PROJECT GWixDD ? What a Waste say Cardiff Friends of the earth?

Give us a zero wate strategy cardiff!!

PROJECT GWixDD ? What a Waste?

Despite the apparent universal coverage of the city's "Green Bag" scheme,
the recent opening of some new " Bring Sites",and and a fully-opperational
Mechanical Recycling Facility [MRF], Cardiff is still only managing to
recycle 27% of its household waste. Though this figure is in line with EU
Landfill Dirrective targets, the figure required by 2009-10 is 40% ?

The recently-reported practice of transporting recycled material long
distances for processing in the Third World is in NO waygood for the
environment.

Whilst the amount of Cardiff's waste continues to grow at about 5% per
annum, available landfill capacity at Lamby Way will last barely a year.
Even if a suitable replacement landfill site was available, the Council
cannot afford to wait 5 years in order to follow the necessary planning
procedure, [which is a legal requirement], in order to commence

operations. Given this difficult situation, [which somebody at the Council
must have seen coming a long time ago], its hardly surprising that other
methods are being considered. Building a massive incinerator in Cardiff
Bay, [otherwise known as Project Gwyrdd], is one way to deal with the
Residual Solid Waste [RSW] from half a dozen Local Authorities in SE Wales

This approach is unacceptable to Cardiff Friends of the Earth on the
grounds of,

• Excessive cost;
• Reducing the need to maximise the recycling of finite,valuable resources.
• Health risks from pollution and increased traffic.
• . The increased need for transport.
• Sheer waste of finite resources.
  

An alternative method would be to adopt a " Zero Waste" strategy, thereby
concentrating local authoritie's limited resources on maximising waste
reduction and re-use projects, in order to minimise the amount of RSW
requiring landfill.

Municipal waste management

Why?
to reduce the volume of waste that is land filled but how?
INCINERATOR - high costs -industrial scale - private partners -

Background information
A Report of: Environmental Scrutiny Committee Municipal Waste Management Strategy – Residual Waste Treatment Options JUNE 2005

11. Reducing the volume of waste which is land filled, however this is to be
achieved, will require active public support:
· Public support for, and participation in, action to reduce waste
arisings and to increase recycling will be required in the short,
medium and long term in order to minimise the potential landfill
generated;
· Public are likely to be suspicious of some new treatment systems,
such as incineration, and must therefore be educated on the
environmental realities surrounding waste treatment in order to
generate support;

· Any new waste treatment plant is likely to be an industrial scale
development necessitating a lengthily, transparent, planning
process. Public opposition to a planning application may be greater
if there is uncertainty or misconceptions about the plant and the
environmental impacts it might have.

12. Depending on the treatment process adopted, the capital costs of
building a plant are likely to be in the region of £40-80m. Given this cost,
it is likely that the Council will have to enter into a partnership with the
private sector to finance the project. Equally, the investment is such that
joint working with neighbouring authorities to generate economies of
scale could be highly desirable. If the Council were to adopt this regional
partnership approach, it would be necessary to enter into such
arrangements with clarity of the Council’s objectives and a clear
identification of risks involved and the strategies to manage these risks.
The costs which will fall to the Council will be in inverse proportion to the
risks accepted by the Council.

RECOMMENDATIONS
13. The Executive is recommended to avoid the temptation to rush to a
technical solution but rather to recognise that the eventual solution
arrived at is likely to be heavily influenced by the market, which needs to
be carefully understood. Nonetheless, urgent action is required by the
Executive to protect the Council against the financial penalties that
continued reliance on landfill will involve. To achieve this, the Executive
is recommended to:
R1. Commence structured dialogue with neighbouring authorities to establish the viability for creating a regional waste management facility;
R2. Accurately define, with neighbouring authorities, the “waste problem” to which potential private sector partners will be invited to develop solutions.
R3. Commission Officers to examine potential sources of the capital funding
required to deliver a new waste management facility.
R4. Embark on an expansive education campaign about the need to reduce land filling, and the technologies available to achieve this. Such a campaign would need to address the information needs of all elected Councillors and officers, as well as the general public.
R5. Lobby the Welsh Assembly Government to reclassify the UK definition of RDF (– Residual Waste Treatment) from waste to fuel.

Waste going to landfill’ - each new incinerator requires a nominated hazardous waste site to receive the highly toxic fly ash produced by this technology. The additional sites will require constant and careful monitoring for health and safety reasons.