EU Circular Economy Package Could Cost Britain £2 Billion

Following proposed EU waste policies would cost British businesses and households an additional £2 billion, according to a new report by the Policy Exchange.

In a major new report, Going Round in Circles, Policy Exchange says that Brexit presents a huge opportunity for the UK Government to develop a new approach to waste and resources policy.

The report highlights significant shortcomings in the EU’s approach to waste and recycling: the objectives are increasingly unclear, the targets are badly designed, and the policies are not in the UK’s interest.

Policy Exchange’s Head of Environment and Energy, Richard Howard – “The EU’s proposed ‘Circular Economy package’ is ill defined and poorly thought through. It focuses too much on the means rather than the ends. The UK needs to take back control of our rubbish and develop a more coherent set of waste policies which better serve UK businesses and households, as well as the environment.”

Rather than adopting the EU’s proposed “Circular Economy Package”, which would cost British businesses an extra £2 billion over the next twenty years, the British Government should use Brexit to define our own approach to waste and resource policy.

This should focus on maximising the resource productivity of the UK economy, in line with the Government’s emerging Industrial Strategy. It should also seek to minimise the carbon emissions and wider environmental impacts of waste management and resource use.

It also says emphasis should be given to energy from waste infrastructure, rather than spending £280 million exporting waste overseas.

The report makes the following key recommendations:

  • Household Waste Recycling Centres should also be collection points for reusable items, which can then be sold or redistributed to local charities. This approach is, bizarrely, illegal under current waste rules.
  • Local authorities should use one of three standardised systems for collecting waste and recycling – simplifying the more than 400 systems which currently operate across England.
  • Government should encourage innovation in the recycling and reuse of materials, and help to develop markets for scrap materials.
  • Government should also promote efficient forms of energy from waste – for example using black bag waste to create “green gas”.

Policy Exchange’s Head of Environment and Energy, Richard Howard, who co-wrote the report, said: “Since 2000, the UK has made significant progress in the way we think about waste – boosting the level of recycling and cutting greenhouse gas emissions from waste.

“But there are still significant issues. For example, households are totally confused about what they can recycle, with more than 400 different collection systems across the country. Since 2011, the UK has spent nearly £1 billion exporting our waste overseas, where it is burned to produce energy – energy we don’t benefit from.

“The EU’s proposed ‘Circular Economy package’ is ill defined and poorly thought through. It focuses too much on the means rather than the ends. The UK needs to take back control of our rubbish and develop a more coherent set of waste policies which better serve UK businesses and households, as well as the environment.”

Dr Colin Church, CIWM – “We certainly have an opportunity, as BEIS and Defra shape their respective strategies for UK industry and the environment, to realign the system to maximise resource productivity.”

Kristian Dales, Communications Director at waste management firm FCC Environment, said: “The issues exposed by Policy Exchange in this report are all too real for us and are hampering business growth and development in the waste and resource sector.

“The fact that waste management companies are paying to export waste out of our country for incineration is simply not sustainable. It glosses over the fact that the UK urgently needs increased investment in its own waste infrastructure, which will not only enable us to better manage the waste, but will also help to safeguard the UK’s long-term energy security.”

Commenting on the report, CIWM’s CEO, Dr Colin Church, said: “The report by Policy Exchange and FCC raises a number of important issues that are already being explored across the UK waste and resource management sector as it looks towards the future post-Brexit.

“We certainly have an opportunity, as BEIS and Defra shape their respective strategies for UK industry and the environment, to realign the system to maximise resource productivity.

“Achieving this will require engagement and action from all the different stakeholders, however, and any new policy framework will need to be collaborative, realistic and deliverable if it is to be successful.”

For the report’s executive summary CLICK HERE 


Read Similar

Full Implementation Of Environment Legislation Could Save EU €50bn

Brexit Presents “Unique Opportunity” To Drive Up Resource Productivity

Scottish Construction Businesses Offered Free Waste Prevention Support

Britain Falling Behind On 2020 Renewables Target

Commission Questioned Over EfW Communication

Views expressed in the comments below are those of the users and do not necessarily reflect the views of CIWM.
CIWM reserves the right to remove or amend any comments submitted for posting with no explanation or reason being given.

  1. The EU is an utter joke and the sooner the UK leaves it and gets back to sensible waste management strategies the better.

  2. I don’t think the EU waste management approach is a complete joke. For instance, it’s not the EU that compels us to export waste for energy generation in other countries. Until we change our perspectives and behaviour towards waste and see waste as a resource, things will remain the same either we’re outside or in the EU.
    Also, there’s a need for a strong investment especially in waste infrastructure so as to reduce or prevent the amount of waste we’re sending to other countries.
    What’s the UK government currently doing with the landfill tax and other environmental levies such as plastic bag tax? All these revenues should be re-invested into waste infrastructure but nobody is talking about that.

Got something to say about this story?