Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Good morning, everybody. I am standing in for Deputy Leddin, the Chairman, who is unavailable this morning. I have also received apologies from Senator McGahon.

This morning's meeting will be split into two sessions. In the first, we will hear from representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, and the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications while the second, we will have representatives from FoodCloud, Food Drink Ireland and the Circular Bioeconomy Research Group, CircBio.

The purpose of the meeting is to have a discussion on the circular economy and how it relates to the food sector. On behalf of the committee, I welcome the following stakeholders to the meeting: Mr. David Flynn, Mr. Warren Phelan and Ms Fiona McCoole from the EPA; and Mr. Tony Collins, Mr. Marc Kierans and Mr. Brian Quirke from the Department.

I am required to read a note on privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or to otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in regard to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise nor make charges against either a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I also remind members that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex to participate in public meetings. In this regard, I ask all members that prior to making their contribution to the meeting, that they confirm they are on the grounds of the campus. Finally, I remind members and witnesses to switch their phones either to silent mode or off.

I call Mr. Flynn to make his opening statement.

Mr. David Flynn:

I thank the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach for the invitation to speak with the committee today. I am joined by Mr. Warren Phelan and Ms Fiona McCoole, both of whom work in the EPA’s circular economy programme. As a nation, Ireland is wasting too much food – almost 800,000 tonnes each year. We are not alone in this. The United Nations recently reported that a billion meals are wasted every day across the globe. This is edible food that is lost during production and distribution or is wasted in shops, restaurants and our homes. Wasted food is a triple loss to society: a lost nutritional opportunity, an avoidable contribution of up to 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions and needless pressure put on water quality and biodiversity. Most of Ireland’s food waste is generated from non-household sources, such as manufacturing, food service and retail. EPA data shows that 30% comes from our houses and the rest along the supply chain, with 29% from the processing and manufacturing sector, 23% from food service, such as restaurants and cafes, 9% from primary production and 8% from retail and distribution.

Ireland’s ambition is to halve food waste by 2030. That is a reduction of almost 400,000 tonnes. Ireland has made several international commitments to reduce food waste such as under the UN sustainable development goal 12.3. Wasted food is included as a specific focus in the European Union’s circular economy action plan, which is part of the European Green Deal. Food is one of the eight sectors the EU has identified as using a lot of resources and where the potential for circularity is high. To accelerate progress, the European Commission last July proposed legally binding food waste reduction targets for 2030. From an EPA perspective, the key issues are encouraging business and households to improve prevention at source; to encourage the redistribution of unavoidable surplus food, the diversion of material to use in other food and non-food products; the recovery of nutrients and energy, via composting and anaerobic digestion, collection for recovery; and as a final, least preferable, option disposal. The provision of an organic waste bin, or so-called "brown bin", to all households is an important step to avoid this final disposal option. At the moment, only 69% of households have a separate kerbside bin collection service for organic waste.

The EPA protects, improves and restores Ireland’s environment through regulation, by providing scientific knowledge and working with others. The EPA has a wide range of statutory responsibilities including: licensing; national enforcement; climate change; administering the EU emissions trading systems, ETS; circular economy and waste management; water protection; environmental monitoring; chemicals in the environment; environmental research; and radiological protection. The EPA’s activities to drive down food waste follow the national food waste prevention roadmap. The EPA’s key roles on food waste include: annual reporting of food waste data and statistical insights; communications and awareness; running the food waste charter; and guidance and behavioural research. The EPA has statutory reporting responsibilities on food waste statistics, including degeneration and treatment.

We now report annually to the European Commission on food waste statistics. These national statistics show that Ireland generates a significant amount of food waste each year, representing 4% or 753,000 tonnes of the total waste generated, which is 17 million tonnes. The vast majority of this waste is construction and demolition waste. Data for reporting years 2020 and 2021 show a similar scale of food waste from each part of the supply chain. Based on 2021 data, Ireland's food wasteper capita, at 154 kg, is 18% higher than the current EU average of 113 kgper capita. Ireland generates 3.71 million tonnes of municipal waste from households and commercial premises. Some 15% of this municipal waste was treated by composting or anaerobic digestion which was an increase of 39% on 2020 figures. The EPA characterisation studies show that food waste makes up 17% of a general household bin and 27% of a commercial waste bin. Better segregation at source will facilitate greater capture of this food waste and lead to improved rates of recovery and recycling.

The EPA carries out a range of communication, education and awareness activities focused on food use and preventing food waste. Our activities include, the consumer-facing Stop Food Waste educational programme, as well as national Stop Food Waste Day, which we run on 1 March each year. We also administer the food waste charter, which is a national initiative, led by the EPA, in co-operation with the Government and five State agencies. It is a voluntary agreement whereby food-supply-chain businesses pledge to measure their food waste, set a target and take action to prevent food waste. A key focus of the EPA's food waste prevention programmes has been to develop standard methods for measuring food waste in the food and drink manufacturing sectors for hospitality and food services. The EPA has produced guidance and step-by-step checklists and case studies for bakeries, consumer goods and for the seafood sector. We are also in the process of preparing other guidance for other sectors.

Our food waste prevention activities are supported by behavioural insights, recognising that evidence about behaviours and attitudes to food waste is needed to inform communication campaigns, policy development and calls to action. Prevention is always the best option to reduce food waste. Understanding where and why food waste is generated within a business is essential to setting targets and taking appropriate actions. This includes designing efficiencies into food production processes to: reduce the input of resources; reduce the amount of produce rejected at intake; look at opportunities for value-added products from production residues and offcuts; encourage collaboration across the full supply chain; redistribute surplus food and use data to improve food planning and ordering. Where food waste is generated, it should always be separately collected in a segregated organic waste bin, for recovery of its nutrients and energy resources. Halving the amount of food waste by 2030 is a particularly challenging target. However, reducing food waste has multiple benefits. Individuals need to be supported with options and information to make sustainable choices. Food waste must also be addressed at a systems level, where businesses along the full supply chain and food services sector must all play their part. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

I thank the Acting Chairperson and members for the invitation to meet with the committee today to discuss the circular economy as it relates to the food sector. As we are all aware, the circular economy is about looking at our throw-away economy and recognising that there is a better way and that it is possible to break the cycle of wasteful resource extraction, unsustainable consumption and unnecessary disposal. In environmental terms, the essential reason for a circular economy is that this "take-make-waste" business model is not sustainable, with global resource consumption, outstripping the planet's natural resource capacity. Increasing extraction of natural resources and disposal of waste is a major contributor to habitat and biodiversity loss and contributes to global warming. Achieving a circular economy will play a crucial role in reducing global carbon impact and protecting natural resources and environment and health. Tackling food waste is one of the key steps we need to take to achieve sustainability, help combat climate change and to support our transition to a circular economy.

The use of circular economy and bioeconomy approaches and the waste hierarchy to address food waste requires a strategic and collaborative approach to find solutions across the entire food system rather than continuing to operate within single linear supply and consumption chains.

In line with the food waste hierarchy, our top priority is to prevent food waste. Food waste can occur at any point along the food supply chain, from primary production, processing and manufacturing to retail and distribution, restaurants and food services, and households. Ireland is committed to reducing food waste by 50% by 2030, in line with the United Nations sustainable development goals. The publication of the first national food waste prevention roadmap is a key step that is helping to steer our efforts towards this goal. It sets out a number of priority actions to bring the focus on food waste prevention across key sectors in the food supply chain together in a coherent manner. In terms of responsibilities for key sectors, the first roadmap is focusing on a voluntary approach, particularly in terms of measuring and reporting of food waste. The effectiveness of this approach is being kept under review. New proposed EU targets to reduce food waste that are currently being considered at EU level, the establishment of baseline data and developments in relation to food waste measurement and reporting will inform further focused actions on food waste prevention into the future.

The National Food Waste Prevention Roadmap 2023-2025 includes detail on how Ireland will establish its national baseline data on food waste from which we will achieve a 50% reduction by 2030; the approach to interim milestones and targets on the way to that 2030 target; and how we will ensure a robust national system for food waste measurement and reporting is established in order to meet Ireland’s reporting obligations and to monitor Ireland’s progress in meetings its UN and EU commitments over the next decade. It also contains a commitment to work together to enhance food waste measurement and identify and implement key priority actions along the food supply chain to help deliver on Ireland’s commitments on food loss and food waste prevention; details on the approach to food waste segregation, food donation and redistribution, and the role of research and innovation; a commitment to deliver sustained communications and awareness on food waste prevention and segregation; and details on how we will establish a monitoring and evaluation framework to check progress of key activities and update the roadmap accordingly.

A focus area of food waste prevention includes looking at the role of the public sector in tackling food waste by improving procurement practices. In this respect, the green public procurement strategy and action plan, buying greener, which was published recently, includes a target of 100% of new contract arrangements related to canteen or food services to include measures that are targeted at addressing food waste, with a specific focus on food waste prevention and food waste segregation. Buying greener also has a key focus on organic food procurement to support Ireland’s climate action plan target of 10% of utilisable land area to be farmed organically by 2030. The strategy sets out a target of a minimum of 10% by value of food sought by public sector bodies under new contract arrangements, including via contractors such as canteen service providers, is to be certified organic in a number of food categories, as set out under the target.

While food loss and food waste are a significant challenge, the Bioeconomy Action Plan 2023-2025 recognises that this challenge can be turned into an opportunity given the potential to harness value from the circulation of food byproducts through upcycling into new high-value ingredients and bio-based products. Given that one third of food is being lost or wasted, circulation and upcycling innovations provide opportunities not only to avoid sending food and byproducts to landfill, but also to generate economic opportunities for farmers, fishers, and food businesses alike, based on unavoidable waste. In achieving this, it will be necessary for the bioeconomy to be considered in addressing issues around byproducts and end-of-waste, cascading use, valorisation, resource efficiency and sufficiency, and consumption patterns. A national review of the regulatory systems which categorise materials, including byproducts and end-of-waste materials, will be conducted with the aim of enabling eco-design and the better use and reuse of bio-based materials in our economy.

In support of this and in the context of the development of the new circular economy strategy an analysis, which will map materials across their life cycle, quantifying resources, materials, and waste over the stages of extraction and importation, production, use, recovery and end of life, is currently being conducted.

This analysis will form the basis of Ireland’s first circularity gap report, which is required given that in 2019 Ireland’s circular material use rate was the second worst in the EU, at 1.6% compared to an EU average of 11.9%.

The purpose of this project is to enable us to better understand the levers for change in moving to a circular economy and the benefits that these levers could bring based on a solid analysis. Furthermore, it will reveal the extent to which Ireland currently achieves the recycling of resources back into the economy in order to provide a clear starting point to identify where different sectors and supply chains should focus their strategies going forward so that we can deliver the biggest results in terms of reducing environmental impacts and increasing secondary material use, ultimately narrowing our circularity gap.

It should be recognised that a key component of the bioeconomy action plan is the cascading principle. This logical principle ensures a maximum output from a minimal input. Considering the various sectors of the bioeconomy holistically rather than in isolation provides an appropriate basis for co-delivering ecosystem services and prioritising the uses of biomass and the waste hierarchy. Focusing on the cascading principle and the circular use of biomass is essential, that is, taking less while making more.

Through the use of sustainably produced feedstocks, including grass silage, animal slurry and food waste resources, there is potential to increase our circular bioeconomy, helping to build resilience in our local biological resources, environment, economy and society. This will be supported by the national biomethane strategy, currently being developed by the Departments of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and Environment, Climate and Communications.

The waste action plan for a circular economy seeks to realise the anaerobic digestion and composting potential of the food waste resource, recognising that anaerobic digestion and composting provide opportunities for regional development with sales of locally generated energy and compost. To help ensure unavoidable food waste can become a resource down the food waste hierarchy, the European Union (Household Food Waste and Bio-waste) (Amendment) Regulations 2023 were introduced on 31 December 2023 to require waste collectors to provide all household customers with a biowaste bin. This is being supported by a comprehensive education and awareness campaign to advise households of their entitlement to this service while also offering advice on how to properly segregate their food and other organic waste.

However, while food waste may be considered the optimal feedstock for anaerobic digestion, it is recognised that there is insufficient resource available to meet the required scale. The national food waste prevention roadmap is a key consideration in the use of food waste, in particular considering the food waste hierarchy. To complement this hierarchy, the national policy statement on the bioeconomy outlines the cascading principle, whereby higher value applications are preferentially derived from biological resources prior to their use in energy and fuel generation, which will allow us to derive the maximum value from our bio-resources.

The new circular economy strategy will be unambiguous that food waste prevention is the focus of actions, emphasising that prevention actions need to be prioritised in order to achieve the 2030 target to reduce food waste. It will emphasise that the circular economy regarding the food system means reducing the amount of waste generated in the food system, the reuse of food, the utilisation of byproducts and food waste, nutrient recycling and changes in consumer food practices and diet. Where food surplus does occur, the emphasis will be on the reuse of surplus food for human consumption for people affected by food poverty through redistribution networks. In line with the bioeconomy action plan and the national biomethane strategy, it will be acknowledged that unavoidable food waste can be recycled into animal feed and composting and as a resource to be recovered, through technologies like anaerobic digestion, into high-value energy.

The circularity gap report, which will be published later this year, will provide us with the required evidence base and technical analysis on which the second circular economy strategy will be prepared and submitted to Government by the end of the year. This report will include the bioeconomy, and circular economy actions contained in the bioeconomy action plan, specifically actions 3.2.3 and 7.6, to undertake a material flow analysis to support the transition to a sustainable and circular bioeconomy and examine the proposal of analysing and identifying any skills gap for the circular economy and bioeconomy.

Our transition to a more circular economy and our ambition to halve food waste by 2030 will only be achieved through the continued collaboration of Government, the local authority sector, EPA, general public and private industry on ensuring the actions required or to be specified in the new circular economy strategy are successfully delivered. Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Quirke. The comprehensive opening statements for both parties are welcome. There is a sort of standing order in the committee that there is a five-minute opportunity for every member to ask questions and receive answers. If we have time, we will come back for a second round. I will call on members in the following order: Deputies Bruton, Kenny, presumably O'Rourke, Whitmore, and then myself.

I have one question on anaerobic digestion and then I will pass over to Deputy Bruton. The committee has been for a number of years talking about anaerobic digestion as a key component of reducing waste that does not perform and is simply disposed of or not utilised. What is the expectation of the Department regarding a meaningful roll-out of anaerobic digestion across the State? What level of engagement is the State or its agents pursuing to achieve a reasonable level of anaerobic digestion at scale to suit the Irish economy?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

I will ask my colleague, Mr. Collins, to answer this question.

Mr. Tony Collins:

I am from the e-policy division of the Department. We have been working with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on the CAP commitment to deliver a national biomethane strategy. We are at the final stages of that and expect to bring it to the Minister to bring it to Government shortly. The strategy will target the delivery of up to 5.7 TWh of biomethane with plants at scale of about 40 GWh - approximately 140 of them nationally over the coming years. The strategy will set out the aims in terms of implementation groups and so on to put the strategy in place, as well as the sustainability criteria.

In terms of feedstocks, we consulted with industry stakeholders during the development of the strategy and there was a public consultation which garnered quite a few responses. Food waste has a role in the anaerobic digestion industry we envisage and has potential to deliver up to 1 TWh of that 5.7 TWh target.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Collins. I throw this open to the EPA, if its representatives have any remarks to make on it.

Mr. David Flynn:

We made a submission to the Department on the draft strategy. We were looking at food stocks, the use of material coming out of those, the importance of delivery of the large number of facilities that will need to go through EPA licensing and permitting processes, and the capacity of the State to deliver on that.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A key component of the strategy, when published, will probably be the capacity to get it up and running effectively without undue delay. I thank Mr. Flynn. I call Deputy Bruton.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for the presentations. I am not happy with the progress we are making. Four years ago we were talking about halving food waste and now we are still talking about measuring it and getting a baseline. That is not good enough. We passed legislation that said within six months we would have a strategy from the Department. We are still waiting for a strategy. That Bill was initiated in 2021 and passed in 2022; here we are in 2024 and we still do not have a strategy.

I presume the Department did not trigger the start of that section to avoid some breach of the legislation. My frustration is that there are a lot of what might be called low-hanging fruit and good practice in other countries that we could easily be implementing on a voluntary basis already. In France, there are zero packaging areas. There are producer responsibility schemes that are well-established but we have not applied one in the food waste area. We still have non-recyclable plastics in use in the food sector. We are still talking about the same things.

The EPA will confirm whether I am right or wrong but my understanding is that half of the material that householders collect goes into the wrong bin. It indicated that 17% of the contents of black bins could have gone into the organic bin. In the commercial sector, the figure is far worse. The figure given by the EPA was that 27% of commercial black bin waste was comprised of compostable material. What I have been consistently calling for, and I do not understand why we are not doing it, is a voluntary compact bringing together the various interests in the food sector. The construction and food sectors are the two sectors with real potential for rapid progress in Ireland. I do not think the best way is to wait for regulatory requirements to come beating down upon us. They are already only six years away. If we start bringing in regulatory heavy-handedness at five minutes to midnight, we are going to get one awful mess. My sense is we need to get voluntary compacts in place that can roll into the Department's permanent strategy. An awful lot of time is being lost by virtue of not getting to grips with relatively easy things.

As regards having a compost bin at every house, the rate is only 69%, having stood at 55%. While we are making some progress, my sense is that it is not fast enough to meet a target that is fast coming down the track. Can we not put our foot on the accelerator? The big strength of the circular economy is that it is a less divisive approach than telling people that they must cut emissions. Some 45% of our emissions come from materials other than fossil fuels. We are doing an awful lot on the fossil fuel front but we are not doing anything comparable on the other 45%.

I know that was a bit of a rant rather than a question but there is a serious question behind it. Why the delay? Why not take a series of actions well ahead of a statutory strategy?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

In terms of the strategic approach, the first national level policy strategy was the national food waste prevention roadmap published in November 2022 for a three-year period from 2023 to 2025. It sets out 38 priority actions of focus to steer efforts towards the goal of UN sustainable development goal 12.3. The next iteration of the roadmap, following the publication of the next circular economy strategy, will be a statutory one following the Circular Economy and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 2022.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That was to be six months after the Bill. That is two years ago.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

Where we are at the moment is that the roadmap, as I say, sets out a number of areas and one of these was to set out the baseline data for Ireland for how we are going to measure our progress for the 2030 target. In parallel, there is a process under way at EU level, with the Commission proposal on food waste reduction targets which was published in July last year. The Commission is going through the process of examining the proposal at EU level and there will be negotiations at trilogue stage. That is anticipated following general approval of the general approach later this year. That is trying to achieve a harmonised approach in all member states as regards what baseline year would be looked at in meeting the proposed European Commission targets. The Department is participating in that process.

As has been pointed out, the EPA produces the data on food waste, and 2020 was the first referenced year that was published in 2022. We are following an EU process and we are setting out the main areas of focus in the roadmap, which will probably be updated before the end of 2025, which will be before the end of the current roadmap period.

Mr. David Flynn:

I will confirm some of the data but I will first say that this is a win-win-win situation in the areas of cost, climate and nutrition. As the Deputy said, anything we can do around food waste is of benefit to nearly everybody in the process.

Approximately two thirds of the food waste that is generated by householders is placed in a general waste bin. In other words, approximately 17% or one fifth of the contents of a black bin could have gone into a brown bin to be recovered. In terms of non-household waste, 69% of the waste in commercial waste bins should have been placed in recycling or organic bins. Of that figure, approximately 27% is organic waste which could have-----

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it therefore the case that in both cases roughly two thirds is misplaced?

Mr. David Flynn:

Roughly, yes. It is two thirds of food waste in a household bin. The figure of 69% refers to both recycling and organic waste in the big commercial bins that are seen outside restaurants or food cafes. Of the total contents of the bins, 17% could have been put in an organic bin. It is therefore important to again emphasise the need for a separate collection, where feasible and possible.

On the voluntary side of things, we are currently running the food waste charter, which is voluntary mechanism to which food companies all along the supply chain can sign up. Currently, 30 companies have signed up to it, but we would like for that figure to be much higher so that companies can commit to measuring and taking action on food waste.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could that not be expanded into the area of packaging, as well as feeding back into the primary production side, where there could be premiums for products that are produced sustainably? Is there not more leverage to be gotten?

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will have to come back to that question because I have to move to Deputy Kenny, but perhaps our witnesses can bear that question in mind.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their contributions. I will follow on from Deputy Bruton’s question about the brown bins and the amount of organic waste that is going into the wrong bins. Has an analysis been done on why that is? Is it an education problem? Is it the case that the people do not understand? Is it just carelessness? What is the position there?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

Education and awareness are hugely important and are key focuses of the National Food Waste Prevention Roadmap 2023-2025, which deals with communications about food waste. The EPA is a very important stakeholder in that process. There is Stop Food Waste and consumer-facing awareness campaigns. Our Department has been funding food waste awareness campaigns in collaboration with the local authority sector. For example, national food waste recycling week was held last year, and we are waiting for that to be rolled out on an annual basis. In the past couple of years, it has included the provision of advice. There was also funding through the awareness campaigns to roll out food waste caddies to educate householders on segregating food waste where it actually occurs, such as in the kitchen, which makes sure that food waste is segregated and put in the proper organic bin.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is it the same in the restaurant sector, which is one of the areas where much of this is happening? Has an analysis been conducted on where this food waste is coming from? Is it being generated in the kitchen? Are people getting portions that are too large, do not finish them, leave a lot on their plates, and that then ends up in the bins? What is the situation?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

There are two quite distinct focus areas of the campaigns. The national food waste recycling week has focused on the household aspects of it. There are also requirements for the commercial sector to segregate food waste. New regulations came in to incentivise commercial waste collection. That includes the provision of three bins for enterprises, namely, the residual black bin, the dry mixed recycles and the organic biowaste bin.

Household and commercial waste is one of the national waste enforcement priorities for 2024. There will be local authority waste enforcement efforts that will be targeted to ensure, for example, that waste collectors are providing the service as required.

Mr. David Flynn:

Understanding that behaviour is key both in the commercial sector and in the household. I will ask my colleague, Ms McCoole, to say a word about the work the EPA is doing around behavioural insights because it will answer the Deputy's question.

Ms Fiona McCoole:

Waste prevention and behaviours are very complex, and positive behaviours are often a mix of a number of different steps to do the right thing. Understanding where the change needs to happen and the attitudes and behaviours of the population is very important. As regards Stop Food Waste, there has been a big focus on looking at behavioural insights and doing market research into behaviours, attitudes and preferences among the population. How they prevent food waste or opportunities to prevent food waste are the focus. We know that a big cause of food waste is lack of planning, so a lot of information in respect of our communication campaigns for Stop Food Waste is about proper management and planning of meals and how to store and how to purchase food. Our focus in the Stop Food Waste programme is on prevention as opposed to segregation, but among the public there will always be some unavoidable food waste, whether that is peelings or skin or bones. In that case the message is always to make sure they have an organic bin and segregate their food waste in order that it can be recycled, it is sent for anaerobic digestion or composting and they get the maximum value from it. Prevention is the key because without prevention we cannot reduce food waste tonnage that is generated. If, however, we have unavoidable food waste, the message is to make sure it is segregated.

Martin Kenny (Sligo-Leitrim, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ms McCoole is saying the focus is to change the habit we have generated in this country for many years of the weekly shop, whereby people go out and fill the trolley and probably end up with a large proportion of it wasted. As regards other countries, someone who lived in France told me everybody shops every day for that day. They just buy what they need for that day. That is the culture there, whereas here we seem to have the culture, probably retail-driven, of getting the big shop, the weekly shop. One of the issues is to try to get away from that. Naturally, there will be resistance to that from, in particular, the multiples and the large stores because that has been a gravy train for them. What level of engagement is there with those chains and large outlets?

Mr. David Flynn:

The main engagement we have is through the food waste charter, whereby we engage with companies to try to come forward to measure food waste, to look at the volume of waste that is produced and the reasons for it and then to commit to reducing it. That is in terms of engagement with retail, the supply chain and food service companies. That food waste charter is our primary mechanism for that. The behavioural insights are about really understanding how people are living their lives right now, what their shopping habits are and what their livelihoods are. That can then inform the design of products in terms of portion sizes, how material is presented in shops and how often people do a shop. Is it a weekly shop or is it catching something on the fly on the way home to prepare a meal? There are new food meal services whereby people can get just the right amount of product to make a meal and that can be delivered to them. There are all these types of innovation that will help with this. As I said in my opening statement, however, it is about trying to encourage a whole-systems approach to that in order that it not only responds to the way in which people actually live their lives but also gives choices in reducing the amount of food waste. If people can only buy four of something but they are going to use two of it, they are obviously going to end up-----

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Following on from Deputy Kenny's line of questioning, we have talked in this committee about the multiples not selling packs of vegetables ideal for the very point Mr. Flynn has just made: "I need only two of those, one of those and three of those."

Everybody knows they are the common ingredients but there does not seem to be any incentive or action by the larger multiples to actually provide those sort of things. Another element to the behavioural analyses of users is to do with the disincentives for using the black bin for food waste. Is there a sufficient incentive for the waste collection bodies across the country to notify their customers to tell them their bins are half full of food, are heavy because of that and costing more, and to ask the customers why they are not using their brown bin? This is just to have a logical play out of that conversation with Deputy Kenny.

Mr. David Flynn:

On the waste data that we produce, we do waste characterisation. We are collecting a representative sample of all the different bins and we are able to then feed that data back to the public, the Department and everyone who needs it to say what is typical. People's waste bills are usually broken down by bin so they should be able to see that. It does not go beyond that in the composition of what is in each bin.

Regarding the engagement of the retail sector in this and the food waste charter, the first step in everything is measure to understand where this waste is coming from in terms of committing to it and taking action. It is really around the measure of targeting a particular area rather than acting on it. If food is purchased and disposed of in the home, that is going to show up in the home waste characterisation as opposed to the retail. In 2024, two big things will happen. The circularity gap report, when produced, will be hugely useful to really design interventions, along with the EPA's characterisation data and our behavioural insights data. Matched with the targets that are coming at EU level, the rubber will start to hit the road at that stage once we have binding targets, those behavioural insights and that circulatory gap report for what is happening at an Irish level, along with the data coming from the EPA's characterisation.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for engaging on this matter. I wish to pick up on the point regarding anaerobic digestion. I take the point on the timeline. What indication is there as to what part of the overall will food waste play in anaerobic digestion? One of the opening statements mentioned insufficient capacity.

Mr. Tony Collins:

The strategy looks at organic waste in its entirely and food waste is an element of that. As I understand it, and as I stated earlier, there is a potential for 1 TWh from organic waste. From memory, the food element of that is approximately 0.5 TWh so in the scheme of things it is obviously not sufficient to meet the overall objective.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there a risk of perverse incentive or are both the biomethane strategy and anaerobic digestion strategy complementary? There is the need to feed that beast to generate energy an,d on the other hand, we are trying to reduce waste in the first place.

Mr. Tony Collins:

The biomethane strategy is going to be agri-centric in its approach and that is in line with the wider European model. Generally, organic wastes at a European level would contribute approximately 11% of the feedstock for AD plants so we would be broadly consistent with that. Regarding the implementation of the strategy, an implementation group will be set up and established. We will absolutely be working with colleagues in the waste sector to make sure they talk to each other and there is not a divergence in the implementation of the strategies.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Regarding the voluntary nature of this, there was a mention of the food waste charter and s on. There are mandatory elements in other countries. In Britain, for example, some of the really large retailers have been advocating mandatory food waste reporting.

Are there any elements that will be mandatory or is there a look towards mandatory components? The witnesses will appreciate that that is sometimes more effective than a voluntary code in driving change.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

I would point out that one of the actions in the national food waste prevention roadmap is to assess the effectiveness of the voluntary approach to see whether there is merit in looking at possibilities around mandatory reporting, and that is referring to the food waste charter. The revised charter was launched just last year so it is early days in terms of seeing how effective it is. The EPA might wish to comment on the food waste charter.

Mr. David Flynn:

To echo the Department in terms of the food waste charter specifically, it is early days. As I said, about 30 people are signed up to it at the moment and we would like to see a lot more do that. We are certainly out there trying to get people to sign up to this with a view to improving our understanding of the sector but also allowing people the opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to this. In many ways, when companies speak about sustainability, the immediate jump is to energy reduction or climate change when, as I pointed out in my statement, there is a huge opportunity for companies to improve their overall sustainable performance by focusing on food waste as one of the issues. To echo some of the comments earlier, it is a win-win situation all round in terms of cost, climate and so on.

With regard to making the food waste charter mandatory, I would say it is too early at this stage. However, very shortly, particularly if the EU targets come in, there will have to be a move to looking very closely at the policy that is needed to meet those targets, as well as the UN's SDG target, which is hugely ambitious.

Darren O'Rourke (Meath East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I see that separate food donation and redistribution is a priority action. I want to ask about the regulatory barriers and the opportunity to keep food in the system. For example, the hot school meals programme is very welcome but from speaking to primary school principals, I know there is significant food waste associated with it, and that is also the international experience. As I understand it, schools cannot give food to kids to bring home even if they know there is a shortage of food at home. The witnesses might address the regulatory barriers to redistribution and also the hot school meals programme.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

The national food waste prevention roadmap has a specific basket of actions around food redistribution and donation. Among the actions that we have committed to undertake are as follows:

- Investigate the potential impact of a prohibition on the destruction of edible food in advance of its ‘use by’ date.

- Investigate the regulatory and legal barriers to ‘Good Samaritan’ acts of donation and whether mandatory donation of edible food from retail outlets would reduce food waste.

- Using the EPA’s Food Waste Charter, support a voluntary target with retailers and the processing industry for a percentage of edible food to be donated.

There is still work to be carried out in looking at the regulatory barriers to understand exactly what are the barriers so this can inform further policy in this area.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before I bring in Deputy Whitmore, I want to follow up on the point I was making about incentivising the waste collection companies to help their customers to help the planet. Is there sufficient authority within the EPA and the local authorities to properly regulate those collection companies to inform their customers that they are literally making more out of those customers because customers are doing certain things, whereas if they use their brown bin, there is a reduction in overall cost because it is done on a weight basis? Does the EPA in particular, or the local authorities, have a role in helping those companies to help their consumer base?

Another point I wanted to raise was regarding transparency, which again goes back to the point about the charging relationships with their customers. Do the EPA and the Department feel that sufficiently robust arrangements are in place?

Unfortunately, I want to go back to the old conversation we have had many times about packaging. We need to work with our European partners, but we must also take a significant lead where possible to try to reduce packaging. I will go back to the point I was making about the pack for a stew, a stir fry or whatever it is. We just do not have the ability to walk into a store where a recyclable container is available so we can go and pick the individual items we want. This is really only available in the larger stores or in the slightly artisan-style supermarkets, rather than in the large, low-cost multiples. If we are going to turn the corner on food waste, then that is a very clear and, dare I say it, simple solution. It is simple for us. It might be difficult for them, but that is their problem. They would be charging for it. We must figure out how to do this and get it brought in effectively. I put those questions to the witnesses.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

I have a comment on the regulatory side of the information and awareness piece. As we mentioned earlier, new regulations came into force on 31 December that require waste collectors to provide all household customers with a biowaste bin. The regulations also require collectors to provide a food waste pack to any customer who is provided with a biowaste bin for the first time. That pack includes the kitchen caddy, roll-out, certified compostable liners, and a leaflet, which form a starting point for the provision of the collection service. On the centralised pricing structure, we can come back to the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach when we consult with our colleagues in the Department on the waste collection policy.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would be very helpful if Mr. Quirke could do so. He might want to ask them to send a note to us via the secretariat. That would be most beneficial. I call Mr. Flynn.

Mr. David Flynn:

As Mr. Quirke outlined, the EPA has less of a role in waste collection. I will give some statistics that might be helpful to the committee. In terms of total packaging, there is a legal target of 65% by 2025. At the moment, we are at 58%, so it looks as though that target is within reach, but how it will work out remains to be seen. In terms of plastic packaging, though, there is a 50% recycling target by 2025 and at the moment we are at approximately 28%, so the indications are that we will not meet that target but it remains to be seen.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Flynn for that. I thank Mr. Quirke for mentioning the caddies, which I was actually going to ask about. Is there is there any data to show that they are effective and that they are incentivising people to use their brown bins? If there is, would it not be beneficial for us to roll it out on a national basis? We must try to incentivise people to actually use those brown bins effectively so we can hit our target, as has been previously discussed. Aside from caddies, are there other methods in play to incentivise and educate the general public, as one of my colleagues mentioned, about the importance of using these bins appropriately?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

The expansion of the brown bins is currently being supported by a comprehensive education and awareness campaign. MyWaste.ie is an important resource for the general public to get guidance and tips about segregating food waste and it has been rolled out. As I mentioned earlier, there is the national food waste recycling week, which is undertaken and co-ordinated by the local authority sector as well. That is very important to bring public awareness to this issue.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses. I call Deputy Whitmore.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee.

I want to concentrate on an incredibly important issue when it comes to food wastage in Ireland and that is the best before date. Interestingly, neither the EPA or the Department mentioned it in their submissions. Every year, 1 million tonnes of food is thrown away and 55% of Irish people throw away food based on the best before date, which is an arbitrary data that producers place on their products. Safefood Ireland is the watchdog for food safety. It has said that there is no safety risk or health and safety reason for a best before date.

My first questions are for the EPA. What work has the agency done on the best before date? Do they think we should legislate to remove the best before date? In other countries supermarkets have taken the lead in some instances on this matter and the use of a best before date on products has been banned in other countries.

In respect of the Department, we have talked about voluntary versus mandatory requirements. The reality is that the bottom line for companies is they will be hit by getting rid of the best before date because they make more money, the more food is wasted. I believe, therefore, a voluntary option will not work and we need mandatory implementation. Does the Department believe a mandatory option is needed and has it examined the matter?

Mr. David Flynn:

It is extremely important that people understand when food has gone beyond its useful or safe date. There is confusion about the best before date and the use by date. A lot of the work that we do concerns behavioural insights and understanding of what is avoidable food waste, why food is being wasted and why people are purchasing so much food. The best before date is one aspect of it, which features in our campaigns.

On mandatory implementation, I will let the Department officials comment on the legislation. I know from consulting with colleagues around Europe that this is an issue around Europe. Countries are moving at different paces but this issue features in discussions on food waste targets at a European level. It is one of the policy instruments that is available to allow a better understanding, particularly around dairy products that might have a best before date but it is very obvious whether a product is edible through its look, smell, etc. Similarly with fruits and other products that, to a certain extent, have arbitrary best before dates applies. There is a lot of potential. I ask Ms McCoole to briefly comment on the work that we have done on best before dates.

Ms Fiona McCoole:

The EPA supported the Department in 2022, and the Department of Health, regarding an interdepartmental working group on food labelling, which considered developing Ireland's position on the EU Commission's package of revisions of food information to consumers regulation, under the Commission's farm to fork strategy and Beating Cancer Plan. We had five elements, one of which concerned front of pack nutrition labelling and nutrient profiles. Another element was revising the current date marking rules for use by and best before.

We have, from our behavioural insights work, found that the population has a good understanding of the difference between use by and best before but do not necessarily demonstrate the corresponding behaviours and, therefore, we would advocate for better practices around use by and best before dates on packaging. The reasons that people give for wasting food are as follows: 68% said that passing the use by date was one of their main reasons and 45% said passing the best before date was one of their main reasons. We know that the use be date is the health and safety aspect. One of our campaigns has been that the best before date does not relate to food safety and food is still okay to eat after that. The focus of advice from the stop food waste programme is to reinforce the message that best before dates do not relate to food safety and it is still okay to use food after that. The main recommendation is always plan to use one's food and do not leave it to the point where one is not sure whether one is going to eat it anymore.

We have worked with Safefood Ireland and the FSAI on advice that we have given on freezing and use by dates.

We have collaborated on complementary campaigns with Stop Food Waste and Safefood on communications around food safety and food waste prevention. We have had dedicated campaigns on this too through Stop Food Waste. It is something we are very conscious of. For example, at Christmas we share information around food safety at Christmas, linking to best before and use by dates. Later this year, Too Good to Go is planning a campaign around best before dates. We plan to support that as well. It is absolutely a focus. We need to make sure that all of our campaign messaging is very much linked to improving behaviours so that people are very much aware and they change their behaviour to make sure to take action. That could be to freeze something. One thing we found was that consumers did not realise you could freeze food up to the use by date and that is a prevention activity. If you have space in the freezer, you can put your food in there rather than throwing it out at that stage.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

On the regulatory side of things, date marking on food products is controlled under EU Regulation No. 1169 of 2011, which is the food information to consumers, FIC, regulation. The European Commission is proposing a revision of the FIC regulation that focuses on a number of elements of it, including in relation to date marking on food products. The Irish Government has been developing a policy position on the European Commission's approach to food labelling and packaging. That has been developed by a cross-government group headed by the Department of Health. It is working closely with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, our own Department, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and other key stakeholders such as the Environmental Protection Agency. That is on the regulatory side.

To add to what I mentioned earlier about key roadmap actions, the food waste prevention roadmap does acknowledge the role of date marking. As I said earlier, we will undertake an action to investigate the potential impact of the prohibition on the destruction of edible food in advance of its use by date and also the regulatory barriers around good Samaritan acts of donation.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It seems to me that this should be a simple thing. We are not going to meet our targets on food wastage. One twelfth of greenhouse gases are created by food wastage and here we have a problem that does not need to be there because there is no reason to have a use by date on a product. Rather than having meetings, setting up groups and having analysis, should we not be more proactive and ambitious and just bring this in? There is no benefit to having use by dates other than commercial benefit to companies. Where did the use by date come from? What was its origin?

Mr. Brian Quirke:

My understanding is the use by date relates to the safety aspects of food waste.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sorry, I meant to refer to best before dates rather than use by dates.

Mr. Brian Quirke:

The best before date relates more to quality. A number of categories of food are subject to the regulation that they must have a best before date. This is all being considered under the new regulation, acknowledging that date marking has a key role to play.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry, Deputy, but we have to move on.

Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Just one point. I think our problem is we are continually focusing on consumers and educating them instead of putting the onus on the producers to do what they should be doing.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Whitmore. I will now move to Deputy O’Sullivan.

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is a specific question for the EPA. Ms McCoole mentioned anaerobic digestion earlier. What role does the EPA feel that anaerobic digestion has in the circular economy in relation to the food sector?

Mr. David Flynn:

As I said in my opening statement, above all else, prevention is absolutely the No. 1 area in the waste hierarchy where much of the policy and a lot of our work is based.

Then, as regards reuse, you would look to redistribute the food to beneficial human use and then animal feed.

As regards recycling, there is a lot of embedded nutrient and a lot of embedded energy in food, so if it cannot be used for human consumption through redistribution of surplus food and cannot be used in animal feed or for some other beneficial, value-added product, you are then into recycling and recovery. Ahead of disposal, you would really want to look at things that recover that embedded energy and those embedded nutrients from it. Anaerobic digestion is one way of doing that. It is not the only way, and you can have composting. Anaerobic digestion has a role to play. As we said earlier, we need to be conscious that it does not become too easy an outlet for food waste, that there are not - I think someone used the phrase "feed the beast" earlier - incentives produced such that food waste then displaces higher elements in the food hierarchy such as redistribution to human nutrition and prevention. The system needs to be carefully constructed in that regard. Anaerobic digestion absolutely has a role to play. It is producing green energy, recovering nutrients and recovering the embedded energy in that product. Again, we need to be sure that the outputs from it are used beneficially in that it is displacing rather than adding to nutrients that are being added to land. It needs to be managed carefully but it certainly has a role to play and is technology that-----

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The first part of Mr. Flynn's answer, in particular, plays out to the feeling out there among the sector that the EPA sees very little role for anaerobic digestion in dealing with waste. If I may expand on that a bit further, the experience for those who are either already involved in anaerobic digestion or trying to get involved in it is that the EPA just does not want anaerobic digestion or that it is pretty much against it. One term that was used was that it has almost a vindictive approach to anaerobic digestion. This plays out if you take, for example, the testing of digestate. That is carried out by the EPA, but the EPA has a UK standard, a European standard and then the EPA standard, which is almost unachievable. It is the same when it comes to the lagoon technology and the use of lagoons. It has a UK standard, a European standard and then individual tests - this goes back to the digestate as well - or independent testing done. The EPA always seems to find that fault. It plays out and harks back to the fact that anaerobic digestion just has not been rolled out in this country in terms of its role in dealing with waste and providing renewable energy. There is a feeling out there that the EPA is almost putting up roadblocks in that regard. I have visited a lot of these smaller plants. They deal with waste from chicken processing, pig processing, distilleries - all valid waste. Most of it has seen its end of life - there is no other use - and the intention is to use this to provide energy instead of burning fossil fuels. The feeling out there, however, is that the EPA just does not want to have anything to do with anaerobic digestion.

Mr. David Flynn:

I reject that completely. As regards the EPA, we have licensed anaerobic digesters and we have provided input into the Department's own development of the strategy. Anaerobic digestion absolutely has a role to play, as I have just said, in the development of a holistic system for dealing with food waste, clean energy production and biomethane in terms of displacing carbon-intensive areas. We will certainly come back to the committee on the details of the testing and look at that, but-----

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps comparisons of the EU and UK standards as well.

Mr. David Flynn:

-----these are large, complex activities which need to be managed. There is a licensing process that needs to be followed and there are conditions attached to those licences. There is potential for negative environmental impact from anaerobic digestion. There are both benefits and risks that need to be managed. As regards the EPA licensing process, as I said earlier, if we are going to have 140 new fairly significant plants in the country, we need to make sure there is capacity within the planning and environmental permitting system to allow that to happen.

Whether or not a particular plant goes ahead, the EPA does not have a view against anaerobic digestion. In fact, as I said before, we have licensed several plants and we are in the process of doing that.

Christopher O'Sullivan (Cork South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will finish on that. As a member of this committee which deals with climate action, climate change and the environment, I do not want to see any practices that in any way harm the environment, but I am just giving feedback from constituents of mine and also from other people in the sector. It kind of played out in Mr. Flynn's initial answer in that he described a lot of caution around anaerobic digestion. This plays out when we compare it to Europe. I am not saying that we should have 10,000 plants here, but it is a proven technology on the Continent and we are going nowhere with it. I genuinely feel it could play such a vital role on a co-operative model where farms and food processing factories could feed into it. I am not talking about ADs on a massive scale but smaller scale ADs. The people in the sector feel they are being stymied at every corner by the EPA. I just want to give that feedback.

Mr. David Flynn:

I might just respond to that. For the information of the committee, what we will do is send the number of AD plant applications that we have received and that we have issued, with the conditions attached. We will also send a copy of our submission on anaerobic digestion to the Department just to assure the committee that the EPA has a role to play.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Flynn very much. I have just one follow-up question in the four minutes that remain. I invite Deputy Bruton to please ask a brief question.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to ask about the EPA's charter. Mr. Flynn referred to waste companies signing up. They are pivotal in this. The charter itself does not suggest using FoodCloud, for example, zero-packaging areas or menu formats that might reduce food waste. Why not get far more specific and go after the sources of food waste in the supply chain where we can actually see a behavioural change and look for people to sign up to that? I say that especially now that the potential of compulsory targets is very imminent. Surely it is a golden opportunity to pull all these people in, not on a voluntary basis but by means of a summons. Obviously, they can refuse, but it is much more a sectoral expectation of the sector rather than something that is an add on that they might sign up to voluntarily.

Mr. David Flynn:

I think I referred to 30 members earlier, it is 35 members that we have at the moment. The charter has been around for a few years but we relaunched it last year. It is targeted but more expanded into manufacturing, food retail and restaurant and food service. Initially, it was not all of those sectors. We have 18 members from manufacturing and processing and we have five on the retail side. The names are available on our website. We have 12 on the restaurant and food service side. We have started off and we are trying to increase the number of participants in the charter. We would be open to any sector becoming involved in it. At this stage it is voluntary. Depending on what comes from Europe, there could be different approaches to that. What we would like to see is a critical mass of people from the manufacturing, food retail and service sectors getting involved at this stage. That is where we see the greatest potential at this time. We are open to any company becoming involved.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps the committee could inject a little bit of urgency into it.

Mr. David Flynn:

Yes.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone very much. That concludes our time for this session. I thank the witnesses both for their attendance and their engagement with the committee. We will suspend for five minutes and resume in public session with our next set of witnesses. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On behalf of the committee, I welcome the following stakeholders to this resumed meeting. From FoodCloud I welcome Ms Angela Ruttledge, head of public engagement, and Ms Aoibheann O'Brien, co-founder and director of development and innovation; from Food Drink Ireland I welcome Mr. Paul Kelly, director, Ms Linda Stuart-Trainor, deputy director, and Mr. Kevin Maher, environmental sustainability executive; and from the Circular Bioeconomy Research Group I welcome Mr. James Gaffey and Dr. Helena McMahon, co-directors.

I will read a note on privilege. I remind the witnesses of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If their statements, therefore, are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I call Ms Ruttledge to begin her opening statement.

Ms Angela Ruttledge:

I thank the Chair, Deputies and Senators for meeting us to talk about the circular economy and food waste. Up to 40% of all food produced worldwide is wasted each year. Food waste globally in 2022 was more than 1 billion tonnes, 132 kg per person, or 1 billion meals a day. This waste comes at a cost of $1 trillion annually. Food loss and waste contribute to between 8% and 10% of human-made greenhouse gas emissions. It is meanwhile estimated that up to 783 million people are facing malnourishment. In Ireland, more than one in 11 people are experiencing food poverty. It is morally wrong to waste this food when we have the opportunity and the systems to share it. We are grateful for the opportunity to explain FoodCloud’s solutions to this problem, our impact, the benefits for all food systems stakeholders and our future focus in Ireland and internationally.

FoodCloud is an Irish-registered charity that redistributes surplus food to alleviate food insecurity, increase social inclusion and reduce the environmental and climate impacts of food loss and waste. This is in support of UN SDG 12.3 for 2030 to reduce food waste by 50%, reduce food loss all along the supply chain and of SDG 2 on zero hunger. In 2013 there was no national food redistribution solution in Ireland. In response, FoodCloud developed two core solutions that are complementary, enabling food rescue at each stage of the value chain.

Our food rescue technology, Foodiverse, directly connects retailers and food businesses that have surplus food, to local community groups that can use that food. The technology we developed is being used by food redistribution organisations in the UK, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Kenya and Indonesia. We also have three hubs located in Cork, Dublin and Galway. From here we can redistribute larger volumes of donated food. FoodCloud is also the Department of Social Protection partner organisation for nationwide management of the ESF+ food support programme.

FoodCloud is always looking for more ways to ensure food goes to people and not to waste. FoodCloud kitchen launched in 2022 and is located at Ace Enterprise Park, Clondalkin, Dublin. We prepare meals on wheels for a homecare service provider, as well as for use in FoodCloud’s food truck at markets, festivals and corporate events, and at a café at Richmond Barracks, Inchicore, Dublin.

As well as using surplus food, the kitchen offers opportunities for community building and education. In addition, FoodCloud recently launched Thrive Together, an education programme that provides support, resources and guidance that can build capacities in communities for food surplus redistribution and food waste reduction. To date, FoodCloud has facilitated the redistribution of more than 280 million meals. That is more than 180,000 tonnes of food to more than 10,000 community partners in every county in Ireland and across five other countries. FoodCloud employs 92 staff and 22 community employment scheme colleagues and relies on support from 50 community volunteers. Our activities are funded through a mix of grants and donations and revenue from services.

We have described the policy and legal context of Ireland's obligation in more detail in the appendix supplied to the committee. Ireland's national food waste prevention roadmap recognises the country's commitment under UN SDG 12.3 and identifies 28 key priority actions to achieve a 50% reduction in food waste by 2030. Ultimately, in five and a half years' time or potentially by the end of the lifetime of the next Government, there will be economic, environmental, legal and reputational consequences for Ireland if we do not reduce food waste by 50% and make significant inroads to reduce food loss all along the supply chain.

I want to refer to the three priorities FoodCloud has identified to help meet these obligations. The first is the grower's project. FoodCloud is seeking to establish a national programme for the redistribution of surplus produce from growers who would not otherwise be able to donate the surplus due to cost, to community groups across the country. FoodCloud received funding from the rural innovation and development fund in 2021, 2022 and 2023 and to continue the project in 2024. The pilot was also funded by Tesco. Last year, FoodCloud aimed to redistribute 60 tonnes of fresh produce through the current phase of the project. By January 2024, working with two local development companies in Donegal and Foodshare Kerry, we had redistributed 122.5 tonnes of produce to 31 community organisations, supporting five farmers, within rural communities. That is equivalent to more than 290,000 meals. This project is aligned with the mission of Food Vision 2030 to create viable and resilient primary producers with enhanced well-being and helping the rural economy, reducing farm level food loss and providing a consistent supply of nutritious Irish produce to charities nationwide and meeting the key priority actions of the roadmap. These are supporting a significant increase in the capacity in scale of the surplus food redistribution sector and supporting social enterprises and community-based initiatives that promote surplus food redistribution. FoodCloud is seeking multi-annual funding to be able to scale this project.

Regarding virtual food banking, in partnership with the global food banking network, FoodCloud has introduced its technology-led model for surplus food redistribution in Africa and south-east Asia. We have projects under way in Kenya and Indonesia. We aim to leverage the technology we have developed in Ireland to support our partners in developing countries that are on the front lines of climate breakdown and food poverty. For the Kenya project, FoodCloud was awarded the Irish Aid enterprise fund for international climate action grant. Connecting donors with surplus food directly with the communities in need of the food makes food redistribution more efficient and reduces the amount of waste going to landfill. This project is aligned with Irish Aid's objectives to support lower- and middle-income countries and Food Vision 2030's aim to be a leader in sustainable food systems with an innovative, competitive and resilient agrifood sector, driven by technology and talent.

The current funding comes to an end in September 2024 and FoodCloud is seeking multi-annual funding for this project. Collaborative action, advocacy, data and insights provide support for Ireland's national food waste prevention roadmap. While we are incredibly proud of our ten-year milestone and FoodCloud's impact on the projects outlined above, we know that our work is chipping the tip of an iceberg. For example, the 3,723 tons of surplus redistributed in Ireland by FoodCloud in 2023 represents just 0.5% of the total food wasted in Ireland. Our January 2024 survey found that 70% of those organisations reported an increased demand for food assistance, with 23% finding it difficult to meet this growing need. As part of the EU platform on food losses and waste, Champions 12.3, the European Food Banks Federation and the Global FoodBanking Network, GFN, FoodCloud is advocating for measures to reduce food loss and waste and support food rescue and redistribution. It is crucial that the Irish Government continues to drive and to invest in the key priorities listed in the roadmap. We believe that UN SDG 12.3 and the ambitions set out in the draft amendments to the waste framework directive will only be achievable through continued and increased collaborative action to unlock food surplus and reduce waste. Technological solutions and investments that can drive scale and changes in policy and legislation that will support food loss and waste reduction in an Irish context are also important. We draw the committee's attention to the references in both the draft European Parliament amendments to the waste framework directive and in the United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, food waste index to the importance of co-ordinated and collaborative action across public and private stakeholders in tackling the problem of food loss and waste.

FoodCloud will continue to focus on collaborative innovation and knowledge sharing with the Government, the EPA and our network of food and community partners. We are particularly focused on supporting, where our expertise allows, implementation of the key priority actions and the roadmap. Our ambition is to exponentially increase Ireland's and all nations' ability to redistribute surplus in order to avoid the unnecessary damage caused by our food systems, combat climate breakdown and meet our collective hunger prevention goals.

In conclusion, therefore, we are requesting the committee's support for the following initiatives: establishment of a national programme for redistribution of farm-level surplus; virtual food banking in low- and middle-income countries; and investment of the resources required for full and timely implementation of the key priority actions set out in the roadmap.

Mr. Paul Kelly:

I thank the committee for the invitation to appear today. The food and drink sector is Ireland's largest indigenous manufacturing sector, with a turnover of more than €29 billion and accounting for 165,000 jobs. Government has set out ambitious sustainability targets for the sector. Food and drink manufacturing must play its part in achieving emission reductions of 35% across the enterprise sector by 2030. Food Vision 2030, the ten-year national agrifood strategy, has a vision of Ireland becoming a world leader in sustainable food systems. The waste action plan for a circular economy touches on many areas where the sector can play a role, particularly around food waste, plastic and packaging waste and byproducts.

Food Drink Ireland, FDI, represents 150 food and drink manufacturers and suppliers. The sustainability group within FDI was established to bring together subject-matter experts from member companies to discuss and disseminate information on sustainability developments. Our members are committed to contributing to the creation of a circular economy and working collaboratively along the supply chain with suppliers, retailers and consumers to support sustainable consumption patterns. Our forthcoming report, Prepared Consumer Food Sustainability Report: Driving better practices across the supply chain, will give a sense of the level of commitment, investment and innovation from the sector. Food and drink companies will continue to push for improved circularity and environmental performance of their products, wherever possible, while ensuring the highest level of quality and safety.

It is worth noting that the food waste generated in the sector is very different from that generated in other sectors along the supply chain. Food waste from the manufacturing sector includes foods unsuitable consumption or processing, for example, unsafe products or product returns, and process wastes, for example, waste arising during processing and cleaning and some animal tissues issues. Many companies are implementing initiatives to reduce food waste according to the food waste hierarchy. These include rigorous supply chain management to minimise surplus, clear date markings to reduce household waste and redistributing surplus food through organisations like FoodCloud. Additionally, inedible food waste is processed into pet food and food waste is converted into bioenergy via anaerobic digestion. While Ireland has few digesters at present, the sector has growth potential, if the right policies are put in place. FDI has worked with the Environmental Protection Agency to share the food waste charter with industry and an increasing number of our members are signing up to the EPA's food waste charter.

Packaging is also essential to bring many foods and beverages to our tables. It has a number of important functions, two of the most important being to ensure food safety and to reduce food waste. Food and beverage packaging plays a key role in protecting and preserving the product. Modern packaging plays a central role in maintaining product integrity during manufacturing, handling and distribution from the factory to the consumer's table. Food labels on packaging provide important health and safety information, such as allergen declarations, along with instructions for the safe storage and preparation of products. Companies recognise the need to minimise the environmental impact of their packaging while maintaining food safety for consumers. FDI members are actively working on initiatives such as phasing out hard-to-recycle materials, reducing complex packaging combinations in favour of simpler single material formats and developing packaging that promotes reuse or higher recycling rates, such as polyethylene terephthalate, PET. They are also setting ambitious targets in creating markets for food-grade recycling content, investing significantly to achieve these goals.

Government policy should support these efforts by providing more resources for recycling infrastructure, continuing to work with the waste sector to encourage investment in circular economy technologies and supporting the development of closed-loop recycling processes, particularly for food-grade materials. Additionally, a harmonised, science-based approach across Ireland and the EU should be encouraged and the role of packaging in ensuring food safety must be prioritised.

The rate and complexity of packaging legislation coming from the EU in recent years have been challenging for industry. The single-use plastics directive, in particular, had wide-ranging impacts for our industry. While we share the goals to reduce marine litter, the implementation timelines have been difficult to achieve, in particular due to delays in secondary legislation and vital implementing guidance from the European Commission. Companies need time to adapt their supply chains to any new rules and to assess the possible impacts on everything from safety and shelf life to the cost of production. Now the packaging and packaging waste regulation is near finalisation, introducing new rules and targets before there has been adequate opportunity for reflection and analysis of the efficacy of the single-use plastics directive.

Food production is a highly regulated sector, with extensive rules in place to ensure that consumers' health is protected. This is a constantly evolving landscape that is and must continue to be driven by the latest scientific evidence. Part of this evolution must be the continued focus on ensuring that food safety is maintained within the context of environmental regulatory developments. Equipment used within manufacturing processes and packaging used to protect, store and transport food are all examples of food contact materials. There are existing regulatory frameworks for food contact materials that need to be considered in tandem with any development of packaging legislation. Additionally, the unique role of packaging intended for use within the food sector must be recognised and protected, and adequate safeguarding measures should be implemented to ensure that its availability is maintained.

In order to assist the industry in meeting myriad evolving regulations, there should be a clear line of sight on the roles the relevant Departments and agencies play in the governance of this legislation.

Food Drink Ireland has a Skillnet, which works with companies in the food and drink sector to address skills gaps and access government funding to develop and deliver industry-specific learning programmes. In recent years, courses such as our master's in sustainable food systems, done in conjunction with Atlantic Technological University, and our certificate in sustainable food packaging have clearly supported the move towards a circular economy and have been very much in demand across the industry.

The food and drink sector is committed to contributing to the creation of a circular economy. This transition represents a major change in how society and economy operate, but the industry is facing the challenge head-on, with high levels of investment and innovation. The Government has an important role to play in supporting the changes that are needed. In particular, we call on the Government to provide financing to incentivise investment in carbon abatement measures, more sustainable packaging solutions and green transport initiatives; provide more supports for continuing development of recycling infrastructure; provide supports and incentives to scale up the bioeconomy; continue public sector investment in industry-led applied and fundamental research; ensure a taxation environment which encourages investment in innovation; and ensure that appropriate focus is maintained on food safety within the context of sustainability developments and innovations.

I thank members again for the opportunity to address the committee.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Mr. Kelly. I call Mr. Gaffey and Dr. McMahon.

Mr. James Gaffey:

We thank the Chair and the committee for the opportunity to present. This is a joint statement from James Gaffey and Dr. Helena McMahon, directors of the circular bioeconomy research group at Munster Technological University.

The development of circular economy within the food sector is a growing trend, demonstrated by the growing number of food companies adopting circular solutions to create more sustainable value chains and bringing new products to market. This has been driven by a combination of innovation, technology commercialisation and enabling policies such as the EU circular economy action plan and Ireland's circular economy strategy and bioeconomy action plan.

Many consider the circular economy in food to be a food waste reduction strategy; however, that is a narrow view and only part of the story. The key message we want to convey today is that large-scale deployment of circular economy and, in particular, circular bioeconomy across Ireland's agrifood and marine sector has the potential to transform food supply chains, benefiting primary producers, businesses, consumers and communities. This can make a very significant contribution to achieving Ireland's 2050 targets and transition to a climate-neutral economy.

Primary producers who supply the raw materials for Ireland's food sector face significant environmental targets and the challenge of remaining profitable in a world competing for resources and markets. Through adoption of circular bioeconomy models, Ireland's primary producers can achieve more sustainable food production, including waste reduction and valorisation, nutrient recycling and renewable energy production, diversifying farm incomes and reducing imports and farm emissions.

In Ireland, this is exemplified through the Farm Zero C project, which is developing a climate-neutral dairy farm using circular and climate mitigation strategies, a model which, to date, can support a 36% reduction in farm emissions and savings of €18,000 per annum to an average Irish dairy farm. This approach can be scaled to dairy farms across Ireland, significantly supporting achievement of emissions targets.

Another area of enormous potential for upscaling the circular economy across the food sector is the deployment of biorefineries. These biomass processing facilities convert biomass and waste streams from all sectors of the food system - for example, grass, tillage, meat, marine and municipal waste - into innovative, high-value, sustainable, bio-based products with export potential. CircBio is pioneering this approach with Carbery farmers, BiOrbic and others and has demonstrated biorefinery technology on farms in Cork, converting grass and clover into cattle feed, protein for monogastrics, biomaterials, high-value ingredients and energy, increasing the value obtained from grass while reducing dependency on soy and energy imports. Other companies progressing this model include Tirlán, exploring conversion of dairy processing residues and waste into biodegradable plastic. Marine companies such as Brandon, BioAtlantis and Nutramara are using green chemistry and biotechnology to create biofertilisers, food, feed and cosmetic ingredients from seaweed. This provides a route to capture carbon, reduce NPK use, improve soil security and upscale the bio-based industries in Ireland.

The circular economy can also provide opportunities for new synergies to be developed between companies to share resources and close loops. For example, in Longford, St. Mel's brewery and Panelto Foods are collaborating on an industrial symbiosis model in which waste bread is used to create a new beer, while a new bread is produced using outputs from the new beer production process in a closed loop. BiaSol is producing functional ingredients from brewing waste in a B2B model and producing branded products. Kerry Group has strategically placed sustainable food systems as a core strategic pillar and is innovating across its portfolio towards a more circular bio-economy model across its supply chain.

Dr. Helena McMahon:

There is a huge opportunity to develop circular processes and business models to close loops connecting resource flows with essential everyday products and services. Within the food system, this goes from farm to fork to consumers and on to end of life. To support this, work is ongoing in CircBio and elsewhere to quantify resource and material flows across our economy to better understand the potential for improved circularity. Industry and enterprise clusters, such as the circular bioeconomy cluster based at CircBio, are playing key roles as brokers in a circular economy, fostering networking and new value chain development. I refer, for example, to the clusters working on an all-island basis through projects such as BioDirect, which aims to create all-island circular bioeconomy value chains, and CircBioCityWaste, which is converting municipal wastewater into biofertilser and bioenergy.

On the market side, a growing number of Irish brands have been transitioning to the use of more circular ingredients and the development of more circular products. Brands such as Lee Strand and Keelings have included bio-based and compostable materials in their packaging to address the plastics and carbon-neutral challenges. Food producers in the bakery, dairy, meat, fisheries and brewing sectors are embracing regenerative agriculture practices.

Research at CircBio indicates that the trend towards greater uptake of sustainable materials among brands is likely to continue, although several challenges, such as high cost, continue to exist. Our research into Irish consumer behaviours indicates that consumers have a general preference for more sustainable products; however, choice is impacted by cost and a lack of awareness among consumers as to how to actually select sustainable alternatives. There needs to be an improvement in awareness and knowledge of the circular economy at all levels of society to bring this concept into wider adoption.

The skills gap is a critical issue and potential bottleneck in the scaling of the circular economy and circular bioeconomy. CircBio and MTU have been leading the way nationally in delivering sustainable education from the Springboard-funded certificate in circular economy and the master's in bioeconomy with business and through HCI3-funded project IKC3, Ireland's knowledge centre in carbon, climate and community action, which has developed and is delivering a range of micro-credentials in climate entrepreneurship and leadership, among other topics, for industry, the public sector and primary and secondary schools.

The upscaling of the circular economy has significant potential to contribute to a just transition on an all-island basis and to the achievement of 2050 targets towards a decarbonised Ireland, in particular for the agrifood and marine sectors.

We urge continued support for early movers to test and implement integrated circular value chains. Ireland needs to incentivise the deployment of sustainable and circular business models, provide investment instruments in fiscal policies, support knowledge exchange, networking and regulatory supports across the areas of innovation, entrepreneurship, technology development and skills and talent.

We thank the committee for the opportunity to present this information and welcome any questions the members would like to ask.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Dr. McMahon and all our speakers for their opening statements. I call Deputy Bruton.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I recall Chris Horne saying years ago in the context of research in Ireland that we have lots of interesting launches but what we need is an admiralty. Looking at the evidence here, that is my sense. My question to everyone is: how do we scale up?

In terms of those with whom Ms Ruttland deals, which I presume are some of the big food providers and the retail sector, how much penetration has FoodCloud in that? What potential is there to scale in that sector? I understand that France has introduced zero tolerance on waste at a certain retail level. Is that completely different from the environment in Ireland?

On the food and drink sector, we just heard that only 35 people signed up to the food waste programme. FoodCloud has 150 members. Presumably IBEC has members in the waste sector and many others who are not in food processing in the supply chain. If this is something that we all recognise that we need to be on a rapid change then why is there such a low level of take-up? Would IBEC support the kind of approach that seems to be taken in the Netherlands where there is a sort of compact of the whole supply chain? That is that it is not just the food processors but looking up the chain to the primary producers and down the supply chain through retail and into consumers so that you start to get joined-up initiatives. It makes enormous sense and we heard earlier that everyone wins from this.

If we are to present the bioeconomy opportunity to farmers, can we now see a profitable pathway for them that in five or ten years they can see it yielding profit or are we still in an uncertain environment with costs and barriers?

Second, is there any sustainability conflict in building this biochain? Will it mean using fertilisers to grow more grass that leaches out into the environment, or whatever, or is that balanced by the presumption of a lower herd that presumably washes away somewhat? It is not the same emissions but it does have other benefits. How far are we on this? Can we scale this or is it an interesting opportunity that is still a bit out on the horizon?

Ms Angela Ruttledge:

On penetration, FoodCloud works with 186 food businesses in Ireland. They are a mix of multinationals down to small craft traders. We work with all the multiples in Ireland, that is, all the retailers so we have good penetration in the retail sector. There is still opportunity in manufacturing and processing and we see much opportunity in the area of agriculture recovery and the growers project that I mentioned in primary production.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

And that is not the food waste, as we heard earlier.

Ms Angela Ruttledge:

No, exactly. It is not even measured properly, never mind tackled. We see huge potential to scale up there.

On the elements required to scale, it feels like everything is coming together now with the roadmap. The legislation is on the horizon from the EU but it feels like what we need is more resources and more investment in the capacity of the redistribution sector.

We also need more headcount to ensure that we are sharing all of our knowledge.

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does that investment come from the State or from the entire supply chain seeing the benefit distributed?

Ms Angela Ruttledge:

That is a very good question. I think it can come from both but I think the State probably needs to lead on it.

On the mandatory food donation law, the Deputy mentioned France. Mandatory food donation is an example of a policy lever that may have an impact on the amount of food that we can redistribute. It was introduced in France in 2016. There has been some feedback from France around the quality of the food being donated at this stage. There is also a crisis in relation to the number of volunteers they can use to redistribute the food. There is work to be done in Ireland on investing in capacity of the redistribution sector before we would look at mandatory donation. I also think there is an opportunity to share more knowledge with food businesses and community partners around encouraging redistribution.

Mr. Paul Kelly:

We would certainly like to see higher numbers. It is something on which we have been encouraging our members. We had the EPA before our sustainability group late last year to give a detailed presentation on the food waste charter. That was with the aim of increasing the take up. It is something we have been putting out regularly to our members. Again, when we are reporting to them on today’s meeting, one of the things we will emphasise will be the-----

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there a sort of silo issue as well, that the waste is not in the food even though they will be collecting it? Is IBEC a bit siloed in that way in terms of a circular strategy?

Mr. Paul Kelly:

No, I do not think so. We obviously look at things horizontally and vertically from a sectoral perspective but while we have a particular sectoral focus, we do not do it in isolation. We do a lot of these things in conjunction with our colleagues in the retail sector, in particular, who obviously have representation in IBEC too. My colleague, Mr. Maher, may wish to add to that.

Mr. Kevin Maher:

On the food waste charter, as Mr. Kelly said, we had the EPA before our FDI sustainability group, which we run and which meets regularly. At the end of June, the EPA is running a food waste charter event. We have shared that event with the members. We hope that on the back of that we will get more signatories to the charter. From a food waste perspective, many of our members approach it through origin green so they all have specific targets and actions through that. Therefore, it is about trying to couple-up the origin green with the food waste charter.

Mr. James Gaffey:

I would like to comment on the bioeconomy and where we are at now in the business model and farmers being able to take these up on the farm. When Dr. McMahon and I first started looking at this, we were looking overseas at what people were doing in other countries around putting in infrastructure on the ground. We had to go over there to see this and then bring ideas back home. We are now at the stage where the Government is starting to invest in demonstration projects which are in a practical setting - for example, working with Carbery farmers and others to demonstrate these technologies, to test business models and markets and working with them to show how products can work. Some of the things we are doing in grass, for example, is producing protein and this is being tested as a replacement for soy bean meal. We import a lot of soy, for example, so this would be an Irish alternative. We are definitely making a lot of progress in a more scaled setting and the next stage will be to move it up to the commercial level. I do not think we are too far away. Some of the business models we have been looking at overseas, which would have been at the more demonstration scale we are at now are now moving to commercial level. There is definitely potential to do this in quite a short time frame.

On sustainability, impacting, out-scaling and so on, it is case-by-case. It depends on how we implement it. If we do things in an unsustainable way, we will have unsustainable results but I would say that with the Irish interpretation of the bioeconomy and what is coming from Europe in terms of its bioeconomy strategy, there is much more awareness on the need to implement these circular bioeconomy ideas in a way that is within the ecological boundaries so that we are taking into account and protecting against the adverse effects of scaling done by some of these solutions.

That can happen in various ways. It can happen, as was suggested, through increasing land production for feedstock and things like that. It can be caused by integrating solutions which are not really clean or green, or as a result of products that are not really resolving challenges. There are lots of ways in which this can happen but now, through the integration of the bioeconomy within the circular economy, there is much more awareness of the need to guard against those impacts.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Gaffey. I will return to a points I made before Mr. Gaffey joined us. It relates to packaging that could be reduced by making fruits and vegetables available in retailers on a loose basis rather than in pre-packaged lots. The example I gave was some retailers, large multiples in particular, offering stew packs, stir fry packs or similar. Clearly, one element of reducing food waste involves providing people with the sorts of products they want on demand individually. These means they select what they want and need and we do not end up with excessive food waste at the end. I ask the witnesses to comment on that element of the food circular economy and packaging.

In relation to farm surpluses and farm waste, I have concerns that there is an untapped resource in the food sector where we can make obvious gains in achieving the targets in place, which, I understand, will be difficult to achieve, notwithstanding that there are other groups we could talk to as part of the question. What are the views of the witnesses on primarily reducing but also redistributing in the event that there is unavoidable production and, therefore, unavoidable waste?

The only other comment I want to make is in regard to regulatory barriers or barriers to achieving our targets for industry as opposed to residential. In the earlier discussion, we all focused on the residential side rather than the commercial and industry side. The school meals programme, a recent initiative by the Departments of Social Protection and Education, was mentioned, but there are other examples across industry. Given the resources available to us, what are the areas in which we could improve? Do the witnesses have suggestions arising from their research or day-to-day roles in the three organisations represented?

Ms Aoibheann O'Brien:

We are seeking to establish the growers project, which Ms Ruttledge discussed, as a national surplus food redistribution programme tackling farm level waste. The EPA's statistics record 70,000 tonnes of surplus at farm level but when we count pre-harvest, the figure is actually 122,000 tonnes. There is, therefore, a lot of surplus. From the research conducted by MTU, this is due to retail specifications as well as seasonal lack of demand. There are a lot of factors, particularly in relation to the horticultural sector, that drive surplus. There is currently a market for animal feed but in terms of the food waste hierarchy, after prevention, which is the work the team at MTU is doing and is very important, there is an element of that surplus that can be redistributed for consumption. We have based the programme on international best practice. Internationally, there are some farm level redistribution programmes which try to capture grade 2 product, for example, that is perfectly fit for consumption and make it available to community organisations. This means it has the twin benefits of reducing farm level waste and, from a social perspective, providing access to good surplus products to community organisations across the country.

It is a transitional solution. Prevention is the primary goal but the reality is that there are 122,000 tonnes of surplus at present. While we can implement a project on the ground today that can rescue a portion of this and make it available in order that the environmental impact is clear, the social impact is very strong. The project that we got funding for with the growers project through the Department of agriculture allowed us to redistribute 122 tonnes last year of really good surplus produce and make it available through local development companies in Donegal, west Kerry and north Cork, which has had a massive social impact in terms of nutritional value of produce. For us, we have a very clear goal to ensure that the diversity and consistency of produce we redistribute is nutritionally balanced. This also offers our 650 charity partners across the country access to another supply of great surplus produce. Ultimately, however, it is a transitional solution and in an ideal world, we would aim for the surplus not to exist. We could then wrap up the programme but we are quite far away from that at the moment. We have a project that is working on the ground and we would love to scale that further as has been done in other European countries, especially Spain and Portugal. That is in respect of the growers project.

On regulatory barriers, the food waste prevention roadmap and the priority actions within it are very strong in terms of looking at things like date-labelling and the good samaritan Act. All of the things that need to be done are outlined in the priority actions. What we would like to see, as Ms Ruttledge mentioned, is resources. That includes resources within the Departments to drive and implement what is within the food waste prevention roadmap. Obviously in relation to informed policy decisions, more research is required on unintended consequences but in terms of the priority actions within the food waste prevention roadmap, which are based on what has been working really well internationally, what is missing at the moment is resourcing for implementation of those priority actions.

Ms Angela Ruttledge:

In relation to the school meals, we were involved in a programme called the community sustainable village programme in a primary school in Cabra and one of the issues on sustainability that immediately struck the children in the classroom was on food waste and packaging of school meals in particular. Other people who were working on that project went ahead and supported the primary school children in doing an audit of food waste in the school and the results were quite staggering. While we absolutely support the objectives of the school meals programme around better nutrition - in fact part of the inspiration for the establishment of FoodCloud was Iseult Ward, the cofounder of the organisation, growing up and seeing the benefit of having a breakfast club in a school in Ballymun - we need to roll out the system in a way that does not embed problems around food waste. When they did the report, there were suggestions around things like flexibility in the system for ordering food, portion sizes, the ability to change from hot meals to cold meals from winter to summer and so on that could really help the programme to be more sustainable as it is rolled out and scaled up.

Mr. Paul Kelly:

I will address the final question on barriers first and then respond to the question on packaging. Four immediate barriers come to mind, one that I did touch on in my opening statement, which was food safety and the need to take account of that and in particular, food contact material legislation. It is great to have initiatives in sustainability but if we are not cognisant of the food safety implications, we are going to run into problems. A second issue is to do with recyclate. It is important that the timelines for both initial own targets from companies and more recently, recycling content targets from European legislation are looked at, in order to ensure that they take account of the potential for market distortions. We regularly see situations where the price of recyclate is significantly higher than the price of virgin raw material and that is to do with supply and demand in balance. That needs to be combined with increased investment in infrastructure so that we can not only collect, but recycle, prepare and develop the sufficient quantities of recyclate that will be required.

Policy certainty is really important. We can see that in the case of anaerobic digestion, of which we have a small amount in the country. It is expensive and technically complex. In the absence of policy certainty, the risk appetite will not be there to the same extent as it would be otherwise.

I will go back to a point I mentioned in my opening statement, namely, implementation timelines and timeframes. We saw quite a few examples of that during the introduction and roll-out of the single-use plastics directive when much of the detail was left to the Commission to introduce by means of implementing regulations and harmonised norms, the European standard from the European Committee for Standardization, CEN, and so on. They came at a very late stage. That creates great difficulties for companies when they are trying to change and update their supply chains to meet the new requirements in a pretty tight timeframe.

On the issue regarding vegetable packaging, that is addressed in part by the packaging waste regulations. I will ask my colleague Mr. Kevin Maher to touch on that.

Mr. Kevin Maher:

The incoming packaging and packaging waste regulation is pretty much over the line at this stage in the Commission. That will introduce mandatory reuse targets, which will include no packaging on certain fruit and vegetables as well. This will probably be addressed through that. I know a number of our members are looking at this. A lot of it comes down to consumer demand. If the demand is there for consumers, it can lead that way as well but the packaging and packaging waste regulation will probably bring in a lot of those targets as well.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I take Mr. Maher's point. I understand quite a bit about consumer demand, as it happens. We can safely say that people prefer a certain route but if people's capacity to have their preferred route is removed, they will find a new preferred route, which could be better for the environment and their own pocket. I take Mr. Maher's point, though.

Dr. Helena McMahon:

On the issue of addressing on-farm waste, we are here to talk about the circular bioeconomy and how that integrates with addressing food waste and circular economy. When we look at farms going from farm to fork and then to the consumer and end of life, we can see there are food losses along the value chain. As one goes along the value chain, there are opportunities for valorisation and the creation of new products. It is not just the finished food product that provides an opportunity. For example, we can have food processing waste streams, such as apple pomace, or we may have side-streams on the farm that are coming from harvesting. All of those are a very valuable input that can go to bio-refinery facilities for the creation of new products and ingredients. One could have the production of functional ingredients, such as biowaste polymers that could be used in the production of plastics, or the production of new feed ingredients. This means looking at food wastes, some of which are unavoidable, but also taking that and converting it into new products that are very favourable in terms of their environmental performance and also issues, opportunities and KPIs around decarbonising the agrifood system. A more holistic view of the food system is required in terms of the opportunities for valorising waste and introducing opportunities for decarbonisation.

The final step in that value chain is always the creation of energy from the residues that are left, where possible. That is considered in a way to be the lowest common denominator in the process, but it also provides benefits for the energy systems through the production of renewable energy. That is where we would see some of the key opportunities in terms of legislation.

I am glad someone mentioned industry, as opposed to just primary producers. There is a huge amount of innovation required in policy. We have a project, EnableBIO, funded by the EPA. It is specifically funded to look at the policy innovations that are required for valorising agrifood waste. That project just kicked off in February and we have two years to work on it. The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications is represented on our committee, which will meet next week. We are looking at issues such as the animal byproducts regulations, for example. It is about how we can take these side-products that would not be considered suitable for the food chain, valorise them and add value. There is a lot of work that needs to be done in that particular area.

When we look at companies that are creating new and novel ingredients, Biorefinery Glas is creating fructooligosaccharides, which are prebiotics and really valuable products that can be bought into animal feed. However, we would also like to bring them into food and the human food chain. There are a lot of regulatory hurdles that have to be overcome when bringing new and novel ingredients to the market. This is very expensive for companies that are highly innovative but have these market-related barriers to bringing products onto the market.

They would be some of the barriers we would take.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Dr. McMahon for that. I have one last question on FoodCloud. Ms Ruttledge mentioned multi-annual funding in her opening statement. Obviously she identified a fairly unique gap in the market, which is commendable. Is FoodCloud only applying to the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications? Are there other Departments? What kind of funding are we talking about?

Ms Aoibheann O'Brien:

There are three different projects outlined there. FoodCloud has a mixture of funding. The food industry pays a contribution for its technology service, which is very welcome. We deliver a number of Government projects. We are a host organisation for the community services programme. We deliver the ESF+ Food Support programme, for which we get an administration fee. We get other Government funding, but it tends to be annual grant rounds. For example, with the growers' project, we were awarded €165,000 from the Department of agriculture last month. However, we would look for funding - €300,000 in year one to €500,000 in year three - in order to scale that project over the new three years. We believe there is a very good return on investment for impact in terms of food recovered and in terms of access to food for those community partners across the country. In terms of the project in Kenya that is funded through Irish Aid, the scale of funding there to roll that out across Kenya is €360,000 per year. At the moment we are just in Nairobi and the surrounding areas. This is not a significant amount of funding, but it would have a massive impact. It is aligned with Irish Aid's focus area and focus country, Kenya and agri-food. Finally, we are in active discussions with the Department of the environment, representatives of which were here earlier, regarding certain priority actions, particularly involving surplus food redistribution under the food waste prevention roadmap. We feel that our expertise and experience can support the achievement of some of those actions. We are in active discussions with the Department regarding funding for resources, where we can actually turn those actions into deliverables for the Department. The funding proposal is in discussion with that Department and it is €250,000.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does Deputy Bruton wish to contribute?

Richard Bruton (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No.

Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their opening statements and their engagement. That was a good session.