From bin to biogas – Jennifer Bridge

Introduction

Jersey recycles approximately 35% of its waste — well below the EU average of 48.1% — and throws away roughly twice as much per head as Guernsey. The Energy Recovery Facility at La Collette will reach the end of its working life in 2036. The next Council of Ministers faces a decision on whether to replace the ERF on a like-for-like basis at a projected cost of up to £250 million, or to invest in substantially higher recycling rates.

This paper examines the issue including the proposal for an anaerobic digestion plant at La Collette, identifies the conditions for progress, and recommends actions for the incoming government.

Summary

Jersey is at a critical waste management crossroads. With the Energy Recovery Facility (ERF) at La Collette reaching its end-of-life in 2036 and a ten-year lead-in required for capital projects, the next government must decide by 2026 whether to spend £250 million on a like-for-like replacement or invest in a high-recycling framework. Currently, Jersey recycles only 35% of its waste, significantly trailing the EU average (48.1%) and generating twice the waste per capita of Guernsey.

While Jersey possesses most of the necessary physical infrastructure, it lacks a unified, island-wide collection framework and a source-separated food waste stream.

Wales has achieved recycling rates exceeding 70% through mandatory source separation and coordinated standards. Success in jurisdictions like Newport, Wales, relies on “engagement officers” rather than strict enforcement to drive behavioural change.

Jersey currently has 13 independent waste authorities (12 parishes and the Government) with inconsistent systems; two parishes offer no kerbside recycling at all.

Island Energy has proposed a £25–30 million Anaerobic Digestion (AD) plant at La Collette to convert food and farm waste into biogas and fertilizer. While AD is supported by the Carbon Neutral Roadmap, several hurdles remain:

• Gas Integration: Biogas is not directly interchangeable with the current LPG-based network. Alternative uses, such as fuelling waste collection lorries or buses may be more viable.
• Environmental & Health Risks: Concerns include PFAS contamination in soil and a lack of on-island demand for digestate.
• Odour Regulation: Jersey’s current regulatory framework is reactive and “weak.”

To make an informed decision on the 2036 ERF deadline, five actions are needed:

1. Independent Strategy Review: Model the costs of a high-recycling pathway against a like-for-like ERF replacement.
2. Unified Legislation: Implement an island-wide collection framework similar to Guernsey’s 2015 Law to standardise parish responsibilities.
3. AD Feasibility Study: Investigate digestate demand, PFAS risks, and end-use options for biogas.
4. Regulatory Reform: Update odour laws to include pre-operational management plans.
5. Agricultural Consultation: Formally establish the position of premium producers, such as Albert Bartlett, regarding the use of biofertilisers on export crops.

Jersey’s waste management challenge

Jersey currently recycles approximately 35% of its waste stream. Government of Jersey figures show that Jersey generates roughly twice as much waste per head as Guernsey, and the EU average recycling rate of 48.1% (Eurostat, 2023) puts Jersey well below most comparable jurisdictions. Much of what could be recycled is instead incinerated at the ERF at La Collette.

The ERF is expected to reach the end of its operational life in 2036. Infrastructure projects of this scale typically require a lead-in period of around ten years. The next Council of Ministers will therefore need to establish a direction of travel early in the next term if Jersey is to avoid defaulting to a like-for-like ERF replacement — currently projected at up to £250 million — without first examining whether improved recycling rates could extend the ERF’s life, reduce the required capacity, and cost.

Jersey already has a functioning recycling infrastructure. AA Langlois handles glass; Abbey Waste handles paper, cardboard, and plastics; Hunt Brothers handles metal; green waste is composted into soil improver at La Collette; and clean wood goes to Acorn. Bottom ash from the ERF is recycled into construction materials. The main gap between Jersey’s current position and international best practice is not physical infrastructure, but system design and political coordination.

International evidence: what high-recycling jurisdictions do differently

Newport City Council in Wales has achieved a recycling rate of 71.45% — among the highest in the United Kingdom. The system operates through mandatory source separation at household level: materials are sorted by residents and collected in separate streams by specialised vehicles. Food waste is collected weekly in a caddy, and garden waste is available by subscription. Each separated stream has a named destination.

Newport is not exceptional. It operates within the Welsh Government’s circular economy strategy — Beyond Recycling(2021) — which sets legally binding recycling targets, requires mandatory source separation, and establishes coordinated collection standards across all local authorities. As a result, Wales is recognised as the nation with the second-highest levels of recycling in the world.

What Newport adds to this framework is a community engagement model. When a household contaminates a waste stream, an engagement officer visits to explain the correct separation method. An enforcement backstop — a three-strike tagging system for persistent contamination — exists, but Newport City Council reports that fewer than 1% of cases have required it. The primary driver of behavioural change is clear information and consistent systems rather than enforcement.

Newport does not just encourage kerbside recycling but also supports comprehensive community reuse shops, a library of things, and a repair café. These reduce the volume of material entering the waste stream in the first place.

The lesson for Jersey is not that Newport’s model should be transplanted wholesale, but that an island-wide framework — with consistent collection standards and genuine public engagement — is the condition under which high recycling rates become achievable.

The case for an island-wide collection framework

Jersey’s 12 parishes and the Government currently operate three different waste collection systems. Two parishes — Grouville and St Clement — do not have kerbside recycling collections at all. There is no single authority responsible for coordinating household waste collection across the Island.

The closest Channel Islands comparator is Guernsey’s Parochial Collection of Waste (Guernsey) Law 2015, which assigns clear responsibility for household waste collection consistently across parishes, empowers douzaines (administrative bodies which support the work of Guernsey’s parish constables), and aligns local collection with broader government waste management plans. Jersey would benefit from equivalent legislation.

The parish system is not an obstacle to this transition; it is, if properly engaged, a structural advantage. Its community roots and local accountability make it well suited to an engagement-officer model of the kind Newport has used effectively. The Comité des Connétables and the relevant government department would need to agree to coordinate collection standards, and capital investment would be required in vehicles capable of carrying multiple separated streams. Neither of these requirements is beyond Jersey’s existing institutional capacity.

A transition of this kind would also require a public education programme of genuine scale, and a review of the Statutory Nuisances (Jersey) Law 1999 and the Waste Management (Jersey) Law 2005 to ensure the legislative framework supports the new collection model.

Anaerobic digestion: Island Energy’s proposal and the questions it raises

In September 2025, Island Energy (formerly Jersey Gas, a Jersey subsidiary of Islands Energy Group, owned by Ancala Partners) announced plans for a £25–30 million anaerobic digestion (AD) plant at La Collette to process Jersey’s food and farm waste into biogas, soil conditioner, and fertiliser. Ancala, through its portfolio company Biogen, operates 19 AD plants across the United Kingdom. Biogen’s experts contributed to BSI PAS 110, the British Standard for digestate quality.

When well designed, anaerobic digestion can be carbon-neutral or carbon-negative. The Jersey Climate Council Reporton the Carbon Neutral Roadmap (March 2026) explicitly encourages an options appraisal for anaerobic digestion of food and agricultural waste as part of a modern waste management strategy.

The gas network question

Island Energy’s stated interest is in gas self-sufficiency. However, the Statistics Jersey Energy Trends 2024 report shows that manufactured gas now accounts for approximately 3% of Island energy use, serving around 4,400 households and businesses. Jersey’s current gas network carries manufactured gas derived from liquefied petroleum gas (LPG — primarily propane and butane). LPG and biogas are not directly interchangeable, although a degree of blending is possible; Island Energy has stated it is investigating the extent to which this can occur before infrastructure changes are required.

If blending capacity is limited, the optimal use of biogas from a La Collette plant may not be injection into the existing network. Using biomethane as transport fuel — for waste collection lorries or buses — offers a more direct alignment with Jersey’s existing infrastructure and transport decarbonisation goals. Bristol’s Bio-Bee food collection vehicle runs on food-waste-derived biogas, First West of England’s 77-bus fleet in Bristol runs on biomethane, and 106 buses in Villiers-le-Bel, Paris, run on biomethane.

The Carbon Neutral Roadmap actively encourages a shift away from gas towards heat pumps and electric heating. Whether biogas production at La Collette supports or sits in tension with that direction will depend on the end-use configuration chosen, and should be examined as part of any feasibility process.

Collection and governance

A food-waste AD plant requires a source-separated food-waste stream collected consistently from households across the Island. At present, Jersey has 13 independent waste management authorities — 12 parishes and the Government — operating different systems. Any operator of an AD plant would need to negotiate consistent feedstock supply across all of them.

Resolving the collection governance question — which authority is responsible for household food-waste collection, who funds it, and how it is enforced — is a prior condition to the AD proposal being viable.

Digestate, soils, and PFAS

Jersey already operates anaerobic digesters at Bellozanne Sewage Treatment Works, producing biogas and biosolids regulated under the Waste Management (Jersey) Law 2005. Of the current biosolids output, 50% is used in agricultural land application; the remaining 50% is sent to the ERF when seasonal demand, ground conditions, or other constraints mean there is no agricultural demand.

Food-waste-derived digestate carries additional constraints. Jersey’s agricultural land area has decreased in recent years, and some catchments are already under pressure from nitrate loading (the volumes of nitrates entering a water system over time). Digestate only delivers its environmental benefits when it replaces existing inputs, is applied under strict nutrient budgeting, and is kept away from soils and watercourses already at capacity. Given that half of the current sewage-sludge AD output already goes to the ERF for want of agricultural demand, a feasibility study establishing on-island demand for food-waste digestate specifically is required.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination is a material consideration. Jersey’s PFAS Scientific Advisory Panel — chaired by Dr Steve Hajioff — has recommended testing agricultural fields before applying biosolids or food-waste digestate, where four specified PFAS compounds must not exceed 4 micrograms per kilogram dry weight. Albert Bartlett, whose Jersey Royal potatoes depend on premium market access, has confirmed that it does not currently use biofertiliser from food waste. When asked directly whether it would sell potatoes grown in soil fertilised with food-waste biofertiliser, its communications manager stated “We cannot comment on this at this time. All we can confirm is that we do not currently use bio fertiliser from food waste.” The position of Jersey’s premium agricultural producers on this question is commercially and reputationally significant, and should be established before any digestate land-application regime is designed.

An alternative to on-island land application is exporting to a UK AD plant, as Guernsey currently does with some of its organic waste. This avoids the on-island soil constraints but introduces a risk, namely dependency on third-country acceptance, and does not itself produce biogas for Jersey’s energy system.

Odour

Anaerobic digestion plants in the United Kingdom periodically generate odour complaints. Proximity to homes or schools, operational lapses, or inadequate initial modelling can all cause nuisance impacts. La Collette’s location — adjacent to St Helier and within reach of residential areas — makes an odour impact study essential at feasibility stage, before any design decisions are taken.

Best practice at well-operated UK and European AD plants includes enclosed reception buildings with negative air pressure, biofilters and wet scrubbers, continuous real-time monitoring accessible to the public, and strict feedstock controls. These need to be built into any design specification from the outset, not retrofitted in response to complaints.

Jersey’s existing regulatory toolkit is largely reactive. Environmental Health Officers can investigate and issue abatement notices under the Statutory Nuisances (Jersey) Law 1999, but there is no up-front odour-permit framework equivalent to the UK system, which requires an approved odour management plan before operations begin. Two recent cases before the States of Jersey Complaints Board — the Northern Leaf case concerning a medicinal cannabis cultivator at Retreat Farm, and the late Michelle Le Cornu’s case against Jersey Electricity substations — both resulted in findings that the 1999 Law was inadequate: in the Northern Leaf determination it was described as ‘weak and misinterpreted’; in the Le Cornu determination, as ‘currently falling short of providing adequate protection to the public’. The Board has recommended that a review be prioritised. This regulatory gap would need to be addressed before an AD plant at La Collette could be approved, with adequate public protection in place.

The decision the next government faces

The next Council of Ministers faces a choice with a hard deadline. The ERF’s 2036 end-of-life date and the ten-year lead-in requirement for capital projects of this scale mean a decision must be reached within the next term of government. Delay is itself a decision — one that defaults to like-for-like ERF replacement at up to £250 million, without testing whether a higher-recycling model could reduce both the required capacity and the cost.

The first option is to replace the ERF on a like-for-like basis. It would require a prompt decision to maintain the lead-in. It would not, of itself, improve Jersey’s recycling rate.

The second option is to invest in substantially higher recycling rates, reducing residual waste volumes and the size and cost of any future ERF. This path requires coordinated action across parishes and Government on collection standards, capital investment in collection infrastructure, a public education programme of genuine scale, and the legislative changes needed to support it. It is consistent with the circular economy direction taken by Wales and with Jersey’s own Carbon Neutral Roadmap commitments.

Anaerobic digestion of food waste could form part of the second path, but only if the prior conditions are met: a unified household food-waste collection system, a feasibility study on digestate demand and soil capacity, resolution of the PFAS and premium-agriculture questions, an odour impact assessment, and reform of the 1999 Law. Island Energy’s proposal should be evaluated within that framework, not as a standalone infrastructure decision.

A third option — exporting food waste to a UK AD facility while developing the recycling framework — could serve as an interim measure while the longer-term questions are worked through.

What needs to be done

Five actions would put the incoming government in a position to make an informed, timely decision.

1. Commission an independent waste strategy review

The review should establish the Island’s recycling potential under a coordinated source-separation system, model the capital and revenue costs of the high-recycling pathway against a like-for-like ERF replacement, and set out a recommended trajectory for the 2036 decision. It should report within the first year of the new term.

2. Legislate for an island-wide collection framework

The Government and the Comité des Connétables should agree a timetable for legislation equivalent to the Parochial Collection of Waste (Guernsey) Law 2015, establishing consistent responsibilities for household waste collection — including food waste — across all 12 parishes. Without this, neither a high-recycling pathway nor an AD feedstock supply is achievable.

3. Commission an AD feasibility study

Before any commitment to the Island Energy proposal, the Government should commission an independent feasibility study covering: on-island demand for food-waste digestate given current soil and catchment conditions; PFAS risk and the position of the premium agricultural sector; gas end-use options and alignment with the Carbon Neutral Roadmap; and a full odour impact assessment for the La Collette site.

4. Reform odour regulation

The Government should act on the Complaints Board’s recommendation to review the Statutory Nuisances (Jersey) Law 1999 and introduce a pre-operational odour management plan requirement before any AD plant is approved. The Northern Leaf and Le Cornu determinations have already identified the inadequacy of the current framework; a new facility at a sensitive site would make that gap untenable.

5. Establish the agricultural sector’s position formally

The Government should formally consult Jersey’s premium agricultural producers — including Albert Bartlett — on their position regarding food-waste digestate and land application before any digestate regime is designed. A premium brand that cannot accept food-waste biofertiliser is a material constraint on the entire proposal, and it should be established as a fact rather than left as an open question.

Taken together, these actions would allow the incoming government to enter the 2036 ERF decision with clear evidence, a functioning collection system, and a realistic assessment of what anaerobic digestion can contribute. Without them, Jersey faces the same choice by default — at greater cost and with less room to manoeuvre.

Sources and further information

1.  Government of Jersey Open Data, Waste Management Statistics (dataset, various years)

2.  Eurostat, ‘Municipal waste statistics’, Statistics Explained, last updated 2024

3.  WRAP Cymru, ‘Reducing residual waste capacity in Newport’, case study within Welsh Government Collections Blueprint 2025, 2025

4.  Welsh Government, Beyond Recycling — A Strategy to Make the Circular Economy in Wales a Reality, February 2021

5.  Parochial Collection of Waste (Guernsey) Law 2015

6.  Jersey Evening Post, ‘New energy plants proposed by utility to reuse waste and cut carbon emissions’, 22 September 2025

7.  British Standards Institution, PAS 110:2014 — Specification for whole digestate, separated liquor and separated fibre derived from the anaerobic digestion of source-segregated biodegradable materials, BSI, 2014

8.  Jersey Climate Council, Review of the Carbon Neutral Roadmap 2022–2025, March 2026 (lodged by the Minister for the Environment)

9.  Statistics Jersey, Energy Trends 2024, Government of Jersey, August 2025

10.  GENeco, ‘Meet the Bio-Bee’, press release, 17 October 2017

11. Bioenergy Insight, ’77 biomethane-powered buses launched in Bristol, UK’, February 2020. FIND URL

12. Gaz-Mobilite.fr, ‘Ile-de-France: 100% biométhane, le dépôt de bus de Villiers-le-Bel sera opérationnel en 2025’, 4 October 2024

13.  Bellozanne Sewage Treatment Works / Waste Management (Jersey) Law 2005 / biosolids

14. Operations described in Government of Jersey, Bridging Liquid Waste Strategy 2023–26, presented to States Assembly as R.71/2023

15.  WRAP, ‘The Biofertiliser (Digestate) Quality Protocol: Code of Practice for Agricultural Use of Bioresources’, as amended

16. WRAP, Digestate and Compost in Agriculture (DC-Agri) project, 2010–2015

17.  PFAS Scientific Advisory Panel for Jersey (Chair: Dr Steve Hajioff), Interim Report on PFAS in the Environment (Report 4/5), published December 2025

18.  Albert Bartlett [Communications manager], Email [23.03.2026].

19.  Environment Agency, H4 Odour Management: how to comply with your environmental permit, Environment Agency / Natural Resources Wales, Version 1, March 2011 (updated)

20.  States of Jersey Complaints Board, ‘Findings — Complaint by Ms. X against the Minister for the Environment and the Infrastructure and Environment Department’ [Northern Leaf, Retreat Farm, St Lawrence], R.101/2025, presented to the States Assembly 2 Septem

21. States of Jersey Complaints Board, ‘Findings — Complaint by Ms. M. Le Cornu against the Minister for the Environment regarding a decision of the Environment Department not to issue an abatement notice in accordance with the Statutory Nuisances (Jersey) La

Biographical note

Jennifer Bridge MBE is an accomplished Chair with extensive experience across the creative arts, third sector, and political spheres.

Jennifer contributes regularly to public discourse through her columns and articles in local media, focusing on inclusion and open government.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, she completed postgraduate studies in research methodologies, which has enhanced her evidence-based approach to public commentary.

Jennifer is a co-organiser of Jersey repair café – a community group where volunteers fix broken items like clothes, electronics, and bikes for free, promoting sustainability and reducing waste.