Miljøprojekt, 1061 – Håndtering af organisk affald i dagligvarehandlen

Håndtering af organisk affald i dagligvarehandlen

Summary and conclusions

Organic waste arising in the Danish groceries sector
What about organic waste from the groceries sector?
27 Groceries sorted out organic waste
Results of the trial project

Organic waste arising in the Danish groceries sector

It makes sense to make sellers of grocery consumer goods sort out organic waste for biological treatment. The waste is found in large homogenous fractions that can be collected and reused fairly easily.

The groceries are capable of handling an extra waste fraction – even with the extra workload of removing packaging from the waste. Energy production is increased if the waste is treated at a biogas plant instead of an incineration plant – and large enough to cover the energy consumption required for collecting the waste. The cost of handling a dual waste fraction system with a 14 day collection of the rest fraction is the same as the price of the current mixed fraction collection. However, such a system sets demands for the groceries ability to cooperate – even across ownership boundaries. Veterinary rules set demands on the handling of organic waste from groceries trade.

What about organic waste from the groceries sector?

Groceries generate approximately 45,000 tons of organic waste each year. The main part of organic waste from groceries goes to incineration, which is not appropriate seen from a recycling perspective. Until 2002 a portion of the discarded meat from groceries with butcher departments was collected and made into animal fodder. This is no longer allowed, and an EU regulation on animal bi-products has tightened the possibilities for use of this fraction of organic waste from groceries. Today, discarded meat collected from groceries is hygienised and treated in biogas plants.

Purely vegetable waste is in some cases collected for composting. A smaller part is - after special approval from the Danish Plant Directorate - used for animal fodder. In these cases of compost production and reuse for animal fodder, the waste must under no circumstances contain animal products, for veterinary reasons – even mixed products like pizza and ham sandwiches must be sorted out.

The purpose of this project was to clarify which parts of the groceries' organic waste can be collected and treated separately. It was a condition of the project that the biodegradable waste should be handled in such a way that hygienic and veterinary regulations were fully met.. Additionally, the project sheds light on logistical, environmental, economic and organisational aspects of separate handling of the organic waste.

27 Groceries sorted out organic waste

In the project a trial was carried out where 27 groceries sorted out the organic waste for nine weeks.

For the first five weeks, half of the groceries sorted out only vegetable waste. All packaging was removed from discarded fruit, vegetables and bread. This was needed to treat the waste at a composting facility.

After five weeks, the groceries sorted out all organic waste (including waste of animal origin).

Sales packaging was not removed, since such removal was not demanded by the biogas plant. This procedure was followed by the other half of the groceries throughout the whole period.

The participating groceries were appointed by COOP, Dansk Supermarked and De Samvirkende Købmænd. If all groceries in the area had participated in the analysis a more optimal organic waste collection scheme could have been achieved.

The pilot project was followed closely by the consulting firm Econet. The results of the trials were evaluated in relation to current legislation, and the environmental and economical consequences of dual fraction collection were evaluated.

Results of the trial project

The trial showed that the groceries were able to sort out the organic waste for recycling purposes. In addition, it was found that:

- Dialogue with the groceries and the grocery managers was important to achieve a positive result. Grocery managers expect to participate in a discussion concerning the collection scheme, location of containers, organisational contact, schedule of collection etc.

- The groceries sorted out an average of 200 kg organic waste per week. The amount varied between 33 and 1,100 kg.

- The groceries did not spend more time sorting out organic waste compared to current waste disposal procedures.

- The groceries that were to remove packaging from vegetable waste used up to five minutes per day. One grocery estimated 10 minutes a day was spent.

- In general, four out of five grocery managers were committed to the project. Among those, the quality of sorting was good. The quality was varying in the remaining groceries.

- Groceries that were to sort out vegetable waste without sales packaging made fewer faults in their sorting than groceries which were also sorting out animal waste (including sales packaging).

- As a whole, the waste complied with the requirements for acceptance set by the treatment facilities.

- Sales packaging made up less than 1% (weight) of the total waste.

- It is recommended to line containers provided the treatment facilities can cope with plastic lining.

- Significant odour nuisances were not recorded during the trial period (August-October).

The logistical, environmental, economic and organisational aspects of dual fraction collection have been evaluated. Among other facts it is shown that:

- Dual fraction collection results in increased diesel consumption compared to mixed waste collection.

- The energy production of biogas plants is so much larger than by incineration, that it more than covers the increase in fuel consumption by dual fraction collection.

- Separate handling the organic waste is more expensive than handling a single mixed fraction. The major cause is the increase in time spent on a dual fraction collection scheme compared to a single fraction collection.

The groceries are able to sort out the organic waste

Before the pilot project, the grocery managers were contacted and the collection schemes of the groceries were inspected. Information material, sorting manuals and collection equipment were distributed to the groceries. Most groceries started out well, but some needed initial help.

The groceries with the best performance – both concerning waste amount and quality – were those where grocery managers had shown the greatest commitment and interest for the sorting of waste. This shows that it is important to engage the grocery managers – and possibly also the staff responsible for the daily handling of waste – in the process. Factual and descriptive information, personal contact and a hotline are important elements of this dialogue.

All grocery managers expressed scepticism at having to remove sales packaging from vegetable waste.

However, an evaluation after five weeks showed that it was not a big problem. The actual additional time of waste handling was recorded at less than five minutes a day, which all groceries could accept. This is significant – especially when the treatment plant sets strict demands to the purity of the organic waste.

When practice meets authority

In recent years, a number of compost and biogas facilities have contacted the regional Veterinary and Food Administration regarding approval of collection and treatment of organic waste from groceries and similar sources. For these facilities it has been frustrating that the rules for handling this waste type are very different from the rules concerning similar waste types from other sources – for example organic household waste and food waste from industrial kitchens.

Organic waste from trade in consumer goods is regulated in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 Animal by-products not intended for human consumption, while source-sorted organic household waste and food waste from catering centres is regulated in Statutory Order No. 623, 30 June 2003 from the Ministry of Environment and Energy on application of waste products for agricultural purposes. it may take some time before the rules concerning the handling of organic waste from consumer goods groceries are streamlined with the current rules concerning source-sorted organic household waste. As an extension to the project, a dialogue is established between the treatment plants and the Danish Veterinary and Food Administration regarding the interpretation of certain elements of Regulation (EC) No.1774/2002 – including demands for fraction content, cleaning of vehicles etc. It is possible that this dialogue can result in a guideline improving the possibility of utilising organic waste of consumer goods.

In November 2005, the European Commission put four changes of Regulation (EC) No.1774/2002 to the vote. In general, these proposals provide for a change of procedure in handling animal bi-products.

Environmental and economic considerations can be coupled

Three parameters are included into the calculation of environmental consequences:

Fuel consumption of the waste collection
Comparison of the energy production of bio gasification and incineration
Energy savings by substitution of fertilisers.

Fuel consumption depends on the driving profile. Three profiles were made – based on different urbanisation level, grocery density and collection frequency. One profile is for the collection of mixed waste – the other two deal with dual fraction collection. It becomes apparent that one achieves a net energy gain of approx. 20% with bio gasification (4,779 MJ/tonne waste) compared to incineration (3,594 MJ/tonne waste).

Expenses for handling waste can be divided into three categories:

Waste storage (rental of material, container cleaning, lining of packaging, etc.)
Collection and transportation
Waste treatment

Comparing the most economic dual fraction driving profile (collecting organic waste once a week and the rest fraction every other week) with mixed waste collection (once a week) we see that costs for dual fraction collection are approx. 5% higher than the costs of collecting a similar amount of mixed waste.

The costs of handling of 20 tonnes mixed waste are approx. DKK 17,100, while handling the same amount with a dual fraction collection scheme costs approx. DKK 18,000.

It is expensive for groceries with their own butcher department to get rid of discarded meat. If the discarded meat was collected along with the remaining organic waste, it would be possible for groceries collecting 20 tonnes of waste/week, to save DKK 1,800week on their waste handling budget.

And then the `if's'

The calculations of the environmental and economic consequences of collecting organic waste from groceries are based upon averages. As the individual grocery has to pay the same price for rental of material, collection and transport of waste no matter the produced waste amount, separate collection will be relatively more expensive for the smaller groceries.

Groceries that have joined a collection scheme for discarded meat, can switch to a dual fraction collection scheme and thereby save the money spent on their current system. However, this is only a possible saving for the larger super/hyper markets with their own butcher section.

Finally, is it uncertain that the groceries and grocery chains are able to co-operate on the collection of organic waste. If the groceries and chains use different contractors within the same region, the routes for each contractor will be longer and, thus, less efficient. This could mean a dramatic increase in expenses for collection and transport compared to the expenses calculated in the project. Again, a smaller waste amount per grocery means a corresponding increase in collection costs. Therefore, the project recommends that groceries co-operate on the collection of organic waste.