Official Publication of the
ISSUE 88 | FEBRUARY/MARCH 2019
www.insidewaste.com.au
Strategic planning essential to solving waste crisis By Paul Green
PP: 255003/07055
ISSN 1837-5618
THE UPPER HOUSE INQUIRY into the NSW EPA highlighted the many, pressing issues facing the waste industry in NSW, including concerns about the waste levy, illegal dumping, interstate transportation of waste, regulation of energy-from-waste projects, the EPA’s regulatory role, the lack of strategic planning for waste management infrastructure, and the challenges facing the recycling and resource recovery sector. The high waste levy was partially credited for the state’s impressive resource recovery rate, however, stakeholders expressed concerns about its effectiveness in supporting the development of much-needed waste infrastructure, particularly recycling and resource recovery facilities (RRFs) and alternative waste technologies. In 2014-15, NSW generated about 19 million tonnes of waste and is currently the second highest per capita producer of waste in the world. It’s essential that waste management services and infrastructure are strategically planned and delivered appropriately. However, successive NSW governments fail to leverage levy funds to support the development of these much-needed services and facilities, leaving NSW dependent on landfill for waste disposal. The inquiry committee made a number of recommendations to overcome this issue, including the government hypothecating a greater percentage of levy funds to local councils and the waste industry to support the provision of additional waste services, initiatives and infrastructure. A number of stakeholders said that
funds are especially useful in developing alternative waste solutions. Waste Less, Recycle More is the primary initiative funded through the levy, providing funding for recycling, organics collections, market development, managing problem wastes, new infrastructure, local councils and programs to tackle illegal dumping and litter. The EPA said that the objectives of the initiative include stimulating investment in waste and recycling facilities and infrastructure, changing community attitudes towards reuse and recycling, and strengthening compliance and enforcement. The committee received evidence that the EPA should be restructured to enhance the regulation of the industry. “Government is urged to implement the type of reform and cultural change that was so effective in shifting the priorities of WorkCover to SafeWork to achieve regulation and compliance together with support and education as equal priorities,” the Australian Organics Recycling Association said. “This may require restructuring the EPA to achieve a better balance between regulating illegal activities and working with the organics recycling industry.” The Australian Council of Recycling suggested that opportunities to incorporate future advances in technology into energy-from-waste facilities will depend on landfill levies. According to the Illawarra Pilot Joint Organisation, the effectiveness of the levy in allowing councils to develop alternative waste solutions is not always clear, particularly in regional areas. “Councils in regional areas face the challenge of maintaining an adequate income stream to fund landfill
operation fixed costs, as they would still be required for some waste streams not suitable for alternative waste treatment,” the organisation said. There can be no doubt that the levy has contributed to the development of waste management projects in this state. However, while the levy has supported significant investment in alternative waste technologies, it is clearly insufficient to adequately deal with our overall waste management needs. This is disappointing, as the levy has generated significant amounts of money for the government. A greater proportion of levy funds should be returned to local council and the waste industry to fund innovative solutions. In NSW, the current dependence on landfill is unsustainable, and local councils and the government must work collaboratively to deliver suitable alternatives for waste management. Evidence received by the committee suggests that the EPA seems to be struggling in some areas and therefore needs a further review of their structure. The committee recommended that the EPA’s Waste and Resource Recovery Infrastructure Strategy helps: • identify appropriate locations; • facilitate new infrastructure; • enable the circular economy; and • create markets for secondary materials. I recently moved an amendment to the Protection of the Environment Operations Amendment (Asbestos Waste) Bill 2018 to ensure local councils have 12 months to implement the changes. The bill contained two schedules that made changes to the laws and penalties surrounding the unlawful movement of asbestos and will impose stricter
INSIDE 18 Inside Waste Awards 30 Waste Transportation 35 Young Professionals 42 C onsultants Survey
Paul Green, chair of the Upper House Inquiry into the NSW EPA.
sanctions for offences, while minimising impacts on legitimate operators. It sends a strong deterrent message to illegal dumpers of asbestos. It is my hope that the increased revenue as a result of the 100 per cent increase in maximum penalties for dumping asbestos will go back into tackling illegal asbestos dumping, rather than being returned to the government. The minister and the EPA have agreed to give councils 12 months to meet the standards. I encouraged the minister to hold true to that agreement, and if there is a change in government, we want to ensure that the amendments carry over. Asbestos is dangerous and we can see that an urgent response is required. However, we need to ensure that local councils are given time to get on board. Paul Green is an Australian politician who is a member of the NSW Legislative Council. He chaired the Inquiry into the NSW EPA, which handed down 36 recommendations to the government.