INSIDE WASTE: December 2017/January 2018 by Mayfam Media

Official Publication of the

ISSUE 81 | DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

www.insidewaste.com.au At this year’s Sculpture by the Sea in Bondi, Marina Debris’ Inconvenience Store captured everything you never needed and more materials that littered the beautiful Bondi Beach. (Credit: Jennifer Soo Photography)

INSIDE 14 The industry speaks 18 Can WA get way ahead? 28 Understanding LISA

Reforming C&D

Do we need a product stewardship commissioner?

PP: 255003/07055

ISSN 1837-5618

AS the National Product Stewardship Act is being reviewed, Inside Waste’s Steward of Change columnist, John Gertsakis pondered over whether Australia could benefit from appointing a product stewardship commissioner. “Up to now, we’ve seen various stakeholders argue for regulation, while others advocate voluntary programs. It’s clear either way that engaging and enthusing industry is the key and that’s a compelling reason to look at a product stewardship commissioner,” Gertsakis wrote. The commissioner would be appointed by the federal Environment Minister and operate nationally. He or she would be free to work closely with industry, all levels of

government, research institutions, and the community to achieve better outcomes that are both practical and strategic. “Most importantly, a commissioner would be solution-oriented and work creatively and collaboratively to bring businesses to the table with other stakeholders to develop schemes in product categories currently absent or under-developed… and there are many,” Gertsakis wrote. “A commissioner could drive national efforts on stewardship awareness, smarter design and materials reuse, waste avoidance and resource recovery imperatives yet be unconstrained by the usual MoEM (Meeting of Environment Ministers) processes. Their work would

directly and indirectly supplement existing stewardship activities being undertaken by commonwealth and state jurisdictions.” And we wouldn’t be reinventing the wheel as there is already an example, and a good one as well, of the role with the Department having appointed a threatened species commissioner who has been successful in raising awareness and brokering solutions between the community, the non-profit sector, industry, scientists and all levels of government. We asked readers in an online poll if Australia needed a product stewardship commissioner. 84% said yes and 16% said no.

IT’S been a year-long wait but the NSW EPA’s much anticipated updated minimum standards for managing construction and demolition (C&D) waste and a suite of draft miscellaneous waste reforms are now available for public consultation. The EPA noted that the proposed changes set standards to ensure appropriate management, production and use of materials recovered from construction waste. These changes seek to ensure that waste is appropriately sorted, the quality of recovered materials is maintained, and human health and the environment are protected. Other changes proposed by the EPA relate to: • improving performance at landfills; • improving the handling of asbestos waste; • transported waste deductions; • new operational purpose deductions; • clarifying how the waste contributions are applied at resource recovery facilities; • monitoring of waste at licensed facilities; • waste transport; • changing the land pollution offence changing licensing requirements for a small number of activities clarifying resource recovery exemptions; • providing for the issue of penalty notices for certain offences; and • updating references to local government areas. The EPA has also flagged its intention to repeal the proximity principle and offered minor clarifications to the matter in which deductions from the waste levy are claimed. Consultation closes on December 12. More on page 15.

Editor’s note // Official Publication of the

Much to look forward to WHEN the team was at the tail end of putting the December issue of Inside Waste together, Queenslanders were getting ready to go to the polls in what is said to be a tight race to the top; a week out of the November 25 election, reports about how close the race was - too close to call were making the rounds. Ahead of the elections, key industry bodies put forward their wish lists, outlining policy priorities for the sector. It is an exciting time for Queensland and the sector - locally and nationally. Will the new government heed calls to commit to a landfill levy? Would they implement a new waste policy or strategy to better support the waste management hierarchy? And would they take WRIQ’s long-held position that waste and resource recovery should be removed from the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection portfolio? With our next (and first issue of 2018) being in February, we will be speaking to a range of stakeholders in Queensland to get an idea of what we can expect for the sector and from the government post-election.

There are also a number of new things happening next year as we seek to engage you, our community, and champion the sector. For those of you who have been waiting for the Consultants Review survey to arrive in your mailboxes, you will have to wait a little longer but trust us, it’s well worth the wait. Why? Because we’ll be launching the inaugural Inside Waste awards in August that will include the annual Consultants Review. We hope you’re as excited as we are! Details will follow shortly. In August, we asked you to provide feedback on the topics that matter to you - thank you for taking the time to complete the survey. A snapshot of results can be found on page 14 and Natasza Purser from the City of Boroondara was the lucky winner of a $500 Flight Centre voucher (congratulations!). The survey will help the team shape programs and content in 2018 that could include a series of seminar sessions. As we work towards creating content of value to you, in a range of shapes and forms, we hope to hear from you about what you’d like to see in the new year.

Senior Editor: Jacqueline Ong (jacqueline.ong@mayfam.net) Journalists: Jan Arreza (jan.arreza@mayfam.net) Catarina Fraga Matos (catarina@mayfam.net) Patrick Lau (patrick@mayfam.net)

NEW IN 2018: AWAR DS

Advertising: Alastair Bryers (alastair.bryers@mayfam.net or 0431 730 886) Marketing and Customer Support: Benjamin May (ben.may@mayfam.net) Creative Director, Patterntwo Creative Studio: Toni Middendorf Subscriptions: subscriptions@mayfam.net

It’s been an interesting year to say the least. In the second half, the sector took a bit of beating in the public space with coverage that at certain points, were one-sided. But it’s heartening to see industry band together, encourage one another, stand by each other and find ways to find the positives and improve the sector. Here’s to a profitable and successful 2018 but before that, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

Published by Mayfam Media Phone: 0400 868 456 Web: www.insidewaste.com.au Publisher: Ross May (ross@mayfam.net) 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

Victoria opens EfW policy discussion THE Victorian government has released its discussion paper on the energy from waste (EfW) industry, ahead of formulating a policy early next year. The paper covers the technology used in EfW processes; current applications in Victoria and elsewhere; and the case for increased support for EfW. It asks for input from the energy and waste industries, local governments, heavy users of energy and producers of waste, and communities and individuals. The consultation period comes at a time when the Andrews government is engaged in future-proofing both waste and energy industries. According to the paper, Victoria is “forecast to generate over 60% more waste over the next 30 years as the state’s population increases to a projected 9.5 million by 2046”, with the government considering “facilitating greater recovery of energy from waste” as one response.

In 2015-16, according to the report, about two-thirds of Victoria’s annual 12.7 million tonnes of waste was recovered through processing. As much as 85% of the energy generation mix was made up of brown coal, with just under 12% renewables. Renewable energy targets set by the government aim for that to hit 25% by 2020, and 40% by 2025. Supporting an EfW industry would “add a small amount of reliable, renewable electricity supply”. It would reduce emissions and reliance on landfill, while adding employment and economic development opportunities. But despite the clear benefits, and economic incentives and support already in place, EfW still plays a small role in Victoria (currently processing only 4% of the state’s waste). Suggested possible models include large-scale thermal processing plants; anaerobic digestion plants; smallscale precinct solutions and closedloop industrial solutions. Currently,

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

the only EfW projects in operational stage in Victoria are closed-loop industrial plants. This includes biogas projects such as Yarra Valley Water’s sewage treatment/biogas plant at Wollert, which generates net positive energy. Organics are singled out as a problem stream in landfill, composing 35% of undiverted waste and producing disproportionate methane emissions. Options and technologies applicable to organic waste (either source-separated or as part of residual mixed waste) and the resultant byproducts are given plenty of attention, suggesting that any future EfW policy will focus on this area. The paper also notes that a separate organics strategy is currently in development. As a valuable and relatively easily-recovered stream, several on-site EfW facilities that exploit homogeneous by-product feedstock are used as case studies. Other significant government

engagements mentioned as relevant with the waste industry include the EPA reforms; the e-waste ban; and a market development strategy. Some existing investment support is noted, despite low levels of uptake. However, the paper reports strong levels of interest. In particular, “Sustainability Victoria’s investment facilitation service estimates that between 60 to 70% of all enquiries they receive are about establishing a waste to energy facility.” Meanwhile, grants from the $2.3 million Waste to Energy Infrastructure Fund have been announced. $1.1 million will be spread over two sewage biogas plants run by the Western Region and East Gippsland Region Water Corporations. Another $467,000 will go to closed-loop industrial systems at Diamond Valley Pork and Nestle. The final $900,000 was awarded to Resource Resolution’s anaerobic digestion facility for organics.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

Federal Court deems JJ Richards’ contract terms unfair JJ Richards has become the first company to land in trouble with new laws that protect small businesses from unfair contract terms. In October, the Federal Court declared that eight terms in the standard form contract used by JJ Richards to engage small businesses are unfair, and therefore void, following ACCC action. These terms had the effect of: • binding customers to subsequent contracts unless they cancel the contract within 30 days before the end of the term; • allowing JJ Richards to unilaterally increase its prices; • removing any liability for JJ Richards where its performance is “prevented or hindered in any way”; • allowing JJ Richards to charge customers for services not rendered even when caused by reasons beyond the customer’s control; • granting JJ Richards exclusive rights to remove waste from a customer’s premises; • allowing JJ Richards to suspend its service but continue to charge the customer if payment is not made after seven days;

• creating an unlimited indemnity in favour of JJ Richards; and • preventing customers from terminating their contracts if they have payments outstanding and entitling JJ Richards to continue charging customers equipment rental after the termination of the contract. In finding that each of the terms was unfair, his Honour also found that “the Impugned Terms tend to exacerbate each other, increasing the overall imbalance between the parties and the risk of detriment to JJR Customers.” Since the laws came into effect, JJ Richards had written about 26,000 contracts. It is believed that a significant proportion of these contracts will be impacted by the case. In resolving these proceedings, JJ Richards consented to orders restraining it from relying on the unfair terms in existing small business contracts and from using the terms in future contracts with small businesses. JJ Richards also consented to orders that it publish a corrective notice and provide a copy of the Court’s orders to all its small business customers which are parties to an affected contract.

Profile | Joshua Romeo Joshua Romeo develops/co-ordinates waste planning projects and policy documents in accordance with Penrith Council’s waste planning vision and innovative service objectives. What was your first job in the sector and what attracted you to it? My first job was as a graduate waste education officer in 2014. With a background in geology and geography, I finished my last university exam on a Friday and commenced my journey in waste and resource recovery on the Monday. Favourite part of your current job? As a senior waste planning officer, I work with a diverse range of developers, consultants, contractors, government bodies and industry stakeholders where I can influence corporate policy review, urban design, masterplan development and commercial/residential development considerations throughout the approval process. What is the strangest thing you have had to do (or found)? I don’t think I can write about those items in this column. How has waste management changed in your time in the industry? Waste planning has become a priority within the DA process as urban densification is observed across Western Sydney. The increased density has supported the adoption of innovative waste collection technologies and alternatives. Penrith Council has prioritised resident amenity through the removal of traditional kerbside collection, and has required all higher density developments to perform on-site waste collection. Best advice ever given to you? All great changes are preceded by chaos.

Perth EfW facility one step closer THE Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) has selected a consortium led by Hitachi Zosen Innova (HZI) as the preferred tenderer for its Resource Recovery Facility that will result in the diversion from landfill of 96% of the EMRC’s residual household waste. The EMRC plant in East Rockingham will convert approximately 300,000 tonnes of waste per year into baseload renewable energy, producing 28MW of electricity at full capacity. It will utilise HZI’s proprietary moving grate combustion technology. HZI’s other partners in the project are New Energy Corporation, a Perthbased EfW business which has been developing the East Rockingham site

since 2013, and Tribe Infrastructure Group (Tribe), an international advisory and investment firm specialising in the development and financing of complex infrastructure transactions. The project represents a $400 million investment in the Perth area and will create 300 jobs during construction and 50 new full-time jobs throughout its 30+-year operating life. EMRC will now meet with its individual member Councils to get approval for various agreements required under the arrangement with HZI. This process must be completed before the award of tender can be finalised and to allow the project to proceed and for waste deliveries to commence in 2021.

An artist’s impression of the facility.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

News //

Profile | Equilibrium When was the company founded and why? Equilibrium was founded in early 2009 with the aim of being a sound business that positively transforms organisations through sustainability knowledge, insights, tools, research and advice. What are the key services that Equilibrium offers? Equilibrium brings together a suite of services that support sustainability and enhance organisational performance. Equilibrium is multidisciplinary firm across four core areas:

• Environment and sustainability. • Climate change and carbon. • Compliance and management. • Engagement, communications and government. Equilibrium brings broad capacity, capability and balance when working with clients and project partners. The team offers technical assessments across energy, carbon, product stewardship, waste and recycling and environmental management systems, also providing strategic advice along with stakeholder engagement and communications. What are the key barriers that prevent organisations from improving their sustainability? Uncertainty and lack of defined purpose often creates barriers and inertia when considering environmental and sustainability programs and activities. Equilibrium’s approach to overcome such barriers starts with a strong emphasis on robust research and sound data applied through fit-for-purpose methods that are commercially sensible, environmentally responsible, and socially desirable. Equilibrium works hard to listen carefully and fully understand customer requirements as a foundation to advancing sustainability in organisations. What are some of Equilibrium’s goals and plans for the next 12-18 months? Equilibrium’s goal is to continue to expand services and reach, and to exceed customer expectations through trusted advice, ongoing support and innovative outcomes. Having now worked on 12 product stewardship schemes, Equilibrium is working to develop, implement, assess and manage schemes across a range of products and materials. Climate change and carbon work will also continue to be a focus, as will audit and compliance services. More: www.equil.com.au

Providing a coherent approach to waste management THE federal government has embarked on an inquiry into the country’s waste and recycling industry and has sought feedback on how it can provide a coherent approach to the management of solid waste, with particular reference to: a. the quantity of solid waste generated and the rate of diversion of solid waste for recycling; b. the accreditation and management of landfills; c. the extent of illegal landfilling; d. the role of landfill levies in determining the end destination of material, including the hypothecation of collected levies for enforcement and waste diversion purposes; e. the role of different incentives and collection methods in determining the quality and quantity of material collected for recycling; f. the destination of material collected for recycling, including the extent of material reprocessing and the stockpiling of collected material; g. the current economic conditions in the industry, including the market for material collected for recycling; h. the transportation of solid waste across state boundaries; i. the role of the Australian government in providing a coherent, efficient and environmentally responsible approach to solid waste management, including by facilitating a federal approach; and j. any other related matters. The inquiry was meant to report by November 29 but has since been given an extension by Senate to report by June 13, 2018 instead.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

WRIQ’s Rick Ralph.

Setting QLD’s waste agenda AT press time, Queenslanders were getting ready to head to the polls on November 25. Ahead of the elections, both the Waste Management Association of Australia (WMAA) and the Waste Recycling Industry Association of Queensland (WRIQ) put forward their election wish list; outlining key policy priorities for the sector. The WMAA Queensland branch is calling for a a comprehensive review of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity Strategy 2014, and the urgent implementation of a new waste policy/strategy that supports the waste management hierarchy and includes ambitious diversion targets supported by a landfill levy for all waste streams. “The absence of a comprehensive waste strategy, underpinned by a landfill levy, results in Queensland maintaining a ‘take, make and dispose’ approach to waste and resource recovery, when Australia has moved further towards a circular economy,” WMAA said in a statement. The statement also emphasised the need to commit a proportion of such a levy to reinvestment in the waste and resource recovery industry. “The current linear approach adversely impacts Queensland in making it difficult for resource recovery industries to invest, depriving Queensland of the opportunity to create new jobs,” said WMAA CEO Gayle Sloan. WMAA’s list of other priorities include (but are not limited to) resourcing investigations of unlicensed sites, developing and implementing best practice guidelines for the management of landfills and mandating sustainable procurement policies in government. Meanwhile, WRIQ has not addressed the landfill levy in its policy paper but reiterated its long-argued position that responsibility for waste policy should

be removed from the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP). Industry negotiation with the environmental regulator (alongside local government) was the founding raison d’être of WRIQ, whose membership includes many family-owned small businesses. Their argument to replace ownership of waste policy has been enduring, with little success to date. In July 2014, WRIQ reported “unanimous support for their position” from dozens of LNP MPs, senators, and ministers, after a series of one-onone discussions with CEO Rick Ralph. However, successive LNP and Labor governments have made no movement since then. WRIQ is also pushing for a formal waste and resource recovery strategy for Queensland; a planning framework to develop resource recovery precincts (RRPs); an inter-departmental taskforce targeting unlicensed environmentally-relevant activities; and an “articulation of general environmental duty on waste generators”. Additionally, the association has called on the state government to step in to intervene with Sunshine Coast Council, and local governments in general, that choose to “monopolise commercial waste and recycling services”. WRIQ previously took this issue to the Queensland Competition Authority in 2013, which found that Sunshine Coast was engaging in uncompetitive practices; however, the council voted unanimously to reject their recommendations and much of the substance of the claims involved. WRIQ remains concerned, stating: “It is a fundamental right of all business owners operating in a democracy that legitimate businesses should not be forced out of their markets by any government operating a monopoly”.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Screens anything from C&D to MSW The new â&#x20AC;&#x153;Hextraâ&#x20AC;? Dynamic Waste Screen from Ecostar is a flexible, fully mobile screen. Masterfully screening C&D and MSW, the Hextra also screens the most difficult composts and wet sticky materials at high speed.

the machine size for transport and also offers the option to utilize or remove the first fraction from your production if required.

The new Hextra model with its patented antiwrap and Hardox Discs, will outlast a star The Hextra model comes in lengths from 4 metres screen in any compost or mulch application up to 7 metres in length for massive productivity. and reduce your costs ten fold. Choose single or double decks for up to 3 fraction separation. Contact us now to hear more. The Hextra features the Smart Feeder System, a slide in-slide out 3 cubic metre feeder with dosing screw (for consistent feed material). The Freecall: 1800 644 978 Smart Feeder System, gives flexibility to reduce www.cssequipment.com.au

News //

WCRA calls for change after spate of truck accidents THE Waste Contractors & Recyclers Association of NSW (WCRA) has long been vocal about the need to tackle the interstate transport of waste but at the end of October, it reiterated its call following three truck accidents in seven days. In all three incidents, trucks transporting waste were travelling from NSW to South East Queensland. The most recent accident, which occurred overnight on October 31 in Blacktown in Greater Western Sydney, involved a truck that was loaded with demolition waste headed for Sunnybank in Brisbane. Meanwhile, on October 24, NSW Police Force chief inspector Phillip Brooks wrote to WCRA about a roll-over event where it appeared a truck was transporting exhumed waste interstate. WCRA has lobbied hard for many years for the NSW government to review regulations to prevent landfills from undertaking the activity of exhuming

waste but this is just one issue. With some 1800 truck movements heading north, long distance transportation of waste continues to pose a challenge and WCRA executive director Tony Khoury pointed to range of factors that have resulted in these accidents, such as the use of sub-standard trucks and trailers, drivers being pushed to work long hours, and in some cases, the lack of insurance coverage on trucks. “Chief inspector Phillip Brooks has confirmed that defective trucks, fatigue management breaches and speed are the most likely causes of these accidents. The concern is that with these high number of heavy vehicle truck movements, that there may be a fatal truck accident,” Khoury told Inside Waste. “Some waste is also transported long distance by rail. The EPA has publicly stated that rail operators require an EPA depot licence [but] the operators have fought this requirement. The issue of

The accident on October 31 involved a truck that was was loaded with demolition waste and headed for Sunnybank in Brisbane. (Source: WCRA)

long distance transport of waste from NSW interstate also undermines NSW’s waste minimisation objectives and the NSW government’s $950 million, nine-year investment in the Waste Less Recycle More initiative,” he added. “We first brought our concerns relating to the long-distance transport of waste to the attention of the NSW government in August 2012 [and] several times this year - March, June, August, October - we

The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust was established in 1965 to honour the memory of Sir Winston Churchill. (Source: Churchill Trust).

Churchill Fellows to search for new waste and recycling ideas THE 2017 Churchill Fellows have been announced and two recipients will embark on a worldwide search for new waste and resource recovery ideas, innovation and excellence next year. The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust was established in 1965 to honour the memory of Sir Winston Churchill by the awarding of Memorial Fellowships to be known as ‘Churchill Fellowships’. The aim of the Trust is to provide an opportunity for Australians to travel overseas to conduct research in their chosen field that is not readily available in Australia. It also aims to reward proven achievement of talented and deserving Australians with further opportunity in their pursuit 8

of excellence for the enrichment of Australian society. This year, 109 Australians from a pool of 1140 applicants were awarded Fellowships worth more than $2.8 million, which will fund their travel for up to eight weeks. “We will be sending Fellows from all states and territories of Australia around the world, to investigate everything from high-energy batteries and milk pricing, to sustainable shoemaking and driverless cars,” Churchill Trust CEO Adam Davey said. “The key to becoming a Churchill Fellow is your passion and drive to make a difference in your community and a good project that will allow you to do just that.”

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Of the recipients, 26 are from NSW, 21 from Victoria, 18 from Queensland, 13 from Western Australia, eight from the Australian Capital Territory, nine from South Australia, seven from Tasmania, and seven from the Northern Territory. Among them are Helen Millicer, principal of One Planet Consulting and manager at the Vinyl Council of Australia, who will look to the UK, Belgium, Germany, and Malaysia for ways to increase the recycling and reprocessing of plastics in Australia, as well as Sarah May, policy officer at the Australian Department of Agriculture who will turn to New Zealand, the UK, Denmark, US, and United Arab Emirates to research international models for reducing food waste.

have formally raised our concerns with NSW EPA, the Premier, the Minister for the Environment, and the NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into waste,” he added. WCRA is continuing to call on the government to fix the issues, particularly around long distance transport of waste, and has urged for a review of the state’s waste regulations, which it says has not kept pace with the higher value of waste in NSW.

Vic says no to the bag THE Victorian government has committed to banning single-use, lightweight plastic shopping bags in the state and has promised to consult closely with businesses and the community on how best to implement the policy. The government pointed to experience in other jurisdictions saying these have shown that banning lightweight plastics can lead to undesirable results, including increased use of heavier duty plastics, which can have an even greater environmental impact. Thus, the government’s aim is to deliver a workable scheme that doesn’t unfairly impact on consumers, retailers, industry or the environment. “We will work closely with Victorian communities and businesses to design the ban, we’re proud that we’re doing our bit to reduce the impact plastic bags have on our environment,” Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change Lily D’Ambrosio said. South Australia, the Northern Territory, Tasmania, and the Australian Capital Territory have banned single-use plastic bags while Queensland and Western Australia will implement a ban next year.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

TDS TDSV20 V20Medium Medium Speed SpeedShredder Shredder

NOW NOWIN INSTOCK STOCK

 Variable Variablespeed speedindependent independentshafts shafts  Intelligent Intelligentprotection protectionsystem system

protectsagainst againstcontaminants contaminants protects  Bolt Boltononcutting cuttingtips tips  Accurate Accurateend endproduct productthrough through interchangeablescreens screens interchangeable  Accurate Accurateend endproduct productthrough through interchangeablescreens screens interchangeable  Vecoplan Vecoplanshredding shreddingchamber chamber

NOW NOWIN INAUSTRALIA AUSTRALIA

Steelweld SteelweldWindsifter Windsifter Rotary1500 1500 //Rotary  Horizontal Horizontalvibratory vibratoryfeeder feeder  Low Lowfeed feedheight height  Fully Fullyadjustable adjustable1500mm 1500mmwide wide

acceleratorbelt beltwith withspeed speedcontrol control accelerator  Recirculating Recirculatingdust dustcontrol controlsystem system  Removable Removabledust dustcovers coversover overvibratory vibratory feederand andlights lightsconveyor conveyor feeder  On Onboard boardairaircompressor compressortotoallow allow cleaningofofthe themachine machine cleaning

WASTE WASTE HANDLERS HANDLERS

CBI CBI GRINDERS GRINDERS

WINDROW WINDROW TURNERS TURNERS

TROMMELS TROMMELS

SLOW SLOW SPEED SPEED SHREDDERS SHREDDERS

RECYCLING RECYCLING SCREENS SCREENS

1800 1800777 777300 300 || info@mwsenvironmental.com.au info@mwsenvironmental.com.au || www.mwsenvironmental.com.au www.mwsenvironmental.com.au

News //

Central knowledge hub planned for QLD THE Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection is throwing its weight behind organic recycling activities by providing financial support to establish the Centre for Recycling of Organic Waste and Nutrients (CROWN) within the University of Queensland’s School of Agriculture and Food Sciences. Led by the University of Queensland, CROWN will be supported by a range of stakeholders, including the Department, local government, the organics recycling industry, natural resource management groups, and the agricultural/horticultural industries. A key role of CROWN will be to build linkages between state and local government, the waste and organics recycling industry, university researchers, agricultural producers and natural resource management groups. CROWN’s activities will cover the processing and beneficial use of all organic waste and nutrient streams, including municipal and commercial organics, manure and agricultural wastes, food and fibre processing

residues, biosolids and sludges, and focus on both research and development, as well as training and education of farmers, agronomists, composters, waste managers and regulators. It is envisaged that a large proportion of CROWN’s work will cover aspects of utilising raw and composted organic resources for land management and plant production purposes, but will also include other organics re-use activities, such as the use of biochar, digestate, struvite, or next-gen organomineral fertilisers. CROWN’s research, development, training and extension activities will focus on the development and assessment of high-quality and fit-for-purpose recycled organic products and their beneficial use in terms of agronomic, economic and environmental effects. CROWN aims to be an independent research, training and advisory organisation that covers all aspects of organics recycling and resource recovery supply chains.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Susan Hunt of Lotterywest, Earth Carers’ Amy Mickelberg and Amy Warne, and UNAAWA president Steve Lennon at the gala.

Perth council lauded for waste education program A Perth council has won plaudits for an extensive educational and informational campaign aimed at reducing waste. Western Metropolitan Regional Council, which sprawls from innercity Subiaco to residential Mosman Park, took out the Environmental Action Award at a UN Day gala in October. The award went to their waste education team, which has championed better residential waste practices through an extensive engagement program called Earth Carers. The centrepiece of the program is a free course, run bi-annually, that includes tours of waste

facilities and community gardens, sessions on minimising food waste and at-home organics processing, problem wastes, and the waste management sector in Perth. Earth Carers also runs outreach events, recycling drop-off centres and programs, portable water bottle refill stations and an annual “Less is More” festival. Initially set up by the Department of Environment and Conservation in 1998, the program is funded by gate fees at the FR (Jim) McGeough Resource Recovery Facility. The award was given by the WA division of the United Nations’ Australian arm.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

COMPACTION COUNTS

UNIQUE VERSATILITY

Equipment news //

What’s new in size reduction? How quickly the year has gone by and it’s not only the final issue of Inside Waste, but also the annual size reduction edition. From pages 35 to 46, you’ll find numerous size reduction case studies as well as a directory featuring a range of equipment available in the Australian market to help operators get the size of materials they need. But as a start, here are some of the newest equipment that have made its way down under.

Sometimes great doesn’t have to be big BRENTWOOD Recycling Systems has unveiled a new Metso M&J Fineshred 1550 and 3550 which the company says can produce RDF material of the highest standard. “Many people ask us why the new M&J Fine Shredders perform so well, particularly when it comes to RDF production. We could argue that it is because of the patented close tolerance ‘clean cut’ knife system, the robustness and durability, the resonance-free hydrostatic transmission or the unique Metso service and support network. But we fully understand, that most days, you just need to know that it provides you up to 18tph with a homogeneous output from 100mm all the way down to 10mm, with a minimum of dust, fines, and heat generation,” Brentwood said. The M&J FineShred series consists of two new single-shaft vertical feed shredders, which due to their multi-edged shaft, a flexible knife configuration fed by an intelligent hydraulic pusher (that ensures material is not forced into the shaft, minimising heat generation), are perfect for handling all kinds of waste fractions from recycling processes.

Metso saw a need in the market for single shaft fine-shredders with in-line feeding. These new shredders have an unbeatable price performance and deliver a super stable and homogeneous output which increases the value of products. Their goal was to create a shredder with a vertical feed at a competitive price - without compromising on Metso’s usual high quality. Its great achievement is that it can shred almost any material into very small pieces and ensure a completely uniform result. Knives and knife holders are easy to fasten and change and are available in different designs to suit the demands from different applications. The service hatch on the outside of the machine provides easy access with optimal working positions to service the rotor and change or adjust the stationary knives, ensuring minimal down time. Brentwood Recycling Systems is the exclusive distributor for Metso Waste Recycling Machinery in Australia. More: www.brentwood.com.au or 02 4271 7511

been made to the machine’s tracks, conveyor belts and software. Already popular with both Italian and international customers, Ecostar is confident that Hextra will be able to offer even better performance thanks to this fresh selection of

technological solutions. Ecostar’s Australian distributor, CSS Equipment, is now taking orders for the Hextra Screen. More: www.cssequipment.com.au or 1800 644 978

A new star ITALIAN equipment manufacturer Ecostar has launched its Hextra Screen at Ecomondo, an energy expo in Rimini and the machine will soon arrive in Australia. The new Hextra is fitted with the tried and tested Dynamic Disc Screen technology, which has been patented by Ecostar and which it said “has brought about a revolution in disc screening systems”. According to the manufacturer, it is still unparalleled in its field in terms of reliability, precision and capacity. In addition, Hextra will come with some significant innovations such as a traversing “Smart Hopper”, which can divide the material to be loaded, exclude the third fraction in the three‐ fraction version and create a loop with any shredder. Four screening options ranging from 4000 to 7000 are available, while maintaining the same frame. As part of a solution developed by 12

Ecostar’s R&D department to optimise production processes and reduce delivery times, identical frames are used for both the tracked version and the roll-off version. In addition, the company said that numerous other improvements have

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

news

From the CEO’s desk The upcoming Queensland election has very quickly brought waste management into focus and, sadly, how it is not seen as an ‘essential service.’ As you are aware, the waste, recycling and remanufacturing industry in Australia, currently contributes $15 billion annually to the economy as well as employing 50,000 people. At present, Queensland continues to be one of the largest generators of waste, however one of the poorest diverters of waste from landfill. The absence of a comprehensive waste strategy, underpinned by a landfill levy, results in Queensland maintaining a “take, make and dispose” approach to waste and resource recovery when the remainder of Australia (and the developed world) has moved towards thinking circular. As such there is a real opportunity for Queensland to develop and introduce policy settings that will support the return materials back to the productive economy, displacing the need for virgin materials in the manufacture of new products, via the circular economy. The current linear approach adversely impacts Queensland in many ways, not the least of which being making it difficult for resource recovery industries to invest depriving Queensland of the opportunity to create new jobs.

WMAA values our developing relationship with the Queensland Government, as evidenced by recent participation in a range of initiatives including the introductionn of the Container Refund Scheme, Inquiry into the Interstate Transportation of Waste, the review of Regulated Waste Classification and Waste-Related Environmentally Relevant Activity (ERA) frameworks. WMAA welcomes the current Government’s commitment to engaging with industry and trusts that this commitment will continue by way of tangible action and funding support post the upcoming election. Right now inconsistent State regulation creates a massive incentive for millions of tonnes of waste to be transported many hundreds of kilometres. This creates environmental harm and this situation must stop. Recent media attention focused on NSW and QLD but this is a nationwide issue. The future of our industry is in the circular economy, and our assisting in helping with issues such as sustainable energy and the creation of new “green collar” manufacturing jobs in Australia, and very much including in regional Australia. We’re not going to create a fly-in-fly-out waste sector, the nature of what we do means we need to do it close to the communities where people already live and generate waste materials. Very few if any other industry can do as much in terms of creating sustainable, long term local jobs that support local economies and contribute so much towards the sorts of Sustainable Development Goals that Australia is already committed to. Gayle Sloan Chief Executive Officer Waste management Association of Australia

WasteQ 2017 Brings Circular Economy Ideas To Mackay WasteQ was held this year at the Mackay Entertainment Centre in Queensland. The theme of the two and half day conference was Reshaping Regional Resilience.

most fundamental form, that these types of schemes reduce litter while increasing recycling and protecting the environment.

The Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection and Minister for National Parks and the Great Barrier Reef, Hon Dr Steven Miles was in attendance to address the conference on his thoughts on the state of the industry and his favorable outlook on the Circular Economy and how it can aid regional Australian economies.

The conference also included some wonderful opportunities for the attendees to network at both the pre-conference drinks and conference dinner.

Another highlight was the panel discussion facilitated by WMAA CEO Gayle Sloan about Container Refund Schemes and their efficacy. The panel included Anne Prince (APrince Consulting), Jeff Maquire (Coca-Cola Amatil), Stuart Garbutt (RDT), Kylie Hughes (DEHP), Luke Hannan (LGAQ), and Gavin Kelly (Scouts Australia). The panel discussed how Container Refund Schemes were product stewardship in its

WasteQ would not have been possible without the generous support of its sponsors: Suez, Queensland Government, Mackay Regional Council, JJ Richards & Sons, Cleanaway, Re.Group, ATC Williams. WasteQ also gave attendees to see exhibitors like – Incredable, RPS, The Water and Carbon Group, Jaylon Pacific, Evirondata, EnviroCom Australia, Wastech Engineering, Manadalay Technologies, Polyworld, GCM Enviro, Robots in Waste, and Access Environmental.

Survey //

The topics that matter By Jacqueline Ong IN August, Inside Waste reached out to the industry to get a feel for the topics that matter to you in your day-to-day operations. To the 134 readers who responded to the survey, thank you. Your input is greatly appreciated and will help us shape programs and content in 2018 that are relevant and of value to you. While there was an option for respondents to remain anonymous, we also offered a $500 Flight Centre voucher to those who wanted to enter the lucky draw. The prize went to City of Booroondara’s coordinator of waste management, Natasza Purser, who as it turned out, had just finalised Council’s 2017-2022 waste strategy at the time. What started out as a congratulatory phone call ended up in an insightful conversation about Council’s food waste diversion ambitions (more on page 16). Topics covered in the survey included: • recovering value from waste; • waste management planning and operations; • resource recovery; • landfill and transfer stations operations; • energy from waste and advanced technologies; • equipment and technology innovations; • policy, regulations and government programs; • waste infrastructure planning and design; • waste transportation/haulage; and • other business issues. Municipal solid waste remains a key area of focus for majority of respondents (67.74%), followed closely by commercial and industrial waste (65.32%). While there are changes ahead for construction and demolition waste, for example, reforms in NSW that are being mulled over as we speak, only 41.73% ranked it their key area of focus. Perhaps, as some told us after the survey ended, the reason for that is the C&D sector is ticking along nicely (enough). Thinking about these key areas of focus in your day-to-day operations, Inside Waste then asked what topics were of most interest to you. Coming up on top, and by a relatively large margin, was advanced technologies, including landfill gas, bioenergy and energy from waste (72.23%). It is hardly surprising that there is keen interest in EfW with the recent 14

movements and progress across the country, and in pushing EfW forward, areas that needed clarity included the approvals process, implementation, technology selection, community consultation and how EfW appropriately fits in the waste hierarchy. Policies and regulations followed, coming in second at 65.35%, and readers were more or less unanimous in their call for harmonisation in this area. Drilling down on specific waste streams, it is encouraging to see that readers had their eyes firmly fixed on the future and were thinking about, and wanting to find out more about technological advancements and end markets. These came out as top priority topics, superseding even themes such as on-site process improvements. And technological advancements went beyond machinery. The future of the Internet of Things was one area that sparked great interest (70.8%), particularly in subjects related to smart city waste management initiatives, as well as real-time data and connectivity. Next up were automation technologies (56.64%) followed by field personnel productivity and mobility technologies (43.36%), and big data technologies and tools (38.94%). Turning to infrastructure planning and design, readers were most keen on improvements in resource recovery infrastructure (82.76%). Also on their minds were integrating waste management and resource recovery into land use planning and usage frameworks (66.38%) and planning for regional communities (65.52%). Not far behind, and an area that is especially pertinent in inner city suburbs and satellite cities, were better waste management and service infrastructure for multi-unit dwellings (56.03%). Operationally, majority of respondents were looking for ways to increase income streams from materials as well as engage and educate the community better. While this is but a snapshot of the topics and issues that matter to the sector, as told by readers who participated in the survey, you can be sure that Inside Waste has and will continue to reflect on these priorities. As the year wraps up, the team is putting on our thinking caps to bring you a range of new initiatives and programs in the new year, such as our inaugural national awards in August/September, which will include the annual Consultants Review, as well as a range of seminar series iw throughout the year.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

KEY AREAS OF FOCUS

TOPICS OF INTEREST

THE “NEED TO KNOW” IN DRIVING EFW FORWARD

WHAT READERS WANT FROM GOVERNMENT

ADVANCING THE SECTOR: AREAS OF INTEREST

BUSINESS PRIORITIES

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Legal

NSW EPA attempts to demolish rogue operators with reforms By Gavin Shapiro IN late 2016, the EPA proposed reforms, including minimum standards for the management of construction and demolition (C&D) waste. Following a lengthy period without further action, some hoped that the EPA had abandoned those reforms. However, this has proved to be wishful thinking, as the EPA has now released for public exhibition a package comprising: • the draft Standards for Managing Construction Waste in NSW (the Minimum Standards); • draft amendments to the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014 (Regulations); and • an Explanatory Paper, explaining the proposed reforms. It now appears that the EPA will be pursuing these reforms, and putting in place some form of minimum standard for C&D waste, together with amended Regulations, in 2018.

• specific training requirements for personnel; • the keeping of a register of rejected loads; • the sorting of all loads into multiple categories - further recovery, further processing at the C&D waste facility, transportation to a waste facility that can lawfully receive that waste, and/or disposal at landfill; • detailed requirements for the separate storage and labelling of waste streams; • a prohibition on mixing sorted waste, except with the same waste category; • ongoing obligations to inspect waste that has already been sorted; • all unpermitted waste types to be transported offsite within one business day; and • a prohibition on the on-transport of C&D waste unless it has been through the relevant inspection and sorting requirements.

The Minimum Standards

The proximity principle

This part of the reforms will apply to C&D waste facilities, being any waste facility, other than a landfill, that receives 6000 tonnes or more per annum of C&D waste (except for facilities receiving waste only from outside of the metropolitan levy area). Compliance with the Minimum Standards is proposed to be a condition of each C&D waste facilities’ environment protection licence. This means that the Minimum Standards will be legally binding on C&D waste facilities - and breaching them will result in a licence breach - a criminal offence. The Minimum Standards require: • inspection of each load at weighbridge by a trained person, to determine if it contains any asbestos waste and rejection of loads if asbestos is reasonably suspected to be present; • a more detailed second inspection by a trained person, by tipping and spreading the load, in a dedicated 100m2 inspection area and rejection of the load if any asbestos waste is observed; • the immediate moving of any waste streams not permitted at the facility to a dedicated storage area;

The other reforms will impact all waste facilities, not just C&D waste facilities, and the most significant is the proposed repeal of the “proximity principle”. Those with a good memory will note that back in March, the EPA proposed to repeal the “proximity principle”, but it remains in force in the Regulations to date. Those with an even better memory will recall that when the Regulations were first exhibited in draft in early 2014, there was no “proximity principle” - it was snuck into the Regulations shortly before they commenced on November 1, 2014. With that history, and rumours of a national proximity principle, or a national waste levy trigger based on point of generation, there certainly may be a few more twists and turns in the “proximity principle” story before the reforms are finalised - stay tuned.

Reforms to the waste levy A number of other reforms relate to the waste levy, including: • deductions will only be available if the facility can satisfy the EPA, with evidence that the deduction is valid;

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

• the EPA can require the facility to engage an independent auditor to audit claimed deductions; • changes to the deduction for waste transported to another waste facility, which mean that the facility must now satisfy the EPA that the receiving facility can lawfully receive that waste before the deduction will be granted; • a new provision allowing the EPA to estimate mass loss at a waste facility for the purposes of the waste levy – currently, under the Regulations, there is no explicit legal ability for waste facilities and the EPA to make a deduction for mass loss; • minor drafting changes to the triggers which determine when the waste levy is payable for nonlandfills (however the triggers effectively remain the same); and • an ability for the EPA to pay rebates to waste facilities where they have been charged the waste levy on waste which is subsequently transported lawfully to another facility. While they may seem minor, these changes mean that the EPA will now have far more tools in its arsenal to charge the waste levy to facilities that the EPA suspects are not meeting all relevant requirements. Facilities will need to keep meticulous records, and have clear evidence of where all waste was transported - and that the end destination can lawfully receive that waste. These reforms mean that when utilising transport contractors or sub-contractors, it will be extremely important for facilities to know exactly where waste is being transported, that it is lawful, as well as having appropriate contractual protections from the actions of transporters or sub-contractors.

Other minor reforms In addition, there are some other minor housekeeping changes, including: • small changes to environment protection licence thresholds, especially clarifying that intermodal facilities require licences, even if waste is transferred between units of rolling stock or vehicles; • banning the exhuming of waste

HDY’s Gavin Shapiro.

at landfills (except in specific circumstances); and • a prohibition on landfills on-transporting waste, except in limited circumstances.

What are the implications for industry? The stated aim of the package is to improve the management of C&D waste. Of course, in doing so, significantly increased costs are likely to be borne by C&D waste facilities. Smaller C&D waste operators without sufficient facilities or staff may be forced to cease operating. The reforms also mean that C&D waste facilities face a potential compliance minefield, with potential criminal sanction if they do not follow the Minimum Standards. The changes to the waste levy, while subtle, also mean that there is significantly greater scope for waste facilities to be saddled with the waste levy. To avoid paying the levy, facilities will need to take great care to ensure that the end destination for waste is lawful, and that all steps are well documented. Facilities should also revisit contracts with transporters and sub-contracts to ensure that they are appropriately protected. The potential repeal of the “proximity principle,” if it occurs as advertised, may deliver temporary certainty to the legality of waste transported from NSW to Queensland. However, with a likely replacement on the cards, any window of opportunity for interstate transport will likely be short-lived. Those who may be impacted should make a submission to the EPA by December 12, 2017.

Gavin Shapiro is a senior associate at Henry Davis York with more than a decade’s experience specialising in waste. Contact: Gavin.Shapiro@hdy.com.au iw or 02 9947 6797.

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Local government //

Boroondara FOGOs the distance

By Jacqueline Ong $10 billion dollars. That’s how much Australians are wasting each year by throwing out unwanted food, according to the 2017 RaboDirect Financial Health Barometer released in October, and the average household chucks 14% of food bought. While the report is based on a survey of only a small sample of the population - 2300 people - there are numerous other figures from government about just how dire the situation is. For instance, the federal government has noted that 20% of purchased food ends up in the bin and this is only household waste. Over in the commercial and industrial sector, about three million tonnes of food is wasted annually, costing $10.5 billion in waste disposal charges. No wonder many a council have ranked food waste a priority material to deal with and earlier this year, the federal government stepped in, holding a roundtable discussion with industry and community leaders on how to reduce the nation’s food waste by 50% by 2030. Over in the City of Boroondara, in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne, food and organic waste is the main driver of Council’s new 2017-2022 waste strategy. Council’s coordinator of waste management, Natasza Purser, told Inside Waste the city sends about 31% of food waste to landfill - most of it avoidable - making it a compelling reason to tackle the waste stream and achieve higher diversion. While the strategy is not overly prescriptive, it is crystal clear on its aim to divert a large proportion of food waste from landfill in an attempt 16

to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, extend the life of the region’s landfills, reduce the cost incurred by paying the landfill levy, and processing the material into resources that can go back into the soil. Purser is passionate about food waste diversion and has played a key role in a food waste collection service pilot in the UK - a model that is today used by more than 50% of the country’s councils - as well as driving the introduction of a food organics garden organics (FOGO) service last year in Bendigo, 150km north west of Melbourne, which has to date diverted 10,000 tonnes of the waste stream from landfill. While Purser will bring her learnings to the table in Boroondara, Council will also embark on an investigation into the practicalities of various food waste diversion and collection methods to determine the best solution for Boroondara. “One of the things I’ve learnt as food waste services have evolved over the last 15 years is that there isn’t a one-size-fits-all model. We do have to look at each case individually and work out what would work best for the residents and our infrastructure, as well as the disposal options we have that would suit our transport times,” Purser said. “So, Council will be doing feasibility studies. We will have a look at the bin collection frequencies to make sure we’ve got the correct suite of services in place and if we do introduce a new service, we will determine what that looks like - whether it’s going to be food and garden waste in the same bin or some other model. “Council would also need to provide

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

organics bins to properties that don’t currently have one. We’ve got about 42,000 people already on the garden organics service but Boroondara has around 66,000 tenements, so there’s a little bit of a gap to cover. We may also look at joining regional procurement for disposal via the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group (MWRRG) or we could go out to tender on our own.” There may not be a one-size-fits-all approach but Purser acknowledged that there are common behaviours and perceptions among residents both here and overseas. “I learned quite early on in the UK project that people had a poor perception about collecting kitchen waste separately. They thought it was going to be smelly and dirty and we also see these perceived barriers in Australia. However, they can be quite successfully overcome once people start to use the system,” Purser said. “You’ll need good engagement and education and really work with people on what their ‘why’ is - why do they want to engage with that service? Do they want to save money or go shopping less? Or do they want to do something good for the environment? We just have to work that out, get them on board and get past those barriers. That is why it is key that we do the engagement and education piece properly at the beginning and not try to rush things into place. We need to give ourselves time to properly engage with the community about what they think might work for them and what their concerns might be so we can get a model that really works.” Thus, it is unsurprising that while food waste is Council’s top priority in

Natasza Purser is passionate about food waste diversion.

its waste strategy, waste education comes a close second. Later down the track, Council will also need to re-evaluate its infrastructure and identify areas of improvement at its depots to complement its food and organic waste diversion efforts. Early discussions have already begun and Council will work with the MWRRG to look at the larger pieces of infrastructure required to manage disposal through the latter’s strategic procurement exercises. “There are two procurement exercises going on at the moment and I think these facilities will be able to start accepting FOGO as early as 2018. It is looking like the infrastructure will be there and aligned nicely with what we want to do but also what other councils are looking at doing,” Purser said. For now, Council has its work cut out for it in having to address the bin sizes and pricing structures, and determining the effects these changes may have on people and their service preferences. “I view food waste and its diversion as a circular and closed loop concept. As councils, we may tend to think that providing a kerbside service is the panacea but I think there are few more strands than that. Education and engagement are really key because if we can reduce waste at source, then there will be better value in terms of how we spend ratepayers’ money as iw well,” Purser concluded.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Legal

CoR and the waste sector Holding Redlich partner, Nathan Cecil.

By Nathan Cecil THE Chain of Responsibility (CoR) laws are hotting up, as is the regulators’ ongoing focus on the waste sector. With maximum penalties set to rise to $3 million for corporations, and $300,000 and up to five years in jail for individuals, participants in the waste supply chain can’t afford to continue to overlook their CoR compliance obligations.

CoR recap The CoR laws make every party in the waste supply chain responsible for heavy vehicle safety. If a heavy vehicle breach of mass, dimension, load restraint, maintenance or driver speed or fatigue occurs, every person in the chain for that load can be held liable, even if they did not own/operate the vehicle and even if they were not contractually responsible for the particular process which caused the breach. The only defence is to prove that you took ‘all reasonable steps’ to: • avoid committing a breach; and • exercise control or influence over all other parties in the chain to prevent them from committing a breach. This obligation extends from the customer (e.g. local government authorities) to the contractor (e.g. waste services companies) to the recipient (e.g. landfill or waste sorting and treatment facility).

CoR is hotting up The CoR laws are to get hotter in mid2018, when the obligation on supply chain participants will move from being incident/accident focused to being proactive and risk management focused. Under the new laws, a business can be found in breach even where there has not been any incident. The primary focus will shift to the risk management systems that a business has in place to prevent any incident from arising. Any business which does not have in place a CoR risk management system

will be in breach under the new laws and exposing itself and its executives to the new maximum penalties.

In the crosshairs The waste sector has been identified by Roads and Maritime Services NSW (RMS) as the number one offender for on-road breaches in NSW by a very significant margin. As a result, the waste sector can expect to be an ongoing target for investigation and enforcement action.

$982K penalty imposed on waste contractor This was illustrated most recently with the prosecution of Remondis for 50 mass breaches. Remondis was contracted by Lake Macquarie Council to receive, process, compost and remove household ‘green bin’ waste at its facility. After processing, Remondis contracted Jet Group to transport the waste from the facility to Jet Group’s premises. The Jet Group truck was weighed on each journey at a weighbridge operated by the Council. The driver was provided with a weighbridge docket, but did not review it to identify any overloading. The weighbridge figure was inserted into invoices to Remondis, which paid based on weight, without checking to ensure that the loads were compliant. Even though Remondis had subcontracted the waste transport, it was still required to take ‘all reasonable steps’ to exercise control and influence over Jet Group to ensure that Jet Group complied. Remondis’ arrangements with Jet Group didn’t include any policies, procedures, education/awareness, contractual terms or compliance monitoring to ensure compliance. As such, Remondis was forced to plead guilty. Having regard to the number, duration and objective seriousness of the offences, Remondis was ordered to pay a penalty of $732,206 and the prosecution’s legal costs of $250,000, resulting in a total penalty of $982,206.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

What should Remondis have done? Once alerted to the breaches, Remondis cooperated with the investigators and implemented significant response and rectification measures, including: • implementing a loading protocol, so that applicable mass limits are identified and verified at the point of loading; • installing load cells at the loader bucket to ensure that the load limits are not exceeded; • implementing communication protocols between Remondis and the weighbridge or driver of the heavy vehicle so as to ensure that no truck is allowed to exit the site overweight; and • providing supervision to ensure compliance or corrective action when non-compliance occurs.

Local councils also in the crosshairs In their role as principal contractor and sometimes receiving site operator for municipal waste services, local councils are also in the crosshairs. This was demonstrated when the City of Glen Eira was prosecuted for 88 mass breaches committed by its municipal waste services contractor. As a result of the Council becoming aware of mass breaches during 2006, meetings took place between the Council and contractor over the next 18 months. Throughout 20072008 the mass limit issue improved. However, in 2008 there was a sudden reversal, which resulted in the Council serving the contractor with a ‘show cause’ notice. VicRoads inspected the weighbridge records for the receiving site, identified the history of breaches and commenced a prosecution. The Council was able to escape conviction on the basis that it had: • ensured, during the tender phase, that the contractor had equipment that permitted it to conduct the services in compliance with the law; • put in place a commercial

The waste sector has been identified by Roads and Maritime Services NSW (RMS) as the number one offender for on-road breaches in NSW by a very significant margin. As a result, the waste sector can expect to be an ongoing target for investigation and enforcement action. arrangement requiring compliance with legislative or regulatory provisions (e.g. compliance assurance conditions); • structured the arrangement so that there was no incentive to breach regulations such as mass limits (e.g. payment per household, not per weight collected); • had a disincentive to breach such regulations, such as bonus payments only paid when full compliance occurs (e.g. bonus deductions in cases of breach); and • monitored the system to ensure its smooth operation and compliance.

What you need to do The new laws are expected to come into force in mid-2018. Before then, every party in the waste supply chain - councils, waste services providers and waste recipients - needs to assess whether it has in place the full suite of compliance policies and procedures to avoid CoR breaches from occurring. If not, you need to develop and implement them so that they are in place and purring before mid-2018, so you’d better start now.

Nathan Cecil is a partner in the transport group of Holding Redlich and an expert in legal CoR compliance and general logistics issues. Contact: nathan.cecil@holdingredlich.com. iw

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Policy //

How can WA get way ahead? When the state government creates the right policy and market conditions, local government and private waste industry will invest to increase waste diversion from landfill.

By Giles Perryman WESTERN Australia’s recycling rate has been trailing behind most of the other states for a long time, so what is needed for WA to move up the table and one day be way ahead? The WA Waste Strategy is under review and the Waste Authority released its Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy consultation paper in October, inviting feedback and submissions until March 1, 2018. Therefore, this is a timely opportunity to outline the actions, that in my humble opinion, I consider are needed and see if the Waste Authority agrees. In 2007, WA’s recycling rate was 23% and lagged behind SA, Victoria, NSW and Queensland. By 2016, the WA recycling rate had increased to 49% and while still at the back of the pack, the gap has narrowed considerably. Therefore, WA has made some good gains however, achieving a rate of 50% is ‘easy’, while 50%-65% is tricky and then every extra percentage point after that requires considerable thought and effort. However, based on basic trend lines WA would only move up one position over the next 10 years unless something changes, but what measures are required to bring about change?

Who makes up the waste industry in WA and what drives its actions? 18

Based on 2015-16 figures of the waste generated in WA, 31% was MSW, 31% C&I and 38% C&D, so broadly speaking less than a third of the industry is managed by local government, while over two-thirds is managed by the private sector. Local government is responsible for providing value for money services for their community (us ratepayers), while business is responsible for ensuring a return on investment to owners and shareholders, therefore economics is the main driver for the industry and, as we know, it is a very price sensitive industry. As is often heard and experienced, ‘waste flows to the lowest cost option’; but this is within the regulatory, policy and market framework created. Making the assumption that regulation is appropriately ‘policed’ to ensure a level playing field leaves policy and market to determine what the lowest cost options are. Each waste management process has its own ‘cost’ and this is made up of economic, social and environmental impacts, some positive and others negative. Government policy assigns a dollar value to these costs.

What is expected of the waste management sector? It is generally accepted that in a perfect world, minimal waste would be generated and all waste would be recycled. This has been reflected in the waste hierarchy for decades. However,

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

this was an ‘end of pipe’ approach to waste, while the move towards to a circular economy really ensures the whole supply chain, from design to end of life reflects the hierarchy. This approach has the potential to completely change the current linear consumer model and end the culture of ‘recycling is something the waste industry has to do when you throw stuff away’. These concepts and objectives are reflected in the Waste Authority’s consultation paper, including suggested targets for a reduction in waste generation per capita and increased recycling rates.

How? So, in WA how does the Waste Authority and state government get the waste industry (private and local government sectors) to invest in and develop recycling and recovery facilities, rather than landfills? How do we go from a recycling rate of 49% (2015-16) to the suggested target of 70% by 2025? How does WA get way ahead? Simple, by creating the correct economic and market environment, then the industry will do the rest. This is an easy statement to make. However, getting the right mix of measures to achieve this is the challenge.

Push and pull market forces The recycling of waste is a manufacturing process and is therefore

affected by supply and demand. Push factors such as landfill levies, landfill bans, etc push the raw materials (waste) from disposal towards recycling facilities. These are blunt instruments, but provided they are implemented with appropriate notice and in the case of levies, at least five years of forward forecasting, they are effective and allow the industry to plan for future investment. But any manufacturer needs a market of plentiful customers to buy their products or the stock(piles) will build up. This is the issue facing the C&D recycling sector in WA - a rapid increase in the landfill levy for inert waste ($12 per cubic metre to $75 per cubic metre in two years) has pushed large volumes of material away from landfill to recycling facilities. Unfortunately, the market has not grown at the same rate, resulting in possibly over one million tonnes of ‘product’ stockpiled at facilities around Perth. This shows that any push factors need to be introduced with complementary pull measures to ensure the supply chain grows together. The largest customer in the state is the government and these are their targets. Thankfully the Waste Authority’s consultation paper considers the implementation of a state government procurement policy as something the Waste Authority “believes it should do”. I believe a minimum proportion of recycled

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Policy

content material in all government projects, (with the total value of the recycled material used being a selection criterion on all tenders) should do it. Hopefully that is also the Authority and state government’s intention.

STEEL BIN SPECIALIST

Public support The coverage of the industry in the media has been higher in the last 10 months than in the previous 10 years. While not all good (or accurate), it has gotten our communities and politicians talking about waste. For the first time ever, when asked at a BBQ, ‘what do you do?’, folk haven’t changed the subject as soon as I tell them. But as these conversations have progressed, I’ve realised that my neighbours have no idea about the waste sector and how the waste from their homes, offices and businesses is managed. Importantly, they are interested and do want to know more. This is key role for the Waste Authority, who needs to provide a steady stream of information to educate and engage with the community about MSW, C&I and C&D as we all have homes and offices. The “we believe that we should also” section of the Waste Authority’s consultation paper does state “improve community awareness and understanding of waste generation issues and solutions”, so this is all sounding quite positive.

Targets The mention of targets in the consultation paper brings us back to what is expected from the waste industry. The targets define what the Waste Authority and state government want from the sector. It’s a positive move to see a target for a reduction in waste generation per capita of 10% by 2025 and 20% by 2030 suggested. However, for simplicity of measurement, a KPI based on waste disposal per capita could be monitored quarterly as all metropolitan landfills already provide this data for levy payments. The other targets relate to the good old recycling rate, a discussion about the measurement, accuracy and real value of this metric is for another day, but it is encouraging to see the targets are almost ‘SMART’; they’re Specific, Measurable-ish, Relevant and Time-based, however I’m not sure they’re Achievable. I fully support a challenging target however, for a MSW recycling rate of 65% by 2020 (metropolitan area) to be achieved, a growth rate of 13% per annum in the local government waste sector would be required. In 2015-16 the rate was 36%. Someone may have done the sums and calculated that the widespread uptake of FOGO collection may achieve these rates... Or could

ASK Waste Management’s Giles Perryman.

How does WA get way ahead? Simple, by creating the correct economic and market environment, then the industry will do the rest. Ultimately the role of the Waste Authority and state government is to create the right policy and market conditions, then both the local government and private waste industry will invest to increase waste diversion from landfill. it be reliant on the numerous EfW projects proposed in WA - but would this option align with the circular economy when energy recovery is classified as leakage? At this early stage of revising the WA Waste Strategy, the information provided within the consultation paper is encouraging. Once the feedback has been considered, we should see a more definitive document where the “we believe we should” statements should become “we will” statements, with a bit more detail. Ultimately the role of the Waste Authority and state government is to create the right policy and market conditions, then both the local government and private waste industry will invest to increase waste diversion from landfill. Let me recycle a line from a 1989 film: “Build it (the correct market environment) and they (the waste industry) will come”.

Giles Perryman is the director of ASK Waste Management which he established in 2007. He is also a WMAA WA committee member. iw Contact: giles@askwm.com

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

MAJOR WASTE & RECYCLING INDUSTRY SUPPLIER OF QUALITY AUSTRALIAN DESIGN & ENGINEERED BINS & STEEL STRUCTURES SKIP AND MARREL BINS

(Also available with doors)

• 1m3 to 11m3

4,000 BINS IN STOCK

USED BELT BUYER $$

FRONT LIFT BINS • 1.5m3 – 3m3 – 4.5m3 AUTO TIPPLERS

HOOK LIFT BINS • Extremely durable • From 6m3 to 40m3

Certified Offshore 3m3 & 6m3 Conform to DNV2.71 and ASEN 12079

ACT Bins & Sheds Australia wide & WA Head Office T (08) 9439 6888 Geoff 0430 477 980 Phil 0423 281 848 E service@actindustrial.com.au 1 Yeates Road, Kwinana

Queensland T (07) 3382 7555 Matt 0402 197 259 E service@binsandsheds.com.au 398 Stapylton-Jacobs Well Road, Stapylton

Victoria Jamie 0431 246 758 E jamie@actindustrialbins.com.au

www.actindustrial.com.au DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Energy from waste //

EfW - a sustainable solution? By Jacqueline Ong AS energy from waste is on track to becoming a reality in Australia - just look to the west where New Energy is progressing with its plants - voices, whether for or against, have become louder. And there is definitely keen interest in the sector to find out more about EfW (more on page 14). In the October issue of Inside Waste, Lee Bell from the National Toxics Network Australia, argued that EfW or waste incineration plants emit high levels of toxins. Questions have also been raised about the potential for EfW to cannibalise recycling, despite proponents insisting that only residual waste destined for landfill will be processed. So, amid the chatter, who’s right and who’s wrong? In NSW, an inquiry into EfW technologies was established in April with the next hearing scheduled in November. Many, including EfW technology solutions supplier Hitachi Zosen Innova Australia’s managing director Dr Marc Stammbach, have made submissions to Parliament. Dr Stammbach pointed to a summary by WRAP UK of thermal gate fees approximately $130/tonne for plants between 400,000 to 600,000 tonnes per annum; $198/tonne for 200,000 to 300,000 tonnes per annum facilities; and $264/tonne for small plants ranging between 50,000 and 100,000 tonnes per annum. “The following conclusions can be drawn from this in the NSW context even at large-scale EfW plants, there is therefore no impact on recycling (as it is less costly). Medium-scale plants are barely competitive in NSW at today’s landfill pricing and levy, and small-scale plants would only make sense in the nonmetropolitan areas which have an even lower landfill levy and therefore won’t get build,” he said in his submission. “Overall, it can be said that EfW isn’t endangering recycling as also shown by the leading European countries which have high composting and recycling rates as well as EfW with only treated and low amounts of residues going to landfill,” he added. But what about talk of dioxins and other pollutants? Now, it is widely known (and discussed at numerous conferences) that proponents have done comparison after comparison and there is certainly no lack of facilities to look at, what with more than 2000 EfW plants operating across 35 countries. For instance, Dial A Dump Industries which is proposing to develop a facility 20

in Eastern Creek - The Next Generation - has done extensive research and has said that EfW is not only on par with natural gas, it is cleaner than coal. The company has made information available to the public by way of a 4000-page document. The European Suppliers of Waste to Energy Technology or ESWET has also done a study comparing pollution from EfW to that of other sectors and has found that dioxin emissions in g/TEQ per year from EfW is 0.133, compared to 23 from domestic fires. Looking at particulate matter or PM 10, it was found that emissions based on 100 tons per year was 0.01 for EfW and 41.30 for transport. And over in Germany, the Federal Environment Agency released data in 2000 that drilled down on the dioxin emission sources and output per year in 1990, 1994 and 2000 (see Table 1). It is evident that even as far back as 17 years ago, emissions from EfW have drastically reduced due in large part to technological advancements coupled with stringent standards. “If human health is of concern, we would immediately assess emissions from landfills, transport, air stacks from motorway tunnels, residential wood fires, crematoria, rotting compost mountains without a home, coal power stations, metal smelters, cruise ships, and to top it off - fireworks at New Year and Australia Day. All those are environmentally more deleterious than energy from waste projects,” Dr Stammbach said.

The west progresses Perhaps the most positive example that EfW has a place in Australia can be seen in WA, where New Energy has

made progress with its East Rockingham plant, announcing in September that the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) had selected the company as its preferred tenderer as part of a consortium led by Hitachi Zosen Inova (HZI). The plant will utilise HZI’s proprietary grate combustion technology. New Energy CEO Jason Pugh told Inside Waste that the EPA and WA Waste Authority have taken a leadership position on the issue, driven by the company’s EfW proposal submitted in 2012, commissioning engineering professional services firm, WSP to undertake a threestage review of EfW that covered the legislative framework, state-of-the-art technologies, and potential health and environmental impacts. The work culminated in independent advice offered to the Minister of Environment in 2013 stating that “waste to energy plants employing best practice can be operated with acceptable impacts to community”. “As an industry, that set a base for how these projects could proceed in the WA market, with a key focus on best available technology,” Pugh said. “The very important second step is that every project needs to be assessed on its own merit against the known criteria in a detailed environmental impact statement.” Pugh noted that the level of assessment of EfW projects in WA is as high as that of mining developments and “no stone is left unturned” in their reviews. But that’s not all, WA has quite a different approval and planning process that could be replicated on the east

coast to not only expedite proposals, but also ensure that community and local government alike are confident the impacts are acceptable. “In WA, the environmental impact assessment and planning process are managed separately - you cannot achieve development approval from local council until you have ministerial approval on part four of your application,” Pugh explained. “It’s beneficial because it allows local government to firstly, rely on the advice from the EPA and once the Minister has signed off saying yes, this project can proceed, then local council can really focus on making sure the project aligns with the town planning scheme.” Moreover, Pugh said it is a far quicker process, pointing to NSW where “the process has been going on for a couple of years and hasn’t come to a conclusion.” “One the key factors is environmental questions keep coming up through applications to the local council as well as the overriding question of whether these technologies are safe to the community, which I believe, have not been answered to everyone’s satisfaction,” he said. Pugh added that the east coast states could learn from the west, if it wants to progress EfW. “What WA did well was to acknowledge that best practice EfW has operated successfully in places like Europe for a number of years. They haven’t tried to re-write those rules but referred to these mature markets to take on learnings and then use that as a basis for our regulatory framework,” iw he said.

TABLE 1

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Energy from waste A 3-D rendered image of the new ResourceCo resource recovery plant.

Out with the coal, in with the new By Jan Arreza AUSTRALIA will soon be home to two new resource recovery plants, thanks to a $30 million Clean Energy Finance Corporation grant. The ResourceCo facilities will transform selected non-recyclable waste streams into processed engineered fuel (PEF) that is used in cement kilns to reduce the reliance on coal and other fossil fuels. This fuel will be consumed by cement kilns in both Australia and Asia. The first of these plants is being constructed at Wetherill Park, 34km west of Sydney’s CBD, while the second plant’s location is still being finalised and has yet to be announced. CEO of ResourceCo Sustainable Energy, Ben Sawley told Inside Waste the plant will be a dry waste facility, meaning no putrescible, liquid or wet waste will come through the door. “Our plant competes with landfills and therefore those residuals from other resource recovery operations that usually go to landfill, such as nonrecyclable plastics, will be taken into our plant for processing,” Sawley said. “From the waste coming in, we will pull out various commodities such as concrete, brick, rock, metals, and clean timber. What’s leftover is often a jumbled mix of non-recyclable plastics, textiles, paper, cardboard, treated and engineered timber, amongst other things, and instead of sending that to landfill, we turn that into PEF. In addition to that, we will also be accepting dry commercial and industrial waste streams. We will look to take in some light construction and demolition waste streams. “We will only accept streams that are high in plastic and are difficult

for other resource recovery operations to deal with. This sort of material typically goes to landfill so we are here to provide a non-landfill option for it.” The Wetherill Park plant, which is due to be operational by May 2018, is expected to turn up to 200,000 tonnes of select waste a year into PEF. “The approved capacity is 250,000 tonnes per annum, and we will look to run the plant at probably 150,000 to 200,000 tonnes per annum in the long term,” Sawley said. The facility is three years in the making and while ResourceCo has plans to ramp up the facility, Sawley said the company will do so carefully to mitigate any potential issues and ensure quality of processed materials.

Filling the gap On what drove ResourceCo to move forward with its plans in NSW, Sawley said: “Three factors came into play for ResourceCo wanting to undertake this project - landfills are becoming rarer in Sydney, the current rate of the state’s landfill levy, and a lot of waste generators and collectors genuinely want to have an alternative to landfill for their waste streams.” “We’ve been operating a similar plant to this for nearly 10 years in Adelaide, so

this isn’t new to us, and the technology used is an updated version of what we do there,” Sawley added. “In terms of the process, it is quite straightforward – basically it is a mechanical and pneumatic series of separations. The materials then get shredded afterwards to turn into the final fuel product. “We do have a very strict focus on quality control, so we have an onsite laboratory and an online infrared analyser, which is giving constant feedback on key parameters of the product during the processing.” Because the plant will accept more than 100,000 tonnes of waste a year, it falls into the major projects category in NSW, meaning the project had to go through a very rigorous approval process, including a comprehensive environmental impact study (EIS). “It was a very comprehensive and time-consuming process, which ultimately will give good assurances for the community and the stakeholders of NSW as all major projects have to comply with all conditions set in NSW,” Sawley said. “Through the EIS, we had to demonstrate how we would comply with all the different types of emissions from such a facility - dust, noise, odour,

The new facility is being built in Wetherill Park, 34km west of Sydney’s CBD.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

CEO of ResourceCo Sustainable Energy, Ben Sawley.

stormwater, traffic, etc. The plant was designed to ensure that it complied with all of the emissions criteria set by the EPA and therefore, part of the design was to ensure we do that in terms of all waste handling. There is no waste handled outside, everything is kept in an enclosed building. “We also have a lot of dust extraction and suppression systems in the building to ensure we control the dust produced. Given that we are a dry waste facility, odour is not a problem. In terms of noise, we made sure we found an appropriate site that was in an industrial area where we could process day and night without creating any nuisance and noise in the community.” As an indication of the plant’s environmental credentials, it has been successful in securing $5 million in grant funding from the NSW Environmental Trust under the Waste Less, Recycle More initiative. The technology is also eligible for Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs). ResourceCo said there is strong interest from waste collectors and generators to use the new facility once it is commissioned. Additionally, it has secured a long-term contract with Boral Cement, which will be using ResourceCo’s fuel in its cement kiln in Berrima, NSW as a coal substitute. “It’s a great outcome for the environment once the plant is up and running as the waste that was going to landfill previously will now get a second life as fuel. This will help with landfill diversion rates and with a iw reduction in coal use.”

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Recycling //

Keeping plastic as plastic David Hodge, managing director of Plastic Forests, which was recently ranked in Westpac’s Top 20 High Potential Businesses of Tomorrow.

By Jacqueline Ong PLASTIC, whether we like it or not, is here to stay. After all, it allows us to live our 21st century life and could we really, hand to heart, say we’d be happy (or willing) to give that up? But what we do with the material at the end of its life can be changed, and China’s National Sword policy may just be the push Australia needs to deal with its own plastic waste. From January 2018, China has banned the importation of used waste plastic bags, films and nets collected from household or sorted municipal waste, used agricultural plastic films and plastic hose, and will also enforce strict new contamination levels where exported plastic must be 99.7% pure (to put things in perspective, contamination loads of plastic currently range from 15% to 30%). One company, which began as a “secret start-up” is taking plastic recycling by storm and has designed a recycling plant that can process more than 1000kg of contaminated plastic film an hour. The system is fascinating to say the least. For one, it does not use water in its process. And the company is certainly attracting attention globally and here in Australia, recently ranking in Westpac’s Top 20 High Potential Businesses of Tomorrow. Inside Waste (IW) caught up with Plastic Forests’ managing director David Hodge to find out more about the company’s “secret” past, its drycleaning process and its new plant in Albury in southern NSW, and more. IW: Today, Plastic Forests boasts global clients and you’ve got a new plant coming online. Tell us a bit about your journey. Hodge: When we started in 2011, we were a bit of a secret project researching and testing how to clean 22

contaminated plastic film without water. It was a complex process, and was fraught with lots of issues. When you have different types of contaminated materials and different types of films - LLDPE, LDPE, HDPE, etc - everything performs differently when you size and clean it and we ran into a lot of processing problems. But by 2014 we had overcome all those issues and started recycling contaminated plastic film for Unilever and Tip Top (George Weston Foods) - companies with a global corporate direction of ‘zero waste to landfill’. 2015-16 was about consolidating the cleaning process, expanding our client base to companies like Hazeldene’s, Nestle and SPC and manufacturing our own recycled plastic sheet products, like garden edging and underground cable cover. And in the last 18 months, we’ve been fully focused on finding a new site so that we can expand our capacity and set the business up for the future. Our new site in Albury will allow us to run 24 hours a day, seven days a week, enabling us to process thousands of additional tonnes of plastic film and extending our reach on the east coast of Australia. Moving to Albury is about being accessible to new customers, expanding our capacity, fine tuning our technology and making an even better, cleaner product. IW: Tell me more about the plant and the technology Plastic Forests has designed. Hodge: We’ve built a 10,000 tonnes per annum capacity plant and that’s significant in the world of plastic recycling. But what’s more significant is that there’s no water involved in the process - we can deal with contaminated plastic film without water and we recycle that plastic film back into resin or plastic products. We keep plastic as plastic

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

and don’t make timber or concrete substitutes. To date, we’ve been able to achieve 200UM (200 micron) builder’s film. Next year, we’ll start producing bin liners which are at the 50-100-micron level. Our technology doesn’t use water because if you think about it, what does water do? It’s a carrier for the contamination. In a standard plastics wet wash plant, you chop up the plastic, it then goes into a sink float tank of water - the heavier plastics sink, whilst others, like polyethylene, float. It produces good resin, but it’s an expensive process which produces another problematic waste stream contaminated water. Instead of using water to separate plastics, we use currents of air at different velocities at various points along our production line to take off different density materials. It sounds quite simple, but we’ve spent $800,000 modifying just one machine. There’s a lot of physics involved. One of the important things for any recycler is to get the size of your material right. Once you’ve got it down to small pieces, you’ve got to then manage those pieces. At our plant, it’s all done in the one production line that involves sizing the plastic at the front. The material then goes through a proprietary process and at the end, you have shredded clean film. This can then go into a machine like a cutter compactor to be filtered and turned into resin. There are many individual parts of the process which must work together for our dry-cleaning technology to work effectively, including air separation, sizing of material, heat, friction and connectivity of machines. It is a complex and challenging process which has taken many years of development but we are really pleased with the results we’re able to achieve.

IW: How is Plastic Forests going to ensure that it is sustainable and can stand on its own two feet? Plastic, made from raw materials is after all, relatively cheap. Hodge: We have put a lot of thought into our business model to ensure we will be commercially viable and sustainable in the long run. We’ve never targeted clean film because there’s always been a market for it, so we’ve focussed on the challenge of contaminated plastic film which had no home other than landfill. We weren’t going to compete with China, Malaysia and India with their low labour and production costs. So as part of our business model, we charge for the receival of contaminated plastic film to ensure we will be able to survive the ups and down of the recycling industry and keep providing our unique service to our clients. Now, with China announcing that they’re banning a wide range of plastics, and with strict contamination levels that will be difficult to meet, everyone is trying to push their plastic into Vietnam, Malaysia, and Thailand. But these countries only have a certain amount of capacity. The ban will result in a shortfall of some 7.2 million tonnes of plastic going to China for recycling, and hence a shortage of recycled resin being produced in China. There will be opportunities for recyclers like Plastic Forests to sell recycled resin into the Chinese market. The plastic market has changed forever - plastics are distressed with nowhere to go. Prices have fallen significantly and that’s a good thing for us. We are in a great position to take more contaminated plastic film and we’ve started thinking about how we can further expand our capacity to meet the recycling demand here in Australia. One of the most important things for any recycler is to value-add into end markets. We haven’t targeted green

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Recycling

The situation in China • Materials not allowed include used waste plastic bags, films and nets collected from household or sorted out from municipal waste, used agricultural plastic films and used agricultural plastic hose. • Materials allowed include waste plastics from industrial sources (i.e. waste and scrap from the production of plastics, processed scrap plastic, thermoplastic waste, and defective products) More information can be found on www.isri.org

Next year, we will also be partnering with many of our multinational clients Plastic Forests manufactures recycled plastic sheet who are keen to complete products including underground cable cover. the circular economy by purchasing products made dollars or government support dollars. from their own contaminated plastic We want to stand on our own two feet film. We are installing a production line in commercial marketplaces that provide to make recycled bin liners which been suitable, high volume markets for recycled supported by the Environmental Trust plastic products. Our GreenMongrel as part of the NSW EPA’s Waste Less, garden edging and underground cable Recycle More initiative, funded from cover, that protect high value assets the waste levy. Our clients can use in like electrical cable, are great products their own businesses, and also offer to for recycled resin and provide a stable their employees who are keen to make revenue base for the business. a sustainable, environmental choice

in the products that they buy. It’s a win/win/win situation for ourselves, our clients and their staff. IW: Now, when you reflect on the early days, did you think, “this isn’t going to work”? Hodge: Yes. Many times, the technical challenges were almost insurmountable and it’s been a hard journey. Lots of people have tried and failed and we were just ignorant of the fact that it would be so hard, because we were not from the waste or plastics industry. I guess we were a little naïve, but then we just went on

and dealt with each of the unknown unknowns, one by one. What we’re very good at doing is finding and adapting ideas from other industries. Whilst many people get locked into these industrial work silos, when we encounter a problem, we’ll say, “it behaves like this, it looks like that, we should look at the such-and-such industry.” We cast wide, open questions and we give things a try. The team at Plastic Forests is a group of entrepreneurial, ecological, industrial, problem solvers! We see plastic as this major problem for the planet and we iw want to help solve it.

www.hyva.com

Ÿ Tipping solutions Ÿ Truck loader

cranes

Ÿ Hookloaders Ÿ Skiploaders Ÿ Waste handling

equipment

Hyva Pacific Pty Ltd

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Ph: 1800 041 733 DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Year in review //

LOOKING BACK ON 2017 IT’S been a little over a year since Inside Waste revamped its website and newsletter, taking advantage of the very latest in responsive technology to give you access on any device, any time. And we’ve been bringing you news, stories, opinion pieces and more daily, which we hope have provided useful and interesting insight. As 2017 comes to a close, here are some of the year’s highlights from our online news channel.

JANUARY

FEBRUARY

The Victorian government kicks off the year with an announcement that it will provide more than $45 million in funding as part of a program to reform the EPA. Environment Minister Lily D’Ambrosio also confirmed the government’s support for recommendations made by an inquiry in 2016 which in sum, will deliver a more proactive and strategic regulator.

In NSW, newly-appointed Environment Minister Gabrielle Upton announces a later container deposit scheme start date, pushing back commencement from July 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017. Operational details of the scheme, including refund amount payable for containers, exclusion of containers, and fees for applications and approvals, and classes of persons prescribed as MRF operators are finalised in March. The National Waste and Recycling Industry Council (NWRIC) officially forms following the first meeting of its executives in Sydney. By August, the council has had discussions with the Heads of EPA (HEPA) about interstate transport of waste, amongst other things. Over in SA, a new waste and recycling representative body forms. The Waste and Recycling Industry Association of SA (WRISA) comprises representatives from Solo Resource Recovery, Peats Soil, Veolia, Mastec, Suez, Scout Recycling, ResourceCo and Bettatrans.

Approval is given to TyreRecycle for its tyre shedding facility in Longford, Tasmania, paving the way for clean-up of a stockpile to begin.

JAN

FEB

MAR

APRIL Bingo floats on the stock market and it is reported that CEO Daniel Tartak has collected $420 million from the move. The first green waste bin collections have taken place in Weston as part of the ACT government’s green waste bin pilot program. The pilot program will cover suburbs in Canberra’s south, including Chapman, Duffy, Fisher, Holder, Rivett, Stirling, Waramanga, Weston and Kambah.

APR

MAY

MARCH The ACCC approves Victoria’s North East Waste and Resource Recovery Group’s (NEWRRG) application to jointly procure, which the group said will save the region an estimated $200,000. South Australia is the only state in the country that has banned e-waste from landfill and to ensure that the state has the capabilities to process these materials, Nyrstar announces the expansion of its Port Pirie facility. Federal Minister for the Environment Josh Frydenberg announces the commencement of a review of the Product Stewardship Act 2011, the first since the Act began. Cleanaway is granted approval by the EPA to extend its Melbourne Regional Landfill in Ravenhall, 22km west of Melbourne. The approval is for a smaller landfill than Cleanaway had applied for, with a shorter lifespan. Dulverton Waste Management wins the WMAA 2017 Landfill Excellence Award for its landfill in Devonport, Tasmania while Toowoomba Regional Council Waste Service takes home the Innovation Award. Meanwhile, Townsville Waste Services wins the Transfer Stations Excellence Award.

INSIDEWASTE

Following a global strategic review, John Swire & Sons announces its decision to sell C&D recycler Alex Fraser, which has eight facilities in Melbourne and Brisbane. The CEFC says it is lending $30 million to ResourceCo to build two alternative waste treatment plants, which will transform selected non-recyclable waste streams into processed engineered fuel. The first plant will be built at Wetherill Park in Sydney (more on page 21) and the second will be located in another Australian state yet to be announced. The doors of Cleanaway’s new South East Melbourne Transfer Station in Dandenong, Victoria are now open and the site will act as a consolidation point for waste, which will then be transported to the Melbourne Regional Landfill in high capacity A-Double trailers.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Year in review

AUGUST JUNE The Queensland government introduces two initiatives - a container refund scheme and a plastic bag ban - into Parliament. Brisbane City Council awards SUEZ a 16-year waste collection contract totaling close to $900 million. The company also wins a seven-year contract in Parramatta. Trish Hyde abruptly ends her tenure as CEO of the Australian Packaging Covenant after taking up the position in March 2016. Brooke Donnelly assumes the role. WMAA elects its new president Re.Group business development manager Garth Lamb. In 2016, Lamb was elected WMAA NSW branch president.

OCTOBER Victoria’s ban on e-waste in landfill moves forward with the release of a Policy Impact Assessment (PIA) that applies a cost-benefit analysis to five options for achieving the ban (including a null option). The preferred option combines a total ban on e-waste in landfill with a moderate level of coverage by a state-administered collection service.

EPA Victoria commences the removal of the infamous Stawell tyre stockpile, comprising millions of unused tyres in western Victoria that has sat dormant for close to a decade. ABC’s Four Corners airs Trashed, which “revealed” a number of “issues” in the waste sector, from interstate transportation to the stockpiling of glass. Industry is upset and understandably so given the coverage is pretty one-sided. Not only is community’s trust damaged, EPA’s Steve Beaman, who was unfairly scapegoated by the ABC, is thrown under the bus. Beaman, who was director of waste and resource recovery, goes on “leave” and returns as director of hazardous incidents and environmental health, taking over Sara Gardner who is now executive director of waste and resource recovery.

The federal government embarks on an inquiry into the country’s waste and recycling industry and calls for feedback on how it can provide a coherent approach to the management of solid waste. The inquiry will report by June 13, 2018. After a year-long wait, the NSW EPA releases its much-anticipated updated minimum standards for managing construction and demolition (C&D) waste as well as a suite waste reforms. More on page 15.

A new Department of the Environment and Energy report shows Australia produced around 5.6 million tonnes of hazardous waste in 2014-15, a 30% increase from 2010-11.

The $18 million Northern Oil Advanced Biofuels Pilot Plant in Yarwun, Queensland’s first commercial-scale facility, is now open.

JUN

The Department of the Environment and Energy releases its National Waste Report 2016, providing national, state and territory data on waste quantities, sources, and management for 2014-15.

WA Premier Mark McGowan seeks input in shaping the state’s container deposit scheme, an election commitment set by the Labor government.

JUL

AUG

The Victorian government releases its discussion paper on the EfW industry, ahead of formulating a policy early next year. JJ Richards becomes the first company to land in trouble with new laws that protect small businesses from unfair contract terms.

SEP

OCT

NOVEMBER

JULY The Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority (NAWMA) is expanding its footprint beyond its facilities at the existing Edinburgh North site. It also appoints a new CEO, former East Waste general manager, Adam Faulkner. The Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (EHP) puts forward options in its consultation regulatory impact statement (RIS) that reviews the state’s regulated waste classification and waste-related environmentally relevant activity (ERA) framework. New solid waste charges are applied in SA. More significantly, packaged asbestos waste no longer attracts a levy (i.e. both metro and non-metro: $0/tonne). A Cleanaway TOMRA joint venture is selected as the NSW CDS’ first network operator. The joint venture will provide handling, transport, processing, recycling, and data services from reverse vending machines. A national waste working group has been set up by the Heads of EPAs (HEPA) across Australia to find ways to harmonise regulatory policies. Veolia continues to grow its reach in regional Australia with the acquisition of Ellwaste Waste and Recycling Services, a regional waste management business currently servicing rural NSW and Victoria.

NOV

SEPTEMBER WMAA launches the Waste of Origin pledge, challenging the industry to “join the fight against irresponsible, dangerous, and environmentally damaging practices in the sector”, and advocate best practice in the industry. Lightweight, single-use plastic shopping bags will be banned in Western Australia from July 1 next year. Remondis is now the new owner of Waste Trans, a liquid waste collection business in Queensland operated by AusWaste Environmental. Serial dumper Dib Hanna becomes the first person to be extradited in relation to alleged illegal dumping offences. He is extradited from Victoria to face the NSW Land and Environment Court. New Energy’s East Rockingham EfW plant is one step closer to being utilised after the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) selected the company as its preferred tenderer as part of a consortium led by Hitachi Zosen Inova (HZI), which also includes investment firm Tribe Infrastructure Group.

WRIQ calls on all political parties to commit to better planning and greater engagement with business ahead of Queensland’s November 25 elections. Releasing is policy paper, WRIQ repeats its long-argued position that responsibility for waste policy should be removed from the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection. WMAA also outlines its key policy priorities ahead of the Queensland elections, including a comprehensive review of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Productivity Strategy 2014, and the urgent implementation of a new waste policy/strategy that supports the waste management hierarchy and includes ambitious diversion targets supported by a landfill levy for all waste streams. WA Environment Minister Stephen Dawson chairs a roundtable to discuss how waste could be better managed across the state.

iw INSIDEWASTE

Waste Expo //

Back to the future with bin design By Patrick Lau NO one would argue the fact that Waste Expo Australia, held in October, was a more sedate affair than its colocated event, All-Energy. Next door they had solar-powered model kitchens and flashy Tesla cars but hey, we got to discuss the finer points of garbage bin design! The trend this year seemed to be all about the humble rubbish receptacle, and while all of the sector stalwarts and heavy hitters were present as you’d expect them to be, it was a quiet revolution in the form of smart bins which set the tone for Waste Expo 2017. Ranging from established players, to new competitors, to manufacturers and waste processors experimenting with swimming upstream, it seemed like a third or more of this year’s exhibitors had some kind of bin product to talk about. It may reflect an increased public awareness of waste issues in 2017 anyone catch War on Waste? It had that guy from the Chaser. Or it may reflect the fact that technology and hype have finally intersected at the point where the Internet of Things is no longer just a catchword meaning “stuff in the future”, but a reality for many Australians’ personal and public lives. Whatever the reason, it looks like we could be entering the era of smart bins. Solar Bins Australia, local distributors of market leaders BigBelly, continue to roll out across Australian retail and municipal locations. Their wide range of offerings includes solar-powered devices, compactors, sensors and some pretty impressive proprietary cloudbased management software. Up-and-comers Smart City Solutions will be looking to challenge them using alternative technology sourced from Korea. Their Clean Cubes bin 26

enclosures, Clean Cap sensors and integrated Clean City Network Software have done well in Seoul and elsewhere around the world; with some early moves in Australia, they’ll be one to watch. Waste sector veterans, the plastic moulders at Kiel Industries are probably best known for their RotaLoos, (waterless, self-contained toilet systems popular with national parks and off-grid facilities). They, too, have added sensor technology to their recycling stations which, naturally, are made of recycled plastic themselves. Given the modular nature of their bin enclosure systems and their design experience, I’m sure there are plenty more upgrades on the way. Australian extrusion specialists Telford Smith, representing their

BigBelly’s products include proprietary cloud-based management software.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Swedish partners Orwak, also had a fancy bin system on display. The TOM is an enclosure that handles 120L as standard, features Orwak compactor technology, and has a builtin suite of software with a range of programming options. David Picone, GM at Telford Smith, told Inside Waste that the TOM operator can customise aperture open-and-close triggers, sensor responsiveness, rest cycles and plenty of other features. With the level of command available it’s possible to fit each bin to location, prepare for events with higher footfall, or otherwise modify your bins for situational appropriateness. At the Source Separation Systems stall, exhibitors were positively effulgent about the eternal struggle of bin aesthetics. Though some may

describe them as prosaic, even humble objects, Josh Riley of SSS convinced me that simple visual cues can improve separation rates and quality of life in the home, office, or public space. Their bespoke items attracted the most attention - particularly a nifty can-shaped bin, promoting deposit container schemes; and a coffee cup bin with sections for liquids, recyclable lids and non-recyclable cups. But they have a huge range of pre-built offerings, including compostable dog waste bags and an e-waste station, that fit into applications across all kinds of environments. Elsewhere, Manningham City Council was demonstrating a combined litter/stormwater pollutant trap system that promises costs as low as $1 per lift. Designed to be integratable

Have you met Tom?

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Strap

Bendigo Council’s Bridgette McDougall.

with standard collection services and technology, their Riversafe bin is the result of a collaboration between Council, state government, and the Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Group. In many ways, so much focus on bins is back to the future. Solar-powered compacting bins are no longer cutting-edge technology, but their adoption in Australia is still in its infancy. When considering the host of other value-adding features that have snuck in over the last 15 years - not least of which include sensing, tracking, automation and other logistical and management tools many on the industry side of waste management will no doubt be waiting impatiently for their uptake on the supplier end.

Dr Mazher Mohammad shows off his grinder and melt extruder.

But councils, retailers and others are set to gain even more from the expansion of smart bin networks. As a fundamental piece of urban infrastructure, the rubbish bin can be a necessary evil or a source of commercial benefits and positive externalities. We’ve all heard by now about the Wi-Fi hotspotting, and the integrated LED advertising. But air, noise, thermal, moisture, traffic, footfall, and any other sensors you can think of have a place as well. Smart bins represent a distributed, self-powered and adaptable network that’s cheaper to run and more efficient than the existing one. It’s hard to imagine a civic or commercial entity to whom that proposition doesn’t appeal. On the other hand, Australia undoubtedly still has many cultural

issues when it comes to sourceseparated waste: even when offered equal convenience in public spaces, and equal collections from private ones, some Australians still view using a recycling bin as an alternative lifestyle choice. With the upcoming introduction of kerbside e-waste collection across Victoria, and the rollout of container deposit schemes in NSW and elsewhere, public understanding of and participation in source separation will no doubt be on the agenda for the next few years. Bendigo Council has some recent experience in that department. Bridgette McDougall, strategic waste officer at the City of Greater Bendigo, spoke at the Waste Summit on the recent introduction of kerbside organics collection in the area. As project officer

Source Separation Systems takes bin design to a whole new level. Surely contamination levels will be next to nothing with these bins?

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

of the trial in late 2015-16, McDougall oversaw both the communications campaign and logistical changes. From the pilot catchment of 2800 households alone, Bendigo diverted 700 tonnes of organics from landfill in a year. General waste, which was about 50% organics beforehand, is now down to 22% organics. Meanwhile, the organics bins are sitting at about 2% contamination. Impressive results, but McDougall also reported some hiccups along the way. Dealing with an unexpected slew of applications for exemptions, for example, meant having to draft in the parking rangers for extra manpower. But good communication can help alleviate residual resistance to change: Bendigo’s engagement with the program continues to grow. It was only at the end of the day when I got a chance to have a look at the team from Deakin University, who provided a little of the kind of spectacle that folks next door were enjoying. Dr. Mazher Mohammed and researchers from Deakin’s Faculty of Engineering were showing off a 3D printing system they’re currently developing. The system combines a manually-operated grinder that crushes plastic bottles; an extruder that melts the pieces and produces a filament; and a 3D printer that uses the filament to create pipe joints and other difficult-to-source elements of water infrastructure. Future schematics will expand the print library. It’s a beautifully self-sufficient process that turns waste into highvalue products directly at the source, with applications from disaster relief to everyday use in the home. Dr. Mohammed and his team are currently planning an upcoming field test in the Solomon Islands, both to give the system a run in the open and to make sure the design meets end-user operability expectations. Oh - and it’s iw solar powered, of course.

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Landfill //

Understanding LISA By Lea Dillon VICTORIA has a new quality assurance requirement for landfill construction - Liner Integrity Survey Assessment (LISA) - and in October, Terra Firma Laboratories invited key stakeholders from the Victorian landfill construction industry to learn more about LISA. Highlights of the Understanding LISA workshop were presentations by leading industry experts, including world renowned expert in geosynthetic liners, and one of the founders of the International Geosynthetics Symposium (IGS), Dr Ian Peggs from I-Corp International, who provided a technical overview of LISA test methods. There was also a practical demonstration of the testing equipment by Terra Firma Laboratories. Attendees had a pond-side view of the water lance and water puddle method in a purpose-built pond set up at the workshop (with strategic leaks to be found). Adjacent to this was a trial pad set up to replicate a geomembrane liner with a drainage aggregate layer on top and a third trial pad was built as a double liner with Geofabrics Australiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s new conductive geotextile, bidim C, layered between and a drainage aggregate layer on top. In these trial pads, participants had an opportunity to find the leaks in the liner and to convert theory to practice.

2. Water lance method - this is often suitable on a graded slope where the lance has a water hose attachment to establish, using a stream of water, a small area of a conductive layer above the geomembrane. 3. Dipole method for earthen cover - the same testing method as deployed for the water covered geomembrane, but for use where there is an earthen cover above the geomembrane. The earthen cover must be confirmed to be sufficiently conductive and in the context of landfill cells, this method will be useful when surveying after leachate aggregate has been deployed but has reduced sensitivity at depths greater than one metre. 4. An insulated double liner system using the conductive geotextile was also tested using the soil dipole method. The conductive geotextile was positioned between two layers of geomembrane and a layer of aggregate covered the liner. This test method demonstrated the effectiveness of the deployment of a conductive geotextile.

Dr Ian Peggs provided a technical overview of LISA test methods at the Understanding LISA workshop.

assurance requirement, it brings with it many aspects that need to be taken into consideration during the construction of each new landfill cell or cap. First, there are substantial site conditions that may impact on how or indeed if a survey may be achievable on site. Isolation of the subgrade from the conductive layer above the geomembrane may be compromised by any number of elements on site, for example pipes and leachate drainage systems. Isolation may also be a factor at close proximity to

Introducing LISA LISA is an electrical leak detection method that is a proven quality assurance method to locate leaks in geomembrane liners. The principle behind these techniques is to place a voltage across an electrically insulating geomembrane and then locate areas where the electrical current flows through leaks in a geomembrane. All test methods have a sensitivity of detecting leaks of 1mm diameter or smaller. There were four testing methods described and demonstrated at the workshop. Choosing the suitable application for a specific project depends on a number of factors but whether the geomembrane is exposed or covered with water or earth must first be determined. The four methods include: 1. Dipole method for water covered geomembrane where the geomembrane surface is submerged in water, the body of water is charged by the power electrode and a leak sensor will detect any localised anomalies in the electrical potential at the location of a leak. 28

1 A simple outline of Liner Integrity Survey

Landfill construction considerations While LISA has been a requirement within the EPA Victoria Best Practice Environmental Management guidelines for Siting, Design, Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills (Landfill BPEM) since 2010, EPA Victoriaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s senior applied scientist for landfills and associate principal expert for landfills, Kapila Bogoda confirmed at the workshop that it will be a mandatory requirement for landfill designs going forward. Like the introduction of any new quality

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

anchor trenches where cushion geotextile is anchored with a geomembrane liner, a common design in Victorian landfill construction. If the cushion geotextile is operating as part of the conductive layer above the geomembrane but anchored in the subgrade (clay liner) then there will be a preferential current flow path that will mask any current flow through a leak. It is also possible that a liner integrity survey could be compromised when assessing new cell liners in close vicinity to the cell tied in with an older cell liner system.

At the point of project design and specification, designers and landfill owners will need to consider what are the specific criteria that would establish LISA as an effective quality assurance activity. Does the full extent of the cell (or landfill cap) require a LISA? Are there any limitations in the design of the cell that may compromise the performance of a LISA? For example, the distance from a ground electrode to achieve a sufficient current for the leak sensor to detect may be too great in larger cells. Design specifications will also be more effective documents if a non-conformance procedure establishes what is suitable verification after a leak has been repaired. Would air pressure testing be sufficient or would an additional survey be required? While the Landfill BPEM requires a LISA once the cell design is complete, owners may consider whether there is contractual benefit that outweighs the cost in assessment being conducted before as well as after drainage aggregate placement. Dr Peggs confirmed that up to 70% of damage to a geomembrane liner occurs during aggregate placement - any question about the benefit of mandating liner integrity surveys has been proven by this statistic. Landfill owners and all stakeholders in the construction of new landfills will benefit from a liner integrity survey verifying that the geomembrane liner is achieving the objective of being impermeable.

Lea Dillon is the director of Terra Firma Laboratories, which specialises in construction material, geotechnical and geosynthetic Quality Assurance testing. The company has extensive experience facilitating the construction of new cells for EPA-licensed landfills across Victoria. Contact: ldillon@terrafirmalabs.com.au iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Women of waste

Images courtesy of G&B Lawyers partner, Kim Glassborow. Close to 100 people attended the event.

A show of leadership and determination By Jan Arreza IN October, the Waste Management Association of Australia hosted its inaugural Women of Waste Leadership Breakfast at the Kirribilli Club in Sydney. Kim Glassborow, partner at G&B Lawyers, which sponsored the event, told Inside Waste that “the brilliant and inspiring leadership of women in the waste industry” were showcased at the breakfast and that close to 100 members were in attendance, all keen to hear from The Hon Penny Sharpe (MLC), Shadow Minister for the Environment, Tracy Chalk, waste and resource recovery manager at Penrith City Council, and Sarah Mandelson CEO of Serendipity Ice Cream. “It was a truly impressive lineup of speakers who shared stories of determination and clear leadership, which are highly relevant values for women in the waste industry today,” Glassborow said. While we couldn’t be at the event, Inside Waste decided to speak to Chalk to find out more about her journey in the sector.

All roads lead to... Originally wanting to be an agriculture teacher, Chalk instead took her career on many unexpected paths, having worked in and around local councils over the last 30 years, picking up valuable experience and finding her love for the waste sector along the way. “I was originally a health and building surveyor, so I went to the Hawkesbury Agriculture College at the time when they were dealing with

local government to put together an environmental health degree course. I didn’t really have much of an idea about local government, but that was where I ended up as a result of the time I spent working with them,” Chalk said. “I then moved to Blacktown Council through work experience and as a result of Council’s structure, I ended up doing some relief work for Richard Smith, who was the waste manager at the time. He gave me my first look into what the waste network was like in local governments, which I found to be very interesting right from the start, and it progressed from there.”

All in a day’s work Since 2010, Chalk has represented Penrith Council in the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (WSROC) and she has, from the outset, been heavily involved in bringing to fruition many of the Council’s waste initiatives. Prior to this, she had also spent time in the councils of Blacktown, Ku-ring-gai and Strathfield, and sat on the Western Sydney Waste Board when it was first initiated. “I’m very happy to have been on the board to look at ways to tackle illegal dumping, because that has always been a big issue,” Chalk said. “I was at the forefront when we introduced the Regional Illegal Dumping Squads (RIDS) and I am happy to have contributed to the program to the point where today, officers have jurisdiction across more than one council. That took a lot of effort at the time - we worked from a section 355 committee base, so it took a little bit of breaking the mould

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

L-R: Kim Glassborow, G&B Lawyers partner, Tracy Chalk from Penrith City Council, The Hon Penny Sharpe MLC, Gayle Sloan CEO of WMAA, Sarah Mandelson CEO of Serendipity Ice Cream, and Garth Lamb, WMAA’s national president, at the Women of Waste Leadership breakfast meeting.

to get that through. “I’m also happy to have been part of the introduction of a network of waste officers, which wasn’t really prominent back then. I am glad to see that waste education officers have taken off, and they have been very valuable in their own right.”

Taking the lead At present, Chalk is involved in Penrith Council’s efforts to tackle food and organic waste, which Chalk believes the sector can and should take the lead on. “Over the years, the waste industry has evolved from an interesting place where they were just the silent achievers that picked up and collected waste, and the sector’s innovations were not promoted as much as they would be in other industries,” she said. “I believe that now, there is a real chance to lead the way with new technologies, and food waste is an area in which we can definitely do that. Being on this journey for quite a while now, I can understand that people might think it will be really hard to initiate, but I genuinely believe majority of the community wants to come on-board and are happy to do the right thing. “We have a very positive experience with our food organics system and once people know how it works and what it does, we’ve found that they’d start to really get behind it.” Waste planning is the other area that industry can make a difference, ensuring that waste and resource recovery always have a place in development considerations.

“We are looking at working with the local university on how we can align waste management with planning so that it is a consideration of the developer that is no different to any other [consideration],” Chalk said, adding that “we are currently working on a new tender, which will move us into council-managed waste streams as opposed to just general residential.” Looking ahead, there are many opportunities for the sector to take the lead. For instance, when it comes to infrastructure, Chalk is urging all stakeholders, industry and government alike, to take a fresh look. “We can’t expect the infrastructure to be looked at the same way as landfills once were, which is that we should just put them on the fringe or somewhere we can’t see,” Chalk said. Instead, Chalk believes that there is a place for infrastructure within our communities and all it takes is proper planning. Doing so will be well worth the work and effort - if only to have infrastructure and technology all in the one spot so that we can better accommodate all and any advancements while maintaining our waste and resource recovery cycles efficiently. The road ahead may not be an easy one but that should not deter the sector. “I always say to my crew that the waste industry is a marathon and not a sprint, and as long as you are prepared to be here for the long haul, you’ll really enjoy the fruits of what you have invested your time and effort in. The waste industry by its sheer nature has a lot to offer and it is unbelievably iw interesting,” Chalk said.

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Policy //

Is a waste collection ship the solution to Pacific’s waste issues? By Catarina Fraga Matos MANY of the waste challenges facing the Pacific Islands are typical of developing nations around the world. Limited waste infrastructure and resources are significant and so is behaviour; plastic packaging has replaced the humble biodegradable banana leaf, but a throwaway culture persists. Meanwhile, increasing affluence is generating increasing waste. However, the island nations’ small populations across a wide geographical divide throughout the Pacific Ocean presents particularly unique challenges. In this context, what is the most appropriate waste management infrastructure? Where should it be located? And where should the waste’s final destination be? These are the questions the Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility (PRIF) has been grappling with and has engaged

consultant Anne Prince to investigate. Speaking at the Boomerang Alliance’s (BA) Beyond Plastic Pollution: Pathways to Cleaner Oceans conference in October, PRIF secretariat manager Jack Whelan said the Pacific is largely dealing with waste from other nations. “In the Pacific, it is all coming from us [Australia and other industrial nations]. It’s just that it’s been imported on ships and it doesn’t seem to come back,” said Whelan The research being undertaken by Prince highlights that waste management infrastructure and legislation varies extensively across the Pacific region. Currently, very few formal and public recovery waste management services exist in the region. In Fiji for example, the Naboro landfill in the capital Suva is the only public waste collective service in the country. Also speaking at the BA conference,

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Prince said across the Pacific, around 40% of countries have some form of waste management legislation, while 60% have environmental legislation, but this may be disjointed across various pieces of legislation or different government departments. Six countries have specific marine debris legislation and another eight have legislation around shipping and ocean dumping. Furthermore, four countries (Cooks Islands, PNG, Samoa and Tonga) currently have legislation to either ban, regulate or tax plastic bags or items, with draft legislation being considered in another six countries. Prince said it would be great to see legislative consolidation to fast-track solutions in a region which is scarcely considered in the international arena, yet bears the brunt of the effects of climate change and plastic pollution. “If the countries in the Pacific were

to get together and have some greater cooperation, some of these legislations could be fast-tracked. Then everyone is playing from the same song sheet and all the rules are the same across the region,” said Prince. The scope of Prince’s study is not minor. It includes 15 materials across 15 countries. All the usual suspects are there - bottles, aluminium cans, steel cans, PET, cardboard - in addition to plastic bags, scrap metal, end-of-life (EOL) e-waste, EOL white goods, EOL motor vehicles and their associated waste products (tyres, oils, and car batteries), as well as lithium batteries and EOL renewables. In poorer nations where resources are scarce, the challenges of recovery are significantly more complex where education still has a large role to play in discussing environmental impacts. Whelan pointed to Fiji as an example.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Policy

“Fiji [imports Prius cars] for good reasons because they want to reduce their petrol consumption. But because they’re importing around eight-year-old cars, a couple of years later the battery stops working and needs replacing which is pretty unlikely [to happen] in Fiji. What they do is take the battery out and convert the car back into a petrol car, which defeats the object of having a hybrid in the first place. But what do they do with the battery? We’re finding that very often they’re dumping those in the lagoon because they make really good boat anchors.” Acknowledging the need for behaviour change to feature in the Pacific’s waste management future, Prince hopes there will be an opportunity for her not-for-profit organisation WasteAid to co-design and co-develop community education. But it’s not all bad news. Guam has had a zero waste plan since 2013 while Palau and Kirabiti have an advanced container deposit scheme with reported recovery rates of 98% and 89%, respectively. The issue with extending any of these systems across the Pacific is who is going to pay for it. PRIF is supported by the major donor agencies and development

partners in the region including the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, Australian Aid, New Zealand Aid Programme, the European Union and the Japan International Cooperation Agency. While these donors have signalled financial commitment to developing waste management solutions in the region, Prince highlighted the need to plan around them not being around forever to ensure a sustainable solution. “The donors are going to want to put in one lot of money to kick start things and then see the countries take ownership of this problem themselves. So, we’ve looked at a raft of different options - extended producer responsibility programs, container deposit schemes, taxes, levies, bag disposal fees, bans, pay as you go, and a combination of all of these because we’ve got 15 materials.” And this brings us to a shipping option for waste collection in the region - a highly pertinent option given the relatively small amounts of waste in each of the many islands. Prince is considering whether it is more effective to use a commercial ship which already circles the majority of the Pacific (with the exception of the smaller islands), or whether donors should have their own ship whose route they can dictate.

In the Pacific Islands, limited waste infrastructure and resources are significant. (Credit: Anne Prince)

Ultimately, the preference is to transport waste to a regional hub and create local employment outcomes, particularly since the announcement of China’s waste importation ban has fundamentally changed end market options. “It’s expensive to move everything between anywhere, so clearly we want to take the minority of material to where the majority of the material is. What we are really focusing on now is the circular economy and in-country processing to value-add. We can’t just bale up and export because those export markets just don’t exist and when you’ve got such a small amount, you’re at the absolute bottom of the pecking order of who’s going to buy it,” said Prince.

“One of the things we would love to achieve from this project is local employment outcomes as well as diversity across the economy so that everyone can get a benefit from this, not just a few large corporations,” she added. This could include locally dismantling e-waste, plastics re-manufacturing, cardboard re-manufacturing for insulation or briquettes for fires, and glass-crushing for various applications from drainage to road construction. Prince’s final recommendations are expected to be published in February, with a feasibility study to follow between April and June. This will enable the project to commence with donor support from July onwards. iw

TRIDENT PLASTICS

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

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Hazardous waste //

A review of hazardous waste regulatory frameworks By Laura-lee Innes and Richard Collins IN 2009, Victoria introduced the Environment Protection (Industrial Waste Resource) Regulations (IWR Regulations). The IWR Regulations departed from other jurisdictional approaches by going beyond protection of the environment and health to specifically require managers of hazardous waste to reduce the generation and the hazard levels of the waste. Two key regulatory mechanisms include requiring most hazardous wastes to be treated before landfill disposal; and a hazardous waste levy imposed on the remainder, either $70

or $250 per tonne, depending on the hazard category. The IWR Regulations sunset in 2019, prompting Environment Protection Authority Victoria (EPA Victoria) to undertake a detailed review of regulatory frameworks in Australia and internationally. While the review revealed a high level of commonality in many aspects, there were some significant differences and alternative approaches. In general, the review found many similarities across Australian jurisdictions and with those adopted in the USA and Canada. Singapore also explicitly draws on aspects of these

regimes, including varying levels of reliance on lists of hazardous wastes and limited incentives for treatment. In contrast, the European Union (EU) adopts a more detailed and integrated approach, with a more closely structured framework of directives, controls and guidance, underpinned by strong scientific justification for threshold values and a clear risk assessment focus.

Risk versus hazard Regulatory frameworks conceptually describe how overarching hazardous waste management principles and policies are implemented through a

range of control measures, including tracking requirements, facility licensing, acceptance standards and broader guidance. Together they provide the approach to hazardous waste management within a given jurisdiction. The higher order elements of regulatory frameworks are the most powerful, in this case the guiding principles that shape the structure and intent of regulations. The critical difference between the EU principles and those of other jurisdictions is the primacy of a risk-based approach that manages hazards according to the relevant context, rather than

MANCO ENGINEERING AUSTRALIA PTY LTD

CAN YOU AFFORD NOT TO HAVE A CLOSER LOOK? aulic Control Proportional Hydr stem CANbus Control Sy

stem

Pendulum Pack Sy

Models

8 36

rial Hardox 450 Mate

lic System

au Load Sensing Hydr

stem

Pendulum Pack Sy

Models

THERE CAN BE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR QUALITY

Body Sizes

stem

Pack & Sweep Sy

stem

CANbus Control Sy

Body Sizes Months Warranty

stem

CANbus Control Sy

Months Warranty

aulic Control Proportional Hydr stem CANbus Control Sy stem

Pendulum Pack Sy

MELBOURNE | BRISBANE | SYDNEY Phone: 1800 626261 | www.mancoeng.com.au Email: info@mancoeng.com.au

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Hazardous waste Credit: John Messina, CC-BY-SA-3.0

through a single set of criteria for all circumstances, however different. For example, in setting threshold values for waste categorisation, Australian jurisdictions and Ontario (Canada) base their threshold tests on both total concentration (mg/kg) and leachability (mg/L) of contaminants. The latter criteria implicitly link the classification regime to the hazards of landfill disposal rather than just the intrinsic hazard of the waste. However, landfill-based are not relevant to applications like converting food processing wastes into stock feed. EPA Victoria has moved towards risk assessment with some wastes, such as its revised 2015 classification process for drilling muds, which introduced consideration of the source of the drilling mud and its appropriateness for an alternative use. However, the EU is far more comprehensive in the way it integrates risks to determine appropriate pathways for hazardous wastes. It uses total concentration as its sole classification criteria and then separately determines recovery, treatment and disposal options through facility licensing controls such as acceptance criteria. Specific site assessment is undertaken for each hazardous waste type to be received (by classification), covering the potential impact targets and the pathways between them. This then informs development of risk-responsive controls for that facility. This tailored approach appropriately manages the risks from hazardous waste, while potentially reducing management costs, constraints on recovery opportunities and the potential for unintended consequences from inappropriate classification. Implementing controls at the site level allows greater flexibility as advances in technology enhance capabilities to treat and manage hazardous waste.

Definition and classification of wastes Most jurisdictions have a multi-part definition of hazardous waste. Their definitions combine a list of specific waste streams and sources that are pre-

determined to be hazardous, together with a range of hazard properties and contaminant constituent analysis, largely via chemical concentration measurement. All feature, to varying degrees, lists of specific waste streams or sources that have been deemed hazardous based on criteria including industry type, process, specific wastes, substances and concentrations. These lists offer simplicity in defining what is considered ‘hazardous’. The problems with these lists include the potential for gaps in definitions, challenges in adding new wastes, limited flexibility for alternative waste management pathways, and related challenges where regulators and users do not agree. The state of New York is principally guided by lists and seeks to mitigate some of these weaknesses by including a very wide range of wastes and sources. Pre-classifying the waste as hazardous has the potential to misclassify low hazard wastes, increasing overall compliance costs. The EU also pre-classifies some wastes as hazardous in its List of Wastes, but the core of the classification scheme is a scientifically robust set of contaminants and thresholds that are linked to the inherent hazard properties of the waste, such as total concentration. The EU also has a process for approval of an alternative waste management pathway, where suitable evidence is provided. Victoria’s Hazard Classification System and associated IWR Regulations align the state with the EU in focusing on hazard thresholds while removing the previous list of hazardous wastes. Other Australian jurisdictions rely more heavily on either a list or thresholds, with limited integration between the two. The threshold approach is more flexible, but depends on the rigour of the science to define - and defend - the threshold values. The EU approach draws on chemicals classification frameworks, such as the European Chemical Agency’s Classification and Labelling Inventory, rather than waste-related guidelines such as in the US EPA 2012 Toxicity

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Laura-lee Innes.

Richard Collins.

This review’s tabulation of the threshold values and scientific references underpinning hazardous waste classification in each jurisdiction will provide a central resource that will help foster this conversation about waste management between state governments and improve overall waste outcomes. Characteristics. Another advantage of adaptive regulatory frameworks is that the chemical classifications reflect the latest science, ensuring the threshold values are up to date.

Science and threshold values EPA Victoria, in collaboration with the Australian government’s Department of Environment and Energy and the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection, has undertaken a project to tabulate the threshold values used to determine the landfill acceptance of hazardous waste in each state. They have also tabulated the multipliers used to determine sequential category thresholds, which are used for the dilution/attenuation factor that models the leaching rate into groundwater. Comparing thresholds between states is not easy due to misalignment and gaps in some values. For example, Victoria, South Australia and the proposed Queensland frameworks categorise waste using separate concentration and leachability figures, whereas New South Wales and Western Australia use concentration threshold values that are an intermediary between the two. The former three states also set separate criteria for waste soils while the latter states have a single set of criteria for both soils and hazardous industrial waste. Despite these challenges, one of the most useful learnings from comparing Australian jurisdictions has been to identify the scientific references used to determine the thresholds

for each of the 121 listed chemical contaminants and properties across all jurisdictions. Many were based on US EPA 2012 Toxicity Characteristics and the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines for leachability values, and 1999 NEPM values (HIL-F) for total concentrations. Several states base other threshold concentrations on the NSW EPA total concentration values, and some draw on international thresholds. However, some used older versions of these thresholds sets and there were also inconsistencies in the application of dilution and attenuation factors. Discussions are underway among Australian governments for greater harmonisation of key aspects of waste regulation in a bid to increase efficiency and decrease perverse incentives, such as different levy rates incentivising long-haul transport of waste. This review’s tabulation of the threshold values and scientific references underpinning hazardous waste classification in each jurisdiction will provide a central resource that will help foster this conversation about waste management between state governments and improve overall waste outcomes.

Laura-lee Innes is the senior applied scientist for waste and chemicals and the principal expert for waste with EPA Victoria. Richard Collins is principal consultant for waste advisory with Arcadis Australia Pacific (contact: iw richard.collins@arcadis.com)

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

C&D recycling //

One MRF, many purposes By Jan Arreza IN September, King Bins Waste Management opened the first stage of its construction and demolition (C&D) materials recovery facility (MRF) in Landsdale, Perth and as we found out, it is more than just a MRF. For one, the facility has been built almost entirely from recycled, reclaimed or reused materials. “Everything from the conveyor belts to the use of a sea container to house the picking table to the steel support girders, and to the use of overrun waste concrete from a nearby batching plant to create the concrete foundations are examples of this,” King Bins CEO Aaron Baker said. The plant has the capacity to process up to 80m3 of mixed C&D waste per hour and King Bins approximates that

the MRF will be able to handle up to 140,000m3 per annum running a single shift, five days a week. In terms of safety, during the design and construction of the plant, King Bins installed a three second delay start audible siren, safety lanyards, e-stops, and anti-fatigue mats to keep employees safe. The MRF’s trommel has also been positioned at the end of the plant. This is quite a novel set-up but Mike Haywood, principal at Mike Haywood Sustainable Resource Solutions and consultant on the project, explained the reason for this. “Instead of screening first we screened last because his trommel wasn’t dealing with the volume of material that was hitting the conveyor belt,” Haywood said.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Dr Anne Aly, federal member for Cowan and King Bins CEO Aaron Baker at the opening ceremony of the new MRF in Landsdale, Perth.

The new MRF’s picking station.

“Baker took an old high-end MRF and reconfigured it to fit a small C&D bin – basically a skip bin, and I helped him to understand how he needed the materials to flow through his plant for maximum efficiency. He was also planning on setting up a front lift and I strongly advised that he should go with some roll-off instead - going from skip bins to slightly larger roll-off bins.” King Bins consults regularly with industry bodies to achieve best practice. It is in the business of providing quality materials for end products such as recycled road base, drainage rock and clean fill sand. “Our screened sand goes to local sand suppliers, cardboard is separated and exported to domestic and international markets, metals are separated and sold to local scrap traders, and plastics are sorted and sold to a local plastics commodities broker,” Baker said. “Wood is separated and processed by the Eastern Metropolitan Regional Council (EMRC) who sell their products to well established markets, and who are currently commissioning a wood to energy facility that will provide power to Perth Airport,” he added. Apart from material recovery, King Bins has another priority - offering Indigenous employment. Functioning as a social enterprise, King Bins said it focuses on four Ps people, planet, profit, and purpose. On the people front, Baker noted that the company has hit its 25% Indigenous employment KPI, and offers employment to the disabled. It also runs a successful prison-to-community employment program with community organisations

The construction process is currently at its midway point.

Ngalla Maya and Mission Australia. “I strongly advocate employees being trained in waste management, logistics and business qualifications, which will help to increase their skills and improve their employability,” Baker said. “Our partnership with the First Nations Homelessness Project (FNHP) sees King Bins donate skip bins to help volunteers prevent eviction of First Nations families from their homes. To date, KBWM has prevented approximately 20 families – including 50 children – from homelessness. “We will continue to further develop on our commitments to Indigenous employment and have a commitment to ongoing involvement with grass roots social groups in the community,” Baker said, adding that the company will also “further develop and improve with our recovery of waste and will look for more opportunities to become a more sustainable, technical, and social waste management business. “We will also move into other waste streams as they become feasible and we look forward to working on some iw amazing projects in the future.”

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Size reduction

A rock solid investment By Jacqueline Ong TWO months ago, sugar cane farmer Josh Keith, who also runs Green Fingers Potting Mix and Rocky Point Mulching in Queensland, decided to take control of his growing stockpile of legacy green waste. The decision was not an easy one, considering he’d have to invest in plant he had never used or thought about using before. Keith has only had his fingers in the composting pie for about three years so it can be said that he’s fairly new to the game. In those three years, Green Fingers, which produces potting mix, compost and soils and supplies them to Rocky Point Mulching for sale to the agricultural sector and nurseries around the country, a legacy pile has occupied the site’s pad. “[The legacy pile] was a problem that was building up and the cheapest thing to do was to stockpile it, let it sit on the pad, and not worry about it. But these things catch up with you quickly,” Keith acknowledged. Not only did the stockpile take up valuable real estate, it was costing the company both in the present and the future. “The large amount of rocks and other plastics that was in our pile has been in circulation so they’ve been going through the composting process for the last three years. What you probably don’t realise is that if we were to pull 5000 tonnes of heavies out of that, it’s 5000 tonnes that we were shifting around on-site every three months - you take it from your oversize [fraction], you put it back in, you compost it again, you screen it again, and then you shift it again and you do that four times a year,” Keith said. “Two months ago, we decided that we had to free up the hardstand. But [the decision] came down to selling the product rather than letting it sit on the pad. If we can turn it into a product that we can use and sell right away, instead of letting it sit on our pad for 12 months, that’s cash flow for us.”

Giving Green Fingers the edge For Keith, the biggest challenge was coming to terms with the capital spend and how he would get the best return on investment. He embarked on a process of trialling a number of material classifiers before deciding on the EDGE MC1400, distributed by machinery specialist Focus Enviro, which he had viewed at another customer’s site in Sydney. On top of dealer support, he

told Inside Waste value for money and machine design drove his decision. The machine was purchased mainly for separating the rocks from green waste and out of the oversize fraction as well as for the extraction of contaminated plastics and papers from the final product. “The design of the machine, with its large 1400mm opening, and how the actual separator works, best suited our needs as it lets the big rocks drop out whereas another machine I trialled didn’t do that,” Keith explained. The MC1400 is able to extract impurities from highly contaminated material in a single pass using controlled air flow as a separation medium. Contaminated compost overs are first screened before being fed to the MC1400 to be separated into a range of materials, including clean rock, ferrous materials, clean organic fraction, and light fraction. At the same time, plastics are removed to prevent them from re-entering the compost stream. Operators are able to adjust a range of controls, from fan and feed conveyor belt speed, to drum positioning. Additionally, the machine is fitted with a wide feed conveyor to allow for an even spread of material, which can be fed from existing trommel screens, increasing the efficiency of separation. In being a fully self-contained machine, air flow is better controlled while air depressurisation, dust creation and spillage are minimised. At present, Green Fingers composts more than 40,000 tonnes of green waste a year. To get through its legacy pile, the company has been running the MC1400 full-time in October and will continue to do so till the end of November. Now that the machine has been in operation for a few months, Keith is able to reflect on the capital spend and said that based early figures, he expects a return on investment in four years. “And that’s purely based on the numbers and selling product to pay off the machine. But there are a lot of other benefits that we’ve not included in this estimate, for instance the space we’ve freed up space on-site and the capacity it gives us,” Keith said. “And if I were to move to an alternative screening solution, I can run the MC1400 off three-phase power, off 415 volts. I won’t need to run the motor because it’s got the ability to plug into power if power becomes a iw cheaper option,” he added.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

The MC1400 turns waste materials from the compost process into fractions that can be reused.

THE MC1400 turns waste materials from the compost process into fractions that can be reused. At the same time, it removes light plastics from re-entering the compost/organics material stream. “For years within the organic recycling industry the search for a solution to effectively remove light plastics from compost has been the holy grail. The EDGE MC1400 can remove over 98% of these plastics in a single pass,” Focus Enviro managing director Robbie McKernan said. The main areas of removal are: • clean rock; • ferrous metals; • clean organic fraction (suitable for reuse back to the compost process); and • light fraction/plastic contamination.

TABLE 1: VOLUME AND TONNAGE SPLIT, RECOVERED HEAVY FRACTION Material/Fraction Infeed Heavy Fraction

Density

Contamination

Size range

Markets

400Kg/m3

40-60%

0-350mm

None

1200Kg/m3

0-1%

0-80mm

Secondary Aggs

TABLE 2: VOLUME AND TONNAGE SPLIT, RECOVERED MID-DENSITY ORGANIC FRACTION Material/Fraction

Density

Contamination

Size range

Markets

Infeed

400Kg/m3

40-60%

0-350mm

None

Mid density Fraction

180Kg/m3

0-1%

80-350mm

Re-grind

TABLE 3: VOLUME AND TONNAGE SPLIT, LIGHT FRACTION (PLASTICS AND FILM) Material/Fraction Infeed Mid density Fraction

Density

Contamination

Size range

Markets

400Kg/m3

40-60%

0-350mm

None

80Kg/m3

100%

25-350mm

Landfill

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Size reduction // Given its size, the machine is suitable for small to medium sized operators.

A compact solution

By Jan Arreza

DESIGNED FOR THE TOUGHEST JOBS AUSTRALIAN MADE SIZES FROM 10-32m

PVC & MESH WIND OUT TARPS

HOOK LIFT BINS - COMPACTORS - TRANSFER TRAILERS

Call: 0439 766 639 Email: sales@iws.net.au Visit: www.iws.net.au

IWS INNOVATIVE

WASTE

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

SOLUTIONSS

TEREX’S new EvoQuip, the Bison 120, is now available in Australia after launching at Conexpo in Las Vegas earlier this year. In WA, SA and NT the machine is available exclusively through OPS Environmental Equipment. OPS, which already has a partnership with Terex, distributing the latter’s Terex Finlay Crushing and Screening range since 1995, saw an opportunity present itself with the new machine and broad range of EvoQuip machines as they have been designed with versatility, manoeuvrability and transportability in mind. “The EvoQuip range of plant is very versatile and has opened opportunities for OPS Environmental Equipment with new compact machines that are more cost effective and have a smaller footprint,” Aden Prisk, OPS Environmental Equipment area manager for WA and SA told Inside Waste. “In the past, crushing and screening equipment had generally been quite large and made for quarrying and mining, but the new range of compact plant gives opportunities for smaller contractors and customers in recycling applications to enter into this market as well.” The Bison 120 is small enough to fit inside a container for transport, overcoming transport issues in the vast land that is Australia. It is suitable for a number of projects, from crushing and screening construction and demolition waste to screening top soil from gardens or golf courses, to crushing material from worn driveways and brick walls. But don’t be fooled by its size. The

machine is strong enough to withstand the toughest of applications thanks to its 680mm by 400mm single toggle Jaw Crusher that can be adjusted hydraulically using the remote control, which comes as standard with the machine. This feature gives the operator the ability to reverse the Crusher to clear a blockage, as well as being able to run in reverse permanently for sticky applications such as asphalt. Being able to adjust the jaw setting and operate the plant fully from the remote control also allows for a fast and simple set up. “It doesn’t have any direct competition as such, because traditionally the machines have been a lot bigger and designed for different applications, so the idea to make it far more compact is quite a revolutionary idea, which allows smaller contractors to buy into this, rather than the bigger outlayers,” Prisk said. The machines have been deployed in the UK and Europe where they have been running smoothly. Here in Australia, they will be available for hire or sale and OPS said it will be on hand to meet their customers’ needs. “We look at each individual application differently and apply the correct machine to that for our customers. There’s been a lot of research and a lot of expertise put into this, which has also built on the experiences of the past,” Prisk said. On top of distributing the EvoQuip, OPS will provide parts, service and warranty support for EvoQuip equipment by factory-trained technicians. Financing options will also be available iw to qualified customers.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Size reduction Opening the side door gives fast access to the hopper and the rotor, providing a smooth way for removing any non-crushable materials from the hopper.

A shredder for the most difficult of materials By Jan Arreza IN 2014, the Tana Shark swam onto our shores and at the time, Inside Waste gave a rundown of the machine’s key specifications. But don’t worry, we’ll jog your memory below. Three years on and GCM Enviro, the exclusive distributor of the Shark has found many homes for the machine, with a multitude of waste streams for it to devour. Inside Waste speaks to some of GCM’s clients about how the Shark has been performing to date.

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTE “Biocoal makes solid recovered fuel (SRF) used in energy from waste plants or in cement kilns. They had two smaller shredders that weren’t shredding the materials properly and the size reduction wasn’t sufficient enough for the plant to run efficiently. “From an efficiency and throughput point of view, the Shark was selected because of its ability to achieve the reduction in size of the shredding of many different materials that are required for the production of the SRF. “In terms of ease of operation, it gives us the ability to move the machine from site to site with ease, and they are relatively easy to service, manage and handle - our staff were trained really quickly on the machine and became competent in its operation in no time. “From our point of view, I don’t think there’s really much that could be improved on. For what we use it for, for what it is capable of doing, for the outsourcing and the contract work that we send it out for, it’s perfect for all of those applications.” - Jamie Brown, operations controller, BioCoal

THE TANA SHARK Key specs: • Shreds particle sizes of 35mm-500mm. • Suitable for most reusable, recyclable and recoverable materials, including mattresses, tyres, cables, municipal solid waste (MSW), green waste, or construction and demolition (C&D) waste, for the purpose of volume reduction, renewable energy fuel production, or recyclable material production. • Available in tracked or semi-trailer models. • Hydraulic-driven, diesel engine powered, single shaft, low-speed mobile waste shredder. • Comes with a hydrostatic transmission and is controlled by a TCS control unit, which protects the system from overloading, overheating and damage caused by non-crushable material.

GREEN WASTE, TYRES, MATTRESSES, AND C&D WASTE “We chose the Shark because we previously used a Lindner shredder for the Cyclone Debbie clean up and it could not produce the quality of mulch that we required. “The standout feature of the Shark is that it can do all these different waste streams and materials without any problem. The Shark has also allowed us to tender for a broader aspect of waste reduction.” - Paul Verwoerdt, owner, Tropical Mulch Group

TYRE WASTE TO ENERGY (PYROLYSIS) AND GREEN/AGRICULTURAL WASTE “It was the only shredder around that could do multiple streams and materials – no other machine was able to separate nails or handle metals going through it. The Shark ticks all the boxes as far as I am concerned. “It is opening the doors on new opportunities. For example, no more tyres or concrete are going into landfill, and instead they are being shredded up and used to make base load power. With green waste, we are turning it back into compost. “We are finding everything good so far and the guys over at Tana are open to any criticisms I have or any alterations that I want done, which we have done in order to make the machines a little bit more user-friendly on our site. “If we hadn’t had the Shark, I think we would’ve had all sorts of problems in our operations and we wouldn’t have had the proper inputs into the business that we are after.” - Chris Curran, owner, Aus Shredding Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

WL and WLK single shaft shredders

FORUS SE 250

Speed (slow/high): slow speed shredder Throughput: up to 10,000 kg/h Suitable material: all sorts of plastics incl. film, containers, lumps, pipes, bulk bags, straps, as well as timber, paper, cardboard, MSW, industrial waste, etc. Drive type: compact drive or hydraulic drive No. shafts/speed: one / 65 - 250rpm Hopper size: up to 3000x1930mm opening or 15m3 Unit Dimensions: 4285 x 3600 x 3020mm

Speed (slow/high): slow Throughput: 0-30t per hour Suitable material: waste wood, household waste, C&I and more Drive type: diesel or electric No. shafts/speed: twin shaft Hopper Size: tilting hopper Unit Dimensions: transport 7800x2500x2500 mm; working 10000x2500x2500 mm

TANA Shark 440DT Shredder

Speed (slow/high): twin shaft - slow speed Throughput: 200tph+ Suitable material: all waste types Drive type: diesel or electric No. shafts/speed: twin shaft/slow speed up to 40rpm Hopper size: up to 16m3 Unit Dimensions: TBC Weight: Up to 66 tonnes No. of units in range: six models Base price: $250,000 + GST More: www.cssequipment.com.au or 1800 644 978

Speed (slow/high): slow Throughput: up to 300t/h, depending on the material and shredded size Suitable material: MSW, mattresses, tyres, C&D waste, C&I waste, plastics, IBCs, sleepers, tree stumps, green waste, e-waste, white goods, etc. Drive type: hydraulic No. shafts/speed: single shaft, 33rpm Hopper Size: 7m3 Unit Dimensions: 10.5m(l) x 2.8m(w) x 3.4m(h) in transport, with 15.8m max. length Weight: 29 tonnes (tracked version)

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

JDM Aust Pty Ltd

Weight: up to 30 tonnes No. of units in range: various sizes Base price: P.O.A More: http://direct.dksh.com.au/ recycling or 1300 133 063

GCM Enviro

Hammel Recyclingtechnik (CSS Equipment)

VB Primary Shredder

WEIMA Maschinenbau Germany

Product profiles: Shredders //

No. of units in range: three types - diesel on tracks, diesel on semi-trailer or stationary electric Base price: P.O.A. More: www.gcmenviro. com or Daniel Kastowsky 0417 269 378/02 9457 9399 or info@gcmenviro.com.au

Weight: 13.5 tonnes No. of units in range: 1 Base price: P.O.A More: www.jdmaust.net.au / www.forus.de

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Speed (slow/high): high Throughput: material dependent; 300kg/4-5,500kg/h Suitable material: plastics, timber, paper, copper cable, aluminium cans, textiles, foam, organics Drive type: direct drive, electric motors with heavy, oversized gearboxes mounted directly on the rotor shaft No. shafts/speed: single shaft Hopper size: 790mm x 500mm (V500), through to 1300mm x 1500mm (V1500) Weight: 1.5 tonnes (V500),

through to 6.3 tonnes (V1500) No. of units in range: six â&#x20AC;&#x201C; V500, V600, V800, V1000, V1200, V1500 Base price: from $29,000 + GST (subject to change) More: www.appliedmachinery. com.au/genox, or 03 9706 8066

Brentwood Recycling Systems

Focus Enviro

SLAYER XL Speed: slow Throughput: variable maximum, tonnage varies depending on chamber configuration and application Suitable material: household waste, C&D waste, green waste, wood waste and mattresses. Drive type: hydraulic No. shafts/speed: two / variable speed Hopper size: 3.5m3 Unit dimensions: L 11.9m W 2.25m H 5.1m Weight: 22 tonnes

No. of units in range: two Base price: P.O.A More: www.focusenviro.com.au or 02 4365 4247

FV Evans & Sons Engineering Ltd

Applied Machinery

Genox - Vision Series

FV Evans & Sons Engineering Ltd

// Product profiles: Shredders Evashred EV25E Hard Disk Drive Shredder Speed (slow/high): slow speed high torque Throughput: up to 15 standard hard drives per minute Suitable material: standard hard drives, solid state hard drives and server hard drives at a reduced rate Drive type: 4Kw three-phase electric 400-415 volts No. shafts/speed: two/slow speed Hopper size: 270mm x 190mm Unit dimensions: 1100mm high x 1250mm long x 750mm wide Weight: 400kg No. of units in range: Evashred

offers seven model shredders to the market Base price: starting from NZ$32,000 More: www.evashred.co.nz or +64 045269512

Evashred EV45E Data Destruction Shredder Speed (slow/high): slow speed high torque Throughput: up to 1500kg of product per hour Suitable material: high security data destruction for documents and e-scrap and other electronic data recording devices Drive type: 22Kw three-phase electric 400-415 volts No. shafts/speed: two/slow speed Hopper size: 930mm x 800mm Unit dimensions: 2200mm high x 2600mm long x 1000mm wide Weight: 1200kg

No. of units in range: Evashred offers seven model shredders to the market Base price: starting from NZ$65,000 More: www.evashred.co.nz or +64 045269512

Brentwood Dual and Quad Shaft Shredders rotary shears style Speed: slow Throughput: up to 20t/hr Suitable material: MSW, paper, wood, plastics, medical waste, e-waste, tyres, timber, greenwaste, steel/plastic drums, IBCs Drive type: 5kW to 110kW electric No. shafts/speed: two or four shafts/25 to 50 rpm Hopper size: to suit cutting chamber and material / optional pusher feed and bulk feed systems Unit dimensions: from 900x925x420mm to 4300x1700x765mm Weight: 250kg to 10,000kg

No. of units in range: 13 base models, custom lengths and variations available Base Price: from $35,000 More: www.brentwood.com.au or 02 42717511

Metso M&J

M&J Eta Preshred Mobile Speed: slow Throughput: up to 300t/hr Suitable material: C&I, C&D, MSW, mattresses, carpet, wood waste, biomass, baled materials, stumps, sleepers, greenwaste Drive type: 159 to 390kW diesel drive - hydrostatic drives No. shafts/speed: one or two shafts / 16 to 55rpm (depending upon model) Hopper size: to suit cutting chamber and material

Unit dimensions: up to 11.195 x 2700 x 4150mm Weight: 15 tonnes to 40 tonnes No. of units in range: five base mobile models - various knife combinations. Base Price: from Euro 300,000 More: www.brentwood.com.au or 02 42717511

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Speed (slow/high): high Throughput: low to medium Suitable material: rigid plastics and films Drive type: electric motor15kw up to 75kw No. shafts/speed: single Hopper size: 700mmx1200mm up to 1600mmx1700mm Rotor lengths: 650mm up to 1600mm Rotor diameter: 370mm Weight: 3.6 tonnes up to 3.8 tonnes No. of units in range: Four Base price: P.O.A

More: Koga Recyclingtech +61419558600 or www.koga.com.au

Terex Ecotec TDS820 Shredder Speed (slow/high): slow speed shredder Throughput: dependent on material Suitable material: green waste, wood waste, industrial waste and mattresses Drive type: twin hydrostatic independent shaft drive variable speed No. shafts/speed: twin shaft unit up to 50rpm Hopper size: 7m3 Unit dimensions: 2.5m width x 3.2m feed height x 11.7m length Weight: 27.5 tonnes (dependent on options)

XL Shredder

Speed (slow/high): slow Throughput: up to 100 m³/h Suitable material: green waste, rootstock, C&D and specialist applications. Drive type: diesel direct drive/ diesel hydraulic/ electric No. shafts/speed: two Hi and Low Hopper size: 2000mm wide x 2820mm in length Unit dimensions: 6940 x 2855 x 3265mm in Transport position. Weight: up to 27000kg No. of units in range: six models available, in Hook, Track and

Waste reduction via shredding all waste type Speed (slow/high): 1.6M/Sec Throughput: variable - maximum tonnage varies depending on chamber configuration and application. Suitable material: household waste, construction waste & demolition waste. Drive type: hydraulic No. shafts/speed: two variable speed Hopper size: 3.5m³ Unit dimensions: L 11.9m W 2.25m H 5.1m

Trailer variants. Base price: P.O.A More: www.komptechaus.com.au or Craig Cosgrove - 0417 320 082, ccosgrove@komptechaus.com.au

Precisionscreen Pty Ltd

CRAMBO

No. of units in range: variable configurations available Base price: P.O.A More: www.opsenvironmental.com.au or 0458 456 033

Weight: 22 tonnes No. of units in range: one Base price: P.O.A More: www.precisionscreen.com.au or 1800 727 991

ZB Shredders and Hammermills

Speed (slow/high): slow speed Throughput: configuration & material dependent Suitable material: wood waste, stumps, greenwaste, biomass, MSW, etc. Drive type: electric & diesel/hydraulic direct drive No. shafts/speed: single shaft (21 or 42 teeth) Hopper size: 4.5m3 Unit dimensions: working L/W/H - 13800/2990/3400

Speed (slow/ high): slow speed Throughput: 10 to 40 tons per hour Suitable material: C&D and ferrous and non ferrous metals Drive type: diesel or electric No. shafts/speed: one shaft and 600rpm Hopper size: various

Weight: 30,000Kg No. of units in range: one (two configurations) Base price: P.O.A More: www.lincom.com.au or www.neuenhauser-ut.de or 1800 182 888

Sierra Asia Pacific Pty Ltd

TARGO 3000

Unit dimensions: 1.2 x 2.1 to 2.1 to 2.1 Weight: 25 tonnes to 95 tonnes No. of units in range: eight Base price: P.O.A More: 0414 952 861

Shredders

TUETON

Speed (slow/high): slow Throughput: - 4 t/ph – 70 t/ph Suitable material: MSW, C&D waste, e-scrap, wires, bulky waste, green waste, wood, tyres Drive type: hydraulic No. shafts/speed: single, twin, quad Hopper size: 6m x 2m x 2.5m Unit dimensions: 6m x 2m x 1.2m Weight: up to 25 tonnes No. of units in range: 12 Base price: P.O.A More: www.mclanahan.com or 02 4924 8248

Speed (slow/high): slow Throughput: 200m3/hour Suitable material: MSW, C&D, C&I, biomass, greenwaste Drive type: 405kW No. shafts/speed: single shaft Hopper size: various Unit dimensions: up to 10m L x 2.5m W x 3.95m H Weight: 31 tonnes No. of units in range: six Base price: P.O.A More: skala.com.au or 02 49050650

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

TUETON

McLanahan Corporation Pty Ltd

NEUENHAUSER

Komptech

Lindner reSource

Apollo

OPS Environmental Equipment

Product profiles: Shredders //

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

HG6000TX

Unit dimensions: 4070mm(L) x 2415mm(W) x 2170mm(H) Motor: up to 180kW Rotor diameter/speed: single shaft shredders featuring an angled hydraulic ram Designed for: mainly used in the wood industry to achieve economical recycling of wood off cuts, pallets or other waste. Throughput: up to 10 tonnes/hour Finished product size: >40mm determined by optional screen size Base price: from $30,000 More: www.Zerma.com.au

Speed (slow/high): high speed Throughput: 250m3 / hour – depending on screen size and material Suitable material: various organics/timber/ green waste Drive type: low maintenance Vermeer duplex drum, HPTO wet clutch No. shafts/speed: single shaft Hopper size: 81.3cm (H) x 152.4 (W) infeed conveyor Unit dimensions: 11.4m (L) x 3m (W) x 3.9m (H) (transport dimensions)

Vermeer

ZWS 1400-2600 WOOD SHREDDERS

Weight: 34 tonnes No. of units in range: five tub grinders and nine horizontal grinders are on offer. Base price: P.O.A More: www.vermeer.com.au or 1300 VERMEER

Ti Pallet Breaker

WT4080 1 Shaft Shredder

Speed (slow/high): auto Throughput: 25 pallets / hour Suitable material: timber pallets Drive type: electric 415v Hopper Size: 200mm x 1250mm Unit dimensions: height:1500mm width:1575mm depth:1100mm Weight: 1300kg No. of units in range: one Base price: $23,990 + GST More: http://www.autobaler.com.au/products/pallet-breaker/

Speed (slow/high): 74R/min - slow Throughput: 800-1200kg/hour Suitable material: PET plastics, hard plastic, wood, cable, paper, light metal, white goods, solid waste, rubber, textile, fiber and glass products. Drive type: 37kW electric motor + 2.2 kW hydraulic motor No. shafts/speed: one shaft, 74r/min Hopper size: 1410 x 800 x 500 Unit Dimensions: 2825(L) x 1747(W) x 1875(H) Weight: 3.5 tonnes No. of units in range: 19 Base price: P.O.A More: www.wasteinitiatives.com or 1800 44 11 00

Waste Initiatives

Autobaler P/L

ZERMA Size Reduction Machinery & Recycling Technology

// Product profiles: Shredders

Lokotrack IMPACT Crushers

The Lokotrack LT1110(S) is our most compact impactor plant on tracks, commonly used for crushing recycled material such as asphalt, concrete and bricks due to the Nordberg NP1110M impact crusher providing high capacity and a high reduction rate. The addition of the screen module with a return conveyor (S) allows the Lokotrack LT1110 to produce a calibrated end product with just a single unit providing fuel consumption in the order of 25 lt/hr.

MOBILE CRUSHERS BUILT AND DESIGNED WITH FLEXIBILITY AND RUGGEDNESS IN MIND.

The Lokotrack LT1213 is a fully-equipped mobile impactor plant that combines mobility, high capacity and flexibility in aggregate, quarry or recycling applications. The 12’x 5’ dual slope screen increases screening area by 40%, new radial side conveyor and stand-by function gives fuel consumption of 24lt/hr. new gantry and tools increase safety with changing of wear parts.

For more information on OUR metso lokotrack crushers, contact your nearest Tutt Bryant Equipment branch on 1300 658 888 or visit us @ tuttbryantequipment.com.au Follow us on:

brisbane sydney melbourne adelaide perth Metso - Inside Waste v1-1 (half page).indd 1

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

tuttbryantequipment.com.au 1300 658 888 14/11/2017 2:12:37 PM

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Unit dimensions: 600 to 3000mm dia x 1 to 12m long - custom designed Motor: electric with optional variable speed drive dependent upon design Screens material this size: thickness: 3 to 16mm / material: mild steel, stainless steel or Bisalloy 400 Screen type: punched/laser cut plate fully welded drum Designed for: wide range of materials Throughput: dependent upon design Base price: from around $80,000 More: www.brentwood.com.au or 02 42717511

Waste Screen, flip flow screen, Double Deck screen

Spaleck

Brentwood Trommels

Unit dimensions: up to 7m x 3m (screen) Weight: up to 15 tonnes Motor: 1 x standard three-phase AC motor Screens material this size: 2-500mm Screen type: steel, rubber, stainless steel Designed for (material): MSW, C&I, C&D, shredded material, ASR, incineration slag. Throughput: up to 400m3 / hour Base price: P.O.A More: 1300 133 063 or http://direct.dksh.com.au/recycling

Hextra Model

Terra Select T-Series Trommel Screens

Unit dimensions: up to 7m long. Weight: 17 tonnes on crawler tracks Motor: diesel/electric Screens material this size: various (double or triple fractions) Screen type: dynamic (Hardox discs) Designed for (material): all waste materials Throughput: up to 200tph+ Base price: P.O.A More: www.cssequipment.com.au or 1800 644 978

Unit dimensions: 15.2m(l) x 2.55m(w) x 4m(h) - for T60 model Weight: 7.4t to 24t (depending on model) Motor: diesel - 25kW to 81kW Screens material this size: 4mm to 150mm Screen type: punch-plate or mesh drum Designed for: soil, compost, green waste, C&D waste, wood waste, metal waste, recycling and shredded materials, etc. Throughput: up to 300m3/hr No. of units in range: eight - ranging in drum length from 3.2m to 7.5m Base price: P.O.A More: www.gcmenviro.com or Daniel Kastowsky 0417 269 378 / 02 9457 9399 or info@gcmenviro.com.au

200 TONS OF CONSTRUCTION

DEBRIS

GCM Enviro

Ecostar (CSS Equipment)

Brentwood Recycling Systems

Product profiles: screens and trommels //

EXCLUSIVE NORTH AMERICAN & AUSTRALIAN DEALER HAAS RECYCLING SYSTEMS

SHREDDED IN 3 HOURS HAAS TYRON 2000 XL is the perfect tool for high volume waste reduction. shred-tech.com | +61 (0) 498 730 684 shred@shred-tech.com

Capacities can range from 25 tons per hour to 100 tons per hour, depending on the application & material.

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Product profiles: screens and trommels

JDM Aust Pty Ltd

ZEMMLER DOUBLE DRUM TROMMELS Unit dimensions: variable depending on model Weight: 3.5 tonnes to 24.5 tonnes Motor: diesel and electric options Screens material this size: from 2mm Screen type: wire Designed for (material): all types of materials Throughput: 0 -180m3 per hour Base price: P.O.A More: www.jdmaust.net.au / www.zemmler.de

Komptech

MULTISTAR STAR SCREEN Throughput: from 80m3 to 360 m3 / hour depending on material Designed for (material): green waste, bio waste, wood waste, bark Screens material this size: fines <10mm; medium 10 – 60mm; coarse >60mm Drive type: diesel c/w generator / electric Motor: Perkins Diesel Hopper size: varies by model No. of units in range: eight models available to suit a variety of applications Base price: P.O.A More: www.komptechaus.com.au or Craig Cosgrove - 0417 320 082 / ccosgrove@komptechaus.com.au

Komptech

NEMUS 2700 Unit dimensions: 12000 x 2550 x 4000mm Weight: 1700kg Motor: Perkins Diesel 70.0 kW Screens material: 8mm up to 80mm Screen type: punch plate, or segment screen mesh Designed for: compost, wood/biomass, spoil/gravel, and waste. Throughput: up to 170 m³/h Base price: P.O.A More: www.komptechaus.com.au or Craig Cosgrove - 0417 320 082 / ccosgrove@komptechaus.com.au

NEUENHAUSER

NH6020 (Diesel/Electric, Diesel/Hydraulic) Weight: 18,000 – 24,000Kg Motor: diesel hydraulic/ diesel electric Screens material this size: 8 - 100mm Screen type: drum type Designed for (material): soil, compost, aggregate, woodchip, green waste, coal, industrial waste, etc. Throughput: drum aperture/material dependant Base price: P.O.A More: www.lincom.com.au / www.neuenhauser-ut.de – 1800 182 888

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

TRT622 Tracked Trommel

Unit dimensions: 2.4m diameter - 5m diameter, up to 5m x 20m Weight: up to 80 tonnes Motor: 75kW – 220kW Screens material this size: 2mm to 150mm Screen type: high density polyurethane panels/ NI Hard/CCO plate Designed for (material): metals, tyres, MSW, recycling, concrete Throughput: up to 150 t/ph Base price: P.O.A More: www.mclanahan.com or 02 4924 8248

All waste separation/ reduction via screening Unit dimensions: L 4.1m x W 2m Weight: 3200kg Motor: 96kW (129hp) @ 2100rpm Screens material this size: max feed size various Screen type: Trommel Designed for (material): top soil, recycling, composting & C&D waster. Throughput: Up to 200tph material dependent Base price: P.O.A More: http://www.precisionscreen.com.au/trt622_trommel_mobile.html

Precisionscreen Pty Ltd

Rotary Sizing Trommels

Terex Ecotec TRS 550 Recycling Screen

Fingerscreen

Unit working dimensions: 12.6m width x 4.8m height x 14.08m length Weight: 30.5 tonnes (dependent on options) Motor: Caterpillar C4.4 Screens material this size: dependent on material Screen type: 4.8m x 1.53m 16 x 5 Spaleck 3D punch plate top deck, Flip - Flow Technology bottom deck Designed for (material): commercial waste, biomass, compost, waste wood shredded, soil, gravel, sand, bark, wood

Unit dimensions: various Weight: +30 tonnes Motor: 22kW+ Screens material this size: 0-1500mm Screen type: GK Fingerscreen Designed for (material): C&D/C&I/green waste Throughput: various Base price: $180,000+ More: skala.com.au / 02 49050650

General Kinematics

OPS Environmental Equipment

McLanahan Corporation Pty Ltd

Product profiles: screens and trommels //

chips, scrap metal, slag, and contaminated soil. Throughput: dependent on material Base price: P.O.A More: www.opsenvironmental. com.au or 0458 456 033

Have you read

Specialist provider of material processing equipment for the waste recycling and organics processing industries

Inside

FOCUS YOU CAN’T AFFORD NOT TO!

Fines

Lights

• • • • • •

Low Cost Modular Systems Quick & Easy Same Day Set Up Process Up to 150m³/hr within a small footprint or within existing building No on site power required No planning or civils cost Lowest cost per tonne solution

Plastics

Waste Ferrous Metals Book your free site survey today...

Efficient, Quick & Affordable

T: +61 24 365 4 24/7 M:+61 478 22 00 88

C&D Waste

www.focusenviro.com.au info@focusenviro.com.au

RECOVERY PLANTS

SHREDDERS 44

TROMMELS

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Clean Brick & Concrete

Timber

AIR SEPARATORS

PICKING STATION

STACKERS

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Trommel

Unit dimensions: 10300L x 3316W x 3670H Weight: 19 tonnes Motor: 4 x 5.5kW Screens material this size: <75mm Screen type: single skin trommel Designed for (material): green waste / C&I Throughput: 150m3/hour Base price: P.O.A More: skala.com.au / 02 49050650

Unit dimensions: designed & manufactured to suit specific requirements Weight: to suit application Motor: to suit application Screens material this size: to suit application Screen type: mesh or punch plate Designed for (material): C&I or C&D Throughput: to suit application Base price: P.O.A More: www.wastech.com.au or (03) 8787 1600

Wastech Engineering

2585

TR620 3-Product Trommel Screen

TRT 622

Unit dimensions: 12m (L) x 2.5m (W) x 3.8m (H) (max transport dimensions) Weight: 18,143.7 kg Motor: Cummins QSB 3.8l Tier 4F (Stage IIIB) Screens material this size: 10ml & 20ml screens and overs (screen sizes can be changed on the drum) Screen type: high tensile steel mesh Designed for (material): various; organics, aggregates, waste

Unit dimensions: L 24.7m W 2.8m H 4.8m Weight: 36,000kg Motor: 96kW (129hp) @ 2100rpm Screens material this size: max feed size various Screen type: trommel Designed for: top soil, recycling, composting and C&D waste Throughput: up to 200tph material dependent Base price: P.O.A More: www.focusenviro.com.au or 02 4365 4247

Throughput: 137.6m3 per hour with 0.5â&#x20AC;? (1.3 cm) screens installed and material with moisture less than 40% Base price: P.O.A More: www.vermeer.com.au or 1300 VERMEER

Focus Enviro

Vermeer

Eggersmann

// Product profiles: screens and trommels

NEW IN 2018: S D AWAR

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018 INSIDEWASTE

Granulator

Weight: 4 tonnes (GXC800), through to 16 tonnes (GXC2000G) Motor: 55kw (GXC800), through to 315kW (GXC2000G) Rotor diameter/speed: 520mm/520rpm (GXC800), through to 800mm/480rpm (GXC2000G) Designed for: heavy duty, high throughput processing. A variety of rotor configurations makes them suitable for a wide range of applications including plastic drums, crates and chairs, film, large woven bags and rubber,

Weight: 1500- 15 tonnes Motor: 11-250 kW Rotor diameter/speed: Ø300 - 1000 mm Designed for: processing of all kind plastics scraps Throughput: 100- 8000kg/h Finished product size: 3-25 mm Base price: P.O.A More: http://direct.dksh.com.au/ recycling or 1300 133 063

profiles and large sheets. Finished product size: dependent on the size of the screen; 12mm standard Base price: P.O.A More: www.appliedmachinery. com.au/genox, or 03 9706 8066

Neue Herbold GmbH

Genox – Gran Excalibur Series

Polaris

Granulator Series LG 300/LG 420

Unit dimensions: various Weight: various Motor: electric (up to 2 x 132Kw) Rotor diameter/speed: 112rpm Designed for: one step RDF production Throughput: 25tph+ Finished product size: down to 25mm Base price: P.O.A More: www.cssequipment.com.au or 1800 644 978

Speed (slow/high): high Suitable material: rigid plastics and films Drive type: electric motor No. shafts/speed: single Hopper size: 500mmx300mm up to 1200mmx420mm Rotor diameter: 260mm, 360mm Rotor lengths: 500mm up to 1200mm Weight: 0.8 tonnes up to 2.8 tonnes No. of units in range: four Finished product size: 5.00mm More: Koga Recyclingtech +61419558600 or www.koga.com.au

Lindner reSource

Lindner Recyclingtech (CSS Equipment)

Applied Machinery

Product profiles: granulators //

ZERMA Size Reduction Machinery & Recycling Technology

Ditch Witch Australia

Diamond Z

INSIDEWASTE DECEMBER 2017/JANUARY 2018

Unit dimensions: 2.9 x 12.8m / 3.3 x 19.3m Weight: 28 – 56 tonnes Motor: Caterpillar C15 – C32 Rotor diameter/speed: 840 - 1320mm Designed for: green waste / C&D / pallets / stumps & logs Throughput: 50 – 120 tonnes / Hour Finished product size: 20 – 200mm Base price: P.O.A More: www.diamondz.com or 0417 320 120

GSH 800 HEAVY DUTY GRANULATORS Speed (slow/high): high Throughput: up to 15 tonnes/hour Suitable material: designed to withstand the most demanding and universal applications in the plastic recycling field, with high throughput requirements. Drive type: up to 320kW No. shafts/speed: single V-cut rotor Hopper size: 1200mm x 1150mm feed opening Unit dimensions: 3100mm(L) x 2430mm(W) x 3770mm(H)

Weight: 10.4 tonnes No. of units in range: 12 Base price: from $45,000 More: www.Zerma.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Wasted Space

Have you been naughty or nice? ARE we ever too old for the magic of Santa Claus scurrying down the chimney, sack of gifts in hand? Yes. But we’re not too old to make wish lists and we know that, despite what mainstream media has shouted about this year, the lot of you have been good so who knows? Maybe if we made up a list of things we’d like to see in 2018, we might get our wishes granted. Presenting... Wasted Space’s first Christmas wish list. 1. Keeping promises First and foremost, we’d like the NSW EPA to go the distance. They said they’d repeal the proximity principle but surprise surprise, it remains in force to date. Then there were whispers of a national proximity principle, which we heard was on the agenda of the heads of EPA (HEPA) but nothing has come out so far. Will 2018 be the year of keeping promises? 2. One nation Last time we checked, Australia is a single nation; one country. Can’t the states and territories just get together once and for all to sort out this levy situation? What’s the problem here (I’m looking at you, Queensland)? It’s not just the levy but regulations in general. It’s about time to start harmonising some of these, ensure levies are implemented across the board, and close loopholes that create an uneven playing field. 3. World peace It’d be nice if we could all get along, holding hands and singing campfire songs under the starry night sky. Over

the years, we’ve talked and talked about fragmentation of the industry, the numerous associations and industry groups for what is really a small (but important) sector, the various events and expos and all that. We are a community; how can we work as one? We do think though, that 2018 is the year to keep a close eye on movements in this space... 4. Dig deep Ok, this one still confounds us. Governments push the whole reuse,

reduce, recycle mantra and talk till the cows come home about recycling and the like. Yet, procurement policies for recycled materials/products in government are lacking and honestly, plain disappointing. Please, for the love of god, put your money where your mouth is. 5. The bigger picture We all know that waste and resource recovery issues often become political footballs (think: CDS). We all have

demands for government but in 2018, we should start thinking about bigger picture issues. Why? Well, governments as we know, have limited appetite for regulatory action and if we put forward the “issue of the day”, the thing that can be an emotional and political topic for community, for e.g. plastic bags, then the real areas that require regulatory action get pushed to the bottom of the pile. In 2018, let’s channel our efforts to the right policy issues.

DIARY February 20-22 Australian Waste to Energy Forum Mercure Ballarat, Victoria The Australian Waste to Energy Forum aims to provide a platform for all interested parties to discuss the development of a waste to energy industry within Australia. Government, industry and individuals will be able to learn, network and discuss issues in an open forum with like-minded and interested companies and individuals. www.aien.com.au/wteforum

May 3-5 IE Expo China Shanghai New International Expo Centre As Asia’s leading environmental show, IE expo China 2018 offers an effective business and networking platform for Chinese and international professionals in the environmental sector and is accompanied by a first-class technical-scientific conference program. It is the ideal platform for the professionals in the environmental industry to develop business, exchange idea and do networking. www.ie-expo.com

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

May 8-10 Waste 2018 Coffs Harbour, NSW First established back in 1996, the Coffs Harbour Waste Management Conference is now well regarded as the industry’s leading waste management conference. It provides a quality program focused on the latest developments in the industry, high profile presenters that are leaders in their field, and an exhibition by leading edge companies and professionals from across Australia and overseas. www.coffswasteconference.com.au

May 14-18 IFAT Munich, Germany More than 3000 exhibitors attend the world’s leading trade fair for environmental technologies to showcase their pioneering technologies, innovations, and strategies and solutions tailored to meet the requirements of the market in question. www.ifat.de

August 29-30 Australasian Waste & Recycling Expo ICC Sydney, Darling Harbour The Australasian Waste & Recycling Expo brings together the industry to discover the latest trends, showcase innovation, attend high quality practical seminars and workshops, and network with key waste and recycling decision makers from industry and government. www.awre.com.au

OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2017 INSIDEWASTE

MAXIMUM OUTPUT

3-Stage Grinding Process

The Impact Release System

The Impact Cushion System

Peterson’s powerful up-turn 3-stage grinding process provides better fracturing of material and a more consistent product, giving you just the product your buyers are looking for.

Peterson’s patented Impact Release System’s air bags provides uniform grinding and protection from contaminated feedstock, a feature unique to Peterson grinders.

Urethane cushions and shear pins help protect the mill from catastrophic damage in the event of a severe impact from contaminants in the feedstock.

Provides Faster Reduction

Protects Your Investment

Land clearing, mulch, compost, asphalt shingle tiles, scrap wood, biomass, green waste—we can handle it all! Peterson offers horizontal grinders from 433–839 kW, offering grinding solutions with output at the lowest cost per ton. Peterson’s innovative and ultra-productive machines are ready to tackle the hardest jobs.

www.komatsuforest.com.au

The Second Line of Defense

Visit us at www.petersoncorp.com and see why we have been leading the industry for over 35 years! Peterson is represented by Komatsu Forest in Australia and New Zealand, providing industry-leading product support and expertise. Komatsu Forest Pty Ltd. 11/4 Avenue of Americas Newington NSW 2127 Australia T: +61 2 9647 3600, E: info.au@komatsuforest.com