In a report issued on Friday (September 18), the Waste Partnership explained that a combination of the recession, adverse national press coverage and restrictions on council recycling services might have sent a message to residents that “recycling has become less of a priority” and that the fall in the recycling rate “might point to the possibility that recycling behaviour has slipped”.
The Partnership – which manages waste and recycling on behalf of Mendip, South Somerset, Sedgmoor and West Somerset district councils, Taunton Deane borough council and Somerset county council – said its overall recycling figure for the first quarter of 2009/10 (April-July) was 51.24% compared to 52.55% in the first quarter of 2008/09.
The report was presented to the Somerset Waste Board, which scrutinises the work of the Partnership, by its managing director, Steve Read.
Mr Read claimed that the fall in the recycling rate may have been caused by a reduction in bring banks and household waste and recycling centre opening hours and also said that one of the causes could have been “considerable adverse national press coverage in late 2008 and early 2009 about the value of recycling”.
The report cites media coverage of stockpiled material and the quality of material being exported to foreign markets, as well as articles that referred to food caddies as “slop buckets” and campaigns about “wheelie bins blighting the landscape” as potentially having “affected people's confidence in the system”.
However, the report to the Board also suggests that the recycling rate may have fallen due to the Partnership having not performed any “significant enhancement” to the kerbside collection system over the last three or four years, such as not adding any new materials to the collections.
Figures
The Partnership claimed that the fall in the recycling rate was directly linked to a decline in the amount of material reused, recycled or composted during first quarter of 2009/10 (April-July) being just 47,277 tonnes compared to 49,743 twelve months ago – representing a decline of 5%.
With regards to the overall tonnage of recyclable material being collected at the kerbside, Mr Read told the Board that the decline was “at least partly explained by the recession”. He claimed this had led to less newspapers and magazines being bought by residents and subsequently recycled at the kerbside.
Mr Read said: “It is well documented that there is less paper in the system than a year ago due to the effects of the recession. Newspapers are thinner due to less advertising. People are buying fewer magazines and household goods which often come with significant cardboard packaging.”
It was also noted that waste arisings were 92,256 tonnes for the first four months of 2009/10 compared to 94,665 tonnes for the same period for 2008/09.
Mr Read did draw attention to efforts made by retailers to cut the amount of packaging used in goods and said this could have had an effect on the figures, as it would have reduced overall tonnages.
He also revealed that the amount of food waste collected by the council was down 6.6% compared to the first quarter of 2008/09 – with 4,733 tonnes collected between April-July 2008 compared to 4,418 tonnes for April-July 2009.
Actions
In a bid to address the issue, Mr Read suggested a district-by-district analysis to establish if the difference was being caused by different collection systems and bin sizes. And, he said comparative data was also being sought from other local authorities to see if it was a national trend.
In addition, the Partnership called on the Board to allocate £30,000 for a comprehensive study to analyse the composition of kerbside waste to assess how much recyclable material was still being put into the residual waste stream.
Mr Read stated: “This is, on the face of it, a relatively expensive study but could be very valuable to inform the revised Waste Management Strategy as well as identifying issues for targeted communication. The cost of this would be recuperated if remedial measures resulted in just a 500 tonnes uplift in recycling through avoided landfill.”
A further report is set to be delivered to the Waste Board at its next meeting, which is yet to be scheduled
Register for free to comment