technical report templates version b final … · web viewwrap believes the content of this...

Final Report

Recycling on the Go Containers

A reference document identifying considerations in the selection of containers for different Recycling on The Go (RotG) sectors and situations.

Project code: PAC004Research date: February 2012-April 2012 Date: July 2012

Recycling on the Go Containers 2

WRAP’s vision is a world without waste, where resources are used sustainably.

We work with businesses and individuals to help them reap the benefits of reducing waste, develop sustainable products and use resources in an efficient way.

Find out more at www.wrap.org.uk

Written by: Polly Griffiths (Score Environment)

Front cover photography: Recycling on the Go containers at a South Ayrshire park (source: Taylors)

WRAP believes the content of this report to be correct as at the date of writing. However, factors such as prices, levels of recycled content and regulatory requirements are subject to change and users of the report should check with their suppliers to confirm the current situation. In addition, care should be taken in using any of the cost information provided as it is based upon numerous project-specific assumptions (such as scale, location, tender context, etc.).The report does not claim to be exhaustive, nor does it claim to cover all relevant products and specifications available on the market. While steps have been taken to ensure accuracy, WRAP cannot accept responsibility or be held liable to any person for any loss or damage arising out of or in connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. It is the responsibility of the potential user of a material or product to consult with the supplier or manufacturer and ascertain whether a particular product will satisfy their specific requirements. The listing or featuring of a particular product or company does not constitute an endorsement by WRAP and WRAP cannot guarantee the performance of individual products or materials. This material is copyrighted. It may be reproduced free of charge subject to the material being accurate and not used in a misleading context. The source of the material must be identified and the copyright status acknowledged. This material must not be used to endorse or used to suggest WRAP’s endorsement of a commercial product or service. For more detail, please refer to WRAP’s Terms & Conditions on its web site: www.wrap.org.uk

http://www.wrap.org.uk/

Contents1 Overview...........................................................................................................4

1.1 Objective......................................................................................................................41.2 Information sources.....................................................................................................41.3 Sectors and situations.................................................................................................4

2 Selection Considerations....................................................................................62.1 General considerations................................................................................................62.2 Considerations according to internal or external environment....................................92.3 Considerations by sector.............................................................................................92.4 Security......................................................................................................................102.5 Features.....................................................................................................................11

3 Containers.......................................................................................................13

TablesTable 1 RotG sectors and situations...................................................................................................5Table 2 Key general considerations in container selection................................................................6Table 3 Conventional units versus reverse vending machines..........................................................8Table 4 Container material considerations.........................................................................................8Table 5 Characteristics required of containers in different situations................................................9Table 6 Specific considerations by sector........................................................................................10Table 7 Container features...............................................................................................................12Table 8 Examples of containers currently or planned to be utilised in different RotG sectors and situations...........................................................................................................................................14

GlossaryContainer: receptacle used for the collection of recyclable materials within a RotG scheme.

Bin: receptacle used for the collection of residual waste. Also used in conjunction with ‘wheelie’ when ‘wheelie bins’ are used to collect recyclates within a RotG container.

AcknowledgementsWRAP would like to acknowledge the help of the container suppliers, who generously committed time to provide information, and the individuals and organisations involved in the development of the Scottish RotG case studies.


1 Overview

1.1 ObjectiveThe objective of the research was to identify recycling on the go (RotG) containers that are suitable for use at different types of site.

It is recognised that a range of different container types are likely to be suitable for RotG schemes. The research aimed to identify the key considerations in container selection and give examples of existing containers that are suitable for different situations.

1.2 Information sources The information sources used in the compilation of this document were:

Recoup (undated) Recycling on the Go Scoping Document RotG workshop outputs RotG literature review draft Zero Waste Scotland RotG Capital Support Fund application forms (container type and site type information

only); and Direct contact with container suppliers (see Appendix 1). Telephone conversations: Leafield and Glasdon; and Face to face meetings: Broxap and Wybone.

1.3 Sectors and situations Table 1 below gives a breakdown of the typical sectors and situations where RotG containers may be located. This breakdown forms the structure for the information presented in the remaining sections.


Table 1 RotG sectors and situationsSector Sub-sector Potential situationsAcademia Colleges

Public areas of schoolsUniversities

Car parksEntrancesExternalInternal

Events Commercial (e.g. exhibitions)Music / cultural festivalsSporting festivals

ExternalInternal

Hospitals Public areas including areas with retail outlets and food outletsWaiting areas


Leisure attractions CinemasCommunity hallsConference centresMusic venuesPrivately managed parks /open spacesSporting venuesTheme parks


Local authority Beaches / esplanadesCar parksParksStreets

ExternalPavement

Shopping centres Car parksEntrancesExternalInternal

Tourist accommodation Camping and caravan sitesHoliday parksHotels


Transport hubs AirportsBus stationsMotorway service stationsPortsRoadsideTrain stations


Transport vehicles FerriesTrains

Internal


2 Selection Considerations

2.1 General considerations As shown in Table 2, there are a large number of considerations to take into account when planning the installation of RotG containers or the upgrade of existing facilities.

Manufactures and suppliers who were consulted suggested that they will work with the client to undertake a site survey or waste audit to help set the constraints and boundaries for container selection. All suggested that footfall is a very important consideration as it impacts on the best locations for containers, the number of containers required and the capacity needed to meet demand. Most suggested that clients should consider a trial or pilot before implementing full schemes. Suppliers suggested that the trial stage need not necessarily involve a cost to the client.

Table 2 Key general considerations in container selectionHeadline considerations

Sub-considerations

Budget available Limits the number of containers; Some materials and signage requirements will be expensive; and High-tech reverse vending machines versus other types of container.

Potential locations for containers

Geography – e.g. internal or external environment; Ensuring that containers are visible; Space available may be an issue; Busiest locations – areas of highest footfall; and High waste producing areas – e.g. canteens, food outlets.

Materials collection Wastes arising and materials to be collected for recycling; Segregated or co-mingled; Number of materials collected; and Plans for residual waste - will residual waste be paired/twinned/co-located

with recycling.

Selecting number of containers

Size of location; Space available; Footfall; Accessibility – adequate number to allow easy accessibility; and Vehicle available for servicing containers – emptying / cleansing.

Selecting container capacity

Space available; Footfall; and Emptying frequency –in part will dictate capacity required. Frequency will

depend on whether the collection will be a new service or added to an existing collection round.

Operational constraints Manual handling issues; Emptying by hand versus by vehicle uplift; Vehicles available for servicing containers – emptying / cleansing; Ability to empty when full; Number of operatives available to empty containers; Ease of opening and accessibility; and Ability for users to continue to use container while being emptied.

Security and fixing Ability to lock; Fixed versus free standing;


Headline considerations

Sub-considerations

Fixed containers may need planning permission; Ability to secure containers in the case of a security alert; and Specific security consideration for certain sectors e.g. airports (see Section

2.3).

Other health and safety considerations

Ability to move containers; Exclude sharp edges; and Accessibility to disabled and children.

Signage and branding Ability to brand with corporate and national messages/signs/iconography; Aesthetically in keeping with surroundings; Corporate style /street scene consistency; Flexibility to change if scheme is modified/new materials added; and Ability to add advertising/sponsorship – potential source of income.

Maintenance requirements

Ease of cleaning; Vandalism risks – fly-posters, fire risks; Vermin risks – seagulls, rats; Longevity – corrosion (e.g. salt corrosion at seafront sites); Ability to refurbish; and Flexibility of solution – ability to easily adjust or change signage, apertures,

volume split.

Procurement/sustainable procurement/CSR

Ability to recycle; Use of recycled materials in manufacture; Ability to refurbish; and Any procurement restrictions e.g. framework contracts.

This document focuses on ‘low tech’ containers i.e. containers which do not require an energy supply. Table 3 outlines some differences between conventional units and reverse vending units. There are conventional units that require an energy supply to allow the incorporation of more high-tech solutions. These are recent additions to the container market. Two examples are given in Error: Reference source not found and Error: Reference source not found


Table 3 Conventional units versus reverse vending machines Conventional unit Reverse vending No requirement for an electrical supply; Substantially cheaper to procure than RV; Opportunity to collect mixed recyclables within

the same unit; Suitable for different sizes, shapes and forms of

packaging; Internal units are smaller in size and require less

floor space; Low daily maintenance; and Rely on external messages to the consumer to

minimise contamination.

Require an energy source (can be supplied through solar panels);

Generally more expensive than conventional units;

Generally collect just cans and plastic bottles. Some units can be used for hot drink containers;

Ability to provide incentives to users; however, users may expect a form of incentive which is not always sustainable and withdrawing incentives can result in lower capture rates;

Able to reject contamination; but can also reject requested items (e.g. unidentified barcodes);

Electronic record keeping of the number of times the unit has been used;

Can incorporate crushing and therefore have a higher capacity compared to a non-crushing unit;

Require periodic emptying and cleaning; Require software update (e.g. new barcodes); Depending on the size, may not be applicable to

all types and sizes of packaging (e.g. no HDPE bottles or no 1-2L PET bottles); and

If external, can attract vandalism.

Table 4 Renew in LondonLocations installed:200 Renew ‘communication pods’, that double as paper recycling containers, have been installed in the Square Mile of London.High tech features: Two LCD screens displaying live news,

entertainment and information; Wi-fi hotspots; and Public broadcast network in emergency

situations.

Other features: Designed to mitigate the force, fire and

fragments of an improvised explosive device: inner chassis four times stronger than steel and body panels made from glass-reinforced polymer; and

Slot aperture for paper recycling.

Cost: £25,000 per unit; Renew pays for containers and maintenance;

and

Recoup capital expenditure through sponsorship and corporate news and announcements, as well as the content that


is shows in real-time.

Source: http://renewsolution.com/index.html and various internet news articles accessed.


http://renewsolution.com/index.html

Table 5 Big Belly solar bin

Locations installed (worldwide):

External locations; and On-street, parks, colleges, beach fronts,

leisure venues.

High tech features: Solar panel which powers a compactor; and Wireless monitoring system – sends text or

email when 85% full.

Advertised advantages: Reduction in container collection costs; Elimination of over flowing containers; and Generates positive public response and “buy-

in”.

Energy supply: Solar panel

Source: http://www.bigbellysolar.co.uk/

There are some considerations when thinking about the material most suitable for the body of the container (see Table ). However, many units tend to be composites or manufactured from a mixture of materials. Manufacturers of metal containers are able to supply containers with a variety of finishes such as anti-fly paint and anti-corrosion paint. As such, it is hard to draw general conclusions about material suitability. (Material considerations in relation to bomb proof units are discussed in Section 2.3.)

Table 6 Container material considerationsMaterial CharacteristicsGlass fibre Non corrosive; and

Hard wearing.

Plastic Generally lighter than steel; Generally cheaper than steel; Can be more vulnerable to vandalism and fire damage; Can have double-skin moulding for added strength; and Can be manufactured using recycled plastic.

Steel/galvanised steel

Heavier than plastic; High durability; Can be more vulnerable to corrosion but galvanised metal containers are more

resistant and anti-corrosion paint is commonly available; Can get hot in summer if positioned in direct sunlight; Can have sharp edges; and Can be refurbished.


http://www.bigbellysolar.co.uk/

2.2 Considerations according to internal or external environmentTable 7 outlines some of the characteristics required for containers depending on where they will be located. Internal locations are frequently more space-limited than external situations and so container footprint is a key consideration. Internal environments tend to be more controlled than external environments - features can be included such as liquid reservoirs and vandalism is less of an issue. In external environments, the key considerations are selecting containers that will be robust, hard-wearing and resistant to weather and vandalism.

Table 7 Characteristics required of containers in different situationsCar park As external;

Highly visible; and Tend to require larger capacity than internal.

Entrances As internal.

External Fireproof; Fixed and locked; Hard wearing; Larger capacity / large footprint; Planning permission (required for fixed

containers); Resistant to vandalism; Vermin-proof including seagulls; and Weather resistant.

Internal Easily accessed; Easily serviced / cleaned; Movable; Resist damage; and Small footprint.

Pavement As external; and Small footprint.

2.3 Considerations by sectorTable 8 sets out some specific considerations by sector; these have been highlighted at the WRAP organised RotG stakeholder engagement workshops1 or identified by container suppliers. Generally, the considerations outlined in Table 2 are common across different sectors and have not been specifically repeated below. The only design specification identified in this research was produced by BAA for their airports (see Section Error: Reference source not found). The NHS sets strict fire requirements which have to be met by waste collection containers.

1 Stakeholder engagement workshops were held in England, Scotland and Wales with organisations involved in RotG development and delivery to explore the financial mechanisms behind their schemes and how existing partnership arrangements could be replicated. The workshops were held in January and February 2012.


Table 8 Specific considerations by sectorSector ConsiderationHospitals Compliant with fire safety;

Infection control – must be easy to clean; and Restricted space (in corridors).

Local authority managed spaces

Ability to empty using existing vehicles; Aesthetically in keeping with surroundings, particularly in conservation

and heritage areas / with street-scene requirements; Containers that will not corrode - specifically for coastal areas; Easy to open and empty; Low maintenance; Meet the requirements of the population that use the area; and Resistant to vandalism.

One-off events Easy to transport, stack and store; High capacity; High visibility; and Quick to install.

Permanent leisure attractions / venues

Aesthetically in keeping with surroundings; and Highly visible.

Shopping centres Aesthetically in keeping with surroundings; and Highly visible.

Transport hubs Aesthetically in keeping with surroundings; Airports – the collection of materials that cannot be taken through

security e.g. sharps, liquids and textiles; Highly visible; Security – requires frequent emptying; and Security – transparent or blast resistant containers may need to be

considered.

2.4 Security Security is a particular concern at transport hubs and some other potential terrorist targets. Blast proof containers have been installed within the Square Mile in London (Section 2.1).

The Aviation Security in Airport Developments (ASIAD) provides recommendations on the positioning and structure of containers for airports that can be accessed through official sources.

The Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI)1 has carried out a number of tests on containers. They then allocate a rating and it is up to the airport to decide on the standard and suitability of the containers they install.

The Home Office has produced a guidance note (HOSDB 12/08) – The selection, positioning and testing of Blast Resistant Litter Bins2.

BAA has a ‘Design Performance Standard for Airport Bins’3. This sets out detailed requirements including: being able to sustain intense use; having a high quality visual appearance; being readily

1 http://www.cpni.gov.uk/

2 http://www.cpni.gov.uk/documents/publications/2008/2008052-hosdb_guidance_note_12_blast-resistant_litterbins.pdf?epslanguage=en-gb

3 BAA Airports (2009) Airport Bins: Design Performance Standard.


maintainable and cleanable; being portable and meeting manual handling regulations; and being colour-coded according to WRAP conventions.

Based on the consultation with the suppliers, it would seem that railways station operators are more concerned about the security risks than airports. Glasdon produces the only container approved by TRANSEC1 for use in railway stations. The ‘C-thru’ container is fire and blast-proof. Some containers available from suppliers can be provided with blanking plates to block the apertures of containers if there is a security alert.

2.5 FeaturesThis section highlights some of the specific features that can be included on RotG containers to encourage use and to help operationally.

Container suppliers and practitioners at the RotG workshops suggested that material-specific apertures help reduce contamination. Containers are available with apertures specific for bottles, cans, paper and mixed dry recyclate. Generally, it seems to be agreed that the aperture size for all materials, including residual litter, should be restricted to prevent contamination and, for larger capacity containers, used by commercial businesses. In addition, it also seems to be generally agreed that the aperture provided for residual waste should be larger than that for the recycled material streams. Table Error: Reference source not found identifies some of the other container features available.

1 The Transport Security and Contingencies Directorate (TRANSEC) was set up as a separate unit within the Department for Transport (DfT) following the Lockerbie bombing of 21 December 1988.


Table 9 Container featuresFeature CommentsAbility to group bins Some containers are specifically designed to be grouped together e.g.

collecting source-segregated material.Ashtray/stubber plate For external environments.Branding/good signage Branding and signage can look busy on smaller containers;

Needs to be very clear, simple, eye-catching and easy to understand; and

Should look different from residual waste bins.Brushes on apertures Can extinguish lit matches decreasing the fire risk;

Can prevent food waste; and Can reduce potential health and safety risk e.g. broken glass escaping

out of container.Castors on liners Helps to make emptying easier.Colour Recycle Now1 and Recycle for Scotland colour code is current standard

best practice; Black can work well for RotG if well signed and has coloured apertures

for recyclate; Black can be viewed by users as residual waste containers, if not

distinguished by signage/colour-coding; Colour can be used to tie in with kerbside scheme in a local authority

situation; this may not be appropriate in tourist areas where the kerbside colour has no meaning to visitors; and

Colour on the apertures and doors can be used to help identify the materials accepted.

D-shaped profile or flat profile

Allows positioning against a wall.

Dimpled/perforated/ribbed surface

Deters fly posting.

Front opening Allows emptying without lifting.Interchangeable apertures/lids

Gives flexibility to modify what is being collected.

Liner tray with reservoir To collect liquids and help cleaning.Liquid reservoir Can be used to help reduce liquid contamination; and

Not suitable in an external environment.Rat modification For consideration in areas where rats are an issue.Seagull flaps For consideration in areas where seagulls are an issue.Side or rear opening Containers can still be used while being emptied.Sound dampening For consideration if collecting glass.Sloping/pyramid roofs Prevents materials being placed on the top of the container.Special coatings e.g. anti-fly posting, anti-corrosion

Can be considered for specific external situations.

Transparent Users can see what materials should go in the container; Discourages contamination; High security –any suspect package can be seen; It has been suggested that transparent containers are not suitable in an

external environment. However, some suppliers are now producing transparent containers considered to be tough enough to use externally; and

Can have some aesthetic issues, as not everyone likes to see the content of a recycling container.

Weight warning graphic On clear containers to indicate when contents reaches a certain weight within the container (e.g. used for battery collection).

1 http://www.recyclenow.com/ and http://www.recycleforscotland.com/


http://www.recyclenow.com/

3 Containers

Table 10 gives some more detailed examples of containers that have been adopted in different RotG sectors and situations. This information has been compiled from the Scottish RotG case studies and the Scottish RotG Capital Support Fund applications.

The accompanying Excel file (RotG container database July 12.xls) gives details of recycling containers currently available from the main manufacturers. It should be noted that suppliers have development programmes and as such new products are continually being developed. In addition, some suppliers are able to offer bespoke solutions. Hence, there is likely to be greater flexibility in container provision than can be demonstrated in the database.

Within the database the following details are provided for each container, subject to the information being available via the manufacturer’s website (details are listed in same order as the database):

Manufacturer; Model; Main material type; Containment method inside container e.g. metal liner, plastic sack; Colour; Colour of aperture/lid; Number of apertures; Type of aperture; Volume; Suitability for grouping; Number of material streams; Situation most suitable (external or internal); Other comments on suitability (based only on information provided by supplier); Features; Optional features; Lockable option; Fixing; and Source (website link).

The information in the database was supplemented with material provided directly by the suppliers consulted.


Table 10 Examples of containers currently or planned to be utilised in different RotG sectors and situationsOrganisation

Sector Sub-sector

Situation

Container types

Material type

Internal containment method

Number of apertures

Aperture type

Vol. (litres)

Reasons given for selection

Aberdeenshire

Local authority managed space

On-street External Glasdon Nexus 360, Leafield Eco Envirobank, Broxap Derby

Plastic, cans, residual waste

Wheelie bin – 240 or 140 litre

2 Specific to material stream

3x140 or 240

Residual waste can be collected adjacent to recycling to reduce contamination

Compatible with wheeled bin collection system so existing vehicle fleet can be utilised for collection

Clackmannanshire Council


On-street External Double Derby Bins Slimline Recycling Unit (BX 2596-DDS-RC)

Mixed recycling (paper, card, plastics, metal food and drink containers); residual waste

Clear plastic liner

4 Specific to material stream.

2x80 Allows collection of residual waste with recycling

Community Central Hall

Permanent leisure attraction

Community hall

Internal Wybone – box cycle single

Paper, plastic bottles, cans

Clear plastic sack

1 Specific to material stream.

60 Clear containers to reduce contamination

Fit together easily to create recycling points

Dundee City Council


Parks / open spaces

External Wybone Timber Fronted (RLA/5 & 6)

Plastic packaging, aluminium cans and paper/car

- 1-2 Self-closing flaps

Timber fronted containers match the circular slatted timber litter bins currently on-site

Blend in well with the surroundings


Organisation

Sector Sub-sector

Situation

Container types

Material type


Number of apertures

Aperture type

Vol. (litres)


dboardDundee City Council


On-street External Broxap Single Sided Recycling Container (BX45 SEPR8)

Plastic packaging, aluminium cans, paper/cardboard

- 3 Flap 270 Same container as found to be successful in beachfront location

Hard-wearing High enough capacity to

cope with demand Size not too obtrusive

Dundee City Council


On-street External Glasdon Nexus range / Wybone Mini Cyclo

Plastic packaging, aluminium cans and paper/cardboard Double unit

- - - 200 - 300

Co-ordinate with the existing litter bins yet distinctive enough to avoid confusion (and hence contamination)

Minimise the risk of fly posting damage

Aperture sizes limits large-scale deposits or the dumping of larger materials

East Lothian Local authority managed space

On-street and car park

External Taylors Node 360º

Mixed recyclates: mixed paper and cardboard; comingled cans, plastic and glass.

- 1 - 4x800 High capacity (to fit with fortnightly collection frequency)

Locking post and base plate gives security without need for planning permission

Material specific apertures reduce contamination and minimise health and safety risks

Edinburgh Leisure


Swimming pool

Internal Wybone – triple, double,

- Clear plastic liner

1-3 Specific to material

- Ability to relocate – if location chosen not working

Similar in design to those found in many other public


Organisation

Sector Sub-sector

Situation

Container types

Material type


Number of apertures

Aperture type

Vol. (litres)


single and plastic cup recycling

stream. spaces therefore easier for visitors to recognise and use

Essential Edinburgh


Parks / open space

External Broxap Buxton Double Recycling Unit

Mixed recycling; residual waste

Liners 6 Large aperture

2 x 120

None given

Glasgow Council


On-street / parks / open spaces

External Wybone Peat unit

Mixed papers (newspapers/magazines), card, plastic bottles and cans

Metal liner. 1 Keyhole 120 Able to secure on concrete plinth which makes them secure and less likely to be knocked overSize makes it suitable for highly visible locationSize does not cause any manual handling issue

Highland Council


Car park External Glasdon Nexus 200

Paper, cans and plastic bottles

Liner 4 Small hole

200 None given

Perth and Kinross Council


On-street External Taylors Node 360

Mixed recyclates: Paper, cardboard, cans, mixed plastics

- 4 - 4x800 Able to be serviced by current fleet of RCVs – reducing operating costs

High capacity (to fit with fortnightly collection frequency)

Highly visual Locking post and base plate

gives security without need for planning permission

No need for groundwork Container can be moved –

freedom to adjust location of containers if required


Organisation

Sector Sub-sector

Situation

Container types

Material type


Number of apertures

Aperture type

Vol. (litres)


Reduced manual handling risk

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh

Leisure attraction

Parks / open space

Internal Dolphin recycling container – stainless steel

Paper, plastic bottles, residual waste

Clear plastic liners

3 Large aperture

2 x 501 x 70

High specification Aesthetically appropriate to

setting (visitor centre entrance)

Robust Clear signage

Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh

Leisure attraction

Parks / open space

Internal Glasdon – Nexus 100

Plastic, paper, cans

Clear plastic liners

1 Slot (paper); small hole (plastic)

100 High specification. Aesthetically appropriate to

setting (meeting rooms). Robust. Clear signage

Source: Successful applications to the Zero Waste Scotland RotG Capital Support Fund – Phase 1.


www.wrap.org.uk/relevant link

technical report templates version b final … · web viewwrap believes the content of this...

Documents