Opinion piece by Matt Stoneman, Wastecare Group Sales Director

For centuries, Britain has stood as a beacon of innovation and manufacturing prowess. However, in the last fifty years, a significant portion of our engineering and manufacturing has been outsourced abroad along with many of our inventions developed overseas. Waste management and recycling has followed the same path. Despite being a critical force in safeguarding our planet, it is yet another sector who have become heavily reliant on other nations for innovation, investment, and waste recycling.

The global movement of waste has reached staggering proportions. Europe alone exports more than 30 million tonnes of waste worldwide a year while importing 16 million tonnes from outside the EU. In addition, a shocking estimate of over 8 million tonnes of additional waste is being illegally shipped worldwide.

In response to this crisis, the EU implemented the Export of Waste Regulations in November 2021 in an attempt to curb waste crime and impose controls on the volume of waste exported. In the UK, the Environment Agency governs the movement of recyclable materials across borders through the Transfrontier Shipment (TFS) Regulations. However presently, over 800,000 tonnes of waste are being legally exported annually from the UK – with plastics constituting over 60% of this trade. In our eyes, this practice of sending materials offshore that could be processed and recycled domestically is completely counter-intuitive.

We all know the UK’s trade balance with other nations has been in deficit for over four decades. This imbalance is exacerbated by paying other countries to handle our waste and subsequently paying for products manufactured from the same waste. The irony is clear.

Moreover, aside from transport costs and the environmental impact of increased carbon emissions, outsourcing waste management while continuing consumption perpetuates an economically flawed cycle. And others are catching on. China, India, Turkey, and Vietnam amongst others have started refusing our waste, and The Netherlands have implemented a waste import tax to regulate volumes entering the country. Repercussions of our waste export trade hit the headlines in early 2022, when the Environment Agency incurred a £1million bill from Indonesia to repatriate illegally exported waste—a burden borne by taxpayers whilst leaving the perpetrators unpunished.

The need for change is glaringly evident in the pursuit of global net zero waste disposal. It’s time to challenge these practices and the status quo. Why can’t we process this material domestically when we have the capacity to do so?

Countries like Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden serve as key examples of having invested in sustainable, efficient, and clean waste recovery methods internally. Sweden’s model means that it recycles nearly half of what is thrown away, and the majority of the rest is utilised in waste-to-energy processes – leaving less than one percent reaching landfill. This continued investment in recycling practices to reach the EU’s recycling target of 65% by 2035 remains at the forefront of Sweden’s strategies.

Our call is for the UK government and regulators to champion recyclers and re-processors, whilst encouraging investment in cutting-edge technology to position the UK as a leader in waste management.

However we do want to stress that advocating for self-sufficiency in waste management doesn’t oppose free trade. While importing products can be economically justified, the scenario becomes more intricate concerning waste. Refuse Derived Fuels and Solid Recovered Fuels for instance, are often transported to Sweden and Germany for recovery, incurring additional costs for transportation, treatment, and resulting in higher-priced electricity and products.

Ultimately, it’s now more imperative than ever for the UK to leverage its domestic infrastructure to attract investments that elevate our waste management standards and reduce costs for all. While benefiting from a global economy, we must strive for self-sufficiency and carbon reduction in avoidable circumstances.