UK environment under threat from red tape, says International Clean Up conference

Citation

(2000), "UK environment under threat from red tape, says International Clean Up conference", Disaster Prevention and Management, Vol. 9 No. 4. https://doi.org/10.1108/dpm.2000.07309dab.009

UK environment under threat from red tape, says International Clean Up conference

UK environment under threat from red tape, says International Clean Up conference

A key plank of government's environmental and planning policy – to clean up and reclaim the UK's estimated 100,000-200,000 brown-field sites for housing – is being strangled at birth by red tape, according to environmental technology companies, industry bodies, construction companies and contractors, environment agencies and campaigners, such as Friends of the Earth, represented at the UK's first International Clean Up conference and exhibition.

The unusual alliance is ranged against the clean-up licensing regime, introduced in 1999, which applies to processes on brown-field sites. It is ill-equipped for the new on-site environmental technologies on show at the International Clean Up exhibition, which promote truly environmentally sustainable development as well as reducing clean up costs by as much as 50 per cent.

"Conventional 'dig and dump' and 'capping' stockpile environmental and economic problems for the future," said conference chairman of International Clean Up 2000, Professor Jim Lynch, who is head of the school of biological sciences at University of Surrey and co-ordinator of the OECD Programme on Biological Resource Management. "The new contaminated land regime being implemented this month is proving a false dawn for bio-remediation."

The disparity between government policy objectives and implementation is putting at risk the development of the UK's bioremediation industry and the nation's environmental well-being. "The LTK has some of the best biotechnology for the environment in the world – acknowledged by countries as far afield as Brazil, the US and Japan," continued Lynch "Yet we can't showcase and apply it in our own backyard."

New primary legislation is now required for the licensing framework to match the pace of advances in remediation technology for contaminated land.

Merlin Hynam, director of Environmental Industries Commission (EIC), which represents the sector, said, "While we welcome the efforts of the Environment Agency to overcome the problems, it's now up to the government to find Parliamentary time in the next session to provide a supportive framework for environmental re-mediation."

Ed Gallagher, chief executive of the Environment Agency, which has the unenviable task of presiding over the current bureaucratic muddle, said to delegates at the International Clean Up conference, "There should be a single 'joined-up' regime for dealing with contaminated land, or a framework which eliminates confusion between contaminated land and waste management legislation."

His sentiments were echoed by many other organisations and companies, ranging from geo-technical contractors, such as May Gurney, environmental consultancies and the environmental divisions of companies such as BG, AEA Technology and others. Market leader and acclaimed innovator in bio-remediation, Biologic, told the conference, "the biggest challenge that faces the company is Waste Management Licensing which is not ready to cope with a rapidly developing land remediation market place."

Dr W. "Buck" Cox Jr of Biosystems Technology Inc., outlined the US experience.

There the bio-remediation industry was encouraged by initial pump-priming from research grants, tax programmes and regulations designed to support site clean up. This policy led to thriving research and biotechnology advances which have been exploited commercially. Working with Onyx Total Waste Management in the UK, he warned, "Unless positive changes are implemented that will create a competitive climate, it is difficult to view a market where the advantages of bio-remediation can be maximised in the UK."