Disposing of North London's waste

KEY MESSAGES FOR STUFF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF

Sell or give away
Put out in Recycling or take to Resource and Recycle Centre
Collect the same material together (and clean) for best recycling
Recycling is best, turning it into something else
Anaerobic digestion is best for food and garden waste
Landfill is bad for untreated food waste
Incineration is the last resort for true waste

North London discarded 1,796,000 tonnes of household and commercial/industrial waste in 2021, including 190,000 tonnes from Haringey, according to the London Plan (p386). The ‘arisings’ collected by the Local Authorities, including some trade waste is collected as a) recyclables, b) food waste or c) ‘residual waste’ ie black bag and the onward journeys for these streams is covered below.

Haringey, together with Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Hackney, Islington and Waltham Forest owns the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) and has contracted the disposal stages to the NLWA. Haringey does not include the climate change consequences of waste in the Haringey Climate Change Action Plan (other than the council’s own waste).

The cabinet members in Haringey who sit on the board of the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) are Cllr Isidoros Diakides at isidoros.diakides@haringey.gov.uk and Cllr Mike Hakata at mike.hakata@haringey.gov.uk

Recycling

Each Borough contracts individually for the collection of refuse from kerbsides, estates, recycling centres plus there are private contracts for commercial and industrial waste. For instance, in North London, Veolia has contracts with Camden and Haringey to collect household waste. The NLWA budget report shows that there is a variety of contracts across the North London Boroughs for different waste and recycling streams. The collection company takes what it has collected to either Biffa Edmonton, London Energy at Edmonton Eco park or elsewhere depending on whether it was collected as recycling, ‘residual waste’ (black bag), food waste or garden waste.

Video of Biffa’s Materials Recycling facilities (MRF)

From truck to recycling - click

The NLWA web site details the different item types collected in North London, and their destinations, including the names of the companies processing the recyclables.

Glass

is processed in the UK and abroad…. sorted in Materials Recovery Facilities (MRF) in London. Glass is separated from other recyclable materials and sent to facilities in the UK and Europe (Hertfordshire, Essex, Pontefract, Brentford, Derbyshire, South Yorkshire and abroad in Belgium and Portugal) where the glass is processed into glass cullet, or pellets. The final product is either used for bottle manufacturing or for aggregate in road construction. See NLWA – GLASS

Metal tins and cans

are separated from the other recycling in the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and sorted into steel and aluminium. This is then sent onto UK markets (Derby, South Yorkshire, Neath, West Glamorgan and Essex) for onward recycling. The metal can be converted back into new metal products. See NLWA – CANS & TINS

Plastics

are separated from your other recyclables at a facility in London and sorted into the different plastic types, including plastic bottles and mixed plastics, such as pots and trays. Plastic bottles are then sent onto facilities in the UK for remanufacturing – they are washed and chipped to create plastic pellets which can be remade into new plastic bottles. The other mixed plastics are sent to specialised sorting facilities within the UK for further separation by polymer type, prior to being sent on for reprocessing into new products. See NLWA- PLASTIC BOTTLES, POTS, TUBS & TRAYS

Paper

collected from north London households and the reuse and recycling centres are processed in the UK and abroad. The material is sorted at Materials Recovery Facilities (MRF) in London and sent to mills for reprocessing both in Kent, Flintshire, Hertfordshire and abroad (Germany and France). It is recycled into new paper and card. See NLWA – PAPER

Card

collected from north London households and the reuse and recycling centres are processed abroad.The material is sorted at Materials Recovery Facilities (MRF) in London and sent to mills for reprocessing in Germany, Taiwan and Turkey. It is recycled into new card. See NLWA – CARD

The horrors of exporting ‘recycling’

For plastic, according to The Guardian, the UK exported 688,000 tonnes of discarded plastic packaging in 2020, with just 486,000 tonnes recycled in the UK. “The Turkish government has imposed a crackdown on plastic waste imports, announcing a ban on imports of many types of plastic waste from January. UK trade data, however, suggests the move has had little impact. The country sent more plastic waste to Turkey in January 2021 than it did in the same month last year“, although the NLWA says that no North London plastic is sent abroad.

For paper, the NLWA’s site says that North London paper is only exported to Germany and France although Biffa was fined £1.5m for “sending more than 1,000 tonnes of household waste to India and Indonesia, in breach of a ban on sending such waste to developing countries”. The putrid waste was “packaged as waste paper for export to Asia in Biffa’s recycling facility in Edmonton, north London, between 2018 and 2019.” As reported by The Guardian in July 2021.

The incident raised the issue of the level of contamination remaining in bales of paper sorted from collected recycling. Lets Recycle quoted a waste professional who pointed out that the material was being sent to a mill that would handle ‘the outthrow’ as normal. The Environment agency has been asked to “develop a standard that both the regulator and the producer works to” so that recyclable material is not overly contaminated.

In other words, although it is not made clear in promotional videos, when the recyclables are baled at the end of the process they are expected to have a percentage of contamination and the Environment Agency is tasked with ensuring it is ‘acceptable’.

Changes that will affect the waste collected

Consistency in Recycling legislation is being passed proposing that, unless exemptions have been obtained, all local authorities must move from ‘co-mingling’ dry recyclables to separate collections of •glass, •metal, •plastic, •paper and card. Producers will be subject to an ‘Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme and have to pay for producing excessive packaging, which will be given to waste authorities.

Foil, foil trays, metal aerosols cans, metal jar lids and aluminum tubes will be put in the metal stream (with householders told to put heavily soiled items in residuals and advised how to empty aerosols safely).

Plastic film and flexible packaging will be in the plastic stream, and later in a new dedicated stream.

Food and Drinks Containers will be subject to a Deposit Return Scheme (DRS) and will returned to dedicated locations for refunds, rather than put out for collection.

Cartons will be collected in the card stream rather than the plastic stream.

These changes were due to start in 2023, but Green Alliance reports (p13) that the Environment Bill is delayed until the next session of Parliament and the Deposit Return Scheme for bottles and cans is delayed until 2024.

KEY RECYCLING MESSAGE. Once the regulatory changes come into law the volume of recycling will increase significantly, so the volume going to incineration will decrease significantly.

Landfill

The horrors of landfill

Abandoned Toxic Waste – The site above is at the Goshems Farm former landfill site in East Tilbury and was in use for 50 years before tipping stopped in the 1980s. The Metro Nov 2019 says “toxic waste – which is now prohibited from being put in landfill – is buried in the soil and is leaking into the river.”

Currently there more than 21,000 old landfills scattered across England and Wales according to a Jan 21 Ends Report covered by the Guardian. “Old dumps can contain substances now banned or restricted such as asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), PFOA and PFOS, all of which are extremely toxic to human health and the environment.” …. ”About 746 toxic dumps are located within 500 metres of water bodies, 13 are beneath golf courses and four below school grounds” (of the ones where the contents are known).

Defra’s Environment Agency is responsible for regulating current Landfill, but Local authorities don’t have the funds to clean up toxic sites, and increasingly residents are resorting to the courts to get action. For example Mathew Richards (aged 5) lives approximately 400m away from a landfill that emits hydrogen sulphide (H2S) that is shortening his life. His mother won a High Court Case with a ruling that the Environment Agency must do more to protect him, and local residents, from the landfill fumes.

Emissions from Landfill - click
Methane

Recycle explains that “methane is developed due to the anaerobic decomposition – lack of oxygen – that takes place in a landfill. Whereas a compost pile decomposes aerobically – with oxygen – producing mainly CO2.” The author “has reason to believe that the collection efficiency of Methane CH4 derived from food waste is quite a bit worse than 60 – 90%” and that much of the methane escapes before collection is put in place.

Methane volume is multiplied by 25 to be stated in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂eq) in calculations of the Greenhouse Gases that are causing global warming. eg “Landfill emitted 90% of the 23 million tonnes of Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂eq) – about 4% of UK emissions in 2007″, according to the Government’s Energy from Waste “ (p24). The Guardian reported in Sept 21 that the UN are saying that “cutting methane is the fastest and most effective way to reduce the rate of global temperature increase and keep within the 1.5C goal.”

Putting ‘biogenic’ waste (eg food, paper, card, garden waste and wood) into landfill results in the release of methane (Defra’s Energy from Waste p20/24). Despite some sites capturing considerable methane (to feed into the gas grid) there was “a record rise in emissions of methane last year, according to the UN, coming mainly from the fossil fuel industry, cattle and rotting waste.”

Carbon dioxide (CO₂)
- fossil fuel content, eg plastic. Energy from Waste (p14) says that for fossil based residual wastes, e.g. plastics that cannot be recycled “conventional energy from waste [incineration] will almost always deliver a negative carbon balance compared to landfill”. This is because plastic in landfill sequesters its CO₂, whereas it emits its CO₂ from incineration.
- biogenic content eg food, paper, card in landfill also sequesters some CO₂, whereas it emits CO₂from incineration.
The UKWin Incinerator GHG guide emphasises that the CO2 in plastic is far better landfilled than incinerated. It explains that the CO2 in paper and card material can also be better landfilled than incinerated.

It is the escape of Methane from paper, card and especially food and garden waste that needs to be minimised.

Green House Gas emissions – landfill v incineration

However the sequestered CO₂ into landfill and the emitted CO₂from biogenic incineration are usually removed from comparisons of landfill versus incineration, leading to policy decisions that increase GreenHouse Gas emissions.

Landfill policy

Defra’s Environment Agency is responsible for regulating landfill, as per 2020 guidance for disposing waste to landfill. Defra’s Energy from Waste Guide p23 shows the waste hierarchy and energy from waste and landfill are the disposal options that require careful comparison to choose the lower GreenHouse Gas decision.

The Government policy is to move away from landfill towards incineration by taxing landfill at £96.70 per tonne deposited and even exempting electricity from incineration from the UK Emissions Trading Scheme tax.

The NLWA position is that “Landfill is extremely damaging for the environment and the worst option for dealing with non-recyclable waste.” The NLWA admits that it does send some North London waste to landfill – 8% to Ockenden in 2018/19 and 5% to Bletchley in 2019/20, though it is not clear under what circumstances. And the NLWA Budget and Levy 20/21 report records that its budget for landfill is due to rise from £1,438K for 20/21 to £1,675K by 2024/25.

London Energy, that is contracted to manage incineration for NLWA, has a vision to see no waste from London Energy sites sent to landfill.

These policies are based on calculations that ignore CO2 emissions from incinerating biogenics and the CO2 sequestration from landfilling plastic and biogenics.

Less bad landfill?

Minimising emissions, maximising sequestraton from landfill - click

Methane

Some methane is typically captured for mains gas replacement. Pic from Infinis.

A large proportion of captured landfill gas is used to generate energy – offsetting power station emissions. Defra’s Energy from Waste Guide P26 warns that “Crucially however, some of the methane would escape into the atmosphere. As a very potent greenhouse gas even a relatively small amount of methane can have dramatic effect and be equivalent to a much larger amount of carbon dioxide.“

Rotting matter can be ‘bio-stabilised’ before landfill to prevent methane escape. UKWin’s 2021 Incineration Guide (p78) quotes a European Waste Model document: “The central aim of aerobic stabilisation processes is to produce an output which has a reduced biodegradability, thereby decreasing the environmental impacts associated with landfilling this material.” It also quotes the Zero Waste Europe report that a Mechanical Recovery and Biological Treatment system “allows us to ‘stabilise’ the organics that are included in residual waste, so as to minimise their impact once buried in a landfill“… “and factoring the GHG savings from aerobic degradation, prior to landfilling, of biodegradable materials included in waste..“

Eunomia’s report recommends a “a differential rate of Landfill Tax for ‘biostabilised’ wastes [which] would: Lower the overall environmental impacts of landfill, and waste management more generally, in the UK, particularly with regard to climate change.”

Carbon Dioxide

Although Eunomia’s report Greenhouse Gas and Air Quality Impacts of Incineration and Landfill March 2021 concludes that energy from waste “provides significant carbon benefits over landfill, which sits at the bottom of the waste hierarchy”, again this is perpetuating the flawed assumption leading to the emissions from biogenics being disregarded in it’s carbon analyses. “high biogenic content makes energy from waste inherently better and landfill inherently worse“.

Electricity

The Eunomia conclusion is also based on an another common assumption that the UK will not decarbonise the grid in the foreseeable future “and because the electricity generated from treating residual waste avoids the need for electricity to be produced elsewhere on the grid – some of which will be from fossil fuel sources, such as natural gas.”

Because Eunomia removed the figures for sequestration of carbon from biogenics and plastic in landfill, and for emission of carbon from plastic during incineration, as well as assuming that the UK will not reduce the carbon intensity of the grid, the conclusion that incineration “provides significant carbon benefits over landfill, which sits at the bottom of the waste hierarchy” cannot be accepted as correct.

KEY LANDFILL MESSAGES. Old, abandoned landfill sites are an environmental disaster. Current sites that allow methane escape are damaging the planet. Landfill that sequesters CO2 and prevents escape of methane could be the less bad option for some of our waste.

Anaerobic digestion

From truck to Anaerobic Digestion and Composting - click

Anaerobic Digestion

Food waste – according to NLWA “Food waste is sent to two Anaerobic Digestion facilities in Hertfordshire. Anaerobic Digestion is a process that uses bacteria to break down the food waste in specialised containers called silos. Gases that are produced through this process are captured and then burnt to produce electricity. The process also creates a nutrient-rich liquid fertilizer that is used on local farms.”

In Vessel Composting

Green garden waste – according to the NLWA “is delivered to In Vessel Composting sites in Cambridgeshire and London. The in vessel composting process involves different stages. First, the waste is enclosed and begins to decompose. Following that, the decomposing material is moved to a process called open windrow composting. This process involves the material being piled in the open air in rows, where it is occasionally turned, to allow heat and moisture to mix through and decompose it to compost. The compost is then collected for use at local farms and horticultural settings”

Mixed food and green garden waste – according to the NLWA “is delivered to In Vessel Composting sites in Cambridgeshire and London. The compost is then collected for use at local farms and horticultural settings.”

Open Windrow Composting

Green garden waste – according to the NLWA is also sent to a number of facilities in South East England where it is turned into compost through open windrow composting. This process involves garden waste material being piled in the open air in rows, where it is occasionally turned, to allow heat and moisture to mix through and decompose it to compost. The compost is then collected for use at local farms and horticultural settings.

Changes that will affect the food and garden waste collected

Consistency in Recycling legislation is being passed proposing that, unless exemptions have been obtained, all local authorities must collect food waste weekly with (free) caddy liners and collect garden waste with more limited charges to residents.

The collected food and garden waste must be sent for anaerobic digestion or composting.

KEY ANAEROBIC MESSAGE. Once the regulatory changes come into law the volume of food and garden waste collected and sent to Anaerobic digestion will increase significantly – so the volume going to incineration will decrease significantly.

Incineration

From refuse truck to incineration - click

Everything that is left as ‘black bag’ is sent to the Edmonton incinerator, as well as contaminated ‘recycling’, litter, road sweepings and Commercial and Industrial waste.

Plastic that could have been recycled has a high fossil fuel content and is used to generate electricity. Biogenic matter, including food waste – such as from flats that have not asked for food collection, is also burned. The claims that incineration is ‘green’ ignore these carbon emissions and is the main cause of conflict with those who show that it is not green.

The horrors of incineration

The Plume Plotter illustrates the reach of emissions from the current Edmonton incinerator, depending on the wind direction. It lists the level of the pollutants and particulates coming from Edmonton per day, with figures at ‘DETAILS’.

Health affects due to emissions from incineration - click
Defra’s Environment Agency is responsible for regulating pollutants, continuing the EU’s Large Combustion Plants Best Available technologies (BAT) regulations. Part 2 of Annex V . This has emission limit values in mg/Nm3:
- Sulpher Dioxide SO2 (150 to 200mg/Nm3)
- Oxides of Nitrogen NOx for combustion plants using solid or liquid fuels (150-250 mg/Nm3)
- dust for combustion plants using solid or liquid fuels (20 mg/Nm3)
- Note: Carbon Monoxide ie CO only seems to be regulated for Gas Fired plants.
These are interpreted for the UK in Defra’s Energy from waste A guide to the debate Feb 2014 which lists (p56) the mandatory emission levels and monitoring requirements, some at intervals and some continuously for:
• total particulate matter (TPM)
• sulphur dioxide (SO2)
• oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
• hydrogen chloride (HCl)
• carbon monoxide (CO)
• total organic carbon (TOC)
• hydrogen fluoride (HF)
• heavy metals
• dioxins
• furans

“Additionally, the EA can require operators to measure ammonia and nitrous oxide continuously and to measure dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), and particulate matter, i.e. PM10 and PM2.5. Operators must also measure other parameters, such as the concentration of oxygen, and furnace temperature.”

Crucially the Environment Agency does not require measurements of Ultra Fine Particles.

The Guardian reported that “One of the most harmful pollutants is tiny particulate matter, smaller than 2.5 microns in size (PM2.5), which can pass through the lungs into the bloodstream and affect other organs.” In Sept 2021 the World Health Organisation (WHO) has halved the annual average exposure limit for PM2.5 from 10 to 5 micrograms per cubic metre (µg/m3). “The WHO classified these particles as cancer-causing in 2013” and for NO₂cut the annual average limit from 40 to 10 µg/m3.

There are many studies that look into the particles and pollutants that come out of incinerators and the efficiency of the latest measures to minimize them.

A recent All Party Parliamentary Group panel discussion on health and air quality impacts of pollution from waste incinerators, with the video available here It included a talk from Professor Vyvyan Howard from the University of Ulster, a professor of bioimaging in the Centre for Molecular Biosciences who stressed the lack of research of the nature and effect of Ultrafine Particles and the indicative evidence linking proximity to incinerators to bad health (including Covid mobiity).

Dr Dominic Hogg also spoke about the progression of regulation and tax incentives, which have lagged behind knowledge.

Disproportionate effect on poorer people and ethnic minorities - click

The Enfield Commission Report 2020 exposed the poverty and inequality around the Edmonton incinerator area, covering high unemployment, low qualifications and low life expectancy. The Enfield Dispatch revealed that Edmonton’s ethnic make-up is around 60% black, brown, or other racial or ethnic group in Why a new incinerator will worsen race equality. This built on research by Unearthed for Greenpeace that incinerators are three times more likely to be built in deprived areas.

Delia Mattis of Black Lives Matter and Stop the Burn is a leading figure in opposing the Edmonton incinerator, and can be heard at 22.08mins of the NLWA 2021 AGM meeting pointing out the very sparse, out of date consultation and lack of consultation of the black and brown communities around Edmonton.

GreenHouse Gas emissions from incineration - click

The UKWin 2021 Incinerator GHG guide emphasises that CO2 from both plastic and biogenics is emitted during incineration, so ignoring it gives a false basis for claiming a low carbon disposal solution, and goes against IPCC advice.

Actual emission data has been collected by UKWIN in the 2021 Incinerator GHG Guide and the bar chart here shows how high actual incineration emissions are compared with emissions from low carbon sources of electricity.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)

The Committee on Climate Change (CCC) has recommended, in the Sector Summary for Waste (p26) that, as a last resort, emissions from incinerators should be captured with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) with Defra due to issue a plan by Spring 2022.

Catapult Energy Systems studies CCS at Energy from Waste Plants with Carbon Capture May 2020 and recommends much more research, which would delay any implementation. Zero Waste Europe analyses the effect and likelihood of CCS for incinerators here, calling them ‘an expensive distraction to a circular economy.”

NLWA’s report on CCS shows that CCS would only be introduced well after the new incinerator was built if the Government paid for the expensive infrastructure they would be heavily on Government subsidies – or this would be at great cost to North London council tax payers. Therefore relying on CCS to reduce the emissions from incineration seem speculative.

Carbon Intensity Floor (CIF) targets and policies

Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance Standard for London’s Local Authority Collected Waste prepared by Eunomia for the GLA In 2017 analysed London’s incinerators at that time and said that the performance was around 700 g CO2 eq/kWh electricity, based on the composition and energy performance data at that time.

The Carbon Intensity Floor (CIF) target set by the Mayor of London (p314) is for 400g CO2e/kwh for electricity generated by incinerators, with the intention to set a tighter standard of 300g CO2e/kwh by 2030, effectively ruling out “the use of traditional mass burn incineration techniques generating electricity only.”

Eunomia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance Standard for London’s Local Authority Collected Waste – 2015/16 Update justify the proposed Edmonton incinerator with “By way of examples: the proposed new energy recovery facility in Edmonton will be of a higher generation efficiency than the facility it will replace, and documents submitted to the Planning Inspectorate suggest that it is intended that its performance is in line with the existing CIF target.”

Plans to replace North London's current incinerator - click

The current Edmonton incinerator is due to come to the end of life by 2027, very close to the 2030 UK targets to avoid the worst of climate change. Because the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) is owned by the residents of 7 Boroughs there is the opportunity to review the likely waste up to and beyond 2027 and ensure that it is dealt with in the best way for the planet and for local communities.

The assumptions underpinning the plans for the site, particularly building a new incinerator are hotly disputed by campaign groups and hotly defended by representatives of the NLWA and the North London Heat and Power Project (NLHPP) who state their views here.

Campaigners against these plans for the site have been lobbying the NLWA board members to reassess and update the plans in the light of recent changes. This includes briefing papers published in July 2021 on Emissions, Capacity and Cost and Ownership

Since then Defra has confirmed that it is recalculating the predictions of residual waste available for incineration, which will then affect the GLA capacity figures for the North London boroughs. And the World Health Organisation has issued new, lower limits for pollutants “The stringent new limits reflect the large body of evidence produced in recent years of the deadly harm caused to people by much lower levels of pollution than previously thought.”

The strength of feeling from North London residents who oppose the plans for the replacement incinerator were expressed on 25th Sept 2021 with a mass demonstration.

reported by local papers, such as the Ham and High.

Value for money - click

The basis for the costs of the incinerator are for the NLWA levy per Borough to include repayments of the £600m for construction (since increased). They are based on plans prior to approval in 2017. The plans assumed that there will be no regulatory tax changes, with the exemption remaining from the Emissions Trading Scheme tax for electricity generated and no reduction of landfill tax for material that has been biostabilised, as proposed by Defra in 2011.

The National Infrastructure Commission says that “the UK could save £6.2 billion by 2050 and avoid the need to build 20 new incinerators by achieving higher recycling rates.” But the NIC is an Executive Agency of HM Treasury, and is not allowed to address issues already in the pipeline eg overcapacity of incinerators. Their framework agreement says that “when making recommendations, the NIC should take account of the role of economic regulators in regulating infrastructure providers and the government’s legal obligations (e.g. carbon reduction targets or assessments of environmental impacts)” but it is not clear how the NIC works with the Government Departments affected.

Value of Jobs

Defra’s Impact Assessment for the Deposit Return Scheme p17 have considered the value of job creation. Studies have shown that the introduction of a DRS could increase the number of jobs available by between 3,000 and 4,300. These jobs would all be part of a Green Recovery from the current pandemic.

UKWIN’s Recommendations for a Value for Money (VfM) May 2020 review of the NLWA’s Edmonton incinerator replacement project’ points out the changes since the plans were approved in 2017. Even with no adoption of technology to take reclables out of black bags, and the assumption that the Governments waste measures will not happen, the waste volumes across North London are insufficient for the capacity of the planned incinerator.

It has 10 recommendations and the final one is that “The wider benefits of moving away from incineration and towards a low-carbon circular zero waste economy; the indirect costs and burdens of incineration; and the need for any review to be credible in the eyes of the community.”

Less bad incineration?

Single Stream collected recyclables are best, but Post Separation Recovery technology can retrieve most of the recyclables that would otherwise go to waste. In the Attero facility in de Wijster an estimated 57% of Plastic, Metal, Drinks cartons are recovered.

The Environmental Services Association (ESA), the trade body representing the UK’s resource and waste management industry, made a commitment to a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions strategy for the UK recycling and waste sector by 2040 as part of its members £10bn recycling investments, according to Protos.

Currently there are many facilities already in use to separate out recyclables from waste, such as de Wijster in Holland, with more advanced plastic waste recycling plants being built, such as the Peel NRE at Ellesmere Port, which will use smart chain recovery to remove the need for incineration or landfill. Recyclables in North London black bags could be retrieved and sent by water to Ellesmere Port rendering a new incinerator an expensive white elephant.

Focus on low emissions and today's best practice - click
A less bad incinerator would be:

No incinerator in an area populated by deprived residents.

Minimum incineration elsewhere, and only in unpopulated areas and with low carbon transport to get there.

Built in flexibility to avoid ‘feeding the beast’. No feedstock to be bought in from elsewhere

Carbon Capture (CCS) to stop warming the planet

Air quality measures that send NO pollutants out to local residents

And this would only be after all the higher stages of the waste hierarchy had been implemented.

Since the Edmonton incinerator was approved many of the assumptions that were embedded in the analysis and plans have become out of date. In particular:

The Government has progressed the election promises to deliver a circular economy. Although delayed the volume of plastic, cans, paper, cardboard, food and garden waste being recycled will be dramatically increased, dramatically reducing ‘residual’ waste to be incinerated.

Planned over capacity of incineration across London, the South East and the UK will reduce the option of ‘buying in waste’ to feed the incinerator – mapped by UKWin.

The Government set a climate change target of 78% reduction by 2035, and is therefore obliged to deliver the Committee on Climate Change’s target of a carbon intensity of the electricity grid (p36) of 10gm CO2e/kwh by 2035

The IPCC has added to the advice on counting emissions from bioenergy (FAQ 2-1) to say that it should not be assumed that this is carbon neutral.

The body of scientific conclusions is that the (unregulated) particles, including Ultra Fine Particles are the cause of excess deaths (and Covid cases) around incinerators.

The Enfield Commission Report 2020 exposed the poverty and inequality around the Edmonton incinerator area, covering high unemployment, low qualifications and low life expectancy.

The UK waste industry body ESA has started supporting ways to decarbonise waste treatment in Net Zero Exec Summary. And Acciona, the only contender to construct the incinerator, claims to lead on this market.

Towards Zero Waste London - click
UKWin has a section about alternative treatments for Local Authorities. It explains that “‘Residual waste’ is not a single feedstock, but is instead a collection of material streams, many of which could have been captured for recycling, composting, or re-use.” …. “Compositional analysis studies show that there are many instances where the majority (i.e. over 50%) of ‘waste’ collected at the kerbside could have been recycled or composted had it been put into the correct bin (See here). Further material can be recycled if additional recycling services are offered.“

Steps to design a state of the art low carbon regime for disposing of North London’s waste.
1. Remodel the volumes of the different types of recyclables and composition of residual waste according to new legislation and best practice waste collection
2. Ensure that each recyclable type is recycled, with emphasis on local jobs
3. Ensure that all food and garden waste is collected and sent to anaerobic digestion
4. Use state of the art technology to extract recyclables from black bag waste and contaminated ‘recycling’.
5. Sponsor independent study of the effect of Ultra Fine Particles and other pollutants on surrounding residents.
6. Explore alternative low carbon sources of heat for District Heat Networks.
7. Explore all options to deal with truly residual waste, including plastic and stabilised biogenic matter in landfill, transporting to non residential areas to incinerate.
By the time the current Edmonton incinerator is closed in 2027 the world will increasingly be affected by the consequences of global warming. There is the opportunity for the publicly owned North London Waste Authority to demonstrate that North London waste is an exemplar for Zero Waste London.

KEY INCINERATION MESSAGES.
• Incineration is a high carbon method of disposing of waste.
• Incineration will become a high carbon method of producing electricity and heat as the UK grid uses less gas and more wind, sun and tides.
• Incineration must be the last resort and well away from populated areas.