LAWR

The MRF of tomorrow Trevor Smart, UK sales manager for Stadler Engineering, is involved in the design and upgrading of MRFs on a daily basis. In this article, he looks at the need for them to be "future proofed" if they are to meet the needs of the ever-evolving waste management market he process of how we build waste manage- ment facilities has not changed for some time. Traditionally, a local authority carries out research to assess the composition of the waste in its area before determining which facility would be best suited to pro- cessing waste of this specific composi- tion. The MRF is then built to handle this waste composition and, initially, all can appear to be going well. However, the failings of the system can become apparent when the composition of the waste evolves to such an extent that the plant is no longer able to work efficiently and effectively. These changes can occur as a result of many differing factors - for example, changes in legislation, changes in recyclates markets and changes in consumer habits impacting waste, such as more of us reading electronically creating less newspaper and paper waste. In addition, as local authorities are required to increase recycling this can result in targeting more marginal or lower quality materials which will require changes in collection or MRF processing requirements. These changes often call for a modification in the way a MRF runs and handles its wastes. But, in most cases, very little provision has been made for a change, or indeed an upgrade within the MRF building. Trying to fit new lines, or reconfiguring the existing system, can call for some creative and inventive design and engineering if possible at all! The serious side to this is that, if MRFs cannot be adapted to work with the changed waste composition, they become uneconomic or unworkable. And don't think this applies only to old or out-of-date buildings – there have been a number of mixed dry recyclable MRFs closed over the last two years which is an incredible waste of time, effort and money for all involved. In overcoming these challenges, a more forward-thinking approach is needed when new MRFs are commissioned. The industry needs to remember that these facilities are expected to have a 25-year lifespan to meet the requirements of a typical waste contract. So, why is there no recognition of the fact that nothing remains the same and the waste landscape is ever-changing? We would laugh if someone told us that our mobile phones would stay the same for the next 25 years – or even two years – but we continue to build these hugely expensive and important cogs in the management of our waste, as if nothing is going to change in the future. To combat these inevitable changes, designers and operators need to ensure that facilities are designed and built with an eye to the future and recognising that there will – not may – be a need to adapt the processing systems within the facility over its lifetime on at least one occasion, but probably more. This planning for the future is something which will allow local authorities and operators to react to the changes that occur and help to keep costs down. For example, making provision for an additional line to sort additional glass – given that it has a real value in the remelt market – or for the refining of the plastics line based on new legislation which may happen in five years' time, is more realistic and should ensure that the MRF will continue to be economic throughout its life. 22 Local Authority Waste & Recycling April 2014 T MAPPING THE MRF Trevor Smart April 2014 Local Authority Waste & Recycling 23 To maximise efficiency and profitability, it is imperative that MRF operators and local authorities look for opportunities to make the best possible use of every potential recyclate going through each facility. I have lost count of the amount of times that I have visited clients to see them walking around the sorting plant constantly looking at the process to optimise and improve it with each meeting accompanied by the sentence: "Trevor, while you are here can you look at…." The need for this flexibility can be seen when we look at current issues facing the waste industry, such as the banning certain types of material going to landfill, or the potential effect of the introduction of carrier bag tax – both of which would have profound impacts on the nature of material passing through most MRFs. It's fair to say that this impact on a MRF which has been specifically designed to process certain tonnages of certain materials is often not considered when such developments are proposed by Government. At Stadler, we believe that there needs to be an acknowledgement that banning products from waste collection and/or landfill without considering their implications for the operational MRFs is not the way forward for the industry. Whilst waste management contracts have the ability to change as a result of legislation, the physical nature of MRFs is another story. We need to look at operational factors such as how is this change going to affect the operation of the MRF? Also, what impact will any changes have on financial returns? For example, in some cases, removing a product from the process can have a significant impact on the ability of the plant to maintain its purity levels. In our opinion, the fairest and simplest way of doing this is to continue to increase landfill tax over a reasonable time frame allowing MRFs to be adapted for changes in input materials over a workable time frame. The driver for recycling will continue to be economic which, in turn, would result in the recovery of higher levels of quality fractions and, importantly, operators would be rewarded for doing so. This far more responsive system would result in positive changes recovering more material and therefore reducing the amount of material going into landfill. The alternative, if some MRF outputs can no longer be sent to landfill, are clear. After all, what is the operator likely to do with it? In all likelihood, the responsibility will be passed back to the local authority, and subsequently the collection agent, with the probable result of householders being told not to put some materials in the bins. This backward step is clearly not the way to go. Instead, we need to see greater consideration given to the commercial side of the recycling system to ensure continued successful operation with the maximum amount of resources being recovered and reprocessed. As the new MRF Code of Conduct sets out the need for higher quality waste to be coming into MRFs, there is a real need for greater adaptability allowing plants to change and put in place processes which will handle it efficiently and effectively. As part of this, thinking ahead and future-proofing the life of a MRF should be a no-brainer for the industry. Clearly, the more efficiently the MRF is able to extract high value recyclate, then the more income it will generate for the operator, the local authority and, ultimately, the more value for money will be provided to council tax payers. Stadler Engineering is a high-tech supplier of complete sorting and treatment plants for the waste management industry with offices in six countries. " In overcoming these challenges, a more forward-thinking approach is needed when new MRFs are commissioned " MAPPING THE MRF

• Cover