Waste Recycling Angela Jones, Assistant Director Jenny Robinson, WRAP Serving the people of Cumbria
Waste Hierarchy Serving the people of Cumbria
Cumbria Recycling and Re-use • Cumbria County Council – Waste Disposal Authority (WDA’s) • Six District Councils – Waste Collection Authorities (WCA’s) • 14 HWRC’s – Cumbria County Council delivered through Shanks PPP contract subcontract to Cumbria Waste Management • Additional Bring sites • Re-use organisations and charities • Freegle and social media Serving the people of Cumbria
Household Collections • WCA’s responsible for kerbside and bring site recyclate • 6 different schemes and different contract arrangements • Some provide trade waste collection • Some services allow for charge – Bulky and Garden Waste • WCA’s directed by WDA where to deliver household waste Serving the people of Cumbria
Council Priority We will deliver our Climate Local commitments, work on joint initiatives to deal with waste as efficiently as possible, and promote waste minimisation. How – Work with district authorities to develop a business case for greater consistency in Cumbria’s waste and recycling collections. Serving the people of Cumbria
Cumbria Strategic Waste Partnership (CSWP) • County Council and 6 Districts – Elected Member representation • Partnership to develop the most cost effective and practical methods of dealing with waste in the future commitment to work together has been • No decision making powers • Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy 2008 – 2020 – needs refresh • Government funded Waste and Resources Action Plan (WRAP) Consistency project Serving the people of Cumbria
Cons nsis istenc ency y Project ject for Cumbria bria St Strateg egic ic Waste Pa Partn tner ership hip (CSW SWP) Je Jenn nny y Ro Robinson inson – WRAP AP Septe tembe mber r 2017 7
• Initial drive from Rory Stewart “There is potential for recycling to be done more cheaply and more efficiently but it is about persuasion and local authorities working together to make it simpler for public; industry and each other.” “There maybe over 100 different ways in which recycling is done if we could get that down to 5 or 6 it would make a huge difference.” • Remains a policy priority for Defra Political context
Cross ss indus ustr try y advisor isory y pane nel l establi lishe hed: : Local Government Association (LGA) Resource Association Local Authority Recycling Advisory Recycling Association Committee (LARAC) Anaerobic Digestion and Bio- National Association of Waste resources Association (ADBA) Disposal Officers (NAWDO) Green Alliance Association of Directors or Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport (ADEPT) Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Environmental Services Association (ESA) London Waste and Recycling Board British Retail Consortium (BRC) (LWARB) / Resource London Food and Drink Federation (FDF) Chartered Institute of Wastes Advisory Committee on Packaging Management (CIWM) (ACP) Cross Industry Advisory Group
Consistency Framework
Increased reased quantity tity of mater erials ials Increased reased quality ty of mater erials ials re recycled cled recycl re ycled ed Financial ncial – cost t & bett tter er va value e for r money ey Legal gal Compl pliance ance Bett tter er househol seholder der engag gagem ement ent Benefits - what consistency must deliver
• Stage 1: Cumbria SWP was successful in applying for 2016/17 funding and received value of c. £40,000 contractor support plus free additional support from WRAP • Stage 2: Cumbria SWP was successful in applying for 2017/18 funding and is receiving value of c. £45,000 contractor support plus free additional support from WRAP • WRAP has contracted through its Framework with Eunomia Research and Consulting for both stages of the work. Funding and support
Stage 1 Purpose: • Assess possible service changes which would allow for greater consistency in household kerbside collections across CSWP • Test range of options through options appraisal process • Provide CSWP and members with information on: – costs – operational issues – performance – potential recycling gains Background
Stage 2 purpose • Identification of preferred option. • Focussing on overall costs, both tiers of local government • Effect of any changes holistically – how would collection changes work with existing and new infrastructure? • A time-line for changes – all authorities have different contracts, vehicle purchasing plans, infrastructure needs and political aspirations – it can’t all happen in the short -term • Looking at cost-savings overall but costs may need to be shared differently through an agreed pragmatic mechanism • Full consistency of approach in collections and materials collected (both recycling and residual) and how the materials are transported to processing plants and end markets • Good value for Cumbria Council tax payers Background
Options Modelled
Indicative Household Recycling Rate Performance by Option (including kerbside waste from households not modelled, bring sites, bulky waste and street cleansing) Model Outputs - Performance
• Predicted costs and savings associated with each option compared with the baseline – provides a relative comparison to be made against each of the options modelled • Gross collection costs: – cost of operating the service in terms of vehicles, resources and containers • Net costs: – take account of the gross costs of collection – factor in any assumed income (sale of recyclables & recycling credits) – Waste Collection Authority (WCA – the districts in Cumbria) cost of processing/treating dry and organic waste Model Outputs – Costs
Sensitivity - No Food Waste • Sensitivity run – assess the impact on recycling performance and cost of not separately collecting food waste on fortnightly residual collection options (1 – 4) • Amount of food waste assumed collected under fortnightly residual options was 11,800 tonnes – impact of not collecting food waste reduces recycling rate between 5.1 – 8% (based on option 1)
Sensitivity - No Food Waste • Introducing a separate food waste collection increases the collection costs of the kerbside collection service • Estimated net cost of operating a separate food waste collection is estimated to be in the region of £400,000 to £870,000/yr per authority – the assumed recycling credit from collecting food waste offsets the gross cost of collection – If no food waste was collected this would obviously reduce the cost of the kerbside collection service but have an impact on performance • Collecting food waste is important to Government in meeting recycling targets and for sustainability issues such as energy production • Full costs and potential savings will be explored in Stage 2 Sensitivities – No Food
• A decrease in potential recycling rate from 5.7% - 11.7% across all LAs (relative to Option 1 with a free of charge service) • However this drop in recycling rate could be made up through collecting food waste weekly • Garden waste not collected through charged for service is likely to end up back in the residual waste, for which collection and disposal costs would be generated. Sensitivities - Charged Garden
• Revenue from charging for garden waste collection presents opportunities to offset against cost of changes to other services e.g. introduction of food waste Sensitivities - Charged Garden
WDA Costs : • Important to consider the implications for Cumbria CC (Waste Disposal Authority) of different options, in terms of : – potential impact on residual disposal costs and guaranteed tonnages of residual waste – the additional cost of processing waste at HWRCs if additional material enters the sites e.g migration of waste from kerbside due to charging for garden waste collections – the recycling credits payable from the WDA to the WCA for additional material recycled WDA Costs
WDA Costs : • Additional dry recycling 2,200 – 6,700 tonnes/yr • Estimated Food waste 11,800 – 15,500 tonnes/yr • Charged garden : – potentially additional 2,100 tonnes/yr residual – 6,400 – 8,600 tonnes/yr of garden waste entering HWRCs – 21,400 tonnes of garden waste no longer collected at kerbside (Recycling credit) • A summary of Estimated Costs to WDA from WCAs introducing different Collection Options has been produced and reported WDA Costs
• WDA costs need to be considered in the round – Is there a better way of sharing overall costs to incentivise recycling and waste diversion? • From Department of Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG) 2017 Litter Strategy: Two-tier Costs
Recommend
More recommend
