Agenda item

The Chairman advised that he was going to consider the two items of County Campaign and Contamination in Recycling together.  It was noted that it was planned to run an article in the January edition of County News in relation to contamination in recycling.

The Partnership was advised that when Mid-UK commenced the new contract, they also started a materials sampling operation.  However, initially there were some serious concerns raised regarding the way that samples were collected as part of the sampling regime.  Following a series of engagement meeting with Mid-UK the methodology for collecting samples has been changed and has significantly improved.  However, there were still considerations that could be made.

It was noted that a decision had been made regarding the statistics which had been presented in April, May and June of 2015 would not be used as they were flawed.  The data collected in July (using the new methodology) would be applied retrospectively to the earlier months.

The sampling process was still showing high levels of contamination in the materials collected, and officers were meeting monthly with Mid-UK.  An overview of the market for recyclables was requested, as with the reducing oil prices, it was now cheaper to produce new plastics than to recycle.

It had also been found that when residual bins were analysed, there were still considerable levels of recyclable material being thrown away.

Members of the Partnership were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to this issue and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         It was commented that it should be a moral obligation rather than financial reward which drove the need to recycle.

·         There was a need to work towards a more consistent mix, in order to provide a better quality product.

·         It was noted that an article in Materials Recycling Weekly had observed that recycling markets were approximately where they expected to be for the time of year.

·         It was suggested that the reason why the quality of recyclables presented was so poor was because districts did not have the budget available to promote good quality recycling.

·         It was suggested whether a visit to Mid-UK could be organised?

·         One of the biggest issues was that there were so many different variables, with a need to try and simplify the message across all districts as there was a lot of confusion among residents.

·         In relation to the sampling methodology, what day the sample was taken could be important, as the City of Lincoln officers were aware of particular areas in the City where recycling contamination was high.

·         County Council officers would be exploring further with Mid-UK how the sampling was programmed.

·         It was reported that in June 2015 the levels of contamination in recycling were between 28% - 30%, but they had now fallen to 15%-18%.

·         There was also an issue in relation to target and non-target materials, and whether non-target materials were being recycled.  Members were informed that Mid-UK were a fairly proactive company and if there was a way for something to be recycled it would be.

·         It was queried whether not increasing the recycling rate would affect the calorific value of the EfW.  Members were advised that an increase in green waste would affect it, however, when all waste reached the EfW it was mixed.  The most important role within the facility was the grab operator to ensure that the waste was mixed properly before it was fed into the grate.

·         It was reported that the EfW was currently operating at its optimum level, and it had been working very efficiently for the last 18 months.

·         It was queried whether removing all plastics from the residual waste and into the recycling stream would have a negative effect on the EfW.   It was commented that this was a matter for debate, as it was possible that if the recycling mix was simplified, this could lead to an increase in residual waste and a decrease in recycling.

·         There was a need to consider what the optimal mix was and what financial impact this would have.

·         It was noted that there was still work to do to build relationships between the County Council and Mid-UK.  Ian Taylor and his staff would visit periodically to watch the processes at work.

·         It was suggested that a very small task and finish group should be set up to meet before the next meeting of the Partnership which was scheduled for 19 November 2015, to discuss some of the ideas for the County News article, and then make a presentation to the meeting on 19 November 2015.  Councillor Shore, Sean Kent, Councillor Smith and Steve Bird agreed to be part of the group and meet up with Simon Cotton from the Communications Team.

·         In South Holland the recycling wheel had been the most successful tool for promoting recycling.

·         The message in the article needed to be simple, such as no food waste in recycling, no black bags in recycling etc..

·         It was suggested that it should be included in the article how much it cost if an average household recycled as much as possible compared to not recycling.

·         It was queried whether the longer term impact of the requirement to recycle 50% of household waste by 2020 was understood, or whether this was something which should be looked at further.

·         It was queried whether there was a need to come up with a uniform list of what items were accepted for recycling.

RESOLVED

1.    That the update be noted;

2.    That Councillors R A Shore and Mrs F Smith, and Sean Kent (LCC), Simon Cotton (LCC) and Steve Bird (CoLC) form a working group to discuss ideas for an article in the January 2016 edition of County News on recycling practices, and then present these suggestions to the meeting of the Lincolnshire Waste Partnership scheduled for 19 November 2015.