Paul Rogers, Technical Director, tor&co reflects on what he believes the Tees Valley Energy Recovery Facility can teach planners and policymakers about delivering major infrastructure.
Britain’s infrastructure debate usually focuses on rail, housing and energy. Yet one of the UK’s biggest delivery challenges is far less visible: how to build the waste infrastructure needed to support growth, regeneration and decarbonisation.
The lesson from Teesside is that infrastructure delivery is often won or lost long before a planning application reaches committee. Too often, major schemes enter the planning system carrying unresolved questions about location, political backing, procurement strategy and long-term purpose. That uncertainty increases delivery risk, slows investment decisions and creates fertile ground for opposition.
The £2bn Tees Valley Energy Recovery Facility (TVERF) offers a timely example of a different approach.
The public-private partnership (PPP) between seven north-east councils and Viridor will see a major energy-from-waste facility built on the former British Steel works at Grangetown, within the wider Teesworks regeneration zone. Once operational, the facility is expected to process around 450,000 tonnes of waste each year and generate 49MW of electricity for the national grid.
Yet the significance of TVERF extends beyond waste management. It demonstrates how infrastructure projects can move more effectively from concept to delivery with more certainty from the outset, within the additional context of a PPP process.
Why the site matters
Unusually, the local authorities identified a suitable site and secured outline planning consent in 2020, well before contractor procurement was completed, with financial close announced in 2026 and operations expected to begin in 2030. The result was a clearer delivery pathway and greater confidence for investors and delivery partners.
What makes Teesside particularly noteworthy is the role site selection played in shaping its prospects. The councils put forward previously developed industrial land within an established manufacturing and energy cluster, already benefitting from strategic road access, grid connectivity and a policy context that recognised the role of industrial infrastructure in wider regeneration.
For planners and environmental specialists, TVERF is a reminder that deliverability is not only a technical question. It is shaped by land strategy, environmental evidence, political confidence and the ability to maintain a coherent case for investment over many years.
Planning as a delivery tool
Planning remains one of the UK’s most important infrastructure enablers, yet it is often viewed primarily through a regulatory lens.
TVERF proves the value of a more strategic approach. By securing outline consent early, the discussion could focus on delivery, design and implementation rather than the principle of development itself.
Waste and energy infrastructure remains politically sensitive, with concerns around emissions, visual impact and health requiring careful consideration. This controversiality is unlikely to disappear. However, projects are more likely to progress when communities and decision-makers understand how infrastructure supports wider economic and environmental objectives.
Teesside also highlights the importance of consistency. Major infrastructure projects rarely align neatly with electoral cycles, funding or policy changes. Maintaining a stable strategic direction over time can be just as important as securing planning consent in the first place.
The role of partnership
TVERF reflects the continuing importance of public and private sector collaboration.
Many local authorities no longer have the capacity required to deliver large-scale infrastructure independently. In this case, Viridor brought operational capability and commercial experience, while the public sector provided strategic leadership, democratic accountability and coordination across multiple authorities. Neither side could have delivered the project as effectively on its own.
Lessons for the next generation of infrastructure
The wider lesson for Government is not just: planning reform. It is that infrastructure delivery works best when planning policy, site strategy and delivery models are considered together.
Three key practical learnings can be used:
- Identify strategic infrastructure sites before procurement begins. Early site selection can reduce delivery risk, improving confidence and engagement.
- Align planning policy with regeneration objectives and delivery strategies, especially key for industrial regions pursuing decarbonisation and growth.
- Resource local planning authorities to act as delivery partners as well as regulators. Many councils possess deep local knowledge but face significant capacity constraints when supporting complex infrastructure programmes.
From exception to expectation
If the UK is serious about accelerating infrastructure delivery while meeting net zero and growth ambitions, it cannot rely on projects succeeding without land strategy, procurement, political leadership and environmental evidence being treated as part of the same delivery process.
Planning has a role that extends beyond regulating development once proposals emerge – it can help shape delivery from the beginning.
As Government looks to unlock the next generation of industrial infrastructure, that may be the most important lesson of all.
