The quality of curbside recyclables and their management options. Presented by Adam Read, Waste Management & Resource Efficiency Practice Director. Presented at the Air & Waste Management Association’s 105th Annual Conference & Exhibition, San Antonio, June 19-22, 2012.

1. THE QUALITY OF CURBSIDE RECYCLABLES AND
THEIR MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
Dr Adam Read – Practice Director
Waste Management & Resource Efficiency, AEA
AWMA 2012
A world leading
19th – 22nd June energy and climate
change consultancy
San Antonio, Texas

2. An Overview …. In 20 minutes …..
+ Personal Welcome
+ Introduction to the topic
+ What is quality?
+ Who is responsible?
+ What are the issues?
+ How to measure the extent of the problem?
+ How to overcome these issues?
+ Lessons from the UK
2

3. A personal welcome
+ Adam Read
- Practice Director @ AEA for Waste Management
- 18 years of operational expertise in recycling service
design, roll-out and monitoring
- Staff of > 75 consultants (UK and US)
+ Role on the project
- Project Director
+ Acknowledgements
- Dr Nia Owen: lead author & MRF and recyclate quality
specialist
- AEA for their support in allowing me to be here today
3

4. My sponsor ….
4

5. Our US sponsors
+ We are here exhibiting with ERG
- we acquired them in 2010
+ Come and see us on Booth #118
- ERG and AEA Technology Group
+ Franklin Associates (ERG division)
- extensive experience in all aspects of
solid waste management (over 30 years
of practice)
- integrated solid waste master plans
- full life cycle analyses of solid waste
- waste stream evaluations for local,
regional, state, and national agencies
5

6. Introduction
6

7. The Context
+ Landfill disposal cost is increasing each year
- Landfill tax alone is increasing by £8 per tonne
- Currently £64/ tonne
+ Recycling targets set by Devolved Administrations in the UK
- England, Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland
o as well as EU targets
- Theme = maximise capture of recyclables from MSW
+ Focus has been predominantly on quantity:
- 70% target for Scotland by 2020
- 70% target for Wales by 2025
- EU Waste Framework Directive requires 50% recycling 2025 AND
75% reduction on 1995 levels of BMW going to landfill by 2020
+ These are driving local authorities to introduce recycling
services….. Usually heavy materials included! 7

8. Security of markets is key …
+ Increasing tonnage collected and
lack of UK [processing capacity
+ UK is heavily reliant on the export
market – particularly China
Paper
+ BUT Chinese market is expected to
decline in a few years
- They are producing their own
recyclate from middle classes in China
+ Producing quality recyclate will be
key to securing long term markets
Plastic 8

9. Export of poor quality materials…
9

10. What is Quality?
10

11. What do we mean by Quality...
+ Material that meets a defined standard
+ Materials in a form that an end market (reprocessor) is
prepared to accept, at a price that is more advantageous
then alternative material sources
+ Materials that an end market accepts but whose processing
costs do not exceed the income from the material
+ Focus in the UK has traditionally been on quantity rather
than quality!!
- BUT under current economic conditions Quality materials will always
sell!
- This is now a growing concern for local authorities….
11

12. What do we mean by Quality...
+ This doesn’t mean that we always have to produce this…
12

13. What do we mean by Quality...
+ Or this…..
13

14. What do we mean by Quality...
+ Sometimes this is fine ….
+ The market ultimately decides what its prepared to accept!
14

15. Good quality? 15

16. Bad Quality?
16
Bad quality?

17. Poor quality? 17

18. Who is responsible?
18

19. The Quality Supply Chain
Householder
Collection
Crew
Local
Authority
MRF
Reprocessor
19

20. Quality Supply Chain
Householder
Collection
Crew
Local
Authority
MRF
Reprocessor
20

21. Quality Supply Chain
Householder
Collection
Crew
Local
Authority
MRF
Reprocessor
21

22. Quality Supply Chain
Local
Authority
22

23. Quality …
+ Consistently delivering materials to the marketplace that are
- effectively separated to meet customer requirements
- compliant with national regulations and policies….
- at a cost that is acceptable
23

24. MRFs can perform miracles!
24

25. 25

26. Time is money!
26

27. MRFs often blamed for poor quality….
+ BUT
“Rubbish in = Rubbish out”
+ MRFs are part of a manufacturing process
- From collection to reprocessor and back into consumption!
ALL ARE RESPONSIBLE
27

28. What are the issues?
28

29. Impacts on quality
+ Non Target Materials (NTMs)
- Materials not accepted by MRF
+ Residues
- Wastes that find their way into the recycling stream (by accident)
+ Weather
- Changes composition of material streams
- Wet paper is not as acceptable as dry!
+ Behaviour
- People choose to present NTMs
- People choose not to keep things dry
- People aren’t aware of what goes where
29

30. Reasons for Contamination
+ Limited range of materials collected in recycling scheme
+ Poor communications (confusion @ the kerb)
+ Language barriers (don’t understand the messages)
+ Lack of support for elderly / disabled (scheme fails)
+ Lack of facilities for flats (all in 1 bin!)
+ Poor service provision (can’t expect a poor design to deliver)
+ Lack of understanding by collection crew (collect anything)
+ Lack of enforcement @ the kerbside (no feedback to
residents)
+ No monitoring (no data…. no idea!)
30

31. Reported levels of NTMs
+ Ceredigion – 12.7%
+ LB Wandsworth – 8.2%
+ Northumberland County – 30%
+ Lichfield DC – 16.2%
+ Commonly reported NTMs:
- Food contaminated materials
- Plastic bags
- Glass
- Tetrapak
- Wet paper
31

32. How to measure the extent of the
problem
32

33. How do we measure it...
+ Two ways of measuring input quality:
- Composition analysis of loads
collected @ kerbside
- % of bins set out containing NTMs
+ Quality measured using one of these
- but the results are markedly different
33

34. How do we measure it...
+ Composition analysis - % by weight of NTMs:
- doesn’t tell you if this is caused by a small number of people
grossly misusing the scheme
- or a large number of people getting it a bit wrong...
34

35. How do we measure it...
+ % of bins set out will provide information on the spread of any
NTM issues
- But only top of bins can be seen when monitoring...
- No idea how much / how significant the problem is!
+ Need to use both measures…. and with some frequency…..
35

36. How do we overcome the issues?
36

37. Scheme Design
+ Container Type:
- Open bins / boxes can be compromised via
littering from passers by
- Lids can be used to minimise this
+ Provision of free recycling bags but not
residual bags
- Encourages misuse of the recycling system
- Think carefully about ‘unexpected consequences’
+ Use of transparent containers
- Enables NTMs to be easily identified
- South Holland District council switched from a box
to transparent bag and reported a decline in NTMs
37

38. Scheme Design
+ Border effects:
- Impact of neighbouring authorities scheme
- Friends and relatives are recycling yoghurt pots ‘so I can to!’
+ Residual waste collection frequency:
- Switch to fortnightly residual waste collection…
- Misuse of recycling system – needs careful monitoring & feedback
+ Range of materials collected:
- Central Bedfordshire added plastic packaging, foil and waxed cartons
to kerbside scheme and NTMs decreased from 7.8% to 1.4%
- Stratford upon Avon Council added plastic packaging and foil @
kerbside and NTMs decreased from 4.5% to 1.9%
38

39. Operations
+ Crew training works!
- Recognition of TMs & NTMs
- Effective engaging with householders
+ Great Yarmouth
- Decreased NTMs from 12.5% to 6.9%
+ East Hampshire
- Decreased NTMs from 8.8% to 5%
+ LB Lewisham
- Decreased NTMs from 22% to 13%
39

40. Communications
+ Range of approaches available:
- Door to door / Leafleting / Roadshows/ Radio
advertising etc.
+ Durham County Council’s ‘Kerb-it’ campaign:
- Adverts / leaflets/ roadshows/ door to door
- NTMs decreased from 11.5% to 5.8% in areas of high
student population
+ Kingston upon Thames
- Recycling advisors visited persistent offenders
- NTMs decreased from 9.8% to 6.8%.
+ Craigavon Borough Council
- Introduced AWC but NTMs in recycling collections
increased significantly (local confusion)
- Bin inspectors visited offenders
- NTMs decreased from 17% to 8.5%
40

41. What’s most effective?
+ Increase range of materials collected by the
kerbside scheme
- BUT can the MRF accept them...
+ Crew training – recognition of NTMs
- Work on crews in turn and publish results to
encourage others of the benefits
- Need to have a parallel strong policy on ‘lids
down’ and contaminated bins left etc..
+ Communications
- Will underpin any new scheme initiative – new
materials, change of days etc..
- Must be focused on areas with specific problems
- Must provide positive feedback on
improvements!
41

42. Conclusions
42

43. Conclusions
+ Monitoring quality @ all stages in the collection and
treatment system is vital
+ Sending rubbish to a reprocessor only costs you money!
+ Good data on contamination ‘pockets’ or specific materials
will allow targeted communications campaigns
- more effective than blanket campaigns!
+ Work with your contractors (crew engagement is key)
+ Think about your residents (they don’t want to contaminate)
- Help them adjust
- Help them understand
+ Keep challenging your collection system – every little helps!
43

44. Lessons for the US
+ Curbside recycling has its limits
+ International commodity markets will
impact on material prices
+ Think about future scheme expansion &
improvements – what is key?
+ Communications budgets are under-
funded and under-utilised
+ Crew training is vital
+ Working with your MRF / reprocessors
@ the outset will ensure everyone
understands the materials specification
44

46. Thank you!
46

47. Come and see us …. Booth #118
Adam Read Shelly Schneider
Practice Director - AEA Franklin Associates (ERG)
Waste Management & Resource Waste Management & Resource
Efficiency Efficiency
cell: 0044 7968 707 239 tel: 913-800-8276
email: adam.read@aeat.co.uk email: Shelly.Schneider@erg.com
web: www.aeat.co.uk web: www.aeat.co.uk