Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published January 2007

Potential for Local “Bring Sites” to Reduce Householder Recycling Mileage

Abstract

Using a significant database of origin postcodes, a study was designed to estimate the current annual mileage associated with visitor trips to household waste recycling centers (HWRCs)—known as manned recycling drop-off centers in the United States—and to identify how this mileage could be reduced if a series of “bring sites” (unmanned recycling drop-off centers) in the community were enhanced to take green garden waste. The total annual distance driven by approximately 4,677,000 visitors to the 26 HWRCs in Hampshire, United Kingdom, is estimated to be 40 million kilometers (assuming that 60% of visitors made dedicated trips), costing approximately £14 million (£1 = $1.896 in April 2005 U.S. dollars) in private transport and emitting approximately 1,873 tonnes of CO2 (as carbon) into the atmosphere. Providing a network of 104 bring sites capable of accepting green waste, in addition to the existing facilities provided by the 26 HWRCs, could save approximately 8.5 million kilometers (21%) of vehicle travel per annum (£3 million in visitor transport costs and approximately 369 tonnes of CO2 as carbon). Such a scheme would require a fleet of approximately 78 refuse collection vehicles at an annual cost to the scheme provider of slightly more than £1.5 million. If HWRCs become a major channel for the return and reprocessing of waste electrical and electronic equipment and some newly classified hazardous waste items, space at existing sites could become an issue. More local consolidation of certain waste categories (e.g., green waste) would enable HWRCs to focus their activities better.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Network Recycling. Trade Waste Input into Civic Amenity Sites. 2002. www.networkrecycling.co.uk/products/research/tradewaste/index.html. Accessed Nov. 2, 2004.
2. Strategy Unit. Waste Not, Want Not: A Strategy for Tackling the Waste Problem in England. 2002. www.number-10.gov.uk/su/waste/report/downloads/wastenot.pdf. Accessed Nov. 24, 2004.
3. Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive. 2002/96/EC. europa.eu.int/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_037/l_03720030213en00240038.pdf. Accessed Oct. 10, 2005.
4. Restriction of Certain Hazardous Substances Directive. 2002/95/EC. europa.eu.int/eurlex/pri/en/oj/dat/2003/l_037/l_03720030213en00190023.pdf. Accessed Oct. 6, 2005.
5. Coggins P. C. Cooper A. D. and Cole J. Characteristics for Recycling at Civic Amenity Sites: Trade Waste at Civic Amenity Sites. Civic Amenity Waste Disposal Project, Luton College of Higher Education, Ref. 2, Luton, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom, 1986, p. 16.
6. Speirs D. and Tucker P. A Profile of Recyclers Making Special Trips to Recycle. Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 62, 2001, pp. 201–220.
7. MEL. Project Integra Kerbside and Household Waste Recycling Analysis and Questionnaire Survey Results. Hampshire County Council, Castle, Winchester, Hampshire, United Kingdom, 1999.
8. Network Recycling. The National Assessment of Civic Amenity Sites. Maximising Recycling at Civic Amenity Sites. 2004. www.networkrecycling.co.uk/products/research/tradewaste/nacas-report/nacas_chapter2.pdf. Accessed Nov. 2, 2004.
9. Butler J. and Hooper P. Optimising Recycling Effort: An Evaluation of Local Authority PCW Recycling Initiatives. Sustainable Development, Vol. 7, 1999, pp. 35–46.
10. Woodard R. Bench M. Harder M. K. and Stantzos N. The Optimisation of Household Waste Recycling Centres for Increased Recycling—a Case Study in Sussex, UK. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Vol. 43, No. 1 2004, pp. 75–93.
11. Williams I. D. and Taylor C. Maximising Household Waste Recycling at Civic Amenity Sites in Lancashire, England. Waste Management, Vol. 24, No. 9 2004, pp. 861–874.
12. Coggins P. C. Cooper A. D. and Brown R. Public Awareness and Use: Civic Amenity Sites & Recycling Centres. Report for the Department of the Environment. Civic Amenity Waste Disposal Project & The Recycling Evaluation Consortium, Luton College, of Higher Education, Luton, Bedfordshire, United Kingdom, 1991.
13. Welsh Assembly Government. The Composition of Municipal Solid Waste in Wales. Report produced for the Welsh Assembly Government. AEA Technology, Harwell, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom, 2003.
14. Audit Commission. Waste Matters—Good Practice in Waste Management. ISBN 186240 048 2, London, 1997.
15. The Automobile Association Limited. Petrol Car Running Costs: Basic Guide for 2005. www.theaa.com/allaboutcars/advice/advice_rcosts_petrol_table.jsp. Accessed Jan. 12, 2006.
16. Babtie J. Project Integra. Maximising Collection Efficiency. Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Waste Implementation Programme Local Authority Support Unit, Exeter, United Kingdom, 2005.
17. National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory. UK Emissions Factor Database. www.naei.org.uk/datachunk.php?f_datachunk_id=7. Accessed Jan. 12, 2006.
18. Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Municipal Waste Management Survey 2003/2004. 2005. www.defra.gov.uk/environment/statistics/wastats/mwb0304/wbch01.htm. Accessed Oct. 5, 2005.
19. Hogg D. and Hummel J. The Legislative Driven Economic Framework Promoting MSW Recycling in the UK. Final report for the National Resource and Waste Forum, Eunomia Research & Consulting Ltd, Bristol, United Kingdom, 2002.
20. Barton A. Green Waste Scheme Gets Off the Ground. Press Release 9034. London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, 2005. www.barking-dagenham.gov.uk/2-press-release/press-release-menu.cfm?item_code=1991. Accessed Feb. 8, 2006.
21. Health and Safety Executive. Waste Industry Health and Safety: Reducing the Risk. 2005. www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg359.pdf. Accessed Oct. 4, 2005.
22. Health and Safety Executive. Operating Civic Amenity Sites Safely. 2005. www.hse.gov.uk/waste/amenitysites.htm. Accessed Oct. 4, 2005.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published: January 2007
Issue published: January 2007

Rights and permissions

© 2007 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Tom Cherrett
Transportation Research Group, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom.
Adrian Hickford
Transportation Research Group, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom.
Sarah Maynard
Transportation Research Group, School of Civil Engineering and the Environment, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom.

Notes

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 21

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 4

  1. A multi-period model for reorganising urban household waste recycling ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. A spatial interaction model for the representation of user access to h...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  3. Drivers for the fly-tipping of household bulky waste in England
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  4. Use of mapping with routing and scheduling to gauge the merits of loca...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub