ITEM 14
ITEM 14
TORR QUARRY DEVELOPMENTS
Report of Chief Customer Operations Officer
Corporate Plan Page: various pages refer
Statutory Powers: Environmental Protection Act 1990 s45
Financial Implications: £300,000 for construction of Waste Transfer Station (approved
Minute no. POL128/99)
£14,000 for research into alternative recycling methodologies
(funded from existing Waste Management budgets).
Introduction
1.
This report reviews the background to the use of Torr Quarry as a depot and waste
transfer station and discusses potential uses for the remainder of the site.
Background
2.
Torr Quarry was originally purchased for use as a Council Depot and a Waste Transfer
Station. The benefits from this acquisition were:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
The site is relatively remote from residential development and does not lie within
or directly adjacent to sensitive areas and is screened from view.
Well located to run operations that will serve the main towns of Kingsbridge and
Salcombe and coastal areas.
Operational savings can be achieved by using Torr Quarry as an operational
depot.
Ideal location to establish a Waste Transfer Station
By having a Waste Transfer Station within the district it will allow the Council to
have some control over Waste Management activities in the future.
Devon County Council as disposal authority can dictate the disposal route.
Should DCC highlight a disposal route that is a greater distance from the District
than the current disposal site at Chelson Meadow, Plymouth, it could have major
financial implications in terms of the operational costs to the Council. The
construction of the Waste Transfer Station will help to protect the Council against
one element of increasing costs in the future.
The Issues - Phase 1 - Waste Transfer Station
3.
The Council's Direct Services Organisation was awarded the refuse collection contract
on 10th May 2001. In their submission, the financial benefits of the Waste Transfer
Station were detailed.
4.
A saving of £42,000 per annum can be achieved by utilising the transfer station. This
saving originates from the savings made by the Kingsbridge Depot not requiring a relay
vehicle and driver. Additionally, it has been calculated that a saving of 30,000 miles
per annum can be made through the reorganisation of the refuse rounds. This will
maximise the efficiency of the vehicles and equates to approximately £95,000 per
annum. This saving has arisen due to savings in weight through the implementation of
the household recycling scheme.
5.
Construction of the Waste Transfer Station - Construction of the Waste Transfer Station
at Torr Quarry has previously been approved by the Policy Committee (Minute no.
POL 128/99).In addition it was agreed that tenders be invited for the construction of the
facility, and for a separate contractor to tender for the loading and haulage of household
waste from the station.
6.
A consultant has now been appointed to draw together tenders for the design and build
of the Waste Transfer Station. The original budget for Torr Quarry was estimated to be
£300,000 (design and build including consultancy fees). Once tenders have been
returned, a further report will be brought to the Executive as the latest advice is that
tenders are likely to be in the order of £350,000 - £400,000.
7.
Operational Waste Transfer - The Council has negotiated with Devon County Council a
contribution of £130,000 per annum, to meet the operational costs of transferring waste.
This agreement provided for 10,000 tonnes per annum of household waste to be
transferred from the station, to Chelson Meadow or the Heathfield landfill sites. The
contribution is linked to the Retail Price Index. The total costs of operating the waste
transfer station and the bulk haulage of the waste to a landfill site are expected to equal
the contribution from Devon County Council.
Appendix 1 shows the Torr Quarry site with the proposed Council Depot and Waste Transfer
Station. Planning approval was given for the construction of the depot at the Council meeting
on 13th September 2001, and planning approval will be sought for the waste transfer station in
due course.
The Issues - Phase 2 - Household Recycling Scheme (Dry recyclables)
8.
The household recycling scheme currently covers 62% of households throughout the
District. The recyclable materials are delivered to the Plymouth Materials Reclamation
Facility (MRF) for sorting. Income for the materials and from recycling credits will
only be paid on the materials actually recycled or recovered. Originally the Council was
credited with a recovery rate of 75%. However this has recently been reduced to 50%
recovery due to inefficiencies at the MRF. This reduction has a major impact on the
income received from the scheme and will result in additional costs of approximately
£70,000. (Originally the processing costs of the MRF were covered by the income
from the sale of recycled materials and recycling credits).
There are still 38% of the households within the District that have not been introduced
to the recycling scheme. As part of the new cleansing contract the refuse rounds will be
reorganised and an estimated saving of approximately £95,000 could be achieved. This
saving could enable the Council to increase the catchment area on the current recycling
collection rounds, to include a greater number of properties through increased
efficiency and will be the subject of a bid in the forthcoming revenue review process.
9.
The household recycling scheme will be extended to Dartmouth town and surrounding
villages (approved by Council on 10th May 2001, Minute 29/01 [3]). This would then
leave the problem of the more rural or inaccessible areas to be solved. Waste
Management Services therefore is seeking approval to investigate alternative recycling
collection methods. These methods could potentially be more cost effective, financially
stable and sustainable in the future than current schemes. A paper collection pilot
scheme is one option that needs to be explored given that in excess of 51% of all
material collected on the household recycling scheme is paper. Whilst the public may
feel frustrated that only paper is being collected and not including plastics and cans, the
benefits are financial. No MRF processing costs are involved and it is estimated that
the costs of storage and transport would be offset by the income from the sale of paper
and recycling credits. Other trial schemes will also be explored to identify if there are
cost effective methods of processing recyclable materials. If a trial scheme were
successful both operationally and financially, then it could be used to replace or
supplement the MRF for processing household recyclable waste throughout the District.
Approval is therefore sought for a sum of £14,000 to undertake three trials in rural parts
of the District which currently do not have any form of household recycling scheme.
These trials can be funded from existing Waste Management budgets.
The Issues - Phase 3 - Composting of Household Waste.
10.
Within the cleansing contract submission made by the Direct Services Organisation,
was an initiative compiled by Waste Management Services. This proposal highlighted
the potential for the composting of household waste, i.e. the grey bin material.
11.
The concept of this proposal is as follows. The Plusgrow agitated bay composting
system is a space efficient, and extremely economical method for processing a variety
of organic wastes. At the heart of the system is a versatile diesel powered,
hydraulically driven Plusgrow turner. This turner both effectively shreds and mixes
ensuring a high degree of aeration. The turner operates with a series of purpose-built
reinforced concrete bays housed within an industrial specification building. Due to the
vigorous action of mixing and turning on a regular basis, composting conditions are
optimised and the processing of organic waste can be achieved in 28 days. The system
can be contracted in modular fashion; with up to six bays in parallel, enabling some
15,000 tonnes of input waste to be processed by a single Plusgrow turner.
The Plusgrow machine travels along the top of the bay walls, progressively moving
composting material down the bays in 5 metre increments at each pass.
12.
The refuse collected from both domestic and commercial premises would be collected
as normal, with no pre-sort of materials. The refuse would be delivered straight to the
site and fed through the system. To add value to the compostable materials received, it
is proposed that a partnership be formed with South West Water (SWW). This
partnership would enable SWW to dispose of sewage sludge at the plant. This activity
would increase the quality of the compostable materials. The recovery rate of materials
would be 55%, this would increase the councils overall recycling rate, potentially to
66%.
13.
In summary the benefits of this scheme would be:








One collection, no separate collection receptacles or vehicles.
Maximum quantities are collected and no materials excluded.
A fast and effective methodology for processing of organic wastes.
No additional operational cost to be incurred by the council.
Partnership between the council and South West Water.
A marketable product and potential end use for the material produced on local
farms.
Support from Ecological Sciences Limited – a research company in Exeter.
A significant increase in the Councils recycling rate could be achieved in a
sustainable manner.
14.
To enable this dynamic, innovative, initiative to be implemented the process would
ideally be located at Torr Quarry, Kingsbridge, to gain the full benefits of the proposal.
A feasibility study for the Plusgrow Composting project has already been
commissioned by SHDC, SWW and Eco-sci. This has been undertaken by Hyder
Consultants to establish the possibility of this proposal. In order for this process to
work, an adequate site has to be identified which would work in conjunction with
existing activities, i.e. the Waste Transfer Station and Council Depot.
15.
In line with the report of Hyder Consultants, Waste Management Services are
investigating the viability of this process. The outcome of this will be reported at a later
date. The Council could achieve recovery rates of up to 55% just from this process.
This would constitute a considerable step in achieving targets set by the government for
recycling and of even greater importance it will help to reduce the pressure on the use
of landfill for the disposal of waste. The effective management of the District’s waste
will continue to be one of the most important issues for the Council over the next 10
years.
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Executive RESOLVES that:
1.
The sum of £14,000 for research into alternative recycling
methods to be funded from existing Waste Management
budgets be approved.
2.
The possibility of alternative uses for the remainder of the land
at Torr Quarry be noted.
V G Palk
Waste Management Officer
Executive
20th September 2001
C J Lucas
Customer Operations Manager
A J Eden
Chief Customer Operations Officer
Background Documents
Torr Quarry Composting Plant – Engineering Feasibility Study
Torr Quarry Developments – Fee Proposals for Consultancy Services
Policy Committee Reports (Minute POL 128/99)