Forthcoming events
18th September 2009
There are currently no events planned
Nick Herbert, Shadow Minister for the Environment speaks to the Policy Exchange - July 2009
17th August 2009
"After seeking to prevent, reuse and recycle as much waste as possible, we must do more to try to capture the potential of energy from waste. Again the story is one of the UK being slow to recognise the potential benefits of energy from waste while other EU nations forge ahead. In 2000, 9 per cent of England's municipal waste went through energy recovery processes, but after nearly a decade this has only risen to 11 per cent.
Under the EU Renewables Directive the UK will need to generate 15 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020, yet currently we only generate around 5 per cent. As the Policy Exchange report argues, given the potential energy challenges in the years ahead, any means which could help towards meeting the nation's security of supply, decarbonising the economy and shielding the UK from the impact of downturns in global energy markets is to be welcomed.
A framework for action
But what do we need to do in order to deliver our vision for waste where we truly act in accordance with the waste hierarchy? (He continued)...I believe that there are six key factors... (two of which are abstracted from his speech, below);
1. The right fiscal framework
First, we should aim for a fiscal framework which encourages the behaviours on waste which we want and discourages those which we don't. One way in which we do that most clearly already is through landfill charges. When it was first introduced in 1996, the landfill tax was designed to feed back some of the revenue in the form of reductions in national insurance for businesses and income for community projects. While the tax has increased under Labour, the original design has been altered so that it no longer benefits companies and communities to the same degree. But landfill tax does embody the polluter pays principle, and it has a valuable role to play.
So I announced at the Futuresource Conference last month that a Conservative Government will put a floor under the 2013 level of landfill tax at £72 per tonne until 2020. In other words, the tax is here to stay and it will continue to rise. That will give businesses certainty for the next decade, as well as sending a strong message to companies that they can invest in new forms of waste disposal with confidence.
Policy Exchange's report also proposed that the landfill tax should be reformed into a broader waste disposal tax. We need to think about how the fiscal and regulatory regime in waste should reflect the waste hierarchy. Clearly landfill is the most unacceptable form of waste disposal and should be penalised accordingly. But how can we also ensure that materials which should be recycled do not end up being used to generate energy - and how do we measure which is the better treatment of that waste in any case?
3. Focusing on commercial and industrial waste
Third, we need to address the key concern of how better to drive commercial and industrial waste away from landfill and towards more environmentally friendly methods of disposal. Municipal waste is the focus of most EU and UK targets on diverting waste from landfill, but it only accounts for around 9 per cent of all UK waste, whereas commercial and industrial (C&I) waste totals around 25 per cent. But apart from the landfill tax there aren't many drivers to divert C&I waste from landfill.
Currently, local authorities have a duty to provide a trade waste collection. However, this does not extend to them providing a recycling service. And much of this waste is similar to municipal and could be recycled or have energy recovered from it. So I believe that the Policy Exchange report is right to raise the issue of the boundary between municipal and C&I waste. We will need to consider carefully whether incorporating the two waste streams is the right approach, or if a market based solution would be more effective. But in any case, there is no doubt that the focus on municipal waste has tended to eclipse the much bigger issue of C&I waste. We will not make Britain greener and deal with landfill unless we address both sources".
May 2009
1st May 2009
Renewable energy plant granted operator's permit by Environment Agency
Click here for full article.
July 2007
1st July 2007
Integrated Pollution Prevention Control (IPPC).
The Environment Agency have received WP2’s IPPC document relating to the operation of an Advanced Thermal Treatment (ATT) plant near Wells, Somerset and have accepted it as ‘duly made’. We now await their deliberations on our application which may require the provision of further information or will lead, in due course, to the provision of an operator’s license for the energy from waste facility which is planned for Haybridge. Further information will be made available shortly.
June 2007
1st June 2007
WASTEplanning magazine reports on WP2’s planning approval for thermal waste treatment plant.
To read the first page of the article please click here.
To read the second page of the article please click here.
April 2007
1st April 2007
Somerset County Council gives go-ahead for £17m energy from waste plant for Wells
Yesterday’s decision by Somerset County Council’s Regulation Committee to approve plans to build an Advanced Thermal Treatment (ATT) plant to convert waste into energy has been welcomed by WP2 Ltd, the local company behind the scheme to build and operate the first pyrolysis energy from commercial and industrial waste converter in the South West.
For more information please click here.
Also, Planning approval given for WP2’s energy from waste scheme
For more information please click here.
March 2007
1st March 2007
Newsletter
WP2 is publishing a 4 page newsletter to be made available to the public to bring them up-to-date with developments over the past 12 months. It provides a background to the current situation in respect of both waste and energy issues and a letter from the company’s Chief Executive, Mike Love. A page is also devoted to providing a roundup question and answer feature which addresses many of the concerns which a number of local people may still have about the environmental impact of the planned facility.
To open the newsletter please click here.
Also, Caroline Jackson MEP writes letter of support for the WP2 application.
To view the letter please click here.
February 2007
1st February 2007
Stakeholder consultation period ends
The consultation process by Somerset County Council with its statutory consultees on the second planning document, issued following the completion of further work by WP2 to furnish additional supporting evidence on issues including emissions, noise and traffic, has now ended.
Somerset in Business Conference Video
1st January 2007
Conference 2007
Succeeding In Green Economy
Mike Love
CEO
WP2 Ltd
January 2007
1st January 2007
EA approves WP2 EP OPRA
WP2 has submitted detailed submissions to the Environment Agency on its emissions inventory, in support of its application for permission to operate the Haybridge facility. The EA has assessed these and confirmed that, subject to completion of IPPC application, the process is one that it is content to approve and regulate. Visit www.environment-agency.gov.uk for more information. December 2006
Further dispersion report allays fears of pollution over Wells
When WP2 applied for planning permission for the construction of an advanced thermal treatment plant at Haybridge, a detailed dispersion report was included as part of the Environmental Impact Statement. Due to further questions that were raised by Somerset County Council, dispersal modelling was repeated over a much larger area, and using weather data obtained from Mendip Weather Eye, rather than the recommended (and complete) data set from Yeovilton Air Base. RPS (an independent environmental consultancy) were contracted to perform the study. The EA have approved the submission for planning purposes, but suggest that further modelling may still be required for the IPPC submission.
Fears raised concerning a noticeable reduction in the air quality Wells have been discredited by the report which proves that the so called 'Wells Bowl' effect is not a significant factor in the dispersion patterns. The results of the revised study indicate even lower worst case values than the initial dispersion modelling investigation. Furthermore, the Environment Agency has stated that WP2 is 'unlikely to cause any breach of the Air Quality Objectives which are very precautionary limit values and are set to prevent negative effects on the environment.'