_{^{By Chris Sloley}}
The controversial guidance on alternate weekly collections which communities secretary Eric Pickles is pressuring the Audit Commission to withdraw, notes that the life-cycle of a fly is 14 days and accordingly, fortnightly collections should be "okay".

And the guidance also appears to sound a note of caution about the incineration of waste jeopardising recycling levels if this matter is not considered carefully.

The internal document, ‘Waste Management Quick Guide', rose to prominence last week when Mr Pickles launched an attack against its supposed support for "unhygienic" and "unpopular" fortnightly waste collections (see letsrecycle.com story).

The Audit Commission has commented on the potential for incineration to reduce recycling

Easy-to-read

The document is written in an easy-to-read style for use by Audit Commission staff and was not meant
to be seen outside of the Commission. However, it has now attracted criticism from the secretary of state who has long opposed "bin bullies" and criticised fortnightly waste collections.

The 24-page guide is three years old. It was issued in August 2007 to Audit Commission inspectors working with local authorities to give an overview
of waste management and recycling practices, describes waste management as "not rocket science".

Incineration

In addition to AWC, incineration is identified as a "contentious area" in the Audit Commission guidance. Although it is accepted as "better" than landfill, the document states that "burning mixed waste is no longer really sensible practice".

And, raising questions over the use of incineration alongside other disposal methods, the Audit Commission claims a detrimental link between council recycling performances and the use of incineration as a disposal route. It states: "For a long time, councils with incinerators have had poor recycling rates."

The guidance urges councils to find a balance between the "efficiency in collection and efficiency in treatment/disposal" and claims "eventually, there will be a balance between recycling/incineration (or some similar treatment) and landfill".

Stressing the need for balance, it states that incinerators "need a regular supply of waste" and claims: "The importance is not to embark on [an] arrangement that will prevent another [treatment method] taking place. Incineration has typically been a culprit in this - the contractor requires, say, 100,000 tonnes of waste a year to operate the incinerator. This is the big difference between incinerators and other treatments."

Complicated

And, on alternate weekly residual waste collections (AWC), which has drawn the ire of communities secretary Eric Pickles, the Commission recognises that AWC is a "very complicated situation", with government committees, media campaigns and campaign groups debating its merits.

Last week Mr Pickles said: "Fortnightly collections are unpopular and unhygienic. It's the traditional weekly bin round that people want. Diktats imposed from the centre forced councils to listen to bureaucrats over residents.

Fortnightly collections are unpopular and unhygienic.

 
Eric Pickles, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government

Despite Mr Pickles painting it as being heavily in favour of AWC, the guide also acknowledges that the collection scheme "will not suit all councils or all areas" and states that it does "not always offer the best solution".

However, in the document, the Audit Commission does defend AWC, as it states: "The minimum life cycle of the fly is 14 days in the UK, so a fortnightly collection should be okay providing waste is wrapped before putting it in the bin."

Assessing its actual impact on council performance, the document states "where [AWC] works well" it has led to recycling rates increasing "dramatically" and states that 90% of the "top recycling councils" operate AWC.

And, on the topic of fines for waste offences, another particular concern of the coalition government

Green waste

Furthermore, green waste collections come under scrutiny in the document, with the Audit Commission questioning whether collecting the material is worthwhile.

Identifying an uptake in green waste collections by councils, the document claims that this has "led to some criticism" as there has been an increase in the overall total of waste collected with the addition of garden waste collections to existing residual and dry recycling collections.

"Whether it is sensible to collect [green waste] or not is still out for debate," the document states. It points to the example of Daventry district council, which is a beacon status local authority, and it claims "most of their achievement is through garden waste collected for composting".

And, it states that a "neighbouring council" to Daventry, which does not offer green waste collections, collects "almost identical amounts of dry recyclables" and landfills "the same amount of waste".

Minimisation

In addition, the document looks at waste minimsation initiatives and highlights a number of practices that an Audit Commission inspector could suggest to a local authority to improve in this area.

Among the potential ideas, the document states that there is "growing evidence" to show a "link between the capacity of the waste collection and how much waste is collected", with wheeled bins shown to collect more than bagged collections.

However, the Audit Commission states that councils have managed to cut down on people increasing the amount of residual waste they put into their wheeled bin by introducing a ‘closed lid' policy and also staunch non-collection of side-waste. The introduction of smaller residual waste bins is also seen as a way of cutting waste arisings.

And, while the document does acknowledge the efforts to cut waste arisings, the Audit Commission states that there are issues over how far waste minimsation efforts can actual go in a local authority setting.

It states: "Councils are partly constrained in really effective waste minimsation actions by having to provide universal and ‘free' (at the point of deliver) refuse collection service, and (for Waste Disposal Authorities) having to provide sites where householders can deposit their household waste free of charge."