Green Dreams

The environment is rarely out of the news.

Whether it's global warming, climate change, rising sea levels, disappearing polar ice caps, recycling, freak weather, renewable energy, GM food, save the whale, pay-as-you-throw, air travel, gas guzzlers...

But what is the real truth behind the green headlines? And what can you do to really make a difference?

Eco-expert Rob Holdway sorts the fact from the fiction...

Up in smoke – why burning our waste may be the only short term option...

'PAIN' and Riots

Incineration or more appropriately recovering energy from waste (efw) is an emotive subject. The announcement that an incinerator is being built is probably the only time you get middle class worthies in Guildford nearly rioting. A similar announcement galvanised the people of Rainworth to have formed the People Against INcineration group or PAIN for short to fight the new proposed incinerator.

Pissing outside the tent

Like it or not incineration as a method of waste management is here to stay. The Energy from Waste Association states that by 2010 around 15 new plants will be needed to meet Government targets. In contrast, groups e.g. Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace argue there is no place for incineration as it’s a polluting process and a waste of valuable materials that can be recycled or reused.

I respect the work of both these organisations but this is the typical eco warrior approach. It’s like saying; 'I wouldn’t start from here if I was you'. The point is we can’t be somewhere else.

It is better to be working with the practicalities of the existing system – 'pissing inside the tent outwards' rather than 'outside pissing in'. The latter isn't really helpful. Landfill space is running out fast. Incineration provides a substantial reduction in the total volume of waste requiring disposal in landfill. The cost of landfill is increasing which, although driving increased recycling rates, isn't having enough of an effect on the amount of waste we generate. This is growing at around 2% each year. This means we have to look at other options... like energy from waste.

New EU Directives on toxic emissions from incineration plants means the old negative arguments are now redundant. Incineration is a well-established process which is best employed when linked to local heat or power users. Four new recycling and reprocessing plants will be developed in London to turn waste into renewable energy as part of the Mayor's Waste Strategy. The London development Agency claims energy from waste and biomass is a viable option to help the targets of reducing London’s carbon emissions by 60% by 2025. If all of London's waste that can't be recycled and currently goes to landfill were used to generate energy, it could generate enough electricity for up to two million homes and heat for up to 625,000 homes. Hospitals incinerate their waste for obvious reasons which reduces heating costs. As the UK Government seeks to wriggle out of its target of generating 10% of Britain's electricity from renewable sources by 2010, it's no surprise that 'less popular' alternatives are being progressed.

Recycling vs Incineration

It's patently obvious that recycling is a better option than incineration. However, modern waste to energy facilities burn municipal solid waste then use resulting heat energy to generate steam and electricity. Municipal solid waste (MSW) generates 2.8KWh per Kg, whereas mixed plastic generate 8.26KWh/Kg. The higher calorific value generates more energy. Therefore, if this material is otherwise going to landfill then surely incineration is the only option.

Plastics e.g. PVC are currently not collected or recycled in UK curbside collection schemes. PVC is 58% fossil fuel, 42% chlorine. This and other plastic e.g. polystyrene and polyolefin's have a calorific value (around 46MJ/Kg) similar to that of naptha – a by-product of manufacturing fuel. (1MJ is enough energy to power a 40watt bulb for 7 hours). So the embodied energy in this material provides a good opportunity to use this as a resource rather than simply consigning it to a hole in the ground.

Let the bugs eat our waste

There are other options which will become available in the future. The best of these is anaerobic digestion (AD) of our food waste. This is a process in which microorganisms break down biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen. Currently, much of our biodegradable waste e.g. food, garden waste, card and paper is sent to landfill, where it breaks down to release methane, a powerful greenhouse gas. AD is a treatment that composts this waste, producing a biogas that can be used to generate electricity and heat.

100% renewable energy from our biodegradable waste helps tackle climate change, instead of contributing to climate change through landfilling and incineration. As well as biogas it produces a solid and liquid residue called digestate which can be used as a soil conditioner to fertilise land. The Government recognises that AD has significant potential to contribute to our climate change and wider environmental objectives (see: www.defra.gov.uk). It can help us to meet three of the UK's needs at the same time by:

1) producing more renewable energy as biogas for biomass heat and/or power or for transport fuel;
2) helping to mitigate methane emissions from agriculture; and 3) helping to divert other kinds of organic waste, especially food waste, from landfill or incineration.

50%

Around half of our household waste is organic in nature – i.e. garden, kitchen, paper and cardboard. The infrastructure for collecting household putrifiable waste for AD doesn't exist. The former Environment minister David Miliband advocated a separate bin (the Milibin) in each home where this waste could be segregated and collected. This is a long way off. One alternative is to home compost. As long as the compost can breathe it will not produce methane.

Choices

It's a simple choice. The starting point is to reduce the amount of waste we generate in the first place. This is a priority. However, unless we spend a significant amount on the UK’s recycling infrastructure – estimated at £2bn - then we have to consider incineration as a viable option.

For the people in Rainworth, Guildford and elsewhere, I can’t help wondering whether these same individuals are impassioned about the influence their own lifestyles have on generating this waste. Harsh maybe? But this is the basic point – when the impact of our consumption is brought into our back yard we react. Yet, as the broader impact of global warming is so remote its hard for us to feel the same passion and change our lifestyles.

Next: Ban the people saying 'ban the bag'.

Post your comments >