A NATIONAL network of environmental campaigners has welcomed the decision by Scottish Borders Council to abandon plans for a £23m advanced thermal treatment (ATT) facility at Easter Langlee.

A contract with a private company New Earth Solutions (NES) to build and operate a so-called gasification and pyrolysis plant to deal with 25,000 tonnes of waste a year was terminated by councillors last month.

The decision was taken in private after it emerged the firm had neither the technology nor the funding in place to deliver the project.

The council is now to rethink its integrated waste management strategy in a bid to comply with national and EU targets to boost recycling and cut to zero the amount of biodegradable waste going to landfill by 2021.

Although it’s back to the drawing board for the council, which is due to write off £2m already spent on the project, the decision to scrap the NES contract has found favour with the United Kingdom Without Incineration Network (UKWIN).

“We are glad the council took the time to re-evaluate this project in light of changing circumstances and hope other councils across the UK will do likewise for their own outdated incineration arrangements,” said UKWIN’s national coordinator Shlomo Dowen.

“The council was probably aware that this sort of technology was risky, but might not have fully appreciated the true extent of that risk.

“Councils are often expected to make decisions about complex proposals without much in-house expertise and are therefore very reliant on outside consultants who might have little incentive to place the long-term interests of sustainable waste management at the heart of their advice.

“It is not uncommon for local authorities to regret entering long-term incineration contracts which can prove inflexible and overestimate the need for waste disposal capacity.

“To its credit, it seems that SBC at least built in mechanisms into the NES contract that allowed it to terminate without prohibitive financial penalties.

“There are many local authorities across the UK who would love to get out of their incinerator contracts but who would need central government support to so.” Mr Dowen said his organisation had tried to obtain a copy of the technical report which councillors considered last month, but this had been withheld on the basis of commercial confidentiality.

“Although not privy to that report, it would appear one of the issues was that NES was unable to convince the Scottish Environment Protection Agency [SEPA] that the technology would actually work,” said Mr Dowen “Various forms of advanced thermal treatment technology have been attempted for waste management and they have all faced difficulties so it is not surprising there were concerns the technology would not work as advertised.” UKWIN believes that the council should avoid all forms of incineration when drawing up its new integrated waste management strategy.

“They should maximise recycling and composting and look at how to increase the types of biowaste and recyclate they can collect and how to improve the quality of that material,” said Mr Dowen.

“They should avoid paying for new incineration capacity and ensure they are not overly committed to residual waste infrastructure.

“It is crucial the council brings the community along with them so there is a broad buy-in to working together towards zero waste. Councils also have a responsibility to lead by example through green procurement.” Meanwhile council leader David Parker has rejected a call for SBC’s handling of the contract – and the £2m write-off – to be referred to the public spending watchdog Audit Scotland.

That call came from Andrew Farquhar, the former councillor who last year led an unsuccessful campaign for the reinstatement of kerbside garden waste collections.

“At my petition hearing in October, the ATT at Easter Langlee was hailed as the panacea for all the council’s waste management problems and no fears about its delivery were voiced,” said Mr Farquhar.

“Something has gone seriously wrong with £2m of taxpayers’ money down the drain with nothing to show for it and all this happened on Mr Parker’s watch.

“In these circumstances, he should desist from making any further decisions on how this matter will be investigated and refer it to Audit Scotland for their consideration.

“His claims that the project was well managed throughout required to be substantiated and we need independent confirmation that proper risk assessments were carried out and due diligence exercised in assessing if NES possessed the technology or funding to deliver.” Councillor Parker responded: “It was highlighted at the very beginning that, as the council was procuring a waste treatment plant at the cutting edge of technology and was one of the first rural councils in Scotland to be involved in this process, there was always a risk it might not be possible to achieve the outcome that was hoped for.

“Council officers have worked very closely with independent advisers and with NES and the decision not to proceed was taken after significant officer and elected member scrutiny. I thus see no reason to refer this matter to Audit Scotland.”