The consultation paper sees a dilemma in promoting energy recovery at the same time as composting and recycling. However, this has to be thought through sensibly and positively. Also although recycling is good in principle it can be more costly and environmentally damaging. The paper also asks why some CHP schemes are not going ahead. At least part of the answer is due to consumer resistance, but other difficulties are associated with the lengthy planning process and the long term expenditure commitments necessary for such proposals.
Many people profess a willingness to do more for the environment.
However, when confronted with taking some initiative in this direction, especially if it involves increased cost, people may be reluctant to do so. Centralised sources for recycling, unless en route to, or combined with, visits to shops or schools are environmentally uneconomic from simple life-cycle analysis. The best consumer recycling schemes are those in which segregation is made as simple as possible by the provision of separate containers. This does entail additional cost, unless it includes the participation of voluntary labour, as discussed above. Home composting is very attractive in theory, and is easily accommodated in the more traditional dormitory areas, but modern housing densities mitigate against large gardens, so this activity is likely to decrease.