group 9 publishing newspaper

7/31/2019 Group 9 Publishing Newspaper

1/13

Tink Green

Recycling still the mosteective

Foul Beaches Costing a packet

Electric car

sales WillBoostAer more than US$400 million in outlays and monthsbehind schedule, dozens o electric cars have hit the roadin Israel, the test site Agassi chose or his Better Placeventure. Four stations where the cars can get a new doseo juice when their batteries run out are operating, andthe plan is to ramp that number up within months.

Te concept: to wean the world rom oil and eliminatethe biggest hurdles to environmentally riendly electriccars - high cost and limited range.

o do this, Better Place has jettisoned the xed battery.Instead, drivers can swap their depleted batteries or ullycharged ones at a network o stations, receiving a ull,160- kilometre range in ve minutes. Better Place ownsthe batteries, bringing down the purchase price o thecars using the network.

People driving shorter distances, the vast majority ocustomers, can plug in their batteries each day to charg-ers installed at their homes, ofces and public locations,which will ully recharge in six to eight hours.


2/13

The sluggish take-up of electric cars is

expected to get a boost on Tuesday as a new

model arrives in

showrooms with the intention of ending fears

over range anxiety due to limited battery

life.

Vauxhalls Ampera, which launched l ast year

to acclaim in the US as the GM Volt, joins

Renaults

Fluence ZE [zero emissions], a family car that

went on sale last month as one of the newest

eligible for a 5,000 plugged-in car dis-

count from the

government.

Last year, the then transport secretary Phillip

Hammond said: 2011 could be remembered

as the year the electric car took off, as he

launched the

grant scheme that covers nine different

models. But only around 1,000 were sold l ast

year, and gures for rst quarter sales in 2012

show that registrations of new electric cars

have largely atlined, and only half of the

allocated budget for the grant scheme is likely

to be taken up.

Of the 563,556 cars sold in Q1, only 278 were

pure electric models, up from 218 on the year

before.

But Vauxhall forecasts it will sell 3,500 units

of the 30,000 car this year, or 5,000 in a full

year. A

spokeswoman said its target of 10,000 sales

across Europe in 2012 was in our reach quite

easily.

taken rom http://www.emercedesbenz.com/autos/mercedes-benz/c-class/mercedes-benz-c63-amg-coupe-black-series-print-ads/

By : Y&R Chicagoaken rom: http://www.coloribus.com/adsarchive/prints/hotels-eet-8035405/

http://birminghamcityads.co.uk/the-ds-urniture-sale-ends-5pm-sunday-nal-5-days-to-save-middleway-1947.html

The Amperas big selling point is that when

its battery runs out after 50 miles of electric

power, a petrol engine provides back-up

power for a further 310 miles. But because

the petrol still drives the electric motor, the

company says the vehicle should be

considered a range extender, not a hybrid

car like the Toyota Prius.

The car goes on sale in 24 dealers across

the UK on Tuesday, with Vauxhalls spokes-

woman predicting it will be a conquest

model that will lead motorists to buy from the

company for the rst time.

The Fluence ZE is one of four new electric

models from Renault, including a wackily

designed two-seater called the Twizzy that

also just went on sale, and the Zoe, a

Clio-sized car that arrives later this year and

the company expects will make up most of its

electric sales.

At 17,500 and up, the Fluence drastically

undercuts the Ampera on price, by leasing the

battery the most expensive component of

electric cars from 76 a month. The

battery will manage up to 115 miles in

between charges, and the leasing arrangement

means it can be swapped out later by Renault.

A Renault spokesman would not talk about

sales gures but said that, along with Nissan

which it has an electric vehicle partnership

with, it will have sold 1.5m electric vehicles

globally by 2016.

Marc Rinkel, senior analyst at analysts IHS

Automotive, suggested the new cars would

become popular among corporate clients. In

2011, the Nissan Leaf accounted for most of

electric vehicles sales in t he UK. The launch-

es of t he Vauxhall Ampera and the Renault

Fluence ZE are a stepping stone to broaden

the electric car offering.

In addition to the Leaf, early adopters can

now go for the range extender with the

Ampera or a cheaper option with the Fluence.

Although currently low consumer spending

is not in favour of expensive vehicles, these

models shall become popular amongst

company car buyers the exemption of

company car tax for electric vehicle

drivers looks very appealing indeed, he told

the Guardian.

Nissans Leaf, which went on sale in the UK

last year, recently took 2% of the total car

market in Norway, with the company selling

1,000 units in six months.

Photo taken from... http://www.ibelieveinadv.

com/2011/10/mitsubishi-i-miev-imiev-electric-billboard/

Advertising Agency: Clemenger BBDO, Syd-

ney, Australia

Executive Creative Director: Paul Nagy, Mike

Spirkovski

Creative Group Head: Adam Whitehead, Matt

Vandermark

Art Director: Adam Whitehead

Copywriter: Matt Vandermark

Group Account Director: David Hallett

Agency Producer: Vincent Prochillo

ext taken rom...http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/01/

vauxhall-ampera-electric-cars

Electriccar salesWill

Boost


3/13

Medical Waste Is Piling Up

AS beach patrols keep a

wary eye out for

improperly discarded

hypodermic needles and

blood vials this summer,

environmentalists,

hospitals, refuse handlers

and Government

regulators are grappling

with a more serious

public health problem:

even properly handled

medical waste is

becoming harder to

dispose of safely.

The volume of

medical waste and the

costs of disposing of it

have grown steadily over

the past decade or more,

fueled in part by the

growth of single-use

disposable items and in

part by the growth of

small clinics and home

care services, whose

combined waste already

rivals that of big

hospitals.

Infectious waste, the most

troublesome component of

medical waste, has become

an environmental pariah.

Fewer and fewer landlls

accept it, even after it has

been sterilized, and most of

it cannot be recycled. That

leaves incineration, the

solution long followed by

most American hospitals.

But there is wide agreement

that too many

hospital incinerators are soold, obsolete and improper-

ly operated that they cannot

meet increasingly stringent

emissions standards.

Some environmentalists say

this poses a more

serious health hazard than

the highly publicized

incidents of vials and

syringes washing up on

beaches last summer.

The situation is likely to

be complicated, some ex-

perts have concluded, by a

new Federal law designed

to track and contain medi-

cal wastes. Experts say the

tracking requirements, which

took effect last week, are

likely to encourage hospitals

to circumvent the expense

and effort they require by

burning more waste in their

own incinerators than they

do now.

The problem is also

compounded by a growing

ow of waste from walk-in

clinics, doctors and

dentists ofces, nursing

homes, dialysis , cent-

ers, blood banks and home

sickrooms. In particular, the

rapid growth of walk-in

clinics is believed to have

helped

swell the volume of non-

hospital medical waste to the

point where it approaches

the ow from hospitals,

now believed to constitute 2

to 5 percent of t he nations

municipal solid wastes. In all

settings, the ballooning use

of disposable items has in-

creased the volume of waste.

Te needles, used again and again,kill at least 300,000 people a year.

he needles, syringes and other

edical waste that have washed

on beaches this summer point

a larger problem confronting

ery medical institution: how to

al with infectious wastes that

e increasingly barred from the

spitals own incinerators.

State regulations are becom-

g extremely stringent, said

rthur E. Weintraub, president of

orMet, the regional associationat helps hospitals increase their

erating effectiveness. Many

cinerators built recently dont

eet current standards.

ut when hospitals must dispose

the wastes off-site, he said, it

a situation that represents real

onomic hardship. Using private

rters, Mr. Weintraub added, also

duces a hospitals control over

e disposal process and hospi-

s are caught in the middle.

ospitals want to be leaders in

rving community

vironmental-health needs, Mr.

eintraub said, but if they dont

ve a place to put their infectious

astes, it becomes more than an

ue for a single hospital. As a

ciety, we have a problem.

r. Weintraub said the 40

spitals that are members of his

sociation, which represents a

ven-county region including

estchester, have called on state

cials to form a task force to

udy the problem, including

nding regional sites for

cineration. As it is now, he

id, the situation lends itself to

olations of the law.

ocal hospitals, the organizations

ta indicate, are using both

ethods to dispose of

edical waste. Westchester

ospitals burned 98,000 pound

of infectious waste in l986, the

st

year for which gures were

available; 54,000 pounds were

incinerated on site while 44,000

pounds were shipped out of the

county for disposal to sites as far

away as South Carolina.

Infectious waste, commonly

referred to as red bag waste

because state law requires that it

be segregated in red disposal bags,

includes any surgical, obstetrical

or pathological material, Mr.Weintraub said, and all

blood-soiled materials. State law

requires all such material to be

incinerated. Review of Disposal

Options

Several hospitals in the county are

reviewing their disposal options,

with some electing to build on-

site incinerator units and others

hiring private carters. Some

hospitals own incinerators that

do not comply with existing state

regulations and therefore are not

supposed to be used.

http://www.jennwarren.net/#/slumdog-scandal/jw_syringe008://www.jennwarren.net/#/slumdog-scandal/jw_syringe008

Text by By TESSA MELVIN

Published: August 14, 1988

new york times

website:

http://www.nytimes.

com/1988/08/14/nyregion/coping-

with-medical-waste.html?src=pm

Test by By WILLIAM K.STEVENS Published: June 27,1989

Taken from New york timeshttp://www.nytimes.com/1989/06/27/science/medical-waste-is-piling-up-

generating-new-concerns.html?src=pm


4/13

One of the dirty secrets of ocean pollution is how much

of the garbage and miscellaneous plastic crap that ends

up there blows or seeps in from landlls.

Last week in Hawaii, rainstorms washed medical waste

and other trash out of a hillside landlls holding pond,

through storm drains and straight into the ocean. A few

days later, the Waimanalo Gulch Landll

operators claimed the mess had been cleaned up, but

workers were still plucking hypodermic needles, vials

lled with blood and urine, and other hospital waste

from the beach. One worker described vials popping

up like minnows in the surf break.

Much of the garbage is no longer on the beach; it has

been washed out to sea or caught up in the surf.

Cleanup supervisors wonder about the chemical and

biologic waste that was part of the landll and hasnow been swept into the ocean, where it can never be

extracted.

The mid-week storm dumped 11 inches of rain.

Youre talking an awful lot of water accumulating,

said the Ko Olina director of the local Department of

Environmental Services, comparing it to a tsunami

of water rushing off the slopes.

Waste Managementthe giant, national garbage

company that owns the landlland city ofcials

blamed mother nature for the accident. The reality

is that Waimanalo Gulch, like thousands of landlls

across the U.S., is built right at waters edge.

Signs have been posted at the beach to discourage

swimming, and the landll has been closed, for now.

The accident points to an endemic problem: Too often

when we put our trash, even recyclables, on the curb to

be picked up we think thats the end of our debris. Out

of sight, out of mind.

In fact, most of that garbage is headed to a new life,

somewhere else, which may include contributing to the

worlds largest garbage dump, the ocean.

You can view the environmental impacts of the cruise

industry from a variety of angles.

From my perspectiveand Ive traveled on a wide

variety of shipsthose monster eyesores carrying

multiple-thousands are little more than oating

shopping malls packed with bargain hunters who rarely

care much about the places they are motoring past.Some of the smaller operations, carrying passengers in

the hundreds, offer a pretty cool mode for people to see

parts of the world they might not see otherwise, with

minimal impact and a big gain of knowledge about the

places visited.

But all of these ships far too often use the ocean like a

giant toilet bowl. No matter the size of the boat nor the

environmental message spread onboard, all ships leave

in their wake food scraps, shredded paper and

cardboard, ground-up plastic, various detritus blown

off decks, sewagetreated and otherwiseand leak-

ings of motor fuel and oil.

The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) estimates that

passengers aboard a typical cruise

ship will, on an average day,

generate 21,000 gallons of

sewage, one ton of garbage,

170,000 gallons of wastewater

from sinks, showers and laundry,

more than 25 pounds of batteries,

uorescent lights, medical wastes

and expired chemicals, up to 6,400

gallons of oily bilge water fromengines, and four plastic bottles

per passenger (which factors to

about 8,500 on average aboard the

Carnival Spirit, which can hold

2,124 guests, 1,000 crew, has 16

lounges and bars and carts about

900,000 tourists in and out of the

port of Seattle and up the British

Columbia and Alaska coastlines

each year).

Cruise ships are supposed to dump

sewageblobs of concentrated

toxins from the bottom of waste-

treatment facilitiesat least three

miles from the coastline. Given the

number of nes dished out in

recent years, even that small

request is clearly being ignored by

many companies.

The good companies talk about us-

ing cleaner fuels, recycling more,boosting the efciency of sewage

and gray-water treatment systems.

But its hard to judge just how

much the ships are improving.

Even the best onboard water-

quality systems still allow high

levels of ammonia, bacteria and

other pollutants to escape with the

mix into the ocean.

While some of that pollution is attributable to

runoff from shore, the EPA estimates that cruise

ships spill more than 25 million gallons of

sewage into California waters each year.

According to the cruise industry, most boats

have been complying with the three-mile zone

for the past ve years; many even wait until

theyre 12 miles offshore to dump treated waste

into the ocean.

Out beyond three miles, few laws apply to most

sewage. Most pollutants are not supposed to be

dropped into the ocean until ships are 25 miles

from the coast; discharge of oil or oily water

into U.S. navigable waters cannot take place

within 200 miles of shore.

The saddest aspect of this story, to me, is thatdumping into the ocean is still legal, almost

everywhere.

Shouldnt all ships garbage and waste be

cleaned and re-cleaned and cleaned again, and

brought to shore where modern systems can

dispose of and or recycle it? Shouldnt that be

the law, around the globe?

The regions most hard-hit by onshore dumpin

are the most popular stretches for cruisers: the

coasts of Alaska and British Columbia, beach

throughout the Mediterranean, and increasing

the coastline along the globes most popular

route (because its furthest from potential

terrorism and piracy)the run from Rio de

Janeiro around Cape Horn and up to Valparai

Chile. Cruise companies get away with dump

both black water (waste from toilets and med

cal facilities) and gray water (from showers a

sinks) far too close to shore due to the

complexity of international, federal and local

laws the companies choose to either follow o

ignore. Borders on the ocean are hard to den

laws are very hard to enforce. Most solid was

is burned onboard, and the incinerated ash fal

into the sea. Plastic is often chipped, pulped o

ground into tiny pieces and dumped overboar

The ships that carry solid waste back to shore

hand it off to haulers on land, who may take i

landlls, or perhaps dump it straight into the s

themselves. The maritime business is the las

under-regulated bastion of the corporate worlFred Felleman, Northwest consultant for Frie

of the Earth, told Seattles InvestigateWest. B

cause it falls between the borders of the world

its been hard to gure out how to get our arm

around it.

Medical Waste Foul Beaches, CruiseShips Foul Water

A new U.S. federal law would forbid ships of more than 300 tons from dumping treated or untreated sewage within three miles of Califor-

nias 1,624-mile coast, which would close a major loophole in state law; the law is expected to be enacted in 2011. The EPA suggests the

law would prevent 20 million gallons of sewage from swirling into the states coastal waters and improve the overall quality of California

beaches. Last year, the EPA studied California beaches and found that 85 percent of San Franciscos had experienced advisories for high

levels of pathogens; in L.A., all beaches had advisories, as did 75 percent of San Diegos.

Text taken from, http://neptune911.wordpress.

com/2011/01/20/medical-waste-foul-beaches-

cruise-ships-foul-waters/


5/13

Hospital savesortune just byswapping rubbergloves.

he government hopes smarter procurement can help

e NHS in England to save more than 15bn over

e next three years - and some hospitals are already

oving it can be done.

ne of Londons top teaching hospitals has saved the

xpayer more than 300,000 a year - just by chang-

g its order for rubber gloves.

arts and the London NHS Trust used to buy 20

fferent types of examination gloves for medical

aff.

ut by limiting the choice to just two, the trusts

ocurement team has nearly halved the bill.

We spend over 700,000 a year on examination

oves.

What we have done now is to move to one supplier,

d we will be saving 320,000 this year just by

andardising to a better value product, says Zoe

reenwell, who leads the trusts procurement team.

is the kind of common-sense saving that the

overnment is hoping all 168 hospital trusts in

ngland will make.

inisters want to save between 15bn and 20bn

om the NHS budget in England over the next three

ars. And at least 1.2bn of that is expected to come

om the hospital procurement budget.

ut there is a problem for the government. By 2014

arly all hospitals will be run as independent

undation trusts, and ministers will have little directntrol over their spending priorities.

National Audit Ofce (NAO) report found that

ere is already a lack of standardisation and bulk

uying by NHS trusts when it comes to the everyday

nsumables that fuel a hospital - everything from A4

per and rubber gloves to cannulas, the plastic

bing used to administer drips.

We found that trusts bought 21 different types of A4

per and 652 different types of rubber gloves and

mewhere over 1,700 different cannulas, says Mark

avies, director of health value for money studies at

e NAO.

Hospitals like Barts in London are already suc-

cessfully collaborating with other trusts in

England to compare prices and reduce costs.

But attempts by hospitals to work together to

maximize their buying power with suppliers have

not always worked.

Orthopaedic surgeons at the University

Hospitals of Leicester tried to secure a better deal

on the price of knee joints by banding together

with other hospitals in a body called the East

Midlands procurement hub.

Figures nationally suggest the price paid by trusts

for the same knee joint can vary from 1,400 to

2,500.

Orthopaedic surgeon Andrew Browns

department is already saving thousands of pounds

on knee joints

With Leicester performing 1,600 knee and hip

replacements each year, the trust hoped to make

signicant savings. However, it found that its

existing deal was better than the average price the

hub was able to deliver.

It was going to cost an extra 100,000

a year to procure our prostheses via the

hub rather than carrying on

doing it ourselves because we had

already achieved very low costs locally

with our suppliers, says orthopaedic

surgeon Andrew Brown.

My expectation would be that the hub

should look at the lowest price

currently being paid, and bring

everyone to that lowest price, because

unless the companies are selling at a

loss to ourselves, theres no reason

why everyone else shouldnt be buying

things for the same price as we do.

What it seemed to end up with was an

average cost across what people were

paying at that moment, which meant

there were always going to be l osers

within the system.

Leicester decided to go it alone for

orthopaedic supplies, and the East

Midlands procurement hub has now

folded.

The NAO inquiry concluded that there

were too many NHS hubs in the

marketplace, says its author, Mark

Davies.

There is no consistent basis for

measuring their performance. So you

have got this vicious circle that

individual trusts dont know if theyre

getting value, he says.

They think if they go to a hub that

they might get a better deal [but] they

dont really know what a better deal

looks like. The hubs may be competing

with each other in a not very effective

way.

Our conclusion in the report was

that there needed to be a fundamental

rationalization of the hubs, because too

many of them are doing the same thing

not very effectively.

By not setting procurement as aperformance target, the government is

banking on trusts taking the initiative.

It hopes a new system of barcoding

hospital supplies will help trusts shop

more effectively for low-cost,

high-value consumable goods, and

wants trusts to cooperate more to

negotiate the best deals from suppliers.

Health minister Simon Burns insists

that the impetus must come from the

trusts themselves:

Hospitals are also paying a wide range of differ-

ent prices for exactly the same item, with some

paying 50% more than the best performers.

We estimate that there is something like 500m

being lost every year on spending of 4.6bn. Its

the prize thats being lost by the NHS if only they

could get themselves together and procure more

efciently, says Mr Davies.

Health minister Simon Burns insists that the

waste must stop:

It is absolutely crazy; this is why we need to get

greater transparency into the system, to get better

practice and for trusts to look more at how they

can bulk purchase, he says

You cant lose sight of the fact that the NHS trusts are independent organisations, he

says.

It is important that they have got the freedom to be able to make the commercial

decisions that they believe are right for their community including the products that

they buy.

But what we are doing is working with the existing networks to raise awareness of

efcient procurement practice.

This is something that needs to be recognized at a trust board level, and we are

developing standards for good procurement so they can be understood and brought in

throughout the organisation.

Text and photo 1: Taken from File on 4, BBC Radio

By Andy Denwood

on 27september 2011.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-14971984

photo 2: taken from

http://static.tumblr.com/mum7bpy/VfMlfyj6m/elasbandages-6w-yards-ben-_i_lbm40669.jpg

http://www.crudproducts.com/products/print-adverts


6/13

People are needlessly throwing away 3.6m

tonnes of food each year in England and

Wales, research suggests.

The Waste & Resources Action Programme

(WRAP) found that salad, fruit and bread

were most commonly wasted and 60% of

all dumped food was untouched.

The study analysed the waste disposed of

by 2,138 households.

Environment Minister Joan Ruddock said

the ndings were staggering at a time of

global food shortages and WRAP added it

was an environmental issue.

Value of food

The study found that 9bn of avoidable

food waste was disposed of in England and

Wales each year.

It is mostly food that could have been

consumed if it had been better stored or

managed, or had not been left uneaten on a

plate.

Much of that food waste goes into landll

rather than into council food disposal and

composting programmes, it said.

Based on the data for England and Wales,

WRAP estimated that householders across

the UK throw away 10.2bn of avoidable

food waste every year.

Using the same extrapolation, they also

estimated the average UK household need-

lessly throws away 18% of all food pur-

chased. Families with children throw away

27%.

The study also suggested 1bn worth of

food wasted in the UK was still in date.

Nearly a quarter, in terms of cost, was

disposed of because the use by or best

before date had expired.

Liz Goodwin, chief executive of WRAP,

said food waste had a signicant environ-

mental impact.

What shocked me the most was the cost of

our food waste at a time of rising food bills,

and generally a tighter pull on our purse

strings, Ms Goodwin said.

It highlights that this is an economic and

social issue, as well as about how much we

understand the value of our food.

The study also found that:

Bakery goods made up 19%, by

weight, of all avoidable food waste.

Vegetables contributed 18%.

Meat and sh also made up a large

proportion - 18% - of the total money

wasted on food. WRAP said 5,500

whole chickens were thrown away

each day in the UK.

Mixed foods like ready meals made

up 21% of the total cost of waste, with

440,000 thrown away each day.

The two most signicantly wastedfoods that could have been eaten were

potatoes and bread

Yoghurt was a commonly abandoned

product, with an estimated 1.3m un-

opened pots disposed of each day.

WRAP receives government funding

from England, Scotland, Wales and

Northern Ireland.

The body says The Food We Waste sur-

vey is the rst of its kind in the world,

surveying both household habits and

the actual waste they throw away.

The survey interviewed 2,715 house-

holds in England and Wales and several

weeks later, analysed the rubbish of

2,138 of them.

Ms Ruddock said: This is costing

consumers three times over

Not only do they pay hard-earned

money for food they dont eat, there is

also the cost of dealing with the waste

this creates.

And there are climate change costs to

all of us of growing, processing, pack-

aging, transporting, and refrigeratingfood that only ends up in the bin.

About 29 million tonnes of municipal waste,

87% of which was household waste, was

produced in England in 2003/04. Most waste

ends up in landll sites; only 19% of house-

hold waste is currently recycled

or composted. Recycling is widely assumed

to be environmentally benecial, although

the collection, sorting and processing of

materials gives rise to some environmental

impacts and energy use.summarises the en-

vironmental impacts of recycling household

waste, and examines some of the reasons

why recycling rates are still relatively low.

Background

Responsibility for waste is devolved. This

note deals with England only. England

disposes of 72% of its municipal waste in

landlls, yet much

In 2003/04, Englands municipal waste recy-

cling and composting rates increased to 19%

from 15.6% in 2002/031. It is difcult to

compare recycling rates between countries

as different measurements are used. Never-

theless, other EU countries such as t he

Netherlands, Austria, and Belgium appear

to achieve much higher levels of recycling:

more than 50% in some cases. The 2005/06

household waste recycling target for

the UK is 25%2. Policy The main statutory

driver behind household waste

reduction is the 1999 EU Landll Directive,

which aims to prevent or reduce the envi-

ronmental effects of landlling waste3. The

Directive requires that the UK reduces the

amount of biodegradable waste going to

landll to 75% of 1995 levels , by 2010. The

focus is on reducing the amount of biode-

gradable waste sent to landll because it

decays to produce methane, a potent

greenhouse gas that contributes to climate

change. Although household waste accounts

for only 9% of total UK waste, a high pro-

portion is landlled and recycling

rates are low. The then Department for

Transport, Environment and the RegionsWaste Strategy 2000 set a target of increas-

ing recycling rates of municipal waste

to 30% in England and Wales by 20104.

Government recycling initiatives The

Household Waste Recycling Act was intro-

duced in 2003. It requires all English local

authorities to provide kerbside collections

for a minimum of two recyclable

materials for all householders by 20105,6.

Nearly all local authorities in England have

schemes to recycle the largest fractions of

recyclable household waste (paper/card-

board and glass), and 79% of households are

now served by kerbside collection

schemes. To improve recycling, the govern-

ment established WRAP7 (Waste & Resourc-

es Action Programme) in 2001 to stimulate

markets for recycled materials. Recycling

Recycling is widely assumed to be environ-

mentally

benecial, although collecting, sorting and

processing materials does give rise to envi-

ronmental impacts and energy use. The pros

and cons of recycling some common

components of household waste, that is,

paper, glass, metal cans and plastics, are

outlined in box 1. Table 1 summarises the

current impact of recycling in t he UK, com-

pared with manufacture from raw materials.

The elements of household waste most

commonly collected for recycling are garden

waste for composting, then paper and third

glass. Metal cans make up only 1%

by weight of the material collected for recy-

cling, but recycling them offers high energyand material savings

Plastic recycling is not very common, partly

because few facilities exist to handle the

material. Collection is complicated by the

need to segregate waste plastics into

the various different types. Since plastic

bottles are made from only three different

types of plastic, collecting them offers the

greatest potential for increasing household

plastic recycling.

Plastic bags make up only 1% of househo

waste by weight, but some 20% of total

household plastic waste. Some groups ar

that we should recycle more plastic

bags as they are a highly visible and pers

tent feature of the litter stream that also p

a threat to wildlife. However, plastic bag

not routinely collected by kerbside recyc

schemes. One of the reasons for this is

that their low density makes their collect

and recycling uneconomic.

Government recycling targets currently fo

on weight of waste rather than volume, s

plastic recycling schemes are difcult to

erate economically because plastic is so

light. This approach was criticised in a 20

report on waste management by the Com

mons Environment, Food & Rural Affair

Select Committee, which recommended

that the government move away from targ

based purely on weight8.

Food waste on staggering scale

taken from.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7389351.

stm

RECYCLING HOUSEHOLD WASE

Taken from http://www.parliament.uk/doc

ments/post/postpn252.pdf


7/13

The root of our current policy is the EC Directive on

Packaging and Packaging Waste (94/62/EC), as amended by

Directive 2004/12/EC). The Directive was introduced to

create a single market for packaging and to increase recyclin

and recovery levels across the EU.

Two sets of regulations transpose the Directive in the United

Kingdom.

The UK Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations

2003 (as amended) cover, among other things, the Directive

provisions on minimisation, requirements for recoverable an

re-useable packaging, and excess packaging. These Regula-

tions require packaging to be manufactured so t hat its volum

and weight are limited to the minimum adequate amount to

maintain the necessary level of safety, hygiene and acceptan

for the packed product and for the consumer. (BIS)

The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste

Regulations 2007 (as amended) require businesses with an

annual turnover in excess of 2 million and which handle mo

than 50 tonnes of packaging a year to recover and recycle a

proportion of the packaging they handle. (Defra).

The UK Government has set business targets which must b

met by obligated companies each year to ensure that the UK

meets its national targets as set under the EU Directive. The

UK business targets are higher than the Directive targetsbecause under the UK system smaller businesses, and the

packaging they produce, are exempt from the obligations,

whereas the EU directive targets apply to all packaging wast

In December 2011, the Department for Environment, Food a

Rural Affairs (Defra) published a consultation

paper on increased recycling targets for packaging producers

from 2013 to 2017 and on a sub-target for recycling

of glass into re-melt applications. A nal decision will be ma

in the 2012 Budget.

veryone, including manufacturers and retailers, wants as little

ackaging as possible. However, the UK produces

pproximately 11 million tonnes of packaging waste every

ear1. Defra estimates that around half of this packaging waste

omes from the commercial and industrial waste stream and

alf from household waste. The vast majority of consumer

ackaging waste is collected by local authorities, through their

ollection schemes, predominantly from the kerbside. There

a hefty cost to this, but local authorities receive no nancial

ssistance from the producers/packers/llers or retailers, all of

hom prot by its use.

Most packaging is essential for our daily lives and overall it

revents 10 times more waste than it generates. Retailers and

e packaging industry have set out a lot of positives to

ackaging and its use within the UK as outlined below:

Although packaging has an obvious role in containingroducts and displaying information, its main purpose is to

op goods being damaged or spoiled e.g. in store wastage of

rapes2 packed in bags or sealed trays is 20 per cent less than

e waste from those sold loose.

Households generate far more food and drink waste (8.3 mt

a3) than used packaging (4.7 mt). Almost half (44%4) of this

ackaging is collected for recycling5.

Manufacturers and retailers are working to make packaging

ore resource efcient and, where possible, reduce it and use

cycled materials.

Figures for 2007 from t he European Union show that the UK

ses less packaging per person (175kg) than many other Eu-

opean countries including the Netherlands and Italy (212kg),

rance (202kg) and Germany (196kg)6.

Progress has been made in reducing packaging. Glass

ontainers today are on average 20 per cent lighter than they

ere in 1990; the weight of cans has fallen by 30 per cent,

ogurt pots 40 per cent and carrier bags 45 per cent7.

Costing a packet minimisingpackaging waste.

Text from Costing a packet minimising packaging waste:a London

Councils position paper. by London Councils

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/environment/

waste/costingapacket.htm


8/13

Often packaging of fruit and vegetables comprised plastic bags, although the market did

provide paper bags. This is an approach that could be taken by more retailers to improve

the proportion of their waste that is

recyclable.

The majority of packaging on the meat products was rubbish.

The packaging on a fresh pizza varied between retailers, from a simple cardboard box or

a cardboard base and shrink-wrapping - both good approaches - to a plastic or

polystyrene base, shrink-wrapped and contained in a box. While the cardboard box is

recyclable, the number of layers in these cases seemed excessive.

The plastic tubes provide sufcient packag-

ing for the cookies but in some cases a tray

was also part of the packaging, providing fur-

ther waste in a layer of packaging that could

be considered unnecessary. Retailers could

also focus on reducing the size of the packag-

ing in relation to the volume of the product, to

reduce the quantities of waste produced.

The market set a good example by provid-

ing a loaf of bread in a paper bag, whilst the

seven other retailers had wrapped the bread in

a plastic lm or plastic bag.

The baked beans, jam and milk came i n thesame form of packaging for all retailers: a can

for the beans, a glass jar for the jam and a

plastic bottle for the milk. Apart from the tops

on the jar and milk bottle, the packaging for

these products were all recyclable.

The objective of this research was to inform

the Local Government Associations War

on Waste campaign, which seeks to address

the amount of rubbish produced and the way

in which it is thrown away. BMRB Social

Research were commissioned to monitor food

packaging levels in a shopping basket, in

terms of amount of packaging (including in

relation to volume of food)

and composition of that packaging

(for example, whether the packaging

is recyclable).

A range of common food items (29

items), representing a regular

shopping basket were purchased

from eight retailers (six super-

markets - ASDA, Lidl, Marks and

Spencer, Morrisons, Sainsburys and

Tesco - a local high street and a large

market) Analysis involved

recording the total weight of the

product and recording the totalweight of the packaging. The

component parts of the packaging

were weighed separately to measure

the proportion of packaging that was

recyclable or rubbish. An estimate of

the volume of the food in relation to

the packaging was also provided, to

consider cases of excessive

packaging. Photographs of the

shopping baskets were taken before

analysis and of the piles of waste

created. This exercise will be repeat-

ed every six months for two years,

in order to record the trends in food

packaging over time.

Taken from the war on waste packaging study,

from the local governmanet assosiation.

http://new.lga.gov.uk/lga/aio/1098616

Each year the UK generates about 30

million tonnes of waste from

households1, most of which ends up in

andll. Britain dumps more household

waste into landll than nearly all other

ountries in the European Union (around

hree-quarters of its municipal waste goes

o landll; only Portugal and Greece put

more there2). The objective of this

research is to inform the Local

Government Associations War on

Waste campaign, which seeks to address

he amount of rubbish produced and the

way in which it is thrown away.

This study monitored food packaging

evels for a basket of 29 common foodtems that had been purchased from eight

etailers. These were:

ASDA

Lidl

Marks and Spencer

Morrisons

Sainsburys

Tesco

a local high street

a large market.

The over all results showed that On

average, 5% of the total weight of the

shopping baskets were made up of

packaging. The average weight of pack-

aging in a basket was 748.5 grams, but

this ranged from 684.5 grams for Tescos

basket to 799.5 grams for Lidls basket.

Overall, the best performing retailers

have low levels of packaging, but also a

high proportion of recyclable waste. They

were Asda and the market.

The total weight of packaging in the

basket from Sainsburys was 749g, of

which 70% (525g) was made from

recyclable materials. Within their basket:

The sugar was packaged in a recyclable

paper bag. The pizza was on a polysty-

rene base and shrink-wrapped (rubbish),but then packaged in a recyclable card-

board box.

Four of the ten fruit and vegetable items

were available without any packaging.

The total weight of packaging in the

basket from Marks and Spencer was

782g, of which 60% (469g) was made

from

recyclable materials. Within their basket:

The pizza was shrink-wrapped onto a

polystyrene base, although it had an outer

cardboard layer that was recyclable. The

Five of the ten fruit and vegetable items were avail-

able to purchase without any packaging.

The researchers drew the following conclusions:

There were some items on the shopping list that

appeared to be somewhat over-packaged, such as

shrink-wrapping on peppers and broccoli, or excessive

layers of packaging, or packaging that was much larger

than the contents of the product and had low volume

measures (for example, cornakes, meat, tomatoes and

crisps).

War on Waste Food Packaging Study


9/13

Fancy packaging on

supermarket goods is costing

us more in council tax.

The news comes from a

report by the Local

Government Association

(LGA) out today, looking at

how much rubbish is produced

by the countrys different

supermarket chains.

It has revealed that tax payers

are shouldering the burden of

recycling the wrapping that

comes with the food we buy.

According to the report, in

a typical basket of shopping

almost 40 per cent of super-

market food packaging cannotbe easily recycled.

And the Kent Green Party has

reacted with concern that after

20 years of intensive

improvement we still have

problems.

Councils have to pay 32 for

every tonne of rubbish they

throw away and, between

2008 and 2011, local councils

across the country are pre-

dicted to spend 1.8 billion

landll tax.

Steve Dawe, spokesperson for

the Kent Green Party, said: It

isnt just a cost to us as coun-

cil tax payers, its a cost in

terms of priorities for our local

councils and its a cost to the

environment with this

constant search for new

landll sites.

Paul Vanston, Kent Waste

Partnership (KWP)

programmes and projects

manager at Kent County

Council said that it has

improved recycling by 40 p

cent and reduced landll w

from 80 per cent to 20 per

in the past 10 years.

Thats our main job on be

of residents, he said.

However, we also do our

best to inuence governme

policy and national issues.

The KWPs efforts are to

work with the LGA, the Pa

aging Federation and super

markets because reducing fand packaging waste can o

happen when everyone get

around the table and arrive

a consensus on what to do.

Mr Vanston said that KWP

working with these

organisations to raise the

issues and lobby for chang

where needed.

The fact that Kent is the

leading county on the

national Love Food Hate

Waste campaign is a sign th

were ready and willing to

bold and innovative when

comes to protecting the mo

in residents pockets at the

same time as protecting the

environment.

This also leads to massive

movements of heavy goods

vehicles that contribute to

Kents general trafc prob-

lems.

He thinks the answer lies with

the public, though. If people

favour goods with minimum

packaging then the message

will get home, he added.

Consumers have the power,

supermarkets will only do so

much. Theyll be led by the

consumer.

The LGA is instead calling on

the Government to make

retailers responsible for

funding the collection of pack-

aging so they have a direct

incentive to produce less

Cllr Margaret Eaton, chairman

of the LGA, said: Britain is

the dustbin of Europe.

Taxpayers dont want to see

their money going towards

paying landll taxes and EU

nes when council tax could

be reduced instead.

If retailers create

unnecessary rubbish, they

should help taxpayers by pay-

ing for it to be recycled.

Text by :

Caroline McGuire - Tuesd

February 17 2009

For kent online

http://www.kentonline.co.kentonline/newsarchive.

aspx?articleid=57342

photo top : photo from : ht

www.dailymail.co.uk/new

ticle-1147321/Waitrose-w

using-excess-packaging-C

recycling-levy-supermark

html

photo below : photo from

http://www.dailymail.co.u

news/article-2075942/Stor

told-cut-packaging-year--f

crackdown.html

Shouldering the burden o recycling supermarket packaging

Taylor will conrm that

overnment gures show how

ast year around 240,000 tonnes

f plastic bottles were sent to

andll by households with

ccess to kerbside plastic

ecycling collection

quivalent to nearly half of all

ottles used.

He will add that the plastic

ottles sent to landll would

ave been worth around 91m

f they had been recycled.

Last months budget set a new

arget for plastic recycling of

2 per cent by 2017, and Taylor

will argue that the best way to

meet the target will be to make

quick progress on recycling

lastic bottles.

Over half a million tonnes

f plastic are used each year

o provide us with bottles for

rinks, shampoo and kitchen

leaners, yet half of this ends

p at the dump, he will say.

The vast majority of these bot-

es could easily be recycled,

nd this shocking waste is

osting the economy millions

f pounds.

The government will call on

ouncils and businesses to beef

p plastic recycling capacity

nd better realise the nancial

alue arising from the hundreds

f thousands of tonnes of waste

lastics discarded each year.

n a speech to be delivered at

he headquarters of Recoup, a

harity that promotes and

supports plastic recycling

nitiatives, Defra minister Lord

Taylor of Holbeach will argue

hat waste plastics represent

ne of the easiest and most

ost-effective areas for the UK

o meet its binding recycling

argets.

Describing the continued dis-

osal of plastic bottles and

ther plastic products to landll

s shameful,

I want to see a major push to

end this sorry state, with

businesses, councils and

householders all doing their bit

to address the problem.

Defra is working with Re-

coup, the advisory committee

on packaging and industry, to

explore the possibility of a

responsibility deal to help

raise awareness among

households and businesses on

the steps they can take to help

increase plastic bottle recy-

cling.

A spokeswoman for Defra told

BusinessGreen the talks wereat an early stage and the depart-

ment was considering a number

of options, including a pack-

age of voluntary targets for the

recycling industry similar to

those adopted by

waste levels under the

Courtauld Agreement.

The department also indicated

that any deal could emulate the

successful Metal Matters

campaign, which increased

recycling of drinks cans by

21 per cent through leaeting

households in a selection of

areas.

In addition, a number of

councils are currently running

trials looking at how recycling

incentive schemes, such as

those run by US rm

RecycleBank, which provide

households with reward pointsbased on how much they recy-

cle, can help drive up recycling

rates. The government is

supportive of the model and

keen to see more trials rolled

out.

However, the latest speculation

about a new voluntary

agreement on plastic recycling

is unlikely to appease some

recycling rms, which have

criticised the governments

waste strategy and accused

ministers of failing to take a

sufciently robust legislative

approach to improving

recycling rates and driving

investment in new recycling

capacity.

plastic waste to be tackled by government

By: James Murray for for Busi-

nessGreen, part of the Guard-

ian Environment Network

guardian.co.uk, Thursday 3May 2012 11.38 BST

Website:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/en-

vironment/2012/may/03/shame-

ful-plastic-waste-government


10/13

For textiles, theres not very many

statistics, but what there is shows reuse

is clearly optimal, followed by recycling

and then energy recovery [incineration].

For food and garden waste, anaerobic

digestion looks preferable; then

composting and incineration with energy

recovery come out very similar.

For plastics, we have got strong evi-

dence this time that recycling is the better

option, because recycling has improved.

For wood, recycling looks preferable.

For paper and cardboard, what the

statistics throw out is the importance ofquality: the higher the quality [paper and

cardboard], the better it is to recycle, but

as you go down to the lower end, energy

recovery [incineration] may be

preferable.

The good showing for incineration

preferred for a small number of items and

often the next best option after recycling

will be controversial with some

environmental campaigners who worry

about the pollution from recycling plants,

and that incineration becomes an easy

option that deters investment in proper

recycling.

However, the option of incineration was

only preferred when it was using the best

technology and generating energy,

preferably energy that was directly

replacing fossil fuel use, which is blamed

for the greenhouse gas emissions that

help cause global warming, said James.

Energy recovery has a role to play, and

if were trying to divert more waste from

landll, we need to increase recycling and

increase some energy recovery. But we

need to make sure we get the right

technologies, he said.

As well as analysing recycling in the UK,

the study also considered the impact of

transporting waste to other countries

often China for recycling. It found that

overseas transport was still better than

sending it to landll.

The important thing is, because were

in an international economy ... [that if]

were sending metal back to China for

recycling, its coming back around the

circle again, said James.

According to Defra, in 2008-9 the

total waste collected from the UKs 25m

households dropped slightly to 24.3m

tonnes, or 473kg per person. Of this,

9.1m tonnes 178kg per person was

recycled, a bit more than a third. Almos

all of the remainder went to landll.

Defra has a policy of encouraging more

incineration, but no formal targets, said

spokesman.

We cant keep on sending waste to

landll, said the spokesman. People

are already reducing the amount of was

they produce, and are reusing and

recycling more, and we are working har

to increase this. Some waste will alwaybe produced, but it can be valuable in

generating renewable energy through

anaerobic digestion or incineration.

In 2006, Wrap published a preliminary

analysis of a different set of materials.

But it used a much smaller collection o

evidence. And it did not examine the

newer energy-from-waste options of

gasication and pyrolysis, both of whic

involve not burning but heating materia

until a chemical reaction changes them

into gases and residue

published by the Department for

Environment Food and Rural Affairs

warning that biopolymer plastics made

rom crops should be recycled rather than

put into compost, despite being widely

marketed as biodegradable.

Wrap, the governments waste and

packaging agency, said it had analysed

200 reports covering seven different ma-

erials: paper and cardboard, plastics, bio

polymers, food, garden cuttings, wood

nd textiles. The experts then looked at

he evidence for seven methods of

disposal, including recycling, compost-

ng, incineration and landll, measured by

our different criteria: energy use, water

use, other resource use, and greenhouse

gas emissions.

n more than four out of ve cases,

ecycling was the clear winner, said Keith

ames, Wraps environmental policy

manager.

But there were different messages for

different materials, said James.

For biopolymers, I think the preferable

option is recycling, which isnt what

people have commonly thought, he said

Recycling still the most eective waste disposalmethod, report nds

Report for UK government refutes

persistent claims that recycling is a waste

of time, calls for better facilities and an

ncrease in incineration.

Recycling is almost always the best way

o get rid of waste, even when it is export-

d abroad, according to the biggest ever

eport on the industry for the UK

government.

The report, which addresses persistent

laims that householders are often

wasting their time recycling, calls for

better recycling facilities but also an

increase in incineration of waste, anoption that is opposed by many

environment groups.

t also backed up l ast weeks controver-

ial reportext by Juliette Jowit guardian.co.uk, uesday 16 March 2010.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/mar/16/recycling-waste-disposal


11/13

aken romhttp://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/20/g-e-says-eco-eco-hello-hello/ http://www.interbiketimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/Vadermark-ad.jpg

How much do you recycle? According

o the latest data from Defra, English

household rates are at a record high - at

40% of household rubbish.

The gures show that the average

ecycling rate for English councils was

41.2% between April 2010 and March

2011, up from 39.7% the year before.

Recycling rates have been nudging up

nnually in the past decade but the rate

of progress been begun to slow since

2008, a trend that continued last year.

But it also shows that recycling is not at

he same rate around the country - its

tronger in some boroughs than others.

Rochford district council and South

Oxfordshire district council topped the

ecycling league tables. The two

ouncils came top with recycling, reuse

nd composting rates of 65.79% and

65.11% respectively, with Ashford

borough council bottom of the rankings

with a rate of just 14%.

nterestingly, were also producing less

ubbish than ever before - around 449kg

per person per year. And despite a

growing population - theres a 0.9%

eduction to 23.5m tonnes of total

ubbish. But that rate of decrease is

lowing.

But, good as those gures are, were

till worse than other countries, as

Hanna Garsman writes :

he UK produces more household waste

per head of population than many of its

European neighbours, with an average

of 449kg per year, compared to 406kg

or the European average

Weve extracted the key data below.

What can you do with it?

Recycling rates in England: how does your towncompare?

by Simon Rogers

Friday 4 November 2011 12.45

guardian.co.uk

taken from.: http://www.guard-

ian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/

nov/04/recycling-rates-england-

data


12/13

Our waste costs are actually lower now

than when we started and we even turn a

slight prot some years when the

commodity prices are high. As a

non-prot, this money just gets

reinvested.

Further proof that the system works is

provided by neighbouring regions which

use different systems. For example, one

charges according to the number of people

who live in the home, whereas another

offers one option: a weekly collection of a

100l bin.

These regions both produce 100kg more

waste per person per year than we do

here, says Weiss. But he also believes

that Neustadt has probably gone as far asit can with maximising recycling.

Getting to 80% would be impossible.

There are behavioural issues such as those

few people who still mix up their waste.

Plus, there is a xed percentage of people

who live in high-density housing without

access to gardens or outside storage.

Gabrielle Stahl lives on a hill overlooking

the town in the leafy suburb of Hambach.

She didnt even know Neustadt boasted

Germanys best recycling rates, but isnt

surprised:

We are all very normalised to the

system here. There is no controversy

or debate whatsoever about our

rubbish.

Stahl, who lives with her husband

and shares bins with her mother who

lives next door, opens the cupboard

beneath her sink to reveal two waste

caddies containing vegetable peel-

ings and non-recyclable domestic

waste. In the cellar below, the family

stores its bottles and yellow bag

material.

They have paid extra to have a

dedicated wheelie bin for their paper

and card outside. The bags kept

splitting, she explains.

One day every fortnight, four

lorries pull up outside Stahls home

to separately collect each waste

stream. If they miss a bag, you just

ring them up and a car comes back

to collect it. Once or twice a year,

I will drive down to the depot and

get rid of things like old furniture

or a broken appliance, but thats it.

And in the summer, I buy a chemical

patch from the supermarket to stick

on the inside of the bin to kill the

ies and maggots.

The only thing that could be improved is that I

would like a separate collection for organic waste

as sometimes I produce too much for my

compost heap.

Back at the recycling depot, Stefan Weiss moves

on to the subject of enforcement. Or rather, the

lack of it. In theory, we have the power to ne

people if they dont sort their waste. But we

never do this because it costs too much to in-

vestigate. And we just dont have an issue with

ytipping because we make the system so cheap

and easy to use. We still get the odd complaint

about the move to fortnightly collections, or that

our bins are ugly, but that really is about it.

A car towing a trailer full of construction waste

pulls up at the weigh-station by the entrance gate.

Weiss wanders over to inspect the contents. Thisweighs about half of tonne. If will cost 270 to

dump it as it is. Or if the car owner sorts it into

separate types of waste timber, paper,

plasterboard etc it will cost him just 17.

That, in summary, is our system. We provide a

major incentive to recycle.

Text and photos taken from,

Leo Hickman in Neustadt an der Weinstrasse

The Guardian, Friday 18 March 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/

mar/18/recycling-waste

Photo 1: taken from

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/

commons/5/5d/Glass_and_plastic_recy-

cling_065_ubt.JPG

photo 2 : taken from German Missions in South

Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland

http://www.southafrica.diplo.de/Vertretung/

suedafrika/en/10__GIC/05__Env/Nature__Env/

Awareness.html

photo 3 : Taken from the guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/

mar/18/recycling-waste

A small town in Germany whererecycling pays...

he less waste households put out

r incineration, the less t hey pay.

s why Neustadt an der

einstrasses recycling rates are

e toast of Germany.

he citizens of Neustadt an der

einstrasse take their recycling

ry seriously. So much so that

ere is even a collection point

the recycling depot for dead

imals.

eople bring their dead dogs

re, says Stefan Weiss, one of

e towns waste managers, as he

eps into a refrigerated shed and

ens the lid on a wheelie bin

ntaining a deers head recently

posited by a local hunter.

All these animals get rendered

wn at a nearby facility for their

t. It then gets used to produce

ings like this. Weiss pulls a tube

lip balm from his pocket.

ocated in the south-western state

Rheinland-Pfalz and set in the

art of Palatinate wine-growing

gion, the predominantly

iddle-class, medieval town of

eustadt boasts the best recycling

tes in Germany. Over the past 30

ars, the town has nurtured and

ned a system that means it now

cycles about 70% of its

aste 16% higher than the state

rget. By comparison, UK

cycling rates average about 40%

up from just 5% in theid-1990s.

he reason for Neustadts suc-

ss is simple, says Weiss. Its all

out providing nancial incen-

ves and education. We dont

arge citizens anything for the

cycled waste they leave out. And

e less waste you put out for in-

neration weve had no landll

Germany since 2005 the less

u pay.

Having no incentive to reduce

waste is poisonous to your aims.

We have a separate, visible fee

that is intentionally not embedded

within a local tax.

For example, the majority of

Neustadts 28,000 households opt

for a 60-litre bin for their

non-recycled waste. This is

collected once a fortnight and

costs the household 6.60 in

collection fees. If a householdopts for a 40l bin, the fee falls to

5.30. Conversely, if they opt for

a 240l bin (the standard wheelie

bin volume in the UK), the fee

rises to 24, or 48 if they want it

collected weekly. If they produce

higher than expected waste due to,

say, having a party, they can buy

special 60l plastic sacks for 3 and

leave them out by their bins for

collection.

When it comes to recycling,

householders are asked to sort

their items and bag them into three

groupings: paper/cardboard; glass;

and plastics/foils/cans. The latter

grouping goes into a

yellow bag and can include

anything from Styrofoam and

yoghurt pots through to

aluminium foil and Tetrapaks.

Compost bins are provided for

those with gardens to dispose of

organic waste.

Everything else batteries, toys,

timber, old TVs, tins of paint, deadpets must be taken to the

recycling depot a mile or so from

the town centre.

Larger loads of waste debris

from a house renovation, say can

be dumped at the depot for a fee of

5 for loads up to 100kg, although

households are limited to one load

a week.

Bigger loads command much higher

commercial fees. For those without a

car, a calendar is provided each year to

households marking pick-up days for

different types of waste, or private rms

are available to take away waste on

demand for a fee.

We started this simple fee system in

2006 and we nd it works, says Weiss.

We have been sorting our waste since

the early 1980s, but in 1989 we joined

up with other towns in the region and

formed our own waste company to

process the waste more efciently.


13/13

Ambitious targets to increase

the amount of rubbish recycled

in the UK could help create

more than 50,000 jobs, a report

suggested today.

The study by Friends of the

Earth said 51,400 jobs could be

created if 70% of waste col-

lected by local councils were

recycled.

And another 18,800 jobs would

be created if commercial and

industrial waste were recycled

at the same rate.

According to the study,

recycling creates 10 times

more jobs per tonne than

sending rubbish to landll or

incineration, with posts gener-

ated in collection, sorting and

reprocessing, as well as in the

supply chain and in the wider

economy.

In 2008, the UK recycled

around 37% of municipal waste

rubbish collected by local

councils from households and

other sources such as street

sweepings and public bins

Under EU rules, that has to riseto 50% by 2020.

While Wales and Scotland have

announced they plan to recycle

70% of council-collected waste

by 2025, Northern Ireland and

England, where most rubbish is

thrown away, are still aiming to

recycle only 50%.

If the UK were to set and meet

the ambitious 70% target, it

could create 29,400 jobs in the

recycling industry, a further14,700 in the supply chain and

7,300 in the wider economy,

the report estimates.

The Friends of the Earth waste

campaigner Julian Kirby said:

Recycling is a win-win for the

environment and the economy

saving precious resources and

creating many more jobs than

expensive and outdated

incinerators.

The government must be

ambitious in setting recycling

rates better product design, as

well as action to stop

supermarkets and producers

selling products that cant be

recycled, means that we couldeasily achieve upwards of 75%

recycling rates by 2025.

If the coalition is serious

about creating a green, jobs-

rich economy then it must

unlock the wealth in our waste

and help consumers to recycle

as much as possible.

Increased recycling could create 50,000 jobs, report nds

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi-

ronment/2010/sep/14/recycling-

jobs-england

group 9 publishing newspaper

Documents