I am pleased to have secured today’s debate, under your guidance, Mr. Hancock. It is important that we understand and are aware of the matter before us. The UK produces more than 17 million tonnes of food waste each year. I submitted a parliamentary question today seeking an assessment of the food waste generated by the 13 outlets in the parliamentary estate—a third of the UK’s waste comes from large-scale food manufacturers, and I do not expect the House to have an equivalent wastage.
With many people turning to ready meals and packaged food, the problem of food and package waste has exploded over the past 10 years. In fact, the British might waste more food than any other nation in throwing out 30 to 40 per cent. of all the produce bought and grown each year, according to research. Figures collated by the Government, supermarkets, processors and farmers show that modern food production methods might appear efficient, but the reality is that large-scale manufacturing and rigid supply chains are creating significant quantities of waste.
Separate Government figures show that some 17 million tonnes of food, worth up to £20 billion a year, are being put into landfill, even though approximately 25 per cent. of it could be eaten safely by people or animals, or turned into compost or, in this case, energy. The cost of transporting that waste is thought to be more than £175 million a year.
In seeking today’s debate, my aim was to highlight a unique technology developed by Inetec, a company in my constituency, and to seek solutions to the problems it faces in rolling out and developing that major contribution to energy and landfill problems. Inetech was formed in 1997 to address the problem facing large-scale food manufacturers with food and non-recyclable packaging waste. I should like to recognise the financial support from the Welsh Assembly and the grants gained by the company to support its research and development, including two Department of Trade and Industry smart awards.
Inetec’s research discovered that food waste and its non-recyclable packaging contained a high energy value that was being squandered. The waste stream was discovered to be a valuable means of generating renewable energy, allowing an on-site energy recovery system to be placed alongside a food processor, resulting in a reduction in fossil fuel usage and greenhouse gases, saving on transport and landfill costs, and increasing bio and food security.
The technology is known as abrasive drying and, explained simply, involves the water contained within food being removed to a very low level, after which the food and packaging waste is loaded into a vessel where it is macerated against itself, while heat is applied gently. As the waste warms, moisture held within it becomes exposed and evaporates. The vapour is drawn out of the vessel and run through a condensing unit to convert it back to liquid. The liquid has a near-neutral pH, so it can be discharged straight to a foul sewer without the requirement for further treatment. After the batch process, a powdery biomass fuel remains, similar in appearance to coffee grains. The whole process takes about 24 hours to complete.
The technology was developed via two commercial operations: one with Greggs bakery, in which bakery and food sandwich waste was processed, and a second with a pedigree chicken hatchery in which eggs and dead chicks were processed. After thousands of test runs, the technology has proved highly successful in processing waste as different as supermarket waste, chicks, cows’ stomachs, offal, fish, airline waste, bakery waste, oil-laden sludge and many other forms of waste too attractive to mention.
Britain has a large work force employed in food production who could be offshored unless production, and bio and food safety costs can be reduced and a viable alternative to landfill found. Drawing on those two problem areas, Inetec has two lines of progress. The first is working with individual food producers, such as Ethnic Cuisine, which produces Chinese ready meals for Sainsbury’s. Food and packaging waste will be used to provide heat and energy for the plant, thus reducing its carbon footprint by one third and reducing the need for electricity drawn from the grid and fossil fuels—an option that perhaps the House of Commons could pursue.
The second line is to develop a UK-wide network of 10 large-scale Inetec plants, using biomass prepared in the Inetec process that is converted to synthetic gas and then to renewable electricity. Each plant will generate 21 MW of electricity from biomass, and a further 5 MW of thermal energy by-product. Each site will prevent 500 tonnes of food waste and packaging per day—1.5 million tonnes per year—including food-contaminated packaging, from going to landfill.
We know that we must find alternative means of providing power. Energy consumption is continuing to rise at a staggering rate and the population continues to grow. The world’s energy demands are predicted to reach an all-time high by 2050. We know that renewable energies are needed, and biofuels have emerged as a viable means of generating large quantities of energy from sources that previously have been squandered. Landfill is an option that is rapidly running out; landfill sites are unpopular alongside local communities and generate great controversy.
Food producers, hotels, supermarkets and households could benefit from the Inetec process, with communities benefiting from energy provided from their food and packaging waste by a local Inetec site. With the recently announced rise in landfill tax, which will lead to a substantial increase in food waste and packaging disposal costs, this novel technology becomes even more financially attractive.
During a recent Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee visit to Germany, we saw such small-scale energy-producing plants utilised to provide energy in small villages in southern Germany. If such a scheme was adopted and centres placed alongside towns, it is conceivable that as much as 75 per cent. of a town’s electricity requirement could be provided by the waste stream that it generates. That is especially relevant following the announcement of the development of five eco-towns by 2020.
For companies such as Inetec to be successful, we must remove the barriers faced in rolling out this new technology. Although the Government announced yesterday that they will simplify the planning process for large projects, smaller proposals such as Inetec’s still face problems with regulations, procedures and planning policy. A major problem is the time scale and cost of meeting necessary approvals. The planning system is slow, very expensive and risky, with Inetec having to spend £2 million on the planning application for its first proposed plant, which could ultimately be refused.
The slow and expensive nature of planning permission must also be viewed alongside the time and cost of obtaining a pollution prevention and control licence and national grid connection. Those hurdles need to be jumped with each new planning or licence application at a new site. Each application starts from a zero base with no recognition of past success and past examination of the issues concerning the application.
In the UK, the cost of creating a connection to the grid is dependent on a price dictated by regional electricity companies. The purchase price of the electricity is set by the power companies. In Germany, during the Select Committee visit, I found that the Government set low connection and high sale prices, which has successfully fostered a growing alternative energy supply industry. The cost of connection to the grid must be paid upfront before the planning consent is gained, possibly adding £1.1 million to the gamble for success.
Inetec and its novel technology have received huge interest from many of the largest food production companies in the UK, such as Northern foods and Greencore, but it still finds itself receiving little assistance from the Government and is stuck trying to navigate through the complex legislation and planning regulations.
We know, and have known for generations, that people produce waste. Our archaeology and our understanding of past generations is often based on the uncovering of waste sites and seeing the food, utensils and packaging—the earthen-based vessels—that archaeologists uncover. However, we can change how much we produce, how we manage it and what we do with it.
If we are to adopt a renewable energy-based industry in the UK, we must resolve the question of how the potential of such an industry can be harnessed, by reviewing the current barriers of regulation, planning and processes, while retaining the protection that they afford to local communities. I am aware that the Government will announce a greater concentration on food waste in the energy White Paper that is coming soon. There are those who would say that this debate is perhaps one or two days too soon, but better that than one or two days too late. If I am to applaud the energy White Paper, it will also, as I hope, announce initiatives to liberate innovative uses of waste to generate heat and power, so that food can provide energy not only for the body, but for the home and for industry.
Food Waste to Energy
Proceeding contribution from
Madeleine Moon
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 22 May 2007.
It occurred during Adjournment debate on Food Waste to Energy.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c422-4WH 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
Westminster Hall
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:00:19 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399027
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399027
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_399027