A comprehensive waste collection cost model applied to post-consumer plastic packaging waste

Post-consumer plastic packaging waste (PPW) can be collected for recycling via source separation or post-separation. In source separation, households separate plastics from other waste before collection, whereas in post-separation waste is separated at a treatment centre after collection. There are also two collection schemes, either curb side or via drop-off locations. These different schemes have impact on total costs of collection at the municipal level. It can also influence the facility choices and network design. Therefore, a method which can compare costs of various collection schemes is needed.A comprehensive cost model was developed to compare costs of municipal collection schemes of PPW. The ‘municipal waste collection cost model’ is based on variables including fixed and variable costs per vehicle, personnel cost, container or bag costs as well as on emission costs (using imaginary carbon taxes). The model can be used for decision support when strategic changes to the collection scheme of municipalities are considered. The model takes into account the characteristics of municipalities, including urbanization degree and taxation schemes for household waste management.The model was applied to the Dutch case of post-consumer plastic packaging waste. Results showed that that in general post-separation collection has the lowest costs and curb side collection in urban municipalities without residual waste collection taxing schemes the highest. These results were supported by the conducted sensitivity analysis, which showed that higher source separation responses are negatively related to curb side collection costs. Greenhouse gas emission costs are a significant part of the total costs when collecting post-consumer plastic packaging waste due to the low density to weight ratio of the materials collect. These costs can amount to 15% of the total collection costs.     

Recycling for small island tourism developments: Food waste composting at Sandals Emerald Bay,Exuma, Bahamas

The ability for small islands to meet sustainability goals is exacerbated by the costs of transporting goods on, and then, wastes off the islands. At small scales, recycling can be prohibitive and complicated by labor costs; the need to profitably recycle and manage solid waste output from tourism is complicated by scale and available technologies. A multi-year study documents the amount of solid waste generated on Great Exuma (Exuma), The Commonwealth of The Bahamas since 2010 with one year of benchmarking, then limited recycling of food waste generation by an all-inclusive resort, Sandals Emerald Bay (SEB). For the island of Exuma, the rapid increase in the rate of accumulation of solid waste associated with a large destination resort has led to an increase in pests such as rats and flies, along with an increased occurrence of fires associated with unburied solid waste. Solid waste has accumulated faster than the island solid waste management can absorb. SEB kitchen and hotel operations contributes an estimated 36% of all solid waste generated on the island, about 1752 t¹ out of a total of 4841 t generated on the island in 2013 (exclusive of vegetation waste). Based on 4 weeks of benchmarking, 48.5% of all the waste coming out of the SEB resort is compostable, organic waste, but waste composition varies widely over time. Exuma Waste Management (EWM) and Recycle Exuma (RE), both privately-held Bahamian businesses, worked for one year (2012–2013) with SEB resort to implement a benchmarking and pilot recycling project to meet Earth Check green resort certification requirements. This paper outlines the costs and resources required for food waste recycling and some barriers to implementing more effective solid waste management for the tourism industry on small islands.     

Socially optimal and fund-balanced advanced recycling fees and subsidies in a competitive forward and reverse supply chain

Advanced recycling fees (ARFs) and government subsidy fees are important for curtailing the consumption of new products and encouraging recycling and disposal of end-of-life (EOL) products. We introduce a model consisting of a leader (the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA) and two groups of followers (MIS firms and recyclers) consisting of manufacturers, importers and sellers, and recyclers which compete in both consuming and recycling markets. The EPA determines the ARFs paid by the MIS firms and the fees subsidizing recyclers to maximize the social welfare in closed-loop supply chains where the MIS firms and recyclers attempt to maximize their respective profit functions. To compare with current practice, we describe a conceptual fund balance model to determine the ARF and subsidy fee on the basis of the balance between total collected ARFs and expenditure of subsidies. Using numerical examples for the laptop computer market in Taiwan, we demonstrate that our results outperform the current practice.     

碳中和视域下的垃圾精细化治理：日本吸收性卫生用品回收体系的构建经验及启示

通过循环利用，减少吸收性卫生用品产量和废弃量的陡增所带来的碳排放量，将加速碳中和进程。日本提供了吸收性卫生用品回收体系构建的先行经验，即以“政府引导—企业运作—社会团体协作”为顶层架构，明确制度、完备设施、完善渠道、宣传到户等。建议我国取长补短，在夯实法律法规和优化主体协同机制的基础上，重点着眼于突破技术壁垒、推动智慧化监管、深化绿色理念，以点带面推进吸收性卫生用品的回收循环试点，进一步推动垃圾分类精细化治理的进程。     

建筑垃圾资源化利用项目中特许经营模式的适用和争议——基于江苏省的实践启示

特许经营模式能够较好地发挥市场化、效率化、竞争化导向作用,充分发挥市场机制在资源配置中的决定性作用,在建筑垃圾资源化利用项目中得到了一定的应用。本文在分析江苏省建筑垃圾资源化利用项目中特许经营模式的实践经验和面临问题的基础上,总结了特许经营模式典型的交易结构,从物品属性、市场逻辑、风险分担和垄断之争四个方面对存在的争议问题和观点进行辨析,提出了国家层面制定规则、科学选择运作方式、确保采购充分竞争、合理确定项目补贴、加强政府规制作用和持续优化营商环境等政策建议,以期为未来建筑垃圾资源利用推广采用特许经营模式提供参考和启示。