On 21 November 2017, ACR+ member WRAP published a summary of local authority business cases, as part of the organisation’s work on consistency in household recycling collections.

WRAP supported seven groups of local authorities – covering 49 individual authorities – to evaluate the local business case for adopting the consistency framework. According to WRAP, the review presents a ‘mixed picture’ across the pilot projects with respect to the overall strength of the business case to make major changes to services in line with the framework. The three systems defined within the framework include a weekly collection of food waste, as well as the collection of a common set of dry recyclables. These include: commingled and food; two-stream and food; and, multi-stream and food. The models included some local variations relating to garden waste and residual waste.

One of the findings of the review was that a commingled system for collecting recycling had a higher cost to local authorities in comparison to multi and single-stream. The results show that for 64% of local authorities involved in the pilot projects, commingled had the highest cost, in comparison to the other models. The baseline (current) arrangements were seen to represent the least cost option in just over half of the results primarily because the majority do not include a separate food waste collection service.

In terms of recycling WRAP found that overall there was little difference between the three systems in terms of the average recycling rates achieved. However, where the three framework systems were modelled, collection of the common set of dry recyclable materials and separate weekly food waste was seen to add (on average) approximately 4 % to the modelled recycling performance.

Source: www.wrap.org.uk


Back to Members News

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By browsing this website, you agree to our use of cookies.