I am puzzled by the seeming lack of awareness that EfW reduces emissions. The alternative, which has been the historic norm in the UK, of landfill tonne for tonne of waste, produces more emissions than EfW. We think of waste as a problem, but Scandinavians think of waste as a resource. We should do the same, but sadly many are still living in the past and cannot think of waste as a resource to be carefully managed for the benefit of society, while thinking of emissions in the same way - as a resource rather than a problem, seems to be beyond their imagination. At Agile Energy we do this: take in raw residual waste, process it to remove any remaining recyclates, produce steam with the fuel that is left and export electricity to the grid, use the waste heat for affordable reliable district heating, produce hydrogen at off peak times, capture the CO2 from the flue gas and produce liquid fuels by combining the CO2 and the H2.

And the CCC want to stop our industry doing this? Who is advising these people? Do they only understand the stick when it comes to motivation? Here is my alternative statement:

"Implement a whole-systems approach to address Waste Management, including setting out the implications of continuing to waste resources by landfilling instead of a properly designed whole systems approach to utilize waste and emissions at Integrated Recycling and Resource Recovery Facilities (IRF's) for waste decarbonisation and confirming plans to capture and convert carbon emissions into circular economy low carbon-based products and fuels." 

Alf Robertson

Managing Director, Agile Energy Recovery Limited