetable waste from the food processing industry; 

187 http://pressreleases.eon-uk.com/blogs/eonukpressreleases/archive/2008/07/15/1257.aspx 

188 Wood Recyclers Association, www.woodrecyclers.org 

189 http://www.woodrecyclers.org/



• Wood waste, with the exception of wood waste which may contain halogenated organic compounds or 

heavy metals as a result of treatment with wood preservatives or coating, and which includes in 

particular such wood waste originated from construction and demolition waste; 

• Continued-fibrous vegetable waste from virgin pulp production and from production of paper from pulp, if 

it is co-incinerated at the place of production and heat generated is recovered; 

• Cork waste. 

Draft standards for CEN 355 are available for download from the Biomass Information Centre website. 190 

Germany is somewhat ahead of the UK in its use of waste wood for energy and has developed a grading system 

based on composition and origin. 191 This has gained some acceptance in the UK because of its practical nature. 

It is given below. 

Box 3: German Waste Wood Grading System 

Waste wood category A I: 

Waste wood in its natural state or only mechanically worked with, during use, was at 

most insignificantly contaminated with substances harmful to wood. 

Waste wood category AII: 

Bonded, painted, coated, lacquered or otherwise treated waste wood with no 

halogenated organic compounds in the coating and no wood preservative. 

Waste wood category A III: 

Waste wood with halogenated organic compounds in the coating, with no wood 

preservatives. 

Waste wood category A IV: 

Waste wood treated with wood preservatives, such as railway sleepers, telephone masts, 

hop poles, vine poles as well as other waste wood which, due to its contamination, 

cannot be assigned to waste wood categories A I, A II or A III, with the exception of 

waste wood containing PCBs. 

Category A I includes sawmill co-products which also currently have a market in the UK as fuel for cofiring 

at coal power plants, fuel for other stand-alone biomass plants and raw material for a variety of 

competing markets, including animal bedding, horticultural use and, most significantly, the panel board 

mills. Sawmill co-product that has only been mechanically treated is treated as clean wood for the 

purposes of combustion under the Waste Incineration Directive (WID). It is transported long distances 

across the UK and is priced competitively compared to virgin biomass fuels. 

Category A II includes residues from the production of furniture, kitchens etc. This product is usually 

disposed of to landfill or mass burn incineration at present. It is difficult to separate out the clean waste 

wood from the contaminated and E.ON, for example, would have to take it unsorted. This product should 

not come within the WID. However, it is impossible to protect it from contamination with fractions of waste 

that do come under WID and therefore the position is not clear cut. It is likely that the Environment 

Agency would regard the potential contamination issue as important and class any combustion process 

under WID. 

Category A III is treated as waste for the purposes of combustion under WID and any plant burning these 

wastes would need to comply with WID as part of the conditions of its licence. 

190 http://www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk 

191 Ordinance on the Management of Waste Wood dated 15 August 2002 

105

106 



Table 54 Risks and barriers for wood fuel production 


Technical Low Many projects for both pellet and chip worldwide. 

Social & Planning Medium Some current waste wood installations can be 

unsightly and “bad neighbours” creating noise 

dust and fire risks from large quantities of stored 

waste wood. 

Sawmill based installations are positive due to 

reduced transport of residue, job creation and 

low additional impact. 

Financial Medium Requires revenue from sale of fuel but market 

not well established. 

Waste wood derived fuel is still classed as a 

waste which may give problems with sale and 

use and hence price. 



Attractiveness depends on the price of oil as well 

as incentives. 

These aspects should be resolved within the 

next few years. 

Regulatory Medium Waste wood derived fuel is still classed as a 

waste which may give problems with sale and 

use hence a reduced price. 



Market depends upon incentives for heat and 

electricity these can change due to extraneous 

factors. 

These aspects should be resolved within the 

next few years. 

7.1.6 Thermochemical fuels 

The purpose of thermochemical processes is to produce a fuel with an increased energy density and 

physical and chemical properties that are both more consistent than the source material, and better 

matched to the requirements of the conversion technology. 

The fuels in this category are derived from lignocellulosic materials such as wood, crop residues, paper 

and board. The two main categories are 

Char, Oils and liquors from pyrolysis either as separate liquid and char products or slurry of the two. 

Char is similar to coal in some respects being friable and having a relatively high calorific value, 

unfortunately it contains less than half of the energy value of the source material. Pyrolysis liquids are a 

mixture of complex carbohydrates and hydrocarbons that contain up to 70% of the energy of the source 

material. The relative proportions of char and liquids depend upon the reaction conditions in the process. 

Torrefied material. Torrefaction is the heat treatment of the material at temperatures between 200°C 

and 300°C that results in the removal of all moisture and a subsequent degradation and shrinkage of the 

polymeric structure of the material. The changes produced by this process give an end product that is 

more energy dense, friable and less susceptible to take up moisture from its environment. These 

changes make it easier to transport, store and to use, particularly when pelletised. Torrefaction has the 

advantage of producing a consistent fuel that retains over 90% of the energy of the source material.



More information, such as the principles and the mass and energy balances for this route are given in 

references 179 and 180. 192,193 

At present these fuels have only been proposed, none are currently produced from waste materials 

specifically as fuels, other than in research and development activities. 

Producing fuels with improved properties has benefits in terms of transport storage and use but there is a 

penalty in resource use efficiency due to the heat used for the processing. Uslu et al have analysed the 

efficiency of a range of supply chains using thermochemical fuels and pellets manufactured from wood 

and come to the conclusion that torrefaction with an energy efficiency of 94% required least energy whilst 

pyrolysis fuels with an efficiency of 64% are unlikely to be cost effective. 194 This analysis was carried out 

largely on wood feedstocks and was targeted at life cycles involving long distance transport but 

nonetheless the broad principle should hold for most lignocellulosic materials. These conclusions were 

confirmed to some extent by Mortimer who found that there was no advantage in using pyrolysis based or 

other upgraded fuels in the supply to a transport biofuels plant in the North East. 195 

7.1.7 Conclusions for Solid Recovered Fuels 

Producing a fuel type that provides consistent properties will enable more waste to be utilised as a fuel 

source for the generation of energy or fuels. The status of this area in the UK is: 

• Processes are commercially available for producing fuels from MSW and C&I waste using the 

heat from composting as the energy from drying. 

• Processes for the production of fuels using thermal energy to dry and sterilise waste are currently 

being demonstrated and may offer advantages in providing a more consistent product that is 

biologically stable. 

• Standards for fuels derived from MSW have been developed but are not widely used 

• The production of graded wood waste fuels has expanded rapidly in the last three years. 

Standards and codes are being adopted by the industry which is aiding acceptance and 

development. 

• Clean wood fuels are becoming widespread and standards and codes are being adopted by the 

industry. 

• Fuels prepared using pyrolysis and torrefaction have been proposed but as yet not implemented 

commercially. 

192 Harold Boerrigter, Jaap Kiel, Patrick Bergman Proceedings of Thermalnet meeting April 2006 Lille 

http://www.thermalnet.co.uk/docs/ECN_%20Torrefaction%20of%20Biomass%20as%20pretreatmentLille.pdf 

193 Report reference ECN-RX--05-180, Torrefaction for biomass upgrading, Patrick C.A. Bergman, Jacob H.A. Kiel 

Published at 14th European Biomass Conference & Exhibition,Paris, France, 17-21 October 2005 

http://www.techtp.com/recent%20papers/ECN-Torrefaction%20for%20biomas%20upgrading%20-2005.pdf 

194 A. Uslu et al. / Energy 33 (2008) 1206–1223 

195 NNFCC project 09/016. Feb 2009 

107

108 



8 Supplying Energy from Waste by 

Combustion 

In most European countries, by far the most common method of extracting energy from solid waste either 

in untreated form or as a prepared fuel is combustion (or incineration) with energy recovery. Virtually all 

wastes can be treated by combustion and the technology is usually regarded as the default against which 

other options are measured. 

Combustion is a well established technology and the main technical challenges have been addressed. 

There remains however significant technical uncertainty surrounding the impact of the composition of the 

waste on the performance of the heat exchange surfaces, particularly fouling and corrosion. 

Other barriers remain, such as the largely negative public perception of such sites in some countries, 

including the UK. 

8.1 Process Description 

Untreated Waste 

Waste derived fuel 

Combustion 

Heat and/or 

Electricity 


A combustion system in its simplest form comprises two basic elements: a furnace where the fuel is 

burned and a boiler that recovers the heat from the combustion as steam or hot water. 

When the fuel enters the high temperature environment in a furnace it will first dry and then decompose, 

or pyrolyse, into volatile tars and gases and char components. These components then react with air to 

release the energy contained in the heating value of the fuel. This energy is released as radiation to the 

walls of the furnace and into a flow of hot flue gases to be captured by heat exchange surface in the 

boiler that generates steam for use either in the process, or by a turbine to produce electricity, or both 

(CHP). 

A furnace essentially consists of a box, lined either with refractory or water tubes, and a burner where the 

air and fuel mix and burn. There are two main categories of burner for solid waste and biomass 

applications, grate and fluidised bed. The first has evolved from designs that have been used widely 

throughout the 19 th and 20 th centuries whilst the second is a fairly recent innovation from 1970’s onwards. 

Grate burners 

In grate-firing the fuel burns in a layer on a grid. Air for combustion is blown both through the grid and 

over the top of the fuel layer. The processes of drying, pyrolysis and combustion of the volatiles and char 

take place sequentially as the material proceeds through the boiler on the grate. Various types of grids or 

grates have evolved to move the fuel through the boiler and eventually remove the ash. Some grates 

vibrate, some move slowly forward on chains whilst others have a reciprocating action. Grates are 

reliable, but are considered somewhat inflexible and are designed to cope with a limited range of fuels. 

Experience in the UK has shown that high, and variable, moisture content fuels such as poultry litter can 

lead to uneven combustion and high dust emissions.



Small industrial-commercial and domestic boilers are small grate burners that burn almost exclusively 

clean wood in the form of logs, chips and pellets. Logs are used mostly for domestic applications, pellets 

for domestic and commercial and chips for commercial to large commercial and industrial. 

Fluidised bed burners 

In a fluidised bed furnace, the fuel burns in a bed of sand or other mineral that is violently agitated by the 

combustion air. The fuel is fed at a controlled rate to keep the temperature of the sand bed at 800 to 

900°C. With moderate air velocities the bed has the appearance of a boiling liquid, hence the name 

bubbling fluidised bed (BFB). If a higher velocity is used the sand will be carried out of the furnace and 

must be recycled to the base via a cyclone – this is known as a circulating fluidised bed (CFB). Heat is 

removed and steam is raised by tubes in the bed of sand (not needed for biomass fuels), the walls of the 

furnace and in the exhaust flue. This type of boiler is proving very popular for medium to large industrial 

boilers for coal and other solid fuels and is taking an increasing share of this market. 

A great advantage of the fluidised bed to the power plant operator is its fuel flexibility. This feature has 

been used to great advantage by CHP plants in the Nordic Countries, where it is common practice to fire 

wood chip, coal, peat, oil and wastes both together and separately. This flexibility is bought at the cost of 

greater complexity however and they are unlikely to be cost effective lower output alternatives. 

Good modern examples of fluidised bed burners from the Bioenergy capital grants scheme are at 

Lockerbie (43MWe) and Wilton (31MWe). Both are fuelled by a mix of forestry wood chip and graded 

waste wood from wood recycling operations. 

Steam Boilers 

There are two types of boiler in common usage, fire tube and water tube. 

Fire tube boilers, as the name suggests, transfer the heat from the fire to the water by passing the hot flue 

gasses through tubes inserted in a pressure vessel containing the boiling water. Typically the gas will 

pass backwards and forwards three times through the boiler – three tube passes. They are inexpensive 

and manufactured in volume. Typically the furnace supplier will purchase the boiler and adapt it to his 

system. Fire tube boilers are manufactured in sizes up to 50 tonnes steam/h and a typical steam 

pressure of 20bar, although 40bar is possible. They produce only saturated steam but a variant is 

available that allows for superheating by installing a heat exchanger after the second tube pass. This is a 

cost effective solution for industrial plants that require smaller turbines, typically 1 - 2MWe. 

Water tube boilers generate steam inside of tubes that are installed around the furnace and in banks 

across the flue gas. The temperatures and pressure of the steam can be much higher than in water tube 

boilers. Utility boilers can reach supercritical conditions. For large biomass boilers 520°C and 120 bar is 

not uncommon. Smaller units that might be appropriate for a CHP installation would have temperatures 

of 450°C and 50 bar. They can be manufactured in much larger sizes than fire tube boilers and tend to 

overlap the top end of the fire tube range. 

Grate burners can be installed with either fire tube or water tube boilers. Fluidised beds are normally 

installed with water tube boilers. 

Control of emissions 

The combustion gases are cleaned by a sequence of process stages that remove particulates, acid gases 

and trace organic compounds such as dioxins and furans. The number of stages their type and 

complexity depends upon the composition of the waste, its legal classification under the Waste 

Incineration Directive and the size of the installation. The main species to be removed and abatement 

technologies are summarised below in Table 55. 

109

110 



Table 55 Pollution and the abatement methods for combustion of waste 

Pollutant Method of removal 

Particulates or aerosols Fabric or electrostatic filters, for smaller 

boilers and cleaner fuel cyclones or 

multiclone. 

Acid gasses mainly from sulphur and Dry or liquid carbonate wash or dry 

chlorine 

absorber. 

Dioxin and other organic compounds Active carbon absorber, can be combined 

with dry carbonate scrub 

Oxides of nitrogen. Injection of ammonia or urea into 

combustion zone. Catalytic removal from 

the flue gas. 

The main concerns on pollution from incinerators relate to the health effects of dioxins and other 

chemicals such as PCBs (poly chlorinated biphenyls) and PAHs (poly aromatic hydrocarbons). These 

compounds accumulate in body fat and are persistent. 

Dioxins are not present in nature. The term is loosely used to describe the whole family of toxic organic 

micro-pollutant emissions that may be formed during and after combustion. They have been associated 

with poorly run incineration in the past when chlorine containing wastes such as PVC, paper and card and 

treated wood were burnt, and this association persists. 

Understanding of how dioxins are formed has led to advances in process design and control that have 

resulted in the emissions from the incineration sector falling dramatically in the UK. Scientific studies 

have shown that the impact of emissions from an individual plant is very low. Dioxin emissions have 

reduced by more than 90% in the UK in the past 20 years. Nevertheless there remains acute public 

concern over the issue, despite the fact that local authorities have access to this information. 

PCBs are classified as persistent in the environment and as being probably carcinogenic to humans. 

They have also been linked to sub-chronic effects such as reduced male fertility and long-term 

behavioural and learning impairment. They may originate from flexible plastic waste, paint waste, as well 

as transformers and capacitors. PAHs are a large group of chemical compounds and are carcinogenic. 

They may originate from waste wood, tar or fat waste for example. 

Sampling and analysis costs for all of these compounds are high due to the specialised nature of the 

equipment and trained laboratory personnel required. This restricts the frequency of data collection. For 

this reason the public express concern regarding the reliability of data. A simpler, on-line test would be 

more satisfactory but due to the nature of dioxins this is a long way off. 

Smaller installations burning wood that do not have particulate removal equipment have also given rise to 

concern recently. This is due to the nature of emissions from wood firing. The ash composition contains 

alkali components that vaporise at the furnace temperature to later condense in the cold atmosphere as 

aerosols with a size that is respirable. There is a similar problem with condensable organics in batch fed 

wood combustion devices where poor combustion control allows the formation of aerosols of organic 

compounds and soot. These are particularly worrying as they contain carcinogenic materials such as 

furans and aromatics. This is only likely to be a problem in urban areas where the aggregate effect of 

several installations in a small area coupled with other sources such as diesel traffic could give 

unacceptable impacts. Local Authorities are being issued with revised guidelines on this issue and this 

should resolve the situation. 

The ash leaves the process as two distinct streams – bottom ash that falls out of the combustion grate or 

bed, and fly ash that is separated from the flue gases. Bottom ash is considered to be inert and, after the 

separation of metals, is either disposed of to general landfill or used as aggregate. Fly ash, however, can 

contain heavy metal contamination and, with certain chlorine containing wastes, dioxin so must be



disposed of in a controlled landfill site. Recent European practice involves melting fly ash to form a glass 

that reduces the mobility of the metal ions and destroys dioxin. Following this treatment the ash can be 

used as aggregate or filler. 

Impact of waste composition on boiler performance 

There are two main impacts that must be managed by the designers and operators of waste combustion 

plant; acid gas and ash fouling. 

Chlorine is always present in mixed waste streams and derives largely from plastics but also from paper 

and card. The chorine is converted into hydrochloric acid in the combustion chamber, and this can cause 

excessive corrosion in the boiler, particularly at high temperatures. Restricting the temperature and 

pressure of the steam produced by the incinerator limits the corrosion risk but also restricts the electrical 

efficiency that can be achieved. 

Circulating fluidised bed combustors have an advantage in treating wastes with a high chlorine content in 

that the high temperature boiler surface can be located in the circulating bed material where the chlorine 

concentration is lower. 

The oxides and salts of silicon and alkali metals are present in biomass derived wastes to a much larger 

extent than fossil fuels. The content increases with the proportion of annual growth material in the fuel. 

Thus, straw and other annual crop residues contain large quantities as does the bark and outer layers of 

trees. These components have low melting points that can lie below the temperature of the furnace, they 

also have a propensity to form low melting point eutectic mixtures with other ash components. The liquid 

ash can adhere to heat transfer surfaces causing a reduction in output, sites for corrosion, and 

occasionally physical damage. Fluidised beds are also susceptible to agglomeration and eventual 

sintering and fusing due to the sticky nature of soft and liquid ash. 

Problems caused by ash chemistry are some of the most intractable in the industry and require the 

application of substantial knowledge and experience in sourcing and blending feedstocks and instituting 

regular boiler cleaning procedures. Suppliers of fluidised bed boilers have learned to manage the 

chemistry of their bed materials to avoid low melting point eutectics by the addition of materials such as 

dolomite. 

A comprehensive review and a discussion of best practice for waste combustion is given in the supporting 

documentation for the Waste Incineration Directive 196 

Co-firing biofuels with fossil fuels 

The concept of co-firing biofuels with coal is one means of increasing the combustion of biomass in an 

existing power plant without incurring excessive capital costs. This approach has received increased 

attention recently, particularly in Denmark, the Netherlands and the US. The details of over 300 co-firing 

installations can be found on the IEA Bioenergy Agreement Task 32 database of co-firing installations. 197 

The way in which biomass is fired depends on the quantities involved. Where biomass quantities are 

small (2- 5%), the biomass is mixed with the coal at the mill inlet. Where biomass constitutes 5-25% of the 

total fuel, shredded biomass is fired through dedicated burners. Beyond the 25% level, new concepts will 

be needed because combustion of that amount of biomass will have a substantial impact on both furnace 

and ash behaviour. Current opinion within the industry is that this will probably mean converting the fuel 

to gas. 

Current practice in the UK is to receive the fuel on site in the form of pellets that are stable, easy to 

handle and break easily in the coal mills. 

196 European Integrated Pollution and Prevention and Control Bureau Waste Incineration Bref (08.06) http://eippcb.jrc.es/pages/FActivities.htm 

197 http://www.ieabcc.nl/database/cofiring.php 

111

112 



8.2 Review of UK and international waste combustion 

practice 

8.2.1 Combustion of MSW for energy in the UK 

There are a number of MSW energy recovery plants in operation in the UK using combustion technology, 

and numerous examples worldwide. 

In total in the UK, 45.1% (12.9 million tonnes) of MSW had value recovered from it in 2007/08 (including 

recycling, composting, energy from waste and fuel manufacture), a rise from 41.8% (12.2 million tonnes) 

in 2006/07. It has been estimated that Energy from Waste (EfW) capacity in the UK in 2007 reached 4.9 

million tonnes. 198 

The vast majority of sites in the UK that combust mixed waste and recover energy use MSW. This is 

because the long term contracts available from local authorities for waste management enable the 

development of what are very high capital cost plants. However, there are some merchant plants being 

proposed in the UK and Lakeside is one of the first of these. These plants are being developed without 

MSW contracts, and, although MSW will probably dominate input, these plants will also have more 

flexibility to take commercial and industrial waste streams. 

Table 56 Current EfW of MSW to generate electricity 199 

Site and 

Operator 

Edmonton, SITA 

/ London Waste 

Allington 

Quarry, Kent 

Enviropower Ltd 

Coventry, 

Coventry and 

Solihull Waste 

Disposal 

SELCHP, Onyx 

Selchp 

Tyseley, Veolia 

Environmental 

Services 

Sheffield ERF, 

Veolia ES 

Billingham, 

Cleveland WTE, 

Sita UK 

Marchwood, 

Veolia 

Environmental 

Location Quantity of 

MSW 

tonnes p.a. 

Energy 

Generation 

Operational 

North London 500,000 55MWe 1989 

Kent 500,000 with 

separation of 

65,000 t for 

recycling. 

50 MWe 

Warwickshire 250,000 20 MWe and 

14.5 MWe 

2007 

2000 

Middlesex 420,000 30 MWe 1994 

Warwickshire 350,000 28 MWe 

(25MWe 

exported to 

grid) 

Sheffield 225,000 19MWe and 

Teesside 350,000 being 

increased to 

Southampton, 

Hampshire 

60MWh 

19 MWe 

1996 

2007 

1998 

475,400 

165,000 15MWe 2006 

198 Mass burn begins its big breakthrough, ENDS Report 394, November 2007, p.28-31. 

199 Waste to Energy Plants in the UK, http://www.industcards.com/wte-uk.htm, EPER UK Facilities Report, 2001, 

http://www.eper.ec.europa.eu/eper2/Activity_FacilityList.asp?year=2001&area=UK&id=17&EmissionAir=on



Site and 


Services 

Marchwood, 

Veolia 

Environmental 

Services 

Portsmouth, 

Veolia 

Environmental 

Services 

Havant, Veolia 

Environmental 

Services 

Stoke Sideway, 

Stoke on Trent 

Bolton, Greater 

Manchester 

Waste Ltd 

Kirklees Waste 

to Energy Plant, 

Sita UK 

Baldovie, 

Dundee EfW 

Plant 

Dudley, Dudley 

Waste Services 

Ltd 


MSW 


Energy 

Generation 

Operational 

Hampshire 165,000 14 MWe 2004 


Portsmouth, 

Hampshire 

165,000 14MWe 2006 

Staffordshire 200,000 12.5MWe 1997 

Lancashire 120,000 10 MWe 2000 

refurbishment 

Huddersfield 136,000 9MWe 2002 

Dundee, 

Scotland 

120,000 of 

course SRF, 

from 

MSW and C&I 

8MWe 

1999 

Staffordshire 90,000 7.4 MWe 1998 

Chineham, 

Veolia ES 

Hampshire Ltd 


Wolverhampton West 105,000 7MWe 1998 

Isle of Man EfW 

Plant, Sita UK 

Grimsby, 

NewLincs 

Development 

Ltd 

Midlands 

Isle of Mann 60,000 

including tyres 

North East 

Lincolnshire 

6MWe (5MW 

exported to 

grid) 

56,000 3.45 MWe 

and 3 MWh 

as CHP 

2005 

2004 

Estimations of energy efficiency for each plant are difficult to make as such figures are not readily 

available and the waste input may vary, affecting the efficiencies. 

It is likely that the number of EfW combustion plants will increase in the future. To meet the UK’s 2013 

and 2020 landfill diversion targets it has been estimated that an additional 8.5 million tonnes of annual 

processing capacity for MSW alone will be required. 200 It is likely that a proportion of this will be as EfW 

plants with potentially 25% of MSW going to EfW eventually. 

200 Waste Infrastructure Delivery Programme (WIDP) Action Plan, Defra, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/widp/documents/widp- 

actionplan.pdf 

113

114 



Although using waste as a resource for energy generation is likely to increase, the output of the UK’s EfW 

plants above is small compared to the energy generated through traditional methods such as coal power 

stations. The sum of output described above is 395MW, where as Britain’s traditional power stations’ 

output was 75,000MW in 2007. 201 

Four new EfW plants (with associated recycling and reprocessing facilities) are planned for London in the 

near future, based on the Mayor of London's Waste Strategy. 202 These are: Dagenham, Newhaven (in 

East Sussex), Lakeside and Belvedere. The Dagenham proposal includes a proposed gasification plant 

to process 100,000 tonnes of waste each year and generate 15MW of electricity. Contracts between 

Shanks, the operator, and Ford, the beneficiary, have been signed but construction has been delayed. 

The Newhaven site has full planning permission and it is intended that the steam produced will be used 

for heat energy. 203 The Lakeside EfW Ltd site will be capable of handling 410,000 tonnes of waste per 

annum and is expected to open in July 2009, 204 while the Belvedere site in South East London is 

expected to process 600,000 tonnes per annum of waste and generate 66MW of electricity. 

In addition INEOS Chlor on Merseyside has permission to build a site capable of consuming 800,000 

tonnes of stabilised fuel from municipal waste, generating 100MW of electricity and 360MW of heat to be 

used largely on the chemicals site. 

International Situation 

The numbers of EfW plants world-wide continues to grow. Several countries in Europe, for example 

Denmark and Germany, have a strong history of incineration, and the process is widely accepted by the 

public. Such countries have found it relatively easy to move to EfW plants in terms of public perception, 

and as such use of EfW tends to be more widespread. 

Currently there are at least 91 sites throughout Western Europe that use MSW as the main fuel source for 

EfW combustion plants. Some of these sites augment the MSW with bio-solids, wood, straw, and hospital 

waste depending on the site. World wide there are at least 154 industrial scale waste to energy plants, a 

considerable number are in the USA, while China and Taiwan also have several each. 

Japan has many functioning EfW facilities as well as numerous straight incinerators. This is due to the 

policy of waste minimisation that has been pursued for a number of decades, due to the limited land 

space. Only recently has deriving energy from the waste incineration process become a priority. Of 

Japan’s 1,301 incinerators in 2006, 293 generated electricity (7,190 GWh per annum). 205 Of these 

facilities 7.4% do not carry out direct incineration, but convert waste to energy and fuels via other 

technologies, 206 which represents a 5-fold increase between 2001and 2006. 205 Such technologies are 

discussed below. 

8.2.2 Biomass CHP Plant for Commercial Food Waste 

In Widnes, Cheshire a combustion biomass CHP plant is operated by PDM, that is heavily utilised by 28 

Sainsbury’s stores in Scotland, for disposal of 56,000 tonnes of commercial food waste. 207 The excess 

electricity generated is fed into the grid, and the heat produced utilised by an adjacent chemicals 

company. Meat is separated for rendering and packaging for recycling before the waste is burnt. 

Sainsbury’s intends to extend the scheme to all stores, sending additional material to the CHP biomass 

201 Giant offshore wind farms to supply half of UK power, The Sunday Times, 9 th December 2007. 

202 London Development Agency Press Release 2007, http://www.lda.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.2127 

203 Newhaven Incinerator Clears Final Hurdle, 17.03.09, LetsRecycle.com 


204 Lakeside EfW Project Update, Viridor Waste Management, http://www.viridor-waste.co.uk/lakeside-energy-from-waste-project-update 

205 The status of MSW Management, 2005, http://www.env.go.jp/press/press.php?serial=8277 

206 Japan's waste management 2006, published September 2008, Department of Environment Japan, 

http://www.env.go.jp/recycle/waste_tech/ippan/h18/data/disposal2.doc 

207 ENDS Report 409, February 2009, p.18-19, Supermarkets burn food waste as anaerobic digestion shortage bites.



site at Hartshill, near Nuneaton. Asda is using a similar programme for 20 of its stores, sending some 

waste to Veolia’s CHP site in Sheffield (included in Table 56 above). 

PDM have also received planning permission for a £25 million 150,000 tonnes per annum biomass plant 

close to the above facility in Widnes. 

8.2.3 Utilising Wood - C&D Waste, Sawmill products, Forestry Residues 

Utilising forestry residues is largely carried out on a local scale, with clean wood being used in small scale 

biomass boilers. 

In the UK a significant amount of waste wood is used within the wood working industry. For example, 

wood waste may be used at furniture manufacturing sites to generate process heat. The level of 

utilisation of such a resource is unpublished, but it has been estimated that there are at least 275 smallscale 

wood-burning boilers in the UK (0.4 – 3MW), consuming 223,500 tonnes of wood each year in the 

furniture industry. 208 Such figures do not include throughputs for the larger scale boilers used by the 

panel board manufacturing industry. 

One instance of waste wood being processed for utilisation is by Wood Pellet Energy Ltd in County 

Durham, which collects wood waste from business and households in the region. They convert wood 

waste, which would otherwise go to board manufacturing, to fuel pellets. Annual production is 

approximately 12,000 tonnes, with output expected to rise. The pellets produced from ‘clean’ waste wood 

are then used by Durham County Council to heat twelve of its schools, schools in Northumberland and 

North Yorkshire and parts of Leeds University. Pellets that have been produced from treated wood can 

only be used in boilers that are WID compliant such as at Sembcorp Biomass Power Station at Teesside. 

E.ON received permission in 2008 to build an energy plant at Blackburn Meadows in Sheffield, that uses 

recycled wood as the fuel source. Construction is expected to begin in 2009, with full commercial 

operation expected in 2011. It is intended to generate 25 MW of electricity. 209 

Table 57 Wood utilising energy generation systems 

Site and 


Port Talbot 

biomass 

power station 

Eccleshall 

Biomass 

energy 

RSPB Old 

Moor 

Sheffield 

Road Flats 

(166 flats), 

Barnsley 

Metropolitan 

Borough 

Council 

Location Quantity of Wood Generation 

Capacity 

Port Talbot, 

South Wales 

120k tonnes forestry and 

sawmill residues. 

13.5MWe 

Electricity 

only 

Staffordshire 20k tonnes wood chip and 

miscanthus 

2.3MWe 

South Yorkshire 3 tonnes of fuel (12m 3 ) 

delivered twice per week 

during winter, once every 

two weeks during the 

summer. 

Barnsley 100m 3 of fuel gives 1 weeks 

supply in winter and 3 to 4 

weeks in summer. 

208 Benchmarking wood waste combustion, BFM, 2005, 

http://www.bfmenvironment.co.uk/images/BFM%20Wood%20combustion%20benchmarking%20-%20full1.pdf 

209 E.ON, Blackburn Meadows, http://www.eon-uk.com/generation/1490.aspx 

100kW 

Heating 

1 x 320 kW 

and 1 x 150 

kW 

providing 

space and 

water 

heating 

Operational 

2008 

2007 

2004 

2004 

115

116 



Bio-energy Capital Grants Scheme 

The Bioenergy Capital Grants Scheme (BEGS) was launched in 2002. Four funding rounds have been 

held over the past five years to support various aspects of the Bioenergy sector. DTI and the Lottery 

funded the first two rounds and Defra the third and fourth. The fifth round funded by DECC was launched 

in Dec 2008 and the successful applicants have just been announced. 

The objectives are focused on building the basis of an industry, and providing a learning experience. This 

has directed the scheme towards a broad portfolio of projects that captures a wide range of technologies 

and companies. 

The scheme has produced the following highlights: 

• Two major power plant projects in operation at Lockerbie and Middlesbrough see Box 4. 

• Several electricity/CHP installations in operation located in South Wales, Northern Ireland, and 

Staffordshire including anaerobic digestion. 

• 1 x 5.4 MWe industrial CHP at a brewery. Replications are already being planned across the 

sector. 

• 1 x 1.4 MWe gasification CHP to supply a University Campus. 

• A core industry of suppliers installing biomass boilers with over 400 installations so far. 

• Parallel generation of local wood fuel suppliers extracting local woodlands and resources. Each 

region now has several suppliers. 

• Nine projects with local authorities that demonstrate public sector leadership in developing carbon 

abatement strategies. For example, Nottingham is converting all their schools to wood heating. 

• Started UK pellet fuel industry by supporting the Balcas sawmill CHP plant in Northern Ireland, 

producing 40k tonnes pellets per annum. Balcas are now replicating this, at double the size, in 

Scotland based on the experience. 

• Initiated a new industry in recovered wood fuel in the North East and North West by providing a 

market for over 200k tonnes per annum. E.ON and others are now planning further installations 

to use this resource. 

• Average cost of carbon abatement: £132 of Government funding per annual tonne abated in later 

rounds.



Box 4: New UK Projects burning graded waste wood supported by the Bioenergy 

Capital Grants Scheme 

Wilton 10: Wood Burning Power Station 

Wilton 10 at Teeside, Middlesborough, was the UK’s first large scale biomass power station, 

built at a cost of £60m, and commencing operation in 2007. It is owned and run by SembCorp 

Utilities, using 300,000 tonnes of wood as the fuel source and sourcing this material from a 

mixture of waste wood from civic amenity sites, C&D sites and waste firms (40%), primary 

processing products (20%), arboricultural arisings sourced from the north east region’s 

forestry commission and dedicated coppice grown as an energy crop. All material is stored 

and chipped on a neighbouring site to the power station. 

The power station uses a bubbling fluidised bed boiler, capable of handling the high moisture 

fuel and the ash produced from the wood. The Siemens steam turbine is used to generate 

33MW of electricity, which is sold directly to the grid. In addition 10MWth of steam is available 

and this is used by the sites district heating steam circuit, largely as process heat. 

Steven’s Croft: Wood Burning Power Station 

Steven's Croft, in Lockerbie, Scotland, is currently the UK’s largest biomass power station. It 

is owned and run by E.ON, who opened it in 2008. The cost of building was £90m including 

£18m from the Big Lottery Grant. 

It utilises 480,000 tonnes of wood each year of which is sourced principally from forestry coproducts 

from within a 60 mile radius, up to 20% recycled wood from wood product 

manufacture, and some short rotation coppice willow. It is intended that by 2012 90,000 

tonnes of wood will be sourced from locally grown willow. The output is 44MW of electricity to 

the national grid. 

There are a considerable number of facilities that use forestry residues and sawmill co-products 

internationally. The table below signposts to sources of information regarding the most important 

markets internationally. 

Table 58 Forestry waste to energy facilities 

Country Feedstock Comments 

Finland 210 Forestry 

residues and 

saw mill coproducts 

Finland has several power plants that utilise the widely available 

resource of wood, with much of the resource coming from forestry 

residues and saw-mill co-products. Many of these are CHP 

systems. In addition Finland has two plants that are fuelled by the 

waste from paper processing plants – called Black Liquor, the 

lignin and hemicellulose fragments of wood. The generation 

capacity of these plants ranges from 17-240MW. 

The CHP plant of Pietarsaari (Alholmens Kraft Power) is the 

world’s largest biofuel CHP plant with an output of 240 MW of 

electricity, 100 MW process steam and 60 MW of district heat. It 

began operating in 2001 and processes 150,000 - 200,000m 3 of 

logging residues (as well as peat and black liquors from the paper 

mill). 211 

210 The World’s largest biofuel CHP plant, http://www.itebe.org/telechargement/revue/Revue5/Revue5-UK/RevueBE5-UK-p42.pdf 

211 Alholmens Kraft, http://www.metso.com/corporation/home_eng.nsf/FR?ReadForm&ATL=/corporation/about_eng.nsf/ WebWID/WTB- 

071102-2256F-C513C 

117

118 



Country Feedstock Comments 

Italy 212 Forestry 

Residues 

Italy has five biomass power stations that burn wood and make 

some use of Forestry residues. 

One is the CHP system in Pozzilli, opened in 1997,which takes 

70,00 – 80,000 tonnes per annum of wood residues as well as 

agricultural residues (hazelnut shells, olive kernels, fruit stones, 

pine cone seed residues) to generate an output of 9.8 MW. 

Sweden Wood waste Sweden has 3 biomass power plants that burn waste wood, and 

Iwakuni, 

Japan 213 

Anderson, 

USA 214,215 

8.2.4 Straw 

Forestry 

Residues 

Forestry 

Residues 

one of these also burns waste tyres. 

A co-generation station that has used 90,000 tonnes per annum of 

logging residues since 2006. Operated by First Energy Service 

Company Ltd. The first biomass plant of larger than 10MW. 

Operated by Signal Shasta Energy Co it has been operational 

since 1989 and utilises 750,000 tonnes per annum of mill waste 

and forest residues, with a generation capacity of 3 x 18MW. 

There is one straw burning power station in the UK, the Elean station in Ely, Cambridgeshire, constructed 

by Energy Power Resources Ltd (EPRL) and in operation since 2000. 216 This plant uses 200,000 tonnes 

per annum, generates 38MW of electricity and cost £60M to build. It is also capable of burning a range of 

other bio-fuels. This plant uses a vibrating grate with conventional steam cycle. The operator requires 

relatively dry straw, so bales over 650 kg at 16% moisture content command an average price while there 

is a price penalty for bales that are either less dense than this or have a higher moisture content. EPRL 

have developed monitoring equipment to enable them to assess moisture and density as the bales enter 

the plants. 

Straw has a high potassium and sodium salt content which can lead to increased deposits and corrosion 

when using straw. 

Small–scale straw burning boilers are available in the UK, and it is estimated that a further 17,000 tonnes 

per annum are used in small-scale on farm schemes. These boilers are used for a number of purposes, 

including heating farmhouses and associated buildings, drying grain and heating swimming pools. Many 

of these plants were built as a result of grants for straw heat and power in the 1980s. However, since this 

Government programme stopped, a number of the plants have been converted to wood. This is because 

of the problems with storage and handling of straw, and the problems surrounding ash corrosion. 

There are no schemes in the UK to co-fire straw, although some power stations are licensed to take it. 

Straw power plants have been built in Denmark, where there are targets to drive this development. The 

Danish work has demonstrated the feasibility of large-scale co-firing of straw. 

212 Production of energy from biomass residues in the CHP plant of Pozzilli, Italy, 2002, http://www.tekes.fi/OPET/pdf/Energonut_IT.pdf 

213 Circulating Fluidized Bed Power Plant, JFE Engineering Corporation, http://www.jfe-eng.co.jp/en/en_product/environment/environment2121.html 

214 http://www.industcards.com/biomass-usa-ca.htm 

215 http://www.slthermal.com/pdf/Anderson,%20California.pdf 

216 http://www.eprl.co.uk



Table 59 International Facilities that combust straw for heat and electricity generation 

Site Feedstock 

Generation 

Capacity Comments 

Denmark Straw 8.3-28 MW Straw is used in co-firing in large utility power stations in 

Denmark, where there is an obligation on the powerstations 

to do so, for example the Grenaa site. Due to 

the composition of straw there have been severe 

problems with slagging, fouling and corrosion. In addition 

there are restrictions on the temperature of operation. 

The Danes have overcome these problems, most 

noticeably by building stand-alone boilers for the straw. 

More recently Denmark has built purpose designed straw 

power stations at Haslev that consumes 27,000 tonnes of 

straw per annum, and another at Nakskov with an output 

of 6MW + 8MW. 217 

Przechlewo Straw N/A An old coal power station that provided heating for 18 

Poland 

houses, a school, a kindergarten and three office and 

public utility buildings was replaced with one that used 

straw as the fuel source. It is owned and run by the Local 

Authority and uses three Apacor Brzeg Dolny boilers, with 

a power rating of 2 x 2.5 MW and 1 x 1.25 MW. In 

addition the site has a straw warehouse, 1800m 2 - 

sufficient to hold 1 month’s worth of straw. The 2500 tons 

of straw used each year must be shredded and 

compressed into cubes, with a humidity of 22%. The site 

has been in operation since 2001. 218 

Såtenergi Straw 20,000 MWh The Air Force site at Såtenergi purchase their heating 

AB, 

of district from a straw fired station supplied with straw by 40 local 

Sweden 

heating farmers, who also own 9% of the station. Ash generated 

is returned to the fields. 219 

China Straw 2 x 12 MW The facility in Sugian began operation in 2006 with 

capacity of 200,000 tonnes per annum. 

8.2.5 Poultry Litter 

The UK has several plants that use poultry litter as a feedstock for energy generation. Poultry Litter is a 

mixture of poultry droppings and the material used as bedding, often wood chippings. The material has a 

calorific value between 8.8 -15GJ/t and a highly variable moisture content of between 20% and 50%, 

depending upon husbandry practices. The key players in the industry have now resolved most technical 

issues associated with using this as a fuel. The ash produced is largely used as a fertiliser, as it is high in 

potassium and potash. 

The UK has been at the forefront of power generation from poultry litter with three plants currently in 

operation: Eye and Thetford in England, and Westfield in Scotland. Although it is possible to co-fire 

poultry litter with coal, there are few examples of this described in the literature. Poultry litter now falls 

under WID controls, and as such any new facility would have to comply with WID emission limits. 

217 Case Study: Straw fuelled heating plant in Nakskov, Denmark, European Commission, Directorate General for Energy and Transport. 

218 Case Study: Biomass straw fired boiler plant in Przechlewo, Poland, European Commission, Directorate General for Energy and Transport. 

219 Såtenergi AB- 4 MW Straw heating plant, http://www.managenergy.net/download/nr80.pdf 

119

120 



Table 60 Burning Poultry Litter to Generate Energy 

Site and 


Thetford, 

EPRL 

Westfield, 

EPRL 


Poultry 

Litter (t/yr) 

Generation 

Capacity 

Operational 

Norfolk 420,000 38.5 MW 1998 The largest 

poultry litter 

fuelled plant 

in the world. 

Fife 110,000 10 MW 2000 Uses a 

bubbling 

fluidised bed 

combustion 

system. 

Eye, EPRL Suffolk 140,000 

Plant also 

burns horse 

bedding and 

feathers 

It cost £22 

million to 

develop and 

implement. 

12.7 MW 1992 The world’s 

first poultry 

litter fuelled 

plant. 

More than 650,000 tonnes of poultry litter are committed to the three EPRL (Energy Power Resources 

Ltd) plants. Significantly EPRL has contracts with the all of the largest commercial poultry farmers so it is 

likely that the remaining resource will be more difficult to collect and use. Nevertheless it is estimated that 

around 80% of the poultry litter in the UK could be available for energy plants, totalling 3.33 million tonnes 

(using the figures generated in Section 4.5), potentially with an energy content of 30 million GJ. 

This resource is available “free”. It is a waste with considerable disposal problems and the farmers need 

to get rid of it. However, EPRL pay the farmers £10/odt in order to ensure a secure supply of good quality 

fuel for their plants. 

Applications so far have all been for large scale power generation due to the difficult nature of the fuel 

that demands economy of scale to be economic. A project at the University of Manchester, supported by 

the Carbon Trust and Keld Energy, is working to develop a small-scale power plant, 200kW,that uses a 

fluid bed gasifier capable of converting biomass into combustible gas connected to a small gas turbine. 

Such a system would provide heat to the poultry farm, electricity to the surrounding community, and 

provide a bio-secure disposal route for the poultry litter. 220 

As discussed above agricultural residues have a wide range of composition and properties that often 

result in reduced performance and operating difficulties. However they have the overwhelming 

advantages of being cheap and available. Engineers therefore develop robust solutions to access the 

profit that can be generated from these feedstocks. We give below some examples of how problems 

have been addressed worldwide. In addition a recent patent issued in the USA discusses a pyrolysis 

method of obtaining energy from poultry litter. 221 We are aware anecdotally of other gasification concepts 

to treat poultry litter but no examples of operating plant. 

220 The University of Manchester, http://www.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/news/archive/list/item/?id=3177&year=2007&month=10 

221 Thermochemical Method for Conversion of Poultry Litter, US2009031616 (A1), 05.02.2009.



Table 61 Two international examples of plants that use poultry litter as feedstock 

Capacity 

Comments 

Location Year 

Generation 

Moerdijk, 

Netherlands 222 

2008 440,000 

tonnes/annum 

36.5 MW Constructed by the Dutch multiutility 

company Delta, the 

feedstock is sourced through a 

cooperative comprised of 629 

separate poultry farmers. 223 

Benson, 

Minnesota, 

USA 224 

2007 500,000 

tonnes/annum 

55 MW The first poultry-litter fuelled 

power plant in the USA based 

on the Fibrowatt plants in the 

UK. 

Animal Wastes 

The Glanford power station in North Lincolnshire was originally commissioned to burn poultry litter, but 

was converted to allow the burning of MBM (Meat and bone meal) in 2000 as part of the UK effort to deal 

with the build up of MBM resulting from the rules for slaughter and disposal of cattle suffering from BSE. 

As of 2004 the plant has been licensed to burn MBM from any source. It has a generation capacity of 

13.5MW. 

8.3 EfW Potential 

The UK has a number of incineration plants, which currently make little use of the heat generated. 

Table 62 shows that the current permitted incineration capacity in England and Wales in 2007 (this does 

not include facilities that burn waste from their own in-house processes) was about 8.6 million tonnes. 225 

Facilities for MSW account for about 50% of the total capacity, and only 60% of the total available 

capacity was used in 2007. 

Table 62 Incineration capacity (tonnes) in England and Wales for 2007. 225 

Type Permitted 

Capacity 

Tonnage 

Incinerated in 

2006 

Tonnage 

Incinerated in 

2007 

Animal Carcasses 85,779 22,685 19,427 

Animal By-Products 1,258,000 803,480 799,158 

Clinical 222,093 114,272 123,349 

Co-Incineration of hazardous 

waste 1,052,087 215,016 281,099 

Co-Incineration of non 

hazardous waste 972,660 99,984 347,707 

Hazardous 209,175 133,895 132,963 

Municipal 4,416,100 3,293,719 3,277,707 

Bio-solids 387,500 196,434 190,825 

Total 8,603,394 4,879,485 5,172,235 

222 

Netherlands plant to convert poultry litter to energy, http://www.biomassmagazine.com/article.jsp?article_id=2006 

223 

Netherlands Plant to Convert Poultry Litter to Energy, http://www.biomassmagazine.com/article.jsp?article_id=2006, 

http://www.delta.nl/web/show/id=84742 

224 

Fibromin, http://www.fibrowattusa.com/us-projects.cfm?id=16 

225 

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/library/data/97795.aspx 

121

122 



Table 63 shows the incinerator throughput by region in 2007. London and the West Midlands both sent 

over 0.9 million tonnes to MSW facilities, and the East of England sent almost 0.6 million tonnes to animal 

by-product facilities. 

Table 63 Incinerator throughput (‘000 tonnes) by region in 2007 225 

Municipal Animal 

by-product 

Other Total 

East Midlands 156 - 183 339 

East of England - 583 46 629 

London 941 - 105 1,046 

North East 206 - 23 229 

North West 87 97 193 377 

South East 570 34 252 856 

South West 2 - 62 64 

West Midlands 944 - 102 1,046 

Yorkshire and Humber 358 85 105 548 

Wales 11 - 25 36 

Total 3,278 799 1,095 5,172 

Table 66 compares the composition of the mixed/general waste C&I stream with that for municipal solid 

waste. This shows that, whilst there are differences between the two reported analyses, in general 

mixed/general C&I waste stream has a higher content combustible content than overall MSW arisings. 

Table 64 Composition (Wt %) of MSW and mixed/general C&I waste 

Typical 

MSW 

Mixed/general 

C&I waste 

Report 1 226 

Mixed/general 

C&I waste 

Report 2 227 

Paper 14 22 14 

Cardboard 7 19 20 

Plastic film 3 4 7 

Dense plastic 4 6 5 

Textiles 2 1 2 

Other combustibles 12 7 19 

Glass 6 4 4 

Other non-combustibles 10 2 6 

Food waste 19 25 16 

Garden waste 14 3 2 

Metal 6 5 3 

WEEE 2 1 1 

Household hazardous 1 1 1 

Recycling initiatives for MSW have targeted and therefore removed much of the paper, cardboard, glass, 

plastic, metal and garden waste categories. The arisings of MSW in the UK are estimated (see Section 

4.1) to be 38 million tonnes per annum by 2020. If a 50% recycling target is achieved by 2020, then 19 

million tonnes will be recycled, composted or sent to anaerobic digestion facilities. It is more difficult to 

estimate the amount of MSW that will be landfilled by 2020, but if 20% (8 million tonnes) was directly 

landfilled, then a potential 11 million tonnes per annum of MSW could be treated in other energy recovery 

plants (3 million tonnes per annum is already being processed). The need to comply with the Landfill 

226 The composition of municipal solid waste in Wales. Report by AEA for the Welsh Assembly Government, December 2003. 

227 Determination of the Biodegradability of Mixed Industrial and Commercial Waste Landfilled in Wales. Report by SLR for Environment Agency 

Wales, November 2007.



Directive requirements for the diversion of biodegradable waste and for the treatment of other wastes 

prior to landfill mean that EfW is one of the likely options to treat this waste. 

In addition there are the C&I and C&D wastes that will require treatment and disposal. 

8.4 Conclusions for Combustion Technologies 

Combustion, or incineration is by far the most common method of extracting energy from solid waste 

either in most European countries, in either untreated form or as a prepared fuel. 

It summary 

• Combustion is a well established technology and the main technical challenges have been 

addressed. Whatever the difficulties with the properties of the fuel engineers have developed 

robust solutions that have been proven to work commercially at most scales. As a result of this, 

combustion remains the default technology for heat and power against which all new, more 

innovative, options must be measured. 

• There seems to be a combustion solution for all waste fuels. A summary of combustion 

alternatives, their scales of operation and the range of feedstocks for which they are suitable is 

given in Table 66. 

• There remains however significant technical uncertainty surrounding the impact of the 

composition of the waste on the performance of the heat exchange surfaces, particularly fouling 

and corrosion. 

• Other barriers remain, such as the largely negative public perception of such sites in some 

countries, notably the UK. 

• A summary of risks and barriers is given in Table 66. 

• There are countless examples of combustion practice worldwide on which to draw. 

123

124 



Table 65 Overview of technology, scales of operation and fuel suitability 

Burner type Typical size 

MW fuel 

input 

Fuel 

quality 

Burner Technology 

grate (G) or 

Fluidised (F) 

Domestic 0.015 MW Logs and 

pellets 

G 

Commercial 0.2 MW Wood chip G 

upwards most 

qualities 

Small industrial 2 MW Most dry G 

upwards shredded 

materials 

Large industrial 20 MW Most dry G or F 

heat and CHP upwards shredded 

materials 

not 

necessarily 

dry 

MSW mass burn 20MW Minimally G 

incineration upwards sorted 

MSW 

Large cofiring 100 MW Most dry n/a 

upwards shredded 

materials. 

Preference 

for pellets 

SRF 

Waste Wood 

Clean Wood 

Domestic Pellet 

 

Industrial Pellet 

 

Unsorted Waste 

Wet Wastes 

Agricultural 

Residues 

T C Fuels



Table 66 Risks and barriers to combustion 

Level of 

Risk 

Comment 

Technical Low to Many commercial installations, however the materials handling 

medium aspects have proved troublesome in the UK and there is a lack of 

experience. 

Agricultural residues and poor quality wood fuels may give high 

ash contents that lead to problems with boiler fouling. 

Wastes regulated under WID will need extensive emissions 

monitoring equipment. 

Social & Planning High High where used to produce electricity on a regional basis as it will 

be perceived as an incinerator irrespective of its efficiency or 

recycling credentials. 

Financial Medium Track record of delays in planning for waste projects are a 

disincentive. 

Wood and agricultural residues are OK in normal circumstances 

but can be delays in urban areas 

Regulatory Medium Receives subsidy via the Renewables Obligation. 

Waste incineration directive compliance is usually necessary. 

Co-firing waste in a utility boiler is difficult as it would require the 

reclassification of the whole station as an incinerator 

Fly ash may contain dioxin and be classed as hazardous waste. 

125

126 



9 Biological Processes 

The recycling initiatives targeting paper, cardboard, glass, plastic, metal and garden waste have also had 

the effect of increasing the food waste content (on a weight percent basis) of the remaining waste, 

particularly in the household waste stream. The food waste stream is now being increasingly targeted for 

separated collection and subsequent treatment by either composting (using in-vessel composting) or 

anaerobic digestion. Ultimately this could result in up to 4 million tonnes per annum of food waste being 

sent to anaerobic digestion facilities which could generate bio-gas, potentially used for electricity 

generation or transport gases, and a solid digestate. We can also add to this the waste from food 

manufacture, distribution and sale and the substantial quantities of manures from agriculture. Bio-solids 

are a further specialised form of wet waste that is used extensively for energy. 

9.1 Anaerobic Digestion (AD) 

Wet organic 

wastes 

Anaerobic 

digestion 


Anaerobic digestion is a natural biological process carried out by bacteria in low oxygen conditions. 

Organic material is converted into biogas (a mixture of methane, carbon dioxide and other trace gases) 

and a solid residue or digestate. 

The biological reactions occur in three sequential steps. The organic waste is first broken down into 

simple sugars and amino acids by enzymes (hydrolysed). These then ferment to produce fatty acids that 

are converted to hydrogen, carbon dioxide and acetate by acetogenic bacteria. Finally methanogenic 

bacteria produce biogas, a mixture of carbon dioxide (40%) and methane (60%) and other trace 

compounds. These biological processes operate in aqueous media, and hence are best suited to wet 

wastes. 

Anaerobic bacteria occur naturally and are commonly found in soils and deep water. They produce 

biological cultures that thrive within three temperature ranges, 7 - 24°C (psychrophilic), 35-39°C 

(mesophilic) and 55-60°C (thermophilic). 

Table 67 Comparison of AD systems 

Biogas/ 

Digestate 

Heat, power, 

grid gas 

Psychrophilic Mesophilic Thermophilic 

Optimal Temperature and 

Range ( o C) 

22 (7 - 25) 35 (25 - 42) 60 (49 - 72) 

Concentration V dilute Medium High 

Retention time (d) >50 20-40 5-20 

Gas generation rate Very slow Medium High 

Conversion of solid material Low Med to High High 

Construction Covered dam Steel or Steel or 

or lagoon concrete tank concrete tank



Figure 17 Anaerobic Digester schematic 228 

In Europe more than 85% of plants operate within the mesophilic temperature range as the greatest 

number of suitable bacteria species operates at this temperature and are more tolerant of varying 

environmental conditions. 8% of AD systems in Europe operate in the thermophilic range, mostly in 

Denmark as the thermophillic temperature range is especially applied in centralised AD plants, as are 

common in Denmark. The advantage of such systems is the reduced time required and the greater level 

of sterilisation achieved of the digestate. The drawback of such systems is the greater heat requirement. 

Less than 5% of European systems operate in the psychrophilic range. 

AD systems used to treat food and farm wastes have been adapted from well established systems used 

to treat wastewater solid fractions (bio-solids). The digestion process takes place in sealed tanks 

(digesters) that are continuously mixed to ensure a uniform reaction rate. 

The amount of biogas produced using AD will vary depending on the volatile solids component of the 

waste, the process design, such as reactor residence times and operating temperature. 

228 Schematic taken from “AD biological cycle” page on the “Renewable Energy Association”, http://www.r-e-a.net/biofuels/biogas/anaerobic- 

digestion/ad-biological-cycle 

127

128 



Approximately a third of the heat production will be used to heat the digester vessel and maintain the 

bacterial cultures at their optimum temperature. Further heat may be necessary to pasteurise the solid 

residue before it can be sold as fertiliser or soil conditioner. 

Recently the National Grid Company has announced plans to encourage and develop projects that can 

inject natural gas quality biogas into the National Gas Grid. This will involve the removal of carbon 

dioxide and any acid gas components by a combination of liquid scrubbing and adsorption technologies. 

The resulting cleaned gas will then need to be compressed to either transmission pressure of 

approximately 30bar or for smaller installations the low pressure distribution network at 3.0 and 0.5 bar. 229 

This concept has advantages for the operator of an AD plant if the incentives are sufficient, in that he will 

be able to sell the biogas into the grid all year round. Heat sales from CHP are always problematic with 

space heat demand varying throughout the year. 

Understanding the potential for AD requires study on a spatial basis 

The technology relies on the collection, transport and disposal of large volumes of materials and at each 

stage of the process there are constraints related to the location; 

• Wastes, crops and manure must be collected from a wide variety of sources and suppliers. 

• All feedstocks are high water content, low energy density, and expensive to transport. 

• The installation must be sited where traffic density and odour will not be a problem and where 

there is an electricity network connection and a heat customer. 

• The unit produces almost as much material as digestate for transport and disposal as it receives 

as feedstock. 

• The business will also need access to suitable agricultural land within a reasonable transport 

radius to dispose of the digestate. 

An accurate estimate of potential would need to be carried out by mapping waste arisings, energy 

demand, gas grid and the digestate holding capacity of the land as a GIS study. ADAS have carried out 

work on the holding capacity but this has not as yet been extended to digestate. 

Feed stocks suitable for anaerobic digestion 

Only high moisture content organic feedstock containing proteins, fats and carbohydrates can be 

processed successfully by anaerobic digestion. Cellulose and lignin digest far too slowly so it is not 

suitable for paper and wood. This does mean that a large variety of wastes ranging from farm manures 

and bio-solids to catering wastes, food wastes, meat, and bone meal can be treated, however the 

processing time (retention time) varies widely with the feedstock composition. 

The content of nitrogen compounds in the feedstock needs to be managed as they are converted to 

ammonia, which is toxic to anaerobic bacteria. The C:N ratio is also important as optimal growth of the 

bacteria is achieved when this is 20-30:1. 

Food wastes and manures contain high levels of pathogens such as Salmonella and E.coli which must be 

destroyed during the digestion or during the pasteurisation process once digestion is complete. 

Scale of operation 

Typically digesters based in rural locations and using manures, food waste and energy crops will have an 

output of 300kWe, which represents approximately 40k tonnes per annum of wet feedstock, such as the 

BioCycle Plant in South Shropshire and the Western Isles Integrated Waste Management Facility. 

Larger installations in semi-rural and urban locations that so far have focussed on supermarket and food 

processing waste may have an output up to 5MWe, for example the Wanlip Composting and AD Plant in 

Leicester. Sainsbury and PDM indicate that larger installations are unlikely. 230 

229 http://www.nationalgrid.com/corporate/Our+Responsibility/News/newsbiogas.htm 

230 Announcement by Sainsburys and PDM cooperation



By-products 

The digestate can be used as a fertiliser and soil conditioner. Recent practice has been to strike an 

arrangement between the plant operator and local farms to allow the spreading of digestate to their land 

in return for treatment of manures. 

More recently the establishment of the Quality Protocol for the digestate where it is to be spread on 

agricultural or forestry land, is intended to facilitate the use of the digestate, although care will still need to 

be taken in Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ), as discussed in the Protocol, as 68% of arable land in 

England and 4% in Wales are designated to be within NVZs and there are restrictions on how much 

nitrogen farmers can apply yearly. 231 

A recent example of the challenges increased volumes of digestate will create is given by Summerleaze’s 

Holsworthy site in Devon, which may only spread the digestate on land between February and September 

during the grass growing season, as the surrounding farms are livestock ones. Therefore to operate at 

maximum capacity it must be able to store six months worth of digestate, totalling 42,000m 3 . Its current 

storage capacity is 15,000m 3 . 232 

Technology status 

Anaerobic digesters are very well established in Germany and other EU Member states, which have or 

have had favourable policy instruments. 

The table below provides the number of AD plants in EU countries and their electricity generation 

capacities in 2005. It is clear from the table that there are a number of European countries in which the 

uptake of AD, either on-farm or centralised (CAD), by the agricultural industry has been much greater 

than in the UK, although it is also clear that Germany is quite exceptional. 

Table 68: Numbers of biogas plants in EU-countries producing electricity 233 

Country Agricultural AD 

plants 

Installed capacity MWe 

Austria 159 

29 

+150 to end 2007 + 40 to end 2007 

Belgium 6 12.3 

Denmark 58 on-farm 

20 CAD 

40 

France 3 n/a 

Germany > 3000 550 

Great Britain

130 



Some water companies are beginning to suggest the co-digestion of waste water and food waste 

alongside the digestion of bio-solids, such as the proposed site at Cumbernauld in Glasgow by Scottish 

Water. This arrangement could yield a higher biogas output as well as enabling a higher proportion of 

ROCs to be earned. 

Table 69 Risks Associated with Anaerobic Digestion 


Technical Low to medium Established mature technology with operating commercial 

plant in existence. 

Limited experience in UK. Recent incentives may stretch 

UK suppliers. 

Poor reputation from early Holsworthy experience. 

Sensitive to feedstock composition, can be poisoned by 

Social & 

Planning 

trace elements. 

Medium Not as divisive as an incinerator but transport of slurries in 

rural areas is a major issue and focus for opposition, as 

may be large scale transport of food wastes. 

Financial Low Installations are being financed in the UK at present and 

further experience should make this easier. 

Regulatory Medium Receives subsidy via the Renewables Obligation at an 

enhanced rate of 2 ROCs under the banding 

arrangements. 

Policy may change under installations lifetime although 

current practice is to maintain the financial position of 

existing plant. 

The installation is classed as a waste management 

operation and subject to regulation as such which brings 

additional costs and responsibility. 

Digestate disposal is an important consideration and a 

change of rules could materially affect the operating costs 

of the installation or even prevent operation. 

9.1.1 Anaerobic Digestion of food waste from MSW 

The AD capacity for solid waste in the UK is growing. From a capacity of 135,000 tonnes in 2004, it 

increased to 277,000 tonnes through the addition of 6 new plants in 2005 and 2006. 234 This utilisation 

level is still very small compared to the waste potentially available to it. BERR estimates that the UK 

generates over 100 million tonnes of wastes that would be suitable for AD (90 million tonnes of 

agricultural wastes and 9 million tonnes of food waste). 

It is likely that utilisation levels will continue to grow, assisted by the reclassification of anaerobic digestate 

to no longer a waste product, so long as it is used as fertiliser on farmland. 

Defra intend for AD technology to be used throughout the UK by 2020, that it will be “making a significant 

and measurable contribution to our climate change and wider environmental objectives“ in part through 

the production of around 10-20TWh of energy. 235 For comparison, Drax power station in North Yorkshire, 

produces 25TWh annually, approximately 7% of the UK’s electricity mix. 236 

234 Anaerobic Digestion and its role in Transport Fuels, Renewable Energy Association, 2007. 

235 Anaerobic Digestion – Shared Goals, Defra, 2009, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/ad/pdf/ad-sharedgoals-090217.pdf 

236 http://www.draxpower.com



Almost all UK solid waste AD sites only utilise the biogas collected for the generation of electricity, and 

some heat required for the process. Little of the remaining heat is utilised, in external heating systems for 

example. In addition the biogas has the potential to be used in other ways, for example as a transport 

fuel. Current policy favours the production of electricity. 249 However, the Renewable Energy Strategy 

and increased targets for renewable heat in the UK may make it more feasible to inject gas into the grid in 

the future. 

237, 238 

Current operational AD plants in the UK for solid waste are: 

• The BioCycle Plant in South Shropshire, run by Greenfinch, has been in operation since 2006 

and was built as a Defra Waste Technology Demonstrator Project. The system now takes 4,100 

tonnes of kitchen only waste (originally it took kitchen and garden waste but the feedstock was 

too contaminated) from households and commercial premises, converting it into biogas and 

ultimately electricity with a 0.2kW output annually. 239 

• The Wanlip Composting and AD Plant in Leicester started operation in 2004 at the Severn Trent 

Sewage Works, using the organic component of MRF from MSW. 240 The waste goes through five 

processes: homogenisation, sand separation, hydrolysis, digestion, and decantation. The 5mm 

and smaller component is mixed to a slurry and pumped with air for 24 hours as an aerobic 

hydrolysis process then the material undergoes an 18 day thermophilic wet AD process, before 

being composted to produce CLO (compost like output) for further use. The site accepts up to 

50,000 tonnes per annum and has a 1.5MW potential output. 166 

• Summerleaze Ltd, at Holsworthy, Devon was the UK’s first centralised AD site, and opened in 

2005 for the digestion of agricultural slurries. It now handles organic wastes from bakeries and 

food processors, abattoirs, fish processors, cheese producers, biodiesel manufacturers and local 

councils in a system capable of processing 80,000 tonnes per annum currently. 241 The methane 

produced is used to generate 2.7MW, with approximately 10% of this used to run the plant and 

the remaining 90% exported to the National Grid. 242 One advantage of accepting food waste, is 

that it attracts higher gate fees than agricultural waste, encouraging the feasibility of the site. 

• As part of the Western Isles Integrated Waste Management Facility in Scotland a waste treatment 

centre incorporating recycling and MBT, the EarthTech AD plant, takes up to 12,000 tones of 

biodegradable municipal waste and generates 0.24MW of electricity annually. This plant also has 

a CHP system incorporated into it, which is used to heat the AD system itself. 

• At the Premier Waste AD site in Thornley, Durham, capable of processing 20,000 tonnes/yr of 

MSW, three concrete towers are used as the AD vessels. This project is part of Defra’s 

Demonstrator Project, and after some initial problems the project recommenced demonstrator 

phase in mid 2008. 243 

Identifying a comprehensive list of currently functioning AD sites, and sites that will become operational in 

the future is difficult due to the level of interest in this area. Many potential sites are reported as 

certainties, when in fact they do not get as far as the planning stage, or markets change and a company 

decide not to go ahead with a site development. Also, many early AD sites have ceased operation for 

technical or financial reasons. 

A planned AD site is at Cumbernauld in Glasgow, for the treatment of 30,000 tonnes per annum of local 

food waste, by Scottish Water. The site is expected to be operating in 2010, to generate 1MW of 

237 

EU Requirement Approved Plants Report – Section VI Biogas Plants, 18 Feb 2009, http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/byprods/approvals/section6.pdf 

238 

ENDS Report 404, September 2008, p. 30-33, Biogas scents the sweet smell of success, 

239 

South Shropshire Biodigester, Ludlow Biocycle South Shropshire/Greenfinch Ltd, Information Sheet, 2008. 

240 

Anaerobic Digester at Wanlip, BiffaLeicester, http://biffaleicester.co.uk/about/composting.php?&printpage=true 

241 

Holsworthy Biogas Plant, Case Study 2, http://www.devon.gov.uk/renewable_energy_guide_case_study_2.pdf and “UK’s largest" AD plant 

permitted to take more food waste, 2008, http://www.letsrecycle.com/do/ecco.py/view_item?listid=37&listcatid=333&listitemid=10429 

242 

Andigestion, Holsworthy, http://www.andigestion.co.uk/content/holsworthy 

243 

Defra Factsheet, Premier, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/dem-programme/pdf/Premier.pdf 

131

132 



electricity and 1MW of heat. Meanwhile a 75,000 tonnes per annum site has planning permission in 

Beddington for processing kitchen waste and the organic component of the systems already on the site, 

generating 2MW of electricity a year. 

A demonstrator site run by Organic Power in Somerset has been working to convert food, animal and 

other organic wastes to biomethane through AD for use as a transport fuel for a number of years. The 

biomethane is converted to CNG (compressed natural gas) with the addition of a small amount of 

biohydrogen to ensure optimum combustion in CNG vehicles. 244 


One exemplar example of the use of large scale use of AD for MSW is the Brecht II facility in Belgium, 

which began operation in 2000 with a capacity of 50,000 tonnes per annum. The feedstock for the plant 

is mainly organics such as garden, kitchen and food waste to which nappies, non-recyclable paper or 

cardboard can be added. The facility processes the waste from the municipalities around the city of 

Antwerp. During 2005, 7.4 million m 3 of biogas was produced, used to generate 9.1 GWh of electricity. 

The plant also produces 20,000 tonnes of compost which meets the Flemish regulations for high quality 

soil amendment. 

9.1.2 Anaerobic Digestion of Commercial Waste 

Many food producers, including the major supermarket chains, have stated their wish to use waste 

diversion methods for their food wastes. Although there are only two strictly commercial food waste sites 

operational at the moment (and one of these is a demonstrator project), it is likely that this number will 

increase in the very near future, due to the significant rise in interest in this process. 

The demonstration scale anaerobic digestion facility exists at Waterbeach, Cambridge Research Park, 

near Cambridge. Trials of commercial waste materials such as agricultural, biodegradable industrial, 

kitchen and animal by-product wastes are being conducted at the site which can handle up to 17 tonnes 

of material per day. 245 

The Twinwoods Biogen Greenfinch site in Milton Earnest north of Bedford accepts up to 42,000 tonnes of 

commercial food waste combined with 12,000 tonnes of pig slurry each year and converts it to 1MW of 

electricity, 1.65MW of heat energy which is largely consumed by the process itself, and 32,000 tonnes of 

bio-fertiliser. 

A further commercial food waste site is at Westwood, Bedford, Northamptonshire, to be operated by 

Biogen Greenfinch. It is due to be operational in 2009 and will be able to process 45,000 tonnes of food 

waste each year, generating 1.5MW of electricity and 35,000 of biofertiliser. The supermarket company 

Sainsbury’s recently announced that they were investing in his facility, with the intention that 

supermarkets close to the site and its nearby distribution centre will use the process. 207 

Another potential AD site in Doncaster has been granted permission, this site will process 45,000 tonnes 

of food waste each year for Prosper De Mulder (PDM), a commercial food waste firm and Sainsbury’s has 

already expressed a strong interest. It is expected to generate 2MW of electricity. 

Drinks firm Diageo has announced its plans to construct an AD facility at its Cameronbridge distillery in 

Fife. 238 

244 Organic Power Website, http://www.organic-power.co.uk/press_articles.aspx 

245 Waterbeach AD Site, http://www.andigestion.co.uk/content/waterbeach




Identifying sites that use AD to dispose of commercial organic wastes is difficult as many are simply 

recorded as accepting ‘biowaste’ without further details. Austria cites several AD sites that accept only 

catering waste, including the Bruck a.d. Leitha site (20,000 tonnes p.a.), the Hagenbrunn site (20,000 

tonnes/yr) and the Heiligenkreuz am Vase site (12,000 tonnes p.a.). 246 

Bellisimo, an American frozen meal producer is constructing its second 5.25 US million gallon digester at 

its production facility in rural Ohio, one of the first American companies to invest in this technology. 247 

The system’s output will be used within the factory. 

9.1.3 Anaerobic Digestion of Biosolids 

The digestion of biosolids is a special case of anaerobic digestion. Sewage gas is the result of controlled 

anaerobic digestion (AD) occurring within a sewage handling facility, with 66% of sewage generated 

already treated by AD in the UK in 220 sludge digesters. 248,249 The process occurs in a well mixed, 

heated reactor but the reactions take some time due to the relatively low concentration of volatile solids. 

Sewage gas feed stock is the leftover sludge from the activated sludge process used at sewage 

treatment plants. Much of the biogas generated from this process is used to supply the needs of the 

processing plant. Water UK estimate that 60% of the biogas produced is collected and used to generate 

renewable heat and power by CHP engines, totalling 88MW of electricity. 249 However this represents 

only 14% of the energy requirements of the industry, as the water processing industry is the UK’s fourth 

most energy-intensive industry, accounting for approximately 3% of the UK’s electricity consumption. 250 

Defra has set the aim for the water companies to supply 20% of their energy needs from renewable 

sources, such as their in house AD processes, by 2020. 251 As of April 2009 water companies earn the 

reduced 0.5 ROCs per MWh of energy they generate from biogas. 249 Some water companies are 

considering the use of food and other wastes as additional feedstocks in response to the enhanced level 

of incentives given to anaerobic digestion in the reformed renewable obligation. 248 

Many water companies have pledged to reduce their carbon footprints and one way of doing this would 

be through achieving a greater efficiency of harvesting the biogas. For example Anglian Water has 

committed to increase the proportion of its energy met from biogas and wind power from 2% to 20% by 

2010; Southern Water aims to increase renewable generation to 20% by 2020, up from 10% in 2008; 

Thames Water aims to increase its renewable generation from its current level of 14% to 18% by 2020; 

and United Utilities intends to increase it in house electricity generation by 8% by 2012. 249 

9.1.4 Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural wastes 

Anaerobic digestion of animal wastes is an established method of dealing with significant quantities of 

animal slurries and residues. Controlled anaerobic digestion of such residues, with collection and 

utilisation of the bio-methane produced is less well established in the UK. 

The bio methane potential (Bo) of manure and slurry is the methane producing potential of the manure, 

expressed as cubic meters (m 3 ) of methane per kilogram of Volatile Solids (VS), also referred to as the 

maximum methane producing capacity for the manure. It varies by animal species and diet. Table 70 

246 

IEA Biogas, Plant List, http://www.iea-biogas.net/anlagelisten/Plantlist_08.pdf 

247 

Bellisimo Foods, http://www.bellisiofoods.com/sustainability.html, Turn Food Waste into Energy, Environmental Defence Fund, 

http://innovation.edf.org/page.cfm?tagid=1339 . 

248 

Water UK, Water Industry at the hub of anaerobic digestion, 17/02/09, http://www.water.org.uk/home/news/press-releases/ad-vision 

249 

ENDS Report 404, September 2008, p.30-33, Biogas Scents the Sweet Smell of Success. 

250 

ENDS Report 401, June 2008, p.32-36, Water Companies call in the Carbon Accountants. 

251 

Defra (2009) Anaerobic Digestion – shared goals available www.defra.gov.uk 

133

134 



describes the characteristics previous discussed in the agricultural residues section, but also details the 

bio-methane potential of the material. 

Table 70 Animal manure generation characteristics 

Bio Methane: cubic meters (m 3 ) of methane per kilogram of Volatile Solids (VS). 

Animal Proportion of 

the year 

housed 

Proportion of 

waste 

collected as 

slurry 

Volatile 

Solids 

kg/head/day 

Bio methane 

potential 

m 3 CH4/kg VS 

Dairy cow 59% 66% 3.48 0.24 

Other cattle 

(excl. calves) 

50% 18% 2.7 0.17 

Calves 45% 0% 1.46 0.17 

Dry sow 100% 35% 0.63 0.45 

Sows plus 

litters 

100% 75% 0.63 0.45 

Fattening pig 

(20 – 130kg) 

90% 33% 0.49 0.45 

Weaners 

(



• The AD site at Bank Farm in Wales was one of the first on farm AD sites in the UK, becoming 

operational in 1991 with a capacity to treat 790m 3 . It has recently been converted to generate 

electricity from the methane produced on site. 

A proposed AD site at Piddlehinton in Dorset has recently been granted panning permission. It is 

expected that this site will accept 35,000 tonnes per annum of food waste, green waste and pig slurry, 

and generate electricity and a biofertiliser. 255 

Further sites that are fully consented but are not yet operational are Eye Airfield in Suffolk which is 

expected to have an output of 1.05 MW, Dimmer in Somerset anticipated to have a 3MW output, and 

Lowe Farm with a predicted output of 0.5MW. 


Digestion of agricultural manure and slurries by controlled AD are well utilised in some European 

Countries. Centralised Anaerobic Digestion was first used in Denmark in the late 1980s. Its appeal is 

growing rapidly and its use is now common in Germany and to some extent in Sweden and Italy. 

Production of biogas in the EU 27 has risen steadily over the last few years and totalled 62 TWh in 2006 

(once again, compare this against Drax power station output of 25TWh p.a.). 256 

It is worth noting that the use of AD systems across Europe can be split into two distinct types. Southern 

countries such as Italy, Portugal and Spain use it as a waste-water treatment technology because the 

waste is collected at high water content levels, so containing low solid residues. While in northern 

European countries such as Germany, Denmark and Switzerland the water content is considerably lower, 

the solid content correspondingly higher and the systems optimized for fertilizer production. 257 

Denmark 

There are over 20 centralised plants operating in Denmark, with a further 20 farm scale operations. 

Feedstocks are mainly pig and cattle manure, but also include waste food, fat sludge and brewery 

wastes. 257 

• The Vester Hjermitslev was the first centralized co-digestion plant in Denmark, built in 1984 and 

supplied by 5 cattle and pig farms which supply slurry to the plant, together with a small amount 

of fish processing waste, tannery waste and waste fodder. The process operates at 37°C, with a 

sanitation stage of 4½ hours at 57°C. Once this is completed the biogas can be utilised in the 

onsite CHP unit in the 2 motors (840 kW +770 kW). Any overproduction is used in a gas boiler 

(250 kW). 257 

• The Ribe Biogas Plant began operating in 1990 and is supplied by 69 livestock farms (cattle, pig, 

poultry, mink), together with waste from abattoirs, food and fish waste. The facility is owned by 

the supplying farmers, a food processing company that supplies organic waste to the plant, the 

regional power company and two investment companies. The site operates at a digestion 

temperature of 53°C, and the minimum retention time of 4 hours ensures the digestate is 

sanitised, and is then used by the slurry providers as a liquid fertiliser, or sold as surplus. The 

biogas produced by the system is piped to a CHP pant at Ribe, which generates electricity and 

heat for the city using a mix of bio gas and natural gas. 257 

• Nysted biogas plant was built as an extension to the already established Hashøj biogas plant. 

Slurry and manure is received from 36 farms and is mixed with waste from the sugar industry, the 

medicinal industry, tanneries, an abattoir as well as fruit and vegetable waste and held at 38°C, 

with a sanitation phase consisting of 8 hours at 55°C. The plant is also able to process source 

separated household waste. The biogas produced is used in a 2300 kW engine to generate 

electricity for the grid and heat for 150 customers. 257 

255 Green Light for £5.5 Million Dorset AD Facility, 16.03.09, LetsRecycle.com, 


256 Danish Centralised Biogas Plants – Plant Descriptions, Bioenergy Department, University of Southern Denmark, 2000. 

257 Environmental Aspects of Biogas Technology, B. Klingler, German Biogas Association, AD-NETT. 

135

136 



Germany 

Germany has by far the greatest number of AD sites in Europe. The 2.4Mtoe p.a. of biogas produced 

from over 3,700 plants is largely used in co-generation facilities, and generated 1,270 MW of electricity in 

2007. 258 Estimates are that Germany will exceed 3,000 MW by 2020, 259 despite the annual increment 

slowing from 800 units per annum in 2006 to 250 per annum in 2007. This slowing is felt to be due to 

higher energy crop prices and a doubling in the equipment costs. 

The incentives system of producing renewable electricity in Germany has largely favoured the uptake of 

on-farm AD systems by farmers seeking to enhance their income but the scale of operation is increasing 

and there are reports of very large plants now being built specifically for injection of gas into the grid. 

For small-scale AD the additional tariff is nearly twice that of renewable obligation certificates in the UK, 

with extra available for CHP and for cultivated biomass feedstock. Driven by this market, technological 

advances made in Germany enable dry fermentation and co-digestion with energy crops, increasing the 

potential for biogas production. The industry is also backed up by a large number of suppliers and good 

technical support. 

Figure 18 German AD sites and the electrical output 260 

In Germany over 200 companies are offering services in connection with biogas technology, e.g. 

consulting, planning, manufacturing and delivery of parts and components (pumps, stirrers, engines, 

tanks) as well as servicing. It is estimated that together with the operating staff 8,000 jobs are depending 

on the services revolving around biogas technology so far. 

We give below a small selection of interesting examples from Germany illustrating the communal 

character of many installations and the large scale which is now possible. 

• The biogas plant in Reichenbach, in Saxony became operational in 2007, producing 845kW from 

liquid manure from the local farming cooperative. The waste heat produced is sold to the local 

hospital. 

• Jühnde (population 750, 220 households), near Göttingen became the first bioenergy village in 

Germany. 261 Ten agricultural businesses supply the 700kW electrical and 740kW heat Hasse 

biogas plant with slurry, grass, maize silage and garden waste, which together with the connected 

258 Renewables made in Germany, http://www.renewables-made-in-germany.com/en 

259 http://www.renewables-made-in-germany.com/en/biogas/ 

260 Source German Biogas Association 

261 The First Bioenergy Village in Germany, http://www.german-renewable-energy.com/Renewables/Navigation/Englisch/Biomasse/case- 

studies,did=132894.html



heat and power generator (powered with local biomass) generate enough electricity and heat to 

supply the requirements of the village. 

• Germany’s first industrial sized biogas plant opened in 2008, on the Klarsee industrial estate in 

Penkun, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania on the German-Polish border. 262 The site takes silage 

and manure (together with maize and other cereals) from local farms and creates slurry to be 

processed by 40 independent digesters. The methane produced is converted into electricity, with 

the plant capable of producing a 20MW output. 

Sweden 

Sweden is well known for having created several examples of a biogas network used to power vehicles. 

In Linköping a biogas plant was built in 1997, treating 100,000 tonnes p.a. or animal slaughter-house 

waste and industrial organic waste and producing 7.7 million m 3 per annum of upgraded biogas. This 

biogas is then used to power the city buses plus several light and heavy vehicles, as well as a number of 

private vehicles. 263 Sweden is well placed to develop such systems as the country had a considerable 

number of gas powered vehicles to begin with (13,500 in 2008, 110 gas filling stations 264 ) , and the gas 

distribution network is not that extensive, for example it does not reach Linköping. Another town in 

Sweden, Laholm, has been injecting the biogas its AD digester produces into the local natural gas grid 

since 2001. The digester accepts 48,000 tonnes p.a. of agricultural manures and industrial organic 

waste. 265 

A similar project in the UK, undertaken jointly by Sita UK, Gasrec and Boc, announced in June 2008 that 

they had produced a biomethane transport fuel from landfill gas at the Sita UK landfill site in Albury, 

Surrey. 266 This landfill site produces 2,300m 3 of landfill gas per hour, and the intention is to use this to 

produce 5,000 tonnes of biomethane for use by the site operator, by haulage firm Hardstaff Group, by a 

Sainsbury’s delivery truck and by a street cleaning vehicle in Camden to give feedback on a range of 

uses. The process upgrades the landfill gas by dewatering, then removal of hydrogen sulphide, carbon 

dioxide and nitrogen, selectively capturing 85% of the methane processed, at 95% purity. The gas 

produced is then liquefied for use. Potentially this fuel could also be used in CHP plants. 

9.2 Composting - an alternative to Anaerobic Digestion 


Composting is the aerobic decomposition by micro-organisms of biodegradable material to produce a 

residue - compost. It is a process primarily used for readily degradable organic materials, such as source 

separated green garden wastes and kitchen wastes. 

The waste is degraded by "heat-loving" micro-organisms. This is a biological process that oxidises the 

organic matter to break it down to a more simple form. A high temperature within the process is important 

to eliminate pathogens that may be present in the source materials. 

The composting operations must ensure that the micro-organisms are kept supplied with moisture, 

oxygen, food and nutrients and that conditions such as temperature remain in the optimum range. A 

large number of procedures and engineered solutions have been developed to achieve these objectives 

for the treatment of organic wastes. 

262 Industrial-scale production in world's largest biogas plant, Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, Germany. 

263 100% Biogas for Urban Transport in Linkoping, Sweden, IEA Biogas Network. 

264 Renewables target to be extended to at least 35%, ENDS Report 402, pp 38-39. 

265 Injection of Biogas into the Natural Gas Grid in Laholm, Sweden, IEA Biogas Network, http://www.ieabiogas.net/Dokumente/casestudies/sucess_laholm.pdf 

266 Gasrec, boc and SITA UK announce first fuel production at biomethane project in Albury, Surrey, Site Press Release 2008. 

137

138 



Open Composting Systems 

Most compost is generated through open air techniques, which places the organic waste in piles exposed 

to the air. The waste is commonly formed into elongated triangular piles that are called windrows, which 

allow optimum exposure to the atmosphere whilst minimising the land area taken up. Once the waste is 

prepared for composting the principal control mechanism for the process is the air requirement of the 

micro-organisms and the dissipation of the heat generated. Introduction of air into the waste can be 

achieved either though active pumping of air into the waste or through the mechanical lifting and mixing of 

the waste to introduce air into the pile. These two approaches are called static aerated pile and turned 

windrow. 

Windrow composting is well established in the UK with a large number of facilities treating source 

separated garden waste. Such systems for green wastes are typically quoted at between £20 and £25/t 

of waste treated although there is strong regional effects due to the potential for markets of the compost. 

In-Vessel Composting Systems 

Reactor or enclosed composting is a relatively new composting development that provides a faster active 

biodegradation process, reducing the area required. The use of a ‘closed’ vessel allows much greater 

control over the process and this helps both with the speed of the process but also the consistency 

(hence quality) of the compost product. 

The reactors come in a variety of forms and have varying degrees of automation. However, the basis of 

reactor composting is that materials are enclosed in a drum, silo, or similar structure and air is injected 

into the composting material to maintain the optimum conditions for composting. 

Following the foot and mouth outbreak in 2001, any waste which contains or could contain meat or meat 

products has to be treated at a certain temperature for a minimum period of time, thus any source 

separated waste which includes the collection of kitchen waste from households, would need to be 

composted in an in-vessel system. 

In-vessel composting facilities are not as well established, with less than 20 operational in the UK. These 

systems are more expensive than windrow systems with potential gate fees in the range £35-£50/t of 

waste treated. However, in Europe the number of facilities is large with in-vessel composting becoming 

the norm for organic wastes other than green garden wastes. 

Outputs 

Compost is stabilised organic material consisting of the refractory and slowly degradable cellulosic 

components. The main use of this compost is as a soil improver. 

The quality of the compost is largely determined by the feedstock provided to the process. Relatively 

uncontaminated feedstocks will give rise to uncontaminated products and these are generally composted 

from source-separated materials. The residues from the composting process are those materials that do 

not readily degrade, such as wood and these can either be returned to the front of the process to be 

shredded or they can be disposed of. 

The ratio of soil improver product to reject fractions will vary markedly with the feedstock and process but 

typically the product material might only be 50 to 60% of the incoming waste with 15-30% loss of mass 

through the biodegradation for source separated materials whilst residual (mixed waste) compost may 

only generate 10-20% compost product with up to 60% being reject to landfill. 

9.2.1 Composting of MSW 

The use of composting schemes is growing, especially as the organic fraction of MSW to landfill must be 

reduced. While composting does not produce either energy or fuels from waste, it does produce a viable 

product as an output, and it gives an indication of the proportion of organic material, largely from MSW, 

currently being treated.



In 2006-07 3.6M tonnes of source segregated waste was composted, a 5% increase on the previous 

year. 267 The vast majority of this waste is from MSW, and of this 48% was from civic amenity sites while 

46% was from kerbside collections. 

There are many composting sites in the UK, of varying sizes, types and longevity. Identifying a complete 

list of sites is difficult as many waste operators are experimenting with this process, and so sites are 

developing rapidly at the moment, as decisions are taken on whether to pursue this disposal method. 

Some of the better known examples of large scale composting sites in the UK are: 

Table 71 Large scale composting examples in the UK 

Name and Location Volume Operational 

Glasgow Fruit Market, 

Glasgow 268 


2005 

Council run and output is 

sold. 

Twycross Zoo, 

Warwickshire 269 

Lynnbottom, Isle of 

Wight 270 

St. Ives, 

Cambridgeshire 271 

Wharton, 

Herefordshire 272 * 

Enclosed composting of waste 

fruit, vegetables, paper, card and 

pallet wood 

800 tonnes p.a. 

Enclosed composting of animal 

wastes and garden waste. 

Up to 60 tonnes per day 

Originally composting of garden 

waste in windorws. More recently 

taking food waste in-vessel. 


Conversion of kitchen and green 

waste in 4 composting tunnels, 2 

of which are part of Defra 

Demonstrator Programme. 


In vessel anaerobic digestion 

technique to compost garden and 

kitchen waste. Also one of the 

Defra Demonstrator Programmes. 

2008 

1992 

2002 

Parham, Suffolk 273 * Site takes garden and food 

waste, shredded paper and 

cardboard, from Suffolk Coastal 

District Council 

2006 

* The operating company went into administration in February 2009, at which point the site in Parham was 

taken over by Country Style group and continues to operate. 

267 Compost Information Sheet, Waste Online, http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resources/InformationSheets/Compost.htm 

268 Chronicle of Glasgow’s Fish, Fruit and Flower Markets, 

http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/en/Business/Markets/chronicleofglasgowsfishfruitvegetableandflowermarket.htm 

269 Twycross Zoo Recycles Poo! http://www.twycrosszoo.com/news/currentnews.htm 

270 Lynnbottom Composting Facility, http://www.wrightenvironmental.com/pdf/IsleofWight_print.pdf 

271 Envar, Services, Composting, http://www.envar.co.uk/services/composting.html?menu_pos=services 

272 Bioganix Research Limited, Defra Factsheet, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/dem-programme/pdf/Bioganix.pdf 

273 Greenprint Forum and Green Issues Task Group visit the Parham Compost Facility, 

http://www.suffolkcoastal.gov.uk/yourdistrict/greenissues/greenprint/forum/parhamvisit/default.htm 

139

140 



Upcoming projects include the Mytum & Selby site, which is constructing a 25,000 tonnes per annum 

facility, due to be operatational by October 2009. Phase two would see this capacity increase to 75,000 

tonnes per annum. 274 

9.3 Hydrolysis and fermentation of lignocellulose 

(Biological 2nd Generation Biofuel) 

Wood 

waste, 

Agricultural 

/ cereal 

waste 

Pre 

treatment 

Hydrolysis/ 

saccharification 

Fermentation 


Most ethanol is produced industrially by the fermentation of sugars by yeasts or bacteria although a small 

quantity is produced by the hydration of ethylene. The most common processes use simple sugars such 

as sucrose that the organisms can easily process. These sugars are found in food crops, either directly 

as in sugar cane and beet, or as starch in grain that is converted to sugar by the action of an enzyme. 

Wood and the stem material of plants - lignocellulosic material - are also composed to a large extent of 

sugars and are much more abundant. However these sugars are unsuitable for fermenting organisms 

and locked into the plant structure. 

Lignocellulosic material contains two sugars, cellulose and hemi-cellulose, both in polymer form. They 

are enclosed by coating of lignin, a compound with no sugars that gives the plant its structural strength. 

To obtain fermentable sugars it is first necessary to release the cellulose and hemi-cellulose from the 

lignin and then hydrolyse them to simple sugars. These can then be fermented by yeasts, or more 

usually, bacteria to produce ethanol. 

The generic flowsheet for this process has four sequential steps covering a pre-treatment step to release 

lignin and hydrolyse the hemicellulose, hydrolysis of the cellulose to simple sugars, fermentation, and 

purification of the ethanol produced. Of these steps pre-treatment and hydrolysis have proved technically 

the most difficult and the subject of most research and development. 

Pretreatment. The first operations are normally physical treatments to reduce the size and increase the 

surface area of the feedstock that improve its accessibility to the reagents used. Washing may also be 

necessary for some feedstocks, and steaming followed by solvent washing has been proposed to remove 

resins that may inhibit the later biological processes. 

Normally the breaking of the structure is achieved by a dilute acid that will break the lignin free from the 

structure to liberate the sugars, and at the same time hydrolyse the hemi-cellulose polymer to simpler 

274 Mytum & Selby plans £45m waste-to-biofuel plant, Letsrecycle.com 13 th March 2009. 

Purification 

Ethanol



Xylose and 5 carbon sugars. Some cellulose will also be converted to 6 carbon sugars, but most will be 

hydrolysed in the following stage. 

Physical methods have also been proposed for pre-treatment, usually in combination with dilute acid 

treatment, the most common being steam explosion where the slurry in the pre-treatment stage is flashed 

to low pressure through a choke causing the cell structure to burst during decompression. The same 

explosive decompression effect has been demonstrated using ammonia and CO2 as the medium. 

A consequence of the acidic conditions is that some of the sugars will be converted to furfans and other 

compounds that may inhibit the fermentation organisms in a later stage. A key development challenge for 

process designers is to minimise the production of inhibitors whilst maximising the yield of simple sugars. 

Acid will need to be recovered and sugars washed from the process and the liquor neutralised following 

pre-treatment. Lignin is also removed at this stage. Most developers propose to use this as a fuel for 

power and process heat generation. 

Cellulose Hydrolysis. Pre-treatment is followed by a second hydrolysis stage where the cellulose is 

converted to 6 carbon sugars. Historically this has been achieved by acid hydrolysis using a higher 

temperature but lower concentration acid than in the pre-treatment step. An alternative route is to use 

concentrated acids which improves the yield of sugar but is critically dependent for its economics on 

effective recovery and reuse of the acid. This is technically possible but difficult and involves complex 

engineering. 

Acid based processes have been proven for many years but only now are demonstrations being planned 

in the USA and the EU. This lack of progress has been historically due to the expensive equipment 

necessary and the low price of competing ethanol from sugar and grain. Only with the recent interest in 

ethanol as a biofuel has development restarted on this process. 

Following hydrolysis the process will include separation stages to wash out the sugars and remove 

fermentation inhibitors such as heavy metal contaminants and organic products of hydrolysis followed by 

neutralisation with lime if acid has been used. 

In the last decade, an alternative, enzyme hydrolysis route has been proposed and developed to pilot 

stage. This technology has the potential to achieve high conversion rates with low production of inhibitors 

due to the mild reaction conditions. The key development necessary for commercialisation is to reduce 

the cost of the enzyme cellulase by an order of magnitude. Enzyme based processes are still in the 

development phase but offer the prospect of being economically more attractive than other options if their 

further development is successful. Demonstrations are planned in Canada, USA and EU. 

Fermentation. 

The sugars from either hydrolysis route contain five and six carbon atoms and need to be fermented in a 

microbial process rather than the yeast process used for simple sugars from sugar beet, sugar cane and 

grains. Typically these are proprietary recombinant organisms whose metabolisms have been tailored to 

the sugars in the process. We understand work is also being carried out on advanced yeasts. 

Development status 

A substantial research programme has been underway for over a decade in the USA and EU to 

commercialise this technology. 275 This has resulted in several demonstration plants, but as yet no fully 

commercial installations. 276 Progress has been made however and the US have announced a target of 

producing ethanol from lignocellulose to the same price as that from corn by 2012. 

275 IEA (2008) From first to second generation biofuel technologies: An over view of current industry and R,D & D activities 

276 www.abc-energy.at/biotreibstoffe/demoplants.php. 

141

142 



Current key topics for research are the improvement of the organisms used in the process to improve 

yields and efficiency and the combination of several processes in the same unit operation to reduce 

capital costs. 

Current plans in the USA indicate that one of the most promising configurations for a demonstration will 

be to install the hydrolysis stages on a corn ethanol site to process the maize harvesting residue. 

Scale of operation – Regional 

The reliance on clean feedstock would suggest that this would be a regional technology drawing from 

agricultural residues such as straw and chipped wood fuels. The low bulk densities would tend to reduce 

the economic transport radius. However the process involves complex process engineering which 

responds well to the economies of scale. 

Hydrolysis feed stocks 

Feed stocks for hydrolysis based processes need to be clean waste, virgin wood or agricultural residues. 

The microbial fermentation is susceptible to poisoning if contaminated waste biomass is used as a 

feedstock. 

Table 72 The suitability of feedstocks for hydrolysis processes 

SRF 

Waste 

Wood 

Clean 

Wood 

Domestic 

Pellet 

Industrial 

Pellet 

Unsorted 

Waste 

Wet 

Wastes 

Agricultural 

Residues 

 

T C Fuels – Thermochemical Fuels 

A contrary view on the necessity for clean feedstocks is taken by Aquegen who propose using MSW 

fractions at their installation to be built in the UK at South Milford in West Yorkshire. The chemical 

process appears to be acid hydrolysis of the cellulose and hemi cellulose but the impact on the 

fermentation stage is unclear and operating data is scarce. 

UK Biomass to Ethanol Plant 

Mytum and Selby have planning permission for the creation of a biomass to ethanol facility at South 

Milford in West Yorkshire, as a joint venture with AqueGen. The intended site will be capable of 

processing 400,000 tonnes of waste food, ABP (Animal By Product) and liquids into 100 million litres of 

alcohol each year. It is hoped that the site will be operational by 2011. 274 

Table 73 Risks Associated with Ethanol from lignocellulose waste 


Technical High The technology remains innovative with only small 

demonstration and pilot projects built so far. 

Feedstocks are currently limited to clean wood and 

agricultural residues. Contamination from other 

sources could damage the fermentation process. 

Social & Planning Medium Process should be no more difficult to implement 

than a biomass power plant. 

Implementation is likely to be on an existing grain 

ethanol site 

Financial High The combination of expensive processing and the 

need for good quality feedstock means that 

product will be more expensive than imported 

ethanol for some time. Plant economics will be 

sensitive to price competition for feedstock and 

competition from improved cane sugar ethanol 

processes for final product. This may make it 

T C 

Fuels




unsuitable for use in the UK. 

Regulatory Medium Would require additional subsidy from Renewable 

transport fuels obligation. 

9.4 Conclusions for Biological Processes 

Biological processes for waste include anaerobic digestion for the production of methane fuel gas and the 

hydrolysis and subsequent fermentation to ethanol fuels of the hemi-cellulose and cellulose fractions of 

lignocellulosic materials. 

Following our review of these technologies our conclusions are as follows; 

• Anaerobic digestion processes are technically viable and available for most wet waste feedstocks 

including sewage bio-solids. 

• There is much discussion concerning whether AD is economically viable for standard fee waste at 

the moment. Greater interest in applying this disposal method is being stimulated by the revised 

Waste Framework Directive, and interest in biogas for transport. 

• Using a proportion of food waste is important to the economics of anaerobic digestion due to its 

high gas generation potential and gate fee. Manures are bulky and have poor gas potential. 

• Digestate disposal is becoming difficult due to constraints in nitrogen sensitive areas. 

• Composting is a lower cost alternative to AD but does not produce energy and can be regarded 

as a competitor to AD. It is popular with waste managers due to the cost and its status as a 

recovery, rather than a disposal process. Disposal of compost to land suffers from the same 

constraints as AD digestates. 

• Hydrolysis and subsequent fermentation to ethanol fuels of the hemicellulose and cellulose 

fractions of lignocellulosic materals is still at the development stage although there are plans for 

demonstrations in the EU and USA. 

• Feedstocks are limited at present to clean wood and agricultural residues. 

o We question whether hydrolysis and fermentation should be a priority for the UK at 

present where clean residues are relatively expensive and could potentially be used in 

more efficient ways. 

143

144 



10 Thermochemical processes for generating 

energy 

Thermochemical processes for the generation of energy are taken as gasification and pyrolysis in the 

Chapter. Combustion, gasification and pyrolysis all use heat to break down the structure of the feedstock 

so that the chemical energy can be released either as heat or a fuel product. The conditions in the 

reactor determine the products. 

When combustible waste enters a high temperature environment it will first dry and then decompose into 

volatile gas and char components. 

A combustion process is always supplied with an excess of air so the char and volatile gas burn 

completely. The energy in the waste is released within the combustion equipment and the flue gas 

from it. It is recovered as hot water or steam. 

Gasification processes use a limited supply of oxidant; usually air, to maintain both combustion and 

reducing reactions in the same reactor. These reactions produce carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen 

(H2) and hydrocarbons as well as combustion products. Most of the energy in the fuel is transferred 

into the calorific value (CV) of the gas leaving the reactor. This gas can be burned separately in a 

boiler, engine or gas turbine. Alternatively it can be converted by a synthesis reaction to methane for 

injection to the Natural Gas Grid or liquid fuels for transport. 

In a pyrolysis process there is no oxygen and the char and volatile gas remain largely unchanged. 

The energy in the waste is retained in the CV of the gas and char removed from the reactor. These 

can then be burned separately in a boiler, engine or gas turbine. Some pyrolysis processes produce 

gases that can be condensed into a liquid fuel. Pyrolysis products can also be further upgraded to 

transport fuels although the technologies required are not yet commercially available. 

There are a number of advantages of converting solid waste into a gas or liquid fuel. 

• Cleaning a small fuel gas stream before combustion rather than a large flue gas flow as in an 

incinerator reduces the size of the pollution control equipment. 

• The controlled combustion in a gas flame, as opposed to a grate, may also reduce the extent and 

complexity of final gas cleaning. 

• The two points above make installations economically possible that are smaller than current 

incinerators. These should be more acceptable for permitting and more compatible with the 

throughputs of the newer mechanical separation and other recycling and recovery processes. 

• Higher electrical output per tonne is possible if high-pressure boilers, gas turbines or engines are 

used. 

• Alternative energy products such as methane and liquid fuels can be manufactured by chemical 

synthesis using the products of gasification or pyrolysis as a base. 

In the sections below we discuss how thermal technologies are used to generate energy from waste, 

what demands they make of the feedstock, their commercial status and the risks of deployment. 

These advantages are often quoted by gasification and pyrolysis suppliers as solutions for perceived 

weaknesses in the current market leader – combustion with energy recovery. These claims are shown in 

Table 74 with our comments.



Table 74 Claims for gasification/pyrolysis with comments 


Large (Regional) size and 

fuel demand suppresses 

recycling. 

Small volume of Hazardous 

and toxic fly ash. 

Bulky residual ash can be 

used as a aggregate. 

Poor electrical efficiency 

and lack of suitable heat 

loads gives poor resource 

use efficiency. 

Can be built economically at 

the smaller sizes that can be 

integrated into local 

schemes. 

This remains to be 

demonstrated, but is 

probably true. 

No dioxin found in fly ash. This seems to be valid. 

Some options give low 

volume compact ash. 

Some options can give very 

high electrical efficiencies. 

Smaller sizes can match heat 

loads better. Particularly as 

these are often independent 

of the power supply. 

Electricity and or heat only Some options can be used to 

generate gas or transport 

fuels 

10.1 Gasification 

RDF 

Waste wood 

Clean wood 

Ag residues 

Gasification 

Syn gas 

Valid. Some incinerators can 

give low volume slag like ash 

but at a very high energy cost 

for ash melting. 

Very few demonstrations of 

high electrical efficiency. 

Lack of enthusiasm for CHP. 

Installations in wood waste 

sector now making progress. 

True at very large scale. 


In simple terms gasification is the conversion of a solid fuel to a gas that has sufficient energy value to be 

useful as a fuel or feedstock in its own right. 

This concept is refined in the definition for the Renewables Obligation to the substoichiometric oxidation 

or steam reformation of a substance to produce a gaseous mixture containing two or all of the following: 

oxides of carbon, methane and hydrogen and which has a gross calorific value of at least 4.0 MJ/m 3 when 

sampled at the inlet to the generator and measured at 0.1 MPa and 25°C. 277 

277 Renewables Obligation: Defining the different types of electricity generation using biomass and waste www.berr.gov.uk 

Methanation 

Grid Injected 

SNG 

Fischer 

Tropsch 

CHP 

2 nd gen 

biofuels 

Heat, 

Power 

145

146 



Gasification has been successfully used with coal, in the American Great Plains project to generate 

synthetic natural gas and in South Africa to generate transport fuels. There are also instances 

internationally where gasification has been used with SRF waste as a feedstock. 

A gasification for energy process has four steps, the gasifier itself that produces the gas, feedstock 

preparation to get the fuel in the right form for the gasifier, the clean-up of the gas, and the utilisation of 

the clean gas for energy. This is shown Figure 19. 

Step 

Material 

state 

Typical 

equipment 

and 

process 

Step 1 

Pretreatment 

Step 2 

Thermal 

reactor 

Step 3 

Gas 

conditioning 

Solid Waste Raw gas 

Clean Gas 

Separation 

of glass and 

metals. 

Screening 

Shredding 

Pelleting or 

briquetting 

Fluidised 

bed reactors 

Externally 

heated 

reactors 

Fixed bed 


Entrained 

flow 


Gas 

coolers 

Filters 

Liquid 

scrubbers 

Figure 19 Steps in a gasification process 

Step 4 

Conversion 

to energy 

Energy 

products 

Steam 

boilers 

Engines 

Gas 

turbines 

Chemical 

synthesis 

The gasification process 

The gasification reactions that produce the fuel gas components are endothermic and need a constant 

supply of heat to sustain production. This heat is supplied by the combustion of part of the fuel. The 

challenge is for the equipment design to transfer heat from exothermic combustion to endothermic 

gasification. There are two main types although there are many variants in each category. 

Direct – This process occurs in a single reactor where oxygen or air and usually superheated steam is 

supplied to the same vessel so that some combustion occurs in situ providing the required heat to drive 

the gasification reactions. The direct use of air dilutes the product gas and results in a low calorific value 

fuel commonly referred to as producer gas. 

Indirect – Here gasification and combustion process occur in separate fluid bed reactors. Heat is usually 

transferred by circulating the fluidised bed material between the two beds. This concept is more complex 

than the direct process but produces a gas with a higher calorific value.



Table 75 Gas compositions of typical gasifier types 

Compound Typical indirect 

(Gussing twin 

fluid bed) 

% by volume 

Typical Direct 

(Downdraft fixed 

bed) 


Direct bubbling 

fluid bed 


Carbon monoxide 22.7 % 21.4 %v 11-15 %v 

Hydrogen 31.5 %v 15.38 %v 8-13 %v 

Methane 11.2 %v 2.05 %v 5-8 %v 

Higher hydrocarbons 4.0 %v 0.5-1.5 %v 

Carbon dioxide 27.4 %v 11.82 %v 14-16 %v 

Nitrogen & Oxygen 2.8% 49.35% 35-45 %v 

Water vapour As dry As dry 14-21 %v 

LHV, kJ/Nm 3 

12,000 - 13,000 5,005 –5,200-5,800 

There are a wide variety of commercial processes on the market. The list below gives the basic generic 

types. 

147

148 



Table 76 Generic gasifier types 

Type Description Direct/ 

indirect 

Fixed bed Fuel, air and the produced gas flow co currently direct 

downdraft downwards through a reactor with a converging 

base section. 

Fixed bed updraft Fuel and air flow counter currently through a 

cylindrical bed. 

direct 

Fluidised bed The waste is gasified in a hot bed of sand or direct 

direct 

limestone that is agitated by air and the gas product. 

This is known as a fluidised bed. Char burns in situ 

to provide heat. The fluidised bed can be retained 

within the reactor vessel as a coherent bed with only 

gas and dust leaving or the velocity of the gas can 

be increased to the point that bed material is 

transported from the top of the vessel necessitating 

its recirculation back to the reactor. These two 

patterns are respectively referred to as bubbling 

and circulating fluidised beds. 

Fluidised bed The waste is gasified in a turbulent bed of sand or indirect 

indirect 

limestone. Char from the reaction is transferred with 

sand to a separate vessel where it is burned in air. 

Heat is transferred by sand circulation. As with the 

direct type the fluidised beds can be bubbling or 

circulating. 

Heated kilns The waste is tumbled in a rotating drum heated by 

the combustion of some of the product gas 

indirect 

Small heated tubes The waste is progressed by a screw or ram through 

a tube heated by the combustion of some of the 

product gas. 

indirect 

Large heated tubes The waste is progressed by a screw or ram through 

a tube heated by the combustion of some of the 

product gas. 

Indirect 

Large entrained Finely divided or liquid fuel is gasified as a flame direct 

flow 

with oxygen. 

Plasma gasification High temperature plasma from an electric arc 

dissociates the waste into its component molecules 

Direct 

Feedstocks 

The feedstock quality requirements depend on the size and the design of the gasification process. While 

most thermal gasification processes work best with dry regularly sized feedstocks there are some limited 

examples of processes that will accept unsorted MSW. In general, the smaller the gasification unit, the 

more stringent the quality requirements will be for the feedstock being used. The requirements for each 

of the types identified above are summarised below.



Table 77 Gasifier feedstock requirements 

Gasifier 

Type 

Fixed bed 

downdraft 

Typical 

Size MW 

fuel 

1 MW 

modules 

Fixed bed 10 MW 

updraft modules 

Fluidised 25MW 

bed direct or upwards 

indirect 

Heated kilns 20MW 

modules 

Small 

heated 

tubes 

Large 

heated 

tubes 

Large 

entrained 

flow 

10 MW 

modules 

Fuel Quality 

Regularly 

sized, dry and 

clean wood 

chips with low 

ash. Possibly 

pellets 

Wood chip 

SRF 

Waste Wood 

Clean Wood 

 

most qualities 

Most dry 

shredded 

materials 

Most shredded 

materials not 

necessarily dry 

Most dry 

shredded 

materials not 


50MW Minimally 

sorted or 

prepared 

100 MW 

upwards 

Plasma 2MW 

upwards 

T C Fuels – Thermochemical Fuels 

materials 

Capable of 

high pressure 

pneumatic 

transport or 

slurry 

component 

Most shredded 

materials not 


Domestic Pellet 

Industrial Pellet 

Unsorted Waste 

Wet Wastes 

Agricultural 

Residues 

T C Fuels 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With the exception of the direct fluidised beds none of the gasification processes above can be 

considered to be widely available commercially. The allocation of feedstock is therefore an estimate 

based on AEA knowledge. 

Primary Gas Cleaning 

The gas from the gasifier contains a range of contaminants. The most important are dust and residual 

organic compounds or tars that can cause difficulties for the following conversion process. The extent of 

cleaning necessary varies with the end use of the gas, so a fluidised bed gasifier supplying hot gas to a 

coal fired utility boiler will have minimal dust removal whereas a unit supplying gas to a reciprocating 

engine will need reliable dust, tar and acid gas removal. Synthesis processes require a very high level of 

purity to avoid poisoning of the catalysts used in the reactions - these are more properly regarded as part 

149

150 



of the synthesis package and so will be described below in that section. The requirements for the more 

demanding end uses have been summarised by the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology. 278 . 

Cleaning processes, especially those for the tars, have proved exceptionally difficult to design and 

implement in practice and are the principal cause of project failure where engines and gas turbines are 

used. 

Options that have shown success are: 

For tar removal 

• Catalytic cracking or steam reforming on limestone or nickel catalysts. (VTT, Condens) 

• Filtration on ceramic filter with limestone precoat. (Gussing, Biomass Engineering) 

• Liquid scrubbing with vegetable oil or biodiesel. (Gussing, Xylowatt) 

• Wet electrostatic precipitators (REFgas) 

• Plasma reaction chamber. (Europlasma) 

For dust removal 

• Ceramic, or sintered metal filters (Guessing, Biomass Engineering) 

• Cyclones 

• Liquid scrubbers with vegetable oil or biodiesel. (Gussing, Xylowatt) 

• Plasma reaction chamber. (Europlasma) 

Table 78 Syngas trace contaminants and target levels in ppm 278 

mg/Nm 3 Biomass 

gasification 

Gas motor Gas turbine MeOH FT (Sasol) 

Particles 10 4 – 10 5 < 50 < 1 0.2 n.s. 

Tar 0 – 20,000 < 100 < 5 < 1 n.s. 

Alkali 0.5 – 5 n.s. < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.01 

NH3, HCN 200 – 2000 < 55 n.s. < 0.1 < 0.02 

H2S, COS 50 – 100 < 1150 < 1 < 0.1 < 0.01 

Halogens 0 – 300 n.s. < 1 < 0.1 < 0.01 

Heavy 

Metals 

0.005 - 10 n.s. n.s. n.s. < 0.001 

n.s = not specified 

Gas conversion 

The clean gas has many uses. It can be burned directly, to provide heat, raise steam, or drive electrical 

generators. It can also be used as a feedstock for further processes to synthesise methane, diesel fuel 

components and other chemicals and fuels. 

Without doubt the most successful application to date has been the direct combustion of gas in industrial 

processes and boilers. 

The most quoted example of process use is the use of fluidised bed gasifiers producing low calorific gas 

for heating lime kilns in the paper and pulp industry. Typically the gas is burned through a burner nozzle 

designed for the low calorific value directly into the combustion chamber of the process unit. One unit in 

Varo Sweden has been operating since 1987. 279 

Gas can also be used to raise steam in a boiler which can in turn be used for power generation. This is a 

robust concept that carries much less technical risk than the use of engines or gas turbines. Prime 

examples of this are those processes based on an externally heated reactor with all the heat release in a 

278 IEA Bioenergy Agreement Task 33 Spring 2009 Workshop, Karlsruhe, www.gastechnology.org/iea German country update 

279 IEA Bioenergy Agreement Task 33 Spring 2009 Workshop, Karlsruhe, www.gastechnology.org/iea Swedish country update.



high temperature combustion chamber followed by a boiler (Ethos Energy, Thermoselect, Mitsui MES 

R21). These have all proved reliable in commercial service and delivered substantial emissions benefits. 

A special case of this is the use of gas for firing district heating plant. Through the 1980’s a Finnish 

company, Bioneer, installed a series of updraft gasifiers linked directly to hot water heating boilers in 

Finland and Sweden. These were very successful and reliable but development stopped after the 

company was sold to a major engineering concern. 

There are plans to implement a project in east London (ELSEF) that will use a fluidised bed gasifier, 

fuelled by SRF from a neighbouring waste management facility. Here the gas would be cleaned of acid 

gas components which allows the use a much higher pressure boiler and turbine than would be possible 

with a combustion plant and hence potential for higher electrical efficiency in power and CHP cycles. 

A further related application that is enjoying considerable success is the use of a circulating fluidised bed 

gasifier close-coupled to a coal fired boiler. Three installations have been built: Lahti in Finland, Amer in 

Netherlands and Electrobel Ruien in Belgium. These units take a wide range of feedstocks from SRF to 

waste woods and plastics. The first installation of this type, Lahti in Finland was commissioned in 1998 

and has operated reliably since. Details of all of these installations can be found on the IEA Bioenergy 

Agreement Task 32 database of cofiring installations 280 . The inherent simplicity of this approach and it’s 

ability to make use of the high efficiency steam cycle of the fossil fuel plant is attractive and further 

installations are planned in Finland and Sweden. 279 

A class of installations that is enjoying some success in the UK is the close coupled gasifier and boiler, 

where waste is burned directly after production. This does not allow for acid gas removal but ensures 

that the gas is burned in a well developed and controlled flame that reduces other emissions to a low 

level. One of the most developed version is the Energos gasifier which is demonstrating a unit on the Isle 

of Wight as part of the Defra WIP. 281 Further replications are planned in the UK. The controlled nature of 

the gasification and combustion reactions mean that this type of unit can be designed to burn sorted 

MSW and SRF in smaller heat and CHP installations than grate and fluidised bed combustors which 

means they can be used to power industrial heat and high load chp installations that have high GHG 

abatement potential. A further example of this type of technology is the Bioflame unit which is currently 

being marketed to produce CHP using waste wood chip as a fuel. 282 

Using the gas to generate electricity from combustion in a reciprocating engine or gas turbine has proved 

problematical and there are very few examples of a fully commercial, reliable system operating today. 

The obstacle is cleaning the gas of the tar and dust contamination that can damage the engine. This 

apparently simple task has defeated many engineers over several decades. There has however been 

some progress over the last five years; 

• At Gussing in Austria an indirect gasifier has been operating for over 20k hours fuelling a 2.5 

MWe reciprocating engine. The key to success here appears to be the combination of a ceramic 

filter with a liquid scrubber containing biodiesel. 

• Biomass Engineering Ltd in the UK have installed three downdraft/ engine systems in Germany 

that are generating reliably as CHP units supplying district heating. The key here seems to be 

close control over the feedstock sizing and quality combined with the use of a ceramic filter. 

• At Harboore in Denmark a fixed bed gasifier supplies three reciprocating engines in a local district 

heating system. Tar cleaned from the fuel gas is stored and subsequently fired in a boiler to even 

out peaks in heating demand. 

280 http://www.ieabcc.nl/database/cofiring.php 

281 Lets recycle Tuesday 18 September 2007. 

282 http://www.bioflame.co.uk/ 

151

152 



10.1.1 Using the gas to synthesise further products. 

As noted above the gas produced by gasifiers can be used to manufacture methane or transport fuels. A 

review of gasifier technologies, with a focus on those suitable for liquid fuel production from syngas, has 

been recently released by NNFCC. 283 Nitrogen dilution is not acceptable in this type of application and 

this route is restricted to direct gasifiers using oxygen as an oxidant and indirect gasifiers. 

Transport fuels produced by Fischer Tropsch synthesis reactions are endothermic using syn-gas 

(synthetic gas) to produce long chain hydrocarbons that can be distilled to produce transport fuels or 

intermediates for chemical processing. These reactions commonly require carbon monoxide, carbon 

dioxide and hydrogen in specific proportions. These proportions are adjusted by use of the shift reaction. 

The resulting gases are then catalysed at temperatures of 150°C – 300°C, and elevated pressures by an 

iron or cobalt catalyst. 

CO + H2O ↔ CO2 + H2 

Shift Reaction 

(2n+1)H2 + nCO ↔ CnH(2n+2) + nH2O 

Fischer-Tropsch Reaction 

Methanation is an exothermic process that uses syn gas to produce methane that can be injected into the 

gas grid. Syn gas is catalytically reacted with steam at temperatures between 340°C – 550°C and up to 

60 bar. 

CO + 3H2 ↔ CH4 + H2O 

A further variation is the synthesis of methanol which in turn can be converted to a range of organic 

chemicals and dimethyl ether, potentially a fuel used in diesel engines. Nickel is commonly used as the 

catalyst. These reactions commonly require carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and steam in tightly 

controlled proportions which are obtained by the shift reaction and carbon dioxide absorption. Carbon 

dioxide removal is done by amine solvent scrubbing or refrigerated methanol scrubbing, both commercial 

refinery and gasworks processes. The use of catalysts requires a high level of purity from trace 

contamination, particularly sulphur and metals that must be removed to single ppm levels. This is usually 

done by passing over beds of zinc and copper oxide. 

The methanation reaction is highly exothermic and rejects heat at the reaction temperature of over 340°C. 

This makes it a useful source of process steam and in the past commercialisation of this technology has 

often been driven by the desire to use this to the full. A process producing 700MW of methane could 

produce 200MW of steam. 

Neste Oil, Stora Enso, VTT and Forest Wheeler are exploring ways to transform wood waste in to 

transport fuels through a Fischer-Tropsch process to give a usable syn-gas at a demonstration plant in 

Varkaus, Finland. 284 The plant is due to open in Spring of 2009, and will use forest residues such as 

branches, stumps and trimmings to generate heat and electricity for the attached papermill, and quantities 

of biowax, the raw material to be refined into transport fuels and its use is to replace food oils. The facility 

is expected to have a capacity of around 100,000 tonnes p.a. of biowax. 

283 Review of Technologies for Gasification of Biomass and Wastes, NNFCC and E4Tech, June 2009. 

284 Transforming wood waste into renewable fuel, http://www.nesteoil.com/default.asp?path=1,41,540,10793,10795,11601



Table 79 Scales of operation 

Direct Downdraft to 

CHP 

Local Regional National 

Updraft to CHP 

Fluid bed to 

CHP and power 

only 

Updraft to CHP 

Indirect Fluid bed to 

CHP 

Indirectly heated 

tubes and kilns 

for CHP and 

power only 

Oxygen blown 

entrained flow to 

methane and 2 nd 

Gen Biofuels 

Fluid bed to 

methane 

153

154 



Table 80 Risks and barriers associated with Gasification 

Local Scale 

Level of 

Risk 

Comment 

Technical High Very few operating commercial plant for power 

or CHP. 

Significant residual risk in gas cleaning for 

power production. 

Social & Planning Medium Likely to be located on an industrial site where 

impacts can be minimised. 

Financial High Poor track record of gasification technologies 

Regulatory Medium Receives subsidy via the Renewables 

Obligation. 

Status of ash product is unclear under Waste 

Incineration Directive due to high carbon 

content 

Regional scale 

Level of 

Risk 

Comment 

Technical High Very few operating commercial plant for power 

or CHP. 

Significant residual risk in gas cleaning for 

power production. 

Substantially lower risk for gas combustion in 

boilers and process units. 

Social & Planning High High where process is used to produce 

electricity on a regional basis as it will be 

perceived as an untried form of incinerator. 

Financial High Poor track record of gasification technologies. 

Regulatory Medium Receives subsidy via the Renewables 

Obligation. Status of ash product is unclear 

under Waste Incineration Directive due to high 

carbon content. 

National scale 

Level of 

Risk 

Comment 

Technical Medium Little experience of biomass gasification for 

this application but substantial coal 

experience. 

Closely allied to refinery practice. 

Social & Planning Low Low for syn gas production at large scale on a 

petrochemical complex. 

Financial Medium Poor track record of gasification technologies 

but developers are likely to be substantial and 

have track record of delivery. 

Regulatory Medium Receives subsidy via the Renewable transport 

fuels obligation. Risk for change in long lead 

time for build.



10.1.2 Examples of gasification of MSW in the UK 

Gasification 

The Energos gasifier in Newport on the Isle of Wight began processing waste in mid 2008, the first 

example in the UK, and part of Defra’s New Technologies Demonstrator Programme. 285 It will potentially 

consume 30,000 tonnes per annum of floc: an SRF baled fuel comprised of waste paper, plastic and 

packaging sorted from MSW. It is estimated to have a calorific content of 11-14MJ/kg. The gasification 

process used is a two-stage process where first the floc fuel is burnt in oxygen depleted conditions such 

that a gas is created. This is then transferred to an oxidation chamber where it is fully oxidised in a 

controlled environment. The resulting heat from the flue gases is recovered and used to generate 

electricity. It is expected that the site will produce 2.3MW of electricity, and be able to deliver 1.8MW to 

the community for use. 

Scotgen is part way through the construction of 40,000 tonne per annum gasification plant at Dargavel, 

near Dumfries. The site was due to open in March, with commissioning expected to begin in November 

of this year. The anticipated electrical output is 6 MW. 286 

A further gasification site is proposed at Derbyshire, UK, capable of generating 8MW of electricity through 

the processing of 140,000 tonnes of waste. This is joint venture between United Utilities and Interserve 

using Energos technology. 

Plasma Gasification 

Enviroparks Ltd, an energy company based in South Wales, have announced plans to build a number of 

waste treatment centres in the UK, each incorporating a plasma gasifier. The first identified site is to be 

at Hirwaun in Wales, and will incorporate six separate processes including recycling, material recovery 

and AD to treat the majority of the waste, with plasma gasification used for the residual components. 

It is intended that the site will process municipal and light industrial waste, converting the residual waste 

to an estimated 120,000MW of electricity through generation of a BioSynGas, refined through the use of 

plasma torches, which will then be used to drive a gas turbine potentially achieving efficiencies of 

electricity generation of 40%. This site intends to use the GHO-Power technology. The first of four 

announced sites to use GHO-Power technology from French company EuroPlasma, is at Morcenx in 

France, a 12MW power plant that will use 55,000 tonnes of general industrial waste per annum. 

Construction began in late 2008, and the site is intended to be operational in January 2010. 

10.1.3 Examples of gasification of waste wood in the UK 

A downdraft Gasifier plant in Tunstall, Stoke-on-Trent has been developed by Biomass Engineering Ltd 

and owned by O-Gen to utilise waste wood in combination with forestry wood and energy crops, intended 

to begin operation in 2007 and generate 8 MW of electricity. The systems uses a three-stage process, 

requiring fuel preparation (size and moisture), wood gasification and finally power and heat generation 

through combustion of the gases produced. 287 

Another gasifier site, built by Biomass Engineering Ltd, that makes use of clean waste wood is located at 

Mossborough Hall in Merseyside. It is capable of generating 250kW of electricity and was connected to 

the grid in 2005. 288 

285 

Defra Factsheet, Waste Gas Technology UK Limited (WGT), http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/demprogramme/pdf/Energos.pdf 

286 

Scotgen, http://www.scotgenltd.co.uk/ 

287 

O-Gen’s First Timber Resource Recovery Centre, 13/09/07, http://www.biomass.uk.com/case-study-article.php?id=172 

288 

Green Energy UK Newsletter, 2005, Mossborough Hall. 

155

156 



10.1.4 International Situation 

Gasification 

There are a few projects using the Energos technology for example the plant at Averøy in Norway. The Averøy plant 

opened in 2000 and processes 30,000 tonnes of MSW each year, the power output of which is used by a 

neighbouring factory. 289 A further Energos site in Norway is in Forus, receiving 40,000 tonnes per annum 

of residual waste since 2002. 

Japan has an established history of gasification, with the first Thermoselect plant built at Chiba in 1999 by 

Kawasaki Steel Corporation (now known as JFE). There are now seven plants (a total of 16 Thermoselect 

units) in operation with a total daily capacity of nearly 2,000 tonnes. The availability of the operating 

plants is about 80%. The syngas produced in the Thermoselect furnace is quenched and cleaned before 

it is used in gas turbines or engines. The amount of useful gas produced per tonne of MSW processed is 

much lower than in conventional combustion and steam generation units as cleaning a reducing gas is 

more complex than for combustion process gas. 

In the Thermoselect process waste is pushed through a heated tube. The residual char is gasified and 

the gases mixed, the gasification agent is oxygen which gives a high enough temperature to convert the 

ash to slag. The mixed gases then pass through a waste heat boiler and scrubber before being burned in 

a steam boiler. 

Currently electrical efficiencies are rather low at but the Japanese licensee is carrying out trials using the 

higher calorific value gases from the reactor with reciprocating engines and fuel cells rather than boilers, 

which should significantly improve the electrical efficiency of the process. 

Table 81 Thermoselect facility locations and specifications in Japan 

City 

Startup 

year 

Design 

Capacity 

(tonnes/day) 

Feedstock Syngas use 

Power 

generated 

Chiba 1999 2 x 165 

MSW + 

Gas engine at steelworks 


NA 

Mutsu 2003 2 x 70 MSW Gas engines 

2 x 1.2 

MW 

Kurashiki 2005 3 x 185 

MSW + 

Gas engine at steelworks 


NA 

Isahaya 2005 3 x 100 MSW Gas engines 

5 x 1.6 

MW 

Yokushima 2005 2 x 60 MSW Gas engines 

0.9 x 2 

MW 

Izumi 2005 1 x 95 Industrial Waste Boiler/Steam Turbine 1.7MW 

Yorii 2006 3 x 150 

MSW + 


Boiler/Steam Turbine 10.5 MW 

Ebara’s TwinRec is a fluidized bed gasification process with ash vitrification, designed for material 

recycling, energy recovery and detoxification of wastes. 290 This process is capable of treating shredded 

residues, waste plastics, electrical waste, industrial wastes, MSW and bio-solids. The gasifier allows 

separates the non-combustible portion, such as metallic proportions of the waste from the combustible 

portion. The former is recycled as valuable products from the bottom off-stream of the gasifier, and the 

latter is transferred as ash, char and combustible gas to the second stage. In the second stage, fuel gas 

289 Homes to be powered by green power from waste, 16.04.2008, Ener.g, http://www.energ.co.uk/?OBH=490&ID=143 

290 TwinRec Gasification and Ash Melting Technology – Now also established for Municipal Waste , A. Selinger, Ch. Steiner and K. Shin EBARA 

Corporation, WASTE 2003: 4th Int. Symposium on Waste Treatment Technologies, 

http://www.ebara.ch/downloads/EBARA%20Manuscript%20Sheffield%20IChemE%202003.pdf



and combustible material produced from the gasifier are burnt together in a cyclonic ash melting chamber 

at temperatures between 1350-1450ºC by the addition of secondary air. The particles are then collected 

on the walls, where they are vitrified and proceed slowly through the furnace. 

The good quality recovered metal components are sold into the metal markets. The molten glass 

products fulfil the stringent Japanese soil standard and are sold to the construction industry. The energy 

content of the shredder residue is converted to electricity and sold to the grid. 

There are numerous TwinRec Fluidized Bed and Gasification facilities in Japan. Several examples are: 

• Ube City plant has a capacity of 8.3 tonnes per hour over three process lines and has been 

commercial operation since 2003. The electricity output of the plant in is 4MW. 291 

• Seki City plant has a capacity of 7 tonnes per hour, in commercial operation since 2003, with an 

electricity output. 

• Recently, the Kawaguchi plant was started, treating 18 tonnes per hour of municipal solid waste 

in three process lines (3 x 21 MW). 

Foster Wheeler, Lahti, Finland 

Lahti is a small town to the north of Helsinki. The town authority operates a 350MWth coal and natural 

gas fired CHP installation that provides electricity and district heating for the town. A 50MWth fuel-gas 

burner, supplied by a circulating fluid bed gasifier (see Figure 20), has been installed in place of one of 

the pulverised coal burners. A wide range of shredded fuels have been used with considerable success. 

Typical fuels are sorted domestic waste, tyres and plastic bottles, sleepers, debarker residues and 

sawdust. The feedstock is blended in an ‘A’ frame storage building with a traversing screw discharge. 

No gas clean up is used, acid gas emissions are controlled by source separation of the feedstock and 

dust from the gasifier is carried forward into coal fired boiler and mixes with the coal ash. 

A detailed case study for this installation and a similar installation at Zeltweg in Austria have been 

prepared by the IEA Thermal Treatment of Waste Task. 

291 Ube, Japan, Plant Sheet, http://www.ebara.ch/downloads/ebara_plant_sheet_ube_twinrec.pdf 

157

158 



Figure 20 Gasifier used at Lahti 

Bioflow, Värnamo, Sweden 

Bioflow Ltd (a joint venture of Foster Wheeler and Sydkraft) has operated a demonstration plant 

producing approx. 6 MWe and 9 MWth for district heating. This plant has been operated using a variety 

of fuels, including RDF, but it is likely that the system will be targeted at biomass fuels. It is included here 

as an example of the concept of integrating gasification with combined cycle power generation to achieve 

higher electrical conversion efficiencies. 

The operating temperature of the gasifier is 950-1000°C at an approximate pressure of 20-22 bar. The 

gasifier system is based on the CFB principle (see Figure 20) with integrated cyclone and cyclone return 

leg. The three parts (gasifier, cyclone, cyclone return leg) are totally refractory lined. Following the 

cyclone, the fuel-gas produced is led to a cooler and a hot gas filter. The gas cooler is of a fire tube 

design and cools the gas to a temperature of approximately 350°C prior to entering the filter. Following 

the filter the fuel-gas is burned in the combustion chambers of a single shaft industrial turbine (Alstom 

Typhoon). The hot flue gas from the gas turbine is ducted to the heat recovery steam generator. 

This process has the potential to deliver the highest electrical efficiency of all the options described here 

(40%). To do this however would require a suitable waste treatment plant to remove and recycle plastics 

and metals and supply a consistent fibrous fuel. 

SVZ Swartzepompe, Saxony, Germany 

This large chemical complex was built originally to convert brown coal into a range of chemicals and fuels 

as part of the energy system of the former DDR (East Germany). With reunification the plant was 

successfully modified to accept industrial and domestic waste. In its current configuration it comprises 

seven fixed bed, steam/oxygen blown gasifiers operating at 25 bar and fed by a mixture of waste and 

coal. The complex also includes two oxygen-blown, entrained flow gasifiers that accept liquid and slurry



wastes. The company has plans to complete the installation of a larger fixed bed British Gas/Lurgi 

slagging gasifier. 

The medium CV product gas is cleaned and used to generate electricity, through a combined cycle using 

a 44 MWe Alstom Turbine and a 30 MWe steam turbine. There are plans to synthesise methanol to 

enhance the degree of recycling that can be achieved in the installation. 

Current capacities are 

• Plastics 5 tonnes/hr 

• Wood 6 tonnes/hr 

• Liquid waste 200 tonnes/day 

• Domestic waste 20 tonnes/ hr 

All residues leave the site as inert slag 

This project represents a technically viable waste disposal and energy complex on a very large scale. It 

is an engineering success that combines a high degree of material recovery with a high electrical 

efficiency. It did however make substantial use of the existing brown coal processing plant so replication 

may prove difficult. 

Choren, Freiberg, Germany 

CHOREN Gmbh have been developing a process to produce a renewable fuel compatible with the diesel 

fuel infrastructure that uses lignocellulose materials. The concept is to gasify biomass and use the 

resultant gas as a feedstock to synthesise alkanes using the Fischer Tropsch reaction. 

The process for the gasification of wood and similar materials is based on an entrained flow gasifier used 

for brown coal in the 1980’s in the former DDR. The gasification process comprises two steps, slow 

pyrolysis of chipped material followed by the oxygen gasification of the tar vapours and char produced. 

The oxygen gasifier is interesting in that it is arranged in two stages; the first gasifies the pyrolysis 

vapours in oxygen and the second gasifies the char by reaction with the product gases from the first 

stage, having first been finely ground. A consequence of the second reaction is that the gasses are 

cooled by the endothermic reaction of char with CO2. 

The synthesis gas from the gasifier is essentially free from tar contamination and can be cleaned by 

filtration before the CO/H2 ratio is adjusted using the CO shift reaction. CO2 is then removed by scrubbing 

and the gas passed further into the Fischer Tropsch reactor to form a product mixture of diesel oil and 

naphtha. 

The first installation was a pilot, or alpha, plant which operated from the mid 90’s to 2005 and had a fuel 

input of 1MW. The second, or beta, installation is a demonstration with a fuel input of 45MW and is just 

undergoing commissioning and testing near Freiberg in Saxony. The third installation, or sigma, is a full 

scale commercial unit of 640 MW which is in the design phase and should enter service in 2015. 

The overall energy balance of the beta demonstration unit is predicted to convert 100% fuel energy value 

to 39% diesel, 13% naphtha, and 6% export electricity giving an overall efficiency of 58% fuel to energy 

product. This is expected to improve with scale up. 

The development of the process is being supported by a consortium of Daimler Chrysler, Shell, 

Volkswagen, and others with assistance from local German authorities and the EU. 292 

292 Start-up of the first commercial BTL production facility. Lecture by Dr. Christoph Kiener, Project Development Manager at the 16th European 

Biomass Conference & Exhibition, 3. June 2008, Valencia. www.choren.com 

159

160 



Plasma Gasification 

Plasma gasification is the gasification of matter in an oxygen-free environment to decompose waste 

material into its basic molecular structure. It does not rely on incineration but converts organic waste into 

a fuel gas and inorganic waste into an inert vitrified glass. In Japan the biggest industrial unit of its kind 

operates at the Eco-Valley site at Utashinai, Hokkaido plasma facility, built by Hitachi Metals. It began 

processing MSW in 2003 with a capacity of approximately 200-280 tons per day. 293 It uses 8 Marc-3a 

plasma systems with torches that are rated for 300 KW, operating at 2 gasification islands, each with 4 

torches. The system delivers 1.5MW of net electricity output to the grid, 294 although the facility wasn’t 

designed with maximum power output in mind. If it had been, the predicted output would be 12MW. 295 

A second plasma gasification system operates in Japan, the Mihama-Mikata WTE Facility. The system 

gasifies 24 tpd of MSW and 4 tpd of waste-water sludge through 2 Marc-3a plasma systems. 294 The heat 

output is used within the waste water treatment facility. 

There are two plasma gasification plants under construction in India, at Pune and Nagpur, both intended 

to take 72 tons per day of hazardous waste and convert it to energy. 

A plasma gasifier has planning permission in the USA, Florida where it is intended that 3,000 tons per 

day of MSW will be converted to 120MW of electricity and is expected to be operational in 2010. 296 

10.2 Pyrolysis 

SRF 

Waste wood 

Clean wood 

Pyrolysis 

Gas 

Pyrolysis oils 

Char 


Pyrolysis is normally defined as the thermal degradation of a substance in the absence of any oxidising 

agent (other than that which forms part of the substance itself) to produce char and one or both of gas 

and liquid. 

The process converts feedstock waste into char, vapours of complex carbohydrates and permanent 

gases, primarily CO, H2, CH4 and CO2. This is done by the action of heat in oxygen free conditions at 

high temperatures between 400°C and 900°C. The proportions of the three product classes depend upon 

CHP 

293 Eco-Valley Waste-to-Energy Facility, http://www.alternrg.ca/project_development/commercial_projects/utashinai 

294 Alter Nrg and Westinghouse Plasma Corp: The Plasma Gasification Process, February, 2008, 

http://www.calgaryregion.ca/crp/media/32152/the_alter_nrg_plasma_gasification_process_-_turner_valley_presentation.ppt.pdf 

295 Westinghouse Plasma Corporation, Waste Processing, http://www.westinghouse-plasma.com/markets_applications/waste_processing.php 

296 Westinghouse Plasma Corporation, www.westinghouse-plasma.com/common/pdfs/WPC.pdf 

Slurry 

Thermochemical 

Fuel 

Heat 

Power



the temperature of the reactor and critically the rate at which heat is applied to the biomass fractions. 

Lower temperatures and fast heating rates favour vapours, higher temperatures and high heating rates 

gas, low temperature and slow heating rates favour char formation. 

There are two main categories of pyrolysis process, but many practical variants within them: 

Fast or flash pyrolysis – typically finely divided biomass waste is injected into a fluidised bed of inert 

material operating at 500°C. The size of the fuel and the excellent heat transfer characteristics of the fluid 

bed ensure a very fast heating rate which maximises the production of vapour. The vapour is 

subsequently condensed as a liquid that contains approximately 70% of the energy value of the waste 

feedstock. The by-product char and gas is used in part to provide heat to drive the process. The liquid 

fuel has been successfully used to fire boilers and kilns. Trials have been undertaken in reciprocating 

engines and gas turbines. Excess char can be sold as a product for activated carbon manufacture or 

reducing agent in metal production. The char can also be used as fuel either on its own or as a slurry 

with the pyrolysis liquids. 

The main use for fast pyrolysis processes at present is the manufacture of speciality chemicals and food 

additives although this is expected to change to energy use when the current demonstration plants in 

Canada come fully on stream. 

Slow Pyrolysis – finely diced waste is pyrolysed in either in a screw conveyor or reactor vessel that is 

indirectly heated. The slower heating rate favours char and liquid production over gas. 

Carbonisation – large pieces of waste or wood are heated in a retort. The heat is provided by burning a 

proportion of the vapour and gas product. 

A variation of slow pyrolysis using a heated screw has recently been proposed as a step in the production 

of thermo chemical fuels in the form of a slurry of charcoal and pyrolysis liquid product. The concept is a 

series of distributed fuel preparation processes on a local and regional scale that feed supply a very large 

gasification plant at national scale. The advantages are reduced transport costs and having the fuel in a 

form that it can easily be pumped into the high pressure (60 bar) processes that are used in this type of 

facility. 

Feedstocks for Pyrolysis 

Currently fast pyrolysis processes are being designed for both clean wood and wood extracted from the 

waste stream. In all cases the wood will need to be ground to less that 3mm particle size before use. 

Slow pyrolysis can use a wider variety of solid shredded material including SRF. 

Table 82 Risks Associated with Pyrolysis 


Technical High Operating commercial plant in existence for oil 

production little experience in energy generation. 

Social & Planning High / Low High where process is used to produce electricity 

at a regional scale where it may be perceived as 

an untried and unsafe incinerator. 

Low for syn gas production or thermo chemical 

fuel production where it wuill be perceived as 

another industrial process. 

Financial High Few suppliers and uneven track record. 

Products have no established energy market and 

would rely on dedicated customer. 

Regulatory Medium Receives enhanced subsidy via the Renewables 

Obligation. 

Status of products is unclear. 

161

162 



10.2.1 Pyrolysis in the UK 

Seamer Carr, Scarborough 

The UK’s first full scale waste pyrolysis plant is to be known as Scarborough Power Ltd. Once 

operational the plant will consume 18,000 tonnes per annum of high calorific value pre-sorted MSW, i.e. a 

form of SRF. 297 After shredding and drying the expected calorific content of this material will be 15MJ/kg. 

Simple flash pyrolysis, with technology provided by GEM, will be used to convert the waste to syngas in 

the absence of oxygen, which is then ultimately used to generate electricity and heat, expected to be 

2.4MW of electricity and 1.8MW of gross heat output. 

This project is a joint venture between Yorwaste, pyrolysis technology company GEM, and engineering 

consultancy NEL Power, and is part of Defra’s New Technologies Demonstration Programme. 

Compact Power, Avonmouth 

The Compact Power process is typical of a heated tube system. The schematic (Figure 21) shows the 

company’s 8,000 tonnes per annum demonstration plant at Avonmouth. This plant is intended for the 

treatment of MSW and clinical waste. Waste may be first sorted to remove recyclables. It is then 

conveyed by a screw through a heated tube where it pyrolyses. The pyrolysis gases are then burned in a 

cyclone combustion chamber. The residual char falls into a hopper where it is gasified by steam that has 

been preheated in the combustion chamber, leaving an ash residue. The gas from the gasification 

section is burned with the pyrolysis gas. The hot gas from the combustion chamber is first used to heat 

the pyrolysis tubes then to raise steam for power generation. Flue gas clean up is after the boiler and 

uses a dry bicarbonate injection system. The residue is reported as a dry, inert gas. The emissions 

performance is reported as excellent with most regulated pollutants an order of magnitude below the 

statutory limit. 

The focus is largely on waste disposal at an acceptable cost on a small scale appropriate to clinical and 

industrial wastes, and smaller urban communities. As such it fits well with recycling schemes. Energy 

recovery is currently relatively low and comparable with combustion systems. More development would 

be necessary to take advantage of the higher efficiencies offered by gas turbine and reciprocating engine 

cycles. 

Figure 21 Schematic of Compact Power’s demonstration plant at Avonmouth 

297 Defra Factsheet, Scarborough Power, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/dem-programme/pdf/Scarborough-Power.pdf



The Avonmouth Pyrolysis and Gasification Plant near Bristol, is the next step in the development path for 

this technology but has experienced difficulties with the original owners Compact Power went into 

administration in 2008 and Ethos Recycling bought the site. Assuming the site does become operational, 

it will be capable of processing 30,000 tonnes of waste per annum, generating 2,400 kW of electricity and 

7,620 kW of heat. 298 

10.2.2 International experience 

R21 process 

Mitsui Babcock Energy runs a number of R21 (Recycling in the Twenty First Century) Pyrolysis 

Technology facilities in Japan. These facilities rely on a pre-incineration pyrolysis process operated at 

low temperature (less than 450ºC) of MSW, which converts poor fuel (such as MSW) into high value 

product fuels such as syngas and a solid residue. These products are then combusted at high 

temperatures (1300ºC) and efficiencies, from which heat recovery occurs to produce heat or power 

output. Applying this technology to MSW means that the waste can be burnt in much better combustion 

conditions, reducing the potential for dioxin production, NOx and the dry slag produced is vitrified inert, 

carbon and dioxin free. 

Typically, a 100,000tpa R21 plant treating MSW with a calorific value of 9.5MJ/kg will produce 8MW gross 

electrical output per tonne of MSW 299 . Some of this electrical energy is used in house to drive the process 

reducing this figure to 5.1MW net electrical output per tonne MSW. Table 83 cites some of the 

commercially operating facilities by Mitsui Babcock Energy Ltd in Japan. 299 The focus in Japan is 

currently very much on waste disposal and recovery of material rather than energy. 

. 

Table 83 Examples of commercially operating R21 facilities by Mitsui Babcock Energy 

Location Capacity (tonnes/day) 

Aichi/ Toyohashi City 220tpd over 2 trains 

Hokkaido / Ebetsu City 140tpd over 2 trains 

Fukuoka / Koga Seibu 

Regional Cooperative 260tpd over 2 trains 

298 

The Avonmouth Renewable Energy Plant, Defra Factsheet, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/waste/wip/newtech/demprogramme/pdf/Avonmouth.pdf 

299 

Mitsui Babcock Energy Limited Submission to Greater London Authority City Solutions Stakeholders On Municipal Waste Management, 2003, 

http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/waste/wasteconfdocs/Mitsui.pdf 

163

164 



Figure 22 A schematic of the Toyohashi R21 system 

Coke-Oven 

A process developed by Nippon Steel converts waste plastic into energy, the “Coke-Oven from Waste 

Plastics to Chemical Raw Materials Method”. This method uses a chemical recycling process to recover 

coke, tar, light oil and gas from general wastes plastics mixed in coal by carbonisation of coke ovens 

without deteriorating the quality of coke. The yield from this process is approximately 20% of coke, 40% 

tar and light oil, and 40% gases. The recovered coke is used to reduce the iron ore in a blast furnace, the 

tar and light oil as raw material for making plastic and the gas in a power plant. A number of such 

facilities exist in Japan, and shown in Table 84. Nippon Steel have recently filed a patent for a process 

which would give a product with greater utility value. 300 

Table 84 List of Coke-Oven from Waste Plastics to Chemical Raw Materials Method facilities 

Year Capacity 

City 


Nagoya 2000 40,000 

Kimitsu 2000 40,000 

Muroran 2002 20,000 

Yawata 2002 20,000 

300 Method and Apparatus for Thermal Decomposition of Waste Plastics, JP2008266452 (A), Nippon Steel Corporation, 06.11.2008.



As is demonstrated by the above examples, in terms of thermal treatment of waste Japan, has a wellestablished 

system in place. Now the agenda has begun to shift towards the generation of energy as well 

as waste minimisation, Japan is one of the leading countries in terms of technology development and has 

the largest number of plants in operation that use thermal conversion techniques to treat waste and 

recover energy. 


From this review the following conclusions can be drawn; 

• Combustion, gasification and pyrolysis all use heat to break down the structure of the feedstock 

so that the chemical energy can be released either as heat or a fuel product. The conditions in 

the reactor determine the products. 

• Gasification technologies are being developed but often encounter severe technical difficulties 

when attempting the step of using the gas for power generation in an engine or gas turbine. 

• The robust approach of firing the gas in a boiler is proving reliable and a worthwhile innovation. 

These units can be produced in smaller sizes than conventional incineration and can be matched 

to heat loads in CHP and process heating applications to give potentially the best GHG 

abatement potential. 

• Gasification as a pre-treatment is likely to become more popular in cofiring as generators seek to 

increase the proportion of biomass in coal fired utility boilers. 

• There are few commercial pyrolysis plant operating on waste. 

• The technologies available for conversion of waste to heat and power are more widespread than 

those for conversion to transport fuels, although work is ongoing on advanced conversion for 

liquid biofuels. 

• The use of gasification at very large scale for the production of transport fuels or pipeline 

methane is attracting increasing attention and is potentially an efficient use of resources. 

165

166 



11 Potential GHG Reductions 

Wastes arisings in the UK represent a potential resource and feedstock available to be converted into 

products for further use. Assessing the most environmentally friendly disposal option for a particular 

waste can be challenging as there are often a range of disposal options available and limited data on 

which to base assumptions of potential environmental costs and benefits. 

The key advantage of utilising waste materials for the generation of energy or transport fuels is that they 

displace the use of fossil fuels and divert material that would otherwise likely be disposed of to landfill. 

The quantification of the environmental costs and benefits is required to ensure the most appropriate 

solutions are developed. Recent work performed by AEA and North Energy for the EU Commission, DG 

Environment (awaiting publication) has identified that ‘waste-based bio-energy pathways offer the highest 

GHG emissions savings’. 301 This is due to the absence of production emissions for the material, and the 

displaced fossil fuels. 

Below, two scenarios of converting a waste material to energy or a transport fuel, and the GHG savings 

such conversions would achieve, have been explored: 

• Converting source separated food waste, through anaerobic digestion, to a digestate and a 

biogas, and subsequently converting this biogas to CHP, electricity or alternatively a transport 

fuel. 

• Converting waste wood, through combustion, to electricity. 

These scenarios were selected to complement our identification of these feedstocks in Section 5 as likely 

to make a substantial contribution to renewable energy from wastes in the future. They also illustrate the 

insights that can be gained through this type of analysis as they cover an extensive life cycle extending in 

to feedstock supply and alternative uses. 

Both scenarios are been explored through the use of BEAT. 

Box 4: Biomass Environmental Assessment Tool (BEAT) 

BEAT was originally developed for the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 

(Defra) and the UK Environment Agency (EA). Hence, the nature of the technologies, performance 

characteristics and related assumptions are based on UK circumstances. 

It is designed to provide a means of assessing biomass schemes by: 

1. Providing a comparison of GHG emissions from the proposed plant and fossil fuel based plant; 

2. Providing information on key potential environmental impacts; 

3. Identifying potential options for mitigating environmental impacts; 

4. Providing an estimate of production costs and of support mechanisms. 

While the tool can consider all stages of the fuel chain, modification of the analysis is readily 

achievable through altering the system boundaries and the reference pathway. 

BEAT was launched on 13th November 2008, when the tool/dataset were also made publicly available. 

Beat is available from the Biomass Energy Centre www.biomassenergycentre.org.uk. 

301 Implementation of the EU Biomass Action Plan and the Biofuel Strategy: Comparing GHG emission reduction performance of different bio-energy 

applications on a life cycle basis, AEA and North Energy,



Some of the key features of the BEAT systems and the criteria that have been used here are: 

• System boundary: In this work the systems begin at the point the waste is available for use as a 

resource, taking no consideration of the environmental impacts of creating the waste. Once use 

of the waste as a feedstock commences all subsequent stages are incorporated, e.g. emissions 

from processing the waste, manufacture of machinery and ash disposal, to cite a few stages. 

• GHG Emissions: Emissions of the three main GHGs, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and 

nitrous oxide (N2O) are included. While carbon dioxide and, to a lesser extent, methane 

emissions are widely publicised, sources of nitrogen giving rise to the emission of nitrous oxide 

(N2O) from the soil is a less well known effect. A complex series of reactions and processes 

transform some of the nitrogen present into N2O, potentially a critical issue as the global warming 

potential of N2O is nearly 300 times that of CO2. Individual GHG emissions are converted into 

equivalent CO2 using quoted values of Global Warming Potentials (GWPs). 

• CHP: In all cases emissions savings have been derived assuming the displacement of 

compressed natural gas, or the displacement of grid electricity. 

• Reference system: Reference systems are used here to address the alternative fate of a waste 

product. The disposal of a waste product will be avoided if it is used as a biomass feedstock for 

energy production. The GHG emissions that would have arisen from disposal are taken into 

account by deducting from the total GHG emissions of the pathway. 

• Fossil Fuel Displacement: Assumptions about the fossil fuel displaced (e.g. coal, oil, or gas) and 

the efficiency of the conversion technology for heat and electricity production can make a 

significant difference to the savings calculated. 

Using BEAT to follow the two waste disposal scenarios outlined below allow establishment of the 

potential GHG reductions that could be achieved were the alternative disposal route to be pursued and 

the final products fully utilised. 

The results have been presented in terms of the kilograms of GHG saved per tonne of waste, as waste 

utilisation is the primary aim, with energy generation the secondary aim. 

11.1 Scenario 1: Food Waste 

Domestic food waste can be collected separately as part of the MSW disposal route. This waste 

represents a resource that can be widely available throughout the UK, although collection and transport 

are likely to be more efficient in urban areas. It is estimated that there is potentially 5 million tonnes of 

MSW food waste each year, as well as nearly 7 million tonnes of C&I food waste (for England, Wales and 

Scotland), although it is unlikely all would be available for collection. 

The majority of this waste stream currently goes to landfill, often with energy recovery through landfill gas. 

This situation is rapidly changing with the requirement of the Landfill Directive that levels of biodegradable 

municipal solid waste (MSW) sent to landfill must be reduced to 75% by 2010, by 50% 2013 and by 35% 

by 2020 of 1995 levels. The alternative disposal options available are to compost or anaerobically digest 

the waste. 

Food waste treated at a compost site will produce a soil conditioner material. The composting process 

will be required to be carried out in a sealed container as the material may contain meat or meat 

products. 

Food waste treated at an AD site will produce an organic digestate output, which can be used as a soil 

conditioner. It has been assumed that a compost soil conditioner and a digestate soil conditioner, 

although having different physical forms, have the same value as a soil conditioner. In addition biogas 

167

168 



will be produced which, depending on the properties of the input material, can be expected to contain 

approximately 40% carbon dioxide and 60% methane. The biogas can be upgraded, cleaned, 

compressed and ultimately converted into a transport fuel. 

MSW Food 

Waste 

Biodegradation 

Composting 

Anaerobic 

Digestion 

Landfill 

With landfill gas 

Compost 

Digestate 

Biogas 

Cleaning and 

Compression 

Figure 23 Disposal options for food waste 

Transport 

Gas 

While disposal to landfill is the current most likely route, composting is likely to become the norm in the 

near future. Therefore the utilisation of waste food has been explored predominately with the reference 

system set as in vessel compositing: 

1. The GHG savings an AD disposal route would generate, with the biogas produced used for: 

a. heat and electricity generation, 

b. electricity generation, 

c. the biogas used for vehicle transport, with additional cleaning and compression stages. 

In addition a comparison reference system of disposal to landfill has been run: 

2. The GHG savings an AD disposal route would generate, with landfill disposal used as the 

reference system with the biogas produced used for: 

a. electricity generation.



Table 85 Comparing AD disposal of food waste against in vessel composting 

End Use 

1a 

GHG savings 

kg CO2eq / 

tonne biomass 

• Centralised AD for CHP using 90,000 

tonnes food waste per annum. 

104 

• 1.7MWe and 4MWth exported. 

• 75% efficiency at 55% load. 

1b 

• Centralised AD for electricity using 90,000 

tonnes food waste per annum. 

• 2.8MWe exported 

• 25% efficiency at 70% load 

1c 

• Centralised AD for biomethane production 

from 90,000 tonnes of food waste per 

annum, to be used for vehicle transport. 

• 28,000MWth per annum biomethane 

produced. 

The centralised AD systems generating energy, one generating CHP, the other only electricity, can be 

considered as economically feasible where gate fees can be charged. The conversion of the biogas into 

a transport gas is not commercial currently in the UK. 

The benefits of composting food waste or anaerobically digesting it are broadly similar. The additional 

significant benefit of AD systems is the use of the biogas to displace fossil fuel use. Although there is 

some variation between the above scenarios, all three represent significant GHG savings versus the 

composting of the waste. The CHP scenario assumes 100% utilisation of the heat produced, a utilisation 

level that may be challenging to meet, and correspondingly the real-world GHG savings are more likely to 

be comparable with those for electricity generation or transport fuel generation. 

Table 86 Comparing AD disposal of food waste against landfill disposal, with landfill gas recovery 

End Use GHG savings* 

(Kg CO2eq / T) 

2a 

• Centralised AD for electricity using 90,000 tonnes 

food waste per annum. 

219 

• 10MWe exported 

• 25% efficiency at 70% load 

Significant GHG emissions still occur through using AD, such as methane leakage from the system and 

N2O generation from the spreading and incorporation of the digestate into soil. However, even taking 

such effects into account, it can be concluded that using AD to dispose of food waste, with electricity 

generation from the biogas, large GHG savings are generated, versus disposal to land fill. 

Where use of AD disposal routes is compared to in-vessel composting, significant GHG savings are also 

achieved, whether the biogas is used for CHP, electricity generation or as a transport fuel. The most 

78 

71 

169

170 



significant saving is if the biogas is used for CHP and highly efficient use of the heat generated is 

achieved. 

11.2 Scenario 2: Wood Waste 

Wood waste is taken here to be wood that is contaminated, either impregnated with preservatives, or 

coated with paints and varnished. Disposal therefore requires WID compliant facilities, and currently only 

the largest of facilities have appropriate emissions cleaning facilities. While a considerable quantity of 

such material is estimated to be disposed of each year, there is little good quality data for this waste 

stream. Estimations from WRAP put the volume of wood waste at 1,065,000 tonnes from MSW, 602,000 

tonnes from waste furniture, 4,400,000 tonnes from C&D waste (5,040,000 if include reclaimed wood), 

and 4,481,000 tonnes from C&I waste. This would potentially offer 10,548,000 tonnes of wood waste a 

year. 

The options available for the disposal of wood waste are for it to be sent to landfill or for it to be 

segregated and used as a feedstock for combustion, generating heat, CHP or electricity. An alternative 

possibility is for a conversion process to be used, such as gasification followed by Fischer Tropsch to 

generate a transport fuel. This however hasn’t been modelled as we have been unable to identify 

sufficient data on using wood waste as a feedstock for this process. 

Waste Wood 

Combustion 

Landfill 

With landfill gas 

Heat, CHP 

or Electricity 

Figure 24 Disposal options for waste wood 

It is assumed that most wood waste is disposed of to landfill with energy recovery. Such a scenario has 

not been taken as the reference system for this work as the intention here is to compare the different end 

uses of waste wood, and comparison to landfilling can generates large negatives that do not allow 

accurate comparison. In the following situations the GHG savings come from the displaced fossil fuel, in 

each case natural gas, so once again giving a conservative estimate of the savings generated. 

Two different scenarios considering the GHG saving that could be achieved from using waste wood as a 

feedstock for energy generation. 

1. Industrial or commercial building heating. This system is already economic, but still has 

challenges to face including WID compliant facilities, fuel storage and ash disposal. 

2. Combustion in a medium scale plant – the practical limit for waste levels generated within an 

RDA geographical region. Such a system would be economic with the currently available 

subsidy i.e. the availability of 1.5 ROC. 

Both systems have been considered in terms of the displacement of natural gas as the fossil fuel 

equivalent and are estimated to would produce the following GHG savings:



Table 87 Combustion of wood waste and the savings generated from avoided fossil fuel consumption 

End Use GHG savings 

(Kg CO2eq / tonne of 

biomass) 

• Industrial or Commercial building heating 

• 500kW boiler using wood chips 

1,040 

• Operating at 33% load 

• Medium combustion plant 

• 50MWe exported 

450 

• 85% load. 

Significant GHG savings would be achieved were wood waste to be used as a fuel source for 

combustion, rather than disposal to landfill. 

11.3 Other, recent GHG life cycle analyses 

Recent work by the Environment Agency has analysed a wide range of biomass energy cycles using the 

BEAT tool. Such cycles take in to account the fate of by-products and the production of the fuel. The 

main findings of this work are that 

• Heat applications are the most beneficial in terms of GHG abatement followed by CHP where the 

heat load is high. 

• Transport fuel production by means of gasification is mid range. 

• Electricity production comes lower in the hierarchy as do biological transport fuel processes and 

low heat load CHP. 

What is interesting from this work is that it is the resource use efficiency to energy that is the determining 

factor, so that heat will always score highly because it converts over 90% of the energy of the feedstock 

into usable heat. The performance of CHP is very dependent on the heat load; industrial process heat 

loads score well but minimal application of district heat scores badly. 

Given the high resource use efficiency gasification and methanation should be very beneficial if the high 

grade heat from the exothermal reaction is fully used, however there is no data on these systems at 

present. 

171

172 



12 Recommendations and NNFCC’s role 

Challenges, issues and the role of NNFCC 

Throughout this report we have identified areas of uncertainty, and specific challenges that need work if 

the full potential of energy from waste is to be realised. These are set out in the table below. Most of 

these are concerned with building business confidence in the links between each of the technology steps. 

Not all of this work will come under NNFCC’s remit but a significant amount is concerned with 

coordination of stakeholders and the provision of information to the market. 

Those topics we feel are most appropriate for NNFCC initiatives are as follows: 

• Improve quality of policy and investment decision making by developing an understanding of the 

fit between SRF properties and energy production technologies. What properties does each of 

the technologies require? 

• There is a wide difference in the benefits brought by various waste to energy chains and it is 

important that policy support those that contribute the most. NNFCC could add value by 

developing an evidence base for the design and implementation of policy and a hierarchy of uses 

for each class of resource based on environmental and social benefits including life cycle GHG 

impact. 

• To maximise the benefits of using waste for energy we will need to change current practices 

across a wide range of stakeholders. NNFCC could add value by developing an understanding of 

the relative timeframes of structural changes and technology developments necessary to 

maximise implementation. 

• Develop a better understanding of the impacts of increased energy usage on alternative and 

existing markets for straw and other residues. 

• NNFCC could consider the logistics of moving dispersed low density feedstocks around the UK, 

taking a role to assess options for transport modes and evaluate the optimal size of plants for the 

various feedstocks. 

• Municipal and solid waste is being managed using more sustainable technologies. There is 

interest in developing these technologies on one site, so that recycling, separation technologies 

or mechanical and biological treatment and anaerobic digestion is all integrated. NNFCC could 

examine the potential energy benefits in such trends and the impact they may have on energy 

recovery from waste in general.



Table 88 Recommendations for NNFCC’s role 

Challenge Purpose NNFCC 

1 Improve evidence base 

for policy and investment 

decision making 

2 Facilitate commercial 

transactions and develop 

SRF as a traded 

commodity. 

3 Improve quality of policy 

and investment decision 

making 

4 

5 

Provide an evidence base 

for the design and 

implementation of policy 

Build market confidence, 

enhance UK market 

share 

Quantifying arisings of C & I wastes. Reducing 

uncertainty in quantities, properties and composition 

of commercial and industrial waste streams. Data is 

very sparse compared with the municipal sector. 

Development of analysis methods in particular the 

determination of the biogenic proportion of SRF 

Support the implementation of CEN standards for 

SRF 

Develop an understanding of the fit between SRF 

properties and energy production technologies. 

What properties does each of the technologies 

 

require? 

Develop a hierarchy of uses for each class of 

resource based on environmental and social 

benefits 

Develop an understanding of the relative timeframes 

of structural changes and technology developments 

necessary to maximise implementation. 

Develop a better understanding of the impacts of 

increased energy usage on alternative and existing 

markets for straw and other residues. 

Identify technology areas needing demonstration. 

Industrial pre qualification round for demonstration 

Implement a portfolio of shared cost technology 

demonstrations 

Lead 

Collaborate 

173 

Others lead 

 

 

 

 

 

1 – 2 

years 

2 – 5 

years 

5 – 10 

years 

Beyond 

10 

years

Appendices 

174 



Appendix 1: Further information on Waste Arisings 

Appendix 2: Waste Legislation 

Appendix 3: MBT Methods



Appendix 1 

Further information on Waste Arisings 

This information has been provided so that methodologies for deriving the data can be followed, and reapplied, should information be required on a different 

scale. 

A1.1 Agricultural Residue Arisings 

The following tables give more detail regarding to potential Agricultural residue arisings and their energy content. 

Table 89 Livestock numbers for the UK, on a regional basis. 

East Midlands 

East of England 

North East 

North West 

South East inc. 

London 

South West 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 

England – Total 


Ireland 

Dairy α 


cattle β 

Cattle Pigs Poultry 

Calves γ Total Dry Sow δ 

Sows 

plus 

litter) ε 

Fattening 

pig (20- 

130kg) ζ 

175 

Weaners 

(

Scotland 

Wales 

UK – Total 

176 



170,820 1,176,390 549,970 1,897,180 41,420 6,230 285,210 123,900 456,760 2,920,240 1,586,610 8,308,280 

280,968 735,732 306,088 1,322,788 3,061 643 15,343 6,119 25,166 1,532,725 273,756 5,836,436 

2,242,212 5,059,471 3,138,339 10,440,022 459,711 75,549 3,043,345 1,249,063 4,827,668 34,270,836 9,771,642 1.5 x 10 8 

α Dairy cattle are dairy females over 2 years. 

β Other cattle includes beef cattle, all males older than 1 year, and dairy females between 1-2 years 

γ Calves include all cattle younger than 1 year. 

δ Dry sows are pregnant pigs: sows in pig and gilts in pig, as well as boars for service and gilts. 

ε Sows plus litter are classified as ‘other sows’ in the census tables. 

ζ Fattening pig includes barren sows for fattening as well as all fattening pigs between 20 – 130 kg. 

Table 90 Volatile Solids of Collectable livestock manure arisings, for the UK, on a regional basis. 

Amounts are kilograms per day. 

East Midlands 


North East 

North West 


London 

South West 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 



Ireland 

Scotland 

Dairy α 


cattle β 

η All pigs under 20kg. 

θ Total layers includes growing pullets and laying birds. 

ι Includes layer breeders, broiler breeders, cocks and cockerels. 

κ Total fowls excludes all other types of poultry (turkeys, ducks, geese), as the numbers are considerable 

smaller, and a much greater proportion are free range. 

Cattle Pigs Fowls 

Calves γ Total Dry Sow δ 

Sows 

plus 

litter) ε 

Fattening 

pig (20- 

130kg) ζ 

Weaners 

(



Wales 

380,743 996,999 0 1,377,742 675 304 2,233 436 3,648 81,234 

UK – Total 

3,038,448 6,856,150 0 9,894,598 101,366 35,697 442,898 89,033 668,994 1,816,354 

Table 91 Bio Methane Potential of collectable livestock manure arisings, for the UK, on a regional basis. 

Amounts are cubic meters (m 3 ) of methane per kilogram of Volatile Solids (VS). 

Cattle Pigs Fowls 

Dairy α Other 

cattle β Calves γ Total Dry Sow δ 

Sows 

plus 

litter) ε 

Fattening 

pig (20- 

130kg) ζ 

Weaners 

(

178 



Table 92 Crop area potentially generating straw, by crop type and region of the UK 302 

Year 

Region Crop area 

(‘000 ha) 

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

East Midlands Wheat 353 386 348 347 343 

Other Cereals 104 90 82 82 84 

Oilseed rape 101 106 117 114 139 

East of England Wheat 481 513 486 472 470 


Oilseed rape 94 91 101 104 130 

North East Wheat 66 71 68 65 66 


Oilseed rape 22 25 25 23 27 

North West Wheat 28 36 31 31 30 


Oilseed rape 4 4 4 4 4 

South East and Wheat 241 251 241 237 229 

London Other Cereals 99 89 79 81 86 

Oilseed rape 75 81 83 79 92 

South West Wheat 174 191 180 176 172 


Oilseed rape 41 48 47 45 52 

West Midlands Wheat 150 167 157 155 153 


Oilseed rape 33 36 38 34 43 

Yorkshire and Wheat 233 252 237 227 227 

Humber Other Cereals 126 116 108 107 111 

Oilseed rape 54 65 66 61 76 

England -Total 10379 10728 10182 9977 10343 

Scotland Wheat 88 101 96 100 103 114 

Other Cereals 321 314 295 274. 279 320 

Oilseed rape 35 39 36 34 36 34 

Wales Wheat 15 15 15 16 - 

Other Cereals 24 25 22 19 - 

Oilseed rape 3 3 3 3 - 

Northern Wheat 7 9 8 9 9 12 

Ireland Other Cereals 28 27 26 23 23 - 

Oilseed rape 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 - 

UK – Total 12197 12896 11935 11648 

302 Data collated from Defra Farm Survey 2008, Welsh Agricultural Statistics 2007, 

http://wales.gov.uk/docrepos/40368/4038231/statistics/agriculture/agric2008/was07/was07ch1.xls?lang=en , The Agricultural Census of Northern 

Ireland and Statistical tables and graphs showing the final results of the 2008 June Agricultural and Horticultural Census, Scotland, 

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/01/14164908.



Table 93 Nutrient values of straw, taken from the ADAS Report for NNFCC. 303 

Nutrient value /t £/kg* Value £/t 

Wheat 

N - 5.0 kg 1.13 5.65 

P2O5 - 1.3 kg 1.45 1.89 

K2O - 9.3 kg 1.00 9.30 

Total 16.84 

Barley 

N - 6.0 kg 1.13 6.78 

P2O5 - 1.5 kg 1.45 2.18 

K2O – 12.6 kg 1.00 12.60 

Total 21.56 

Oilseed Rape 

N - 7.7 kg 1.13 8.70 

P2O5 - 2.2 kg 1.45 3.19 

K2O – 11.5 kg 1.00 11.50 

Total 23.39 

Table 94 Total Fowl Numbers raised on bedding, by region for the UK 

East Midlands 


North East 

North West 


London 

South West 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 

England – 

Total 


Ireland 

Scotland 

Wales 

UK – Total 

Total Fowls 

Total 

Layers 

Fowls raised 

on bedding 

24,177,981 6,816,531 17,361,450 

25,312,303 2,458,942 22,853,361 

2,428,461 295,369 2,133,092 

8,262,834 2,453,187 5,809,647 

9,866,970 4,009,313 5,857,657 

18,315,773 5,952,707 12,363,066 

16,602,106 2,914,044 13,688,062 

14,408,052 2,519,278 11,888,774 

119,374,480 27,419,371 91,955,109 

16,321,500 2,398,500 13,923,000 

8,308,280 2,920,240 5,388,040 

5,836,436 1,532,725 4,303,711 

1.5 x 10 8 

34,270,836 115,729,164 

303 Addressing the land use issues for non-food crops in response to increasing fuel and energy generation opportunities, ADAS for NNFCC, 2008, 

http://www.nnfcc.co.uk/metadot/index.pl?id=8253;isa=DBRow;op=show;dbview_id=2539 

179



Table 95 Estimated Poultry Litter output by Region 

180 

East Midlands 


North East 

North West 


London 

South West 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 



Ireland 

Scotland 

Wales 

UK – Total 

Fowls raised on 

bedding 

Table 96 Estimated Poultry Litter output by Region 

East Midlands 


North East 

North West 


London 

South West 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 



Ireland 

Scotland 

Wales 

UK – Total 

Litter output 


Energy Content 

(GJ) 

17,361,450 625 5,625,110 

22,853,361 823 7,404,489 

2,133,092 77 691,122 

5,809,647 209 1,882,326 

5,857,657 211 1,897,881 

12,363,066 445 4,005,633 

13,688,062 493 4,434,932 

11,888,774 428 3,851,963 

91,955,109 3,310 29,793,455 

13,923,000 501 411,052 

5,388,040 194 1,745,725 

4,303,711 155 1,394,402 

115,729,164 4,166 37,496,249 

Fowls raised on 

bedding 

Litter output 


Energy Content 

(GJ) 

17,361,450 625 5,625,110 

22,853,361 823 7,404,489 

2,133,092 77 691,122 

5,809,647 209 1,882,326 

5,857,657 211 1,897,881 

12,363,066 445 4,005,633 

13,688,062 493 4,434,932 

11,888,774 428 3,851,963 

91,955,109 3,310 29,793,455 

13,923,000 501 411,052 

5,388,040 194 1,745,725 

4,303,711 155 1,394,402 

115,729,164 4,166 37,496,249



A1.2 Forestry Arisings 

The following table gives more detail regarding to potential Forestry residue arisings and their energy 

content, if no account of competing markets is made. 

Table 97 Current potential operationally available forestry residue resources by region (in the absence of 

competing markets) 

Region 

Forestry and Sawmill Co- 

Woodland (odt pa) product (odt pa) 

Arboricultural 

arising (odt pa) 

Total 

(odt pa) 

East Midlands 53,046 7,664 50,363 111,073 

East of England 70,489 24,577 37,357 132,423 

North East 82,956 50,615 11,133 144,704 

North West 86,063 37,899 25,979 149,941 

South East 94,994 22,191 119,160 236,345 

South West 125,633 27,204 27,012 179.849 

West Midlands 

Yorkshire and 

41,966 100,460 7,115 149,541 

Humberside 63,285 18,969 23,814 106,068 

Total England 618,432 289,579 301,933 1,209,944 

Scotland 848,345 403,538 12,448 1,251,883 

Wales 272,735 165,783 6,841 438,518 

Total Great Britain 2,919,634 

181

1.3 Waste Wood Arisings 

182 



Table 98 Summary of the main reports that investigate arisings of waste wood from Construction and Demolition Activities. 

Source Data Quality Findings 

TRADA: wood residues – waste or 

resource? 1999 304 

Recycling of construction materials 

(IDE and NFDC), IDE, 1990 305 

Nottingham Trent University 

Study 306 

Environment Agency for England 

and Wales, Survey on wood waste 

from the Construction and 

Demolition sector 307 

Enviros’ Study of Northern Ireland’s 

Construction and Demolition waste, 

2001 308 

• Construction waste data originates from BRE’s SmartWaste method: 

visual inspection of skip contents. 

• Data quality was judged as ‘very poor quality’, and containing 

considerable uncertainties. Therefore this data has not been used in 

subsequent discussions. 

• Demolition waste estimates rely on the compositional data gathered 

through a desk data gathering exercise by the Institution of Demolition 

Engineers (IDE) in 1989. Total demolition waste also established from 

this survey. 

• Data quality was judged as ‘very poor quality’, and containing 

considerable uncertainties. Therefore this data has not been used in 

subsequent discussions. 

• The study measured the wood content of C&D waste stream together 

with waste from industries supplying construction products. Therefore it 

is not possible to know the composition of waste arising wholly from 

construction and demolition. 

• Composition established by manually sorting and weighing small skip 

contents in Nottingham in three successive years. 

• The quantities of waste sorted as part of this work were low, and the 

data quality was assessed as having considerable uncertainties. 

• Considered C&D arisings for Wales in 2005-6. 

• Obtaining data was not straight forward as many companies did not 

keep records, or take an interest in responding to the survey. 

• Data is from a survey at the point of disposal of C&D wastes, and a 

survey based on point of arising. 

• Enviros indicated that this figure is probably an underestimate of the 

true figure, since some wood would have been categorised as “other 

C&D wastes including mixed wastes.” 

• It should be noted that there are a number of assumptions in the 

estimates which could affect the quality of the estimation, but the data 

was assessed as being of reasonable quality. 

Woodwaste arisings in Scotland – • Taking the annual C&D tonnage of 6.28 million tonnes and assuming 

2% is waste wood. 

• Construction wood waste estimates were 25.77% and 19.3%. 

• Using the lower estimate of 19.3%, as a fraction of 10 million tonnes 

total UK construction waste arisings. 

⇒ Construction: 1,930,000 tonnes 

• Identified that 7% of demolition waste arisings were wood. 

• Multiplying this percentage by the total demolition waste of 25 million 

tonnes yields an arisings figure of: 

⇒ Demolition: 1,875,000 tonnes 

• An estimated average wood composition of 12.44% was identified. 

• As this value includes waste from the construction products industry, it 

is likely to be a high estimate. 

• Of the 12.2 million tonnes produced in this period, 3% of C&D waste 

was wood. 

⇒ 366,000 tonnes. 

• Identified waste wood to be 1.5% of construction and demolition waste, 

as a minimum figure. 

• Waste Watch - % of C&D waste that is wood is 2% 

⇒ 125,600 tonnes 

304 

This reflects TRADA’s comments on collection of wood waste information, Riddoch S TRADA: wood residues – waste or resource? 1999. 

305 

Recycling of construction materials – Joint survey by Institute of Demolition Engineers and National Federation of Demolition Contractors (IDE and NFDC), IDE, 1990. 

306 

A comparative study of the quantities of construction waste arising in large and small skips in the Greater Nottingham area, Nottingham Trent University and APT for ShanksFirst Wastes Solutions and Nottingham City Council, 

2001. 

307 

A survey on the arising and management of construction and demolition waste in Wales 2005-06, Environment Agency, 2006, http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/library/publications/33979.aspx 

308 

Construction and Demolition Waste Survey, Enviros Consulting Ltd for the Northern Ireland Environment and Heritage Service (NIEHS), http://www.ni- 

environment.gov.uk/construction_and_demolition_waste_survey_northern_ireland_2001.pdf.



Remade Scotland, 2004. 309 • No explanation for the figure of 2%. 

BigREc Survey – A survey of the 

UK reclamation and salvage trade 

2007 310 

Table 99 Estimates of industry specific waste wood arisings 

• Generated estimations of reclaimed and salvaged wood from a survey 

conducted in 1998, BigREc Survey, Salvo and BRE. 

• Data was gathered from postal surveys with low response rate. 

• The methodology of how the responses were grossed up to a national 

figure is unclear, which makes it difficult to rate how reliable the 

estimate is. 

• It is the only available data. 

• Total salvaged wood in the UK estimated to be 634,000 tonnes. 

C&I Industry Data Quality Waste Wood Arisings 

(tonnes) 

Furniture Manufacturing Sector 311 • Covers UK, 2000 – 2003 

530,511 

• Data quality is either containing considerable uncertainties, or is poor. 

Manufacture of panelboards (MDF 

and chipboard only) 312 

• No estimate is made of how much of this waste is used for heat or power within the panel board 

industry or of the quality of the wood. 

1,107,074 

• Data covers the whole of UK, and is of ‘good quality’. 

Manufacture of wooden products for 

the construction industry 313 

• Figures can be broke down into: 

• 181,522 tonnes (England and Wales), 

201,298 

• 17,991 (Scotland) and 

• 1,785 (Northern Ireland) 

• Data contains considerable uncertainties or is of poor quality. 

Manufacture of wooden 

• Data covers the whole of the UK, and contains considerable uncertainties or is of poor quality. 40,000 

packaging 314 

Manufacture of other products of 

wood 

• EA waste production survey model run for Nikitas et al (2005) covering England and Wales 296,232 

Production of Railway Sleepers • From Nikitas et al (2005) own study. 

26,000 

• Data covers the whole of the UK and is of ‘good quality’. 

Utility poles • Data covers the whole of the UK. 

23,500 

• Several surveys performed, but few took account of regional density variations. 

• Nikitas et al corrected for this, and is believed to be the best estimate. 

Wood waste from ‘other’ C&I • Environment Agency’s waste production Survey, covering England and Wales. No information 

2,552,312 

arisings 

available for Scotland and Northern Ireland. 

309 Woodwaste arisings in Scotland – assessment of available data on Scottish woodwaste arisings 

310 BigREc Survey, A survey of the UK reclamation and salvage trade, 2007, http://www.crwplatform.co.uk/conwaste/assets/Publications/BigREcfullreport.pdf 

311 Furniture manufacture sector estimate is based on an average of three studies: Evaluation of waste production, utilisation, and brokerage potential within the UK furniture industry, FIET, 2002; Wood waste recycling in furniture 

manufacturing – a good practice guide, BFM, 2003; The use of microwave technology for the recovery of wood fibre from MDF, FIRA, 2004 

312 Determining the market share of recycled materials – Stage 2 case study report, Esys Consulting, 2004 

313 Environment Agency waste production survey 1998 

314 Based on “Trada- Turning a blind eye?” report, 2001 

183

184 



• Calculated by subtracting figures from known industries sawmill wastes, wood products industry, 

furniture wastes) away from total arisings. 

• Likely to include waste wood from refurbishing industry – may be double counting with the C&D 

waste stream. 

• Likely to include a significant proportion of packaging waste. 

• Data is likely to be of ‘poor quality’ as based on visual inspections. 

Table 100 Estimations of future Waste wood arisings from various waste streams. 

Year 

MSW arisings 

(‘000 tonnes, no 

furniture) 

MSW furniture 


C&D 

(‘000 tonnes, mid 

range estimate) 

C&I 


2005 1,097 620 5091 6,563 

2006 1,113 629 5116 6,579 

2007 1,130 639 5142 6,595 

2008 1,147 648 5167 6,612 

2009 1,164 658 5193 6,628 

2010 1,181 668 5219 6,644 

2011 1,199 678 5245 6,661 

2012 1,217 688 5271 6,678 

2013 1,235 698 5298 6,695 

2014 1,254 709 5324 6,712 

2015 1,273 719 5351 6,729



Appendix 2 

Waste Legislation 

Waste management strategies 

The European Union has become the major source of environmental legislation and guidance in 

relation to the management of waste. A number of European Directives which aim to increase levels 

of recycling and recovery, and thus reduce the amount of waste which is landfilled, have been 

introduced: 

• Framework Directive on Waste (75/442/EEC) 

• Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC) 

• Directive on Packaging and Packaging Waste (94/62/EEC) 

• Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (2002/96/EC) 

• End of Life Vehicles Directive (2000/53/EC) 

• Ozone Depleting Substances (Regulation 2037/2000) 

• Directive on Batteries (2006/66/EC) 

• Waste Incineration Directive (2000/76/EC) 

Although most waste legislation in the UK has been introduced to meet the requirements set by 

European Directives, the UK Government has also introduced additional legislation, some of which, 

such as the Landfill Tax Regulations 1996, is specifically aimed at encouraging recycling. 

Landfill Directive 

The European Commission Landfill Directive of 1999 (1999/31/EC) was passed into English and 

Welsh law in 2002, and Scottish law in 2003. This aims to prevent, or minimise, the negative effects 

on both the environment and human health caused by landfilling of wastes. The Directive requires the 

amount of biodegradable municipal solid waste (MSW) sent to landfill in the UK to be reduced: 

• to 75% of 1995 levels by 2010, 

• to 50% of 1995 levels by 2013, and 

• to 35% of 1995 levels by 2020. 

The Government has implemented the requirements for land filling of biodegradable waste through the 

Waste and Emissions Trading Act 2003. This sets Waste Disposal Authorities annual allowances 

limiting how much biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) can be landfilled in any particular year, with 

effect from April 2005. The Government will fine Authorities that do not achieve their annual targets, 

but will allow Authorities to buy allowances from other Waste Disposal Authorities if they expect to 

landfill more than their allocations and sell their surplus if they expect to landfill less than their 

allowance. 

The Landfill Directive also sets a requirement that only waste that has been subject to treatment can 

be landfilled. This requirement applied to landfilling of hazardous waste from July 2004, and was 

extended to all wastes (such as commercial and industrial wastes) destined for landfill (with some 

exceptions) from 30 October 2007. A number of European countries have introduced 315 legislation 

which bans the landfilling of wastes with biological activity and intrinsic energy above set de-minimis 

limits. These restrictions apply to all wastes irrespective of their origin, and compliance is impossible 

without some form of treatment - mechanical, biological or thermal. However, the guidance 316 for the 

UK indicates that provided some source separation of recyclable material has occurred, the waste can 

be landfilled without requiring any further treatment. The Government intends to consult on whether 

the introduction of further restrictions on the landfilling of biodegradable wastes or recyclable materials 

would make an effective contribution to meeting the objectives (reducing greenhouse gas emissions 

315 Delivering Key Waste Management Infrastructure : Lessons Learned from Europe. Final Report by SLR to CIWM, November 2005 

316 Treatment of non-hazardous waste for landfill. Environment Agency, February 2007.



and increasing resource efficiency) set out in the national waste strategy, but this would (due to the 

need to construct the required treatment capacity) be a long term (at least 2020) target. 

National waste strategies 

An updated waste strategy for England 317 was published in May 2007. The aim of this updated Waste 

Strategy, which sets the Government’s vision for sustainable waste management, is to reduce waste 

by making products with fewer natural resources, and thus breaking the link between economic growth 

and waste growth. Products should be re-used, their materials recycled, energy from waste 

recovered, and landfilling of residual waste should occur only where necessary. The key points are: 

• Waste minimisation - A strong emphasis on waste prevention with householders reducing their 

waste (for example, through home composting and reducing food waste), business helping 

consumers, for example, with less packaging, development of a service which will enable 

households to opt-out of receiving un-addressed as well as addressed direct mail, and a 

reduction in the use of free single-use plastic bags. 

• Recycling - More effective incentives for individuals and businesses to recycle waste, leading 

to at least 40 per cent of household waste recycled or composted by 2010, rising to 45% by 

2015 and 50 per cent by 2020. This is a significant increase on the targets (30% by 2010 and 

33% by 2015) in the previous waste strategy (which was published in 2000). 

• Treatment of residual waste - Increasing the amount of energy produced by a variety of 

energy from waste schemes, using waste that can't be reused or recycled. It is expected that 

from 2020 a quarter of municipal waste - waste collected by local authorities, mainly from 

households - will produce energy, compared to 10 per cent today. 

The English waste strategy also included a new national target for the reduction of commercial and 

industrial waste going to landfill. This will require the level of commercial and industrial waste that is 

landfilled to fall by 20% by 2010 compared to the baseline of 2004. 

The Welsh Waste Strategy 318 , which was published in 2003, established a challenging but realistic 

programme of change by 2013. The aim of the strategy is to move Wales from an over-reliance on 

landfill to a position where it will be a model for sustainable waste management. This will be achieved 

by adopting and implementing a sustainable, integrated approach to waste production, management 

and regulation (including litter and flytipping) that minimises the production of waste and its impact on 

the environment, maximises the use of unavoidable waste as a resource, and minimises where 

practicable, the use of energy from waste and landfill. 

The Welsh strategy set the following targets: 

• Municipal solid waste 

o Each local authority to achieve a minimum 40% recycling/composting rate by 2009/10, 

with a minimum of 15% composting (with only compost derived from source 

segregated materials counting) and 15% recycling. 

o Waste arisings per household should be no greater than those (for Wales) in 1997/98 

by 2009/10. 

o By 2020, waste arisings per person should be less than 300kg per annum. 

• Commercial and industrial waste 

o Achieve, by 2010, a reduction in waste produced equivalent to at least 10% of the 

1998 arisings figure. 

o Reduce, by 2010, the amount of industrial and commercial waste going to landfill to 

less than 80% of that landfilled in 1998 

• C&D 

o To re-use or recycle at least 85% of C&D waste produced by 2010. 

317 

Waste Strategy for England 2007. Defra, May 2007. 

318 

Wise About Waste: The National Waste Strategy For Wales. Welsh Assembly Government, 2003. 

186 AEA



The Scottish National Waste Plan of 2003 319 establishes the direction of the Scottish Executive’s 

policies for sustainable waste management to 2020. It is built around a major commitment of funding 

by the Executive to transform Scotland’s record on waste reduction, recycling, composting and 

recovery. It sets out challenging, but realistic objectives to achieve fundamental change in the way 

that Scotland’s waste is managed, and the main targets are to: 

• Achieve zero growth in the amount of municipal waste produced by 2010; 

• Achieve 55% recycling and composting of municipal waste by 2020 (35% recycling and 

20% composting); 

• Recover energy from 14% of municipal waste; 

• Reduce landfilling of municipal waste from around 90% to 30%; 

• Provide widespread waste minimisation advice to businesses; and 

• Develop markets for recycled material to help recycling become viable and reduce costs. 

In 2007 Scotland also published a strategy for business 320 (C&I) waste. This aims to reduce the 

amount of business waste which is landfilled through both reducing the amount of waste which is 

generated and increasing the recycling rate, but it does not set specific recycling targets. 

The Northern Ireland waste strategy 321 , which was published in 2006, sets the following targets: 

• Recycling and Composting of Household Wastes to increase to 35% by 2010, and to 45% 

by 2020. 

• 60% of Commercial and Industrial Waste to be recycled by 2020 

• 75% of Construction, Demolition and Excavation Wastes to be recycled or reused by 

2020. 

The national waste strategies all set targets for recycling/composting of MSW, and include 

requirements to meet the targets on landfilling of biodegradable MSW set by the landfill Directive. The 

targets for C&I waste aim to both reduce the amount of waste which is produced and reduce the 

amount which is landfilled, but only the Northern Ireland waste strategy sets a recycling target. Two 

strategies (Wales and Northern Ireland) set recycling targets for C&D waste. 

English regional strategies 

Although some of the English Regions have published waste strategies, others have covered waste 

within their spatial strategy/plan. Table 101 lists the waste reduction/minimisation, recovery and 

recycling targets set in each Region, and shows that only two regions (London and the South East) 

have set recycling targets for all (MSW, C&I and C&D) of the three main waste streams. Table 101 

also shows that some regions (such as the East of England) have set recovery targets but have not 

set recycling targets, and that only four regions have set waste reduction/minimisation targets. 

Other targets/objectives included in the strategies/plans include: 

• London - Ensure that facilities with sufficient capacity to manage 75 per cent (15.8 million 

tonnes) of waste (MSW and C&I) arising within London are provided by 2010, rising to 80 

per cent (19.2 million tonnes) by 2015 and 85 per cent (20.6 million tonnes) by 2020 

• East Midlands - To reduce the amount of waste landfilled in accordance with the EU 

Landfill Directive, and take a flexible approach to other forms of waste recovery 

• East of England - The objective is to eliminate the landfilling of untreated municipal and 

commercial waste by 2021 

• West Midlands - The Region must play its part in delivering the targets set out in the 

National Waste Strategy, and development plans should include proposals which will 

enable the Regional targets to be met. 

319 Waste Action Scotland: The National Waste Plan. Scottish Executive, 2003 

320 Business Waste Framework. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) and Scottish Executive, March 2007 

321 Towards Resource Management: The Northern Ireland Waste Management Strategy 2006 – 2020. Northern Ireland Department of 

Environment, 2006.

Table 101: Summary of targets in regional strategies 

Waste 

Recovery targets Recycling Targets 

minimisation/reduction 

Municipal Solid Commercial and Construction and 

Waste industrial waste demolition waste 

East of 

England 322 

- Municipal waste – recovery of 50% 

- - - 

by 2010 and 70% by 2015 

Commercial and industrial waste – 

recovery of 72% by 2010 and 75% 

by 2015 

East Midlands 323 To work towards zero Overall recycling, recovery or re- To exceed 

- - 

growth in waste at the use rate for all waste streams of Government targets 

Regional level by 2016 75% 

for recycling and 

composting 

London 324 - - Exceed recycling or 

composting levels in 

municipal waste of: 

35 per cent by 2010 


North East 325 - Municipal Solid Waste – to increase 

recovery to 53% by 2010 and 72% 

by 2016 

Commercial & Industrial – to 

North West 326 Achieve and retain 0% 

growth in the amount of C&I 

wastes produced through 

the life of the Strategy, 

without compromising 

economic 

growth in the region 

increase recovery to 73% by 2016 

MSW - recover value from 67% of 

MSW by 2015 

recover value (including recycling) 

from at least 70% of all commercial 

and 

industrial wastes by 2020 

322 East of England Plan May 2008: The Revision to the Regional Spatial Strategy for the East of England. Government Office for the East of England, May 2008 

323 East Midlands Regional Waste Strategy. East Midlands Regional Assembly, January 2006. 

324 The London Plan: Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London. Greater London Authority, February 2008 

325 The North East of England Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021. Government Office for the North East, July 2008 

326 Regional Waste Strategy for the North West. North West Regional Assembly, September 2004 

Achieve recycling or 

composting levels in 

commercial 

and industrial waste 

of 70 per cent by 

2020 

Achieve recycling 

and re-use levels in 

construction, 

excavation and 

demolition waste of 


- - - 

- recycle 35% of all 

commercial and 

industrial wastes by 

2020 

-

South East 327 - - 55% of MSW by 

2020 

65% of C&I by 2020 60% of C&D by 2020 

South West 328 Become a minimum waste 

producer by 2030, with 

business and households 

maximising opportunities 

for reuse and recycling. 

- - - - 

West 

Midlands 329 

- Recover value from at least 45% of Recycle or compost 

- - 

municipal waste by 2005 and 67% at least 30% of 

by 2015; 

household waste by 

Reduce the proportion of industrial 2010, and 33% by 

and commercial waste which is 

disposed of to landfill to at the most 

85% of 1998 levels by 2005 

2015 

Yorkshire and 

Humber 330 

Moving the management of Achieving all statutory waste 

- - - 

all waste streams up the management performance targets 

waste hierarchy 

during the Plan period 

327 A Clear Vision for the South East – The South East Plan. South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA), March 2006 

328 From Rubbish to Resource: The Regional Waste Strategy for the South West 2004 – 2020. South West Regional Assembly, 2004 

329 Regional Spatial Strategy for the West Midlands. Government Office for the West Midlands, January 2008 

330 The Yorkshire and Humber Plan: Regional Spatial Strategy to 2026. Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber, May 2008

The strategies consider future requirements for management of MSW; this is because of the 

requirements for management of this stream in order to meet the targets for landfilling of MSW set in 

the Landfill Directive. However, only the London strategy sets requirements for treatment capacity for 

C&I waste, and whilst the London and South East strategies set high (over 60%) recycling targets for 

C&I waste, these are unlikely to be achieved without future changes in Government policy. 

AEA

Appendix 3 

MBT Methods 

Specific in use processes for MBT include the 3R-UR process, illustrated below, with a typical mass 

balance for the system shown in Table 102, the BTA process, 331 and the Orchid Process. 

Table 102: Mass balance for 3R-UR process 

Figure 25: Flowsheet for the 3R-UR process 332 

Biogas 

Wt % 

3-5 

Recyclables and/or fuel product 15-20 

Compost product 15-20 

Process loss (waste gas – treated in biofilters before 40-45 

discharge to atmosphere) 

Residues (landfilled) 15-20 

Total 100 

331 Information at http://www.srm-norfolk.co.uk/index.htm 

332 Global Renewables, 3R-UR Process, http://www.globalrenewables.eu/ur3r-process

AEA 

Figure 26 Process flow sheet for the BTA process 333 

333 The BTA Process – Implementing Anaerobic Digestion in Wales Workshop 11 th November 2008, Enpure, 

http://www.swea.co.uk/downloads/Biogas_ROBYN.pdf

Figure 27 Orchid Environmental process 334 

334 Orchid – Seamless Waste Management Solutions, Company Brochure, http://www.orchidenvironmental.co.uk/downloads/pdf/orchid_process_4pp.pdf

AEA group 

329 Harwell 

Didcot 

Oxfordshire 

OX11 0QJ 

Tel: 0870 190 6036 

Fax: 0870 190 6318 

AEA

to read the full report - Ecolateral by Peter Jones

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?