OPINION: BBC missed big picture on energy from waste

A recent BBC investigation claims that burning waste for energy now ranks as the UK’s “dirtiest” power source.

The article draws on data from the past five years, noting that energy-from-waste (EfW) facilities produce greenhouse gas emissions comparable to coal.

But by solely focusing on current emissions, the report walks right past the tremendous progress in EfW technology—especially regarding carbon capture.

To me, this feels like sloppy journalism. EfW is not without its challenges, but it’s a far cry from the environmental villain it’s portrayed as in this piece.

Skipping over carbon capture ignores the huge potential of EfW

The recent BBC article casts EfW in a negative light, emphasising emissions without context and overlooking the broader picture.

For years, councils have been scrambling for alternatives to landfilling waste—an environmental emergency that generates gases far more harmful to the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (CO₂).

MORE: What happens when landfill waste rots (and what can we do)?

EfW emerged as the very definition of killing two birds with one stone, providing a solution to non-recyclable waste while generating heat and electricity. Some even recover useful by-products like aggregates for construction.

Of course, with this comes emissions, which is why the government just pledged a £22 billion investment in carbon capture to decarbonize essential sectors like EfW. This isn’t mentioned in the investigation at all.

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) facilities intercept CO₂ generated by industrial processes and energy production, keeping it from entering the atmosphere. The harmful gases are stored deep underground where they can’t do any damage to the environment. And because capturing carbon effectively removes CO₂ from the atmosphere, it can actually achieve negative emissions.

So far, pilot schemes are looking extremely promising. Enfinium’s Ferrybridge pilot in West Yorkshire is capturing one tonne of CO₂ every day. And Viridor’s Runcorn project aims to capture around 900k tonnes of CO₂ annually, with 450k tonnes from biogenic sources.

These initiatives represent substantial steps toward carbon reduction, proving that EfW facilities are evolving in response to environmental targets and becoming aligned with the UK’s long-term net-zero goals. Not to mention the thousands of jobs they’re creating.

Far from disregarding environmental impacts, EfW is actually leading the way and setting the standard for carbon capture and negative emissions.

By failing to be clued into these advancements (or perhaps deciding to ignore it in favour of sensationalism) the BBC’s investigation dismisses the fundamental role EfW is playing in the nation’s environmental transformation.

MORE: SunSkips gets a tour of Suffolk’s energy-from-waste plant

Emissions reduced by diverting waste from landfill

Fair reporting would pay a bit more attention to the significant reduction in greenhouse gases by diverting waste from landfills and balance this against EfW emissions.

Landfills produce methane, a greenhouse gas over 25 times more potent than CO₂, as waste decomposes anaerobically. EfW facilities not only avoid methane emissions, but also reduce the need for additional landfill space, which directly benefits both the atmosphere and the surrounding environment.

MORE: SunSkips to save ‘100k tonnes’ of waste going to landfill

It’s also important to remember that EfW was always supposed to be a practical stopgap while the UK works to reduce waste generation. This is supposed to come from expanding recycling initiatives, including extended producer responsibility (EPR) and the long-anticipated deposit return scheme (DRS). These policies aim to shift responsibility for waste back to producers and incentivise recycling among consumers.

However, delays in rolling out these programs have left gaps in the waste hierarchy, which EfW currently fills by processing non-recyclable waste and reducing landfill reliance. As these schemes take effect, EfW’s role can adapt, complementing a more circular economy.

EfW was never meant to replace recycling, but rather handle residual waste sustainably. But while some councils excel with dedicated programs and advanced sorting facilities, a lack of unified national policies has hindered widespread progress.

And with recycling rates stagnating in the UK, EfW is stepping up to help the nation operate more sustainably where other initiatives have failed.

EfW’s proven reliability over alternative waste technologies

The investigation also missed EfW’s relative success over alternative waste technologies, which have seen costly failures.

Essex’s Tovi Eco Park, a mechanical biological treatment (MBT) facility designed to handle 417k tonnes of waste annually, became a financial and operational burden due to ongoing performance issues. The project ended in costly litigation, with Essex County Council eventually proposing demolition—a costly outcome with no lasting environmental benefits.

Similarly, Lancashire’s £2 billion PFI-supported MBT facility, designed to divert 75% of waste from landfills, faced frequent technical issues and never fully delivered on its goals.

These expensive missteps contrast sharply with EfW’s ability to process waste efficiently and reliably, generating renewable energy in the process.

Of course, environmentalists insist that more should be invested in alternative energy sources like solar and wind, but they simply aren’t reliable enough. Cloudy days and night time halt solar power, while calm days reduce wind power generation. Because of these natural constraints, solar and wind alone struggle to provide a stable energy supply without backup from other energy sources.

In contrast, EfW consistently generates energy by diverting waste from methane-producing landfills. And that’s why both local and national governments are investing heavily.

Long-term contracts are essential for local councils’ stability

Another critique of EfW from the BBC is reliance on long-term contracts, which often include “deliver or pay” clauses requiring councils to supply a set amount of waste or face penalties. But the investigation’s portrayal of these contracts as restrictive ignores why they exist in the first place.

Long-term contracts reflect the reality of high-capital infrastructure projects, which require predictable returns over time. For local councils with limited budgets, private finance initiatives (PFI) and long-term agreements make EfW projects financially feasible, balancing environmental responsibility with financial stability. This ultimately benefits cash-strapped communities and ensures waste is managed reliably.

A call for balanced waste management journalism

The EfW debate demands a balanced perspective. Incineration isn’t just about managing the nation’s burgeoning waste problem; it’s about addressing the UK’s broader environmental goals while producing sustainable energy.

Moving forward, we should encourage more informed discussions around both waste management innovation and environmental responsibility. EfW is a practical solution that aligns with a waste hierarchy approach—prioritising reduction, reuse, recycling, and responsible disposal.

While the BBC rightly highlights the need for continued progress in waste management, it misses an important opportunity to recognize EfW’s adaptability and alignment with the UK’s net-zero goals. By focusing solely on emissions data without acknowledging these advancements, the BBC paints an incomplete picture that undervalues EfW’s role in sustainable waste management.

SunEnviro is proud to divert waste from landfill and support the EfW industry. If you’d like to learn more about how we can make your waste management, demolition or aggregate sourcing more sustainable, reach out to our friendly team today.