Recycling collection schemes aim to, firstly, divert more waste from landfill and, secondly, facilitate efficient, profitable recycling. However, the debate rages on the proper method for meeting these targets:
The case for "co-mingled" collections
A 2005 study by the Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP) showed that the quantity of paper collected for recycling rose when collections moved from single-material to multi-material. Clearly, separating recyclables takes time, whereas co-mingled (mixed waste) collections are easier for the householder, and boost overall recycling levels. To collect the material accepted in co-mingled schemes individually, kerbside collection lorries would need to be highly compartmentalised. Co-mingled kerbside collections reduce the number of trips householders make to recycling centres. Both factors make co-mingled collections more energy-efficient.
The case for separation
Costs increase as more collection and separation is required for the recovery process. Furthermore, co-mingled waste leads to an increased risk of contamination. Different types of material are in contact with each other, and a single kerbside box may result in householders being less attentive when sorting recyclate. The recycling box becomes more of a second dustbin, with hygiene and cross-contamination both issues to be considered.
The solution?
A good compromise is the dual bag method adopted by several local authorities. Powys County Council, for example, provide households with two bags - a red one for plastics and metal, a black one for paper, card and textiles. Partial separation makes the process more efficient for the council, without placing a burden on householders.
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario