Truscott Research Fax Pro forma - City of Norwood Payneham and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Disposal of lawn clippings and garden prunings Next, all respondents (566) were asked what they use to regularly dispose of lawn clippings or garden prunings, from the following list: .Green kerbside organics bin .Garbage bin .Garden contractor takes it away .Hessian bag/bale .Compost bin/garden. By far, the top response was green kerbside organics bin at 85%. Other relatively popular responses were spread on garden or in compost bin (19%), and garden contractor takes away (5%). 22% use more than one method of disposal. 1% did not know what happened to their clippings and prunings. The chart on the next page shows these results and also highlights differences by housing type. Mulch and compost bins were more prevalent for those in traditional housing (29%) compared with residents of other housing (3%). PRELIMINARY REPORT Page 18
DISPOSE OF LAWN CLIPPINGS AND GARDEN PRUNINGS Green organics bin Home Compost bin No garden or lawn Garden contractor Hessian bag/bale Garbage bin Other Don’t know 3% 1% 5% 6% 4% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 9% 19% 23% Further segmentation revealed that: 29% ALL 75% Traditional housing Other 85% 92% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% NB: includes multiple responses There are 9% of respondents with no garden; 13% in Kensington and 6% in St Peters. 21% of respondents who rent do not have a garden. The green kerbside organics bin is used for lawn clippings/prunings by a higher proportion of home owners (91% compared with 73% of renters) and users of the Bio Baskets (88% compared with 70% of non-users). Garden contractors were more common for former users of the bio basket system. Use of garden contractors also increased with age, as did use of a compost bin or mulch. This increased from 12% for under 40’s to 28% for over 60’s. PRELIMINARY REPORT Page 19
Page 1 and 2: ZERO WASTE SA BIO BASKET PILOT SURV
Page 3 and 4: INTRODUCTION Truscott Research was
Page 5 and 6: PATTERNS OF USE 85% (482) of all r
Page 7 and 8: All respondents who had used the sy
Page 9 and 10: BARRIERS TO USING THE SYSTEM AND DI
Page 11 and 12: SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS A total of 5
Page 13 and 14: In each of the households included
Page 15 and 16: six or more five four three two one
Page 17 and 18: Types of waste used for Bio Basket
Page 19: Placement of Bio Basket bags Those
Page 23 and 24: Use of green kerbside organics bin
Page 25 and 26: Increased level of awareness Respon
Page 27 and 28: Reasons for not using the Bio Baske
Page 29 and 30: Reasons for stopping use of the Bio
Page 31 and 32: Another way of looking at usage is
Page 33 and 34: Difficulty in using Bio Basket syst
Page 35 and 36: Household use of the Bio Basket sys
Page 37 and 38: 83% of former users cited problems
Page 39 and 40: INCIDENCE OF CAPACITY ISSUES FORTNI
Page 41 and 42: RATING - EXISTING 3 BIN SYSTEM [MEA
Page 43 and 44: RATING - BIO BASKET SYSTEM [MEAN SC
Page 45 and 46: RATING - COLLECTION FREQUENCY RESID
Page 47 and 48: RATING - COLLECTION FREQUENCY - GRE
Page 49 and 50: Predicted future use of Bio Basket
Page 51 and 52: Cost perceptions All respondents we
Page 53 and 54: Respondents were invited to comment
Page 55 and 56: Predicted future use - if 150 bags
Page 57: BASKET ISSUES Need a stronger bask

Truscott Research Fax Pro forma - City of Norwood Payneham and ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?