AEAT in Confidence - r3 Environmental · When burned, the same amount of carbon dioxide is released...

AEAT in Confidence

Markham Willows Masterplanning

A report produced for exSite

March 2004

AEAT in Confidence

AEAT in Confidence

Funders and Research Team

AEAT in Confidence

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning

Title Markham Willows Masterplanning Final Report

Customer exSite Customer reference Confidentiality, copyright and reproduction

AEAT in Confidence This document has been prepared by AEA Technology plc in connection with a contract to supply goods and/or services and is submitted only on the basis of strict confidentiality. The contents must not be disclosed to third parties other than in accordance with the terms of the contract.

File reference ED04001001 Report number Report status Issue 1 Future Energy Solutions

AEA Technology Environment B154 Harwell Didcot Oxon OX11 0QJ Telephone 0870 190 6308 Facsimile 0870 190 6329

AEA Technology is the trading name of AEA Technology plc AEA Technology is certificated to BS EN ISO9001:(1994)

Name Signature Date

Author Julian Wilczek Reviewed by Paul Maryan Approved by Paul Maryan

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology ii


Executive Summary

Background The former Markham Colliery, like many other coal mines in Britain has played a key role in fuelling the prosperity of the nation's industry and has provided a source of heat and power for the benefit of the population. The decline in British coal mining in the last two decades has resulted in large areas of land falling into disuse and the loss of thousands of local jobs. The associated problems of economic, social and environmental impact have been recognised by Government through the National Coalfields Programme. To be effective, solutions need to be planned and implemented locally. The restoration of the 106 hectare coal spoil North Tip at Markham has become known as the Markham Willows project. The aim is to carry out the restoration by using tree plantation in a technique that has become known as phytostabilisation - where the root system and soil layer are employed to both physically and chemically provide stability to the tip surface. Although this is not an entirely new idea, this approach has never been employed on such a large scale. The project aim is much higher than just achieving a long-term restoration of the site. An integrated solution is planned that will create new employment, provide income to the site and ensure that the restoration is sustainable in all aspects. The exemplary nature of the project has led to it being included as a case study in the latest report from the Sustainable Development Commission1. The project aims to meet the three core criteria for sustainable regeneration: • Putting local people at he heart of the process • Improving the quality of the local environment • Taking an integrated and long term approach The Markham Willows project also forms an integral part of the regeneration of the whole Markham Colliery site. The site, known as Markham Vale, is planned to be a new business park with particular emphasis being placed on environmental technologies. The site will have direct access to the M1 via a new motorway junction, 29a. The position of the site alone will make it an attractive location for setting up new businesses or relocating existing ones. Markham Willows will provide an attractive green backdrop to the development as well as acting as a sustainable regeneration project in its own right. Short Rotation Coppice Willow is a hardy, vigorous tree species that has been shown to tolerate the difficult soil conditions associated with coal spoil. It is also a species that thrives under the management system known as short rotation coppice (SRC). This system employs a system of regular cutting back of the trees (coppicing) so that the wood can be harvested and utilised. The cut back trees grow back vigorously from the base reaching a height of 1-2 meters within the first growing season. By dividing the tree plantation into several large plots, these can be harvested in different years in rotation, normally after three years of growth. This routine ensures that the majority of the site is always well established so that the visual impact of the woodland is maintained and habitat for flora and fauna is always available.

1 Mainstreaming sustainable regeneration: a call to action, Sustainable Development Commission, December 2003, www.sd-commission.gov.uk

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology iii


Willow has the advantage over other tree species of a particularly shallow root system that binds the topsoil without penetrating into the more aggressive subsoil layer. The topsoil layer builds up continually as the coppice establishes. This is achieved by the addition of organic matter to the soil at the preparation stage and subsequent harvests and through annual leaf drop. The willow coppice is therefore a means of restoring the site at a reasonable cost. The method avoids the need to import large quantities of topsoil and lime onto the site and the cost and disruption that this would cause. Conventionally restored coal spoil is known to regress through chemical attack leading to physical erosion. This regression is already apparent on the North Tip. The phytostabilisation of the site will provide a long term solution with additional benefits. The willow that will be harvested from the site on an annual basis can be used as a fuel. As the willow that is harvested is replaced within three years by new growth, then the willow coppice becomes a renewable source of energy, often referred to as biomass. Thus a site which has previously been a major source of energy from coal again becomes an energy source, but with the advantage of the resource being renewable and sustainable. After about 25 years, the willow coppice may lose its vigour. At that time the topsoil layer will have increased in depth and stabilised. The land may then be put to other use or replanted with new coppice for further fuel production. As the willow grows it absorbs carbon dioxide from the air through the process of photosynthesis. When burned, the same amount of carbon dioxide is released as a product of combustion. As the harvested wood used for fuel is replaced by new growth, there is no net emission of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Fuel produced from SRC is therefore regarded as a renewable source of energy and 'carbon neutral' in terms of its environmental impact. Compost Production The SRC needs the addition of organic matter to the soil to provide a suitable environment for tree growth. Two types of material have been considered in the masterplanning phase: sewage sludge and compost. These materials both originate from waste. Their use as a soil improver turns them from a waste material that would have to be disposed of in landfill into a beneficial commodity that can be recycled. Treated sewage sludge is available from water companies for agricultural purposes. Severn Trent Water has offered to provide sewage sludge (a.k.a. biosolids) to the site for the soil preparation stages at no cost. The material supplied is analysed prior to delivery to ensure that it is suitably matched to the receiving site in terms of heavy metal contents. Field trials at Markham have shown that the addition of sewage sludge to the topsoil prior to planting has a marked positive effect on the establishment and growth of the willow. Trials conducted by AEA have shown that the addition of compost to the topsoil/sewage sludge mix further enhances the establishment and growth of the willow. Compost is also suitable as a mulch that can be added to the growing coppice to suppress weeds, help retain moisture and contribute to the building of the topsoil thickness. The large land area available at Markham Willows provides the opportunity for the production of compost on the site. The compost can then be conveniently used on the site involving minimal transport requirements. The masterplanning has considered the simplest form of compost production using windrows. In this process, green waste material is piled into long rows and allowed to compost naturally over a period of months. The green waste would otherwise have been disposed of in landfill and landfill tax would have been paid on a per tonne basis. The bulk supply of green waste for use at Markham Willows therefore creates an opportunity for the

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology iv


owner to make significant financial savings to the extent that the receiver of the waste can be paid an incentive to take it. A fee known as the 'gate fee' is negotiated between the owner and the receiver. For Markham Willows this means that a substantial income can be generated via the gate fee. Renewable Energy Context While wood is the oldest fuel known to man, it has been relegated to the position of 'alternative' or 'supplementary' fuel when compared with the mainstream fossil fuels of gas, oil and coal. In a national energy context, Britain has been described as 'an island of coal in sea of oil'. Then came the exploitation of natural gas from the North Sea and the 'dash for gas' for electricity generation. The resultant energy independence has been a tremendous asset for the UK economy in recent decades but unfortunately the resources are finite. The 'low hanging fruit' have been plucked and, although there are still further resources to be exploited, these are likely to be more expensive and also finite. The UK now faces the prospect of reverting from a net energy exporter to a net energy importer and the consequences associated with that position. The issue of 'climate change' has risen to the top of the international political agenda, as the potential risks of emitting increasing amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere are better understood. Many countries have sought to reach international agreement on tackling climate change through ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. The Energy White Paper2 highlights the need for the UK to address the above issues. An important part of the strategy is for the UK to become less dependent on fossil fuels by developing its indigenous resources of renewable energy. In January 2000 a target was set for UK to supply 10% of UK electricity from renewable energy sources. Capital grants have become available to encourage the investment in renewable energy technologies. Other drivers to reduce carbon emissions have been introduced, including the Climate Change Levy, Renewables Obligation and the Emissions Trading Scheme. The role that Markham Willows can play in the move towards a lower carbon economy is small but significant. In addition to the thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide that will be saved by substituting fossil fuels by renewable energy sources, the main significance of the project will be its role as a beacon for broader replication on other brownfield regeneration sites in the UK and across the world. Wood Heat The harvested wood is processed into woodchips by the harvester and then allowed to air dry by storing it in the open air during the summer. The woodchips are intended as a fuel for wood fired boilers. The fuel is in a form that can be fed automatically into the boiler to match the heat demand. The main quality requirements are moisture content and chip size. The fuel may sometimes require additional air drying prior to dispatch to ensure that the moisture content is within the specification agreed with the customer. Wood fuel in this form has a relatively low monetary value, typically £24 per tonne based on dry weight. Selling wood fuel from the Markham Willows site would create a small income but barely sufficient for the maintenance of the site. To add value to the fuel it is necessary to sell its energy content rather than the material itself. Buying and selling heat is by no means a new concept, it is used in district heating schemes and centralised heating schemes where the heat consumer pays simply for the amount of heat consumed. To create a

2 Our Energy Future - creating a low carbon economy, DTI, February 2003

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology v


significant income for the Markham Willows project we propose to provide a complete heat supply service that includes not just the provision of heat but also the supply, installation and maintenance of the boiler. This provides the customer with the heat they require at a competitive price and without the complication and responsibility of the boiler management. The economic modelling carried out as a part of the masterplanning has shown that to be a viable, sustainable and profitable commercial operation will require a boiler cluster of about ten units. The wood supply available from Markham Willows is only sufficient to provide about two boilers (depending on heat demand). It is therefore necessary to use other sources of wood, for example forest thinnings or wood residues from timber processing to meet the fuel demand as it grows. Our investigations have shown that there are more than sufficient wood resources within about 25 miles of Markham Willows to satisfy the demand for fuel processing on a sustainable basis. Wood fuelled boilers are still rare in the UK but growing interest in renewable energy is increasing the interest in this sector. Both UK produced and imported boilers are available. The first building to be erected at Markham Vale, the Environmental Technology Centre will have a wood fuelled boiler. This will send a strong signal to both visitors and new businesses that Markham Vale is both a far-sighted business centre development and a showcase for environmental technology. Derbyshire County Council will seek to encourage further take-up of the technology at Markham Vale and more widely within the County. Social Benefits Markham Willows provides an opportunity to create social benefits for the local community. Restoring the land and putting it to long term use creates some permanent new jobs. New paths through the coppice woodland create new routes for walkers with spectacular views from the top of the site. Markham Willows will provide a positive contribution to the local landscape and public amenity. The unique environment will provide a subject for educational field trips. Economic Benefits The potential compost production and wood heat operations provide opportunities to create substantial income to the site to sustain new employment, ensure the long term maintenance of the site and to provide some operating surplus. The economic viability of these operations is dependent on their scale and the level of investment granted for their establishment. The compost production needs to be based on a long-term and reliable source of green waste. The annual tonnage of green waste needs to be at least 6,000 tonnes at which level a break-even operation is possible under favourable conditions. Ideally the input needs to be at about the 10,000 tonnes level to ensure viability. The wood heat business needs to grow to a ten boiler cluster within 3 years to ensure that the income repays all costs and generates a surplus in the medium to long term. When integrated, the compost and wood heat operations can share some overheads and equipment ensuring a more robust business case. The operations could be combined to form an integral unit operating under the control of DCC. Surpluses generated could be ploughed back into education, research and improving public amenity. Alternatively, the operations could be organised as a part of a larger service company for the new Markham Vale development.

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology vi


Environmental Benefits Site investigations indicate that heavy metal concentrations on the Markham Colliery site are generally not a cause for concern but further sampling and testing is planned to confirm this. The site is known to have some dioxin contamination at a 'hotspot' and to a lesser extent on the south facing slope. These areas will not be planted with SRC and will be fenced off to exclude access. The high acidity levels caused by the coal spoil have led to patches of erosion of the rough grassland that has established on the site. This has been exacerbated in areas where motorcycles have been used, rendering the ground barren. The risks from the site have been considered as part of the masterplanning and recommendations for risk management have been produced. The planting of SRC and the process of phytostabilisation will bring environmental benefits to the site, for example, erosion will be controlled. SRC, although a monoculture, does provide an attractive habitat for a wide range of insects and birds, especially when planted as intimate mixtures of varieties giving diversity in the canopy. The various stages of growth (1-3 years) of the different plots provide differing habitats that attract different species. Grassland will still be retained at the top of the site so that bird species such as skylarks will not be excluded. It will be important to ensure that any run-off from the higher grassland area does not adversely affect the SRC plantation. It is planned to plant permanent broad leaved woodland on the south facing slope. The Markham Willows site will therefore provide a diversity of habitats for a broad range of flora and fauna. As such the site should become an interesting focal point for education and research. Research The pioneering nature of Markham Willows raises opportunities for a wide range of research including the following: • Waste management • SRC production and fuel quality • Soil formation • Risk management • Economic performance • Social (community) benefits • Added environmental benefits • The performance of Markham Willows as an exemplar at a national and international

level. Promotion The Markham Willows project has been publicised through a number of events and publications during 2003 creating national and international interest in the project. The main interest has been the holistic approach to sustainable regeneration of a brownfield site. Those responsible for other sites, projects or regeneration programmes are keen to understand how a site can be brought back into use in an environmentally acceptable way. There will be great interest in the development of the project and the potential for replicating it or adapting aspects of it for the regeneration of other brownfield sites.

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology vii


Main Conclusions 1. SRC is a technically feasible and cost effective means of restoring the North Tip that will

avoid expensive ongoing maintenance costs. 2. A risk remediation plan has been produced but will be updated following further site

investigation. 3. Compost production using the simple windrow method could be self-financing after all

capital costs are granted at a level of 6,000 tonnes of green waste per year but a higher input of about 10,000 tonnes is required to ensure a robust commercial operation.

4. A wood heat operation based on the local supply of wood fuel and ten wood fuelled boilers and the sale of wood heat to the customers has the potential to generate a significant income to the site.

5. Wood fuel produced from the Markham Willows site should be fully acceptable as a fuel in terms of its trace elements contents and absorption of any dioxins from the site.

6. The operation of the Markham Willows site will create new jobs and income. 7. SRC, together with some retained grassland and new broadleaved woodland will provide

a broad range of habitats that will enhance the biodiversity of the site and create interest for educational and research purposes.

8. Markham Willows is pioneering a new concept in brownfield regeneration that creates new opportunities for research.

9. The Markham Willows project has created significant interest in the concept of a holistic and sustainable approach to brownfield regeneration and the possibility for replication on other sites.

Recommendations 1. The masterplanning phase has now been completed. The use of SRC as a means of

long-term remediation of the site has been accepted as a cost-effective and viable solution. The timetable for the establishment of the SRC is controlled by nature as the cuttings must be planted in the dormant season, early spring 2004 at the latest in this case. However, the option is available to bring forward the overall multi-phase planting programme by increasing the size of the phased planting plots by using three planting plots rather than four, should the first or any subsequent plantation be delayed.

2. The associated technologies of compost production, wood fuel production and wood heat

sales can make a positive financial contribution to Markham Willows if they are carried out at sufficient scale. In order to be able to formulate business plans for these operations it will be important to establish the basis for their ownership and operation. Options include: i. Operations are fully funded by DCC to operate self-sufficiently and to feed back

any surpluses into the Markham Willows site for research and improvement of public amenity.

ii. Capital for establishment of one or both of the operations is provided by DCC but ownership is integrated within the Markham Vale development, possibly as part of the provision of site services.

iii. Operations are fully funded by DCC during their establishment period (perhaps 2 years) and are then transferred to the private sector through a bidding process. DCC should be able to at least recoup the value of the assets at that time and if the operations are indicating good prospects then some goodwill value should also be sold.

iv. The operations start as private sector enterprises. This would again require some form of bidding process but would be unlikely to be attractive to the private sector unless some clear reassurances and incentives were offered.

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology viii


Reassurances could include green waste volumes and price structures, guaranteed numbers of boilers etc.

3. We suggest that option ii above may be the most effective way to proceed i.e. capital

funding is provided by DCC but responsibility for management and ongoing financial control is taken by the Markham Vale management operation. This option does not rule out the later transfer of either the compost or wood heat operations to the private sector at a later date.

4. The viability of a green waste compost production facility is dependent upon the long

term availability of green waste at sufficient quantity and negotiated gate fee. We recommend that a green waste supply of about 10,000 tonnes per year be secured for a ten year period before investing in a new compost production facility. As shown in the economic appraisal a lower volume can be viable if all capital is fully granted and other factors are favourable. However even under these most favourable conditions we recommend that secured green waste quantities should exceed 6,000 tonnes per year.

5. There are clear cost benefits of integrating the compost production with the wood fuel

production operations. Integration allows some overheads and equipment to be shared and for operatives to work flexibly within the two operations for their maximum deployment and efficient working. We therefore recommend that these two operations be considered as an integrated unit where possible.

6. Derbyshire County Council need to designate a manager for the implementation of risk

management activities across Markham Willows. This individual could also be responsible for the co-ordination of SRC, wood heat and composting activities.

7. Derbyshire County Council need to proceed with the commission of the development of

site specific assessment criteria (SSAC) and further site investigation work to validate these preliminary findings. Further plantings may be delineated on the basis of top soil contaminant concentrations.

8. The final risk management approach for Markham Willows needs to be put out for

consultation by external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency. 9. Following agreements with the regulator and other stakeholders, an outline

implementation plan needs to be agreed and procurement activities begin. Procurement may well proceed on the basis of a series of component activities, rather than procuring a single service provider for the whole range of Markham Willows activities.

10. Procurement should be linked to the development of a detailed integrated implementation

plan for the remediation of the Markham Willows site. The detailed integration plan needs to be drawn up in consultation with external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency.

11. The preparation of the ground for willow planting, the planting process, cutback,

maintenance and harvesting are all specialist techniques that require experienced management. We suggest that the site contractor appointed by Derbyshire County Council could carry out the work. The site contractor could then appoint a specialist subcontractor. Alternatively DCC may want to appoint a specialist contractor experienced in managing SRC crops directly for the work. Whatever arrangements are put in place we suggest that the work be independently checked to ensure that the specification is adhered to.

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology ix


12. The Research Strategy encompasses the verification studies for the Markham Willows remediation. Derbyshire County Council should confirm that it will undertake these. In the immediate future it is recommended that Research Management is undertaken by exSite Research Ltd, with the assistance of the masterplanning team members. However, we recommend that research should be implemented by local organisations, with the support of a leading university or research institute, who would provide a research leadership role, particularly for approaches to Research Councils..

13. The first building to be erected at Markham Vale, the Environmental Technology Centre,

will have a wood fuelled boiler. This will send a strong signal to both visitors and new businesses that Markham Vale is both a far-sighted business centre development and a showcase for environmental technology. For the wood heat operation to be viable a cluster of about ten wood fuelled boilers is required. We recommend that wood fuelled boilers be promoted as an alternative to fossil fuels within Markham Vale, DCC buildings and new buildings and developments supported by EMDA. Not only would such promotion of wood heating be in keeping with Local Agenda 21, but also it would provide the necessary seeds for a new local renewable energy industry.

14. The Markham Willows scheme represents a sustainable solution for brownfield site

regeneration that could be replicated nationally and internationally. There is much to be learned from the site during its remediation phase and afterwards as the SRC matures and the process of phytostabilisation occurs. There are important opportunities for research at the site. We suggest that DCC, EMDA and shanks.first give due consideration to supporting future research on the site. One of the benefits of good research will be good publicity, which in turn will attract forward-thinking companies and organisations to locate at Markham Vale.

15. Markham Willows and Markham Vale provide an opportunity to demonstrate other

renewable energy and low carbon technologies including for example anaerobic digestion of waste to produce biogas and the installation of wind turbines. We suggest that a first step would be to carry out a feasibility study to assess the viability of deploying such technologies at the site.

AEAT in Confidence AEA Technology x


Contents

1 BACKGROUND 14

2 INTRODUCTION 16

3 OBJECTIVES 17

4 RISK MANAGEMENT 18

5 SITE RESTORATION 23

6 SHORT ROTATION COPPICE 29

7 COMPOST PRODUCTION 33

8 WOOD FUEL 45

9 WOOD HEAT 47

10 ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE 49

11 BIODIVERSITY 58

12 SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS 60

13 RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES 61

14 EXEMPLAR PROJECT 63

15 BENCHMARKING 64

16 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 71

17 PROMOTION 74

18 CONCLUSIONS 76

19 RECOMMENDATIONS 77

11


Appendices

APPENDIX 1 PLANNING FOR EMBEDDED GENERATION FOR MARKHAM WILLOWS AND MARKHAM VALE

APPENDIX 2 MARKHAM WILLOWS – THE POTENTIAL BENEFIT OF AN ON-SITE ANAEROBIC DIGESTION (AD) PLANT

APPENDIX 3 TOPSOIL ANALYSIS FROM A 1999 SURVEY OF THE NORTH TIP APPENDIX 4 LEAF AND STEM SAMPLE ANALYSES APPENDIX 5 GROUNDWORK CRESSWELL COMMENTARY

Annexes

Annex 1 - Risk Management Annex 2 - Site Investigation Phase 1 Report Annex 3 - SRC Production Plan Annex 4 - Economic Performance Annex 5 - Research Strategy Annex 6 - Waste Management

12


13


1 BACKGROUND

The former Markham Colliery, like many other coal mines in Britain has played a key role in fuelling the prosperity of the nation's industry and has provided a source of heat and power for the benefit of the population. The decline in British coal mining in the last two decades has resulted in large areas of land falling into disuse and the loss of local jobs and associated problems of economic, social and environmental impact. During 1999/2000 a consortium of interested organisations came together to develop an exemplar regeneration project to tackle the challenges caused by such a major mining operation and its closure. The consortium is composed of organisations with particular skills and experience included Derbyshire County Council, Groundwork UK, AEA Technology, r3 Environmental Technology, exSite, and latterly Groundwork Creswell. The project aimed to demonstrate the concept of short rotation coppicing as a means of phytostabilisation of colliery spoil heaps, and at the same time promoting local area regeneration and community benefits. The location chosen for the project was the former Markham Colliery north spoil tip that lies to the East of the M1 Motorway between Junctions 29 and 30. This site was chosen for a number of reasons: • •

•

• •

the derelict nature of much of the site the willingness of the local authority (DCC) and regeneration agency (EMDA) to support the project the existence of local partners, such as Groundwork Creswell that could provide a further link into local communities regeneration proposals for the area including a new M1 motorway junction (29a) the Markham Employment Growth Zone (MEGZ) now known as Markham Vale.

The development of such a major environmentally driven and socially integrative project will attract inward investors and give a boost to the confidence of local businesses and promote 'pride of place' with local communities. As the project was to be based around the growing of willow coppice, it became known as 'Markham Willows'. The project seeks to integrate the remediation of the site with a range of environmentally focussed activities that will promote new local businesses formation, the development of training opportunities and community involvement. The project aims to create new employment opportunities such as woodland/coppice management, green waste composting, materials recycling linked to the proposed business park and woodland enterprises, possibly linked to the green tourism industry. Other 'low carbon' technologies could also be integrated with the site (see Appendices 1 and 2) but an in-depth investigation of these is beyond the remit of masterplanning. The central objective of the Markham Willows project will be the phytostabilisation of despoiled ex-colliery land. Phytostabilisation is the term we apply to the physical and chemical stabilisation of the land, holding back a wide range of substances in the land that might otherwise spread into the surrounding area and pose risks to human health and the environment. The coppiced willow is to be processed into wood chip fuel suitable for medium-large scale wood fuelled boilers for use on the Markham Vale site and for the heating of other buildings in the region.

14


Markham Willows should provide a new focal point within the North Derbyshire/North Nottinghamshire coalfields area as an exemplar of environment-led regeneration. The pioneering and synergistic approach taken for the project has already attracted international attention by those involved in large scale brownfield site regeneration. The team is grateful to the external experts who have contributed to the project in its development stages and provided support and advice during the masterplanning. The team are grateful to the following funding partners who have made this masterplanning phase possible: • • • EMDA • Groundwork

EB Nationwide (Shank First Fund) Derbyshire County Council

The team is also very grateful to a number of other individuals and organisations who have provided advice and support for the project both during its inception period and during the masterplanning phase.

15


2 INTRODUCTION

This report is the main report for the Markham Willows Masterplanning carried out November 2002- February 2004. In order to ensure that the report is reasonably concise, some technical detail have been omitted but sufficient information has been included to allow the reader to understand the project and its findings. The reader can obtain more details on the project by referring to the Annexes to the main report: Annex 1 - Risk Management Annex 2 - Site Investigation, Phase 1 Annex 3 - Short Rotation Coppice, Production Plan Annex 4 - Economic Performance Annex 5 - Research Opportunities Annex 6 - Compost Production

16


3 OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this project is to carry out masterplanning for the remediation and regeneration of the Markham North Tip to enable decisions to be made for the implementation of the regeneration. The solution needs to meet the following conditions: •

• •

be financially sustainable i.e. ongoing costs following remediation are at least covered by income generated on the site have a positive net impact on the local environment. act as an exemplar for other projects for the regeneration of coal spoil and other brownfield sites.

The project aims to meet the three core criteria for sustainable regeneration: • Putting local people at the heart of the process • Improving the quality of the local environment • Taking an integrated and long term approach Specific objectives associated with the project are: • Engendering wider community involvement and ownership from planning through to

implementation, leading to greater sustainability of the site. • Developing local training and job creation opportunities in new “Green-collar” industries. • The development of additional “Green” businesses on the site, which are sympathetic to

the core project, such as timber and construction/demolition, waste recycling. If sensitively handled, such additional businesses could help to “sell” the green credentials of the Markham Vale Development and boost the image of the area. Such businesses could also potentially support the development of a “Green Business Park”, by recycling waste materials produced by other industries. (Green Business Parks are industrial estates where the businesses seek to operate to high environmental and social standards, in a good quality environmental setting).

• Wider academic involvement that will monitor the site and assess the success of its

various elements, thus validating the results and providing wider dissemination, as well as providing an excellent learning opportunity for a wide range of students, from biochemists through to social scientists.

• Developing the site for local amenity use and “Green tourism” potential. • Developing a programme of actions that seeks to protect any important existing site

ecology and widen the biodiversity of the site by encouraging the development of habitats that are suitable for the introduction or attraction of rare flora and fauna on to the site.

17


4 RISK MANAGEMENT

The aim of this report is to suggest a risk management approach for the Markham Willows site and identify how its performance should be evaluated over a ten-year time frame (the risk management model). The approach involves a combination of detailed quantitative risk assessment with localised remedial action to demonstrably break pollutant linkages giving rise to unacceptable risks to human health, controlled waters or the environment. This report is based on an initial desk top site investigation carried out by Derbyshire County Council, and applies the risk assessment and options appraisal mechanisms suggested in the draft Model Procedures (Environment Agency 2003). It uses the following criteria to evaluate risk management options (based on Bardos et al. 2002) within the Model Procedure approach.

• Project boundaries and goals (e.g. re-use for SRC) • Risk management • Technical suitability • Stakeholder perceptions (likely) • Sustainable development • “Costs and benefits” • Feasibility.

A number of possible pollutant linkages of potential concern have been identified in this report, which are summarised in Figures A and B, and are grouped in Table A. There is, at present, insufficient information to fully appraise pollutant linkages connected with controlled water receptors. However, the planting of SRC seems, at least, unlikely to exacerbate any possible impacts. Preliminary information is available to appraise potential pollutant linkages impacting human receptors. For the purposes of an initial screening, and from a conservative standpoint, the Soil Guideline Values (SGVs) for “Residential without plant uptake” have been compared with existing site data in a preliminary generic screening. SGVs have been derived for: arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel and selenium, but not for copper, zinc, or dioxins. However, these SGVs do not consider the “agricultural” use of the soil, i.e. for pasture or the cultivation of SRC. Guidance for sewage sludge applications is linked with permitted contents of a series of potentially toxic elements in soil: cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc. Hence for an initial screening, comparison of measurements of potentially toxic elements with both the SGVs for “Residential without plant uptake” land-use and soil metal limits after application of sewage sludge are suggested. The latter provides for consistency with both future use of sewage sludge for soil forming and the agricultural use of the land. As regards generic screening guidance for dioxins, AEA have suggested that there appears to be a general presumption that concentrations below 10 ng TEQ/kg will pose acceptable risk except to certain infrequent vulnerable groups. The Phase 1 Site Investigation (Derbyshire Consulting Engineers 2003) sets out the results of a number of investigative surveys at the North Tip, primarily dioxin surveys, and a survey of “top-soil” samples. Drawing 9033A/279 from this report sets out the locations for the topsoil samples and also the dioxin survey findings – which are also summarised in Annex 1 Appendix 3. These measurements are in the range of 3 to 88 ng ITEQ/kg across the North Tip, with the higher concentrations (20 to 88 ng ITEQ/kg) being in samples from the southward face of the Markham North Tip.

18


An initial conclusion from a comparison with the generic dioxin guidance would therefore be that the southward face of the Markham North Tip is not suitable for sensitive land uses. Derbyshire County Council have agreed with the regulator that this area will be used for deciduous woodland and will be fenced off from public access. Derbyshire CC will produce a map of proposed land use superimposed on the exiting dioxin and other analytical data. During 1999/2000 one hundred topsoil samples were taken from the North Tip for chemical analysis. Analyses were performed on 20 sets of composites of five of these samples (as shown in Derbyshire Consulting Engineers’ Drawing 9033A/279). The data from these analyses are listed in Appendix 3, along with the generic SGVs and soil metal limits after application of sewage sludge. Some of the arsenic levels detected in samples exceed the SGV for arsenic for “Residential without plant uptake” land use. The maximum arsenic level found is about 2.5 times the SGV, and is from an area of the North Tip apparently as yet not covered by imported topsoil. Cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel and selenium are well below SGVs for “Residential without plant uptake” land use. Analyses for cadmium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc are below the proposed soil metal limits after application of sewage sludge in the 2002 revision of the Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989. Analytical findings for PAH (“screen” data) and “Phenol Index” are close to or below limits of detection, with the exception of one set of samples, taken from the southward facing face of the North Tip, whose composite analyses reported a “PAH screen” of 188 mg/kg-1. Hence, this initial comparison with SGVs for “Residential without plant uptake” and the proposed soil metal limits after application of sewage sludge indicates that, with the possible exception of arsenic and the comments made earlier about dioxins, the land is suitable for the use envisaged, and planting of SRC should not be delayed pending further site investigation and the development of Site Specific Assessment Criteria (SSAC). The number of samples (20) analysed for potentially toxic elements is relatively low for identifying hotspots in an area in excess of 100 ha.. However, the average deviations from the sample means are low. Furthermore, additional analyses for potentially toxic elements will be carried out by Severn Trent ahead of any sewage to land application. In the longer term, the significance of potential pollutant linkages at the Markham Willows site will have to be assessed using SSAC. Some intrusive site investigation will be required, for example to assess possible pollutant linkages affecting controlled waters, and to substantiate the initial analytical information collected. Derbyshire County Council (DCC) is considering both commissioning the derivation of SSAC for the Markham North Tip, and further site investigation. The aims of these activities are to:

• Appraise the validity of the generic findings outlined in Section 5.5 • Provide a sound technical basis for the appraisal of risk management performance

by SRC and organic matter addition on the Markham North Tip over time. These generic screening suggestions cannot be applied to risk assessment for those involved in site remediation activities, including the initial planting of SRC or deciduous woodland areas. These activities will require the derivation of specific health and safety risk assessment and risk management procedures by the organisations undertaking this work. An integrated remediation strategy (set out in Table 1) is suggested to manage the potential pollutant linkages identified. This remediation strategy is compatible with the aim of using organic matter return to land and SRC cultivation to provide a revenue stream to support site management in the long term.

19


The remediation strategy proposed will be revised according to the results of this further risk assessment, within the existing master planning budget as previously agreed by r3 with Derbyshire County Council. Following this revision, consultations on the Markham Willows risk management plan should take place with a number of key stakeholders, in particular: • the local authority (planning and environmental health) • the Environment Agency and other regulatory bodies such as HSE & English Nature • prospective purchasers (if any) • prospective insurers and funders • neighbours to the site • local interest groups. Integration of their views may require a second stage of amendment to this report. This report makes a series of suggestions for the further implementation of remediation works beyond the scope of the masterplanning project. These include the development of a detailed implementation plan, which would need to be linked with the procurement of services, a further phase of consultation, and consequent ongoing site management activities, including verification and maintenance activities. Of the vegetative covers, the greatest effect on stabilising contaminants (i.e. reducing their ability to migrate) is likely to be achieved through the use of short rotation coppice with regular organic matter addition. However, the local regulator and Derbyshire County Council have agreed that overall the greatest protective effect is to promote deciduous woodland on the most contaminated areas of the North Tip, and fence them off to prevent public access. There is a known dioxin hot spot on this southward facing slope (see Annex 1), which may need to be removed. Following this masterplanning project: 1 Derbyshire County Council need to designate a manager for the implementation of

risk management activities across Markham Willows. It makes sense for this individual to also be responsible for SRC, wood heat and composting activities.

2 Derbyshire County Council need to proceed with the commission of the development

of SSAC and further site investigation work to validate these preliminary findings. Further plantings may be delineated on the basis of topsoil contaminant concentrations.

3 The final risk management approach for Markham Willows needs to be put out for

consultation by external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency. 4 Following agreements with the regulator and other stakeholders, an outline


5 Procurement should be linked to the development of a detailed integrated

implementation plan for the remediation of the Markham Willows site. The detailed integration plan needs to be drawn up in consultation with external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency.

20


6 The Research Strategy encompasses the verification studies for the Markham

Willows remediation. Confirmation that Derbyshire County Council will undertake these in the long term is required.

Table 1- Integrated draft Remediation Strategy for Markham Willows

Possible Pollutant Linkages

Remedial Objectives Remedial Options

- Subsurface and surface contaminants

- Ingestion inhalation/dermal contact

- Workers and public not on bridle paths

Prevent workers and public not on bridle paths being exposed to hazardous levels of contaminants

Hotspot removal then vegetation based containment (pathway management), linked to a comparison of surface contamination levels with SSAC developed for Markham. SRC will be used for areas of elevated contamination concentration that do not necessitate hotspot removal, grassland and woodland for areas with low contamination levels.

- Subsurface and surface contaminants

- Ingestion/inhalation/dermal contact

- Bridle path users

Prevent bridle path users being exposed to hazardous levels of contaminants

Hotspot removal in bridle path and picnic areas, followed by a conventional cover system for containment (pathway management), in turn protected by a wearing surface

- Colliery spoil, waste deposits, surface deposits (various contaminants)

- Surface water/drainage/Vaduz zone/groundwater

- River Doe Lea, Doe Lea Flash, Poolsbrook Flash, Woodside Field slope and stream, Markham Colliery Reedbeds, Bolsover Colliery Marsh, Coal Measures

Prevent unacceptable deterioration of the River Doe Lea, Doe Lea Flash, Poolsbrook Flash, Woodside Field slope and stream, Markham Colliery Reedbeds, Bolsover Colliery Marsh, Coal Measures

Possible remediation approaches, if pollutant linkages are significant are: - Permeable reactive barriers

(including bioscreens) - Monitored natural attenuation

- Mine gas - Explosion - All users

Prevent mine gas explosions

Any buildings on the North Tip will need to be constructed with adequate measures to prevent accumulation of mine gas in enclosed volumes, for example adequate ventilation. This includes any temporary excavations, e.g. for drainage etc.

21


Figure 1 - Site Conceptual Model Network Diagram for Human Receptors

Figure 2 - Conceptual Model Network Diagram for

22

Note: SRC workers mayalso work at on-site composting facility

Controlled Water Receptors


5 SITE RESTORATION

The North Tip Part of North Tip, February 2003 The above photograph shows a view of the north tip taken from the existing concrete base. The picture illustrates the rather barren nature of the tip and in this area this has been exacerbated by the unauthorised use of motorcycles. The coal spoil contains pyrite (iron sulphide), which oxidises in the presence of air and water creating an acidic environment. One of the possible chains of reactions is: FeS2 + 3.502 + H2O Fe2++ 2SO4

2- + 2H+

The high acidity (low pH) can kill vegetation and this leads to surface erosion. Further exposure of the coal spoil then occurs producing more acidity in a vicious circle. This herbicidal and erosion process is clearly illustrated in the following photograph taken at Markham:

23


Erosion, North Tip, February 2003 The acidity arising from the affects of the surface oxidation of the pyrite in the coal spoil is to some extent carried into the surface drainage and the iron is deposited in an oxidised form (ochre):

Iron deposits in ditch adjacent to main track on North Tip Landscape There appears to be a risk that there will be a gradual reversion of the North Tip grassland back to coal spoil. Not only will that increase the risk of negative environmental impact to the site and beyond but also, unless the process is prevented, the North Tip would eventually become a scar on the visible landscape. The site is already highly visible from the M1 motorway and therefore seen by thousands of people every day. It will also be a very visible backdrop to the new Markham Vale industrial development. The following photograph illustrates the high visibility of the site in relation to the M1 motorway:

24


View from North Tip towards M1, February 2003 The site is in both a rural and semi-industrial location. Attractive rolling farmland lies to the North while the Coalite Works lies to the South and East. Not far beyond that lies Bolsover and its prominent castle offering a picturesque landscape. The prominence of the site and its proximity to attractive rural and residential areas places emphasis on remediating the site to harmonise with its surroundings.

View from Field Trial Plot Northwards

25


View towards Coalite Works and Bolsover Castle Remediation Solutions The North Tip occupies an area of some 106 hectares and is made up of millions of tonnes of coal spoil accumulated from decades of coal mining at the site. The site has already been profiled and some topsoil applied and grass allowed to grow. While a large proportion of the site is still in reasonable condition there are signs of reversion to coal spoil and if left unchecked this process is likely to accelerate. The volume of material is too large to remove or process in any way. Containment is the only practical option but this needs to be a long term solution with a minimum of maintenance cost. Grassing alone has been only partially successful. Permanent woodland is possible; this is an expensive solution and one that takes a long time to achieve the desired results but one that may be suitable for some specific areas of the site. The Markham Willows concept for the site is the planting of willow to both chemically and physically stabilise the topsoil. The process, phytostabilisation, works by building the topsoil depth and so reduces the air reaching the coal spoil that causes the acidity due to the action of the bacteria associated with extensive fibrous root layer. At the same time the willow root system forms a shallow but strong network within the topsoil, binding it and helping to prevent erosion. The process has shown to be effective in trials but has not yet been demonstrated on a full scale planting as proposed. By using the method of short rotation coppicing, the willow will be treated as a crop and so provide the basis for a renewable fuel. This will also maintain the vigour of the trees. It will be possible to produce compost on the site from imported green and possibly other wastes. This compost can be applied to the willow coppice to help build the soil layer, retain moisture and provide some nutrients. The processes planned for Markham Willows are summarised below and are described in Annex 3 Short Rotation Coppice, Production Plan. The on site processes are summarised in the following chart and are summarised in separate sections within this report.

26


Figure 3 - Summary of Site Processes

Site Preparation

Green Waste

SRC Planting

Compost sales/imports

Compost Production

SRC Maintenance

SRC Harvest

Fuel Processing

Wood Residues

Sewage Sludge

Use of Sewage Sludge The soil survey results carried out for DCC in 1999 (see section on Risk Management and Annex 3 for details) generally concur with the averaged result of sampling by Severn Trent Water prior to provision of sewage sludge for the field trials carried out in 2002. This sampling was carried out to ensure that heavy metals introduced within the sewage sludge did not lead to concentrations that would exceed the Soil Agricultural Limits. The results of the soil and sewage sludge analysis were as follows: Table 2 - Soil and Sludge Analysis Prior to Field Trial

Metal or other (mg/kg)

Soil Sewage Sludge

Soil Final Mix Soil Agricultural

Limit Arsenic 1.4 4.4 1.5 50 Cadmium 1.7 1.9 1.7 3 Chromium 19 46 19.9 400 Copper 30 340 40.1 135 Lead 42 122 44.6 300 Mercury 0.07 1.1 0.1 1 Molybdenum 1 5 1.2 4 Nickel 28 27 28.0 75 Selenium 0.49 1.9 0.5 3 Fluoride 140 260 143.9 500 The levels of heavy metals are not considered to be potentially detrimental to the growth of the willow SRC. High levels of sulphate have been found in all samples. This is believed to be mainly due to the presence of ferrous sulphide that is oxidised in the presence of air and water leading to

27


the formation of sulphuric acid. The low pH, typically 5, has led to the killing of grass in patches on the North Tip. This process leads to erosion of the subsoil producing more acid and the killing of more vegetation in a 'vicious circle'. Nitrates The Markham Willows site is defined as being within the Nitrate Vulnerable Zone (NVZ) as defined by the Nitrate Directive in England. This Directive refers to agricultural land and is designed to reduce water pollution by nitrate from agricultural sources. Land, which is in the process of restoration and in its aftercare period, is not classed as agricultural land and so not subject to the Action Programme measures until the aftercare period is complete. The point at which aftercare is deemed to be complete is not specifically defined but could be interpreted as being at that point when all the SRC has been established e.g. in year five. Sewage sludge does contain nitrate but it is only intended that it is applied at the soil forming stage i.e. as part of the site restoration and not once the SRC is established. Compost addition to the SRC at the soil formation stage, after first year cutback and after harvesting is expected to create a demand for nitrogen to break down the carbon-rich material. In addition the SRC is expected to require about 100 kg N/ha/Yr. The application of sewage sludge (25% solids) at a rate of 400 tonne/ha for soil forming is expected to provide nitrogen at a rate of 7.5 kg N/tonne i.e. 3,000 kg N/ha. However only 10-20% of this is available in year 1 but that should be sufficient to provide nitrogen for both SRC growth and compost breakdown. It would be interesting in year 1, after the first planting, to monitor nitrogen concentrations.

28


6 SHORT ROTATION COPPICE

Introduction Short rotation coppice (SRC) is a development of the traditional method of woodland management. The term short rotation means that the intervals between coppicing is normally less than five years, a much shorter interval than used in traditional coppicing. Willow reacts well to the SRC method and under good conditions quickly broadens out and grows at 1-2 metres in height per year according to the varieties. The advantage of the short rotation is that the stem thickness is less than 50mm and so the SRC can be harvested mechanically using fast and efficient equipment. Field Trials In the spring of 2002 two field trials were established on the North Tip. The field trials which occupy approximately 2 hectares in total are located near to the access bridge known as Bridge plot and at the top of the North Tip facing the motorway known as Hilltop plot. The aims of the trials were: • • • •

•

• •

•

To evaluate the benefit of adding sewage sludge as an ameliorant to the topsoil. To compare the growth rates of varieties of willow: Tora, Torhild, Jorr, Stott, Sven. To evaluate the growth rates of broad leaved species: ash, alder, hazel, sweet chestnut. To compare results from the two plots, which have quite different locations.

The results from the first year of growth are:

Sewage sludge application improves growth for applications up to 300-400 tonnes per hectare for the willow. All willow varieties grew. Sven and Jorr showed the highest growth. Of the broad leaved species only alder was established and growth rates appeared to be independent of sewage sludge application rates. The Hilltop and Bridge plots provided very similar results indicating that these different locations should provide a good indication of growth on the site generally.

The willows were coppiced (cut back to ground level) in early April 2003. This is normal practice for establishing willow coppice as it provides access for weed control and an opportunity for mulching. Cutting back the willow allowed yields to be determined. Sven and Jorr produced the highest yields with Stott in third place. However Stott is known to be a slow starter that would be expected to outperform other varieties therein the period of growth after coppicing. The trial plots continued to be monitored during 2003. No weed control or further ameliorant was added. The trial area was also extended to evaluate other species. However the late start in establishing the extended trial did not allow sufficient time for new sewage sludge to be applied and was followed by a period of drought. As a result most of the new plantings failed to establish. This result underlines the importance of establishing planting before the growing season starts and the importance of the addition of ameliorant (sewage sludge or compost or both) to retain moisture and provide nutrients. The monitoring of the established willows through the drought showed that Swedish type varieties (Tora, Torhild, Jorr, Stott, Sven) are hardier but may not be the best performers under ideal conditions.

29


The trials were conducted by Coppice Resources Limited (CRL). CRL have provided guidance to DCC on the sources of cuttings and varieties for the main plantings. Preparation In order to establish the SRC it is necessary to condition the topsoil. Field trials have used sewage sludge only, but other trials by AEA Technology have shown that best results are obtained by also incorporating green waste compost into the soil. It is also important to apply herbicide and remove any competing plant growth from the planting area so that the SRC can establish free of competition. A detailed preparation planting and management schedule is included in the Production Plan, which forms Annex 3 is appended to this main report. While a four-year planting programme is currently planned, a three-year harvesting rotation is envisaged. Preparation of the first 15 hectare plot should start at latest in January 2004. Using a three year rotation will ensure that wood is taken from the site as soon as possible creating a small income and also a higher demand for compost that is applied post-harvest. Planting Willow cuttings are normally obtained from a commercial producer as 2-3m long rods of diameter up to about 20mm. These are normally cut automatically into 20 cm cuttings by the planting machine which inserts the cuttings vertically into the soil and firms the surrounding soil.

Planting - Picture courtesy of Coppice Resources Ltd Planting should take place in the early spring to give cuttings the entire growing season to become established. However, planting may be delayed by a few weeks if the ground is too waterlogged. To achieve the recommended planting density of 15,000 cuttings per hectare, and yet still allow mechanical access into the crop, the willow cuttings should be planted in double rows 0.75m apart and with a space of 1.5m between the double rows. Cuttings should be equally spaced at 0.59m along the rows. The field trial at Markham Willows has been managed by Coppice Resources Limited. The varieties of willow trialed were Tora, Torhild, Jorr, Stott and Sven. DCC has placed an order for willow cuttings for the first planting zone.

30


Figure 4 - Map showing planned areas for SRC

M1 North

Grassland

First Year SRC Planting Plots

Future SRC

PermanentWoodland

31


SRC Maintenance The willow is coppiced (cut back to ground level) after one year's growth. This encourages new growth to branch out from the base, or ‘stool’. After this first year cutback, it is planned that compost is applied to the SRC as a mulch. This acts to suppress weeds, retain moisture, add nutrients and build up the soil layer. Compost will be applied by a spreader at a rate of approximately 200 tonnes per hectare. After mulching with compost there should be no maintenance necessary for the next three growing seasons. An exception to this could be the need for some irrigation during periods of extreme drought during the growing season. Apart from this the crop should be monitored for pests and diseases and where necessary appropriate remedial actions taken. Fencing should also be monitored and if necessary repaired to ensure that rabbits and deer are excluded. Harvesting Traditionally, the willow crop was normally harvested in the dormant season October – March, but recent research has shown that the crop can be harvested year-round with no adverse effects. The cut wood can be stacked on open ground to air dry during the summer or taken directly for drying and processing into wood fuel. The wood can be chipped directly by the harvesting machine or removed as rods and chipped later in a purpose built plant. The yield is measured in terms of the dry weight of the material i.e. in units of oven dry tonnes (odt). The yield from Markham is expected to be in the range 5-7 odt/ha/y averaged for the whole site. Thus a 60 hectare plantation is expected to yield about 360 odt/y. Contracting The preparation of the ground for willow planting, the planting process, cutback, maintenance and harvesting are all specialist techniques that require experienced management. We suggest that the site contractor appointed by Derbyshire County Council (DCC) could carry out the work. The site contractor could then appoint a specialist subcontractor. Alternatively DCC may want to appoint a specialist contractor directly for the work. Whatever arrangements are put in place we suggest that the work be independently checked to ensure that the specification is adhered to. Irrigation Following the dry summer of 2003 we consider that it will be prudent to make provision for some form of irrigation. This should only be required in periods of summer drought for the newly planted cuttings to ensure that they establish effectively. Once established the SRC should not require irrigation. The simplest form of irrigation is by mobile rain guns as used in agriculture. The cost for such a system has been estimated as £50k and has been included in the establishment costs. In the intervening period between now and early summer the irrigation system needs to be arranged and provision made to abstract sufficient water if needed. An alternative is to use some form of bioliquids (eg brewery waste) – but this creates disposal/application issues of its own. However an annual application of bioliquids of one form or another will be quite valuable in maintaining crop growth through the dry months.

32


7 COMPOST PRODUCTION

Introduction Within the Markham Willows project there are a number of separate but interlinked activities. These are; the establishment of Short Rotation Coppice for use as a harvested fuel, the use of biodegradable materials to provide nutrients and humic substances, production of wood fuel for use at Markham Vale and the opportunity for the creation of a community company to manage and support the project. This chapter considers the local realities of waste management in terms of waste procurement, treatment technologies, and use of composts and markets, with an overview of the regulatory status for the project. The position and the involvement of the district authorities, both from the aspect of procuring waste and environmental regulation will also be considered. It will be essential that the districts that consider Markham Willows as a partner for the treatment of their waste can do so in complete confidence that they will meet best value guideline criteria and that the use of Markham Willows stands up to auditable scrutiny. An important aspect of the Markham Willows project is its approach to the treatment of the colliery spoil surface. Sewage sludge has been traditionally used to provide nutrients for growth promotion in remediation projects. For the Markham Willows project a mixture of sewage sludge and compost will be used for the formation of a new topsoil horizon while leaving the existing spoil heap surface in situ. Subsequent applications of compost as a mulch will provide additional organic matter and provide the humic conditions necessary for continued growth of the willow. Local Waste Management Strategy UK government waste strategy and the European Landfill Directive will require substantial diversion of waste from landfill. This will require the development of appropriate waste handling and recycling facilities. With existing waste contracts in Derbyshire due for renegotiation in 2005, the Markham Willows project offers a useful composting option. The 1999 Derbyshire Waste Management Strategy Document committed the county to an integrated waste management strategy, which reflected the requirements of the waste directive and landfill directive. This strategy included the composting of biological wastes. The strategy also reflects the “proximity principle” and the adoption of “best practical environmental option” (BPEO) in the development of its of waste collection and treatment policies. The Markham Willows project fulfils the proximity principle, as biological waste would need to be sourced from the District Authorities who surround the Markham site. The district authorities of Bolsover, Chesterfield and North East Derbyshire comprise a grouping know as the North East sub-area. Composting at Markham would help to meet one of the strategic aims of the waste strategy and would assist the county in diverting biodegradable waste from landfill. Given the political will, Markham Willows has the potential to expand to become an exemplar project involving sustainable and integrated technologies all beneficial to the overall ethos of the project, sustainability, regeneration and employment. However, despite these benefits, in order that the districts, which comprise the North East sub-area, could contract with Markham Willows, the facility would need to provide best value, especially in terms of costs and environmental performance. The project team envisioned

33


that this would best be achieved and demonstrated by providing a discounted gate fee below current commercial rates, so that they are able to demonstrate “best value” in a single tender action procurement. Derbyshire County Council indicated that the North East sub-area grouping of district councils could potentially provide some 6,000t per year of green waste sourced from green waste collection schemes and civic amenity sites. Based on the sub-area population of 120,000 and figures for typical civic amenity site collection and separate green waste collection, the potential biodegradable waste stream is 20,000 t/y, based on current waste generation rates. While this figure is not based on the highest recorded per household collection rates, for example that could be achieved by including kitchen wastes; it does assume 100% collection, and 100% participation, so a maximum arising may be lower. Hence, while there is some scope for an increasing delivery of green waste to a Markham Willows composting facility, a 10,000 t/y facility seems a sensible compromise. A suitable site linked with an initial contracted and secure source of compostable waste are the key factors in the development of composting facility at Markham Willows. The green waste will form the corner stone of waste input, with additional suitable compostable green waste sourced locally from private and commercial sources. Local Waste Arisings The potential organic wastes, which might be composted and applied to soil formation and SRC cultivation on Markham Willows, include:

• Sewage sludge – not considered as a composting feedstock as it is unlikely that a gate fee could be charged

• Mechanical Biological Treatment residues from mixed waste collection – not considered further due to regulatory concerns on the application of finished composts

• Compost made from source-segregated wastes collected by local authorities including kitchen wastes – not considered at this stage due to increased infrastructure and operational cost needed to meet regulatory requirements for composting of this material

• Compost made from source-segregated wastes collected by local authorities NOT including kitchen wastes, i.e. “green wastes”. This could also encompass Private Sector waste sources such as green waste from commercial landscaping contractors and tree surgeons3

Only green waste, excluding kitchen wastes, was considered as a suitable feedstock for the initial Markham Willows Composting facility, for the reasons set out below.

3 Compostable Waste Materials Availaibilty Study and Procurement Plan. Carried out by Groundwork Creswell in association with Envirosphere.

34


Constraints on Waste procurement. Compostable or biodegradable waste is a significant component of the household waste stream. However in most cases it is contaminated by other waste, which makes it unattractive as a feedstock for composting operations for which the end use may be agriculture, horticulture or virtually any other current use for composts and mulches other than engineering materials for landfill. This source of biodegradable waste is usually separated from household waste by processing the household waste stream through a mechanical biological treatment (MBT) system or by source separation. Current legislation classifies biodegradable waste in the household waste stream as “Catering Waste” and as such, requires it to be composted to a specific set of conditions that comply with the Animal By-Products Order (ABPO). This is a statutory order introduced in the wake of the BSE and foot-and-mouth epidemics. The aim of the order is to prevent the re-occurrence and spread of these diseases by preventing the distribution of pathogens that can be carried in compost that has been improperly stored or processed, and which is subsequently spread on grazing land. The effect of ABPO is to require composting unit’s to provide facilities appropriate to the materials that are being composted. The result is a two-tier system in which organic wastes which have had no contact with meat or meat products can be composted in a relatively simple and low cost windrow system. All other compostable materials require a much higher standard of containment with a more rigorous operating regime with subsequently higher capital and operations costs and generally referred to as in vessel composting systems. Biodegradable waste, which originates from domestic households, can be spilt into a number of categories as indicated in Table 3. Green or Garden Waste is a compostable waste that does not require specialist treatment and is readily available from householders by a separate collection system. As this waste does not include kitchen materials, vegetable stalks etc, it is exempted from the constraints of the animal by products order4. This is the target material for most source separation schemes provided by local authorities across England, Wales and Scotland. Additional sources of green waste may be found within the private sector, arising from such business as tree surgeons and garden maintenance contractors. The size of this arising is difficult to estimate. Compost Production Cost modelling by AEA suggests that for 6,000 t/y input level, with a discounted gate fee and utilising shared use of equipment and labour, operating costs may be covered by gate fees. However, income would be sensitive to commercial pressures such as fluctuations in waste volumes. A facility would need to process 10,000 t/y or more to be fully commercially viable.

4 DEFRA. Draft guidance on the treatment in approved composting or biogas plants of animal by-products and catering waste. July 2003, Page 7 Par 3.13

35


Table 3 Generic composition of household waste

Generic Type of waste. Consisting of Commercial Scale Treatment Option

Green or garden waste. Grass clippings, shrubs, weeds, flowers, leafs etc

Turned windrow

Kitchen and catering waste.

Vegetable trimmings5, fruit peelings, raw and cooked food waste

In vessel composting system complying with ABPO Regulations

Other biodegradable waste Card, paper, biodegradable packaging, disposable nappies and incontinent pads, miscellaneous biodegradable materials

In vessel composting system complying with ABPO Regulations or preferably incineration.

It was essential therefore that that the Markham Willows project identified the most cost effective composting approach, described below. The Markham facility will be a windrow system, which will consist of triangular piles of shredded green waste, which are regularly turned to stimulate microbiological activity. The operation will be carried out on a large asphalt pad, which will be designed to collect rainwater run off and leachate for reuse in the composting operation. The equipment used for the operations is typical industrial mobile plant such as front-end loaders and telescopic handlers. Shredding equipment will be selected for its ability to be used on MEGZ estate maintenance and be suitable for chipping of SRC and wood to a specification suitable for fuel use. The nature of the composting operation means that there is a great deal of compatibility in terms of equipment use and labour skills that can be utilised and integrated with other departments such as the (MEGZ) estate management team. This includes the use of equipment and labour to maintain and support the SRC willow plantations providing long-term all year round sustainable employment, at the lower end of the skills spectrum. Compost Applications The short rotation coppice plantations would be the main user of the output of the composting facility. It became apparent in the project planning stages that the composting facility is unlikely to be producing finished compost in volume until the end of 2005. However planting of the first plot of willow is planned for the spring of 2004. A need for compost imports of 3,800 to 15,800 tonnes may therefore be necessary, depending on the extent to which compost is used in soil forming work (see below). The figures for imported compost cover the SRC establishment period of 2004-2008 and represent the total requirement that may be needed. For each 15ha SRC plots there will be an initial period of several months for soil formation and willow planting. A first cutback follows after 12 months. There is a further 20-24 month 5 This material is considered to be likely to be contaminated by meat products and is therefore classified as catering waste unless it can be conclusively proved that no contamination has occurred.

36


growth period prior to harvesting giving a 3-year first cycle. After the first harvest, each plot will then be harvested at 3 or 4-yearly intervals. Both the soil formation and cultivation stages will use compost. The soil formation stage is based on the addition of sewage sludge and compost (pot trials carried out by AEA indicate that the combination is better than using either material alone). Cultivation uses compost as mulch applied after first cutback and after harvest. Current masterplanning envisions a total plantation of 60ha, thus leading to the establishment of the first new plot in the spring of 2004 and subsequent planting in the spring of 2005, 06, & 07, i.e. on 15ha plots. During soil forming, organic matter is applied to the surface to be planted. This is then mixed into the top 15 cm of the surface using a disc cultivator. The maximum depth that can readily be disked in on the surface of the North Tip is 10 cm6. It is assumed a 50/50 mixture of sewage sludge and compost is applied, as this will be the simplest mixture to manage on site. To allow some leeway, the application depth to be used is 8 cm, hence the depth of compost added will be 4 cm. 4 cm depth of compost and 4cm depth of sewage sludge will equate to approximately 3,000 tonnes of compost (assuming a bulk density of 500 kg/m3) and 6,000 t of sewage sludge (assuming a bulk density of 1000kg/m3) for each 15ha plot. Mulching is based on an application of 4 cm depth of compost, which will equate to 3,000 tonnes per application. These depths of composts represent relatively small additions, and greater volumes could be added. On site compost production at Markham Willows is likely to begin, at the earliest by mid 2005 following the granting of the waste management licence and completion of construction of the facility7. With a process time of 3-4 months, no significant amount of compost is expected from the Markham Willows facility during 2005. Modelling for compost delivery only considers production of a yearly basis and therefore the compost produced from waste input in 2005 is only considered available for use in 2006. To enable more precise predictions to be made on the relationship between waste input, compost production, compost requirements and the need to import compost, must be modelled. This would need to be carried out on a more detailed basis, most probably by looking at the needs and requirements on a quarterly basis. Modelling at this level would also allow seasonal variations in deliveries to be incorporated. Figure 5 illustrates the production and use of compost at the Markham Willows project over time, based on the following assumptions and projections. The projection assumes an increase in green waste input over a 4-year period taking the facility to its full capacity. The increase in waste is assumed to come from household participation in source separation and collection services for green waste and use of the facility by private contractors such as landscape gardeners. Table 4shows the assumed projection for an increase in input tonnage.

Table 4 Predicted input tonnage for Markham Willows Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

6 Coppice Resources Limited, Personal Communication. 7 DCC indicated that this would be their expected timescale for the development.

37


% Increase 10% 15% 15% 15% Input Tonnage

6000 6,600 7,950 8,728 10,037

During the composting process, there is an overall mass loss (loss of tonnage), which is the result of moisture loss and biological degradation. A nominal reduction of 30% is used to demonstrate this effect for modelling purposes, which in actual composting operations can be in the range of 25%-40% dependant on the composting regime, seasonal and atmospheric conditions. The output or finished compost tonnage is also influenced by the size of the materials screened out of the finished compost. Oversize materials, which in most commercial composting operations means >25mm are rejected reducing the finished mass further. The modelling exercise takes this factor into account, allowing for the use of a greater amount of oversize, which is considered to be beneficial in the production of compost for mulching applications. Thus for the input tonnage predicted in Table 4, the model predicts finished compost tonnage will be as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Comparison of Input and finished compost tonnage Input tonnage

6,000 6,600 7,590 8,728 10,037

Finished compost

4,200 4,620 5,313 6,109 7,026

In practise, there is a significant processing time to be considered which is generally between 3-4 months from delivery of waste to the facility. The input tonnage to finished compost relationship is also affected by seasonal delivery variations and climatic conditions. Therefore the model assumes that finished compost received in year X will be stockpiled for use in Year Y. Table 6 shows the modelled output of finished compost, based on the projected input tonnage. In practice it is likely that compost would be stockpiled until required for use. The SRC plots will be harvested in late autumn or early spring depending on the ground conditions and an application of compost will be made on the completion of harvest. Suitable contractors will most probably carry out the actual application of composts in one operation and this would also require that a sufficient stock of compost is available to ensure a cost-effective operation.

Table 6 Modelling predictions of finished compost from the Markham Willows facility Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Finished compost available

0

4,200 4,620 5,313 6,109 7,026

Willow planting will therefore require compost to be imported to the site, particularly during the soil forming stages, which coincides with the development, and build up of production of the Markham Willows facility. With the first plot due to begin soil forming operations in the

38


spring of 2004, and the remaining three plots in subsequent years, compost will be required for soil formation and mulching. Table 7 indicates the SRC requirements for compost. Table 7 SRC soil formation and mulching requirements for compost8

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Compost requirement

3,000 6,000 6,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 3,000

Table 8 indicates the predicted requirements for imported compost. By cross-referencing with Table 7 and Table 6, the net compost requirement can be derived.9

Table 8 Compost import requirements Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Compost required (Table 7)

3,000 6,000 6,000 9,000 6,000 3,000 3,000

Compost available from MW (Table 6)

0 0

4,200 4,620 5,313 6,109 7,026

Imported 3000 6,000 1,800 4,380 687 Surplus 3,110 4,026

The variations in the requirement to import compost are due to the staggered planting of the 15ha plots coinciding with cutback and harvesting applications. By 2008 all plots are planted and the requirement for compost reduces to an application to each plot after it has been harvested. The plots will be harvested every 4 years after the initial harvest and a post harvest application of 4cm of compost results in a compost requirement for 3,000t/y. From 2009 the Markham facility will produce surplus compost, which can be utilised in either deeper applications of compost or will be available for use or sale.

8 Predictions are based on year by year modeling; more precise prediction will require a more detailed model. 9 The full model can be accessed via R3 Environmental Technology ltd.

39


Figure 5 Compost requirements and flow during establishment of the SRC plantation

Compost Flows at Markham Willows

-8000

-6000

-4000

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Input tonnageFinished compostCompost imports or surplus

Note that the values shown represent the total materials required or produced at year-end.

40


41


On the basis of the assumptions made, following the establishment of the four SRC plots, there is likely to be a surplus of compost available for sale. It is envisioned that these materials would be available to the districts and county for use in ground keeping and estate maintenance activities. Alternative markets for compost were also identified such as the APEX marketing project, which purchases bulk qualities of compost for retail sale. Usually green waste composting facility’s can at least produce compost to the British Standard PAS 100, which would enable widespread use depending on available markets, although compost prices per tonne do tend to be low in monetary terms. Infrastructure, costs and operations Costs for both infrastructure and equipment have been defined and developed with incorporation of cost elements into the internal business planning. Cost elements include options for purchase, contract hire and contracting in of services such as shredding and screening, costs for compost testing and civil engineering costs.

Table 9 Main cost elements for compost production at Markham Willows.

Cost centre or element

Description Cost impact and comment

Site and physical infrastructure

Roads, fencing, hard standing, drains, lagoons, landscaping, weighbridge and office/mess rooms

Significant initial cost required establishing the facility, with ongoing maintenance

Compost processing equipment

Front end loader, shredder,screen, windrow turner

Many options available from outright purchase to contracting in the services required. Option chosen depends on funding available and green waste input tonnage

Operational labour and support

At least two staff allocated

Waste management licence will require Certificate Of Technical Competency (COTC)10 staff member allocated to site. Costs may be shared across other duties dependant on facility loading

Testing and compliance

Testing of compost produced for accreditation of facility

Facility to strive to be an accredited compost producer producing compost to the British standard PAS 100. Will require inspection and regular testing of its output compost

Waste Management licence

WML Required to operate the facility.

Initial application fee and ongoing annual charges for compliance

The design of the infrastructure has been based on a hardwearing asphalt pad of 9,500m2

with drainage to a leachate lagoon and circulation system. Onsite buildings would be “Portacabin” type for mess rooms and office. The estimated composting capacity of the hardstanding is 10,000t/y and allows for seasonal peaks in the supply of green waste materials A number of options were identified for the procurement of equipment and contract services for the composting process. The range of options covers the outright purchase of various

10 Certificate of technical competence issued by WAMITAB

42


types of equipment through to the contracting in of services and equipment for use at the facility. A total of six options were considered which developed a direct cost recovery range of between £5 per ton using a mixture of new and second hand equipment to £14 per ton for all new equipment. Other options looked at contract hire of equipment and contracting in services such as screening. These options produced mid range prices of £6-£10/t based on a 3 year operating period with yearly input of 6000t/y All costs are direct recovery costs and do not include fuel and maintenance costs. This model indicates that at 6,000t/y input, the facility and equipment would be working at a very low level of efficiency and that additional waste would be required. This is confirmed by cost modelling carried out by AEA, which suggest that the minimum throughput for the facility should be 10,000t/y. The final choice of equipment procurement will be critical to the profitability of the facility. The expected level of throughput does not support a case for major equipment spend. In simple terms, green waste inputs below 10,000t/y do not achieve high levels of equipment use and efficiency, which is reflected in a relatively high cost per tonne of throughput. Confirmation by Derbyshire County Council of the waste available will be required before accurate costs for production can be developed, as there are several significant options that will affect the wider operational cost base, which has been developed and identified by AEA and R3. Regulatory and Health & Safety issues The green waste composting facility requires a waste management licence issued by the Environment Agency. Assuming the site would be the responsibility of Derbyshire County Council, they will be required to provide suitable financial provision and suitable insurances. The waste management licence also requires that a person holding a current Certificate Of Technical Competency issued by WAMITAB be employed at the facility. Health and safety issues are considered mainly in the context of bio aerosols, noise, dust and odours. Given the location of the proposed facility in the centre of the North Tip, or even at locations nearer to the boundary, the issues are not expected to present a significant problem providing sufficient operational safeguards are taken during procedures such as windrow turning and screening. Conclusions The possible supply from Derbyshire waste collection authorities of an estimated 6,000t/y of green waste has provided the composting phase of the Markham Willows project with a base structure from which it can develop. While 6,000t/y of green waste is unlikely to be commercially sustainable, it will provide the base loading and justification to develop the necessary infrastructure and obtain the regulatory waste management licence required to operate a green waste composting operation. With a clear understanding of the facility in terms of capacity, capability and timing, further feedstocks may be secured from private sector suppliers such as landscape contractors. Securing additional waste will be a key element in taking the facility into commercial sustainability within a reasonable time frame. Potential development routes could be the provision of “in vessel” type systems to deal with more difficult wastes. However this would be totally dependent on availability of these compostable materials. The composting facility will provide long-term employment and contribute to Derbyshire’s recycling and composting efforts while playing a pivotal role in the Markham Willows project.

43


44


8 WOOD FUEL

While wood is the oldest fuel known to man, it has been relegated to the position of 'alternative' or 'supplementary' fuel when compared with the mainstream fossil fuels of gas, oil and coal. However, the need for UK to become less reliant on imported fuels and the need to reduce carbon emissions has focused increasing interest on renewable energy technologies. Wood is a renewable energy source if the wood consumed as a fuel is replaced by new growth in a managed way. Using wood grown under the system of short rotation coppice satisfies this criterion. The carbon dioxide emitted by the wood fuel on combustion is approximately the same quantity as the carbon dioxide absorbed through photosynthesis in growing the same quantity of fuel i.e. burning wood fuel from managed SRC produces no net carbon dioxide emissions. Wood fuel produced from an SRC source is therefore both renewable and 'carbon neutral'. Wood fuel therefore has some distinct environmental advantages over fossil fuels. However it also has some disadvantages in terms of convenience and the generally held perception of wood as a primitive fuel. The UK's favourite fuel is gas - it is relatively cheap, is delivered through a pipe as required, burns cleanly and is supported by a well established supply and service infrastructure. While wood fuel is relatively cheap, it is bulky and needs to be delivered to the site using transport and stored there for use. Wood is quite widely used for domestic heating in open fires and wood burning stoves but has yet to gain a significant niche in the non-domestic heating market. However this is the market that we propose for Markham Willows i.e. wood fuel for boilers of about 200 kW and above - a size typically suited to a large school or similar size of building. To penetrate this market requires a competitive fuel, good convenience and the availability of a comprehensive supply, maintenance and repair service. Wood fuel needs to burn efficiently and have minimal environmental impact. Modern wood fuelled boilers have a high efficiency and burn cleanly provided that the fuel quality is controlled within the specification and the boiler is properly set up and maintained. The main requirements for a wood chip fuel are the chip size and the moisture content. These requirements are determined by the individual boilers. The ash produced by wood is a very low proportion of the fuel burned, being typically less than 0.5%. As part of the masterplanning, chemical analysis of willow grown on Markham North Tip has been carried out. The purpose was to determine whether heavy metals present in the coal spoil and to some extent in the sewage sludge would be taken up by the wood. While detailed results are available, they can be put into context by comparing the trace elements in the wood with trace element concentrations in coal that is typically used in UK power stations. With the single exception of cadmium, which is present in higher levels than found in coal, the other heavy metals in the willow wood were lower than found in a range of typical coal products. In addition dioxin measurements in the wood were found to be low in the wood but only two samples were analysed for this and so it is not appropriate to draw firm conclusions. More details of the leaf and stem analysis are provided in Annex 3. The analysis of the willow wood fuel is a suitable subject for ongoing monitoring at the site. The quantity of wood fuel that will be produced from the 60 hectare SRC at Markham Willows is expected to average 360 tonnes (dry weight) per year. This is sufficient to satisfy one 220 kW boiler operating for 8,000 hours. Also, the first fuel would not be available from the site until the end of the fourth growing season. In order to satisfy the fuel demand for a cluster of ten boilers it is necessary to draw upon wood other local wood such as forest thinnings and

45


timber production residue. Investigations within a 25 mile radius of Markham Willows has revealed more than adequate quantities of wood that could be processed into wood chip at a reasonable cost. This investigation needs to be followed up by negotiations with potential suppliers as part of the early implementation of the Markham Willows masterplanning.

46


9 WOOD HEAT

The barriers to the development of markets for wood heat are well understood. These are all associated with the high cost of wood fired boilers relative to fossil fuel fired units, the lack of a credible long term fuel supply infrastructure, and lack of local technical and mechanical support for the wood fired boilers. These barriers have prevented the creation of a market for wood fuel in the UK, despite the cost of wood, which is almost always cheaper than fossil fuels. To address these barriers we have devised a novel solution where the many benefits offered by wood fuel can be unlocked and at the same time, wood heating can be offered without ongoing subsidy at a price that is competitive with many fossil fuels. This approach is based on the supply of heat as a service by a local company. This approach recognises that customers don’t need fuel - they need heat. Normally to obtain heat the user buys fuel. This arrangement also means that they are responsible for the cost of buying and running the boiler that converts the fuel into the heat that is needed. We propose an alternative arrangement whereby a local organisation or company supplies heat to the customers with the added value that is produced from locally sourced wood fuels. AEA Technology Environment has been involved in a project in the South West of England that has established a wood energy supply company that: • Buys, installs, runs and maintains woodchip boilers in volume to achieve cost savings. • Secures wood fuel, and uses local labour to process it to ensure a consistent quality. • Sells heat to Local Authority and private sector business customers against long-term

supply contracts. • Seeks to maximise local benefit by franchising individual heat supply operations to local

wood producers once the plant is operating and the commercial risks have been removed.

Wood fuel is often much cheaper than fossil fuels, but wood fired boilers are considerably more expensive than oil or gas fired units. The wood energy supply company gains cost savings by creating a volume market for standard boiler plant and then uses the difference in price between wood and fossil fuels to service a loan that buys the boiler. This requires the customer to offer a heat supply contract for at least the length of the loan, which is usually 10 years. The economics are made even more attractive if capital grants can be obtained for the boilers. This is currently the case under the Clear Skies scheme for automated wood fuelled boilers.11 Using this approach, wood heat supply can be offered at a similar price to that currently being paid by the customer. At the same time, the customer is freed from the need to raise the capital required to buy the boiler and the ongoing burden of boiler maintenance and repair. This means that the customer gets ‘green’ heat for less than the price of ‘brown’. In areas where coal is still burnt, fuel mixing in existing coal fired plant can be an option; offering enhanced environmental performance compared with coal alone. The proposed climate change levy has not been imposed on wood heat. This will further improves the economics of wood heat relative to fossil fuel consumption. In addition, it is likely that the CO2 savings make by these installations can be traded in a future ‘Carbon Credit’ market. 11 Clear Skies Renewable Energy Grants, www.clear-skies.org

47


A financial appraisal of wood heat as a commercial operation has been carried out as part of the masterplanning for Markham Willows and is reported in more detail in Annex 3.

48


10 ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

Introduction The Markham Willows project aims to be 'sustainable' in all aspects. Among the many other criteria, sustainability means it should not be dependent on funding in the medium to long term. To reach such a position, the site needs to be used to create enough income to sustain its upkeep. The project has the potential to integrate three technology operations on the site: • Short Rotation Coppice - SRC is a means of restoring the site using the planting of

willows to both physically and chemically stabilise the surface soil. • Wood Fuel Production - The willow can be harvested regularly and the wood used to

produce fuel. Wood fuel production itself is unlikely to be profitable but a viable commercial operation can be established if heat is sold. The operation is known as 'wood heat'.

• Compost Production - The SRC can benefit from the addition of compost as a mulch. Producing compost from green waste can generate a significant income known as the 'gate fee' from the avoided cost of landfill.

While the SRC is central to the scheme, wood heat and composting are optional. While there may be strategic reasons for Derbyshire to adopt these optional technologies for the site, in the medium - long term they need to be sustainable and possibly transferable to the private sector as commercially viable operations. To investigate the costs of the individual and combined operations it was first necessary to create an economic model. This has used typical current market costs and data wherever possible. However some uncertainties and variables remain and the model has been used to determine the possible effects of these through a range of scenarios. A sensitivity analysis was carried out on what were considered to be the most important variables. The results of this analysis are summarised below in order of relative importance: Major Opportunities: • Higher gate fees • Higher levels of compost application • Higher heat prices • Increased number of boiler installations Major Risks: • Boilers do not qualify for capital grant that is currently available • Lower levels of compost requiring lower amounts of green waste • Lower gate fees • Lower heat prices • Fewer boiler installations The following conclusions have been reached over the three operations: SRC SRC is a cost-effective means of restoring the site and ongoing maintenance costs are low. It is estimated that the investment to prepare the 60 hectare site and plant the SRC will be approximately £300k. We do not consider that SRC alone should be regarded as a commercial opportunity. We recommend that the cost of establishing of SRC at Markham

49


Willows should be regarded as a one-off restoration cost. This cost can be spread over the proposed four year planting period. Compost Production Compost production using green waste in windrows can be a self -sustaining operation (i.e. cover its ongoing costs) provided that the following conditions apply: • A long term commitment is obtained from the waste suppliers (probably Derbyshire local

authorities) for a guaranteed annual tonnage of 6000 tonnes of green waste. • A minimum gate fee of net £20/tonne (i.e. after discount to ensure 'best value'). It would

be prudent to negotiate a higher gate fee or penalty charge to cover circumstances where the minimum tonnage is not achieved otherwise the compost production would not be self-sustainable.

• All capital equipment costs including the concrete pad grant aided at the start of the project.

• The compost production staff can work flexibly on other work on the site to ensure that their costs can be maintained at a reasonable level.

It is estimated that the capital cost for setting up a compost production facility capable of handling up to 10,000 tonnes of green waste would be approximately £300k for the equipment. This cost could be reduced by sharing some of the equipment with other site operations. The cost of a hardstanding for 10,000 tonnes of green waste per year has been estimated as approximately £410k including all services. At the 6,000 tonne level the cost is estimated as approximately £290k. Wood Heat This study has shown that wood fuel alone has a relatively low value and consequently a scheme to sell wood fuel is unlikely to be commercially sustainable. However, the relatively low cost of wood fuel allows heat to be produced at a competitive price to conventional fossil fuels. The economic model has considered how the heat from wood fuel could be sold locally by operating a full service of boiler installation, control and maintenance and fuel provision. The scheme would operate by supplying heat to local customers according to agreed terms of a contract, probably for ten years. The economic analysis has shown that the production of wood fuel on the site and the sale of wood heat to the site or locally could be profitable once capital costs have been recovered. It is recognised that wood heat will need to compete with conventional forms of heating. To create the confidence to invest in the operation we believe that it is necessary to establish some demand for wood heat through long term heat supply contracts. One way of achieving this would be for DCC to make a firm commitment to install a number of wood heat boilers (say 5 minimum but ideally 10) in their buildings within the next three years. This would provide sufficient confidence in wood heating locally for others to take on the technology. Such a commitment would also allow more favourable costs to be negotiated with wood fuel boiler suppliers. It has been estimated that capital cost for setting up the wood heat business will be approximately £400k assuming a capital grant of 50% for the boilers. Capital grants are currently available through the DTI Clear Skies scheme and should be applicable to local authority schemes.

50


An Integrated Solution Whilst the decisions on compost production and wood heat can be taken independently and are not especially time critical, these operations would benefit from integration to reduce overheads and share some staff and equipment. The combined operations could be self-sustaining 'not for profit' operations, perhaps part of a Markham Vale service operation or if shown to be commercially viable, they could be sold to an independent operator if required. Economic Appraisal A range of scenarios were studied to determine what scale of operations could be viable under realistic cost and market conditions. Cashflow forecasts for the individual technology sectors and the combined operations were carried out. These are more fully described in the full report on Economic Model which is annexed to this report. As a starting point a standard scenario was first established using what was considered to be likely market data and information. Modifications to this standard scenario were then tested in an attempt to determine those conditions that could lead to viable operations for compost production on site and wood fuel production combined with wood heat sales. Analysis of the compost model showed that both the gate fee and the green waste tonnage were the key issues for a viable operation as these two factors determine the income. Capital cost for setting up a new production plant is significant with the provision of a concrete pad as the main component. However, DCC have indicated that capital investment for a new plant may be available provided that the plant can cover all its running costs including repairs, maintenance and plant replacement. However, at the 6,000 t/y waste import level and at a net gate fee of £20/tonne the ongoing running costs exceeded income compost operation after all capital costs are excluded. This confirms what is already generally accepted in the composting industry that fully commercially viable operations need to handle a throughput of green waste of a minimum of about 10,000 t/y. Table 10 below shows the annual cashflow for the compost production as the bottom line that is consistently negative.

51


Table 10 - Annual Cashflow for Compost - compost production bears full costs Scenario 3.6 - standard scenario without cost sharing Import and on-site compost 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

y 1 y 2 y 3 y 4 y 5 y 6Capital and set up cost - 310,000 - - - -Capital replacement - 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Fuel and consumables - 12,937 12,937 12,937 12,937 12,937 Maintenance - 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 13,400 Business overhead 0 86,000 86,000 86,000 86,000 86,000Capital Grant 0 300,000 0 0 0 0Total Cost 0 152,337 142,337 142,337 142,337 142,337Income from gate fee 0 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000Imported compost cost 0 -15,000 0 -3,000 -9,000 0Annual cash flow 0 -17,337 -22,337 -19,337 -13,337 -22,337 There are some measures that can be taken to share and more fairly apportion costs to the compost production. Delaying the start of the compost operation to 2005 and removing all costs for importing compost significantly improves the cashflow but not enough to make the operation viable. However if some manpower and overheads are shared with the wood heat operation (Scenario 4.2) then positive annual cashflows are generated from the first operational year and are sustained allowing the accumulated cashflow to grow. Table 11 - Compost Production with cost sharing

Year Scenario 4.2 at gate fee of £20/t and 6,000t/year, no imported compost costs

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Total Cost 0 100,369 90,369 90,369 90,369 90,369Income from gate fee 0 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000 120,000Imported compost cost 0 0 0 0 0 0Annual cash flow 0 19,632 29,632 29,632 29,632 29,632 A 6,000 t/y operation is therefore viable provided that some reasonable sharing of manpower can be achieved with the wood heat operation (or other site operations) and provided that the net gate fee is around £20/tonne or higher. This analysis assumes that all capital costs for the compost production are separately funded but does include the cost for equipment replacement. As the income is the product of gate fee and tonnage there is some flexibility e.g. a lower gate fee could still allow a viable operation if the tonnage was increased proportionately. Using this scenario for compost production, the economics of the fully integrated technologies can be analysed. Firstly, the economics of establishing and maintaining the SRC:

52


Table 12 - SRC Establishment and Maintenance SRC 4 y rotation, 1st harvest y 4

y 1 y 2 y 3 y 4 y 5 y 6SRC costs 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Establishment 50,550 55,800 55,800 55,800 Mulching after planting 5,250 5,250 5,250 Management and maintenance 1,575 3,150 4,725 6,300 6,300 6,300 Harvesting 1636 1636 1636Mulching after harvesting 4667 4667 4667Irrigation system 50,000 Total 102,125 64,200 65,775 73,652 12,602 12,602 Planting Grant 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 0 0Net 87,125 49,200 50,775 58,652 12,602 12,602Yield (odt) 360 360 360Income from fuel production 0 0 0 8,640 8,640 8,640Annual cash flow -87,125 -49,200 -50,775 -50,012 -3,962 -3,962 After the first four years of establishment the net cost of maintaining the crop is very low. For wood heat there is a significant investment required in equipment and boilers. It has been assumed that equipment will not be separately funded (as for compost production). It has been assumed that boilers will be entitled to receive a 50% capital grant (Clear Skies Scheme). Table 13 - Wood Heat Wood Heat (Scenario 4.2)

y 1 y 2 y 3 y 4 y 5 y 6Boilers installed 1 5 4 0 0 0Capital cost 66995 184975 147980 0 0 0Proportion of yr operating 0.25 0.5 0.5 1 1 1New boiler years 0.25 2.5 2 boiler operational 0.25 3.5 8 10 10 10Fuel cost 2255 31570 72160 90200 90200 90200Maintenance 0 450 6300 14400 18000 18000Business overhead 25,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000Financial Support Total Cost 94,250 266,995 276,440 154,600 158,200 158,200Heat sales 9,372 131,208 299,904 374,880 374,880 374,880Annual cash flow -84,878 -135,787 23,464 220,280 216,680 216,680 It can be seen that in year 3 the heat sales just exceed the total costs to produce a small surplus. From that point the wood heat cashflow is predicted to remain positive. The annual cashflows for the combined operations are shown graphically below.

53


Figure 6 - Annual Cashflows for the Separate and Combined Operations

-200,000-150,000-100,000-50,000

050,000

100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000

1 3 5 7 9 11

years

£

wood heatcompostSRCTotal

These cashflows can be accumulated to show the cash position at the end of each year: Table 14 - Combined Accumulated Cashflows Operation 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

y 1 y 2 y 3 y 4 y 5 y 6wood heat -84,878 -220,665 -197,201 23,078 239,758 456,438compost/green waste 0 19,632 49,263 78,895 108,526 138,158SRC 12,875 26,550 25,775 25,763 21,800 17,838total accumulated -72,003 -174,484 -122,163 127,736 370,084 612,433 This data is depicted graphically below and shows a very positive cash growth from year 4. Figure 7 - Accumulated Cashflow (Scenario 4.2)

Actual cashflow accumulated

-500,000

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

1 3 5 7 9 11

wood heatcompostSRCTOTAL

The cost of finance has not been taken into account at that stage. The following table shows the effect of using a discount factor of 3.5% as recommended in the Treasury Green Book to give the net present value:

54


Table 15 - Net Present Value Net Present Value at 3.5% discount rate for accumulated cashflow for integrated operations. Based on Scenario 4.2

year disc. factor cashflow NPV2004 = year 0 1.0000 -72,003 - 72,003

1 0.9662 -174,484 - 168,586 2 0.9335 -122,163 - 114,039 3 0.9019 127,736 115,205 4 0.8714 370,084 322,492 5 0.8420 612,433 515,669 6 0.8135 854,782 695,365 7 0.7860 1,097,131 862,345 8 0.7594 1,339,480 1,017,201 9 0.7337 1,581,829 1,160,588

10 0.7089 1,824,177 1,293,159 It is apparent from this result that success of the integrated operation is very dependent on the wood heat operation. To be prudent we have investigated some negative effects on the wood heat business and the consequences for the integrated operation. If capital grants are not available for the boilers then the capital costs for the wood heat operation are significantly increased. The effect is shown in the following graph, which should be compared with Figure 8. Figure 8 - Accumulated Cashflow - no capital grant for boilers


-1,000,000

-500,000

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

1 3 5 7 9 11


The non-availability of capital grants for the boilers is the single factor that has the most significant effect on the overall result pushing the breakeven point out to five years. Another factor could be that boiler installations are slower than anticipated e.g. one in year 1 and then three per year for years 2,3 and 4. The effect would be as follows:

55


Figure 9 - Effect of Slower Development of Heat Sales


-400,000-200,000

0200,000400,000600,000800,000

1,000,0001,200,000

1 3 5 7 9 11


Other negative influences could come to bear on the wood heat operation and if several of these occurred together then the business might not become self sustainable within five years and could therefore be considered to be too high a risk. However, if the local heat market can be initiated within the public sector, then such risks are greatly diminished if not removed. Conclusions 1. The SRC operation is best considered as part of the site restoration and not a

commercial operation in its own right. Although selling the harvested wood for fuel production eventually generates a small income, the value of this is small and not quite sufficient to cover ongoing maintenance. We therefore recommend that a restoration grant of about £250k is made available to cover the SRC establishment costs. At just over £4k/ha this is still a cost effective alternative to other restoration techniques, and is likely to be more robust.

2. Compost production is highly sensitive to gate fee and the scale of operation. The operation could breakeven at the 6000 tonne level if: (a) If a favourable gate fee of £25/tonne for green waste is achievable in the open

market with a 20% reduction for contributing Local Authorities to ensure best value. (b) All capital is fully funded. (c) Some labour and capital replacement costs are shared with the wood fuel production

operation. (d) Any compost purchases are added to the SRC establishment costs and funded

separately. 3. Compost production does not become reasonably commercially viable until green waste

is processed at about 10,000 tonnes per year. This is because operations of that scale have a fairly high fixed overhead.

4. Wood heat sales could produce a high income and profit but the capital investment means that breakeven is unlikely until year 4. Capital funding of 50% should be available for non-commercial ('community') applications but if not then the year when breakeven occurs is extended. If heat prices are as much as 20% lower than anticipated and at the same time the 50% capital grant is not available then the wood heat business would not be viable at the ten boiler scale. However, the heat sale price used in the business model is competitive with fossil fuels.

5. Compost production and wood heat sales both offer opportunities for viable new operations at the site and are directly linked into the site restoration. These operations are not interdependent i.e. either compost production or wood heat could be run

56


independently. However by operating the two together some cost savings can be made. As both operations can be run independently and also are subject to various identified risks, then it is important that there are no cross-subsidies between them. This would simply act to mask commercial weaknesses and increase the risks for the combined operations.

6. There is more uncertainty over the major influencing factors for wood heat than for compost production. This is because compost production is an established process and the market for green waste already exists. However, the market for wood heat has yet to be established and must displace heating from more conventional means. The installation of a wood heat boiler at the Environmental Technology Centre will be a signal that DCC want to demonstrate support for renewable energy technology at Markham Vale. However unless there is a commitment for further boilers for the Markham Vale site or other DCC buildings then the 'critical mass' needed to get the wood heat business started will be harder to achieve.

7. A decision making process is now necessary as the first step towards development of a business plan. An approach to this process is outlined in the following section.

57


11 BIODIVERSITY

A review of research12 on SRC revealed a number of relevant findings related to biodiversity: • •

• • •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Large numbers of invertebrate species are associated with willows and poplars. The invertebrate fauna of coppice is far more diverse and abundant than that of arable crops. A substantial number of moth species feed on willows and poplars. Willow is attractive to insects, thus attracting insectivorous birds. Willow coppice contains ''remarkably high'' densities of certain migrant warbler species of recognised conservation interest. One group of mammals that may find benefit from arable coppice is bats who benefit from the abundance of flying insects above the canopy.

According to Best Practice Guidelines for applicants to DEFRA's Energy Crops Scheme SRC can support biodiversity. This is illustrated by the following extracts:

Despite the fact that it is essential to eradicate weeds during the establishment of SRC, once the crop is mature the growth of a ground flora is beneficial. Ground cover encourages the presence of invertebrates, which in turn leads to an increase in the number of small mammals and birds found.

High numbers of bird species are also found throughout the year and over the 3-year harvest cycle. For example, skylark, lapwing, yellow wagtail and snipe are often found in newly planted, cutback and harvested SRC. Species of high conservation value such as bullfinch, reed bunting and song thrush have been noted to regularly hold territories in SRC during the breeding season.

Headlands and rides provide further habitat for a wide range of plants and animals, for example, 14 species of butterfly have been recorded on SRC headlands.

British Biogen confirm this view13 as illustrated by the following extracts:

SRC has greater potential to encourage wildlife diversity than any other crop currently grown by UK farmers.

SRC has been shown to attract a wide range of woodland and other birds. In spring, newly cut SRC is used by skylarks, pipits and wagtails. Young coppice growth attracts migrant warbler species as well as reed buntings, while third or fourth year SRC is preferred by other resident species such as thrushes, tits and finches.

Other reports14 15 conclude:

12 Arable Energy Coppice - A review of published R&D and discussion of the potential for widespread production on surplus agricultural land in the UK ADAS, October 1995 13 Good Practice Guidelines Funded by the DTI through British Biogen, 1996 reprinted 1999 14 Enhancing the Conservation value of Short Rotation Biomass Coppice Phase 1 - The Identification of wildlife conservation potential, ETSU B/W5/00277/REP, 1994, Report produced by the Game Conservancy Trust 15 Integrated Crop Management of SRC Plantations to Maximise Crop Value, Wildlife Benefits and Other Added Value Opportunities, ETSU B/W2/00400/REP, 1998. Report produced by the Game Conservancy Trust

58


•

•

•

In general, SRC provides an attractive habitat for songbirds and pheasants and its introduction into farmed landscapes will be beneficial.

For both pheasants and songbirds there were clear advantages from planting willow as opposed to poplar.

The inclusion of grassy headland helps create attractive conditions for flowers and butterflies. The crop edge should provide low, dense and windproof cover.

Thus the regeneration of the poor grassland and scrub on the Markham North Tip will create new habitats for flora and fauna. Not all the existing grassland will be planted with coppice. Some will be retained as pasture while the area facing southwards will be planted with broad-leaved woodland. The combined areas are therefore expected to support a broad biodiversity and have the potential to be an interesting area for nature study.

59


12 SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The current derelict state of parts of the Markham site serves as a reminder of the colliery closure and creates a sense of abandonment of the area. Although motorcyclists use the site without authorisation, the area is otherwise more an eyesore than an amenity. The regenerated Markham Willows site has the capacity to allow the public access via pathways (newly planted areas of coppice will be fenced to prevent rabbits and deer from destroying the young crop) and so create a new amenity for walking and nature trails. These will be enhanced as the fences are removed once the crop has matured. Markham Willows will create some new jobs but not enough to have a significant impact on the area. However Markham Willows also has the important role of being the backdrop to the Markham Vale development, which will become a major employment area. The impact of Markham Willows on the Markham Vale site is therefore significant in terms of landscaping perspective, which will be a factor in attracting new businesses. This will be enhanced by the adoption of 'green' technologies that will be pioneered on the site to provide the basis for the environmental sustainability theme that Markham Vale will promote. This in turn will attract other 'green collar' businesses and organisations. By adopting this approach the social outcome of the Markham Willows and Markham Vale developments will be more than just new jobs. The site should become recognised as a prime example of brownfield site regeneration of which the local communities can be proud.

60


13 RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

The integration of green energy, waste re-use, soil development, risk management and the provision of viable economic activities provide an opportunity for Markham Willows to become a focal point for research as the development goes forward. However, funding for these activities is not yet secured. As this situation is resolved, it is suggested that Research Management is undertaken by exSite Research Ltd, with the assistance of the master-planning team members. However, as the research portfolio develops it research should become more locally managed, with the support of a leading university or research institute, who would provide a research leadership role, particularly for approaches to Research Councils... This research strategy which will be used to guide the development of funding proposals is built up from the following components:

• Research aims and objectives for Markham Willows • General approach to research at Markham Willows • Benchmarking studies • Studies to maximise benefits • Fundamental research topic suggestions • Research funding opportunities • Procedures for working with external research suggestions • Research management (overall) • Research strategy contacts • Linkage of the Markham Willows Research Strategy to EC and national

environmental policy and research programmes Bench marking studies form the core of the Markham Willows project research needs. The basic question that benchmarking studies will be answering is as follows- Is Markham Willows an effective strategy for restoration and can it be replicated? These studies will encompass: • providing data for the substantiation of risk management/remediation performance • providing essential site monitoring data required by planning and regulatory authorities • an annual report on the impact of Markham Willows as a sustainable development

project with environmental, resource use, social and economic elements Research management over the 10 years envisaged programme duration will encompass: • Interpretation of findings for verification (or otherwise) of the Markham Willows activities • The central collation and interpretation of the Markham Willows project information • Preparation of an annual report on the impact of Markham Willows as a sustainable

development project, also to include regulatory and planning compliance information • Provision of a data management system for the Markham Willows Research Community. Research will address the main components of the Markham Willows project: • Waste management • SRC production and fuel quality • Soil formation • Risk management • Economic performance • Social (community) benefits • Added environmental benefits

61


• The performance of Markham Willows as an exemplar at a national and international level.

These findings of these components will be evaluated in a holistic sense across the whole initiative to produce the annual reports mentioned earlier. While SRC is the main thrust of site management, it will in fact be planted in a mosaic of other land uses: “natural” woodland and grazed grassland. Hence research efforts should examine the impact of three types of vegetation on risk management. For benchmarking the project, a series of “Key Performance Indicators”, KPIs, have been agreed by the master-planning team as the yardstick against which success can be measured. For each a benchmark has been suggested (see Research Opportunities, Annex 4). Other criteria have been agreed as being “useful to monitor”, but for which a KPI cannot yet be set. Research findings from Markham Willows will firstly establish whether benchmarks have been met and findings from monitoring studies may be used to establish KPIs for criteria where they do not yet exist.

62


14 EXEMPLAR PROJECT

An aim of the Markham Willows project is to demonstrate a new sustainable approach to the remediation and regeneration of brownfield sites. The project will demonstrate that a brownfield site can be regenerated to become a significant local and regional resource. Markham Willows should be seen as a backdrop to the Markham Vale business park development and as such its recognition as a large pioneering regeneration scheme will help to attract investment and new business into the area. The development will be further boosted by the creation of the new M1 motorway junction 29a adjacent to the site. Groundwork Cresswell are closely associated with the social and environmental aspects of the Markham Willows project and complements their bids for EU funding through the East Midlands Development Agency (EMDA) and the Government Office East Midlands (GOEM). The project 'Waste-2-Resources' will seek to provide companies with opportunities to trade their waste resources and will develop a database of waste material availability. The Markham Willows Environmental Enterprise cluster will consist of a group of integrated enterprises that support the development of the Markham Willows and Markham Vale projects and will potentially include the development of enterprises with the following remits. •

•

• •

•

•

Recycling of packaging and other waste produced by on-site industries that are attracted to locate at Markham Vale. Management of the sites as a single unit to provide a good quality environment, amenity access opportunities and tourism potential. Management of the coppice woodland as a crop to produce sustainable fuel. Management of the green waste composting entity as a sustainable "disposal" route for municipal and commercial green waste and to provide the necessary compost material to support the growing of the short rotation coppice. Added value companies that utilise the green waste and coppice material as a feedstock such as woodland crafts manufacturers, charcoal burners, carbon black manufacturers, compost sales companies etc. An enterprise that utilises land fill gas from the adjacent Viridor site and/or mine gas to power a district heating scheme at the nearby village of Poolsbrook.

The project will seek to develop both a physical cluster at the Markham Willows site as well as a virtual cluster of similar enterprises through a dedicated web site linked to the Markham Innovation Centre and the synergistic Groundwork Cresswell Waste-2-Resources project. The exemplary nature of the project has led to it being included as a case study in the latest report from the Sustainable Development Commission16.

16 Mainstreaming sustainable regeneration: a call to action, Sustainable Development Commission, December 2003, www.sd-commission.gov.uk

63


15 BENCHMARKING

While the majority of individual components of the Markham Willows project are reliable and demonstrated technologies and management approaches, their integration is new. A key part of the future work on Markham Willows is therefore devoted to 'proof of concept' studies: i.e. does the integrated project succeed as it was planned to. Therefore Markham Willows masterplanning includes developing a conceptual model against which the performance of the development and its individual components can be assessed. The model provides a framework for reporting, information management and further research and development. The masterplan includes two activities related to proof of concept:

• Information management (see Chapter 17) o Development of an approach to storing information for proof of concept o Developing an overall model of the types of proof of concept information o Initial (masterplanning) Information management system o Agreeing an approach for validating and verifying findings (quality assurance

and control) • Study management

o Identification of performance indicators and benchmarking o Review of initial Markham Willows models and their verification plans o Development of an information system for future Markham Willows projects o Proposed approach to providing proof of concept for presentation at a

Markham Willows Workshop o Revised verification, research and information management plan for future

Markham Willows work The “technical core” objectives of the Markham Willows project will be the regeneration of despoiled, ex-colliery land through the utilisation of biological processes associated with Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) and the concomitant build up of organic materials to form soils and by doing so stabilise and contain contaminants, rendering them less harmful. As part of the core objectives the coppice material is to be utilised as feedstock fuel for biomass-energy boilers that will provide heat to a number of industries at the proposed Markham Vale industrial park. The Markham Willows project now form a vital part of the sustainable regeneration of the Markham area, and will have an impact on the North Derbyshire/North Nottinghamshire sub region and has the potential to become recognised as international exemplar of environment-led regeneration and Sustainable Development of major significance. The predominant Sustainable Development outputs that can be forecast for the project are related to both the technical core objectives, and the wider social and economic impacts that can be anticipated and are linked to the following issues that the project will deal with. Hence, the broad questions Proof of Concept needs to address is as follows: Is Markham Willows an effective strategy for restoration of the Northern Tip at Markham Colliery and can it be replicated? This can be broken down into the fundamental questions:

• Does it work • Is it sustainable (which encompasses is it cost-effective, environmentally benign,

resource efficient and beneficial to society).

64


Consequently, the aims of proof of concept studies for Markham Willows must be to: • provide data for the substantiation of risk management/remediation performance • provide essential site monitoring data required by planning and regulatory authorities • report on the impact of Markham Willows as a sustainable development project with

environmental, resource use, social and economic elements The Markham research project has an envisaged duration of 10 years. The scope of Proof of Concept studies over this time is likely to encompass

• The maintenance of monitoring systems established on the site • The central collation and interpretation of the Markham Willows project data, both

from continuous monitoring activities and specific studies • Preparation of an annual report on the impact of Markham Willows as a sustainable

development project, also to include regulatory and planning compliance information • Possibly link an extract of the data management system to the web site for use by

authorised research groups in the UK and overseas (it is unlikely that many sites in the world will provide this volume of data on sustainable site management).

Demonstrating proof of concept addresses the questions “does it work” and “is it sustainable” to the different functional units in the Markham Willows approach:

• Risk management – the risk management performance of the combined organic matter return/SRC land use

• Waste management - the recycling and re-use functionality of Markham Willows. • Added-value – the impact of the land use of local ecology and conservation • Economic performance – the local and regional economic performance (benefits) and

significance of Markham Willows as a regeneration package • Exemplar – the effectiveness of the promotion of this Derbyshire initiative at regional

national and local levels • Community value – how the local community feels about and values Markham

Willows and its social benefits. How each of these functional units will be assessed and verified has been called a “conceptual model” in the masterplanning. The types of information that will be provided will be diverse, for example:

• Regular monitoring data, for example from groundwater monitoring • Findings from questionnaires and surveys • Findings from specific research and development/proof of concept studies (which

may be core projects or independent projects taking place on Markham Willows) • Economic and technical data from activities such as composting, SRC harvesting and

cultivation The information management required will need the following fundamentals:

• Central archiving of project information • A presumption of free access to information unless there are pressing reasons why

this should be otherwise • As far as possible standard reporting and data presentation formats.

For each functional unit benchmarks or “Key Performance Indicators” (KPIs) have been developed by the Markham Willows team to set out what should be measurable goals for the Markham Willows project. The team have also identified key parameters which should be monitored, but for which it is not possible to set a benchmark at this point time. Experience at Markham Willows should allow benchmarks to be set for many of these parameters for future projects. These KPIs and parameters for monitoring are set out in Table 16.

65


The KPIs fall into three types: • Process/science related – e.g. fate of compounds • Operational (e.g. ease of management) • Economic

One approach to economic performance indicators would be on the basis of a comparison of costs and benefits with (a) doing nothing (b) an alternative restoration strategy. It might also be useful to elaborate quantitative targets/indicators, such as:

• The cost of restoration £/ha compared to normal restoration at £15k/ha according to the B9 report Biomass Integration with Landfill

• The carbon trading value per tonne of carbon saved. Direct comparisons possible with other measures.

• Jobs created per £ invested etc Not all features that we would like to set key performance indicators for are capable of having targets set for them at this stage in the project life cycle. Therefore this section sets out two tables:

• Key Performance Indicators • Monitoring – attributes which should be monitored, and as further information

becomes available may be capable of target setting.

66


67


Table 16 - Key Performance Indicators Proof of Concept

KPI Comments

Waste Re-use 1. Diversion of green waste from landfill

The target is to maximise diversion by maximising the throughput of the facility (as measured by weighbridge), and hence maximising the contribution of this facility to the relevant Best Value Performance Indicator. It is not possible to set a fixed target at this stage as green waste deliveries have yet to be agreed. Data would be reported on an annual basis, however the target date would be 2006, based on the likely time to opening a composting facility

2. Compost rejection levels

Minimise loss of green waste as reject level, this is affected both by operations and the nature of the waste delivered. A target would therefore need to be decided in collaboration with the waste collection authorities

3. Conversion of coal spoil surface to SRC cultivated soil - 6000 m3/ha

The target is for the conversion of 60 ha of spoil heap surface by 2010 (assuming first planting in 2004), the volume of soil spread on the surface that is expected to be upgraded is 30 cm time 60 ha, equals 180,000 m3.

4. Compost quality Compliance of compost for sale with BSI PAS 100 SRC Production

5. Crop establishment: 95% Up to 5% does not survive to end of first growing season. A small amount of die-back is normal and does not significantly influence yields.

6. Crop growth: 95%>1m Can probably only be estimated visually but this should be sufficient. 7. Yield: >5 odt/ha Yield is measured in dry weight expressed as oven dried tonnes (odt). The

yield is an annual figure based on the whole SRC crop area. Thus while only one third of the crop, about 20 ha, may yield 300 odt, this is defined as 300/60 = 5 odt/ha.

8. Fuel Composition: lower levels of heavy metals than typical UK coal

This benchmark requires further development. Only cadmium levels seem to be higher in willow than typical coal but there is no benchmark for typical coal or typical willow.

Soil Development

There are not any meaningful accepted targets that we can use as benchmarks.

Risk Management

9. Meeting regulatory needs Compliance with risk assessment based site specific targets, as set out in (section 4). · Surface (top soil) contaminant concentrations

68


· Physical containment measure performance · Controlled water contaminant loadings · Compliance of buildings and operations with the need to avoid risks

from mine gas and combustible materials in mine spoil. Economic Model

10. Competitive with conventional restoration on nett cost basis

Nett costs accounts for income to site from restoration processes. Restoration costs are very site specific but for any given site SRC establishment as proposed is regarded as being a significantly lower cost than establishment and management of conventional woodland.

11. Positive contribution to local economy

Majority of revenue recycled locally. Added value. May be DCC method for this KPI but method called BIOSEM is nationally recognised.

12. Waste management is competitive with conventional methods

Gate fee set to locally available prices to secure waste throughput (to be elaborated in the Groundwork Creswell Business Plan)

13. Energy is competitive with conventional sources

Refers to price per unit of wood heat (p/kWh) compared to price of heat from conventional fossil fuel sources. This benchmark refers to the charge to the consumer. Wood heat price must be reasonably competitive to ensure demand

Social Aspects 14. New jobs KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work 15. New businesses KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work 16. Training resource KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work 17. Educational resource KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work 18. Local amenity KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work 19. Reintegration of site into local

landscape KPI to be set by Groundwork Creswell work

Environmental Aspects

20. Biodiversity KPI to be considered by Groundwork Creswell

Exemplar Aspects

21. Replication KPI met when project replicated

22. Profile Public and stakeholder awareness 23. Spin-off opportunities e.g. new businesses, tenancy, attracting co-funding 24. Recognition e.g. winning an award for the Markham Willows scheme 25. Research outputs number of peer reviewed publications

69

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Table 17 - Monitoring Scheme Proof of Concept Monitoring Waste Re-use 1. Tonnage lost by degradation during composting

2. Tonnage used on Markham Willows 3. Tonnage used outside Markham Willows 4. Nature of non Markham Willows Applications 5. Compost processing records (temperature profiles in particular) 6. Cost intensity (costs per tonne of production).

SRC Production 7. Yield versus time (i.e. years of establishment) 8. Wood composition over time (including content of trace elements

and other possible compounds of concern ) Soil development 9. Soil organic matter content

10. Soil depth 11. Soil condition 12. Soil structure 13. Soil chemical properties, heavy metals, FeS, nitrates, dioxins etc,

redox potential, pH 14. Root growth 15. Soil biological composition 16. Soil fauna

Risk Management 17. Groundwater and controlled water composition 18. Soil composition (chemical) 19. Subsurface conditions (redox, pH) 20. Hydrogeological model of Markham Willows activities / site 21. Biological risks from site and waste operations (pathogens,

allergens) Economic Model 22. Land value

Carbon sequestration economic value 23. Waste and emissions trading value

Social Aspects 24. To be confirmed by Groundwork Creswell Environmental Aspects

25. Visual appearance 26. Life cycle inventory 27. CO2 balance 28. waste balance 29. ecological assessments

Exemplar Aspects 30. Publications 31. Conference papers 32. Press reports and media interest (local, national, international)

70

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning 16 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

The information management recommendations for the masterplan work grew from the activity: “proof of concept management”. This comprised three activities:

• Developing an overall model of the types of proof of concept information • Initial (Master-planning) Information management system • Agreeing an approach for validating and verifying findings (quality

assurance and control). However, there is a much wider range of information that has been generated and will be generated by the Markham Willows project. Table 18 sets out the information management “model” for Markham Willows. The goals of information management are to:

• make more effective use of our time as environmental scientists • preserve the value of the data for future sale and cost recovery • optimise information use

Advances in information technology software (such as databases, Internet connectivity, geographical information systems) have enabled considerable progress in environmental data management techniques. A preliminary information management system has been set up at www.r3-environmental.net/mw based on the categories in Table 18. Ultimately this will be a central, password protected, archive of project documents, which can also serve web development work for Markham Willows being undertaken by Groundwork Creswell. There may be value in (a) developing a Markham Willows information resource to support its role as an exemplar project, and (b) in the medium term, developing a more formal information management system, linked to GIS. However, this is as yet an unfunded proposal. External peer review is likely to be the most effective approach for validating and verifying findings. There are several routes by which this might be achieved:

• Expanding the role of the research advisory group suggested in the research strategy (Annex 5) so that it becomes an external advisory group for the Markham Willows project overall

• The response to applications for funding, e.g. Research Council proposals • Submissions to peer reviewed journals.

In the medium term we suggest that these peer review activities are co-ordinated by a Markham Willows research and information manager, who also be the secretary for the external advisory group. Table 18- Markham Willows Information Categories Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5

71

http://www.r3-environmental.net/mw

http://www.r3-environmental.net/mw

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Data KPIs Waste Re-use Diversion from landfill

Proportion of LA waste arising recycled

Conversion of coal spoil to soil Compost composition SRC Production Crop establishment Crop growth Yield Wood fuel Composition Soil development Depth Organic matter content

Risk Management

Pollutant linkages (subdivide on basis of SCM)

Economics Restoration nett cost calculations

Contribution to local economy Energy supply costs Social New businesses Educational use Landscape appraisals Environmental Biodiversity Exemplar Replication Profile Spin-offs Recognition Research outputs

Monitored - not KPI Waste Re-use Degradation mass loss

Use on MW Use outside MW BVP data SRC Production Foliar composition Soil development Physical properties

Soil chemical properties by depth redox

pH Root growth Soil biological properties

Risk Management Fate of compound

Groundwater composition Soil composition (chemical)

Biological risks (pathogens, allergens)

Economics Land value Carbon sequestration value

Waste and emissions trading value

Social To be defined Environmental Visual amenity Life cycle inventory data CO2

waste production

eco-toxocity

72

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning other Exemplar Publications Conference Papers External Publications

Project Reports Open

Client restricted Conferences Papers Slide sets

Trade journal articles

Media Peer reviewed Internal documents

Progress Reports Finals

Drafting work

Quarterly Reports Finals

Drafting work

Meeting Reports Finals

Drafting work Publications Drafting work Other Photo gallery Waste Re-use

SRC Production

Soil development

Risk Management

Economics Social Environmental Exemplar Contact base

Separately managed

73

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning 17 PROMOTION

The Markham Willows project featured at the following Promotion Events: • IFAT Exhibition, Munich – exhibitors with EMDA and DCC • English Partnerships Brown to Green conference, the Earth Centre - presentation • Urban Summit badged event, Loughborough University - workshop • Environment 2002 Conference and Exhibition, London – web showcase • Consoil, Ghent, “The practical use of Short Rotation Coppice in land restoration”

– paper and presentation • Consoil Ghent, “Planning the sustainable regeneration of a UK megasite” – paper

and presentation • NICOLE workshop, Barcelona, “Sustainable development on post-industrial and

redundant military land” - presentation • Geological Society meeting, Edinburgh - presentation • Meeting with the British Trust for Conservation Volunteers - presentation • Site visit by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister – presentation • Inclusion in the Sustainable Development Commissions database of sustainable

projects Promotion results: • Inclusion as a case study in the Sustainable Development Commission’s report

“Mainstreaming sustainable regeneration, a call to action” December 2003 • Acknowledgement by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that the approach

being taken at Markham epitomises the creativity and quality of project that can contribute significantly to the UK’s emerging Comprehensive National Brownfield Strategy

Peer-reviewed publications: • Land Contamination and Reclamation, Volume 11: Part Three, 2003 – “The

Practical Use of Short Rotation Coppice in Land Restoration. Mark Paulson, Paul Bardos, Joop Harmesen, Julian Wilczek, Malcolm Barton, David Edwards.

Ongoing promotion: • Publicising the full integration of the Markham Willows project with the Markham

Vale Megasite development to consume waste, manage contamination, supply energy, create amenity land, provide a long-term research and educational asset and support local businesses.

• Acceptance of EURODEMO within the EU 6th Framework programme starting in summer 2004 and lasting three years This Co-ordination action will enable a network of demonstration sites and programmes to collaborate effectively and to synchronise their activities within the EU’s Environmental Technologies Action Plan. One of the demonstration sites will be Markham Willows.

• Preparation of an Interreg proposal for submission by DCC to create an international network of Environmental Technology Innovation Centres. One such

74


centre is being constructed adjacent to the Markham Willows site, due for completion in 2004.

• Preparation of an Interreg proposal in 2004 to replicate Markham Willows in areas that are climatically diverse. This will include Northern, Southern, Western and Eastern Europe.

75

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning 18 CONCLUSIONS

1. SRC is a technically feasible and cost effective means of restoring the North Tip that will avoid expensive ongoing maintenance costs. The willow varieties planned for the site grow quickly to produce green woodland and so send outs a strong visible signal that the site is being restored and regenerated.

2. There is only a narrow 'time window' for preparing the first planting plot and

establishing the SRC. If this is missed, the first planting would have to be delayed by a year.

3. A risk remediation plan has been produced but will be updated following further

site investigation. 4. Compost production using the simple windrow method could be self-financing

after all capital costs are granted at a level of 6,000 tonnes of green waste per year but a higher tonnage of about 10,000 tonnes is required to ensure a robust commercial operation.

5. A wood heat operation based on the local supply of wood fuel and ten wood

fuelled boilers and the sale of wood heat to the customers has the potential to generate a significant income to the site.

6. Wood fuel produced from the Markham Willows site should be fully acceptable as

a fuel in terms of its trace elements contents and absorption of any dioxins from the site.

7. The operation of the Markham Willows site will create new jobs and income. 8. SRC, together with some retained grassland and new broadleaved woodland will

provide a broad range of habitats that will enhance the biodiversity of the site and create interest for educational and research purposes.

9. Markham Willows is pioneering a new concept in brownfield regeneration that

creates new opportunities for research. 10. The Markham Willows project has created significant interest in the concept of a

holistic and sustainable approach to brownfield regeneration and the possibility for replication on other sites.

76

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning 19 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The masterplanning phase has now been completed. The use of SRC as a

means of long-term restoration of the site has been accepted as a cost-effective and viable solution. The timetable for the establishment of the SRC is controlled by nature as the cuttings must be planted in the dormant season, early spring at the latest. Missing the planting 'window' would delay the remediation for a year. The recommendation is therefore to ensure that the 'critical path' timetable for preparation and planting is followed. However, the option is available to bring forward the planting programme by increasing the size of the phased planting plots by using three planting plots rather than four.

2. The associated technologies of compost production, wood fuel production and

wood heat sales can make a positive financial contribution to Markham Willows if they are carried out in sufficient scale. In order to be able to formulate business plans for these operations it will be important to establish the basis for their ownership and operation. Options include:

i. Operations are fully funded by DCC to operate self-sufficiently and to

feed back any surpluses into the Markham Willows site for research and improvement of public amenity.

ii. Capital for establishment of one or both of the operations is provided by DCC but ownership is integrated within the Markham Vale development, possibly as part of the provision of site services.

iii. Operations are fully funded by DCC during their establishment period (perhaps 2 years) and are then transferred to the private sector through a bidding process. DCC should be able to at least recoup the value of the assets at that time and if the operations are indicating good prospects then some goodwill value should also be sold.

iv. The operations start as private sector enterprises. This would again require some form of bidding process but would be unlikely to be attractive to the private sector unless some clear reassurances and incentives were offered. Reassurances could include green waste volumes and price structures, guaranteed numbers of boilers etc.

3. We suggest that option ii above may be the most effective way to proceed i.e.

capital funding is provided by DCC but responsibility for management and ongoing financial control is taken by the Markham Vale management operation. This option does not rule out the later transfer of either the compost or wood heat operations to the private sector at a later date.

4. The viability of a green waste compost production facility is dependent upon the

long term availability of green waste at sufficient quantity and negotiated gate fee. We recommend that a green waste supply of about 10,000 tonnes per year be secured for a ten year period before investing in a new compost production facility. As shown in the economic appraisal a lower volume can be viable if all capital is fully granted and other factors are favourable. However even under these most favourable conditions we recommend that secured green waste quantities should exceed 6,000 tonnes per year.

77

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning 5. There are clear cost benefits of integrating the compost production with the wood

fuel production operations. Integration allows some overheads and equipment to be shared and for operatives to work flexibly within the two operations for their maximum deployment and efficient working. We therefore recommend that these two operations be considered as an integrated unit where possible.

6. Derbyshire County Council need to designate a manager for the implementation

of risk management activities across Markham Willows. This individual could also be responsible for the co-ordination of SRC, wood heat and composting activities.

7. Derbyshire County Council need to proceed with the commission of the

development of SSAC and further site investigation work to validate these preliminary findings. Further plantings may be delineated on the basis of topsoil contaminant concentrations.

8. The final risk management approach for Markham Willows needs to be put out for

consultation by external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency. 9. Following agreements with the regulator and other stakeholders, an outline


10. Procurement should be linked to the development of a detailed integrated

implementation plan for the remediation of the Markham Willows site. The detailed integration plan needs to be drawn up in consultation with external stakeholders, in particular the Environment Agency.

11. The preparation of the ground for willow planting, the planting process, cutback,

maintenance and harvesting are all specialist techniques that require experienced management. We suggest that the site contractor appointed by Derbyshire County Council could carry out the work. The site contractor could then appoint a specialist subcontractor. Alternatively DCC may want to appoint a specialist contractor directly for the work. Whatever arrangements are put in place we suggest that the work be independently checked to ensure that the specification is adhered to.

12. The Research Strategy encompasses the verification studies for the Markham

Willows remediation. Derbyshire County Council should confirm that it will undertake these. In the immediate future it is recommended that Research Management is undertaken by exSite Research Ltd, with the assistance of the master-planning team members. However, we recommend that research should be implemented with local management, with the support of a leading university of research institute, who would provide a research leadership role, particularly for approaches to Research Councils...

13. The first building to be erected at Markham Vale, the Environmental Technology

Centre will have a wood fuelled boiler. This will send a strong signal to both visitors and new businesses that Markham Vale is both a far-sighted business centre development and a showcase for environmental technology. For the wood heat operation to be viable a cluster of about ten wood fuelled boilers is required. We recommend that wood fuelled boilers be promoted as an alternative to fossil

78


fuels within Markham Vale, DCC buildings and new buildings and developments supported by EMDA. Not only would such promotion of wood heating be in keeping with Local Agenda 21, but also it would provide the necessary foundations for a new local renewable energy industry

14. The Markham Willows scheme represents a sustainable solution for brownfield

site regeneration that could be replicated nationally and internationally. There is much to be learned from the site during its remediation phase and afterwards as the SRC matures and the process of phytostabilisation occurs. There are important opportunities for research at the site. We suggest that DCC, EMDA and shanks.first give due consideration to supporting future research on the site. One of the benefits of good research will be good publicity, which in turn will attract forward-thinking companies and organisations to locate at Markham Vale.

15. Markham Willows and Markham Vale provide an opportunity to demonstrate

other renewable energy and low carbon technologies including for example anaerobic digestion of waste to produce biogas and the installation of wind turbines. We suggest that a first step would be to carry out a feasibility study to assess the viability of deploying such technologies at the site.

79

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning APPENDICES

80

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning APPENDIX 1

Planning for Embedded Generation for Markham Willows and Markham Vale

The development of Markham Vale and Markham Willows provides a great opportunity for a world class business zone in terms of its environmental and energy sustainability. Not only can the site become sustainable in terms of heating for buildings and processes but there are also several opportunities for generating 'green' electricity at the site making it fully sustainable in energy terms and also capable of green power export. The Masterplanning for Markham Willows is focusing on biomass production from coppice as part of the site remediation strategy. Organic recycled resources from Markham Vale and imported from surrounding areas will not only contribute to the soil conditioning at Markham Willows but will provide in income from the 'gate fee' for materials that would otherwise have been dumped in landfill. Anaerobic digestion (AD) of organic wastes can produce 'biofibre' (compost materials) and 'biogas' (mainly methane). Biogas can be used for co-generation, also known as combined heat and power (CHP). The former colliery is likely to have a mine gas resource (mainly methane). If this is a significant resource then it could be used together with the biogas with the advantages of a - dual sourcing for security of supply and b - larger gas volumes allowing larger scale and more economical CHP. There are a number of potential benefits from CHP over a heat only scheme. Power is more expensive than heat and most buildings use power all the year round – so the local benefits are more valuable. Power from a CHP would probably be Climate Change Levy exempt, some of the power may be eligible for the renewables obligation and the investment in the scheme may be eligible for an Enhanced Capital Allowance. Markham Vale is situated at the heart of England and on its main artery, the M1. What better place to demonstrate 21st century joined-up thinking on sustainable development! With the M1 curving around the coal spoil heap, Markham Willows occupies a very prominent position. We believe that this offers a further opportunity to demonstrate renewable energy in a cost-effective way. A large wind turbine sited at the top of the Markham Willows will act as a beacon to the site and constant reminder of the vision behind the development. It will also catch the wind! It might even become known as the Angel of the Midlands! It would certainly be at least as prominent as the 'Angel of the North' but would also be functional and effective - art and technology in harmony. We believe that Markham Vale and Markham Willows are strongly synergic but that a broader holistic approach to the total energy and environmental aspects of the developments is needed. It makes good sense to look at heat and power generation at the same time and to maximise the potential of the sites assets. We suggest that the following extra work is required; • Feasibility of AD/biogas, mine gas, and CHP for the development • Feasibility of a large wind turbine for Markham Willows • Integration of these technologies into the site • Development of a business venture to take forward the energy strategy

81

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Ideally these activities could run in parallel with the Masterplanning but this is not essential. What is important is to ensure that principles are established early so that the optimal solutions for the site can be achieved. AEA Technology Environment is keen to explore the full potential for the site with exSite and the Markham Willows development team and stakeholders.

82

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning APPENDIX 2 Markham Willows – the potential benefit of an on-site anaerobic digestion (AD) plant

Background Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a biological process whereby organic material is converted into methane that can be used to either displace natural gas, or can be burnt in a gas engine for electricity generation (and possibly CHP). This process is flexible, and a wide range of wastes can be processed in this way. While AD is ideally suited to wetter waste streams, dry organic wastes can also be digested. These dry organic wastes could include cardboard and paper packaging materials from Markham Vale, or cardboard rejects post-composting (some local green wastes are collected with cardboard included). These materials can be prepared for AD by a process based on sonication. In addition to methane, AD also produces a fibre component, and a nutrient rich liquid stream that can either be reused in the process or taken off as an organic fertiliser. The fibre produced by the process can be used for compost production, where it can give a far higher valued product compared with green waste compost. Because of the ‘in-vessel’ nature of the AD process, and the availability of heat for feedstock/digestate thermal treatment, AD has the potential to utilise high value food wastes that can no longer be accepted into the green waste stream. Given that waste composting is likely to be a central part of the Markham Willows project, it appears sensible to consider the potential role of AD to add value to the Markham Vale development as an integrated part of the Markham Willows activity. AD on a large scale has the potential to contribute to the sustainability and commercial viability of Markham Vale. A further synergy with the Markham Willows SRC is that production on non-agricultural land can be benefited using compost with potential kitchen waste derived content. Materials could also be used for restoration of the adjacent landfill site. These non-agricultural applications offer potential for beneficial re-use of animal derived products as well, which may command a higher gate fee. Benefits to the Markham Vale project • Increased sustainability delivered by turning waste into a feedstock for energy

production. • Increased range of services and more income to the site leading to more jobs and

local wealth creation. • An innovative approach to waste management • Lower building overhead costs for occupants of units located on the Markham

Vale site from lower waste disposal and energy supply costs. • Higher potential income from compost production. • Better willow yields for Markham Willows from the application of the nutrient rich

water produced by the process (perhaps combined irrigation using grey and storm water collected from Markham Vale).

83

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning How might AD be integrated into the Markham project? 1. By co-treating on-site sewage with packaging and cardboard waste, and

kitchen waste digestion. In this option the main sewer to the Markham site is not extended into the development site. Cardboard and packaging wastes, along with green wastes that contain kitchen wastes are directed to an AD plant and co-digested with the sewage from Markham Vale.

2. Through development of a bespoke AD plant excluding Markham Vale

sewage. This option envisages a plant designed to take cardboard, packaging MSW derived kitchen green wastes, possibly combined with specific animal by product waste streams.

Both plant types would be designed to meet current and proposed future waste management legislation in terms of the waste handling and the subsequent processing of the fibre produced. The electricity produced would compliment the wood heat production and would enable energy sustainability for the Markham site. The approach to organic waste management overall could include: • Dirty waste handling (from an animal by product perspective) • Anaerobic digestion (targeted for problem wastes from a composting perspective,

and also where a first phase of treatment is required under animal by product regulations)

• Clean waste handling (outputs from AD, green waste not containing kitchen wastes)

• Integrated composting: combinations of AD fibre and green waste on a bespoke basis depending on whether products are required for SRC, landfill restoration or external sale)

• Product refining (rejects: cardboard goes to AD, woody oversize to mulch or as wood fuel)

How can we take this forward? The package of ideas presented here is not planned into the current range of activities being undertaken as part of the Markham Willows project. For this reason, a separate development plan must be developed and funded.

84

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning APPENDIX 3 Topsoil Analyses from a 1999 Survey of the North Tip (in mg.kg-1)

85


Topsoil Analyses from a Survey of the North Tip 1999 in mg.kg-1

Sample numbers

Topsoil? Planting Area pH As B Cd Cr (total) CN (total) Cu Pb Hg Ni Se Zn PAH (screen) Phenol index

20 n/a 30 200 n/a n/a 450 15 75 260 n/a

pH 5 to < 5.5 3 80 200 1 50 200

pH 5.5 to < 6 3 100 200 1 60 200

pH 6 to <7 3 135 200 1 75 200

pH > 7 3 200 200 1 110 300

Analysis No

W1 1 to 5 Yes 5.7 21 <0.5 <1 28 <1 35 80 <0.5 53 0.64 131 12 1

W2 6 to 10 Yes 5.8 13 <0.5 <1 25 <1 29 66 <0.5 34 0.56 107 <10 <0.5

W3 11 to 15 Yes 6.2 12 <0.5 <1 22 <1 33 55 <0.5 29 0.5 89 16 0.5

W4 16 to 20 Yes 4.7 21 <0.5 <1 22 <1 28 51 <0.5 25 0.49 77 14 <0.5

W5 21 to 25 Yes 4.5 28 <0.5 <1 23 <1 40 58 <0.5 27 0.67 86 16 <0.5

W6 26 to 30 Yes 5.2 14 <0.5 <1 23 <1 30 53 <0.5 30 0.5 106 <10 0.9

W7 31 to 35 Yes 5.9 11 <0.5 <1 24 <1 25 56 <0.5 27 0.47 102 <10 <0.5

W8 36 to 40 Yes 4.1 25 <0.5 <1 26 <1 43 64 <0.5 29 0.56 89 15 <0.5

W9 '41 to 45 Yes 7.7 9 <0.5 <1 24 <1 30 54 <0.5 24 0.51 100 <10 <0.5

W10 46 to 50 Yes 6.3 13 <0.5 <1 26 <1 30 61 <0.5 31 0.57 122 <10 <0.5

W11 51 to 55 Yes 6.6 8 <0.5 <1 25 <1 17 48 <0.5 19 0.32 98 <10 0.5

W12 56 to 60 Yes 5.1 13 <0.5 <1 29 <1 29 39 <0.5 47 0.51 134 <10 <0.5

W13 61 to 65 Yes 5.1 13 <0.5 <1 21 <1 34 56 <0.5 30 0.59 105 10 <0.5

W14 66 to 70 Partially, colliery spoil

4.9 17 <0.5 <1 19 <1 39 39 <0.5 26 0.48 73 17 <0.5


3.9 34 <0.5 <1 16 <1 32 36 <0.5 20 0.69 54 18 <0.5


5.3 15 <0.5 <1 23 <1 27 53 <0.5 20 0.49 89 10 <0.5


4.7 49 <0.5 <1 22 <1 34 34 <0.5 17 0.87 36 15 <0.5

W18 86 to 90 Yes 6.3 12 0.7 <1 30 <1 27 57 <0.5 37 0.58 90 <10 0.6

W19 91 to 95 Yes 5.4 17 <0.5 <1 31 <1 36 73 <0.5 39 0.76 124 <10 1.9

W20 96 to 100 Yes 6.9 13 1.5 <1 26 <1 43 59 <0.5 28 0.5 99 188 58.2

Mean 5.515 17.9 not calc not calc 24.25 not calc 32.05 54.6 not calc 29.6 0.563 95.55 not calc not calc

0.7765 7.06 not calc not calc 2.775 not calc 4.855 8.44 not calc 6.42 0.0866 17.695 not calc not calc

5.9378 22.21028 not calc not calc 25.84529 not calc 34.81989 59.72952 not calc 33.56199 0.615285 106.109 not calc not calc

5.0922 13.58972 not calc not calc 22.65471 not calc 29.28011 49.47048 not calc 25.63801 0.510715 84.99099 not calc not calcUpper 95% Confidence Limit

SGV : Residential without plant uptake

Proposed soil metal limits after application of sewage sludge in the 2002 revision of the Sludge (Use in Agriculture) Regulations 1989

Average deviation

Upper 95% Confidence Limit

86


87

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning APPENDIX 4 Leaf and Stem Sample Analyses Samples of leaf and stem were taken on 29 September 2003 from the two field trial plots known as Hilltop and Bridge. It should be noted that samples were taken following a long dry spell. However the Bridge plot is much lower than the Hilltop plot and therefore moisture levels were likely to be higher there. Two of the varieties of willow, Sven and Stott were sampled and also alder. These were taken from trees in their second year of growth. Samples taken were those at 400 tonnes per hectare of sewage sludge and no sewage sludge. This sample survey was intended to identify any possible trends. However it is not an in-depth and comprehensive survey. The results are summarised below. All concentrations are measured in mg/kg. Arsenic All leaf and stem samples were <9.0 mg/kg the detection limit. Cadmium Leaf No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven 1.0 3.5 <0.60 6.4 Stott 1.5 4.0 0.9 2.3 alder <0.60 <0.60 Stem No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven <0.60 1.3 <0.60 2.1 Stott <0.60 1.8 <0.60 1.2 alder <0.60 <0.60

Conclusions: 1. Leaf samples contain more cadmium than stem samples, about double. 2. The willow leaf samples from Hilltop contained more cadmium than the alder from

the same plot. No alder samples were available from Bridge. 3. The Bridge plot samples contained significantly more cadmium than the Hilltop

samples. 4. The sewage sludge had the effect of slightly increasing cadmium levels in Sven

but decreasing cadmium levels in Stott. However the effect is slight and the conclusion may not be robust.

Chromium All leaf and stem samples were <3.0 mg/kg the detection limit. Copper

88

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Leaf No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven 8 19 9 11 Stott 8 12 13 10 alder 19 14

Stem No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha


Conclusions: 1. Leaf samples contain slightly more copper than stem samples. 2. The alder samples contain slightly more copper than the willow samples. 3. Most Bridge samples had a slightly higher level of copper than equivalent Hilltop

samples. 4. Sewage sludge had the effect of slightly increasing copper levels in most sample

types. Lead Leaf No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven 6 29 <4.0 <4.0 Stott <4.0 5 <4.0 <4.0 alder <4.0 <4.0 Stem No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 Stott <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 <4.0 alder <4.0 <4.0

Conclusions: 1. All stem samples were below the detection limit of 4.0 mg/kg. 2. Sven leaves from the zero sewage sludge application showed the highest lead

levels with Bridge significantly higher than Hilltop.

89

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Nickel Leaf No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven <6.0 32 <6.0 22 Stott <6.0 25 7 13 alder 37 16 Stem No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven <6.0 <6.0 <6.0 <6.0 Stott <6.0 <6.0 <6.0 <6.0 alder <6.0 <6.0

Conclusions: 1. Only some leaf samples had nickel levels above the detection limit of 6.0 mg/kg. 2. Alder levels were significantly higher for the Hilltop samples. 3. Bridge samples were higher than Hilltop samples. Zinc Leaf No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha

Sewage Sludge Hilltop Bridge Hilltop Bridge Sven 270 480 230 410 Stott 250 48 180 300 alder 110 110 Stem No Sewage

Sludge 400 t/ha


Conclusions: 1. Leaf samples generally contain higher zinc concentrations than stem samples. 2. Bridge samples generally contained higher levels of zinc than Hilltop samples. 3. Willow samples contained more zinc than equivalent alder samples. 4. Sewage sludge did not have any clear influence on zinc levels. Mercury All samples were at or below the detection limit of 0.020 mg/kg for mercury. Molybdenum All samples were below the detection limit for molybdenum of <2.0 mg/kg.

90

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning Other Elements Analysis was also carried out for sulphur, boron, calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus and potassium. These are not summarised here. Dioxins Dioxin analysis was carried out on two leaf/stem samples of Sven grown in a sewage sludge application rate of 200 t/ha. One sample was from Bridge and the other from Hilltop. The detection limit (method blank) is <0.5 ng/kg I-TE. The Bridge sample gave a result of 0.55 ng/kg I-TE. The Hilltop sample gave a result of <0.5 ng/kg I-TE i.e. below the detection level. While the levels detected appear to be low, the results should be interpreted independently by an expert in the field. Comparison with Coal Information has been obtained on trace elements in coal17 typically available for UK power stations. The concentrations of trace elements varies considerably for the following four coals: • Gascoigne Wood and Harworth from the UK • El Cerrejon from Columbia • Binungan from Indonesia Apparently there are no specific limits for trace elements in coal. For a crude comparison the range of heavy concentrations for the four coal types and the willow stem samples are compared below. All figures are in mg/kg. Element

Coal Examples Willow Stem Samples

Arsenic 1.2 - 43.4 <9.0 Cadmium 0.06 - 0.15 < 0.6 - 2.1 Chromium 9.7 - 28.1 <3.0 Copper 1.1 - 27.3 3 - 11 Lead 0.2 - 13.9 <4.0 Nickel 1.8 - 21.7 <6.0 Zinc 2.1 - 31.4 55 - 96 Mercury 0.02 - 0.23 <0.02 - 0.02 Molybdenum 0.2 - 5.75 < 2.0

This comparison shows that cadmium and zinc levels in the willow stem samples is higher than found in coal. The presence of zinc is not significant as it has relatively low toxicity. The cadmium levels are believed to be typical for wood fuels. Cadmium is volatile and hence is emitted on combustion. Other heavy metals are generally lower in the willow stem samples than found in the range of coal examples.

17 The Fate of trace elements in PF combustion systems, Report No. COAL R193, DTI/Pub URN 00/947, 2000

91


APPENDIX 5 Groundwork Cresswell Commentary The Markham Willows Project forms a vital part of the sustainable regeneration of not only the Markham area, but also a new identity for a major part of the North Derbyshire/North Nottinghamshire coalfields area, through its potential position as an internationally recognised exemplar of environment-led regeneration and sustainable development. In “A way with waste”, three key principles for sustainable waste management were recognised: The Best Practicable Environmental Option (BPEO) The waste hierarchy The proximity principle It is considered as being crucially important for the project to be developed in a way, which is consistent with these principles. It is widely accepted that composting of biodegradable waste materials represents the Best Practicable Environmental Option in most circumstances and, since the Markham Willows project will utilise compost materials derived from waste to achieve further environmental benefits, namely the treatment of contaminated land and the production of sustainable fuels, it is considered that the best environmental outcome will be achieved. In support of the proximity principle it is recommended that all possible efforts should be expended to ensure local sourcing of suitable biodegradable waste materials, irrespective of their source (given quality issues are met) and in an attempt to consider the waste hierarchy, the project partners have made an assessment of whether promotion of reduction-at-source strategies, such as home composting programmes, would not provide a more sustainable option. Groundwork Creswell is currently evaluating a Community Composting Business Plan to ensure integration into the forward planning for the cluster project and future development of Markham Willows. As well as the more obvious site-based, local, regional and national based sustainable development indicator’s (SDI’s) that the project could be measured by, there are several strands of UK and European policy that the Markham Willows project team could take into account in formulating individual SDI’s for the project. These will provide the project team with future direction for project management, consultation and information frameworks and systems to be better representative and integrated with what will increasingly become more recognised sustainable development “norms”. The Markham Willows project will have a positive impact on the area’s local authorities ability to achieve the landfill reduction targets set through the Landfill Directive, and they may even be able to trade permits to landfill as they may have surplus landfill capacity (and therefore unused credits) available to sell. Groundwork Creswell’s Sustainability Plan is currently being evaluated to integrate into planning for future development of the enterprise cluster, alongside Derbyshire County Council (DCC) and potential initiatives such as the “Innovation Centre”. The

92

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning project offers an alternative positive use for biodegradable waste, other than incineration and it is this particular issue that makes the project so important and provides the basis for the project’s exemplary status and its replicability elsewhere. The Markham Willows project partners are aware of this increasing desire (and obligation) on the part of government to provide information on environmental issues and that this will result in a requirement for publicly funded projects to also operate in a transparent manner and this need to be transparent. To gain the trust of local people it is therefore proposed that a positive campaign of openness (where this does not threaten Intellectual Property rights). Also, the project team have accepted the need to respond to government initiatives to make information more readily available through the use of new technology. For instance the Prime Minister has set a target to have all government services on-line by 2005 and through the work of the ‘E-envoy’, to develop new approaches to the utilisation of ICT to more closely integrate the work of the government to feedback mechanisms and to local decision-making. The Markham Willows project has therefore recognised that, if it is to have the impact on policy formulation that it deserves, it must become integrated into this ICT revolution and a clear strategy with this respect has been formulated and is being acted upon through the “Groundwork Creswell Markham Willows Environmental Enterprise Cluster Development” project with its associated website and will link to SME’s becoming involved in the cluster project during 2004. The UK government has stated that “Strong and informed community participation and high voter turnout are among the ‘vital signs’ of a healthy civic society - one in which the awareness, skills and enthusiasm of local people, voluntary bodies, and businesses all play their part in shaping change, and in which people in all sections of the community feel that their votes count”. - “The British Social Attitudes” survey, published in “Public Finance” on 21 January 2000. The government therefore accepts that Sustainable Development requires putting people at the centre of the debate as a means of combating social exclusion; however, recent trends as expressed by voter turnout suggest that on the whole in the UK people are becoming disillusioned with local decision-making, for instance “The British Social Attitudes” survey, showed that more than half of the population have little or no interest in local politics. The Markham Willows project partners have developed a framework for local involvement in decision-making that supports the desire for the project to be regarded as a true exemplar of Sustainable Development. Two examples of work in this area would be the Materials Exchange Feasibility Study and Business Plan, currently being evaluated and the Community Involvement Strategy, soon to be undertaken by Groundwork Creswell. The Markham Willows project should develop educational resources to inform and publicise the concept of the project, and in so doing make a contribution to the local knowledge base on Sustainable Development issues. To further this, Groundwork Creswell has undertaken a feasibility study to evaluate this issue, in the context of Markham Willows, to ensure it is integrated into future developments, and has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with a local SME to deliver business support and ICT training, to business and the community.

93

AEAT in Confidence Markham Willows Masterplanning The Markham Willows project can have a positive impact on Sustainable Development by proving the value of new land uses that can assist with farm diversification and by providing the opportunity to train local people in the processes involved in managing these alternative land uses. Therefore, SDI’s for such a project will recognise the impact is far from clear-cut and achieving sustainable development is more of a process than a direct outcome. To be effective they must communicate useful information - enabling situations to be understood and decisions made. They must be both meaningful - accurately portraying what is happening - and resonant - allowing people to grasp the relevance to their own lives. Local communities are increasingly recognised as both indicator users and data providers and since Sustainable Development concerns the relationship between people and the environment over time, indicators must be able to capture these broad dimensions, and especially their complex relationships. This will be crucial to development of the Enterprise Cluster. The Home Office’s Active Community Unit promotes voluntary activity and community involvement and is pursuing a range of measures designed to increase local people’s capacity to participate and since May 1999, the policies which have been put in place which support community participation in decision-making include; the National Strategy for Neighbourhood Renewal; the new duty on local authorities to produce Community Strategies (building on Local Agenda 21); the new guidance on local transport plans and the new Compact between government and the voluntary sector. Through best value, local authorities are required to consult with their communities during review of all their functions and services over a rolling 5-year programme. The Markham Willows project will potentially therefore have an impact on a wide range of SDI’s utilised by the UK government in measuring the UK’s progress (or otherwise) to achieving Sustainable Development.

94

AEAT in Confidence - r3 Environmental · When burned, the same amount of carbon dioxide is released...

Documents

Transcript of AEAT in Confidence - r3 Environmental · When burned, the same amount of carbon dioxide is released...