Waste not want not - States Assembly

More documents

Recommendations

Info

waste generation and practices, and sets targets for the following year – in effect the report acts as an internal benchmark. Further work would be needed to assess if mandatory environmental reporting would be workable and yield significant benefits without imposing an additional burden on business. In the interim further encouragement should be given to voluntary take up of such environmental performance monitoring. The wider development of both Waste Minimisation Clubs 155 and Waste Exchanges 156 is an opportunity for providing commercial and industrial waste producers with another approach to increase awareness, change inhouse practices, and divert more material away from waste disposal options. There are approximately 100 active clubs across the UK and Envirowise is involved with them all to some extent. There is considerable scope to extend the number of clubs in operation and therefore increase the number of companies participating. In addition, the number of waste exchanges currently operating is minimal and the quantities of waste being re-used and recycled through these networks is limited, therefore there is potential to increase their role. The Environment Agency has set itself a policy to push waste exchanges and facilitate networks; however there has been limited evidence of progress to date and this area needs more work. A number of specific key barriers to greater action on this waste stream have been identified as: ● ● ● ● a lack of good data on waste arisings (see recommendation 20); a lack of sufficient economic incentives to recycle: the landfill tax is too low (see recommendation 11); a lack of extensive voluntary targets to encourage reduction and recycling of commercial and industrial waste, plus a lack of appreciation whether statutory targets would be appropriate; and a lack of awareness at the SME level of sustainable waste management practices (refer to recommendation 19). A number of specific recommendations have been made to address the key barriers and specific needs identified in this annex. Details can be found in the attached table ‘Summary of Key Recommendations and Action Plan: Wider Wastes’. 155 Aire and Calder and Project Catalyst, both demonstration projects in the early 1990’s, supported by government, showed considerable financial savings largely as a result of waste minimisation 156 Waste exchanges – where details of waste that may be used by others are available and can be exchanged ANNEX C. WIDER WASTES 147
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Annex C: Summary of Key Recommendations and Action Plan: Wider Wastes Recommendation Benefits/Risks Action to By when Lead dept/ Others Measuring be taken organisation involved progress HAZARDOUS WASTE B = Benefits. R = Risks. Ensure clear definition of all hazardous waste (including household) is developed and disseminated. B – clarity and time to plan. Clear list disseminated to all stakeholders. 2003 DEFRA EA Measures in place to manage hazardous waste. Assess existing and planned capacity for hazardous waste management. B – identify shortfall and time to plan. R – difficult to get data & information. Develop & implement data collection. 2003 DEFRA EA/Chemical Industry Association/ESA Sufficient capacity in place to meet requirements. Assess the potential for flytipping in light of legislative requirements. B – ensure effective management of hazardous waste. Examine the need for increased regulation and enforcement. 2003 EA Measures in place to manage flytipping. Hazardous Waste Forum. B – proactive approach to overcoming barriers and proposing solutions. Exchange of information and good practice. 2003 DEFRA + key stakeholders CBI, CIA, SMEs, ESA, LAs, EA Co-ordinated approach towards the development of more sustainable management practices. 148
Page 1 and 2:
Waste not, Want not A strategy for
Page 3 and 4:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 2
Page 5 and 6:
The report shows clearly that a dif
Page 7 and 8:
Key points (continued) The aim of p
Page 9 and 10:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 8 There are sev
Page 11 and 12:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 10 The second p
Page 13 and 14:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 12 that cause e
Page 15 and 16:
● 50% of households carrying out
Page 17 and 18:
Box 1: Tackling waste in the devolv
Page 19 and 20:
● Chapter 3 describes why tacklin
Page 21 and 22:
Box 2: Types of waste: (continued)
Page 23 and 24:
authority makes arrangements to rec
Page 25 and 26:
Box 3: Instruments used in other co
Page 27 and 28:
There are sound economic and enviro
Page 29 and 30:
Current policies are failing to tac
Page 31 and 32:
● setting up the Waste and Resour
Page 33 and 34:
4. BARRIERS TO MORE SUSTAINABLE WAS
Page 35 and 36:
4.7 As well as DTI and DEFRA, the E
Page 37 and 38:
that only 7% of the public identify
Page 39 and 40:
Box 6: Common waste ‘myths’…
Page 41 and 42:
● time series data on the costs o
Page 43 and 44:
Summary (continued) ● funding for
Page 45 and 46:
Figure 7: A more detailed version o
Page 47 and 48:
Box 8: Roles and Responsibilities (
Page 49 and 50:
Having set out the principles and t
Page 51 and 52:
● ● ● options open and reduce
Page 53 and 54:
● ● ● ● reducing the rate o
Page 55 and 56:
Box 11: Scenario 1 - Do nothing - h
Page 57 and 58:
Box 13: Scenario 3 - Doing even bet
Page 59 and 60:
Reform of the economic and regulato
Page 61 and 62:
Box 15: An example of incentives to
Page 63 and 64:
Box 17: Measures to tackle fly-tipp
Page 65 and 66:
Box 18: The UK Producer Responsibil
Page 67 and 68:
Option (a): developing markets for
Page 69 and 70:
Building regulations 6.26 One of th
Page 71 and 72:
minimisation targets for office was
Page 73 and 74:
Recommendation 9: DEFRA together wi
Page 75 and 76:
Figure 12: Landfill tax rates and p
Page 77 and 78:
6.53 Lessons from the introduction
Page 79 and 80:
management strategy in reducing was
Page 81 and 82:
Box 26: Department of Health eviden
Page 83 and 84:
7. CHAPTER STRATEGIC HEADINGS INVES
Page 85 and 86:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Figure 14: Four
Page 87 and 88:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Figure 14: Four
Page 89 and 90:
What could a reduction in waste gro
Page 91 and 92:
Box 27: current collection infrastr
Page 93 and 94:
WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Figure 17: Two
Page 95 and 96:
Industry: what’s needed? 7.19 Sin
Page 97 and 98: Priority 4: improving the research
Page 99 and 100: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Figure 18: Summ
Page 101 and 102: 8. Funding and Delivery Summary Spe
Page 103 and 104: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 102 Pressures f
Page 105 and 106: scheme to tackle priority areas for
Page 107 and 108: Figure 19: A new framework for the
Page 109 and 110: will be required and then translate
Page 111 and 112: Recommendation 31: DEFRA and ODPM s
Page 113 and 114: Recommendation 34: ODPM and DEFRA s
Page 115 and 116: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 114 2. Strategi
Page 117 and 118: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Summary of key
Page 119 and 120: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Recommendation
Page 141 and 142: ANNEX A. THE ROLE OF THE STRATEGY U
Page 143 and 144: Lester Hicks - ODPM, senior officia
Page 145 and 146: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT The conclusions
Page 147: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 146 3. Commerci
Page 151 and 152: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT Annex C: Summar
Page 153 and 154: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 152 Community s
Page 155 and 156: WASTE NOT, WANT NOT 154 Licensed si
Page 157 and 158: Waste Strategy 2000 - Government vi
show all

Waste not want not - States Assembly

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

Delete template?

Save as template?