Moving Toward an Integrated System for Waste Reduction in Hamilton

MOVING TOWARD AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM FOR WASTE REDUCTION IN HAMILTON Howard Mitchell Gavin Bush Environmental & Refuse Manager Central Region Manager Hamilton City Council Waste Management NZ Ltd SETTING THE SCENE The management of waste in New Zealand has evolved during the last twenty years into an extremely complex and interwoven mix of issues. Public concern about environmental pollution has been linked to waste disposal and the consumption of resources, however there is an ongoing desire for economic growth, which is at odds with the minimisation of waste. The participants include service providers in the public (local authority) and private sectors (waste companies), waste generators (the entire community) and regulators (local, central and regional government). Their operations are not well co-ordinated. In an attempt to co-ordinate a national approach to waste, the Ministry for the Environment presented the NZ Waste Strategy in March 2002, which set long term goals and expectations. The Waste Management Institute of NZ has developed the LifeAfterWaste (LAW) principles, which aim to move the problem “up the pipe” and to harmonise the activities of resource use and waste management in a way that will ensure a better environment. LAW recognises that without a high quality environment and a truly integrated and sustainable approach to resource use, consumption and disposal, there can be no long term improvement in the quality of life. On top of all that, service providers strive to be customer focused in delivering what customers want at a price that is acceptable, while governmental agencies strive to educate the consumer to take a considered approach to resource use. There is a competitive market for waste, particularly as existing landfills close down and the major new ones are increasingly being developed, owned and operated by privately owned waste companies. The Resource Management Act process of consenting new landfills has made landfilling a highly specialised activity, which requires particular skills. The waste companies work in a full cost recovery mode, but competition for revenue forces them to reduce charges so that they can attract major customers. They operate in a highly regulated environment and the NIMBY syndrome makes landfills extremely risky financial ventures. The high investment cost of selecting, consenting, operating and closing a modern landfill must be recovered from the users, while ensuring that an acceptable return is generated for shareholders. New Zealand’s liberal approach to international trade makes waste minimisation and recycling difficult in economic terms. Production costs of some of our major trading Page 1 of 9 partners are lower and they do not necessarily share our approach to environmental or social issues. Rapid development of attractive new technology, an increasing variety of products and packaging, cheaper imports and the persuasive power of advertising together encourage increased consumption. These factors militate against products that have a long service life or can be repaired cheaply, and so goods are replaced or disposed of in a shorter timeframe, thereby increasing the amount of waste generated. Ultimately, waste management is a high risk activity, not just in environmental terms but also in economic and social terms. This paper describes the approach taken by Hamilton City Council in addressing changing expectations regarding waste and managing risk by working together with private sector operators for the benefit of the community. HAMILTON CITY’s APPROACH TO WASTE Hamilton City Council has for many years taken an enlightened, practical and forward thinking approach to managing waste. As long ago as 1978, a comprehensive report on the city’s waste explored various options for waste collection and disposal. Published after the international “energy crisis”, the report reached some key conclusions, namely • Waste generation was increasing at 6 to 7% per year. • The current method of individuals hauling waste to a tip was not economic in fuel consumption terms. • The traditional practice of dumping waste into an unlined gully, with no thought to subsequent environmental effects, should not continue. • Research into energy generation by burning refuse was continuing in Auckland, and Hamilton might participate in a future joint venture at one of the power stations. • A modern sanitary landfill was the most cost effective disposal method and a new landfill should be constructed, with appropriate controls on waste acceptance, site management, compaction, leachate management and post closure land use. The landfill should have an operating life of not less than thirty years. • Four refuse transfer stations were proposed, within easy reach of customers, thereby limiting the number of vehicles needing to be accommodated each day at the landfill. • Charges should be introduced at the transfer stations. • Council support for existing commercial recycling operations should continue. While the emphasis was on improved environmental outcomes and economic efficiency, the report also drew attention to possibilities for “user pays” refuse collection, separate facilities for garden waste disposal, inorganic collections, pulverisation of refuse to increase its density, a regional landfill and the growing need for resource conservation. The opportunities for implementation were limited only by the budgetary constraints of a council that was dealing with various other major projects at the time. Page 2 of 9 New landfill and refuse transfer station Following a process of site identification and tendering, the preferred site at Horotiu was selected in 1980. The site was owned and operated by Perry Aggregates, who extracted sand and gravel for sale to various industries. The site required reinstatement on completion of sandwinning, and a win-win situation would be achieved by establishing the new landfill at the site. The new landfill was to be developed sequentially in a series of shallow stages each with a low permeability clay liner, leachate extraction and final reinstatement to grazing, re- establishing a landform that was consistent with the surrounding agricultural land. Operations commenced in 1985, concurrently with the opening of the new transfer station in the city. Composting Another example of an enlightened approach was the development of greenwaste composting in Hamilton. During the early 1990’s HCC worked with a private developer to establish a commercially viable greenwaste composting centre, which contributed significantly to reducing the waste to the landfill, while at the same time producing a high quality range of mulches and composts suitable for use on the land. The initiative aligned with HCC’s Environmental Policy, which sought to “enable” the private sector and the wider community to participate and flourish in achieving desirable environmental outcomes. The policy placed a higher value on “enabling” than the rather more traditional mechanisms of “regulating” and “service provision by council” in achieving the desired environmental outcomes. Council had no expertise or experience in composting on a large scale and had not investigated the market for such products. Council was able to minimise the financial risk inherent in the venture by opting to invest in the land and infrastructure. The site was leased to the operator, who was required to produce a business plan, demonstrating the viability of the venture. The operator was entirely responsible for quality control, setting the fees and marketing the products. An added attraction was that the gate fees for greenwaste were lower than the refuse fees at the transfer station and no artificial subsidy was required from Council’s rates funds. The composting centre has been very successful and has recently won an Environmental Business award. Waste Management Plan In 1998, HCC prepared a Waste Management Plan (WMP), as required by Local Government Amendment Act no. 4 (1996). The process commenced with invitations to all sectors of the community, who wished to be represented on a working party to develop a vision of the way forward. Page 3 of 9 The WMP drew on the waste management hierarchy of the 5 R’s (reduce, reuse, recycle, recover and residual disposal), placing a strong emphasis on treating waste as a potential resource and identifying public education as a key factor for successful implementation. The WMP supported much of the current practice, including the use of economic instruments (user pays) and recommended the introduction of kerbside recycling and the development of a Resource Park, which would provide a nucleus for new businesses to establish, using the resources discarded by others. The high financial costs that were identified for the following twenty years were not attractive enough for all of the ideas to be implemented immediately, however the WMP provided the basis for a long term strategy. Sustainable Environment Team HCC has a Sustainable Environment Team, whose roles include community education, particularly at the school level, and the development and monitoring of sustainability indicators for the city. Waste issues have been incorporated into these activities. Service delivery in Hamilton All of Hamilton City Council’s refuse services have been carried out by medium to long term contracts, following a process of competitive tendering. The evaluation of the tenders includes consideration of the technical and management skills, track record, proposed methodology, as well as price. Contracting

Load more