Transcript Document

ArialArial
BoldBold
17 point
17
point
Arial 14 title area
Food Waste Pilots – the story so far
Justin Lang, Program Manager – Local Government, ZWSA
LGA / WMA Breakfast
17 November 2008
Once upon a time in a land far away…
• There lived a princes
trapped in a kitchen…
• People in her village had
no idea of what to put in
their GO bin
• But then along came the
GO contamination wkg grp
Source separated food organics
Burnside Trial
•
September 2005 to April 2006
•
Green organics collection, monthly to
fortnightly
•
food organics popular
•
achieved 64.6% kerbside diversion
•
potential for greater diversion from
landfill (GO Bin ownership, increase
participation)
Source separated food organics
Business Case (undertaken by John Comrie ‘06) suggests
•
costs $15-16/hh/annum to add food waste to 3 bin system
•
reduces to marginal saving if waste collected fortnightly
http://www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au/pdf/reports/food_waste_collection_business_case.pdf
Further business case to be undertaken – from pilots.
Why Pilots?
To identify:
• Costs and savings (compared
with existing 3 bin system)
• Diversion from landfill &
participation
• Yields and capacity in each
kerbside bin
Why Pilots?
To identify:
• Contamination rates (recycling and organic bins)
• Effectiveness of communication material
• Community attitudes
Overview of Council EOIs
Councils proposing weekly collection of residual
Adelaide City Council
Incl MUD’s / hi rise
Campbelltown
Weekly versus fortnightly comparison
Image area
Charles
Sturt
Reviewing two different containers
Light Regional Council Compare 2 different townships
(demographics: young families, older area)
Mitcham
Joint submission by East Waste w C/town
Whyalla
Reviewing two different containers as well as
testing two areas (contamination)
West Torrens
Demographics, communication
Overview of Council EOIs
Image area
Councils proposing fortnightly collection of residual
Campbelltown (940 dwlgs)
Comparison also with weekly
Mallala (850 dwlgs)
Currently f/nightly 240L
Norwood, Payneham & St
Peters
1,000 dwellings (2 areas)
alternating presentations
Wattle Range (Millicent f/n
4,150 dwellings, fluctuating
populations (tourist
destinations)
Who else is involved
Collectors
• East Waste
• Solo Resource Recovery
• Cleanaway
• Mastec Collection Systems
• Veolia
Processors
• Jeffries
• Van Schaiks
• Peats
Testing decomposition: 6 Samples
After 7 Days
Testing decomposition: 6 Samples
After 28 Days
Audits - Complex and critical
• Councils nominate areas / demographics;
• Numerous samples (seven councils
had 2 samples, 1 x 3, 1 x 4, 1 x 6);
• Visual analysis – dwelling type,
chronological list and digital photos,
notes on contents, capacity analysis;
• 3 streams, 100 bins, presentation rates;
• Audit facilities & checklist for Councils.
Kerbside Audits
• Demographics (population,
no. per h/hold, dwlg type)
– Traditional dwelling
– Semi-detached
– Maisonette (1950’s SAHT)
– MUD (Units)
– Row dwellings/townhouse
– Rural Living (over 3,000m2)
Where 5% or more
• Representative versus
random sampling
• Revisit & seasonal issues
Kerbside Audits
• Bin condition (potential)
• Contamination item count
and weight
• Incidence of contamination
• Composition analysis
(site specific / truck level)
• Presentation rates
Waste …………….. 95%
Recyclables ……… 86%
Green Organics …. 52%
Opportunities
Image areasupport from Zero Waste SA to implement
• Initial
systems to divert more compostable material. To
learn together, and share findings;
• In a pilot, potential to:





review participation, diversion, contamination,
bin ownership, rate of uptake*
satisfaction levels,
assess economies of full-scale implementation,
capacities (bin and collection rounds);
Nuances of a system – and management






Specific
attributes of a successful system (weekly versus
Image area
fortnightly),
Presentation of residual bins - collection with alternating
bins (green organics versus recyclables);
Assessment of increased diversion (incl. recyclables);
Extent, severity and incidence of contamination;
Three strikes policy – keeping recyclables and green
organics clean.
Options for large households – user pays for extra MGB?
Cost sharing framework for pilot
Zero Waste SA is funding:
• Kitchen receptacles/bins for food waste
• Compostable bags (150 bags / household)
• Kerbside audits – all three streams (2 per council) & report
• Market research - survey (representative sample / pilot) & report
• Development of template communication materials
Cost sharing framework for pilot
Councils are responsible for:
• Communication with residents in pilot areas
• Negotiating with collection contractors and processors
And are funding:
• Production of communication materials
• Delivery of containers (and compostable bags) to households
Pilot brochures…
• Key messages :
– Frequency of collections
– Place material in GO Bin
– 50% of residual stream is
organic
– System will help divert up
to 75% of residential waste
– Uses images, icons, KISS
– As easy as one, two,
three…
Local Government feedback
•
Performance criteria (contract conditions):
Image area
•
•
•
•
•
Performance based: success thresholds and
intervention levels;
Intention to maintain pilots (for up to 2 years) with
potential to expand with further support;
Repayment events;
Feedback on containers;
Communication material – development of clear,
common messages and enjoy efficiencies;
Fortnightly Waste - Issues
•
Need for a trial of fortnightly 140L waste bin
•
Perception – not enough capacity in waste bin
•
Expected to force more organics and recyclables into other
bins (hence improved diversion from landfill)
•
Effect on contamination - green organics and dry
recyclables?
Conclusion
The 10 pilots will contribute to a broader body of work:
•
•
•
•
•
Audits: systems, diversion, contamination, yields
Market research: user satisfaction
Cost/benefit analysis of each system
Capacity analysis (visual analysis by audits), tonnes per truck
Option later for Councils to change systems with support
Following final assessment, reports will be available at
www.zerowaste.sa.gov.au