10 Cost Influences Residual Frequency Collecting food waste - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

10

Cost Influences – Residual Frequency

Collecting food waste separately produces yields between two and three times that of a mixed collection. Typical yields between 0.5 and 1.5 kg/hh/wk = 26 – 78 kg/hh/yr Three weekly increasing this? Limited data but…

Separate Collection Yield and Residual Frequency

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 W Bin W Sack 2W 240 2W 120-180 2W Sack 3W Sample Size kg/hh/yr Food Waste Collected (16-17 WDF Q10) Residual Frequency and Containment Median of Each Residual Policy Group

Separate Collection Yield and Residual Frequency

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 W Bin W Sack 2W 240 2W 120-180 2W Sack 3W Sample Size kg/hh/yr Food Waste Collected (16-17 WDF Q10) Residual Frequency and Containment Median of Each Residual Policy Group Median of Each Residual Frequency

Separate Collection Yield and Residual Frequency

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 W Bin W Sack 2W 240 2W 120-180 2W Sack 3W Sample Size kg/hh/yr Food Waste Collected (16-17 WDF Q10) Residual Frequency and Containment Median of Each Residual Policy Group Median of Each Residual Frequency Sample Size

Separate Collection Yield and Residual Frequency (2W->3W Residual)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 20 40 60 80 100 120 Conwy East Ayrshire East Devon Falkirk Gwynedd Isle of Anglesey Powys SWP Average Percentage Change in Food Waste Yield Food Waste Yield (kg/hh/yr) Before (2W Residual) Net Change (3W Residual) Percentage Change

Cost Influences – Yields/Participation

• Reduced residual frequency is more effective in driving up

food waste yields/ participation than reduced residual capacity

• Need to get rid of putrescible waste on a regular and frequent

basis

• Food waste isn’t high volume and can fit in the gaps in a bin
• Reducing the residual frequency can off-set the costs of

introducing a food waste collection

Cost Influences – Demography and Rurality

WRAP’s Ready Reckoner gives a good indication of yields to expect by demography

Cost Influences – Rurality

• Distances

time cost

• Availability of AD/ IVC
• Bulking and haulage
• Food waste is relatively easy to bulk haul – a dense

material

Cost Influences – Communications

• Clear instructional communications

Cost Influences – Communications

Huge impact a simple residual-waste bin sticker!

2006 2010 2011

North Yorkshire and City of York go to market – final bids submitted 2009 Commercial close completed, project agreement finalised by parties and planning application submitted in September 2011

2013 2014 2018

Planning permission confirmed in October 2013 Financial close achieved October 2014 and construction commences November 2014 Construction and commissioning phase completed for all three technologies, with service commencement in March 2018

Getting here – the journey to Allerton Waste Recovery Park

Contract awarded to Amey in 2010 and approved by members

Summary Slide

• Evaluate holistic costs/ savings and how they can be

shared across la a tiers and with processors

• Implement as part of whole service review
• Provide caddy liners
• Have good and clear communications
• Ensure the service is regular and reliable

Advice and Assistance

• Here to help!
• Please come and see us for an informal

chat!

www.eunomia.co.uk jenny.robinson@eunomia.co.uk 07855 192961

Transforming waste in North Yorkshire

Transforming waste treatment in North Yorkshire

Overview Rob Edmondson and Jon Callaghan

First to bring three technologies together on

• ne site

Comprehensive and long- term solution for residents in the country’s largest county – 320,000 tonnes of black bag waste a year More than 90% of rubbish diverted from landfill – used to create energy instead Raising awareness of waste and recycling for adult and young visitors

Transforming waste treatment in North Yorkshire

Overview Rob Edmondson and Jon Callaghan

First to bring three technologies together on

• ne site

Comprehensive and long- term solution for residents – 320,000 tonnes of black bag waste a year More than 90% of rubbish diverted from landfill – used to create energy instead Raising awareness of waste and recycling for adult and young visitors

Mechanical treatment Anaerobic digestion Energy from waste (EfW)

Mechanical Treatment

Sorts 70 tonnes of waste per hour! Features various sorting technologies including:

• Trommels
• Ballistic separators
• X-ray sorting units
• Magnets and eddy current separators

for metals

• Shredders
• Near infra-red separators for plastics
• Recyclate balers
• Hand sorting

Anaerobic Digestion

40,000 tonnes a year - or 114 tonnes daily – of organic waste is transferred to the anaerobic digester Fermented under carefully controlled conditions for 20 to 25 days Generates renewable biogas which is used to power our visitor centre and is also exported to the National Grid Produces digestate – this is transferred and used as a fuel in the EfW

The AD tank has a total volume of 2.989m3 and is almost 29 metres high

Energy from waste

The EfW plant treats waste from the mechanical treatment facility and digestate from the anaerobic digester Waste from the MT is supplied by conveyor into the EfW waste bunker, where it is mixed with the digestate Waste is burned at a minimum of 850°C Left over ash is recycled and used as construction aggregate

Air Pollution Control

Strict emissions limits in place – standard throughout Europe Limits are deemed safe by the World Health Organisation Pollution control system consists of:

• Selective non-catalytic reaction - reduces nitrogen
• xides to into nitrogen
• Dry lime to neutralise acid gases
• Activated carbon to neutralise dioxins, furans and

mercury

• Filter system to capture particulates

SESSION ONE

THE ROLE OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES IN DEVELOPING A CIRCULAR ECONOMY

JOE PAPINESCHI DIRECTOR, EUNOMIA RESEARCH AND CONSULTING

The Circular Economy and the Role of Local Authorities

LARAC Yorkshire & Humber Regional Conference

Joe Papineschi Director Eunomia Research & Consulting

28th June 2018

Big Picture: Climate Change Imperative

Source: Climate Analytics

Renewables or Efficiency?

Source: IRENA

Greenhouse Gas Impacts of Resource Management

• 23,000
• 18,000
• 13,000
• 8,000
• 3,000

2,000

Paper / card Plastic Glass Textiles Steel Aluminium Garden (composting) Food waste (AD) WEEE Others Paper / card Plastic Glass Textiles Steel Aluminium Garden (composting) Food waste (AD) WEEE Others Landfill Incineration CHP Incineration

Emissions, kg CO2 equivalent per tonne of waste managed

RESIDUAL WASTE TREATMENT RECYCLING & COMPOSTING AVOIDED PRODUCTION (WASTE PREVENTION, REUSE)

Resource Efficiency and Climate Change

Source: Green Alliance

Moving to High Recycling Rates

Source: Eunomia

84%

OPENING ADDRESS

IAN FIELDING, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL MARK JAMES, HEAD OF CONSTRUCTION, AMEY

What Is ‘the Circular Economy’?

The Circular Economy

The Waste Hierarchy

Prevention (and reuse) Preparation for Reuse Recycling Other Recovery Disposal Design

as Viewed by Designers

Savings in Embodied Energy and GHG Emissions Savings in Embodied Energy, GHG Emissions and Value Added

Historic focus of investment at base

• f the hierarchy

£

EU Circular Economy Package

• Revisions to Waste Framework Directive
• EU Council of Ministers adopted legislation as part of Circular Economy Package - May 2018, package

legally binding from 5th July

• UK govt indicated that it will be adopting the revisions
• ‘Legally binding’ recycling targets for municipal waste:
• 55% by 2025; 60%by 2030; 65% by 2035
• By 2023 'bio-waste' to be collected separately or home composted
• By 2025 separate collection for textiles and haz waste from households
• Other targets:
• 75% recycling of packaging waste by 2030
• Reduce landfill to maximum of 10% of all waste by 2030
• New producer responsibility system for packaging waste will mean producers covering full cost of

recycling

• UK currently 10%
• Estimated additional funding for recycling of £350 million to £1.2 billion per year for the UK
• £10+ per household

Defra’s 25 year Environment Plan

• Launched January 2018 after long gestation
• Much more waste and resources focused than expected
• The Blue Planet effect?
• Take action at each stage of product lifecycle
• Production: environmental impact, rationalise packaging, ‘ease of recycling’
• Consumption: 5p carrier bag charge smaller retailer, plastic free supermarket isles
• End of life: increase proportion of material collected and recycled
• Improve residual waste management – ‘waste as a resource’

National Resources and Waste Strategy for England

• Expected autumn 2018
• Will fulfil requirements of the EU Circular Economy Package
• Michael Gove considering radical options on:
• Plastics
• Litter
• Deposit return systems
• Extended producer responsibility
• Public behaviour change
• Likely to include stretching recycling targets
• But alternatives carbon based targets being considered
• Major focus on plastics and food waste
• More on consistency / minimum collection standards seem likely

Global Challenges and Opportunities

• Chinese ‘National Sword’ initiative - from 1st March 2018:
• Used cardboard max of 0.5% contamination
• Mixed paper/card banned
• Mixed plastic banned
• Closing off the key market for MRF paper and lower grade plastic to the UK

(and EU, North America etc.)

• Stockpiling of recyclables
• Falling prices for mixed paper/card and plastics
• Drive to improve material quality
• Marine plastics now a national & global political issue
• Key brands (e.g. Coca-Cola, Proctor & Gamble, Unilever) desperate to be seen

to ‘do the right thing’ on plastics

What does this all mean?

• The last decade:
• Lack of targets for English LAs has stalled progress
• Austerity has been the key driver for English councils
• UK set to miss EU recycling target of 50% by 2020
• The next decade:
• Ambitious targets for municipal waste
• Big focus on food waste and plastics
• New funding sources from producers
• Big focus on circular economy & creating new markets
• Big focus on quality of recyclables and where they end up

Creating better places to live, work and travel

Putting People First | Delivering Great Service | Creating Better Solutions

Engineering Facilities Environment Utilities Transport Defence Justice

Better Places

www.eunomia.co.uk @Eunomia_RandC joe.papineschi@eunomia.co.uk

SESSION TWO

FOOD WASTE, THE BIGGER PICTURE

DAVID NEWMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR, BBIA

David Newman Managing Director BBIA LARAC, Knaresborough June 28th 2018

• Food waste, what’s the issue ?
• The challenges and opportunities ?
• Collection systems
• Uses of bioplastics
• Standards (EN13432)
• Composting and AD

Subject of today’s presentation

But first a little history….from rural farm civilisation to…

……an urbanised world

This is the first time in human history most of us live in cities

To feed this increasing and urbanised population we changed farming methods from extensive to intensive. The result of this has been desertification (see more later) We created long supply chains from countryside to cities, and across the globe. Food is no longer a local industry, but global. Flow of food is now through cities rather than remaining in the countryside. We have globalised food waste too.

Food waste, it’s a big deal

1.3 bn tons thrown away each year, land area equivalent to the size of China is used to grow wasted food.

Allerton Waste Recovery Park

We’re pleased to welcome you to the Larac

Yorkshire and Humber Regional Conference. We ask that you follow site rules at all times and, for safety reasons, stay within the visitor centre area during the conference. For those taking part in the site visit later, you must be wearing sensible footwear, with arms and legs covered. PPE will be provided.

Mark James Account Director, Amey Ian Fielding, Assistant Director (Transport, Waste and Countryside Services), North Yorkshire County Council

Food waste contributes around 8% to total GHG emissions

And intensive agriculture, climate change are creating desertification, and not just in developing world.

This is the challenge. This is also the opportunity.

So we need to collect, treat and manage food waste.

The UK sends 7.5 million tonnes of food waste to incineration and landfill instead of into treatment. By treating food waste we can make biogas, biomethane, compost, digestate, extracted Co2. We can meet targets to reduce GHG emissions, produce renewable energy, return nutrients to soil, restore the soil to soil loop that urbanisation has broken.

• food waste collections to be obligatory across the EU by end 2023
• Recycling calculation to change from «collected for « to «final treatment

point». UK actually has around 32% recycling with new calculation methodology, not 44%

• Recycling target to be 55% by 2025, 60% by 2030, 65% by 2035. We

have giant steps to make in six years

• Phase out of MBT
• Fertiliser Regulation being finalised.
• Bioeconomy Strategy being renewed

Policy drivers in the EU and the UK

• Industrial Strategy, building on strengths of UK industrial base

(chemistry), waste

• Clean Growth Plan, promoting renewable heat and energy, zero

avoidable waste

• 25 Year Environment Plan, nature, soil quality, zero waste, plastics
• Bioeconomy Strategy, due next month
• Resource and Waste Strategy, due later this year; obligatory food

waste collections for England being discussed now.

• EAC findings on plastic bottles and coffee cups
• Ellen Macarthur Foundation and WRAP to work on plastics recycling

including compostables , the Plastics Pact

BBIA is signatory to the Plastic Pact which sees compostables as part of the solution

Ambition: A plastic free aisle Reduce plastic packaging, make recycling easier Compostable packaging- easy to recycle,made in UK Collected with food waste Is industrially composted in the UK Can produce renewable biogas Returns organic carbon and nutrients to soil; resilient UK farming to produce food REDUCE WASTE MAKE IN UK REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS ENHANCE SOIL QUALITY

Bioplastics aim to be part of the new circular economy, creating closed loop recycling

Key indicators of the EN13432 The material must be able to decompose naturally in the presence of micro-bacteria to at least 90% of its volume in 180 days in an industrial composting facility (the 10% represents loss of moisture mostly) The material needs to be non toxic to soil and plant life. The product has to undergo eco-toxicological tests including on the materials, adhesives, inks. Tests are undertaken in lab and field tests

THESE COMPOSTABLE PLASTICS ARE DESIGNED TO COMPOST, THE STANDARD IN EU IS THE EN 13432

Please follow the instructions

• f your

Amey site host at all times

6

To reduce non-recyclable plastic packaging, especially lightweight To help get food waste cleanly back to treatment To avoid micro plastics contamination of soil through compost and digestate To increase overall recycling levels by increasing food waste capture and reducing plastics waste.

The role of bioplastics….

They compost in composting plants. They do not biodegrade in the street, the river, field, sea (yet). They address needs to improve food waste capture. They do not substitute all plastics for all uses. They are circa 1 mn tonnes now, maybe 5 million tonnes in 2025 Plastics are 300 mn tonnes now, maybe 350 million tonnes in 2025 Bioplastics are niche, but with food waste they can be of critical use

What bioplastics do and do not do…

Time has run out on climate change- if you are serious about it, you have to act now We have committed to Sustainable Development Goals, one of which is halve food

• waste. Introduce prevention methods and awareness now.

We need organic carbon back to soil now, so quality outputs from AD and composting are vital, so food waste collections need to be implemented now. To ensure clean collection and treatment, use of bioplastics is essential. It costs more ? Well, so does treating sewage rather than using the river…but there are efficiencies to make in collection systems.

Finally….

www.bbia.org.uk dn@bbia.org.uk David Newman MD, BBIA

Everything is connected Thanks

ADBA’S PERPECTIVE ON SEPARATE COLLECTIONS

CHARLOTTE MORTON MANAGING DIRECTOR, ADBA

The benefits of recycling inedible food waste through anaerobic digestion

Charlotte Morton, Chief Executive, Anaerobic Digestion & Bioresources Association

https://asindesperdicio.wordpress.com/

The benefits of collecting and recycling all inedible UK food waste through AD

• Production of 8 terawatt hours of renewable energy, enough to heat 615,000

homes each year

• If diverted from landfill, avoided carbon dioxide emissions of 3.4 million tonnes

per year, equivalent to removing 1.65 million cars from the road:  2 million tonnes per year from replacing fossil energy  300,000 tonnes from replacing commercial fertilisers  1.2 million tonnes from preventing methane emissions from landfills

7

We have designated First Aiders across the site – if you need assistance contact an Amey employee or call our emergency number. The 24/7 emergency number is

01423 447822 from an internal or

external phone. If you can see a fire, raise the alarm by pressing your nearest fire call point and evacuate to the designated muster point. If you hear an alarm sound for more than 30 seconds, you should evacuate to the designated muster point.

The need for separate food waste collections

• Help prevent food waste by making

amount wasted more visible

• Ensure quality of all recyclables

(including dry recyclables)

• Necessary for isolating inedible food

waste from non-organic waste streams

• Help to raise recycling rates across all

waste streams

What needs to happen now

• Universal, consistent recycling system across

whole of UK

• Resources & Waste Strategy must include:
• EU CEP targets
• Commitment to Consistency Framework
• Support for local authorities in introducing

separate food waste collections

• Local authorities should look for best opportunities

to bring in separate collections

Food Waste Recycling Action Programme

http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/foo d-waste-recycling-action-plan

http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/cost-benefit-analysis-web-tool

Thank you!

@charlotte_adba @adbioresources adbioresources.org biogastradeshow.com

FOOD WASTE COLLECTIONS: COSTS, BENEFITS AND POLICY CONTENT

JENNY ROBINSON CONSULTANT, EUNOMIA RESEARCH AND CONSULTING

Food Waste Collection: Costs, Benefits and Policy Context

LARAC Conference – Allerton Park

Jenny Robinson – Senior Consultant

28th June 2018

A Short Introduction

• A few slides about Eunomia
• And then the gubbins!
• And time for a panel discussion
• Accompanied by:
• Joe Papineschi
• Gareth Morton

Our Values

To be agents of change for the better To feel good about the work we do To inspire each other To walk the talk To think creatively in a commercial context

Improving Resource Management

Emergency points – main site

Coach parked here

Service Areas

Waste & Recycling

Leading waste, recycling and resource efficiency consultancy in UK and Europe; in the vanguard of efforts to establish a circular economy; combining policy and operational expertise

Energy

Providing advice in the low-carbon energy sector since 2001. Specialising in strategic and technical evaluation work, and challenging research and analytical tasks.

Policy & Strategy

Developing coherent, fully-costed and forward thinking policies and strategies on waste, energy, air pollution, climate change, marine pollution and the natural environment, at the European, national, regional and municipal level.

Evaluation

Evaluation of projects and programmes to assess their effectiveness, and make proposals for changes; duel diligence for the clean-tech sector

Sustainable Business

Supporting businesses to become more resource efficient, reducing impact on the environment whilst generating commercial benefits. Includes circular economy business models and approaches.

Green Economy

Development of policies to support a green economy, spanning environmental fiscal reform, sector-specific policy and regulation, and the development of mechanisms to support the natural environment

Procurement

Helping the public sector deliver value from, and green, public procurement. Supporting businesses to improve life-cycle impacts and enhance resilience of supply chains

Eunomia Offices

Auckland, New Zealand Brussels, Belgium Manchester Bristol London

UK

Glasgow Copenhagen, Denmark New York, USA

Introducing the Northern Team…!

Waste & Recycling

• Collection services design
• Waste contract procurement
• Waste prevention policy
• Partnership working
• Litter prevention and street cleansing
• Waste regulation compliance
• Reducing contamination
• Behaviour Change

Key Contact: Joe Papineschi

From research to implementation

Information Available

• Summary handout
• Website
• Newsletter
• Consultants here today!!!

Running Order

• Policy context
• Local authority schemes - overview
• Benefits
• Costs

Policy Context

• Revisions to Waste Framework Directive (WFD)
• May 2018 - EU Council of Ministers adopted legislation as part of Circular Economy Package -

legally binding from 4th July

• ‘Legally binding’ recycling targets for municipal waste:

55% by 2025 60% by 2030 65% by 2035

• By 2023 - 'bio-waste' (including food) to be collected separately or home

composted

• New producer responsibility system for packaging waste will mean producers covering at least 80% of

costs of recycling (UK currently 10%)

Policy Context

The last decade:

• Lack of targets for English LAs has stalled progress
• Austerity has been the key driver for English councils
• UK set to miss EU recycling target of 50% by 2020

The next decade:

• Ambitious targets for local authorities
• Big focus on food waste and plastics
• New funding sources from producers and maybe govt.
• Big focus on circular economy & creating new markets
• Big focus on quality of recyclables collected and where they end up

Policy Context

• Subject to the revised Necessity and Practicability tests (which have

been strengthened) “member states are required to ensure that, by 31st December 2023, bio-waste is either collected separately or recycled at source (e. g. home composting)”

Transforming waste treatment in North Yorkshire

About AWRP

Local Authority Schemes - Overview

• General movement from mixed collections to separate
• Food waste collections supporting introduction of

reduced frequency residual

• Differences due to devolved policies

Local Authority Schemes – Overview

(Food waste England to 2016/17 – Source: WRAP)

Mixed is reducing Separate is increasing

Local Authority Schemes – Overview

2016/17 Food waste schemes Mixed Separate England No. 38 108 % 12 33 Scotland No. 7 18 % 22 60 Wales No. 22 % 100 Northern Ireland No 6 1 % 55 9

Illustrates how different drivers affect scheme implementation – Source: WRAP

Benefits

• Food waste collections can:
• Reduce overall quantity of waste collected
• Reduce carbon outputs
• Reduce costs
• Savings on residual disposal
• Increase public buy-in to reduced frequency residual

collections

• Produce fertiliser or soil-conditioner for farms
• Produce energy for national grid

Benefits

?

Costs

• Cost balance determined by:
• Split or combined collection/ disposal budgets
• Disposal saving potential
• Cost-sharing arrangements to incentivise introduction and

maintaining of service

• Overall collection service design
• Collection type
• Efficiency of service
• Yield per household

Costs – Disposal and Treatment

• Are there disposal savings?
• Minimum throughput requirements
• Renegotiation of use of void space
• How can any savings financially benefit collection

services?

• Capital support to start
• Revenue support
• Are savings ring-fenced for waste and recycling

services?

Costs – Treatment

• Huge variance in AD gate fees
• Local availability
• Local capacity
• Can treatment providers help?
• Do they need feedstock?
• Capital or revenue assistance?
• C. 568,000 tpa capacity? (from NE through DL, TS, YO and LS – Newcastle to

the Humber)

Median Gate Fees Reported by Local Authorities - United Kingdom 2016/17

AD (food only) £29 (range £0-£65) IVC (mixed food & green waste) £46 (range £28-£60)

Costs – Collection Services

• Service design
• Can food waste be co-collected with dry recycling?
• How frequent is the residual collection?
• Regular and reliable delivery of caddy liners
• Regular and reliable service!
• Clear instructional information/ other communications
• All affect yields and therefore costs/ savings

Cost Influences – Collection Type

• Most cost-effective
• Co-collecting with multi-stream kerbside sort weekly (higher

yields of dry too)

• A dedicated food waste vehicle weekly (7.5 tonne, plastic-

bodied)

• (pods less efficient)