News

Carluccio's, the chain of Italian restaurants and food shops, has been fined £15,000 for breaches of the Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations, the current version of which is SI 2007/871. The company pleaded guilty to failing to register with the Environment Agency as a producer of packaging and failing to meet its requirements to recover and recycle packaging waste between 2004 and 2006. They also asked the court to take into consideration similar offences in 2002 and 2003.

The company joined the Paperpak compliance scheme on 12 February 2007, but in the meantime it was calculated that they had avoided costs of around £16,778 by not registering or purchasing the correct amount of packaging recovery notes (PRNs), as required by the Regulations since 2002. In addition to the fine, Carluccio's were ordered to pay compensation and costs to the Agency, which amounted to some £6,559.

The nature of its business means the company handles a range of packaging, including wine bottles, jars, cardboard, boxes, bags, labels, pallets and shrink wrap. Under the Packaging Waste Regulations, companies who have an annual turnover in excess of £2 million and who handle more than 50 tonnes of packaging per year must register with the Agency or a compliance scheme.

The coffee chain, Starbucks, has angered environmental groups, after it was revealed that it had a policy of keeping a tap running non-stop at all its 10,000 outlets worldwide, wasting 23.4 million litres of water a day.

The chain, nevertheless, attempted to refute claims that it seriously wasted water. The company said that the policy of leaving "dipper wells" running meant the company exceeded their own and local health standards. It stressed that, "Dipper wells use a stream of continuous fresh-running water to rinse away food residue, help keep utensils clean and prevent bacterial growth."

A Starbucks spokeswoman added that the company was considering using dishwashers instead of dipper wells and introducing a more water-efficient way of cleaning spoons. Starbucks acknowledged that there are opportunities to reduce its water usage and that it had to balance water conservation with the need for customer safety.

However, environmental groups have described the policy of leaving a tap running for hygiene reasons as nonsensical. Peter Robinson of the environmental charity Waste Watch said, "Leaving taps running all day is a shocking waste of precious water and to claim you are doing it for health and safety reasons is bonkers."

The Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) have this month revealed the action it has taken to tackle high risk pollution threats on the Mallusk Industrial Estate. Work involving the pollution risk assessment of 300 businesses was intensified in the wake of two fish kills this year on the Six Mile Water River, and the NIEA have identified 20 sites which pose a major pollution risk.

Staff issued four notices to companies, 16 pre-notices and took four sets of statutory samples with a view to prosecution. Following the samples, two cases were recommended for prosecution, while results have still to be confirmed in the remaining two cases.

Environment Minister Sammy Wilson said, "Since the two fish kill incidents this year, NIEA staff have intensified their efforts to address the problem of pollution incidents on the river and ensure businesses are fully aware of what is expected of them. During the survey of businesses on the site, staff identified a range of potential pollutants on 20 high risk sites including oil, chemicals, cleaning materials and concrete. NIEA carried out site investigations, extensive drainage surveys and discussed the seriousness of the risks and the implications for the environment and the companies concerned with site managers. The notices and pre-notices issued to companies contained details of the work required to mitigate or stop pollution within a specified time frame."

Mr Wilson went on to stress the need for the public to help the NIEA eliminate the pollution risk from businesses. "If anyone has information that a company is regularly flouting the law or indeed is responsible for a particular incident they should immediately bring that to the attention of the water pollution team. They can do that by phoning the water pollution hotline on 0800 80760. Our staff are only too willing to investigate those claims."

The pre-registration process under Regulation (EC) 1907/2006, on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) is drawing to a conclusion. Under REACH, chemicals manufactured or imported into the EU in quantities of over one tonne need to be registered with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).

This process started with the pre-registration period, from 1 June to 1 December 2008 and involves firms providing the ECHA with some basic information on the substances they are manufacturing or importing, and the quantities involved. Firms who pre-register their substances will qualify for the staggered registration deadlines after 1 December 2008, giving them longer to fully register. Firms who fail to pre-register will need to fully register their substance immediately after 1 December 2008 and stop its manufacture or import while this is done.

Other import dates for your REACH calendar include:

• 1 January 2009 - ECHA to publish a list of pre-registered chemicals;
• 1 June 2009 - ECHA to recommend the priority substances to be included in Annex 14 of REACH;
• 30 November 2010 - deadline for substances made or imported in amounts over 1,000 tonnes per year, or for known carcinogens, mutagens and substances toxic to reproduction, and those toxic to aquatic organisms made in quantities over 100 tonnes per year;
• 1 December 2011 - ECHA to submit a draft action plan outlining the substances to be evaluated each year over a three year period;
• 2012 - a review of REACH and information requirements for substances made or imported in amounts of 1-10 tonnes per year;
• 2013 - a review to determine whether endocrine disruptors are to be replaced;
• 31 May 2013 - deadline for substances produced or imported in quantities equal to or greater than 100 tonnes per year;
• 2014 - a review of the need for firms to prepare and transmit chemical safety reports for certain substances;
• 31 May 2018 - deadline for substances produced or imported in quantities equal to or greater than one tonne per year;
• 2019 - a review on whether a chemical safety report should be submitted for certain substances made or imported in amounts under 10 tonnes per year, or not subject to registration.

The Government has committed the UK to a greenhouse gas emissions cut of 80% on 1990 levels by 2050 in a bid to tackle climate change.

Climate Change and Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband said the current 60% targets would be replaced in the Climate Change Bill and that the Government accepted all the recommendations of the Committee on Climate Change.

The Committee said the tougher target would be "challenging but feasible", and should cover all the major greenhouse gases - not just carbon dioxide - and all sectors of the UK economy, including shipping and aviation. However, the target does not include emissions from international aviation and shipping.

Moreover, Lib Dem environment spokesman, Steve Webb said Mr Miliband's decision not to include aviation and shipping in the 80% target made a mockery of his commitments. He commented, "It's like telling everyone you're going on a calorie controlled diet but not counting cream cakes. As we saw when the Government gave the green light for Stansted expansion, there is actually a huge gap between what ministers say on climate change and what they actually do."

An amendment including aviation in the target, backed by the Lib Dems, Conservatives and Labour backbenchers to overthrow the Government, was put down in Parliament. However, in the face of defeat, a new amendment has now been put down by Labour MP Elliot Morley, which strengthens the Bill and agrees to take international aviation into account when setting five yearly budgets to meet the target.

However, because there is not yet an agreed way to allocate emissions from international aviation to different countries, they cannot be included in the target. Therefore while the consideration of aviation will make the target more challenging and has been welcomed by green campaigners, it should, nonetheless, be included for the targets to really be effective.

For more information, see:

• Climate Change Act 2008.

Green groups have welcomed a Government reshuffle that created a department for energy and climate change. The department, headed by Ed Miliband, is charged with establishing what energy the country needs and the most environmentally sound way of getting it.

Environmentalists have had a longstanding objection to the fact that the UK's energy policy and climate change brief have previously been divided between different departments.

Green Alliance said it hoped the move would result in a more joined-up approach to cutting emissions. Green Alliance director, Stephen Hale said, "The new department puts climate change where it belongs, with its own seat at the cabinet table." Indeed, some commentators believe Mr Miliband's appointment indicates how strongly the Prime Minister views the issues of energy security and climate change.

However, the move has been given a more cautious welcome by the Policy Exchange think tank, whose head of environment, Ben Caldercott said, "Whether a new energy and climate change department under Ed Miliband's leadership can sort out the current UK energy policy mess is far from certain. Given this Government's track record on energy policy - we're in the third energy consultation in 11 years - I doubt shifting civil servants around Whitehall is going to make very much difference before a general election."