to view the WARR Strategy. - Liverpool City Council - NSW ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 3.5: Estimated Proportion of Total Domestic Waste Generationwithin Liverpool LGAZone Suburbs Proportion of Total Waste1998 2001 2011North EastSouth EastWestGreen Valley, Busby, Hinchinbrook,Miller, Cartwright, Liverpool, Ashcroft,Lurnea, Heckenberg, Warwick Farm,Chipping Norton, Moorebank,Hammondville, Voyager Point,Pleasure PointWest Hoxton, Horningsea Park,Hoxton Park, Prestons, Casula,Leppington, Denham Court,Edmondson Park, Ingleburn,Wattle Grove, HolsworthyGreendale, Wallacia, Luddenham,Badgery’s Creek, Bringelly,Kemps Creek, Rossmore, Austral,Cecil Park, Cecil Hills74% 70% 59%15% 19% 32%11% 11% 9%Total 100% 100% 100%The results demonstrate that, with the release of urban areas to the southeast, a significantlyhigher proportion of Liverpool’s domestic waste will be generated from this area (from thecurrent 19% to 32% of total domestic waste). This is likely to have considerable impacts onwaste transportation logistics.Apart from population changes, future changes in the waste generation (not reflected in theabove projections) may occur due to changes in demographics (such as income) and ingovernment policy, as well as industry initiatives and developments (for example, packagingindustry developments, Extended Producer Responsibility programs).3.5 Waste CompositionDuring July and August 2003 a series of waste audits were performed on the domesticgarbage and recycling streams (McGregor Environmental Services; 2003). Previous to this,the most recent audit was conducted in 1999. Presented in Figure 3.3 is the compositionalassessment of the domestic garbage stream.For ease of interpretation, the categories have been summarised together with a weightingbased upon the split of single unit dwellings (84% of total dwellings) and multi-unitdwellings (16%), which were separately audited.Liverpool City Council11Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy
Dirt/Ash/Ceramics,6%Other, 13%Hazardous, 1%Dry Recyclable MaterialFood, 33%29%Metals, 4%Glass, 5%Plastics, 7%Paper/Cardboard,13%Garden, 18%Figure 3.3: Liverpool Domestic Garbage Composition (2003 Audit)Food and garden organics make up just over 50% of the garbage stream. This is a reflectionof the relatively low percentage of Multi Unit Dwellings (16%) in Liverpool (typically housesgenerate significantly more garden organics than MUDs). There is therefore considerablepotential for diversion of organics through the provision of a separate collection serviceand/or avoidance measures. The suitability of such a service depends however on theultimate end disposal option adopted by Council (some end disposal options for garbagerecover resources from organic materials either in the form of energy or compost, or both).This will become more apparent in later sections.The garbage composition chart also shows there is considerable potential for increaseddiversion of dry recyclable material from kerbside recycling.The composition of the domestic recycling stream is presented in Figure 3.4. All acceptablematerial categories are presented, together with percentage of contamination encounteredduring the audit.Liverpool City Council12Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Strategy
Page 3: TABLE OF CONTENTSPART 1: ..........
Page 6 and 7: 1 INTRODUCTIONLiverpool City Counci
Page 8 and 9: 2 BACKGROUNDTo provide the framewor
Page 10 and 11: In the period 1991 to 2001, the pop
Page 12 and 13: Table 3.3 Domestic Waste Collection
Page 14: 3.4.2 CurrentThe total current (200
Page 19 and 20: 3.6.1 Kerbside Recycling Yield, Con
Page 21 and 22: Table 3.7: Comparison of DEC-Prefer
Page 23 and 24: Increased diversion can be achieved
Page 25 and 26: 4 WASTE LEGISLATION AND POLICY4.1 L
Page 27 and 28: • Reducing toxic substances in pr
Page 29 and 30: amounts to increasing the resource
Page 31 and 32: 5 TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE EVALUATION OF
Page 33 and 34: OptionSingle Unit Dwellings Multi U
Page 35 and 36: Option 4For this option, garbage is
Page 40 and 41: • Assessment of alternative waste
Page 42 and 43: OptionTable 5.4: Assumed Extent of
Page 44 and 45: OptionGarbageTable 5.5: System Cost
Page 46 and 47: ) Environmental PerformanceThe envi
Page 48 and 49: Single Unit Dwellings2.0E+07Load CV
Page 50 and 51: Single Unit Dwellings$15$10Eco $/hh
Page 52 and 53: 5.2.4 ConclusionsOn the basis of th
Page 54 and 55: 6 ACTION AND IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
Page 56 and 57: Waste Avoidanceand Resource Recover
Page 58 and 59: d) Action MatrixKey Actions Timefra
Page 60 and 61: Key Actions Timeframe Groups Involv
Page 62 and 63: d) Action MatrixKey Actions Timefra
Page 64 and 65: The materials currently recovered f
Page 66 and 67:
d) Action MatrixKey Actions Timefra
Page 68 and 69:
6.4 Charging for Waste Management S
Page 70 and 71:
Key Actions Timeframe Groups Involv
Page 72 and 73:
Liverpool City Council (2004), Soci
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
6.7 Development Controls for Waste
Page 78 and 79:
6.8 Commercial and Industrial Waste
Page 80 and 81:
6.9 Household Clean-upa) Strategic
Page 82 and 83:
6.10 Multi Unit Dwellingsa) Strateg
Page 84:
6.11 Illegal Dumpinga) Strategic Ob
Page 88 and 89:
6.12 Problem Wastesa) Strategic Obj
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
6.13 Recovery and Disposal of Counc
Page 94 and 95:
Resource NSW (2003), Specification
Page 96 and 97:
NSW Department of Environment and C
Page 98 and 99:
7 CONCLUSIONSFrom the assessment of
Page 100 and 101:
8 REFERENCESDEC NSW & UNSW (2003),
Page 102 and 103:
Appendix AReview of Waste-Related L
Page 104:
However, it should be noted that th
show all

to view the WARR Strategy. - Liverpool City Council - NSW ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?