Case study

Food Waste Collection Trials – food waste collections from multi-occupancy dwellings

Photo: Food waste collections in Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames (courtesy Hyder Consulting)

During 2007-2008 WRAP provided funding to 19 local authorities to carry out separate food waste collection trials. This case study presents the key findings from those trials involved with collecting food waste from multi-occupancy housing.

Background to trials WRAP supported three food waste collection trials within areas with high proportions of communal flats / high rise properties. These trials took place in Newtownabbey, Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames (RBKT) and the London Borough of Hackney.

„ The Newtownabbey trial was conducted in an urban area with high and low rise multi-occupancy

housing with a few properties in semi-rural locations. In total there were 6 high rise blocks in the trial area. „ RBKT’s trial covered high and low rise multi-occupancy housing in both council and private ownership. „ Hackney’s trial involved high rise properties in an inner city area.

RBKT

Newtownabbey

Hackney

4,538

1,552

4,597

2

2

2

Weekly

Weekly

Weekly

Doorstep

Doorstep

Food waste taken to communal wheeled bins

25L container and liners

25L container, 7L caddy and liners

7L caddy and liners

Vehicle Type

3.5t hopper vehicle in 3 sections to allow collection of food waste and dry recyclables

Minimac 7.5t

Farid Micro7.5t

Reprocessing

IVC

Heat treated and sterilized for bio-fuel

IVC

Number of households monitored for participation

698

1,046

n/a

Phase 1 – 28.5% (No second phase of monitoring)

Phase 1 – 30.5% / Phase 2 – 26.1%

No participation monitoring

0.50

0.52

0.24

0.42

0.54

0.34

Number of households in trial area Number of collection crew per vehicle Residual collection frequency Container presentation Container type

Participation Rate Kgs per household served per week, first half of the trial Kgs per household served per week, second half of the trial

Collection methods Royal Borough Kingston-upon-Thames In contrast to the trial collections in other multi-occupancy areas, no kitchen caddies were provided to residents. The collections were made from the doorstep of each property, and on the same day as the bagged dry recyclables collection residents already received. The vehicle used by RBKT was a bespoke split vehicle with food waste loaded on one side of the vehicle and dry recyclables on the other. Two crews in two separate vehicles serviced the rounds daily. Additional liners were requested by residents via notes left on the containers or by calling RBKT’s call centre. In addition, liners were distributed by crews at selected times throughout the year as a blanket drop.

Newtownabbey The householders were supplied with a 7 litre kitchen caddy, a 25 litre external container and a roll of liners. Collections from the six high-rise block took the form of door to door collections with crews using slave bins (tipping food waste containers into a wheeled bin). Crews started collections from the top of each building and worked their way down. The crews carried out a double sweep of the high rise flats to minimise any missed collections. Newtownabbey adopted a different collection method for the low rise / individual properties, with a door to door service operated where access to individual residences was relatively easy. Other flats had a communal collection point, the use of which was promoted through posters on-site and clear instructions to the crews not to collect anything that was not presented at the communal collection point. Additional liners were supplied to residents who left a note on the collection container or by calling the Council’s call centre. The liners were usually delivered within 2 to 3 days. Newtownabbey did not carry out any blanket drops of liners. Hackney

Servicing a food waste ‘bring’ container in Hackney

Hackney adopted a ‘bring’ scheme for collecting food waste. The scheme was launched in October 2007. Food waste ‘bring’ containers were located near several estates and high-rise properties, alongside dry recycling containers. 100 food waste ‘bring’ containers serve a total of 4,600 households. The estates included in the trial areas varied in size, with some small estates only having one bring container, whilst the largest estate was provided with 19 bring containers. All households in the Hackney trial area were provided with a blue 7 litre (vented) caddy and supply of liners. The communal containers are emptied two or three times per week using a small compaction vehicle.

Collection performance The yields illustrated in the table above show that this scheme (as a ‘bring’ scheme) attracted lower amounts of food waste per household than the schemes in RBKT and Newtownabbey, although the amounts of food waste collected per household in Hackney increased during the second half of the trial. By contrast, the amounts of food waste collected per household dropped during the second half of RBKT’s trial and participation levels for Newtownabbey reduced between the two phases of monitoring.

The collection yields and participation rates for the multi-occupancy properties are relatively low compared to kerbside services. Several anecdotal factors have been highlighted throughout the trials that could help explain this: •

•

•

The authorities in Newtownabbey and RBKT carried out door step collections of food waste while, in the majority of cases, refuse is deposited in communal containers within external bin storage areas. This meant residents had to keep their food waste containers within the confines of their properties over the course of the week whereas as they are used to disposing of refuse at their convenience. All the authorities worked alongside landlords and housing bodies to ensure access to the flats by the crews was not inhibited and that key fobs / access codes were obtained in advance. However in practice access still proved problematic on occasions, especially when crews were carrying out multiple trips into blocks. The crews often had to rely on tradesmen’s buttons or wait for residents to give them access. Additionally some landlords only provided access for collection crews to car park areas, and not to individual blocks. RBKT initially experienced problems with the liners being too small for the collection container. This was rectified with larger liners more suited for the 25 litre containers provided.

Hackney’s collection trial was unique. Performance data from Hackney show weekly yields were lower in comparison with the door-to-door schemes. Feedback was obtained from residents via focus groups, but gave no clear indications as to the reasons for this, although a number of points were raised which are worthy of mention: •

• • • •

The aperture on the ‘bring’ container was considered too small. Residents attending the focus expressed concern that the liner bags could split if they had to push them through the aperture. Hackney intends to trial a different bin design with larger apertures, which should address this concern. There were no complaints of smell at the collection points. There was a noticeable reduction in odours from the refuse bins following the introduction of the food collection trial. There were no reports of the ‘bring’ containers being too full for food waste to be deposited. Some residents thought it would be more convenient if the food waste containers were located next to the refuse bins (as opposed to the recycling bins), as they could deposit food waste and refuse at the same time.

Issues for consideration •

•

•

•

Establishment of good working relationships with landlords / management agents is essential to reduce the risk of access problems to communal collection points. Do not underestimate the time required to gain the proper access keys / codes. Consider the number of storeys in a building, as this has a significant impact on servicing times, and consider the amount of time involved in walking / using lifts in high rise blocks and factor this into the design of your collection rounds. Manual handling, especially for door to door collections and where lifts are not available in blocks, and other health and safety considerations need appropriate assessment. Conduct risk assessments and consult with the Fire Brigade as appropriate. Speak to residents, and continually reinforce the scheme with posters and information displayed in communal areas.

•

•

For bring systems consider where best to locate food waste containers – by recycling bins or by refuse bins. Feedback suggests that some residents may find it more convenient if food waste containers were located close to the refuse bins. Consider parking for the vehicle whilst collections are being carried out and the health and safety implications associated with leaving the vehicle unattended and manoeuvring in car parks.

Further information and advice Contact ROTATE at WRAP: email: [email protected], tel: 01295 819661.