« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
5 Approach to the assessment
5.1 Outline approach
The approach applied in assessing the strategic environmental effects of the draft NWMP is outlined below. The approach has largely followed that which was identified in the Scoping Report for the Plan, however this was augmented and clarified following comments from the statutory consultees. Clarification on the scope and detail of the assessment was achieved through the development of a revised Scoping Note issued for discussion prior to the assessment process. The approach has been conducted in line with the requisite legislative requirements of the "Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005" and current best practice on SEA, including the Scottish Government's SEA Toolkit.
5.2 Method and procedure
5.2.1 Assessment framework
The Scoping Report for the SEA of the NWMP identified a number of key environmental issues which the SEA process needs to consider.
The use of environmental objectives is a common method for undertaking SEA to assess whether a Plan is moving towards or away from stated objectives. Environmental objectives were developed at the Scoping stage for each SEA topic. This list of objectives was then expanded to include some SEA topics which had been provisionally scoped out. This was following responses from the statutory consultees requesting that they should in fact be scoped in. During the early stages of the Environmental Assessment process a set of supplementary criteria was identified in order to account for the range of environmental issues of particular relevance to waste management, and to support the consistency of assessment approach.
5.2.2 Components of the assessment matrix
The assessment framework which has been developed consists of 11 Environmental Objectives supported by 29 supplementary questions/criteria. The objectives, detailed assessment criteria, and the SEA topics to which they relate are presented in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1 SEA assessment framework
Environmental Objective | Supplementary criteria
"Will the Option under consideration…" | SEA Topics of relevance |
|---|
To increase the rates of waste prevention, reuse, recycling and recovery in Scotland in accordance with the waste hierarchy * | a) reduce the overall amount of waste generated in Scotland?
b) Improve recycling and composting rates in Scotland?
c) Improve waste recovery (incl energy recovery) in Scotland? | Material Assets |
To reduce landfilling of waste in Scotland | a) Result in reduction of waste sent to landfill?
b) Ensure that BMW landfill allowances are met? | Material Assets, Soil |
To manage waste in a way that reduces emissions to air | a) Reduce the amount of pollution released to air?
b) Significantly affect air quality standards due to emissions from waste facilities?
c) Significantly affect dust levels from waste management facilities?
d) Result in increased odour issues? | Air, Climatic Factors, Human Health |
To manage waste in a way that reduces emissions to land and soil | a) Significantly change the quality and quantity of soils as a result of waste management activities?
b) Significantly increase/reduce rates of derelict, vacant or contaminated land? | Soil, Human Health |
To manage waste in a way that reduces emissions to water | a) Reduce the amount of pollution released to water?
b) Significantly affect the ecological status of waterbodies in the area?
c) Significantly affect flood risk in Scotland?
d) Affect the status of groundwater? | Water, Human Health |
To manage waste in a way that protects and, where appropriate enhances, biodiversity | a) Have significant effects upon sites or species protected for their nature conservation value?
b) Safeguard the ecological processes on which protected sites/species depend? | Biodiversity, Flora, Fauna |
To manage waste in a way that reduces greenhouse gas emissions | a) Significantly reduce GHG emissions from waste management and reduce the need for virgin materials extraction?
b) Significantly increases the release of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and methane? | Climatic Factors |
To support the development of alternative renewable energy supplies | a) Support or inhibit renewable energy development? | Climatic Factors |
To reduce the movement of waste | a) Significantly affect the volume of waste transported?
b) Significantly affect the distance waste is transported? | Air, Climatic Factors, Population, Human Health |
To manage waste in a way that protects communities and their local environment ** | a) Significantly affect traffic levels in local communities?
b) Significantly affect ambient noise levels?
c) Significantly affect levels of litter in local communities?
d) Increase risk of accident?
e) Significantly affect human health? | Human Health |
To manage waste in a way that protects and, where appropriate enhances, cultural heritage ** | a) Significantly affect protected heritage assets such as Ancient Monuments, Listed Buildings and archaeological sites?
b) Significantly affect historic gardens and designed landscapes? | Cultural Heritage |
To manage waste in a way that protects and, where appropriate enhances, landscape ** | a) Significantly affect overall landscape quality?
b) Significantly affect protected landscapes? | Landscape |
* this objective has been amended since the Scoping Report to include 'waste prevention'
** highlighted objectives have been introduced since the Scoping Report in response to comments from the Statutory Consultees.
5.3 Alternative scenarios for managing waste and their assessment
5.3.1 Assessing NWMP Options
When undertaking an SEA it is a requirement to assess not only the environmental impacts of the scenario set out by the plan being assessed, but also assess other practical options that are an alternative to the proposed plan. In this section the scenario set out in the draft NWMP and practical alternative options are described and assessed for their environmental impact. The Scottish Government team developing the NWMP have identified the draft plan as the main option (Option 1) and a further more aspirational option (Option2) as an alternative option.
The range of options that are genuinely practical has been limited by a number of factors, in particular the introduction of the revised EU Waste Framework Directive which has set out key targets and objectives for member states to achieve and these set the parameters of the NWMP. There are also significant data accuracy issues surrounding Commercial & Industrial waste streams that make target setting in this area difficult at this time. An improvement in this information is likely to make target setting easier in future revisions of the NWMP.
The approach to assessing both options has focused upon assessing the Key Targets set out in each option. Regardless of the option analysed much of the ongoing activity on waste prevention, recycling etc by Delivery bodies, Local Authorities and other stakeholders will continue. Therefore the key difference between scenarios or options is the strategic targets set that will drive that activity.
5.3.2 Why no 'business as usual' Option
It is normal practice to include a "business as usual" option or "do nothing option" when assessing the environmental impacts of alternative scenarios to the proposed plan. However the new NWMP for Scotland is required not only to update the existing National Waste Plan ( NWP) 2003, and the National Waste Strategy ( NWS) 1999, but it is also a key element of Scotland's compliance with the new requirements of the revised EU Waste Framework Directive mentioned in earlier sections of this report.
In addition to the Directive requirements the Scottish Government's policy on Zero Waste was set out in the Cabinet Secretary's statement of 24th January 2008. This policy was set out prior to the draft NWMP and was a departure from the existing NWP and NWS.
For these reasons the "business as usual" option of continuing the current NWP and its targets is viewed as not a genuinely practical option. Therefore a formal assessment of this option has not been undertaken.
5.3.3 Option 1 - The draft NWMP
Option 1 is the draft plan option and consists of a number of targets. These targets and those for Option 2 are set out in the Table below. This option includes challenging targets for MSW recycling/composting and the halting of MSW waste Growth by 2010. To attain these targets increased recycling and composting services and infrastructure will be required and waste prevention measures including improved packaging design will also be required. Growth rates in MSW have historically been in excess of 1% per year but in recent years, between 2004/05 and 2007/08, this growth rate has stabilised. However recycling/composting of MSW has only recently achieved rates over 30%. This indicates the challenge of the targets set out below. However the diversion of more waste from landfill and continuing to halt the overall growth in MSW will have significant positive effects on resource use and climate change emissions.
The 25% cap on residual treatment for MSW should ensure that waste prevention, reuse, recycling and composting are given priority over recovery. This along with a 5% landfill cap should push waste treatment up the waste hierarchy with an associated benefit in environmental impact. Both targets may be very challenging for Councils currently with low recycling and composting rates to meet. The application of the landfill cap to residual treatment means that there will be a strong incentive to find a market for ash from CoEfW plants rather than it being landfilled.
The recycling target for Construction & Demolition, with this being the largest single element of waste in Scotland, will also have a significant positive effect in similar way as the MSW targets. To achieve this target could again require significant investment in infrastructure and services as well as support for changes in practices such as the use of site waste management plans.
Commercial and Industrial Waste has no specific targets in this option.
Table 5-2 Summary of Option 1 & 2 Targets
Focus in Waste Hierarchy | Waste Streams | Option 1 -
The Planned Option
| Option 2 -
The Aspirational Option |
|---|
Waste Prevention and Resource Efficiency | MSW Arising
CoC&I Waste Arising | 0% growth by 2010
No target | -1% growth per year
Reduction of 150ktpa* |
Recycling and Composting | MSW Recycling / Composting Level | Relative to 1995 levels MSW reductions of:
50% by 2013
60% by 2020
70% by 2025 | Relative to 1995 levels MSW reductions of:
50% by 2013
60% by 2020
70% by 2025 |
Construction & Demolition Preparing for Waste Recycling / Composting | Recycling of CoC&D to reach 70% by 2020 | Recycling of CoC&D to reach 80% by 2020 |
Recovery and Disposal | Residual Treatment Cap for MSW | 25% (maximum amount of MSW treated through CoEfW) | 30% (maximum amount of MSW treated through CoEfW) - this higher target is to balance the stricter cap on landfill |
MSW Landfill Cap | 5% (maximum amount of MSW disposed to landfill) | 0% (maximum amount of MSW disposed to landfill) |
Reuse | MSW | No target | 1% by 2013 |
* Thousands of tonnes per annum.
5.3.4 Option 2 - The Aspirational Plan
Option 2 is a more aspirational extension of Option1. C & I Waste has a specific reduction target in this option and the target for CoC&D has been extended to 80% for recycling.
MSW has a waste arising reduction target and a reuse target of 1% per year. Both these targets are likely to be challenging given the background trend in household growth and income which will require to be offset by waste prevention action. The reuse target is likely to focus on materials such as textiles, WEEE, bikes, books and furniture. This will have a positive social and resource use benefit.
The increase of the residual treatment cap to 30% may enable the use of one to two extra treatment plants of average size in Scotland. However with 0% allowed even after residual treatment (see NWMP Annex on proposed 25% cap) all plants will need to limit post treatment landfill to a minimum.
« Previous | Contents | Next »