1. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 Household Behavior on Combustible Waste Set-outs under “Door-to-door” Collection Method with “Pay-as-you-throw” system 1 Shinya Suzuki, Ayako Tachifuji, Yasushi Matsufuji Department of Civil Engineering, Fukuoka University 8-19-1 Nanakuma, Johnan-ku, Fukuoka, 814-0180 Japan ssuzuki@fukuoka-u.ac.jp E-mail: ssuzuki@fukuoka-u.ac.jp

2. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 1-1 Background in Japan 1)Increasing number of municipalities charge begun “charge” for waste collection Pay-as-you-throw - in many cases, “Pay-as-you-throw” system specified waste bag - by using specified waste bag 1)Increasing number of municipalities charge begun “charge” for waste collection Pay-as-you-throw - in many cases, “Pay-as-you-throw” system specified waste bag - by using specified waste bag 2) Some municipalities convert way of waste collection - from “station” collection (traditional method in Japan) - to “door-to-door” collection 2) Some municipalities convert way of waste collection - from “station” collection (traditional method in Japan) - to “door-to-door” collection - specify common waste collection point for multiple households - unspecified people dispose of waste carelessly, which makes there dirty - too heavy for elderly people or physically-challenged people to bring waste - specify common waste collection point for multiple households - unspecified people dispose of waste carelessly, which makes there dirty - too heavy for elderly people or physically-challenged people to bring waste - Each household set out waste bag in front of entrance of housing - clarify waste generator’s responsibility, stimulate waste separation - anxiety on increase of cost of waste collection - Each household set out waste bag in front of entrance of housing - clarify waste generator’s responsibility, stimulate waste separation - anxiety on increase of cost of waste collection Specified waste bag - in order to realize waste minimization effectively

3. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1) Household behavior changed by introducing “pay-as-you-throw” system number of bagsactual weight - reduced number of bags, but not necessarily actual weight, (Don Fullerton & Thomas Kinnaman (1996)) Because, 2) Discouraged household from setting out waste bags, longer periods - to store them for longer periods. (George L., Van Houtven and Glenn E. Morris (2000)) So, 3) WTP for curbside recycling service was highest, container size - while reduced garbage container size under quantity-based pricing (Alok K. Bohara, Arthur J. Caplan, Therese Grijalva (2007)) 1) Household behavior changed by introducing “pay-as-you-throw” system number of bagsactual weight - reduced number of bags, but not necessarily actual weight, (Don Fullerton & Thomas Kinnaman (1996)) Because, 2) Discouraged household from setting out waste bags, longer periods - to store them for longer periods. (George L., Van Houtven and Glenn E. Morris (2000)) So, 3) WTP for curbside recycling service was highest, container size - while reduced garbage container size under quantity-based pricing (Alok K. Bohara, Arthur J. Caplan, Therese Grijalva (2007)) smallerfrequently 5) From theoretical point of view, when storage capacity was relatively smaller, households will set out more frequently. (F. S. Wang, A.J. Richardson, and F.A. Roddick (1997)) smallerfrequently 5) From theoretical point of view, when storage capacity was relatively smaller, households will set out more frequently. (F. S. Wang, A.J. Richardson, and F.A. Roddick (1997)) 4) Difference of waste collection system influenced convenience for residents to set out waste and lead to change behavior on waste set-outs (Pilar L. Gonzalez-Torre, B. Adenso-Diaz, Alex Ruiz-Torres (2003)) 4) Difference of waste collection system influenced convenience for residents to set out waste and lead to change behavior on waste set-outs (Pilar L. Gonzalez-Torre, B. Adenso-Diaz, Alex Ruiz-Torres (2003)) 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 1-2 in Previous Studies,

4. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 1-3 Objective Introduction of “Pay-as-you-throw” system - stimulates thorough waste separation and recycling - has effect on waste reduction - change waste set-outs behavior dramatically Introduction of “Pay-as-you-throw” system - stimulates thorough waste separation and recycling - has effect on waste reduction - change waste set-outs behavior dramatically For better management on waste collection, waste set-out behavior To clarify characteristics on waste set-out behavior door to door - under “door to door” collection method specified waste bag - by using specified waste bag For better management on waste collection, waste set-out behavior To clarify characteristics on waste set-out behavior door to door - under “door to door” collection method specified waste bag - by using specified waste bag How about influence on waste generation and collection? waste set-outswaste How they reduces waste set-outs? reduces waste? waste set-outsamount of waste How about relationship between waste set-outs and amount of waste? more effective methods Are there more effective methods to facilitate to reduce waste? waste set-outswaste How they reduces waste set-outs? reduces waste? waste set-outsamount of waste How about relationship between waste set-outs and amount of waste? more effective methods Are there more effective methods to facilitate to reduce waste?

5. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 2-1 Solid Waste Management Fukuoka city, Japan One district in “Fukuoka city” - 1,664 peoples - 673 households - 0.17 km 2 9,800 - 9,800 people/km 2 Typical residential area in Japan. One district in “Fukuoka city” - 1,664 peoples - 673 households - 0.17 km 2 9,800 - 9,800 people/km 2 Typical residential area in Japan. Fukuoka city “Fukuoka city”, 8th largest city, 1.4 million people, pay-as-you-throw - for MSW, “pay-as-you-throw” system, since Oct. 2005. Combustibles - 1) Combustibles, - 2) Incombustibles, - 3) recyclables “Glasses and PET bottles”, - 4) Bulky waste Fukuoka city “Fukuoka city”, 8th largest city, 1.4 million people, pay-as-you-throw - for MSW, “pay-as-you-throw” system, since Oct. 2005. Combustibles - 1) Combustibles, - 2) Incombustibles, - 3) recyclables “Glasses and PET bottles”, - 4) Bulky waste [Combustibles] - average 0.6 (kg/person/day) - 90% of MSW, - 10% reduction -Households can buy any capacity they like in each 10 bags. [Combustibles] - average 0.6 (kg/person/day) - 90% of MSW, - 10% reduction -Households can buy any capacity they like in each 10 bags. 15 litters - 15 litters (15 yen/bag; 0.11 Euros) 30 litters - 30 litters (30 yen/bag; 0.22 Euros) 45 litters - 45 litters (45 yen/bag; 0.33 Euros) 15 litters - 15 litters (15 yen/bag; 0.11 Euros) 30 litters - 30 litters (30 yen/bag; 0.22 Euros) 45 litters - 45 litters (45 yen/bag; 0.33 Euros) Collected twice a week - in night time - under “Door-to-door” collection Collected twice a week - in night time - under “Door-to-door” collection

6. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 2-2 Analytical Methods 50 sample households 50 sample households - with a variety of household size - used specified collection point waste bagwaste generator - identified relationship between set out waste bag and waste generator 50 sample households 50 sample households - with a variety of household size - used specified collection point waste bagwaste generator - identified relationship between set out waste bag and waste generator retention time - enabled to confirm retention time in each waste bag frequency - Set-out frequency Number - Number of waste bag Capacity - Capacity of waste bag Weight - Weight of waste bag retention time - enabled to confirm retention time in each waste bag frequency - Set-out frequency Number - Number of waste bag Capacity - Capacity of waste bag Weight - Weight of waste bag Actual measurement survey on amount of waste - to clarify actual status on waste set-outs - on March 7th 2006, March 10th, March 14th, March 17th, continuously Actual measurement survey on amount of waste - to clarify actual status on waste set-outs - on March 7th 2006, March 10th, March 14th, March 17th, continuously - Density of waste bag

7. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-1-1) Actual Status on Waste Set-out Pattern half Only half of households did not always set out waste ! Every time: 27 27 households 3 times: 12 12 households 2 times: 7 7 households 1 time: 1 1 household -Tend to reduce set-out rate under “pay-as-you-throw” system in spite of convenience of “door-to-door” collection Number of waste set-outs did not always depend on household size - not have regularity for set out pattern of waste bag Number of waste set-outs did not always depend on household size - not have regularity for set out pattern of waste bag

8. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-1-2) Summation of Waste Set-out Pattern Not every time Every time frequency profile of waste bag Relationship between set-out frequency and profile of waste bag 70%1 kind many household ! - 70% of households used only 1 kind of waste bag (many household !) - Even though households less than 3 times, 45 litters used 45 litters of waste bag, not 30 or 15 litters of waste bag frequency profile of waste bag Relationship between set-out frequency and profile of waste bag 70%1 kind many household ! - 70% of households used only 1 kind of waste bag (many household !) - Even though households less than 3 times, 45 litters used 45 litters of waste bag, not 30 or 15 litters of waste bag Every time or not 45 litter 30 (or 15) litter More than 2 kinds Capacity of waste bag Every time Not every time

9. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-2-1) Density Distribution of Waste Bag Density of waste bag (firstly introduced in this study) - Wide distribution - Mode value: 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L) Density of waste bag (firstly introduced in this study) - Wide distribution - Mode value: 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L) Conventional “apparent density” (at pit incineration plant) - Mean value: 0.20 (kg/L) Conventional “apparent density” (at pit incineration plant) - Mean value: 0.20 (kg/L) Cumulative frequency - indicate 100% near 0.20 (kg/L) Cumulative frequency - indicate 100% near 0.20 (kg/L) 0.20 In fact, waste bag could be fulfilled with 0.20 (kg/L) of waste, but actually, full0.08 - 0.10 Many households felt waste bag “full” around 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L) 0.20 In fact, waste bag could be fulfilled with 0.20 (kg/L) of waste, but actually, full0.08 - 0.10 Many households felt waste bag “full” around 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L) half value

10. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-2-2) Density simultaneously set out from each household full1st bagbefore Left part: already entered waste full into 1st bag before collection day prepared 2nd waste bag, set out 2 bags at the same collection day Right part: a large amount of waste on each collection day, 1 bag could not enter waste into 1 bag at the same time full1st bagbefore Left part: already entered waste full into 1st bag before collection day prepared 2nd waste bag, set out 2 bags at the same collection day Right part: a large amount of waste on each collection day, 1 bag could not enter waste into 1 bag at the same time

11. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-3-1) 5 Categories of Waste Set-outs CATEGORY 1) : 45 liters of bag only, more than 2 bags at least 1 time CATEGORY 2) : More than 2 kinds of bag, more than 2 bags at least 1 time Even such households set out waste bags less than 3 times. Daily change of amount of waste was so large - many households were forced to make adjustment each collection day. Daily change of amount of waste was so large - many households were forced to make adjustment each collection day. A large amount of waste

12. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-3-2) 5 Categories of Waste Set-outs CATEGORY 3) : 45 litters of bag only, 1 bag every time CATEGORY 4) : More than 2 kinds of bag, 1 bag every time CATEGORY 5) : 30 litters or 15 litters of bag only, 1 bag every time Relatively small amount of waste -decided capacity of waste bag in advance - kept from setting our waste bag while smaller amount of waste -decided capacity of waste bag in advance - kept from setting our waste bag while smaller amount of waste CATEGORY 4): perhaps they decided capacity on each collection day?

13. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-4-1) Unit Amount of Waste and 5 Categories Households decided capacity of waste bag amount - according to amount of waste generated from long time experience - not from average value but from maximum value - tend to decide larger capacity of waste bag Households decided capacity of waste bag amount - according to amount of waste generated from long time experience - not from average value but from maximum value - tend to decide larger capacity of waste bag Maximum value: quite different Minimum value: similar Maximum value: quite different Minimum value: similar Those who use only smaller capacity of waste bag were limited C-1) 45 L >2 bags C-3) 45 L 1 bag C-2) 2 kinds >2 bags C-4) 2 kinds 1 bag C-5) 30 or 15 L 1 bag

14. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-4-2) Estimated Way of Using Waste Bag For example, C-2): more than 2 kinds of waste bag, maximum amount of waste -larger than capacity of one 45 litter capacity of one 45 litter, -smaller than capacity of two 45 litters capacity of two 45 litters, For example, C-2): more than 2 kinds of waste bag, maximum amount of waste -larger than capacity of one 45 litter capacity of one 45 litter, -smaller than capacity of two 45 litters capacity of two 45 litters, They decided to use more than two kinds of capacity. Capacity: 30 or 15 L Capacity: 45 L More than 2 bags 1 bag

15. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 3-4-3) Set-out Rate All households tended to keep from setting out waste bag - in order to fulfill such waste bag under “pay-as-you-throw” system - tended to decide larger capacity of waste bag than average amount of waste All households tended to keep from setting out waste bag - in order to fulfill such waste bag under “pay-as-you-throw” system - tended to decide larger capacity of waste bag than average amount of waste Set-out rates of C-4) and C-5) were lower than those of the other categories larger frequently The larger the storage capacity was like 45 litters of waste bag, the more frequently households set out waste bag

16. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 4-1 Conclusions Household behavior on waste set-outs Actual condition survey in one district in Fukuoka city, Japan Household behavior on waste set-outs Actual condition survey in one district in Fukuoka city, Japan High proportion of households used 45 litters of waste bag - Many households reduced waste set-out frequency - from adjustment of amount of waste - kept from setting out waste bag until density full (until 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L)) High proportion of households used 45 litters of waste bag - Many households reduced waste set-out frequency - from adjustment of amount of waste - kept from setting out waste bag until density full (until 0.08 - 0.10 (kg/L)) Only half of households did not always set out waste bag - decided capacity of waste bag in advance - based on amount grasped from long time experience - tended to decide larger capacity of waste bag - households who use smaller capacity were few - decided capacity of waste bag in advance - based on amount grasped from long time experience - tended to decide larger capacity of waste bag - households who use smaller capacity were few

17. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 1. Introduction 2. Materials and Methods 3. Results and Discussion 4. Conclusions 4-2 Conclusions Though, “pay-as-you-throw” system decreased set-out rate for every households, -Which did not always mean success of drastic waste reduction -Only households who had a quite small amount of waste used smaller capacity of waste bag. Though, “pay-as-you-throw” system decreased set-out rate for every households, -Which did not always mean success of drastic waste reduction -Only households who had a quite small amount of waste used smaller capacity of waste bag. In order to reduce both waste amount and set-out frequency - important to consider reduction of peak amount of waste with - promotion of the 3Rs(Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) - under “pay-as-you-throw” system In order to reduce both waste amount and set-out frequency - important to consider reduction of peak amount of waste with - promotion of the 3Rs(Reduce, Reuse, Recycle) - under “pay-as-you-throw” system -effect on volume reduction -improvement of collection efficiency -effect on volume reduction -improvement of collection efficiency - reduced both amount of waste and set out rate

18. Shinya Suzuki, Fukuoka University, Japan. Sardinia 2009 Thank you very much for your attention !