Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Draft Waste Local Plan January 2022

Ended on the 4 April 2022
If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.

(49)5. Waste Management in the Plan Area

5.1. In order to Plan effectively it is important to understand how much waste is produced, how this is currently managed, and what is likely to change in future. To help with this process the Councils appointed specialist consultants (Aecom) to prepare a detailed Waste Needs Assessment (WNA) building on earlier work carried out at the Issues and Options stage[ii].

5.2. The Waste Needs Assessment (WNA) sets out information on current waste arisings and forecasts likely future growth for each of the main waste streams. The assessment then looks at existing waste management capacity within the Plan area and makes specific recommendations as to whether additional facilities are likely to be needed. The WNA is an important part of the evidence base for the Waste Plan and will continue to be reviewed and updated at later stages if relevant new information becomes available.

Waste produced within the Plan area

What you told us at the Issues and Options Stage:

  • the Environment Agency, waste industry, and those Borough and District Councils who responded on this topic, supported the approach to calculating current waste arisings.
  • However, some respondents felt that better quality data should be sourced, including on food waste.
  • More research is needed to determine the level of re-use and recycling by sector.
  • The Environment Agency's Waste Data Interrogator and voluntary Site Waste Management Plans were suggested as possible sources of data
  • More contemporary data should be used as the as the Plan moves forward. LACW figures for 2018/19 are now finalised.
  • The totals for Local Authority Collected Waste total should make clear whether these include trade waste and waste taken to household waste recycling centres.
  • Consultation on wastewater treatment should also include Anglian Water.
  • Recycling provision for rural communities has been reduced. More consideration should be given to the needs of rural areas
  • Historic England's Heritage Counts Report may be of relevance to CD&E waste scenarios and the evidence base for the Sustainability Appraisal.

Issues and Options Sustainability Appraisal findings

The Issues and Options Consultation Document did not set out alternative options for calculating current waste arisings. There were no options to appraise at this stage.

5.3. The updated WNA has confirmed that on average approximately 2.5 million tonnes of waste is produced across the Plan area each year. This is from a variety of sources including Local Authority Collected Waste from households and schools; commercial and industrial waste from shops, offices, and factories; and construction, demolition, and excavation wastes such as rubble and soils. Other sources of waste include wastewater and sewage, agricultural waste, and mining wastes. In the past, large quantities of ash have also been produced from coal-fired power stations which are due to be phased out by 2025. Waste from any of these sources, which is especially harmful to human health or the environment, is classified separately as hazardous waste. The amount of each type of waste produced during 2019 (the latest year for which data is available) is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 – Waste produced in the Plan area 2019

Waste stream

Tonnes

Local Authority Collected Waste

577,000

Commercial and Industrial waste

947,000

Construction, Demolition and Excavation waste

1,186,000

Hazardous Waste

48,000

Agricultural Waste

31,000

Mining Waste

800

Source: Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Waste /Needs Assessment, Aecom, September 2021

5.4. The latest data does not take account of any changes that may have arisen due to the Covid-19 pandemic. It is expected that this may lead to an initial fall in the amount of waste produced for some waste streams, but that the UK economy will gradually return to normal . As the Plan looks ahead to 2038 it is important to ensure it can meet long-term needs as well as adapt to short term changes. Regular monitoring will be carried out to assess how well the Plan is performing. The proposed monitoring and implementation framework for the Plan is set out in Chapter 9 of this document

Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW)

5.5. Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW) is made up of household waste collected at the kerbside from individual households (or taken by householders to a local authority recycling centre/civic amenity site) and also any non-household waste that is collected by the local authority from local businesses (also known as trade waste).

5.6. The amount of LACW waste generated each year has remained relatively stable over the last ten years, ranging between around 540,000 and 580,000 tonnes per year. In 2019 just under 580,000 tonnes of LACW was produced within the Plan area. Since the publication of the Waste Core Strategy recycling rates have slowed and, in some cases, fallen. Most of this waste is recycled, composted, or used to produce energy and heat. Relatively little now goes to landfill. In 2019, the household waste recycling rate was at 43% within Nottinghamshire and 27% within Nottingham. Across the Plan area, the average is 39%.

Commercial and industrial (C&I) waste

5.7. The amount of commercial and industrial (C&I) waste produced by shops, offices, factories, and other businesses has fluctuated considerably over the last ten years from a peak of almost 1.4 million tonnes in 2013 down to a low of just under 500,000 tonnes in 2016. Much of this change is thought to be due to economic circumstances and the decline in ash produced by coal-fired power stations.

5.8. In 2019, the amount of commercial and industrial waste recorded increased suddenly by 26% from the previous year to almost 950,000 tonnes. This large increase may be the result of major changes in waste markets over the last two to three years including the closure of certain export markets. It is possible that some of this increase is therefore material that was previously exported as Refuse Derived Fuel (RDF).

5.9. As local authorities do not control how or where C&I waste is managed, previous estimates of the recycling and recovery rate for this waste stream have been based on national surveys rather than local data. To try and overcome this problem, the updated WNA has looked at the recorded fate of all C&I waste known to have been produced in the Plan area in 2019 using the Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator. This method may not capture all C&I waste but helps to provide a more up to date, local picture[iii].

5.10. The WNA analysis suggests that most C&I waste is now recycled or composted with only around 10% sent to landfill

Construction, demolition and excavation (CD&E) waste

5.11. Construction, demolition, and excavation (CD&E) waste comes from construction activities such as house building, road building and other infrastructure schemes. This also includes the demolition of existing buildings, excavation, and earthmoving works. There is no requirement for businesses to report on CD&E waste and significant quantities of this waste are managed at the construction/demolition site rather than at a permitted waste management facility. Mobile plant is often used to crush, screen, and separate the waste either for re-sale or re-use on site. The WNA acknowledges that the Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator provides limited information on the total amount of CD&E waste produced but this has been used to give the most accurate picture possible/to consider the amount of recorded waste requiring management each year.

5.12. CD&E waste arisings have increased overall since 2010, reaching a high of 1.5 million tonnes in 2014, but have since fluctuated between roughly 950,000 and 1.2 million tonnes per annum. Using the Environment Agency data for 2019, it is estimated that just over 80% of CD&E waste is recycled or recovered with less than 20% disposed of to landfill.

Hazardous waste

5.13. Hazardous waste contains substances which are harmful to hum health or the environment and can include oils, chemicals, batteries, asbestos, and pesticides. Hazardous waste arisings within the plan area have shown some fluctuation over the past 10 years but overall have remained between approximately 34,000 and 52,000 tonnes per annum between 2010 and 2019. These estimates are taken from the Environment Agency's separate Hazardous Waste Data Interrogator and are significantly lower than those contained in the previous Issues and Options document.

Agricultural Waste

5.14. Agricultural waste includes all waste generated from farming activities including natural waste such as slurry and manure as well as non-natural waste such as plastic rubber, metal, and oil. The total amount of agricultural waste produced in the plan area has increased since 2010, largely due to more waste being managed through anaerobic digestion facilities, and therefore recorded, rather than being spread to land. In 2019 almost 31,000 tonnes of agricultural waste down from a peak of 45,000 tonnes in 2018.

5.15. As only a small amount of agricultural waste is produced each year (less than 1.15% of the total waste generated in the plan area in 2019) it is not considered necessary to identify specific waste management capacity for this waste stream.

Mining Waste

5.16. Mining waste is produced during the extraction and processing of mineral resources and includes waste solids or slurries left over after the mineral has been removed, waste rock, and soil. In the past large tonnages of colliery spoil were produced from the area's many coal mines but there are no longer any active collieries within the Plan area. Since 2010, the production of mining waste within the Plan area has generally been less than 1,000 tonnes per year although the opening a new quarry in 2016 saw a peak of just over 12,400 tonnes.

5.17. As with agricultural waste, mineral working now produces very small quantities of waste each year, much of which can be used to help restore other mineral workings or landfill sites. It is not therefore seen as necessary to make separate provision for this waste stream.

Low-level radioactive waste

5.18. Radioactive waste will either contain radioactive material or will have been contaminated by radioactivity. In the UK, radioactive waste is categorised according to the type and amount of radioactivity it contains, and the amount of heat it can generate. All high-level radioactive waste, such as that from nuclear power stations, is dealt with at a national level and is treated or disposed of at specialist sites. Non-nuclear, low-level radioactive waste produced by hospitals, universities, and industry for example, can be managed at conventional facilities. The Waste Needs Assessment has confirmed that there are no major radioactive waste facilities in the Plan area and that only very small quantities of low-level radioactive waste are produced which do not require any specific provision within the Plan.

Wastewater

5.19. Wastewater is a combination of used water from domestic properties, industry, and agriculture as well as rainwater run-off from roads and other hard surfaced areas. Existing wastewater treatment facilities in the Plan area manage an average daily flow of more than 300 million litres of effluent. The Councils will work with the water utility companies to assess the need for additional wastewater treatment capacity within the Plan area.

Forecasting future waste arisings in the Plan area

What you told us at the Issues and Options Stage:

  • There was broad support for the range of scenarios set out within the Issues and Options document.
  • The majority of respondents supported either the 'no change' or 'low growth scenario' for each waste stream to reflect future household and economic growth, although some felt that planning for a higher rate of growth would allow greater flexibility.
  • Some respondents supported planning for a more ambitious decline in waste volumes to reflect future changes in packaging and plastic waste and the need to improve the amount of waste which is recycled.
  • LACW forecasts should be based on the final local housing need figure using the Government's standard method rather than the projections used in the Preliminary Waste Needs Assessment.
  • No comments were received relating to hazardous waste.

Issues and Options Sustainability Appraisal findings:

For each of the waste streams, those scenarios which resulted in either the least amount of growth, or the greatest reduction, in waste arisings were seen as the most sustainable overall. These scenarios scored positively in terms of environmental objectives but less positively in terms of making adequate provision for future waste treatment and disposal and supporting economic growth.

5.20. The need for further waste management capacity will depend on factors such as the level of planned housing, commercial and industrial development within the plan area, whether any major infrastructure projects are likely to take place, and the impact of wider measures to cut waste and re-use materials in line with the circular economy principle. The Waste Needs Assessment therefore considers a range of different growth scenarios for each of the main waste streams in line with national policy and guidance on forecasting future waste arisings. These scenarios have been updated from those considered at the previous Issues and Options consultation stage. The different options considered and the preferred scenario for each waste stream is summarised below. In each case, 2019 has been used as the baseline for forecasting as this is the most recent year for which there is comparable data available for each of the main waste streams.

Local Authority Collected Waste

5.21. To forecast LACW arisings, the NPPG recommends establishing a growth profile that considers a range of possible outcomes based on household or population growth and waste arisings per household or per head. This should factor in a range of different scenarios to take account of both historic growth trends and progressively lowering growth rates due to waste minimisation initiatives.

5.22. The previous Issues and Options consultation considered a range of options including progressive growth in the amount of waste produced per household. The most recent Waste Needs Assessment has updated the previous LACW forecasting scenarios from the Issues and Options stage to take account of more recent housing estimates and gives greater emphasis to future waste minimisation initiatives. The three updated scenarios are described below:

A

 

High rate of decline - this scenario assumes an annual decline in the amount of waste per household of 1.48% in Nottinghamshire and 1.35% in Nottingham. This reflects the historic trend seen between 2007 and 2019. However, this timeframe includes a large drop in household waste arisings between 2007 and 2008 which is likely to be due to the recession and may not be representative of longer-term trends. This scenario would result in a decrease of over 100,000 tonnes per annum of LACW by 2038.

B

 

Low rate of decline - this scenario assumes an annual decline in the amount of waste per household of 0.58% in Nottinghamshire and 0.75% in Nottingham. This reflects the historic trend seen between 2008 and 2019 and therefore excludes the possible recessionary impact between 2007 and 2008. This scenario would result in an increase of less than 10,000 tonnes per annum of LACW by 2038. Although this scenario assumes a decline in the amount of waste per household, the increased number of households by 2038 would result in overall growth.

C

 

No change - this scenario assumes 0% change in the amount of waste produced per household going forward based on the most recent 2019 figures. This scenario would result in increase of around 80,000 tonnes per annum of LACW by 2038. Although this scenario assumes no change in the amount of waste per household, the increased number of households by 2038 would result in overall growth.

 

5.23. These updated scenarios now also take account of the proportion of non-household, or trade waste which is collected by local authorities. Non-household waste is difficult to forecast as it can be affected by a number of variables such as market trends, national policy, and the state of the economy. However, rates have remained relatively stable between 2007 and 2019 so it has been assumed that there will be no change in the most recent non-household LACW generation rate.

5.24. Table 1 below summarises the forecast arisings at key intervals during the plan period.

Table 1. Summary of Forecasted LACW Arisings (in five-year intervals) (000s tonnes), 2019 – 2038

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

Scenario A

577

553

526

495

467

Scenario B

577

581

584

586

586

Scenario C

577

599

620

642

659

 

5.25. Compared to the previous Issues and Options consultation, these revised scenarios result in lower overall estimates of future LACW arisings. Scenario A (high decline) takes account of future waste minimisation measures but includes the 2007-2008 period when, as a result of the recession, households and businesses produced significantly less waste. This single year drop skews the data and is not considered to be representative of future trends. Scenario B (low decline) takes account of expected future waste reduction measures but is not skewed by the effects of the 2007-2008 recession. Scenario C (no change) assumes waste arisings will remain static and takes no account of future waste reduction measures and is also therefore not considered to be realistic because it does not reflect national policy aims. Scenario B is therefore considered to be the most realistic and has been chosen as the preferred option upon which to base the Plan.

Commercial and industrial waste

5.26. To forecast commercial and industrial waste arisings, national policy guidance recommends that waste planning authorities should assume a certain level of growth in waste arisings unless there is clear evidence to indicate otherwise. At the previous Issues and Options consultation stage, a range of growth scenarios were considered based on predicted future economic output. These have been updated as part of the latest WNA and are now more closely linked to predicted future waste generation rates per employee and the employee projections from the Nottingham Employment Land Needs Study[iv].

5.27. The three updated scenarios are:

A

 

No change - this scenario assumes business as usual with no change in either the number of employees or the amount of waste produced per employee during the plan period. The amount of C&I waste produced would remain static throughout the plan period.

B

 

Medium growth - this scenario assumes a 5% reduction in the amount of waste per employee up to 2031 due to waste reduction initiatives and circular economy measures. The number of employees would increase by 11% in Nottinghamshire and 17% in Nottingham in line with predictions. Due to the predicted economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, these predictions assume that there will be a further fall in employment during 2021 before a protracted recovery which will see employment levels return to pre-COVID 19 levels by 2024. This scenario would result in an increase of 85,000 tonnes of C&I waste per year by 2038.

C

 

High growth - this scenario assumes no change in the amount of waste produced per employee. The number of employees would increase 11% in Nottinghamshire and 17% in Nottingham in line with predictions - as in Scenario B above. Due to the predicted economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, these predictions assume that there will be a further fall in employment during 2021 before a protracted recovery which will see employment levels return to pre-COVID 19 levels by 2024. This scenario would result in an increase of almost 120,000 tonnes of C&I waste per year by 2038.

 

5.28. Table 2 below summarises the forecast arisings at key intervals during the plan period.

Table 2. Summary of Forecasted C&I Arisings (in five-year intervals) (000s tonnes), 2019 – 2038

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

Scenario A

903

903

903

903

903

Scenario B

903

903

934

965

988

Scenario C

903

903

945

987

1,021

 

5.29. Compared to the previous forecasts, using the 2019 data results in a higher baseline from which to project future waste growth but is likely to be a more realistic starting point as this reflects the probable impacts of increasing restrictions on waste exports (see paragraph 5.7). However, the revised C&I waste forecasts result in a much narrower range of future waste growth by the end of the plan period. Scenario A (no change) does not take account of predicted future economic growth or the likely impact of waste minimisation measures. This is not considered to be representative of long-term trends as it does not reflect national policy or local growth estimates. Scenario B (low growth) takes account of predicted growth in the local economy after 2024 and the likely impact of waste minimisation measures as described in Chapter 3. Scenario C (high growth) takes account of predicted economic growth but assumes there will be no reduction in the amount of waste produced per employee. This is not considered to be representative of long-term trends as it does not take account of waste minimisation measures. Scenario B is therefore considered to be the most realistic and has been chosen as the preferred option upon which to base the Plan.

Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste

5.30. When forecasting future CD&E arisings, national policy guidance recommends that WPAs should assume a constant level of future arisings as there is a limited evidence base on which to base forward projections. Allowance should also be made for the fact that a sizeable proportion of construction and demolition waste arisings are managed or re-used on-site, or at exempt sites. Although the starting point is to assume that arising will remain constant over time, forecasts should also take account of any significant planned regeneration or major infrastructure projects over the timescale of the Plan.

5.31. At the previous Issues and Options consultation stage three different scenarios were modelled reflecting different rates of construction activity over the life of the Plan including progressive growth in the amount of CD&E waste produced. These scenarios were reviewed as part of the latest Waste Needs Assessment which concluded that there was no evidence to suggest an increase in future CD&E arisings. The only major construction project considered potentially likely to have a significant impact on CD&E generations rates during the plan period is Phase 2b of the HS2 high-speed railway, the eastern leg of which passes through Nottinghamshire. However, as only a small section of the route runs through the County, the impacts on C&DE waste arisings are not considered to be significant. For this reason, only one forecasting scenario has been considered as follows:

 

A

No change - this scenario assumes business as usual with no change in the amount of waste produced during the plan period. There are no major construction projects scheduled during the plan period that would significantly affect future levels of CD&E waste generation.

5.32. Table 3 below summarises the forecast arisings at key intervals during the plan period.

Table 3. Summary of Forecasted CD&E Arisings (in five-year intervals) (000s tonnes), 2019 – 2038

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

Scenario A

1,186

1,186

1,186

1,186

1,186

 

5.33. In line with national guidance, and the lack of alternative evidence, this is considered to be an appropriate forecast upon which to base the Plan.

Hazardous waste

5.34. The NPPG recommends that forecasts of future hazardous waste arisings should be based on extrapolating historic time series data as information on hazardous waste is considered likely to be robust. The previous Issues and Options consultation considered a single scenario based on waste production over the last 10 years. The latest Waste Needs Assessment maintains this approach but has revised the underlying figures on the amount of waste produced over the last 10 years using data from the Environment Agency's Hazardous Waste Data Interrogator. A single forecasting scenario has therefore been considered as follows:

A

Extrapolate historic data - this scenario assumes that the amount of hazardous waste generated will continue the overall minor downward trend observed over the last 10 years. This scenario does not consider any change in hazardous waste arisings as a result of COVID-19 as it is predicted that the amount of hazardous waste will return to normal levels by the end of the plan period.

5.35. Table 4 below summarises the forecast arisings at key intervals during the plan period.

Table 4. Summary of Forecasted Hazardous Waste Arisings (in five-year intervals) (000s tonnes), 2019 – 2038

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

Scenario A

48

47

46

44

43

 

5.36. In line with guidance in the NPPG, this projection of hazardous waste arisings based on historic time series data is considered an appropriate forecast upon which to base the Plan.

Agricultural waste, mining waste, low-level radioactive waste, and wastewater

5.37. No specific guidance is provided on forecasting future waste arisings for other waste streams such as agricultural waste mining waste, low-level radioactive waste, and wastewater. In most cases these are produced in very small quantities and are capable of being managed at existing facilities. For this reason, it is not considered necessary to make any specific provision for these waste streams. The need for additional waste treatment capacity is usually determined by the regulated water utility companies on a case-by-case basis. Local planning authorities consult the water utility companies during local plan production and on major development proposals and both water supply and disposal requirements are considered as part of local infrastructure delivery plans. To date, no specific requirements have been identified but the Plan will continue to make policy provision for the extension or renewal of existing treatment facilities or the provision of new facilities if required.

Existing capacity within Plan area

5.38. In order to establish what level of provision will be required within the Plan, the WNA assesses the amount of waste management capacity that is already available within the Plan area. This is again based on data from the Environment Agency's Waste Data Interrogator which shows the quantity and type of waste which has been received at each facility. In line with national guidance this takes account of those facilities which have planning permission and are operational. This is considered to be more reliable than including facilities which have planning permission but have either not been built or are no longer in use.

5.39. Tables 5 and 6 below provide a summary of existing capacity by type of facility and the waste streams they accept. Further details on the capacity of individual facilities can be found in Appendix F of the Waste Needs Assessment. Due to the way in which waste data is reported through the Waste Data Interrogator, it is not possible to separate the capacity of each facility between LACW and C&I waste streams. This is recorded as a single, category of household, industrial and commercial waste (HIC) for reporting purposes.

Table 5 Existing waste treatment capacity by type as at December 2019 (rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

Facility Type

Waste stream

Total

HIC

CD&E

Hazardous

Anaerobic digestion

364,700

-

700

365,400

Composting

109,800

20,400

-

130,200

Recycling

778,900

1,137,000

145,500

2,060,500

Recycling Total

1,253,400

1,157,400

146,200

2,061,400

Energy recovery

280,800

-

-

280,800

Other recovery (deposit to land)

200

388,300

-

388,500

Recovery Total

281,000

388,300

-

669,300

Transfer

590,500

267,000

49,100

906,600

TOTAL

2,124,900

1,812,700

195,300

4,132,800

 

Table 6. Remaining Landfill Capacity by type as at December 2019 (rounded to nearest 100 tonnes)

Facility Type

2019

Inert Landfill (CD&E)

2,265,400

Non-hazardous Landfill (HIC)

58,800

Restricted User Landfill

598,500

 

Future waste management methods

(1)What you told us at the Issues and Options Stage:

Recycling

  • The majority of respondents felt recycling rates were likely to increase in future although some noted this was likely to require significant government intervention and funding.
  • Some respondents felt that future recycling targets should be more ambitious, especially for LACW
  • There is a need to consider future changes in consumer behaviour and how products are manufactured and packaged.
  • The Councils should collect a wider range of materials for recycling and drive more innovation across the waste industry.

Energy Recovery

  • The majority of respondents supported the use of energy recovery where this would reduce the need for landfill and increase the supply of low carbon energy. However, the priority should be to reduce, re-use and recycle as much as possible.
  • Industry respondents pointed to the need for more energy recovery capacity as RDF exports are rapidly decreasing and the UK still landfills large quantities of waste which could be subject to energy recovery.
  • Energy recovery through incineration can be controversial and greater priority should be given to energy recovery from food and garden waste via in-vessel composting and anaerobic digestion.
  • There is a need to consider greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Energy recovery facilities should recover both heat and energy e.g. Combined Heat and Power (CHP) schemes
  • The terminology in the Plan should refer to 'energy recovery' or 'other recovery' as the broad term 'recovery' also includes recycling.

Disposal

  • The majority of respondents felt that there would be a need for some landfill disposal capacity in future, but this should not prevent further recycling or recovery efforts.
  • Waste should be disposed of as close to where it is generated as possible to reduce transport distances and costs.
  • Disposal sites should be carefully designed and monitored.
  • Some respondents felt there should be greater emphasis on waste reduction measures to avoid the need for disposal.

(2)Issues and Options Sustainability Appraisal findings

Overall, options which assumed the highest rates of recycling and lowest rates of disposal for each waste stream, were considered to be the most sustainable.

5.40. As well as establishing the level of existing capacity, we also need to consider how waste is likely to be managed in future i.e. the proportions of each waste stream that are likely to be recycled, recovered, or disposed of. This will help to identify the types of facilities needed and whether any new capacity will be required over the plan period. The Waste Needs Assessment sets out the recycling, recovery and disposal scenarios which have been considered for each waste stream. In each case these range from a continuation of current recycling rates, a moderate increase, and a more challenging stretch-target likely to require much wider changes from government, industry, and society as a whole.

Table 7. Recycling Scenarios for LACW

Recycling Scenario

Description

Justification

Low

39.4% recycling rate for all years to 2038.

Business as usual, no change in the current recycling rate by 2038.

Medium

55% recycling rate by 2038.

Reflects the EU Waste Framework Directive target for 50% of municipal waste to be recycling or composted by 2020 and the 52% recycling target by 2020 set for Veolia in their contract with Nottinghamshire County Council.

High

65% recycling rate by 2035 continuing to 2038.

Reflects the national waste strategy target to recycle 65% of MSW by 2035. The updated Waste Framework Directive also sets a target for 65% of MSW to be recycled by 2030.

 

5.41. The low scenario reflects a continuation of the current recycling rate for LACW and does not take account of additional recycling measures announced by Government such as the separate collection of food waste from all households. The medium scenario represents a considerable improvement on the current recycling rate but still falls short of the national waste strategy target. The high recycling scenario is preferred as this reflects the more ambitious national target and takes account of the future recycling measures which are due to be introduced.

Table 8. Recycling Scenarios for C&I Waste

Scenario

Description

Justification

Low

70.1% recycling rate for all years to 2038.

Business as usual, no change in the current recycling rate by 2038.

Medium

75% recycling rate by 2038.

Assumes some transition between the current recycling rate and the high recycling rate.

High

80% recycling rate by 2038.

The Nottinghamshire and Nottingham Waste Core Strategy sets a target of 70% of C&I waste to be recycled or composted by 2025. As the current recycling rate is already achieving this target, 80% has been chosen as a possible target to apply to the end of the plan period (2038).

 

5.42. The low scenario reflects a continuation of the current recycling rate for C&I waste and does not take account of proposed measures such as the wider use of Extended Producer Responsibility (customer take-back) schemes. The medium scenario assumes a small increase in the recycling rate over the Plan period. The high scenario is preferred as this reflects a more optimistic target by the end of the Plan period and takes more account of proposed recycling measures.

Table 9. Recycling/Recovery Scenarios for CD&E Waste

Scenario

Description

Justification

Low

82.6% recycling/recovery rate for all years to 2038.

Business as usual, no change in the current recycling/recovery rate.

Medium

90% recycling/recovery rate by 2038.

Assumes some transition between the current recycling/recovery rate and the high recycling rate.

High

95% recycling/recovery rate by 2038.

In-lieu of other practical targets, targets for CD&E waste found within the London Plan have influenced the high scenario.

 

5.43. Recycling and recovery rates for CD&E waste are already at a high level. The low recycling scenario assumes a continuation of the current rate but does not take account of potential future improvements. The construction and demolition sector is identified as a priority area to tackle certain waste materials[v]. The medium scenario assumes an increase in the recycling or recovery of CD&E waste. The high scenario represents a very high recycling and recovery rate for this waste stream and is seen as the most optimistic outcome as the basis for assessing future recycling needs and minimising landfill. This is comparable with selecting the high recycling scenario for LACW and reflects the increasing commercial market for recycled material in the construction sector.

5.44. The high recycling scenario has therefore been chosen as the preferred option for each of the waste streams. To show what this would mean for future waste management, Table 10 below sets out the tonnages of waste that would need to be recycled, recovered or disposed of each year by the end of the Plan period.

Table 10. Predicted Waste Arisings by Forecast Waste Management Method in 2038 (tpa)

Method

LACW

C&I

CD&E

Total

Recycling/

Other Recovery

381,000

790,400

1,127,000

2,298,400

Energy Recovery

146,600

98,800

-

245,400

Disposal

58,600

98,800

59,000

216,400

TOTAL

586,200

988,000

1,186,000

2,760,200

 

Assessing the need for additional waste management capacity

5.45. Having assessed possible future recycling, recovery and disposal scenarios for each waste stream, the high recycling scenario has been selected in each case as the basis upon which to base future plan requirements. Applying the high recycling scenario to the forecast future waste arisings for each waste stream (shown in tables x-y) allows us to calculate the overall requirement for future recycling, recovery, and disposal capacity. Having established the total requirement, a 'capacity gap analysis' can then be carried out to establish whether or not there is sufficient existing waste management capacity to meet expected future needs. The accompanying Waste Needs Assessment provides a more detailed explanation of this methodology and includes a comparison of the predicted capacity requirement using each of the recycling scenarios considered (high/medium/low).

5.46. Tables 11 and 12 below show the estimated recycling, recovery, and disposal capacity that would be required at key intervals during the Plan period based on achieving the high recycling scenario for each waste stream. Due to the way in which waste data is reported through the Waste Data Interrogator, it is not possible to separate the capacity of each facility between LACW and C&I waste streams. In practice many facilities which handle LACW waste are also able to take C&I waste and this is recorded as a single, combined, category of household, industrial and commercial waste (HIC) for reporting purposes. The capacity requirement is therefore shown in terms of the total HIC need.

Table 11. Capacity Gap Analysis for HIC Waste Streams (tpa)

 

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

 

Recycling

Arisings produced

860,461

932,170

1,027,493

1,123,256

1,171,772

Existing capacity

1,253,400

1,253,400

1,253,400

1,253,400

1,253,400

Capacity required

+392,946

+321,237

+225,914

+130,151

+81,635

 

Energy Recovery

Arisings produced

352,200

321,882

292,881

264,347

245,392

Existing capacity

280,770

280,770

280,770

280,770

280,770

Capacity required

-71,430

-41,112

-12,111

+16,423

+35,378

 

Disposal

Arisings produced

258,412 221,545 189,450 154,023 148,157

Remaining capacity

+58,847

-1,122,595

-2,135,384

-2,977,668

-3,567,089

 

Table 12. Capacity Gap Analysis for CD&E Waste Streams (tpa)

 

 

2019

2024

2029

2034

2038

 

Recycling/ Other Recovery

Arisings produced

979,300

1,018,100

1,056,900

1,095,700

1,126,700

Existing capacity

1,545,700

1,545,700

1,157,400

1,157,400

1,157,400

Capacity required

+566,400

+527,600

+100,500

+61,800

+30,700

 

Disposal

Arisings produced

206,700

167,900

129,100

90,300

59,300

Remaining capacity

+2,265,400

+1,348,200

+624,900

+95,700

-188,100

 

5.47. Based on the preferred high recycling scenario for each waste stream, it can be seen that there is sufficient recycling/composting capacity to manage the Plan area's LACW, C&I and CD&E waste up to 2038. There is insufficient energy recovery capacity to manage LACW and C&I waste during the first part of the Plan period although there would be a slight surplus towards the end of the Plan period if the high recycling scenario is achieved. Planning permission has been granted for up to 420,000 tonnes per annum of further energy recovery capacity that has not yet come forward. If implemented, this non-operational capacity, could help to reduce future landfill disposal requirements.

5.48. Landfill capacity for LACW and C&I waste is effectively exhausted, and the Waste Needs Assessment estimates that up 3.5 million tonnes of waste could require landfilling over the plan period, depending on future recycling and recovery rates. Landfill capacity for CD&E waste is currently adequate but could run out close to the end of the Plan period. Opportunities for future non-hazardous landfill, to manage LACW and C&I waste, are limited within the Plan area due to the underlying geology and groundwater constraints. There may be opportunities for inert l CD&Ewaste to be used as backfill to restore f future quarry sites over the life of the Plan. N.B. although the Waste Needs Assessment carried out by Aecom assumes a future landfill rate of 10% for all wastes, this is already being achieved or bettered for some wastes and may mean that there will be less requirement for landfill than envisaged in the WNA. This will be reviewed as part of preparing the next stage of the Plan.

5.49. The WNA does not identify a need for additional waste management capacity for hazardous waste. It is predicted that 42,900 tonnes of hazardous waste will be generated within the plan area in 2038 with sufficient capacity to manage 146,100 tonnes of hazardous waste per year. For other waste streams such as agricultural and mining waste, which are produced in relatively small quantities, the WNA concludes that these are capable of being manged within existing facilities and that no additional capacity would be needed to handle these wastes in future.

5.50. In addition to waste recycling, recovery and disposal facilities, waste transfer stations also play an important intermediary role in waste management. Their primary function is to sort and bulk up waste into more efficient loads before moving the waste on to a final destination (e.g. recycling, energy from waste or landfill). Waste transfer capacity is not therefore included in Tables 11 and 12 above to avoid double counting. The WNA concludes that there is currently sufficient transfer capacity to manage 590,000 tonnes of HIC waste and 267,000 tonnes of CD&E waste per year. If it is assumed that the same proportion of waste will be managed by transfer stations in future, there will still be a surplus of waste transfer capacity for both HIC and CD&E waste by the end of the Plan.

5.51. On this basis the Plan needs to consider how to make appropriate provision for additional energy recovery and disposal capacity where required. The Councils carried out a 'call for sites' at the previous Issues and Options consultation stage but very few sites were put forward. This means that is not possible to make an objective comparison of a range of possible sites. Given this lack site-specific evidence, the Councils have drafted a criteria-based policy against which to judge future waste management proposals (Policy DM1). This policy is similar to that used in the previous Waste Core Strategy and sets out the types of location that are likely to be considered suitable for the different types of waste use.

5.52. As this is an emerging Plan, the level of existing waste management capacity, and estimates of future waste needs, will continue to be monitored during the Plan's preparation.

 


[ii] Preliminary Waste Needs Assessment, Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottingham City Council, February 2020

[iii] In some cases, the waste origin may only be recorded by region or the waste may pass through an intermediate transfer facility outside the Plan which will obscure its origin.

[iv] Lichfields, (2021); Nottingham Core HMA and Nottingham Outer HMA Employment Land Needs Study. The Nottingham Employment Land Needs Study only includes projections for six of the Nottinghamshire local authorities (excludes Bassetlaw). As Bassetlaw is a comparable size (both geographically and in population) to Newark and Sherwood, the same employment projection for Newark and Sherwood has been applied to Bassetlaw.

[v] Our Waste, Our Resources: A Strategy for England, Defra, 2018

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.
back to top back to top