Inside Waste February/March 2022

www.insidewaste.com.au

ISSUE 106 | FEB/MAR 2022

INSIDE 30 38 44

Hazardous Waste Textile Stewardship Grafil lawsuit fallout

How to get rid of residual waste

Going nuclear on waste – is Kimba the answer? just outside the town of Kimba, on South Australia’s Ayre Peninsula.

And while the Minister of Resources and Water, Keith Pitt, is adamant that the community is behind the project – and with its jobs and economic benefits, why wouldn’t they be – not everybody is convinced it is a good idea.

One such person is Dave Sweeney, who is a national nuclear campaigner for the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF). He has several issues with the site, the two main ones being what he sees as a lack of consultation with the traditional owners of the land, as well as concern about how the government is managing the approach to the different waste streams that have different properties. There are going to be two main types of nuclear waste deposited at the site – waste

from nuclear medicine, which is important mainly in the treatment of various cancers, and Intermediate Level Waste or ILW – the waste from the nuclear reactor at Lucas Heights. It is the latter that has Sweeney most concerned.

“The choice of Kimba is a suboptimal choice for the longer, more important question of, ‘what do we do with our ILW?’” he said. “If you look at ANSTO, it has overwhelmingly superior assets for extended interim storage of this waste. There is high security, with 24/7 federal police onsite, secure tenure, and the community acceptance of the facility in the local Sutherland Shire. The material is already there, and there is the highest emergency response and monitoring capacity for nuclear material in Australia.

(Continued on page 24)

PP: 100024538

ISSN 1837-5618

AUSTRALIA doesn’t have a huge history when it comes to nuclear energy/power compared to its European and North American cousins. But the little of it we do have, still causes emotive responses from those who see its pros or cons.

Currently the only nuclear reactor the country has sits on the periphery of southern Sydney at Lucas Heights.

The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) site has been handling the vast majority of low level nuclear waste since it opened in 1958, while some hospitals around the nation also have some storage of used items, which include gloves, gowns, needles and other medical gear.

It has taken almost 40 years, but a decision has been made about where a permanent site for the burying and disposal of nuclear waste will be –

HAVING a complete circular economy – as it stands – is a pipe dream. The current mantra of reduce, reuse, repair and recycle is good, but only for those waste streams where it is possible to do so. Currently – with plastic being the obvious example – there are too many products that will always leave a permanent scar on the circular economy landscape. This is because once they have gone through the wringer of being reused, recycled etc, there will still be the residual afterglow that has to be destroyed while making minimal impact on the environment. The green lobby believe that the companies that use products that create residual waste need to try harder in terms of making them biodegradable and compostable, so the residue doesn’t end up in landfill or incinerated. However, in practical terms, it will be some time before such products become the norm.

And when they do become available, there is so much residual waste out in the community, it will be decades before it is taken care of to the degree that those at the cutting-edge of environmentalism would like.

This means the issues are: can Australia get rid of these nuisance waste streams in the most environmentally friendly way, and at a cost-effective price?

There are two main ways of doing so after all other options have been exhausted – landfill and incineration.

In the not too distant past, these were the literal answers – burn it or bury it.

(Continued on page 26)

Meet the ZR - Low speed. High torque. Maximum performance.

Visit a reference site | Book a trial | Request a free waste audit | info@focusenviro.com.au

MAXIMUM OUTPUT WITH

3-Stage Grinding Process 3-Stage Grinding Provides Faster ReductionProcess

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

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

Land clearing, mulch, compost, asphalt Land clearing, mulch, compost, asphalt shingle tiles, scrap wood, biomass, shingle tiles, scrapcan wood, biomass, green waste—we handle it all! green waste—we can handle it all! www.komatsuforest.com.au www.komatsuforest.com.au

The Impact Cushion System The Impact The Second Line ofCushion Defense System The Second Line and of Defense Urethane cushions shear pins help protect the mill from catastrophic damage in the Urethane cushions and shear pins help protect event of from a severe impact from contaminants the mill catastrophic damage in the in the feedstock. event of a severe impact from contaminants in the feedstock.

Peterson offers horizontal grinders from 433–839 kW, offering Peterson solutions offers horizontal grinders from 433–839 grinding with output at the lowest cost kW, per offering ton. Visit grinding solutions with output atand thesee lowest per ton.

Visit us at www.petersoncorp.com whycost we have been us at www.petersoncorp.com and see why we have been leading the industry for over 35 years! leading the industry for over 35 years!

PROVEN PRODUCTIVITY

2710D Horizontal Grinder 2710D Grinder Portable &Horizontal Efficient

Portable Engine & Efficient Length Engine Weight Length Feed Opening Weight Feed Opening

433 kW or 570 kW cm 433 kW or1612 570 kW 30900 kg 1612 cm 15330900 x 81 cm kg 153 x 81 cm

5710D Horizontal Grinder 5710D Horizontal Grinder High Production with Consistent Sizing

High EngineProduction with Consistent Sizing 722 kW Length 1800 cm Engine 722 kW Weight 42184 kg Length 1800 cm Feed Opening 152 42184 x 102 cm Weight kg Feed Opening 152 x 102 cm

Peterson is represented by Komatsu Forest in Australia and Peterson is represented Komatsu Forestproduct in Australia and New Zealand, providingby industry-leading support New Zealand, providing industry-leading product support and expertise. and expertise.

6710D Horizontal Grinder 6710D Horizontal Grinder Largest Grinder with Highest Output

Largest Engine Grinder with Highest Output 839 kW Length 1860 cm Engine 839 kW Weight 48987 kg Length 1860 cm Feed Opening 168 48987 x 127 cm Weight kg Feed Opening 168 x 127 cm

Komatsu Forest Pty Ltd. Komatsu Forest Pty Ltd. 11/4 Avenue of Americas 11/4 Avenue of Americas Newington NSW 2127 Australia NSW 2127 Australia T: +61 2 9647 3600,Newington E: info.au@komatsuforest.com T: +61 2 9647 3600, E: info.au@komatsuforest.com

Editor’s Note //

shredders for every product, business & budget.

That’s Applied Thinking.

UNCAPPED

INSTANT ASSET WRITE-OFF EXTENDED UNTIL 30TH JUNE 2022

Grafil case offers sobering lessons WE’VE hit the ground running with a string of contentious and interesting stories in our first issue of the year.

First, there is not one but two takes on the NSW EPA being hauled over the coals by Environmental Court judge Nicola Pain due to its handling of the Grafil case, which has been before the courts for the best part of a decade.

Consultant Frank Klostermann takes us through the case and why it should set off alarm bells for all those involved in receiving processed fines and who is liable for any contamination of said material. It makes sobering reading.

Then we get a little bit technical with lawyer Gavin Shapiro who gives a legal take of why Judge Pain was so scathing and how the EPA needs to handle future cases. Not only has the case tied up state environmental resources but has also cost the company involved a lot of money, time and heartache. Sometimes government departments rightly get hauled over the coals not just by judges, but by the court of public opinion while some will argue that the EPA can only work within the framework that current legislation allows.

Publisher Christine Clancy christine.clancy@primecreative.com.au

Inside Waste is available by subscription from the publisher. The rights of refusal are reserved by the publisher

General Manager (Sydney) Terry Wogan terry.wogan@primecreative.com.au

Articles All articles submitted for publication become the property of the publisher.

The Editor reserves the right to adjust any article to conform with the magazine format.

Managing Editor Mike Wheeler mike.wheeler@primecreative.com.au

One of Australia’s most popular brands of shredders and granulators Safe, efficient, cost effective size reduction of your bulky, or sensitive waste streams Perfect for reprocessing your waste material for closed loop manufacturing Huge range available to suit practically all waste streams; plastic, wood, metals, tyres, e-waste & more Machines in stock in Melbourne

appliedmachinery.com.au

Phone: 03 9706 8066 Email: sales@appliedmachinery.com.au

4

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

In other news, I was fortunate enough to host a virtual seminar at the Waste Expo Australia event near the end of 2021. It was an interesting exercise in that we had several experts on board giving their opinions about the pros and cons where Waste to Energy sits on the waste landscape. Some state governments are looking to increase their WtE footprint over the next decade by approving new plant that will help get rid of the biggest bugbear – residual waste. However, according to some there other alternatives that might do just as well.

Finally, nuclear waste. It’s not often we get to talk about what is probably considered one of the most insidious forms of waste. This is mainly because Australia’s nuclear output is limited compared to the bigger players in the world. This doesn’t mean the idea of such waste doesn’t elicit an emotional response from a range of stakeholders.

It does. We look at the differing points of view of the new nuclear waste plant that is set to be built in Kimba, South Australia. Not everybody is happy about it. We find out why.

Have a great month.

Business Development Manager Chelsea Daniel-Young chelsea.daniel@primecreative.com.au Design Production Manager Michelle Weston michelle.weston@primecreative.com.au Design Blake Storey, Kerry Pert, Aisling McComiskey Client Success Manager Justine Nardone justine.nardone@primecreative.com.au Head Office Prime Creative Pty Ltd 11-15 Buckhurst Street South Melbourne VIC 3205 Australia p: +61 3 9690 8766 enquiries@primecreative.com.au www.insidewaste.com.au

Copyright Inside Waste is owned by Prime Creative Media and published by John Murphy.

All material in Inside Waste is copyright and no part may be reproduced or copied in any form or by any means (graphic, electronic or mechanical including information and retrieval systems) without written permission of the publisher. The Editor welcomes contributions but reserves the right to accept or reject any material. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information, Prime Creative Media will not accept responsibility for errors or omissions or for any consequences arising from reliance on information published. The opinions expressed in Inside Waste are not necessarily the opinions of, or endorsed by the publisher unless otherwise stated.

Subscriptions +61 3 9690 8766 subscriptions@primecreative.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

BRISBANE

PERTH

SYDNEY MELBOURNE

T: 1300 859 885 E: peter@triconequipment.com.au A: 11 Lucca Road, Wyong NSW 2259

www.triconequipment.com.au

News //

Profile | Peter Cruwys, Director, Source Separation Systems What made you get into the waste industry?

I lived overseas for several years, and on my return over 15 years ago, I was reminded of just how beautiful Australia was. However, I was also struck by how limited our recycling and litter management was in comparison to other developed countries. My passion for the industry developed as I researched and started talking to people involved. It’s a little cliché, however, after having kids, I am even more passionate about our quest to assist Australian families

content, which has been collected in yellow council bins. It’s initiatives like this that can transition us to a more circular, sustainable economy.

What are some of the key issues facing the industry?

I think green washing is a major concern that requires stronger regulation. The Australian community is responding to the environmental threats we face and are seeking out more sustainable products and solutions. However, many companies are responding by simply adjusting their marketing, so they are perceived

as ‘green’. As a result, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for individuals to choose a truly sustainable option, without spending time researching, which is disappointing.

We need businesses to shown genuine, ethical leadership in this space.

Our business, Source Separation Systems, only offers Australian-Certified Compostable liners under our CompostA-Pak brand, which are completely plastic free. We are also now offering plastic-free freight options, leveraging the infrastructure we use to make our own warehouse more sustainable.

We have recently made a shift to manufacture several of our products from Australian Post-consumer recycled

and in desperation to keep the family farm, a few entrepreneurs were looking for another way to keep the income coming into the farm. After a chance meeting, the very first water truck was assembled and supplied to a local construction site. It wasn’t the most elegant looking water truck, but it did what the client needed.

From then on, a range of truck bodies were created.

What are the key services that STG Global offers?

After introducing a range of product offerings, STG Global wanted to focus on delivering a well-rounded product by having constant back up support from two teams – service and spare parts. With these two dedicated departments the company has been able to assist its customers with their fleet management. The company’s service team can attend to the

occasional breakdowns and schedule services for all plant equipment.

to be more sustainable. There is so much we can do now as individuals to change the impact we are having on the environment. Much of it is really about a mindset shift, and it’s becoming increasingly clear how imperative change is for our future.

Source Separation Systems are known for their involvement in FOGO programs. Where do you see this heading?

Food Organics recycling is imperative for the future, and I see it eventually being available for all. In the 90s, there was opposition to kerbside recycling, but now it’s way of life.

The same will happen for FOGO and eventually, even when booking an Airbnb, families will expect to find a Kitchen Caddy and liners so they can recycle their food scraps. iw

Profile | STG Global

When was the company founded and why?

STG Global was born out of necessity and identifying a gap in the market. Hit by drought

What are some of STG Global’s plans and ambitions for the next 12-18 months?

The company’s bestselling products are its vacuum trucks. With this range tying into the waste industry, the company aims to expand its product offering and enter the garbage industry. iw

Asahi/CUB join VicRecycle ASAHI Beverages, owner of Carlton & United Breweries, has joined CocaCola Europacific Partners and Lion as part of VicRecycle. VicRecycle is going to bid to become the Victorian CDS scheme co-ordinator.

“As beverage producers, our members are committed to taking responsibility for containers and ensuring a successful CDS,” said VicRecycle chair Paul Klymenko. “Our aim is to ensure a CDS that prioritises recycling, economic benefits for the Victorian community and producer responsibility.

Ensuring a successful CDS and high rates of recycling is critical to the sustainability practices and commitments each of our members has made to reduce waste.

“Along with high rates of recycling, we want to see a scheme that is run as cost efficiently as possible, to ensure upward pressure on consumer prices is minimised. That means appointing multiple network operators as proposed by the Government.

6

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Allowing competition will help drive up recycling rates, generate more Victorian jobs, increase consumer convenience and will see the benefits spread right across the state.”

Klymenko said Victoria’s CDS will generate more than $500m every year once it is up and running, facilitating the return of hundreds of millions of containers.

“With Asahi Beverages joining, we

look forward to continuing to work with the Victorian Government to develop the best CDS for Victoria, including advocating for a greater role for community organisations and charities,” he said.

“Additionally, the sale of returned containers to recyclers should be done transparently on an open market, with proceeds reinvested into the running of the scheme.

Asahi is looking to be part of the bidding process to be the Victorian CDS Scheme Co-orindator.

“Like other Container Deposit Schemes across the country, we believe the Scheme Co-ordinator should be a not-for-profit, to ensure there is no conflict of interest in coordinating the scheme.”

Robert Iervasi, Group CEO of Asahi Beverages, said, “Asahi Beverages is committed to the success of the Victorian Government’s Container Deposit Scheme. The scheme is critical to our ambitious sustainability and recycling agenda, including our work to deliver a circular economy and better environmental outcomes.

“Asahi Beverages already has significant experience in the operations of Container Deposit Schemes. Since the inception of the NSW & ACT schemes we’ve been part of Exchange for Change, the Scheme Co-ordinator in NSW and the ACT, where we’ve worked with Coca-Cola Europacific Partners and Lion.

We look forward to bidding, as part of VicRecycle, to become the Victorian CDS Scheme Co-ordinator.” iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

News //

Davis appointed new CEO of WRIQ MARK Smith has resigned as the CEO of the Waste Recycling Industry Association Queensland (WRIQ) and will be replaced by Dr Georgina Davis.

Smith has been in the job for two years. He said despite the COVID-19 pandemic creating the most difficult two years in recent decades, he was proud of what has been delivered for WRIQ and its members.

“Our association has bucked the trend of other associations nationally over the last few years: expanding our member numbers, increasing our revenue, expanding our member services, increasing our presence and profile across a range of communication and media channels and most importantly changing our profile with key stakeholders in government and the private sector.

Smith highlighted three key indicators that were endorsed early

in his tenure at WRIQ that have been achieved – increased member benefits and increased members, increasing the WRIQ brand and profile and increasing revenue.

“Our sector is changing and changing rapidly. We can’t always wait for government to respond to our needs and challenges. If we don’t tackle those issues, much of the incoming change will be forced upon us as opposed to be influenced and created by us.”

Smith will work with the WRIQ Executive Committee in the transition to a new CEO during the next few months. He plans to continue working in the sector and stay in Queensland.

Richard Taylor, WRIQ president, said Smith presided over perhaps two of the most difficult years the association has faced,

with the COVID-19 pandemic disrupting day-to-day lives in ways unimaginable before 2020.

“Despite these obstacles, Mark can be very proud of his achievements during this time,” Taylor said.

He said Davis is well known in the recycling industry and to the association’s membership.

She is the founder of the Waste to Opportunity Enterprise, and is currently finishing a period as CEO of the Queensland Farmers Federation, a position with many similarities to the WRIQ CEO role and with many of the same stakeholders.

Davis is highly qualified in the fields of environmental engineering and education and has more than 25 years’ experience in the waste management and resource recovery sector.

She is a Chartered Waste Manager

New WRIQ CEO Dr Georgina Davis.

and Chartered Environmentalist (CEnv) and holds several board positions and various roles on government bodies and statutory authorities. iw

We are now 25 years young and in the 2021 consultants review we were rated in the top 3 small consultancies in Australia in 8 of the 11 categories with:

Our services:

• Waste auditing • Logistics • Strategy • Procurement 8

• Technology • Modelling • Education • Environmental compliance

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

We can sort it out!

Call our team 02 9907 0994 email: admin@aprince.com.au www.aprince.com.au Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

Dumping costs Victoria $89 million a year A dumping offender is usually a commercial operator looking to offload waste to save money.

COUNCILS in Victoria spent $89 million responding to the dumping of illegal waste in 2019/20, with ratepayers left to foot the clean-up bill. While there has been a dramatic uptick in construction, household, clothing and green waste discarded in parklands, on nature strips and on council property, the biggest growth has been in the dumping of asbestos contaminated soil.

Typically the profile of an offender is a commercial operator looking to offload waste on the cheap, or a member of the public who is transient by nature and constantly on the move.

Although crime waste is widespread across the state, the growth corridors of Melbourne’s north and north-west are key problem areas. These were among the stand-out results of the Annual Illegal Waste Survey 2019-20.

Conducted by Keep Victoria Beautiful (KVB), the key intent of this research was to determine the scale and impact of illegal waste across the state and establish reliable data in order to improve state government policy.

Authorised officers from 53 of Victoria’s 79 councils were interviewed for the survey. KVB enforcement training manager, Travis Finlayson, believes the figures are conservative given that only councils were interviewed for survey and given that waste crime picked up momentum

during COVID with the closure of landfills and transfer stations to the general public, meant waste investigations were compromised and there was an explosion of people getting rid of unwanted items during lockdown. The problem was further accelerated with an increase in the landfill levy in July (from $65.90 to $105.95 per tonne), which has resulted in commercial dumping reaching ‘epidemic’ proportions.

“We’re now seeing dumping activity extending into regional Vic where ‘crazy’ volumes of waste are being abandoned in national parks and forests, putting our environment, waterways and wildlife at risk,” he said. “What is even more alarming is how brazen offending has become.

It’s no longer happens under cover of darkness but in daylight for all to see. People do it because they know they can get away with it.”

Asked what the key barriers are to managing the issue, respondents said it is the sheer scale of dumping coupled with inadequate enforcement.

“Typically, councils have an average of five staff working in enforcement, but their time is divided across all areas of enforcement.

Collectively these officers spend little more than 1.2 days per week managing illegal waste.

“However, the average council is expected to monitor, manage and respond to around 11 incidents and

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

call-outs each and every day.”

Asked what can be done to fix the problem, survey respondents say there is an urgent need for the State Government and the EPA to truly throw their support behind councils, rather than cutting them loose and leaving them to manage the waste crime problem alone.

“We would like the State Government and EPA to develop and fund state-wide anti-litter education campaigns, encourage the sharing of intelligence between councils, finance officer training and create more effective enforcement procedures and processes,” said one respondent.

“Currently, much of this activity is being done on an ad hoc basis, with councils expected to manage these processes themselves... something regional and smaller councils can ill afford to do.” iw

Aussie Skips Recycling convicted of contravening two conditions of an environment protection licence by a person On 11 November 2021, Aussie Skips Recycling Pty Ltd (Aussie Skips) was convicted by the Local Court of six offences against s 64(1) of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (the Act) for contravening two conditions of its environment protection licence.

Aussie Skips holds an environment protection licence (EPL), which includes a condition to ensure that waste is not piled higher than the bunker walls in which the waste is contained at their Greenacre premises (condition O3.6) and also previously included a condition that limited the amount of waste permitted on site at any one time to 4,000 tonnes (condition L3.2). The EPA conducted an inspection on 7 July 2020 and observed that waste was being piled higher than the stockpile bunkers in 3 out of 4 total bunkers. Subsequent investigation revealed that Aussie Skips stored more material on site than was permitted on 4 July 2020 (4483.62 tonnes), 6 July 2020 (5190.10 tonnes) and 7 July 2020 (5726.48 tonnes). The EPA prosecuted Aussie Skips and on 11 November 2021, the Local Court convicted Aussie Skips of six offences against s 64(1) of the Act and ordered it to: 1. Pay a fine for breaching condition L3.2 as follows: a) For the breach on 4 July 2020 (being 4483.63 t) a fine of $1,500; b) For the breach on 6 July 2021 (being 5190.10 t) a fine of $3,000; c) For the breach on 7 July 2021 (being 5726.48 t) a fine of $3,000; 2. Pursuant to section 10A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, no fine or further penalty was imposed for breaching condition O3.6; 3. Pay a 50% share of these fines to the EPA; 4. Pay the EPA’s legal costs; and 5. Publish this notice at its own expense.

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

9

// News

ALGA welcomes government move on circular economy THE Federal Government’s pledge to increase the recycling of waste plastic, glass, paper, and other products has been welcomed by the Australian Local Government Association (ALGA).

The Remade in Australia recycling initiative includes a renewed focus on improving recovery rates by getting consumers to buy more products made from recycled materials.

Remade in Australia builds on existing Commonwealth measures to achieve an 80 per cent average recovery rate from all waste streams by 2030.

ALGA president, Linda Scott, said that to meet this ambitious target, the amount of waste diverted from landfills will have to rise from the current 43.5 million tonnes to at least 58 million tonnes, an increase of about 35 per cent.

“This will require the Commonwealth to exert a greater leadership role

focused on appropriate policy settings, incentives for business and innovators, and continued support for local government.

“Our 537 councils do all the heavy lifting when it comes to collecting, sorting, and recycling municipal waste.

We partner with industry to improve materials recovery rates, and we help educate households to become more aware of recycling and about minimising food waste. These new commitments by the...Government will support this work that is directed at accelerating Australia’s transition to a circular economy,” Scott said.

A recent report by consulting group PwC said that designing out waste and ensuring that products and resources are kept their highest utility and value will deliver a nearly $2 trillion boost to the economy over the next 20 years.

According to Scott, local governments

are well placed to lead the transition to a circular economy and to help identify and implement front-line solutions in that journey.

“The Shoalhaven City Council, for example, is investing in technology that sorts red bin contents and recycles 90 per cent, leaving just 10 per cent for disposal. In the Northern Rivers region of NSW, the Tweed Shire Council recently opened a state-of-the-art organic recycling facility.

“This can process 25,000 tonnes of food and garden organics annually, with the compost soon to be made available to households, farmers, and businesses as well as being used on councilmaintained parks and gardens. We need to facilitate more enterprises like this at the local and regional levels. That is why ALGA is calling on the next federal government to provide funding of $100 million per annum over four years to

A proud Australian-owned family business, Garwood International has been at the forefront of specialised waste collection & compaction equipment design and manufacture for over 45 years, providing high quality, innovation equipment solutions to meet the needs of even the most challenging operating environments.

• Rear, Side & Front Loading compaction units • Single and split-body collection vehicles from 4m2 to 33.5m2 • VWS Enviroweigh bin weighing equipment for refuse vehicles

The ALGA’s Linda Scott.

fund local government circular waste innovation projects,” Scott said.

Scott said that councils, particularly in rural, regional and remote areas, also need sustainable funding to help them address barriers to greater recycling such as thin markets, lack of infrastructure, and high transport costs. iw

AUSSIE! AUSSIE! AUSSIE! DESIGNED & BUILT

OWNED

TOUGH

AVAILABLE EXCLUSIVELY FROM:

NSW, ACT & WA Tony Miller 0429 444 451 tony@garwoodinternational.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

VIC, TAS & SA Ian Pinney 0409 905 451 ian@garwoodinternational.com.au

www.garwoodinternational.com.au

QLD & NT Daniel McHugh 0407 789 370 daniel@garwoodinternational.com.au

NEW ZEALAND Andrew Schoer 0413 751 292 andrew@garwoodinternational.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

11

News //

Waste industry finds lack of exemptions frustrating as NSW government dithers

The NSW government is yet to give quarantine exemptions to waste workers.

“THE waste and recycling sector needs to be included in the definition of critical workers for all purposes, especially the current NSW Public Health Orders for Covid-19 quarantine exemptions as close contacts.”

So says Tony Khoury, the executive director of the NSW Waste Contractors & Recyclers Association (WCRA).

Speaking to Inside Waste, Khoury said there are many issues that need to be tackled with regards to exemptions for the waste industry, which are not being sufficiently addressed by the NSW government.

“Our industry provides a critical and essential service and if all waste is not collected in a timely manner, there will be potential health, hygiene and sanitary impacts,” he said.

“These impacts will potentially be felt across all parts of NSW as the WCRA’s members provide services across all of the 128 NSW local government areas.”

According to Khoury, many members have reported staff shortages of 20 to 30 per cent, which is mainly due to drivers and waste facility workers being close contacts and having to isolate for seven days.

12

“Waste and recycling collection services are falling behind, and finding appropriately trained replacement drivers in this environment is just not possible,” said Khoury. “Many staff are also doing extra shifts, including weekends, to cover those that are off quarantining, adding extra stress.

“This is not sustainable and will likely lead to unsafe fatigue management outcomes, along with health and hygiene issues. We also require urgent access to Rapid Antigen Test (RAT) kits.”

In response to a query by Inside Waste as to why the exemptions hadn’t been extended to the industry, a statement from a spokesperson from the media Department of the Premier and Cabinet didn’t clarify the situation and appears exemptions will not be happening any time soon.

“The NSW Government is committed to protecting the health, safety and wellbeing of the public,” the statement said.

“We recently responded to the significant strain on our food manufacturing and distribution networks by exempting asymptomatic

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

people who are household contacts from the seven day isolation period.

“Workers will only be eligible to leave self-isolation if their employer determines that their absence from the workplace poses a high risk of disruption to the delivery of critical services or activities linked to agriculture, food manufacturing or food distribution.

“These workers must wear a mask and comply with riskmanagement strategies put in place by their employer, including daily Rapid Antigen Tests.

“This allows us to bring more certainty to food distribution, food manufacturing and supply chains to make sure that supermarkets can continue to function.

“The arrangement is also in place for emergency services workers who are necessary for the delivery of critical services and who cannot work from home, as well as critical healthcare workers.

“The NSW Government will continue to adapt to the conditions before us. We are in consistent dialogue with industry and will put in place

exemptions to other sectors as and if required.”

WMRR is also not happy about the lack of exemptions. While it supports the national plan to review quarantine and isolation rules for essential workers, it calls on both the Prime Minister and state premiers to ensure that frontline workers in the WARR industry are also included in all isolation and quarantine exemptions so they can keep collecting material and avoid another type of public health crisis.

“The collection, transport, and processing of waste are essential to protecting community and environmental health. At the moment, a third of our frontline workers are out of action due to the closed contact quarantine rules, which risks services being ground to a halt.

If this were to happen, Australia will face significant environmental and hygiene issues,” WMRR CEO, Gayle Sloan, said.

Sloan said that the industry is finding alternatives, including running limited services on weekends, but this is only a short-term and unsustainable measure given the forecasted continuation of staff shortages. As federal discussions continue, the industry is urgently seeking exemptions for frontline waste workers and it asks that the Prime Minister include in his definition of essential, those that provide WARR collection and transportation services across retail, clinical, and kerbside settings.

“The WARR industry is an essential sector that provides vital services to communities and businesses,” said Sloan. “The same flexibility that is safely awarded to other essential industries must also be provided to frontline WARR workers. This extends to priority supply of rapid antigen tests to ensure that WARR services can continue in a safe and sustainable way to mitigate any risk on the health and safety of communities across Australia.

“We call on all levels of government to work with us to ensure the continued safe provision of our essential service to the community.” iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

TOMORROW’S SOLUTIONS. TODAY

News //

Plastics recycling market to be worth $65 billion by 2026 A report by Global Industry Analysts (GIA) projects that the global plastics recycling market will be worth US$47 billion in five years’ time. According to the report, growth in the global market is being driven by ongoing efforts toward environmental sustainability, prompting industries to focus on plastic recycling.

One factor boosting the market is the availability of advanced plastic waste management technologies.

There is growing government support in countries such as India, China, Southeast Asia, Brazil and European nations to promote the use of recyclable plastic products augurs well for the market. In this regard, several countries have announced legislation to restrict single-use plastics to reduce their environmental impact.

For instance, China has banned the use of non-recyclable plastic in

Currently the global plastic recycling market is worth just over $46 billion.

metropolitan cities in 2020, which is expected to be expanded throughout the country by 2022.

Amid the COVID-19 crisis, the global market for plastic recycling estimated at $46 billion in the year

2020, is projected to reach a revised size of $65 billion by 2026, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.1 per cent over the analysis period. PET (Polyethylene terephthalate), one of the segments

analysed in the report, is projected to grow at a 6.9 per cent CAGR to reach US$15.5 billion by the end of the analysis period.

After a thorough analysis of the business implications of the pandemic and its induced economic crisis, growth in the HDPE segment is readjusted to a revised 5.9 per cent CAGR for the next seven-year period.

This segment currently accounts for a 19.6 per cent share of the global plastics recycling market. PET is the dominant segment due to its widespread usage in applications such as food packaging and bottling.

Recycled PET has replaced virgin PET in manufacturing packaging bottles due to regulations by many governments. Recycled PET is also used in manufacturing furniture, fibres and carpets, which boosts the market further. iw

MANUFACTURERS OF WASTE EQUIPMENT

Astech Group manufactures quality steel bins of all types for the waste and recycling industries.

We also manufacture plastic waste bin lids, supply heavy duty caster wheels for mounting under the bins and produce multicoloured stickers for application to the bins, waste industry vehicles and many other applications. Focusing on quality and personal service since our commencement in 2009 has enabled us to become one of the leading suppliers of steel waste bins in Australia.

sales@astechgroup.com.au CALL US FOR A QUOTE 1300 137 109 SCAN QR TO HEAD ONLINE AND VIEW OUR PRODUCT RANGE

14

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

THE BENCHMARK COMPANY FOR

Scan me to learn more

News //

Our Kitchen Caddies are manufactured in Australia from up to 100% Post-Consumer Recycled Content

Queensland starts process into independent EPA Currently, the DES manages and monitors Queensland’s environmental risks.

We are using bottles and food packaging items discarded by Australian Families, predominantly in Council Roadside Yellow bins, to make our products.

ct

It’s just one of the ways we are working towards a more sustainable, circular economy.

Learn more at w w w . s o u r c e s e p a r a t i o n s y s tem s . c o m . a u

16

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

QUEENSLAND’S state government has begun public consultation on the establishment of an independent environmental regulator for the state. It was part of the government’s election commitment when it was re-elected in 2020.

Environment Minister, Meaghan Scanlon, said the launch of public consultation into the formation of an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was an important election commitment.

“We made an election commitment to investigate and consult on the establishment of an independent Environmental Protection Agency to protect our environment, provide greater investment certainty, and support economic recovery,” Minister Scanlon said.

“Queensland is the only state in Australia without an external independent EPA. “We want to hear from Queenslanders about what they think when it comes to an environmental protection agency.

“The survey is quick and easy

and open to all Queenslanders who have a view on environmental protection. Submissions will be used to inform future decisions around a potential independent EPA. “The survey has eight questions and takes around five minutes to complete and will close in February 2022.”

The survey and summary form part of a broader program of consultation the Department is conducting between November and March.

The role of Queensland’s environmental regulator is currently undertaken by the Queensland Government Department of Environment and Science (DES).

In this role, DES manages and monitors environmental risk through a range of assessment, compliance, investigation and enforcement activities. To ensure compliance with legislation, the department monitors compliance, rewards good performers, conducts educational programs and responds to breaches with enforcement action. iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

WWF happy about consultation on polluting plastics WWF-Australia has welcomed the launch of a public consultation that could lead to harmful single-use plastics, such as takeaway coffee cups and heavyweight shopping bags, being banned in Queensland.

The Queensland Government is seeking feedback from the community and stakeholders on the next tranche of plastics to be phased out.

Items being considered include coffee cups and lids, plastic drinking cups, dome lids like those used on milkshakes, plastic wrapping on magazines or newspapers, fruit and vegetable produce bags, expanded polystyrene meat trays, balloon sticks and closures, and bread bag tags.

“We’re pleased to see Queensland considering action on so many problematic plastics,” said Kate Noble, WWF-Australia’s No Plastics in nature policy manager. “There’s a huge amount of public support for getting rid of the plastics that we don’t need and that do the most damage to our beautiful beaches and marine wildlife.

“Plastic drinking cups, lids and produce bags are often discarded after

a single-use and end up leaking into our environment where they stay for hundreds of years. There are viable, sustainable alternatives to these items, so there’s no reason to delay action.

“We’re pleased to see expanded polystyrene trays on the hit list this time. Expanded polystyrene is particularly dangerous, as it can break down and flow into our oceans in billions of bite-sized pieces.”

Noble also called for the Queensland Government to review other polluting plastics.

“Helium balloon releases, plastic takeaway containers, and cigarette filters should all be up for discussion to be banned in Queensland and around the country,” she said. “Most cigarette filters are made of plastic.

Cigarette butts are consistently the most littered item in Australia, but they continue to fall through the cracks when it comes to plastics policy.

If we want to Regenerate Australia and build a more sustainable future, we need to tackle the products and processes that pollute our wild places and threaten our wildlife.” iw

NO DOWNTIME FLOORING Heavy duty floor topping & repair system for waste handling sites > Leachate Resistant > Industrial Strength > High Impact Rating > Rapid Cure Times > Joint Repairs Call us for more information

While the WWF welcomes the Queensland Government’s consultation process on single-use plastics, it would like more items on the banned list.

AS/NZS 4801

02 8840 8888

enquiries@ascoatings.com.au | www.ascoatings.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

17

News //

Repatriation of radioactive waste underway AUSTRALIA’S nuclear agency ANSTO is continuing to lead planning efforts to repatriate what is called a TN-81 cask of intermediate-level radioactive from the United Kingdom in 2022. One hundred and fourteen spent fuel rods from the old HIFAR nuclear reactor were sent to the UK for reprocessing in a shipment in 1996.

In line with contracts and international best practice, as the country which produced the radioactive waste, Australia will manage it now that reprocessing has been completed.

As confirmed on July 17, 2021, the residual waste from reprocessing will return for temporary storage in ANSTO’s Interim Waste Store until it can be moved to the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility.

The update from ANSTO coincides with an update from the UK authorities, who are managing the

export project. Detailed operational planning is underway with NSW, Federal and international partners. Several regulatory approvals have now been achieved, including EPBC, ARPANSA and AMSA approvals. This includes a licence amendment which permits ANSTO to temporarily store this TN-81 cask alongside another which returned from France in 2015. Both TN-81 casks, along with other radioactive waste at Lucas Heights and at more than 100 other locations around the country, will eventually be consolidated at the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility.

ANSTO has welcomed the recent steps towards the delivery of the national facility, including: • Passing of the supporting legislation for the facility through the Federal Parliament.

• Acquisition of land for the facility

near Kimba in South Australia • T he appointment of a CEO for the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency, which will manage the facility.

“For decades, Australians have benefited from nuclear medicine, and environmental, industrial and minerals research undertaken at Lucas Heights,” said ANSTO’s chief nuclear officer, Hef Griffiths. “Those benefits include production of millions of doses of nuclear medicine; increased profitability of our mining industry; and irradiation of silicon used from fast trains to hybrid cars.

“Along with these benefits comes a responsibility for Australia to safely deal with the by-products including radioactive waste, and ANSTO has the skills and capability to assist.”

ANSTO’s group executive for Nuclear Operations and Nuclear Medicine Pamela Naidoo-Ameglio said that this

will be a routine and safe operation.

“This will be the second repatriation project and twelfth successful transport of spent fuel or reprocessed waste which ANSTO has carried out since 1963,” said Naidoo-Ameglio.

TN-81 transport and storage casks are used for transports around the world – usually with larger volumes of waste with higher levels of radioactivity. The forged steel cask is 6.5m long and 3m in diameter, with walls more than 20cm thick. It weighs 100 tonnes when empty. It is designed to withstand a drop of 9m, temperatures above 800 degrees Celsius, an earthquake or a jet plane strike. The cask which returns in 2022 has capacity for 28 x 500kg cannisters but will only contain four with a radiological equivalence to the spent fuel sent to the UK in the shipment in 1996. iw

Europe mixed plastic waste supply to further tighten Chemical recyclers are switching away from rigid and mixed-rigid/flexible grades of mixed polyolefins.

THE European mixed plastic waste market is expected to further tighten in 2022 amid growing use of mixedpolyolefins grades by mechanical recyclers and increased use of refuse derived fuel (RDF)-suitable reject bales by pyrolysis-based chemical recyclers, according to Mark Victory, senior recycling editor at ICIS. Mechanical recyclers are increasingly exploring the use of mixed-polyolefins waste as a feedstock, amid record 18

high recycled polyethylene (R-PE) and recycled polypropylene (R-PP) pellet prices and structural shortages of mono-sorted R-PE and R-PP waste.

“New sorting capacity from waste managers and recyclers targeting the use of mixed-polyolefins waste, is due to come on stream in 2022,” according to Victory.

Single-material bale prices surge With sharp increases in singlematerial bale prices across 2021, ongoing structural shortages, developments in sorting technologies, and firm recycled high-density polyethylene (R-HDPE) and R-PP pellet values (currently at record highs in Europe), using mixed polyolefins waste as an input has become economically viable.

Northwest Europe (NWE) postconsumer mixed coloured high density polyethylene (HDPE) bale prices increased by 393 per cent on average in 2021. NWE PP post-consumer mixed-coloured bale increased by 182 per cent on average in 2021. NWE colourless post-consumer polyethylene

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

terephthalate (PET) bottle bale values increased by 131 per cent on average in 2021.

Increasingly, waste managers and mechanical recyclers are looking to extract the usable polyolefins from mixed-polyolefins bales, leaving an RDF-suitable reject bale that can then potentially be sold onwards into the chemical recycling or RDF sector. RDF reject bales are currently selling at positive values.

Mixed-polyolefins bale availability is expected to further tighten in 2022, particularly in France as a result of new mechanical recycling sorting and treatment capacity expected to come on stream in the first quarter of 2022.

High prices for mixed-polyolefins fractions and the desire to avoid competing with mechanical recyclers has meant that pyrolysis-based chemical recyclers are increasingly switching away from rigid and mixed-rigid/flexible grades of mixed polyolefins.

Historically, mixed polyolefins have been the preferred feedstock

choice for pyrolysis-based chemical recyclers because of the need to limit PET (which oxidises, and does not depolymerise via pyrolysis), chlorine (which is corrosive), nylon and flame retardants content in its input material.

Although 2021 saw northwest European RDF reject bales trading in positive territory for the first time, in some other European territories, such as Scandinavia and the Netherlands, prices continue to trade in negative territory, although this is expected to change as chemical recycling demand scales up in 2022.

There is currently 364,000 tonnes/ year of operational chemical recycling capacity in Europe, of which 218,000 tonnes/year (or 60 per cent) is pyrolysis based, data from the ICIS Chemical Recycling Supply tracker shows.

With new chemical recycling plant volumes frequently being announced, this volume is expected to increase in the coming years, even as the majority of plants remain at pilot or lab scale. iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

Remondis set to go on expansion spree REMONDIS sees 2022 as a year of expansion as it plans to increase its footprint in Australia and become one of the nation’s leading recycling and water management operators off the back of global industry acquisition activity. As a result, Remondis is able to offer its existing and new customers from the B2G, B2B and B2C sectors a wider range of services.

Amidst Veolia acquiring Suez, Veolia provided the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) with enforceable undertakings to divest key commercial, industrial and medical waste businesses and assets across Sydney, Adelaide and Perth to address specific concerns of the ACCC. In that context, Remondis has entered into binding commitments to acquire various local Veolia and Suez businesses, assets and customers, including:

• V eolia’s Jandakot Commercial & Industrial Collections Business • Suez’ Wingfield Commercial & Industrial Collections Business • Suez’ Wingfield Medical Waste Business • Suez’ Seven Hills Transfer Station • Selected National Commercial & Industrial Customer contracts as set out in the Undertakings The arrangements would see all Veolia and Suez staff transfer to Remondis, who will be warmly welcomed by the Remondis team. The acquisitions are subject to strict conditions set out in the Undertakings, including completion of the global Veolia-Suez merger and the appointment of an independent manager and auditor to ensure smooth ownership transfers and compliance with the Undertakings. Remondis is hopeful the acquisition process will be completed as soon as possible.

Financial aspects of the acquisitions are commercial in confidence.

The arrangements would see Remondis establish a presence in South Australia as well as strengthen Remondis’ footprint in Western Australia, New South Wales and other states across the country. This acquisition is in line with Remondis’ intention to increase investment in the areas of water, recycling and services in Australia and New Zealand. In keeping with its strategy of closing the loop, Remondis focuses on recycling and recovering commodities from residual waste. Furthermore, Remondis contributes its knowledge in the field of energy from waste.

“If completed, the acquisitions would be one of the most significant commercial milestones for Remondis since entering the Australian market nearly forty years ago,” Remondis

Remondis Australian CEO Björn Becker.

Australia CEO Björn Becker said.

“The decision by the ACCC to boost competitive tension by ensuring these businesses were offered to a third waste management operator is welcome.

It’s a win for everyone who relies on cost-efficient and environmentallysustainable waste management and recycling services, in line with international best practice.” iw

Waste Transportation Optimisation If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it Payload Optimisation Efficient and accurate weighing of bin contents that combines

Call us on 1300 069 970

weighing with bin collection, eliminating the need to weigh bin content separately.

Legal-for-trade Suitable For Front, Rear, and Side-lift Loaders Provides high and low-resolution load ranges from up to 4000kg, determined by manufacturer’s bin lifter capacities.

Fully-automated Weighing Process Your drivers will receive a fully-automated weighing process with no delay to the tipping cycle, an RFID interface, and data logging to third party data management systems.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

19

News //

Ecoloop gets accredited under the Product Stewardship Scheme ECOLOOP, Fairview’s aluminium cladding scheme and Australia’s first Aluminium Composite Panel (ACP) recycling solution for recladding waste, has been accredited under the Australian Government Voluntary Product Stewardship Scheme. The announcement was made by Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management, Trevor Evans, as Ecoloop also opened its new $1.6m recycling facility in Lithgow.

Evans welcomed the accreditation of Fairview’s Ecoloop scheme under the federal government’s product stewardship arrangements, which demonstrates that the scheme is credible, effective and aligns with circular economy principles.

“The Ecoloop scheme is great news for Australia’s construction and demolition companies searching for sustainable ways to do business.

Ecoloop makes it easy for builders, councils, developers, owners, corporations and strata managers to take a sustainable path with problem cladding and recycle it into new products.

“Notably, Ecoloop is one of only a handful of product stewardship schemes accredited by the federal government, and the only one administered by a business. It is a significant tick of approval for Fairview and their strong environmental credentials.”

Product stewardship is an approach to managing the negative environmental impacts of products and materials throughout their life, from design, manufacture, and production to disposal.

Fairview’s aluminium cladding scheme is one of only five organisations that have been accredited under the Scheme.

“Whilst rectification of ACPs across Australia continues to move ahead as a matter of priority, these projects have unfortunately created another problem, more landfill,” said Melissa Herrmann, Fairview’s industry engagement manager.

“We have worked tirelessly to change industry processes and mindsets to divert thousands of tonnes of reclaimable materials from ending up in landfill.

“Receiving the Product Stewardship accreditation is a fantastic accomplishment for everyone at Fairview – and more importantly, will keep waste out of landfills and give these materials another life as new fit-for- purpose products.”

Currently, the recommendation for cladding waste is directed to landfill, with a small percentage being exported as scrap metal.

Ecoloop’s process diverts 100 per cent of ACP waste from landfill, facilitating the recovery of a product that, until now, did not have a viable method available to separate the components of ACP for recycling and reuse.

To achieve accreditation, Fairview underwent an extensive process with the Commonwealth Government to review its technology and met the Product Stewardship Scheme’s rigorous criteria. As a manufacturer and supplier of cladding, the Ecoloop initiative allowed Fairview to execute an end-of-life strategy for Fairview products and other like- products. In line with the National Waste Policy

Action Plan, Ecoloop’s recycling process continues to: • Stimulate demand for recycled materials relative to virgin materials (their waste will become recycled feedstock for local manufacturers); • Support domestic jobs and industries by retaining the value of recycled materials (the Ecoloop facility is located in Lithgow, NSW, and all components recovered are sent to local industry partners); • Encourage economy-wide behaviour change (especially in the building and construction industry where a local recycling solution for ACP waste was not previously available).

“Recycling materials coming from the rectification process has many benefits and is a step towards circularity in construction. We are pleased our approach has been formally recognised by the Australian Governments Voluntary Product Stewardship Scheme. We welcome others within the industry to join us and change the way we view waste,” Herrmann said. iw

SA seeks consultation on more plastic bans A range of different single-use plastic items such as cups, plates and bowls could be next on the list of banned items under SA Government’s singleuse plastic ban, with the release of a new discussion paper.

The Turning the Tide 2021 discussion paper seeks community and business views on whether a further range of single-use plastic products should be banned.

On 1 March 2021 South Australia became the first state in Australia to ban plastic drinking straws, stirrers and cutlery from sale, supply or distribution. Under the next milestone of South Australia’s singleuse plastic ban on 1 March 2022, 20

expanded polystyrene cups, bowls, plates and clam-shell containers, and oxo-degradable plastic products will be banned.

Minister for Environment and Water David Speirs, who launched Turning the Tide 2021 at one of the state’s official ‘Plastic Free Champions’ – the SA Aquatic Centre, said the new discussion paper looks at what other single-use plastic items could be phased out in the future.

“I am proud to have led South Australia to become the first state in the country to ban single-use plastics such as straws, stirrers and cutlery but the Marshall Liberal Government isn’t stopping there,” Minister Speirs said.

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

“We have always said we are ambitious for our legislation and as of March 2022 the next round of items such as polystyrene ‘clamshell’ containers and oxo-degradable products will also be banned.

“The South Australian public, businesses and industry have embraced these changes, quickly adapting and adjusting to alternatives but we want to bring them along on the journey.

“We now invite South Australians to be part of the process to decide which single-use plastics we tackle next.

The discussion paper outlines plastics items the public could consider, such as coffee cups, plastic bowls and

plates but we want to hear from the community. Importantly we won’t be banning any items unless there are readily available alternatives.

“Our plastic ban isn’t just good for the environment – by being a first mover nationally we’ve already seen businesses who manufacture re-useable and compostable alternatives start to set up in South Australia, which means we are seeing significant economic benefits and the creation of local jobs.

“Our legislation has been developed with the help of our Single-Use Plastics Taskforce which has representation from 15 different organisations, including people living with a disability.” iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// News

New tyre recycling plant opens in Erskine Park NSW FEDERAL Minister for the Environment Sussan Ley has unveilled Australia’s largest tyre recycling plant at Erskine Park in Western Sydney.

As the first of its kind commissioned in Australia, the launch of the new $10 million state-of-the-art facility follows the December 1 introduction of the COAG waste ban on the export of wholebaled tyres.

Tyrecycle CEO Jim Fairweather says the plant will be able to sustainably process the tens of thousands of tonnes of tyre waste that was previously being sent offshore to poor environmental outcomes. The plant will be using world leading technology to transform waste tyres into quality products for re-use, including tyre-derived fuel and rubber crumb for use in roads, tile adhesive and sporting surfaces.

The plant has the capacity to produce 10,000 tonnes of rubber crumb and

generate 40,000 tonnes of Tyre Derived Fuel (TDF).

“It reflects a significant step forward in Australia responsibly dealing with its own tyre waste, driving strong environmental and economic outcomes,” Fairweather said.

Construction of the plant was supported by a $1.5 million grant for phase 1 and a further $2.9 million for phase 2 from the Recycling Modernisation Fund, as part of the transformation of Australia’s waste and recycling capacity. Tyrecycle, the tyre recycling business of resource recovery and remanufacturing firm ResourceCo, operates seven tyre recycling plants across Australia. As well as continued consumer education, Fairweather said it’s vital that governments, industry bodies and the private sector work together to actively pursue and develop new domestic and international markets

The new plant has the capacity to produce 40,000 tonnes of TDF.

for tyre-derived materials.

“We see huge growth potential in the use of rubber crumb in road construction, but it needs to be supported by bold procurement commitments from all levels of government. Trials have already demonstrated improved grip and braking distances, reduced noise levels and

reduced whole-of-life costs. While the use of TDF in Australia, as an alternative fuel source for industrial applications such as cement plants and pulp mill sectors, still remains relatively untapped. There’s work to be done but the opportunities are there, particularly as companies look to support greener supply chains,” he said. iw

EQUIPMENT FOR

TYRE RECYCLING Easy maintenance Low wear costs

www .el da

High capacity

InsideWaste_1i2_215x150_211221.indd 1

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

ling.com c y rec n

21-12-2021 08:53:51

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

21

news

WMRR: Circuit | Baulkham Hills 2037 NSW 2135 t: 02 8746 5000 | e: info@wmrr.asn.au | w: www.wmrr.asn.au WMRR:Suite Suite4.08 4.08| 10 | 57Century St Johns Road | Glebe NSW | t: 02| 8746 5000 | e: info@wmrr.asn.au | w: www.wmrr.asn.au

From Fromthe theCEO’s CEO’sdesk desk Environment Ministers will meet for the 2022 is now upon us and while I had hoped thatsecond we time year onsome 7 December, following the wouldthis be reaching sense of normality with thefirst 2018 of Environment end ofMeeting the COVID-19 pandemic, theMinisters reality is, (MEM) Omicronin April, which was in part a response to the import continues to cause challenges across Australia. The restrictions driven by China’s National Sword surge in cases has had an impact on staffing levels Policy and the effects this policy has had across across all industries, including the waste sector. These the Australian waste and resource recovery (WARR) issues, and in particular how jurisdictions are dealing industry. decisions from MEM with them,Key highlight two derived challenges thatthe ourApril industry include: continues to face, pandemic or not: the lack of policy and regulatory consistency across jurisdictions, and •the Reducing waste generation, endorsing a target lack of understanding by (some) governments of of 100% of Australian packaging being recyclable, the essential nature of our sector and how integral compostable or reusable 2025, and developing it is to Australia’s economic by supply chains.

There targets for recycled content in packaging. are many examples throughout COVID-19 of inconsistent policy application across • Increasing Australia’s domestic recycling Australia, most recently seen in the numbercapacity. of states that have moved away from an • Increasing the demand for recycled products. approach discussed in 2020 by jurisdictions on how COVID-19-infected waste should • Exploring opportunities to advance waste-to-energy waste-to-biofuels. be consistently managed and classified.

This departure isand causing challenges with • Updating the 2009 Waste in Strategy by year include circular managing volumes, resulting the clinical supplyend, chainwhich being will tested. economy principles.

Further, we understand that the federal government is working on a national plan to review quarantine and isolation rules for essential workers to combat chronic staff It is time to take examinebywhat hashowever, been achieved sincedoes these shortages.

This stock move and is supported WMRR; our industry notdecisions appear were announced.

Now, seven (7) months may not seem like a long time, however to have been considered in the changes to-date for critical industries and retail in despite that time we have seen further close (Malaysia, Indonesia, playing an integral role inmarkets the supply chains of these industries.Vietnam) and if you are an operator under continued financial stress, seven (7) months National consistency has always been a challenge for Australia, despite us could make break you. and one economic market with numerous businesses (within beingorone country our industry and beyond) operating on a national level. Over the past few years, Following the April MEM, weemerging have had (3) states step inthewith varying we have noticed green shoots for three our sector.

This includes federal degrees of financial assistance for industry (councils and operators).

This should government stepping up its involvement with the launch of a new National Waste beAction expected considering almost all states (except Queensland and Tasmania) Plan in 2018, which aims to pursue collaborative strategies to deal with have access to significant waste income Environment each year. OnMinisters the eastern seaboard, emerging WARR issues, to levy the ongoing Meetings (ENM)Victoria that has approximately $600 million in waste levy reserves in the Sustainability Fund has kept our industry on the agenda. Then there is the Prime Minister’s continued and NSW raises more than $700 million per annum from the waste levy.

There emphasis of WARR as seen in ongoing funding through the Recycling Modernisationis certainly no lackSoils of funds be reinvested into our essential Fund, Healthy Fund,that and can Manufacturing Modernisation Initiative.industry.

While these actions are applauded, to forge ahead we need this approach to focus Funding helps but as national we know, the money goesthat a much longer way with on creating consistent regulatory frameworks can then be replicated Government support and leadership, as well as appropriate policy levers. by state and territory governments. Our essential industry appreciates the funding support and opportunities to partner with government; however, in being one of VICTORIA the most regulated industries in Australia, the lack of regulatory consistency and Victoria has arguably beenwill thehold most andmaximising earnest in supporting the industry common-sense approach us active back from what this once-in-apost-China, with two (2) relief packages announced to support the recycling lifetime funding can deliver for industry, the community and the environment. industry, valuedat atall a total million.

The Victorian Government has also gone Government levelsofin$37 2022 must prioritise working with us to develop above beyondrobust, all others by announcing would take a leadership clear,and consistent, andstates common-sense policies itand regulations in various role in areas. creating market demand for recycled products.

This includes planning, end of waste management to resource recover with certainty the valuable secondary raw material that we manage (at present, this is SOUTH AUSTRALIA done through General Environmental Duties in SA and Victoria, Resource Recovery Government announced a $12.4 millionresponsibility, support package comprising $2 million Orders in NSW, etc.), extended producer proximity principle, green of additional expenditure, $5 million additional funding for a loan scheme, government procurement – including mandated Australian recycled content together targets, with from the Greenhierarchy Industries budget. The Government has andtargeted codifyingfunding the waste management in SA all jurisdictions, including also offered grants for recycling infrastructure.

industry however the Queensland Government hascreating embarked on the sensible energy for waste policies. These challenges are barriers todevelopment industry of a wasteand management strategyand underpinned waste disposal levy to increase developing delivering solutions, they requirebya aconsistent national approach recycling and recovery and create new jobs.

The State will re-introduce a $70/ to drive growth and investment, which will lead to beneficial economic and tonne landfill levy in March 2019.

There are also strong attempts to use policy environmental outcomes, including jobs and carbon emissions mitigation. levers (levy discounts and exemptions) to incentivise the use of recycled material While we are slightly encouraged by the ongoing consideration by jurisdictions it cost their competitive with virgin material.

However, littletransition has been done to onand howmake to improve regulatory frameworks to enable a smoother establish new markets and Government has not taken the lead in procurement from waste to resource, in 2022, WMRR will press on with its call for allthe states of recycled material.

There are grants available for resource recovery operations and territories to adopt a General Environmental Duty model. This is fundamental Queensland although no monies been allocated assist in toinbeing able to create a circular economyhave where secondary raw to materials are2018. This is troublingWith as Queensland rolledstill outwithout its Container Scheme on 1weNovember, circulated. some jurisdictions such a Refund framework, how can which will likely impact the cost and revenue models of the State’s MRFs – as we possibly recover 80 per cent by 2030? have seen most recently in NSW. There also is a lack of practical solutions by governments to manage material across the supply chain, with some continuing to put too much emphasis on dealing WESTERN with materialsAUSTRALIA at end-of-life. Oftentimes, this linear approach has resulted in our The Government set up a Waste Taskforce direct response sector Western having toAustralian deal with the issues related to contamination (PFASinanyone?) that to the China National Sword.

As part of this announcement, the State Government should have been dealt with at the time of being placed on market (if not banned, urged allbe local councils the utilisation of afunded three (3)-bin system - red for there must a EPR schemetoforbegin managing at end-of-life, by producers). general waste, yellow forthe recyclables and green for organic - over the coming It is clear that we are on government’s radar, but they arewaste still coming reduce this taskforce is a step in the right toyears grips to with what contamination. our industry does.While Collection and disposal are valuable and direction, we are yet to see any tangible results from it or any funding for industry.

In October, important, but we do far more than that – we are essential to the smooth the WA Waste Authority released its draft Waste Strategy to 2030, which comprises running of the community and the environment, including public health. We are a comprehensive and detailed roadmap towards the State’s shared vision of remanufacturers, greenhouse gas managers, innovators, and we contribute to saving becoming a sustainable, low-waste, circular economy. the planet. Until governments take a holistic approach to material management and understand the flows in a system-based approach, as well as our role in supply COMMONWEALTH chains, and until they can move away from the current short-sighted view that Following MEMbein‘managed’ April, Australia now has athey newcannot Federal Environment industry mustthe simply and ‘regulated’, address planningMinister, Melissa Price, who in October reiterated to media MEM’s commitment to explore and infrastructure needs and proper policy responses, nor can they create a strong waste to energy as part of the solution to the impacts of China’s National national regulatory framework that will achieve the National Waste Policy targets. Sword, which is troublingincluding (EfW is not a solution recycling).

TheinCommonwealth has Some jurisdictions, SA and Victoria,to have led the way working also backed the Australian Recycling Label and endorsed the National Packaging with industry to improve WARR outcomes and WMRR will continue to build these Targets developed by theWe Australian Covenant Organisation partnerships across Australia. hope thatPackaging in 2022, governments recognise the (APCO), which has to date, failed to incorporate industry feedback the development essential nature and complexity of our industry, and develop policy in responses and of theseframeworks targets. To there hasto been significant regulatory thatthe drawCommonwealth’s all stakeholders incredit, the supply chain the table to coordination in reviewing the shift National Waste Policy, the Department of find productive ways to share costs, product design, and with drive greater reuse, Environment bringing together industry players and States during the review repair, recycling, and remanufacturing of products. Doing so will ensure we continue toprocess. move up the hierarchy across the nation and grow market demand for Australian recycled products. This year will be interesting, with Australians heading to the Thenationally, updated Policy go before Environment Ministers onmembers, 7 December. The polls in SA, will and now in Victoria.

WMRR, with the support of our Commonwealth can play a key role – one that goes beyond the development of the will continue to engage with all governments, inform policy conversations, and National Waste Policy.

WMAA is supportive of the Federal Government maximising lead the conversation on the benefits of an integrated WARR system as well as the the leversofit ahas, including taxation and importation powers, to maintain a strong, importance circular economy. sustainable waste resource recovery industry.

We look forward to and working with our members, whose input and support have been invaluable to cementing our position as the peak national body for our AHEADWARR OF MEM 2 Let’s strive to make 2022 the year where not only is our essential sector.

There may be movement Australia, with statesconsistent doing better industry’s value truly recognisedacross and acknowledged, thatsome nationally and than others, but the consensus is, progress is still taking way too long.

It is evident that robust policy and regimes are also put in place to maximise our value. there are funds available in almost all States to assist with developing secondary manufacturing however Gayle Sloan, Chiefinfrastructure, Executive Officer, WMRRthe only way that this will really happen is if there is government leadership around mandating recycled content in Australia now, not later.

NEW SOUTH WALES At first glance, New South Wales’ eye-watering $47 million recycling support package was heralded as the spark of hope industry needed. However, on closer inspection, the bulk of this package that was funded via the Waste Less, Recycle More initiative and therefore the waste levy, was not new, making it very difficult for stakeholders, including local government, to utilise the funds as they were already committed to other activities. Some of the criteria proposed by the NSW EPA also made it challenging for industry to apply to these grants. On the plus side, efforts are being made by the NSW Government to stimulate demand for recycled content through the intergovernmental agency working groups that have been established, though no tangible increase in demand or facilities have developed… Yet.

Voluntary schemes like the Used Packaging NEPM, under which APCO is auspiced, are not working. We have 1.6million tonnes of packaging waste in Australia, which needs to be used as an input back into packaging. Barriers to using recycled content in civil infrastructure must be identified and removed, and Government must lead in this field and prefer and purchase recycled material. A tax on virgin material should also be imposed as it is overseas. MEM must show strong leadership on this issue. Ministers have, since April, dealt directly with operators and councils that are under stress and we have a chance to create jobs and investment in Australia at a time when manufacturing is declining. Ministers have the opportunity to be leaders of today, not procrastinators – leaders of tomorrow and we are urging them to act and not just talk in December.

QUEENSLAND Unlike its neighbours, Queensland did not provide any financial support to

Gayle Sloan Chief Executive Officer

22

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Nuclear Waste //

Going nuclear on waste (Continued from front page) PITT said that all those criteria in terms of security and emergency response times will be met at Kimba, too. He also reiterates that the time for getting it done is now because it has been 40 years in the making and he doesn’t believe another 40 years is an option. But, why Kimba?

“In our view it has minimal risks against all the potential risks you would assess,” he said.

“Fundamentally, it has the majority of community support, the geology works, and it is in the right location.

For a little town like Kimba, the thing they are excited about is that it’ll drive local jobs and the economy, which will support them into the future. It’s taken 40 years for this to get off the ground. How much more time would people want us to keep on talking about it? ” Sweeney points out that there still needs to be a lot of consultation, not just with the locals, but also the traditional owners of the land,

the Barngarla people. Pitt is at pains to point out, that although the government has given the goahead for the facility to be built, there is still a long way to go before ground will be broken. There are a large number of approvals that still need to be obtained in terms of regulation and design. He said it is a complex piece of plant and each stage will be gone through cautiously because he wants to make sure ‘we get everything right’.

And the consultation with the Barngarla People?

“I met with them twice and we have made many attempts to have deeper consultation in terms of the work needed,” said Pitt. “We have tried many times to get engagement.

I’ve met with them personally, as has the previous minister, Matt Canavan. There is always going to be people opposed. You can never get 100 per cent agreement on pretty much anything. This is an essential facility. It is a national piece of

infrastructure, and we need it.

“While Native Title does not exist on the site, the Barngarla People will continue to be consulted on any matters of concern throughout the process of establishing this critically important piece of national infrastructure.”

That might be good news for the Barngarla People. The chair of The Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation, Jason Bilney, released a statement at the end of December 2021. It suggested, not only had they not had sufficient consultation about the facility, but the organisation has filed for a judicial review in the Federal Court against the decision.

“Barngarla have never been respected or engaged by this government at all in this process,” said Bilney. “After successfully winning native title after 21 years of fighting for our country, we were then excluded from the community ballot. The government

has continued to treat us unfairly, including not undertaking heritage assessments with us and abandoning the commitment to ‘broad community support’ at the last minute.

“We will continue to fight to protect and preserve our country, like we have always done, and make sure that the government’s failures are brought to light in the court.”

Sweeney believes the new facility doesn’t need to be built due to the government funding the expansion of the Lucas Heights facility to take on more nuclear waste.

Again, the answer is not black and white, with both Pitt and Sweeney disagreeing on what the best outcome can be.

“We have the Federal Government who committed at the last budget $60 million to upgrade extended storage [at Lucas Heights] and ANSTO and the public works committee reviewed that and signed off on it,” said Sweeney.

Sweeney believes more consultation is needed, especially with the local Barngarla People.

24

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Nuclear Waste

Minister of Resources and Water Keith Pitt.

“That, according to ANSTO, and a report from PwC, provides the capacity to have 40-50 years of secure storage capacity for ILW at the site.

“We believe the overarching question here is not, ‘where should the waste be?’, but how it should be managed and the particular question is, ‘what is the long-term management for ILW?’. This plan fails to advance or address that question and we think complicates that question by spending $350 million on a holding pattern that is suboptimal to the $60 million holding pattern that is currently in the pipeline.”

Pitt disagrees with the assessment

and says that the hierarchy at ANSTO also want the new facility at Kimba to be built.

“It is not correct to say the capacity will be increased for another 30+ years,” said Pitt. “ANSTO has advised that it has applied to build a new Intermediate Level Waste facility at Lucas Heights, which will give it about 10 years more waste capacity after an existing building reaches capacity in 2027.

“ANSTO has further advised that should the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility not be delivered, an additional two waste buildings will be required at Lucas Heights by the end of next decade alone. As ANSTO has said, it must be in the business of medicine production and supporting research, not diverting more space and more resources to long-term waste management.”

Sweeney said he is not surprised that ANSTO want the storage at another location. If he was in charge of the facility, he too, would want to move the responsibility of getting rid of the waste to another facility.

“One of the key drivers, from our perspective, is that ANSTO want to get the waste off their block and off their books,” he said. “I fully understand that. You clear a whole lot of surplus material – waste product – off your site, and you move the cost from your management issue to someone else’s. In this case the Australian

Iodine 131 (I-131) radioactive isotopes used for hyperthyroidism treatment are stored in lead boxes for safety.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Radioactive waste is currently stored at the Lucas Heights ANSTO facility in Southern Sydney.

Radioactive Waste Agency (ARWA), the new agency. It’s cost neutral, frees up room, gets some drums off the place; it’s a good result for ANSTO. But an organisational imperative should not be the primary driver of a national waste approach that is building Australia’s first dedicated national nuclear waste facility.”

After 40 years of waiting by various governments, Pitt believes they have got the location right, most of the community on board, and it is now time to move forward.

His main concern is getting the right people on board, the correct approvals and making sure the project will meet not only the regulatory standards, but the needs of Australia and the people in the South Australian community that will be most affected by the new plant.

“We have to go through the detailed design first. We have to go through a determination on procurement – design and construction etc. We also have to go through all of the regulatory requirements. That does take time,” he said.

“Whether that is EPBC (Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation), whether it is ANSTO, ARPANSA (Australian Radiation Protection And Nuclear Safety Agency) – we have to deal

with all the regulators. That is the reason I have started up ARWA, so we’ll have a specialist group. This will be their prime role in terms of getting the detailed design correct and all the different specs and looking after the facility in the future.”

Sweeney is passionate about the industry and believes that the matter is far from settled. He still believes the Lucas Heights expansion is the answer and is offering an olive branch – of sorts – to the government.

“There are many layers to this,” he said. “We are actually not that far away. We congratulated the government earlier this year on its decision to expand, fund and develop interim storage at Lucas Heights. That really is the way forward.

“We believe that is the circuit breaker that can turn 40 years of conflict into a decade that brings people together. Moves them from the trenches to the table and leads to a lasting and credible outcome.

Otherwise, we will have these fights consistently. This project is a long way from assured. It is a political decision, it faces contest – legal, political, parliamentary and ARPANSA scrutiny.

“It has a long way to go and we need to look at the long-term management questions.” iw FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

25

Waste to Energy //

WtE or landfill gas capture – is there room enough for both in the waste landscape?

(Continued from front page) TODAY, while those options are still on the table, there has been a shift in terms of 1) how it is burned and turned into energy and 2) how the side effects of landfill – in terms of end of life waste creating greenhouse gases – can be corralled into energy. With the former it is about turning waste into renewable and fossil energy via combusting residual waste, while the latter involves generating bioenergy from landfill gas capture.

At a recent webinar, as part of the online Waste Expo Australia, one of the featured conferences was titled Strategies for Innovating and Increasing the Sustainability of Australia’s Waste to Energy (WtE) Sector. There was an eclectic group of panellists who discussed the pros and cons of the various nuances of using WtE technology and where it sits on the Australian circular economy landscape.

Some championed one cause, while some the other, while yet others saw the benefit of both.

Angela Hoefnagels opened the seminar with a talk about how Victoria is approaching the situation.

Hoefnagels, the director of programs and high-risk waste for the Victorian Department of Environment, Land,

Water and Planning said the state is committed to supporting thermal WtE projects as she believes it will help with the advent of the circular economy – but there is a caveat.

“We need to have the right number and scale of facilities to the appropriate level of investment,” said Hoefnagels.

“For that reason, the policy puts a cap of one million tonnes a year on the amount of residual waste that can be sent to WtE facilities in Victoria.

“A couple of months ago we had several consultations with the WtE sector, local government, and community groups to talk about the way we might make this cap work in practice to achieve the government policy goals and to support the industry to invest.”

Hoefnagels pointed out that when it came to the cap, it only related to thermal WtE plant. In other words, it is about any process that uses heat to recover energy from waste and might be converted to steam, electricity or fuel, and includes such technologies as combustion, pyrolysis and gasification.

“We are not talking about incineration where there is a thermal process for waste that doesn’t recover energy. We are not talking about biological technologies like anerobic

Nairn said companies like LMS have a gas capture rate of more than 70 per cent.

26

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Tiana Nairn from LMS Energy.

Hitachi Zosen Inova’s Marc Stammbach.

digestion or landfill gas capture combustion. Those things are outside this cap framework that we are talking about,” she said.

There are some contentious issues surrounding WtE in terms of where it sits on the landscape. Tiana Nairn is the policy group manager for LMS Energy, a South Australian company operating in Australia, New Zealand and the USA, which specialises in capturing and converting biogas-to-energy. LMS has a horse in the race in terms of using the gas that comes from landfills to supply

energy. If WtE plants open up, then LMS will have competition. Nairn points out that although that is true, landfill gas capture does have its positives over WtE. “Across the nation, through increasing FOGO collections, Australians are seeking to have more clean streams of organics that can go to technologies such as anaerobic digestion. This is a great outcome – it captures the energy, nutrients and heat value of the material,” she said. “For our residual wastes, we are at our major landfills directing this waste to energy recovery, as the natural breakdown of organics produces biogas, which companies such as LMS capture. At modern, wellmanaged landfills, we can capture the majority of it and have carbon neutral landfills. We have an over 70 per cent gas capture rate at over a quarter of our landfills.”

As Australia increases resource recovery, the organic matter in residual waste is going to decline, said Nairn, while the portion of waste with plastics in it will increase. She believes that if the residual waste stream is combusted in some form, then it is necessary to look at its emissions profile, too. Nairn observed, “All states have significant renewable energy targets in place.”

She said that WtE has a grid emissions intensity in between natural gas and black coal. If it starts competing against solar or wind, then there is a potential increase in emissions.

“If we look at the emissions profile

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

CAPS AUSTRALIA, YOUR COMPLETE POWER GENERATION SOLUTION

HIGH SPEED DIESEL GENERATORS UP TO 4,600KVA (50 HZ) PACKAGED EITHER IN A PURPOSE-BUILT ACOUSTIC ENCLOSURE OR PLANT ROOM INSTALL. CAPS IS YOUR COMPLETE SOLUTION FROM DESIGN THROUGH TO COMMISSIONING.

CALL 1800 800 878 OR VISIT CAPS.COM.AU

Waste to Energy //

Although the waste-to-energy sector is robust, almost all agree there is still a place for landfills in the waste landscape.

when the grid is about half renewable and with declining residual organics, what we would say is that emissions from landfill go down because you are just dealing with the reduced organic portion while thermal energy from waste emissions go up,” said Nairn. “To the point that, when you look at SA with a 30 per cent organic content and half renewables, then thermal energy from waste – in the forms proposed – would release half a million tonnes of carbon per tonne of waste disposed of, whereas landfill with 75 per cent gas capture has about a third of that. And landfill is more flexible, so we can focus on more clean streams and getting them to a different place.”

Steven Yeardley is the future energy and technology director for APAC from Wood Plc, a UK-based company that is big on sustainability and supporting energy transition. Rather than championing the cause of either technology, he is interested in getting the best-in-class technologies to dispose of unwanted waste. He knows it is an emotive topic for some but believes the waste industry as a whole needs to come up with a solution and that might mean compromises on both sides of the debate.

“When it comes to landfill gas vs thermal conversion technologies there are options for both, and there is a place for both,” he said. “I see a lot of different technologies and projects across the broader energy transition space, and as a general observation I don’t think there is one answer. It is going to take many answers and many technologies and geographies to get it done. I think one of the key elements 28

that has been brought up, this need for collaboration and clear communication.

It is beholden on us as industry users and technology providers is that we need to be very clear about our intent.”

Hitachi Zosen Inova (HZI) is a major player in the WtE sector with its most recent project, the East Rockingham WtE plant in Perth, due to go live in the second half of 2022. Marc Stammbach, managing director HZI Australia, makes no bones about where he stands in the debate. With WtE there are no ifs or buts, just outcomes – and WtE is a solution that has a finality about it in terms of getting rid of the disruptive waste stream and creating energy.

“The circular economy needs an outlet for contamination and historically it has been landfilling but now is going more towards waste to energy,” he said. “It is interesting in that today half the waste is biogenic, so fully renewable, and half of it is fossil. If you put it in a landfill, the biomechanics actually turns into greenhouse gas. We can endlessly debate how much of that is captured or how the fossil parts stay around for a long time. However, if we burn it in waste to energy, the biogenic part is fully neutral because we are turning it back into CO2, which it was originally.

However, the plastic part – 50 per cent of it – is burned instead of going into a landfill. This, if we talk about a full zero emission world, is a positive emission.

This has been recognised, and this is why we already have in Europe the first examples of carbon capture, which can turn waste to energy into sinks of carbon dioxide.”

Europe often leads the way in terms

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

of environmental standards and new technologies that can help reduce carbon emissions from landfills and waste plants. Benoit Englebert works in sales and business development for Keppel Seghers, a Belgian-based company that started out as an engineering enterprise, but now has branched out in many directions including that of waste to energy.

“Waste to energy is recognised in Europe as a good opportunity to apply carbon capture,” said Englebert. “A lot of waste is from organic origin, which means if you capture it, and if you store it, or if you use it, or reuse, your waste plan can be considered as removing carbon from the atmosphere.

“There is a recent report that says that carbon capture – as applied to waste to energy – could be one of the cheapest costs per tonne due to the synergy you can find between the waste to energy process and the carbon capture process. It is a big opportunity to make the waste to energy plants carbon sinks.”

The East Rockingham plant has been 10 years in the making with a high governmental and regulator acceptance.

It takes time to secure a site, get a permit, win council contracts, assure a grid connection, and finally bring it all together with secured investment, bank debt and support from ARENA and CEFC. In other states, a roadblock in getting a WtE plant up and running is government bureaucracy. Victoria is similar in terms of what it demands from such plant, and Hoefnagels makes no apologies. She also points out that while WtE has its place at the moment, she doesn’t want excessive investment in the arena as

it might detract from innovations that might offer better outcomes.

“These waste to energy plants are really big, complicated projects that take a lot of government approvals,” she said. “The EPA needs to make sure these plants are really safe and operate in a way that protects human health and environment from potential harm.

They are also quite substantial pieces of infrastructure that need approvals.

“With regards to Victoria, it is also timely for us to be thinking about exactly what role waste to energy should play in our broader waste mix,” she said.

When Infrastructure Victoria did a review of waste and recycling infrastructure in 2019, it made a point that it is an important part of the mix.

However, it also said the state needs to be cautious about over investment, and over reliance in the future of waste to energy in the context of future innovation of waste minimisation, which needs to be the state’s main goal.

“This is the rationale behind Victoria’s cap on waste to energy – to create and hold that space in the future for future innovation for waste minimisation and recycling,” said Hoefnagels.

As for what waste should go into landfill if it is not residual, Stammbach pointed out that only the really bad waste should be put into landfills, and that the work being done with FOGO, for example, helps. He believes that WtE helps with two outcomes – less emissions and more energy.

“It is great to see Western Australia, NSW and Victoria now promote and implement the separation of food and green waste,” he said. “That means it

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Waste to Energy

gets out back into the earth and that is where it should be.

“One thing that hasn’t been mentioned yet, and that is material flow. Instead of going to landfill and having it lost there, which it not a great legacy for our children, we can actually recover the energy, recover around 20 per cent of aggregates and metals, emit clean air, not toxic air, and we have typically four per cent residuals where the contamination is concentrated.

This is where I see the future role of landfills, which are able to put these materials into a sink. That is why we should reserve our landfills for purposes such as these residues, including asbestos and other things that we cannot organically treat.”

Englebert backed up the assertion.

From his experience in the European arena, he found most EU countries thought a mixture of high recycling rates and waste-to-energy strategies seemed an effective solution for the troublesome stream.

“In Europe, the countries that are managing the waste best, have a high recycling rate,” he said. “In Flanders, in Belgium for example, a region where I live, we have a recycling rate of about

70 per cent. Often this high recycling rate is combined with waste-to-energy for all the non-recyclables, which effectively means the only landfill that remains is for the residues from waste-to-energy where we really concentrate on the things that we don’t want anymore – we don’t want to circulate anymore – which is quite an effective way.”

Nairn pointed out that Australia has materials that are contaminated or aren’t recyclable like multilayer plastic.

She said a big part of this conversation is that organic matter, treated timbers and other materials that are going in are contaminated and that, even with food organics and garden organics collections, approximately 25 per cent of a household’s bin is organic matter.

The gas from this can be captured.

“Do we then want to capture those non-recyclable plastics and other fossil fuel-derived materials, or do we want to keep them essentially banked – the same as not mining certain substances?” she said. “Do we want to leave the energy of that fossil material in the ground? Landfills can be safely managed. To achieve that a lot are double-lined and leachate protected.

Landfills are flexible on the amount of waste they receive in any given time so then you can keep the focus on continuing to clean up your actual design and material supplies.”

Yeardley reiterated that instead of having an either/or approach, both outcomes can be part of the solution.

And that is the key, he thinks, in getting rid of unwanted residual waste and what is the best outcome. While Nairn and Stammbach both believe their solutions are the best answer for residuals, Yeardley thinks the industry needs a more reconciliatory approach to the outcome.

“It’s not that we’re leading with waste-to-energy being the only solution, it is part of a much bigger picture,” he said. “Unfortunately, we are dealing with that residual stream.

It would be wonderful for all of us if it was a fully circular economy and we didn’t have a residual stream then we wouldn’t have to process it. We are talking about the hard end, and the hard end is the materials that are hard to recycle, they are hard to recover, and it not cost effective to do so. Then the conversation is ‘what’s best to do with it?’ Is it best to landfill it, natural gas,

or is it better to go energy? We need to be having robust conversations about what the best solution is.”

In in the final mix, all panellists agreed that a solution needs to be found for a waste stream that arguably fits outside the circular economy, in terms of its final destination.

“It is an exciting time as we transition and to look forward to continued assessments on where we’re looking to be – where we want to be – both from a waste policy perspective and an energy policy perspective,” said Nairn.

While Stammbach was adamant that source separation and WtE was the most viable solution Yeardley was still pushing the conciliatory barrow.

“Let’s get the organics out and the recyclables out, let’s throw the residuals into energy, let’s recover the metals and aggregates and what we can’t recover, put into landfill,” said Stammbach.

“It is an exciting time to be in this space and I would certainly hope that certain drivers would be come together to allow us to really push on with and value the externalities and move towards a circular economy at pace,” said Yeardley. iw

UHF_Ad.qxp_Layout 1 1/12/22 3:46 PM Page 1

Generate More Revenue From Your Fines

ERIEZ Ultra High-Frequency Eddy Current Separator Recovers non-ferrous fines and bare copper wire from ASR waste.

Eriez.com.au | 61 3 8401 7400 Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

29

Hazardous Waste //

Hazardous waste report – data needs to be better to get true picture

By Inside Waste GATHERING reliable data is one of the key ingredients when it comes to the state of play with hazardous waste in Australia. Being a Commonwealth and having various state stakeholders means that when it comes to putting a report together on hazardous materials, the data sets could be better.

This is a according to Dr Joe Pickin, a director of Blue Environment, and Geoff Latimer who is the managing director of Ascend Waste and Environment, who were charged with putting together the Hazardous Waste in Australia 2021 report and its supporting data set for the federal government’s Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment.

While the data supports various purposes within a larger three-year project, including projecting and assessing the adequacy of hazardous waste infrastructure, the report itself hones in on annual hazardous waste generation, trends and emerging challenges for the sector.

At a recent webinar hosted by WMRR CEO Gayle Sloan, both men gave an

overview of the report – some of its outcomes, how the information was collected and how the collection can be improved on in the future.

The industry tracks waste movements – truck load by truck load – which is sent to various state and territory departments, from whom Blue Environment collect annual compilations to process, collate, enhance and present as a consistent national data set. Gathering the facts for the report is not an easy job, according to Pickin, due to the different ways in which the states and territories categorise and collect their data. It means certain aspects of data capture are not as thorough as the authors of the report would like.

For example?

“There are no energy recovery stats because that information cannot be recovered properly given the varying classifications of waste management types adopted by states and territories,” said Pickin. “We are driven to the lowest common denominator which is NSW, SA and WA. Queensland and Victoria capture more comprehensive categorisations of what happens

Despite consolidation in 2019, the amount of hazardous waste is increasing.

30

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

to hazardous waste in management infrastructure, but this must be simplified to fit into a ‘one size fits all’ set of waste management codes and descriptors.”

Gathering Information That being said, in order to make some sense of the data, Pickin and Latimer convert the information into NEPM codes – which is set by the National Environment Protection (Movement of Controlled Waste between States and Territories) Measure, known as the Controlled Waste NEPM. Currently, there are 72 different waste types categorised, but the duo has simplified the data even further by dividing each stream into 27 subheadings or ‘waste groups’.

Overall, the report gives a rundown of what happens to hazardous waste in terms of where it ends up, including treatment, recycling and storage pathways along the way.

Unsurprisingly, 51 per cent of it ends up in landfill, 15 per cent is treated, while another 7 per cent gets stored and 6 per cent is exported, mainly in the form of tyres. The remaining 21 per cent is recycled.

Ascend Waste and Environment’s Geoff Latimer.

Outcomes Despite the challenges of getting the amount of data they wanted, and in a form that would allow definitive conclusions, enough information was gathered for Latimer (the lead author of the report) to reach several conclusions. They are as follows.

Overall Increase Despite consolidating in 2019-20, the quantities of hazardous waste are increasing.

According to Latimer, there has been a significant rise over the past 16 years. In order to get a more accurate picture, he took the most current method of data collation and improvement and traced back or ‘backcast’ these methods using the data he already had, starting from 2006-07.

“We hadn’t done that before,” said Latimer. “What we found was that the total amount of hazardous waste has really moved a lot since 2014 when the first report was done. The trend compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) has been at about 3.4 per cent a year.”

They also found that the major contributor is asbestos, primarily in NSW and contaminated soils in Victoria and Queensland. Notably, it has slowed and now dropped over the past two years, which is due to the NSW asbestos volumes decreasing.

There has also been about a 57 per cent drop in Queensland contaminated

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Hazardous Waste

soil numbers, which had a significant impact on national numbers. That was offset somewhat by 42 per cent growth in Victoria’s contaminated soil numbers.

“PFAS concentrated waste data and soils data are both telling us how rapidly PFAS waste has been on the move in the past couple of data periods we have looked at.”

Increase in PFAS (Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) waste

The effectiveness of thermal destruction of PFAS is not yet proven

“This has increased substantially,” said Latimer. “This includes AFFF (firefighting foam) concentrates, spent PFAS containing absorbents, PFAS contaminated wastewaters and, in the highest volumes, PFAS contaminated soils.”

Victoria has shown a dramatic increase in PFAS waste since 2015-16, which was when the defence industry, in particular, started reducing its AFFF foam stocks through thermal destruction. Queensland numbers are high too, but the numbers don’t ring as true as other states because Queensland also includes PFAS contaminated soils under this code, which are lower in PFAS contamination but arise in much higher quantities.

“That increase is mainly PFAScontaminated soil going to thermal treatment in Victoria,” said Latimer.

“This is not my observation,” said Latimer. “But when I was writing this part of the report around about January 2021, I came across a US EPA report that was the authoritative report on the current state of knowledge around PFAS destruction methods, and the completeness of that destruction.”

The report mentioned several things, said Latimer. For example, the strength of the carbon-fluorine bonds found in PFAS chemicals, compared to the carbon-chlorine bond typical of other Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs). Historically, all POPs were chlorinated organic compounds (chlorine atoms in their structure) but in more recent times there have been some brominated POPs and, with the introduction of the PFAS chemicals such as PFOS and PFOA, now there are fluorinated POPs as well.

Data is king in these types of reports and, moving forward, it needs to be better.

said. “There is a poor understanding and evidence base on the potential formation/reformation of fluorinated products of incomplete combustion (PICs). It may be that PFAS compounds are destroyed to start with, but the flame conditions may not be fully destroying them. There may be re-formation reoccurring during the cooling process.

“Also, the laboratory analysis methods for all the potential individual

Latimer said that what the report from the US EPA showed was that carbon-fluorine bonds in these chemicals are much harder to break down than the carbon-chlorine bonds, requiring 1.5 times more energy, higher temperatures and longer contact times.

This means they are more difficult to destroy.

“There is lack of definitive evidence about PFAS destruction and its efficiency in real world conditions,” he

Thank you for once again voting us Australia’s Best Small Consultancy.

BE

BE

ST

SM A

S ST

LL CO

TA NSUL

M A L L C O N S U LT

NC

AN

Y

CY

Contact our award-winning team today to find out what we can do for you.

Phone 02 8541 6169 Email info@mraconsulting.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

mraconsulting.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

31

Hazardous Waste //

Overall, the public is still not happy about how hazardous waste is managed.

products of incomplete combustion (that may still contain fluorine) are not yet developed, because the PICs themselves are not fully characterised.

Another point is: how effective are the air pollution controls in thermal plants? We know they are very effective with traditional pollutants but have less evidence with PFAS or fluorinated PICs. There is also poor field data based around existing thermal operations that destroy PFAS waste – for example, the lack of emission characterisation linked to feed waste concentrations and types.”

The clinical waste industry coped well with increased volumes caused by COVID-19 Latimer points out that the 2019-20 data collection period did not coincide particularly well with the worst of the pandemic, so drawing data-based conclusions about COVID impacts was not as accurate as he would like it to be. It also isn’t helped by NSW having a regulatory tracking exemption in place for clinical wastes, which means their quantities are largely not recorded.

However, he said of the data in NSW that was available, over the months that he tracked clinical waste data, the amount generated peaked in March 2020, which corresponded with the emergence of COVID in NSW. He said Victorian COVID numbers didn’t start moving until July 2020 when the second wave of the pandemic started, which is outside the 2019-20 data collection period.

However, anecdotes from industry of their experiences provided more insight than the data.

“There have been additional volumes of COVID-19 PPE, which placed a heavy 32

demand on thermal and autoclave clinical waste infrastructure, increasing interstate flows,” he said. “This meant that facility licences were temporarily expanded to cope with extra load. As Victorian infections increased, the industry and regulators acted swiftly and collegiately and coped well with unprecedented quantities.”

used in plastics. As well as flame retardants there are UV stabilisers, heat stabilisers, plasticisers and antioxidants. From an environmental chemical point of view, many of them are troubling.”

The hazardous potential of plastics deserves more attention

The report goes through some of the issues with ageing infrastructure and also some gaps in infrastructure.

“This is in the context where there are issues to resolve but also in terms of a list of new hazardous waste infrastructure in terms of facilities being planned or built,” said Latimer.

“There is quite a lot. I think it indicates, that for relatively a static industry, there’s pockets of it that are moving quite quickly in response to some of these market gaps.”

This aspect of the report was about looking at some of the emerging issues and looking to the future. Latimer said this discussion point comes on the back of the exploration of what unintended contaminants can look like in waste and products.

“For example,” he said, “brominated flame retardants (BFRs) are added to the hard plastics on your TV or computer. Because those products get hot, they could be a fire risk.

When those plastics are recycled there is potential that some of those BFR plastics can get recycled into other uses that have nothing to do with flame retardancy, such as a child’s toy. There have been reports of BFRs turning up significantly in environments where they weren’t expected because there is no need to flame-retard those products.

Contaminants are one thing when you know what to expect, but they are another thing altogether when they are unintended.

“We all know about the macro impact of waste plastics, such as straws on marine life. But we don’t hear enough about the added chemicals in those plastics that find their way into those environments as disintegrating wastes.

There are a lot of added chemicals

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Infrastructure issues remain, but new capability is emerging

Public confidence in hazardous management is low Latimer said a similar issue was discussed in the last report in 2019 so they decided that it was important to revisit the problem in this report as a commentary piece. This is mainly because of the increase of incidents post the Bradbury plant fire in Campbellfield, Victoria in 2019.

“There continues to be a number of problems bringing the community’s anxiety levels up around risk for hazardous waste management,” he said. “We posed the question of whether public disclosure of hazardous waste data – who generates it and where it goes – would help in reducing fraudulent incidents like those recently seen. There are other examples in both Australia and overseas of full

public transparency of hazardous chemical or waste releases, which has not resulted in problems with commercial sensitivity.”

Data quality, access and classification issues must be improved As mentioned at the top of the article, data quality has been an issue. Latimer said that as much as Australia has seen a great step forward in the past 10 years, it continues to have quality issues around data, which could easily be resolved, especially around jurisdictional inconsistencies.

“Better data sharing between states and territories and the Commonwealth would be a simple improvement,” he said.

Other issues Both Pickin and Latimer are both hopeful that there will be an improvement in the data that is collected. They cite the new Victorian waste tracker system that could be great if implemented correctly, both in terms of tracing hazardous waste and in reducing the amount of such waste being illegally dumped.

“I’m looking forward to the system as some of the data could be improved,” said Latimer. “As to how that might change some of the dodgy practices we have observed over the past three years, there is probably a little bit more to it than the tracking systems themselves. I look forward to a more scrutinised set of data.”

During the Q&A, both Pickin and Latimer offered up their thoughts on some of the more intricate aspects of hazardous waste and how to dispose of it in a clean, environmentally sound manner.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Hazardous Waste

One attendee at the webinar asked if there was any data on if waste to energy burns high enough to treat brominated fire retardant and other chemicals, and if so are the emissions adequately managed?

“I think there is a reasonable enough argument to say brominated fire retardants may be a little bit more difficult to destroy fully than chlorinated POPs,” said Latimer.

“But the main questions are around fluorinated ones such as the PFAS’s.

Technical guidelines issued by the Basel and Stockholm [Conventions] are pretty specific about thermal destruction being the most environmentally sound option for brominated flame retardants. Thermal processes are likely to destroy them.

But with all POPs it’s a question as to what extent. It’s about a difference between 95 per cent and 99.9 per cent being destroyed. I believe the confidence around brominated POPs is better than fluorinated POPs. “The thing I would observe about raising this PFAS thermal destruction question in this report is that it is less about arguing that it doesn’t fully destroy these POPs, it’s more about saying ‘we’ve gone down this

merry path on the back of what we have been doing with the chlorinated POPs like pesticides, like DDT, and do we have enough evidence of that because they are a similar chemical, are they also completely destroyed?’ The answer to that is ‘no, we don’t have enough evidence’.”

Another person asked, should there be restrictions on what products can be made from recycled plastics given our limited knowledge on the subject?

“This is a personal view, but I think all questions on how we should manage waste plastics going forward are on the table,” said Latimer. “Ultimately, we have to regulate totally differently.

We can keep on doing the same thing where we find out 15 to 20 years later that a substance is a problem, and that the environmental regulatory mechanisms for enabling those products to find their way onto the market aren’t working or don’t exist. It’s a cycle we have to get out of.

“I don’t know how quickly that can happen. Things that are referenced in the report, such as regulating classes of chemicals, is one way of trying to stop ourselves from tripping over the same thing where you have a product – where, until the evidence

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

is clearer – this whole group of chemicals can’t be used.

“The immediate problem for some of them that are already in the environment, is that it always falls to the waste industry to sort out. The product end of the equation continues to talk about the circular economy till their face goes blue, yet they’ve got the most important role to play in a circular economy in terms of the design.

It is a tough role to fix, and it can take decades to remedy.”

Finally, were there any data sets or other information in the report that surprised either man?

“Up until this year, I would have said that contaminated soils keep coming up [as an issue], and in Victoria that still seems to be the case and I wonder how that can still be,” said Latimer. “The PFAS issue is something we have been talking about for a couple of years.

“Then there are the questions around thermal treatment, which were a bit of a surprise to me given our reliance on it. Something that I haven’t talked about specifically that surprised me too, is that we have been talking about lithium ion batteries for a little while, but we don’t seem to have made a lot

of progress. While it’s only a small part of the report, we are observing quite a large number of fires in garbage trucks due to those batteries.”

“One thing that surprises me each time is that when you really hone in the detail of the data, there is a surprising lack of pattern,” said Pickin.

“There is a surprising amount of things bouncing all over the place.

“Contaminated soil and asbestos seem to be telling the big story, but it is amazingly complex, or the data is not much chop, or both. But I think it is mainly complexity as there is an awful lot of things that govern what this stuff is called and where it comes from.

“There is also some good news around asbestos. By this time next year, because Victoria has reclassified its categorisation of different types of asbestos waste, we’ll have our first ever decent estimate of the amount of asbestos moving out of society in packaging. You can do an estimate for the soil as well, but the main game is the packaged stuff – that is the bulk of the problem. We have never been able to identify that properly. We’ll be able to do that for the first time next year in every jurisdiction except the Northern Territory.” iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

33

Household Recoverables & Processing Solutions The APR Kerbside Material Recovery Facility (MRF) in Truganina is the only one in Victoria that doesn’t accept glass.

For Municipal Councils that have partnered with APR Kerbside in the Glass-out program, their recyclables are now being received with less than 1% glass. These remarkable results have directly contributed to reducing contamination levels and further diverting waste from landfill.

Improving the separation of household recyclables and having no glass in the kerbside commingled stream has led to a significant improvement in the quality of all recyclables.

Key learnings and invaluable experience gained throughout the program well positions APR Kerbside to best support the needs of Municipal Councils who are preparing to implement ‘glass out’ of the commingled stream, transition smoothly and re-educate residents.

APR Kerbside Pty Ltd 9 Felstead Drive, Truganina VIC 3029

Such benefits include: ✓ Eliminate the issue of glass shards that get into all the other recyclables and resources such as paper, cardboard, plastic and aluminium ✓ Significantly recover more recyclable materials ✓ Reduce contamination levels and further divert waste from landfill ✓ Address and combat the limitations presented to approachable end market outlets for recyclable products due to glass shards ✓ Increase the value of recyclables and quality of end product The value-added sorting facility site has capability to process: ✓ Recyclables from Metropolitan Melbourne and Regional councils that have removed glass out of their yellow-lidded recycling bins ✓ Paper and Cardboard ✓ Plastics such as HDPE, PET, PP and Soft Plastics

www.aprkerbside.com darren@aprkerbside.com.au

1800 277 800

// Container Deposit Schemes

Maximising container returns and recycling in SA

By Tony Circelli SOUTH Australia’s CDS is one of the longest running in Australia and is considered one of the most successful product stewardship schemes in Australia. While the return rates (comparison of eligible containers sold against containers returned to the scheme) vary over time, more than 85 per cent of eligible CDS glass containers are returned through the depots. Of this, around 99 per cent is recovered to glass remanufacturing.

This is considered a world-leading system performance and circular economy outcome. By comparison, with the amount of glass that is deposited into the co-mingled kerbside system, only 11 per cent by weight is returned to remanufactured glass, which comes at a substantial cost to the community.

Given that the scheme began in 1977, it is acknowledged that more could be done to maximise the return and recycling of all beverage container material types, while also acting to make the scheme more transparent and efficient by modernising governance.

A scoping paper helped focus the key issues to be reviewed. However, the review acknowledged that despite SA CDS being largely a manual system, the performance outcomes remain world class.

Through a discussion paper circulated in September 2021, the South Australian Government sought feedback on what the objectives of the CDS should be and what containers should be included, plus return rates, governance arrangements and scheme approvals. The SA Environment Protection Authority is now analysing the 146 submissions, together with more than 100 comments on the SA Government engagement site YourSAy, on that package of reform options.

Amending and centralising governance arrangements was proposed to introduce a more transparent and regulated cost pricing system, adopting independent oversight of key CDS elements. This will strengthen the system from its already strong base.

The proposed new governing system, which would all be subject to government direction, could consider: • Scheme costs per container and materials • Performance targets such as return

rate, community awareness and education and customer service standards.

• Container recovery from remote areas including Aboriginal communities.

• Participant dispute resolution and response to complaints about the scheme.

• Performance, including container returns and sales by material type and region, and the destination of sold materials.

Another proposal is to require that container returns be measured by container count, not weight, to enable more transparency and remove the primary cause of many disputes.

The move to more e-based counting and sorting systems, while maintaining manual sorting for smaller and regional depots, will underpin the reporting and auditing framework linked to scheme costs, container return and recycling targets. This would enable a transition from the current manual system to a modern digitised and customerfocused system.

All stakeholders will benefit from reforms that improve the efficiency of the scheme, reduce costs and address the current disproportionate impacts on small to medium beverage producers and suppliers.

Another key point is increasing the recovery of high-value materials in line with a circular economy. Each year about 600 million eligible beverage containers are returned for refund and recycling. Models suggest a modernised CDS could take that to 679 million, plus deliver $34 million in savings to ratepayers each year by diverting more containers from kerbside bins.

In particular, the annual recovery via CDS of high-quality cullet (for local glass bottle remanufacturing) from beverage glass sold in South Australia is expected to increase by around 50 per cent to a total of 65,000 tonnes of cullet per annum.

The discussion paper proposes a staged approach; the first phase will be to finalise, in consultation with industry stakeholders, the new governing arrangements to bring further customer digitisation, efficiency and transparency to the scheme.

A second program would further consider options relating to the scope of containers included in the SA CDS, and potential opportunities for

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

national harmonisation on any changes made by the SA Government.

The various state Environment Ministers, through the Heads of EPAs in Australia and New Zealand, have previously agreed that the states and territories will collaborate and investigate opportunities for alignment of container scope (i.e. eligible CDS containers), approval processes and maintaining alignment on the deposit amount.

While no increase in the deposit amount is being proposed at this time, a behavioural study is underway through Heads of EPA to identify the relative importance of key factors that can influence the return rate of eligible containers sold. This includes convenience for the community to return containers, raising awareness and education, and increasing the

More transparency is one reason for the review according to Circelli.

refund amount. The study is expected to be completed during 2022.

Tony Circelli is the chief executive of the South Australian EPA iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

35

Waste Policy //

A health check on the road to circularity

By Josh Wilson MP, Shadow Assistant Minister for Environment AT the end of another difficult year, let’s first focus on the positives. It is welcome that waste and resource management has continued to feature prominently in the national conversation. It is clear that community support and expectation for improving our approach and outcomes remains high. There is no doubt the sector is champing at the bit, and there are numerous examples of Australian companies and industries looking to embrace innovation.

There is every reason for Australia to push harder down the path of greater sustainability by dramatically reducing waste and its environmental impacts, and by increasing resource recovery/ reuse and the job benefits from new manufacturing.

But nothing is gained by selfdeception. Australia has a long way to go. We are one of the highest per capita producers of waste, and our rates of recycling and reincorporation of recycled material are not flash, especially with problematic materials such as plastic.

At present there are legitimate concerns with respect to the pace

and quality of reform.

When we recognise that the waste export bans were effectively forced on Australia, it’s easier to understand how the reforms to date have tended to be reactive and partial. That doesn’t excuse policy and programs that should be better.

The principles on which progress should be based are obvious. We need to address a broken market through reform that is comprehensive, coordinated, harmonised, and strategic.

To expand briefly on the importance of each: Comprehensive: It’s no good stopping waste exports if the recycling/reprocessing capacity isn’t increased to match through infrastructure investment and the demand for recycled material isn’t supported through strengthened producer responsibility and procurement.

Co-ordinated: All segments of the circular economy need to be addressed with an understanding of how the cycle is connected and interdependent.

Manufacturers bemoan a lack of quality recyclate, while recyclers bemoan a lack of demand certainty.

Harmonised: As change occurs it should be pursued on the

basis of adopting common bestpractice measures across state and territory jurisdictions.

Strategic: Careful thought needs to be given to the opportunities and pitfalls inherent in the redesign of the resource recovery market when considering the challenges presented

by Australia’s huge geography and medium-sized consumption economy.

So far, the Morrison government has missed opportunities to lead harmonised progress on container deposit schemes and the phased elimination of harmful single-use plastic. The promised delivery last year of meaningful Commonwealth procurement rule changes was a 2020 Christmas fizzer.

The approach in terms of producer responsibility and product stewardship has been at the very light-touch end of the spectrum. It is disappointing that we are still waiting for the review of the ineffective National Environmental Protection Measures (NEPM) framework.

Packaging – and plastic packaging in particular – offers a useful prism for examining the gap between optimistic claims on the one hand, and actual progress on the other. The latest Australian Packaging Covenant Organisation (APCO) Collective Impact

Labor’s Josh Wilson.

Report, published in December 2021, showed that the consumption of plastic packaging is increasing, the recycling rate is falling (from 18 per cent to 16 per cent), and the incorporation of recycled material in new packaging has fallen back towards virtually nothing (from four per cent to three per cent).

The accompanying analysis commissioned by APCO from Accenture, Cost and Incentives for a More Circular Packaging System, finally bells the cat by saying what government has been reluctant to acknowledge, namely that

Wilson says there is a still a long way to go as Australia, per capita, is still one of the highest producers of waste.

36

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Waste Policy

a number of the 2025 targets will not be met.

This is not a revelation to anyone who has been watching. Despite being unconvinced that the government’s minimal strengthening of the Minister’s Priority List would be effective, Labor did seek to help the government reconcile or align this mechanism with the badly off-track APCO targets by proposing that packaging be added to the MPL from the outset. The government refused, and here we are, a year later, with the APCO measures sliding further off course, and even the promised accreditation of the voluntary scheme yet to be achieved.

More broadly, there is a danger of Australia shifting from the present broken linear market to a new arrangement that bakes in some anticompetitive and regionally inequitable features. In any transition, larger companies are better placed to adapt to change, and infrastructure will gravitate to locations that capture the largest proximate market. Does this mean that scale and vertical integration in recycling might put small manufacturers at a new

Harmonisation between the various states is still key to the circular economy.

disadvantage, leading to less diversity, competition, and regional spread of jobs and economic activity? Does it result in an uneven distribution of infrastructure so that the smaller and further-flung states/territories continue to be waste exporters

and to bear that cost?

As we look to 2022, there is every reason to be optimistic about Australia’s potential to take on the big task of creating a circular economy as part of the wider push towards sustainability. The community wants

that to occur, and industry will rise to the challenge if provided with a clear and consistent framework. To join those two vectors of change we need policy leadership that is comprehensive, co-ordinated, harmonised, and strategic. iw

FOR ALL YOUR FOGO PROCESSING REQUIREMENTS 35 years international experience, call us to discuss your project FABCOM® In Vessel FOGO Tunnels FABCOM® MAF Compost System Quality Assurance Compost Quality Odour Control Contaminant Management Organic Certification R&D for your Plant/Process Wireless Process Control Australian owned technology Wireless Temperature, O2, Humidity probes

FABCOM® Organics Under Control© www.FAB-COM.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Email: info@spartel.com.au Web: www.FAB-COM.com.au Mobile: Harrie - 0414 37 66 99 John - 0421 43 97 44

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

37

Product Stewardship //

Clothing textile waste, myths, stewardship, and circularity

By Omer Soker IT’S a myth that Winston Churchill once said ‘Never waste a good crisis’.

It was President Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel who coined the inventive phrase in response to the 2008 Global Financial Crisis. And what he meant is that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.

Fast forward to Australia in 2022.

Make no mistake, sending 780,000 tonnes of textile waste to landfill every year is a very real and imminent crisis. And it’s a myth that Australia has anything near an end-of-life solution for clothing or the recycling infrastructure to tackle that volume.

It’s no wonder clothing textiles have been added to The Minister’s Priority List, which identifies the products and materials considered to be most in need of a product stewardship approach.

The Australian Government is sending a clear signal to the entire clothing textiles sector that it’s time for action and for industry to clean this up, and that taking responsibility for waste on this scale needs to be part of the cost of doing business.

Concurrently, the government is also presenting a massive opportunity for the sector to come together in a coordinated action to create a vibrant, circular economy for clothing textiles.

The government is presenting us an 38

opportunity to do things we thought we could not do before. To positively transform the sector and engage the next generation of customers demanding brand sustainability and confidence in downstream textile solutions. Let’s not waste it.

Clothing Textiles Product Stewardship Scheme The Australian Government has awarded the Australian Fashion Council-led consortium a $1 million grant to design, develop and implement a Product Stewardship Scheme for clothing textiles, along with a National Roadmap for Clothing in Australia.

The consortium partners include Charitable Recycling Australia, WRAP, Sustainable Resource Use and QUT. Key collaborators such as the National Retail Association (NRA), Australian Retailers Association (ARA), Waste Management and Resource Recovery Association (WMRR) and Australian Council of Recycling (ACOR), and dozens of other stakeholders across the entire clothing value chain including brands, retailers, industry, academia and federal, state and local governments, are also involved.

The stewardship scheme will be co-designed through consultation and collaboration to create a voluntary accredited, industry-led, self-supporting and economically sustainable scheme, covering

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

all imported and domestically produced clothing.

Far more than just an end-of-life program, the purpose of the scheme is to transform how clothing is made, used and recirculated in Australia to create clothing circularity by 2030. It will achieve this through the waste hierarchy’s R-strategies in not just reducing waste, but accelerating reuse, repair, refurbishment, remanufacture, repurposing, recycling and recovery.

The scheme will bring together all clothing ‘Stewards’ (organisations that place clothing products onto the market) and ‘Recirculators’ (organisations operating in R-strategies). They will create the new investment fund Australia needs for substantial infrastructure and commercial support to find the highest value and best use for clothing textiles across the entire supply chain. With its focus on a shift to circular economy principles, the scheme will address: • Design and production – incentivised design practices, support to adopt circular economy principles, and industry-set Australian targets.

• Consumption, use and disposal – promotion of durability of use, reuse, repair and responsible disposal through behaviour change campaigns and upholding consumer confidence.

Charitable Recycling Australia’s Omer Soker.

• E nd-of-life and recirculation – pathways to recirculate clothing, fibres and materials with investment in commercial-scale collection, sorting and recycling infrastructure.

With collaborative engagement with all clothing stakeholders, success is defined by the creation of an industry-led, self-sustaining scheme

by March 2023, and the establishment of an independent Product Stewardship Organisation governed by a board, charter and members with oversight on all funding and investment decisions required.

This is a rare and exceptional opportunity for all clothing textile stakeholders to come together under a co-ordinated plan for the future of clothing textiles in Australia.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Product Stewardship

Stakeholder engagement plan

There will a lot of industry consultation before the textile stewardship scheme comes into being.

The consortium will launch a comprehensive stakeholder engagement plan in 2022, structured with opportunities for input across the entire supply chain. The consortium includes a lot of the major players in the industry, such as: • T he Australian Fashion Council (AFC), which is the peak body for the fashion and textile industry in Australia and is the lead applicant, with Alex Bowen appointed as the project manager.

• Charitable Recycling Australia, which is taking the lead on the stakeholder engagement plan and integrating clothing reuse into the scheme.

• Sustainable Resource Use, which is leading on a material flow analysis to ensure we understand the stages of clothing product life.

• QUT, which is leading the research in global best practice in policies, processes, and technologies that can be tailored to the unique Australian context.

• WRAP, which is leveraging its global expertise on circular clothing, developing the final scheme structure and leading the economic modelling.

The benefits of clothing circularity There are massive benefits for clothing brands, manufacturers, importers and retailers to move through sustainability to long-term circularity to meet the fast-changing needs of future consumers. This includes: • taking part in a global issue on a national level; • connecting with peers facing the same challenges; • medium- and long-term economic benefits; • reducing the impact on the environment; • public perception and positive publicity as a green brand; • staying ahead of increasing strict regulatory requirements; and • brand positioning as a global leader The benefits for consumers include better stewardship with sustainable brands and confidence in recycling.

Charities benefit from high-quality donations and more reuse. Collectors and sorters benefit from increased business opportunities. Repair comes out of the shadows to return to the important industry it was once.

Renters grow. Refurbishment and remanufacture scales up, and we create a commercially viable longterm recycling sector. To succeed,

we must all come together under a co-ordinated industry-led plan.

Project stages The four project stages under the Commonwealth Agreement are: • Data and Material Flow Analysis Report – identifying data requirements, data sources, data gaps, and making recommendations on how these may be filled.

• Global Scan Report – a robust analysis of global initiatives promoting circularity in clothing textiles, including systems, policies, technologies, and infrastructure.

• Scheme Recommendation Report – the final report, in early 2023, of all analyses and recommendations on sustainable improvements based on the finalised scheme design – i.e. the business plan.

• Roadmap to 2030 - Including a review in 2024 in preparation for meeting the Minister’s Priority List targets for 2025.

The first step is consultation and engagement with clothing stakeholders, to provide a structured and tiered opportunity to provide feedback and contribute to the scheme’s collective co-design and development.

Omer Soker is the CEO of Charitable Recycling Australia. iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

CLOSED EXPORT BORDERS NEED OPEN LOCAL MINDS The Australian ban on the export of whole used tyres from December 2021 demands real-world and innovative thinking from local rubber processors and manufacturers.

Tyre Stewardship Australia support and fund local solutions for end-of-life tyres. If you use raw rubber or tyre derived rubber in your products or have an innovative use for end-of-life tyres, we want to hear from you.

Get in contact with Tyre Stewardship Australia to discuss the myriad of options for virgin rubber right through to tyre derived products and applications.

tyrestewardship.org.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

39

Circular Economy //

Freeing Trevor to drive the Circular bus

By Mike Ritchie “We can achieve a Circular Economy by 2025” was the proposition in a debate run by the Young Professionals of WMRR. I chaired the “No” side. “No chance” we said (and won).

And here is why. The two ends of our economy are broken.

The economy is very efficient at mining, manufacturing, using and disposing of materials. The so called “Take, Make, Dispose” linear flow of materials. To be ‘circular’ our economy needs fixes at each end.

The front end “Design” side (what can be put into the economy) needs root and branch reform to allow for reuse and recycling a “end of life”.

There is not a single law in Australia that requires design for recycling or reuse.

In fact, we have just had a Parliamentary Inquiry into the Right to Repair - for God’s sake. That is, do I have the right to repair something I already own? We are a long way from requiring producers of goods to design them for recycling and reuse.

And at the back end, “Recycling” end of the economy, we still default to landfilling over reuse or recycling.

Why? Because the economics of (most) recycling, is broken. Because landfill is cheap.

As long as landfill is the cheapest disposal option for materials that have ended their first life, it will always be the most economically rational outcome for businesses and waste generators.

Cheap landfills are like oversized vacuum cleaners. They suck up waste and recyclables indiscriminately.

The cheaper the price, the higher their suction power. No rational recycler will set up a business to compete with low cost landfills.

Here is a quick snapshot of the resources our economy ‘wastes’ into landfill: • 7 million tonnes of construction and demolition material.

• 6 million tonnes of commercial material.

• 7 million tonnes of organics.

• 85 per cent of all food waste is landfilled.

• 84 per cent of all plastic is landfilled.

• 93 per cent of all textiles and clothing is landfilled.

• 50 per cent of all glass is still landfilled.

40

How a circular economy is supposed to work.

• 45 per cent of all consumer packaging is still landfilled.

And the reason is, it is rational to do so.

We need to dispense with the myth that if only we “thought” about these materials as resources, that that would somehow fix the problem. The problem is real world economics. Scarcity and demand are not sufficient to compete with cheap landfill.

Sure, there are plenty of recyclers doing the right thing and trying to grow their businesses. But they are doing so in the face of massive competition from landfills.

Recycling cannot be the default option whilst there are cheap landfills strewn across the country sucking in resources and recyclables.

Landfills are mindless. They don’t discriminate between resources and residual waste. A cheap landfill gate fee means cheap disposal.

Put it another way, to make the economics work, almost all recycling in Australia is subsidised by someone (except for cardboard and aluminium/ steel which have enough commodity value to overcome the costs of recycling collection and reprocessing). Most mixed stream recyclables are not so valuable.

Think kerbside recycling – it is subsidised by ratepayers to the

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

tune of $150/tonne.

We have no chance of creating a Circular Economy while landfill can outcompete recycling on a daily basis.

That is why landfill levies are so important. They have started (and I emphasise started) to level the playing field.

The average landfill levy in Europe is A$250/tonne. In Australia, the weighted average levy is $107/tonne.

Most of regional Australia has no levy.

Who would try to recycle and create jobs under these commercial realities?

“What about all the specific streams that are being recycled?” I hear you say. “What about the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) schemes that drive specific stream recycling?” While these are important the common factor is that they all require specific government intervention (the Minister’s List and/or regulation) because the economics don’t work alone. They all require ongoing manufacturer subsidies (paid by you and I).

Here are a few facts: 1. Mobile phone recycling has been in place for 21 years. 6.5 million handsets are sold each year. 1.12 million are recycled. That is 17 per cent. Eighty-three per cent are still landfilled (or stored in drawers).

2. Lithium-ion battery recycling is only 10 per cent.

3. S olar panel recycling is less than 10 per cent and almost all are landfilled.

4. TV and computer recycling is around 50 per cent.

5. 42 per cent of waste paint is still landfilled 6. Plastic packaging recycling is 16 per cent. That is 84 per cent of plastic packaging is still landfilled. The target is 70 per cent by 2025. No chance.

You get the picture. It would be much easier if the whole economy defaulted to recycling rather than governments having to cherry pick individual streams and regulatory interventions.

That means shifting the economics.

How? The obvious candidates are landfill levies, tax incentives for recycling, removing virgin commodity subsidies, carbon pricing to value embodied energy, grants and positive procurement policies. These will drive the economics.

Governments are trying but just too slowly.

All the Governments of Australia (including local government) have signed up to an 80% diversion from landfill target by 2030. That is a critical step in creating a circular economy.

But there is no chance of achieving it without reform. The figure below shows where it is broken or needs work.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Circular Economy

The key drivers of a Circular Economy are not going to mysteriously invent themselves. The economy is a political creation, so is circularising it.

Here is a list of the key framework (structural) changes that are “must haves” if we are going to make any headway. Some are easy but most require political intervention and courage.

Design end of the economy: 1. D esign for reuse and recycling rules including bans on composite packaging (for example plastic inserts in envelopes, plastic windows in paper bread bags, banning PVC drink containers, bans on those ridiculous plastic fruit stickers etc.)

2. Recycling labelling rules on all products sold in the economy 3. Recycled content rules (including minimum levels) 4. Extended Producer Responsibility regulated schemes for difficult to collect materials (e.g. mattresses, solar panels, tyres, batteries, fire alarms etc.)

At the back end of the economy: 1. M arket reform – levies, taxes, subsidies, carbon pricing and grants.

2. Specifically minimum landfill levies across Australia to drive materials to recycling rather than cheap holes in the ground 3. Hypothecation of levy funds to collection and recovery systems (firstly organics) 4. Bans on materials to landfill (firstly organics which in landfill currently generates a significant portions of Australia’s anthropogenic methane emissions) 5. Government procurement rules to drive recycling markets 6. Government planning policies to allow recycling facilities to be built

and not be built out 7. S upply chain incentives to drive waste avoidance (will partly happen as recycling becomes cheaper relative to landfill) But we need to face a few realities.

Circular Economy will be more expensive in the short term than a “take, make, dispose” economy. Almost all recycling in Australia is currently more expensive than landfill (particularly underpriced or “free” landfills). Governments need to remedy that.

If we (the voting public) are serious about a Circular Economy we must give governments the freedom to change the economics of recycling. We know how to do it. But it requires governments to intervene in the market.

That means politics.

The leaders we need right now, are Trevor Evans (Federal Minister for Recycling and Waste Minimisation; first one ever) and State Environment Ministers, many of whom are convinced of the need but don’t have the political mandate to shift the Circular Economy dial.

As voters and advocates we need to give them the political capital to do so.

That means convincing our peers that reform is needed, supporting changes to the economics when it occurs (e.g. levies) and most importantly supporting political bravery to encourage more and faster action.

There is no chance we can achieve a Circular Economy by 2025, but achieving the 80% diversion from landfill Target in the National Waste Action plan by 2030, is achievable and we must support it.

Trevor and the State Ministers have given us the Plan. We need to allow (and push) them to drive the bus to achieve it.

Trusted Advisors in Property, Environment, Planning, Waste & Local Government Law Experts in all areas of waste including: DAs and Land & Environment Court Appeals EPA Investigations & Prosecutions Waste Contracts Operational Issues & Waste Legislation Waste Transportation Asbestos Issues

Contact one of our advisors now: 02 9929 3031 or waste@honeslawyers.com.au or find out more at: www.honeslawyers.com.au/what-we-do/waste/

Mike Ritchie is the principal of MRA Consulting Group iw

There is little chance of a circular economy as long as landfill prices are cheap.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

41

APCO //

The road to the 2025 National Packaging Targets: now is the time to act

By Brooke Donnelly OVER the last year, the work undertaken to improve packaging sustainability has been impressive – from expanding the use of the Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) on packaging to help consumers recycle correctly, to increasing the amount of recycled content used in packaging.

This has been made possible by industry continuing to collaborate, innovate and commit to actions that help drive progress towards the 2025 National Packaging Targets.

The recent release of the Collective Impact Report investigated this more deeply – highlighting where we’re on track to achieve the targets and, importantly, those areas that require more attention. Crucially, the report then identified the alternative interventions that were required to get us there.

It also looked at the transformational shift of the packaging system where waste is no longer viewed as waste, but instead as a valuable resource that can provide economic and environmental benefits for Australian communities, as well as proving to be an enabler for businesses to make a tangible and measurable difference.

Report findings Overall, the report highlighted that we’re making incremental progress with stabilisation in certain areas.

However, despite our progress, 45 per cent of packaging ended up in landfill in 2019.

This represents a significant challenge for industry, governments and the broader community to do more.

Three key material losses were identified in the packaging system – from design through to collection, sorting and reprocessing. These include: • 14 per cent of materials are not recyclable by design.

• 24 per cent of packaging that is recyclable is not being recycled and collected.

• 8 per cent of materials are being 42

lost in collection and recycling processes.

We also know that we need to address consumption as well as recovery if we are to transition to a circular economy for packaging in Australia.

Collective action The report also highlights the gaps that remain across the packaging system that will require collective action. These include: 1. 100 per cent of packaging to be reusable, recyclable or compostable due to: • Uncertainties about the compatibility of packaging items with current and future recovery systems, which is a barrier to change.

• Recyclable materials that are lost in the sorting system due to size (too large or too small) or format type.

2 . 7 0 per cent of plastic packaging to be recycled or composted that is hindered by several issues

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

that include: • Loss of recyclable materials due to poor source separation by households and businesses.

• Technical and/or commercial barriers to sorting within Material Recovery Facilities (MRFs).

• Limited end markets for some materials.

3. The phase out of problematic and unnecessary single-use plastic packaging, but there are issues due to: • Uncertainties about the availability or recyclability of alternative materials.

• Lack of fit-for-purpose alternatives for some packaging applications.

• Capital costs of new processing equipment when changing materials.

4. 50 per cent average recycled content included in packaging with the main issue being insufficient supply of some post-consumer recycled content at the right quality, particularly for glass and food-grade plastics.

The solution With a large task ahead of us to address these challenges, the following strategies and initiatives have been identified as priorities over 2021-23: 1) Provide brand owners (APCO Members) and packaging suppliers with the knowledge and tools to design packaging for compatibility with current and likely future recovery system. Led by APCO, this will involve an education program and working with industry to ensure their packaging can be recovered at end of life and has resource value.

2) Build demand for recovered packaging materials as well as increase their value and drive investment in sorting and reprocessing. This will be a shared responsibility between the packaging supply chain and all levels of government.

3) Invest in new and improved infrastructure for sorting and reprocessing including mechanical

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// APCO

and advanced recycling facilities for soft plastics. This work will be led by the waste and recycling sector with financial support from state, territory and federal government.

Financial incentives to drive circularity will also be explored in greater detail over the coming years, as will reuse – which has proven to be a potential untapped opportunity to avoid 2.9 million tonnes of singleuse packaging year on year.

A call to action It is evident that there is still much work to be done to achieve the targets and transition to a circular economy for packaging.

However, systemic change doesn’t happen overnight – it’s incremental.

If we as a nation can reuse and remanufacture our products and packaging rather than sending it to landfill, we can contribute to reducing greenhouse emissions. In turn, this will help create a circular economy that will see us maximise the use of existing materials, reduce dependence on new raw materials and minimise waste.

More urgency is needed by government and industry if packaging targets are to be met.

This will require us to leverage the good work we’ve done so far and to truly collaborate and work together.

It also calls for bold interventions in policy, production, education and engagement.

What’s pleasing to see is that across the industry it’s clear that the conversation about sustainable packaging has shifted – from

questioning ‘why’ is this necessary, to ‘how’ do we do this – and it’s fantastic to see such widespread commitment across the country as we work together to achieve the 2025 targets.

Our vision – and the vision Australia needs for a sustainable future for packaging – is for the whole packaging value chain to collaborate

SPECIALIST DOORS

for the WASTE INDUSTRY

to keep packaging materials out of landfill and maximise the circular value of the materials, energy and labour within the local economy.

Unequivocally, now is the time for industry to step up and take bold, systemic and tangible action towards achieving the 2025 targets and the development of a circular economy for packaging in Australia. iw

Noise Dust Wind Separation Odour Vermin Security

DMF International Pty Ltd is a fully Australian family owned business, with nearly 55 years of supplying specialist door solutions. We manufacture, import and install a range of high speed and large PVC fold up doors to assist in the environmental controls of the door openings. DMF are proud to be an Australian partner for German brand EFAFLEX Gmbh, who manufacture premium high speed doors for the global market. These doors are designed to operate many cycles a day, with speeds from 0.5-1.5m/sec, and tolerate very dusty applications. For highly corrosive environments, we can even supply doors with stainless steel structures. These door types have been installed for waste processing, waste to energy, recycle and FOGO plants, and are suited to many other industries requiring climate control of large doorways. Call us today!

Free call 1800 281170

www.dmf.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

sales@dmf.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

43

Regulations //

Why the Environment Court was so scathing of the EPA in the Grafil case

By Frank Klostermann NOVEMBER 5, 2021 was a scary day for New South Wales. On that day, the NSW Land and Environment Court sentenced Grafil Pty Ltd and Bruce McKenzie in a long-running prosecution over accepting material from a third-party waste processor that was subsequently found to contain asbestos .

On the same day, the NSW EPA made public that the EPA’s Resource Recovery Framework would undergo an independent review by Dr Cathy Wilkinson from Victoria.

What do you think caused the EPA to have its framework for Resource Recovery Orders and Exemptions (RRO/E) reviewed? Insight? Self-doubt?

No one knows for sure, but our best guess is the scathing critique the EPA earned from the Land and Environment Court about its handling of the Grafil case. According to the Fair Work Ombudsman, the court’s comments were that the RRO for recovered fines and ENM was “unsatisfactory and incoherent” and that consumers of recovered materials could take no comfort that they would not be subject to prosecution or clean up orders from the EPA in the event they unintentionally received material that was contaminated.

To understand why the court was so scathing and why this is of enormous importance, we have to take a step back and look at the Grafil case in some more detail.

In the review of the case decided by the same court in 2018, Samantha Daly from Johnson, Winter & Slattery (JWS) wrote that Grafil had accepted materials, which, Grafil was assured by the waste processors, were recovered fines or ENM. The recovered fines fell under the applicable exemptions.

Grafil was the consumer of the materials. Grafil accepted these materials between October 2012 and May 2013 to build a road on its licensed property. The material was stockpiled when the EPA charged Grafil for accepting waste without lawful authority.

In short, the court found in 2018 that the material was not waste as 44

The case involved a very small amount of asbestos that was in the waste.

it had not been applied to land.

The court found the material would only become waste when it was applied to land and the amount of asbestos found was so little as to be of no harm. Grafil had stockpiled between 24,000 and 44,000 tonnes of recovered fines and ENM. Under the relevant RRE, testing for asbestos was not required by either the processor or the consumer. Grafil did not know there were traces of asbestos in the material until after it had been tested by the EPA. The EPA appealed the decision of the Land and Environment Court. The Court of Criminal Appeal found that: • Once a waste, always a waste, even where the material is recycled, reused or recovered, including under an exemption.

• The onus is on the generators and consumers to prove the application of the RRO. • Any fragment of asbestos makes all material in a stockpile “asbestos waste”, no matter how large the stockpile or how small the fragment.

• Any non-compliance with an RRO/E

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

means the order or exemption does not apply.

• Any application of material under such non-compliance constitutes an offence.

Scary? Well, read on. The matter went back to the Land and Environment Court for sentencing and that’s when the court made its scathing comments. The EPA insisted on Grafil taking all material to a landfill at a cost to the company of between $15-$20 million, on top of the more than $1.6 million already spent in legal fees over nearly 10 years. No one accounted for the impact on McKenzie’s life. Only on the last day did the EPA finally drop that demand. It would have sent the company broke. For what? The court had no choice to sentence Grafil and McKenzie but found that neither of them had done anything morally wrong. Grafil was convicted, but the charge against McKenzie was dismissed with no conviction and no fine. The court found that, “the EPA cannot shy away from its own responsibility for its decision to sit on its hands and let the stockpiles

grow while it watched in secret, doing nothing to stop it”.

Think about it: Grafil had no obligation to test. It relied on the waste processors to operate under the exemptions, which the EPA never disputed. The waste processors were not prosecuted by the EPA. Still not scared? Okay. Imagine an irresponsible individual throws away a sheet of asbestos hidden in a pile of green waste at a council collection (it happens). Then the pile of green waste goes into a shredder with the asbestos not discovered. The asbestos gets shredded into a million pieces and remains undiscovered. It all gets composted, tested for compliance with Australian Standards, then bagged and shipped to Bunnings for sale. You and I buy a couple of bags and open them to put the compost onto our garden beds – by the way, the Australian Standards for Compost do not require testing for asbestos. Now what? The EPA finds a fibre of asbestos. Do we all have to clean out our garden beds and go to court for sentencing?

I know, it doesn’t make any sense, but it’s the law. How did we get to this? Two causes of this are most certainly poor communication and a lack of trust. Let me explain.

First, there is no really meaningful communication between those who make the regulations (or law) and those who have to work with them on a daily basis. The EPA makes the regulations, the industry and the consumer have to work with them.

The EPA consults with the relevant stakeholders. I say “consults”, because all too often practical advice and experience from industry is not listened to.

According to Principle 5 of the Better Regulation Principles of the NSW Government, “Consultation with business and the community should inform regulatory development”. But how do we know which part of the submissions, experience and advice freely given did in fact “inform” the regulations? The EPA has no obligation to explain why it drafted the regulations the way it did. With great power comes great responsibility. The

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Regulations

While the EPA can take some blame for the Grafil case, industry also needs to understand how regulations work.

EPA has great power, as can be seen by the above example of the Grafil case. The EPA should also have the obligation to explain in detail how the regulations will work in practice and what recommendations from submissions it did or didn’t accept, and why. There is a lot at stake here. Let’s not forget who the law is serving. The EPA is merely part of the executive. A lack of explanation about the workings of the regulations is in fact a lack of respect for all stakeholders.

Why is it important for the industry and the EPA to be able to communicate meaningfully?

Well, you cannot make useful regulations if you do not know how the industry you want to regulate works.

There are two things here that we need to separate: the fact that asbestos is still around and is dangerous, and the fact how the RRO/E works and the principle of “once a waste, always a waste”.

First, we need to get asbestos out of our system, but we cannot punish people that have done nothing to contribute to the fact that we have asbestos in our system.

Second, we need to come to the “end of waste”. It doesn’t pass the pub test to ask the industry to recycle materials and consumers to buy materials with recycled content and then keep everyone liable for when something goes wrong. The court was

incredibly polite when saying the RRO framework was “unsatisfactory and incoherent”.

As always, this is not a one-way street. Industry needs to understand how regulations work. Rules and regulations have various purposes.

One purpose is to protect and create certainty; a framework that tells market players what they can and cannot do. Rules only work if they can be enforced. Enforcement requires the state’s ability to make people stop doing some things and do others, such as cleaning up an environmental mess, even punish people.

I still recall an executive director from the EPA telling a conference what difficulty the EPA had getting a particularly unscrupulous guy to stop dumping asbestos waste in public streets at night. The driver ran a business that wasn’t in his name. At the time the EPA only had the power to fine the driver, who didn’t care about fines, because he simply didn’t pay them. Pursuing the business didn’t work either, as it “phoenixed” a week or so after closing shop under another name. It took the EPA quite some time and effort to convince the legislator to let them confiscate the truck, let alone jail the driver. Laws only work if they have some bite.

But rules and its executors also need to be trusted. Let me give some examples.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

The EPA allowed so-called alternative waste treatment facilities to process the organics in household waste into a compost-like “product”. Several hundred million dollars were invested, lots of councils entered into long-term contracts and the industry went about its business for years. Then the EPA changed its mind. It withdrew the Resource Recovery Exemption (RRE) under which the mixed waste organic output was applied to land. It now has to go to landfill.

In 2013 the EPA published its Energy from Waste (EfW) policy statement putting conditions around how such facilities might be approved in NSW. Not a word about locations. So far not one EfW facility has been approved, which says something, but several are or were in the approval process in Greater Sydney. In September 2021, the EPA published its Energy from Waste Infrastructure Plan saying that no EfW facilities will be approved in Greater Sydney. Several million dollars have been spent to date to get facilities through the approval process in Sydney. Where do they stand now? Certainty for investment? Out the window. Trust in future decisions?

No chance.

There seems to be something rotten in the state of NSW. Here are some suggestions for a hopefully fruitful review of the RR-framework: • With any new regulation, the EPA

needs to provide a synopsis of which submissions were accepted and which were not, accompanied by the reasons for such decisions.

Stakeholders require transparency.

Submissions should be made public, except where provided under confidentiality.

• The state urgently needs an “Endof-Waste” framework. A Circular Economy with a “once a waste, always a waste” framework is destined to fail.

• Regulations need to be practical, workable and realistic, not drafted in an ivory tower. Any fragment of asbestos renders 20,000 tonnes of soil “asbestos waste”? This cannot work in practice.

Certainty and trust are two nonnegotiables or to quote Tony Khoury, CEO of WCRA, “To achieve the diversion targets in the NSW waste strategy, we will require infrastructure investment from the commercial sector. This will require certainty, adequate time and a rate of return, all part of the investment decision process, something banks, boards and financiers justly require.”

Let’s also not forget that this sector directly and indirectly employs around 18,000 people in NSW and contributes $6 billion every year to NSW’s economy.

Frank Klostermann is a director of Full Circle Advisory iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

45

Regulations //

Make or break for resource recovery of C&D waste in NSW

By Gavin Shapiro RESOURCE recovery of construction and demolition waste (C&D) is at a tipping point in NSW. With recent court judgments putting further pressure on the system, proposed reforms to waste and contamination legislation, and the EPA conducting a review of its resource recovery order and exemption system (RRO/E), the next year may prove to be make-or-break for the feasibility of resource recovery of C&D Waste in NSW. I have experienced these issues firsthand. I had advised numerous innocent consumers who received contaminated fill despite being provided RRO/E clearance certificates.

There has also been instances of landowners who have taken over sites from tenants that had stockpiled contaminated material, all issued with financially crippling clean-up

notices, due to no fault of their own.

Solving these issues at the heart of the RRO/E system for C&D Waste is key to restoring confidence in the system, and in our circular economy.

The Grafil Problem An article in this edition of Inside Waste by Frank Klostermann (page 44-45) already summarises some of the key points in the Land and Environment Court of NSW’s recent judgment in Environment Protection Authority v Grafil Pty Ltd; Environment Protection Authority v Mackenzie (No 4) [2021] NSWLEC 123 (Grafil). However, the implications of this, and earlier judgments, are so significant that it is worth emphasising a few points briefly.

The background is that Grafil owned a site. It accepted somewhere between 24,000 and 44,000 tonnes of fill material from numerous well-

known recyclers/skip bin operators.

Grafil relied on clearance certificates it received from those recyclers, certifying the material as having been tested in accordance with the ENM and recovered fines RRO/Es. However, on investigation by the EPA, asbestos was detected in certain stockpiles (described as “minor” and “very small amounts” by Justice Nicola Pain).

The EPA prosecuted Grafil, the consumer, for using its land unlawfully as a waste facility under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) (POEO Act). After numerous hearings and an appeal, the court ultimately found Grafil and company owner Bruce Mackenzie guilty (partly due to a failure to keep all necessary records, notwithstanding that they kept the clearance certificates), and due to the presence of asbestos. The Court of Criminal Appeal held that

The EPA is looking at closing a lot of loopholes that currently allow those who are responsible for creating the contaminated waste, off the hook.

any asbestos – even a microscopic amount – rendered the entire stockpile asbestos waste (requiring a licence which Grafil did not hold). Grafil and Mackenzie, as the consumer, were held liable.

However, in sentencing Grafil and Mackenzie recently, Justice Pain sent a very strong message to the EPA. In short, Her Honour’s message was that the EPA should not be prosecuting consumers, who may be unwitting recipients of contaminated material under an RRO/E. Rather, the EPA should prosecute the recyclers who produce the material, and reform the RRO/E system so that it places responsibility for detecting and removing asbestos on recyclers – rather than penalising consumers. Justice Pain was cynical of the EPA’s case, pointing out that there was no requirement for consumers to examine the material received, nor a requirement for the recycler to test for asbestos, and yet the consumer would be guilty – even when they received clearance certificates, even when there was no obligation for a consumer to inspect (and if they did detect asbestos that may be difficult or impossible to see with the naked eye). Justice Pain issued a “section 10” – no conviction recorded and no penalty, effectively holding that while technically guilty under the law, Grafil and Mackenzie were not morally culpable.

Additionally, Justice Pain only ordered onsite remediation, rather than offsite disposal given the huge cost disparities.

The RRO/E Review The Grafil series of cases exposed fundamental issues with the RRO/E system in NSW. The RRO/E system is supposed to be designed for consumers including households – mums and dads – who know nothing of environmental law or the recycling industry. Theoretically, they are supposed to receive certification and be confident that the material they are receiving – soil, fill, etc – has been rigorously tested, meets specifications, and does not contain harmful levels of contaminants, such as asbestos.

However, I have advised numerous clients who have received such material, including with certification, only to discover (on investigation by the council or EPA) that asbestos 46

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Regulations

The EPA should be prosecuting recyclers who produce contaminated material, not the consumers, according to a judgement in the Environment Court.

is present. The EPA or council will then typically issue them, rather than the recycler, with a clean-up notice to remediate the site. This can be financially crippling to many. Often there are also intermediaries that arrange the transaction – sometimes using fake names, or operating twodollar shelf companies – who disappear at the first sign of the EPA..

In fairness to the EPA and councils, it is far harder from an evidentiary perspective to prove what the recycler/ transporter did, and that they are responsible, than it is to simply take action against the landowner – since the material is there, for all to see, on their land. Similarly, sometimes documentation may be fraudulent, never having originated from a recycler (and rather, directly from a demolition site). But in practice, this is the fundamental issue that has been driving scepticism in our RRO/E system and was the heart of Justice Pain’s criticism. It should be the wrongdoer punished – not the innocent mums and dads, or site owners.

Given the fundamental issues exposed in the Grafil cases, the EPA announced a comprehensive review into its RRO/E system on the same day as the sentencing judgment was delivered. Let’s hope that this review produces the framework for a fairer, clearer, and more robust RRO/E system – because if it doesn’t, confidence in resource recovery of C&D waste may continue to erode, ultimately undermining our push for a circular economy.

Reforms to the POEO Act and Contaminated Land Management Act Another part of the complex puzzle in regulating C&D Waste effectively is that many of the bad actors are fly-by-the night transporters and intermediaries, using tricks such as fake identification, bogus documentation, and two-dollar shelf companies that fold at the drop of the hat.

With this in mind, the NSW Government Minister has introduced a bill to significantly expand the powers of the EPA to regulate waste, pollution, and contaminated land. The Environment Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 (NSW) (Bill) proposes to: • Allow the EPA to issue clean-up notices to any person reasonably suspected of ‘contributing’ to the pollution incident – rather than just the person reasonably suspected of having actually ‘caused’ it. This will expand the potential pool of parties on which the EPA can issue a clean-up notice to include, for example those such as transporters or subcontractors who deliver asbestos-contaminated C&D waste, owners of vehicles involved in transportation (even if there was a different driver), intermediaries that arrange deliveries of fill, and the like. This reform will hopefully make it easier to for the EPA to pursue unethical intermediaries and transporters, instead of consumers.

• Allow the EPA to issue clean-up notices and prevention notices

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

on current and former directors of the relevant company, or related bodies corporate if the relevant company does not apply. This will close a loophole where previously, companies known to be responsible for dumping or transportation, simply declared insolvency and deregistered. Now, those directors, parent companies, etc will remain on the hook.

• Allow the EPA to issue cleanup notices and management orders under the Contaminated Land Management ACT 1997 as soon as the EPA is notified of the contamination – rather than waiting for a potentially complex investigation to determine if the land is ‘significantly contaminated’.

This will allow the EPA to address contamination in a timely manner.

Equally, it may expose land subject to low (and potentially acceptable) levels of contamination to orders unnecessarily.

• Tightening the ‘fit and proper’ person test for licences, so that the EPA can take into account related bodies corporate, current and former managers of those related bodies corporate, etc – to ensure that a licence can’t be obtained by simply ‘phoenixing’ a company or transferring assets.

Conclusion As Spider-Man said (or more accurately, Uncle Ben), with great power comes great responsibility.

These reforms expand the EPA’s

powers substantially. If they are used responsibly to pursue the real wrongdoers then these reforms will be worthwhile, and may restore confidence in the RRO/E system.

However, anyone who has ever been on the wrong side of an EPA investigation, or clean-up notice, may well feel a chill up their spine.

There are already many legal risks for recyclers involved in processing C&D waste and supplying it for reuse, as well as the transporters of such waste.

These reforms will increase those risks, and if not exercised carefully, these powers may make the risks too great, pushing responsible recyclers away from the RRO/E system.

The system for resource recovery of C&D waste in NSW is at a tipping point. If the combination of the RRO/E review and reforms do not lead to better consumer protections, a simpler and fairer system for consumers, and if the emphasis does not shift to taking action against those with culpability for contaminated fill (instead of making innocent landowners responsible for clean-up costs), then confidence in the C&D resource recovery system in NSW will continue to erode. However, if the combination of legislative reforms, and review of the RRO/E system results in a system that is easier, fairer, and less risky for consumers, then it will help power NSW towards a more circular economy.

Gavin Shapiro is a partner at Hones Lawyers iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

47

Western Australia //

Levy avoidance big issue in WA it’s a no-brainer concept. We have been asked about this repeatedly and when we briefed the Federal Minister for the Environment the Hon Sussan Ley, her comment was ‘why don’t we have a single system nationally’? We are working on a government-led initiative for Food Organics Garden Organics, where there are a few more of us in the room, with lots of LGAs as key stakeholders. But we are going in the same direction. It’s going to be a state-wide system.

There is already a state-wide list of what can and can’t go in a FOGO bin that should be public soon.

Does the concentration of ownership affect how you operate as an association?

WRIWA’s Mike Harper.

By Inside Waste INSIDE WASTE caught up with Mike Harper from the Waste and Recycling Industry Association of Western Australia; what it does, what its priorities are, and some of the challenges it has recently faced.

What is the main role of the WRIWA? We are an industry-based association, in that you have to own and operate waste or recycling infrastructure in WA to become a member. Industry contributes about 80 per cent of the capital that’s spent on waste infrastructure and WRIWA provides a voice in how policy is being developed by the three tiers of government. We live and work here, which has been important through this pandemic. We are affiliated with the National Waste and Recycling Industry Council (NWRIC) who connect us with similar organisations around Australia, and handle issues at the national level. That’s been good for us through the pandemic, given we could not travel outside WA, and NWRIC’s CEO, Rose Read, has successfully kept us in the loop

What would you say are the biggest differences between the WA industry and the rest of Australia?

Given that we are the biggest state by land mass, yet have only 10 per 48

cent of the population, our members are covering a huge amount of ground just to get their job done. We also have the greatest concentration of ownership of waste assets in the country, with only three owners of the nine MRFs in the whole state.

We leverage this as much as we can – you only need to get a very small number of people in the room to deliver state-wide outcomes. We also work hard to get on with our LGA colleagues, and in that way we get a lot done.

Can you give me an example of how this works ?

WA has the only state-wide guidelines for what can and can’t go into a recycling bin. It doesn’t matter if you are in Esperance in the far south or Karratha in the Pilbara, it’s the same list, which makes messaging a lot easier. This was an initiative proposed by Tim Youe, chair of Southern Metropolitan Council (SMRC) who owns the only non-private MRF. But our members were keen to get on board. The managers of SUEZ, Cleanaway and SMRC took less than an hour to reach an agreement. No going back and forth, just done. Later WRIWA documented it with SMRC, the West Australian Local Government Association (WALGA), SUEZ and Cleanaway, which took a month as we had to make sure it wasn’t going to breach ACCC guidelines. But really

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

It really does. We meet for an hour and half each month. The idea is to get the whole industry in the room and get everything on the table. It’s a good bunch of people. We have all of the international and national players, but we also have the leading WA-based companies. It’s a working meeting where everyone gets an opportunity to speak to the issues in their sector and hear what else is going on. Then, we will go out and advocate as an industry as opposed to doing so as individual companies.

How well does the WRIWA work with government?

When I stood for election, I said ‘if you vote for me you have to understand I will say it how I see it no matter whether I am speaking to the Minister or a subby on a demolition site’. That’s what our members have told me they want – strong, direct representation. There were, and still are, some alarming problems in WA in our industry and if we are going to fix them we have to deal with them directly.

WRIWA is now dealing with our second Minister for the Environment, second chair of the Waste Authority and second director general of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER) and we have been lucky to have quality people in all those roles.

But one thing is for sure, we cannot waste any time and they get a very undiluted view of what is really going on in our industry.

What is the biggest issue facing the industry at the moment?

Levy avoidance. There are other issues, but they pale into insignificance in comparison.

We have a levy confined to the Perth Metropolitan Region and there was an error made when the regulations were put in place. Levy is only collected at a landfill not at a transfer station or a recycling facility. A shadow industry has set up with rural landfill owners opening transfer stations close to the city, shunting the material to their rural landfills and claiming it didn’t come from the Metro.

Two years’ ago, an insider from within the shadow industry come forward who was prepared to name companies, locations, dates and quantities of where levy avoidance was taking place. In April 2019 we got him to a meeting with the Director General of the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and it was a mind boggling experience. His revelations opened

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Western Australia

Levy avoidance is the biggest issue facing the WA waste industry at the moment.

a flood gate of information, and WRIWA identified $93 million of levy avoidance in the 2018-2019 year, which exceeded the revenue collected by the state, which was only $83 million. Based on what we hear, that would easily be $100 million a year or about $2 million a week

back of Margaret River.

We live in a society where we are guaranteed rule of law, and this is heartbreaking. It makes me furious – the Minister, DG and Waste Authority all know I’m furious, but we will get there.

Is the problem being solved?

What are some of the positive changes happening in the industry?

Yes, albeit far more slowly than I would like. It’s been the key topic of all of our one-on-one meetings with both the Minister and Director General over the past three years. At a very early stage in our discussions, we got a clear commitment from government to fix it.

No one in government is in denial and we are seeing government implement incremental changes that are making it more difficult for the fraudsters. Ultimately, we need the regulations changed. We need a state-wide levy and probably really only need that levy for the C&D and C&I sector. We are not looking for a levy on a council-run tip out the

Rapid change across the whole of the WA waste and recycling industry. The WA government’s Waste Avoidance & Resource Recovery Strategy Action Plan 2030 has given industry certainty. We know government is committed to better recycling outcomes and it’s driving investment.

WRIWA was involved in the strategy’s development, and it recognises industry’s concerns.

While it’s good policy, it would be useless if it wasn’t backed up by the key players in government and we are very lucky to have a Minister who is committed to getting the changes done – as was her predecessor.

The innovative Roads to Reuse

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

program, managed by the Waste Authority and DWER, has Main Roads WA committed to buying crushed recycled concrete and WRIWA now has three members certified to supply. We have gone from having – at best – a back yard C&D recycling industry to a fully quality assured industry. We estimate there are about 400,000 tonnes a year of concrete we can recover; that’s a new $6 million industry.

The State Government is promoting FOGO and that’s also creating a whole new business for our members who are tendering and winning collection and processing contracts. Solo Resource Recovery is leading the pack on collection and GoOrganics is already putting FOGO products into shops.

We were recently briefed by Avertas Energy, who will open Australia’s first WTE plant at Kwinana next year, and that’s going to add to our waste and recycling economy.

The recently introduced Containers for Change program has achieved

55-60 per cent recycling rate in its first year and is charging ahead. Its involvement with WRIWA gives us an insight into a new recycling focus.

We now have the most modern MRF in Australia. Cleanaway didn’t simply replace like-for-like when its MRF in Guildford (outer suburban Perth) burned to the ground. It has brought in stateof-the-art design and technology and has a 99.5 per cent purity rate on its fibre and plastics line, as well as a sophisticated fire prevention system.

Last Thoughts?

It used to be frustrating at times living in WA. Ten years ago, it was probably true, WA stood for ‘wait a while’. But our waste and recycling industry has leaped forward by focusing on strong, innovative approaches.

Mike Harper is the President of WRIWA. He is the chairman of Waste Stream Management, which is the largest C&D recycler in WA. iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

49

Capabilities Statements //

CAPS Australia Company Overview:

the complete end-to-end solution.

CAPS Australia is a privately owned and proud Australian company intent on remaining at the forefront of compressed air, critical power generation solutions.

CAPS offers capital sales, rental equipment, engineering & manufacturing, service and parts.

CAPS has over 40 years of experience in the Australian market with nine branches across Australia and over 170 employees, including 60 service technicians covering the full national footprint with a 24/7 service offering.

CAPS is an independent company with the flexibility to search globally for the best products and technologies that best serve the Australian market’s needs and unique conditions.

CAPS has world-renowned partner brands such as Ingersoll-Rand, KOHLER/ SDMO, AIRMAN, Sauer, Pedro Gil and many more.

CAPS has in-house engineering capabilities, able to customer engineer any equipment to your needs and specifications. Back this with our Australian ISO 9001 accredited manufacturing facilities, CAPS can provide

Products & Services: • • • • • • • •

Power Generators Air Compressors Dryers Blowers Spare Parts 24/7 Servicing Engineering services Rental / Hire

Products & Services: • • • • • • •

KOHLER/SDMO AIRMAN INGERSOLL-RAND TEKSAN SAUER BEKO DEEPSEA

Core Capabilities: CAPS Diesel Generators; together with KOHLER are tailored designed to meet onsite limited real estate; featuring superior transient performance; maximum reliability; low specific fuel consumption

& market leader with high power density for various segments.

Our portfolio covers high speed diesel generators up to 4600kVA (50 Hz); available with different voltage configurations; packaged either in a purpose-built acoustic enclosure or plant room install.

Standby Diesel Generators guarantee energy security for waste to energy facilities; to prevent critical process sudden shutdowns; which are termed detrimental to both equipment & revenue generation.

The CAPS Diesel Generators are engineered; tailored built to deliver superior performance but also meet stringent requirements related to real estate; load acceptance & noise

performance; together with in-house engineering & local partners.

Contact Details: CAPS Australia 185 Planet Street Welshpool WA 6106 Phone: 1800 800 878 Email: info@caps.com.au Website: www.caps.com.au Key Contacts: Nestor DeNiese National Sales Manager – Power Generation Number: +61 8 6250 9871 Email: nestor.deniese@caps.com.au

Ecocycle Company Overview: Ecocycle Industries has built a reputation of renown for the handling and processing of Mercury based waste in Australia.

With some 20 years of experience, we have the National network with facilities in each State to support and look after our valued clients.

We deal with most of the larger waste company’s, councils, and industry direct.

Mercury is seen in lighting waste, dental amalgam, button cell batteries, TV’s – computer monitors, and lap tops, and other waste catalyst, soils etc and we are able to handle and recycle all these various types of waste.

We have a range of specialised stillages, smaller bins, Hook Bins, cabinets, boxes and DG approved containers, with DG registered trucks and DG licenced drivers.

This unique processing ability with the National footprint has allowed us to move into Battery Recycling “EcoBatt” and E Waste recycling “Eco E Waste” and 50

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

links nicely into what we do with metal recycling at Recycal.

We have our foundries “Castings Tasmania” melting down our steel and making quality castings for industry in Australia and “ACL Metal Powders” using scrap copper, lead and tin to make Copper based powders for our export markets.

This vertical integration allows to use most of the recover metals in house and have the highest recycling rates while making green products from recycled metals and solar power.

You can be confident when using our group you will have your materials recycled safely and efficiently, with a first class service back up with quality equipment and containers that will give you the confidence and comfort needed.

Contact Details: Ecocycle Industries 5-11 Reo Crescent Campbellfield Melbourne Victoria 3061 Phone 613 93089415

Key Contacts: E Waste/Mercury Tyson Ord 0433205840 tyson.ord@ecocycle.com.au

Batteries Peter Cage 0428722144 peter.cage@ecobatt.net Metals Jarrod Munday 0431319087 jarrod.munday@recycal.net Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Capabilities Statements

Davis Earthmoving & Quarrying Pty Ltd Davis is an industry leading in mobile waste processing in NSW. The company has a range of over 100 pieces of Plant & Equipment on offer for hire or contract in our privately owned fleet.

All equipment is modern, portable and efficient.

We offer services in Green Waste Recycling, Glass & Concrete Recycling, C&D Shredding, Crushing, Screening, Land Clearing, Mulching, Haulage, Recycled Products & Landscape Supplies.

Established in 1975, we are proudly Australian, family-owned and operated, contracting state-wide in NSW. Davis has a reliable reputation and extensive experience gained over 45 years. We are regular contractors for Councils in NSW and have completed tens of thousands of government, civil and commercial projects.

For decades we have been delivering high rates of resource recovery. We process, supply and deliver quality materials using innovative and environmentally responsible solutions.

We process over a quarter of a million tonnes of material per annum. CEO Eric Davis has in-depth knowledge and experience in sustainable recycling.

The company’s focus is recycling and repurposing materials that would otherwise end up in landfill. Our aim is to transform the way the world views and values waste, striving forward towards a circular economy.

Products and Services: • Green Waste Recycling • Low Speed, High Speed, C&D Shredding • Crushing & Concrete Recycling • Glass Recycling • Screening • Forest Mulching, Timber & Stump Grinding • Land Clearing, Road Widening & Forestry • Quality Recycled Landscaping Supplies • Plant & Equipment Hire • Bulk & Heavy Haulage For hire: • Low Speed Shredders; Komptech, Pronar • Horizontal Grinders; Diamond Z, Peterson • Mobile Crushers; Rubblemaster,

Metso, Kleeman Soil & Trommel Screens; Pronar, Metso Picking Stations; Kiverco Forestry Mulchers; FAE Excavators 1.8 to 46 tonne; CAT, Komatsu • Dozers • Rollers, Compactors & Drotts • Wheel & Track Loaders • • • •

Core Capabilities: Davis offers high-powered, mobile waste processing equipment for hire or contract in NSW. Our Low Speed Shredders process bulky C&D, logs, palms, carpet, tyres & mattresses with ease.

Our Horizontal Grinders process green waste, C&D, timber, stumps & logs. Our mobile Crushers recycle concrete, brick, rock and glass. Mobile and Trommel Screens process soil, timber & green

waste. We have equipment available for forestry mulching, subdivisions, road constructions, grubbing, firebreaks.

We operate our own service centre for scheduled maintenance and field repairs, this guarantees safety, quality and maximum efficiency for our machinery with minimum down time for our customers. We are dedicated to maximizing productivity and efficiently recovering environmentally sustainable and quality recycled products for beneficial reuse.

Contact Details: Davis Earthmoving & Quarrying Pty Ltd PO BOX 19 TERREY HILLS NSW 2085 Phone: (02) 9450 2288 Email: davisem@davisem.com.au Web: davisem.com.au

ResourceCo Contact Details:

Recent Projects/Installations:

ResourceCo Head Office Level 1, 162 Fullarton Road Rose Park, SA 5067 Phone: (08) 8406 0300 Email: enquiries@resourceco.com.au Web: www.resourceco.com.au

ERSKINE PARK PLANT Operations commenced at Tyrecycle’s (RC’s tyre recycling division) new multi-million-dollar plant at Erskine Park in Sydney, producing in excess of 10,000 tonnes of rubber crumb for the construction industry, generating 40,000 tonnes of TDF, and providing a local circular economy solution to rubber waste.

Company Overview: ResourceCo (RC) is a global leader in the recovery and re-manufacture of primary resources, extracting maximum value from materials otherwise destined for landfill.

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Products and Services:

Brands:

• C&D & C&I Recycling • Disposal, Treatment & Management of Contaminated Soils • Renewable Energy & Alternative Fuels • Tyre & Waste Rubber Recycling • Recycled Construction Material

• • • • •

ResourceCo Pty Ltd Southern Waste ResourceCo Cleanaway-ResourceCo SUEZ-ResourceCo Tyrecycle Pty Ltd

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

51

Capabilities Statements //

Hitachi Zosen Inova Company Overview: Hitachi Zosen Inova (HZI) is a global leader in energy from waste (EfW), anaerobic digestion (AD) and Powerto-Gas, acting as an engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor delivering complete turnkey plants and system solutions for energy recovery from waste.

Since 2015, HZI Australia, a 100% subsidiary of HZI, is developing new projects in Australia, New Zealand, and the South Pacific. Its first project, the 300,000 tpy East Rockingham WtE is now in construction and will start commercial operation in Dec 2022.

carbon-neutral economy • Development, Design, Build, Finance, Own, Operation & Maintenance Brands: • Hitachi Zosen • Aquaroll, DYNOR, Kompogas, • HZI Etogas, HZI DryMining Core Capabilities: Energy from Waste, Renewable Gas, Project Development, EPC, O&M, Asset Management Recent Projects/Installations:

Products/Services: • Thermal treatment of residual waste, energy recovery, flue gas treatment, and residue recycling • Dry anaerobic digestion of food & green resources, renewable power production, biogas upgrading to biomethane and bio-CNG • Power-to-Gas for volatile electricity into renewable synthetic gas for a

WESTFIELD ENERGY CENTRE – START OF OPERATIONS IN 2025 Fife, Scotland Following financial close on the Westfield Energy Centre on 16 December 2021, developers Brockwell Energy Ltd has appointed HZI to design, build, and, for the very first time in the UK, also operate and maintain the new Energy from Waste plant. The facility

will generate more than 23MW of electricity by processing up to 240,000 tonnes of residual waste each year.

The new infrastructure project will be HZI’s 15th project in the UK and will be built on the site of the former Westfield opencast coal site in Fife. The plant will be equipped with HZI’s own technologies such as the HZI reciprocating grate, as well as their boiler technology and state of the art flue gas treatment.

These processes will enable the Westfield facility to meet the strict emission directive requirements and satisfy the high demands placed on a modern EfW system.

Visit: https://www.hz-inova.com/

hitachi-zosen-inova-appointed-todesign-build-and-operate-thewestfield-energy-centre-in-scotland

close to service and maintenance when help is needed. Therefore, we have a market-wide network of highly trained service professionals that knows your Komatsu, Peterson & Timberpro machine in every detail. They are, in turn, in constant contact with the Komatsu Forest head office so your voice or needs are never more than a call away from our collective expertise. Furthermore, we are constantly developing new services that will help you in your everyday work.

machine • Support and maintenance throughout your machine’s service life • Maintenance agreements with fixed maintenance prices and other benefits

Contact Details: Hitachi Zosen Inova Australia Pty Ltd Level 17, 40 Mount Street North Sydney, NSW 2060 Phone: 02-8003 4110 Email: info@hz-inova.com Web site: www.inova.com Key Contacts: Dr Marc Stammbach 02 – 8003 4110 info@hz-inova.com

Komatsu Forest Company Overview: Komatsu Forest is one of the world’s largest manufacturers of forest machines. We are represented on six world continents by a network of dealers and our own sales companies.

Komatsu Forest’s head office is in Umeå, Sweden, and we have two manufacturing units, in Sweden and the USA. Our own sales companies are located in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany, Austria, France, United Kingdom, Russia, USA, Australia and Brazil, and our network of dealers represent us on all other important forestry markets.

Our extensive service organisation takes care of the machines, ensuring that they perform their best throughout their service lives. We have workshops throughout the world, service vehicles for quick assistance, in-house machine and methodology instructors to help maximise productivity, and support functions for everything related to our machines and services.

Products and Services: We offer products and services that 52

increase productivity while simplifying the working day for you as a machine owner.

We combine all our services under our Customer Care concept. This is our promise that you will enjoy the benefits of Komatsu Forest’s investments in research, development, servicing, support, logistics and innovative services. These combined resources are at the very heart of Komatsu Forest’s offer.

Our goal is to make your working day as safe, problem-free and profitable as possible, no matter where in the world you operate. Let us show you that by choosing Komatsu, peace of mind and accessibility can become a natural part of your working day.

Brands • Komatsu • Peterson • TimberPro Core Capabilities: Our world-wide network of highly trained service professionals is ready for you.

We know how important it is to be

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

We offer: • Workshops and field services throughout Australia & New Zealand • Well qualified personnel with expert knowledge of Komatsu & affiliated machines • Field Service that enables us to remain close to you and your

Contact Details: AUSTRALIA Komatsu Forest Pty Ltd 4/11 Ave of Americas Newington, NSW 2127 T : +61 2 9647 3600 E : info.au@komatsuforest.com NEW ZEALAND Komatsu Forest Pty Ltd 15C Hyland Cres Rotorua, New Zealand M: John Kosar + 64 274 865 844 M: Paul Roche + 64 21 350 747

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Capabilities Statements

Komptech CEA Company Overview: Komptech CEA is the Australasian distributor of Komptech machinery and systems for the treatment and processing of solid waste and organics waste materials for recovery and recycling. Our product range includes over 30 different types of both mobile and stationary machines that cover all key processes in modern waste processing including: • Single-shaft and dual-shaft industrial shredders • Compost windrow turners for commercial operations • Star screen and trommel screen machines • Material separation equipment including windsifters, ballistic separators and stone contaminant separators • Stationary recycling system solutions including shredders, separators and screening machines Brands: • Diamond Z • Screenpod • Trackstack

• Rowan • Komptech Core Capabilities: With a specialized product portfolio that includes over thirty different types of machines covering all key processes in modern waste handling, a consultative guiding approach to solution development for customers, and full service aftersales support and parts, Komptech CEA has become a leading supplier to the recycling and waste processing industry.

Providing customer value is our focus as we strive to be the industry’s technological leader through continual innovation. Komptech CEA is dedicated to working with you to help you solve your waste problems and identify opportunities with comprehensive, detailed solutions driven by world-class technology.

Melbourne 109 Merola Way Campbellfield, VIC 3061 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Perth 230-232 Welshpool Rd Welshpool, WA 6106 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Brisbane 11 Kiln St, Darra 4076 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Auckland 96 Gavin Street Mt Wellington 1060 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Adelaide 260 Cormack Rd Wingfield, SA 5013 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Key Contacts:

Contact Details: Sydney 6 Skyline Crescent Horningsea Park, NSW 2171 1300 788 757 www.komptechcea.com.au

Craig Cosgrove Product Manager 0417 320 082 c.cosgrove@cea.net.au

Tricon Mining Company Overview: Tricon Mining Equipment Pty Ltd was founded in 2001. Years later; now recognised as one of Australia’s leading materials handling solutions suppliers within Australasia. Continually meeting client expectation and demand for supply, maintenance, servicing, inspection, training, and repair services has made Tricon Equipment what it is today, 20 years on.

Tricon Equipment is one of Australia’s leading suppliers of mobile crushing, screening, recycling, conveyor and associated equipment components since operations began.

Tricon has a well-established customer base and have dedicated ourselves to deliver on customer service, support and satisfaction.

In understanding the importance of the productivity and reliability of our products to your business, we appreciate the value of minimising downtime and place great emphasis on after sales support.

Our attention to the details that help your business on a practical level

flows into individualised after-sales programmes, and a commitment to customer care.

With Tricon, you get our knowhow and insider information over the long-term. Our trained service engineers have experience with a wide range of crushing, conveyor and screening equipment - and have access to a huge range of OEM & aftermarket spares.

Tricon is here to ensure our customers receive the right equipment, at the right price and delivered on time to meet project schedules.

Our products and services meet, and in most instances exceed Australian quality, safety, and environmental standards. Tricon works in alignment to AS/NZS ISO 9001-2016 and management systems comply with Commonwealth and State Legislation.

Our suppliers, fabricators, and designers work safely and efficiently all using industry best practices and Australia OHS & Workplace Practices.

• Recycling Trommel’s • TeleStackers • Mobile Conveyors

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

• • • • • • •

Impact Crushers Cone Crushers Conveyor Pulleys Dewatering Plants Blending Plants Conveyor Components Spare Parts

Contact Details: Tricon Mining Equipment 11 Lucca Road, Wyong NSW2259 1300 859 885 sales@ticoneequipment.com.au triconeequipment.com.au FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

53

Capabilities Statements //

Applied Machinery

Australasian Specialty Coatings that allows for bespoke designs for your particular needs.

Brands: • • • •

Contact Details: 55-61 Nissan Drive Dandenong VIC 3175 Phone: 03 9706 8066 Email: sales@appliedmachinery.com.au Web: www.appliedmachinery.com.au Company Overview: Applied Machinery is one of Australia’s largest suppliers of quality recycling machinery. Over 30 years industry experience enables us to deliver turnkey solutions for all manner of recycling applications across Australia.

Products and Services: • Shredders and granulators • Plastic washing, tyre, and e-waste recycling plants • Repelletising systems/screen changers • Polystyrene recycling machines

Genox Polystar Fimic Greenmax

Core Capabilities: Applied Machinery has the capability to service the smallest single machine requirement, through to the largest of multi-site, staged installations and complete recycling line, turn-key projects. We supply some of Australia’s largest recycling organisations.

A wide range of shredders and granulators are always in stock for quick delivery.

Recent Projects/Installations: PORT PLASTICS Port Macquarie Polystar Repelletising system and Genox large format shredder to drive recycling operations in the Port Macquarie region and reduce the need for transport of recyclables to metropolitan centres.

Products/Services: Contact Details: ASC Head Office 1/14 Chicago Avenue Blacktown, NSW 2148 Phone: 02 8840 8888 Email: enquiries@acoatings.com.au Web: http://ascoatings.com.au Company Overview: ASC is a team of experienced coating and flooring professionals. We specialise in repairing and coating concrete and steel surfaces in harsh environments – waste handling, tipping sheds, chemical storage and high traffic surfaces.

We are fully certified to ISO 9001, ISO 14001, and AS 4801 Standards.

When you call in ASC you get a professional, reliable team dedicated to solving your problems and delivering the best outcome, on time.

We have a solutions-oriented approach

Diverseco

Company Overview: As one of Australia’s leading measurement and automation solutions providers, we at Diverseco pride ourselves on the sheer scope of our problem-solving expertise and supply of industry leading innovative technologies. We are heavily involved across a wide range of industries, with a comprehensive solutions portfolio specific for the waste management industry that includes both driver-specific solutions and robotic automation solutions for material recovery facilities.

Products and Services: • Waste vehicle on-board payload optimisation and overload monitoring (Chain of Responsibility and legal-fortrade operations).

• Weighbridges and portable truck scales for accurate vehicle weighing and accountability.

54

• Truck wheel washes for EPA and road safety compliance.

• Automated waste sortation systems: comprehensive and completely automated robotic sortation systems for MRFs. Brands: • Waste Robotics • BinWeigh Core Capabilities: At Diverseco, our core capabilities reside in our ongoing ability to meet and exceed customer requirements through our extensive problem-solving resources: we are ideal partners for any organisation looking to turn their operational problems into new, profitable capabilities.

Contact Details: 3309 Logan Road Underwood, QLD, 4119 M: 1300 069 970 E: onboardsolutions@diverseco.com.au W: diverseco.com.au

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Tipping Shed Floor Resurfacing Chemical Bund Coating & Lining Concrete Repair & Remediation Corrosion Prevention Coatings High Traffic Surfaces Leachate Resistant Materials High Grip & Anti-Slip Coatings Waterproof Membranes Tank Lining Acid Resistant Coatings Expansion Joint Rebuilding & Sealing Water Treatment Plant Coatings

Recent Projects/Installations: TIPPING SHED FLOOR RESURFACING Banksmeadow, NSW Remediation of Eroded Concrete Slab 1500m² Leachate-Resistant Floor Surface CHEMICAL STORAGE AND PUMPING BUND Lidcombe, NSW Acid & Chemical Resistant Bund Re-lining Full Remediation of Bund Internal Surfaces

Spartel Pty Ltd FABCOM® Organics Under Control© www.FAB-COM.com.au

Contact Details:

Products and Services:

Harrie - 0414 37 66 99 E: info@spartel.com.au W: www.FAB-COM.com.au Company Overview: Spartel Pty Ltd was founded in 1995

by Dr Harrie Hofstede, specialist waste management scientist in waste composting and pollution control.

The company has a consulting arm, Hofstede & Associates, and waste technology R&D programme under the umbrella. The R&D has resulted in six patents in international markets. We have designed and developed two main large-scale composting systems under the FABCOM® Brand. FABCOM® Tunnels and the FABCOM® MAF system.

Core Capabilities: The overall core capability is all

aspects organic waste processing from waste generation to soil beneficiation products, technology, process data processing and control, odour prevention and control

• FABCOM® Tunnel compost plants • FABCOM® MAF composting system • Wireless data transmission and processing over a 2 km radius • Aeration controlled by process data • Remote access process control • Design and construct of compost plants • Development and optimisation of compost process and products • ODOROV™ effective odour control agent for organic waste • High nitrogen composts (4% N) Recent Projects/Installations: : FABCOM® MAF SUEZ Newcastle Raymond Terrace NSW Dedicated FABCOM® MAF aeration system for post Bedminster compost maturation & drying; Capacity 10,000 tpa

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Capabilities Statements

Eriez Magnetics Company Overview:

Core Capabilities:

Leading specialists in metal separation, resource recovery technologies, and developing new recycling strategies and processes.

Eriez designs and manufactures equipment to successfully recover and beneficiate ferrous and nonferrous metals. Identify and remove unwanted metal contaminates to minimise product rejection and maximise product purity. We can help you achieve greater recovery at a higher-grade product delivered at a lower cost per ton.

Recover valuable resources from: • MRF, MSW, C & I and C & D, • E-waste, • Tyre recycling and Scrap metal yards, • Energy from waste feed and bottom & fly ash, • Green waste processing, composting and road sweepings

Products and Services: • • • • • • • •

Magnetic Pulleys & Scrap Drums Ballistic Metal Separators Suspended Electromagnets Eddy Current Separators Stainless Steel Separators Fines Metal Recovery Systems Airless Metal Recovery Systems Technical Service, Repairs and On-site Inspections

Brands:

Contact Details:

• • • •

Eriez-Australia 21 Shirley Way, Epping, Victoria 3076 Phone: 61-3-8401-7400 Email: sales.au@eriez.com Web: www.eriez.com.au

P-Rex® Scrap Drum Shred1™ Ballistic Separator FinesSort® Metal Recovery System RevX-E Eddy Current Separator

GET YOUR CAPABILITY STATEMENT IN NOW! Capability statements are a popular medium in Inside Waste that give the industry an insight into your business – how it can help potential clients, the services you offer, and products you sell.

If you want access to all the major stakeholders in the waste industry then a Capability Statement is a great introduction to those decisionmakers, allowing your business to get a crucial foothold in a competitive market.

If you want to know more about Capability Statements and how they can help your business Contact Chelsea Daniel-Young:

Email: Chelsea.daniel@primecreative.com.au | Ph: 0425 699 878 Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

55

UNLOCK A WORLD OF INSIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY BY SUBSCRIBING TO INSIDE WASTE PREMIUM Corporate subscription

Inside Waste News & Networking twitter.com/InsideWaste

$445

5 members

$595

10 members

Individual subscription

LIMITED TIME OFFER

$295

SUBSCRIBE NOW at subscriptions@primecreative.com.au or visit www.insidewaste.com.au/subscribe

// Young Professional

Diversity makes for an interesting career GROWING up, Ben Whitehouse always had an affinity with the environment, so much so he wanted to be a ‘bush ranger’ when he was a child. After all, his young mind reasoned, a bush ranger is somebody who looks after the environment.

Of course, growing older and being more informed, he realised that those connotations were not what his younger self thought. However, it didn’t dissuade him from thinking it might be a career choice.

“I’ve always been interested in animals and the environment and that sort of thing. I’ve always pursued that when I was a kid – bush work and bush walks, too,” he said.

However, as he grew older, he developed an interest in human health, so when he left school decided to study nursing. During this time, he gained worked experience in nursing homes and ended up spending 18 months in the profession before deciding it wasn’t for him. He then took a sabbatical before enrolling in an environmental science degree, which took him back to his passion.

After graduating, he applied for a few jobs and ended up getting one with Brandown, a company that specialises in recycling and repurposing demolition materials.

“People bring us loads of mixed waste, soil, bricks, concrete, anything like that,” he said. “They’ll tip it at our tipping area, and we will process it at the plant and separate it into its different constituents.

From there we on-sell, or if we can’t do that, we landfill.”

He has been with the company for three years, starting out as a materials compliance officer.

From the get-go he found the role interesting and rewarding.

“I did that role for just over two years,” he said. “There was a lot of collecting and preparing samples to be sent to external labs or collecting and analysing samples ourselves like recycled wood waste, recovered fines, recovered aggregate in many different forms.”

At the beginning of 2021, Whitehouse was appointed the company’s safety, health, environment and quality coordinator, a role that covers a range

The daily variety of his work is one of the several aspects of Whitehouse’s job that he loves.

of jobs. Whitehouse organises all things in relation to safety and training, such as making sure staff have their paperwork in order, that they are inducted into the business in the correct manner and have the right training and tickets to do whatever they need to do.

“With COVID-19, I was organising testing, onsite rapid testing, that sort of thing. With the environment part of the job, it is anything to do with the environment onsite – dust monitoring, organising groundwater monitoring and things like that,” he said.

A key enjoyment he has in the job is its variety. He said, on any given day he can have up to a dozen different tasks that need to be fulfilled or achieved. He is never bored.

“I get out and about a bit as

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

well,” he said. “I’m can be offsite, then I’m in the office, then I’m in the lab, then I’m in the workshop, then going to look at a stockpile of soil, then I’m back in the office by the computer. I do so many different things that I enjoy.”

As with anybody who is starting out in a new role, it is something that he is keen to grow into. Like a lot of young people, he has ambition, but is currently happy to bide his time as he gets used to the intricacies of the industry.

“My ambition in the short-term is that I want to get more consolidated in the role. It is still relatively new for me and the company, too,” he said. “They haven’t had somebody in this role for a while. I need to figure out the paperwork side and get tasks streamlined. In the long-term I want to continue progressing in my career.

I’m open to everything. The waste industry is a very important industry so I would like to stay in it for the long run.”

He said Brandown is a good company to work for and offers opportunities for those who want to get ahead.

His biggest issue in terms of difficulty is not dealing with clients or within the company itself, but government bureaucracy.

“Navigating the regulatory space can be difficult at the best of times,” he said. “There is a lot of uncertainty around some of the ways we do things, and one person’s opinion is often much different to another’s.

Response times from regulators can also leave you in limbo for extended periods, which is frustrating.”

That process is also going to affect how the company handles its recovered fines. Whitehouse said it is being used as under-turf soil by its customers at the moment, but the EPA has announced that a new resource recovery order and exemption for the supply and use of this material will be published in March of this year. What this order and exemption look like will have a significant impact on my role and how the business operates.

“The EPA did a recovered fines audit in 2019 and found some non-compliances they were not happy with, so they notified us just before Christmas of their plans for the material moving forward, and we’re happy that it appears there’ll still be a fit-for-purpose use for the material,” said Whitehouse.

As for the future, Whitehouse is optimistic. And what about advice for those who want to enter the industry?

“I would definitely say stick around because it gets more interesting the more you get into it,” he said.

“There is always going to be a need for people to deal with waste. Whether that is construction demolition waste, or municipal waste, or wastewater, there is always a need for more people.

Definitely stick to it.

“At times it might get monotonous, but in reality, most jobs have some monotony. It is enjoyable though.” iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

57

Equipment News //

Battery recycling: Doing it right EcoBatt is emerging as the go-to company for all things battery recycling in Australia.

By Inside Waste WORKING away quietly in the background over the past eight years, EcoBatt says it has developed one of the safest and efficient battery recycling methods across the sector.

“It’s interesting to listen to, and watch, the developments and stories other recyclers are putting out there and promoting,” says Doug Rowe, director of EcoBatt and Recycal. “We don’t try to say we are Australia’s only alkaline recycler or the only Australian battery recycler – we are not – but the team at EcoBatt can confidently say that they are the safest and largest battery recycling company in Australia.”

Rowe said EcoBatt does things that other companies don’t and won’t; including investing more than $8 million into a range of secure battery cabinets to safely hold and transport the full range of batteries around Australia.

EcoBatt has specialised DG-licensed transport vehicles to pick up end-oflife batteries with company-employed DG-licensed drivers.

Vans and tautliners have an inbuilt automated aerosol fire suppression system for early detection and extinguishing of any onboard thermal issues.

The company has a range of specialised European imported galvanised bins, stamped and approved

EcoBatt has specialised DG-licensed transport vehicles to pick up end-of-life batteries.

for the safe and legal transportation of batteries by WorkSafe and the EPA right around Australia.

The 4A containers are a world-class, universally accredited receptacle for transporting batteries under the packaging class P908.

The containers can safely be stacked three high and have a solid, sealedhinged lid that is clamped down with safety pins.

Additional safety measures that are in place include purpose-built, 24/7 monitored on-site aerosol fire suppression storage containers to handle distressed batteries, and a mobile 20-foot container designed for holding distressed or damaged electric

Disposing of batteries the right way is child’s play with EcoBatt battery cabinets.

58

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

vehicles or batteries.

With sprinkler systems, a range of lithium fire extinguishers, thermal imaging cameras, and heat detection systems linked to security cameras, the containers are at the forefront of innovation to detect, extinguish and protect.

“Battery recycling has its challenges,” said Rowe. “They need to be respected, and the very real risks acknowledged and dealt with. Too little has been invested, and too many corners have been cut by too many, over the past few years – and it’s now time to ensure that recycling is carried out to the standards being seen around the world.”

EcoBatt has more than 5000 unique smart sensor units (battery cabinets) positioned throughout Australia, including at most supermarkets.

It even has cabinets in King Island, Alice Springs, Broome, Cairns and many remote areas.

Rowe said the cabinet locations ensure the public has a convenient and accessible place to deposit batteries within a few kilometres’ radius of their homes.

Button cell batteries can be dropped off at these Smart Sensor Supermarket cabinets, or at any Mister Minute store around Australia.

The units even take old mobile phones for recycling.

“It’s convenient, it’s accessible, it’s safe,” Rowe said. “We need the community to get behind it and do their bit.”

On site, EcoBatt has a state-of-theart AI sorting system that separates and sorts all types of batteries.

Batteries are separated into specific

categories, types and chemistries, and any mobile phones, e-waste or other mixed waste is removed for recycling.

Plastic bags are opened and emptied – with the old plastic bags recycled. The end result is bins full of separated batteries ready for processing.

EcoBatt can safely and efficiently process the full spectrum of batteries including electric vehicles, storage batteries, tool pack batteries and smaller batteries, such as button cell batteries.

EcoBatt’s sister company, Ecocycle, removes the mercury from any small button cell batteries by distilling them in a batch dome distilling process.

This allows the remaining metals to be refined and recovered, completing the full recycling process safely and efficiently.

Rowe said EcoBatt has facilities in every state and is committed to ensuring that the Australian public has a recycling solution for all their different batteries.

He said that while most batteries will be covered by the new Battery Stewardship Scheme, large EV batteries and storage batteries will be a paid service.

“There is a solution for recycling your batteries and EcoBatt wants everyone to be part of it,” Rowe said.

“Let’s ensure that batteries don’t end up in general waste streams and landfills where they can cause major fire risks in waste and collection vehicles and ultimately, the contamination of the environment and water ways.

“There are no longer any excuses not to do what’s right.” iw

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

// Equipment News

Latest Euro6 IVECO ACCO range continues long waste industry tradition IVECO’s new range of ACCO trucks come with an array of new features designed with safety in mind.

By Inside Waste IVECO’s ACCO trucks have been a staple of Australia’s refuse collection industry for generations, and today, the current model platform delivers an array of features.

While the latest ACCO range may look similar to its predecessor, it’s based on all-new architecture that was launched in Australia in 2019, adding safety, emission performance and efficiencies to the ACCO’s existing features of high productivity and low total cost of ownership.

The new trucks are available in 6x4 and 8x4 configurations with factory dual control options, and are powered by a Euro6-compliant, 6-cylinder 8.7l engine with two output options: 310hp and 1,300Nm or 360hp

and 1,650Nm. Emission control is handled by IVECO’s unique Hi-SCR technology, which features a single, after-treatment system with a passive diesel particulate filter that doesn’t require regeneration downtime.

Other driveline features include an easy-to-use Allison Generation Five, six-speed fully automatic transmission, Meritor tandem-drive axles featuring Active Traction Control, and driver-controlled diff locks.

Smoothing out the ride while helping to accommodate the vehicles’ 25t to 28.5t GVM capacities is front-tapered, two-leaf parabolic suspension and rear IVECO 8 bag electronically controlled air suspension (8x4 models also receive front electronically

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

controlled air suspension).

In the area of safety, the new ACCO has features include adaptive cruise control, advanced emergency braking, electronic stability program, front and rear disc brakes and daytime running lamps.

Additional equipment such as lane departure warning, driver attention support and a tyre pressure monitoring system are also available as an option. All heavy-duty IVECO models include the company’s proprietary telematics as standard, providing the convenience of a factory-fitted telematics solution that delivers insights for fleet managers from up to 70 data sources.

While the new range is loaded with technology, drivers and operators will also appreciate some of the

utilitarian carryover benefits of the previous models. These include a tough three-piece steel bumper that allows individual sections to be replaced if damaged, rather than having the added expense of purchasing a complete bumper assembly. The interior of the ACCO has also been specified with hardwearing plastics and easy-clean trim, which is easy to maintain in dirty environments.

Before launching the latest range, IVECO consulted with the Australian refuse and recycling industry to ensure key performance measures would be met by the new models.

Industry uptake and acceptance of the latest ACCO for side, rear- and front-loading applications, has been strong, according to the company. iw

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

59

Cracker Mill CM900

Unit Dimensions: 2900 x 1700 x 2600 mm (LxWxH) Weight: 1100 kg Drive Type: electrical Motor: 15+1,1 kW (fan + deck motor) Rotor diameter/lengths/speed: NA Speed (slow/high): NA Suitable material: cables, aluminium, tyres, electronics, etc.

No. of units in range: 4 Throughput: Up to 4500 kg per hour Finished product size: Options/Extras: NA Price: contact us More: Easily accessible adjustment controls enable adjustment during actual operation for an almost 100 % clean main fraction.

Name: Carsten Nielsen Phone Number: +45 21 49 19 67 Webpage: https:// eldan-recycling.com/ Email: cn@eldanrecycling.com

Unit Dimensions: 5226 x 2807 x 3127 mm (LxWxH) Weight: 30 000 kg, Drive Type: electrical, Motor: 110+250 kW Rotor diameter/lengths/speed: NA, Speed (slow/high): NA Suitable material: vulcanised rubber granules No. of units in range: 1, Throughput: Up to 2000 kg per hour Finished product size: 50-10 Mesh, Options/Extras: Cooler for keeping the temperature low during operation, Price: contact us More: The “controlled drive” friction ratio system is adjustable also during operation, and the electrical system is designed to regenerate large volumes of electrical power resulting in energy savings.

Name: Carsten Nielsen Phone Number: +45 21 49 19 67 Webpage: https://eldanrecycling.com/ Email: cn@eldan-recycling.com

Applied Machinery

Meyer Colour Sorting Systems

60

Unit Dimensions: 2710x1580x2020 Weight: 1660 Kgs Drive Type: Motor: 2.7 KW Rotor diameter/lengths/speed: Speed (slow/high): Suitable material: Plastic (PET, PVC, HDPE, WEEE) and grains No. of units in range: Throughput: 300-700 Kgs/hr per chute; depending on purity requirements (6 chutes in total).

Finished product size: Same size sorted by color Options/Extras: Secondary resorting Price: Contact for quote Name: Peter Koueik / David MacDonald Phone Number: (03) 9706 8066 Webpage: www. appliedmachinery.com.au Email: sales@ appliedmachinery.com.au

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

ELDAN RECYCLING A/S

Unit Dimensions: 2700x 1400 x 2700 mm (LxWxH) Weight: 7750 kg Drive Type: electrical Motor: 110 kW Rotor diameter/lengths/speed: NA/1425 mm/460 rpm Speed (slow/high): High speed Suitable material: Tyres, cables, aluminium, plastics, textile, etc.

No. of units in range: 3 Throughput: Up to 4500 kg per hour Finished product size: depending on screen size 8-2,5 mm Options/Extras: Pneumatic Material Transport for cooling material during operation Price: contact us More: Ideal for final granulation.

Designed for quick and easy change of knives and screens Name: Carsten Nielsen Phone Number: +45 21 49 19 67 Webpage: https://eldanrecycling.com/ Email: cn@eldan-recycling.com

Multi Purpose Rasper MPR200 HD Unit Dimensions: 2800x 3900 x 5300 mm (LxWxH), Weight: 27000 kg Drive Type: electrical , Motor: 2x132 kW, Rotor diameter/lengths/ speed: NA/2000 mm/125 rpm, Speed (slow/high): High speed Suitable material: Tyres, cables, aluminium, steel wire, electronics, refrigerators, car batteries, etc., No. of units in range: 2 Throughput: Up to 14000 kg per hour, Finished product size: depending on screen size 12-60 mm, Options/Extras: Frequency converter for reduced power consumption & adjustable rotor speed, Price: contact us More: Heavy duty shredder with re-grindable knives. Designed for quick and easy change of knives and screens Name: Carsten Nielsen Phone Number: +45 21 49 19 67 Webpage: https://eldanrecycling.com/ Email: cn@eldan-recycling.com

Komptech Nemus 2700

Komptech CEA

ELDAN RECYCLING A/S

Fine Granulator FG1504

ELDAN RECYCLING A/S

Separation Table C26

Unit Dimensions: Working 14.95m (L) x 597m (W) x 3.8m (H) Weight: 19T Drive Type: Diesel / Hydraulic Motor: Perkins 70Kw Drum diameter/lengths: 5.5m (L) x 2m (Dia) Drum speed: to 23rpm Suitable material: Compost, FOGO, mulches, soil, gravel, waste No. of units in range: 7 plus stationary range Throughput: up to 170m3 Finished product size: 8mm – 80mm Options/Extras: Track / wheel Price: On request

Ring-O-Matic 275VX vacuum excavator

CEA

ELDAN RECYCLING A/S

Product Profiles Sorting and Separating Equipment //

Unit Dimensions: Height: 1,817mm / Width: 1,688mm / Length: 2,794mm (unit only, excluding trailer), Weight: 1,586kg (dry weight, excluding trailer), Drive Type: Trailer mounted (also available in truck mounted configuration), Motor: Deutz 31hp diesel engine Suitable material: Designed for hydro-excavation, underground utility location, waste clean-up, municipality use, concrete slurry management, micro-tunnelling, storm drain cleaning, treatment plant cleaning, utility pole setting, and many other tasks.

No. of units in range: 7 truck mounted vacuum excavators ranging from 4,000L to 12,000L, with vacuum options from 1,000 CFM, to 3,000 CFM Throughput: Not applicable, Finished product size: Not applicable Options/Extras: Trailer mounted, on an Australian made 4.5T GVM trailer (al Standard features include; kerb side controls with magnetic remote, single water tank, reverse flow, 74o hydraulic opening door, LED work lights, Vacuum: 600 CFM / 15” Hg Spoil Tank: 250 gallons (946 L) Water Tank: 100 gallons (378 L) Water Pressure: 3,000 psi Name: CEA Webpage: ringomaticcea.com.au Email: marketing@cea.net.au Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Unit Dimensions: 5.5 m length and 2.0 m diameter of sieving drum Weight: 20 tonne Trommel Rotational speed: 19 rpm In-Feed hopper capacity: approx. 6 m³ Suitable material: compost organics, mulch, sand, top soil, wet materials No. of units in range: 2 Finished product size: varies depending on mesh fitted Extras: tracked chassis with remote control & fast switching of screening drums Price: FOR HIRE OR CONTRACT. Rates available More: Contact Davis Earthmoving & Quarrying Pty Ltd for further information Phone: 02-9450 2288 Email: davisem@ davisem.com.au Web: www.davisem.com

Unit Dimensions: Rotor width dependent Rotor lengths/speed: 1mtr, 1.2mtr, 1.5mtr, 2mtr @ 3200rpm Speed (slow/high): Variable speed Conveyor .5-2.5 m/s Weight: 2.7 – 3.6 tons Drive Type: Direct Drive Electric No. of units in range: 4 rotor widths with 3 pole designs per width Application: Removes non-ferrous metallic contaminants from plastics, glass cullet, electronic scrap, automobile shredder residue (ASR), boiler bottom ash, spent foundry core sand, and mixed metals Features: Designed with an eccentrically mounted magnetic rotor within the non-conductive larger diameter shell for separation of non-ferrous metals. The eccentric rotor concentrates its eddy current forces into a zone of separation at the end of the belt. By focusing its field, this design ignores ferrous material in the flow Options/Extras: Control, Vibratory Feeders, Magnetic Drums More: Please contact Jonathan Schulberg for more information Phone Number: 613 8401 7400 Webpage: www.eriez.com.au Email: sales.au@eriez.com

Boschung Urban-Sweeper S2.0

Dimensions: (LxWxH) 4400mm x 2300mm x 1750 mm Gross weight: 1.5Tonne Fuel tank: 50L Engine: Kohler Max sweeper width: 2000mm Max speed travel and clean: 20KM Key users: Rural councils, road construction and road maintenance companies.

More: www.garwoodinternational.com.au or 02 9756 3756

The Boschung Urban-Sweeper S2.0. A Compact Sweeper that is fully electric powered and releases ZERO emissions.

Company: Garwood International Product/model name: Boschung Urban Sweeper S2.0 Unit Dimensions: Length 4300 mm (With standard broom) Width: 1150 mm Height: 1990 mm Gross Vehicle Weight: 3500 kg Hopper Capacity: 2.0 m3 with 1200 kgs payload Water Tank: Clean water tank 190L with 400 litres recycling water tank Sweeping Width: 2300 mm (standard broom) Features: Ability to deliver entire 8-hour shift at a charging rate of two hours with the supercharger, or eight hours with standard charger, LED Lights Two 20kw electric motors for a maximum speed of 45km/h Options/Extras: Automatic central lubrication system, Spray gun with high pressure water pump, 3rd front broom, Articulated hand suction hose More: info@ garwoodinternational.com. au or (02) 9756 3756

Garwood International

Bonne SE6T

MDS M518R (Recycling) Trommel

ConveyorTek Self Cleaning Overband Magnets

Machine Unit Dimensions: O/L 16.4m x 2.5m (Wide) Weight: 20000kg, Drive Type: Diesel / Hydraulic Motor: CAT Engine, Drum diameter/lengths/: 5m x 1.8m 12mm Screen Media, Hopper Capacity: 3.12m³ Suitable material: Woodchip, General Waste, Compost, Rubber & Plastics.

No. of units in range: 1 Throughput: 800TPH Finished product size: ± 12mm Options/Extras: Fines Conveyor, Oversized Conveyors, Drum Cleaner, Water Sprays, Price: Call for Price More: The MDS M518R is a compact tracked trommel that is designed to be used in various applications. It can be fitted with 3 different styles of drums (5m x 1.8m dia.). The M518R sits at a lower height than its competitors, making it easier and cheaper to transport from one site to another.

Name: Tricon Equipment Phone Number: 1300 859 885 Webpage: https://www. triconequipment.com.au/ Email: sales@triconequipment.com. au

Machine Unit Dimensions: To suit various belt width from 400mm to 1500mm, Weight: 700~1600kg Drive Type: Electric/Hydraulic Motor: 415V, 50Hz, 3 Phase Capacity: Single or Dual Pole Suitable material: metal No. of units in range: 25+ Function: Extraction of ferrous material from non-ferrous material or discharge of ferrous material to a designated area, Price: Call for Price More: ConveyorTek manufacture high efficiency Self-Cleaning Overband Magnets in various strengths for extracting ferrous metal at operating gaps up to 350mm. Available in cross belt and in-line designs, our standard CORE models are manufactured to suit conveyor belt widths 400mm - 1500mm, with larger and bespoke units available upon request.

• High strength magnet and guaranteed performance • Test certifiedwith an electric or hydraulic drive option • Strong magnetic field, competitive pricing and fast delivery Name: Tricon Equipment, Phone Number: 1300 859 885 Webpage: https://www.triconequipment.com.au/ Email: sales@triconequipment.com.au

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

Tricon Equipment

Tricon Equipment

Rev XE MKII and MKIII

Eriez Magnetics Recycling Equipment

Trommel Screener Pronar MPB 20.55 on tracks FOR HIRE

Garwood International

Davis Earthmoving & Quarrying FOR HIRE

// Product Profiles Sorting and Separating Equipment

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022 INSIDEWASTE

61

Wasted Space //

The nuclear option DEAR SIR Hope you’ve had a good start to the new year and nothing untoward has happened to you and yours.

Been pretty quiet down here to be honest – well other than hundreds of thousands of Omicron cases diagnosed and some Wimbledon wannabe trying to sneak into the country in order to play at that second tier tournament, The Australian Open.

How is 2022 looking Down Under?

There are a few issues that are going to keep things interesting.

One that has been simmering under the surface for a while now could blow wide open. Go nuclear even.

No, this is not a metaphor, this really is nuclear related. Not on the Bikini Atol, Emu Field, Montebello Islands or Maralinga scale, but

62

enough for our Antipodean peaceniks to get their feathers ruffled.

While we’re not quite honingin on Thunderball territory just yet, there is enough of a ‘stink’ – to use a colloquial Australian term – between the federal government, South Australian state government, environmental groups, and the traditional owners of the land that for this to be settled to all parties’ satisfaction is about as likely as John and George joining Paul and Ringo for a Beatles reunion world tour.

The words radioactive and nuclear certainly have negative connotations – and the way the government is trying to sell it is, and I quote that epitome of political savviness Sarah Palin – like trying to put lipstick on a pig. You can’t make a term like ‘radioactive waste’ sexy

INSIDEWASTE FEBRUARY/MARCH 2022

no matter how nicely you dress it up.

Perception is half the problem.

The proposed site is in the middle of nowhere, with not much around it.

It would make the Shetland Islands look like party central of Old Blighty in terms of the amount of people that go through the place.

Who’d be a politician, eh?

Apparently successive Australian governments have been trying to sort this issue out for 40 years but with every change of government comes new ideas, new priorities and the kicking of the can down the virtual road.

While the government think the chosen site is set in stone, it’s still going to take the next part of a decade to make sure all the T’s are crossed and I’s are dotted.

Maybe it won’t even go ahead.

Back in the day we were worried

about sneaky Soviet first-strike attacks, these days it’s ‘where should we dispose of our used medical isotopes?’ Oh, to have such First World problems.

At the end of the day, it’s all about consultation, consultation, consultation. Back in the day we’d just get it done, right? Still, better to get it right first time than have Creatures from the Black Lagoon appearing out of desert sands of South Australia, eh?

Anyway, there is a long way to go in this story and I’ll keep you informed as more information comes to light. They say it has taken 40 years to get this far, but I can’t help but feel it might be another 40 before a definitive conclusion is reached. Here’s hoping!

JB

Daily news updates at www.insidewaste.com.au

London, Oslo and Dublin Rely on Our Energy-from-Waste Technology.

London, United Kingdom

Oslo, Norway

Dublin, Ireland

So Does Perth.

Rockingham, Australia

Our solutions are based on efficient and environmentally sound in-house technology, and cover the entire life cycle of an Energy-from-Waste facility. Our proven technologies have been part of more than 700 plants worldwide. As a global leader in energy from waste we are proud to be able to say: We deliver. Check our references.

Waste is our Energy www.hz-inova.com

TERMINATOR

SINGLE-SHAFT SHREDDER

READY FOR ANYTHING

The Komptech Terminator is a low-speed, high-torque single-shaft industrial shredder designed to process nearly all types of difficult waste, including heavy C&D debris, bulky waste, white goods, mattresses, tires and municipal solid waste.

TYRES

MATTRESSES & BULKY WASTE

CARPET

MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE

HEAVY C&D

WHITE GOODS

ASK US ABOUT OUR SPECIAL FINANCE OFFER FOR THE TERMINATOR 6000S.

1300 352 378 komptechcea.com.au