£20k a Month Added to Blaenau Gwent Waste Bills includes Waste Haulage- South Wales Argus

2:50pm Friday 9th September 2011

BLAENAU Gwent will have to pay an extra £20,000 a month to have its waste dumped in Swansea, the council has revealed.

The Argus exclusively reported on Wednesday how Blaenau Gwent council is having to send waste to NPT Recycling, in Swansea, after its Silent Valley site in Cwm was shut down by the Environment Agency.

At the time, the council refused to disclose how much waste is being transported and how much it is costing.

NPT Recycling Ltd confirmed it had made an arrangement with Silent Valley to dispose of 350 tonnes of domestic waste a week between now and April.

The council released a statement following the Argus’ report, confirming Silent Valley had entered into this contract and that this would cost an extra £5.40 per tonne of waste. This includes haulage costs, the bulking of waste and gate fees.

The contract up until the end of March would therefore cost an extra £139,500 (or £20,000 a month) above the council’s original budget of £1,607,025.

The waste is not being taken to the Swansea site by council lorries, but by articulated lorries from a haulage company which can each carry around 20- 23 tonnes per load.

The cost has been identified as one of the “significant cost pressures” faced by the council, which aims to save £9m over the next four years.

But a council spokeswoman said savings could be made if it remained with NPT Recycling beyond next March as the waste is no longer going directly to a landfill site and so the council would avoid any increase in landfill tax.

She said the council, with its partner Torfaen council, was currently working on obtaining a contract for treating and disposing waste which would start in 2013.

Silent Valley was shut down last month, after traces of toxins such as mercury, nickel and ammonia were found leaking from the waste into groundwater.

Environment Agency Wales said there was no risk to the public, but stopped the site taking waste. It is not clear when the site will re-open.

View the original article here

Haulage companies fined for tipping at Cornish farm - Insider Media

A group of West Cornwall hauliers and director of a skip hire company have been ordered to pay nearly £100,000 in fines and costs for illegally tipping thousands of tonnes of waste at a farm near Helston, the Environment Agency said.

According to the agency, about 9,000 tonnes of construction and demolition waste were dumped at Trenoweth Farm in Gweek. The operators of five local haulage companies appeared at Truro Crown Court for sentencing.

Offenders were fined, told to pay back costs and ordered to pay back profits they had made from their criminal activities under the Proceeds of Crime (POC) Act.

The Environment Agency said Michael Leah received a 12-month prison sentence suspended for two years and was ordered to pay £50,000 under the Proceeds of Crime (POC) Act, plus £4,000 in costs.

It said at the time of the offences Leah was director of a haulage and skip hire company and operated a licensed waste transfer station at Ludgvan near Penzance.

The Environment Agency said that an investigation revealed that during 2007 and 2008 Leah had illegally dumped waste, including asbestos, at three separate sites including two farms and a residential property at St Ives.

The court heard Michael Leah's company, Leah Ltd, has since gone into liquidation.

The agency said Leah claimed he had only deposited three lorry loads of subsoil at Trenoweth Farm, but was unable to verify this by supplying the relevant waste transfer notes. He was also unable to provide documentation for all asbestos entering and leaving his waste transfer station prior to March 2008, it added.

His site manager, Mark Outram from Penzance was ordered to carry out 250 hours unpaid community work and pay £3,000 costs.

Five companies were also involved in offences at Trenoweth Farm and had earlier pleaded guilty to illegally depositing and disposing of controlled waste.

Broad and Sons from Manaccan in Truro was convicted of dumping 2,176 tonnes and fined £2,500 for four offences, plus £4,080 payable as POC. Maen Karne Aggregates from Truro was convicted of dumping 1,875 tonnes of waste and fined £2,250 for four offences, plus £3,750 POC.

St Pirrans Trucks from Camborne was fined £2,000 for three offences, plus £4,860 POC for dumping 1,620 tonnes of waste. Harts Haulage Ltd from Redruth was fined £1,800 for dumping 1,500 tonnes of waste in four offences, plus £3,000 POC. And Michael Mudge Ltd, from Prazein Camborne, was convicted of dumping 1,280 tonnes of waste. It was fined £1,600 for four offences plus £3,200 POC. Each company was also ordered to pay £2,000 costs.

Redwynn Sterry, from the Environment Agency, said: "This case demonstrates how important it is for those who handle waste to make full and adequate checks in respect of where waste is deposited. Simply taking the word of a so called ‘site agent’ or landowner is unacceptable.

"The range of sentences shows the courts take the illegal disposal of waste very seriously. The agency will use the Proceeds of Crime Act to ensure any profits obtained through waste crime are confiscated rendering illegal activities pointless."

View the original article here

INDUSTRY NEWS No time to waste - Waste Management World

Blue Anvil has wasted no time in improving its waste management fleet

WASTE management involves the collection, transport, processing or disposal of waste material to reduce its effects on health in the environment in which we live.

Waste collection methods vary greatly among different countries and regions. Domestic waste collection services are often provided by local government departments or by private companies in the industry.

Generally the waste industry has been slow to react to market needs and hence new developments in technology to facilitate efficient and economic removal of waste have been ignored in some quarters. Some companies however, have risen to the challenge and have gone the whole nine yards to ensure that they are equipped to meet the needs of expanding urban development.

Blue Anvil Bulk Logistics, a Tshwane based company, says it has developed its business around providing the most up-to-date service in waste removal.

At the recent handover of two Mercedes-Benz Axor 3535 waste compactors out of a total of 14, CEO Sandow Rossouw said: & I have been associated with waste removal transport since 1992 and have built my business reputation on using the best combination of equipment for the job.

& The addition of these new Axor 3535s fitted with the McNeilus 26m? compactor body is a continuation of the tradition of using Mercedes-Benz products, which we have done since since 1997.& He says the new Axor 3535 8X4 is well suited for this mediumdistance haulage and heavy duty short-distance distribution.

Powered by the OM457LA six-cylinder diesel engine with an output of 260kW at 1900r/min and torque of 1850Nm at 1100r/min, the Axor 3535 provides a powerful, durable and economical vehicle for the task.

The 9-speed direct-drive transmission allows effortless gear changes, and thanks to the deep crawler gear and reverse gear ratio, enables precise low-speed manoeuvring, especially in the confined urban environment.

The essence of the design has been in weight reduction wherever possible to achieve a balance between robust design and high payload.

This enables the vehicle to endure the rigours of the waste industry and thrive under the most gruelling conditions to which any vehicle can be subjected.

The McNeilus Extra Heavy Duty 26m? compactor makes this combination the monster crusher of the vehicle waste industry because of its high compaction force.

Rossouw says the higher than average compaction capabilities of the McNeilus enables the company to achieve a 50% increase in volume of waste a trip for each vehicle.

& This makes economic sense, especially if the landfill site is far away and we can reduce the number of trips a day.& The Axor-based waste compactors in use by Blue Anvil.

View the original article here

Worldwide moves from solid waste to property - Waste Management World

SHAH ALAM: For more than a decade, Worldwide Holdings Bhd, through its Environment Division, has been providing a vital service in solid waste management.

Worldwide Holdings became one of the pioneer companies in solid waste management when it was awarded a 20-year concession in 1995 by the Selangor government to build and operate a sanitary landfill in Air Hitam, Puchong.

Since 1995, the landfill has received solid waste collected from Klang Valley areas like Kajang, Petaling Jaya, Subang Jaya, Shah Alam, and Ampang.

But when waste from Kuala Lumpur was sent there as well from 2002, the amount proved to be overwhelming.

The Air Hitam landfill was closed after it reached its maximum capacity of more than six million tonnes and solid waste was then diverted to other landfills managed by Worldwide Holdings in Jeram and Kuala Langat.

Worldwide Holdings is now in position to export its expertise.

When Worldwide Landfills Sdn Bhd was established, its expertise was confined to the building, managing and maintenance of sanitary landfills.

Today, the company reaffirms its commitment to conservation and preservation of the environment by expanding its involvement in environmental management.

As a leader in the solid waste management industry, Worldwide Holdings offers a full range of services in sanitary landfill -- domestic waste; inert waste landfill; transfer station; rehabilitation
and upgrading of dumpsites; landfill gas power generation; clean development mechanism; and consultancy.

With the emphasis on an integrated solid waste management system and through its management foresight, expertise and experience, strong balance sheet and available resources, Worldwide Holdings is well positioned to taking up the challenge in venturing into new areas like waste-to-energy operations; composting; material recovery facilities; and transportation and haulage.

In addition to solid waste management, Worldwide Holdings is also involved in property services, including property investment, development and management.

Its portfolio in Malaysia includes Puncak Bestari, Bandar Puncak Alam; Platinum Project, Shah Alam; SA7, Seksyen 7, Shah Alam; Worldwide Industrial Park, Kapar; Worldwide Business Park, Seksyen 13 Shah Alam; and Menara Worldwide, Jalan Bukit Bintang.

Its international property investment portfolio includes Australia Champion Lake in Perth.

Its latest offering is a lifestyle haven - the Subang Bestari's Safira bungalows. Safira, located within the exclusive Laman Permai precint, exudes exclusivity and luxury.

The design theme of "tropical contemporary" features flat and gable tropical roofs with stone walls. The design reflects modern and clean planes that boast natural lighting and ventilation. Featuring spacious living and entertaining areas, there is certainly space for the family to grow.

Senior general manager (operations) Ahmad Azman Azizul Rahman said: "We expect Safira to be well received by the public based on the response from the pre-launch awareness campaign.

"We feel that our products are among the most attractive and competitive in the market. One of the plus points is the relatively large lot sizes for the bungalow houses with average size of 7,000 sq ft."

Other unique feature incorporated in the design is the rainwater harvesting system that stores rainwater for general purpose use like gardening, car washing and general cleaning."

The "guarded housing" concept is another plus factor as security is high on the mind of most house owners.

"Access is limited to two points only and will be guarded round the clock. The development, which is located on elevated ground, provides another natural security feature and the perimeter area are well above the road level.

"Additional incentives are also being offered to buyers."

View the original article here

Regional District looks to clean up waste disposal - Recycling Raises Waste Haulage

Regional District of Central Kootenay officials say a five-year, $14 million waste management plan adopted by the board last week will save money in the long run.

The plan, headed to public meetings over the next month, includes moving the Nelson and Kaslo transfer stations and consolidating the Nakusp and Salmo landfills at Ootischenia.

“The cost of the capital projects will in part be paid by efficiencies gained through new equipment,” says resource recovery manager Mike Morrison. “We’re looking at multi-point pick-up that lets us transport materials more efficiently between sites.”

Public drop-off areas at transfer stations, most of which were built in the 1970s and ‘80s, will also receive upgrades.

As for relocating the Nelson transfer station off the waterfront, Morrison says they’ve received several proposals, but haven’t evaluated them yet.

“We’re required by the province to have waste management plans,” he explains. “We did our original plan in 1996, and you’re supposed to update them every five years, so we’re long overdue for a fresh look at everything.”

Morrison says they studied eight different options over a 25-year period, including the status quo, and found that doing nothing was the most costly option, “which established a strong business case for making changes.”

Nelson Mayor John Dooley, the city’s representative on the central waste committee, says the plan has been more than two years in the making, and touches every part of the regional district.

“The [current] system is not very efficient,” he says. “A more efficient system will help us reduce the number of trucks on the road and cost of haulage.”

Nearly a quarter of the capital outlay will be spent permanently capping portions of the Creston, Salmo, and Nakusp landfills. The latter two sites would no longer have daily operations and would be replaced with transfer stations, while garbage will be redirected to Ootischenia.

“The idea of this program is to consolidate, streamline, and reduce the amount of product actually going to the landfill,” Dooley says. “We believe there will be a great reduction.”

The plan further includes provisions for composting yard and garden waste, and is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and align with zero waste goals.

The regional district currently spends about $6 million per year dealing with garbage and recycling, a figure that has risen as fuel and contract prices have increased.

However, certain work and equipment purchases have been put off pending completion of the plan.

Five open houses are scheduled, including Wednesday, October 27 at the Salmo community services centre, and Monday, November 8 at the RDCK board room in Nelson. Both run from 4 to 8 p.m.

Following the consultation and provincial approval, the plan could be implemented starting next year, with specific projects getting underway in 2012.

View the original article here

Research and Markets: The Refuse Truck Industry in North America: Size ... - Business Wire (press release)

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/7c7ca6/the_refuse_truck_i) has announced the addition of the "The Refuse Truck Industry in North America" report to their offering.

“The Refuse Truck Industry in North America”

The Refuse Truck Industry in North America: Size, segmentation, competition, growth and trends underlying the manufacture and market of front, rear and side loader refuse trucks and recycling trucks in North America

Household waste generation and its haulage have historically been viewed as recession-resilient activities. However recent studies indicate that households put out less waste for collection during an economic downturn, driven by the economics of recycling and reusing a portion of the waste which previously would have been set out for disposal, as well as encouragement from green initiatives actively promoted by community groups and governmental entities. Zero-waste (no waste sent to landfills) is a target set by many local governments. While this target is still quite some distance away, both waste haulers and refuse truck manufacturers are changing to accommodate this trend.

The refuse truck industry is cyclical in nature, albeit moderately so. With private haulers and local governments being the customers, curtailment of their buying power during a recessionary period negatively impacts demand for the refuse truck industry. Local governments and municipalities are hampered by shrinking budgets owing to lower tax collections, while waste haulers cut back on capital expenditures in the face of rising costs, increasing price pressures and lack of financing. Housing construction is the direct demand driver for waste hauling services, and with this segment being in the stranglehold of a severe recession for the past several years, waste haulers have not seen an increase in demand from new routes.

Despite the above-mentioned factors, the refuse truck industry has not witnessed a significant decline in demand. 2007 and 2008 were strong years for the industry; 2009 saw some decline, but the outlook remains positive.

Alternative fuel-powered refuse trucks are generating a lot of interest, and it is expected that such trucks will increasingly replace the ageing fleet of diesel-powered vehicles. The other area of interest is automation of refuse collection activity. Automation contributes not only towards significant reduction in the direct cost of refuse collection, but also works towards improved driver and operator safety and work conditions.

These and other issues are the subject of this succinct report from SpecialtyVehicles.net (SVN). The report can be put to immediate use for sales and market planning, M&A identification, competitive share analysis, alliances and technology transfer considerations

Key Topics Covered:

A. INTRODUCTION

B. SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS

C. INDUSTRY CHALLENGES & MARKET OUTLOOK

D. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN PRODUCT & TECHNOLOGY

E. MARKET ANALYSIS

F. COMPANY PROFILES

Companies Mentioned:

Amrep Inc. Bridgeport Manufacturing, Inc. E-Z Pack Manufacturing LLC Edge Manufacturing, Inc. G&H Manufacturing Ltd GCI Environment Inc. GSP Marketing, Inc. Heil Environmental Kann Manufacturing Corporation Labrie Environmental Group Loadmaster Corp. Lodal Inc. McNeilus Truck & Manufacturing Pak-Mor Ltd. Pendpac, Inc. Scranton Manufacturing Co., Inc./New Way Shu-Pak Equipment, Inc. Universal Handling Equipment Co. Walinga Inc. Wayne Engineering

For more information visit http://www.researchandmarkets.com/research/7c7ca6/the_refuse_truck_i.

View the original article here

Waste not, want not - Road Transport

Recent cases have highlighted the penalties operators can face if they fail to observe environmental legislation, particularly with regards to illegal dumping of waste materials or pollution of rivers or streams.

In May the Environment Agency (EA) successfully prosecuted nine haulage companies and individuals involved in dumping construction and demolition waste at a designated area of natural beauty in Kent in 2008. Fines totalling £74,250 were imposed on the offenders.

The defendants, who had failed to notify the Highways Agency about it, pleaded guilty to charges under the 1990 Environment Protection Act.

Last month, in another EA prosecution, Nicholson's Transport of Billingham, Teesside, and a driver, each pleaded guilty to a charge of causing liquid wood preservative and toxic chemical Wolmanit CX 8 to enter a tributary in Sedgefield, County Durham, in June 2009.

The firm was fined £10,000 and ordered to pay EA costs of £1,875, while driver Nigel Draper was fined £300 plus £330 costs.

The Environmental Damage Regulations 2009 now force polluters to prevent and remedy environmental damage they have caused - the "polluter pays" principle.

Serious damage

However, the government says the rules are mainly used for the most serious cases of damage only.

The principle is that if you or your business carry out an activity that causes environmental damage, you will have to remedy that.

If there is a risk of harm from your business activities, you must prevent such damage occurring.

Under the regulations, environmental damage is:

? serious damage to surface or ground water;

? contamination of land where there is a significant risk to human health;

? serious damage to EU-protected natural habitats and species or damage to - sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs) or areas of special scientific interest (ASSIs) in Northern Ireland.

The legislation affects hauliers involved in sectors such as manufacturing, construction and demolition, waste management and forestry.

Liam Northfield, FTA media relations manager, says: "Broadly speaking, good transport operators will always be aware of their environmental obligations when it comes to disposing of waste, whether they are general operators or disposal companies.

"We are happy with the current legislation as it does not penalise responsible companies and we would not be in favour of any sort of legislative relaxation."

If a haulage firm has threatened to cause, or has caused, environmental damage it must:

-take steps to prevent the damage (or further damage) occurring;

-inform the EA or other authorities who will say what the company must do to prevent and/or remedy the damage;

-if the EA has to remedy the damage, the firm will have to pay the costs.

In England and Wales, the EA, Natural England, local councils and Environment Secretary are responsible for administering and enforcing the regulations, depending on the type of damage involved.

Responsible bodies

In Northern Ireland, the body responsible is the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA), while in Scotland, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Marine Scotland and Scottish Natural Heritage look after the regulations.

If you don't comply with the law, you can be prosecuted, fined and/or imprisoned.

Nick Deal, Road Haulage Association manager for logistics development, adds: "Most of the offences are spillages and companies should have systems in place to deal with these. The principle is the polluter pays, I don't have any issue with that and although the fines can be pretty big, they are there to restore the land."

ENVIRONMENT CIVIL SANCTION ORDERS

New rules allowing environmental regulators in England and Wales to impose civil sanctions on a business committing certain types of environmental offence came into force in England in April 2010 and in Wales three months later.

Environment Civil Sanction Orders are intended as an alternative to prosecution and the criminal penalties of fines and imprisonment.

The government believes the sanctions will make environmental law enforcement more proportionate and reflect the fact that most offences committed by businesses are unintentional.

Civil sanctions will initially cover offences relating to harm to water or wildlife, drainage and waste management.

Regulators can use the legislation to clamp down on businesses committing certain environmental offences.

Sanctions include:

? Compliance notices - written notices to take steps to ensure that an offence does not continue or recur.

? Restoration notices - written notices to restore harm caused by non-compliance.

? Enforcement undertakings - voluntary agreement by business to take corrective action to make up for non-compliance.

? A fixed monetary penalty - a low-level penalty for minor offences fixed at £100 for an individual and £300 for a company.

? A variable monetary penalty - a monetary penalty for more serious offences with a maximum of £250,000.

? A stop notice - written notice to stop an activity which is causing harm.

Environmental regulators with the civil powers - EA and Natural England - will still be able to use civil or traditional criminal punishments at their discretion.

In most cases the regulator will issue a notice of intent to impose the sanction.

The offender can appeal against a civil sanction to an independent tribunal, and subject to the appeal, the offender must pay the penalty.

Legal action will be taken against anyone not paying monetary penalties and anyone not complying with restoration notices or stop notices will usually be prosecuted.

In some cases, the regulator may recover costs of investigation or legal advice. It is important operators admit their mistakes immediately as failure to do so can lead to a heavier fine.

LEGISLATION

? 1990 Environment Protection Act

? Water Resources Act 1991

Environment Civil Sanction Orders

Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2010

Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations 2009

Environmental Damage (Prevention and Remediation) (Wales) Regulations 2009

Environmental Liability (Prevention and Remediation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009

Environmental Liability (Scotland) Regulations 2009

Environmental Liability (Prevention and Remediation) (Scotland) Regulations 2008

View the original article here