• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us|
• Jobs

Targets in the New Zealand Waste Strategy: 2006 Review of Progress

Foreword

Executive Summary

1 Background

2 Overview of progress in implementing the Strategy

3 Review of Progress against Targets

4 Conclusions

5 Recommendations

Appendix 1: Targets in the New Zealand Waste Strategy

References

Glossary

2 Overview of progress in implementing the Strategy

2.1 Introduction

A review of progress against targets in the New Zealand Waste Strategy provides a snapshot of how well we are doing in relation to specific waste streams and actions. It does not necessarily reflect wider changes in waste management, waste minimisation and resource use that have occurred since the Strategy was launched. This section therefore provides a brief overview of the New Zealand waste landscape and the changes that have occurred since the introduction of the New Zealand Waste Strategy in 2002.

2.2 Waste disposal

2.2.1 Landfills

New Zealand landfill management practices are monitored through the National Landfill Review and Audit programme and the Landfill Census programme. A landfill census was carried out in 1995, 1998 and 2006. The results of the 2006 landfill census will be published later this year. However, because it presents the most up to date information available, raw data from the 2006 census is used in this report. A landfill review and audit was conducted in 2002.

These surveys show that there has been a significant improvement in the management of landfills across New Zealand. Improvements include:

• an increase in the proportion of sites with an engineered liner from 20 per cent in 2002 to 52 per cent in 2006

• improvement in leachate collection at landfill sites from 47 per cent of all sites in 2002 to 78 per cent in 2006, with some of the remaining landfills having natural outlets for leachate

• 93 per cent of landfills now measure the amount of waste being disposed of, an increase from 83 per cent in 2002.

Overall, the number of operating landfills has dropped from 115 in 2002 to 60 in 2006 (see Figure 1), and a further eight to 10 are due to close over the next 24 months. Further information on landfill management and details of previous audit information are provided in section 3.

2.2.2 Solid waste to landfill

The amount of solid waste sent to landfill in New Zealand has risen by four per cent since 2002. This is less than the GDP growth of 9.6 per cent and population growth of 5.1 per cent over the same period. Regional and local figures and trends for solid waste to landfill may differ from the annual national (average) figures and trends due to different demographic, economic and population impacts in different areas.

Figure 1 and Table 2 show the number of operating landfills from 1995 to 2006, as well as estimates for amounts of solid waste to landfill from 1983 to 2006. National figures for disposal of solid waste do not include cleanfill materials (which are generally disposed of to separate cleanfill sites), materials disposed of in so-called “construction and demolition waste landfills”, or materials disposed of to dedicated landfills associated with industrial sites or other major operations (see section 2.2.3 below).

Table 2: Number of operating landfills and tonnage of solid waste to landfill, 1983–2006

Notes:

a Figures for 1983, 1991 and 1994 are as given in the National Waste Data Report (Ministry for the Environment, 1997).

b Earlier surveys (1983, 1991 and 1994) may have used different methodologies, and the comparison between figures should therefore be considered approximate.

c The 2006 figure for the number of operating landfills is based on the best estimate at the time of writing.

2.2.3 Cleanfills

Cleanfill sites accept material that when buried will have no adverse effect on people or the environment. This includes virgin natural materials such as clay, soil and rock, as well as other inert materials such as concrete or brick, which are free of:

• combustible, putrescible, degradable or leachable components

• hazardous substances

• products or materials derived from hazardous waste treatment, hazardous waste stabilisation or hazardous waste disposal practices

• materials that may present a risk to human or animal health such as medical and veterinary waste, asbestos or radioactive substances

• liquid waste.

There is limited monitoring of cleanfills because the disposal of cleanfill material to land is classed as a permitted activity in most regional plans, meaning there is no cost recovery mechanism for monitoring these sites. Regional councils and territorial authorities have suggested that there may be over 300 cleanfills across New Zealand, although this figure is approximate, and there could be some duplication in these figures.

A further category of disposal sites are consented to accept materials similar to cleanfill material, but include a wider range. For example, such sites might accept limited construction timber, green waste, plastics and steel, depending on site-specific consent conditions. These sites account for a significant amount of waste in some areas, including Gisborne, Western Bay of Plenty, Waikato and Wellington.

In 2006 the Ministry for the Environment received a report on Waste Composition and Construction Waste Data (Waste Not Consulting, 2006). This included an analysis of the materials disposed of to cleanfill, using data provided by Christchurch, Tauranga, Western Bay of Plenty and Auckland (see Table 3).

Table 3: Tonnages to cleanfill

Notes:

a Street and Zydenbos, 2004.

b Christchurch City Council, 2006.

c Christchurch City Council, 2005.

d Tauranga and Western Bay of Plenty District Councils (in conjunction with Environment Bay of Plenty, 2001).

e Auckland Regional Council, 1995.

Based on the data in this report, it is estimated that the national volume of waste disposed to cleanfill is in the range of 0.65 to 0.91 tonnes per person per year. Based on 2005 population figures, the estimated amount of material disposed of to cleanfill in 2005 was between 2.7 and 3.7 million tonnes.

The Waste Composition and Construction Waste Data report also provides composition data for cleanfills. Figure 2 shows that cleanfill waste consists, on average, of rubble and concrete (88.8 per cent), timber (9.3 per cent), organic waste (1.6 per cent) and other materials, which include small amounts of paper, metals and rubber.

Figure 2 shows that relatively high volumes of timber are disposed of to cleanfill. This may be a concern, given that untreated timber can be processed to a beneficial end-use (such as wood chips), and treated timber contains chemicals that require careful disposal, which is unlikely to be provided at cleanfills. Because composition data has a high margin of error, this is worth investigating further.

2.2.4 Recovered materials

A variety of programmes throughout New Zealand divert materials from landfill and cleanfill. These range from recycling and composting services offered by territorial authorities, to business-led product stewardship initiatives. Some of these programmes provide information on the types and volumes of materials diverted, although many are privately operated and therefore protect data due to its commercial sensitivity.

Estimated amounts diverted from landfill and cleanfill are given in Table 4, based on various data sources. These figures suggest that 2.4 million tonnes of material is diverted from landfill annually, although this is unlikely to include materials diverted between private sector entities (ie, in cases where local authorities are not involved in the diversion).

Table 4: Estimates of materials diverted from landfill and cleanfill (tonnes)

It is much harder to monitor and estimate the likely volumes of waste materials that are either re-used or eliminated altogether via product redesign. If a product is redesigned to eliminate waste, then the impact of this may only be noticed in long-term waste trends (ie, tonnage of waste to landfill), or in overall trends in the tonnage of certain product types, such as electronic equipment. This highlights the problem of defining waste when it comes to measuring diversion. One alternative is to focus on measuring materials that are disposed of to landfill but could potentially be diverted, and design policies to address these waste streams.

2.2.5 Waste composition

The Solid Waste Analysis Programme provides snapshot data on the composition of solid waste in New Zealand. The programme is based on information collected from four indicator sites around New Zealand:

• Silverstream Landfill (Hutt City Council)

• Green Island Landfill (Dunedin City Council)

• Matamata Transfer Station (Matamata Piako District Council)

• Kaikoura Landfill (Innovative Waste Kaikoura / Kaikoura District Council).

Begun in 2002, the objective of the Solid Waste Analysis Programme was to establish generic baseline waste composition data for New Zealand and use it to predict waste composition for the next two years. This data can help to identify priority waste streams and feeds in to the development of national-level waste policy priorities.

Figure 3 provides details of the composition of waste to landfill for 2004. As the figure shows, a significant proportion of waste to landfill in New Zealand is either compostable or reusable. This includes paper, plastics and metals, which have been identified as priority areas for diversion. Construction-related materials, such as rubble, concrete and timber, also make up a significant proportion of waste to landfill.

Figure 3 also shows that a large proportion of waste to landfills is made up of potentially hazardous materials. This figure has increased over time, mainly due to improvements in the identification of hazardous materials. As identification further improves, this figure is likely to grow, but so too will the volumes of hazardous wastes appropriately managed once they have been identified.

Note that the Solid Waste Analysis Protocol Programme did not consider waste disposed to cleanfill, construction and demolition waste landfill sites, or dedicated industrial waste landfills.

2.3 Product stewardship schemes

Voluntary product stewardship schemes have an increasing effect on waste minimisation, both at source (through redesign) and at disposal (though re-use and recycling). Voluntary product stewardship schemes in New Zealand are generally industry-led, with central and local government support. In general, this enhances the success of the scheme because buy-in from key participants is high. Through a voluntary scheme, industry sets its own targets and has the opportunity to review the scheme if they are over-achieving their targets, or are having difficulties that were not previously identified.

One concern often cited by participants in voluntary schemes is that non-participants gain cost advantages in the market place by continuing with old, wasteful practices at a lesser cost, thereby undercutting those who have made a commitment to more sustainable waste practices.

The New Zealand Packaging Accord, signed in 2004, is a successful industry-led, voluntary product stewardship scheme. The Accord brings together recycling operators and representatives from the paper, plastic, glass, steel and aluminium materials sectors in partnership with local and central government in order to increase the sustainability of packaging in New Zealand. Good progress has been made over the two years since the Accord was signed, with each sector implementing a sector-specific action plan to reduce packaging and increase recycling rates.

Packaging comprises 12 per cent of our total waste by weight, and approximately 22% of household waste to landfill. Figure 4 shows that the amount of packaging per person disposed of to landfill is declining, while the amount of recycling is increasing. This demonstrates that key sectors are getting better at minimisation and recovery of packaging. However, reflecting increased economic growth and associated increased levels of consumption, consumption of packaging by New Zealanders continues to grow per capita. This is a continuing challenge for the parties to the Accord.

2.4 Central government action

A primary focus of central government in implementing the New Zealand Waste Strategy has been to promote action at all levels to achieve the goals of the Strategy. A further focus has been the development of waste policy and legislation to support the longer-term strategic direction for waste management and minimisation outlined in the Strategy. Good progress has been made in this respect, especially in relation to national-level policies and guidance for priority waste streams.

The key policy actions in the Strategy identified for central government fall under four programme areas:

• institutions and legislation

• waste reduction and materials efficiency

• information and communication

• performance standards and guidelines.

Table 5 provides a summary of progress made against these Strategy actions.

Table 5: Progress against Strategy actions (central government)

Central government has taken action to facilitate waste minimisation in the assets it manages through the Govt³ programme. This programme, which helps 47 central government agencies undertake sustainable initiatives, includes a recycling and waste minimisation component (its other core focus areas are buildings, transport, and office consumables and equipment).

The Govt³ programme offers its members practical tools, information on best practice, and networking opportunities with other agencies that have undertaken successful waste minimisation initiatives.

2.5 Local government action

Local government has made progress in the area of waste minimisation and management. Ninety-seven per cent of New Zealanders now have access to territorial authorities’ household recycling facilities, and 70 per cent of territorial authorities provide green waste composting facilities. Although there is some similarity of services across the country in terms of the types of materials collected, there are still differences in the types of services provided. These often depend on local infrastructure and markets.

Significant progress has been made in the development and implementation of waste management plans, as required under the Local Government Act 2002. Figure 5 shows the percentage of territorial authorities with waste management plans and how this has increased significantly from 46 per cent in 2002 to 82 per cent in 2005. The increase reflects the growing importance of waste management and minimisation at the local level.

Collectively, through community recycling collection, territorial authorities diverted an estimated 329,300 tonnes of recycling (paper, plastic, card, glass, steel and aluminium) from landfill in 2005. Figure 6 shows the tonnage collected by region in 2005. Of the 97 per cent of New Zealanders who have access to recycling services, 0.083 tonnes of waste per person was diverted to recycling per year. This does vary between regions, however, ranging from 0.14 tonnes to 0.03 tonnes per person per year. As territorial authorities improve their services and increase household participation in recycling schemes, this amount is anticipated to increase.

Source: Survey of territorial authorities, November 2006

Figures for recycled material diverted from landfill can also be assessed in terms of the relative volumes collected in metropolitan, urban and rural areas (Figure 7). Metropolitan areas count for over 50 per cent of the New Zealand population, so it is natural that the totals for metropolitan recycling are higher than for other areas. Further details on differences in waste management between metropolitan, urban and rural areas can be found in section 3.

Councils also show leadership in waste management within their own operations: 72 per cent of councils implement recycling systems in their own council buildings.

2.6 Waste industry action

The waste industry in New Zealand has changed substantially since the Strategy was developed in 2002. There has been a shift away from small, local and publicly owned landfills to larger regional landfills that are privately owned, or, in the case of the Kate Valley and Whitford Landfills (Canterbury and Auckland respectively), represent public-private partnerships.

As noted earlier in this section, the number of operating landfills has reduced dramatically from 115 in 2002 to 60 in 2006, and they tend to be located further away from urban areas. As a result, it is not unusual for residual waste to be transported in excess of 100 kilometres before final disposal. A network of transfer stations, both public and privately owned, has been established to service the landfills and offer an increased range of waste services.

Some territorial authorities offer recycling collection services to business, but a growing number of businesses have contracted separate collection systems that are tailored to their specific needs. These are primarily provided by private waste and recycling companies. Some large waste companies now provide nationwide (or close to nationwide) services to business, with the majority of metropolitan areas receiving recycling services for paper, cardboard, plastic wrap, plastic and glass, amongst others.

This increase in both geographical coverage and type of service offered to business is evidence of the waste industry evolving to meet greater market demand for recycling services. Some larger companies have significantly improved their waste management and minimisation activities because of the increasing cost of landfill disposal and the services now provided by the larger waste companies.

Investment in resource recovery is also starting to grow. This is supported through direct investment in private infrastructure, or through territorial authority contracts. Many territorial authorities use a “design, build and implement” framework and have extended the length of contracts to support the level of investment needed. Examples of this include the development of the Living Earth composting facilities in Wellington, and the new 3-2-1 Zero Waste system in Timaru, which involves the design, building and operation of a new materials recovery facility. In Palmerston North the same approach has been taken, but in the form of a partnership between the waste and recycling contractor and the territorial authority.