Christmas is, amongst other things, a time of over indulgence and wastage, but it doesn’t have to be that way. By thinking carefully about your actions you can cut your Christmas wastage quite easily. First of all the Christmas tree – you may think you are doing your bit for the environment by using a fake tree, but apparently not. According to the Carbon Trust, artificial trees have a carbon footprint at least ten times larger than a real tree as they are made from plastic.

So you’re better of with the real thing, but if you are worried about sending your tree to landfill after the festive period, there are further greener alternatives. Companies exist that will deliver you a real Christmas tree in a pot and collect it after Christmas. www.ChristmasTreeMan.co.uk is one example, they deliver and collect the tree at the customers convenience and then look after the tree for the rest of the year so that it can be used again and again year on year.

Another major source of waste at this time of year is food. According to LoveFoodHateWaste.com, the government website aimed at stopping us wasting food, 64 per cent of us predict there will be leftovers from Christmas day. The website has a useful food calculator to help you work out exactly how much food you are going to need to feed your Christmas guests.

In a bid to save £550m a year in local government spending by 2012-13, local authorities will be forced to cut waste collection services. This could mean that bin rounds are permanently reduced to fortnightly collections instead of weekly. With the general public unprepared to accept fewer collections due to concerns about vermin, a lot of preparation work is needed to help people to adjust.

Money needs to be invested into educating the public on waste minimisation techniques before collection services are reduced. Joy Blizzard of the Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee commented: “One of the ways we can save money is not to deal with the stuff in the first place. We need to see more funds poured into waste minimisation initiatives.”

We must all applaud the efforts of David Hughes acting Site Manager and his colleagues at the Widnes facility. Following the fire at the storage facility at WasteCare's Widnes Recycling operation in the early hours of Wednesday morning, the operation is already back up and fully functioning. There appears to be no suspicious circumstances, although the cause of the fire is still to be determined. The estimated cost of the damage is around £1 million. No one was hurt and no environmental damage caused. Praise also goes to the fire brigade and support services who managed to contain the incident and avoid further damage.

David was on site at 1.30am Wednesday morning, Derek drove up from Bristol to be on site soon after 4am. Their help was invaluable in guiding the fire brigade to help save the facility. The sales team at Leeds also did their bit, phoning over 200 customers who were expecting a collection. The guys are back on the road today and David is convinced by Monday we will have caught up the backlog and be back on track.

We would like to thank colleagues, friends and neighbours who have offered help and assistance over the last 24 hours.

Lib Dem MEP Fiona Hall has urged the UK government to follow the example of other European countries and raise public awareness about safe battery disposal.

Speaking at the European Parliament's 4th Battery Collection Day, Fiona said:

"In France and Belgium, battery collection points are much more common than they are in the UK. Special disposal boxes help to raise public awareness that batteries should not be thrown into the general waste bin.

"Special facilities for battery disposal do exist in the UK at household waste centres - but very few people know about them and use them. That means that batteries and the metals they contain are too often ending up in landfill. What is needed is much more publicity about safe disposal and more convenient facilities."

The 4th Battery Collection Day also highlighted the importance of rechargeable batteries in reducing fossil fuel dependency and increasing the use of renewable energy.

Said Fiona:

"With Nissan' decision to build its new battery factory in Sunderland and the North East striving to become a hub for electric vehicles, the region has been on the forefront of some exciting developments in the battery and electrical industry this year. I was therefore particularly pleased to be able to sponsor the 4th Battery Collection day in the European Parliament.

"It is great to see that our regional industry is making an important and innovative contribution to bridge the technological gap of storing energy produced by renewable sources."

WasteCare were proud to support the MRW National Recycling Awards recently and were honoured to present the Lifetime Achievement Award to Philip Harrington of Wilson James.

Anthony Jagan, regional sales representative of WasteCare who presented the award said: “Well done to all the winners, this was a fantastic event which was a great opportunity to celebrate the great achievements that the waste industry has achieved over the past year.”

Over 600 people attended the event from small businesses, to local authorities, to major waste management companies, materials reprocessors and some of the world’s biggest companies, the awards celebrated everyone with a stake in the recycling and waste management sector.

Householders in Suffolk have been challenged to see if they can reduce their waste by half. As part of a government trial the ‘Seven Suffolk Streets’ project has been awarded a grant of £10,000 from the Defra to attempt the challenge.

One street in each of the seven district council authorities in Suffolk will be taking part in the trial.

Under the new ‘Zero Waste Standard’ proposals householders could end up with more than six bins – this is a sticking point that has caused some controversy.

Doretta Cocks of the Campaign for Weekly Waste Collection says: “People are struggling as it is to cope with all these bins and crates…Zero waste is a wonderful idea but I cannot see anyway they could ever achieve it.”

The government has stressed that the new policy will not necessarily lead to a multitude of bins and that it will be up to each authority to enforce new regulations in their own way.

Peter Hunt, Chairman at WasteCare says: “It’s about time the government started to take the waste issue seriously and I think this is an important step. Hopefully the many trials that are taking place across the country will help to iron out some of the initial concerns.”

Binmen in Croydon and Margate have been caught throwing rubbish, sorted by the householders for recycling, into the normal waste truck destined for landfill.

It begs the question, is this a more widespread problem?

Householders in these areas have caught binmen on camera blatantly emptying recycling boxes and bins into the regular dustcart, while the recycling truck workers lazily watch on.

Peter Hunt, Chairman at WasteCare says: “This news is very worrying and the councils concerned need to take it very seriously. Unlike the council workers specialist waste companies like ourselves have to deal with material set aside for recycling responsibly. There needs to be a re-think with training and monitoring in order to ensure homeowners that their efforts are not in vain.”

The approval of seven battery compliance schemes this week will add an estimated £1,000,000 to the costs for UK Producers, compared to the impact assessment previously released by the regulators.

Originally, the EA stated that the sum required by the regulators in order to manage the Battery compliance directive in the UK was around £670,000.

The result of approving seven schemes will be that the income generated for the EA will now be around £1 million pound, far exceeding that required to meet their costs.

Add to this the additional administrative costs of operating 7 independent schemes and the potential for 7 collection networks competing for the same batteries, the additional costs to producers and eventually consumers could well exceed £1 million or £330 per tonne of batteries collected in 2010.

Based on the anticipated sales for 2010 of 30,000 tonnes, with a 10% collection target there will be an obligated tonnage of 3,000 tonnes to fund. Therefore the effect of this added cost will increase producer costs by as much as £330 per tonne. This is on top of the expected £1,000 per tonne average cost of compliance.

This is not believed to be a deliberate overcharging by the EA for profit, as all viable scheme plans had to be approved. We do however now have a situation that needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency in order to avoid an unnecessary additional cost burden being passed on to Battery Producers.

With only two weeks to go for producers to decide on the right scheme, sadly it falls to producers to solve the problem.

They firstly, need to make sure the scheme they join is guaranteeing the cost of compliance for 2010 and beyond. They need to avoid the trap of signing blank cheques. As has often been the case with packaging and weee, many schemes are not confirming costs until the evidence is posted, leaving the producer to take all the risk.

The producer also needs to make sure their scheme has a viable low cost collection service in place to secure the evidence. Some schemes are trying to form alliances which are untested and currently uncosted. If the scheme is not viable in the long run the cost will inevitably fall to the producers.

BatteryBack has focused on developing a national collection network first. With currently over 3,500 collection points already established, BatteryBack is able to quote firm prices for the next three years and is already aware of the challenges ahead.

Peter Hunt Chairman of BatteryBack explains “we need competition in this sector but too many schemes brings as many problems as too few. Three to four schemes would ensure healthy competition in what is expected to be a £2.5 - 3 million cost to all UK producers for 2010 compliance. Seven schemes brings an additional burden of over £1 million in costs per year”.

By guaranteeing both compliance and costs, BatteryBack is convinced its members will not get a shock from battery compliance.

A new scam that offers businesses a solution to their used tyre problems is a growing problem across the UK according to a report by BBC Wales.

In one such scam garages were offered a service where tyres were removed for a fee. The tyres were then left in storage rather then being recycled, and the garages were left with the responsibility for the disposal and clean up of the stored tyres.

A recent European Union directive made it illegal to dump tyres into landfill, businesses must now make sure that tyres are recycled. Victims of the scam feel that the Environment Agency should be doing more to prevent such scams.

Peter Hunt, managing director of WasteCare says: “There are a number of reputable companies who offer reliable and convenient tyre recycling services for businesses at very competitive rates. At WasteCare we offer recycling certificates to our clients as proof that material has been recycled as promised.”

Further information about tyre recycling can be found by contacting the European Tyre Recycling Association www.etra-eu.org

8,000 households in Rothewell, Leeds are taking part in a trial which could lead to Government legislation that would make food waste recycling compulsory.

Each household will be provided with a caddy to be kept in the kitchen and to be used to store all food waste. They will also be provided with an outside food bin to transfer the waste into. This will then be collected once a week. The waste will then be sent for treatment and turned into compost.

Environment secretary, Hilary Benn is using similar trials up and down the country to help him to decide whether to launch a national scheme.

The proposal aims to deal with the estimated 4.1m tonnes of food waste which is sent to landfill every year. If it gets the go ahead, the Government plan will fine those who do not recycle food waste.

Peter Hunt, Managing Director of WasteCare based in Garforth near Leeds says: "This is an excellent idea which will really encourage people to think more about what they are throwing into landfill. I hope the people of Rothwell will embrace the trial wholeheartedly."

A good company concerns itself with things that others are not even aware exist. For many years the John Lewis Partnership has led the way in customer service and product quality. One feature of their service is that they will remove unwanted waste electrical appliances when they deliver new. For many this is the end of the story. Not for the John Lewis Partnership. They use specialist recycler WasteCare. Every item is handled over to WasteCare at the distribution centres and the whole journey from the customer to final recovery is traceable. Over 93% of all this waste, as well as the original packaging handled by the John Lewis Partnership, is recycled. The John Lewis Partnership is committed to fulfilling its environmental responsibilities as well as providing good service and great value. WasteCare is proud to be of service to the John Lewis Partnership.

WasteCare is proud to continue their support of the BPIF Environmental Excellence Awards. Inspirepac and Webmart picked up Environmental Company of the Year awards. A host of other companies also picked up awards - congratulations to all the winners who have proven that good environmental management is simply good business. Reducing waste and improving efficiency is synonymous with reducing cost and increasing profits. WasteCare can help you help the environment as well as help your bottom-line.

A new report by Frost and Sullivan has shown that Europe has the largest waste-to-energy market in the world with 429 plants earning a revenue of £3.10bn in 2008.

The European Union has indirectly helped the waste-to-energy business as a push to move away from landfill resulted in the planning and commissioning of many plants during the last five years.
In addition to the Landfill Directive, a growing demand for power coupled with volatile oil prices, has made such plants a more attractive alternative. France and Germany have the most plants and are consequently hitting their landfill targets. The UK still has a long way to go to reach their targets, but many energy from waste plants have been springing up. Planning permission has been granted for new plants in Ince, Cheshire and for a food waste plant in Selby in Yorkshire in the last month alone.
However the report warned that global recession and difficulties with planning processes could hamper the momentum of future growth of the industry. It noted that strict planning regulations had already affected the speed of growth and warned that recession would make it harder to find funding for such projects. Peter Hunt, Managing Director at WasteCare says: “It’s important that we divert waste that cannot be recycled away from landfill. Waste-to-energy plants are an important part of our overall waste plan and the government should work to ensure that growth in this area can be maintained. More importantly the EA needs to give a clear message and support what all should agree is a key component of our energy strategy going forward.”

Here at WasteCare we pride ourselves at offering our clients an extremely transparent track and trace system. This system was put to the test recently when a valuable duvet went missing in a washing machine that had been picked up by us for recycling.
The washing machine had been originally picked up by John Lewis in Cheadle when they were delivering a new machine to the customer. The duvet then went on a journey to Halifax where WasteCare picked it up and took it too Leeds. The duvet (a special homemade quilt) was of great value to the customer, on discovery of her mistake she immediately contacted John Lewis. But the duvet was already well on its journey and the company advised the customer to contact us. As soon as the customer phoned us our tracking system swung into action, we were able to apprehend the truck as it entered our site in Leeds and we easily located the duvet and were able to return it to a very happy customer. Not so much a needle in a haystack but a duvet in a mountain of WEEE.

As data for 2009 recycling and recovery rates start to emerge, it is clear that the rate for the recycling and recovery of separately collected business-to-business waste electrical and electronic equipment is going to be as low as the previous year.

Before the regulations were introduced, most non-householder end-users of WEEE already had systems in place for disposing of WEEE – invariably by recycling it. After the regulations were introduced all this was supposed to change. When WEEE arose the end-user was expected to identify the manufacturers (in any collection of accumulated WEEE this could be dozens of different manufacturers) contact them for the identity of the Producer Supplier Schemes (PCS)– this could be 10 to 20 PCSs, contact each PCS and persuade them to come in and sort through the pile of scrap to identify those pieces of WEEE they were responsible for and remove them. At the end of this process the hapless end-user would be left with ‘orphan’ and unidentifiable WEEE which he would have to arrange to be collected by his friendly local scrap merchant!

This was just NEVER going to happen! What has happened is what happened before. The problem is that by meddling in a sound commercial process the government has increased the costs and bureaucratic workload of thousands of producers. Producers of EEE have to register with a PCS and provide them with quarterly data on EEE sales – the PCSs process this data and submit it to the Environment Agency (not for free)! In addition to this cost, producers have to pay an Environment Agency fee for the privilege of selling EEE in the UK.
The really annoying thing about this is that none of it was necessary. The European Directive only contains (for the UK, easily-achievable) targets for household WEEE and none for B2B WEEE.

Many other EC Member States have chosen, quite rightly, to do nothing about B2B WEEE and do not include it in their legislation, but the UK, as usual, has chosen to gold-plate the regulations to the detriment of British business. The same thing is about to happen again with waste batteries.

The ubiquitous aerosol can is taken for granted when in use but becomes a nuisance at the end of its useful life.
The can itself is a hazard even when empty, old cans often contain propellants more hazardous than the product they were made to dispense. These problems are compounded when a clutch of cans are accumulated over time; possibly rusting, poorly labelled but waiting to cause a problem. How do you pack them safely for road transport? How do you label them? Where do you send them? Then there are part filed cans of paint solvents, cleaners etc. Do we still have the data sheet? Do we know what constitutes the risk?

This is where the Can-CAN comes in. Designed for virtually every type of aerosol can or small(less than 1 litre capacity) container, whether full, part full or empty the Can-CAN is the simple answer. Capable for storing up to 60kg of containers, the Can-CAN is a safe and convenient on site storage system for unwanted aerosol cans and small containers which when full is collected free of charge by WasteCare. On arrival at WasteCare’s treatment facility the Can-CANs are individually unpacked, sorted, identified and then treated. All metals and plastics are recovered and nothing goes to landfill. Unlike the French version our Can-CAN is neither risqué or risky, it is simply a easy way to rid yourself of an otherwise hazardous or troublesome waste stream. The Can-CAN costs £49.00. Go to WasteCare.co.uk/can-can to order your CanCan now.

WasteCare Group’s Managing Director, Peter Hunt gives his personal view on the new Battery Regulations

"Retailers will find the new battery regulations difficult and confusing to comply with" says Peter Hunt of BatteryBack. He continues, "unless retailers seek advice in advance of the regulations coming into force, many may find themselves falling foul of the new rules." Most of Europe has adopted the European Waste Battery Directive in much the same way as us, but here in Britain what should have been a straight-forward and beneficial piece of legislation has been turned into a regulatory minefield. Unlike the rest of Europe, in Britain we have four separate versions of the same regulations. Retailers, collectors and recyclers of batteries are faced with different interpretations of the regulations in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. And the confusion doesn't end there. The best storage and handling practices for batteries hasn’t been decided. The Health and Safety Executive has just announced that the Buxton H&S Laboratories are to research the storage and handling methods for batteries. The problem is that we do not know when they will give us the results, and it certainly won’t be before the new regulations come into force.
There is a lack of clarity on whether batteries can be sent by post - the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) recently announced that waste batteries could be sent in the post, but, the Advisory Note on transport and storage of waste portable batteries, published by Defra now rules this out.
Defra states that it is difficult to tell easily if a battery contains hazardous Lithium or Cadmium, or is a common non-hazardous alkaline or zinc battery. So whilst the Department of Transport helpfully allows up to 333kg of Lithium batteries to be carried on the same vehicle, Defra now insists that we assume all mixed batteries are Lithium. Therefore full ADR rules will apply.
In fact Defra insist mixed batteries, which may contain no Lithium (less than one per cent on average of mixed waste batteries are actually Lithium) are now labelled as though the entire consignment is Lithium. If a vehicle cannot collect more than 333kg of mixed batteries without full ADR then back-hauling for large retailers is out of the question and the cost for dedicated battery collectors will soar, not to mention the environmental impact of vans running around with under a third of a tonne of batteries. In fact if this rule is upheld it will add over £2.5m to the annual cost of collecting batteries within the UK. At BatteryBack we are doing our best to help retailers and producers navigate the maze of regulation whilst keeping costs of compliance to a minimum. To avoid any shocks contact www.batteryback.org to find out all you need to know before the new regulations come in to force.

The EA have today announced the total list of applicants for scheme approval.

* BatteryBack
* Budget Pack
* CCR UK
* Econo -Batt
* ERP
* Exel Europe
* Repic
* Valpak

This is the first hurdle, costing each company £17,000. Following eventual approval each of the qualifying companies will be required to commit a further £118,000 to the EA before they can start trading. If all 8 are approved then the total cost of compliance fees alone will be £1,080,000, add to this the EA registration fee of £680 per producer and the total EA fees, to be born by producers, exceeds £8 million. With the likelihood of lower collection densities and reduced effiencies the potential cost to producers could exceed £20 million in year one alone. Unlike the parcel business which is a multi-billion pound sector, battery collection will consist of a series of small hazardous waste collections. It should be possible to provide a collection service for the whole country at a cost of less than £5 million a year. Too much competition could prove to be expensive for producers, retailers and consumers.

In reality it is probable that a number of schemes will not reach final approval. Producers must be careful when choosing a scheme that it has in place a coherent collection and treatment model that can provide low cost compliance next year and for years afterwards.

Peter Hunt, Chairman of BatteryBack, explained "Our scheme is backed by Veolia and WasteCare who together already handle hazardous and difficult waste from over 40,000 sites in Britain. We are already offering a low cost collection service for batteries and for this reason have guaranteed producers a compliance cost of just 1 penny a battery".

New regulations for battery recycling mean that any retailer selling over 32kg of batteries per year must by law provide free battery collection and recycling facilities by February 2010.

Amongst the major retailers, Morrisons have got ahead of the game and started trialling battery recycling facilities at a number of their stores, with plans to roll out nationally well before the February deadline? A number of smaller retailers also intend getting a head start.

BatteryBack Plc., established by Veolia and WasteCare are already operating a national collection and recycling service. Providing a range of BatteryCans to suit all needs, the aim is to collect low cost batteries as part of their existing hazardous waste services.

Peter Hunt, chairman of BatteryBack says: "Retailers do not want extra trucks visiting stores to collect small quantities of batteries. At the same time they will not want to handle potentially hazardous waste over which they have little control. By combining battery collections with other waste being removed, will not only be safer but reduce cost. A number of retailers, who sell own brand batteries, will also need to be registered producers; combining compliance with collection is a win win for everyone."

Around 1 billion batteries are discarded in Britain each year. Currently, less than 3% are recycled. This has to increase to 25% by 2012 and then to 45% by 2016. Retailers have an important roll in helping the country achieve its targets. Data shows that stores that offer battery collection sell more batteries, so really, it is a bit of a no brainer. All retailers need to act soon to make sure they are ready before the February 2010 deadline.

Turn a negative into a positive - contact Ali West on 0844 800 5671

Battery producers

BatteryBack is currently applying to be the first approved compliance scheme in the UK. Guaranteeing low cost compliance for all sizes of producer our offer is £2,000 per annum and 1 pence per battery placed on the market.

Compliance sorted - £2,000 and 1 penny per battery

Battery retailers

From the 1st February 2010 all retailers selling over 32kg of batteries per year will have to offer free collection and recycling to their customers. BatteryBack offers you free recycling now for all registered retailers.

Local Authorities and economic operators

If you wish to join the thousands of registered battery collection points, visit our website to register for free.

Collection sorted – Free national service

Battery consumers

Help us recycle your batteries. Please visit our website www.batteryback.org to find the nearest collection point to you. By early next year over 30,000 retailers, schools and public buildings will have a free Battery Collection Point.

Recycling sorted - No charge

Waste Batteries and Accumulators Regulations 2009

Summary

The long awaited battery recycling regulations have this week finally been approved by Parliament. Although little has changed since the last draft published just before Christmas there are a few tweaks in response to wide spread lobbying by producers and other stakeholders.

In summary the impact on producers, retailers, users and recyclers can be summarised as follows;

1 Portable batteries only - Neither industrial nor vehicle battery producers need join a scheme. However, producers of products containing batteries will be included.

2 Producer de minimus - Producers of less than 1 tonne per annum of batteries (typically around 30-40,000 portable batteries) per annum will not need to join a scheme but register directly with the EA or SEPA.

3 Scheme costs - Each compliance scheme is going to incur the following fees;
Application fee - £17,000
Annual subsistence fee - £118,000
Annual scheme member fee - £680

4 Small producers (< than 1 tonne placed on the market) will register with the EA or SEPA for an annual cost of £30 but will not have to contribute to the cost of collection and recovery. The Government expect this cost to be born entirely by the larger producers.

5 The de minimus level for retailers has been set at 32 kg of batteries placed on the market. Below this level the retailer will not be required to offer retailer take-back.

6 Exempt batteries are limited to those going into armaments or outer space.

7 Annual battery recovery levels set to meet Directive’s recycling targets;
2010 - 10%
2011 - 18%
2012 - 25% Mandatory target
2013 - 30%
2014 - 35%
2015 - 40%
2016 - 45%

8 Approved recyclers will pay a fee of £2,590 per site to recover batteries. Reduced fee of £500 for recyclers of less than 15 tonnes of portable batteries or 150 tonnes of automotive and industrial batteries per annum. Exporters will also have to pay the same fee for each site abroad to which they wish to export batteries. As Lithium and NiCd are handled on the whole by two specific sites in Europe most recyclers will be paying the same fee three or more times.
There is a reduced fee of £500 for annual volumes less than 15 tonnes.

9 Public promotions will be the financial responsibility of each scheme, including education and explanation. No financial limit has been set but the collection performance of each scheme will be monitored and poor performance may lead to withdrawal of approval.

10 Waste Management Licensing Regulations are being amended to allow for the storage of up to 5 tonnes of lead acid batteries and 10 tonnes of portable batteries without a WM licence. At the moment this excludes Scotland.

11 Producer has a financial obligation to fund the cost of collection, treatment and recovery for their individual share of the market based on batteries placed on the market in the preceding two years. Schemes will not be able to trade recycling evidence. Schemes maybe exposed to the costs of being too successful in encouraging end user returns.

12 Retailers and distributors are duty bound to accept batteries free of charge if the battery type (chemistry) is the same as those sold.

13 Schemes will be duty bound to accept all types of batteries free of charge both from retailers, collectors or the public.

14 Producers and distributors cannot declare the cost of these Regulations to the public.

Timetable

The timetable for introducing the Regulations is as follows;
5 May 2009 - are introduced
31 May 2009 - Deadline for applications for scheme approval
15 October 2009 - Deadline for producer membership
1 January 2010 - Beginning of first annual compliance period

What can we expect?

We expect the high entry costs for schemes will limit applicants to no more than possibly four, whilst we expect the de minimus levels set for producers will result in less than 600 registered producers in the first year. The challenge is to determine the cost of compliance in advance to enable producers to make an educated decision as to which is the best scheme for the year ahead. There is uncertainty as to the financial implications for schemes, or their members, that perform better or worse than average.

Registration costs assuming 3 registered schemes

If we end up with 3 compliance schemes then the true administrative cost of compliance will look something like this:
3 application fees at £17,000 - £51,000
3 annual subsistance fees at £118,000 - £354,000
600 member EA fees at £680 - £408,000


The Government revenue = £813,000 + £762,000 per year thereafter

Scheme Costs

3 set up costs at £50,000 - £150,000
3 running costs at £80,000 - £240,000 pa

Public promotional costs Year 1 - £4,000,000 (BERR suggest £3-5mill)
Year 2 onwards £1,500,000

Total costs - £5,203,000 yr1: £1,652,000 per year thereafter

This is before we consider the all important costs of the collection and recycling of the batteries.

Collection and recycling costs

With typical collection and treatment costs across the sector running at around 2 pence per battery* placed on the market (est. 1 billion), the total cost of compliance could exceed £20 million per annum.

* This costing is at odds with those outlined by BERR in their consultation document (Table 1 page 131) of the evidence base they suggest a cost for collection, sorting and recovery of £3,018 per tonne (7.5 p per battery) in 2010 dropping to £1,062 per tonne (2.7 p per battery) in 2012, in contrast to Table 4, page 135 where they predict a cost just for collection at £10,000 per tonne (25 p per battery). Assuming a mixture of collection methods and variety of service providers our average of 2 pence per battery placed on the market, for collection and treatment is considered conservative. We have based our calculations on an average of 40 batteries per kg.