1. With support from Mike Ritchie
Loss of recyclables
Colin Clissold
With support from Mike Ritchie

2. Loss of recyclables: Bin capacity constraints?
Australia
24% by weight of rubbish is recyclables
That is = 33% of all recyclables are lost to garbage
They are sitting in the garbage bin rather than the recycling bin
Why?
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

3. Loss of recyclables: Only 3 possible reasons I don’t care I don’t know
My recycling bin is too small and I cant fit it in (so it leaks to the garbage bin)
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

4. Proposition is that capacity constraint of the recycling bin causes leakage
~33% by weight of recyclables
Problematic streams such as nappies.

5. Loss of recyclables: Options
Do nothing – lose 33% of recyclables, higher cost of disposal to landfill
Weekly 240 – doubles the costs of the recycling service
Fortnightly 240 x 2 bins – doubles the cost of the recycling service
Fortnightly 360 – adds a one off $50 premium to the service costs
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

6. Loss of recyclables: The study: 1. Model the four option costs
2. Test the benefits of the larger bin
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

7. Loss of recyclables: Testing the 360 litre bin:
BCC 16% growth but not just because of bin.
Melville 30% - but volume based
Study partners:
OEH
Rockdale City Council
Sutherland Shire Council
SULO
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

8. Loss of recyclables: Experimental design
2 shires – Rockdale and Sutherland
2 suburbs in each shire
Offered the 360 bins Voluntarily
120 “test 360” bins in each suburb; 120 control bins
Weighed and volume estimated 4 times
Jan 2012
Feb
March
May
Weight and volume of BOTH the recycling and garbage bins
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

9. Loss of recyclables: Experimental design
We wrote to 200 people in each shire
Lower socio-economic area; many more retirees
So voluntary preferable (and it saves money)
Uptake was dramatically different:
Engadine – 90% uptake
Caringbah – 90%
Bexley – 80%
Monterey – 1%
Bins delivered in Jan 2012
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.
JW- Where did the % uptake come from??

10. Data sheets
SSC -Engadine Test/Control/Twins Audit Team - A
Audit Date
LGA - Suburb
SSC - Engadine
Residual Waste Audit Y/N
Y - 240Ltre
Bin type
120 red bin
240 yellow bin
360 Yellow bin
Dry Recycling Audit Y/N?
Y - 240Ltre + Y 360 litre
Bin weight
9.3 13 17
Collection Date
Collection time range
5-9am
Data recording codes
Normal collection date by truck
Non Presenter NP
weather Conditions on audit date
No house/under construction NH
Audit team/ Initials
****All NP houses must be entered into data sheet****
House Number
Street
Suburb
360L bin hhld Y/N
Twin/single (1 or 2)
Bin 1 Weight (kg) recycling
Bin 1 Volume (%) recycling
Bin 2 Weight (kg) recycling
Bin 2 Volume (%) recycling
Bin 1 weight (kg) garbage
Bin 1 Volume (%) Garbage
Bin 2 weight (kg) garbage
Bin 2 Volume (%) Garbage 4
TARCOOLA PLACE
Engadine N 2 6 7 8 11 15 18
101
RIDGE ROAD
103 Y 1
105
JW - Mike – I’ll send you a better/updated version of this for inclusion

11. Auditing
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

12. Auditing
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

13. Results after Baseline (audit 1) and Audit 2
Research is needed to determine the reason why recyclables end up in garbage bin. E.g.:
Bin constrains
Don’t care to recycle
Etc
During audits, need to record whether recycling bin was full and cross check to see if the corresponding garbage bin contained recyclables.

14. Bexley recycling (kg)

15. Bexley garbage (kg)

16. Bexley - % recycled (vol)

17. Caringbah recycling

18. Caringbah – Density of recycling

19. Engadine recycling

20. Engadine – recycling volume

21. Overall recycling (kg)

22. Overall - Recycling volume

23. Overall – recycling % full

24. Summary of larger bins
Larger bin increases recycling volume – as expected
Density of recycling drops - as expected
Data on weights still unclear
some up, some down compared to controls
Different suburbs perform differently – as expected
Increased recycling weights not necessarily coming from garbage bins
Link of leakage to bin size still to be clarified – 2 more audits
240 L
360 L

25. Historic leakage data – 1881 houses (APC)
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0% % of
Recyclables in
garbage
bin
Avera ge
% recycling bin full

26. So we don’t leak more when bin is full?? We leak all the time.
100% 80 60 40 20 0%
% of recyclables in the garbage bin
% recycling bin fullness

27. OK. So if the bin is full do we compact it then ?
45.0%
40.0%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
Average bin weight
% fullness (litres)

28. Yes. We compact a bit when bin is full.
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
.05
0.0
Density kg/l
Bin fullness (litres)

29. Fuller bins get compacted a bit more60 50 40 30 20 10
Weight (kg)
Volume (litres)

30. Conclusions so far When bins fill - we compact (pretty obvious)
Data on leakage still inconclusive
Suburbs behave differently
Trends still to emerge
We leak at all levels of fullness
i.e. poor recyclers leak the same as good ones
Larger bin reduces density of recycling i.e. no need to compact
Not clear if it reduces garbage weights yet
Next steps
2 more audits
Survey participants
Comparisons with other jurisdictions
240 L
360 L

31. MRA Consulting