| Front page | | Contents | | Previous | | Next |
Vægtbaserede indsamlingssystemer for dagrenovation
This report deals with three studies carried out in the municipalities of Tinglev and
Nørre Rangstrup.
The three referenced studies are:
 | Analysis of the category "remaining waste" collected from households. |
 | Analysis of waste found in civic amenity site containers labelled "combustible
waste". |
 | Study of waste collected at lay-bys and service areas. |
Analysis of the category "remaining waste"
Table 0.1 hereunder shows the amounts recorded and the differences between them, in
the analyses at the municipalities of Tinglev and Nørre Rangstrup.
Table 0.1
Analysis of the category "remaining waste"
Category |
Kg per household per week |
|
Tinglev |
Nørre Rangstrup |
Difference4 |
Percentage difference |
Animal food waste |
0.304 |
0.413 |
0.109 |
36% |
Vegetable food waste |
2.009 |
2.602 |
0.593 |
30% |
Flower and garden waste |
0.111 |
0.204 |
0.093 |
84% |
Nappies |
0.351 |
0.710 |
0.359 |
102% |
Newspapers, magazines and advertising
material |
0.116 |
0.470 |
0.354 |
305% |
Cardboard |
0.053 |
0.113 |
0.060 |
113% |
Other types of paper material |
0.157 |
0.227 |
0.070 |
45% |
Metal tins |
0.106 |
0.147 |
0.041 |
39% |
Bottles and household glass |
0.137 |
0.338 |
0.201 |
147% |
Ashes, cat litter,
street litter, etc. |
0.158 |
0.911 |
0.753 |
477% |
Other types of waste |
2.196 |
3.884 |
1.688 |
77% |
Total |
5.698 |
10.019 |
4.321 |
76% |
The findings of the waste analysis carried out in the municipalities of Tinglev and Nørre
Rangstrup show that the recorded amount of each category differs considerably.
Table 0.2 shows the amounts of animal food waste, nappies, ashes/cat
litter/street litter, etc. as well as other types of waste (up-scaled in kg per household
per year). All these four categories are collected as refuse in both municipalities.
Table 0.2
Study of categories collected as refuse
Category |
Tinglev |
Nørre Rangstrup |
Animal food waste |
15.8 kg |
21.5 kg |
Nappies |
18.3 kg |
36.9 kg |
Ashes, cat litter, street litter, etc. |
8.2 kg |
47.4 kg |
Other types of waste |
114.2 kg |
202.0 kg |
Total |
156.5 kg |
307.7 kg |
This shows that, in these categories, the waste collected in Nørre Rangstrup is almost
double (97% greater) that collected in Tinglev.
Analysis of waste found in civic amenity site containers labelled "combustible
waste".
Table 0.3
Refuse and garden waste found in containers labelled "combustible waste"
Category |
Amount in kg |
Tinglev |
Nørre Rangstrup |
Animal food waste |
5.70 |
0 |
Packaging |
152.00 |
14.30 |
Nappies |
20.50 |
0 |
Newspapers, magazines and advertising
material |
88.60 |
9.10 |
Cardboard |
34.10 |
14.30 |
Other types of paper materials |
218.90 |
26.10 |
Clothes and shoes |
187.50 |
32.05 |
Ashes |
5.80 |
2.65 |
Other waste/refuse |
127.05 |
22.85 |
Toys |
3.55 |
18.50 |
Home nursing |
7.60 |
|
Total refuse |
851.30 |
139.85 |
Garden waste |
23.90 |
4.00 |
Total |
875.20 |
143.85 |
Total waste found in containers labelled
"combustible waste" |
1,465 kg |
1,420 kg |
Percentage classified as refuse and
garden waste (combustible waste) |
60% |
10% |
Combustible waste |
589.8 kg ~ 40% |
1,276.15 kg
~ 90% |
As can be seen from Table 0.3, there is a considerable difference between the amount of
refuse and garden waste recorded for both municipalities (60% and 10%). The total amount
of waste in the containers of the two municipalities, however, is practically identical
(1,465 kg and 1,420 kg). More than half (60%) the content in Tinglev was recorded as
refuse. In Nørre Rangstrup, the refuse only amounted to 10%.
Study of Waste Collected at Lay-bys and Service Areas
The recordings of waste collected at lay-bys and service areas in the four counties
(Sønderjyllands Amt, Fyns Amt, Ringkøbing Amt and Viborg Amt) show that proportionally
more refuse is collected from lay-bys and service areas in municipalities with
weight-based collection schemes than from lay-bys and service areas in the remaining
municipalities. The same conclusions cannot be made from the recordings from the county of
Vejle. However, the findings from Vejle Amt do not exclude that citizens from
municipalities with weight-based collection schemes tend to leave more waste at lay-bys
and service areas than citizens would do from municipalities that do not have such a
collection system.
Overall Assessment
Table 0.4 lists under various headings the amount of waste recorded in 2000
(up-scaled for one year). For the municipality of Tinglev, the difference in vegetable
food waste and garden waste has been added (up-scaled for one year). It is presumed that
equal amounts of these two categories are being produced in the two municipalities, but
that the difference in vegetable food waste and garden waste constitutes an additional
amount which is being home composted in Tinglev apart from the amount that is supposed
being home composted in the two municipalities.
Table 0.4
Amount of waste recorded per household
Category |
Tinglev |
Nørre Rangstrup |
Remaining waste (recorded by
the waste analysis in 2001) |
318 kg |
532 kg |
Paper and cardboard (2000) |
106 kg |
105 kg5 |
Bottles and household glass (2000) |
34 kg |
32 kg |
Remaining waste + paper and glass |
458 kg |
669 kg |
Difference in amount of
vegetable food waste and
garden waste (0.593 kg + 0.093 kg)
x 52 weeks |
36 kg |
- |
Total refuse |
494 kg |
669 kg |
Refuse in civic amenity
container labelled "combustible"
(up-scaled for one year) |
74 kg |
17 kg |
Total |
568 kg |
685 kg |
Collected "remaining waste" per household for the entire country averaged 5876 kg in 1998 and 5887 kg in 1999.
After including the additional amount which it is assumed is being home composted in
Tinglev, a difference in the amount of refuse in the two municipalities can be noted (see
Table 0.4).
The difference in waste volume between Tinglev and Nørre Rangstrup amounts to 117 kg
per household per year.
Since the findings of the questionnaire survey (published in the Environmental Project
No. 576, 2000) do not show any difference in consumer habits for municipalities with and
without weight-based collection schemes, it must be assumed that on average the same
amount of waste is being produced in both municipalities.
As it appears from the above-mentioned project, the difference in the amount of waste
being collected (including home composting) in the two types of municipalities might be
due to the fact that the households in municipalities with weight-based collection schemes
dispose of their waste in an alternative way. This could include bringing categories other
than paper, cardboard and glass to civic amenity sites; incineration in stoves/furnaces
and disposal of waste at lay-bys, service areas, etc.
The study shows (see chapter 3) - when analysing waste delivered to civic amenity
containers labelled "combustible waste" that the amount of refuse was
significantly higher in Tinglev than in Nørre Rangstrup. When up-scaled for one year, the
difference in the amount of refuse found in these containers amounts to 57 kg per
household per year.
In addition, the analysis of waste left at lay-bys and service areas shows that the
volume of refuse is higher in Tinglev than in Nørre Rangstrup.
However, the present study does not confirm the difference in home composting that was
indicated by the questionnaire survey (published in the Environmental Project No. 576,
2000). The findings of the referenced questionnaire survey indicated a difference of
approx. 80 kg per household per year on average. However, the waste analysis carried out
in 2001 recorded only a difference in the amount of vegetable food waste of approx. 30 kg
per household (up-scaled for one year).
4 |
The amount from Nørre Rangstrup deducted from the amount
from Tinglev
[Tilbage]
|
5 |
1999
[Tilbage]
|
6 |
Bulletin from the Danish Environmental Protection Agency No.
3, 2000; "Statistics on Waste 1998" (83% of the recorded amount of refuse
distributed on 2,406,968 households)
[Tilbage]
|
7 |
Bulletin from the Danish Environmental Protection Agency
No.17, 2001; "Statistics on Waste 1999" (85% of the recorded amount of
refuse distributed on 2,406,968 households)
[Tilbage] |
| Front page | | Contents | | Previous | | Next | | Top
| |