DOCSLIB.ORG

Kerbside Collection Deep Dive Infrastructure Victoria

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kerbside Collection Deep Dive Infrastructure Victoria Kerbside Collection Deep Dive Infrastructure Victoria Final Report Infrastructure Victoria, 1 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Contents About the research 3 Detailed findings 8 Drivers and barriers to adherence 9 Reactions to initiatives 19 Optimal configuration 28 Appendices 30 Infrastructure Victoria, 2 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 About the research Infrastructure Victoria, 3 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Background In June 2019, Infrastructure Victoria undertook a community survey to understand, at a high level, Victorians’ perception of recycling and their willingness to change household behaviours. The polling demonstrated Victorians had a high appetite for various potential kerbside waste sorting / collection initiatives. Infrastructure Victoria want to understand Victorians’ attitudes, perceptions and factors which will influence the success of various This subsequent qualitative deep dive sought potential kerbside waste sorting / collection to obtain more discerning feedback once initiatives. The research will inform householders understood the implications of Infrastructure Victoria’s advice to Government the schemes. on recycling and resource recovery infrastructure, due in April 2020. Infrastructure Victoria, 4 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Research objectives The specific objectives of the project were to: Understand awareness, attitudes and perceptions of current kerbside 1. waste sorting / collection practices, including factors which may limit more complete adherence. Explain why initial receptiveness to proposed new kerbside waste 2. initiatives polled as high. Explore how thoughts develop as new information is added about the 3. implications of proposed new initiatives.. Investigate the level of motivation to adhere to new initiatives and what 4. is underlying that motivation. Conversely, what will limit adherence and how this can be addressed. Compare initiatives against one another to conclude which represent the 5. best strategic opportunities for Government. Infrastructure Victoria, 5 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Who we spoke to High Moderate / low A total of n=44 focus group participants: adherence to adherence to Total waste sorting waste sorting practices practices • Victorians aged 18+, who are responsible for managing / sorting waste for their household. Metro 2 2 4 • A mix of genders and life-stage / household composition. Melbourne • Each participant completed a 15-minute homework task consisting of questions Bendigo 1 1 2 related to awareness of council collections, and perceptions towards waste sorting practices prior to the focus groups. Groups lasted 90 minutes. Total 3 3 6 • Groups were conducted over three evenings on 12th – 14th November 2019. Note that, to facilitate a shared discussion, and to highlight where there are differences in perspective, groups were split between those who do / do not completely adhere to current waste sorting practices. The project was carried out in line with the Market Research International Standard, AS ISO 20252. Infrastructure Victoria, 6 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Who we spoke to Participants were sampled to reflect a range of demographic characteristics. Gender n= Annual household income n= Work status n= Council n= Male 21 Less than $50,000 9 Employed full-time 23 Greater Bendigo 15 Female 23 $50,000 - $74,999 14 Employed part-time/casual 9 Port Phillip 4 $75,000-$99,999 7 Student 1 Maribyrnong 3 Age n= $100,000-$149,000 9 Working and student 3 Moreland 3 18-24 5 $150,000-$199,000 3 Home duties 3 Wyndham 2 15-34 6 More than $200,000 2 Retired 4 Hobsons Bay 2 35-44 11 Unemployed 1 Bayside 2 45-54 9 Children under 18 at home n= Stonnington 2 55-64 10 Yes, all aged under 13 years 9 Moonee valley 2 65-70 3 Yes, at least one aged 13 or over 8 Boroondara 1 No 27 Melton 1 Monash 1 Maroondah 1 Victorians from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) backgrounds were included in the research. Whitehorse 1 Darebin 1 Infrastructure Victoria, 7 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Detailed findings Infrastructure Victoria, 8 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Drivers and barriers to adherence Infrastructure Victoria, 9 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Victorians feel a sense of duty to the environment Informed by a broad range of sources, they are concerned about the environment and feel it is important to take actions to minimise their impact. Some are more committed – they are more cognisant of the impact of environmental issues, have well established sorting habits, and are willing to go out of their way to seek ways to recycle or create their own sorting systems. At the apex, the most committed already take non-kerbside waste to collection centres and upcycling programs within their community. Those who are less active – rather than dismissing the environment entirely – feel a sense of duty to do ‘the right thing’ but just don’t do it consistently or don’t prioritise it over other factors such as convenience. Too much of our waste goes to landfill and impacts on our environment. It just isn’t right. Infrastructure Victoria, 10 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 The positive habits of those committed to correctly sorting waste are deeply ingrained Rather than having a rational basis, those committed to correctly sorting waste cite a broad emotional connection to ‘the environment’, and are compelled to ‘do the right thing’ by habit: ‘It’s who I am’ ‘It has been instilled in me’ ‘I have an obligation not just to myself but to others’ Environmentally conscious – positive waste It is common for Victorians to describe that sorting practices are just one expression of waste sorting behaviors have been habitual They have a more developed social this audience’s interest in minimising their for such a long time, that they are now conscience and a broader sense of social footprint. They commonly describe caring for second nature. The systems they used when responsibility. A part of this persuasion is to the environment and taking positive steps as growing up tend to have translated into the place higher importance / priority on the part of how they self-identify. systems they are using nowadays. This is environment. especially true of younger audiences who may never have known any differently. Infrastructure Victoria, 11 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Recycling for me is just automatic. It’s part of who I am. I don’t plan it, it just happens. Infrastructure Victoria, 12 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Mature Victorians and those living in regional areas have higher tendency to adhere to current waste sorting practices Empty nesters / retirees Regional residents I have the time and space to make it a priority Mature Victorians are are less time pressured so face fewer barriers Compared to metro residents, regional residents have more space - giving them to sorting their waste correctly and consistently. more freedom to sort their waste as they wish before collection and to keep their waste separated into different streams (e.g. kitchen caddy for food waste, extra They also have more consistent, structured lifestyles, so their waste bins / storage indoor for recyclables, etc). generation is less likely to change and they are less likely to be in situations where their waste collection system is insufficient (e.g. They are also less concerned about having to store their dry recyclables for an overfilling of the recycling bin). extra week / wait for next collection. Regional residents are more likely to engage in more ‘drop-off’ behaviours, made easier by their proximity to these centres compared to Metro residents and the predictability of traffic congestion. Infrastructure Victoria, 13 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Environmental concerns alone cannot dependably drive engagement with waste sorting practices It is common for Victorians to put environmental concerns to the back of their mind in the face of other more pressing day-to-day matters. For those who don’t consistently adhere to waste sorting practices, other concerns more personal to them, such as careers, caring for their families, or staying healthy, take up the majority of their focus. This results in little room for conscious thought about the environment in their everyday behaviours. It takes too long to work out what can and can’t go into each bin. I have three kids at home, I just want to get the trash out of my house, I have other things I need to focus on. Infrastructure Victoria, 14 Kerbside Collection Deep Dive, Nov 2019 Uncertainty creates misconceptions about how the system works and negatively impacts commitment to sorting Victorians generally associate certain items as ‘obviously recyclable’ – for example, plastic bottles, dry cardboard and glass. However, there is a ‘grey area’ between what they know can definitely be recycled and what can’t. In this grey area, they are left to their own accord to figure out how they should dispose of the waste. Those not inclined to to proactively seek clarity on how to sort waste likely do the wrong thing much of the time in one of two ways… ‘Let the system take care of it’ ‘It’s better to be safe than sorry’ Alternatively, they may dispose of the item in the recycling bin. They believe that sorting out non- When unsure, they may dispose of the item in the recyclable waste is one of Council’s roles and that landfill bin. The main reason for this is a concern that recycling facilities cater for this. Further, they believe if anything non-recyclable was included among a that at least attempting to recycle an item is better batch of recyclable items, it would mean the entire than the certainty of it going to landfill by putting it in batch would go to landfill as a result of the non- the general waste bin. recyclable item ‘contaminating’ the others.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Perceived Value Influencing the Household Waste Sorting
    International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health Article Perceived Value Influencing the Household Waste Sorting Behaviors in Rural China Ying Ma 1,2, Mansoor Ahmed Koondhar 1, Shengke Liu 1, Huiling Wang 1 and Rong Kong 1,* 1 School of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, No. 3 Taicheng Road, Yangling 712100, China; [email protected] (Y.M.); [email protected] (M.A.K.); [email protected] (S.L.); [email protected] (H.W.) 2 School of Economics and Management, Xi’an Shiyou University, No. 18 Dianzi Road, Xi’an 710065, China * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 25 July 2020; Accepted: 19 August 2020; Published: 21 August 2020 Abstract: Waste sorting is the cardinal measurement to solve the problem of low efficiency of rural environmental governance and to alleviate environmental pollution by reduction, recycling, and harmlessness in rural areas. However, non-excludable and non-rival features of public goods easily cause a wide free-rider problem, which results in a low frequency of participation in the waste sorting of rural people. Based on the theory of the utility maximization of the rational economic man, this paper investigates survey data of 688 farm households in three cities and three counties of Shaanxi Province to explore the effect of the perceived value on the household waste classification behavior based on cost-benefit analysis. The results show that perceived benefit and perceived cost are important perceived value factors affecting farmers’ participation in waste sorting. Specifically, the spiritual benefit of the perceived benefit has a significantly positive impact on classification behavior, while the time cost, physical cost, and material cost of the perceived cost have a negative impact on waste classification behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • 5.0 Kerbside Contents
    WEEE Collection Good Practice Guidance 1 5.0 Kerbside Contents 5.1 Bulky waste 01 5.1.1 Interacting with local reuse schemes 01 5.1.2 Identifying reusable items 02 5.1.3 Collection arrangements 02 5.2 Staff training 04 5.3 Handling and storage 05 5.4 Contractual arrangements 06 5.5 Small Mixed WEEE collections 07 WEEE Collection Good Practice Guidance 1 Audience: The primary audience for this section of the guidance is waste collection authorities (and their contractors). However, third sector organisations and producer compliance schemes will also be interested in this guidance. Benefits: The benefit to the collection authorities of implementing this good practice is to maximise the WEEE that is segregated for reuse and recycling through their kerbside/bulky waste collections. Producer compliance schemes will find this section of interest as they can benefit from innovative collection methods and may wish to discuss appropriate approved recycling and reuse routes with the local authorities. Third sector organisations will find the guidance of value by understanding how they can support waste collection authorities to maximise diversion of WEEE for reuse. Summary: This chapter considers the options available to waste collection authorities for maximising reuse and recycling of WEEE, through kerbside/ bulky waste collections, bring banks and ad hoc collections such as WEEE amnesties. Advice is therefore provided on how to identify reusable items, how to raise awareness of reuse avenues with householders and how to interact with local reuse schemes so they provide the level of service required. Useful sources of information of relevance to this section of the guidance are available from the Furniture Reuse Network.
    [Show full text]
  • Standardising Kerbside Collections in Aotearoa
    Recommendations for standardisation of kerbside collections in Aotearoa Prepared for Ministry for the Environment May 2020 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STANDARDISATION OF KERBSIDE COLLECTIONS IN AOTEAROA DOCUMENT QUALITY CONTROL Version Date Written by Distributed to Sarah Pritchett (WasteMINZ) and Draft 0.1 29 May 2020 Sunshine Yates (Sunshine Stephen Goodman Yates Consulting) on behalf of WasteMINZ Sarah Pritchett and Draft 0.2 10 June 2020 Stephen Goodman Sunshine Yates Sarah Pritchett and Final 1.0 26 June 2020 Stephen Goodman Sunshine Yates CONTACT DETAILS Ministry for the Environment WasteMINZ Stephen Goodman Sarah Pritchett Policy Manager Sustainability Advisor 23 Kate Sheppard Place PO Box 305426 Thorndon Triton Plaza Wellington 6143 Auckland 0757 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The Project Managers acknowledges the time, expertise and guidance provided by the members of the Steering Group and Oversight Group in preparing this report. Steering Group Oversight Group Duncan Wilson (Chair) - Eunomia Research and Consulting Stephen Goodman (Chair) - MfE Mike Jones - Earthcare Environmental Shaun Lewis - MfE Rick Thorpe - Xtreme Zero Waste/Zero Waste Network Parul Sood - Auckland Council Rob Wilson - Eco Central Jason Krupp - Local Government New Zealand Angela Atkins - Hastings District Council Pamela Ritchie - MfE Janine Brinsdon - WasteMINZ Rodrick Boys - MfE Stephen Goodman - MfE The Project Managers also thank each and every local authority representative and waste and resource recovery industry representative that generously gave of their time and expertise
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Management Guidance for Residents
    Kent County Council Waste Management Guide to household waste disposal Guidance document for residents September 2019 4 kent.gov.uk This document can be made available in other formats or languages. To request this, please email [email protected] or telephone 03000 421553 (text relay service 18001 03000 421553). This number goes to an answer machine, which is monitored during office hours. Or write to: Kent County Council, Diversity & Equality Team Room G37, Sessions House, County Hall, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 1XQ 2 Contents Responsibility for Waste Background Information 4 Roles of Authorities in Kent & Current Performance 5 Waste Segregation 6-17 Household Waste Recycling Centres 18-20 Conclusion 21 Waste Collection Authority Contacts 22 Quicklinks 23 Kent County Council Waste Management Mission Our Ambition is to deliver a high quality household waste disposal service, whilst remaining cost- effective for the people of Kent, with an emphasis on waste reduction, reuse, recycling and achieving zero landfill 3 Collection and disposal of waste Background Information Kent County Council (KCC) works in partnership with the Kent District and Borough Councils to find the best solution for the household waste that requires disposal. The aim of this document is to provide clear guidance to residents so they can dispose of their waste in a way that is in line with the Waste Hierarchy enabling waste to be reduced, reused or recycled where possible; and waste being sent for incineration or landfill is as minimal as possible. Prevention Most preferred Preparing for re-use Recycling Other recovery Disposal Least preferred 4 Roles of authorities in Kent District and Borough Councils are Waste Collection Authorities (WCAs) and they are responsible for collecting household waste from residents’ houses, referred to as kerbside collections.
    [Show full text]
  • National Waste Report 2018 19 NOVEMBER 2018
    National Waste Report 2018 19 NOVEMBER 2018 PREPARED FOR Department of the Environment and Energy PREPARED IN ASSOCIATION WITH Report title National Waste Report 2018 Client Department of the Environment and Energy Status Final Authors Joe Pickin, Paul Randell, Jenny Trinh, Bill Grant Data analysts Luke Richmond, Joe Pickin Reviewers Christine Wardle, Luke Richmond Project number P863 Report date 19 November 2018 Contract date 20 September 2017 Information current to 1 July 2018 Copyright Department of the Environment and Energy; Blue Environment Pty Ltd Disclaimer This report has been prepared for Department of the Environment and Energy in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment dated 20 September 2017, and is based on the assumptions and exclusions set out in our scope of work. Information in this document is current as of 1 July 2018. While all professional care has been undertaken in preparing this report, Blue Environment Pty Ltd cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party. The mention of any company, product or process in this report does not constitute or imply endorsement by Blue Environment Pty Ltd. © Department of the Environment and Energy; Blue Environment Pty Ltd Blue Environment prints on 100% recycled paper Blue Environment Pty Ltd ABN 78 118 663 997 Suite 209, 838 Collins St, Docklands Vic 3008 Email: [email protected] Web: www.blueenvironment.com.au Phone: +61 3 9081 0440 / +61 3 5426 3536 Contents At a glance ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of Industrial Waste Management
    Overview of Industrial Waste Management Ajith de Alwis Chemical and Process Engineering Office of Science Technology and Innovation I N D Public Solid U Non W Hazardous S T PPP A R Y S Liquid B Private T A C E Hazardous K B Air O N E New Industries and Infrastructure • Ports and related infrastructure • Airports • Highways • Power stations – Coal • Industrial Estates • Export led manufacturing industries • Food Processing • Mineral Processing and Value Addition • Tourism • Urban growth - Metros • Nanoscience Park • Off shore Oil Exploration Analysis • Policy Aspects • Regulatory Environment • Human Resources Availability • Planning Aspects • Technology Aspects • Industry Mentality • Market requirements • Stakeholder requirements Policy Goals 1. Achieve Sustainable Development in Sri Lanka 2. Improve Environmental Quality throughout Sri Lanka 3. Improve eco-efficiency across all sectors of the economy in Sri Lanka 4. Alleviate Poverty and Improve the Living standards of all Sri Lankans 6 Prescribed Projects Approach to Environmental Protection Extreme Moderate No Change Change Change Government Authoritarian more than civil environmentalism society Government Moderate and Civil Environmentalism Society Civil Society Corporate Anti more than Environmentalism environmentalism Government EPL 6980 industries without an EPL Lankadeepa Oct 11, 2011 Illegal Dumping Due Diligence & LC Responsibility …. A Structural Failure ! BOARD OF DIRECTORS CHAIRMAN FINANCE DIRECTOR ACCOUNTANT GENERAL MANAGER CLERKS PRODUCTION & ADMINISTRATION MANAGER PROCESS
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Incineration and Informal Livelihoods: a Technical Guide on Waste-To-Energy Initiatives
    WIEGO Technical Brief No 11 August 2019 Waste Incineration and Informal Livelihoods: A Technical Guide on Waste-to-Energy Initiatives Jeroen IJgosse WIEGO Technical Briefs The global research-policy-action network Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO) Technical Briefs provide guides for both specialized and nonspecialized audiences. These are designed to strengthen understanding and analysis of the situation of those working in the informal economy as well as of the policy environment and policy options. About the Author: Jeroen IJgosse is a senior international solid waste management advisor, an urban environmental specialist, trainer and process facilitator with 25 years of experience in solid waste management in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe. He has worked extensively in the fields of planning, process facilitation, institutional strengthening, policy development, financial issues, due diligence assessment and inclusive processes involving informal actors in solid waste management. After 20 years living and working in Latin America, he currently resides in the Netherlands. Publication date: August, 2019 ISBN number: 978-92-95106-36-9 Please cite this publication as: IJgosse, Jeroen. 2019. Waste Incineration and Informal Livelihoods: A Technical Guide on Waste-to-Energy Initiatives. WIEGO Technical Brief No. 11. Manchester, UK: WIEGO. Series editor: Caroline Skinner Copy editor: Megan MacLeod Layout: Julian Luckham of Luckham Creative Cover photo: Waste pickers working at the Kpone Landfill in Tema, Ghana face the threat of losing access to waste for recycling. Photo: Dean Saffron Published by Women in Informal Employment: Globalizing and Organizing (WIEGO) A Charitable Company Limited by Guarantee – Company No. 6273538, Registered Charity No.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Recycling and Refuse Service Standards
    Your Recycling and Refuse Service Standards for Lewisham 1 What are Service Standards? Service Standards set out the standards that residents can expect from the Council regarding both recycling and refuse collection services. These services have a major impact, making Lewisham a great place to live, but we need your support and commitment. This is why the standards also outline what we need from you. Please visit www.lewisham.gov.uk/recycling for more information and keep this leaflet to refer to, thank you. Recycling We will provide a weekly collection of your paper, cardboard, glass, cans, plastic bottles, mixed plastics, beverage cartons (Tetra Pak) and shredded paper from your recycling wheelie bins, green boxes, clear sacks and large communal bins. Our promise Your role One of the following will be provided for Please contact us to let us know what kerbside properties and flats for recycling: recycling facilities you require. Recycling wheelie bins (kerbside). When recycling please ensure that you: Clear sacks (flats). Place the correct materials in the Communal recycling bins (estates/flats). recycling bin, loose if possible. Green reusable recycling estates bags Do not use black refuse sacks (these (estates). will not be collected). Your recycling crew will only empty recycling Wheelie bins and sacks must be bins and clear transparent sacks that contain moved to the inside edge of your the correct materials. property and be clear of obstructions. Leave recycling bins and clear sacks out by 6am on the correct collection day. 2 Our promise Your role We will return your recycling bin to the Please put the returned bin back to its outside edge of your property.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global E-Waste Monitor 2020 Quantities, Flows, and the Circular Economy Potential
    The Global E-waste Monitor 2020 Quantities, flows, and the circular economy potential Authors: Vanessa Forti, Cornelis Peter Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Garam Bel Contributions by: S. Adrian, M. Brune Drisse, Y. Cheng, L. Devia, O. Deubzer, F. Goldizen, J. Gorman, S. Herat, S. Honda, G. Iattoni, W. Jingwei, L. Jinhui, D.S. Khetriwal, J. Linnell, F. Magalini, I.C. Nnororm, P. Onianwa, D. Ott, A. Ramola, U. Silva, R. Stillhart, D. Tillekeratne, V. Van Straalen, M. Wagner, T. Yamamoto, X. Zeng Supporting Contributors: 2 The Global E-waste Monitor 2020 Quantities, flows, and the circular economy potential Authors: Vanessa Forti, Cornelis Peter Baldé, Ruediger Kuehr, Garam Bel Contributions by: S. Adrian, M. Brune Drisse, Y. Cheng, L. Devia, O. Deubzer, F. Goldizen, J. Gorman, S. Herat, S. Honda, G. Iattoni, W. Jingwei, L. Jinhui, D.S. Khetriwal, J. Linnell, F. Magalini, I.C. Nnororm, P. Onianwa, D. Ott, A. Ramola, U. Silva, R. Stillhart, D. Tillekeratne, V. Van Straalen, M. Wagner, T. Yamamoto, X. Zeng 3 Copyright and publication information 4 Contact information: Established in 1865, ITU is the intergovernmental body responsible for coordinating the For enquiries, please contact the corresponding author C.P. Baldé via [email protected]. shared global use of the radio spectrum, promoting international cooperation in assigning satellite orbits, improving communication infrastructure in the developing world, and Please cite this publication as: establishing the worldwide standards that foster seamless interconnection of a vast range of Forti V., Baldé C.P., Kuehr R., Bel G. The Global E-waste Monitor 2020: Quantities, communications systems. From broadband networks to cutting-edge wireless technologies, flows and the circular economy potential.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrated Waste to Energy and Liquid Fuel Plants: Key to Sustainable Solid Waste Management
    Integrated Waste to Energy and Liquid Fuel Plants: Key to Sustainable Solid Waste Management Bary Wilson, Ph.D. Barry Liss, Ph.D., P.E Brandon Wilson, Ph.D., P.E May 2019 EnviroPower Renewable, Inc. 7301A Palmetto Parkway Rd. Suite 206B Boca Raton, FL 33433 www.eprenewable.com EPR Doc. 05212019 © 2019 EPR All Rights Reserved 1 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 4 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 4 Plastics................................................................................................................................................... 5 Plastics Recycling................................................................................................................................... 6 Diesel Fuels ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Premium Diesel ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Biodiesel and Renewable Diesel ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Management
    10 Waste Management Coordinating Lead Authors: Jean Bogner (USA) Lead Authors: Mohammed Abdelrafie Ahmed (Sudan), Cristobal Diaz (Cuba), Andre Faaij (The Netherlands), Qingxian Gao (China), Seiji Hashimoto (Japan), Katarina Mareckova (Slovakia), Riitta Pipatti (Finland), Tianzhu Zhang (China) Contributing Authors: Luis Diaz (USA), Peter Kjeldsen (Denmark), Suvi Monni (Finland) Review Editors: Robert Gregory (UK), R.T.M. Sutamihardja (Indonesia) This chapter should be cited as: Bogner, J., M. Abdelrafie Ahmed, C. Diaz, A. Faaij, Q. Gao, S. Hashimoto, K. Mareckova, R. Pipatti, T. Zhang, Waste Management, In Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [B. Metz, O.R. Davidson, P.R. Bosch, R. Dave, L.A. Meyer (eds)], Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. Waste Management Chapter 10 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................. 587 10.5 Policies and measures: waste management and climate ....................................................... 607 10.1 Introduction .................................................... 588 10.5.1 Reducing landfill CH4 emissions .......................607 10.2 Status of the waste management sector ..... 591 10.5.2 Incineration and other thermal processes for waste-to-energy ...............................................608 10.2.1 Waste generation ............................................591 10.5.3 Waste minimization, re-use and
    [Show full text]
  • Impact Assessment
    Title: Reforming the UK packaging producer responsibility Impact Assessment (IA) system Date: 18/01/2021 Stage: Consultation IA No: Source of intervention: Domestic RPC Reference No: Secondary legislation Lead department or agency: Defra Type of measure: Other departments or agencies: Contact for enquiries: [email protected] Summary: Intervention and Options RPC OPINION: GREEN Cost of Preferred (or more likely) Option 3(2019 prices, 2020 present value) Total Net Business Net Net cost to business One-In, Business Impact Target Status Present Present Value per year () Three-Out Value £275.4m -£9,532.5m £1,131.0m In scope Qualifying provision What is the problem under consideration? Why is government intervention necessary? A producer responsibility (PR) system for packaging has been in place since 1997. Over this time, it has helped businesses across the UK to meet their packaging waste recycling obligations and the UK to achieve its and the EU packaging waste recycling targets whilst keeping the cost of compliance to businesses low compared to EU Member States. As the current system is designed to enable producers to meet (not exceed) their recycling targets it provides little incentive for producers to design their packaging to be more recyclable or encourage the use of reusable or refillable packaging. In addition, a range of environmental externalities (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions and disamenity impacts from littering) are not fully accounted for in packaging producers’ and users’ decisions. Other issues of the current system include stakeholders’ concerns over system transparency; limited direct financial support for local authorities (LAs) managing packaging waste and that recycling that can be done at a lower cost overseas resulting in a lack of a level playing field for domestic reprocessors.
    [Show full text]