Search | Sitemap | Contact

Foundations for Sustainable Resource Use:

A strategy for England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Introduction

This report is based upon work carried out by Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FOE) as part of the Sustainable Use of Resources in Europe [SURE] project. SURE has been partly financed by an EC grant.

FOE's focus for this project has primarily been the use of paper in the UK, although a broader analysis of policies and practices with regards recycling of resources has also been undertaken.

The general conclusions reached are as follows:

• The UK is consuming too many virgin resources and reductions in the region of 80-90 per cent by 2050 are required.
• Government intervention in waste management in the UK has to date primarily been focused on improving standards at waste disposal sites rather than improving resource use efficiency.
• Recycling schemes across the country are struggling to maintain economic viability due to the poor market value of waste paper.
• The focus for Government action must now be to improve resource use. Policies such as producer responsibility legislation, minimum recycled content and the use of economic instruments are recommended.
• The EU has a key role to play in ensuring that a framework exists for recycling to flourish and that incentives exist to improve resource use. This will involve both legislative changes and the use of EU-wide economic instruments.

This report, which has been informed by two round-tables organised by FOE, is structured as follows:

Section 1 - looks at the present situation in the UK with regards resource use and waste management. It looks at the policies and mechanisms introduced over recent years to improve resource use. It concludes that further mechanisms need to be introduced if the UK is to substantially reduce resource use.

Section 2 - suggests policies that need to be introduced at a UK and EU level to put the UK on the path towards sustainable waste management and to contribute to the reductions in resource use required in the UK.

Section 3 - looks in detail at paper use, the requirements to reduce UK consumption of virgin fibre and ways in which the reductions can be achieved.

Section 4 - presents conclusions from the project.

1 Resource use and waste management in the UK: Background information

Recycling is not new - it has happened for thousands of years. Yet in the UK it is simply not working at the level required. This is not because we in the UK are trying to achieve the impossible - we recycle very little, and our recycling targets are low compared to what has been achieved elsewhere. It is not because it is unpopular - recycling is probably the most popular environmental activity in the UK. And it is not because we cannot afford it - we raise ú500 million a year through waste taxes, but none of this is directed towards supporting recycling.

FOE is unashamedly upbeat about the potential to recycle and compost the vast majority of the UK's household waste. The case studies we have investigated, published in our recent report, Recycling Works, show that it is possible. They also show that economic and employment benefits can be gained from intensive recycling schemes, as well as environmental benefits. All it needs is a little political will and the willingness of all players - Government (both EU and national), industry, local authorities, the community sector and individuals - to play their part.

However, increased recycling is not only possible; this report will argue that it is essential if we are to achieve sustainable development.

This section first sets out the resource reductions required in the UK. It then provides background information on waste, focusing on household waste. Finally it examines current policies and targets to increase recycling.

1.1 Sustainable development and resource use

The Government has recently stated in its Sustainable Development consultation paper Opportunities for Change that "production and distribution patterns will have to change to reduce emissions, resource use and waste" [1]. How far we have to improve resource use is, of course, a matter of debate, but there is a growing awareness that doing so can bring economic and employment benefits as well as environmental improvement. And every tonne recycled in the UK not only reduces waste here but also cuts down on tonnes of waste generated elsewhere in mining and processing.

An international project by Friends of the Earth groups has estimated the limits to resource use and calculated the required reduction in resource consumption for developed countries.

Renewable resources

The limits to renewable resources are identified by estimating sustainable yield while also ensuring that other functions of the ecosystem are protected. In the case of wood, for example forests play an important role in protecting watersheds, soil stability and biodiversity. Friends of the Earth has estimated that the UK, which is the world's fifth largest consumer of paper, needs to reduce virgin wood consumption by 73 per cent by 2050.

Non-renewable resources

The limits to the use of non-renewable resources are not, as previously thought, the danger of the resources simply running out. Instead, limits have more to do with the environmental impacts of mining and processing resources. In the case of aluminium, there is thought to be around 300 years' worth of reserves remaining, but the impacts of mining aluminium are huge [2]. For example, the Valco aluminium smelter in Ghana produces one per cent of the world's aluminium and it is powered by hydropower from the Akosombo dam on the Volta river. The dam flooded an area half the size of Wales and forced 80,000 people to move, destroying local industries and agriculture. And for every tonne of copper mined, a massive 110 tonnes of material is unearthed, pulverised and treated with chemicals such as arsenic. Another concern regarding the consumption and use of non-renewable resources is the health impacts associated with their build-up in the environment. This is especially true with metals such as mercury.

Friends of the Earth has estimated that the UK needs to reduce virgin aluminium consumption by 88 per cent and virgin steel use by 83 per cent by 2050.

Equity and reduced consumption

These reductions identified by Friends of the Earth illustrate the scale of the challenge facing the UK if it is to achieve sustainable development. The reductions are largely based on the premise that countries should consume no more than their fair share of resources - a premise that recognises that it is inequality that drives environmental destruction and conflict. Whether the Government will respond to this challenge remains unclear, although there are indications that some government departments will resist radical change. For example, a memorandum from the Department of Trade and Industry to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions urged them to drop proposed sustainable development indicators on resource use and equity.

1.2 Waste generated in the UK

The UK produces 414 million tonnes of waste each year [3]. Around two-thirds of this is so-called "controlled waste", the waste of greatest concern (table 1). Of this, 27 million tonnes per year is household waste. This report largely focuses on household waste, politically the most contentious but also some of the most difficult to handle due to its heterogeneous nature. Also, while household waste "arisings" are only a small proportion of total waste arisings, much of the other waste produced is a result of the manufacturing processes for products purchased by consumers. It has been calculated that for every tonne of products made, ten tonnes have been used to manufacture them [4]. It is therefore essential to reduce household waste and increase the efficiency of resource use in order to reduce overall waste arisings.

Table 1 - Waste arisings in the UK

Waste Annual arisings (million tonnes) Percentage of total Agriculture 80 18 Mining and Quarrying 82 20 Sewage sludge 36 9 Dredged spoils 33 8 Municipal waste 29 7 Commercial 15 4 Demolition and construction 70 17 Industrial 69 17

Source: DETR (1998)

Household waste and resource use

Of the 27 million tonnes of household waste produced, only around seven per cent is recycled or composted. Yet recent waste composition studies have shown that over 40 per cent of waste is recyclable and 30-40 per cent can be composted (table 2). Michael Meacher, Minister for the Environment, has described our recycling rate as "frankly pathetic" and says in a recent consultation document, Less Waste, More Value, that "The Government believes recycling is critical to the task of making our waste management more environmentally acceptable; and is committed to a substantial increase in the role it plays in this country." The UK's poor performance on recycling is certainly put to shame by countries and communities that are recycling at a much higher level (tables 3 and 4). Yet opinion polls consistently show that the public views recycling as the preferred option. A recent opinion survey commissioned by UK charity Waste Watch shows that recycling is supported by 96 per cent of people, and that 87 per cent would recycle more if they had a doorstep collection scheme [5].

1.3 Waste targets and policies

Recycling and composting targets

Numerous targets have been set in the UK for moving waste away from landfill and increasing recycling and composting. For example:

In 1990, the Government set a target of recycling 25 per cent of household waste by the year 2000. As noted earlier, the UK is at present only recycling around six per cent of household waste and so the likelihood of reaching this target nationally is extremely slim, although a number of individual local authorities have met it. To get close to the target now will take a concerted effort from Government and others. To put the target in perspective, it is worth noting that some countries are already exceeding 25 per cent recycling and aiming for 50 per cent.

In 1995, the last Government set further targets in its policy document, Making Waste Work. These included a target of 40 per cent recovery of household waste by 2005 (recovery defined as including recycling, composting and incineration) and composting one million tonnes of organic waste per annum by 2001. The Labour Party at the time described the targets in Making Waste Work as "modest in the extreme" [6].

Table 2 - Lewisham Kerbside Waste Study - June 1997 sample

Source: Re-Inventing Waste: Towards a London Waste Strategy (1998)

Table 3 - Recycling rates in several countries (per cent)

Austria 24   Japan 5 Belgium 3   Netherlands 28 Canada 29   Norway 14 Denmark 25   Sweden 19 Finland 30   Switzerland 42 France 8   UK 6 Germany 18   USA 24

Source: TSU (1998), An Introduction to Household Waste Management.

Table 4 - Recycling rates in selected cities (per cent)

Toronto 28 Castle Morpeth (Northumbria) 32 Hanover 32 New York State 32 Vienna 37 Florida 40 Minnesota 46 Nuremberg 50 Bluewater (Ontario) 80 Lunenberg (Nova Scotia) 80

Source: Re-Inventing Waste: Towards a London Waste Strategy (1998)

• In early 1997, just before the General Election, the Conservative government introduced packaging regulations which require 25 per cent of all packaging waste to be recycled by 2001, with a minimum of 15 per cent for each material. When the regulations were laid before Parliament, Michael Meacher, the incoming Labour government's Minister for the Environment said "as usual, the Tory government has managed to achieve the worst of both worlds. They have havered and delayed over the regulations, and set the weakest possible targets, abandoning any pretensions to care for our environment."[7].

The Labour government has consistently said since it came to power that it does want to increase recycling, although it has yet to set targets for doing so. If it does want to increase recycling then it will need to ensure that there is a market for materials collected. Research by Friends of the Earth published in June 1998 revealed that a large number of local authorities are cutting back on recycling schemes due to the current low price for waste paper. The Community Recycling Network, Waste Watch and Friends of the Earth are campaigning for legislation to increase the recycled content of newspapers, so that there is a market for waste paper and that recycling schemes are economically viable. This campaign is supported by numerous companies involved in recycling.

Policies currently driving increased recycling

Clearly it is not good enough simply to set targets for increased recycling. It is also necessary to put in place regulation and policy measures to ensure that the targets are met. The most important measures currently in place include:

• Landfill: Regulations controlling landfill have become more stringent over the last 20 years - before the mid-1970's landfill was virtually unregulated - with the result that new landfill sites in the UK are generally well designed and controlled. However, as the House of Lords recently recognised, all landfills will leak at some point in the future [8]. The impact of these regulations has been to force an increase in landfill costs. But with a large number of older sites still operating to lower standards, landfill is still the cheapest waste disposal option for most parts of the country.

On the horizon, however, is the EU's Landfill Directive. This will force radical changes in the UK in that it will require a reduction of 65 per cent in the amount of biodegradable municipal waste disposed of to landfill by 2020 (2016 in most other EU member states). This will force a shift to increased recycling and composting - although it could also lead to increased incineration.

• Incineration: A large number of incinerators were closed at the end of 1996 because they could not meet emission standards introduced by the European Commission. The new standards substantially reduced emissions from incineration and, because of the cost of abatement technology, increased the cost of this disposal route. Another Directive to further reduce emissions is being discussed and is likely to be introduced within the next few years [9]. This will increase the cost of this option even further, perhaps by as much as £9 per tonne [10]. These new controls on incineration are liable to make this an uneconomic option in the near future, especially if an incineration tax is introduced. Incineration tax was recommended by Customs and Excise in a report to the Treasury [11]. It is worth noting that a report published by the European Commission has estimated that by 2010 the cost of incineration is likely to be £140 tonne [12].
• The landfill tax: In October 1996 the Government introduced a landfill tax. The tax was set at £7 per tonne for most controlled wastes and the revenues raised were used to offset reductions in Employer's National Insurance contributions. Landfill operators are able to divert 20 per cent of taxes to approved environmental projects, although at present they cannot divert funds for recycling schemes. Much of these funds are being used for environmental projects near and around landfill sites rather than on projects related to reducing waste. The landfill tax will be increased to £10 per tonne in March 1999 and the extra funds raised (as much as £200 million) would sensibly be used to fund increased recycling and composting. The landfill tax is likely to have led to some increased recycling since its introduction but the problem remains that even with the tax, landfill is still the cheapest disposal option for most of the country.
• Producer responsibility - packaging regulations. The packaging regulations introduced in 1997 is the first producer responsibility legislation introduced in the UK. As previously mentioned they require producers to ensure 25 per cent of packaging waste is recycled and 50 per cent recovered. These regulations, although heavily criticised, have led to increased recycling activity but due to the low recycling targets (a minimum of 15 per cent for each material), most of this activity has focused on transit packaging and retailers in-house waste. The Government is currently reviewing the regulations and are likely to ensure that they are amended to increase household waste recycling.

In Canada a national packaging protocol resulted in packaging waste disposed of to landfill or incineration being reduced by over 50 per cent over an eight year period. In Germany packaging legislation has led to a 12 per cent reduction in the amount of packaging used.

1.5 Conclusion

Recycling in the UK is not working. The reasons for this are many, but the underlying cause is that past governments have not implemented an adequate package of measures to ensure that recycling is increased and resource use improved. If the new government is serious about developing sustainable waste management and improved resource use, as it says it is, then it must soon put into place the mechanisms and policies to ensure that recycling works. The next section suggests what these policies should be.

References

1. Digest of Environmental Statistics No 19, 1997, The Stationery Office.
2. Jones, P (1995), Mass Balance and the UK Economy, Biffa Waste Services Ltd.
3. DETR (1998), Opportunities to Change, consultation on a revised UK strategy for sustainable development.
4. Waste Watch (1998), "What People Think about Waste."
5. Holland, H and Petersen, U (1995), Living Dangerously: The Earth, its Resources and the Environment.
6. Ruddock, J MP (1996), debate in the House of Commons, Hansard, 10 January 1996, column 161.
7. Labour Party (1997), press release, 29 January 1997, "Gummer slammed over backsliding' on packaging rules."
8. House of Lords Select Committee on the European Communities (1998), Session 1997-98, 17th Report, "Sustainable Landfill".
9. EC DGX1 (1998), Draft commission proposal for a Directive on the incineration of waste.
10. EC DGX1 (1997), Economic evaluation of the draft incineration Directive.
11. HM Customs & Excise (1998), Review of the Landfill Tax: Report.
12. Sofres Conseil (1996), "Elements for a Cost-Effective Plastic Waste Management in the European Union: Objectives and Instruments for the Year 2000," European Commission.

2 Policies to improve resource use in the UK

The previous section suggested that the reality is that recycling is still not working in the UK. Yet recycling can work and can bring environmental, economic and employment benefits. This section suggests the policies that are needed to make recycling work in the UK and how it can improve the UK's use of resources. The policies recommended are briefly discussed below.

2.1 A Sustainable Waste Strategy

A Government waste strategy is essential, not only to outline what regulations and fiscal instruments the Government plans to introduce, but also to outline targets for the future. The Government has just produced a draft strategy and in it they recognise that it has a vital role in improving waste management and reducing the consumption of resources. The proposed strategy suggests that it will introduce long-term "ambitions" for waste minimisation - vitally important so that different players can understand where they should be investing energy and monies. It also states that the Government is willing to intervene to increase markets for recycled materials, introduce producer responsibility legislation, use the tax system to encourage better practice, and potentially use landfill tax money to encourage recycling.

The draft strategy is, on the whole, very good. However, it has two major weaknesses. Firstly, it underestimates the ability to increase recycling, composting and the markets for recycled materials (and therefore suggests that to meet targets in the landfill Directive increased incineration is necessary). Secondly, it does not adequately address the potential for increased employment opportunities through higher levels of recycling and composting.

The UK waste strategy must, in Friends of the Earth's opinion, set short-term, medium-term and long-term targets for waste minimisation and for recycling if it is to be effective in shifting the UK's currently unsustainable waste management practices to practices that are compatible with sustainable development.

However, it is increasingly the case that UK strategies need to operate within an EU framework. Trade rules and legislation significantly limit the space for the UK to take action alone. Unfortunately, the EU does not yet have a coherent sustainable development strategy and the EU Fifth Environmental Action Plan is not valued within the Commission. The EU waste strategy, while welcome, is very brief and does not contain targets for EU improvement. The EU should produce a coherent waste strategy, with targets to reduce waste and increase recycling. A coherent sustainable development strategy with resource use reduction targets should also be produced.

2.2 Producer responsibility legislation

Producer responsibility legislation - making the producer of a product responsible for the product for the whole of its life - is potentially the most powerful mechanism to reduce waste and drive design for durability, reuse and recycling. This is especially true if waste taxes are high, making design for disposal unattractive.

In 1997, the Government introduced packaging regulations (implementing the EU packaging Directive) which brought the first producer responsibility legislation into place in the UK - although the regulations do not imply complete producer responsibility in that producer, packers, fillers and retailers are only responsible for 50 per cent of packaging waste. The regulations have led to the setting up of a number of compliance schemes which help companies fulfil their obligations.

The Government should introduce producer responsibility legislation for other waste streams, such as newspapers and magazines, and support European Commission initiatives on electrical goods and cars.

When the EU reviews the packaging Directive it should set substantially higher recycling targets. It should also introduce producer responsibility legislation for paper users (such as newspapers).

2.3 Minimum recycled content of goods.

In theory, producer responsibility legislation that encapsulates targets for recycling and re-use should lead to an increased uptake of recycled materials. But this is not certain. In some areas, and especially where producer responsibility legislation does not exist, it may be necessary to introduce regulations on the minimum recycled content of goods. This can not only increase the uptake of recycled materials but the extra demand can reduce costs of recycled materials through increased economies of scale in production.

FOE, together with non-governmental organisations Community Recycling Network and Waste Watch, have drafted a parliamentary Bill mandating an increased recycled content of newsprint in the UK. The Bill was first introduced into Parliament by David Chaytor MP and has the support of a large number of MPs, local authorities and businesses. It will need to be re-introduced if it is to have a chance of being enacted (the previous Bill ran out of parliamentary time). If the Bill is passed, it will bring economic, employment and environmental rewards.

FOE believes that the Government should support the Recycled Content of Newsprint Bill. It should also keep under review the impact of the packaging regulations and, if necessary, introduce minimum recycled content standards for packaging. Finally, it should consider setting minimum recycled content for other products.

2.4 Procurement policies

As the case studies in this report show, it is essential that we close the loop through procurement policies aimed at increased uptake of recycled materials. The Government should take a lead in this area. But bodies other than Government also have a role to play. Greening supply changes is one of the more effective ways in which a body can exert influence in this area. Also, local authorities involved in recycling ought to encourage inward investment by companies that can use materials collected in recycling schemes.

2.5 Environmental taxes

The potential to use environmental taxes to increase environmental performance is beginning to be tested throughout Europe. Environmental taxes are better set to achieve policy objectives rather than trying to set them through an inevitably incomplete assessment of externalities and the use of hugely controversial contingent valuation.

Two potential forms of tax are:

• Resource taxes. A tax on virgin resources would both increase the competitiveness of secondary materials as well as provide an incentive to reduce overall resource consumption. Since recent research by Friends of the Earth has revealed that a number of local authorities are withdrawing recycling schemes because of the poor demand and uptake of recycled paper, then the first such tax to be introduced would sensibly be a virgin fibre tax (although it is likely that this would need to be introduced on an EU wide basis).
• Waste taxes. As discussed earlier, landfill is the cheapest waste disposal option for most parts of the country and in some places incineration may also be cheaper than recycling (in the short term). The introduction of waste taxes can help change this, so that recycling becomes not only the preferred environmental option but also the preferred economic option.

The landfill tax should be increased year by year by around £2/tonne and a tax on incineration should be introduced. The Government should also investigate introducing a virgin fibre tax, as should the European Commission. The revenue raised by these taxes should preferably, in the opinion of FOE, be used to reduce taxes on employment and/or fund environmental schemes.

2.6 Quality standards

When forcing a shift towards the uptake of secondary materials it is essential that the quality of the materials are adequate and that customers can have confidence in them. While secondary materials, such as recycled paper, can perform as well as if not better than virgin-based materials, there is a still a need to ensure customer confidence and assurance in the quality.

The Government should work with others (such as the European Commission) to produce mandatory quality standards for secondary materials where consumer confidence requires this. Possibly the most urgent material where standards are needed is waste-derived compost.

2.7 Funding

Recycling needs seed funding to allow it to grow and flourish. The case studies detailed in Recycling Works show that in time recycling becomes the best economic option, as well as the better environmental option. The Government must explore ways to ensure that funds are in some way transferred to recyclers, preferably in a way that rewards good practice.

2.8 Conclusion

These policy measures, if introduced correctly, will help the UK recycle more waste and reduce our overall consumption of resources. But before they are implemented, careful consideration should be given to the details, and all stakeholders consulted. Policy measures will need to be introduced at both EU and UK level.

It is important to note that these recommendations are made as a package of measures, not a pick and mix' selection. Only if they are all implemented will we finally move towards more sustainable waste and resource management in the UK.

3 Managing Paper Resources

This section looks in greater depth at the management of paper resources. It address Friends of the Earth's estimate of the environmental limit for virgin paper consumption and its implications for the UK paper cycle. It looks at the potential to reduce paper consumption. It suggests we need to increase recycling. It also suggests the preferred techniques for dealing with residual waste paper.

3.1 Environmental limits

Paper is generally produced from wood, a renewable resource, but like other renewable resources it can be over-consumed. An international project by FOE groups has estimated the limits to resource use for a range of materials, including wood [1]. In calculating the environmental limit for wood consumption it has been necessary to take into account a number of factors:

• The role of forests in protecting watersheds and soil stability.
  
• Old growth and ancient forests' importance in protecting biodiversity (see box 1).
  
• Forests' important role in hydrological and carbon cycles.
  
• The limited capacity for afforestation.
  

To ensure that our consumption of wood does not exceed environmental limits, i.e. by recognising the functions outlined above, Friends of the Earth believes that:

• The world's remaining primary forests must be excluded from large-scale industrial logging (as little as one per cent of forests within Europe).
• Secondary forests must be managed in a truly sustainable way - i.e. to give a sustainable yield of timber at the same time as protecting biodiversity, local people and other functions. This will require a shift away from current practices towards environmentally sustainable forestry, creating mixed forests using native trees and logging at a sustainable rate. The Forestry Stewardship Council certification scheme is an important contribution to this shift. Such a shift is essential to protect those species currently at risk due to existing forestry practices. Industrial monoculture plantations are not a sustainable method for producing wood.
• Afforestation of valuable habitats and important carbon sinks, such as peatlands, is not acceptable. It is worth noting that in Finland, by the year 2000, around 15 per cent of wood production will come from drained and afforested mires. It has been estimated that in Finland the draining of mires is already a greater carbon dioxide source than the country's burning of fossil fuels [2].

These environmental constraints, together with a requirement for the UK to consume no more than an equitable amount of resources, indicate that the UK should reduce consumption of wood and wood products by 73 per cent by 2050. This is a similar estimate to that of the research organisation International Institute for Environment and Development in their report Citizen Action to Lighten Ecological Footprints, where it states that "The UK per capita consumption of timber is 66 per cent higher than the permissible global average, based on sustainable yield criteria" [3].

Box 1: Biodiversity and forests

The World Wide Fund for Nature have published "European Forest Scorecards", based on the Helsinki resolutions and the forest principles of UNCED. In the report they score different countries on how they perform on 91 indicators in five categories - environment, production, social and cultural aspects, protected areas and pollution. The scores, which have been merged to provide a league table of performance, show that all countries need to improve forestry management. For the record, Finland (30 per cent of UK paper imports) scores 60 out of 100, Sweden (25 per cent) scores 54, Germany (15 per cent) scores 49, France (10 per cent) scores 52, Norway (5 per cent) scores 51, whilst the UK scores 43 [4].

In Canada, where the UK obtains a proportion of its virgin fibre, forestry practices have a significant impact on biodiversity. A quarter of all temperate rainforests are found in Canada and over 90 per cent of logging in Canada takes place in them. Seventy per cent of Canada's plant diversity and 74 per cent of Canada's land-dwelling mammals are found in British Columbia, predominately in the coastal ancient temperate rainforests. Ten per cent of British Columbia's plant and vertebrate species are facing extinction. Logging is listed by the Ministry of the Environment as one of the leading causes. Brian Emmett, Canada's Federal Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, reported in his second annual report tabled to the House of Commons (26 May, 1998): "Canada's biological diversity is increasingly threatened by pollution and the loss of wildlife habitat. Canada has been slow to meet its obligations under the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity." The Financial Times has reported that because of the impact of Greenpeace's campaign, the two biggest forestry companies in Canada have announced that they will now pursue certification under the FSC scheme [5].

Source on Canada data: Greenpeace, 1998

3.2 Reducing consumption of paper

As noted above, paper consumption in the UK is increasing - yet we need to reduce consumption of all wood products by around three-quarters by the middle of the next century. This section looks at the potential for electronic publishing and electronic communication to reduce paper consumption.

Electronic publishing of newspapers
Newspapers consume over two million tonnes of paper every year - about 20 per cent of total paper consumption. The potential for reducing consumption through electronic publishing is therefore, in theory, huge.

The Daily Telegraph is probably the most advanced newspaper in the UK for publishing in electronic format. Electronic Telegraph is targeted to young professionals, of which there are estimated to be one million (this group is thought to be computer literate and increasingly accustomed to receiving information on-screen and on-line). There is no cover price for Electronic Telegraph, with revenues coming from advertising, on-line computer games and on-line shopping. It is designed with the web in mind and currently has 45,000-50,000 readers a day. It is published Monday - Friday (not on Saturday or Sunday because it is felt that for cultural reasons the uptake would be much lower) [6].

Danny Meadows-Klue of Electronic Telegraph is of the personal view that electronic publications will replace some functions of paper newspapers within the next decade -for example, share price listing - but that longer-term predictions are more difficult. However, he believes that it is increasingly clear that consumers will become more demand orientated in gathering information - rather than allowing newspaper editors to select the stories of interest - and increasingly have access to new media and technologies. It is therefore difficult to predict what reductions of newsprint consumption may materialise over time, although it is likely, in Friends of the Earth's view, that some savings (probably minor) will be made in the next 15-20 years.

The paperless office
Around four million tonnes of paper are consumed in offices in the UK every year, with consumption having risen by around 600 per cent over the last 25 years [7]. According to one (un-referenced) internet site discussing the paperless office [8]:

• 95 per cent of business data is held on paper,
  
• staff lose 15 per cent of documents and spend up to 30 per cent of their time looking for documents,
  
• if you purchase a 747 aircraft from the Boeing Corporation you receive aircraft documentation heavier than the aircraft itself !
  

But the office environment has changed over recent years, with a large percentage of offices now having electronic mail systems and access to the internet and internet communication. The scope for reducing paper use in offices is, in theory, very large. Examples of trying to reduce paper in the office environment include:

• Document management: Xerox Ltd is committed to helping their customers improve document management. It notes that new machines combining functions of copier, printer and fax "can avoid unnecessary energy and paper usage". Electronic publishing and print on demand' technology (replacing traditional document publishing) can further reduce paper use and wastage whilst also providing important benefits such as increased currency of material. Xerox notes that waste-free document management is growing in importance and that the role of paper is changing [9].
• Equitable Life reduced paper consumption by 75 per cent between 1991 and 1995, despite transactions doubling and response times being substantially reduced over the same period. It achieved this through the introduction of an electronic information management system [10].
• Even paper consumption in ministerial "red boxes", which are in essence official briefcases packed by civil servants, can be reduced! It has been reported that John Battle, Minister in the Department of Trade and Industry, is to swap his 20lb red box for a lap-top computer. Ministers may have 10 policy papers, 30 briefing papers and up to 100 letters in an average weekend red box [11].

The paperless bookstore
Recent reports have suggested that in the future we may no longer read books as we know them. Instead we will read one book which will be printed with electronic ink'. The electronic ink can reposition itself to form the text of another book simply by receiving a message from the spine of the book (in which numerous titles would be stored). While this may seem far fetched, and certainly at the moment inordinately expensive, Sally Taplin of Waterstones says that, in blue sky terms, these products could be developed. However, even though Waterstones consider themselves sellers of information rather than sellers of books, she questions whether consumers would find these products acceptable [12]. Leona Weiss, Co-owner and Buyer for A Clean Well-lighted Place for Books in San Francisco, suggests that "all nonfiction books, reference works, journals, and such will be available to read on-screen or to download to one's computer within 15 years"[13].

3.3 Increasing paper recycling

As discussed above, the potential to reduce paper consumption exists but how much of that potential may be realised is as yet unclear. It is clear that cultural obstacles will have to be overcome and economic incentives may need to be introduced. Indeed it may be that the new technologies may only prevent increased consumption of paper rather than reducing consumption. Therefore, as part of the calculations to identify how the reductions required to meet the environmental limit for wood can be made, Friends of the Earth has assumed a conservative five per cent reduction in paper use by 2050.

So in the short term and probably medium term, Friends of the Earth believes that we must increase recycling of paper to reduce our consumption of virgin fibre. This increase should ideally be accompanied by improvements in paper mill technology to reduce pollution and should sensibly also involve locating smaller paper mills within or near to the sources of paper and paper demand (urban areas) to reduce transportation.

Increasing paper collection
Friends of the Earth has calculated that to reduce the UK's consumption of virgin fibre to sustainable levels, paper recycling rates will have to increase to 50 per cent by 2010 and 80 per cent by 2050. These figures assume that overall demand for wood and wood based products can be reduced by 5 per cent by 2050, and that non-wood fibres, such as straw and hemp, replace 15 per cent of virgin wood based materials.

At present the UK recycles 39.6 per cent of paper [14]. Increasing this recycling rate will require greater investment in recycling infrastructure - for example, collection infrastructure, reprocessing capacity. Methods of ensuring this investment include:

• imposing producer responsibility on paper manufacturers and/or users
  
• increasing waste disposal taxes
  
• providing financial assistance for local authority recycling schemes.
  

Legislation requiring a minimum content of recycled fibres, such as the Recycled Content of Newsprint Bill, would also force increased recycling.

It is worth noting that Friends of the Earth's target of 50 per cent paper recycling is already being achieved by countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands, and that Switzerland and Austria are close to achieving the 80 per cent target [14].

Increasing the use of recycled paper should go hand in hand with increased collection of waste paper. Methods to ensure this include economic incentives and regulatory measures. Without intervention, regulatory or otherwise, it is possible that paper mountains will be created, leading the price of waste paper to collapse and collection facilities to suffer.

Reducing pollution impacts from recycling
Like all industries, the paper industry has the potential to produce unacceptable levels of pollution, whether from the mining' of resources, transportation, processing or waste generation. A Friends of the Earth literature review shows that recycled paper reprocessing mills compare well to mills producing paper from virgin pulp in all pollution categories except, perhaps, carbon dioxide emissions, where there is less certainty - see box 3 [15]. Friends of the Earth would of course welcome tougher standards at paper mills regardless of the source of their resources.

We would also welcome a shift to more urban based mills to reduce transport distances - see, for example, the 150,000 tonne newsprint mill in the Bronx, New York [16]. Increased fuel efficiency of lorry transport - a 10 per cent increased efficiency is probably the maximum over the next ten years or so - and a switch from road to rail would further reduce transport impacts. But perhaps the greatest savings in terms of reducing pollution could be obtained by shifting to an increased use of biofuels at paper mills (see box 2).

Box 2: Carbon dioxide, virgin paper and recycled paper

It is generally accepted that using recycled paper rather than virgin pulp is less energy intensive. An important difference is, however, that virgin paper is made using a greater proportion of renewable energy (biofuels), whilst recycled papers are usually made using mostly fossil fuels. Clearly this has implications for greenhouse gas emissions. A life cycle analysis in the UK (Leach et al) favoured virgin paper production above recycled paper production for reasons of CO2 emissions [17]. However this research has numerous flaws and its findings are questionable see Friends of the Earth's critique of the research [18]). More recent research in the USA has favoured paper manufacture using recycled materials, although this research also makes a number of questionable assumptions [19].

Whichever the case, it is clear that paper recycling in the UK should involve a greater use of renewable energy and less CO2 intensive forms of fossil fuel. At Aylesford Newsprint's reprocessing mill in Kent, 20 per cent of the energy used is biofuel - waste paper that cannot be recycled [20]. Shotton Paper in Deesside are planning to use a gas-fired combined heat and power station [21]. A paper mill in Kemsley, Kent is planning to obtain its energy requirements through utilising unrecyclable waste paper and paper sludge together with its existing gas-fired CHP plant [22]. A greater use of renewable energy for energy production at paper mills and a continued shift in the UK towards less use of coal is, in Friends of the Earth's view, highly likely to favour the production of recycled paper rather than virgin paper in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

3.5 Conclusions

A paper cycle in the UK must recognise the environmental limits to virgin paper consumption, limits that include the need to protect biodiversity-rich forests and forests of importance for other reasons (watersheds, protection against soil erosion, etc). It must also recognise the need to shift to more equitable access to resources for developing countries. To fail to do this simply ignores the complexities and challenges of sustainable development.

Friends of the Earth has calculated that the reduction required is in the order of three quarters. This paper suggests that increasing forestry cover in the UK or elsewhere will not significantly reduce the reduction target, because the availability of suitable land to afforest is limited. It suggests that the UK must therefore work towards reducing overall paper consumption and, where we do use paper, shift towards the use of recycled fibre. Some virgin material will be required and Friends of the Earth has allowed for 25 per cent input of virgin fibre (which should come from FSC-certified forests) and 15 per cent of non-wood fibre. Some wastes will be generated, and Friends of the Earth suggests that the waste from the production process and residual waste paper is best used as a biofuel at the paper mill or composted and applied to land.

References

1. Friends of the Earth (1998), Tomorrow's World: Britains Share in a Sustainable Future. Earthscan.
2. Isomaki, R (1991) "Paper, Pollution and Global Warming: Unsustainable Forestry in Finland," The Ecologist, 21 (1), Jan/Feb.
3. IIED (1995), "Citizen Action to Lighten Ecological Footprints".
4. WWF (1998), European Forest Scorecards 1998.
5. Boulton, L (1998), "Canadian About-turn on Logging," Financial Times, 23 May 1998.
6. Electronic Telegraph e-mail response.
7. Financial Times Review (1995), "Battle is on to Control Avalanche of Paper in the Electronic Office", November 1,1995.
8. http://www.pcti.co.uk/paperles.htm
9. Personal communication, Dr Irina Maslennikova, Environmental Manager, Xerox Ltd, Buckinghamshire.
10. Laflin, J (1997), "Moving Towards the Paperless Office, Business Options and Costs", Information Management and Technology, vol 30 No 4 1997
11. Guardian 0n-line (1998), "Virtual Red Boxes Lighten Load of Techie Ministers", 29 December 1997.
12. Personal communication, Sally Taplin, New Media Manager, Waterstone's, Middlesex.
13. Quoted in Reality Check' (1997), Hardwired.
14. Environment Watch: Western Europe (1997), "European Paper Recycling Rate Advances", 5 September 1997.
15. Friends of the Earth (1997), "Paper Recycling: Exposing the Myths".
16. Personal communication, Professor Robin Murrey, Ecologica, London.
17. Leach et al (1997), "A Systems Approach to Materials Flow in Sustainable Cities: A Case Study of Paper", Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 40 (6), 705-723.
18. Friends of the Earth (1997), "Critique of A Systems Approach to Materials Flow in Sustainable Cities: A Case Study of Paper'."
19. US EPA (1997), "Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Municipal Waste Management."
20. Aylesford Newsprint Ltd (1996), The Aylesford Environment Report.
21. Environmental Data Service Ltd (1998), ENDS Report 279, April 1998, p. 5.
22. East Kent Gazette (1998), "Friendly Support Shock for Incinerator Plan."

4 Conclusions

FOE's research has shown that substantial reductions in resource use are required in developed countries such as the UK. It is likely that a shift to reduced virgin fibre consumption in the UK could lead to increased employment in, for example, the collection and reprocessing functions. However, this has yet to be quantified. It may be argued that reduced UK consumption of virgin fibre may lead to job losses in forestry elsewhere, however, Friends of the Earth would argue that with growing demand for paper world-wide this is unlikely to be the case. It is also likely that increased use of recycled paper would lead to reduced C02 emissions compared to a scenario of using greater proportion of virgin fibre.

It is clear that both the UK and the EU do not yet have in place the strategies or mechanisms to achieve the reductions required. It is also not clear whether the political will exists. The UK Government is making promising statements, but it is a relatively new Government and has yet to reveal either its sustainable development strategy or its waste strategy. Meanwhile the EU has no coherent strategies in this area.

This report suggests policies that can put the EU on the path to sustainable waste management and sustainable resource use. Recommendations include:

• The EU should produce a coherent waste strategy, with targets to reduce waste and increase recycling. A coherent sustainable development strategy with resource use reduction targets should also be produced. The planned UK Government strategy on sustainable development must set resource reduction targets. Its sustainable waste management strategy should set targets for minimising waste and recycling the waste that is produced.
• The Government should increase the recycling targets in the packaging regulations. They should also introduce producer responsibility legislation for other waste streams, such as newspapers and magazines, and support European Commission initiatives on electrical goods and cars.
• When the EU reviews the packaging Directive it should set substantially higher recycling targets. It should also introduce producer responsibility legislation for paper users such as newspapers.
• The Government should support the Recycled Content of Newsprint Bill, it should keep under review the impact of the packaging regulations and, if necessary, introduce minimum recycled content standards for packaging, and should consider setting minimum recycled content for other products.
• The Government should work with others (such as the European Commission) to produce mandatory quality standards for secondary materials where consumer confidence requires this. Possibly the most urgent material where standards are needed is waste derived compost.
• The landfill tax should be increased year by year by around £2/tonne and a tax on incineration should be introduced. The Government should also investigate introducing a virgin fibre tax, as should the European Commission.

FOE will be working to ensure that these policies are introduced and that the social, environmental and economic gains associated with them are achieved. It will also be researching the potential to further reduce resource use by encouraging consumers to purchase services as opposed to products.

March 1999
Published by Friends of the Earth Ltd
© Friends of the Earth Ltd

Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland
26-28 Underwood Street
London N1 7JQ
Telephone 0171 490 1555,
Email: info@foe.co.uk

Content

Contact details:

Friends of the Earth
26-28 Underwood St.
LONDON
N1  7JQ

Tel: 020 7490 1555
Fax: 020 7490 0881
Email: info@foe.co.uk
Website: www.foe.co.uk

March 1999
Waste Team

Last modified: June 2001