INSIDE WASTE: April/May 2017

Official Publication of the

ISSUE 77 | APRIL/MAY 2017

www.insidewaste.com.au

INSIDE 18 A busy year for Vic 22 Change your profitability 36 Breaking the vicious circle

WMAA honours excellence and innovation More than 200 wasties gathered at Rosehill Gardens in March to celebrate excellence and innovation in landfills and transfer stations.

Pictured are the (very happy) 2017 winners along with WMAA CEO Gayle Sloan in the middle (more on the winners in the story on the right). Unfortunately, Townsville City Council was unable to make the event due to Cyclone Debbie.

(Credit: Paul Benjamin Photography)

$700M EfW facility progresses amid opposition

PP: 255003/07055

ISSN 1837-5618

DESPITE opposition from the local community and NSW Greens, Dial a Dump Industries (DADI) has progressed with its $700 million Eastern Creek energy from waste facility at the Eastern Creek industrial park, lodging a submission for approval to the NSW Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) at the end of March.

DADI chief executive Ian Malouf said the facility, which will convert residual waste to power, will prevent the release of three million tonnes of greenhouse gas and divert more than one million tonnes of waste from landfill a year.

The community and NSW Greens have been vocal about the potential air quality and human health impacts of the facility and the EPA has said in its submission to the Planning Department that DADI had not provided enough information

about the feedstock the plant would process, making it “difficult to properly and robustly assess the potential impacts”. The EPA said some 20% of the proposed fuel mix had been described as “other” or “other combustibles”, offering “insufficient detail”. Additionally, NSW Health, in its submission, said the proposal was not consistent with more than “100 years of environmental regulation to improve urban air quality”.

Malouf has brushed off these objections, saying the plant would be the most sophisticated, integrated plant in the world. He also questioned if people had actually read the extensive documentation or are “pretending to have read it” and then running “scare campaigns”, adding that he’d welcome government inquiries and independent reports.

Malouf confirmed that the facility would be built based on the latest European and Australian engineering and environmental standards, and outputs would be below the limits set by the EPA and strict European directives, noting that in many cases, these outputs were not even detectable.

“The facility’s pollution controls will be monitored live by the EPA 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with results published publicly,” Malouf told The Sydney Morning Herald in March.

The facility, which will generate electricity for 200,000 homes across Sydney, will sit alongside DADI’s Genesis Xero plant and if all goes according to plan, will commence operations in 2019.

SOME 250 people gathered at Rosehill Gardens on a hot and muggy evening in March - ice cold beers helped cool them down - to honour exceptional landfills and transfer stations at the Waste Management Association of Australia’s 2017 Landfill and Transfer Stations conference.

The Innovation and Excellence awards, which were given out at the awards dinner on the evening of Wednesday, March 29, showcase the best that landfills and transfer stations have to offer, with the aim of applauding sites that are exceptional and encourage best practice in operations.

Taking home the 2017 Landfill Excellence Award, sponsored by the Australian Landfill Owners Association (ALOA), was Dulverton Waste Management for its landfill site in Devonport, Tasmania.

Turning to innovation, Toowoomba Regional Council Waste Service took out the competition, winning the Innovation Award sponsored by Wastech Engineering.

The Council was also the only finalist at the dinner that did a live presentation the others showed videos - and wowed with its automation system.

Last, but certainly not least, Townsville Waste Services won the Transfer Stations Excellence Award sponsored by Wastech Engineering for its Magnetic Island Transfer Station.

Inside Waste will be speaking to the winners soon and will bring you the details of each project and site that have swayed the judges in their favour.

Editor’s note // Official Publication of the

A fiery first quarter CONFERENCE season has commenced, with WMAA’s 2017 Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference kicking off the line-up of events for the year.

As you turn the pages of this issue, you’ll notice that we’ve included a couple of presentations that came out of the conference and will continue to share what the team has learned over the two-day event at Rosehill Gardens in Sydney on www.insidewaste.com.au And of course, we’ve also included a two-page pictorial because we do love conference pictures, especially ones taken during the dinners, which are always a lot of fun as you can tell on page 30.

It’s not all about landfills and transfer stations though. On page 22, we speak to REMONDIS, MRA Consulting Group, Bucher Municipal, and Diverseco about weight-based billing. Now this is not a novel or foreign topic, but these companies have recently completed a trial in the Hunter Valley and the results could push Australia one step closer

to rolling out weight-based billing.

Of course, we need appropriate policy and regulatory instruments for weight-based billing to work and the National Measurement Institute has committed to initiating a pilot project in 2017-18 to focus on trade measurement compliance issues in the waste management and recycling sector.

Inside Waste also reached out to Victoria’s Environment Minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, to find out, amongst other things, where the government is at with its proposed ban on e-waste to landfill. D’Ambrosio’s spokesperson provides an update on some of the government’s ongoing initiatives, next steps for the ban - policies are being developed as we speak and will be released for public comment this year - as well as what it is doing by way of planning and integration on page 18.

While we’re still in Q1 of 2017, we’ve already experienced two major fires at resource recovery sites - one at SUEZ’s Chullora facility in NSW, and the other at SKM’s plant in Coolaroo, Victoria.

According to Arthur J Gallagher principal broker Russell Boucher, the number of fire incidents at waste and resource recovery facilities have increased markedly over the last five years. Not only do they capture our attention, damage equipment and lead to downtime, these incidents have made obtaining insurance far more challenging. On page 29, Boucher offers some advice on what operators need to do so they are able to insure their businesses.

Turning to food waste, research director at UTS’ Institute for Sustainable Futures, Dr Dena Fam says the inner city university campus has turned to Closed Loop in order to manage the five tonnes of food waste produced and collected at its kitchens every month.

She details the project the team has undertaken and the lessons learnt in the process on page 40.

In this issue, we also offer an update on glass recycling in NSW. A year ago, Waste Contractors and Recyclers Association of NSW (WCRA) members came together to express how dire the glass recycling situation was in NSW. It was agreed at the end of the meeting that the logical first step forward was for WCRA to collect accurate datasets so the sector and governments clearly understood what and where the problems were.

Senior Editor: Jacqueline Ong (jacqueline.ong@mayfam.net) Journalist: Jan Arreza (jan.arreza@mayfam.net) Advertising: Alastair Bryers (alastair.bryers@mayfam.net or 0431 730 886) Creative Director, Patterntwo Creative Studio: Toni Middendorf Published by Mayfam Media Phone: (02) 9267 1166 Web: www.insidewaste.com.au COPYRIGHT WARNING All editorial copy and some advertisements in this publication are subject to copyright and cannot be reproduced in any form without the written authorisation of the managing editor.

Offenders will be prosecuted.

www.insidewaste.com.au

WCRA took its members’ advice, engaging A.Prince Consulting (APC) to undertake a situational analysis and then develop a glass recovery strategy. More on page 36.

We hope you enjoy the issue!

Government to review Product Stewardship Act FEDERAL Minister for the Environment Josh Frydenberg has announced that the government will commence a review of the Product Stewardship Act 2011.

As part of the first review of the Act since it began in 2011, the Department of Environment and Energy says it will actively seek input from industry, governments and the general public to ensure the Act continues to be effective and is delivering the best outcomes for business and the environment.

The Act currently supports the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme (NCTRS) which has recycled approximately 184,500 tonnes of electronic waste since 2012.

The review will provide an important opportunity to continue to update and improve the NTCRS, which was updated following an operational review in 201415, including the possibility to include other electronic products.

The Act also provides accreditation for industry-led voluntary arrangements 4

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

such as MobileMuster, which is the only industry-led mobile phone recycling program in the world that has collected and recycled more than 10 million handsets since 1998.

The Act also establishes the Minister’s Product List, which is updated annually and informs the community and industry of those products being considered for possible accreditation or regulation under the Act. Products under consideration for this financial year include batteries, photovoltaic (PV) solar panels, used oil bottles and plastic microbeads.

The review will also examine the adequacy of services provided by industry to remote and regional communities and the way in which exports of working computers for reuse in other countries is accounted for and reported under the scheme.

The review will commence immediately and is scheduled to conclude in the first half of 2018.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

The Smart

Alternative Fuel System World leader in economical RDF and SRF production.

High throughput capacity. Energy efficient and maintenance friendly.

Customised to your requirements

Proud Suppliers of:

Freecall: 1800 644 978

Website: www.cssequipment.com.au

News //

Profile | Helen Millicer Helen Millicer coordinates leading recycling programs for the Vinyl Council Australia; supports governments, business, manufacturers and not-for-profits with One Planet Consulting; and pushes to enable sustainable living in Australia as president of the Alternative Technology Association. She is also Inside Waste’s regular sustainability columnist (more on www.insidewaste. com.au), publishing Future Focus once every six weeks.

What was your first job in the sector and what attracted you to it?

The offer was too good to refuse. In 1992, I managed the metro-wide Area Improvement Grants program for the Victorian government. My team supported local government and many community groups do things that we take for granted now.

What’s your favourite part of your job?

Working with outstanding people delivering solutions. As a consultant, I am entrusted with the complexities of people, organisations and systems. In my parttime job, I get to design, negotiate and form recycling programs for Australia. In my board roles I get to think big, strategic and long term.

How has waste management and resource recovery changed in your time in the industry?

Other sectors have changed far more than this one. Our recycling rates have plateaued and we still throw quality material to landfill at a great cost and loss to our jobs, economy and environment.

What are some of your achievements that you are most proud of?

The big strategic shifts. I have worked in seminal projects with expert teams on energy, water and materials recycling. I’ve helped bring together opposing parties for agreement on Victoria’s 50-Year Water Plan, coordinated the 2030 Vision for Australia’s plastics and chemicals industries, and advised governments on major grants programs for recycling and energy in Australia.

Best advice ever given to you?

Get your vision and message out there.

Bingo worth upwards of $700M BINGO Industries is seeking to float on the ASX in a few months and recent estimates from Macquarie Capital has valued the company at 8.5 to 10 times forecast 2018 financial year EBITDA. Macquarie Capital told Inside Waste detailed reports were given to fund managers at site visits and a prospectus will be released to the public in “a few weeks”.

However, The Australian Financial Review revealed in March that in the report, Macquarie analysts valued Bingo at $693.6 million to $816 million enterprise value.

Based on 2018 financial year forecast profit, this valuation points to 14.8 to

17.8 times on a price to earnings basis.

According to The AFR, Macquarie expects Bingo to grow its annual revenue by 36% and annual earnings by 50% on a compounded basis from the 2015 to 2018 financial years.

The waste company has forecasted $203.4 million revenue in the 2017 financial year with $31.1 million net profit. These figures are expected to rise to $258.5 million and $40.7 million respectively in the next financial year.

Bingo, which was previously in the market looking for a buyer for the business, is expected to seek an initial public offering in Q2.

CDS details finalised THE NSW government has finalised the operational details of its proposed container deposit scheme, publishing the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery (Container Deposit Scheme) Regulation under the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001.

The regulation finalises a number of operational aspects of the CDS including: • the exclusion of beverages and containers from the operation of the scheme; • the refund amount payable for containers (10-cents); • the classes of persons prescribed as material recovery facility operators; • the fees for applications and approvals under the Act; • matters that the Minister may

consider in determining whether an applicant for a scheme administration agreement is a fit and proper person; • the approval of collection point arrangements (including applications for approval, variation, suspension and revocation of approvals and the administrative review of decisions relating to applications and approvals); • claims for refund amounts for containers processed by MRF operators, including the methodology for determining the amounts payable, the circumstances in which refund amounts are not payable and the manner of making claims for refund amounts; and • matters required to be included in reports prepared by the scheme operator.

The NSW CDS will be rolled out from December 1.

$1.3M offered to councils to divert organics LOCAL councils in NSW are being encouraged to apply for grants worth up to $1.3 million to introduce or enhance kerbside organic bin collection services.

For the first time, councils will also be able to apply for funding to trial organics collection services in apartment buildings.

EPA unit head organics, Amanda Kane, said the grants provided local councils with an opportunity to cover the costs of upfront infrastructure such as bins and kitchen caddies to introduce food and garden waste collections to residents.

“These grants provide the chance to make a real difference when it comes to diverting food and garden waste from landfill,” Kane said.

“Previous projects have provided new or improved green lid kerbside collection services to 500,000 more homes in NSW to transform an 6

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

estimated 100,000 tonnes of waste into high quality compost each year.

“This year we are welcoming trials and services that focus on apartment buildings.

Apartment buildings pose a unique set of challenges such as lack of space for bins, so we are excited to offer funding to councils who want to find solutions.”

NSW Environmental Trust director Peter Dixon said that the Trust was pleased to offer the first of three new rounds of funding for organics collections under the Waste Less, Recycle More Extension.

“There are $10 million in grants available over three rounds under this program, in addition to the $16.9 million already allocated,” Dixon detailed.

Applications close on May 18, 2017.

An information session and concurrent webinar was held on April 6.

The grants are being delivered through a partnership between the EPA and the NSW Environmental Trust.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

$2M to support WtE THE Victorian government has launched a $2 million program to support the development of waste to energy technologies, including anaerobic digestion and thermal treatment of waste.

The Waste to Energy Infrastructure Fund will boost sustainable energy production using organic and other materials and divert more waste from landfill.

As a major food producing and processing state, Victoria’s commercial and industrial sector produced more than 300,000 tonnes of food waste in 2014-15, but only 22% of that was recycled.

“A variety of industrial and organic waste products can be used in waste to energy projects, however thanks to our agricultural base and food culture, Victorian farms, food processors and commercial operations are well-placed to benefit from turning waste to energy,” Minister for Environment Lily D’Ambrosio said.

The Waste to Energy Infrastructure Fund is designed for the waste management sector, councils, water authorities and businesses with proposals for new or upgraded

Profile | RST Soil Technologies

Victorian Environment Minister Lily D’Ambrosio.

projects that can be commissioned by December 31, 2019.

Expressions of interest closed on April 3, 2017.

When was the company founded and why?

Reynolds Soil Technologies was incorporated in 1994, after RST’s now operations and technical director, David Handel, developed a liquid road stabiliser in 1988 to solve the problems he faced while working as a licensed builder in civil roadworks.

RST soon received demand for dust management solutions, implementing a research and development project to create a range of dust suppressants and soil stabilisers. Decades later, RST continues researching and developing the best solutions to problems faced by industries on a global scale.

What are some of the products that would be of interest to the sector?

Popular products include the Heavy Water Dynamic, which is applied on roads to stop vehicle dust and reduce watering requirements; the RT5 Superskin, which is sprayed on non-trafficked areas to create a crust that stops dust lift off by wind in open areas; the RT60 Super Wetter, which prevents dust lift off when moving materials; and the Flock It range, which drops dirt and fine particles in water run-off so clean water is released from site.

RST also has odour neutralising products that are added to their dust suppressants or used individually to solve the odour issues associated with landfills and waste.

Any advice for better managing dust at sites?

Dust management needs a holistic approach. That’s why RST offers a complete service that correctly identifies each client’s issues, recommends the right solution, and ensures that solution is implemented properly with validated results.

What are some of the company’s goals and plans for the next 12-18 months?

We are currently working with The University of Queensland on research projects that will allow us to offer new technology to our clients, and are continuing our global expansion.

More: www.rstsolutions.com.au or (07) 5522 0244

Joint procurement approved; councils save $200,000 THE Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has approved Victoria’s North East Waste and Resource Recovery Group’s (NEWRRG) application to jointly procure, which the group said would save the region an estimated $200,000.

NEWRRG had applied for a blanket approval of all joint procurement activities in the region for the next 11 years and the region will save in fees and staff time during the term of the approval.

NEWRRG works with seven councils in the North East of Victoria, including Alpine, Wodonga, Wangaratta, Indigo, Benalla, Towong and Mansfield, as well as with the three ski resorts Mt Buller/ Mt Sterling, Mt Hotham and Falls Creek.

NEWRRG deputy chair Anthony Griffiths said the approval will allow “NEWRRG to facilitate joint procurement processes for its local government and ski resort partners each year whilst reducing NEWRRG’s legal exposure when performing its statutory functions.”

Traditionally the Waste and Resource Recovery Groups (WRRGs) have required individual approvals for each service.

The broad ACCC approval will benefit the six other WRRGs which can take a

similar approach.

Services which are covered by the approval are: • The collection of materials from transfer stations, resource recovery centres and landfills.

• Transport of materials from the collection locations to the processing sites.

• Processing at the processing sites of ›› metal recyclers; ›› tyre recyclers; ›› plastic recyclers; ›› electronic waste recyclers; ›› mattress recyclers; and ›› concrete crushing and garden waste chipping on site.

• Receiving and processing of organics (together with the above, the Service Streams); and ›› purchase of waste and resource recovery infrastructure such as bins and other infrastructure.

Applications to the ACCC usually cost between $2500 and $7500 and take approximately five months for processing which include public and industry consultation.

Obtaining the blanket approval will save the north east group money and resources and increase the benefits of joint procurement, NEWRRG said.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

7

News //

EPA approves Ravenhall landfill extension THE Victorian EPA has granted a works approval application for Landfill Operations Pty Ltd (Cleanaway) to extend its Melbourne Regional Landfill at Ravenhall, 22km west of Melbourne’s CBD. The works approval allows for approximately half of the proposal put forward by Cleanaway and is subject to the proposal securing a planning permit from the Minister for Planning.

It follows 13 months of extensive

engagement and consultation with community and considered the expert views of specialist EPA staff, staff at referral agencies, waste groups and more than 3900 public submissions.

The works approval issued to Cleanaway is for a smaller landfill than applied for, with a shorter life span and it: • limits the landfill to seven cells in the south portion only; • has not accepted the proposal for

nine cells in the north portion; • grants landfill area of 96 hectares, with 23 million cubic metres of airspace (the space to be filled with waste); and • grants space for 13 years of landfilling (from 2025 to 2038) based on projected landfilling rates.

EPA did not grant a works approval for the north portion of the proposed landfill for a number of a reasons.

For one, the Victorian government has not identified a need for more landfill space beyond 2046. The lifespan of the proposed landfill was until 2055, which is nine years more than the currently identified need. An approval to 2055 was therefore deemed unnecessary. However, Cleanaway could still apply for works approval for the north portion in the future if a need is identified.

Court imposes strict conditions on composting plant THE NSW EPA has welcomed the judgment handed down by the Land and Environment Court in March, imposing strict conditions on the development of the Gardenland composting facility near Port Stephens.

In November 2014, the EPA refused to issue general terms of approval for the development of a composting facility because of a lack of measures in place to adequately protect the environment and community, considering its location in a major catchment area for

the Hunter region’s drinking water.

The Land and Environment Court decision outlined the following strict conditions that must be met: • the receiving area must be covered and all composting operations must occur under a roof; • all outside organics and waste storage areas must be lined with a barrier of at least 600mm thickness and permeability of 10-9m/s; • all dams with leachate from the organics and waste storage area

must be lined with a composite liner with permeability of 10-9m/s and at least 900mm compacted clay. The liner must be overlaid with a flexible membrane liner; • no landscaping materials stored outside can contain more than 5% compost materials; and • preparation of an Operational Environmental Management Plan and a Composting Operations Plan - to be approved by the EPA. The EPA will now work with Port

Stephens Council and Gardenland to map out a plan for the court orders to be implemented, and to undertake the assessments outlined in the orders.

EPA chair and CEO Barry Buffier said he was pleased with the outcome which has the health of the community and the environment at its centre.

More ways to Master waste The JCB Wastemaster range now offers a wide range of models purpose built for waste and recycling operations, which means that your choice of machine is now greater than ever. What’s more, with over 10,000 JCB machines working in waste worldwide, we recognise the importance of round the clock service.

1300 522 232 jcbcea.com.au

8

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

INTRODUCING THE GARWOOD

DUALPACT REARLOADER

Why run two trucks when you can do the job with one?

Ideal for locations where multiple waste streams are being collected, pick up; Garbage/Recycle or Paper/Plastics or Comingled/Organics. The options are endless!      

Tailgate split configurations available in 50/50, 60/40 and 70/30 Body sizes from 6m3 up to 22m3 ZERO chance of cross contamination Independent chamber compaction settings Multiple bin lifter configurations Able to pick up the full range of wheelie bins (120L, 240L, 360L, 660L & 1100L) 12m3

70/30 split available for demo

HEAD OFFICE NSW 3 Hexham Place, Wetherill Park, NSW, 2164 – Daniel McHugh Ph (02) 9756 3756 VICTORIA 24 Industrial Drive, Sunshine West, VIC, 3020 – Ian Pinney Ph 0409 905 451 QUEENSLAND 4/12 Daintree Drive, Redland Bay, QLD, 4165 – Mark Scull Ph 0405 447 554 UNITED KINGDOM Garwood Europe, Calcott Lane, Shrewsbury, UK, SY3 8EZ – Neil Barnfield +44 1743 851 263 EMAIL info@garwoodinternational.com.au WEB www.garwoodinternational.com.au

News //

Hexham Bridge incident turns spotlight on chain of responsibility issues IN March, O’Neill’s Truck and Trailer Repairs was called to the scene after a truck containing waste material rolled on Hexham Bridge near Newcastle in NSW. This is the sixth rollover incident involving waste materials that the company has had to deal with in the last 12 months.

The incident, which occurred on March 5, resulted in the closure of two northbound lanes and the northbound on-ramp, with traffic being diverted.

According to reports, three people were injured after the truck slammed into the guard rail near the Tarro on-ramp at about 4pm.

Waste spilled across 100 metres of road and the EPA was on-site to monitor the clean-up. According to a Transport Management Centre spokesman, the truck had also spilled diesel into the river and on to the road.

O’Neill’s managing director Mick Grining confirmed that the truck and trailer were registered to Perth

company Delta Logistics and said there was a combination of defects on the prime mover and trailer. He also told Inside Waste investigations were ongoing to determine if the materials contained asbestos.

Given this is the sixth clean-up in a year that O’Neill’s has been called in to attend to, Grining expressed his concerns particularly around the appropriate insurance cover, or lack thereof, of material loads.

He noted that when such incidents occur, the clean-up costs were “phenomenal”, sitting anywhere between $10,000 and $16,000.

Grining is often hesitant to take up these jobs for fear of having to foot the bill because of the lack of insurance cover. However, he said Road and Maritime Services (RMS) NSW has agreed to pay for clean-ups in a bid to effectively and quickly clean up the mess and re-open roads. But the question is, why should RMS pay?

Waste spilled across 100m of road after a truck rolled over on Hexham Bridge in NSW. (Credit: WCRA)

“Under the chain of responsibility, I would have thought that the waste mobs were making sure that everyone had the proper insurance. The long and short of it is, I do these big clean-ups and I get paid but the money is coming from the taxpayer - the general public is paying for these clean-ups… I’m billing the government and they are paying for it,” Grining said.

“If companies are going to cart waste, they should be made to have all the proper insurance before they come up the highway.”

Grining also questioned why waste is still being transported from NSW to Queensland, a controversial and much debated topic and one that Waste Contractors & Recyclers Association of NSW (WCRA) has been vocal about.

Commenting on the Hexham Bridge incident, WCRA executive director Tony Khoury said: “The details surrounding this accident are quite disturbing non-compliance with NSW road rules, low quality equipment and poor maintenance on the truck and trailer.

“We understand that RMS has serious chain of responsibility concerns that should be addressed with the waste facility that loaded this truck. Unless the authorities, NSW government and the Queensland government take steps to address the issue of long distance transport of waste, these ever-increasing heavy vehicle truck movements may result in a serious catastrophe or fatalities on our roads. And I really don’t want to read that headline.”

www.hyva.com

Ÿ Tipping solutions Ÿ Truck loader

cranes

Ÿ Hookloaders Ÿ Skiploaders Ÿ Waste handling

equipment

Hyva Pacific Pty Ltd

10

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Ph: 1800 041 733 Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Vehicle shown in a waste application with third party body fitted.

Body must be purchased separately from a third party body builder.

Low entry, low noise, dual control and available now.

It's a hard collection to beat.

The Econic Dual Control Cab Chassis is now available for immediate delivery.

Purpose-built for the Australian waste industry, the Econic Dual Control Cab Chassis comes loaded with operational and safety benefits. From driver ergonomics to environmental and noise impact, every element has been carefully considered, quite literally from the low-level entry up.

Visit mercedes-benz.com.au/econic for more information, or contact your local authorised Mercedes-Benz Trucks Dealership.

• Full Walk Through Cabin • On Board Scales • Air Bag Suspension on all Axles • ESP Stability Assist Program • Frequent Stop Brake • ECE R29/3 Cab Crash Test Standard

News //

CONEXPO: Going all out in Vegas

Metso’s new MX multi-action cone crusher drew the attention of the crowd.

Waste 2017 Conference and Exhibition Opal Cove Resort | Coffs Harbour | 2 – 4 May 2017 Due to popular demand, the well-known Coffs Harbour Waste Conference has been extended to 2½ days, with an earlier commencement on Tuesday 2nd May. The program is now available, featuring expert keynote addresses, inspiring case studies, interactive workshops and panel discussions. You can also attend a Landfill Application Training Course on Tuesday 2nd May. If it is important in your role to keep abreast of the latest industry developments whilst networking with national and international industry leaders, then Waste 2017 is for you.

Register today to ensure you don’t miss this industry event which will feature: • 550+ delegates • 90+ presenters • 80+ sponsors and exhibitors • 3 social events

View the program and register online at www.coffswasteconference.com.au/2017/waste Email: wasteconference@impactenviro.com.au Phone: 02 6583 8118 Supported by: Major Sponsors:

12

Hosted by:

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Organised by:

IN March, the Inside Waste team made the long trek to Las Vegas - tough gig - to check out CONEXPO-CON/AGG and it was a feast for the senses.

Many an equipment supplier took the opportunity to showcase their latest innovations. Here’s a snapshot of the machines that caught our eye.

Scrap King - Gusella-Bakker, which manufactures lifting equipment for waste, is now in Australia, having entered the space “a few months ago”.

Gusella-Bakker’s Robert Slikker pointed to the Scrap King SCE Orange Peel grapple, which was on display, saying the product has numerous benefits.

He said unlike traditional grapples, the Scrap King does not have a central column and its unique base is built entirely out of high tensile steel. This design, Slikker said, allows for minimal welding, meaning the structure is more rigid than other grapples.

Additionally, not having a central column means there is more room in the centre of the base to accommodate the hydraulic components and parts of the GRI rotator.

Because of these features, the company said the Scrap King SCE requires “far less height than any other grapple available on the market today”.

McLanahan - McLanahan Corporation launched its MMS Track Trommel at the show, taking its first step into the mobile equipment market. The company said the MMS Track Trommel is ideal for processing aggregates, waste fines, construction and demolition material, compost, topsoil, ash, and wood waste. The mobile trommel can be containerised when almost fully assembled, and can be set up and running in just 15 minutes.

It is capable of handling up to 165

tons per hour of material. MMS Track Trommels also feature a self-cleaning drum that minimises downtime.

Morbark - Morbark unveiled its 3400XT Wood Hog horizontal grinder at CONEXPO-CON/AGG, and one of the most important features, according to the company, is the 3400XT’s standard width of 2.53 metres, making it within the legal transport width in any country, regardless of the engine used. This model also accommodates engines from 540 to 800 horsepower (402-596kW), meaning it is ideal for a broad range of applications, and it is available with electric power.

Customer feedback steered Morbark towards creating more operatorfriendly features. Key among these is the design of the infeed bed, which is 60.96cm longer with sloped sides.

Metso - The company promised to dramatically lower cost of ownership with its new MX multi-action cone crusher, saying the machine would increase uptime by 10%, reduce operational costs by 10%, and offer up to 70% of wear part utilisation. Metso can make these promises because of its patented multi-action technology, which allows the MX multi-action cone crusher to optimise the crusher setting and wear compensation in real-time, requiring no human action. Both the piston and rotating bowl adjustments can also be fully automated while dynamic setting adjustment and wear compensation are designed to be used when the crusher is operating, meaning the process does not need to be stopped when adjustments are made and leading to, as Metso puts it, much higher uptime compared to traditional cone crushers. Meanwhile, the Metso MX provides maximum utilisation of wear parts - up to 70% of the mass.

New waste body forms in SA A new waste and recycling industry representative body was formed in Adelaide on February 16, following a meeting attended by representatives from a range of companies with direct investment in the state’s waste management, recycling and resource recovery industry.

The Waste and Recycling Industry Association of South Australia or WRISA is now ready to roll and an inaugural management committee has been formed consisting of representatives from Solo Resource Recovery, Peats Soil, Veolia, Mastec, SUEZ, Scout Recycling, ResourceCo and Bettatrans.

“Through WRISA, the waste management and recycling industry

operators in South Australia will have the opportunity as a single voice to promote the industry, and optimise engagement of government, business and the community,” said Peter Wadewitz, president of WRISA and managing director of Peats Soil.

“Our objective is to influence change in the interest of the industry.”

The focus of WRISA will be to engage those with an investment in the industry and to promote solutions to the legislative and regulatory challenges facing the sector.

Key to the success of the association’s activities will be ensuring consultation goes right across the local industry, and canvasses the views of all players large and small.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

THE AGGRESCRUB AVAILABLE FROM MWS CALL 1800 777 300

   

Dual shaft logwasher system Produce 4 grades of washed, screened material Breaks down clay bound aggregates Suitable for C&D waste applications

MODULAR SAND WASHING

COMPACT SAND WASH

MANUFACTURED SAND WASH

MOBILE RINSING

C & D WASTE PROCESSING

THICKENERS & FILTER PRESSES

TELEPHONE 1800 777 300 EMAIL info@mineralwashing.com.au

www.mineralwashing.com.au

News //

Three-armed robot to enter Singapore

EPA tracks illegal dumpers THREE years ago, the NSW government introduced tougher laws, including the power to install trackers on vehicles.

In March, the NSW EPA announced that it had fitted GPS trackers to vehicles suspected of illegally dumping construction and demolition waste, including asbestos.

These vehicles were fitted with the trackers after a covert EPA investigation into illegal dumping incidents last year.

The GPS trackers have been fitted to the vehicles, with the owners’ knowledge, as part of a 12-month trial.

It is illegal for the drivers or vehicle owners to remove or tamper with the trackers “The GPS system allows the EPA to track the vehicles’ movements, alerting them if they travel near known illegal dumping hotspots,” NSW Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton said.

“The NSW government is serious about cracking down on illegal dumpers - trial results show the trackers fitted to vehicles have deterred illegal activity and won’t just deter those being watched but others who think

they can get away with dumping on our communities and environment.”

The EPA will consider using tracking devices to monitor other vehicles accused of transporting or dumping waste unlawfully once the trial is complete.

The EPA can issue on the spot fines of up to $15,000 for corporations and $7500 for individuals. Courts can impose a maximum penalty of $1 million and/or seven years’ imprisonment to individuals, or both, for an offence that is committed wilfully.

SINGAPORE will soon have its first three-armed robot, after ZenRobotics and V8 Environmental Pte Ltd agreed on the delivery of the ZenRobotics Recycler Unit that will be installed in a new material recovery facility expected to be operational by mid next year.

The ZenRobotics Recycler system reclaims multiple fractions simultaneously with the help of industrial robots and smart machine learning technology.

The three-armed ZRR unit makes up to 6000 picks per hour and throws the sorted objects in several waste chutes. A wide working area of 2m by 2m ensures the system’s high sorting performance.

Meanwhile, the ZenRobotics Smart Gripper is specifically designed to meet the demands of solid waste. The gripper opens from 40mm to 500mm, allowing sorting of objects of various shapes and sizes, even up to 30kg.

The delivery to Singapore will be ZenRobotics’ first in Southeast Asia.

NSW waste operators slapped with fines Environmental Equipment

Ecotec

SLOW SPEED SHREDDERS • MEDIUM SPEED SHREDDERS

A TEREX BRAND

COMPACT CRUSHING & SCREENING EQUIPMENT Exclusive Dealers in WA, NT & SA WA - 08 9359 0333 | NT - 08 8932 3000 | SA - 08 8280 6033

www.opsaust.com.au 14

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

THREE waste operators in South West Sydney and the Southern Highlands have been fined more than $53,000 by the NSW EPA for alleged unlawful waste activities.

Chester Hill truck driver Assem Fattah, now trading as AACE Civil, was issued with $8000 in penalties after a truck registered to him was involved in an accident while trying to dump building and demolition waste on a roadside reserve off Picton Road at Wilton. He has also been fined for providing false and misleading information to the EPA during its investigation.

EPA manager regional waste compliance Cate Woods said Fattah’s truck was in the process of dumping the waste when it rolled partway onto its side.

Responding to the accident, traffic services were able to identify the dumping activity, alert the EPA and gather evidence at the scene.

“Our investigation revealed that this was the third time this truck had visited the site - a known hotspot for illegal dumping,” Woods said.

“On this occasion, not only was this waste dumped near a catchment for Sydney’s drinking water, it was also dumped in close proximity to the road, causing a road safety risk.

“We don’t tolerate illegal dumping. It undermines legitimate operators in the

waste industry who are working with us to do the right thing. We also don’t tolerate individuals who attempt to derail our investigations by providing false information.”

Over in East Kangaloon, the EPA has issued $30,000 in penalties to soil company Amiterre Ag Solutions Pty Ltd and a $15,000 penalty to SUEZ for allegedly operating an unlawful waste facility on a private property on Tourist Road.

Following, again, another traffic incident, emergency services and Wingecarribee Shire Council alerted the EPA to what they suspected was an unlawful waste facility.

EPA investigations found that approximately 285 tonnes of food and other waste had been deposited at the property and that the waste was being eaten by livestock, which Woods said may present a biosecurity risk.

“The waste material here included material which contained meat products, such as dog chews, which need to be disposed of properly,” she said.

“While the EPA allows some waste to be used in farming, it needs to be done in a lawful manner and in an environmentally responsible manner. This allows us to make sure it’s beneficial to the soil and the wider environment.”

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

Legal Eagle: resource recovery orders and exemptions - how do they work?

G&B Lawyers partner Kim Glassborrow is Inside Waste’s Legal Eagle columnist, publishing updates, case studies and case notes once every six weeks. In March, she detailed how NSW resource recovery orders and exemptions work.

Resource recovery orders outline conditions that must be met by generators and processors of waste in order to lawfully supply recycled waste for the purposes of land application, use of the waste as fuel or in connection with a process of thermal treatment. Resource recovery exemptions set out the conditions that must be met by consumers and receivers of recycled waste who wish to apply this waste to land, or use the waste as fuel or in connection with a process of thermal treatment.

If the consumer/receiver abides by the conditions in the exemption, they will be exempt from specific requirements set out in the exemption, such as holding an EPL, levy liability, waste transport certificates, or annual reporting.

However, it is important to note that the resource recovery orders and exemptions do not remove the requirement to comply with planning consent requirements.

The Recovered Aggregate Order 2014 applies to any person who supplies recovered aggregate that has been generated, processed or recovered by the person. Part 4 of the Order lists the processor requirements which include, but are not limited to: • preparing a sampling plan and undertaking specific sampling and testing; • that the recovered aggregate is not to be supplied to any person if particular chemical concentrations exceed the maximum amount listed; • ensuring that testing of samples is undertaken by National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) (or equivalent) approved laboratories; and • providing a written statement of compliance as well as copies of the Order and Exemption to the consumer.

The Recovered Aggregate Exemption 2014 applies to any person who applies or intends to apply recovered aggregate to land. Part 7 of the Exemption lists the conditions of exemption which include, but are not limited to: • not using the exemption for applications such as the construction

of dams, mine site rehabilitation etc.; • keeping a written record of the quantity of recovered aggregate received and the name and address of the supplier; • making any records available to authorised EPA officers on request; and • ensuring that any application of recovered aggregate to land must occur within a reasonable period of time after its receipt.

As many would recall, on October 21, 2016, the EPA released a consultation paper on the minimum standards for managing C&D waste in NSW. The consultation paper proposed a number of reforms that will affect the waste industry as a whole if legislated.

One of the proposed changes is the removal of the general recovered fines order and exemption which is to be replaced by site-specific recovered fines orders that will be issued by the EPA. This means that if the reforms are legislated, individual facilities will need to apply to the EPA to obtain an order to lawfully recover fines.

Between October 21, 2016 and November 17, 2016 the consultation paper was open to the public for

Firefighters battle blaze at SUEZ facility ON February 23, a large fire broke out at SUEZ’s Chullora Resource Recovery Park, 15km west of the Sydney CBD, that left waste smouldering for weeks.

The fire, which broke out before 9.30am, sent plumes of thick black smoke into the air that could be seen from the CBD. Reports indicated that at 10am that morning, 11 fire trucks were at the scene with 15 more on their way.

Fire and Rescue NSW said all on-site were accounted for and factories surrounding the centre had been evacuated.

“SUEZ confirms that a fire has occurred at its Chullora Resource Recovery Centre,” SUEZ corporate affairs manager Luke Schepen said.

“Emergency services and authorities were called to the incident immediately. All personnel have been accounted for and no injuries have been reported.

“We appreciate the very swift response and ongoing work from emergency services and we will continue to work with them and conduct a full investigation.”

SUEZ also released a statement weeks later on March 10, saying it continued to experience smouldering from waste located in the building, which had been damaged. Because of the severity of the damage, access to fully extinguish the fire had not been possible due to concerns regarding the building’s structural integrity.

“Preparations are underway to demolish the building and this will be undertaken in conjunction with NSW Fire and Rescue, NSW Environment Protection Authority, Ausgrid and demolition contractors,” SUEZ said at the time.

“Demolition work, including isolating electricity and gas lines to the site, will commence in the coming days. Completion of the demolition process is then estimated to take some weeks.

“We are working with emergency services, South West Sydney Local Health District officials and the New South Wales Environment Protection Authority to monitor the site and any potential impact on local air quality or the environment.”

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Inside Waste’s Legal Eagle, Kim Glassborow.

consultation. The next step in the process is for the EPA to prepare a consultation report to address the issues raised during the consultation.

No updates have been provided to the public to date.

This means that the current regime of resource recovery orders and exemptions that apply to fines will remain in force.

The full article can be found on www.insidewaste.com.au Credit: sv1ambo, Flickr CC

Several injured in waste truck collision IN another unfortunate event, a collision between a REMONDIS waste truck and a bus in Sydney’s west in mid-March has left multiple people injured.

The accident occurred at about 9.40am March 14 on the corner of Widemere and Davis roads in Wetherill Park.

According to a NSW Police statement, the garbage truck, which was travelling on Davis Road and a bus travelling on the Transitway collided, causing the bus to leave the road and hit a number of parked cars in a car park.

The bus was carrying about 20 passengers at the time and NSW Ambulance paramedics treated 15 of the passengers at the scene for various injuries including fractures and bruising.

A Transit System buses spokesperson told The Sydney Morning Herald the cause of the accident was “the truck going through a red light”.

NSW Police said the male driver of the garbage truck was uninjured and breath tested at the scene. The test returned a negative result.

A REMONDIS spokesperson told the newspaper the driver, aged in his 50s, had been with the company for more than 10 years.

“He’s in shock at the moment, he’s very shaken to have seen people injured,” the spokesperson said.

“He will be getting counselling later today.”

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

15

Equipment news //

EVO goes to Garwood GARWOOD International Pty Ltd has purchased the design, IP and manufacture rights for the EVO Front lift product from Wastech. The unit will now be fully manufactured and available from Garwood International, a 100% Australian owned and operated family business with its head operations in Wetherill Park, Sydney. The unit will be offered all around Australia and will also be introduced into the European market through Garwood Europe Ltd, which is again a 100% Australian owned and operated company.

“It’s an exciting investment for us, we have been looking at the front lift market for some time and rather than

design and develop a unit from scratch, we approached Wastech, came to an agreement and purchased the product from them,” Garwood managing director Daniel McHugh said.

“The front lift unit will complement and complete our leading range of reliable rear loaders, side loaders, and stationary and portable packers for waste equipment collections. The purchase

has also allowed us to hit the ground running with this product, we knew it to be a well-designed, proven product with reliable performance which is what we are all about at Garwood, so it made sense to go after it.”

Garwood has made some subtle changes to improve the design and reduce some of the costs, which will be passed onto the customer.

Four body sizes will be available - 26m3, 31m3, 33.5m3 and 35m3 - to adapt to customers’ requirements.

“We have bodies in build so expect to see a Garwood front lift running around your neighbourhood in the near future,” McHugh said.

More: Daniel McHugh - 02 9756 3756, info@garwoodinternational.com.au or www.garwoodinternational.com.au

Ditch Witch Australia introduces Diamond Z DITCH Witch Australia has diversified its portfolio of proven product offerings with the addition of Diamond Z grinders and metal recycling equipment.

Manufactured in the US for consistent reliability, Ditch Witch Australia brings the Diamond Z brand to Australia’s recycling industries.

The manufacturer’s awardwinning line-up of horizontal, tub, enclosed, tyre and solid waste grinding hardware has developed a global reputation for ground-up engineering dependability.

“The array of machine technologies Diamond Z uses in manufacturing their diverse range of grinders is very impressive,” Ditch Witch Australia said.

“Diamond Z has been constructing

specialised grinding equipment for nearly two decades and is recognised as the world’s premier manufacturer of industrial tub and horizontal grinders. Such is the wide range of options the company

Otto rolls out four-wheel containers

THE number of 1100-litre waste and recyclables containers in the municipal and public domain has increased 16

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

substantially in recent years, with two main types in the market - bins with sliding or round lids, and bins with

offers, we’re confident there will be a Diamond Z grinding solution for any Australian application.”

Since its formation, Diamond Z has been at the leading edge of grinder technology development, building

flat lids. Under certain conditions, flat-lid bins can encounter problems with rotating-drum vehicles because of their long, wide lids. In a few cases, collisions can even occur between lids and waste residues in the tipping zone or with compactor plates. Such contact problems do not usually arise with round-lid bins, but these are costlier and more maintenance-intensive than flat-lid bins. Also, the trucks need to be equipped with a special lid-opener in the lifting device.

Otto has combined the advantages of round-lid bins and flat-lid bins, introducing the 1100L split lid bin that consists a base lid and a flexible front lid.

The Split Lid combines safety, ease of handling and economy, and is an interesting alternative to bins with round lids. The integral bow-type

the world’s first fully enclosed tub grinder in 1996. Diamond Z also designed the SWG 1600, the world’s first and only on­ site mobile solid waste grinder.

Built exclusively to process municipal solid waste and construction and demolition disposal, in overseas markets this model has been deployed in landfill and transfer stations, where its impressive 300ton per hour production rates have had a direct result on net operating income for a variety of operators.

“These are just two of the many model lines available, but it’s examples like these that show the Diamond Z brand really will open up new territory for us,” Ditch Witch Australia said.

More: www.dwaus.com.au or 02 4777 7115.

handle in the middle of the front lid combined with a lip handle all round the edge is a unique solution. The front lid can be opened 150° and remains in that position during filling. The base lid section of the split lid can easily be opened, completely using the bow-type handles at the sides. From neutral position, the front lid can also swing downwards, so that it can yield to any contact zones in the refuse truck during emptying.

The Split Lid, with its flexible front element, can also hinge in either direction, making fractures of the lid or damage to the body hinge practically impossible. All in all, it significantly reduces the risk of accidents due to damaged bins.

More: www.otto-australia.com.au or 02 9153 8666.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

news

Waste Management Association of Australia: Suite 4.08 | 10 Century Circuit | Baulkham Hills NSW 2135 | t: 02 8746 5000 | e: info@wmaa.asn.au | w: www.wmaa.asn.au

From the CEO’s desk our WMAA members – led by Paul Lightbody and Amir Shahkolahi – who volunteered their time and expertise to deliver the program. A big thanks, also, to our sponsors and exhibitors. Without you, the event would not have been possible.

It was great to meet so many people and see so much passion for the industry!

To all of you and the support and energy you bring to this essential industry, we say thanks! We look forward to 2019 and the 8th Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference.

WMAA Board and President’s Planning (BPP) Day

I think that March will be forever known as “Mad March” for WMAA, especially the last week of the month which saw WMAA successfully host the 7th Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference at Rosehill, coupled with a Board meeting and WMAA’s first ever Board and President’s Planning (BPP) Day. The conference was a great success. Approximately 350 delegates took part in the event, which comprised of workshops, conference streams and site tours.

At the Gala Dinner, which was attended by 250 people, WMAA announced the winners of the 2017 WMAA National Landfill & Transfer Stations Innovation and Excellence Awards. Congratulations to Townsville Waste Services - Magnetic Island Transfer Station (Transfer Stations Excellence Award winner), Dulverton Waste Management - Dulverton Waste Management Landfill (Landfill Excellence Award winner), and Toowoomba Regional Council Waste Service – Automation (Innovation Award winner).

Post event, WMAA took the opportunity to bring together in Sydney as many Branch Presidents and Board Members as possible to continue ensuring that WMAA is the peak body leading the success of the waste and resource recovery industry. As a leadership team we signed off on the Strategic Directions for WMAA and this vital industry. We look forward to communicating these and actively planning key state priorities and actions over coming weeks, to ensure that we are delivering for all.

Do not hesitate to contact the WMAA National Office on 02 8746 5000 if you want to get involved!

We look forward to the next three months and all that they bring, including the Waste 2017 Conference and Exhibition in Coffs Harbour which we are very proud to be involved with, and the first Women of Waste (WoW) Breakfast for the year in Melbourne in May. Gayle Sloan Chief Executive Officer Waste management Association of Australia

The conference could not have occurred without the amazing effort of

Making the linear circular. Is it time?

In Europe and in Asia, with the support of government, more businesses are discarding the decades-old linear “take, make, waste” model in favour of the circular economy.

Although “circular economy” might seem like a new concept borne from a recognition that world resources are finite, commodity prices are on the rise and the world is in a desperate need to decouple economic growth from resource consumption, its underlying principles such as cradle-to-cradle, industrial ecology and biomimicry have been practiced since the 1970s.

In recent years, circular economy has gained traction thanks to the work conducted by a number of organisations, predominantly the charity Ellen MacArthur Foundation and McKinsey & Company, who in 2012 released a world-first report making a business case for it. An updated study, Towards a Circular Economy, was published in 2015. The study found that the economic gain from material savings alone – if companies focused on circular supply chains that increase recycling, reuse and remanufacture – could be estimated at over US$1 trillion a year by 2025.

Considering that an estimated 80% of the US$3.2 trillion value of the global consumer goods sector is lost irrecoverably each year due to the current linear model (World Economic Forum), it is understandable why governments and business alike are beginning to sharpen their focus on circular economy.

In late 2015, the European Commission (EC) adopted an ambitious Circular Economy Package which consists of an EU Action Plan with measures covering the whole product life cycle: from design, sourcing, production and consumption to waste management and a market for secondary raw materials.

The EC recognised that a transition towards a more circular economy would bring great opportunities to modernise and transform the European economy, shifting it towards a more sustainable direction with additional energy savings and environmental benefits, as well as the creation of more local jobs.

The China Association of Circular Economy – comprising of government, academic and business leaders promoting the practice of circular economy – cites annual growth of 15% between 2006 to 2010 of its circular economy,

doubling from 1 trillion yuan in 2010 to 1.8 trillion yuan in 2015.

Where does this leave Australia?

Based on the estimates, Australia’s cut of the US$1 trillion could be $26 billion by 2025, with more jobs creation, less landfill, resource depletion and environmental damage (World Economic Forum).

In the absence of federal initiatives, state and local governments, communities and businesses are developing projects to foster a circular economy.

South Australia, with its introduction of the Waste Strategy 2015–2020, aims to steer the state towards landfill diversion rates of 70%, 80% and 90% respectively, with additional attention given to energy from waste.

In Victoria, in an Australian first, Yarra Valley Water constructed a waste to energy facility linked to a sewage treatment plant. The purpose-built facility will provide an environmentally friendly disposal solution for commercial organic waste, with an estimated 33,000 tonnes of commercial food waste diverted from landfill each year.

The Cowra Biomass project in NSW is another prime example of a communitydriven circular economy that shows what state and local government, industry and community can achieve with waste that is created locally: turn it into energy and fertiliser, which then can be reused within that same geographical location.

Within the private sector, the Australian firm Interface repurposes discarded fishing line from the Philippines to create its Net Effect carpet range.

Replas, another Australian company, has for more than 20 years provided a solution for plastic waste by turning it into more than 200 recycled plastic products, including outdoor furniture.

Yet, in spite of these and many other examples of circular economy models taking a quiet foothold in the context of Australia’s relationship with waste and resource recovery, are we still lagging behind the rest of the world in terms of a national debate, policy development, business modelling and mind set?

Q&A //

A busy year for Victoria IN May last year, a government reshuffle in Victoria led to then Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio taking on the environment and climate change, as well as suburban development portfolios.

A year on, Inside Waste was curious about the progress, if any, and changes that the minister had made, particularly around its proposed e-waste to landfill ban, waste to energy - interest seems to be ramping up in the state - and planning and integration.

We posed a number of questions to D’Ambrosio and here’s what her spokesperson had to say.

IW: In 2015, the government announced that it was considering banning e-waste from landfill. A discussion paper was then released a few months later that same year. Can the minister please provide us with a progress update on where this proposal is at?

Spokesperson: DELWP, EPA Victoria, Sustainability Victoria and Victoria’s waste and resource recovery groups continue to work together to develop the e-waste landfill ban. Some of the activities that have occurred in the past 6- 12 months include: • targeted workshops with local councils and the waste and resource recovery industry to explore some of the proposed features of the ban; • analysis on how the ban can benefit the Victorian community and industry and what it might cost to implement; • early planning for an e-waste education and awareness program; and • site visits and discussions about how the ban might work with various stakeholders, such as e-waste and metal recyclers, local councils, landfill operators, social enterprises and other government agencies.

As a result of these discussions and analysis, the government will develop the ban through waste management 18

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

policies under the Environment Protection Act 1970.

These policies are being developed now and will be released for public comment this year. Work will continue on some of the more complex issues, such as compliance standards, enforcement approach, and determining when e-waste may be disposed to landfill as well as on the e-waste education and awareness program, drawing on behavioural research to inform its design.

The Labor government also committed $20 million to the New Energy Jobs Fund, which supports activities that create sustainable jobs and drive innovation in new energy technologies, including waste to energy.

In addition to funding, the government is looking at what other policy settings we might need to put in place to encourage investment in waste to energy.

The government is working hard to reflect the role of waste management and resource recovery in Victoria’s land use planning framework, and to facilitate needed infrastructure.

IW: In February, the government launched the $2 million Waste to Energy Infrastructure Fund aimed at supporting the development of WtE. What is the government’s view of WtE and what is it doing to promote WtE? Spokesperson: Reducing the volume of waste going to landfill is a central goal of Victoria’s waste policy. The Andrews Labor government recognises that waste to energy technologies have the potential to play an important role in reducing our reliance on landfill. They can also provide an additional source of energy, bring investment into Victoria and create jobs. The government is keen to work with the emerging waste to energy industry in Victoria to better support its development.

The 2016-17 Victorian budget included $2 million to help facilitate an organic waste to energy project in metropolitan Melbourne. This initiative has a particular focus on diverting food waste originating from the commercial and industrial sector away from landfill.

The specific design of this initiative is under development, and further details will be announced soon.

IW: When it comes to planning and integration, the government has made great strides in improving integration and coordination between departments, particularly planning and environment, and has also acknowledged that waste and resource recovery is an essential service. What else is the government doing by way of planning and integration?

Spokesperson: In 2015, the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) was established to bring together planning, local government and infrastructure, environment, climate change, energy and water functions, ensuring an integrated approach to the development of longterm state and regional strategies that build on social, environmental and economic opportunities to provide for future population growth and change.

In 2017, environment protection and land use planning will continue in this direction, with a focus on better integration to reduce delays in decisions, improve liveability, and to support investment.

The waste and resource recovery sector provides an essential service to

Environment Minister Lily D’Ambrosio.

all Victorians. This is recognised in the Statewide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan, which together with seven regional implementation plans form part of Victoria’s Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Planning Framework under the Environment Protection Act 1970. One objective of the framework is to better integrate waste planning with land use planning.

The government is working hard to reflect the role of waste management and resource recovery in Victoria’s land use planning framework, and to facilitate needed infrastructure.

It can be difficult to balance the net economic and environmental benefits of a facility and minimise its effects on the surrounding community. But we need to protect waste and resource recovery infrastructure, and other sectors like food manufacturing and intensive farming, against competing and incompatible land uses.

The government is developing a comprehensive suite of waste-related land use planning tools. These tools will be used by local planning authorities to minimise impacts on adjoining communities. They will define, protect and maintain buffers to waste and resource recovery facilities and ensure sites can be appropriately zoned, sited and operated. The Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group is working with local government and relevant planning groups to develop the right planning tools.

The government’s response

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Q&A E-waste landfill ban policies are being developed now and will be released for public comment this year.

(Credit: Curtis Palmer, Flickr CC)

In addition to funding, the government is looking at what other policy settings we might need to put in place to encourage investment in waste to energy. to the 2015-16 Environment Protection Authority Victoria Inquiry recommendations will change the EPA’s role in land use planning. The EPA will have greater opportunity and capacity to influence strategic land use planning decisions to help reduce health, amenity and environmental risks. This means the EPA will be more involved, and at earlier stages, in land use decisions, providing greater certainty for everyone. Standards and guidance will be more practical and easily understood so that land use planners can more effectively apply environment protection considerations.

This is likely to involve changes to both planning and EPA guidance materials and instruments.

Following the release of the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Implementation Plan last year, the remaining regional waste and resource recovery implementation plans will be finalised in 2017, the final piece to the framework. This will provide direction and certainty for industry and communities in Victoria.

IW: And finally, what is the department focusing on in 2017?

Spokesperson: DELWP, along with its environment portfolio partners, will continue to deliver on the government commitments - the e-waste landfill ban and implementing the government’s response to the EPA Inquiry.

DELWP and its portfolio partners are currently finalising the remaining

regional waste and resource recovery implementation plans. The whole framework, including the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Implementation Plan and the Statewide Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Plan, will be fully integrated and published this year. The next phase will be implementing these plans, and identifying what needs to happen to achieve their long-term goals.

DELWP will continue to support the strategies developed by Sustainability Victoria under the Framework.

These include the Victorian Organic Resource Recovery Strategy, the Victorian Market Development Strategy for Recovered Resources, and the Victorian Community and Business Waste Education Strategy. Important objectives of the strategies include: • streamlining government policies and interventions to manage organic waste; • further developing the resource recovery sector; • establishing demand for products made from recovered resources; and • increasing community and business awareness and perception of waste management as an essential service.

The government is also reviewing hazardous waste policy in Victoria.

The review is investigating appropriate policy settings to safely manage legacy hazardous wastes, such as asbestos, including how to deal with the problem of illegal dumping.

At a national level, the Victorian government will be leading the development of a voluntary product stewardship approach for photovoltaic systems, supporting the Australian government’s commitment to reduce food waste by 50% by 2030, and monitoring the effectiveness of actions by industry to phase out the use of iw microbeads in Australia.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

19

Legal //

Insights from inside the EPA: top five tips for managing your response to an investigation

By Ross Fox NO-ONE in the waste industry wants unwanted attention from a government regulator such as the EPA. However, if you’ve been unfortunate enough to have an accident, incident or complaint made about your business, then you may not have a choice. If you do find your business in the spotlight, what can you do to get the best possible outcome? Managing your relationship with the regulator is not just for the big players, often the impacts can be costlier for smaller operators.

I spent around 10 years advising the NSW EPA on compliance action and running major prosecutions in the

20

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

waste industry. In that time, I saw some companies that managed the EPA exceptionally well and some that didn’t - often with very different outcomes.

Now, when clients come to see me about problems they are having with a government regulator like the EPA, often the approach they have taken has been counterproductive. I’ll let you in on a secret. It often isn’t about what happened but how the relationship is managed after that point.

So, what can you do? Here are my top five tips.

1. Listen No matter the level of the staff, listen and ask questions. While difficult, and requiring patience, the

information you gain will be useful.

Before you work up a strategy, it is important to understand as far as possible what is driving the issue.

Is it community concern? Political interference? Introduction of a new policy? Identifying the problem will help with the next step.

2. Frame your response Take all the information you’ve gathered and compare it to the formal compliance policies or any other information available about the decision making process. What is in your favour? If you were in the regulator’s shoes, what would you want to hear? This will ensure you get the message across in terms that are understood.

3.

Where possible, offer an alternative solution If serious, is there an acceptable solution to the problem that the regulator can present to the community as a positive outcome?

What alternatives are there to prosecution? For example, in NSW, it is possible to negotiate an Enforceable Undertaking to avoid prosecution and conviction. Doing so may require you to take the initiative.

4. Be firm and appear fair It is often dismissed but appearances matter. If you take out your frustrations on the messenger (i.e. the low level officer), you may create an enemy within the organisation which will make life difficult for your business in the long run. This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be firm in your approach. Target your efforts at the person who is responsible for making the ultimate decision on what actions will be taken.

5. Get good advice early Get good legal and technical advice early. It is critical to know your position and risks as well as to justify your response before positions become entrenched.

Taking the example of the Enforceable Undertaking, this is only likely to be considered by the NSW EPA when raised within weeks of the alleged incident. A lawyer

Fishburn Watson O’Brien senior associate, Ross Fox.

can help you put forward a clear position and limit the issues in dispute. Plus, your lawyer can more easily play “bad cop” while you play “good cop” - meaning less damage to your long-term relationship with the regulator’s staff.

Technical advice can also be important. The regulator will not understand your processes as well as you do. If you require engineering expertise to justify your actions, then obtain it (just make sure your lawyer briefs the expert so that you control whether to release it - a lawyer can make sure that where possible, the report is covered by legal professional privilege).

Ultimately each scenario is different, and the guide above is not exhaustive. However, establishing and maintaining a working relationship with government regulators will help ensure your corporate reputation comes out on top in the long run when the unfortunate or unavoidable happens.

Ross Fox is a senior associate at Fishburn Watson O’Brien and leader of its waste law team. He is also a former principal legal officer and assistant director of litigation for the NSW EPA. He specialises in advising the waste industry on licensing and dealing with the EPA across Sydney and on the North Coast of NSW. iw Contact: rfox@fwolaw.com

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

YOU

SCANIA

SAVE ON FUEL AND MAINTENANCE.

Scania has been helping waste contractors make a clean sweep of European and Australian streets for decades. Our success hinges on reliability, durability, low operating costs and maximum uptime. Your truck spends more time working, and you spend less on fuel and maintenance.

Contact Scania to find out how we can help you clean up your balance sheet as easily as you clean up the streets.

VICTORIA Scania Campbellfield Tel: (03) 9217 3300 Scania Dandenong Tel: (03) 9217 3600 Scania Laverton Tel: (03) 9369 8666

SOUTH AUSTRALIA Scania Wingfield Tel: (08) 8406 0200 NEW SOUTH WALES Scania Prestons Tel: (02) 9825 7900

Scania Newcastle Tel: (02) 9825 7940 K&J Trucks, Coffs Harbour Tel: (02) 6652 7218 NJ’s of Wagga Tel: (02) 6971 7214

QUEENSLAND Scania Richlands Tel: (07) 3712 8500 Scania Pinkenba Tel: (07) 3712 7900 Wideland, Toowoomba Tel: (07) 4633 1150

RSC Diesels, Cairns Tel: (07) 4054 5440 WESTERN AUSTRALIA Scania Kewdale Tel: (08) 9360 8500 Scania Bunbury Tel: (08) 9724 6200

Policy //

An opportunity to change your profitability

By Jacqueline Ong IF you think about the potential benefits of weight-based billing (WBB) - greater transparency, improvements in profitability, clearer price signals, and increased recycling to name a few - there seems to be little reason not to roll-out WBB in Australia.

WBB has been discussed widely over the last five or so years and it is certainly not a novel system, but one that is used across Europe. While there has been interest in Australia, what has so far stood in its way is the lack of appropriate and/or robust technology.

Then, there’s the policy and regulatory landscape which to date, has been somewhat hazy about the use of WBB in the country.

Last year, four companies REMONDIS, Bucher Municipal, MRA Consulting Group, and weighing systems company Diverseco came together to trial WBB in the Hunter Valley in NSW and the results could push the country one step closer to jumping on the WBB bandwagon.

Why now?

MRA, which applied and received a NSW EPA grant of $70,000 to conduct the trial, said WBB could very well support the regulator’s ongoing initiatives.

“MRA approached the NSW EPA and said, we think WBB is an important public policy shift and we think it’d support Bin Trim and what you’re trying to do with small businesses,” MRA director Mike Ritchie told Inside Waste.

“So the state government gave us $70,000, of which $40,000 was spent with Diverseco to install the Acconboard/BinWeigh on to a front lift Bucher Municipal truck in the Hunter Valley with REMONDIS. This billing system has been operating for about a year and the initial results support the view that in giving a proper price signal, generators of waste will recycle more and waste less.”

And REMONDIS, which is a first mover in this space, has recognised the growing interest in WBB, which is why it is exploring the technology now.

“Customers are seeking transparency in their invoicing and are interested in ways in which to reduce costs and improve environmental outcomes. Our goal is to continually improve the way 22

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

in which we service our customers,” REMONDIS general manager NSW/ACT operations and BD Susie McBurney said.

At time of press, MRA was still developing a report for the EPA based on the trial and Inside Waste will be publishing the results as soon as they are available.

But the drivers of the trial go beyond the government’s initiatives. Diverseco has heavily invested in training and technology in the measurement space and CEO Brenton Cunningham, who has been in the industry for 25 years, said technology was a major hurdle but the situation has changed.

“Measurement is more than it appears. It is more than what reads of the display,” Cunningham said.

“We found an organisation in Switzerland that utilises a different type of technology to what everyone else uses, which are pressure transducer technologies. In the static part of the sector, we use load cell technology where the load cell is the heart of any weighing system. However, load cells did not seem to work as well in motion,” Cunningham explained.

The Swiss supplier then forged a partnership with a company in New Zealand for the system and here is where it gets interesting, the equipment, which received trade approval in New Zealand, worked!

“That was basically when the penny dropped. Why is this working in New Zealand when everything else that every man and his dog have tried and we’ve tried, doesn’t? Where it seems you’ve got it to work one day but the next day it doesn’t and it works on this machine but not that machine and it depends on this operator and so forth? That’s why we’ve invested in the product and we’ve bought the IP, invested in engineering and developing the equipment to suit the vehicles we have in Australia as well as our bins.”

Making the tech work The general consensus is that Australia is some two to three years away from WBB but these four stakeholders agree that the work starts now.

For Cunningham, it is important that the sector has a system that is engineered to suit the different trucks on the road and one that’s worth spending money on. As part of the

trial, Bucher and Diverseco worked closely to make sure they had a system that did just that.

“At the end of the day, you’re putting two tonne bins over the top of your head, so we’ve had to engineer accordingly and the end result is that we now have a system that the operators are not turning off, we’re getting the reliability needed, and there’s no inaccuracy,” Cunningham said.

“The main benefit, apart from its weighing accuracy, which is a huge thing, and apart from the fact that it’s legal [National Measurement Instituteapproved], is that it’s in-motion and it suits industry.”

Bucher Municipal state manager NSW, Luke Aitken explained why the company’s interest in the system today is not premature.

“As a truck manufacturer, we want to make sure we’re partnering with companies that have the most accurate systems, which will benefit our customers. But we also want to make sure they’re fully integrated into our bodies and into our control systems.

We spend a lot of time and quality on our vehicles and bodies and we want to make any additions to that, any other options for our customers, have that same quality and it’s actually integrated and not just a bolt-on system,” Aitken said.

“The bins that our Force front loader can lift up are up to 3.6 tonnes and because it comes over the driver’s head, safety is a huge concern and focus for our product. We’ve designed our front loader to be as strong as it possibly can be and that area of the fork where the weighing system is installed is the working part of the truck. A lot of technology design goes into the steels used there, and a lot of technology design goes into the shape of the bracketry and the forks that actually lift the bins and the arms as well,” he added.

“We’re talking about one to two years of testing before a design is released to market so one of the challenges of this system is because it sits right there, that whole area had to be re-designed.”

The ongoing hurdles

WBB technology and since then, two more have been nationally approved with a third on its way. Diverseco’s AccuOnboard/BinWeigh system is one of the three. However, the technology is still developing and more testing needs to be done.

“There are some difficulties with WBB because it’s not an obvious path,” Ritchie noted.

“The difficulty is the technology is still developing. So you need a foolproof system or you need to have backup mechanisms if the scales break or are unavailable for whatever reason. And that fall-back position is going to be the current system, it’s going to be estimated weights. We expect volume-based billing will continue but it will become the back-up system to actual weight.

“The question is really about the technology catching up to the demand.

We only have a number of systems approved in Australia and the technology has to be robust and repeatable for it to be rolled out widely across the economy.”

In front loaders, the BinWeigh system will be installed on the lifting arms, and as the system does add a bit of weight to the trucks, safety is a top priority.

(Credit: Diverseco)

There is still work to be done. In 2005, the National Measurement Institute (NMI) approved the first Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Policy

For waste operators such as REMONDIS, the robustness of the scales needs to be verified in the field.

“Maintenance and calibration costs need to be considered to ensure accurate pricing is issued to our customers at all times,” McBurney said.

Then there’s the question of how billing will change. Ritchie pointed to a potential model that Australia could follow.

“The way it’s operating in Europe is that companies charge a fixed fee which is like an availability charge for turning up and lifting your bin, whether there’s anything in it or not. And then they charge you the direct cost of landfill disposal so effectively, the bill becomes two parts - the availability fee and the disposal fee. And it’s only the disposal fee part that’s based on weight,” he detailed.

The NMI also needs to step up as the regulator in this space because why would you pay 10 to 15% more to

install a NMI-approved system on a waste truck when you do not need to or can simply install a system that’s not approved and hence, cheaper?

“We’ve certainly been calling for NMI to enter the space as a regulator but they’re also the educator and it’s important that the waste industry understands what the baseline is, what’s committed and what’s not. No one is going to go to the expense of installing an expensive, NMI-approved system if you don’t have to. WBB is prevalent in the Australian market, just not the authorised version of it,” Ritchie said.

There are also other considerations such as the added weight of a weighing system.

“The systems need to be very accurate and a lot of the time, they are quite heavy. In Australia, our axle weights are a concern so that creates a bit of a challenge for us,” Aitken explained.

“We always want to make sure that our trucks are as durable as they can be, but also as light as possible so customers get maximum payload. That’s one of the reasons why we’re getting into this so early. Bucher wants to make sure we design a system that’s integrated but also as light as possible and strong enough to last the 10 or more years a refuse body will be used for.”

So why should we still consider WBB? Despite the challenges, the future is not bleak nor should Australia give up its WBB aspirations, particularly as there are numerous benefits to be had.

McBurney said governments should consider WBB because it improves transparency for business, offers education opportunities for councils, and could potentially lead to higher resource recovery outcomes.

“Our understanding is that the results [of the trial] show an improvement in recycling rates for businesses that received weight-based invoicing when compared against the control group that received standard volume-based service charges. REMONDIS was also able to offer a solution to charities that were unable to self-haul their waste to landfill to receive their landfill levy exemptions,” McBurney said, adding that other potential benefits include “reduced contamination and lower tipping fees, particularly in regions with high landfill levies.”

And it’s easy to see why recycling rates improved during the trial. After all, in a volume-based system, waste generators do not see an immediate change in their billing costs if they dispose less waste unless they reduce their bin collection frequencies or offer smaller bins - both of which are fairly unrealistic asks of businesses.

“The whole idea of WBB is that you start to reflect the actual cost of disposal in the billing rate,” Ritchie said.

“MRA is not interested in changing the economics of the companies that are lifting the bins but in changing the price signals that waste generators see on their invoices.

“WBB means that for every tonne that you move out of the garbage bin into a recycling bin in NSW, that’s equal to a $400 turnaround. If you move a tonne of cardboard into a recycling bin, that’s worth $100 and you save $300 on not disposing it to landfill.

But you won’t see that $400 under the current billing systems, you’d only see that when you move to WBB.” However, for any progress to be made, McBurney said governments need to offer verifiable trial results to ensure approved scales work in the field and are robust enough to withstand the waste sector.

The NMI has committed to initiating a pilot project in 2017-18 to to focus on trade measurement compliance issues in the waste management and recycling sector.

In the meantime, NMI manager trade measurement services, Malcolm Bartlett advised that “all businesses that sell, supply or use weighing devices and flowmeters for trade purposes are required to comply with Australian trade measurement laws, the National Measurement Act 1960 and the National Trade Measurement Regulations 2009.”

“If you use equipment such as a weighing instrument or a flowmeter to determine the charge for a service, you must make sure the equipment is of an approved type, is suitable for its intended purpose and has been verified as accurate by a licensed technician.

Businesses that don’t comply with these laws can face prosecution and fines of up to $180,000. You can find more detail on your obligations under the law at http://bit.ly/2nVTKxb.” MRA will also be holding sessions for the sector to talk about possible next iw steps and the future of WBB.

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

23

Local government // Bins to be delivered to the community as part of the councils’ roll-out of the new kerbside organics collection and processing service. (Credit: Maitland City Council)

Strength in numbers

By Jacqueline Ong TWO years ago, Maitland City Council in the lower Hunter region of NSW set out on a journey to find ways to conserve precious landfill space at its Mt Vincent Road Waste Management Centre. To do that, Council decided that it needed to implement a garden organics collection service but given it was locked into a 10-year contract for its recycling and waste collection services, Council became concerned that it would not be able to attract competitive tender bids for a single garden organics service.

Thus, in October that year, Maitland City Council turned to its neighbours - Cessnock and Singleton - to discuss the viability of implementing a regional contract for the collection and processing of organics. It was quickly determined that a regional contract was indeed the only financially sustainable option for the three councils to deliver a kerbside organics collection and processing service to their communities.

The procurement process As with any joint tender, the three councils, in planning to pursue a regional contract for the collection of organics, as well as a separate regional contract for the processing, had to seek permission from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which was granted.

The company [Solo] currently holds 35 collection contracts nationally and as such, is very experienced in implementing and providing collection services of waste, recyclables and organics.

Since its formation 84 years ago, the company has not defaulted on any of its contracts. On balance, the tender from Solo offered best value for money - Elfi Blackburn.

“Considering the size and value of this regional contract and the involvement of three councils, it was considered pertinent to engage a probity adviser to oversee the tender process including the tender evaluation. This would not only ensure that the probity principles of transparency, accountability, confidentiality, managing conflict of interest and obtaining value for money are upheld at all times, but that the perception of undue process and contravention of probity principles can be eliminated. Adams Consulting and Training (ACT) was engaged to provide the probity services. The tender process was guided by a tender evaluation plan and a probity plan,” Maitland City Council waste services coordinator, planning environment and lifestyle, Elfi Blackburn, said.

“It was agreed to proceed with the organics processing contract first to ensure a processing facility was available where the organics could be transported to by the collection contractor. Contract documentation was

Modelling has established that the implementation of a garden organics collection service would increase the diversion of domestic waste from landfill from currently 29% to 45% for Maitland City Council - Elfi Blackburn.

Maitland, Cessnock and Singleton Councils then tapped into the sector’s expertise to determine the most advantageous contract term for organic waste collection and processing.

24

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

The new garden organics collection truck. (Credit: Maitland City Council)

then developed for the processing of the organics and tenders invited by way of public invitation between August 28 and October 27, 2015. Six conforming tenders were received and the contract

was awarded to Australian Native Landscapes in December 2015.”

Once that was done, contract documents were developed for the collection service and tenders were invited between March 1 and April 26, 2016. Three conforming tenders were received and Solo Resource Recovery eventually won the tender in June last year.

Blackburn explained that the councils decided Solo was the best candidate given its “extensive resources” and history of providing kerbside recycling collection services to the councils over the last 18 years.

“This long-term presence in the region has permitted the company to accumulate invaluable local knowledge of streets, areas, distances, and collection routes, which is considered advantageous to providing an organics collection service. Solo also has access to extensive resources including spare vehicles that would ensure service continuity and minimise interruptions due to breakdowns and maintenance,” Blackburn said.

“The company currently holds 35 collection contracts nationally and as such, is very experienced in implementing and providing collection services of waste, recyclables and organics. Since its formation 84 years ago, the company has not defaulted on any of its contracts.

On balance, the tender from Solo offered best value for money.”

Solo Resource Recovery contracts and communications manager, Scott Geer told Inside Waste that from the onset, the company recognised that it needed

to not only offer Councils a service that would complement their existing garbage and recycling services, but that a key component was to deliver the highest quality service to the community.

“With rising landfill costs, all councils sought to ensure that materials separated by residents and businesses were able to be converted for beneficial reuse and diversion from landfill was maximised,” Geer said.

“Maitland, Cessnock and Singleton also wanted to be sure that the fundamental collection service would be delivered at an economical price and the service standard to households was high. Solo was able to determine the costs of a new organics service through set quoting of a bin distribution program, use of collection run statistics from the area’s existing recycling collections, and use of data from other contracts that allowed for accurate estimates of organics yields.

From that, Solo and the councils were able to effectively communicate and promote the details of the new organics service to the community to maximise diversion from landfill, saving all three councils landfill charges.”

Meeting expectations Blackburn noted that the councils had a number of expectations, from increasing their resource recovery rate, to diverting garden organics to a beneficial use, reducing waste to landfill to extending the life of their landfills, and reducing their waste levy liability to the EPA. “Modelling has established that the implementation of a garden organics collection service would increase the diversion of domestic waste from landfill from currently 29% to 45% for Maitland City Council,” Blackburn said.

Councils also had an obligation to community because ahead of the tender process, the three councils had set an expectation that they would provide kerbside organics collection services

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Local government

Looking at the contracts ORGANICS PROCESSING CONTRACT: • 14-year contract term with a one-year extension option.

• Processing of garden organics for the first seven years of the contract term.

• Processing of garden organics and food organics from the eighth contract year (or if possible earlier) for the remainder of the contract term.

• Marketing and sale of the recycled organics derived from the composting process.

• Access to an organics processing facility.

ORGANICS COLLECTION CONTRACT: • Supply and distribution of new 240-litre mobile garbage bins (MGBs) to all eligible premises in the councils’ LGAs. • Provision of a fortnightly kerbside collection service of garden organics for the first seven contract years.

• Provision of a weekly kerbside collection service of garden organics and food organics (to replace the fortnightly kerbside collection service of garden organics) for the remaining seven contract years.

• Delivery of all organics collected to the organics transfer facility.

• Development, delivery, and funding of community education programs.

• Provision of all collection trucks and labour to perform the collection service.

to their communities, just as other neighbouring councils had.

Not only did they meet this expectation, thanks to education and communication by Solo, the transition to the new service was a smooth one.

“Maitland Cessnock and Singleton were confident that the collections of the new organics bin would go well from the March 6 commencement due to Solo already performing the recycling collections in the area. From March 6, the councils were surprised by the smooth transition to the new service.

A large emphasis was placed on the promotion of the new service through the community education program to ensure the new organics bin was well accepted,” Geer said.

“Solo’s education officer worked with consulting firm MRA and representatives from all three councils to design and

the first three weeks of the service was an impressively low 0.3%.

To ensure that Cessnock, Maitland, and Singleton’s expectations were met, Solo focused on a number of key initiatives, actions and technologies.

“New technologies and systems were diligently assessed for added value by the councils to ascertain how much they would contribute to the core service requirements and potential drawbacks of their adoption. Vehicle data management systems, for example, allowed for improved customer service using proven technology. Maitland, Cessnock and Singleton decided not to start with an organics service that included food due to reservations around the actual tonnes of food that would migrate from the garbage bin and the increased contamination issues that would generate for the processor.

New technologies and systems were diligently assessed for added value by the councils to ascertain how much they would contribute to the core service requirements and potential drawbacks of their adoption. Vehicle data management systems, for example, allowed for improved customer service using proven technology - Scott Geer. deliver a professional and comprehensive pre-start promotional campaign that covered print, radio, public signage and social media. From day one, the community had made good use of their new bins and diversion of organics from landfill was above expectations.”

Additionally, contamination levels in

“The new contract would involve delivery of a new organics MGB, a commencement and ongoing education program to maximise diversion of organics from landfill and the efficient collection of MGBs using the latest in collection vehicle technology,” iw Geer said.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

25

Landfill //

GHD’s Mark Koller (right) and Baw Baw Shire Council’s Shekar Atla (left), speak to delegates at the conference about the lessons learnt in successfully rehabilitating the Trafalgar landfill. (Credit: Paul Benjamin Photography)

Rehabilitating a legacy landfill

By Jacqueline Ong WORD from the Victorian EPA in 2011 that the Trafalgar landfill in east Victoria had to close took the Baw Baw Shire Council by surprise. After all, the landfill, which commenced operations in the early 1960s, still had three years left on paper.

What followed was a six-year journey to rehabilitate the valley fill operation, with GHD and the council working hand-in-hand on the project.

The Trafalgar landfill Speaking at the Waste Management Association of Australia’s 2017 Australia Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference at the end of March, Baw Baw Shire Council coordinator waste and major projects, Shekar Atla, noted that the former landfill, which accepted a range of waste including asbestos, had faced a number of challenges during its operation, including the lack of a leachate collection system.

“It was an unlined landfill so that’s challenging. We also had massive leachate issues on the soil and surface water and being in an area with heavy rainfall, it was always saturated, we were always capturing water, and we were spending huge amounts of money carting huge quantities of leachate,” Atla said, later noting that council was spending about $1.4 million a year just to manage the leachate.

Considerations and innovations In Victoria, landfills are heavily regulated and subject to an independent 26

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

audit process. As such, project designer GHD knew that working closely with the EPA was vital to plan’s success.

“It was absolutely paramount that from day one, we’d established a close working relationship with the auditor on the basis that there would be no surprises at the end. So rather than us delivering the final design documents and saying ok, can you please approve that tomorrow, we basically had to sit down from day one and say this is what we’re proposing to do, these are the reasons, these are the project drivers, and these are what we’re going to achieve,” GHD principal environmental engineer, Mark Koller said.

“Similarly, the auditor will sit down and set their expectations in terms of what is required from design calculations through to their expectations around the final report itself. That’s the key factor, at least in Victoria - having that strong, robust working relationship with the auditor.”

The terrain was also rather steep, which meant GHD had to take into consideration slope stability, particularly as part of the redevelopment required a re-shaking of the waste mass which in itself, posed environmental challenges.

“We ended up with slopes varying from 1:3 is to 1:3.9, which is still relatively steep and certainly outside the BPEM guidelines recommended by the EPA. Thus, we needed to get EPA approval for those steeper slopes and we did a rigorous slope analysis,” Koller said.

The other issue that landfill operators have to consider, and Baw Baw Shire

Council was no different, is whether to install landfill gas infrastructure prior to or post cap installation.

For this project, GHD chose to install the infrastructure following the completion of the cap because it was “just cleaner - a contractor gets in, does the shaking of the waste, provides the cap and then a new contractor can come in and install the landfill gas infrastructure,” Koller said.

And when it came to the cap design, Council had a tough decision to make - go with the substantially cheaper cap design that was in its original EPA licence or the BPEM multi-layer alternative.

“We had the best practice guidelines, which incorporated a multi-layer system with a geomembrane and urban layers that included a compacted clay layer - that was the default cap design. At the same time, Council had in their EPA licence a cap design which had been approved many years ago, prior to the existence of these guidelines. And obviously there’s a huge difference in cost between the EPA licence design - less than a million dollars - versus the landfill BPEM cap design, which turned out to be more than $5 million,” Koller said.

“So you can see there’s a temptation, and there were $4 million worth of good reasons, to go for the cheaper design.

To Council’s credit, they considered some of the broader environmental and cost issues associated with a high cap quality generating low quantities of leachate versus a low quality cap generating high quantities of leachate.

“In the end, taking into consideration CAPEX and OPEX, and bearing in mind Council’s experience of carting huge

quantities of leachate during the operational phase of the landfill which was front of mind in the discussions, Council went with the best practice cap design.”

There were also other considerations such as the site being a constrained one. But a simple idea from the project’s second contractor proved extremely helpful.

“What wasn’t forming part of the landfill, of the landfill cap, was an operating part of the facility in terms of the transfer station and resource recovery. So as huge quantities of soil were being brought onto the site, there were challenges of where to stockpile the soil, then once you’ve stockpiled it, how you moisture condition it on slopes during times of year that are less than optimal [because of high rainfall],” Koller explained.

“The second contractor of the project identified a parcel of land offsite and it seems simple but it was a fantastic idea because it enabled the quarry bed where the soil’s coming from, particularly the clay, to be brought in with a far higher weight than it would have otherwise been placed, and allowed them to moisture condition properly and uniformly and then the soil just had to be placed and compacted with no further working of the clay.”

Lessons learnt One critical issue was the setting up of the LFG flare after the capping was completed. Atla told delegates that Council was “taken for a ride on the issue” during the geomembrane welding, which resulted in a significant delay.

“On hindsight, we should have appointed our earthworks contractor rather than the geomembrane contractor as the head contractor.

If the LFG system is installed after final capping, ensure the contractor has the necessary experience and documentation that clearly states the LFG risks,” Atla said.

“We also nominated the soil sources which saved us a bit of time versus having the contractor nominate the capping soil sources.”

On GHD’s part, Koller advised delegates to work closely with the EPA, and in Victoria, with the auditor.

“And the last issue to consider is under specification versus over specification of soil types. It’s the landfill designer’s dilemma. We’ve gone round in circles at times and I’m not saying we have come up with the optimum solution but I have noticed on other projects where consultants have over specified the materials to the point where it’s not possible to provide material of that quality in Victoria. But on the other extreme, we’ve also had under specifications,” Koller said. iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Legal

C&D waste in a state of flux

By Gavin Shapiro A number of recent Court rulings around the country, as well as a delay in the introduction of NSW’s package of New Minimum Standards for Managing Construction and Demolition Waste in NSW have left the management of construction and demolition (C&D) waste in a state of flux across Australia.

What is waste? It depends who and where you ask…

One of the first steps in working out what C&D waste can be used for, and the rules it is subject to, is determining if it is actually “waste” under relevant legislation. Unfortunately, it depends who (and which state) you ask.

In 2013 the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal determined what it considered to be “waste” under environmental legislation, in a ruling that has had significant implications on the reuse, recovery and recycling of C&D waste (Environment Protection Authority v Terrace Earthmoving Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCCA 180). In that case, which involved the reuse of C&D waste, the Court determined that the test to be applied is whether the owner of the original material still has a use for it. If not, it becomes waste - even if another party wants to reuse it.

However, a NSW Land and Environment Court judgment in 2015 slightly muddied the waters. That case dealt with the meaning of waste under planning/land-use legislation.

A glass beneficiation facility was held not to be a waste facility, but instead, the Court determined it was simply a manufacturing facility under planning legislation - even though it may still require an environment protection licence as a waste facility under environmental legislation.

Recently, it has been the turn of other states to contribute to the growing confusion.

In Western Australia, a recent case asked whether the waste levy applied to material used to fill in void spaces (Eclipse Resources Pty Ltd v The State of Western Australia (No. 4) [2016] WASC 62). The WA Supreme Court followed the lead of NSW and determined that whether a material is waste is to be determined at its source. Whether the recipient has intentions for reuse is irrelevant - it is all about the intention of the generator.

Waste will remain waste unless it has been “substantially transformed”.

However, in two recent cases, (Wood v Adelaide Resource Recovery Pty Ltd [2017] SASCFC 13, Corporation of

the City of Adelaide v Circelli [2017] SASCFC 12) the Supreme Court of South Australia has blazed its own trail. In the Wood case, the Court held that material in stockpiles (RDF) was no longer waste, as it had undergone some processing. While that is not unusual on its face, the Court stated that “having passed through the gate and into the possession of the defendant, it is clearly ‘viewed’ in a different light by its new owner and, in my view, has changed in character.” This is precisely the type of reasoning that the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal rejected Terrace. The Court also stated that “a holistic assessment is necessary, with the point at which “waste” becomes a “product” ultimately being a question of fact and degree,” and considered that the availability of a market and demand for material were important factors in determining if it was waste - again, reasoning that was rejected in Terrace.

The NSW minimum standards In October 2016, the NSW EPA published a consultation paper New Minimum Standards for Managing Construction and Demolition Waste in NSW. The consultation paper was on public exhibition until November 17, 2016. It proposed a number of significant changes to the way C&D waste is handled in NSW, primarily to be achieved by amending the Protection of the Environment (Waste) Regulation 2014. These included requirements for: • licensed waste facilities receiving C&D waste to have a written procedure for dealing with C&D waste; • the written procedure to cover processes for screening and inspection of C&D waste loads, removal of contaminants and rejection of contaminated loads, and the storage and management of recoverable waste; • separate identified storage areas for various types of waste, as well as for contaminants and asbestos waste; • visual inspection of loads on entry, and the unloading and spreading for more detailed inspection of mixed loads (such as skip bins); • the isolation and disposal of contaminated loads; • a detailed sorting process; and • mandatory resource recovery targets of 75% for large facilities, and 50% for smaller facilities.

In addition, the consultation paper proposed that only material which has undergone the required inspection and

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

sorting can be sent offsite for further recovery or disposal.

The consultation paper also flagged that the proximity principle would be repealed, and that the EPA would instead investigate other ways to address the impacts of long distance waste transportation.

Although no draft regulations were produced with the consultation paper, it raised a number of practical, commercial and legal issues.

For example: • whether smaller facilities, without sufficient room or staff, will be able to comply with the requirements; • if the mandatory requirements for inspecting and rejecting loads will conflict with a facility’s existing contracts with waste suppliers; • whether facilities will be able to pass on increased costs resulting from the changes; • how the mandatory resource recovery targets will be enforced; and • what, if anything, will replace the proximity principle.

The consultation paper stated that the reforms would be introduced on March 1, 2017. As we know, that has not yet occurred. This may be for a number of reasons, including the Cabinet reshuffle earlier this year, which resulted in a new Minister for the Environment. We do not yet know whether the new minister will be following through with the changes

proposed under the consultation paper, or if the minister has different priorities.

So, where does this leave us?

Unfortunately, (or fortunately if you are a lawyer) managing C&D waste in Australia has become increasingly complex. As we see in NSW, the question of the standards which will apply to resource recovery are in a state of flux. And indeed, even the seemingly simple question of when C&D waste is actually “waste” under relevant legislation requires an understanding of complex case law. Hopefully, the coming weeks and months will see further guidance on both issues.

However, until this occurs, and until definitions and standards become more standardised across Australia, those dealing with C&D waste can be forgiven for scratching their heads.

Gavin Shapiro is a senior associate at Henry Davis York Lawyers. He has particular expertise in the waste industry including the procurement of waste services, environmental prosecutions and litigation, advising clients on environmental regulation and compliance, assisting in infrastructure projects, PPPs, and the approval of new waste facilities. Contact: gavin.shapiro@hdy.com.au or iw 02 9947 6797

Henry Davis York Lawyers senior associate Gavin Shapiro.

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

27

Transfer stations //

Getting Banksmeadow off the ground

A state significant piece of state infrastructure, Veolia’s Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal also utilises the freight rail network for transport. (Credit: Dennis, Flickr CC)

By Jan Arreza IN September last year, Veolia’s Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal in Sydney’s south commenced operations.

The three-year process to get the facility up and running had its fair share of trials and tribulations and Veolia Australia and New Zealand site manager, Alex Kanaar, detailed the company’s journey at the Waste Management Association of Australia’s 2017 Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference in March.

Kanaar, who was responsible for the mobilisation and operation of the Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal development, told delegates that the main challenges were around getting the development operational, and going through the process to mobilise, operate and manage the facility.

Picking the site Kanaar said the facility offers choice and competition for the region, delivering a much-needed innovative and sustainable resource recovery solution, which can respond to local government and commercial demands.

Veolia deemed the site at Banksmeadow most suitable for the following reasons: • accessibility to the freight rail network, which will reduce the number of heavy vehicles on Sydney’s roads; • appropriate zoning for industrial use; and • proximity to residential and commercial waste generators in the southern Sydney region that currently lack choice in waste management and resource recovery.

“It is centrally located for the SSROC [Southern Sydney Region of Councils] local community, it is located near an industrial area in Banksmeadow, as well as having the rail connection and access to the greater railway network of Sydney - a major factor in the success of this site,” Kanaar added.

28

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

The Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal is also considered a significant piece of state infrastructure, Kanaar noted, one that utilises the freight rail network for transport and facilitates greater resource recovery by opening up access to remote treatment solutions as part of Sydney’s long-term waste strategy.

But because the facility is considered a State Significant Development under the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011, a development application (DA) was required by NSW Planning and Environment.

To support this DA, Veolia prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to identify and address any potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed development. The EIS was then placed on public exhibition and the project assessed under the NSW Environmental Planning Assessment Act 1979, by the NSW Department of

to get all of those boxes ticked.

“We’ve broken the facility down into seven key areas and have looked to isolate the risks associated with those continual activities to those areas like waste trucks interacting with each other and other waste vehicles, as well as the rail infrastructure that runs through it so there were a lot of risks that we had to take into consideration.”

Keeping up with communication Veolia also undertook a dedicated program of consultation with stakeholders to ensure that everyone was aware of the proposed development and could provide comments and feedback.

Kanaar said that through these consultations over the years, Veolia has engaged with local, state, and Commonwealth agencies, as well as local community groups, and their concerns were considered and addressed during

The Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal will receive hundreds of thousand tonnes of waste per annum, with a mix of household and commercial waste containerised for transfer by rail to Veolia’s site at Woodlawn for treatment and resource recovery.

Planning and Environment.

“It’s a pretty amazing site, and it’s great to be a part of it, but there were a few challenges obviously for us to get to where we are at now, and it took the input of a lot of people within Veolia to get it to where it is now,” Kanaar said.

“We’ve liaised with everyone from the lease holder, the owners of the land, Pacific National, RMS, EIS, the EPA, everyone - and that was handled by the projects and operations teams, which I was a part of, just to truly mobilise this safely and effectively.

“We also had to manage all the key community items, including traffic to the site, access to the site, odour, obviously since it’s a waste transfer station, noise vibration, and existing site contamination, so there was a lot of resource and effort going into that

the planning assessment process.

“An example of this has to do with the huge challenge we faced with rail haulage - the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) looks after the network in Sydney, and John Holland Rail Country Regional Network runs on the other side. So dealing and planning with the 22 networks to get our waste train onto the bigger network was a huge challenge,” Kanaar said.

“We also dealt with Transport for NSW, as they wanted to make sure that all of the community services ran on time. They wanted as little impact on that as possible so we’re running out early in the morning and arriving late at night to minimise those impacts.

“Trying to work within that network is very interesting as there is a bit of variability there, but it’s been operating

for several months now and it’s going really well. We are sending out 26 to 34 containers a day consisting of about 40% municipal solid waste (MSW), and at the moment it just works seamlessly.”

Operating Banksmeadow The Banksmeadow Transfer Terminal will receive hundreds of thousand tonnes of waste per annum, with a mix of household and commercial waste containerised for transfer by rail to Veolia’s site at Woodlawn for treatment and resource recovery.

The majority of the waste that is transferred to Banksmeadow comes from households in the South Sydney region. The materials are delivered to the facility by waste trucks, including household waste from Botany Bay, Rockdale, Woollahra, and Kogarah Councils, as well as from commercial businesses in the region.

“This was a $37 million capital expenditure investment, and it took us about three, three and a half years to get this facility up and running - ever since the very first time we started scoping for sites to develop on until its completion just recently,” Kanaar said.

“Getting something like this off the ground couldn’t really have happened without the support of a number of stakeholders within SSROC - it could’ve been a six-year turnaround as opposed to three, but with their engagement, we got it done a lot quicker.”

The Banksmeadow facility has a 400,000-tonne putrescible waste capacity built into it and it is Veolia’s second gateway on the Woodlawn eco-project, with the company’s Clyde facility operating for more than 10 years now, transferring about 500,000 tonnes of waste per annum.

“We’re constantly building on the back of Southern Sydney Region of Councils’ Advanced Waste Treatment processing contract, which will increase the recovery of resources from their waste stream,” Kanaar said.

iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Insurance

Keeping the sector insured

By Jacqueline Ong IF you think that there have been more fires at waste and resource recovery sites in the last few years, you’re not wrong.

According to Arthur J Gallagher principal broker Russell Boucher, the number of fire incidents at these sites have increased markedly over the last five years.

These fires, like the one at SUEZ’s Chullora Resource Recovery Park in south-west Sydney as well as the incident at SKM’s recycling plant in Coolaroo, Victoria in February, captured the industry’s and community’s attention. And why would they not?

Smoke blanketed the area and hours were spent trying to put out the fires.

But it’s more than attention, operational down time, evacuations, material damage and potential injuries - thankfully no one was hurt in the two fires in February - that these fires cause. The increased prevalence of these incidents has made obtaining insurance far more challenging.

Boucher told Inside Waste it has

always been more difficult for the sector to get insurance and when they do, premiums tend to be high because of the materials at facilities and risks involved in running these sites. Unfortunately, the willingness for underwriters to grant insurance has only worsened due to the recent losses.

“As recently as last week, one major insurer in Australia decided to drastically reduce their exposure in the waste industy,” Boucher revealed.

As regulations and standards continue to evolve and awareness of and desire for recycling grow, more recycling facilities will no doubt come into the picture and Boucher has some advice for operators to help them insure their businesses.

“They need to put in place strategies that will reduce the risk of loss. Sprinkler systems for example, better housekeeping, fire alarms, more firefighting equipment such as hydrants and hose reels,” he said.

Most facilities would already have these tools in place and have their housekeeping in order but Boucher is encouraging

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

operators to go above and beyond.

“Facilities should think about installing spark arrestors to stop sparks from flying around and fire retardants in the actual machinery so if a fire starts in a machine due to an electrical fault, which does happen, there is an automatic sprinkler system within that machine to put the fire out and stop it from spreading,” Boucher said.

“Also things like 24-hour surveillance and smoke alarms. When it comes to smoke alarms, they are usually placed in the building. But if it goes off and the facility is unattended, then what’s the use of a smoke alarm? No one’s going to hear it. What we’d like to see are these smoke alarms being wired into the burglar alarms so if the smoke alarm goes off, it will actually ring somebody and action can be taken instead of just blaring out into the cold night air.”

Ultimately, it’s all about risk management. When insurers see that operators have stringent rules in place and good housekeeping, businesses stand a better chance at getting insurance.

Businesses need to put in place strategies that will reduce the risk of loss, says Arthur J Gallagher principal broker Russell Boucher.

“At Arthur J Gallagher, we have many years in the waste industry, providing risk management and insurance solutions, advising on how to reduce your loss exposure whilst trying to arrange affordable premiums,” Boucher said.

“It’s not just a matter of turning around and saying I’ll do this and this to get my insurance. It’s the way you look at your business, it’s about having rules and regulations in place and iw making an effort to reduce risk.”

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

29

2017 Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference //

Continuing the transformation

ONCE every two years, the Waste Management Association of Australia puts on its national Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference and delegates wait in anticipation for the learning and networking opportunities it brings.

This year was no different. Some 320 delegates descended on Rosehill Gardens for the two-day event at the end of March, with 250 sticking around after the sessions on day one for the customary dinner where the Innovation and Excellence Awards were given out.

This year, the winners were Dulverton Waste Management - Dulverton Waste Management Landfill (Landfill Excellence Award), Townsville Waste Services - Magnetic Island Transfer Station (Transfer Stations Excellence Award), and Toowoomba Regional Council Waste Service - Automation (Innovation Award).

Inside Waste was at the event and coverage of the various sessions can be found on pages 26 and 28, as well as on www.insidewaste.com.au.

For now, here are the best snaps of the conference.

This sexy little number was given out to three winners.

30

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

NSW EPA chair and chief executive Barry Buffier delivered the first keynote address of the event.

Winners of the awards, obviously very happy, posing alongside WMAA CEO Gayle Sloan (centre).

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// 2017 Australian Landfill and Transfer Stations Conference

I-CORP International president Dr Ian Peggs showed delegates numerous images of landfill and related lining failures.

Inaugural winner of the WMAA Young Professionals Scholarship and JustWaste consultant Isabel Axio discusses the strategies that could help transfer stations increase diversion rates.

This year, 250 people attended the dinner where they broke bread, shared a few laughs, and applauded the winners of the awards.

Some 320 delegates descended on Rosehill Gardens for the two-day event at the end of March, with 250 sticking around after the sessions on day one for the customary dinner where the Innovation and Excellence Awards were given out.

All images courtesy of WMAA and Paul Benjamin Photography.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

31

Waste to energy //

Can bioenergy from waste really help stabilise the grid in Australia?

By Michael Salt and Giles Prowse

attention has been paid to the role bioenergy can play as an effective, low cost and low carbon grid management and energy storage solution. In the pursuit of a greener and more stable grid, the opportunity for bioenergy from waste is worth exploring further.

STABILITY of the electricity grid is a topical issue in Australia. The cause of recent blackouts across the country has been heavily debated in the press and in Parliament and what is clear are the challenges that the integration of solar Introducing bioenergy as a and wind energy bring to Australia’s solution already strained electricity grid.

Bioenergy is a term used to describe The intermittent nature of these energy derived from biological sources, renewable technologies requires capacity a definition which specifically excludes to balance the fluctuations in generation. fossil fuels. Organic waste streams from Balancing can come from quick start-up agriculture and forestry are often used gas turbines, batteries, pumped hydro as the input for bioenergy production energy storage and spinning reserves. to create energy from waste.

The International Energy Agency The of bioenergy with (IEA) notes that to date, little Brentwood_IWApril2012_03Print.pdPage 1 integration 20/3/12 4:56:44 PM

the grid has the potential to result in a more reliable electricity supply, firstly via the ability to balance fluctuations in generation, often with a lower environmental impact than other fossil fuel-based alternatives and secondly, where suitable bioenergy plants can be built to handle regional energy demands, it could reduce the need for costly grid infrastructure. This article explores three forms of bioenergy technology, which can be derived from organic waste, and may be suitable for this purpose, namely: (i) Biomass: a biomass-fired power plant burns biomass in a boiler to raise steam for use in a turbine to generate electricity and/or heat.

Arup project analyst Michael Salt.

Wood chips, agricultural/forest residues - particularly bagasse and cane trash in Australia - and other types of biomass are used in the boilers, in a similar way to coal, natural gas and oil. Coal-fired generators can also be “co-fired” with supplements of biomass materials to improve the related lifecycle CO2 emissions. (ii) Biogas: biogas1 is a methane-rich gas produced via anaerobic digestion (AD) - breakdown in a lack of oxygen - of organic waste.

The oxygen depleted environment creates conditions ideal for producing methane. A digestate is also produced that can be sold

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

32

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Waste to energy Figure 1. Annual Bio-power Generation, by Country / Region 2005-20152 (CEC) notes that bioenergy generated approximately 3200GWh of electricity in 2015, equating to 1.3% of total electricity generation3.

So what about the cost?

Arup waste consultant Giles Prowse.

and used as compost. Biogas may also be captured from landfill facilities, where organic matter in waste undergoes a decomposition process and creates large amounts of methane. Biogas can then be cleaned to produce bio-methane (removing CO2 and other impurities) and burnt in a gas engines / turbines or compressed and sold into the existing gas network. (iii) Bio-fuels and bio-liquids: bio-fuels and bio-liquids are derived from biomass that can be used in place of traditional fossil 1.

liquid fuels (such as diesel and petrol). Typically, bio-fuels are used for transport whereas bio-liquids are used for heat or power. When derived from energy crops however, they have created tensions, as arable land is used creating competition with resources for global food production. More recent developments have provided the production of bio-liquids and bio-fuels from waste materials by pyrolysis. These technologies are still in the early stages of commercialisation or still under

Biogas is a mix of methane, CO2 and other impurities. There is another process known as biomass gasification that produces a mixture of carbon monoxide, char, CO2, tar and hydrogen. This technology has not been explored in this article.

development but they avoid the “fuel vs. food” problems faced in the past by biofuels.

What’s happening with bioenergy around the World?

Bioenergy technologies are already available and are deployed successfully throughout the world. According to the Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century (REN21), bioenergy produced 464TWh of electricity in 2015, which is around 2% of In global electricity generation2.

Australia, the Clean Energy Council

Levelised Cost of Electricity (LCOE) is a common metric used to compare the competitiveness of electricity generation technologies. It combines the capital and operational costs, expected capacity, and lifetime of the project to provide an expected minimum price - the LCOE - that the generated electricity should sell for, as to recover the associated costs of the technology. Investment into bioenergy projects should be practical, if not advantageous, when they can deliver LCOEs below that of other competing technologies.

According to REN21, the weighted average LCOE of projects commissioned in 2015 was around US$0.06/ kWh (AU$0.08/kWh) for bioenergy, US$0.05/kWh for hydro, US$0.06/kWh for onshore wind and around US$0.08/ kWh for utility scale PV. Newly commissioned fossil fuel generators

2.

REN21 2016. Renewables 2016: Global Status Report. Bonn: REN21, 2017.

3.

https://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/dam/cec/policy-and-advocacy/reports/2016/ clean-energy-australia-report-2015.pdf

FORESTRY AND RECYCLING SPECIALISTS Static and Mobile Grinders, Slow Speed Shredders, Picking Stations, Air Separation Units, Trommel, Incline and Star Screens.

NEUENHAUSER TROMMEL

CRS STATIC PICKING STATION

Northern NSW, QLD & NT Matt Wass · 0488 422 099 Southern NSW, VIC, TAS, SA & WA Mark Malone · 0438 880 810

NEUENHAUSER TARGO 3000

SALES

HIRE

SERVICE

MORBARK 3800XL

iw

PARTS

Free Call 1800 182 888 www.lincom.com.au sales@lincom.com.au OFFICE LOCATIONS

|

QLD

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

|

NSW

|

VIC

|

WA

|

NT

|

NZ

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

33

Waste to energy //

Figure 2. LCOE of Bio-power Generation2

tended to have costs of between US$0.045/kWh and USD 0.14/ kWh.2 The LCOE of bioenergy is affected by a number of factors. The energy content and homogeneity of the various feedstock are important. These factors will tend to impact the transportation, pre-treatment and storage costs, as well as the appropriateness of different conversion technologies. The most competitive bioenergy projects utilise agricultural or forestry residues already available at sites where marginal feedstock costs are minimal or even

34

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

zero. Where steam or heat loads are also required, the improved efficiency can reduce the LCOE of electricity to as low as US$0.03/kWh.4 Electricity generation utilising municipal solid waste as a feedstock tends to have higher LCOEs; however, it is important to note that the primary objective of these projects is not power generation, but to dispose of waste. Capital costs are often higher as sorting of the incoming waste streams is typically required, as well as including technologies to ensure

local pollutant emissions are reduced to acceptable levels.4

The practicality of bioenergy in Australia Bioenergy Australia estimates that more than eight million tonnes of urban waste and more than 120 million tonnes of agricultural and industrial waste suitable for bioenergy generation were generated in 20105.

With these waste streams expected to increase over the coming decades, the opportunity for generation of electricity

from bioenergy seems advantageous.

Biomass Biomass combustion is most practical where waste streams do not need to be transported large distances and waste heat can be utilised. In Australia, this is likely applicable for agricultural or industrial processes. When biomass projects occur in rural/regional areas, it reduces the demand for electricity, and reduces the strain on the electricity network. For example, the ATP biomass plant in regional Victoria has been operational since 2013. The plant runs

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Waste to energy

Bioenergy has the potential to play a focal role as a stabilising element in the renewable power supply system. on the waste streams from wine making and has helped generate 60% of the company’s electricity needs on-site, reducing demand on the local grid.

Bio-liquids and bio-fuels Bio-liquids also provide potential to store, transport and use these intermediate forms of energy6 through existing value chains and technologies available. Bio-liquids such as biodiesel, vegetable oil, and pyrolysis oil could be used in gas turbines and boilers to generate electricity and provide balance as well as replace traditional fossil fuels.

In these instances, it can reduce the lifecycle emissions associated with power generation. The IEA notes however, that the economics of utilising bio-liquids over traditional fossil fuels in these circumstances are not very favourable.6 Bio-fuels

may be more useful in Australia to replace transport fuels, particularly in the aviation industry, to reduce the reliance on fossil fuels and reduce the lifecycle carbon emissions of transport.

Biogas Biogas is of particular interest for grid stability. It can be used in gas engines and turbines which have a quick response time, as well as high ramping capabilities, and respond to peaks in electricity demand. Assuming the standards for gas can be met - which experience in the UK demonstrates with around 50 gas to grid projects currently in operation with more in planning - biogas can be generated and then stored in the gas network.

This provides ease of distribution and transmission; allowing transportation of gas to high efficiency gas plants for

base-load or peaking capacity, use in the home, or as a transport fuel.

Similar to the other technologies, there is also potential for biogas to generate electricity in regional areas and reduce the need to augment the grid. However, a fairly constant demand for biogas is required as the biogas generation process is not simply switched on and off.

Again, biogas is most practical in instances where it can be stored and used as needed. Industries and sectors ideally suited for biogas generation and/or capture and storage include piggeries, poultry operations, breweries, or any organisations with high loads of organic waste.7

Bioenergy is part of the solution There is potential for bioenergy, which may be derived from waste streams, to help stabilise the grid in Australia.

Biogas and bio-liquids seem particularly favourable, as they can be generated,

stored and used to produce electricity for grid balancing purposes. A range of bioenergy technologies could also be used to meet energy demand in agricultural processes and reduce the need for costly network augmentation to regional/rural areas.

While bioenergy can help, it will most likely be deployed as part of a combination of solutions - hydropower, batteries, demand side management, power to heat, and other technologies - that will provide the greatest stability for the Australian electricity grid. A diverse system is a resilient system, which can cope when the sun fails to shine and the wind isn’t blowing.

Michael Salt is a project analyst and Giles Prowse is a waste consultant at Arup.

Contact: michael.salt@arup.com and giles.prowse@arup.com.

The comments in this article are those of the authors, and may not iw represent the views of Arup.

4.

International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) 2015. Renewable Power Generation Costs: in 2014. Bonn: IRENA, 2015.

6.

IEA 2017. Bioenergy’s role in balancing the electricity grid and providing storage options – an EU Perspective. Berlin: IEA, 2017.

5.

Bioenergy Australia 2015. Consultation response to the Forest Industry Advisory Council (FIAC) issues paper 2015. Bioenergy Australia, 2015. Web. 6 Mar. 2017.

7.

International Energy Agency (IEA) 2015. IEA Bioenergy Task 37: Country Report Australia. Berlin: IEA, 2015.

WANT TO MANAGE YOUR SITE MORE EFFECTIVELY?

Optimise compaction and increase productivity with Carlson machine guidance.

Backed by industry expertise & nationwide support at Position Partners.

1300 867 266 • positionpartners.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

35

Recycling //

Breaking the vicious circle

36

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

The hurdles

By Jacqueline Ong AT a Waste Contractors and Recyclers Association of NSW (WCRA) glass recovery forum a year ago, members came together to express just how dire the glass recycling situation was in NSW, with one presenter declaring that the industry had found itself in a “vicious circle on every front”.

At the time, many of the issues that plagued the sector, from dramatically reduced demand for glass recycling, to the influx of cheap glass imports and limited viable end markets were discussed (more on www.insidewaste.com.au) and it was agreed at the end of the meeting that the logical first step forward was for WCRA to collect accurate datasets so the sector and governments clearly understood what and where the problems were.

WCRA took its members’ advice, engaging A.Prince Consulting (APC) in November last year to undertake a situational analysis and then develop a glass recovery strategy. The project wrapped up in February and APC director Anne Prince presented her findings to WCRA members at a breakfast briefing in March.

Over the four months, APC conducted a member survey that returned a 45% response rate, led member consultations, undertook local, national, and international desktop analysis, and engaged with stakeholders, specifically Benedict Industries, Glass Recovery Services (GRS) and the EPA in NSW, Alex Fraser and O-I in Victoria, and Envirosand and O-I in Queensland.

The first challenge that came out of the study is glass fines, which shouldn’t come as a surprise… glass breaks. APC found that the average breakage rate depended on how hard materials were packed in the collection vehicle, with the minimum rate being 35% though this could go up to 80%.

In 2005, APC conducted studies which led to the development of a formula based on the compaction ratio in the truck to predict the amount of likely breakage.

Essentially, the ideal conditions for fully commingled collections is 120kg/m3, which resulted in 26.5% breakage, and for every increase of 10kg/m3 in load density, breakage increased by 2%. Meanwhile, during a containers-only collection at the same load density, breakage would be 46%, again increasing 2% for every 10kg/m3 rise in load density.

APC also found that when it came to kerbside collection, 35% to 50% of all glass collected had broken down to less than 50mm in size. Managing fragments of this size would require advanced sorting technology, such as optical sorting machinery, which has the ability to identify and sort glass fines as small as 6mm. GRS for instance, has a mixed glass processing facility with optical sorting capabilities and is able to sort glass as small 3mm.

“Because glass is a victim, in a way, of the automated system that we use in kerbside collections and in MRFs, O-I was getting less coloured glass to use in their re-manufacturing. Thus, the EPA provided grants - about $2.5 million - to a number of rural MRFs for them to install local glass reprocessing facilities for glass fines,” Prince said.

APC found that the average processing cost of regional facilities is about $70/ tonne while the average income received is nothing to $5 in the best case scenario.

“The other challenge, and glass is in no way different to a whole range of other commodities, is that we’ve got increasing cheap imports from overseas.

In the last five years, glass container imports increased 175% and in one year alone, they were valued at $46 million.

So that’s money and containers that are no longer made here but we are recycling them here,” Prince noted.

“As a result of that, there’s been

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Recycling

a reduction in the glass furnace requirements for O-I and in NSW, O-I has closed 50% of their furnaces and now have just two. And there’s no longer any green glass manufacturing in NSW.” What this means is that green glass is currently being shipped to Adelaide but as a result, price points have fallen.

“As glass now has to be shipped to Adelaide, the current market price that you would receive for glass in NSW is $11/t when it used to be $70 to $80. That $70 to $80 is now used to transport materials to SA,” Prince explained, adding that the commodity value for flint and amber is $38/t after freight from a rural location.

“GRS which is driven by O-I’s quality specifications, has sought to improve quality and revised their own specifications and pricing policy.

Instead of paying for the glass it receives, it is now charging $30/t for mixed glass processing So all of a sudden, you’ve gone from a positive $70 to $80/t to negative $30/t,” she added.

“And the revised specifications mean there’s pretty much zero tolerance to almost everything. The specifications I’ve seen are almost unachievable for a regular MRF to achieve and from my understanding, mixed glass is no longer really accepted by GRS since November last year.”

Then, there are limited viable end markets. For one, Benedict Industries, which was processing more than 100,000t of glass fines as part of their C&D operations, closed its NSW facility in 2015, leaving a gap in the market that has not been filled. As a result, 100,000t of glass fines are now left without a home. Most are being exported to the other states for processing or stockpiling.

Local government, the EPA and the community have also exacerbated the problem.

“We’ve got long-term council collection contracts and the only variation you can normally get in those contracts are the CPI adjustments and CPI is zero. So there’s no closed loop to take the glass back for local reuse in civil engineering works and then you’ve got the NSW EPA compliance standards where we can’t stockpile for more than a year or you’ll pay the levy,” Prince explained.

“And there’s also market resistance, there’s a market perception and reality that the contractors, councils, RMS, and the community have that recycled glass is inferior and so there’s a reluctance to use recycled products.

There are a lot of synergies with the composting industry 15 years ago.

“In summary, we’ve got limited options for where glass can go; it’s continuing to be created and we can’t afford to landfill it locally because of the levy; members aren’t able to store

and process it locally because of the current regulations so we’re sending it interstate; and the freight interstate is around $80/t. One company is spending $3.5 million to send it interstate and another company has 17 warehouses interstate full of glass fines waiting for a home. We’ve got crippling storage fees of about $13 million and we’ve got quantity surveyors who are charging $15,000 to $20,000 just to estimate how much is in the warehouse stockpiles. The economic pain cannot be sustained in the long-term, it’s not even sustainable in the medium term.”

But that’s not all. With the container deposit scheme (CDS) on its way - it’ll be rolled out from December 1 - there are several questions that need to be answered. What we do know is that the CDS will likely place more glass in the system when commercial premises, food and beverage outlets and the like, come on board.

“There will be a lot more glass, it will be clean glass and unbroken, and will potentially displace all the MRF glass and all the kerbside collected glass in NSW if we’re not careful. So we’ve got to have alternative outlets for the MRF glass over and above what we have now before we get CDS glass,” Prince warned.

We need to be able to store glass externally if there are containment and buffer zones to mitigate leachate and odour issues,” Prince added.

“The landfill levy could potentially be rebated if glass fines have to be landfilled due to market failure. We need to permit stockpiling clean washed material externally. At the moment if it’s clean and washed, it still needs to be undercover. We need a common sense approach to the glass sand exemptions and the EPA needs to have additional resources because at the moment, it’s taking up to a year to get an exemption.”

And in order to have this common sense approach, perhaps the government needs to undertake an economic assessment to determine the true cost and economic impacts of market failure.

Funding would certainly help too, particularly with finding new, alternative markets for glass as well as to support the purchase, installation and commissioning of cleaning equipment to improve MRF glass fines quality.

One area that has often been discussed, not just when it comes to glass recycling, is government procurement.

“We need to look at mandated preferential purchasing. At the moment,

Forging ahead The way forward will take a concerted effort with the entire supply chain engaged and supportive. Government support and leadership are also required but Prince said that the first thing that’s needed is a cross-sectoral working party tasked with developing a roadmap.

A range of players need to come to the table as part of this group, including WCRA, the EPA, Local Government NSW, GRS, O-I, the Australian Packaging Covenant, Australian Council of Recyclers, and academia.

And instead of re-inventing the wheel, Prince recommended collaboration with Victoria.

“We need the NSW EPA and OEH to collaborate with Sustainability Victoria.

Glass fines have been a priority waste of concern in Victoria for more than a decade. They are well placed and well advanced, and have learnt some valuable lessons which we can learn by following in their footsteps,” she said.

“And certainly the EPA needs to engage with other jurisdictions. We are not on our own in this journey and others are doing things that we must follow.”

Turning to regulations, it is Prince’s view that glass fines be deemed a priority waste of concern and specifications should be developed for glass to be used as a daily landfill cover material.

“We need to have some relief from stockpiling from the current regulations.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

contractors have to pick up the yellow recycling bin but the councils aren’t taking any of that glass back in any of the civil works so we need to try to improve that situation both at a state and a local level,” Prince said.

“We need education and communication, to inform the engineering professionals and local and state governments of the benefits of using recycled glass, and to provide clear instructions to householders about not placing any asbestos items in the yellow bin because it has happened and probably will continue to happen until we do a major education around that.”

Finally, in preparation for the CDS, Prince suggested that a business development workshop should be held to discuss the commercial opportunities after its roll-out for MRF operators.

“With the CDS, glass value could be approximately $150/t subject to eligibility of containers. That’s going to change the dynamic and price point for glass so we need to do some business case development because if glass is now worth $150/t, you’re only going to get $150/t if it doesn’t go to landfill and that’s an economic driver to move glass somewhere and somehow through iw the system,” Prince said.

MACPRESSE IT!

T H E R E L I A B L E W AY T O B A L E

BALE WRAPPING AVAILABLE

EASY TRANSPORT HANDLING

PLASTIC WIRE TIE

THE MACPRESSE RANGE OF BALERS FOR MSW, C&I, RDF AND ALL RECYCLABLES

• • •

Hardox liners for increased baler life Mobile wire tie for RDF and waste Liners bolted for easy replacement

• • •

Interchangeable steel/plastic tie wire Vermin-proof cabling Range of control options available

CALL DKSH AUSTRALIA ON 1300 133 063

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

37

Waste 2017 preview // Last year, a record number of attendees - 575 - made their way to Coffs Harbour for Waste 2016.

Will you be at Coffs?

WE’RE about a month away from the annual Coffs Harbour Waste Conference, the event that attracts more than 550 delegates, 80-odd sponsors and exhibitors, and in excess of 90 national and international presenters to Opal Cove Resort every year.

As with previous years, Inside Waste will be at the conference and so keep an eye on www.insidewaste.com.au as we bring you the latest from the event. If you can’t make it to the conference but would like us to cover a specific topic, innovation or even speak to an exhibitor about their latest offering, send us an email at jan.arreza@mayfam.net or jacqueline.ong@mayfam.net This year, delegates will be spoilt for choice, having three streams of

seminars to choose from. The three-day event commences on May 2 with a preconference optional workshop at 8am on landfill application. At 1pm, Tim Silverwood, co-founder and CEO of Take 3 will deliver the opening address, after which, the program will start, covering education, social enterprise, and landfill.

On Wednesday, Coffs Harbour City Council Mayor Cr Denise Knight will welcome delegates, after which City of Vancouver’s Albert Shamess, WRAP UK’s Richard Swannell, and NSW EPA director waste & resource recovery Steve Beaman will take the stage to deliver their keynote speeches. Day two’s streams are planning, circular economy, and innovation in the morning, followed

by product stewardship, infrastructure, and education after afternoon tea.

The last day of the conference on May 4 kicks off with a welcome address from Waste Management Association of Australia CEO Gayle Sloan, followed by keynote addresses from CSIRO principal research scientist Chris Wilcox, and Clean Energy Regulator manager of the emissions avoidance section Chris Mill, as well as a panel discussion on the container deposit scheme.

After morning tea, seminars will be broken up into three streams - organics, waste services and tendering, and illegal dumping - followed by organics, energy from waste, and litter after lunch. Once you’ve had your afternoon tea and cake,

the conference will wrap up with its remaining three streams, technology, energy from waste, and CRS, bulky waste and other waste challenges.

There will be a number of social events as well, from the welcome reception on the evening of May 2, to the conference carvery at 6.30pm on May 4. And don’t forget the customary conference dinner - that’s where the party comes to life! If you’ve been to a Coffs conference, you’ll know that the dinners follow a different theme each year. This year, the dinner takes on a 1970s theme so be sure to dress the part. The dinner will be held offsite at the Charlesworth Room, Pacific Bay Resort.

The full conference schedule can be found on www.coffswasteconference.com.au

We’re a bit proud We’re proud of our achievements delivering exceptional waste management solutions across Australia. Together with our clients, we’re creating lasting community benefit.

www.ghd.com Voted Australia’s #1 waste consultant since 2011

38

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Waste 2017 preview

AND HERE’S A SNAPSHOT OF THE EXHIBITORS THAT HAVE SIGNED UP TO THE CONFERENCE AT PRESS TIME: Current exhibitors

Booth

Current exhibitors

Booth

360green (and vice president, AAEE NSW)

46 - trade exhibitor

Source Separation Systems

3Logix Pty Ltd

37- gold sponsor

21 - silver sponsor 20 - silver sponsor

Access Environmental Systems

13 - silver sponsor F9 - free standing display

Square Link Pty Ltd

42 - trade exhibitor

SUEZ

10 - major sponsor

AMTA (MobileMuster)

43 - silver sponsor

Superior Pak

ASP Software Pty Ltd

11 - silver plus sponsor

Outdoor 5 - trade exhibitor Outdoor 6 - trade exhibitor

Australian Native Landscapes

52 - trade exhibitor 51 - trade exhibitor

Tarpomatic Australia

35 - silver sponsor

Techcollect

1 - trade exhibitor

Belgium Trade Office (Awex Australasia)

27 - trade exhibitor

TIC Mattress Recycling & Soft Landing

44 - silver sponsor

Beneterra Pty Ltd

57 - trade exhibitor

TOMRA Collection

59 - trade exhibitor

BioBag World Australia

28 - trade exhibitor

Toxfree

12 - silver plus sponsor

Boomerang Bags

24 - trade exhibitor

Trident Plastics (SA) Pty Ltd

26 - silver sponsor

Cardia Bioplastics

15 - trade exhibitor

Tumbleweed by Reln Garden

3 - trade exhibitor

Caterpillar of Australia

8 - silver plus sponsor

Tutt Bryant Equipment

45 - trade exhibitor

Clean Energy Regulator

31 - trade exhibitor

Waste Aid

F5 - free standing display

Cleanaway

23 & 60 - coffee sponsor

Waste Expo Australia - Reed Exhibitions

F7 - free standing display

Compost Revolution

55 - trade exhibitor

Waste Initiatives

Contained Waste Solutions

53 - trade exhibitor

14 - smoothie cycle corner Outdoor 7 - trade exhibitor

Container Deposit Solutions Australia

56 - trade exhibitor

Waste Management Association of Australia

WMAA - trade exhibitor

Endeavour Foundation

F1 - free standing display

F8 - free standing display

Envirobank

47 - trade exhibitor

Waste Management Review - Prime Creative Media

EnviroCom Australia

48 - trade exhibitor

Wastech Engineering Pty Ltd

38 - silver sponsor

G James Extrusion

61 - trade exhibitor

Zero Waste Systems

22 - trade exhibitor

G&B Lawyers

30 - massage station

Garwood International

Outdoor 1 - trade exhibitor 49 - trade exhibitor

GCM Enviro

32 - silver sponsor

Hi Tech Rear Vision

40 - trade exhibitor

HID Global

2 - trade exhibitor

Impact Environmental Consulting

F4 - free standing display

Jaylon Pacific Pty Ltd

18 - silver sponsor

Liebherr-Australia Pty Ltd

16- silver sponsor

Local Government NSW

54 - trade exhibitor

Inside Waste - Mayfam Media

F6 - free standing display

MRI E-Cycle Solutions

63 - recharge station

Newcastle Weighing Services Pty Ltd

39 - gold sponsor

NSW Environment Protection Authority

9 - major sponsor

Penske Commercial Vehicles

Outdoor 11 - outdoor exhibitor Outdoor 8 - trade exhibitor

Polyfabrics Australasia Pty Ltd

17 - silver sponsor

Polynex

29 - trade exhibitor

Re.Group

19 - silver sponsor

Refunda

34 - gold sponsor

Resource Recovery Australia

7 - silver plus sponsor

Reverse Garbage Co-Op

50 - trade exhibitor

Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

58 - trade exhibitor

School of Environment, Science & Engineering (Southern Cross University)

36 - silver sponsor

Silveranne Pty Ltd

25 - trade exhibitor

Smart Biz GmbH

41 - trade exhibitor

Smart City Solutions

6 - trade exhibitor

Soilco Pty Ltd

5 - trade exhibitor

Solar Bins Australia

33 - silver sponsor

Solo Resource Recovery

Outdoor 3 - trade exhibitor

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

iw

39

Food waste //

Onsite processing of food waste in an inner city university campus

By Dr Dena Fam AT the inner city campus of the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) in Ultimo, approximately five tonnes of food waste is produced and collected from student and staff kitchens as well as campus cafés per month before being processed onsite in the basement of two campus buildings to produce soil conditioner for land application.

Through the use of rapid food waste decomposing systems from Closed Loop, food waste is processed in 24 hours at UTS in an aerobic environment using controlled temperatures, agitation, airflow and microbial organic starter material. The end result is a reduction in the volume of food waste by up to 90% and the production of a soil conditioner for application to land. The benefit of this system is not only an economic one; with reduced volumes of food waste potentially reducing waste contracting fees, but also added environmental benefits such as reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by diversion of food waste from landfill.

The added benefit of installing a food waste management and source separation system within a large tertiary educational institution is that there is the potential for the system to act as an exemplary alternative food waste management practice. With almost half

of household waste destined for NSW landfills consisting of food and green garden waste, onsite processing of food waste at UTS’ campus provides an opportunity to share with the broader community how food waste might be managed differently.

In the search for a solution to the food waste problem, UTS set an ambitious goal to demonstrate how 100% of food waste might be separated and processed on-site, and turned into soil conditioner for use in gardens and parks in Sydney with the potential of turning 120 tonnes of food waste into 24 tonnes of soil conditioner each year.

To achieve this, all uncontaminated food waste collected from 22 staff/ student kitchens, public waste bins servicing approximately 34,500 fulltime students, 11 individual cafés and one concourse area housing five separate food outlets needed to be separated. Since 2014, UTS has been implementing an on-campus food waste separation and collection program via a green bin system in staff/student kitchens and cafés.

Dedicated green 120-litre wheelie bins for collected food waste are collected daily by cleaning and café staff, weighed and documented before being emptied into the decomposing systems via automated bin lifters.

The product is currently transported to EarthPower to generate energy and

UTS has learned that there is a need for a continual process of communication.

40

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

From food waste to soil conditioner - rapidly decomposed food waste harvested from the Closed Loop system at UTS.

In the search for a solution to the food waste problem, UTS set an ambitious goal to demonstrate how 100% of food waste might be separated and processed on-site, and turned into soil conditioner for use in gardens and parks in Sydney with the potential of turning 120 tonnes of food waste into 24 tonnes of soil conditioner each year. produce nutrient-rich fertiliser. After completion of a three-month sampling and testing regime to confirm outputs can be safely used in land application (due for completion by mid-2017), the goal is to partner with local community gardens to productively use the processed food waste (soil conditioner) in close proximity to the university.

In deciding on the decomposing system, UTS facilities management and the Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) teams thoroughly investigated a range of food waste management technologies currently on the market taking into consideration cost, size, capability, processing requirements, Australian Standards compliance, energy consumption, carbon reduction, and testing and regulation of outputs.

This research included on-site visits of food waste management systems in operation across Sydney, as well as desktop research and discussions with a range of technology providers.

The Closed Loop system was identified as the most viable solution for UTS, with two models selected (CLO300 and CLO100) with the goal of using the outputs on land, and meeting the needs of a growing inner city campus.

In addition, the systems chosen successfully obtained a resource recovery exemption (RRE) from the NSW EPA in order for the food waste to be used as a soil conditioner.

UTS has implemented a rigorous monitoring and evaluation regiment for a range of aspects of the system including monitoring volumes of food waste collected and processed, contamination rates, energy consumed by the systems, and sampling and testing the processed

outputs to ensure safe application to land. This valuable information has the potential to enable comparison of technologies on the market based on evidence-based data, providing other organisations the opportunity to benchmark other food waste management systems for their own use in the future.

The real value for money in this project is its ability to influence food waste practices beyond the UTS campus. An education and behavioural change campaign underpins the project, engaging staff and students in the process of collecting, separating, and reducing contamination rates.

A project-specific communications strategy currently underway is also enabling ISF and UTS to influence the broader community by sharing both the successes and challenges of the project; in particular, the challenges of better understanding food waste practices and separation of food waste from solid waste and recyclables. What has been learned is that there is a need for a continual process of communication to not only inform staff, students and café staff about what’s happening in the basement of the university but also reduce contamination rates of collected food waste.

Dr Dena Fam is a research director at the Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney. Contact: dena.fam@uts.edu.au or 02 9514 4950. *This project is financially supported by the Environmental Trust and NSW EPA as part of the NSW EPA’s Waste Less, iw Recycle More initiative.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Food waste

The Black Soldier Fly, a biological agent for waste management

By Nanjappa Ashwath and Neil Hoy THE Hermetia illucens or black soldier fly (BSF) is a saprophagous insect and a globally accepted agent for domestic waste management and resource recovery.

While the adults take no food and live on dew, the larvae use a variety of organic matter as their food source, and the larva can consume waste twice its body weight per day. This particular feature of the insect attracts environmentalists to use BSF larvae in waste management. The same feature is also attractive to animal scientists as the larvae can be used to produce cheap animal protein or biodiesel or bioplastics. And in all instances, the BSF does not interfere with human life, or harm animals or crops.

Could the BSF be a new way to drive households and commercial sites to manage food waste sustainably?

Testing the theory Nanjappa Ashwath is working on a project to convert kitchen waste into biodiesel with the help of BSF larvae.

He has carried out experiments in an attempt to grow BSF larvae on domestic waste, which will then be used in biodiesel and protein production.

He details his simple procedures to offer some insight into the use of BSF larvae.

Figure 1: A plastic drum like this one can be used to hold household waste.

Step 1: Any household waste (vegetables, cereals, fruits, noodles, meat, bread, etc) can be fed to BSF larvae. A healthy colony can handle a considerable amount of meat trimmings and fat, however, a drier mix is preferred.

The food waste can be mixed with wood chips as a bulking agent to provide aeration for optimum growth. The BSF larvae will hollow out the individual cracked grains in chicken mature.

Step 2: Place the household waste into a plastic drum, such as the one shown in Figure 1. The drum should have a tap at the bottom and two holes at the top. The bottom of the drum should be lined with gravel or plastic mesh so that the liquid will drain from the waste and flow into the saucer, preventing anoxic conditions from being created inside the waste.

Fresh air should also be circulated through the drum via two holes cut on opposite sides of the drum (see Figure 1 - the hole near the plastic zip tie).

These holes are necessary for the flies to enter the drum and lay eggs in the moist cloth that covers the waste.

Step 3: Cover the waste with a blanket or cloth that holds moisture but allows aeration. The moisture released from the waste will be absorbed by the blanket which provides an excellent atmosphere for the BSF to lay eggs.

At the start, naturally occurring black soldier flies will be attracted to the putrefying smell of the kitchen waste in about 2-4 weeks of placing the waste in the bins, although this depends on the season and the temperature. The flies will lay eggs in the moist cloth and the eggs will hatch in about 36 hours and begin to feed on the waste.

After about seven days, the 2mm-sized larvae will grow up to 15mm and will reach their maturity and turn into pupae. Before this metamorphosis, the mature larvae will climb up and dwell on the covered cloth. These larvae can be harvested by lifting the covered blanket and shaking into the lid of the plastic drum.

These larvae (see Figure 2) can be fed to chickens or fish, or they can be used to extract oil and the press cake.

The oil can then be used in the paint industry or converted into biodiesel.

The press cake can be used as an

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Figure 2: The BSF larvae can be used to extract oil and the press cake.

animal feed supplement, or converted into biodegradable plastic.

The fresh BSF larvae contain c. 30 % moisture, while the dried larvae contain up to 30% oil and 40% protein.

Thus, BSF larvae serve as an excellent source of lipid and protein and can be used in animal feed supplement, paint manufacturing, biodiesel synthesis or biodegradable plastic synthesis.

Using BSF larvae Food waste is typically composted through anaerobic digestion or vermiculture, processes that require an initial investment of up to $3 million for a population of 100,000. These processes also incur recurring costs of collection, storage, and processing of the final product. Thus, using BSF larvae could offer an inexpensive and environmentally-friendly alternative of reducing the household waste accumulating in landfills.

At present, North Keppel Island Environmental Education Centre in Queensland disposes its organic kitchen waste with the help of the BSF larvae.

There is also a company in the US that handles 450 tonnes of waste per day using BSF larvae, demonstrating the commercial potential of BSF in waste management.

The company Practical Aquaponics is the Australian agent for Bio Pod Plus, which helps convert household or commercial food waste into animal or fish feed with the help of BSF larvae.

However, further research is needed to optimise the technology.

What we do know is that the art and science of managing aeration in the culture drums seems to be critical to

rapidly disintegrate the waste. A simple, inexpensive and proven technology is therefore needed to be developed.

Additionally, synthesis of value-added products from BSF larvae must be researched and used to develop commercial-scale units.

The process is also not without its limitations. For example, the BSF can only be used in the tropical climate (20°C to 35°C), as the adults require about 23°C to hatch. In an active colony, their voracious appetite ensures that putrescible domestic waste is consumed very quickly before it has time to rot. The generous use of inert bulking material enhances an aerobic process and doubles as a biofilter allowing odours to be properly managed. The pheromones from an active colony are suspected to be attractive to adults and a deterrent to other nuisance fly species.

To drive this along, the public should be educated and provided with free BSF culture units along with technical support all round the year.

But perhaps as a start, BSF larvae technology could be used to manage supermarket, bakery, restaurant and food industry wastes, as their wastes are homogenous and centrally located, and large quantities can be gathered to justify building a controlled environment facility with processing capacities of up to 400 tonnes of waste per day.

Nanjappa Ashwath is an associate professor at CQUniversity’s Institute for Future Farming Systems (contact: n.ashwath@cqu.edu.au) and Neil Hoy is a naturalist based iw in Rockhampton.

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

41

SPONSORED: 2017 Consultants Review winners //

Champions of diversity AT the end of last year, Alison Colella was appointed GHD’s first female service line leader for waste management in Australia, Europe, the Middle East and Asia Pacific.

Together with North America’s service line leader, Victoria Shortreed, the duo leads GHD’s global waste management practice, which is fairly unique in a male-dominated industry.

Colella, an environmental engineer who has worked in various roles in GHD for 15 years, said it is GHD’s focus on cultural and gender diversity - the company has set a target of 40% of women in the workplace with 30% being in technical and professional roles by 2020 - and its acceptance that the new norm is workplace flexibility as some of the reasons why the mother of two felt supported to not just come back to work, but take on such an intense and busy role. She believes that these factors have also encouraged other women to apply for leadership roles.

“GHD’s diversity and inclusion

strategy is truly authentic. It’s been led from the top down. We’ve got people even at the most senior levels who are working flexibly, people at different stages of their career, whether they’re men or women. The management recognises that this is simply just the way that we now do business,” Colella said.

Changing the way GHD’s teams work has had a positive impact on its operations, output and how its brand is perceived.

“Consultants are traditionally seen as conservative and solid, but today, people are seeing us differently and that’s in part due to our diversity piece but also because of how we changed the way we face the market and engage with our clients.”

GHD is also a champion of young people, investing heavily in its graduates.

“If you look at our waste business, we have a very high retention rate, and we do this by giving intensive training to the graduates and having them work closely with our seasoned professionals

rather than recruiting senior people from other firms. Many of those who are now seniors were graduates and they’re now taking on mentoring roles,” Colella said.

“We tend to give our grads a lot of responsibility, from project delivery, design and client liaison. We get them involved in the broader business objectives and business planning so they can see the bigger picture, which we find gets people committed to projects, and to the team, and it gives them a platform to be creative and pitch their ideas so that we continually improve our services.”

And finally, GHD’s waste management team is a champion of its clients, connecting them and their projects internally to the other specialists across the various disciplines.

“For example, if we’re working with someone who wants to bring a new waste facility to market, our role as the waste service line is to brief the internal specialists in other related areas, whether it’s air quality or

GHD’s push for greater diversity is authentic, says Alison Colella.

structures, or environmental approvals, and we maintain that leadership role in the project so we can ensure the project stays on track,” Colella said.

“Our people have a drive for technical excellence and a desire to really get in and work with our clients for the best outcome. I really love seeing the passion our people have for delivering for our clients.”

GHD was crowned the overall winner, large consultancy, in the 2017 Inside Waste Consultants Review, as well as winner of the environmental/greenhouse gas management, reporting & iw compliance category.

WE WHEELIE WANT YOUR OLD AND DAMAGED BINS. Understand the financial benefits of dealing directly with Australia’s largest recycler of old and used MGB’s.

Small, medium and large volumes specialists.

Email justin.knott@astronplastics.com.au Phone 0418 600 589

42

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// SPONSORED: 2017 Consultants Review winners

Talis grows and conquers TALIS Consultants has come a long way, from four colleagues working around a kitchen table in WA five years ago, to a company with more than 40 staff members that has commenced growth strategies in the eastern states.

And this year, Talis was crowned the overall winner in the small consultancy category of the annual Inside Waste Consultants Review.

“Taking out the award for 2017 is a massive achievement, which we are incredibly proud of, particularly as it is voted on by those who matter most to us - our clients. On behalf of myself and John King, I would like to thank all those who voted for us and also the wasties, enviros, and civil staff who have helped deliver our projects,” Ronan Cullen, Talis Consultants director - waste management section leader, said.

As its logo suggests, Talis is focused on delivering solutions for its clients, and an important aspect of this ethos that the waste team is committed to, is to provide a complete waste consultancy service, including strategic planning,

resource recovery and waste contracts through to the delivery of waste and recycling infrastructure.

“This work has been incredibly satisfying for us and along the way, we have been lucky enough to collectively devise initiatives with our clients and also see them through to completion.

Our environmental and civil teams have been able to support us to ensure that the vast majority of our clients’ project requirements can be provided internally,” Cullen said.

Looking back on the year Cullen said the year has been busy, one marked by organic growth as the team takes on more projects.

“We are currently working on a range of landfill projects, including establishing new facilities and rehabilitation of some old cells,” he said.

“Through these works, we have also expanded the services we offer our clients, particularly in the environmental field, with in-house geotechnical and hydrogeological services complementing

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

the array of services we already provide.

Key infrastructure projects of note include works for the Shires of Broome, Esperance and Ashburton, which are focused on providing long-term waste disposal security.”

Talis has also undertaken a number of waste strategy and contracts projects, including the Resource Recovery Projects for the Rivers Regional Council, Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council and Mindarie Regional Council.

“As part of these, Talis has been one of the first consultants to lead significant waste supply procurement processes, recognising the advancement of the private sector within WA, and the future role of merchant plants,” Cullen said.

An ever-evolving sector As the industry continues to evolve, Talis is committed to ensuring its team of scientists, engineers, and consultants can provide complete waste consultancy services, and the team now includes more than 12 staff with varying skillsets.

Talis Consultants director & waste management section leader, Ronan Cullen.

Talis Consultants director & principal waste management consultant, John King.

“Some of our key skillsets that our team holds are with respect to contracts and landfill engineering works,” Cullen said.

“Talis, and particularly John King, has delivered some of the largest and most complex waste services and resource recovery contracts within Australia.

From a landfill design perspective, Lee Miller recently joined us to lead our waste engineering team. Lee has more than 20 years of international experience on landfill design works which is hard to rival in Australia.

“Our team keeps a very close eye on the waste industry, both nationally and internationally, to ensure that we are keeping up on top of the dynamic iw waste industry.”

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

43

SPONSORED: 2017 Consultants Review winners //

Quenching the thirst for good data AUDITING and data management is a niche market and there is no better consulting firm that does this, according to Inside Waste’s readers, than A.Prince Consulting (APC).

For the second consecutive year, APC has taken out the competition in the data management and auditing sub-category of the annual Inside Waste Consultants Review. Over the last 30 years, APC director Anne Prince has been vocal about the need to make decisions based on data and facts, and her expertise and experience in this area have paid off.

Prince says the data management and auditing market “is not pretty” but it is vital because consultants who dig deep into bins to gain data compile important information for their clients to make key decisions on, decisions that over time, have serious consequences, whether in policy, budget or environmental outcomes.

She points to her management,

44

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

technical, and field teams as the reason why APC has been able to deliver high quality services.

“APC has a highly experienced team including our statistician, a data analyst, an environmental scientist, an environmental engineer, and project managers, which support our audit teams. We understand waste management systems and processes; we understand what clients want to find out. And we’ve got 20 years of experience in sorting rubbish and recycling to understand how to get good client outcomes at minimal cost and maximum statistical reliability,” Prince said.

“My statistician and I have worked together since 1991 and we can almost finish each other’s sentences. My lead audit supervisor has been with APC for 20 years, and our collection supervisor for 10 years. I’m an old world employer, I look after my staff and I don’t churn and

burn. I invest in staff and the reward for that is staff stay and that’s pretty unique in an industry where people jump around all the time. I’ve got great long-term staff and I absolutely value them.”

And it is this longevity within APC that has helped the team become a cohesive force. That, and having taken on diverse and challenging projects locally and abroad, means APC is well-equipped to take on difficult, bespoke, and problematic projects.

“Clients want projects delivered on time, on budget, to an exceptionally high standard, and they want total reliability and confidence in the deliverables, which is the data. And we do what we do very well and to a high standard because of experience, the expertise, the qualifications of the staff, and the continuity of staff… that’s unique to us,” Prince said.

Looking ahead, Prince told Inside Waste that clients’ demands, by

We understand how to get good client outcomes at minimal cost and maximum statistical reliability: Anne Prince.

way of how information and services are delivered, have not changed. What they want to know however, has.

“Governments have released new policies like energy from waste so clients now want to know about moisture content and calorific value. With the forthcoming CDS, NSW and Queensland clients want to know more detail about CDS containers that are in the kerbside and commercial mix,” she said.

“The AWT and EfW market will be evolving and will be challenging for the regulators and the community to understand and support. The introduction of CDS in NSW and Queensland, brings new data opportunities and we’re working with governments, councils and MRFs to provide good datasets to help them plan for the CDS introduction.” iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Compactors and balers

Market continues to grow

By Jan Arreza AS urbanisation and population increases, so does the volume of waste generated in growing suburbs.

Governments and the community expect and demand more efficient waste solutions and in a bid to drive sustainable outcomes, more stringent regulations have been implemented over the years.

How do compactors and balers fit in the picture as commercial establishments continue to seek ways to manage their waste and optimise resource efficiency?

Pakmor general manager Dean Crozier told Inside Waste the continued focus on diversion of waste from landfill means clients are looking for equipment such as balers and compactors to effectively manage their recyclable products.

“Whilst the growth of our business is a good challenge for us to face, and for the greater waste industry to face for that matter, it means we need to be proactive in expanding our infrastructure and staffing resources to keep up with market demand”, Crozier said. ”We have a strategic plan around our organisational structure and manufacturing advancement, but the day-to-day recruitment and retention of qualified tradespeople can be a challenge - we want to recruit well, develop our people, and offer opportunities for long-term careers. ”Our business has seen strong, consistent growth in recent years and we expect this to continue in 2017 and 2018, so we’ve set ambitious growth targets this year.

“Fortunately, our industry is reasonably robust and, though we do also feel the impacts of the economic downturn, people will always generate waste.”

Orwak’s latest TOM waste compactor.

Meanwhile, Orwak Solutions general manager David Picone noted that the balers and compactors market is very competitive at the moment, though he believes that it always will be.

“I believe the industry is just going to get better and better as more businesses and communities have their own sustainability goals to achieve,“ Picone said.

“Internally, we’re really growing from where Orwak was last year and the years before. We’ve already grown the business and are getting more clients, so I’m not looking at the challenges, I’m looking at the opportunities. There is this new in-bin compactor called TOM, which only came into Australia in September last year, and there is already a lot of interest from all of the big shopping centres, as well as a few other big facilities, to put them in their sites.

“On the baler front, there is a new product that Orwak is bringing out with connect features implemented, which we call Orwak connect - a modembased communication service that offers great management, maintenance

Pakmor’s Auger Compactor.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

and supervising opportunities.”

Crozier also highlighted that the closure of landfills facilities across Australia has resulted in an extensive network of transfer stations in both metropolitan and regional areas.

“This affords our business the opportunity to work with waste companies and councils offering transfer station compactors, trailers, and horizontal balers to collect and process materials,” Crozier said.

“Large apartment complexes and multi-unit developments need collection alternatives to traditional kerbside bins, including smaller trucks and compactors. This system is popular in inner-city areas of Sydney, but many councils across the country are now considering options to avoid armies of wheelie bins lining narrow streets each week.

“Similarly, we’ve seen councils look at shared waste infrastructure for multiple tenants that back onto shared laneways or carparks - I expect this will also continue to be a consideration for councils and property managers.

“Also, demand for tested and proven organic waste solutions continues to be prevalent for office buildings, restaurants, and shopping centres, and there have been various technologies tried around the world but, to date, nothing widely accepted as an effective, cost appropriate processing unit for the Australian market - hopefully we see development in this area.”

Crozier added that today, customers are smarter and the sector must be able to deal with well-informed clients making considered buying decisions when it comes to compactors and balers.

“Depending on availability of capital in a business, we’ve found customers requesting various finance options, so we’ve altered our business model

in recent years to provide a fully maintained rental fleet of compactors and balers, adding rent-to-own options and other flexible payment plans to meet customer demand,” Crozier said.

“Also, major customers like commercial office buildings and shopping centres are aspiring for Green Star and NABERS ratings that require detailed reporting of waste generation per tenant or retailer.

“Compactors with scale systems and reporting are more commonly specified, as is technology that generates email notifications when the compactor is full and due for servicing - there are systems that allow us to remotely monitor equipment in order to rectify minor service faults without sending a technician to site.”

The outlook for the compactors and balers market may be bright, but Picone highlighted that more education about the benefits of these machines is needed to drive further growth.

“There are still a lot of people who aren’t familiar with balers and compactors and the benefits that comes with them in terms of seeing clear savings on waste removal costs, as well as improving workplace efficiencies,” Picone said.

“There’s also still a resistance to investing in a machine for waste and I don’t think that has changed yet, but I believe it will eventually.

“In my experience, I find that a lot of people are aware the benefits, especially the middle management guys that I’ve been talking to – they can see the upside of the savings.

“I find that it’s the people above them, their bosses, that don’t fully understand the benefits even though it is so simple –it’s a case of getting information and knowledge out there iw and properly educating people.”

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

45

3 3 3 3 3 46

HBM-3030-35CX

Description: the ArnoPress D series for baling scrap metal can be supplied in five sizes. Models 80-2 and 100-2 compact on two levels and models 100-3 to 300-3 compact three-dimensionally. Rugged, robust, reliable, low maintenance.

Throughput: 800kg/h up to 35t/h, material dependent Bale size/weight: 300mm x 300mm up to 600mm x 400mm Operation: each machine can be operated manually, automatically or remotely from a loader.

Force: 800kN up to 3000kN Cycle time: 45 sec up to 55 sec Price: P.O.A. More: Koga Recyclingtech - info@koga.com.au or 0419 558 600

Description: the HBM 3030-35CX is an automatic cycling baler with manual tie. This machine is fitted with cutting knives and is ideal for cardboard, paper as well as plastic bottles. The unit is activated when the hopper is full by a photocell. It will produce bales measuring 760 x 760 x 1150 and has been designed with higher pressures to enable heavier bales for containerisation. With capacities of up to and beyond one tonne per hour, depending on material, this is an ideal machine for the exporter.

Dimensions: 5923 (L) x 1214 (w) x 1840 (h) Weight: 5900kg Throughput: 800-900 kg/h (based on plastic bottles) Bale size/weight: 210 - 230 kg Operation: semi-automatic with manual tie Force: 112 tonnes Cycle time: 30sec Base price: $80,000 - $90,000 More: www.torqind.com

Torque Industries

Arno Press D

Jewel JP8060T5X Small Vertical Bale

Stationary Packer SK866

Description: hydraulic transmission with intersection oil cylinder design;easy to move, fits in small spaces with low ceiling height; pre-installed packing tape provides easy and convenient baling; excellent stability and durability with elegant appearance; english sealing parts to improve the lifetime of oil cylinder; oil pipe joint adopts conical without gasket form, no oil leakage; and motor connects with pump directly to ensure 100% concentricity and extended pump life.

Dimensions: 1100 (L) x 2100(h) x 850 (w) Weight: 550kg Throughput: 4-7 bales/h Bale size/weight: 800 x 600 x 400 Operation: hydraulic Force: 5 tonnes Cycle time: 28 sec Base price: $9,000 +gst More: www.torqind.com *Exclusive Australian Importer

Description: stationary blade compactor, designed to take all waste streams and tailormade to customer requirements.

Bisalloy wear plates used in all necessary areas.

Drive: hydraulic cylinder 15kW power unit Compaction force: over 40t Hopper capacity: Manufactured to suit specific requirements Clear top opening: 1600mm x 1200mm Cycle time: 45 sec Throughput: 220m3/h Connects to: full range of waste bins from 4m3 to transfer trailers Base price: $40,000+GST More: Daniel McHugh - 02 9756 3756 or info@garwoodinternational.com.au

Garwood International

Torque Industries

ATM Recycling

Product Profile: Compactors and balers //

3 3 3 3 3

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Marathon V-6030 HD Vertical Baler

Description: specifically designed for compacting large volumes of waste, suited to general waste including wet material, ideal for shopping centres, hospitals and industrial sites.

Bin capacity: 5-30m3 Auger diameter: 900mm Auger speed: 8rpm Motor drive: 10kW Head weight: 1750kg Power supply: 415volt, 3-phase, 32amp, 5pin Base price: P.O.A More: 03 9271 6400

Description: a Marathon Vertical Baler is precision-built for ease of use and maintenance-friendly access. Features such as the side-mounted, self-contained power unit, front-facing panel box, and feed gate interlock system all add up to a reliable baler.

Overall width: 2210mm Overall depth: 1054mm Overall height: 3556mm Total baler weight: 2124kg Bale size/weight:1 524mm x 762mm x 1219mm - 499Kg Maximum platen force: 277kN Cycle time: 56 sec Base price: P.O.A More: 03 9271 6400

Garwood International

Garwood Portapac Description: Portapac capacities: 8-25m3. Binlifter can be fitted to packer or remote-mounted.

Hydraulics and electrics mounted to packer. Bissalloy and Hardox wear plates used in all necessary areas.

Dimensions: 23m3, 6800mm x 2350mm Weight: approx 4t Drive: hydraulic cylinder, 3kW power unit 415V Compaction force: over 40T Hopper Capacity: approx 5m3 Clear top opening: 2100mm x 1630mm Cycle time: 30 sec Throughput: 175m3/h Connects to: Dyno and Hook loader units Base price: From $32,000+GST More: Garwood International, Daniel McHugh - 02 9756 3754 or info@garwoodinternational.com.au

Bucher Municipal

Integrated Auger Compactor

Bollegraaf Recycling Solutions

Bucher Municipal

// Product Profile: Compactors and balers

HBC-120S Description: our wide range of balers includes the perfect match to the volume and recyclables handled by your company.

Dimensions: 11.750 x 2.500 x 7317mm Weight: 38.800kg Throughput: variable Bale size/weight: 1100 x 1100mm Operation: fully automated Force: 119.7 tonnes Cycle time: 19 sec (without knotting) Base price: P.O.A More: www.bollegraaf.com or +31 596 654 333

TRIDENT PLASTICS

AS4123 Parts 1,5,6 & 7 80,120,140,240,360L MGB

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

47

48

G Baler or Godswill

Description: baling of all recyclable materials, paper, cardboard and plastics. Also, offering the only baler range designed specifically to handle MSW and RDF. Fitted with bolted replaceable Hardox lining in the baling chamber and channel, with a special mobile wire tie unit, designed for processing solid waste and with a leachate collection and conveying system available to keep the workplace safer and cleaner.

Weight: up to 50 tonnes Power: up to 150kW Throughput: up to 60 tonnes /h (depends on infeed material density) Bale size/weight: 1100mm x 1100mm x variable bale length Force: up to 200 tonnes Base price: P.O.A More: Jeff Goodwin, DKSH Australia, 1300 133 063 or http://direct.dksh.com.au/recycling

Description: we have more than 50 different models of horizontal, closed door, twin ram, and briquette balers.

Dimensions: bale size from 200mm x 200mm up to 1100mm x 1100mm Weight: from 8 - 30 tons Throughput: from <1 ton per hour up to 30 tons per hour Bale weight: from 30kg up to 1 ton Operation: manual tie to auto tie Force: over 100 tons pushing force Cycle time: varies depending on the model Base price: From $100,000 to $400,000 More: www.rowlandengineering.com.au

Rowland Engineering

Macpresse ‘L’ Series balers

Superior Pak ‘SP850’

Superior Pak ‘SP1500’

Description: small stationary push blade compactor, designed to take all waste streams and tailer made to customer requirement.

Drive: 7.5kW power pack - remote or integrated options Compaction force: 22 tonnes Hopper Capacity: mainly suitable for hand loading or a 120 ~ 240 bin-lifter Clear top opening: 850mm x 1420mm.

Cycle time: 48 sec Throughput: 56m3/h Connects to: 18 - 30m3 bin.

Base price: P.O.A More: 1800 013 232 or www.superiorpak.com.au

Description: large stationary push blade compactor, designed to take all waste streams and tailer made to customer requirements.

Drive: 11kw power pack - remote or integrated options Compaction force: 32 tonnes Hopper capacity: multiple options depending on application, tippler bin, conveyer, 240 ~ 1100 bin-lifter option, available Clear top opening: 1500mm x 1420mm.

Cycle time: 54 sec Throughput: 90m3 per hour Connects to: 18 - 40m3 bin Base price: P.O.A More: 1800 013 232 or www.superiorpak.com.au

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Superior Pak

Superior Pak

Macpresse Europa

Product Profile: Compactors and balers //

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Where do business leaders find the best business leads?

“There is not a better place than WasteExpo to get a current ‘pulse’ on the industry from all levels of the leading players’ leadership. We’ve come away from WasteExpo many of the past 19 years with an acquisition opportunity we later closed. In our 20th year, we’re looking forward to seeing and celebrating with our friends throughout this great industry.”

Ron Mittelstaedt Chairman & CEO Waste Connections

Only at WasteExpo 2017

Don’t overthink it. Ron hasn’t for 19 years. He knows WasteExpo is where the best and brightest converge to meet, exchange ideas and introduce new methodologies that will impact the industry for years to come. Looking for the latest in recycling techniques? WasteExpo offers more than any other event in the industry. It is THE event—with 600+ exhibitors, a comprehensive education program and a venue ideal for doing business. There’s nothing else to think about—you need to be here.

Learn more at www.wasteexpo.com

Conferences & Special Events: May 8-11, 2017 • Exhibits: May 9-11, 2017 Ernest N. Morial Convention Center (New Orleans, LA, USA) Associated with:

Produced by:

In Collaboration wIth:

COMMERCE • EVENTS EDUCATION • INFORMATION

Inside Waste Readers SAVE! Use code V21 at www.wasteexpo.com today.

50

Portable Refrigerated Auger Compactor

Description: integrated one-piece compactor designed for wet and dry waste streams. Different hopper configurations can be made to suit.

Drive: 7.5kW power pack integrated Hopper capacity: 7 x 240MGB bins. Can be hand loaded or 240 to 660 bin-lifter option Clear top opening: 1700mm x 1700mm Cycle time: 14 sec Throughput: 130m3/h Integrated bin: 15 to 25m3 capacity Base price: P.O.A More: 1800 013 232 or www.superiorpak.com.au

Description: integrated one-piece compactor designed for wet/organic waste streams in high temperature humid conditions. Fully insulated bin.

Drive: 10kW electric motor, 8rpm integrated Hopper capacity: as per customers spec, hand loaded or bin-lifter option available Clear top opening: 1375mm x 1700mm Throughput: 120m3/h Integrated bin. 15 to 25m3 capacity Base price: P.O.A More: 1800 013 232 or www.superiorpak.com.au

Superior Pak

Superior Pak Portable Pendulum Compactor

IPS TRHE - 852 - 100 Baler

Harris Badger Long Box Baler

Description: US made 2-ram high efficiency Baler 100HP. • 9.2m x 4.4m x 2.3m • 26 metric tonnes • Up to 9 tonnes per hour OCC • 1575mm x 1143mm x 790mm, 1.4m3, 510-630Kg OCC • Auto, semi, manual • 114 metric tonnes force • 20 seconds Base price: US$350,000 installed and commissioned More: www.wastedrive.com or 02 9630 9333

Description: US made 2-ram Baler 50, 75 or 125HP. • 10.3m x 5.3m x 2.4m • 26 metric tonnes • 5, 7, 10 tonnes per hour OCC • 1525mm x 1120mm x 790mm, 1.4m3, 520-650kg OCC • Auto, semi, manual • 151 metric tonnes force, 60% ram penetration • 24 sec, 20 sec, 17.5 sec Base price: US$340,000 - US$360,000 installed and commissioned More: www.wastedrive.com or 02 9630 9333

INSIDEWASTE APRIL/MAY 2017

Harris/IPS

Harris/IPS

Superior Pak

Product Profile: Compactors and balers //

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Wasted Space

Small minds, big navels ARE we an inward-looking sector? A sector paralysed by vested interests that we dare not offend? Have we become accustomed to navel-gazing?

Just think about some of the ‘associations’ that have formed over the last decade… how many arose out of a single issue? If an association or interest group is formed over a single issue, let’s be honest and call it a special interest or lobby group and not pretend to be representative of the ‘industry’.

And take the container deposit scheme as an example. It’s looming large right now. And whether you’re for it or not, and whether it’s good for the country, recycling, environment, community or not, it is still largely a political issue. Yet, CDS is endlessly discussed, dissected, de-constructed and re-constructed again. Have we forgotten about the National Television and Computer Recycling Scheme for example? Does anyone remember that a review of the Product Stewardship Act was meant to happen in 2016 but has only just commenced and will be completed in the first half of next year? Where’s the collaboration and commitment to follow through without the tedious partisan timewasting and delays? We’d all be the better for efficient engagement on issues and clear decision-making that is then embraced by all stakeholders

for the sake of industry efficiency and profitability.

While it is important to tackle these issues, it is astonishing that the industry homes in on them for such extended periods of time, works itself into an unproductive frenzy, and forgets that the bigger picture is just as important.

Thus, is it so surprising that, and we hear this complaint all the time, governments do not acknowledge waste and resource recovery as an essential service? Because really, how are we helping them see the bigger picture?

And can we hand on heart say we’ve effectively communicated our impacts and the essential services we provide to the non-waste world?

Now, don’t even get us started on events, conference and seminars. But we will. Every year, despite Australia’s population of only 24 million and a sector valued around $14 billion a year, we organise more and more of these activities on the pretext that we need to learn about new methodologies and technologies and most importantly, to advance the industry. But much of the time, we come together to air our grievances against politicians, regulators, the community (it’s them, not us). Have these events truly contributed to policy? In the last 10 years, what have been the major shifts in the sector and

why are we still so far behind in terms of policy and technology compared to Europe and the US? This despite the number of “learning opportunities”?

So our question to you is, what comes out these events? Given the time, resources, and money they take up, we need to be certain they deliver more than navel-gazing and grandstanding.

If we can’t come together to raise the profile of our sector and look at the big picture, if we can’t articulate our offerings and base them on data

and facts, if we can’t look beyond the issue of the day, then we really shouldn’t expect the community and governments to take us seriously and make us a priority. Perhaps it’s time to consider a spirit of generosity and come together as one voice to clearly communicate what we offer both as an essential service and perhaps as importantly, a vibrant growth sector driven by innovation and technology that should make us the poster child of Australian industry.

May 10-12 AORA National Conference Mercure Grosvenor Adelaide The highly popular AORA National Conference for the organics recycling and composting industry showcased over three days includes workshops, networking opportunities, professional development, keynote speakers, panels, case studies, focused sessions, the National Awards gala dinner, and site tours. www.aora.org.au/nationalconference

June 15 WCRA Industry Update 2017 Waterview in Bicentennial Park, Sydney Since 1948, the Waste Contractors & Recyclers Association of NSW (WCRA) has assisted members in meeting the issues of the day, relevant to the waste and recycling industry. This annual event provides stakeholders with information on a range of topics critical to operating in the current environment as well as a forum to discuss the many opportunities and challenges. The Industry Update will provide delegates with a balanced program on a range of topics including; chain of responsibility in the waste Industry; the waste levy - positive or perverse outcomes; employment relations update; glass recycling; and an update from the NSW EPA. Dinner follows the Industry Update and we have invited the Minister for the Environment, The Hon. Gabrielle Upton MP to be our dinner speaker and special guest. www.wcra.com.au

August 23-24 Australasian Waste & Recycling Expo Melbourne Convention & Exhibition Centre The Australasian Waste & Recycling Expo (AWRE) is the most established commercial event dedicated to the Australasian waste and recycling marketplace. The event brings together the industry to generate quality sales leads; discover the latest trends; showcase innovation; network with key waste and recycling decision makers from industry and government; and attend high quality practical seminars and workshops. www.awre.com.au

DIARY May 2-4 Waste 2017 Opal Cove Resort, Coffs Harbour NSW First established back in 1996, the Coffs Harbour Waste Management Conference is now well regarded as the leading waste management conference in Australia. Well-known as the ‘Coffs Conference’ or the ‘Coffs Waste Conference’, this prestigious event will be held in Coffs Harbour from May 2-4, 2017 and will feature two full days of presentations, a comprehensive trade exhibition and social events on three evenings providing invaluable networking opportunities. www.coffswasteconference.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

APRIL/MAY 2017 INSIDEWASTE

51

EFFICIENT I CAN UNLOAD BOTH TRAILERS WITHOUT UNCOUPLING WITH THE LUSTY EMS STAG WALKING FLOOR B-DOUBLE

KEITH BIDDLE | OWNER SAPAR LANDSCAPING SUPPLIES

When it comes to quality and efficiency for your business, the Lusty EMS Stag® Walking Floor B-Double has you covered.

The first of its kind, it brings you the stability and safety of a Walking Floor® paired with the productivity gains of unloading the B-Double combination without uncoupling. What’s more, you can carry up to an extra 12m3 over a standard Walking Floor B-Double. Insist on a Lusty EMS Stag Walking Floor B-Double today and start enjoying the benefits.

MULCH

WASTE

To gain your efficiency boost, scan this QR code or visit lustyems.com.au to find your nearest Lusty EMS dealer. ® “Walking Floor” is a trade mark of Keith Manufacturing, Oregon, USA

CONSTRUCTION ®