Pay as you throw

Options, economics and prospects across Europe¿Pay as you throw¿ has been implemented in Europe for over a decade now, but how successful and economical is its implementation? Several European trials suggest that PAYT does pay off.Driven by legislative, environmental and economic concerns, an increasing number of countries are working to reduce the amount of solid waste they send to landfills and to increase diversion and recycling. This new strategy generally requires support from a broad base of stakeholders. It also prompts municipalities to review their traditional financing mechanisms for waste management and consider differentiated fee systems for the services involved. At the same time, many municipalities are keen to attain a higher degree of sensitivity for individual waste generation and to lower the total amounts of waste they need to handle. PAYT aims to increase recycling and lower waste generation Within this context, one strategy that is receiving growing international interest is ¿pay as you throw¿ (PAYT), in which citizens reduce their individual waste production because of financial incentives. By facing a direct form of unit pricing for the different discards they produce, households are motivated to divert an increased portion of their wastes away from the conventional routes of waste disposal. This aims to increase the amount of recycling activity and, ideally, lower overall waste generation. In this way, waste collection more closely resembles other utilities, where the customer directly pays for services received. ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF PAYT Figure 1. Schematic of the different technical approaches for the implementation of PAYTThe use of prepaid sacks or labelled bins were the first steps taken to relate payment for waste services directly to the collected unit (sack) or to identify the actual waste generator. In the early 1990s, transponders became affordable for use in identifying waste bins or their users. Since then, significant advances have been made both in developing efficient, tamper-proof PAYT solutions, and in accommodating them in densely populated urban areas, which often do not have individually assigned waste containers. A large spectrum of technical approaches for unit pricing in different settings is now available (see Figure 1), and PAYT has become a practical reality in an increasing number of countries in Europe, such as Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark, Austria and Finland. PAYT PRINCIPLES: IDENTIFICATION BY BIN OR USERImplementing a PAYT system depends on identifying the producer, and measuring the waste generated and/or the associated services as well as the unit pricing for individualized charges.Bin identificationFrom the spectrum of systems available, bin identification is by far the most popular option for municipalities and waste management associations in Europe. For this approach to work, it is vital to have a good system for bin allocation, particularly in densely inhabited, multi-family areas, to ensure accountability for the waste generated. Possible solutions include individually locked bins, locked container boxes and wire cages set up for a known circle of users. LEFT TO RIGHT Container site with individually locked waste bins for householders of an apartment building l Locked container box for standard waste containers used by households l Access-protected container site for a group of households However, reduced accessibility will affect not only users but also collection. The hauling time for each container site can increase by 12%¿40% as a result of installing such measures. Furthermore, additional investment will be required to set up new sites: in Germany, for example, this involves between ¿7 to ¿45 per tonne of waste.User identificationAn alternative to bin identification is user identification through the chamber system (¿Müllschleusen¿), which can be operated in various environments and allow PAYT principles to be applied in full. Advertised under the technical synonym ¿waste lock¿ or ¿lockhopper¿ by their producers, chamber systems are waste storage installations that require users to pass their waste through a special feeding chamber. Access to this chamber is provided after the user has registered, such as by means of a smart card or electronic key. The amount of waste deposited is then recorded, and the responsible authority then either bills the user or the system deducts a corresponding amount from prepaid credits. Devices on the market range from simple and completely mechanical systems to fully automated, even solar-powered electro-mechanical systems. WEIGHT-BASED AND VOLUME-BASED CHARGINGIdent-weighing systems provide the technical solution for weight-based charges. The weight of the collected waste is measured with the help of a weighing device integrated into the lifter, which empties the waste bin into the collection vehicle. Systems operated for volume-based accounting either establish the actual filling level of the collection receptacle with the help of ultrasound or optical sensors, or work on the basis of the different volumes of standard-sized receptacles assigned to collection. These receptacles will then be identified during pickup whereby the size (i.e. filling capacity) determines the volume that will be taken into account. Another way is for households to buy one-way receptacles (such as plastic sacks) of a certain size which will be completely retained during the collection. Weight-based accounting is believed by many as the more accurate way for charging, as only the exact mass of the waste, instead of the volume or even maximum content of the waste bin, are considered. However, volume-based schemes are often easier to implement, give less opportunities for failure, and make little difference for those who operate conventional thermaltreatment systems and thus often have heavier ashes in their waste. The most sophisticated chamber solutions include remote-control sensing, where radio messages are sent automatically when operational failures occur or when the storage units need to be emptied. Both volume- and weight-based accounting can be carried out, and various types of standardized waste containers can accommodate these installations, including large containers up to 30 m3, which can be directly loaded on to pickup trucks. Mechanical volume chamber as top-lock installation on a 1.1m3 standard containerAn example of a larger solution can be found in the German city of Sindelfingen, where a total of 18 chamber installations with a container capacity of 8 m3 each were set up in 2003 to replace standard-sized, 1100-litre waste containers for residual waste in 16 residential areas. One of these installations now replaces the pickup operations for 29 containers of the former type.Considerable logistical advantages, including waste collection from a small number of locations and the arrangement of pickup operations on demand, compensate for the relatively high investments that these solutions require. Thus a chamber solution is an interesting option for a very broad range of applications, including commercial centres and even single-family houses.EXAMPLES OF PAYT SYSTEMS IN EUROPEIn Germany, an electronic system for bin identification and differentiated billing system was first introduced in Dresden, Saxony in 1994. Since then, many German districts and cities have reformulated their waste statutes and collection plans, enabling PAYT to be a viable option when planning new waste management strategies. For Germany as a whole, company figures indicate that in 2000, more than 4.5 million waste bins carried an identification device,1 corresponding to approximately 9.2 million households. Following further subsequent expansion and development, it is likely that waste services and billing using PAYT principles now operate in about one quarter of German households (see Table 1).2 Combinations of basic fees and variable, service-dependent fees make up 24%, while fully variable, one-tiered charging models are applied in 2% of cases only. Electro-mechanical chamber system with volume-based accounting systemIn Germany and the Netherlands, chamber systems for some time have been considered an instrument to address citizens¿ concerns and their demands for fair treatment in response to ever increasing taxes or levies for waste services. Transparency in the cost of waste services may also play a crucial role in prompting more widespread uptake of this approach in the future.In Italy and Austria, interesting pilot schemes are reported where door-to-door collection in some small and medium-sized tourist towns has been replaced by a centralized collection service, arranged on demand via the chamber system approach. Aside from the large cost savings from optimized transportation and shrinking amounts of waste for disposal, there are also noticeable positive effects to traffic, living quality and city appearance. Integrating such a system with central collection points for the collection of recyclables offers citizens the ability to dispose of their recyclable discards and residual waste at the same time. Such a system places less emphasis on households to be responsible for their own waste bins and releases landlords of multi-family dwellings from their obligation to organize billing for each tenant. Table 1. Distribution of charging models for residual waste collection in Germany Scheme Distribution (%) PAYT-related charging schemes: 26% Basic fee + variable service fee (ident) 15 Basic fee + token system 7 Basic fee + tag system 2 Entirely service-dependent (ident, fully variable) 2 Non-PAYT waste charging: 69% Entirely service-determined (fixed service) 40 Basic fee + service fee (conditionally variable) 22 Fixed charge (flat rate) 7 Miscellaneous ¿ 5 In Italy and Ireland, the application of PAYT systems is evolving rapidly due to the revision of national policy programmes. The Minister for the Environment in Ireland declared January 2005 as a target for national completion of the changeover to pay-by-use waste charges for all households. Italy abolished the flat-rate tax (TARSU) and has set a target to complete the shift ¿from tax to tariff¿ by 2007. In both of these countries, there have been significant moves towards realizing these goals, such as the preparation of new waste fee ordinances and establishment of additional collection schemes for recyclables. However, there is still some way to go before PAYT is fully implemented.THE IMPLICATIONS OF PAYTExperiences to date suggest that chamber systems provide the most effective solution, particularly in terms of fair allocation of waste charges and waste diversion goals. Numerous cases in Europe have shown that the source separation of certain material fractions can rise by over 100% after the introduction of PAYT, even when the respective collection systems for source-separated waste are already in place. In particular, this applies to lightweight packaging material, organic waste and waste paper, which have conventionally been found in large quantities in residual waste. Chamber systems are often linked to areas where the reduction in residual waste and increase in source separation reach the highest rates, well above the reasonable average change of 30%¿50%.3 Source separation can rise by over 100% after the introduction of PAYT However, in many instances a reduction in residual waste has occurred at a higher rate than source separation alone could explain. The ¿missing¿ amounts of waste may be due to unfavourable waste disposal activities, such as illegal dumping. Such concerns have formed a significant stigma for PAYT solutions. Occasional examples of increased waste export to outside areas or of more pollutants found in the recyclable waste streams have indeed been found (see Figure 2).A recent survey conducted among municipal authorities in Germany explored the issue of the ¿disappearing waste¿, which is frequently put before advocates of PAYT as a counter-argument to its introduction. Nearly three quarters of the respondents named fly-tipping and waste export as an almost inevitable consequence of the application of chamber installations.4 However, it is notable that the concerned responses included feedback from areas that had not operated such systems and were thus an expression of fears rather than proven facts. A recent European research project (PAYT-project) confirmed that hard facts in support of such allegations are difficult to find and are very seldom directly supplied by those sceptical of PAYT. In contrast, most reports about PAYT applications speak of few unfavourable consequences in relation to the manifold positive effects and improvements that can be attained. This reflects enhanced knowledge about proper implementation of PAYT systems, which has materialized in a more careful selection of the applicable technology, appropriate waste charge designs and other important measures such as public education during recent years. Figure 2. Collected residues found in source-separated, lightweight packaging material (LVP), compared with the existing system for waste charging High investment and maintenance costs remain as a potential obstacle to the introduction of PAYT. Taking German examples, additional investment for installing chamber solutions on standard waste bins can range from ¿15 to ¿90 per tonne of waste disposed and operating expenses range from ¿4 to ¿15 per tonne. According to representative calculations made for different types of chamber systems (using a depreciation of eight years and the common range of waste charges in Germany), break-even was reached after a 9%¿19% reduction in residual waste for simple chamber systems with a top-lock, and after 23%¿38% for more sophisticated systems.5 These results, combined with the reduction in residual waste when using these systems, should help to diminish fears that chamber solutions might not be economical. In fact, chamber solutions are not the most cost-intensive solution; this can be proved by replacing a large number of bins with a chamber system with a high container capacity. Bin identification systems, with total additional expenses ranging ¿4¿7 per tonne of collected residual waste or ¿1.5¿2.5 per capita per year,6 can indeed be less expensive; however, the potential to apply such a system at full scale in dense residential areas is limited and requires additional investment for suitable container settings. In addition, the waste reduction and waste diversion effects using this strategy were generally lower, although one can optimize collection by permanent monitoring of bins and pickup operations. Simple chamber systems reached break-even after a 9%¿19% waste reduction The cost of invoicing is approximately the same for most PAYT systems; however, chamber systems can reduce it. Here the direct identification of the waste generator ¿ as opposed to the more circumstantial way of identifying waste generators via their receptacles ¿ has a positive effect.The core challenge for PAYT is to introduce the associated technical components and provisions in such a way that local environmental concerns are addressed and waste streams are influenced in the manner desired. Often this requires an iterative approach, whereby many different aspects need to be considered, which would prompt several adjustments over time. Improved performances going far beyond current expectations for individual behaviour of waste disposal may pay off, not only for the incremental costs of introducing PAYT but also for the painstaking adaptation processes that have to take place.Dipl.-Ing. Jan Reichenbach, MSc, is Senior Researcher and Head of the International Project Unit at INTECUS GmbH, Waste Management and Environment-Integrating Management, and has co-ordinated an EU-funded research project on PAYT, from which a handbook has been produced.Fax: +49 351 31823 33e-mail: intecus.dresden@intecus.de NOTES Potthast, H. (BDE e.V.) Entwicklung und Standards für Sammlung und Transport von Abfällen. Fachtagung Informations- und Kommunikationsmanagement in Umwelt und Abfallwirtschaft, 2002. Einzmann, U., Turk, Th., Fricke, K., Lenkungsfunktion der Abfall- und Abfallgebührensatzung. In: Müll und Abfall 8/01. European Research Co-operation ¿PAYT¿, Project findings, 2001¿2003, www.payt.net. Verband kommunale Abfallwirtschaft und Stadtreinigung e.V. (VKS): VKS ¿ Information 61, 2004. Verband kommunale Abfallwirtschaft und Stadtreinigung e.V. (VKS): VKS ¿ Information 39, 1999. INTECUS: Multi-client study ¿Die Erfolgsfaktoren der Zukunft ¿ Chancen und Risiken von Ident-Systemen bei der Abfallsammlung¿, 2004.\n