Carmarthenshire’s move to commingled “a step back”

 

This may prove a costly development for the residents of Carmarthenshire as report after report is finding that commingled is not the cheap option

 
Mal Williams, Cylch

The Welsh local authority announced last week that it had started to roll out a blue bag commingled collection service to replace its previous system of using blue boxes for a source-separated kerbside collection, as it attempts to increase its 25% recycling rate (see letsrecycle.com story).

However, that change has now come in for strong criticism from Cylch, whose chief executive, Mal Williams, has claimed that the move will do little to increase participation rates and, as a result, tonnages.

He said: “The decision to compact all the materials collected is unlikely to increase participation rates which are the key to meeting recycling targets.

“It is somewhat spurious to claim that you will collect more tonnages because you spend less time gathering the material – that time, money and energy is simply transferred to the MRF stage of the process.

“In reality, the move to commingled collections is a step back for recycling in the county,” he added.

Carbon 

Cylch's critique of the move to commingled collections also questions the carbon impact of the change, citing a report published by Camden council last week that compared its current commingled recycling service's performance in 2006-7 to the source-separated scheme it had operated in 2005-06.

The London borough's research discovered that, while commingled collections did boost recycling rates and reduce health and safety risks, the need to send collected materials for sorting at a materials recycling facility in Greenwich contributed to the system having a 77% larger carbon footprint that that produced by the kerbside-sorted collection.

And, relating the results of that study to Carmarthenshire's decision, Mr Williams asked: “They might have saved time at the kerbside, but at what price?”

Cost 

The Camden study followed hot on the heels of a nationwide report published by the Waste & Resources Action Programme earlier this month that revealed that it is currently more cost-effective to source-separate recycling collections at the kerbside than to use a commingled collection, once the costs of sorting at a MRF are also taken into account (see letsrecycle.com story).

That report has triggered considerable debate within the waste management and recycling sector, with waste management companies arguing that aspects of the study are flawed and some of its conclusions are misleading (see letsrecycle.com story).

However, Mr Williams claimed that the report was further proof that Carmarthenshire's move to commingled collections was the wrong decision.

“This may prove a costly development for the residents of Carmarthenshire as report after report is finding that commingled is not the cheap option,” he said.

Newport 

And, the conclusions of the WRAP cost-analysis report have been welcomed by Jessica Morden, the MP for Newport East, who hosted a parliamentary reception on behalf of the Campaign for Real Recycling last Monday (June 23).

Ms Morden's constituency is home to Newport Wastesavers, the community-based group which operates a source-separated kerbside collection for Newport council, and she said that “it is no surprise that this independent report by WRAP reaffirms the campaign's arguments.

“In my constituency we have Newport Wastesavers which already separate recyclable materials at source, which has led to great results in the quality of recycled products. I hope these results can be replicated across the country,” she added.

The WRAP report has also been positively received by the Community Recycling Network UK, with the body's chair, Lucy Danger, defending the methodology used in the research, and questioning the motivations of those who have criticised it.

“We're not at all surprised by these findings, which bear out our own modelling work and are backed up by empirical evidence such as last year's Welsh Assembly Government report which showed that Welsh local authorities are getting much better value for money from kerbside sort operations,” she said.

“We are also unsurprised by the response from private sector MRF specialists who are clearly more interested in protecting their commercial interests than providing value-for-money to local authorities.

“This was a thoroughly-researched and widely-reviewed study, some criticisms of which demonstrate a lack of understanding of the document itself and a biased view of the current marked conditions,” she added.