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

8.5.10 Climate Change Assessment of the Impacts of Variable Charging
The review given so far within this section has demonstrated that charging systems
have the effect of increasing recycling and composting, as well as preventing the
generation of some wastes in the first place. Analysis we conducted as part of the
Defra charging report estimated the climate change-related benefits from pay-by-use
systems being applied in England using data on the benefits associated with recycling
from three different sources: 182
144
� Using research undertaken by ERM, Defra has supplied ‘low’ and ‘high’
estimates of the benefits of recycling different materials;
� Using work undertaken on behalf of WRAP; and
� Using our own review of some of the literature, with specific figures were
chosen for specific materials.
Figure 8-7 shows the benefits (for the situation in which 62% of England households
are assumed to be on charging schemes) from recycling under the different scenarios
alongside what would have happened if the same materials had been treated through
energy from waste (EfW) incineration, or landfill. For the ERM Low and High
Scenarios, the ERM low and high benefits from EfW incineration and landfill
respectively were used. For the Eunomia Scenarios, the average of ERM’s high and
low benefits was used.
The situation is shown in tabular form in Table 8-7, which also includes benefits from
the recycling of dry materials estimated using figures from WRAP’s recent review of
life-cycle studies in the field. The first row of figures shows the saving from recycling.
The second row shows what savings would have occurred had the material been
recovered as residual waste or disposed of (through EfW incineration or landfill). The
final row shows the net effect of switching from the disposal route to the recycling
route, and is calculated by subtracting the figure in the second row from the figure in
the first.
These benefits, expressed in terms of savings of CO2, were converted to a monetary
figure. The savings were estimated as shown in Table 8-8. The savings were
estimated at between £4-£15 million where the alternative disposal route is assumed
to be EfW, and £8-24 million where the waste would have been landfilled (which
seems more likely in the current context).
It is important to note that these savings relate only to the additional recycling. There
are also benefits associated with waste prevention. These are more difficult to
calculate as the benefits rely on prior knowledge as to the average ‘recycled material
content’ of each of the materials which are being ‘prevented’ from arising as waste. It
is worth pointing out, however, that the additional recycling is far smaller in total
quantity than the waste prevention (the latter is approximately four times the former).
182 D. Hogg, D. Wilson, A. Gibbs, M. Astley and J. Papineschi (2006) Modelling the Impact of Household
Charging for Waste in England, Final Report to Defra. Referred to within the text of this report as ‘the
Defra charging review’.
29/09/09