NLWA mustn't mix up its MBT and its BMT (as if anyone would!)

 Letsrecycle.com, from 2003:

Link above to the 2003 report

"A meeting of the North London Waste Authority (NLWA) has heard that 

Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) 

has limitations in its role for North London's waste, ... compared to 

Biological and Mechanical Treatment (BMT)

"Comparing the difference between MBT and BMT, the meeting heard that while MBT produces fuel pellets for recovery or landfill, BMT produces a low-grade compost. 

"The NWLA noted that MBT has a greater land-take than BMT,  but it is less expensive."
 

[Glad we've sorted that out. It was beginning to worry us.]

---

 And Letsrecycle.com, 9 February 2011:

Link to later report

"While the NLWA has stressed in the past it is technology neutral, the reference technology it used to originally secure PFI funding included delivery of:

• two MBTs, 
• a combined heat and power facility, 
• two materials recycling facilities (MRFs), 
• both composting and anaerobic digestion facilities, and 
• four new and refurbished civic amenity sites."

"The NLWA would not comment on what arrangements would be made to secure funding, as an alternative to the withdrawn PFI money." 

[So are you saying that Pinkham Way will produce fuel pellets? Don't you need a process at maybe 700decC to do that?]