OPINION: I’ve heard this question often posed in the last few months: Could the EfW price increase once it’s brought under the Emissions Trading Scheme spark an increase in the volume of waste sent to landfill?
It may seem an odd question when you consider that legislative drivers are also pushing waste handlers away from landfill, but when EfW enters the ETS from 2028, the average cost per tonne is likely to increase to £170—of which a hefty £70 is tax. This highlights the cost pressures waste handlers are experiencing and the dilemma they face—it may make some think, at least for a moment, that landfill is the better option.
However, the government is focused on driving behavioural change, lengthening the lifespan of landfill assets, and supporting the UK’s goal of Net Zero by 2050. It’s evidenced in Defra’s decision to halve the amount of residual waste sent to landfill from 2042 and the 20+% price increase to landfill tax announced in the Spring Budget. Landfill is no longer the answer, especially as costs will likely rise further, at least exceeding the cost of EFW, so incineration is the most affordable and used route, even with the ETS price hikes.
Those continuing to use EfW will want to reduce their liabilities under the ETS. This can be achieved by extracting plastics from residual waste and sending them for recycling separately. Historically, this has been difficult due to organic matter contaminating the plastics, but processes like ours remove all organic matter, leaving the plastic clean and dry, suitable for further processing and recycling. If the floc that’s left is sent to EfW, it will incur less tax.
Ultimately, the only way to reduce our reliance on EfW and landfill is for waste handlers to quickly harness alternative, innovative, financially favourable, and proven disposal routes. This will protect their margins, guard customers against price increases, meet customers’ growing demand for greener options, and reduce carbon emissions.
But we must remove all unnecessary barriers to do that at pace and to help waste handlers stabilise their costs and businesses. Still, one of the most significant barriers to waste innovation remains the delays for permits from the Environment Agency. While no good comes from berating an organisation focused on regulations and standards – we mustn’t ignore that delivering government targets and driving widespread behavioural change requires us to seize the day. When waste handlers are keen to innovate and find alternatives, the path ahead should be easy, not blocked with red tape.
To answer the original question, EfW price hikes may make some waste handlers think landfill is the better option, but it will only be short-lived. The real hope is that this changing waste landscape will send an unmistakable message: alternatives to the waste status quo must be used, and innovation isn’t optional. It’s the only way to protect waste businesses, serve clients, and protect the planet.
Subscribe for free