Waste Collection Methodology Review. Political Cabinet 27 th - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Appendix A1 Waste Collection Methodology Review. Political Cabinet – 27 th February 2018 Jim Perkins – Strategic Waste Lead Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 1

Reason for Review.  Current collection vehicle fleet needs to be re-procured.  Method of collection will determine exactly what vehicles need to be procured. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 2

3 Key Options to Consider.  Source Separated Collections of Recyclable Wastes.  Co-mingled Collections of Recyclable Wastes.  Frequency of Residual Waste Collections. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 3

Benefits of Source Separation of Recyclables  It’s the current service.  Less contamination.  More £value per tonne or recyclables.  No need for separate processing contract (additional costs).  No need for TEEP compliance assessments.  Allows for additional waste streams to be collected by the same vehicle at no extra cost (WEEE, Textiles, Food etc). Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 4

Down side of Source Separated Collections  Bespoke vehicles required.  Health and Safety implications.  Increased Littering.  Capacity governed by size of box.  Street Scene issues.  Wet Paper. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 5

Benefits of Co-mingled Collections  Allows for the standardisation of vehicle fleets.  Reduced Health and Safety risks.  Reduced risk of littering and spillage.  Less collection staff required.  Improved street scene.  Protects the recyclables. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 6

Down side of Co-mingled Collections.  Increases in contamination.  Less £income per tonne.  Restricts collection of additional items (WEEE, Textiles Food etc). Additional vehicles will be required to collect these streams.  Separate processing contract (MRF) required introducing a new cost to the service.  Change to the current service.  Initial service implementation costs. (Bins) Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 7

Residual Waste Frequency 3 weekly +  Drives more recyclables out of the residual waste stream into the recycling and food waste collection services.  Reduction in waste collection costs.  Reduction in waste disposal costs. -  Unpopular with residents. Always seen as ‘service cuts’.  Services and all collection dates changed.  Moving to a 3 weekly collection will require public engagement/consultation. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 8

Options Residual Dry recycling Food Garden Optio n Frequenc Option name Frequency Frequency / Frequency numb Container Container y / Container Container / vehicle vehicle / vehicle er vehicle Fortnightly - 180 l wheeled Weekly - 0 Baseline Weekly - RRV x2 kerbside boxes RCV bin RCV Fortnightly - 180 l wheeled 0+ Baseline PLUS Weekly - RRV x3 kerbside boxes RCV bin Multi-stream with co- Low-rise: x3 Fortnightly - 180 l wheeled 1a mingled recycling at Weekly - RRV kerbside boxes RCV bin Weekly - Food flats Flats: co-mingled collected waste bin Three with dry and Multi-stream and 3 180 l wheeled 1b weekly - Weekly - RRV x3 kerbside boxes recycling kitchen weekly residual bin RCV in RRV caddy Multi-stream and 3 Three Low-rise: x3 180 l wheeled 1c weekly residual, flat weekly - Weekly - RRV kerbside boxes bin co-mingled RCV Flats: co-mingled Multi-stream recycling 240 l Fortnightly - 140 l wheeled 1d with smaller (140 l) Weekly - RRV x3 kerbside boxes wheeled RCV bin residual bin bin, Fortnightly subscription - RCV Fortnightly - 180 l wheeled 2a Co-mingled recycling Fortnightly - RCV 240 l wheeled bin RCV bin Co-mingled recycling Fortnightly - 140 l wheeled 2b with smaller (140 l) Fortnightly - RCV 240 l wheeled bin RCV bin Weekly - residual bin collected Food Three separately Co-mingled recycling 180 l wheeled waste bin 2c Fortnightly - RCV 240 l wheeled bin weekly - in and 3 weekly residual bin and RCV dedicated kitchen food caddy 240 l wheeled bin waste Two-stream (fibres Fortnightly - 180 l wheeled Fortnightly - 50/50 3a for containers and vehicles separate) RCV bin split back RCV 55 l box for fibres Two-stream (fibres Three 240 l wheeled bin 180 l wheeled Fortnightly - 50/50 3b separate) and 3 weekly - for containers and bin split back RCV weekly residual RCV 55 l box for fibres Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 9

Options appraisal Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 10

Annualised cost comparison and kerbside recycling rate £800,000 41.5% 41.0% £600,000 40.5% £400,000 40.0% Annualised cost saving / increase Kerbside recycling rate 39.5% £200,000 39.0% £- 38.5% 38.0% £(200,000) 37.5% £(400,000) 37.0% £(600,000) 36.5% Baseline Baseline Option 1a Option 1b Option 1c Option 1d Option 2a Option 2b Option 2c Option 3a Option 3b PLUS Res-2wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-3wkly- Res-3wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-3wkly- Res-2wkly- Res-3wkly- 180l 180l 180l 180l 180l 140l 180l 140l 180l 180l 180l Multi-wkly Multi-wkly Comingled- Comingled- Comingled- Multi-wkly Multi-wkly (flats- Multi-wkly (flats- Multi-wkly Twin-2wkly Twin-2wkly 2wkly 2wkly 2wkly comingled) comingled) Annualised cost saving -£79,148 £68,669 -£466,331 -£318,514 -£88,275 £693,420 £696,893 £260,424 £598,695 £178,328 Recycling rate 38.7% 39.6% 39.7% 40.7% 40.8% 40.3% 39.1% 39.8% 39.6% 37.5% 38.3% Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 11

Capital Implications of each option. Waste e Managem ement ent Servic vices es Slide 12