London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6.47. There are a range of views from people involved in the hazardous waste industry about the number of landfill sites remaining nationally that will be able to accept hazardous waste after 16 th July 2004. Estimates of around 35 sites are given in ‘Hazardous Waste – A Growing Challenge’ 40 . Alternatively, the National Household Hazardous Waste Forum (Roland Arnison, Manager) suggests that there may only be ‘12 to 15 hazardous landfills across England’ in the short term after 16 th July 2004. 6.48. Information presented by Gill Weeks (Regulatory Affairs Director, Cleanaway) at the Hazardous Waste Summit (24 th March 2004) identified the potential future landfill capacity (post July 2004) in England and Wales as: • 12 merchant hazardous landfill applications/permits; • 11 in-house applications permits; and • 28 applications for separate cells (for stabilised hazardous wastes). 6.49. The list given above is of potential hazardous landfill sites; these are estimated to have a total capacity of approximately 1 million tonnes. However, this capacity is not fully available as many sites will only be able to accept limited types of hazardous wastes e.g. asbestos. This will potentially leave only a handful of landfills across the country with the ability to accept a wide range of hazardous wastes. In addition, only a small number of landfill sites have currently been granted a licence. 6.50. The Environment Agency posted a list of landfill sites where operators have submitted duly made applications to the Agency to continue to accept hazardous waste after 16 July 2004. This information (current as at 20 th April) is presented in Tables 6.3 and 6.4, identifying 13 Merchant Landfills and 9 In-House Landfills. Of the 13 Merchant Sites, only 5 permits have been issued, 2 of which are licensed to accept asbestos only, with the remaining 2 accepting a range of hazardous wastes (Kingscliffe, Northants; Stockton on Tees, Teeside; and Swindon, Wilts). However, at present, it cannot be assumed that this expected capacity will actually be realised since not all of the identified sites have yet been permitted. 6.51. Assuming that the landfill capacity to accept hazardous waste in England and Wales is around 1 million tonnes and with the disposal of hazardous waste being directed to landfill in 2002 being approximately 2 million tonnes, it is apparent that after 16 th July 2004 there will be a very significant shortfall in landfill capacity for the disposal of hazardous waste. This deficit will be further aggravated by the introduction of the new definitions of hazardous waste in 2005 and the consequential increase in hazardous waste, which the Hazardous Waste Forum estimates will result in an additional 0.8 million tonnes of waste above current tonnages. This will be a step change in the total hazardous waste produced, due to the change in regulations scheduled for mid-2005, rather than organic growth. Hence, for England and Wales, the combined effects of the Hazardous Waste Regulations and the Landfill Directive are expected to result in a total annual shortfall of some 1.8 million tonnes of landfill capacity – with 1.0m shortfall anticipated in mid-2004 and a further 0.8 million tonnes in mid-2005. 6.52. Last year, the Government and the Environment Agency were optimistic that some of this shortfall may be addressed through the engineering and permitting of separate cells at non-hazardous landfill sites for stabilised hazardous waste. However, at a recent Hazardous Waste conference in London, the view from industry was that separate cells were unlikely to make up a significant amount of the shortfall in the short to medium 40 Hazardous Waste. A growing challenge. Environment Agency, February 2004 108
term. The stated reason for this was given as the delays in the Environment Agency’s publication of guidance on the engineering requirements for separate cells. Table 6.4: Merchant landfills which have submitted duly made applications to the Environment Agency (20 April 2004) Merchant Landfills for Hazardous Waste (20 April 2004) 1 2 Site Name Operator Location Earlswick Hall Brock plc Crewe, Cheshire North West ICI no. 3 Impetus Waste Teeside North Management. East EA Region EA Area SPG Range of Hazardous Wastes Permit Status South W Contaminated soils To be determined Dales W Wide range of hazardous wastes To be determined 3 Whitemoss J. Routledge and Skelmersdale, Lancs. Sons North West Central W Wide range of hazardous waste To be determined 4 Port Clarence Zero Waste Teeside, Stockton on Tees North East Dales W Wide range of hazardous wastes Permit Issued 5 Winterton South Integrated Waste Winterton, North Lincs. Anglian Northern N Wide range of hazardous wastes To be determined Meece 2 Management Ltd Biffa Stone, Staffs. Midlands Upper N Limited range of 'Chapter To be determined 6 Trent 19' Haz wastes: 19 01 05*, 19 01 07*, 19 01 10*, 19 01 13*, 19 01 15* 7 8 9 Warboys Fenside Waste Management Wingmoor Farm Southwood Landfill Huntingdon, Cambs. Anglian Central N Wide range but slightly narrower range and lower quantities than existing WML allows Grundon Cheltenham, Glos. Midlands Lower Severn Southwood Waste Management Shepton Mallett, Somerset South West North Wessex B Wide range of hazardous waste. Generally higher inputs of HW than previously licensed B Asbestos only. Quantity is same as current WML To be determined To be determined Permit Issued Pinden Quarry Pinden Plant 10 Dartford, Kent Southern Kent B Asbestos only. Quantity is Permit Issued same as current WML Purton Hills Minerals Swindon, Wilts Thames West B Range includes Permit Issued 11 Brickworks and Waste Ltd contaminated soils, filter cakes, packaging 12 Slipe Clay Atlantic Waste Kingscliffe Anglian Northern Area Wide range of wastes Permit Issued cliffe, Kingscliffe Services 13 Winsford Rock Minosus Winsford, Cheshire North South Range of inorganic, non- Planning issues to be Salt Mine West flammable waste currently resolved in negotiation with Agency over detail of waste types SPGs KEY N: Nottingham W: Warrington B: Bristol 109
Page 1 and 2:
Policy & Partnerships London Wider
Page 3:
CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 2. Waste
Page 6 and 7:
Chapter 2 summarises the principal
Page 8 and 9:
Key policy proposals in ‘Waste St
Page 10 and 11:
2.8. The national Planning Policy G
Page 12 and 13:
• where waste cannot be dealt wit
Page 14 and 15:
Policies of neighbouring regions 2.
Page 16 and 17:
• A Thematic Strategy on waste re
Page 18 and 19:
2.34. Legislation applying to speci
Page 20 and 21:
addresses eight main environmental
Page 22 and 23:
3.19. The London Regional Technical
Page 24 and 25:
4.3. There then follows a section o
Page 26 and 27:
Table 4.1: Arisings and basic compo
Page 28 and 29:
Table 4.3: Total commercial and ind
Page 30 and 31:
around London but not on the quanti
Page 32 and 33:
Table 4.6: Number and weight of sam
Page 34 and 35:
through a 20mm sieve Total 73 27.4
Page 36 and 37:
handling and transport in London, r
Page 38 and 39:
4.66. Not surprisingly, all of the
Page 40 and 41:
some construction companies had the
Page 42 and 43:
necessary that the waste producers
Page 44 and 45:
4.101. One other potential major in
Page 46 and 47:
SMEs comprise a slightly lower prop
Page 48 and 49:
Drivers for Sustainable Waste Manag
Page 50 and 51:
4.123. Whilst sustainable waste man
Page 52 and 53:
Encouragement of waste minimisation
Page 54 and 55:
companies. There is no service offe
Page 56 and 57:
their companies than the larger com
Page 58 and 59:
such as road construction, it close
Page 60 and 61:
LREs wishing to model the viability
Page 62 and 63: Table 4.10: Eco-sites established w
Page 64 and 65: • Support for the development and
Page 66 and 67: two internationally recognised stan
Page 68 and 69: London. A phased approach is recomm
Page 70 and 71: encouraged, and that guidance and/o
Page 72 and 73: number of employees of perhaps some
Page 74 and 75: 4.230. The NHS provided a detailed
Page 76 and 77: 4.241. For over half of the WCAs th
Page 78 and 79: 5. Construction and Demolition Wast
Page 80 and 81: 5.7. The findings for England and W
Page 82 and 83: City Limits 5.14. An alternative re
Page 84 and 85: Figure 5.1: Average total waste ari
Page 86 and 87: 5.23. The hazardous waste component
Page 88 and 89: 5.29. Nevertheless, the data estima
Page 90 and 91: Consultations 5.38. Consultations w
Page 92 and 93: to be so in to the future. However
Page 94 and 95: visit and review specific pages. A
Page 96 and 97: European Literature Review and Cons
Page 99 and 100: 6. Special/Hazardous Waste Introduc
Page 101 and 102: ‘Technical Assessment for Waste M
Page 103 and 104: accurate record of hazardous waste
Page 105 and 106: Figure 6.2: Breakdown of recorded h
Page 107 and 108: wastes to London are the closest, i
Page 109: Figure 6.4: Breakdown of hazardous
Page 114 and 115: Table 6.5: In-house landfills which
Page 116 and 117: equirements for the ‘new’ hazar
Page 118 and 119: options to improve treatment, such
Page 120 and 121: 6.80. However, the new hazardous wa
Page 122 and 123: 6.90. The future treatment of asbes
Page 124 and 125: 7.7. London’s total hazardous was
Page 126 and 127: 7.19. There is only limited composi
Page 128 and 129: waste management obligations and be
Page 130 and 131: construction and demolition compani
Page 132 and 133: the precise amount of landfill capa
Page 134 and 135: R.14 In order to more effectively t
Page 136 and 137: R32 It is recommended that a reduct
Page 138 and 139: measurement of wastes from construc
Page 140 and 141: Future Actions Table 7.1: Summary o
Page 142 and 143: Theme 3: Support for Existing Initi
Page 144 and 145: for contaminated soils within Londo
Page 147 and 148: Appendix A: Waste policy and legisl
Page 149 and 150: • whole used tyres (from 2003);
Page 151 and 152: UK Policy The majority of UK waste
Page 153 and 154: • Requires consents to discharge
Page 155 and 156: • Prohibits certain types of wast
Page 157 and 158: Green Paper on PVC Key Features •
Page 159 and 160: Chris Searles, Searles Associates D
Page 161 and 162: Table C1. Data by Number (from Smal
Page 163 and 164:
Appendix D: Results of Further Anal
Page 165 and 166:
Total 100 598.8 70.7 423.4 29.8 178
Page 167 and 168:
Appendix E: Local Authority C&I Col
Page 169 and 170:
All of the respondents said that th
Page 171 and 172:
proportion of waste collected from
Page 173 and 174:
Finally, the authorities were asked
Page 175 and 176:
The authorities were asked how the
Page 177 and 178:
All authorities were asked how they
Page 179 and 180:
Table E11: Do you expect to meet th
Page 181 and 182:
Table E15: What is the situation re
Page 183 and 184:
Appendix F: Consultees for Construc
Page 185 and 186:
Appendix G: Policy, legislative and
Page 187 and 188:
Measure Germany Denmark Belgium The
Page 189 and 190:
Measure Germany Denmark Belgium The
show all

London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?