Energy from waste: the consent route and the need case

The consent route for an energy from waste plant depends on its generating capacity. Above the statutory threshold for onshore generating stations in England, the scheme is a nationally significant infrastructure project needing development consent from the Secretary of State under the Planning Act 2008, examined by the Planning Inspectorate against the designated national policy statements for energy. Below it, the application goes to the waste planning authority, which in a two-tier area is the county council rather than the district. Check the current threshold in section 15 of the Planning Act 2008, because it has been amended for some technologies.

The route determines the timetable, the cost and the policy framework. It does not change the hardest part, which is the need case.

Which consent route applies by capacity

Three routes exist in practice. Development consent under the 2008 Act for a generating station above the threshold, where the examination runs to a statutory timetable and pre-application consultation is a statutory requirement. A planning application to the waste planning authority below the threshold. And, for a plant forming part of a larger industrial development, occasionally a hybrid where the energy element sits inside a wider application.

Capacity is assessed by reference to the generating station's capacity rather than the tonnage of waste it takes, which catches applicants who have designed around a throughput figure. Confirm the basis of the capacity figure early with your electrical engineer, because a scheme designed at a capacity just below a threshold invites scrutiny of the calculation and any later uprating may need a different consent.

Where development consent applies, the designated national policy statements for energy provide the policy framework and the local development plan is an important and relevant consideration rather than the starting point. Where the local route applies, section 38(6) puts the development plan first, which means the waste local plan does the work.

Waste plan allocations and the need case

Start with the waste local plan. If the site is allocated for waste management use, the argument is about the acceptability of this facility on this site. If it is not, you are also arguing that the plan's allocations are inadequate or unavailable, which is a much longer exercise.

The need case has to be built from capacity data rather than asserted. National waste policy expects waste planning authorities to identify the capacity needed and expects applicants to show how a proposal fits. The evidence usually comes from the authority's own waste needs assessment, the data behind the plan, national published figures on residual waste arisings and treatment capacity, and the catchment you propose to serve with contracted or prospective tonnage.

Two difficulties come up on every scheme. The first is that residual waste arisings are falling as recycling rates rise, so a need case built on an older forecast will be attacked. The second is the government's direction of travel. Defra has published criteria indicating that new residual waste capacity should only come forward where there is a demonstrated need and the plant is efficient and capable of accommodating carbon capture, and the policy position has been moving, so state your position as at a given date and verify it against the current Defra publication before submission.

The waste hierarchy argument

The duty to apply the waste hierarchy under the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 sits behind every objection you will receive. Energy recovery ranks below prevention, preparation for re-use and recycling, and above disposal.

So the case is not that incineration is good. It is that the material entering the plant is residual after reasonable efforts at the higher tiers, and that recovery is better than landfill for that material. Evidence that with:

• a characterisation of the feedstock, showing what it consists of and why it is not recyclable at the point it arrives
• the contractual or operational arrangements that keep recyclable material out, including any front-end sorting
• a comparison with the landfill alternative on the relevant emissions basis
• an account of how the plant will respond if recycling rates rise and the feedstock shrinks, which is a question about contract length and flexibility rather than about engineering

Heat offtake strengthens the hierarchy case materially, because a plant exporting heat to a network achieves higher efficiency than one generating electricity alone. If heat export is part of the case, it has to be deliverable rather than aspirational, with a route, a customer and a programme.

Stack height and dispersion

Stack height is where planning and permitting pull in opposite directions. Dispersion modelling wants the stack taller, to keep ground level concentrations within the air quality objectives. Landscape and visual assessment wants it shorter.

Resolve it with modelling rather than negotiation. The air dispersion assessment establishes the minimum height that achieves acceptable ground level concentrations at sensitive receptors, including any designated habitats sites, and the landscape assessment then tests the visual effect of that height from agreed viewpoints. Present both, and present the sensitivity of the air quality result to a lower stack, because an authority asked to accept a tall stack wants to see that the height is driven by the modelling.

The dispersion work belongs in the Air Quality Assessment, which councils expect from a suitably qualified author and where professional review is strongly advised. Where the scheme is near residential areas, a Health Impact Assessment is commonly required by local policy and will be read closely by the local public health team.

Traffic and the servicing case

Vehicle movements are the issue that mobilises local opposition most reliably, and they are measurable, which makes them answerable.

Build the transport case from the tonnage. Annual throughput divided by average payload gives the vehicle numbers, and the daily profile follows from the operating hours and the weighbridge capacity. Then address the route from the strategic road network to the site, the acceptability of that route through any residential area, the queuing and turning on site, and the arrangements for bottom ash and residue removal, which is a separate vehicle stream people forget.

Where the plant replaces existing landfill or transfer activity, the net change in movements may be smaller than the gross figure, and that comparison is worth making explicitly.

Environmental permit alongside planning

The permit from the Environment Agency under the Environmental Permitting Regulations controls emissions, monitoring and operation. Planning controls the location, scale, design and amenity effects.

The two run in parallel and the planning authority is entitled to assume that the pollution control regime will be applied properly, which means emissions limits are not generally a reason to refuse planning permission. Say so, politely, and then address what planning does control, because an authority faced with hundreds of objections about emissions needs the distinction set out clearly in the submission.

Running the applications in parallel also exposes inconsistencies early. The stack height, the throughput, the operating hours and the abatement description must match across both, and a discrepancy will be found by an objector.

The evidence base

An energy from waste scheme is almost always environmental impact assessment development. Incineration of non-hazardous waste above the capacity threshold in Schedule 1 to the 2017 Regulations requires assessment as of right, and hazardous waste installations are also caught. An Environmental Impact Assessment is a report type where competent experts are legally required to prepare the environmental statement under those Regulations, so an AI-assisted draft is a structuring tool for that team rather than a substitute for it.

The topic chapters that need most attention on this kind of scheme are air quality and human health, climate including the carbon case, landscape and visual effects given the stack and the building mass, noise from plant and vehicles, odour from the tipping hall and waste bunker, traffic, and ecology where a designated site lies within the modelled deposition footprint. The operational waste arrangements, including residue handling and any on-site recovery, belong in the Waste Management Strategy.

One live uncertainty to flag in any appraisal. The inclusion of energy from waste in the UK Emissions Trading Scheme has been announced for later this decade, with monitoring and reporting obligations ahead of it, and the detail sits in regulations that should be checked for what is in force. That affects the operating cost case rather than the planning case, but it affects the need argument indirectly, because it changes the economics of the alternative.

PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval. For specialist technical reports, qualified professional input may be required, and this article is general guidance rather than advice on a specific scheme. Enter your postcode on PlanScope to see which reports your site is likely to need.