LAWR

FOOD WASTE The autumn of recycling: Why science and sociology must meet Battling negative perceptions surrounding food waste collections can prove challenging sometimes. Some members of the public view it as messy and problematic. However, Keith Riley argues that there is a solution to this problem - a new innovation that combines science with sociology. Here, he unpicks the issue. s autumn sets in, we can now only reflect on the long, glorious summer of 2014, that stretched itself all the way to October. The economy turned into the long hoped for growth and an aura of anticipation has emerged for the future growth of the economy. It has not necessarily been so good for the UK's environmental performance, however. As soon as elected, the coalition Government took its foot off the ped- dle and "localism" was the excuse that led to both targets and funding being removed, with waste management dis- appearing almost completely from the political agenda. Over this summer it has become clear that the growth in recycling is slowing down, heralded in May by the Telegraph's spectre of "green fatigue". Politics aside, the fact is that the UK's approach to recyclable collection has always been disparate with little common approach across the country and different collection systems in dif- ferent places. This, coupled with the fact that we are a nation whose unwritten consti- tution is based on reasonableness, do not like being told what to and dislike rules in general, when something like recycling is left to whatever the house- holder wants to do, it is not surpris- ing that we revert to the easiest path and just throw everything in the same bin. Consequently, the growth in recy- cling is slowing down and unless things change, it looks like the UK will miss its 50% target for 2020. 'Poor relation of the recycling world' With the spectre of complicating the collection system even more, it is not surprising, therefore, that despite all the noise and publicity food waste collec- tion has received, it is still the poor rela- tion of the recycling world, and often only introduced reluctantly. Yet separa- tion of food from the residual and the dry recycling streams is important if we are to revolutionise waste management in the UK and achieve what the Waste Framework Directive says we have to. Food waste can represent anything from 16% to 18% of the waste produced by householders, and if the 50% target is to be reached, its separate collec- tion must be a feature. But more than that, removing food waste and treating it appropriately could have a major impact on the success of our waste management future. Unlike the rest of Europe, the UK is facing a major shortfall in its energy needs and any future development in how we treat our waste must consider this. Residual waste cannot close the UK's energy gap, but it can make a seri- ous contribution to it. Food waste can contain up to 60% water and hence does not make a good fuel for the energy-from-waste thermal treatment plants. Removing food waste from the residual stream will raise its calorific value and benefit the perfor- mance of those plants. Meanwhile, the UK has seen a bur- geoning of anaerobic digesters, well suited to treat food waste, but unable to get enough of it. Collecting food waste will not only be beneficial to both methods of treatment, but will also remove most of the contamination that occurs in both residual and recycling streams, and if well developed, one could imagine a situation ultimate- ly where the collection system could be simplified to just wet (food waste and organics) and dry (everything else) steams. The concept of the residual stream – which already primarily plas- tic film, trays and card – could disappear and the dry stream sorted and recov- ered using the nIR (near-infrared) and scanning methods available today. This would simplify collection and raise the capture of materials for recycling. Cost There is a strong perception, however, that segregated collection of food waste is not a cost effective method of meet- ing the waste management challenges faced by local authorities. Although " More leaflets and logos is not the answer " 14 Local Authority Waste & Recycling November 2014 A

• Cover