London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

More documents

Recommendations

Info

for contaminated soils within London. • Consideration of the time delay associated with the on-site treatment of contaminated soils and the increased costs of brownfield site development. • Promotion of contaminated land treatment technologies. • Information dissemination to developers and contractors. 3 Develop and implement a programme to assist SMEs with the management of their hazardous waste. This should include: • An awareness raising campaign about hazardous waste. • Provision of interim storage solutions for easily handled low volume packaged hazardous wastes. 4 Develop and implement a strategy to encourage the development of a hazardous waste processing industry in London, especially in light of the likely lag time associated with the planning process and public attitudes of NIMBY. This should build on London’s existing industry and take account of the likely type and quantity of new hazardous wastes under the new definition (from July 2005). NB this links with Action 82 in the Mayor’s Municipal Waste Strategy – relating to planning the waste infrastructure in London. 5 Liaise with WRAP, the LDA and London ReMaDe to review the prioritisation accorded by these organisations to particular waste streams for recycling and reprocessing. Use the results of this as input into the Wider Waste Strategy and consider setting education and recycling targets for each as part of the Strategy. NB this links with Action 76 in the Mayor’s Municipal Waste Strategy – relating to developing markets for recyclable materials. 6 Consider how to influence Government to adopt, those measure that have been effective in achieving high recycling rates of C&D wastes in other European Member States, such as: • banning / partial banning of landfill of C&D wastes. • requiring separation and re-use/ recycling of 140 Key GLA, Haz Waste Forum, Trade Associations Short GLA, Hazardous Waste Forum, EA Short GLA, WRAP, LDA, London ReMaDe Medium GLA, ICE, BRE
C&D waste. • requiring the use of the London Sustainable Construction Code and Demolition Protocol prior to giving developers permission to proceed with a demolition and construction project. 7 Develop and publish a best practice guide for the management of waste resulting from large-scale public events. 8 Subject to the views of NetRegs, carry out a more detailed survey of waste management practice of commercial SMEs in London (to augment the results of the SME-nvironment survey 2003) 9 The feasibility of establishing medium/large scale biogas facilities for the processing of London’s organic waste should be investigated, including the feasibility of using the biogas and heat from such facilities in co-located industrial sites. Medium GLA, ALG Medium GLA, Envirowise, EA Medium GLA, London ReMade, EA, DEFRA 1 Key to priorities (used in conjunction with the Mayor’s Municipal Waste Strategy): Key – requires immediate attention Short – requires attention in the short term (6 to 12 months) Medium – requires attention in the medium term (12 to 24 months) 141
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 112 and 113: 6.47. There are a range of views fr
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 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?