The Green Party, both at 1a Waterlow Road, London N19 5NJ

Tel 020 7561 0282 Fax 020 7272 4474

Acknowledgements

Contents

Summary

Introduction

The authors would like to thank the following: Cllr Craig Simmons (Green Party, Oxfordshire county council), Cllr Rik Child (Green Party, Brighton & Hove council), Danny Bates (Policy Development Coordinator, Green Party of England & Wales).

S1 The UK is facing a waste crisis, with landfill space running out, waste set to double by 2020 at a cost of £3.6 billion a year in disposal costs, and hefty EU fines to be levied if the UK doesn't comply with the Landfill Directive.

S2 New Labour's response to this crisis and to the EU Landfill Directive has been absurd - to decide to build dozens of incinerators. Under these plans, by 2020 the UK will still be landfilling one-third of its waste, will be incinerating one-third, and will be recycling/composting only one-third.

S3 Cities, provinces and states around the world are setting themselves the target of zero-waste status by 2020 or even 2010. Companies including Honda, Toyota and Xerox now have zero-waste strategies. The UK government's plans will leave the UK in 2020 years behind 2002's examples of best practice.

S4 Practice around the world has demonstrated that waste-minimisation can be highly cost-effective. For example, Seattle was able to cut ratepayers' bills by increasing its recycling rate. A scheme in Kaitaia, New Zealand found recycling cost at least 30% less than disposal. Companies around the world have saved thousands or millions by minimising their waste.

S5 Despite the popular belief that people won't be motivated to recycle, Canberra in Australia and Nova Scotia in Canada have achieved kerbside recycling participation rates close to 100%.

S6 A conservative estimate suggests that the UK could create 50,000 jobs in Green waste management if the country pursued a zero waste strategy, as well as reducing our greenhouse gas emissions and avoiding the controversy and risk relating to incinerators.

S7 The Green Party calls on the government to appoint a minister for zero waste who would coordinate a comprehensive package of legislative, educative and other measures intended to achieve zero-waste status for the UK by 2020. (See section 4, Policy Proposals for Zero Waste.)

I1 Zero Waste is both a practical philosophy for sustainable waste management, and a global movement for implementing this key aspect of sustainable development. It's based on the Japanese concept of 'total management,' but the most striking examples at present are in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the USA.

I2 Zero waste is increasingly popular because its central argument is simple and, in the context of a global ecological crisis, unchallengeable. The use of resources should be seen as cyclic. Anything that is extracted from the natural world as a useful resource should not be discarded, but should be used repeatedly. If a resource should finally become unusable then it should be processed in a way that ensures its value is returned to nature.

I3 In the UK today resources are mostly either dumped in landfill sites that are fast running out of space, or burned in incinerators considered a threat to health. This needs to change - but the Labour government seems determined to make it worse! Tony Blair's plans would have Britain recycle or compost only a third of our waste by 2020, and landfill or incinerate two-thirds. While a number of cities, provinces and states around the world aim for zero-waste status by 2020 or even 2010, Blair's policy would leave the UK in 2020 at a far lower stage of development than today's examples of best practice. Worse, the need to supply waste to keep the incinerators going would severely hinder the proper development of the recycling and reuse industries. New Labour's policy is not merely to stand still, not merely to go backwards, but to prevent the possibility of real progress.

I4 Waste is a highly political issue. Waste disposal not only contributes to climate change (1), but affects the health of those unfortunate enough to live near disposal sites (2). The greener ways of dealing with waste are known to sustain more jobs than either landfill or incineration, so waste management is partly about tackling unemployment. And it's also about deciding which types of business will prosper and which will fail, as government decisions can determine whether society promotes health-threatening, unsustainable industries or cleaner, greener, jobs-rich alternatives. As with so many issues, there is a simple divide in terms of political parties. Of the four main parties in the UK, only the Green Party is committed to a zero waste policy and entirely opposed to the building of new incinerators.

I5 The current approach to waste relies heavily on disposal. Under a zero waste strategy it would be transformed into a different set of mechanisms designed to manage resources and work towards eliminating waste from our society. Any strategy developed has to be holistic in its understanding of how waste can be transformed into resources. The Green Party confidently asserts that this is the way forward, because many cities, provinces and companies around the world have proved not only that it can be done, but also that it brings social and economic as well as environmental benefits.

I6 The Green Party is calling upon the UK Government to develop and implement a zero waste strategy. Britain's waste crisis has reached such proportions that we cannot afford to sit on our hands and wait until we are told to do so by the European Union. We need to take the first steps now, in a change of attitude from the old mentality of "produce and disregard" to a new philosophy of "reduce, reuse, repair, recycle."

(2) Environment minister Michael Meacher admitted in June 1999 that "emissions from incinerator processes are extremely toxic. Some emissions are carcinogenic".

1. Britain's Waste Crisis

1.1 Britain's current waste management strategy is clearly failing. It is rapidly reaching a crisis situation, and even Tony Blair admits that there are problems. In a government report he admits that most of the waste generated in UK ends up in landfill and that "This is simply not sustainable."(1) Environment minister Michael Meacher had already admitted that the Government was considering charging householders for their waste collection, with levies rising the more rubbish a household produces (2).

1.2 Recent research shows that England and Wales produce about 435 million tonnes of waste a year, much of which is from industrial, construction, demolition and agricultural activities (3). We produce enough waste in one hour to fill the Royal Albert Hall. Only 12% of this is recycled or composted.

1.3 The proportion of waste incinerated with energy recovery increased from 6% in 1996/97 to 9% in 2001. The Government portrays this as "recovering value from waste". However, the energy can only be used once, and the materials incinerated to produce it are destroyed in the process, so this cannot be properly regarded as either renewable or sustainable. Most UK waste is landfilled (nearly 80%). This falls far below the rate of other European countries, some of which recycle up to 40% of their waste (4).

1.4 Household waste is growing at a rate of 3% each year. At current rates of growth, household waste will double by 2020, and its disposal will cost £3.2 billion a year, which would mean spending an extra £1.6 billion a year on waste management (5). On average, each person in the UK generates seven times their own weight in rubbish every year. Approximately one fifth (20%) of the food we buy in supermarkets goes straight in the bin (6).

1.5 Waste management needs to be approached holistically, we need to concentrate not only upon recycling, reusing and composting waste, but also on minimising the amount of waste generated in the first place. The UK Government has targets for recycling, for composting and for "recovering value" from waste, but no targets for waste minimisation.

1.6 The Government has been forced to look at Britain's growing crisis in waste management by the European Union. The EU Landfill Directive came into force on June 2002. Existing landfills must demonstrate that they will be able to comply with the directive if they wish to operate beyond July 2002. Member states have to reduce the amount of waste going to disposal on land to 75% of the 1995 levels by 2010, 50% by 2013 and 35% by 2020. Landfills are of grave concern, as they are responsible for 25% of our methane emissions, and methane is a greenhouse gas far more potent than carbon dioxide (8).

(2) Michael Meacher was speaking on BBC1's Off The Record, 10 November 2002, in response to a leaked government report.

(4) Ibid.

(6) Ibid.

(8) See Waste Not Want Not, ibid.

2.1 New Zealand launched its Zero Waste Trust in 1999. Designed for the participation of 10 local councils, by mid-2000 the project had 25, each funded with a NZ$25,000 grant. One district, Opotiki, cut landfilling from 10,000 tons to 3,500 per year, and expected to recover 80% of municipal waste (1).

2.2 Western Australia aims to be zero-waste by 2020 (2).

2.3 Canberra, Australia (population 313,000) aims to be waste-free by 2010. It has made rapid progress, increasing its recycling rate by 92% by 2000-01 compared with 1995-96. It enjoys a participation rate greater than 98% in its kerbside recycling (3).

2.4 Seattle adopted zero waste as a guiding principle in its solid waste plan in 1998.Two California counties soon followed, as did Carrboro, North Carolina. Some US communities, like Seattle and San Jose, have achieved 65% reductions in waste (4).

2.5 The province of Nova Scotia, Canada (population 940,000) set a legal target of 50% diversion of solid waste from landfill within 5 years. It decided to cut the number of waste disposal sites from 40 in 1995 to less than 10 in 2005. As a short-term measure Nova Scotia banned disposal of drinks containers, corrugated cardboard, newsprint, lead-acid batteries, tyres, used oil and leaf and yard waste, and over the longer term waste paint, antifreeze, some plastics, steel/tin and glass food containers and compostable material from industrial, commercial, institutional and residential sources, along with a range of other measures. Almost 100% of Nova Scotians have access to kerbside recycling and over 70% have access to kerbside organic collection (5).

2.6 Edmonton, Canada (population 938,000) has diverted 70% of its residential waste from landfill. In 2001 about 15% of its residential waste was recycled, 55% composted and 30% landfilled, compared with 86% landfilled in 1999. That is, in just 2 years Edmonton cut the proportion of its waste landfilled by two-thirds, without building new incinerators. About 27% of Edmonton homeowners (around 42,000 families) are composting in their backyards, diverting 10,224 tonnes of organic waste from landfill each year.

2.7 Christchurch, New Zealand (population 309,000) achieved a composting/recycling rate of 24% in 2001, and has a target to reduce landfill by 65% by 2020. Now 70% of households recycle each week and about 60% compost at home or take green waste to the council's composting plant (7).

2.8 In England one district council has already adopted a zero waste policy, namely Bath and North East Somerset, and one county council, Essex.

2.9 Massachusetts aims to reduce municipal solid waste by 70% by 2010 (8).

2.10 Rapid progress towards zero waste can be made. In Canadian zero-waste city Edmonton, before 1998 all waste was landfilled. In 2000 only about 35% was landfilled (9).

2.11 Germany adopted its Packaging Ordinance of 1991, which shifted the costs of collecting, sorting and recycling used packaging from municipal government to private industry. In its first four years it cut packaging consumption in by a million tons. By 1998, packaging overall had become lighter and smaller, and lower-fee cardboard was replacing higher-fee plastic and glass. In 2000, German consumers carried home 17% less packaging than in 1991. In 2000, the system recovered 93% of its plastics and 91% of its glass (10).

2.12 Variations of the German "Green Dot" system are in place all over the world, including programmes in Poland, Hungary, Korea, Taiwan and Japan. More than two dozen countries now require companies to take back their packaging, including Belgium, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands (11).

2.13 In Finland, a law passed in 1997 aimed to reuse or recycle 82% of packaging waste within the first four years, and prevent another six% from being created in the first place (12).

2.14 Massachusetts has banned the landfilling of TV and computer cathode ray tubes - the largest source of lead in the municipal waste stream (13).

2.15 In Holland, a law effected in 1999 requires computers, appliances and other equipment to be taken back by their manufacturers. Italy has required refrigerator takeback since 1997 (14).

2.16 Some 23 US states ban some or all yard waste from their dumps, 32 states refuse to accept tyres, and 16 states ban large appliances. California's San Diego County bans all materials it deems recyclable (15).

2.17 Ten US states have a legal deposit on bottles and cans. In those states an average of 80% of beverage bottles and cans are recycled; in other states, 40%. Drinks containers alone constitute 5% of the waste stream (16).

2.18 Government departments can work towards zero-waste status. New York State Department of Corrections began its composting project in 1990. In 1997, 47 sites were composting 90% of their food discards. Other initiatives include using cotton from used mattresses as a bulking agent in the compost and recycling corrugated cardboard, office and computer paper, newsprint, bi-metal cans, plastic containers and Styrofoam. Participating facilities now recycle or compost, 80% of their solid waste (17).

2.19 The EU end-of-life vehicles directive sets an 80% recycling rate for 2005 (18).

2.20 The EU biowaste directive states that member states should set up separate collection schemes for biodegradable waste (biowaste), such as kitchen waste, for all towns with a population over 100,000 (to be achieved within 3 years of legislation being introduced). Villages will a population over 2,000 should achieve this within 5 years. The directive is expected to be signed in 2004, so the first deadline will be 2007 (for population over 100,000) and the second deadline will be 2009 (19).

3.1 Zero Waste is not only beneficial environmentally, but economically as well. It isn't just committed environmental organisations and waste-swamped local authorities that are adopting zero waste strategies; many profit-orientated companies have realised the benefits as well. Businesses of all sizes have used Zero Waste to improve productivity and increase profits.

3.2 Reuse tends to be better than recycling, in terms of conserving energy and avoiding pollution, but can also generate economic benefits such as higher job-creation. The old British milk bottle system was of course a prime example of a virtually waste-free (and zero-emissions) delivery/collection system, and some countries have good records on reuse of drinks bottles - indeed, some places such as Nova Scotia have banned the disposal of drinks containers. The Beer Store in Canada saves roughly $160 million (nearly £65 million) in avoided packaging costs every year by implementing a deposit-return programme (10 cents/unit) on their drinks bottles. Serving 12 million people about 1.8 billion servings per year, the Beer Store's standard refillable bottle is reused between 15 and 20 times. The system has a 98% bottle return rate, 97.6% of all packaging is diverted from landfill, 80% are standard refillable bottles, 11% are refillable kegs and 8% are recyclable one-way packaging. The Beer Store's packaging return program saves Ontario municipalities about $31 million in collecting and recycling costs (1).

3.3 Seaman's Beverages Limited in Canada has always used refillable glass bottles for its soft drinks, which can be reused up to 40 times. Some stay in circulation for up to 20 years, and 97% are recycled when no longer useful. Seaman's has achieved the highest refillable bottle recovery rate in North America. This initiative costs the Canadian taxpayer nothing, because the user and the manufacturer of the beverages are responsible for collecting and returning the bottles (2).

3.5 Ratepayers in Seattle saved $12 million between 1988 and 1994 because it was cheaper to recycle than landfill (6).

3.7 Zero waste is increasingly being taken seriously by big companies like Toyota. In countries where facilities exist, Toyota cars have been more than 85% recyclable by weight since 1996. Toyota separates 12 kinds of materials at the recycling stage and tries to reuse them. For example, recycled polyurethane can be recycled into soundproof linings for new cars, and glass can be used as reinforcing material in ceramic tiles. The zero waste philosophy is implemented at the design stage (11). Toyota have invented a more recyclable plastic, which they have licensed to car manufacturers in Europe and North America (12). Fujio Cho, the Toyota Motor Corporation's President referred to the zero waste strategy as "a state of mind - awareness of the product life cycle" (14).

3.8 Xerox has a waste reduction initiative it calls "Xero Waste." It developed the first photocopier that is 95% recyclable/reusable. When the photocopier reaches the end of its useful life Xerox collect it, dismantle it into its component parts, and rebuild it into another machine, which can be resold as a brand new product. In 1999, world-wide recycling rates at Xerox factories reached 87% and reduce, reuse and recycle savings amounted to $47 million (14). Oregon-based computer printer maker Epson recycles 90% of its materials. Hewlett-Packard in California is diverting 92-95% of its solid waste, saving almost $1 million a year in waste disposal costs by recycling cardboard, foam, plastic peanuts, low-density polyethylene plastics, Instapak, polystyrene plastics and reuses and recycles pallets (15).

3.9 Although it certainly isn't always the case, there are occasions when business actually presses government for higher standards, or in some other way takes a lead. Sony Electronics agreed to fund a 5-year programme in Minnesota that would take back for recycling all Sony products currently dispensed with by consumers. Sony's president and chief operating officer, Fujio Nishida, said: "Taking back and recycling products helps Sony design future devices that cost less to manufacture and help save our precious natural resources. It's a win-win situation" (16). And a letter in The Guardian, 3.1.02, signed by the managing director of Sony UK on behalf of the American Electronics Association, Electrolux, Gillette, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Japanese Business Council Europe, and Philips accused the UK government of being "in danger of missing a golden opportunity to encourage the best environmental standards" (17).

3.10 Collins & Aikman, carpet makers of Dalton, Georgia, achieved zero landfill waste in 1998 while the company was increasing production by 300% (without increasing energy use) (18).

3.11 Businesses can make rapid progress towards zero-waste status. The Virco Manufacturing Corporation of Arkansas achieved an 88% waste reduction in eight years. Recovered materials include corrugated cardboard, ferrous and on-ferrous metals, hydraulic oil, mixed office paper, three types of plastics, foam rubber, tires, batteries and wood scraps. The company purchases recycled content items whenever possible and sponsors recycling programs with area schools (19).

3.12 Mad River Brewery, in Blue Lake, California, diverts 98% of its waste from landfills, which leaves only enough garbage to fill two 90-gallon cans a week. In 1998, the brewery's waste reduction efforts saved it more than $35,000. The company takes back six-pack containers and donates plastic grain packaging for remanufacture into reusable shopping bags. Mad River Brewery has its own reed bed filtration system to clean up liquid discharges and recycles the spent brewing grains as cattle feed. Namibian Breweries in Africa opened their sorghum brewery in 1997 with the vision: "good beer, no chemicals, no pollution, more sales and more jobs." The brewery is a fully integrated biosystem with 40 different biochemical processes to reuse everything (heat, water, wastes and CO2) and produces seven times more products compared to conventional beer producers (20).

3.13 Pillsbury's baking operations in Eden Prairie, Minnesota, divert 96% of their waste, and the company is aiming for zero waste. The company recycled or reused enough paper in 1999 to save 200,000 trees, 82 million gallons of water and 48 million kilowatts of electricity. Pillsbury uses rented or recycled shipping pallets, and recently increased the recycled content of its folding cartons to 50%. Pillsbury seeks to improve its waste efficiency by 10% each year and has saved over $500,000 per year through its waste-reduction efforts (21).

3.14 Del Mar Fairgrounds of California, which hosts more than 200 events a year, has reduced waste production by 86% through aggressive recycling and composting programs including increased use of electronic mail, refilling printer toner cartridges, double-sided copying, and reusing shipping and storing supplies. It saved $863,976 in disposal fees and revenue from material sales. San Diego Wild Animal Park in California has implemented a waste-reduction programme which saved over $1 million annually in tipping and hauling fees. The park now landfills only 4% of its waste.

3.15 In Nova Scotia, milk producers provide funding and in-kind advertisement to municipalities to recycle milk cartons (22).

3.16 California winemakers Fetzer reduced their company's waste outflow by 93% between 1993 and 1999, and aim for zero waste by 2009 (23).

3.17 California has a number of "resource recovery parks" - each a central location for recycling, composting and reuse facilities, together with manufacturing. One former steel pipe manufacturing facility was transformed into a 2.2-acre reuse demonstration project called Urban Ore, featuring departments that retail building materials, hardware, arts and media equipment, as well as a general store. Its director claims: "We could produce 100 times the products with the same resources if we were looking at the total system on a holistic basis. And it doesn't have to be altruistic" (24).

3.18 Some small businesses have found it possible to quickly achieve zero-waste status. In the second half of 2000, six stores in Auckland, New Zealand achieved zero waste status and no longer have dumpsters on their premises. The Amdahl Corporation, a computer software business in California, achieved a 90% waste diversion within a decade of introducing its waste-minimisation programme in 1990. Saint Joseph Medical Centre, Fort Wayne, Indiana, has achieved an 80% reduction in waste through source reduction and recycling. This was achieved by eliminating single-use food service items, instituting electronic procedures, and recycling materials including cardboard, plastics, glass, aluminium, bi-metal cans, paper and x-ray film. Larry's Markets in Bellevue, Washington, instituted a composting programme in 1996 as part of their plan to run environmentally responsible stores. The company's five stores recovered 90% of their food discards and realised net savings of about $41,000 a year (25).

3.19 Green waste management will become more economically attractive to business as the net costs of composting and recycling fall over time and economies of scale are achieved. The larger the number of products collected, the lower the average cost per product. Business attitudes to Green waste management are changing. The UK waste industry now accepts a recycling/composting rate of 60% as being achievable - a significant change from their stance 10 years ago. Zero Waste delivers tangible economical results and creates new jobs. Businesses see waste as a resource to be exploited, rather than a cost to be incurred. If the UK does not change its attitude towards waste it will get left behind.

(2) Ibid.

(4) See the report on parliamentary lobby 'Beyond Recycling - Towards Zero Waste'. Some councils are already achieving high levels of recycling/composting within current budgets (Daventry DC is achieving in excess of 40% diversion from landfill). The increasing cost of landfill will improve the economics further still in future years:

(11) For example, Toyota uses heat fusing processes to reduce the need for metal fasteners. They mark rubber and resin parts to facilitate the sorting and recycling processes; see the report by the Toyota Motor Corporation, Act Now for a Better Tomorrow: Finding Harmony between Automobiles and Society.

(12) Toyota Super Olefin Polymer (TSOP), which is easier to recycle than conventional polypropylene; ibid.

(13) Ibid.

(17) The letter also said that "the UK government appears to be moving away from the recognised principle of 'the polluter pays'," and accused it of pursuing a policy which "would not encourage companies to adopt greener designs in the future and would leave the market open to rogue companies to act as free riders bearing no responsibility for the waste they are creating."

4.1 Appointment of a minister for zero waste to coordinate the implementation of a UK-wide zero waste policy. Waste is rapidly becoming a crisis in the UK. The responsibilities are too vast to be adequately incorporated into the Environment's Minister's remit.

4.2 A law banning new waste incinerators and setting the earliest practicable date for phasing out existing incinerators (1).

4.3 A law requiring local authorities to set and meet targets towards zero waste. Many local authorities have done so already, but Government guidelines are needed. (2).

4.4 A major campaign to increase public and corporate awareness of zero waste policies and benefits. The implementation of Zero Waste proposals would undoubtedly meet with public support (3).

a. A law comparable German Packaging Ordinance to shift the costs of collecting, sorting and recycling used packaging from municipal government to private industry (4). Manufacturers were allowed to design their own recycling programme. The Duales System Deutschland (DSD) provides each household with an additional bin for packaging waste bearing the "Green Dot" logo. This waste is collected, sorted and recycled, with costs borne by the producers. During its first four years, the Green Dot program cut packaging consumption in Germany by a million tons. It also served to reduce the amount of packaging materials produced, because in order to reduce recycling costs manufacturers lightened their packages, eliminated unnecessary packaging (like boxes within boxes), and marketed their products in more concentrated forms. Variations of the Green Dot are now in place in other countries including Finland, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Poland, Taiwan.

b. A law requiring manufacturers of consumer durables and electronic goods to take back for recycling any of their products dispensed with by users. Sony Electronics have agreed to fund such a programme in Minnesota, USA, intended to spread soon to 5 other states (5). In Holland, a law of 1999 requires computers, appliances and other equipment to be taken back by their manufacturers. Japan and Norway now have similar programmes. Italy has required refrigerator takeback since 1997, and is working on regulations for other appliances (6).

c. A law banning cathode ray tubes and printed circuit boards from being landfilled or incinerated. Massachusetts, USA has banned TV and computer cathode ray tubes from its landfills. CRTs are the largest source of lead in the municipal waste stream and printed circuit boards are the second.

d. A law banning the landfill or incineration of materials deemed recyclable. This is already the case in San Diego county, California. Some 23 US states ban some or all yard waste from their dumps, 32 states refuse to accept tyres, and 16 states ban large appliances (8).

e. A law requiring manufacturers to use laid-down best-practicable percentages of post-consumer materials in their products. In 1990 Coca-Cola made - and failed to keep - a promise to use 25% post-consumer waste in its plastic beverage bottles. While Coke has not capitulated, it has agreed to use 10% recycled content in a quarter of its bottles, making 2.5% total content (9).

f. A law requiring alcoholic and soft drinks to be provided in reusable containers . Precedents have been set for this. The Beer store in Canada saves about $160 million in avoided packaging costs every year. Seaman's Beverages recycles 97% of their soft drink containers, and together with the beer industry on the Island divert over 47 million containers from litter and landfill each year (10).

(1) Exceptions may need to be made for medical waste.

(2) In England one local authority has formally adopted a zero waste policy, namely Bath and North East Somerset. Many others are beginning to incorporate zero waste thinking into their policy-making (South Norfolk DC, South Lakeland DC, Braintree DC are just some examples).

(3) A recent MORI poll 58% said that they recycle regularly, and 50% said that a lack of amenities would most prevent them from recycling.