Evaluation of recycling programmes in household waste collection systems
2010 (English)In: Waste Management & Research, ISSN 0734-242X, E-ISSN 1096-3669, Vol. 28, no 7, 577–586- p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
A case study and a literature review have been carried out to address the two questions: how can waste flow data from collection systems be interpreted and compared? and which factors are decisive in the results of recycling programmes in household waste collection systems? The aim is to contribute to the understanding of how recycling programmes affect the quantity of waste and sorting activities. It is shown how the results from various waste sorting systems can be interpreted and made comparable. A set of waste flow indicators is proposed, which together with generic system descriptions can facilitate comparisons of different collections systems. The evaluation of collection systems depends on the system boundaries and will always be site-specific to some degree. Various factors are relevant, e.g. environmental objectives, technical function, operating costs, types of recyclable materials collected separately, property-close collection or drop-off systems, economic incentives, information strategies, residential structure, social codes, etc. Kerbside collection of recyclables and weight-based billing led to increased waste sorting activities in the case study. Forty-three decisive factors are listed and discussed.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 28, no 7, 577–586- p.
household waste, kerbside, property close, indicator, recycling, collection, weight-based, Other technology - Environmental engineering
hushållsavfall, fastighetsnära, grindhämtning, indikator, återvinning, insamling, viktbaserad, Övriga teknikvetenskaper - Miljöteknik
Research subject Waste Science and Technology
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:ltu:diva-11258DOI: 10.1177/0734242X09341193Local ID: a2fef9c0-ba2c-11de-b769-000ea68e967bOAI: oai:DiVA.org:ltu-11258DiVA: diva2:984207
Validerad; 2010; 20091016 (ysko)2016-09-292016-09-292016-10-19Bibliographically approved