International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

131
� Bin-volume based (i.e. where households subscribe for a fixed period for a bin
of a given size).
The work by Tønning for the Danish EPA, summarized in Table 8-2, suggests that
weight-based systems deliver the strongest effect both in terms of the reduction in
collected waste and in terms of the increase in recycling. 165 We know that this study
does not include ‘whole system’ wastes, however, so it could not be entirely ruled out
that what is happening is that waste is simply moving through different routes in the
system. Other details of the study – for example, the rates of home composting
quoted – seem to imply that it is unlikely that this could account for all of the
differences across schemes.
Table 8-2: Performance of Different Waste Systems in Denmark
Residual
Residual
Waste
Waste
(kg/inhab)
(kg/inhab)
Paper Paper and
and
Card
Card
Glass Glass Total
Total
(Increase (Increase in) in)
in)
Paper
Paper
Captures
Captures
(Increase (Increase in)
in)
Glass
Glass
Captures
Captures
Weight Weight-based
Weight based 325 108 38 471 71% 87%
Reference 729 67 34 830 41% 77%
Difference -404 41 4 -359 (+30%) (+10%)
Difference in % -55% 61% 12% -43% 43% 43% (+73%) (+13%)
Volume Volume-based
Volume based 552 104 40 696 61% 89%
Reference 660 76 30 766 44% 67%
Difference -108 28 10 -70 17% 22%
Difference in % -16% 37% 33% -9% 9% (+39%) (+33%)
Source: Tønning (2000)
On the surface, the figures from this study look impressive. However, this study
reminds us of an important lesson. In systems with kerbside recycling and
composting schemes of narrow scope, the stated effects on total waste quantities
may be exaggerated because more material is likely to be re-routed away from the
doorstep collection system (to, for example, bring or CA site collections). If there are
limited opportunities for segregation of materials presented by the kerbside
collection, waste may be squeezed in other directions. This would be especially true
where:
� The recycling / composting service provision is more heavily oriented towards
the provision of bring sites and CA sites; and
� CA sites do not charge for the delivery of refuse-type waste.
When assessing the literature, it is often difficult to know from the presentation of
data whether particular studies suffer from the same shortcomings.
A study undertaken for VROM by KPMG (2001) attempted to understand the fate of
materials diverted from residual waste. In particular, it attempted to determine how
much of the reduction in refuse was due to genuine waste reduction and how much
due to evasive activities / illegal disposal. Comparative results across 4 different
165 K. Tønning (2000) Fordele og ulemper ved gebyrdifferentierede indsamlingssystemer for
husholdningsaffald, Teknologisk Institut, Miljoprojekt 576, Report for the Danish EPA.
International Review of Waste Policy: Annexes