London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

More documents

Recommendations

Info

to be so in to the future. However many of the recycling and reprocessing facilities for these ‘soft’ wastes are located outside of London. 5.48. Such cost advantages relate primarily to the recycling and reuse of bulk ‘hard’ and ‘excavation’ wastes (including soils) from construction and demolition sites, although there is also anecdotal evidence that these considerations also apply to the recycling of the ‘soft’ wastes. Whilst in certain circumstances specific other materials (such as fireplace surrounds, timber panelling, internal doors, lighting and wiring etc) may have a resale value, this is generally outweighed by the labour time required to dismantle and remove such goods. Whilst they may be valuable within the context of certain types of smaller project, they become increasingly insignificant on large-scale projects. 5.49. One prominent demolition contractor considered that further improvements in waste management within the sector would only be driven through legislative changes, perhaps accompanied by fiscal instruments (e.g. the Landfill Tax). The same consultee also noted that the data being recorded by companies was insufficient to provide a useful basis for assessing waste management practices within the sector, but that this could not be expected to greatly improve without stricter requirements to improve current data collection. Recommendation 48: It is recommended that consideration should be given to the opportunities that exist to improve the gathering of C&D waste management data, including cooperation with trade associations and discussions with the Environment Agency with regard to incorporation into licensing requirements. Consultations – Tools to Aid Best Practice 5.50. Whilst the efficient use of resources has always been an issue for the construction and demolition industry in financial and practicality terms, measures and initiatives to improve the environmental performance were probably best defined in 1998 with the publication of the Egan report ‘Rethinking Construction’, followed by ‘Building a Better Quality of Life – A Strategy for More Sustainable Construction’ in 2000. A number of related groups then started to develop key performance indicators for the industry and in 2003 Construction Excellence was formed, which brought together the following sustainable construction sector groups into one body: • The Housing Forum. • The Local Government Taskforce. • Building Services Best Practice. • The Infrastructure Task Force. • M4I. • The Quality Mark Scheme. • IT Construction Best Practice. 5.51. A number of trade bodies and institutes have advisors or panels that focus on environmental and sustainable construction issues, such as the Construction Federation, Institute of Civil Engineers, and the Construction Industry Environmental Forum. Further organisations apply research effort and consultancy services to improving and implementing sustainable construction, such as CIRIA, BRE and BSRIA. WRAP, whose focus is to create markets for sustainable waste management, also has a significant involvement in the construction and demolition waste stream. 88
5.52. A number of tools for assisting in the sourcing of facilities to handle construction and demolition waste materials for reuse or recycling are also available. As part of this project we have researched some of these tools and present a brief outline of the provider and service offered in Table 5.8 below. Table 5.8: Tools available to aid the reuse and recycling of construction and demolition waste Tool Summary of Tool CIRIA Recycling http://www.ciria.org.uk/recyc ling SalvoMie www.salvomie.co.uk BREMAP http://www.bremap.co.uk AggRegain http://www.aggregain.co.uk Web-site dedicated to locating construction recycling sites. The service was funded by the RMC Environment Fund, ICE (Institute of Civil Engineers), and DTI Partners in Innovation Scheme (Department of Trade and Industry). Scotland, England and Wales are broken down into 11 regions (it is also possible to search by material), with the additional ability to add your own site details. A search of the London Recycling Sites gave 17 results. Each result links through to further information for contacts and materials accepted/sold. SalvoMIE is a materials information exchange for the construction and landscaping business sectors in England and internationally. It was started by BRE in 1999 funded by the DETR, and relaunched in October 2003 by the Salvo partnership, part funded by Biffa and ICE, and in partnership with BREMAP which is a GIS system for finding waste related UK businesses (see below). Browse by county for materials. Low value waste materials, offered or wanted by the construction industry and landscape professionals for re-use or recycling, can be posted on the website. At the time of searching, 21 items were available nationwide Database searchable by postcode or county which provides a map or list of waste management facilities in that area. A search for facilities 7.5km from Greater London gave 226 companies, which included local authorities, metal recyclers and large waste management companies. Telephone numbers, distances from postcode and links to further company information (materials accepted, addresses) are also given. The Aggregates Information Service was the predecessor to AggRegain. AggRegain is a service from WRAP, funded through the Aggregates Levy Sustainability. It has a link to a directory of more than 250 suppliers of recycled and secondary aggregate products, at 350 locations throughout England. A search can be conducted by name, town, postcode or by region. The supplier database, which is part of the UK Recycled Products Guide, is operated by Waste Watch, and is regularly up-dated. A search for the London region was undertaken. 160 ‘results’ were listed. AggRegain also has the ‘AggRegain Specifier’. This tool helps specifiers and buyers choose the right aggregate for the right application and then download detailed technical notes, purchase orders and case studies. The system can be navigated via: • Project type, e.g. Road building and Housing development • Application, e.g. Unbound sub-base, Bituminous bound base course and Kerb haunching • Product, e.g. Type 1 Granular sub-base material, Heavy duty macadam, and Designated concrete GEN 0 • Material, This returns information related to aggregate materials and tells you if and where they can be used in any construction projects covered by the AggRegain site, as well as providing additional information about the materials themselves. WRAP also have a similar RecycleWood website. 5.53. At the time of writing, Aggregain report around 250 registered members; these include a wide range of C&D companies, including construction companies and material specifiers. The AggRegain website is reportedly receiving around 1,000 hits per week to 89
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 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 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?