Given our rapid depletion of resources, especially raw materials, and Australia’s ever-increasing waste creation, it’s time to ask: what are the best ways to encourage resource recovery and recycling to get to “zero waste”?
South Australia’s money-back container recycling scheme is a success story, with bottle-recycling rates the highest in the country. But the question is whether we achieve zero waste through recycling alone.
Our research says: no. The focus needs to be on avoiding waste creation in the first place. We have to re-think the way we design and construct products and buildings to make it easier to re-use or disassemble them at the end of their life.
A good example of transformation in the construction sector is the take up of prefabrication, with machining off site. This allows for almost zero-waste production of building components, easy retrieval of materials and components, and building elements that are easy to re-use when the building is being demolished.
How do we stop producing waste?
From a purely economic point of view, producing waste is not a good move as it is a waste of materials paid for. More waste only suits a group of suppliers who make money out of higher than necessary consumption and repeat customers. In a future economic model, these suppliers will need to look for a better business model.
Unfortunately, reversing the existing, wasteful business systems and manufacturing practices isn’t a fast, easy or cheap process. If we can begin at the beginning, and design waste out of the picture, we can recover not only the final product, but also the energy, materials and time embodied in the product or building.
Today, zero waste is the most discussed concept for municipal solid waste management systems. Working towards zero waste has become a worldwide movement that changes the way we design, construct, operate, maintain, disassemble and recycle products, buildings and cities. Simply put, zero waste means no unnecessary and unwanted waste from a product – at any stage of its life-cycle.
Zero waste is radical in its ramifications, and it requires more than a top-down, government-imposed approach. To be successful, it needs to be embraced and implemented by citizens and community groups, business and industry.
We need to see the big picture and face the real problem. We cannot have infinite growth and consumption on a planet with finite resources.
Annie Leonard’s The story of stuff has a powerful message about consumerism and waste, while Paul Hawken and Michael Braungart are exploring zero waste theory and behaviour change, trying to alter our throwaway society.
Waste management expert Paul Connett notes that “during the 20th century, the focus was on waste management and how to get rid of waste efficiently and with minimal damage to our health and the environment. The 21st century focus needs to be on resource management and sustainability for future generations. Therefore the real problem is fighting everyone’s over consumption”.
Recycling helps, but only if people want to recycle
But instead of talking about consumption, the media mostly reports recycling rates; simplistic stories that don’t challenge readers to truly rethink their consumption and waste creation.
For instance, Fairfax Media reported on 14 February 2012 that recycling isn’t going as well as previously thought. Participation in bottle recycling, in particular, is lower than anticipated (the official Australian beverage container recycling rate is 52%, whereas environmental groups dispute it and put this figure at 38%).
There has been ongoing piecemeal debate, especially in Victoria, about whether a cash-back recycling scheme for bottles would help. (Bottling companies pragmatically suggest “more bins” would actually do more to improve recycling rates). This is all understandable and of some help, but fails to address the true scale and importance of the issue.
What motivates people to recycle is now one of the core waste management research concerns. A quick look at recycling issues in South Australia provides further insight.
Container deposit legislation (CDL) is one of the most important policies in South Australia’s recycling success story. It was introduced in 1977.
Targets must be quantified and there must be a way to check they’re being met. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the rate of recycling cans and bottles was 80.4% in the 2009-2010 financial year. To raise this rate, the bottle refund doubled to 10 cents in 2008; overall, recycling has increased more than 10% since. From January 2012, the Northern Territory has adopted the SA model for beverage container recycling.
New research by our centre on how to encourage recycling reveals that people are motivated to recycle for many reasons: personal, social, economic or environmental benefits. People are positively motivated by direct economic benefits so the South Australian refund has increased over time.
However, other factors, such as availability of recycling facilities (such as recycling bins and centres), policies and regulations (landfill bans, landfilling levies) and socio-cultural factors (behavioural change) are also significant contributors to achieving zero waste through recycling.
Zero waste is possible: here’s how
Today, it is technologically possible to build a zero-waste and zero-carbon emission city. The question is: are we willing to do so? We would have to design and manage products and processes to systematically avoid and eliminate the volume of waste and materials. This means decoupling the rise in consumption and growth from an increase in material use, and developing new thinking and technology, for the stages from design, to production, to recovery.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) legislation is about to be passed in Australia. It will require producers to be responsible for their products’ entire lifecycle (beyond the selling date), and will include take-back agreements and changes to the way consumer products can be recycled.
EPR is one of the prime strategies for improving recycling rates. In every stage of product design, marketing, retail and end-of-life management systems, producers can contribute and improve overall recycling rates through EPR. Right from the outset, industry will have to incorporate a new ethic: of clean production, responsible packaging and designing for zero waste principles.
Adelaide and Canberra achieve Australia’s highest rates of diversion from landfill: over 70%. What must be asked is whether 100% (or close to) recycling is possible?
It is possible if we stop producing non-recyclable products, and if we recycle every single product we consume. Products are often non-recyclable if the are a composite of various materials, for instance melted together materials on electric circuits in computers and copiers. This makes the entire device difficult and economically unattractive to repair or recycle (compared to the purchase of a new product).
We need to act as an environmentally responsible community rather than a hyper-consumptive society. Container deposit legislation and personal behavioural changes in recycling systems can be useful tools for achieving zero waste.
But there is also a great need for interdisciplinary research into achieving zero waste, behaviour change and better industrial design.
Join the conversation
Comments (10)
Kate Neely
Research Student (logged in via email @deakin.edu.au)
Australia has so far to go to catch up with recyling and end-of-life policy in other countries. One of the main drivers may be how cheap/easy it is for us to dispose of "waste". Higher cost to landfill would see changes in use and resuse patterns. Unfortunately it would also see an increase in illegal dumping. I would support a move towards more single material, recyclable components (as per the vehicle industry).
tamara dimattina
Communicator (logged in via email @trumpetpr.com.au)
we run Buy Nothing New Month, www.buynothingnew.com.au
It's a global campaign for collective conscientious consumption.
Thought you might be interested to check it out.
Sam Lynch
Mattress Recycling (logged in via email @gmail.com)
Great article. I am from Melbourne Australia and the company I work for specializes in mattress disposal and recycling in melbourne. I have seen 700 cubic meters of mattresses turned into 30 cubic meters of fabric and everything else is reused: http://mattressdisposalmelbourne.shutterfly.com/
Eclipse Now
Manager of design firm (logged in via email @optusnet.com.au)
I love this article because it mentions how we have:-
* economic pressure for better design, as waste costs money
* cultural pressures for less waste
* new technologies for processing the waste we do have.
I also enjoyed the ABC Catalyst piece on recycling rebar concrete. Giant concrete crunchers smash up the concrete and extract the steel reinforcing grids sunk into them. Now that's recycling!
Lastly, processing landfill itself, even the old stuff, is becoming affordable with Plasma Burner…
show full comment
Bernie Masters
environmental consultant (logged in via email @iinet.net.au)
It's difficult to argue against the desirable need to reduce and preferably eliminate waste, but two issues arise with this article. The first is the spurious claim that "our rapid depletion of resources, especially raw materials" is a driver for producing less waste. The reality is that virtually no material resources are depleting at such a rate that we are likely to face shortages in the foreseeable future. If you disagree with this statement, please list 4 or 5 materials which are becoming seriously…
show full comment
Atiq Zaman
(PhD Scholar at University of South Australia)
Thank you very much for reading our article. I am glad to have your valuable comments too. In your comments, you have pointed out two thinks which I am trying to answer here. You disagree with our view on the depletion of natural resources. One study has been conducted by Chris Clugston to analyse non-renewable resources (NNRs) scarcity in the near future [51]. The study shows that 88% of NNRs were experienced global scarcity during the period 2000–2008. Approximately 23 NNRs will likely be experiencing…
show full comment
Bernie Masters
environmental consultant (logged in via email @iinet.net.au)
Atiq, thanks for the reply. I'm going to have to disagree with you about the imminent depletion of the listed non-renewable natural resources. I've been a geologist for some 41 years and, in that time, there have been frequent temporary shortages of specific commodities, as a consequence of which the price has gone up and people have found new deposits that are then readily exploitable at the higher prices, after which the commodity prices generally come down again. I simply don't believe the predictions…
show full comment
Michel Syna Rahme
(logged in via email @hotmail.com)
Bloody Brilliant Article!
But sorry Fairfax are on my boycott list. If the journalists that work for Fairfax are prepared to remain subservient instead of defending their moral and professional obligation as journalists, and not stand up for their independence - FAIRFAX IS OUT!!!!!!!! So your quoting of Fairfax does nothing for me! Nothing!
I pay $3000 dollars a year Rates - $3000 - to the Whitsunday Shire council for my shack on 2 and half acres. I have no town water and no town sewage. So can someone please ask the Whitsunday Shire Council, or tell me WHY for $3000 THEY DO NOT even PROVIDE RECYCLING BIN COLLECTION??????? Living in semi rural and remote areas is not an excuse for Councils to charge the hell out of us and just chuck all our rubbish in land fill - "She'll be right Mate! ... NO "She won't be right mate!" ---- WE WANT RECYCLING BIN COLLECTION IN THE WHITSUNDAYS
Bernie Masters
environmental consultant (logged in via email @iinet.net.au)
Michel: have you thought about standing for council or starting a local progress association to tackle these issues as a group of disgruntled ratepayers rather than as a lone voice?
Sabiha Sultana
Student (logged in via email @yahoo.com)
Wao ! Great article! I support this article from different point of view.