<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>GARWER WasteXchange News</title>
      <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/RSS/news.phpsc</link>
      <description>GARWER WasteXchange: News about waste management and recycling</description>
      <language>EN-en</language>
      <copyright>GARWER s.r.l. 2008</copyright>
	  <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:49:09 +0100</lastBuildDate>
      <managingEditor>GARWER s.r.l. &lt;info@garwer.com&gt;</managingEditor>
      <webMaster>GARWER s.r.l. &lt;info@garwer.com&gt;</webMaster>
      	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[17th EUROPEAN CONFERENCE ON TYRE RECYCLING]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/DE1-3F7-A31</link>
         <description><![CDATA[The 17th Annual ETRA Conference, ‘Innovation in Tyre Recycling’ will take place from 17 to 19 March 2010. The venue is the Crowne Plaza Europa Hotel in Brussels.
The programme includes a variety of plenary sessions and special activities. Data on EU tyre arisings and treatment options will be compared and analysed in terms of the three types of collection systems in force in different areas. Discussions will include the results of several research projects and new application developments that are ready for market. 
Special activities include the creation of a series of market scenarios for the future, a Recyclers round table, debates, meetings which will give you extra opportunities to express your opinions, increase awareness and knowledge and expand your relationships. 
For further information, Conference registration and to download the program www.etra-eu.org]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:49:09 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Germany, France cut support for solar power]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/EDA-5B1-C04</link>
         <description><![CDATA[Germany said that it would cut its subsidies for solar power in line with the rapid take-up of the photovoltaic market. The news follows a similar announcement by France.
German Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen (CDU) announced that the government was proposing to cut feed-in tariffs for new roof-mounted solar power by 15% from April.
Open-field sites and farmland installations would follow in July with 15% and 25% cuts respectively.
People who mount solar panels on their rooftops and utilise the energy for personal use would, however, receive higher tariffs.
The environment minister said that the planned cuts were due to the success of the solar sector, which had led to over-subsidisation of the industry. The feed-in tariffs have come under pressure, as the price of solar panels has dropped by around a third due to oversupply in the past year.
But the solar industry warned that the cuts, which will come on top of annual reductions under the German Renewables Act, would lead to job losses. Moreover, concerns were raised about the wider paralysis of the global solar market, which is largely driven by Germany, by far the biggest market in the world.
The Federation of Renewable Energy (BEE) said that coupled with the standard reductions under the Renewables Act, these additional cuts would bring down subsidies by at least a third by early 2011.

&quot;The proposed cut threatens the foundations of the German solar industry and the shift to an age of renewables. If the environment minister wants to implement his ambitious plans to base Germany&#039;s energy supply almost entirely on renewable energy by 2050, he must provide for reliable subsidy conditions instead of spooking investors,&quot; the BEE said in a statement.
France pricks a bubble
France also announced that it would cut its feed-in tariffs for rooftop systems by 24%, from 55 euro cents to 42 euro cents per KWh.
The move was part of a larger overhaul of renewable subsidies, which also saw adjustments to tariffs for geothermal and biomass plants.
The world&#039;s highest tariff at 58 euro cents per KWh was reserved for panels integrated into residential buildings or hospitals and schools. Other constructions like offices and industrial sites would get lower tariffs: 50 cents for existing buildings and 42 cents for newly-built ones.
The government said the new tariffs &quot;would apply only to new projects&quot; and were aimed at pricking a &quot;speculative bubble&quot; that had been developing in the market since November 2009. Therefore, the government said it would not accept applications handed in by generators after 1 November if they had not already applied for a grid connection. They could reapply under the new tariff conditions.
Photovoltaic industry for sustainable tariffs
The European Photovoltaic Industry Association (EPIA) stressed that it would be important for both France and Germany to follow the evolution of market prices in their feed-in tariff systems.
&quot;We are advocating the implementation of sustainable policy support schemes. That support should lead to an accelerated penetration of solar energy but avoid a market overheat and possible speculation,&quot; said Adel El Gammal, secretary-general of EPIA.
He warned, however, that if feed-in tariff cuts were too high, this would have a detrimental impact on the industry. &quot;It would for instance eliminate smaller actors too early, which in some cases would have innovative ideas,&quot; he said.
&quot;I believe that this reduction in France will allow sustainable development,&quot; the EPIA chief argued. Moreover, he said the French move would encourage the development of integrated PV, which focuses on added value downstream and creates local jobs.
When setting the level of feed-in tariffs, all financial elements and the market structure need to be considered, El Gammal stressed. This includes looking at the amount of red tape, investment subsidies and tax rebates as well as the system price, he said.
All things considered, the attractiveness of investment in national markets should be high enough to allow rapid but sustainable growth but below levels that would create a speculative bubble, according to El Gammal.
&quot;The range we would be looking for is that the attractiveness of PV investment is typically 6-10% for private investors and 8-12% for business investors,&quot; he said.
EPIA hopes to see each member state&#039;s support policy converge within these ranges. Although higher support at an early stage could create demand, feed-in tariffs would then be progressively adapted to sustainable levels, El Gammal said.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:40:16 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Paper and board recovery rose in 2009, despite recession]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/35C-0A3-2FC</link>
         <description><![CDATA[Waste paper and board recovery rate continues to rise despite the recession.
The Confederation of Paper Industries preliminary data shows that last year the collection rate rose to 78% even though paper consumption in the UK diminished by 10% to a mere 11.5 million tonnes.
Because of limited domestic use, UK paper exports saw an increase of up to 90% that were using fibrous raw materials coming from recovered paper and board.
Recovered paper sector manager at CPI, Peter Seggie said that the fact that the new UK capacity is based 100% on recovered paper is “good news” for the industry.
He added: “The successful St Regis conversion of a machine to lightweight recycled packaging paper, the new Palm newsprint mill and the progress on the SAICA packaging mill all show that there is scope for a vibrant, modern paper industry in the UK where demand for paper products is much greater than that produced domestically.”
Further details on the 2009 performance of the paper industry will be available in March.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:35:19 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Defra continues to invest in waste research]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/EBC-F94-9AB</link>
         <description><![CDATA[The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has launched a new Evidence Investment Strategy and will continue to invest in evidence gathering for waste programmes.
Defra’s new EIS provides an agenda to prioritise and manage Defra’s investment in evidence from 2010 to 2013. It highlights the need to focus efforts on climate change and protecting ecosystems.
The strategy will ensure that Defra has access to the “best evidence” when developing policies including waste.
There are areas of Defra’s portfolio where it sees its future needs for evidence growing or shrinking but waste is an area which will see continued investment.
Defra currently spends under £5 million on research and development for waste. In contrast, it spends nearly £10m on R&amp;D for exotic diseases and more than £20m on farming for the future [Government farming programme].
The EIS report states that Defra can use evidence investment to foster innovation in a number of ways to deliver sustainability by encouraging technical innovations through co-operation with the Waste &amp; Resources Action Programme and others.
Defra also hope to increase co-operation and communication with its external partners to share its evidence investment, knowledge and expertise through promoting joint programming with delivery partners such as the Environment Agency on waste.
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said: “There has never been a time when there was a greater need for good quality evidence to contribute to policy making and sound decisions, yet this need comes in the midst of a global economic downturn, the speed and ferocity of which has taken us all by surprise.”
Defra chief scientific adviser Professor Bob Watson added: “It is absolutely essential that all the policies that we formulate are based on sound evidence.
“Defra recognises this and invests heavily in evidence, spending approximately £240m to evidence-related activities, including research, surveillance and scientific specialists in 2009 -10.”
The EIS will build on the progress made by Defra’s first evidence strategy – Evidence and Innovation 2005-2008 – by encouraging better use of evidence for policy making.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:33:21 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Defra acknowledges call to do more on C&amp;I waste]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/2D3-A10-97D</link>
         <description><![CDATA[Defra has recognised the call for the government to do more to tackle commercial and industrial waste following claims by MPs that it is too focused on domestic waste.
However, the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs has also highlighted the work that it is already doing in the field and stressed that reducing business waste could not be &quot;done overnight&quot;.
The government made the comments today in response to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee (Efracom) report on the Waste Strategy for England 2007, which was published on January 19.
The Committee criticised what it described as the perceived &quot;disproportionate focus&quot; on domestic waste, which makes up 9% of the UK&#039;s waste stream.
In response, the government pointed to the policy statement it published in October 2009 which identified the need for a greater degree of convergence between C&amp;I and household waste streams.
A Defra statement responding to the Committee said: &quot;We recognise that more needs to be done to tackle commercial and industrial waste and last October we set out our initial plans to do just this. Like household waste, reducing waste from businesses can&#039;t be done overnight - we want to see household, commercial and industrial waste of similar types being treated in the same way to save money and reduce waste to landfill.&quot;
It also stated that, in the meantime, producers of C&amp;I waste are still obligated to pay Landfill Tax and highlighted the work currently being done by the Waste &amp; Resources Action Programme to cut the amount of construction waste going to landfill by half by 2020.
Despite the critical nature of the report, Defra welcomed the majority of its findings and proposals, which included doing more work on tackling single-use carrier bags and introducing landfill bans for certain materials.
The spokeswoman said: &quot;We are grateful to the Committee for their work on this report. We are pleased that they recognise the progress we have made on a range of waste issues such as household recycling, single-use carrier bags, and proposals to ban some materials from landfill. The report contains some interesting proposals which we will examine in detail and respond to in full in due course.&quot;]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:46:40 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Novelis raises aluminium can price for third time this month]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/328-BA4-E51</link>
         <description><![CDATA[Novelis has increased the price it pays for aluminium cans by £100 per tonne on January 25, the third time it has raised the amount it offers for the material this month.
The price increase means that it will now pay councils, waste management companies and other collectors £800 a tonne for loose aluminium used beverage cans (UBCs) and £850 a tonne if the cans are baled or densified.
Outlining the reasons for the increase, Novelis&#039; UK recycling manager, Andy Doran explained that it illustrated the company&#039;s &quot;long term strategy to pay competitive prices for quality material.&quot;
&quot;It also shows our ongoing commitment to the UK market and close working relationship with suppliers,&quot; he said, adding that the increase was also intended to reflect price rises in the aluminium market as a whole.
The price increase would appear to add weight to claims made by the company - which is the UK&#039;s largest recycler of aluminium cans - that it aims to increase both the volume and percentage of cans it sources domestically this year.
Currently, Novelis buys the majority of its cans from mainland Europe, and Scandinavia in particular.
It also comes against the backdrop of the aluminium recycling sector preparing for expected higher packaging recycling targets for 2011 and beyond which would require more material to be recycled in the UK.
A consultation on packaging recycling targets for 2011 to 2020 is expected to be published in the next few months.
This latest price increase - which means the Warrington-based company has added £250 per tonne to the price it pays for cans since the start of the month - also brings the price back to the peak it reached in the summer of 2008, before markets for recyclables crashed.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:42:15 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[New guidance for local authorities to help improve health and safety in the waste and recycling sector]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/045-F23-D52</link>
         <description><![CDATA[The Health and Safety Executive has published new online guidance for local authorities to help them understand the importance of a “sensible approach” to health and safety when it comes to procuring and managing waste and recycling services, in a bid to help reduce death and injury.

Health and safety must be an integral part of the procurement and contract management processes for waste services, according to the HSE.

HSE chair Judith Hackitt said: “Waste and recycling is a sector which is experiencing considerable growth as we all strive to do more to respond to environmental challenges. This makes it doubly important that we take action to respond to the fact that the number of accidents in this sector continues to be high, despite recent improvements. One of the keys to further progress is getting the client or contractor relationships working well.

“The guidance will help local authorities understand the full extent of their role when managing waste and recycling contractors. HSE wants to see occupational health and safety become an integral but common sense part of the specification, procurement and management of waste and recycling contracts.”

The recycling industry has nine times more fatal accidents than the national average and four times as many workers suffer injuries.

The HSE identified that a contributing factor may be that some local authorities are unclear what their legal duties are and mistakenly believe that putting a service out to contract relieves them of all health and safety responsibilities.

Case studies of councils that are already “working well” with their service delivery partners in waste and recycling are also available online.

One such example is Wirral Borough Council which, working with waste firm Biffa Waste Services, has created a partnership approach to managing the borough’s waste and recycling services. The HSE state that the working relationship they have allows health and safety issues to be dealt with flexibly and efficiently. They have also built in checks to ensure the system is working correctly.

HSE will be running a series of regional events, from now until the end of February, giving local authority representatives the opportunity to hear more about the guidance, share experiences with others and seek advice on potential management solutions.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:07:51 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[No takers for pilot `pay-as-you-throw` waste schemes]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/9ED-978-420</link>
         <description><![CDATA[No councils have come forward to pilot “pay-as-you-throw” waste schemes, according to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

The controversial PAYT scheme, also known as the financial incentive scheme has been rejected by councils across the country.

The pilot would have seen up to five councils run PAYT schemes which reward householders who recycle the most and charge extra to those who leave the most rubbish out.

A Defra spokeswoman said: “If any local authorities wish to discuss financial incentives schemes with us or the Waste &amp; Resources Action Programme we are happy to do so.”

The powers in the Climate Change Act can still enable five local authorities to volunteer and take up the PAYT scheme.

Local authorities were asked to apply to the PAYT scheme in April 2009 but Defra has received no expressions of interest for the scheme.

Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee chair Joy Blizzard told MRW: “I suspect many would like to make sure that they have a comprehensive recycling scheme in place before taking it to the next level. For instance, if one is not collecting plastics they might want to get that in place before taking it to the next level.”

Borough of Poole Councillor Don Collier disagreed with Blizzard. He said: “It is a silly idea and I am not surprised nobody has picked it up because it will cause tension in the community as people are worried that their neighbours will steal their bin space and put rubbish in their bins.”

He also said that waste services were combined within council tax and “people expect it as a service”. He added: “Why would they want to pay again for this service?”

The Local Government Association said that it was unsurprising that no councils had come forward to take part in the pilots given that Defra had not published its rules for how they must operate.

Somerset Waste Partnership managing director Steve Read explained “My personal view is that it is a very political question. I think many local authorities are wary of the potential negative reaction towards the idea of introducing PAYT, which has been strongly pilloried by sections of the press.  Not surprisingly local authorities are reluctant to go down that route and draw attention that is unlikely to be constructive.

“There isn’t much incentive to go down this route if local authorities have a comprehensive recycling service that is already working with the aid of restrictions on bin size or frequency of collections. Fortnightly refuse collections usually drive around a 15 per cent improvement in recycling, similar to the results of PAYT schemes in the USA and elsewhere in Europe. I think it’s unlikely that you’d get an aggregate benefit by doing both.”

He added that local authorities tend to seek ways to work with the community and not take risks with penalty schemes that could be highly unpopular. He said that adding PAYT to schemes that already have fortnightly refuse collection “could be a bridge too far”.

“I have always thought that capacity restriction is socially equitable – you get broadly the same sized bin to use whatever your postcode or income. With PAYT, those who can afford to avoid recycling could buy themselves out of the trouble of doing so. That’s an interesting issue politically and economically as a contrast to how markets usually work. But it’s a situation most people seem to accept as fair.”]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:06:22 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[Aluminium sector braced for higher recycling targets]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/379-BC8-922</link>
         <description><![CDATA[The aluminium packaging sector has outlined plans to step up its away-from-home recycling campaign and encourage more councils to collect foil and aerosols in 2010, as it braces itself for potentially &quot;stiff&quot; new recycling targets for the material.
The comments came as the UK&#039;s largest recycler of aluminium packaging, Novelis increased the price it pays for aluminium cans for the second time in a week, from £600 a tonne to £700 a tonne for loose cans and from £650 a tonne to £750 a tonne for baled or densified cans.
And, Novelis also revealed plans to increase the percentage of aluminium used beverage cans (UBCs) it sources from the UK for reprocessing at its can recycling plant at Latchford in Cheshire.
A consultation on new packaging targets for the period 2011 to 2020 is expected in the next few months , and key figures in the sector told that they were expecting them to be &quot;significantly&quot; higher than the 40% the UK has to meet this year.
Diana Caldwell, marketing and communications manager for the aluminium sector&#039;s trade body Alupro, said the expectation was that the targets would &quot;quite stiff&quot;, but claimed that the organisation was &quot;preparing ourselves&quot; for the new goals.
In particular, she pointed towards Alupro&#039;s campaign&#039;s aiming to increase the number of councils collecting aerosols and foil and its away-from-home can recycling scheme, Every Can Counts, as proof of this.
Her sentiments were echoed by Andy Doran, UK recycling manager for Novelis, who told letsrecycle.com: &quot;I think the targets will be very challenging for the industry and we want to make sure the levels are right for full aluminium supply chain.&quot;
He noted that key points of concern for Novelis were &quot;who&#039;s paying for infrastructure, is the quality right and can we collect it&quot;.
&quot;As an operator that has invested heavily in can-to-can recycling, the targets going up is something we&#039;re factoring into our business plans,&quot; he added.
Concerns have already been raised by the government&#039;s Advisory Committee on Packaging that any increase in targets need to take into account the difficulties faced in recycling aluminium packaging other than cans, such as laminates.
And, Ms Caldwell stressed that other issues needed to be taken into consideration, including &quot;that it only arises in the domestic waste stream and has a high volume but low weight&quot;.
Price

January 11 saw Novelis increase the price it pays for aluminium cans by the second time in just seven days, with the £100 a tonne increase added to the £50 a tonne increase made onJanuary 4 to bring the price per tonne to £700 for loose cans and £750 for baled or densified.
One metal recycling expert said he believed the two price increases in quick succession reflected the fact that the company had failed to keep up with market prices with the first increase.
But, he also noted that the fact that large amounts of recycling had not been collected from the kerbside since Christmas due to the wintry weather conditions meant the chances of collectors being able to collect and sell cans to Novelis last week were reduced anyway.
Mr Doran explained that the price increase was a reaction to the sustained strong price for aluminium on the London Metal Exchange, adding &quot;we have a strong demand for high quality UK aluminium cans for our recycling plant&quot;.
He said it was the company&#039;s &quot;ambition&quot; to increase both the volume and percentage of material that it sources from the UK this year and cited the price increases as evidence of this.
With only 80,000 aluminium cans sold in the UK each year, and the Latchford plant&#039;s capacity at 130,000 tonnes-a-year, Novelis currently sources the majority of cans for the facility from mainland Europe.
Mr Doran said that Novelis was willing to talk to any potential supplier, but noted that the company was not in the market for lower quality material, explaining that &quot;heavily commingled material will always be a challenge for us&quot;.
Novelis ran the Latchford works at full capacity last year and anticipates the same situation this year, and Mr Doran revealed that it had been implementing a &quot;lean manufacturing programme&quot;, to increase the output capacity of the plant by increasing its efficiency.
Away-from-home
In terms of Alupro&#039;s &#039;Every Can Counts&#039; initiative to capture away-from-home aluminium and steel cans, which was unveiled in October 2008 (see letsrecycle.com story), Ms Caldwell claimed that &quot;the model does seem to be working quite well&quot;.
In particular, she said that &quot;a couple of other high street names&quot;, which she could not name, were signing up to the scheme, following in the footsteps of ASDA who began a trial in back-of-store areas in July 2009 and have since rolled it out nationwide.
She also highlighted the campaign&#039;s first move into on-the-go can recycling, where six can crushers were installed on Bournemouth beach.
&quot;We weren&#039;t expecting to roll it out into public areas so early, but we did Bournemouth,&quot; Ms Caldwell explained, noting that there had been no vandalism to the crushers, and that there were now plans to launch further trials outdoors over the next 12 months, with a couple of South Wales beaches &quot;in our sights&quot;.
And, she added that they were also in talks with the operators of shopping centres and looking at how the campaign could work at music festivals and other outdoor events.
Ms Caldwell said that the campaign has an initial budget of £500,000 for the first two years of its operations, adding that one partner, the Beverage Can Makers Europe, had signed up to support the initiative for a further 12 months.
Aerosols and foil
In terms of the initiative Alupro launched in September 2009 to increase local authority collection of clean foil and empty aerosols , Ms Caldwell said it had been in touch with most of the councils that were &quot;in its sights&quot;, with meetings held since last October including a group of local authorities in West Sussex.
&quot;People have been very enthusiastic&quot;, she explained, adding that the feeling from the partners involved in the initiative was that none of the issues highlighted as potential barriers were &quot;insurmountable&quot;.
In particular, she cited research published by the Waste and Resources Action Programme in October 2009, which she said showed adding the materials to collections &quot;wasn&#039;t a very costly exercise&quot; .
Benefits
The benefits of collecting aluminium cans, foil and aerosols were highlighted by Mike Trim, head of cleansing services at Exeter city council, who pointed towards both the value of the material and the importance of improving the public&#039;s perception of a recycling service by collecting as many materials as possible.
&quot;It only makes a 5% difference on the recycling rate but it&#039;s been fetching up to £1,000 a tonne,&quot; he explained, noting that, even with the current value at around £600 a tonne, an income of around £45,000 meant it was &quot;worth it just for that&quot; because &quot;that would pay for three members of staff on a picking line&quot;, with the £45 per tonne for a recycling credit adding to that.
And, in terms of the public perception, he said: &quot;it&#039;s the perception the public has that they can recycle everything in Exeter, it encourages people to recycle more.&quot;]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:08:25 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	  	  <item>
		 <title><![CDATA[EA “strengthens knowledge” on compost-like outputs]]></title>
         <link>http://www.wastexchange.co.uk/detailNews.phpsc?doc=/GARWER/DOCS/news/4E9-E46-B09</link>
         <description><![CDATA[The Environment Agency has published research which it plans to use to help draw up policies for regulating the use of the compost-like outputs produced during mechanical biological treatment (MBT).
The regulator has issued two studies looking at the quality of input and output material in MBT plants and the human health risk posed by the compost-like outputs (CLOs) they produce, which have traditionally had a narrow avenue of use due to the presence of contaminants such as plastic and metals.
As a result, the outputs, which are a by-product of both the MBT and mechanical treatment technology (MHT), cannot be used in agricultural applications and are instead restricted to being sent to landfill or used in land restoration and biofuel crop growing.
In the two studies the Environment Agency found that there was considerable variability between the composition of CLOs - both from plant to plant and in the same facility over time.
It also found that the use of CLOs on land could pose an environmental risk, and, as such, called for sites where the products were going to be used to be assessed to establish how contaminated they were both
Outlining the purpose of the research, the Agency said that, with uptake in MBT and MHT increasing, the volume of CLOs produced is also set to increase.
It said that the research &quot;continues to strengthen the Environment Agency&#039;s knowledge of MBT processing and the quality and safety of CLOs. It will use the findings of this study to begin to draw up policies on the regulation of CLOs and a framework for compliance monitoring&quot;.
Studies
In the two studies the Environment Agency took CLO samples &quot;regularly&quot; from four MBT/MHT plants over a five-month period.
This was with a view to answering questions raised in a 2008 screening report relating to the concentration of chemicals in CLOs and improving the accuracy of time limits for workers to be exposed to the material.
Research into the input and output quality of CLOs was said to have made it possible for more reliable ‘limit values&#039; to be calculated for direct toxicity and secondary poisoning caused by several chemical present in CLOs, which arise from the plastics in the municipal waste treated by the MBT.
It also claimed the closer a CLO was to natural soil, in terms of its carbon-nitrogen ration, the better it would be at increasing grass growth, and it also found that the capacity for CLOs to act as a fertiliser varied significantly between different treatment plants.
The study found that there was &quot;great variability&quot; between MBTs in the composition of CLOs produced, and also a variance in the quality of CLOs within a single plant over time.
Human health
Work on the human health risk posed by CLOs was said to be hampered by &quot;ambient background concentrations of chemicals&quot; - meaning the amount of metals or pollutants already in the soil that the CLOs were being applied to.
Despite the uncertainty, the research states that the use of CLOs on land may pose an environmental risk and called for individual sites intended for CLO use to receive assessments to establish existing levels of contaminants before and after their use.
Consultation
The Environment Agency is currently attempting to perform large-scale trials to assess the impact of using CLOs on agricultural land, with the intention of issuing bespoke waste management licences to participants .
A consultation seeking to determine the best practice for the trials is open to interested parties until January 22 2010.]]></description>
         		 		 <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:01:00 +0100</pubDate>      		  </item>
	     </channel>
</rss>
