A Comparison of Collection Systems in European Cities

The key findings of a solid waste characterisation study conducted at the Guadalajara Metropolitan Zone, Mexico, are reported. Objectives of the study were to estimate the daily generation rate of household (HSW) and municipal solid waste (MSW), characterise and compare their composition by type of material, determine the proportion that HSW contributes to MSW, explore changes in MSW composition through time after final disposal, and estimate the types and amount of MSW that are sorted out for recycling at final disposal sites. HSW generated during seven days by a sample of 300 households chosen through a two-stage stratified sampling design was collected, weighed and classified. MSW entering the four local disposal sites was recorded for 12 weeks, and materials' sorting was quantified. MSW samples taken by excavating trenches in two final disposal sites were also characterised. The average per capita daily HSW generation rate was 508 g. HSW mainly consisted of putrescible waste (53%), paper (10%) and plastic (9%). The average daily generation rate of MSW was 3119.2 metric tonnes. HSW represented 55.9% of MSW, and the main difference between HSW and MSW was a lower proportion of organic materials (53% vs. 16.5%, respectively). The major changes in MSW composition through time after final disposal, were the result of the quick decomposition of putrescible materials. Only 2.2% of total MSW generated in Guadalajara (mainly package waste) was sorted for recycling.

Section: Compositionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Solid waste characterisation study in the Guadalajara Metropolitan Zone, Mexico

Bernache-Pérez¹,

Sánchez-Colón²,

Garmendia³

et al. 2001

“…GNI capita −1 can satisfactorily predict the percentage recovered by the formal sector (r = 0.92, p < 10 −7 , R adj 2 = 0.84). Official statistics from 1990 show that municipal waste recycling rates in the EU ranged from 1 to 20%, with half of the 12 member states having rates between <1 -6% (ERL, 1992) is corroborated by a 1989 survey of 8 European cities: the seven Western European cities had recycling rates in the range of 5-20% (Scharff and Vogel, 1994). During the past 10-20 years, high-income countries have been rediscovering the benefits and advantages of both materials recycling and organic recovery as an integral part of their waste (and resource) management systems, and have invested heavily in both physical infrastructure and communication strategies, increasing public participation in separate collection schemes, and overall recycling rates to current levels of 40% or more.…”

Section: Resource Managementmentioning

confidence: 97%

Comparative analysis of solid waste management in 20 cities

Wilson

Rodić

Scheinberg³

et al. 2012

380

349

This paper uses the 'lens' of integrated and sustainable waste management (ISWM) to analyse the new data set compiled on 20 cities in six continents for the UN-Habitat flagship publication Solid Waste Management in the World's Cities. The comparative analysis looks first at waste generation rates and waste composition data. A process flow diagram is prepared for each city, as a powerful tool for representing the solid waste system as a whole in a comprehensive but concise way. Benchmark indicators are presented and compared for the three key physical components/drivers: public health and collection; environment and disposal; and resource recovery -and for three governance strategies required to deliver a well-functioning ISWM system: inclusivity; financial sustainability; and sound institutions and pro-active policies. Key insights include the variety and diversity of successful modelsthere is no 'one size fits all'; the necessity of good, reliable data; the importance of focusing on governance as well as technology; and the need to build on the existing strengths of the city. An example of the latter is the critical role of the informal sector in the cities in many developing countries: it not only delivers recycling rates that are comparable with modern Western systems, but also saves the city authorities millions of dollars in avoided waste collection and disposal costs. This provides the opportunity for win-win solutions, so long as the related wider challenges can be addressed.

“…Likewise, Scharff & Vogel (1994) carried out a comparative study of waste collection systems in eight of the most important European capitals that shows how the particular characteristics of each city and the different administrative management policies are the main causes of the differences between the systems employed.…”

Section: Recycling Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

A model for the reallocation of recycling containers: application to the case of glass

González-Torre

Adenso‐Díaz

2002

From both the social as well as the economic perspective, the recycling of household waste products is of growing importance. The recycling of glass in particular is one of the most successful as far as public collaboration is concerned, as well as due to the demand for recycled material on the part of glass manufacturers. This article presents a model for designing the first stage in the reverse logistics chain, i.e. the collection of material (in our case, applying the model to the collection of glass) directly from the consumer by means of containers. The aim of this model is to determine how to distribute the recycling containers in a specific region in the most efficient way possible, taking into account the economic and sociological characteristics of the population (level of education, number of catering establishments, etc.), while attempting to maximise the material collected and reducing the logistics costs. The model has been applied to the case of the Principality of Asturias, Spain, obtaining estimations that improve the performance of the system.