banner small

Commingled collection significantly reduces glass noise

Commingled collection significantly reduces glass noise

Collecting glass commingled could reduce the noise which operatives are subjected to, guidance published by the Health and Safety Executive has claimed.

The HSE has published a report outlining ways in which noise generated by kerbside glass collection could be reduced and claimed noise generated by glass-on-glass contact – such as that which occurs in source-separated collections – posed the greatest risk to operatives hearing.

The report outlined safety guidance for operatives when collecting glass from the kerbside
The report outlined safety guidance for operatives when collecting glass from the kerbside
Indicating that glass-only collections resulted in “significantly higher” levels of noise exposure, the HSE explained that changing from a kerbside sorting policy to mixed material collections would lessen the risk to operatives.

The findings of the report echo remarks made by the chairman of the Environmental Services Association's health and working group, Chris Jones, that it would be preferable from a health standpoint to collect the material mixed, despite calls from British Glass to stop the practice in the interest of quality (see lestrecycle.com story).

However, the guidance claimed that a change in collection policy should be undertaken alongside further measures to reduce exposure, such as slowing the speed with which glass is deposited in collection vehicles and also limiting the number of glass collections performed by individual operatives.

Risk

The report, which had been written with the support of the Waste Industry Safety and Health Forum (WISH), aimed to offer councils and waste management companies advice on reducing risks posed to operatives on collection rounds, particularly with glass collections.

The HSE explained that it is “highly likely that workers' daily personal noise exposures will exceed 85 dB”, which is the upper limit of the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005, and in some cases this would go as high as 100 dB.

Collecting glass separately at the kerbside was deemed one of the main causes of high levels of noise exposure, and the report claimed that methods of collection which did not include operatives manually tipping glass into refuse vehicles or separating glass at the source would “remove a significant source of noise exposure”.

The report called for risk assessments to be undertaken by employers operating glass collections to make estimates of daily personal noise exposure, as well as suggesting that vehicles could be modified to reduce glass impact noise by slowing the speed of collision between glass items and providing barriers for airborne sound.

The report surmised that “employers should consider these in developing recyclable collection strategies.”

Modifications

Citing research into the addition of linings to receptacles and flaps to reduce the speed of insertion, the report stated that these methods could reduce noise exposure by 5 to 9 decibels (dB) when compared to traditional uses and this represented an approximate reduction of 70 to 85% in noise levels.

Although, the report noted that these provisions could in turn reduce the volumes that could be collected, as there would be less breakages and also more room taken up by the fitting of an additional lining.

The addition of a flap, the report claimed, could only really be recognised as a benefit if the employee was depositing the glass in a “controlled (‘slow') manner” and that faster deposits generated more noise particularly when the receptacles became fuller.

Protection

In addition, the guidance also stated that employers should look to limit the amount of glass collections carried out by an individual operative and make adequate provision of hearing protection, as well as increase awareness about operating while having hearing impaired by protection.

However, it did state that the provision of hearing protection is not to be used as an alternative to controlling noise exposure by other means, and should be used to control exposure levels while other control measures were developed by a waste contractor or council body.

Register for free to comment

Subscribe to receive our newsletters and to leave comments.

The Blog Box

Back to top

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get the latest waste and recycling news straight to your inbox.

Subscribe
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.