BuilderScrap around the world

Just to finish off our BuilderScrap.com recycling around the world series.  Today we’re looking at the amounts highlighted countries send to Landfill. How much waste is recycled, composted and incinerated.

This chart illustrates the point most countries could be doing to recycle.  Our thoughts are that some countries really are on the ball. Some need to implement a cultural shift, and it falls to governments and pressure groups to force the issue.

Thanks for reading.

Todays BuilderScrap.com post revisits the Recycling around the world series BBC reporter Jeremy Bowen discusses Italy.

Waste disposal regulations in Italy vary from district to district. In Rome, the rules were toughened earlier this month. People who do not separate their rubbish can be fined up to 619 euros if they have a recycling bin within 500 metres of their front door.

Romans often claim that it is hard to find a bin and even harder to find one that is not full. The city council has ordered 2,500 new bins. They are colour-coded green for household waste, white for paper and blue for plastic.

The streets of the historic centre of Rome have almost no recycling bins yet. The streets are cleaned very efficiently, by vehicles that drive over waste and suck it up like enormous self-propelled vacuum cleaners.

In southern Italy local politicians claim that the waste management industry is controlled by organised crime. Last year the European Commission said it was taking action against Italy, for 28 breaches of EU laws on the environment. It said that Italy was denying its citizens the same quality of life enjoyed by people in other EU countries.

When I moved here five months ago I asked the caretaker of my building whether I should separate my family’s rubbish. He laughed and looked incredulous. “Are you joking?” he said. “This is Rome.”

We know that Athens is up in flames lets hope that the waste recycling systems they’ve in place haven’t contributed.  More from the office at BuilderScrap.com on Recycling around the world, todays country is Greece.

In the cramped offices of the Ecological Recycling Society in central Athens, Philip Kirkitsos hits us with some alarming statistics.

Every year, he says, one billion plastic drinking water bottles are thrown away in Greece, along with one billion soft drinks bottles and yet another billion plastic containers for cleaning fluids.

Almost one-fifth of the entire waste produced by this country is plastic, and yet just 1% of it is recycled. Greece, he admits, is at least 15 years behind the rest of the EU in almost all areas of recycling and is unlikely to meet EU targets for next year.

In Athens the recycling bins so common in most European cities are a rare sight. Although recently the authorities have launched new schemes, the impact so far seems to be minimal.

Recycling just is not high on the list of priorities for the average Athenian.

Most bags of household waste contain large amounts of glass, metal, paper and plastic which end up being dumped at the city’s only landfill which – not surprisingly – is now almost full.

As a result, the capital currently faces an acute waste management crisis because no alternative sites have been set up.

Ironically the city does have what is believed to be Europe’s largest recycling plant, built next to the landfill four years ago. But the plant – estimated to have cost at least 75m euros (£50m) – has stood idle.

The reason? It was badly damaged by a mountain of rubbish which collapsed on top of it.

Continuing the BuilderScrap.com recycling around the world series… we look at DENMARK

Waste is not just waste. That is the underlying philosophy of one of Europe’s “greenest” countries. For decades, the Danish environment policy has been to regard waste as a resource.

Tough standards have been set by consecutive governments, but it is up to the local authorities to collect whatever waste households may produce.

In 2003 that averaged 559 kg of waste per Dane, ranging from plastic and paper to bottles and batteries. In those councils where not all types of waste are collected at the house, nearby disposal sites or citizen helplines are in place.

Nearly 10,000 Danes are in the business of collecting waste – more than 0.1% of the entire population.

The hard push towards a greener Denmark has given he country a proud record.

Government figures for 2003 suggest that 31% of all household waste was recycled, while 62% was incinerated. The remaining 6% was landfill waste.

However, often the total amount of waste is not big enough for Denmark to have its own recycling plants. In particular, plastic waste, waste from electrical and electronic products, and batteries and metal are sent abroad for recycling.

The government also aims to limit the waste mountain by encouraging industry to promote products that leave a minimum of waste after use.

BuilderScrap.com is looking into the Recycling effort around the world

We know the UK government is trying to encourage more people to recycle their waste and reduce the UK’s waste mountain. Figures suggested in 2005 that 60% of all household waste could be recycled or composted, but the largest nation in the UK, England, appears to be reusing only 17.7%.

We’ve found some articles from BBC correspondents that provide a snapshot of how the UK’s European neighbours and other countries approach recycling of everyday rubbish.

Todays country is: SWITZERLAND: Imogen Foulkes investigates.

Switzerland is proud of its recycling efforts, and with good reason. Glass and paper are just some of the things the average Swiss refuses to simply throw away.

There are bottle banks at every supermarket, with separate slots for clear, green and brown glass. Every town has a free paper collection once a month, and that does not mean just old newspapers; most people recycle everything made of cardboard or paper, from cereal packets to old telephone bills.

Then there is green waste. If you have a garden, all the trimmings can be put out on the street (neatly bundled of course) every two weeks, and they will be collected.

Aluminium and tin can be taken to local depots, batteries handed over at the supermarket, and old oil or other chemicals deposited at special sites.

Plastic PET bottles are the most common drinks containers in Switzerland, and 80% of them are recycled – far higher than the European average of 20 to 40%.

But the Swiss do not recycle just because they care about the environment. There is a strong financial incentive. Recycling is free, but in most parts of Switzerland throwing away rubbish costs money – each rubbish bag has to have a sticker on it, and each sticker costs at least one euro (60 pence).

So the less you throw out, the less you pay. No sticker? Then the rubbish will be left outside your house to rot.

The final part of the BuilderScrap.com Draft Strategy for Sustainable Construction.

There were no consultation questions relating specifically to innovation, however, several comments were made by respondents regarding the Innovation chapter and these are summarised below:

1. The main points made on innovation were:

Support for R&D or Knowledge Transfer Some suggested that sustainable construction might not act as a direct driver for change within the industry since its economic benefits might be long-term or hidden. The industry was unlikely to fund research into sustainability or sustainable construction on its own; Government support and / or additional fiscal incentives for R&D might be needed. Some attached importance to the testing, demonstration and independent third party certification of new products or services. Greater certainty on funding streams for developers and end-users would assist product development.

Innovation Measurement The consultation document suggested using the BERR Community Innovation Survey to track a target of increasing the numbers of “innovation active” companies in the sector. Respondents felt that some work was needed to clarify “innovation active” in the context of the sector and develop challenging benchmarks and targets recognised and
accepted by the industry.

Learning from overseas Some respondents said the UK construction industry could benefit from greater awareness of overseas experience.

Regulation and standards Some suggested that Building Regulations should aim to be more outcome based and non-prescriptive to assist innovation.

Thanks for reading.

This weeks first post from BuilderScrap.com.

Q: What can you do to implement a whole life approach to sustainability in your business?

1. Most respondents were willing to develop a whole life approach, life tools and databases in their business.

2. Some said they would promote a whole life approach among design teams rather than `lowest cost’, e.g. through conferences, training, workshops and publications.

3. Other suggestions included finding end-of-life applications for products; improving robustness of materials; introducing environmental management systems; carrying out life cycle assessments; and carbon foot-printing of business activities.

The final of this weeks BuilderScrap.com post on the Sustainable Construction Draft.

Q: Do you agree that the targets and milestones proposed for Materials will deliver improved resource efficiency with reduced environmental and societal impacts, and are sufficiently ambitious? If not, then please propose alternative targets.

1. Most of the respondents who answered the question thought the targets were reasonable, though some thought they might be very difficult to achieve by 2010. Some questioned whether the targets would drive improvement in performance.

2. Some respondents said that if the targets were adopted, a mechanism should be introduced to monitor performance, taking account of ongoing research on sustainability of materials. Phased implementation and shorter-term milestones were also suggested as a way of making the targets more achievable and effective.

3. A number of respondents suggested that the targets should be consistent with a forthcoming European standard on Environmental Product Declarations developed within CEN/TC 350.

4. Some advocated incentives for manufacturers and developers to create a stronger market demand for more sustainable products.

5. Some respondents expressed the need for an independent tool or certification scheme to rate the sustainability of all products and enable direct comparisons across the sector. Some suggested there was a need for specification guides and sustainable toolkit templates.

6. Other suggestions included: a target for recycled content; more widespread use of Life Cycle Assessments; and the need to support SMEs.

Todays BuilderScrap.com question for the draft proposal. What do you guys think?

Q: New measures to stimulate action from companies to improve resource efficiency are proposed. Please prioritise these proposals and identify quick win opportunities with high impact.

1. There was a broad level of support for measures proposed. Many respondents ranked all five measures in order while others highlighted those to which they attached particular importance. The results are set out in the table below (NB: as details have been added from those who did not rank all responses, rows do not necessarily add up to the same figure).

Numbers of respondents     1st     2nd   3rd    4th      5th

Programme for
smaller contractors                2       0         2        2        16

Halve amount of
construction waste at             3       0          7        9         3
site level by 2015

Manufacturers to
consider lifecycle of                4       8          6        4         0
Products

Designers/architects
to consider waste                   14      8          3        0         0
minimisation

Contractors and
Subcontractors to
reduce, reuse,                         6       9          4         4         1
recycle

2. Some of those who did not rank the measures commented that they were interlinking proposals which would all contribute to waste minimisation but that there was no single “silver bullet”. Some argued that more comprehensive data on waste, waste streams and recycled content material were necessary to underpin a successful waste action plan.

3. On design, there were various comments on the need for standard sizes, greater focus on off-site construction and/or the adoption of lean standards. A number of respondents argued for an extension of producer responsibility, particularly with regard to packaging, so that products could be considered over their life cycle. The importance of full life cycle assessments was highlighted. Others suggested that voluntary sectoral agreements could help deliver targets.

4. Other ideas included broadening the scope of codes of best practice to include more information on waste; greater use of WRAP processes; and greater education across the supply chain, possibly through resource programmes.

This weeks first instalment of the BuilderScrap sustainable construction draft responses…Enjoy!

Q: One aim of the proposal would be to create an integrated approach to maintain and where possible enhance biodiversity as a result of construction sector activity. Please say what you think would be helpful to companies in the construction sector to support the aims of maintaining and enhancing biodiversity.

1. One third of those who responded to this question cited the important role of the planning system in ensuring that biodiversity was taken into account in new developments. Better use might be made of the Planning Gain Supplement – or of Supplementary Planning Guidance – in implementing green infrastructure initiatives.

2. Just over a quarter of respondents identified the need for raising awareness of biodiversity issues and the role of training throughout the supply chain to improve understanding of how individual projects could contribute to biodiversity and the creation of public green space.

3. Just under a quarter of respondents cited the need for a simple guide, widely available, on biodiversity and for a list of quick wins on how to improve and protect biodiversity on projects. Many commented that there were already several relevant regulatory and good practice measures and requirements (e.g. Environmental Assessments, such as BREEAM and Biodiversity Action Plans) which might be included in the Strategy.

4. Some suggested that environmental assessment methodologies, such as BREEAM, could serve to enhance and measure biodiversity on sites. These tools could also be developed to provide credit for site-wide ecological enhancement. Environmental Management Plans such as BREEAM and Biodiversity Action Plans were existing mechanisms for helping the construction industry engage more effectively with conservation and biodiversity issues.

5. Some respondents suggested the Strategy should acknowledge the importance of a green infrastructure in delivering a range of social, environmental and economic benefits. Attenuating storm water run-off through the use of green roofs and green space was, for instance, seen as an important component of sustainable communities. To realise its full potential, considerations about the green infrastructure needed to be taken into account in development proposals from the outset.

6. Many respondents welcomed the proposal to convene a construction and building materials industry workshop. A result of this workshop might be a Draft Strategy for Sustainable Construction Chapter Title: Biodiversity set of guidance papers for the industry developed in partnership with a range of organisations such as local water authorities, Natural England, the Environment Agency, wildlife Trusts, NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisations), the Town and Country Planning Association, CIRIA (Construction Industry Research and Information Association), BSRIA, the Building Research Establishment, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and English Heritage.

7. Some respondents favoured a stronger emphasis on the natural environment in the targets for sustainable construction. Possible targets could be impacts on biodiversity which were neutral or enhancing (e.g. in terms of species and habitats), which could be measured through BREEAM or CEEQUAL (Civil Engineering Environmental Quality and Assessment Scheme).

8. Other suggested possibilities included:

The creation of habitat maps for particular species or wildlife in the area around a site;

Encouraging consultants and developers to increase habitat links in the area as a means of enhancing the biodiversity of the site;

Options to contribute to biodiversity projects offsite; and

The development of Site Biodiversity Action Plans for projects over a certain value (say £1m).

Respondents also pointed out that initial site surveys of biodiversity could be time-sensitive (subject to seasonal variations) and delay development considerably..