Midlands RWS & Organic Waste Chris Mills Not so long ago - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sustainability West Midlands RWS & Organic Waste

Chris Mills

Not so long ago…

Comprehensive survey of senior LA Waste Managers found:

• No significant plans to change
• Will do recycling if there’s a clear business case
• No policy measures
• No clear direction
• Conflicting views from Govt Departments
• Planned further restriction of refuse but often without

investment in recycling

Published 18 December 2018. Goal is for England to move to a more circular economy, which keeps resources in use for longer. Strategy focuses on known problems:

• Sustainable consumption and production
• Single use plastics
• Householder confusion
• Food waste

Commitment that LAs are resourced to meet new net costs arising from the policies in the Strategy, including upfront transition costs and ongoing

• perational costs (EPR).

Resources and Waste Strategy

EU Circular Economy Package

▪ 55% municipal re-use & recycling by 2025 ▪ 60% municipal re-use & recycling by 2030 ▪ 65% municipal re-use & recycling by 2035 “Separate collection requirements for bio-waste (by 2023), textiles and hazardous waste (by 2025). CEP includes strengthened provisions on waste prevention (Articles 9 & 29) and preparing for re-use (Article 11(1)). Notwithstanding Brexit, we will be adopting the package, so it sets the context.

End of Life – Greater Consistency proposals

Government to specify a core set of materials to be collected by all local authorities and waste operators.

• Weekly food waste collections for all

households

• Free (limited) garden waste collection
• Businesses* to separate recyclables and

food from residual waste

Period Separate food waste collections Mixed food and garden waste Any Count of Households collecting food waste 2018/19 7,177,687 3,433,569 10,611,256 2017/18 6,748,121 3,562,068 10,310,189 2016/17 6,501,542 3,443,462 9,945,004 2015/16 6,288,206 3,972,723 10,260,929 2014/15 5,958,038 4,530,195 10,488,233 2013/14 5,347,280 4,722,398 10,069,678 2012/13 4,722,567 4,720,158 9,442,725 2011/12 4,004,924 4,051,010 8,055,934 2010/11 2,990,723 3,533,758 6,524,481 Percentage of Households collecting food waste 2018/19 30% 14% 44% 2017/18 29% 15% 44% 2016/17 28% 15% 42% 2015/16 27% 17% 44% 2014/15 26% 19% 45% 2013/14 23% 21% 44% 2012/13 21% 21% 41% 2011/12 17% 18% 35% 2010/11 9% 11% 20%

37 40 38 49 54 68 72 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2018/19 2017/18 2016/17 2015/16 2014/15 2013/14 2012/13

England – Mixed Garden and Food LAs

116 113 109 104 100 94 85 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 2018/19 2017/18 2016/17 2015/16 2014/15 2013/14 2012/13

England – Separate Food LAs

MSS requirements ▪ Dry Dry rec ecyclables es ▪ Food waste ▪ Res esid idual l waste ▪ Garden en waste ▪ Nappie ies & Clin Clinical ▪ HH HHWRC and fla flats ts

For

• r each strea

tream we we need to

• con
• nsider:

ma materia ials ls degree of

• f separatio

ion serv rvic ice access fre frequency y and capaci city re restric ictio ions on

• n mi

mixing of

• f ma

materia ials ls prop roperty specific ic re requir irements suppor

• rtin

ing poli

• licie

ies devia viation

• n from

from MSS SS fun funding for

• r foll
• llowin

wing MS MSS

Minimum Service Standards

• Issue new Guidelines through Statutory Guidance to

determine what the MSS should look like

Weekly food waste collections – WRAP response

• 1. Agree with proposal
• 2. Longstanding WRAP evidence
• 3. Free liners and comms
• 4. For all properties inc flats
• 5. To either AD or IVC
• 6. When contracts allow

Food recycling capture - UK

Weekly food - Correlation between participation and deprivation

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Index of Multiple Deprivation

Yield: kg per household per week

Weekly food – impact of different refuse frequencies

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Number of weeks from trial roll-out Average food waste yield: kg/ household served / week Fortnightly refuse Weekly refuse

▪ Recognised low capture in mixed garden and food schemes ▪ Ready reckoner calculation for separate food waste collection yields ▪ Correlations with deprivation & refuse service and performance ▪ Lower the deprivation – the higher the kg/hh/yr (served households) ▪ Difference in performance between weekly refuse and fortnightly – c20% http://www.wrap.org.uk/sites/files/wrap/Evaluation%20of%20the%20WRAP%20F W%20Collection%20Trials%20Update%20June%202009.pdf

Food waste capture

Households need support to achieve higher capture in weekly food waste collections

WRAP funded ‘Improving performance of food waste collection projects (on-line FW Guidance)

213 193 171 144 135 125 114 50 100 150 200 250 2018/19 2017/18 2016/17 2015/16 2014/15 2013/14 2012/13

England – Charged Garden Waste LAs

Period Garden waste scheme Charge for subscription service Collects card with garden waste Count of LA collecting garden waste 2018/19 319 213 8 2017/18 318 193 9 2016/17 317 171 10 2015/16 307 144 13 2014/15 305 135 16 2013/14 304 125 20 2012/13 309 114 33 Percentage of LA collecting garden waste 2018/19 98% 65% 2% 2017/18 97% 58% 3% 2016/17 97% 52% 3% 2015/16 94% 44% 4% 2014/15 94% 41% 5% 2013/14 93% 38% 6% 2012/13 95% 35% 10%

Subscription charges – Garden Waste

Annual charge Bin Bag (reusable or non-reusable) Mean £ 45.29 £ 38.68 Median £ 43.00 £ 39.50 Min charge £ 20.00 £ 19.00 Max charge £ 96.00 £ 96.30 Lower range £ 35.00 £ 27.00 Higher range £ 53.50 £ 45.88

Proposal Free Garden Waste Collection

(limited to one container over growing season)

▪ Subscription charging typically attracts around 35% take up ▪ 25% overall garden yield drop following introduction of charge ▪ Clear indications that kerbside residual have significantly increased (c43kgs) ▪ Transfer to HHWRC is c10kgs/hh ▪ No difference in overall arisings between free and charged collections ▪ Regression analysis shows recycling rate differences between free and charged LAs ▪ 100% charging likely to reduce overall recycling rate by c4%

Free (limited) Garden Waste - WRAP response

• 1. Agree but believe waste hierarchy should be

followed

• 2. Home composting issues: suitability, lapsed users

and diminishing returns

• 3. Waste arisings are not falling despite the shift to

charging

• 4. Important to recycle garden waste that cannot be

minimised

• 5. Good business case if lots of garden waste is hidden

in residual waste

• 6. Develop a Strategy for dealing with garden waste

Analysis approach for HH waste in the Impact Assessments

▪ Considers contextual and LA scheme design factors in performance ▪ Different LA and regional potential ▪ Allows generation of fair Indicators to avoid over- burdening LAs ▪ Adopt new scheme at new contract opportunity ▪ Considers transition/mobilisation periods ▪ Link to regional treatment capacity

Q`

Business waste – WRAP response

1. Legislation is essential to compel businesses, public bodies and other organisations to segregate their recyclables from residual waste 2. Support Option 3: Separate dry recycling, separate glass and separate food waste 3. All NHM organisations obligated but some derogations (glass, food) 4. Collaborative procurement options are key to keeping costs low 5. Business support and new tools important in transition 6. Key roles for Local Authorities, BIDs and local partners 7. Use EPR funding to fund business support

Web content to help inform businesses and introduce food recycling into their workplace http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/sme-food-waste/recycling-guidance

▪ Los Angeles to Award 11 Franchise Zones to Seven Waste Haulers ▪ San Jose 15 year contract to one collector ▪ New York study recommends establishing Commercial Waste Collection Zones

Next steps 2019-2023

▪ Recent review of Consultation responses ▪ Environment Bill ▪ Further Consultations (CEP , Service Standards) ▪ New Burdens and EPR funding mechanisms developed ▪ On-going LA support activities ▪ Developing business support activities ▪ Business recycling capital programme ▪ Implementation plans – cross sector engagement

Future recycling rates – RWS red current RWS plan

green potential with intervention

19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 25/26 26/27 27/28 28/29 29/30

45% 50% 55% 60% NHM% Municipal rate 48% HH% Municipal rate 55%

EPR/New Burdens

And Finally…

If you’re an LA and need support to consider the implications of the Strategy, this is available from WRAP . Email: la.support@wrap.org.uk Business support tools: http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/commercial-food- waste-collection http://www.wrap.org.uk/content/sme-food- waste/recycling-guidance

Contact us

WRAP

Second Floor, Blenheim Court, 19 George Street, Banbury, OX16 5BH UK www.wrap.org.uk +44 (0)1295 819900