Pickles ‘bin bible’ backs weekly waste collections

Fortnightly residual waste collections are not a golden ticket to increasing recycling rates, guidance published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has warned.

The Guidance on weekly rubbish collections report released on January 4 2013 (see letsrecycle.com story) claims that myths surrounding the advantages of fortnightly collections undermine the fundamental point of a local service for local tax payers.

the optimisation of resources
creating capacity through adapting existing collection systems at minimal cost
working in partnership with other authorities
seeking innovation, such as Milton Keynes councils idea to turn food waste into low cost fuel for collection vehicles

In terms of behavioural changes towards recycling, the report, or bin bible as termed by the DCLG claims that weekly collections can help improve residents attitudes towards recycling.

It also argues that cutting back on services, as well as new bin taxes, using unfair bin fines or snooping through peoples dustbins is more likely to fuel illegal dumping as residents try to avoid tax.

In place of punitive measures, the report highlights reward schemes such as Recyclebank UK now Greenredeem as important, viewing them as the future of recycling and refuse collection.

Windsor and Maidenhead

The guidance draws on figures from the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead as evidence of Greenredeems success. The Royal borough uses Greenredeems Rewards for Recycling programme and has seen, according to DCLG, an increase in its overall recycling rate from 34% in 2009/10 to 48% in 2012/13.

The report concludes: Moving to a fortnightly collection of residual waste may appears an easy or eager choice for a council wishing to save some money but this decision can often be made without thinking creatively about how to make cost effective changes to the service whilst retaining the five star, weekly refuse collection frequency.

The guidance builds on the 250 million support scheme launched by the DCLG in 2012 to retain, reinstate or introduce waste collection services on a weekly basis for 85 English local authorities (see letsrecycle.com story).

The 250 million scheme, the report claims, is helping to retain a weekly collection of residual waste in councils that made successful bids for government funding, as well as helping their residents recycle an extra 400,000 tonnes of waste and lowering carbon emissions.

In response to criticism levelled by Friends of the Earth that the initiative would have a disastrous impact on recycling, the guidance adds: First and foremost, the Department for Communities and Local Government would encourage local authorities to consider many other factors alongside pure recycling rates when designing services for residents.

‘WRAP has been wrongly accused of trying to force or bully local councils into dropping collections.’

– Dr Liz Goodwin, chief executive of WRAP (speaking in 2012)

These include: the quality and frequency of the local residual waste collection; the quality of the local recycling services provided to residents; and the amounts of household waste generated per head.

All successful bids will deliver environmental benefits. Each bid had to meet minimum environment criteria to be allocated funding.

WRAP

The guidance goes on to criticise a 2007 Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) report on alternate weekly collections, which had argued a well run fortnightly rota would raise awareness of volumes of waste generated and an overall reduction of kerbside waste due to changes in behaviour.

But, in its guidance the DCLG writes that the WRAP advice imposes unreasonable restrictions on residents, and cited Crawley borough council, the London borough of Ealing, and Lewes district council as local authorities that have retained weekly collections and achieved low waste generation.

In 2012, responding to news of the allocations under the Weekly Collections Fund, Dr Liz Goodwin, chief executive of WRAP, complained that WRAP has been wrongly accused of trying to force or bully local councils into dropping collections. She added then that the DCLG announcement represented a political view.