DELIVERING ZERO WASTE

Ian Stupple - Auckland Council Andy Street - SLR Consulting

Auckland’s waste vision and targets

Zero waste to landfill 2040

Waste as a resource

30% less in-house waste by 2018

30% less domestic refuse by 2018

30% less total waste by 2027

To be a world class city

AUCKLAND’S WASTE

MANAGEMENT AND

MINIMISATION PLAN

Main focus of WMMP 2012

20% that Council influences

Consistent household services

Engaging communities in waste

Social & Environmental outcomes

Delivery of domestic waste target

16 KG

LESS

34 KG

LESS

-

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

201

0

201

1

201

2

201

3

201

4

201

5

201

6

201

7

201

8

201

9

202

0

202

1

202

2

202

3

202

4

202

5

202

6

202

7

202

8

202

9

203

0

203

1

203

2

203

3

203

4

203

5

203

6

203

7

203

8

203

9

204

0

Total waste to landfill in Auckland A growing gap

Outline of Brief

SLR appointed September 2016

Advise on future strategies and service delivery options to meet zero waste ambitions

Context of international best practice

Support the Waste Assessment

Inform the next WMMP 2018

Approach adopted by SLR Develop an understanding of the baseline position for Auckland; approaches in similar cities around the World recognised as leaders in environmental performance; and provide a high level assessment of the potential to apply key measures to Auckland in the context of:

policies to drive improved waste management;

infrastructure capacity and investment needs for recycling and organic and refuse processing;

optimisation of waste transfer mechanisms; and

the preferred approach to management of organic waste streams

Lessons Learned – high performing cities Cities selected based on similar populations to Auckland, high

environmental performance/commitments and the employment of varying approaches (e.g. landfill bans, landfill levies, introduction of treatment technologies, etc.)

Two lower performing cities also included

Lessons Learned KPI Key Lessons Learned

Landfill Costs Landfill disposal costs significantly higher than current Auckland rates

Payment System

Most adopt a user charge approach to payments

Two ‘lower performing’ cities (Brisbane& Birmingham) both adopt a flat user charge

Auckland plans to implement ‘pay as you throw’ (PAYT) measures

Service Delivery

Many high performers have a focus on diverting organic waste from landfill

All use either a contracted company or an authority controlled entity to deliver their collection services

Main exceptions are multi-occupancy dwellings (often commercial market)

Contract Structure

None have fully combined collection, treatment & disposal contracts

The same entity may be contracted separately for each service (e.g. San Fran)

Priorities of high performing cities

High priorities of high performing cities:

Environmental (waste minimisation, improving efficiency of resource use, improving management of household organic waste)

Socio-economic (opportunities for public involvement and engagement)

Operational (developing infrastructure / processes to maximise resource recovery)

Lesser considerations:

Cost (in isolation)

Deliverability / risks

Local transport impacts

Lessons from high performing cities

To divert waste from landfill and promote adoption of measures for waste reuse, recycling and treatment, it is imperative that the cost of landfill is sufficiently high to provide a competitive environment in which alternative approaches become viable

Without a sufficient financial incentive to reduce landfill, service delivery, payment and contractual structures become secondary considerations, unlikely to achieve the level of environmental performance that Auckland aspires to achieve

A commonly adopted approach to ensure that landfill costs increase at all sites is application of an appropriate level of landfill tax or levy. This and other ‘game changer’ policies have been applied in other international jurisdictions

‘Game Changers’ for high performing cities

Example ‘Game Changer’ - Seattle

Analysis – Waste Flow Model Forecast Total Waste Arisings and Management in tonnes by 2040

Informs estimation of future requirements for new waste management facilities, and also the potential costs of developing and operating required infrastructure

Scenario modelling (refuse) Using waste composition data and future waste arisings projections provided by

Council, SLR modelled three potential options for treatment of refuse:

Mechanical Treatment (MT)

Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT)

Energy from Waste (EfW)

Baseline scenario without any provision for refuse treatment also considered

Three recycling scenarios (low, medium and high capture rates for specific materials) were applied to estimate additional materials that could be diverted

Although Central Government’s drive to use renewable energy in New Zealand currently rules out use of Energy from Waste facilities, it was included to estimate relative landfill diversion performance and costs

Scenario modelling (refuse) Outputs – estimate of number and type of facilities needed at key

milestones, including - capital and operating costs, expected performance, employment opportunities created

Scenario modelling (organic waste)

More effective management of organic wastes (in particular food waste) fundamental to delivering an improved overall solid waste management strategy, and also meeting the wider environmental targets for Auckland

Options selected by Council for further assessment - secondary segregation of refuse (treatment by MBT), dedicated food waste collections, collection of food waste using split body vehicles or pods (all with treatment by AD)

Scenario Modelling (Organic Waste)

Scenario modelling (organic waste) Comparative Carbon Performance

Scenario modelling (organic waste) User charges need to be considered to incentivise segregation

Total costs associated with organic waste collection and treatment services vary

according to area type and a range of other sensitivities

Optimised service configuration could realise savings in other services, e.g. by reducing refuse collection frequencies (partially off-setting costs for organic waste)

Site optimisation study and detailed cost analysis required to identify the optimum solution (collection and transfer / treatment infrastructure) which best suits needs of Auckland

No ‘one size fits all’ solution for an effective organic waste management system

Conclusions Current cost of landfilling in Auckland is too low to drive the

development of alternative approaches to solid waste management

Based on SLR’s analysis, the current levy of $10 per tonne only incentivises diversion of recyclables and green waste from Domestic Waste. Levy should be increased to at least c.$50 per tonne and c.$125 per tonne respectively to make diversion of food waste and refuse financially preferable to landfill disposal

Investment and support for non-landfill facilities and clear financial incentives are required to drive behavioural change, particularly for Non Domestic Waste

Conclusions

Additional processing / treatment facilities needed to deliver landfill diversion targets, particularly for organic waste and refuse streams

Policy / legislative direction needs to be clearly established across all major waste streams. Clearly defined strategies required to provide a roadmap to achieve short, medium and long term targets

Strategy development should consider all waste streams holistically, particularly in the context of collection and treatment infrastructure requirements

Recommendations Policy Changes:

Landfill Levy should be reviewed and an increased rate implemented (national issue)

Mandatory use of SWMPs could be a useful tool for the construction / development sector

Full or partial ban on disposal of organic waste to landfill should be considered, following development of a complementary organic waste management strategy

Appropriate collection charging mechanisms should be introduced

Organic Waste Management Strategy:

Confirm preferred treatment solution (including consideration of renewable energy incentives and climate change aspirations)

Identification of optimal facility locations

Determine most appropriate organic waste segregation / collection system

Recommendations Refuse Management Strategy:

Aim - to minimise waste disposal to landfill

Confirm preferred refuse treatment technology (to achieve long term targets)

Identification of optimal treatment facility locations

Supporting Measures:

Provide waste transfer infrastructure to optimise collection and transport requirements

Consideration must be given to development of viable markets for waste treatment outputs

Council to confirm what ‘Zero Waste’ means in the Auckland context and the preferred route to achieving this (phased)

Council needs a clear understanding of all waste arisings (sources and types) to inform further strategies

What’s zero waste for Auckland?

International definition:

Encourages redesign of products

Materials are reused and recycled

No waste to landfills or incinerators

Option 1 - zero is the target, success is high diversion

Option 2 - absolute zero using current technologies

Proposed vision

Auckland aspires to be zero waste by 2040

taking care of people and the environment

and turning waste into resources

Priority actions to reduce domestic waste

Continue with consistent kerbside services

Weekly kerbside food waste collection from 2018

Develop the resource recovery network

Target of 110 kgs per person by 2020

Priority actions to reduce total waste

Advocate for a higher waste levy

Advocate for product stewardship

Address three priority commercial waste streams:

- Construction and demolition waste

- Organic waste

- Plastics

Target of 560 kgs per person by 2027

Thanks for listening

Ian Stupple 021 835 614 ian.stupple@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz

Andy Street +44 7771 905801 astreet@slrconsulting.com