- Email: [email protected]
Sorting at the source
Resource Recovery an Conservation , 5 (1980) I5- I9 @Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam - Printed in The Netherlands
SORTING
15
AT THE SOURCE*
J.M. JOOSTEN Stichting Verwijdering Afvalstoffen,
Amersfoort
(The Netherlands)
(Received 5th November 1979; accepted 18th February, 1980)
ABSTRACT
Some result of Dutch experience with sorting at the source are given to dispel frequently held views that this method of recovery does not assure a stable source of material or that the voluntary cooperation of citizens is not possible.
INTRODUCTION
Sorting at the source is not a nevt phenomenon, yet it seems to have so little place in discussions about using waste. Much more attention seems to be paid to complicated and expensive technical solutions, illustrated by beautiful schemes and photographs. Sorting at the source is not so spectacular. This does not mean that only sorting at the source is worth discussion, but rather that each alternative approach deserves attention and research so that objective comparisons can be made. It is possible to discern some kind of rivalry between the supporters of source separation and of mechanical separation systems. In discussions about sorting at the source, arguments which do not always have an objective basis are sometimes used. At the same time, there is often no information available to refute these arguments. Systematic study and research of sorting at the source was started only recently, although some forms of this sorting have existed for a long time, such as for old paper. Now that decisions have to be made about future waste disposal needs and about future raw material and energy supplies, sorting at the source needs more research. Some limited research results are now available and are discussed below. RESULTS
AND DISCUSSION
It is often argued that sorting at the source, on a voluntary basis, does not guarantee a stable supply of raw materials. Figure 1 shows the “fall” of waste * Presented at “Packaging, Recovery and Reuse: Governmental and.Industrial Viewpoints”, Congress sponsored by the Royal Netherlands Fair, Utrecht, 1979.
16
WASTE
PAPER
RECOVERY
LO-. PRICE
WASTE PAPER RECOVERv IN %
OF WASTE PAPER 36.-IN CtsllQ
65
50
55
ZL--
50
22.. 20. c5 18..
40
35
6. Iv-
30
2-c-
65
66
67
6.3
-
Fig. 1. Fluctuations
69
. 70
. 71
12
73
7L
, 75
76
77
76
. 79
c 8C
YEAR
in the recovery rate and price of waste paper over a period of time.
paper (the quantity of paper consumed which flows back to the waste paper trade) and the price, as functions of time. The fluctuations in the price curve are remarkable and cause concern about the quantity that will be recovered. However, more important is the “fall” in the long run as shown by the recovery rate curve which is characterized by two features: the first is that the fluctuations are smaller; the second, that the curve shows a steady growth. From an industrial viewpoint, Fig. 1 probably shows a rather favorable course. The recovery rate does not follow price fluctuations but nonetheless, in a certain way, the recovered quantity adapts itself to the prevailing situation in industry. However, taking into account waste disposal and raw material considerations, falling prices are not desirable from a governmental point of view. Figure 1 shows that a rather marked drop in price does not necessarily mean a strong decline in the recovery rate. That does not alter the fact that in times
17
of depression, citizens must still be encouraged to keep paper separate, then when prices become more attractive, schools and other institutions will restart collections. The main problem here is the possibility of permanent disruption of the system of citizen separation, for once this habit of separation is interrupted, tremendous efforts will be necessary to re-educate and re-interest the citizens. This is probably the reason why the government in the Netherlands grants a subsidy to municipalities. From a municipal viewpoint, another reason for a subsidy is that separate paper collection reduces the amount of waste to be disposed. Study is underway to measure the effects of subsidies on separate paper collections. On the basis of Fig. 1, it is difficult to say that sorting newpaper at the source on a voluntary basis does not guarantee a stable raw material supply. During a period of almost 15 years it is possible to see a rather steadily growing recovery rate without structural alteration to the collection system. It is argued that people will not cooperate on a voluntary basis. This argument is often stated by speakers who then indicate their own situation. In other cases, these people are influenced by objective arguments and calculations, but for sorting at the source they make decisions on the basis of their personal prejudices. It is difficult to present objective research results to refute such viewpoints because studies are only just underway:However, some results are available, in the Netherlands, for projects for the source separation and collection of glass in the province of Noord Brabant, an area of one million inhabitants. Some results are shown in Table 1 which shows that cooperation is not as bad as is often supposed. In Table 1, three groups are shown. The first indicates the number of municipalities which have not attained a 30% cooperation rate, which was considered a reasonable average expectation in view of the publicity. The second TABLE 1 Participation rate of various municipalities in source separation of glass in Noord Brabant. Partkipation Rate (%I
Number of municipalities
< 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-39
19 61
39-45
45-50 < 50
13 3 6
Total
69
27 49 22
18
group attained a cooperation rate between 30 and 39%. The latter figure was considered necessary to obtain equality of costs and revenues. One-third of the cooperating municipalities achieved this breakeven rate. The third group of 22 municipalities achieved a cooperation rate above 39%. Note that six municipalities achieved a rate greater than 50%. The municipalities within the second group will probably attain the breakeven rate, from which it may be concluded that the Dutch citizen is not as easy-going as is often suggested. The separation of glass depends on the willingness of people to cooperate. In order to achieve this cooperation, publicity and information are necessary. In this context, it is important to know the motives for people’s cooperation or lack of it. For this reason, the Institute of Social Sciences of the University of Tilburg made a study on recycling behaviour for the Institute for Waste Disposal. Table 2 summarizes the results of this motivation study. Anyone who still has the idea that people cooperate because of ecological and environmental reasons is mistaken, for fewer than 50% cooperate for such reasons. Category A may be considered the so-called “economic recycler”. Category On the one hand, this person is concerned B can be seen as the “social recycle?. TABLE 2 Motivation of participants in the source separation of glass project in Noord Brabant. Category
Motivation
%
A B C D E
Saving on plastic bags Prevention of injury on cullet Ecological or environmental reasons Others No answer
22.48 15.66 46.97 7.58 7.31
Total
100 %
TABLE 3 Impact of various publicity methods in the glass source separation project in Noord Brabant. Means of publicity Posters (shopping centres) Newspapers Radio/Television Word of mouth Municipal folders Just seeing the glass container Others Total
% 1.39 45.37 2.78 3.70 11.11 32.41 2.78 100 % __
19
about the working conditions of the waste collector and on the other hand, he is sensitive to what people think of him; that is to say, he recycles because the government asks him. Category C comprises recyclers who cooperate on the basis of environmental and ecological motives. It is important to identify such groups in society so as attune publicity to their specific interests. One last question in the field of publicity is that of the means of disseminating the publicity. Table 3 shows the impact of the various publicity possibilities used in Noord Brabant. Newspapers have the greatest impact, while the other methods contribute only slightly. Finally, it is remarkable that many people started to cooperate just from having seen the glass container. On this basis, it may be concluded that the container has an important function as a signal. CONCLUSION
In view of the results.of the research mentioned, it is attempted to show that some arguments used in the discussion about sorting at the source are not always accurate. No mention of cost is made here, as this would be superfluous in this context, because on the one hand, mechanical separation also has its price, and on the other hand, results of study of the costs of both source separation and mechanical separation are incomplete and do not, at present, permit a true comparison. Importantly, the cost of source separation is “ subsidized” by the voluntary actions of concerned citizens.
SORTING
15
AT THE SOURCE*
J.M. JOOSTEN Stichting Verwijdering Afvalstoffen,
Amersfoort
(The Netherlands)
(Received 5th November 1979; accepted 18th February, 1980)
ABSTRACT
Some result of Dutch experience with sorting at the source are given to dispel frequently held views that this method of recovery does not assure a stable source of material or that the voluntary cooperation of citizens is not possible.
INTRODUCTION
Sorting at the source is not a nevt phenomenon, yet it seems to have so little place in discussions about using waste. Much more attention seems to be paid to complicated and expensive technical solutions, illustrated by beautiful schemes and photographs. Sorting at the source is not so spectacular. This does not mean that only sorting at the source is worth discussion, but rather that each alternative approach deserves attention and research so that objective comparisons can be made. It is possible to discern some kind of rivalry between the supporters of source separation and of mechanical separation systems. In discussions about sorting at the source, arguments which do not always have an objective basis are sometimes used. At the same time, there is often no information available to refute these arguments. Systematic study and research of sorting at the source was started only recently, although some forms of this sorting have existed for a long time, such as for old paper. Now that decisions have to be made about future waste disposal needs and about future raw material and energy supplies, sorting at the source needs more research. Some limited research results are now available and are discussed below. RESULTS
AND DISCUSSION
It is often argued that sorting at the source, on a voluntary basis, does not guarantee a stable supply of raw materials. Figure 1 shows the “fall” of waste * Presented at “Packaging, Recovery and Reuse: Governmental and.Industrial Viewpoints”, Congress sponsored by the Royal Netherlands Fair, Utrecht, 1979.
16
WASTE
PAPER
RECOVERY
LO-. PRICE
WASTE PAPER RECOVERv IN %
OF WASTE PAPER 36.-IN CtsllQ
65
50
55
ZL--
50
22.. 20. c5 18..
40
35
6. Iv-
30
2-c-
65
66
67
6.3
-
Fig. 1. Fluctuations
69
. 70
. 71
12
73
7L
, 75
76
77
76
. 79
c 8C
YEAR
in the recovery rate and price of waste paper over a period of time.
paper (the quantity of paper consumed which flows back to the waste paper trade) and the price, as functions of time. The fluctuations in the price curve are remarkable and cause concern about the quantity that will be recovered. However, more important is the “fall” in the long run as shown by the recovery rate curve which is characterized by two features: the first is that the fluctuations are smaller; the second, that the curve shows a steady growth. From an industrial viewpoint, Fig. 1 probably shows a rather favorable course. The recovery rate does not follow price fluctuations but nonetheless, in a certain way, the recovered quantity adapts itself to the prevailing situation in industry. However, taking into account waste disposal and raw material considerations, falling prices are not desirable from a governmental point of view. Figure 1 shows that a rather marked drop in price does not necessarily mean a strong decline in the recovery rate. That does not alter the fact that in times
17
of depression, citizens must still be encouraged to keep paper separate, then when prices become more attractive, schools and other institutions will restart collections. The main problem here is the possibility of permanent disruption of the system of citizen separation, for once this habit of separation is interrupted, tremendous efforts will be necessary to re-educate and re-interest the citizens. This is probably the reason why the government in the Netherlands grants a subsidy to municipalities. From a municipal viewpoint, another reason for a subsidy is that separate paper collection reduces the amount of waste to be disposed. Study is underway to measure the effects of subsidies on separate paper collections. On the basis of Fig. 1, it is difficult to say that sorting newpaper at the source on a voluntary basis does not guarantee a stable raw material supply. During a period of almost 15 years it is possible to see a rather steadily growing recovery rate without structural alteration to the collection system. It is argued that people will not cooperate on a voluntary basis. This argument is often stated by speakers who then indicate their own situation. In other cases, these people are influenced by objective arguments and calculations, but for sorting at the source they make decisions on the basis of their personal prejudices. It is difficult to present objective research results to refute such viewpoints because studies are only just underway:However, some results are available, in the Netherlands, for projects for the source separation and collection of glass in the province of Noord Brabant, an area of one million inhabitants. Some results are shown in Table 1 which shows that cooperation is not as bad as is often supposed. In Table 1, three groups are shown. The first indicates the number of municipalities which have not attained a 30% cooperation rate, which was considered a reasonable average expectation in view of the publicity. The second TABLE 1 Participation rate of various municipalities in source separation of glass in Noord Brabant. Partkipation Rate (%I
Number of municipalities
< 20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-39
19 61
39-45
45-50 < 50
13 3 6
Total
69
27 49 22
18
group attained a cooperation rate between 30 and 39%. The latter figure was considered necessary to obtain equality of costs and revenues. One-third of the cooperating municipalities achieved this breakeven rate. The third group of 22 municipalities achieved a cooperation rate above 39%. Note that six municipalities achieved a rate greater than 50%. The municipalities within the second group will probably attain the breakeven rate, from which it may be concluded that the Dutch citizen is not as easy-going as is often suggested. The separation of glass depends on the willingness of people to cooperate. In order to achieve this cooperation, publicity and information are necessary. In this context, it is important to know the motives for people’s cooperation or lack of it. For this reason, the Institute of Social Sciences of the University of Tilburg made a study on recycling behaviour for the Institute for Waste Disposal. Table 2 summarizes the results of this motivation study. Anyone who still has the idea that people cooperate because of ecological and environmental reasons is mistaken, for fewer than 50% cooperate for such reasons. Category A may be considered the so-called “economic recycler”. Category On the one hand, this person is concerned B can be seen as the “social recycle?. TABLE 2 Motivation of participants in the source separation of glass project in Noord Brabant. Category
Motivation
%
A B C D E
Saving on plastic bags Prevention of injury on cullet Ecological or environmental reasons Others No answer
22.48 15.66 46.97 7.58 7.31
Total
100 %
TABLE 3 Impact of various publicity methods in the glass source separation project in Noord Brabant. Means of publicity Posters (shopping centres) Newspapers Radio/Television Word of mouth Municipal folders Just seeing the glass container Others Total
% 1.39 45.37 2.78 3.70 11.11 32.41 2.78 100 % __
19
about the working conditions of the waste collector and on the other hand, he is sensitive to what people think of him; that is to say, he recycles because the government asks him. Category C comprises recyclers who cooperate on the basis of environmental and ecological motives. It is important to identify such groups in society so as attune publicity to their specific interests. One last question in the field of publicity is that of the means of disseminating the publicity. Table 3 shows the impact of the various publicity possibilities used in Noord Brabant. Newspapers have the greatest impact, while the other methods contribute only slightly. Finally, it is remarkable that many people started to cooperate just from having seen the glass container. On this basis, it may be concluded that the container has an important function as a signal. CONCLUSION
In view of the results.of the research mentioned, it is attempted to show that some arguments used in the discussion about sorting at the source are not always accurate. No mention of cost is made here, as this would be superfluous in this context, because on the one hand, mechanical separation also has its price, and on the other hand, results of study of the costs of both source separation and mechanical separation are incomplete and do not, at present, permit a true comparison. Importantly, the cost of source separation is “ subsidized” by the voluntary actions of concerned citizens.