View
1
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Waste AssessmentSouth Taranaki District Council
2018
Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1 Purpose of this Waste Assessment . . . . . . . . . 1
1.2 LegislativeFramework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Structure of this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.4 The Waste Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.5 Completness and Accuracy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2 TheWasteSituation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1 SolidWasteFramework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.1WasteMinimisationAct2008 . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.2 NZ Waste Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.3 Health Act 1956 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.1.4LocalGovernmentAct1974and2002 . . 17
2.1.5OtherLegislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2 Regional and Local Strategic Context. . . . . . . . 17
2.2.1 Regional Waste Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.2TaranakiRegionalWasteMinimisation . EducationStrategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.3 Long Term Plan (and Annual Plan) . . . . . 18
2.2.4Bylaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.5 Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3 Existingwasteinfrastructureandservices . . . 19
2.3.1Council-ProvidedServicesand Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.2CommercialandNot-For-ProfitServices 34
2.4 CurrentWasteQuantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
2.4.1LandfillWaste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.4.2TransferStationWaste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.4.3KerbsideWasteQuantities . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.5 WasteGenerationperCapita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.6CompositionofWaste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.6.1 SWAP Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
2.6.2OtherSourcesofInformation . . . . . . . . . 64
2.6.3DiversionPotential. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
2.7 DivertedMaterials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2.7.1Council-ProvidedServices . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
2.7.2CommercialandInformalServices . . . . 76
2.8 AssessmentofSouthTaranakiServices . . . . . . 83
2.8.1MaterialsRecoveryFacility . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.8.2KerbsideService . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
2.8.3TransferStations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
2.8.4FutureProjectionWasteQuantities . . . . 110
3 Where Do We Want to Be? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
3.1 ReviewoftheexistingWMMPtargets . . . . . . 113
3.2 Stakeholders’Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
3.3 StrategicDirection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
3.4 Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
3.5 Gap Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.5.1 Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.5.2Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
3.5.3 Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
4 How Are we Going to Get There? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.1 StatementofOptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
4.2 Statement of Proposals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
4.3 TheoreticImpactofOptionsonForecast . . . . 157
4.4 Council’sIntendedRoleinMeetingtheForecast Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
4.4.1StatutoryObligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
4.4.2OverallStrategicDirectionandRole. . . . 164
4.5 MedicalOfficerofHealthStatement . . . . . . . . 165
4.6 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
4.7 InitialsandAcronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
5 Appendix 1: Taranaki Regional Waste Modelling Summary Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3
Figure1- ToolkitforManagingandMinimisingWastein NewZealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure2- WasteHierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Figure3- LocalWastePolicyDocumentRelationships . . . . 12
Figure4- MassflowdiagramforSouthTaranaki2015/16 26
Figure5- WasteDisposedoftotheLandfillbetween 1996/97and2015/16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Figure6- TonnageofWasteDisposedattheSouthTaranaki TransferStations2010-2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Figure7- ComparisonofWasteActivitySourceforthe ThreeMainTransferStationsinTaranaki. . . . . . . 31
Figure8- CompositionofWasteDisposedofattheLandfill 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Figure9- ComparisonofLandfillCompositionby Tonnage between2010and2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Figure10- CompositionofWasteattheHaweraTransfer Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34Figure11- ComparisonofWasteCompositionbyActivity Source. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Figure12- CompositionofSTDCKerbsideBins General Waste Contents2016/17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Figure13- Comparisonofkerbsiderefusebetween NPDC, SDC and STDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Figure14- BreakdownofKerbsideOrganicWaste CompositionperTA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure15- Quantitiesoforganicwastetypeperbag/bin betweendistricts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Figure16- ProportionofWastetoLandfillIdentifiedas Divertable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Figure17- AnnualRecyclingTonnagefortheSouthTaranaki DistrictKerbsideCollectionService . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure18- CompositionofKerbsideBinMixedRecycling Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Figure19- AnnualGreenwasteTonnageforSouth Taranaki DistrictVoluntaryKerbsideCollection . . . . . . . . . 42
Figure20- AnnualTonnageofRecyclingfromSTDCTransfer Stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure21- AnnualTonnageofGreenwastefromSTDC TransferStations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Figure22- Waste,GreenwasteandRecyclingfromSTDC TransferStations2011/16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Figure23- AnnualTonnageofFarmPlasticRecycled within theRegionbyPlasback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Figure24- ContaminationattheMRFbetweenJune2015 andJune2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Figure25- ComparisonofPresentationRatesbetween NPDC, SDC and STDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Figure26- ComparisonoftheAverageWeightper Container forEachWasteStreambetween NPDC, SDC and STDC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Figure27- PresentationRatefortheCouncilGreenwaste VoluntaryKerbsideCollectionService . . . . . . . . . 53
Figure28- AverageWeightperContainerfortheGreenwaste Stream . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Figure29- AnnualGreenwasteTonnageforSouth Taranaki VoluntaryKerbsideCollection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure30- AnnualNumbersofVisitstoCouncilTransfer Stations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Figure31- TrendinPricesofUnitsintheNZETSfrom2011 58
Figure32- ForecastWasteGenerationbyWaste Stream to the TaranakiRegionalLandfill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Figure33- STDCWasteProjectionforKerbsideCollections 61
Figure34- STDCWasteProjectionsforTransferStations . . . 62
Figure35- CommercialandIndustrialSectorWorkshop Collated Response of Desired Changes . . . . . . . . 64
Figure36- HighLevelscenarios-QuantityofWaste Landfilled(2020) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Figure37- Scenarios-QuantityofWasteLandfilledvs Total System Cost. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
TABLE OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLESTable 1 - Summary of Waste Infrastructure and ServicesinTaranaki . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Table2- TaranakiKerbsideCollectionService . . . . . . . . . . 21
Table3- LandfillOverallWastebyActivityType . . . . . . . . 28
Table4- SourceofWastetotheLandfill-6August- 2September2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Table5- ActivitysourceofHaweratransferstation waste-14-17September2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Table 6 - STDC Kerbside Waste per Year . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Table7- WastepercapitaforeachTAwithintheregion . 32
Table8- Landfill-PotentiallyDivertableMaterialsin OverallWasteStreambyActivitySource . . . . . . 39
Table9- QuantityofResourcesDivertedintheRegion . . 47
Table10- IssuesAssociatedwithContamination Foundin theRecyclingattheMRF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Table11- VisitsandTonnagesReceivedatEachRemote
TransferStationbetween2013/14and2015/16 55
Table12- SummaryofProgressAgainst2012-17WMMP Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Table13- OptionsAnalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Table14- StatementofOptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Table15- PreferredOptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
4| |5
The Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) requiresterritorial authorities (TAs) to review and implementWaste Management and Minimisation Plans (WMMPs).The WMMPs are intended to be the guiding documents forcouncilstopromoteandachieveeffectiveandefficientwastemanagementandminimisationwithintheirDistrict.The Waste Assessment (this document) establishes the planningfoundationfortheWMMPbyprovidingbackgroundinformation.
The TAs in the Taranaki region (the Council, NPDC andSDC) are committed to collaborating regionally to achieveefficiencies and effectiveness in waste management. TheTaranaki Regional Council (TRC) hosts the Taranaki SolidWasteManagement Committee (TSWMC), onwhich eachTAhasasittingmember.Thefourcouncils,NewPlymouth(NPDC), SouthTaranaki (STDC)andStratford (SDC)districtcouncils and the TRC, contribute to funding a Waste MinimisationOfficer(WMO)whoservestheCommitteeandiscentralinimplementingtheRegionalWasteStrategyandthe WMMPs. The regionhasa single landfilland theTAshaveawardeda single contract for the residential kerbside waste andrecycling collection for the region. In continuingwith thisregionalapproachtowastemanagementandminimisation,thisWasteAssessmenthasbeendevelopedwith inputbythe three TAs. A regional Waste Assessment template has been developed and regional waste data and regionaloptionsareconsideredwhereapplicable.
1 Introduction
AsperSection51(1)oftheWMA,aWasteAssessmentmustcontain:a) a description of the collection, recycling, recovery,
treatment, and disposal services provided within theterritorial authority’s district (whether by the territorialauthorityorotherwise);and
b) a forecast of future demands for collection, recycling,recovery, treatment, and disposal services within theDistrict;and
c) a statement of options available to meet the forecastdemands of the District with an assessment of thesuitabilityofeachoption;and
d) astatementoftheterritorialauthority’sintendedroleinmeetingtheforecastdemands;and
e) a statement of the territorial authority’s proposals formeeting the forecast demands, including proposals forneworreplacementinfrastructure;and
f) a statement about the extent to which the proposals will-
(i) ensurethatpublichealthisadequatelyprotected; (ii) promote effective and efficientwastemanagement
andminimisation.
TheWasteAssessmentprovidesbackgroundinformationtodeveloptheWMMP.TheCouncil’sobjectivesindevelopingthis WMMP are to:• fulfilthestatutoryrequirementtoreviewtheplanwithin
sixyears;• provide transparency on how the Councilwill deliver on
objectives,policiesandtargetsforwastemanagementandminimisation;
• produceadocumentthatisactionorientedandprovidesaguidefordecisionmakingandcommunitycollaboration;and
• raiseawarenessofwastemanagementandminimisationwithinthecommunity.
WasteinNewZealandislegislatedbyanumberofActs(Figure1).OfprimaryimportanceistheWaste Minimisation Act 2008.
1.1 Purpose of this Waste Assessment
1.2. Legislative Framework
New Zealand Waste StrategyLEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK
OTHER TOOLSWaste MinimisationAct2008
Local Government Act2002
Hazardous Substances and new Organisms Act 1996
Climate Change ResponseAct2002
Resource Management Act 1991
WasteMinimisation& Management Plans
By-lawsRegulationsandgroup
standardsrelatedtowaterDisposal facility
Nationalenvironmental standards
International conventions
WasteDisposalLevy Long-term plansDistrict and
Regional plans and resource consents
Ministry guideline codes of practiceand
voluntaryintitiatives
Waste MinimisationFund
ProductStewardship
Otherregulations
FIGURE 1: Toolkit for managing and minimising waste in New Zealand
|7
1.3 Structure of this document ThisWasteAssessmenthasbeenpreparedinaccordancewithsection51oftheWMAandfollowstheguidelinesprovidedbytheMinistryforEnvironmentii (MfE).
Section 1TheWasteSituationThissectiondetailsthecurrentsituationofwasteinTaranaki.Itincludescurrentwasteinfrastructureandservices,currentandprojected quantities and composition of waste and divertedmaterials,demographicandmarketanalysis,andaforecastforfuture demand.
Section 2Where Do we Want to Be?Thissectiondocumentsourvision,goals,objectivesandtargets.Agapanalysisbetweenthisandourwastesituationisprovided.
Section 3How Are We Going to Get There?ThissectionincludesastatementofoptionsandtheCouncil’sproposedroleindeliveringtheseoptions.
1.4 The Waste Hierarchy
Throughoutthisdocument,wasteservices andfacilitiesaregenerallycategorisedwith referencetotheWasteHierarchy(Figure2).
ThewastehierarchyisrequiredwithintheWMA tobeconsideredwhenformulatingWMMPsand
referstothepreferredorderofwasteminimisationandmanagement methods.
LEASTpreferred behaviour
Avoid
Reduce
Reuse
Recycle
Recover
Treat
Dispose
FIGURE 2: Waste hierarchy
MOSTpreferred behaviour
1.5 Completeness and Accuracy
The Council has a responsibility to plan for all wastegenerated within the District when considering wasteinfrastructure and services. The Council has detailedinformationonthecollectionandfacilitiesoperatedbyitoronitsbehalf.ThisincludesCouncil-providedkerbsidecollectionservices,transferstationsandthelandfill.
Howeverthereisawebofprivatecompaniesinvolvedinthecollection,diversionofwasteandalternativedisposal(i.e.cleanfills)withintheDistrictandwiderregionfromwhich information ismore difficult to capture. Surveyshavebeenundertakentogainawiderunderstandingofwastequantitiesand theirdestination, and thisdata isusedwhereapplicable.However itmustbenoted thattheresponseratefromthesurveysisgenerallylow(lessthan 15% response rate) and the data is therefore only anestimate.Initialconsultationwiththecommunityandcommercialsector has been held during the development of thewaste assessment to gain a broader understanding ofbehaviour and perceptionswith regard to waste. This,in combination with the surveys and Council data issufficienttoidentifytheareasthatshouldbeprioritised,andtooutlinetherolethattheCouncilcouldpotentiallyplay in resolving the issues relating to both Counciland non-Council controlled waste. Additional targetedconsultation to confirm the success of the proposedoptionsisprudentandwillbesoughtthroughtheSpecialConsultativeProcedure,whichisrequiredaspartofthedevelopmentoftheWMMP.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|98|
2.1 Solid Waste Framework2.1.1. WASTEMINIMISATIONACT2008The WMA was developed with the purpose of encouragingwasteminimisationandadecreaseinwastedisposalinorderto:• protecttheenvironmentfromharm;and• provide environmental, social, economic and cultural
benefits.• This is to be achieved by promotingwasteminimisation
throughreduction,re-use,recyclingandrecoveryusingthefollowingmeasures:
• Regulatingproductstewardshipschemesfocussinginitiallyon‘priority’products.Thiswillhelpand,whennecessary,make producers, brand owners, importers, retailers,consumers and other parties take responsibility for theenvironmentaleffectsfromtheirproductsatend-of-life–from‘cradle-to-grave’;
• Controllingdisposalofmaterialtolandfills;• Providingamechanism to reportdisposal tonnagesback
totheMfEtoimproveinformationonwasteminimisation;• Establishing a “waste advisory board” to advise the
Ministeronbestpractice;and• Collectinga levyonallsolidwastetonnesdeposited into
landfills to generate funding to help local government,communitiesandbusinessesreducetheamountofwaste.
TheWMA also aims to benefit the economy by encouragingbetter use of materials throughout the product life cycle,promotingdomestic reprocessing of recoveredmaterials andprovidingmoreemployment.TheWMA requires TAs to develop and adopt aWMMP, andindoingsotakeintoconsiderationthegoalsoftheNZWasteStrategy.
ThissectioncontainsinformationaboutwasteanddivertedmaterialintheTaranakiregionandintheSouthTaranakiDistrictthatisgenerated,recycled,recovered,treatedordisposedoftolandfill.Theinformationincludeswasteinfrastructureandservices,anddataaboutquantities,trends,composition,sourceanddestinationofwasteanddivertedmaterials.Thisinformationprovidesthebasisforprojectingfuturedemandforwastemanagementandminimisationservicesaspresentedattheendofthissection.Datahasbeencollectedfromthefollowingsources:• landfillandtransferstationweighbridgequantities;• thefindingsfromalandfillandtransferstationsolidwasteanalysisprotocol(SWAP)conductedinSeptember2016;• akerbsideSWAPconductedinNovember2016;and• surveysofindustries.
2 The Waste Situation
2.2 NZ Waste Strategy
2.3 Regional and Local Strategic Context
TheNZWasteStrategy2010hastwohighlevelgoals:• Reducingtheharmfuleffectsofwaste,and• Improvingtheefficiencyofresourceuse.
2 .2 .1 . HEALTH ACT 1956 TheHealthAct1956placesobligationsonTAs(if requiredbytheMinisterofHealth)toprovidesanitaryworks.Undersection25(1)(c) of this act, the definition of sanitaryworks includesworksforthecollectionanddisposalofrefuse.
2.2.2. LOCALGOVERNMENTACT1974AND2002The provisions of the LGA 1974, part 31 and the sanitaryassessment provisions for refuse contained in part 7 of theLGA2002havebeenrepealedandarenowlargelyembodiedintheWMA.However,theLGA2002containsvariousprovisionsthatmayapplytoTAswhentheyarepreparingtheirWMMPs,including consultation and bylaw provisions. For example,it details the process for undertaking a Special ConsultativeProcedure when adopting, amending or revoking a WasteManagement Plan (or WMMP as referred to in the WMA).
2 .2 .3 . OTHER LEGISLATIONOther legislation relevant to waste management andminimisationincludes:
The Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996, which addresses themanagement of substances that pose asignificantrisktotheenvironmentand/orhumanhealth,frommanufacturetodisposal;andrelatestowasteprimarilythroughcontrols on the handling and disposal of hazardous substances.
The Resource Management Act 1991, which addresseswaste management and minimisation through controls onthe environmental effects of waste activities. The NationalEnvironmentalStandardforAirQualityrequirescertainlandfills(greaterthanonemilliontonnescapacity)tocollectlandfillgasesandeitherflarethemorusethemasfuelforgeneratingelectricity.
The HealthandSafetyatWorkAct2015,whichisrecognisedasakeypriorityforthewasteindustry.Ahealthandsafetyindustrysectorgroupwasformedandhasdevelopedguidelinesforthesolidwasteindustrytoensurebestpracticeinhealthandsafety.
SomerelationshipexistsbetweentheWMMPandlocalstrategiesandpolicydocuments(Figure3).
NEW ZEALAND WASTE STRATEGY
REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT AND MINIMISATION STRATEGY
COUNCILSWMMP
MISSION STATEMENT COMMUNITYOUTCOMESSOLID WASTE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|1110|
2 .3 .1 . REGIONAL WASTE STRATEGYThe purpose of the Regional Waste Strategy is to set out a strategicframeworkbywhichtheTRCandthethreeTAsintheregionwillhelpreduceandbettermanagewasteinTaranakiforatenyearperiod(2011-2021).Strategyobjectives,methodsandtargetsaddressthetwogoalssetoutintheNewZealandWasteStrategy.TheRegionalWasteStrategywasreviewedin2016andnewtargetswereagreedonfortheperiod2016-21.TheTRCandthethreeTAscollectivelymeet the targets through their respectiveWMMPsandworkprogrammes.ProgresstowardsthesetargetsisreportedtotheTSWMC.
2 .3 .2 . TARANAKI REGIONAL WASTE MINIMISATION EDUCATION STRATEGYThe purpose of the Taranaki Regional Waste MinimisationEducation Strategy is to set out the strategic frameworkfor STDC, NPDC, SDC and TRC to undertake education andcommunicationprogrammesthathelptoachievetheregionalwasteminimisationgoalsoutlined intheWasteManagementandMinimisationStrategyforTaranaki.AnannualprogrammeplanisdevelopedeveryyeartogiveeffecttotheStrategy.
2.3.3. LONGTERMPLAN(ANDANNUALPLAN)The Council stated in the 2015-25 Long Term Plan that itsmission statement is to:leadwithfairnessand integrity,andworkto inspireavibrantandcaringspiritofcommunity,whileremaininganefficientandsensitiveproviderofservicesandfacilities.
To give effect to this statement, seven community outcomeshavebeenidentified:Vibrant South Taranaki: a District that provides a highquality and diverse cultural and recreational experience andencouragesindependenceandcreativity.Connected South Taranaki: aDistrict that delivers accessibleand integrated infrastructure, transport and communicationsystems which meet the needs of residents, businesses andvisitors.
Together South Taranaki: aDistrictthatiscaringandinclusive,works together and enables people to have a strong anddistinctivesenseofidentity.Secure and Healthy South Taranaki:aDistrictthatprovidesasafe,healthy,andfriendlyplacetolive,workandvisit.ProsperousSouthTaranaki:aDistrictthatboastsasustainable,resilient and innovative economy that prospers within thenaturalandsocialenvironment.Skilled South Taranaki: a District that values and supportslearningsothatallpeoplecanplayafullandactiveroleinitssocial, cultural, and economic life. Sustainable South Taranaki: a District that appreciates its naturalenvironmentand itsphysicalandhumanresources inplanning,delivery,andprotection.
Alongside these planning documents, the Solid Waste Asset Management Plan outlines specifically how the solid wasteassetsandserviceswillbemanaged.
2 .3 .4 . BYLAWThe South Taranaki District Council Solid Waste Bylaw 2013aims to ensure that refuse collection and disposal does nothavesignificantenvironmentalorhealthimpacts,byregulatingrecycling,ownershipofthewastestream,refusestorage,wastemanagement,andwastecollection.
2 .3 .5 . POLICIESThe Kerbside Collection Policy was adopted in 2016 toencouragewasteminimisation.Thekerbsidecollectionserviceisnowrestrictedtodwellingsthatarelocatedinanurbanareaoralongthekerbsidecollectionroute.Underthispolicy,eachofthesedwellingsisallowedonesetofbins.AnadditionalsetofbinscanbeallocatedtoadwellingifspecialconditionsapplyandareapprovedbytheCouncil.TheLitter InfringementPolicy2015providestheCouncilwithpowertomonitorillegaldumping,actoncomplaintsandissueinfringementnoticesforbreachesoftheLitterAct1979.
2.4 Existing Waste Services and InfrastructureAvarietyofstakeholdersisinvolvedinwastemanagementandminimisationserviceswithintheregionandtheDistrict.ThethreeTAsintheregionhaveajointregionalcontractforthecollectionofurbanresidentialkerbsiderefuse,recycling,andgreenwaste;andtheoperationofkeytransferstations.Anumberofprivateserviceprovidersofferwasteservicestotheruralcommunity,thecommercialsector,andresidentialcustomerspayingforacollectionservice.Agrowingnumberofcommunitysectororganisationsarealsoinvolvedinwasteservices
TABLE1-SUMMARYOFWASTEINFRASTRUTUREANDSERVICESINTARANAKI
INFRASTRUCTURE/SERVICE COUNCIL PROVIDED OTHER PROVIDERS
REDUCE Education/ behaviourchange (acrosswastehierarchy)
Regionaleducationstrategyandcampaigns*TRCEducationOfficeravailableforwastelessonsRegionalWasteMinimisationOfficer.LoveFoodHateWastenationalcampaignDistributionofwastelevygrantsToursofwastefacilitiesStallsandeventsSocial mediaWeCanwebsite/recyclingdirectorySustainableLivingEducationTrustlicence(NPDC only)
TaranakiEnvironmentalEducationTrustEnviroschoolsTaranakiConservationistsCurious Minds programme Reusable bags for sale at most supermarkets . Some retailers chargeforplasticbagsorprovidediscountforbringingyourown bag Impact (funded by Ministry for Youth Development – working with youth aged 12-24) CommunityfruitharvestingPara Kore (Council waste levy funds part) Wastefreeparentingworkshops(NPDConly)
REUSE Second hand trading and upcycling
ReuseshopatNewPlymouthTransfer StationCommunity Reuse and Recycling Centre (NPDC only, under development)
Charitystores–includingHospiceTaranaki,RedCross, SalvationArmy,SPCA,Oxfam,andChurchstoresDemolitionandbuildingtradestores.Second hand traders, including second hand clothing storesOnlinetradingsitesincludingTradeMe,BuyandSellNewPlym-outh,FreecycleNewPlymouth,NeighbourlyMarketsincludingKids’ Market (monthly), The Seaside Market(monthly),SPCAfleamarket(weekly)–(NPDConly)Garage sales
Council/NZTAcontractorsreuseroadingwastesforbeddingandsub-base–material
Gasbottles–‘Swapabottle’andrefillingRetread tyres (processed outside of region)Informalarrangementswithfarmersfortyres:usedinsilagepitsandretainingwallsBounceBags–makinganddistributingreusableshoppingbags
RECYCLE Collection Weeklykerbsidecollectionmixedrecyclingandglass(STDC-8,305householdsand27schools) Publicplacerecyclingbins(7)–(NPDConly)SomeeventsrecyclingonCouncilpremises
Residentialkerbsidecollectionsisprovidedbyatleast2com-mercialprovidersCommercialcardboardcollectionsbyfourprovidersCommercialmixedrecyclingcollectionsbytwoprovidersFarmsector:PlasbackcontractorcollectsfarmplasticsfromsiteHospitalitysector:TwocollectorsofwastecookingoilAutomotiveindustry:Somedivertoilfilters,carbatteries,antifreezeforrecycling.Allpremisessurveyedrecyclewasteoilfrom site Tyreindustry:SmallquantityoftyresrecycledSomerecyclingprocessedwithinthedistrictandregionandsome outside of the region
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|1312|
INFRASTRUCTURE/SERVICE COUNCIL PROVIDED OTHER PROVIDERS
RECYCLE Refuse transfer stations
Threemaintransferstationsintheregion(Hawera,NewPlymouthandStratford)withfreedropoffofhouseholdrecyclablesanduserpaysservicesforwhitewareandwasteoil.E-wasteacceptedatNewPlymouthandStratfordtransferstations.IntheSouthTaranakiDistrict:HaweraTransferStation(open7days)andsixruraltransferstations(limitedopeninghours)offerfreedropoffofrecyclables
BalerforcommercialplasticsandcardboardlocatedinNewPlymouth Plasback:regionalfarmplasticsbaler,locatedinSouthTaranakiOneprivatetransferstationinHawera
Resource recovery facilities
New Plymouth RRF (under development) with Material Recovery Facility (MRF) sortingandbalingCouncil-ownedrecycling
Fourscrapmetaldealers(onelocatedintheDistrict)Twoprovidersforcommercialskipprocessing
RECOVER Organic waste collection
STDCopt-inuserpayskerbsidegreenwastecollection
ThreeprovidersforkerbsidegreenwastecollectionMany commercial businesses (e.g. landscaping) drop green-wastetoprocessingfacilitiesPiggeriesandcoordinatingorganisationshaveinformalandformalarrangementswithsupermarketsandhospitalitysectorforcollectionoffoodscrapsFoodbankshavearrangementswithsomesupermarketsfornear end of date foodCoffeegroundsfromsomecafesandservicestationsbaggedandmadeavailableforgardensCommunityFruitHarvestingTaranaki
Refuse transfer stations
Greenwasteisacceptedforalowerfeethangeneralwasteattransferstations
Organicwasteprocessing
Patea greenwaste site no longer accepts free public greenwaste disposal . Greenwastecanstillbebeneficiallyplacedon the Patea Beach sand dunes for their stabilisation.However,quantitiesplacedon site are limited to those needed for that purpose
Meatandpoultrywastessuchasoffal,blood,feathersandfallenstockareprocessedbycommercialoperatorsintheregion(predominantlyintheSouthTaranakiDistrict)Onesiteintheregionprocessespoultrylitter.Oneoperator(locatedatthreesites)operatesonecompostingandvermiculturesiteandtwovermicultureonlysites.Thesitesprocesspaunchgrass,poultrywaste,poultrymortalities,fishcarcasses,greenwasteanddrillingmudsAgriculturalslurryandpoultryshedlitterarespreadtolandDairywasteproducts(suchasbuttermilk)aregeneratedandprocessedintostockfoodintheregion.Timberwastefromoneprocessingsiteisusedonsiteforfuel.Chip,bark,sawdustandwoodareon-sold.Someuntreatedtimberwasteiscleanfilled.
Biosolids/ drillingmuds/sludges
WastewaterbiosolidsfromNewPlymouthwastewatertreatmentplantthermaldriedandsoldasafertiliser(NPDConly).
Drilling muds applied to land (landfarming).
Trade Waste (solidportionorliquidifdisposedatlandfill)
Oneprivatewastedewateringfacility;approximatelysixprivatecollectorsoftradewastethatmayusethelandfillfornon-liquidwastesdisposal.
INFRASTRUCTURE/SERVICE COUNCIL PROVIDED OTHER PROVIDERS
RECOVER Hazardous Waste
Residentialquantitiesofhazardouswasteacceptedatthreemaintransferstationsinregion,includingtheHaweraTransferStation.Agrecoveryprovideagrichemicalcollection(18monthly)–fundedby3TAsandTRC.
CommercialhazardouswastesarecollectedandtransportedtoeitherAucklandorWellingtonfortreatment/disposal.Twomainprovidersofthisserviceinthedistrict.
TREAT Cleanfills ColsonRoadLandfillacceptscleanfillascover.OkatoandInglewoodTransferStationsac-ceptanddisposeofcleanfillonsite(NPDConly). NocleanfillforpublicdisposalinSouthTaranaki
23consentedcleanfillsinTaranaki.Someoftheseareonlyavailableforowneruse.SouthTaranakiDistricthas3consentedcleanfillsthatareonlyavailableforowneruse
Collection Weeklykerbsidewastecollectionof:• 120LbinsSTDC-8,300house-holds;SDC-2,500households.• bags:NPDC-27,600households.;Illegal dumping clean up on Council land: asrequiredfortheCouncil.FortnightlyforNPDC.Publicplacelitterbins.
Sixcommercialwastecollectorsinregion,FourworkinginSouthTaranakidistrict.Onecommercialroadsweepingprovider.Manyorganisationsinvolvedincleans-upoflitterinbeach,riverandurbanenvironmentsincludingbutnotrestrictedtoschools,TaranakiConservationists,ProjectHotspot.Residentialkerbsidecollectionsisprovidedbyatleast2com-mercialproviders
DISPOSE Transfer Stations
Wastedisposalatalltransferstations(userpays).Tyres (user pays).
Landfills Oneregionallandfill(ColsonRoad);[newCentralLandfillplannedin2019]15closedlandfillsinTaranaki.SevenclosedlandfillsitesinSouthTaranaki,twoofwhichareemergencylandfillsites(HaweraandPatea)Eightclosedlandfillsites(NPDC).Twoofwhichareemergencylandfillsites(InglewoodandOkato).
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|1514|
2.4.1. COUNCIL-PROVIDEDSERVICESAND INFRASTRUCTUREInTaranaki,wasteminimisationandmanagementplanning isintegratedasfarasispracticablethroughtheTSWMC.ThisisajointcommitteecomprisingtheTRCandthethreeTAschargedwith considering and addressing waste management issuesacross the region. TheMedical Officer of Health and HealthProtectionOfficerareinvitedtoparticipateontheCommitteeinanon-votingrole.Atanoperationallevel,aregionalWMOisappointed to assist the four councils to implement the Regional WasteStrategyandachieveitstargets.
ServicesEducationAccording to the Taranaki Regional Waste MinimisationEducation Strategy, an annual education plan lists theeducationandcommunicationactivitiestheTRCandthethreeTAswillundertakeduring theyear.Theprogramme identifiesschool,communityandbusinessengagementactivities.TheseactivitiesarepredominantlydrivenbytheWMO.Note: Social media has developed since the last wasteassessmentandhasimpactedonthewayweconnectwithourresidents.
WasteMinimisationOfficerThe TRC and the three TAs jointly fund a regional part-timeWMO to facilitate the implementation of the regionalwastemanagement strategy with a particular focus on advocacy,advisoryandeducationalactivities.TheWMOisemployedbyand located at the TRC.
WasteLevyAccordingtotheWMA,a levyof$10pertonne(excl.GST) ischarged on allwaste disposed of at landfill. Half of this levygoes to TAs to spend on promoting or achieving the wasteminimisationactivitiessetoutintheirWMMPs.ThethreeTAsutilise theirwaste levy to fund theWMO(withanadditionalcontributionbytheTRC)andtopart-fundcommunityinitiatives.Funded projects by the Council have included: beneficialgreenwasteplacementforsanddunestabilisationandresearchonorganicwastediversion.AllthreeTAshavesupportedParaKoreandtheirworkinreducingwastefromMaraeandtikangaMāorievents.
KerbsideCollectionServiceThe Council-provided kerbside collection service is fundedthroughatargetedrate.Aregionalsolidwasteservicescontract
that started on 1 October 2015 is operated by EnviroWasteServices Limited, and encompasses both transfer stationoperation and kerbside collection for the three districts. Aspartofthisnewcontractachangetothelevelofservicewasimplemented.All threedistrictsnowprovideaseparateglassrecyclingcollection(colourseparatedatkerbside).TheCouncilandSDCstillprovidebins formixedrecycling,whereasNPDCchanged from collecting recycling in supermarket bags toprovisionofbinsforrecycling.ThekerbsideserviceleveldiffersbetweentheCouncil,NPDCandSDC(Table2).
Council andnumber of households
Receptacleandfrequencyofcollectionof each kerbside service
Mixed Recycling
Glass Waste Green-waste
STDC8,300
140Lbinweekly
60Lcrateweekly
120Lbinweekly
240Lbinfortnightly (voluntaryservice)
NPDC27,300
240Lbinfortnightly
60Lcratefortnightly
60Lbag5weekly
nil
SDC2,300
240Lbinfortnightly
60Lcratefortnightly
120Lbinweekly
nil
All three TAs provide a similar mixed recycling and glasscollection service, with the same branding on educationmaterial,trucksandbins.Thefollowingitemsareacceptedatthekerbsideforrecycling:• aluminium cans• cardboard• glassbottlesandjars• paper• plastic containers 1-7 (excludes soft plastics and
polystyrene)• tincans
Wastefromthekerbsidecollectiongoestotheregionallandfill.Mixed recycling and glass collected on behalf of all three TAs is takentotheNewPlymouthMRFtobesortedandbaledbeforebeingtransportedtoafinaldestinationforrecycling.
TABLE2-TARANAKIKERBSIDECOLLECTIONSERVICE
4 Voluntary user pays service5 52 bags provided annually; additional can be purchased
InfrastructureMaterialRecoveryFacilityAs part of a regional approach, NPDC has invested in thedevelopment of aMRF located at the Colson Road site. Thefunctionof theMRF is tosortandbaledomesticrecyclables,specificallycardboard,paper,tinandsteelcansandhardplastics1-7. Currently the MRF processes Taranaki council-providedrecycling.TheMRFincludesaneducationroomwithaviewingwindowtothefacility.FromJanuarythroughtoDecember2016over50groupshavetouredthefacility.Showingtheimpactofrecyclingmistakestoourcommunityisintendedtoimprovetherecyclingrateandreducecontaminationofrecycling.
PateaGreenwasteSiteThePateaBeachareahasbeeninformallyusedforgreenwastedisposalformanyyears.Bytheearly2000s,thesitehadbecomea regional greenwastedump. TheCouncil startedmonitoringthe site, and as a result the TRC issued a resource consent only allowing fordisposalof theamountofgreenwastenecessaryforsandstabilisation.Overtheyears,theCouncilhasstruggledwith theamountofgreenwastedisposedofonsiteandwithillegaldumpingofwaste.SinceFebruary2017,thesitenolongeraccepts freepublicgreenwastedisposal.Greenwastecan stillbeimportedbytheCouncilandbeneficiallyplacedonthePateaBeachsanddunesontheconditionthatthequantitiesplacedonsitearelimitedtothoseneededforsanddunestabilisation.
TransferStationsIn the region, STDC has seven transfer stations, NPDC fivetransferstations,andSDCasingletransferstation.Allprovidefreedropoff forboth residential andcommercial recyclablesviamobilerecyclingcontainers.Thetransferstationsalsohavebinsfordisposalofgeneralwaste(whetherfromcommercialordomesticsource).ScrapmetalandwhitewareitemsareacceptedatallCouncil-owned transfer stations for recycling (note that a disposalchargeappliesforwhiteware).Greenwasteisacceptedatalowerchargethangeneralwastetoencourageuserstodivertitintocompost.Non-compostablegreenwaste (such asnoxiousweeds, flax, cabbage trees, andagapanthus)isacceptedasgeneralwasteandgoestolandfill.TyresareacceptedattheCouncil’ssitesagainstafeeastheyarederimmedpriortotheirlandfilling.HazardouswasteisalsoacceptedindomesticquantitiesfreeofchargeattheHaweratransferstationonlyforSouthTaranaki.Itis then disposed of out of the region.
LandfillThe region has a single functioning landfill, where all wastefromthecouncil-providedservices isdisposed.Access isalsoavailableforcommercialwasteserviceproviders.Allusersarechargedagate fee.The landfill is expected to reachcapacityin2019andisscheduledtocloseattheendofJune2019.Anew regional landfill, located in Eltham in South Taranaki, isconsentedandscheduledtoopeninJuly2019.
The Council also has seven consented closed landfills. TheHaweraMatangara(alsocalledtheHaweraClosedLandfill)andthe Patea Closed Landfill are both consented for emergencylandfilling,ifrequired.
2.4.2. COMMERCIALANDNOT-FOR-PROFITSERVICESCommercial providers in the region provide a range ofspecialisedservicesincludingresidentialsolidwastecollection,organic waste collection and processing, commercial solidwaste and recycling collections, cardboard cages, recyclingdrop-offpoints (residential, softplastics, scrapmetal), textilereusedrop-off(charityshops/bins)andcleanfillsites.ItisworthnotingthatsincetheCouncil’spreviousWMMPwasproduced,thereisnolongeracleanfillavailableforpublicdisposalintheDistrict.
It is believed, through the data collected for this wasteassessment that commercially collectedwaste from Taranakiis being disposed of outside of the region, in the Whanganui District.However, confirmationof this, orquantities,hasnotbeenmadeavailable.
TheTaranakiregiondoesnothavethefacilityfordisposingofsomecommercialhazardousandliquidwastes,andthesearetransportedoutoftheregion,toeitherAucklandorWellington.The not-for-profit sector is increasingly involved in wastemanagement andminimisationacross the region and groupshavebecomestakeholderstheTAsareworkingwith(Table1).
Areasofinvolvementincludeeducationonwasteminimisationandbehaviourchange,assistancewithsettingupprocessestofurtherwastediversionandlitterclean-ups.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|1716|
2.5 Current Waste QuantitiesIntheSouthTaranakiDistrict,asintherestoftheregion,wastestreamsarediverse.Theseloadsarecartedtodifferentlocationstoreflecttheirtreatmentordisposal(Figure4).
Thedata in this section refers to ‘generalwaste’and ‘overallwaste’.Unclassifiedmixedwaste is referred to in thisdocumentas‘generalwaste’andcomprisesconstructionanddemolition(C&D)waste,commercialandindustrial(C&I)waste,landscapingwaste,andresidentialwaste.Whenthegeneralwastestreamiscombinedwiththekerbsidewastecollections,transferstationwaste,andspecialwastes,thewastestreamisreferredtoasthe’overall’wastestream.
Council’s TransferStation
Council’sKerbsideCollection(Residential Collections) TransferStationDrop-off
Market
MRF1627 t
CompostingFacility2226 t
Landfill8682 t
General waste3,297 t
General waste5,094 t
Mixed Recyling1,539 t
Mixed Recyling
379 t
Greenwaste1,432 t
Greenwaste794 t
New Plymouth District Council
StratfordDistrict Council
2 .5 .1 . LANDFILL WASTEQuantitiesTheColsonRoadLandfill (theLandfill) is theonlyoperationalmunicipal landfill accepting general waste in the Taranakiregion.TheLandfillreceiveswastesfromSouthTaranaki,NewPlymouthandStratforddistricts.
Totalwastetolandfillquantitiesarederivedfromweighbridgerecords at the Landfill gate. The weighbridge records thequantity and type of waste entering the Landfill. This isconsideredtobeanaccurateaccountofwastebeingdisposedoftolandfillintheTaranakiregion.
Tonnage to the Landfill has remained around 60,000 tonnessince 2007,whenwastewas consolidated to a single landfillin the region (Figure5). In the2015/16year, this reduced to54,000 tonnes.Two factorsmightexplain thisdecline.Firstly,the introductionofanewregionalwastecontract inOctober2015 has seen a vast increase in recycling in the region.Secondly,commercialwasteisknowntobetransportedoutsideoftheregionfordisposal.The2017datawillprovidegreaterclarityforthereasonandimpactofthisreduction.
ThesplitbetweenthethreeTAsisanindicationonlyasitdoesnot take into account cross-boundary movement of waste(Figure5).STDCandSDCdata,inthisfigure,primarilyrecordskerbside and transfer station waste.Waste within the NPDCcategory includeskerbsideandtransferstationwaste,aswellaswastesourcedfromtheregionanddisposedofattheLandfillthroughcommercialwastecollectors.
WASTE DISPOSED TO COLSON ROAD LANDFILL 1997-2016
SourceWaste from the New Plymouth Transfer Station is the singlelargestsourceofwastetotheLandfill(asidentifiedduringtheSWAP analysis), comprising 30% of the total. General wastewas the second largest component, representing 23% of thetotal(Table3andTable4).Loadsclassifiedasoriginatingfromtransferstations,bothcouncilandprivately-owned,comprised53.5% of all waste disposed of at the Landfill. Kerbsidecollections,bothcouncilandprivate,comprised18.8%oftheoverallwastestreamandspecialwastescomprised4.5%.
% of weight
Tonnes/week
General Waste 23.2% 196
KerbsideCollection(councilsandprivate) 18.8% 159
Special Waste 4.5% 38
TransferStations(councilsandprivate) 53.5% 452
TOTAL 100% 845
% of total
STDCKerbsideCollections 0.6%
HaweraTransferStation 16.4%
STDCOtherTransferStations 0.6%
General Waste 23.2%
NewPlymouthTransferStation 31.9%
StratfordTransferStation 0.5%
NPDCKerbsideCollections 12.3%
SDCKerbsideCollections 2.9%
StratfordPrivateKerbsideCollections 1.1%
PrivateKerbsideCollections 2.0%
Special Waste 4.5%
Privatetransferstations 4.1%
TOTAL LEVIED WASTE 100.0%
TheestimatedamountoflandfilledwastefromSTDCkerbsidecollectionsislessthantheamountofwastefromtheHaweraTransferStation(Table4).ThisistheresultofkerbsidecollectionwastebeingmainlydisposedofattheHaweraTransferStation.
Tonn
es p
er y
ear
TABLE3-LANDFILLOVERALLWASTEBY ACTIVITY TYPE10
TABLE4-SOURCEOFWASTETOTHELANDFILL6AUGUST-2SEPTEMBER201611
10 Waste Not Consulting. 2016. Composition of Solid Waste in Taranaki Region, September 2016
11 Waste Not Consulting. 2016. Composition of Solid Waste in Taranaki Region, September 2016
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
STDCSDCNPDC
2015
-16
2014
-15
2013
-14
2012
-13
2011
-12
2010
-11
2009
-10
2008
-09
2007
-08
2006
-07
2005
-06
2004
-05
2003
-04
2002
-03
2001
-02
2000
-01
1999
-00
1998
-99
1997
-98
1996
-97
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|1918|
2 .5 .2 . TRANSFER STATION WASTEQuantitiesAllwastereceivedatthetransferstationsacrosstheregionisdisposedofat theLandfill.Thegeographicsourceof transferstationwasteisunknown.ItisassumedthatallwastedisposedofatStratfordandHawera transfer stations ispredominantlyfromtherelevantDistrict.However,atleastonewasteserviceproviderinSouthTaranakidisposesofitswastedirectlytotheNewPlymouthTransferStation.With the current solid waste contract, general waste fromkerbside collections and from remote transfer stations canbecarteddirectly to theLandfill, asopposed to thepreviousmethodologyemployed.Quantitiesofgeneralwastereceivedat the transfer stations have therefore noticeably decreasedsince2015(Figure6).Thisdecreaseinwastequantitiesreceivedat thetransferstationsdoesnotnecessarily indicatethat thedistrictareproducinglesswastesince2015.
SOUTHTARANAKITRANSFERSTATION-REFUSE
Recent data also suggests that one commercial contractor has drasticallyreducedtheamountofwasteitusedtobringtotheHaweratransferstation.Thischangeinwastevolumessuggeststhatthiswasteistakentoanalternativedisposalfacilityoutsideof the district.
SourceThe threemain transfer stations in the region,Hawera,NewPlymouthandStratford,wereassessedaspartof the landfillandtransferstationSWAPinSeptember2016todeterminethesourceofwastegenerationandcompositonofthewaste.
Commercial and industrial activitieswere theprimary sourceofthewastedisposedofattheHaweratransferstation(Table5). The second sourceofwaste came from that collectedviaour Council kerbside collection services, representing 37%ofthesurveyedweight.
No .
of l
oads
su
rvey
ed
% o
f loa
ds
% o
f wei
ght
Tonn
es/
wee
k
Constructionanddemolition 14 18% 6% 9.8
Industrial/commercial/institutional 22 29% 42% 66.8
Kerbsidecollections-STDC13 17%
37% 58.9
Kerbsidecollections-private 9% 14.4
Landscaping 3 4% 1% 0.8
Residential 25 32% 6% 9
TOTAL 77 100% 100% 15 .6
Regional Comparison of Transfer Station WasteThe Stratford transfer station had a significantly higherproportion of refuse weight from residential loads than theother transfer stations while the New Plymouth TransferStationhad a higher rate of C&Dwaste (Figure 7). The largeproportion of residentialwaste at Hawera Transfer Station isduetotheSTDCkerbsideresidentialwastebeingconsolidatedfortransportatthetransferstationbeforebeingbulkhauledtotheLandfill.
COMPARISON OF ACTIVITY SOURCE TO TRANSFER STATION WASTE
TABLE5-ACTIVITYSOURCEOFHAWERATRANSFER STATION WASTE14-17SEPTEMBER201613
13 Waste Not Consulting. 2016. Composition of Solid Waste in Taranaki Region, September 2016
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2015
/16
2014
/15
2013
/14
2012
/13
2011
/12
2010
/11
2 .5 .3 . KERBSIDE WASTE QUANTITESThe three TAs in the region provide a kerbside refuse andrecycling collection for urban residential households. Thequantity of kerbside waste collected in the South TaranakiDistrict between 2010 and 2016 has remained reasonablystableataround3,200tonnesperyear(Table6).
TABLE6-STDCKERBSIDEWASTEPERYEARCouncilprovidedkerbsiderefusecollectionwastepertonnes (includesresidualwastefromkerbsiderecyclingcollections)
2010/11 3973
2011/12 3859
2012/13 3710
2013/14 3405
2014/15 3680
2015/16 3366
2.6 Waste Generation per CapitaWastepercapitaisanindicatorforwastegenerationthatlooksatthetotalamountofwasteproduced,dividedbythetotalnumberofpeopleinadefinedarea.Itisanindicatorofaveragewasteproductiononaperpersonbasis,butisnotdirectlyequivalenttotheamountofwasteanindividualthrowsawayeachyear,asmuchofthewasteisproducedfromcommercialsources.Thepercapitadisposalfiguresforkerbsiderefusecanbeinfluencedby:• ChangingproportionsofthepopulationservicedbyCouncilcollections.• Differentlevelsofcommercialandindustrialactivity(agreaterlevelofcommercialandindustrialactivityinSouthTaranaki
influencesthepercapitarateforthislocation).• Missingdata(privatecollectorsmaynotbeseparatelyaccountedforattransferstations).• Unknowncross-districtwastemovements,e.g.NewPlymouthtotalwastepercapitaishigherthantheothertwodistricts
butdoesnotnecessarilycomprisewastesourcedonlyfromtheNewPlymouthDistrict.ManyoftheprivatewasteserviceprovidersmayservicethewholeTaranakiregionbut,astheyarebased inNewPlymouth,thewaste isrecordedasbeingsourcedfromwithintheNewPlymouthDistrict.Itisdifficulttodetermineanycross-districtwastemovements.
ThewastepercapitaforkerbsidecollectionandforthetotalamountlandfilledfromwastecollectedbytheCouncilwerecalculatedusing2009/10and2015/16data.ForSouthTaranaki,kerbsidewastesenttolandfillremainedconstantwhilethewastepercapitafor totalwaste to landfill reduced from0.4 to0.32T/capita/annum (Table7).Onceagain, the lower volumes receivedat thetransferstationsinceOctober2015explainthedecreaseintotalwastepercapita.
TABLE7-WASTEPERCAPITAFOREACHTAWITHINTHEREGION2009/10 2015/16
Kerbsidewastetolandfill(T/capita/annum)
Totalwastetolandfill(T/capita/annum)
Kerbsidewastetolandfill(T/capita/annum)
Totalwastetolandfill(T/capita/annum)
STDC 0.12* 0.4 0.12 0.32
NPDC 0.27 0.63 0.11 0.56
SDC 0.22 0.41 0.14 0.23*STDC Waste Assessment 2012
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|2120|
2 .7 .1 . SWAP RESULTSASWAPsurveywasconductedin2016toanalysethecompositionofwastedisposed to landfill, at themain transfer stationsandvia theCouncils’kerbsidecollectionservice.
Landfill The SWAP survey analysed the composition of waste sent to theLandfill (Figure 8). Organic material was the largest component oftheoverallwastetolandfillin2016,comprising23%ofthetotal,byweight.Timberwas thesecond largestcomponent,comprising16%ofthetotal.Paper,plastic,andrubblecomprisedsimilarproportions,from10%to14%.
Mostwaste streams reduced inweight between the 2010 and the2016survey,butasaproportionof thecomposition,organicwasteenteringthelandfillshowedthebiggestreductionbetween2010and2016,decliningby7%oftheoverallwaste(Figure9).Thisreductioncouldbeindicativeofeffectiveawarenesscampaignsaroundorganicwaste, but could also be attributed to commercial operators takingloadsthathavebeencollectedthroughkerbsidecollectionswithintheregiontoalandfilloutoftheregion.Thesebinshaveahighproportionof organicwaste . Glass has also declined by around 5% of overallwaste,whichismostlikelyattributedtothenewkerbsidecollectionforglassrecyclingintroducedon1October2015.
2.7 Composition of Waste
COMPOSITION OF OVERALL WASTE DISPOSEDATTHELANDFILL-2016
COMPARISONOFLANDFILLCOMPOSITION(BYTONNAGE)2010AND2016
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
2010 2016
1%
1% Nonferrous metals 6%Textiles
3%Ferrousmetals 10%Paper
3% Glass 11% Rubble
3% Rubber 14%Plastics
5% Sanitary paper 16% Timber
5%Potentiallyhazardous 23% Organics
3%
5%
6%
10%
11%
23%
16%
14%
Transfer StationsThe SWAP survey analysed the composition ofoverall waste received at the Hawera TransferStation (Figure10).Organicwastewas the largestcomponent of waste being disposed of at theTransferStationduringthesurvey,comprising29%of thetotal.Thesecond largestcomponentswereplastics,rubbleandtimber,respectivelyconstituting14%,14%and13%ofthewaste.
A review of the compositon of the four generalactivity sources presents some expected wastestreams(Figure11).Organicwastecomprisesover50%of the landscaping activity sourcewhileover30%ofC&Dwastewastimber. Rubble comprisedbetween 20 and 30% of C&D and C&I wastecomposition.
HAWERARTS-OVERALLWASTE-PRIMARYCOMPOSITION14-17SEPTEMBER
COMPARISON OF COMPOSITION OF WASTE BY ACTIVITY SOURCE AT THE HAWERA TRANSFER STATION
1%
1% Nonferrous metals 6% Sanitary paper
1% Rubber 9% Paper
1%Potentiallyhazardous 13% Timber
3% Glass 14%Plastics
4%Ferrousmetals 14% Rubble
5%Textiles 29% Organics
3%
5%
6%
9%
13%
29%
14%
14%
4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
ResidentialLandscapingICIC&D
Pote
ntial
ly h
azar
dous
Rubb
er
Tim
ber
Rubb
le
Sani
tary
Pap
er
Texti
les
Glas
s
Non
ferr
ous
met
als
Ferr
ous
met
als
Org
anic
s
Plas
tics
Pape
r
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|2322|
KerbsideThe 2016/17 SWAP of South Taranaki domestic kerbsidewaste collections took place between 30 November 2016and2December2016,andbetween23to28January2017,when 90 Council kerbside generalwastewheelie binswereaudited.Organicmaterialwas the largest single componentof the general waste bins comprising 62% of the total, byweight (Figure 12). Kitchen waste comprised 62% of thisorganicmaterialandgreenwastecomprisedof32%.Mostofthe gardenwaste comprised lawn clippings, tree and shrubprunings, and leaves. Other organics (cat tray litter, animalfaeces,vacuumcleanerdustandhumanhair)madeup6%oftheorganicwastecomponent.Plastics, sanitary paper, and paper comprised similarproportionsofthegeneralwastebinsat11%,8.1%,and8.1%respectively. Softplasticbags (including foodpackagingandshopping bags) made up 21% of the plastic wastes. Rigidnon-recyclable plastics comprised 16% of plastics. Theseitems included packaging that did not carry a recyclingsymbol and non-packaging items. Plastic items that couldhavebeen recycled through theCouncil’s kerbside recyclingsystem comprised 25% of total plastics. Composite plasticrepresented38%oftotalplastics.Of the paper component of Council kerbside generalwastebins, 42% was recyclable. Non-recyclable paper, whichincludedfood-contaminatedpackagingandpaperdrinkcups,comprised58%ofthepaper.
NPDC and SDC have also conducted kerbsidewaste audits.NPDC audited 335 Council kerbside rubbish bags and SDCaudited 45 bins. Similar sorting classifications to the STDCaudit were used for regional consistency. Regionally, thecompositionofwaste fromthe threeTAsdemonstrated theslightly differentwaste collection services providedby eachdistrict(Figure13).BothSTDCandSDCprovidea120Lgeneralwaste bin,whereasNPDCprovides a bag service. STDChasahigherproportionoforganicsintheirbinswhencomparedwithSDCandNPDC.HoweverSDChashigherproportionsofglass,metalandplastics.Forallthreedistricts,organicwastemadeupthehighestproportionofwaste.
An analysis of the broken down organicwaste compositionforthethreeTAs(fromFigure13)showsthesignificantlyhighproportion of kitchen waste in all councils’ general wastecontainers(Figure14).
COMPOSITION OF OVERALL WASTE DISPOSEDATTHELANDFILL-2016
KERSIDE REFUSE COMPOSITION COMPARISONSTDC, NPDC AND SDC
1%
0%Potentiallhazardous 3% Timber
0%Rubber 4%Textiles
0%Rubble 8%Sanitarypaper
1% Glass 8%Paper
1% Nonferrous metals 11%Plastics
2%Ferrousmetals 62% Organics
3%
8%
8%
11%62%
2%4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
STDCSDCNPDC
Pote
ntial
ly h
azar
dous
Rubb
er
Tim
ber
Rubb
le
Sani
tary
pape
r
Texti
les
Glas
s
Non
ferr
ous
met
als
met
als
Ferr
ous
Org
anic
s
Plas
tics
Pape
r
Acomparisonoftheweightoforganicspergeneralwastebag/binshowsthatSTDCandSDCbinshaveahigherquantityoforganicspercontainerthanNPDCbags(Figure15).Thisisreflectiveofthetypeofcontainersusedforgeneralwastecollection,STDCandSDCprovidingkerbsidebinsinsteadofbags.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Multimaterial/other
Noncompostable greenwaste
Compostable greenwaste
Kitchen waste
SDCNPDCSTDC
KERBSIDE REFUSE ORGANIC BREAKDOWN BY TA
COMPARISON OF QUANITITES OF ORGANICS BYTYPEPERBAG/BIN(KG)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Other organic
Greenwaste
Kitchen waste
SDCNPDCSTDC
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|2524|
2 .7 .2 . DIVERSION POTENTIALBasedon theresultsof theSWAPauditat theLandfill, ithasbeendemonstratedthatasignificantproportionofwastecouldpotentiallybediverted from landfill (Table8andFigure16).The ‘currently recoverable’and ‘currentlycompostable’materialssection is based on existing local diversion services, while ‘potentially divertable’ materials are based onmaterials that arerecoverableelsewhereinNewZealand.
TABLE8-LANDFILL-POTENTIALLYDIVERTABLEMATERIALSINOVERALLWASTESTREAMBYACTIVITYSOURCE22
Industrial/commerical/institutional
Kerbside collection
Special wastes
Transfer stations
CURRENTLY RECOVERABLE MATERIALS
Paper - Recyclable 5.7% 10.2% 0% 2.9%
Paper - cardboard 9.1% 2.0% 0% 3.6%
Plastic-Recyclable 1.1% 2.9% 0% 0.7%
Ferrousmetal-All 3.2% 2.1% 0% 2.9%
Non-ferrous metal - All 1.0% 0.7% 0% 0.5%
Glass - Recyclable 1.5% 5.2% 0% 1.2%
Subtotal 21 .6% 23.0% 0.0% 11.8%
CURRENTLY COMPOSTABLE MATERIALS
Organics- Kitchen Waste 5.3% 30.1% 0% 7.6%
Organics-Compostablegreenwaste 2.5% 11.1% 0% 6.7%
Subtotal 7.8% 41 .2% 0% 14 .3%
Currently divertable 29 .4% 64 .2% 0.0% 26 .1%
POTENTIALLY DIVERTABLE MATERIALS
Rubble - VENM 0% 0% 0% 0.3%
Rubble-Managedfill 0% 0% 0% 3.1%
Rubble-NewPlasterboard 0% 0% 0% 3.1%
Timber - Reusable 0.8% 0% 0% 0.8%
Timber-Untreated/unpainted 2.0% 0% 0% 2.5%
Subtotal 8.1% 0% 0% 9.8%
TOTAL - DIVERSION POTENTIAL 32 .2% 64 .2% 0.0% 35 .9%
TABLE xxxxx
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Transfer stations
Special wastes
Kerbside collection
Industrial/commercial/institutional
2.8 Diverted materialsThis section contains information about known sources ofdiverted materials in the South Taranaki District or widerTaranaki region. Diverted material, as defined in the WMA,“means anything that is no longer required for its originalpurposeand,butforcommercialorotherwasteminimisationactivities,wouldbedisposedofordiscarded”.The data for diverted material outside of Council-providedservices and infrastructure is difficult to quantify. A regionalwasteinventorywasconductedbytheTRCin2009.Thestudyidentified sources, quantities and destinations of industrialandagriculturalwastes in the region.Thedatawasprimarilycollectedthroughphonesurveys.Morerecentsourcesofdatafor non-Council provided services include an organic wastediversion study and postal surveys of industries includingautomotive, construction, waste services, cleanfills and foodpremises.
2.8.1. COUNCIL-PROVIDEDSERVICESKerbsideCollectionRecyclablesThe Council provides a kerbside recycling collection for theurbanresidentialcommunityandpropertiesalongthekerbsidecollection route that have been allowed to join the service.Akerbsiderecyclingservice isalsoofferedbyNPDCandSDC.Paper, cardboard, aluminium and steel cans, grade 1-7 hardplasticsandglassbottlesandjarsareacceptedaspartoftheservice.Thequantityof recyclables collectedby thekerbsideservice varies between 1,500 and 2,000 tonnes per year forSouthTaranaki(Figure17).
Approximately64%ofkerbsidewastedisposedat theLandfill couldhavebeendiverted (Figure16).Ahighproportionof thedivertible waste was compostable organic materials. Smaller proportions of C&I waste and transfer station waste, 32% and36%respectively,couldbediverted.Consideringthesewastestreamsinfutureplanningisprudent,specificallyfoodwasteandrecyclablewastefromtheC&Isector.ConsideringlocaloptionsfordivertingC&Dwastestreamscouldalsoreduceunnecessarywastetolandfill.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
ANNUAL TONNAGE OF STDC KERBSIDE RECYCLABLES COLLECTION
2010
/11
2011
/12
2012
/13
2013
/14
2014
/15
2015
/16
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|2726|
Anauditof50kerbsiderecyclingbinswasconductedbetween26Januaryand1February2017.Theresultsshowedthattheaverage composition of the bins (by weight) was 39% paperand23%cardboard(Figure18).Contamination(non-recyclableitems including generalwaste and glass) represented 19%ofthecontent,inweight.
COMPOSITION OF OVERALL WASTE DISPOSEDATTHELANDFILL-2016
1%
0%Potentiallhazardous 3% Timber
0%Rubber 4%Textiles
0%Rubble 8%Sanitarypaper
1% Glass 8%Paper
3%
8%
8%
11%62%
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|2928|
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3130|
GreenwasteAvoluntarygreenwastekerbsidecollectionservice isavailable inSouthTaranaki toresidentswhohaveaccesstothekerbsidecollectionservice.ThegreenwasteiscartedtoacompostingfacilitylocatednexttotheLandfill. Greenwaste
CompostablegreenwastecanbedisposedofatallSTDCtransferstations.Thisgreenwaste isdivertedtoacomposting facilitylocatednexttotheLandfill.Thequantityofgreenwastecollectedatthetransferstationshasfluctuatedoverthepastfiveyearsandistypicallybetween500and900tonnesperannum(Figure21).
ThehighestproportionofwastedisposedofattheCouncil’stransferstationsisgeneralwaste(Figure22).
Interpreting annual tonnages of kerbside greenwaste doesnotprovideanyrelevantinformationasgreenwastetonnagesareweather-dependent.Itisworthnotingthatabout1,000to1,500tonnesofgreenwasteiscollectedviakerbsidecollectionannually(Figure19).SinceOctober2015,theCouncilhasallowedresidentstoaddsomeoftheirfoodwastetotheirgreenwastebins.Ithasbeenrecommendedthatupto15%offoodwastebedisposedofintheCouncilgreenwastebins.
TransferStations
RecyclingAlltransferstationswithintheregionprovideafreedropoffforthesamerecyclablewastestreamsasprovidedinthekerbsideservice.SouthTaranakitransferstationsalsoacceptscrapmetalfreeofchargeandrequireresidentstopayafeeforwhitewaredisposal. Recyclablevolumescollectedannuallyatthetransferstationareover400tonnes(Figure20).Someofthedecreaseinrecyclingtonnagefor2015/16maybeexplainedbyinconsistentrecordsof glass volumes at the beginning of the current solidwastecontract.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3332|
GreenwasteAvoluntarygreenwastekerbsidecollectionserviceisavailableinSouthTaranakitoresidentswhohaveaccesstothekerbsidecollection service. The greenwaste is carted to a compostingfacilitylocatednexttotheLandfill.E-WasteElectronicwastewas acceptedonbehalf of theCouncil by alocal waste contractor, Egmont Refuse and Recycling. Thisagreement was operative between 2012 and April 2017. Afeewaschargedfore-waste itemstocovertheircartageanddismantling.TVdisposalwassubsidisedbytheCouncil.There is currently no e-waste drop off point in the District.Thislackofdisposalfacilityhasbeenidentifiedasagapinthepresent Waste Assessment.
1.1.1. CommercialandInformalServicesAwebof private companies is involved in the collectionanddiversionofwasteintheregion.Datahasbeencollectedfromsurveysofsomeindustriesandtheirresultsareshownbelow.However it must be noted that the response rate from thesurveys isgenerally low(less than15%).Thereforequantitiesofwastedisplayedbelowareasprovidedbytherespondentsandnotextrapolatedtothewiderregion.Thefiguresdisplayedbelowareaminimumofdivertedwastes.The findings of a 2015 organicwaste diversion study for theregion,thatwascommissionedtogainabetterunderstandingofthiswastestream,arealsopresentedbelow.
AutomotiveWastesAsurveyofautomotiverepairpremisesin2016,identifiedthatallrespondentsdivertedwasteoil,accountingfor13,000litresofwasteoilbeingreusedorrecycledperannum.All respondents recycle car batteries through a variety ofproviders,primarilyscrapmetalrecyclers,accountingforaround3 tonnesof batteriesper annum.About43%of respondentsrecycleoilfilters througha rangeof recyclers, accounting for430kgofoilfiltersbeingdivertedperannum.Antifreezeisalsodivertedfromlandfill,with34%ofrespondentsrecyclingatotalof 147 litres of antifreeze through a variety of providers perannum. Averysmallresponsetosurveysoftyreretailerswasreceived.Data suggests that the majority of tyres are being disposedof to landfillwitharound20%beingdivertedto farms.Sometrucktyresarebeingre-treaded.Inthe2014/15financialyear
around5,000tyresweredivertedforre-treadingoutsideoftheregion.
CleanfillThereare23consentedcleanfilldisposalsites intheTaranakiregion, threeof thesebeing located inSouthTaranaki.Thesethreecleanfillsareallprivatelyownedandareprovidedfortheownersownuse.A survey of consented cleanfill owners suggest that at aminimum, 48,000 tonnes of waste is disposed of at cleanfillsitesintheregionannually.Eightypercentofcleanfilldisposalis sand, soil or clay , 10% concrete or cement, and between2-4%isgravel,treestumpsandnon-tanalisedtimber.TheLandfillalsoreceivescleanfillwhichcanbeusedascoverorfillonsite.ConstructionwastesOnlysmallquantitiesofconstructionwastesarebeingdivertedfrom landfill. Less than half of the respondents (40 to 45%)reuse or recycle un-treated timber, roofing iron, steel andconcrete. This equates to 120 tonnes of untreated timber,20 tonnes of roofing iron, 54 tonnes of steel and 58 tonnesof concrete being diverted per annum. A small number ofrespondents (35%) diverted treated timber and only 30%divertedcardboard,equatingto178tonnesoftreatedtimberand2tonnesofcardboardbeingdivertedperannumfromtheconstructionindustry.
General Recycling (paper, card, glass)At least four private companies provide residential andcommercialrecyclingservicesintheregiontargetingdifferentwastestreams.Someofthemcollectcardboard,whileothersprovidemixedrecyclingcollectionsincludingcardboard,paper,plastics, glass and cans. These companies have indicatedthattheydivertat least4,500tonnesofthesewastestreamsannually.
Organic WastesGreenwasteGreenwaste (or garden waste) is diverted via greenwastecollections, home composting andmaterial being left in-situonproperties,hence,accuratedataisnotavailable.Onereportcites that based on averages of New Zealand households’generation of greenwaste, South Taranaki households wouldgenerate approximately 4,715 tonnes of greenwaste per
annum,NewPlymouthhouseholds12,000tonnesperannumand Stratford households 1,500 tonnes per annum . Surveyssuggestthat,ataminimum,880tonnesperannumiscollectedanddivertedbyprivatecompaniesintheregion.CommercialFoodWasteFood banks have arrangements with some supermarkets fornearendofdatefood.Piggeriesandcoordinatingorganisationshave informal and formal arrangements with supermarketsandthehospitalitysectorforcollectionoffoodscraps.A2009estimatesuggests1,600tonnesperyearoffoodwasteisfedtopigs.Surveysoffoodpremisessuggestthataround75percentoffoodpremisesaredivertingfoodwastefromtheirpremises(predominantlytopiggeries)and60percentaredivertingtheirusedcookingoiltooilrecyclingservices.Coffeegroundsfromcafes and service stationsarebaggedandmadeavailable forgardening purposes.
MeatandpoultrywastesMeatandpoultrywastessuchasoffal,blood,feathers,sludge,paunch waste, fallen stock are processed by commercial
operators in the region (predominantly in South Taranaki). Itis estimated that 33,800 tonnes ofmeat and poultry wastesare generated and diverted per annum in the region. Theseproducts are either rendered or composted. Itisestimatedthatupto30,000tonnesperannumofpoultrylitterisgeneratedintheNewPlymouthdistrict.Usedlitterisgenerallyspreadonfieldsandasmallproportiononmushroomormaizefields.FarmeffluentItisestimatedthatbetween1.8and2.8milliontonnesofdairyslurry is collected and disposed of by effluent managementsystemsonfarmswithintheregion.
OtherFarmWastesPlasback operates a product stewardship scheme to recoverusedfarmplasticsforrecycling.TheycollectarangeofplasticsfromfarmsandhaveinstalledabalerinSouthTaranakitomeetregional demand. In the 2014/15 year, 140 tonnes of plasticwerecollectedaspartofthisscheme,120tonneswascollectedinthe2015/16year(Figure23).
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3534|
Agrecoveryprovidesanagrichemicalscollectionapproximatelyevery18monthsinTaranaki.ThiscollectionisfundedthroughtheMfE,brandowners, theTRCandtheTAs. In2015,atotalquantityof1,658kgofchemicalswascollectedfrom23sitesintheregion.Ofthis,142kgwassentoffshoreforhightemperatureincineration,asthereisnocurrentfacilitywithinNewZealandthatcandealwiththismaterial.Inthe2013collection,1,800kgoffarmchemicalswererecovered.Thechemicalscollectedwerediverse,with the larger collections being Acidsan (containingsulphuric acid, hydroxacetic acid, ammonium chloride) andIodoshield(activeingredientbeingiodinepresentasiodopher).AsmallquantityofDDTwasalsocollected.Agrecoveryadvisedthat Taranaki collections contain minimal persistent organicpollutantssuchasDDT,comparedwithotherregions.Scrap Metal
Currentquantitiesofmetalbeingdivertedviascrapmetalyardsareunknown. In 2009 thewaste inventory identified17,000tonnesofferrousmetalbeingdiverted,whilenon-ferrousmetalwasestimatedtobearound1,000tonnesperannum.However,withdecliningcommoditypricesthisfiguremayhavereduced.OnescrapmetalyardintheStratfordDistricthasclosedsincethe last WMMP .SummaryofDivertedMaterialsWhile, there is already significant diversion occurring in theregion,thereisthepotentialtodivertmuchmore,particularlyforrecyclingandorganicwastestreams(Table9).
2 .9 .1 . Materials Recovery FacilityTheMRFhasbeenoperatingwellsince itstartedprocessingrecyclableson1October2015.Key issueswiththeprocessingofrecyclables relate to the levelof contamination. Industrybestpractice indicates thatnon-recyclable items should representamaximumof8%ofthetotalweightofrecyclablesprocessed.ThecontaminationhasdroppedconsiderablywiththeintroductionofthecurrentkerbsidecollectionserviceandsincetheoperationofthenewMRF(Figure24).Atpresent,theMRFhasonaveragea12%contaminationrate.
AnumberofissuesattheMRFresultfromthecontaminationfoundintherecycling(Table10).Non-recyclableitemscanharmstaffsortingtherecycling,damagemachinery,and/ordevaluaterecyclablematerials.Contaminationhasbeenakeyissuethathasbeenpredominantlyfoundinkerbsidecollectioncontainers.Itisanon-goingfocusfortheTAsandcanbelessenedthrougheducationwithinthecommunity.
NON-RECYCLABLEITEMS ISSUES
Medicalwastes HealthandsafetyriskTherehavebeentwoinjuriesasaresultofmedicalwastebeingpresentintherecycling,oneofwhichhasresultedinaconfirmedneedlepuncturewoundtosortingstaff.
Fireinducingmaterialssuchasash(fromfireplacesor barbecues),batteriesandgascylinders
FireHazard,HealthandSafety,Propertydamage,Potentialcontaminationof recyclableitemsthatconsequentlyenduplandfilled(fireashes)TherehasbeenafireattheMRFinMay2016.Theinvestigationwasinconclusiveastotheoriginofthefire.
Nappies Biohazardforsortingstaff
Glass Healthandsafetyrisk
Plasticbags Operationalissue.Plasticbgsentangleinrollers,beingamaintenanceandefficiencyissue.
2.9 Assessment of South Taranaki Services
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3736|
2 .9 .2 . KERBSIDE SERVICETheservicewasprovidedto8,275dwellingson1July2016,whichcovers70percentofhouseholdsinthedistrict.Thepresentationrate,asshownbythepercentageofcustomerswhoputmaterialouteachweek,hasbeenanalysedforeachTaranakiTA(Figure25).ParticipationofthecommunityinthenewkerbsidecollectionservicehasbeenrelativelyconsistentsinceitbeganinOctober2015,peakingovertheChristmasperiodforallwastestreams.STDCshowsthe lowestpresentationratesforgeneralwaste,mixedrecyclingandglass,possiblyaresultofthemorefrequentcollection (weekly as opposed to fortnightly). Glass presentation is lower thanmixed recycling orwaste, but is typicalwhencomparedtootherdistrictswithsimilarservices.
AreviewoftheaverageweightsofcontainersforeachTAshowsdifferentbehaviourfromresidentsbetweenthethreeTAs(Figure26).Forgeneralwaste,theaverageweightpercontainerisjustunder9kgforSTDC,whileNPDCandSDChaverespectivelyanapproximateaverageweightof6and12kg.Thisisduetothedifferenceinreceptacles(binsforSTDCandSDCversusbagsforNPDC)andisalsolikelytoreflectthataproportionofNPDChouseholdsopttohaveawastebinprovidedbyacommercialwastecollector (estimatedtobe13%ofhouseholds).SDChas thehighestamountofwastepercontainer,whichmayreflectonthecombinationofhavingbinsforgeneralwasteandanabsenceofaCouncilgreenwastecollectioninthedistrict(meaninghigheramountofgreenwastebeingdisposedofintothegeneralwastebin).STDChavemuchlessmixedrecyclingandglasspercontainercomparedtoNPDCandSDC,whichispartlyaconsequenceofthemorefrequentcollectionserviceofferedtoourresidents.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|3938|
AstheCouncilvoluntarygreenwastecollectionserviceisonlyavailable in South Taranaki, no comparison is available withtheothertwoTAs.Therecordingofthepresentationrateandaverageweightper container for this servicewas initiated inJanuary 2016 and limited information is therefore availablefor this. Figure 27 does not reflect seasonal fluctuations duelimited data.
Overthelastsixyears,theCouncilhassoldaconsistentnumberof greenwaste stickers,withnumbers varyingbetween2,600and2,900greenwastestickersperannum.
2 .9 .3 . TRANSFER STATIONSTheSouthTaranakidistricthasseventransferstations:sixruraltransferstationsandthelargerHaweratransferstation.Fourofthese,Eltham,Manaia,PateaandWaverley,offer24/7recyclingoptions.Overthelastsixyears,theDistricthasfacedtwofloodingeventsanddeclaredastateofemergencyfollowingtheseevents(i.e.in2015,WaitotaraandOpunake).Floodvictimswereallowedtodisposeofflood-damagedmaterialsatthe localtransferstationfreeofchargeaspartoftherehabilitationstage.The2015floodshavetherefore impactedonthenumberofvisitorsandtheamountofgeneralwastedisposedofat theWaitotaraandOpunaketransferstationsfortheyear2015/16.Thenumberofvisitorsforeachtransferstationseemstoremainrelativelyconstant,althoughthereisaslightreductioninthenumberofvisitorsat theWaverleyandWaitotara transferstations (Figure30).Thiscouldbeexplainedbythechangeofstafffollowingthechangeofcontractorandindividualinterpretationofrecording.Itisnotuncommontofindsomeillegaldumpingattheproximityofthe24/7recyclingcontainers,ortouncovercontaminationsuchasgeneralwasteinthesecontainers.Dealingwiththiscontaminationcanpresentsomehealthandsafetyriskstotransferstationstaff.
2013/14 2014/15 2015/16
Num
ber
of
visits
Tonn
age
gene
ral
waste
tonn
age
recy
clin
g
tonn
age
gree
nwaste
Num
ber
of
visits
Tonn
age
gene
ral
waste
tonn
age
recy
clin
g
tonn
age
gree
nwaste
Num
ber
of
visits
Tonn
age
gene
ral
waste
tonn
age
recy
clin
g
tonn
age
gree
nwaste
Eltham 407 56.22 15.79 30.71 434 47.92 20.19 17.50 428 38.00 28.22 21.10
Manaia 702 59.90 62.17 44.26 409 56.98 52.61 51.02 450 60.57 44.34 33.91
Opuanke 1207 41.81 79.15 32.77 759 38.96 94.19 21.62 864 60.48 72.63 25.49
Patea 799 36.54 54.39 0.00 789 48.87 47.55 0.00 842 37.53 37.23 0.00
Waitotara 1684 43.03 40.71 5.23 1799 68.17 38.20 3.87 1140 64.57 28.90 0.96
Waverley 960 54.05 53.06 18.95 805 57.54 54.26 11.63 584 57.16 48.70 3.07
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|4140|
2 .9 .4 . LANDFILL SERVICETheLandfillopenedin1975,andhasbeendevelopedinthreestages (stages1and2arenowclosed). Landfillshavehad toadjusttoevolvingenvironmentalstandards,whichresultedintheclosureofmanysmalllandfillsintheregioninthe2000’s.Thestage3 landfillhas functionedas thesole landfill for theregionsince2007.ItisaClass1landfill,whichensuresahighlevelofenvironmentalprotection.Thishas involved installinga liner to capture leachate and reduce the potential forgroundwater contamination, ongoing improvements to sitemanagement including covering ofwaste, andmore recentlyodour management including a landfill gas capture system,whichwillbeinstalledin2017.Keyoperationalissueswiththesiteinrecentyearshaveincludedmanagementofcover,odourandspecialwaste.Asaresult,inthe2015/16monitoringyearthelandfillwasratedashavinga“poorlevelofenvironmentalperformance”.Measuresarenowinplacetoaddresstheseissues,includingtheconsentowner,NPDC,enforcingtheruleofnoliquidwastedisposedofattheLandfill, better daily site management practices, deodorisingsprays, and the soon-to-be installed gas management system. In order to ensure there continues to be a regional landfillservice available to Taranaki, the available space left in thelandfillforwastedisposalismonitoredonasixmonthlybasis.ThemostrecentsurveyundertakeninFebruary2017indicatesthat there is sufficient space to accept waste until at leastDecember2019.Planningiscurrentlyunderwayforthedevelopmentofanewregionallandfill(CentralLandfill)nearElthamwhichwillberunasajointventurebythethreeTAs.CurrentexpectedtimingfortheclosureoftheLandfillandopeningoftheCentralLandfillis July2019.Theadditionalcapacityremainingat theLandfillfollowingthisdatewillallowforthetransition(e.g.acceptanceofspecialwasteuntilthiscanbetakentotheCentralLandfill)andemergencylandfillinginthefuture.
2.10.1. DemographicandEconomicTrendsTaranaki Region’s populationwas 116,600 in 2016 , up 0.8%from the previous year, compared with New Zealand’s totalpopulationgrowingby2.1%overthesameperiod.Theregion’spopulation ranks 10th in size out of the 16 regions in NewZealand.Asatthe2013Census26,577peopleresidedinSouthTaranaki,with its population ranking 38th in size of the 67 districts inNewZealand.Thiswasequivalentto10,443occupieddwellingsintheDistrict.The2016estimatesreleasedbyStatisticsNewZealandrecordedthepopulationat27,700.The median annual income for households in the TaranakiRegionwas$72,592fortheyearto30June2017,whichwasnearly$9,500lowerthanthenationalmedianof$82,056.ThemedianhouseholdincomeinTaranakiincreasedby0.1%duringthat year, compared to 2.9% nationally. Taranaki’s medianhouseholdincomehasexceededthenationalfigureinfourofthelasttenyears,buthasdroppedbehindthenationalfigureby 1.3%, 10.0% and 13.0% respectively for each of the lastthree years.
Taranaki’sGDPin2016was$8.3billionequatingto3.3%ofNewZealand’sGDP . Thiswas a 9.6%decrease from thepreviousyear,comparedwitha3.5%reductionnationally in thesameperiod.Overthe2010/15timeframe,GDPinTaranakigrewby0.5%.Forestry,fishing,mining,electricity,gas,waterandwasteservicesrepresented35%ofthisGDP.Manufacturingaccountedfor14.8%ofourGDP,fromapproximately597manufacturingbusinesses.Apiculturecontributed5.4%oftheregion’sGDP.The OECD states that New Zealand’s economic growth “isprojectedtobemoderatewith3%in2016and2.7%in2017.Theimpactoflowerdairypricesonexportsandanendtostimulusfromtheearthquake-relatedrebuildwillcurbactivity,althoughtheslowdowninconstructionwillbeattenuatedbyexpansionelsewhere in response to high immigration. Immigrationwillalsosustaingrowth inprivateconsumption. Inflationwill risebutstaybelowtarget”.
In the 12 months to June 2016, $294.4 million of buildingconsentswereapprovedinTaranaki.Thiswasa4.8%increaseto the previous 12 months.Waste generation can be linkedwithgrowth in theeconomyandpopulation.Thispopulationand building growth in Taranaki is expected to impact thewaste sector by increasing overall waste generation. Thekerbsidecollectionservicecontractcatersforsomegrowthfornewproperties.However,priortoconsentingtoanyofthese
extensions, theTAswillneedtoconsidertheir impactonthecostoftheserviceforratepayersandcapacityofcurrentplanttoserviceadditionalareas.Reuseandrecyclinginfrastructureinrelationtocommerciallygeneratedwastestreams,includingtheconstructionindustry,arelimited,andmaybeanareawherefutureoptionsneedtobeprovidedtoreducetheimpactofeconomicgrowthonwastedisposedtolandfill.
2.10.2. MarketForcesThe Taranaki waste industry is impacted by technological,regulatory, and social changes. Regional co-ordination is notonlydrivenbythedesireforefficiency,butalsobyconsumerexpectationforthesameservicesandcostsasotherdistricts.This drives a requirement for similar levels of subsidy forrecyclingoptionssuchase-waste,andforwasteminimisationeducation.OfparamountimportanceintheregionistheclosingofthecurrentregionallandfilllocatedinNewPlymouthinJune2019, and a new regional landfill being located near Eltham(approximately50kmfromtheexistingLandfill).Thiswillhaveasignificantimpactonthetransportationcostsofwaste(higherforNewPlymouth,lessforStratfordandSouthTaranaki).TheNewZealandEmissionsTradingSchemeThe New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) is theGovernment’s principal policy response to climate change. Itsupports global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissionswhilemaintainingeconomicproductivity.TheNZETSputsapriceongreenhousegasemissions.Certainsectorsarerequiredtoacquireandsurrenderemissionunitstoaccountfortheirdirectgreenhouse gas emissions or the emissions associated withtheirproducts.Thisincludesthewastesectorandrequiresthelandfillowner(currentlyNPDC)toreportannuallyonemissionsand surrender carbon units to offset any landfill emissions.Currentmarket prices for a carbonunit are $18, the highestithasbeensincetheNZETSbegan(Figure31).AtpresentthecostsofETSfortheLandfillarefullyrealisedasthereisnogasmanagementsystem.Costsforthe2016yearwere$240,000.Withthetrendofincreasingemissionunitprices,thisislikelytocontinuetobeasignificantcostinthefuture.WiththenewCentralLandfill,whichwillhaveagasmanagementsysteminplace,thecostsarelikelytobesignificantlyreduced.
2.10 Future Demand
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|4342|
Commodities Value and SalesThethreeTAshavegainedownershipofcommoditiesfollowingthe renewal of the solid waste contract in 2015. Decreasingvalue of some recycling commodities, unsteady marketsandhealth and safety regulationhave impactedon the cost-effectivenessofrecycling.Therelativelylowpriceofoilrendersrecycledplasticmoreexpensiveformanufacturerstopurchasethan virgin plastic. This has impacted on the MRF throughlowerrevenueforthesecommoditiessincetheplanthasbeenoperating, however all commodities have sold. Scrap metalpriceshavealsodeclined,affectingtheviabilityofscrapmetaldealerswith one in the region closing and others not takingcertainwastestreams.International policy such as China’s ‘Green Fence’ bans theimportofcontaminatedrecyclablesrequiringbalestobecleanand organised. This has implications for users of the system(and hence higher levels of education required for users),sorting and baling processes at the MRF. Further bans ofcommoditiesimportcouldimpactonrecyclingcosts,abilitytorecycleproductsandrequiretheregiontofindanewmarketforthesecommoditiesorinvestigatealternativetechnologies.Unregulated markets, technological developments andconsumerexpectationhave led toawidevarietyofproductsbeingavailableonthemarketalongwithincreasingquantitiesofelectronicproductsinthewastestream.Multi-materialwasteshavelimitedrecyclingoptionsandsecuringviablemarketsforthisbreadthofwastestreamsischallenging.Developmentsinalternative technologies, such as solar and electric vehicles,areleadingtoanincreasingquantityofbatteriesinthewastestreamwithoutanend-lifeoptionsecured.
2.10.3. NATIONALDIRECTIONMinistryfortheEnvironmentCurrent priority work areas for the MfE around solid wasteinclude:• Developingaconsistentnationalframeworkformanaging disposalofwastetolandby2025;• RevisingtheimplementationoftheWasteMinimisation Fundtobemorestrategicandusinganinvestment approachtoaddressingparticularproblems;• Promotingabettercollectionanduseofdata;• Preparingastatutoryreviewofthewastelevy;and• Continuingtoencourageindustrytoparticipateinproduct stewardshipschemes.
ArecentreviewoftheeffectivenessofthewastedisposallevybytheMfEsuggeststhattheorganisationisconsideringbetterguidanceonthewastelevyspendingtoterritorialauthoritiesand the extension of the waste levy to currently non-leviedlandfills.Thereportalsoraisestheissueofthelevyfeebeinginsufficiently high and consequently not fostering behaviourchange.ThegovernmenthastheabilityundertheWMAtodeclareanyproductapriorityproductformandatoryproductstewardship.Whilenomandatoryproductstewardshipschemeshavebeenrequired to date, 14 voluntary product stewardship schemeshavebeenaccredited.Achangeofgovernmentdirectioncouldlead to this part of the WMA being enacted, reducing certain wastestreamsinthelocalenvironment.
Environmental StandardsEvolving environmental standards put pressure on sometraditionalpractices.TheLandfillwasopenedin1975withtherequiredenvironmentalstandardsinplace.RetrofittingoftheLandfill due to changed environmental standards has beencostly. The new landfill will incorporate high environmentalstandardsandcurrentbestpractice;howeverit isanticipatedthat environmental standards will continue to evolve forlandfills,andinthewidercommunity.RecentprosecutionsbytheTRCforincorrectdisposalofwastehighlight the need for planning for wastes and their correctdisposal.
Ministry of Business, Innovation and EmploymentTheMinistryofBusiness, InnovationandEmployment(MBIE)isinvestinginscienceandinnovationandthedevelopmentofregionstoattractfurtherinvestment,raiseincomesandincreaseemploymentopportunities.Aspartofthis,MBIEisinvestingintheCuriousMindsprogrammeandregionalresearchinstitutes.Theobjectiveof‘ANationofCuriousMinds’istoencourageandenablebetterengagementwithscienceandtechnologyacrossallsectorsofNewZealandsociety.Currentlytheprogrammehasfocussedonenhancingtheroleofeducation,publicengagingwithscienceandtechnology,andthesciencesectorengagingwiththepublic.Someoftheseprogrammes(14)havegainedfunding inTaranaki.Somehadawastecomponent, includinglookingatbestpracticeindisposingoforganicsatschoolandmarinelitter.
WasteMINZWasteMINZ,thewastesectorrepresentativebody,coordinatesa number of national initiatives. The National Waste DataFramework was initiated to develop a nationally consistentframework. This includes protocols for gathering, managingand reporting on waste data and considers consolidatingnational waste data reporting. The Love Food Hate Wastecampaign aims to address the high proportion of kitchenwaste in household refuse bins. Many councils around thecountry are implementing this campaign coordinated byWasteMINZ.Standardisedbinlidcolourshavebeendevelopedfor the country to reduce confusion for users and to address contamination in bins. The Council-provided kerbside servicehas implemented these standardised bin lid colours as part of itsnewcontract,includingassociatedcommunications.
A softplastic recycling schemehasbeen implemented in themajorcentresofNewZealand.Thisisadropoffservicewhereuserscanreturnarangeofsoftplasticstoacontainerlocatedatcertainsupermarketsandretailpremises.ItisexpectedthatthisschemewillrollouttoTaranakiinduecourse.
InfrastructureThe region’s road and rail network, Port Taranaki and NewPlymouth airport provide essential services to the regionalcommunity and economy . The state highway system is acriticalpartofthenetworkconnectingmainpopulationcentreswith processing and manufacturing facilities, export outletsandmarkets.ProblemswiththemainroadsinandoutoftheregionhaveimpactedonaccessibilityintoandoutofTaranaki;howeverplansareinplacetoimprovetheroadnetworknorthinparticular.ThisaccessibilityiscriticalfortherecyclingindustryinparticularthatreliesonlinkagestoAuckland,Wellingtonandoverseasdestinationsforexportofcommodities.ThereislimitedrecyclinginfrastructureinTaranaki,particularlyfor the commercial sector.
Illegal Dumping and Littering Illegal dumping and littering is an undesirable and unsafepractice which occurs on our roadsides, parks, reserves,beaches and outside charity shops, and clean-up costs are significant. It is assumed this is a response todisposal costs,although this has not been tested and should be a future focus. Balancingcostsofdisposaltoencouragediversionfromlandfill,whileminimisingillegaldumping,isprudent.
2.10.4. FUTUREPROJECTEDWASTEQUANTITIESBasedoncurrentwastetrendsandanticipatedpopulationandeconomicgrowth, thefollowingfiguresshowlikelyprojectionsfor futurewaste quantities to the regional landfill. These projections assume no additional infrastructure or serviceswill beimplementedaswellasnochangeinthecurrentwastelevy.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|4544|
OnFigure34,theredlineshowstheactualtonnagesofwastecollectedthroughtheCouncil’stransferstations.Thebluelineshowswasteprojectionsbasedona1percentpopulationgrowth,andthegreenlineshowsthesameprojectionsbasedona3percenteconomicgrowth.TheseprojectionshavebeenadjustedtoincludeaprojecteddropofwastevolumesmanagedbytheCounciltransferstations.ThisalterationistotakeintoaccountthehighprobabilityoflocalcontractorscartingtheirwastedirectlytotheCentralLandfillinsteadoftheHaweratransferstation.ThisislikelytooccurifthereisnofinancialincentiveforcontractorstodisposeoftheirwasteattheHaweratransferstation.
3.1 Review of the Existing WMMP targetsThe2012-17WMMPhadanumberoftargetsandactionsrequiredtoachievethesetargets.Comparisonofthecurrentsituationagainstthesetargetsshowsthatmostofthetargetsweremet,exceptthosefortheamountofgreenwastedivertedfromlandfillandtheexpansionoftheexpectedlifeofthelandfill(Table12).
3 Where Do We Want to Be?
TARGET 2010BASELINE
SOURCE PROGRESS2015/16COMMENTS
OVERALLPERFORMANCE
WASTEMINIMISATION-GENERAL
1.By2015decreasethepercapitatonnesofwaste goingtolandfillby5%to10%from2010baseline.
0.427t/ca(according to SWAP)
Landfill weighbridgedata
Realfigure:0.401t/cafor2009/100.320t/cain2015/16(20%decrease)
2.By2015CouncilwillimplementaSWAPanalysis(in-cludingasortandweighofdomestickerbsiderubbish)attheHaweraTransferStation.
n/a SWAP SurveycompletedSept2016;delayed so it could be under-takenpostimplementationofnewkerbsidecollection
3.By2015,achieveanimprovementincustomer satisfactionforrefusecollectionbasedon2010year(orbetterthanpeergroupaverage).
74%veryor fairly satisfied
NationalResearchBureau survey
85%veryandfairlysatisfiedforweeklyrubbishandkerbsidecollectionserviceforyear2015/16
WASTEMINIMISATION-BYWASTESTREAM
Organicanddomesticrecyclables1.By2015decreasethepercapitatonnesofwaste disposedtolandfillby5%to10%from2010baseline.
0.427t/ca(according to SWAP)
Landfillweighbridgedata
Realfigure:0.401t/cafor2009/100.320t/cain2015/16(20%decrease)
2.By2015,increasetheproportionofkerbsidewasterecycledby5%on2010baseline.
26% Collectionandlandfillweighbridgedata
2009/10:26%2015/16:32%(6%increase)
3.By2015organicwastedisposedtolandfilldecreasesby10%.
2,352 t Weighbridge data
2009/10:2352t2015/16:2154t(8%increase)
4.Continuetoprovideatleastonefacilitywhichreceivesnon-industrial/domesticquantitiesofhazardouswasteforappropriate disposal.
1 Haweratransfer station
Haweratransferstationpro-videsadisposalfacility.
WASTE SERVICES AND FACILITIES
1.Ensurethat95%ofSouthTaranakiDistrict’spopulationiswithin20minutes’driveofdisposalorrecyclingfacili-tiesorprovidedwithregularkerbsidecollection.
95% STDC rated property records
97%
2.Closedlandfillsachieve100%compliancewithresourceconsents.
100% TRC annual reports
Fullcomplianceforyear2015/16
3.ImplementwastereductionandminimisationmeasurestoreducewasteemanatingfromthedistrictinordertoextendlifeoftheColsonRoadLandfill.
2016 Surveyoflandfillcontour
EstimatedclosureJune2019–life extended by three years
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND CONTAMINATED SITES
1.Continuetoprovideatleastonefacilitywhichreceivesnon-industrial/domesticquantitiesofhazardouswasteforappropriate disposal.
1 Haweratransfer station
Haweratransferstationpro-videsadisposalfacility.
2.Allenquiriesforinformationconcerning‘contaminated’siteswillbeacknowledgedwithin5workingdaysbytheCouncil.
Servicerequestdata-base
Theorganisationinchargeofcontaminated sites is the TRC. N/A
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|4746|
AspartofthepreliminaryconsultationindevelopingthisWasteAssessment,wasteofficersengagedwithelectedrepresentativesandthecommercialandindustrialsectorviaaworkshop.Inaddition,theconversationswithmembersofthecommunityaspartofthewasteofficers’dailyworkwereconsidered.
Abroadselectionofcompaniesintheregionwasinvitedtoaworkshopaspartofthedevelopmentofthiswasteassessment.Therepresentativeswhoattendedwerehighlyengagedinwastemanagement.Thedesiretoreducewastetolandfillwasstrong,andmostwerealreadydivertingconsiderableproportionsoftheirwaste.Thesectorsharedclearandconsistentconcernsanddesiresaroundwaste.Theareasofimprovementscanbesummarisedundereightmaincategories(Figure35).
BasedonthereviewofoursolidwasteservicesacrosstheDistrict,thefollowingvision,goalsandobjectivesforthenextWMMPare proposed:
Consistently with national guidance, the Council is stronglycommitted todecreasing theamountofwaste landfilledandincreasingtheamountofdivertedwaste.
What is Zero Waste?AccordingtotheZeroWasteInternationalAlliance,ZeroWasteis: a goal that is ethical, economical, efficient and visionary, to guide people in changing their lifestyles and practices to emulate
sustainable natural cycles, where all discarded materials are designed to become resources for others to use. Zero Waste means designing and managing products and processes to systematically avoid and eliminate the volume and toxicity of waste and materials, conserve and recover all resources, and not burn or bury them. Implementing Zero Waste will eliminate all discharges to land, water or air that are a threat to planetary, human, animal or plant health.
GOALSMAXIMISE OPPORTUNITIES toreducewastetolandfillsREDUCEtheharmfulandcostlyeffectsofwasteIMPROVE EFFICIENCY of resource use
OBJECTIVES• ToFosterBehaviourChange• ToPromotePartnershipsandCollaboration• ToEncourageLeadershipandInnovation• ToProvideAccessibleServicesandFacilities
TOWARDS ZERO WASTE
VISION
3.2 Stakeholders’ Feedback 3.3 Strategic Direction
COMMUNITY EDUCATION
` Moreeducation wanted-school,youth, employees.
` Consistent messages across the community.
` Insufficientwaste quantitiesatanyone sitelimitsdiversion options.
` Transportinghazardous waste.
` Limitiedlcoaldiversion options.
` Somewastestreams don’thaveahome.
` Lotsofplastic.
` Contaminatedplastics.
` Biodegradable.
` Flax,agapanthus, cabbage tree, noxious weedshavetogoto landfill.
` Information/guidence needed.
` Poorconsultation process.
` Uncertaintywithnew landfill.
` Logistcs.
` Details and data gap. ` Significantcosts.
` Health and Safety.
COLLABORATION FOR INNOVATION
LOCALSOLUTIONS
PLASTICS AND PACKAGING
NON-COMPOSTABLEGREENWASTE
DISPOSAL
COMMUNICATION /SUPPORT
INDUSTRY DATA COLLECTION AND COLLABORATION
ILLEGAL DUMPING /LITTER
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|4948|
TheCouncilmeasuresperformanceinwastemanagementandminimisationagainsttargetsthatcanbefoundindocumentssuchastheWasteManagementandMinimisationStrategyforTaranaki,theLongTermPlan,andtheWasteManagementPlan.Theproposed targets for theSTDCWMMP2018areset toaddress thegoalsof thiswasteassessmentandarebasedon theexpectedperformanceofrecommendedoptionsinthisdocument.
Lookingback,thefocusofthepastsixyearshasbeenmainlyonthe“recycle,recover,treatanddispose”endofthewastehierarchy. Waste minimisation requires the Council to shiftto thepreferredbehaviourat the topof thewastehierarchy– “avoid, reduce, reuse and recycle”. Achieving large scalebehaviourchangeinthecommunityrequiresathree-prongedapproachinvolvinginfrastructure,educationandpolicy.
3 .5 .1 . INFRASTRUCTURETherecentlyimplementedsolidwastecontractanduseofthenewMRFprovideinfrastructurefortheresidentialsectorthatisconsistentwithaddressingthevisionofthiswasteassessment.However,theWasteAssessmenthighlightsafewinfrastructuregaps:• Thelackofafacilityacceptinge-wasteandcleanfillthat areopenforpublicdisposalinthedistrict,whichhinders wastediversion• Theinadequacyofthecurrent24/7recyclingservice availableatsomeoftheCouncil’stransferstations• Thelackoflocalsolutionsthatsatisfytheprivatesector, includinggreaterdiversionoptionsthatareeconomically- viable• Thelackofunderstandingofthelong-termimplications ofchangingcommoditypricingandchangingwaste streams entering the system • Thelackofunderstandingofruralwastemanagement, whichallowsimplementingsuccessfulservicesfor the rural community.
3 .5 .2 . EDUCATIONWhile the three TAs and the TRC develop every year aprogramme on waste minimisation education, more can bedone.TheWasteAssessmenthashighlightedafeweducationgaps:• Thetargetingofeducationprogrammescurrentlylimited mainlytoresidentialcustomersandstudents• Thelackofunderstandingofgoodpracticebehaviour changestrategiesthatenablestoreducewaste, illegaldumpinganddivertablewastestream contamination,andincreasediversion• Thelimitedroleofeducationinachievingeffectivewaste minimisation
3 .5 .3 . POLICYAfewgapsexistinthepolicysector,despitetheCouncilhavingadoptedaSolidWasteBylawin2013andaKerbsideCollectionPolicyin2016:• ThelimitedroleoftheCouncilinachievingoverallwaste minimisationinthedistrict• ThelackofleadershipfromCentralGovernmentonsome wasteminimisationissues,e.g.productstewardship• Theinconsistentimplementationandenforcementofsolid wastebylawprovisions• Theinconsistentdatacollectiononsolidwaste managementacrossthedistrict:availability,qualityand management.
COUNCIL TARGETS 2015/16BASELINEDATA TARGET INFORMATION SOURCE
WASTE TO LANDFILL
Anyincreaseinwastevolumestolandfilltoremainbelowanyincreaseinregional economic performance.
Totalwastetolandfill:54,000tonnesTaranaki$75,941GDPpercapitaNational$52,953GDPpercapita
Not to exceed currentratio–711kg/$
Weighbridge data andStatisticsNZ
ReducethetotalwastevolumefromSTDCgoingtolandfillby5%by2023,measuredona per capita basis.
STDC0.32tonnes/capita/annum 0.30tonnes/capita/annumby2023
Weighbridge data andStatisticsNZ
ReducethetotalwastevolumeperhouseholdgoingtolandfillfromCouncilkerbsidecollectionby5%by2023.
0.37tonnes/household/year(3,187tonnes;8,542households)
0.35tonnes/household/year
Weighbridge data and STDC rated property records
DiversionofWaste-Recycling
Increasetheamountofhouseholdwastedivertedtorecyclingby1%peryear(Councilprovidedkerbsidecollectiononly).
Waste: 3,366Recycling:1,488Proportion:44%
Weighbridge data
ReducecontaminationofCouncilprovidedkerbsiderecyclingdeliveredtotheMRFto8%orbelow.
12% ≤8% MRFdata
DIVERSIONOFWASTE-ORGANICWASTE
Reducetheamountoforganicwastetolandfillby10%by2023
KerbsidegeneralwastetoLandfill–3,187tonnes/annumx62%organicsTransferstationgeneralwastetoLandfill–5,106tonnes/annumx29%organicsTotal:3,457tonnesperannum
Total: 3,111 tonnes per annum by 2023
Weighbridge data (excludes residual wastefromrecycling) and SWAP data
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
Percentageofcommunitysatisfiedwiththesolidwasteserviceexceeds93%.
93% (including neutrals and excluding ‘don’tknows’)
≥93% ResidentSatisfactionSurvey
TotalnumberofcomplaintsreceivedabouttheCouncil’ssolidwasteserviceduetomissedcollections,bindamageandreplacement,overturnedbin,driverbehaviour,transferstationissuesremainsbelow100per1,000ratedcollections.
Newmeasure <100com-plaints per 1,000ratedcollections.
Internal Customer RequestManagement System (CRM) and STDC ratedproperty records
PUBLIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
95%ofthepopulationhasaccesstoawastedisposalservice–eitherviaakerbsidecollectionorlivewithin20minutes’driveofatransferstation
97% 95% GIS data
COUNCIL TARGETS 2015/16BASELINEDATA TARGET INFORMATION SOURCE
Continuetoprovideatleastonefacilitywhichreceivesnon-industrial/domesticquantitiesofhazardouswasteforappropriate disposal.
1 1 Asset data
Council-operatedsolidwastefacilitiesachieve100%compliancewithresourceconsentconditions.
0 0 TRC
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Oneannualeducationcampaignonwastemanagementandminimisation.
1 1 Regional Solid WasteEducationPlan
Onewastecommunityengagementsurveycompletedeverytwoyears.
N/A 1 Survey
Oneregionalwasteminimisationofficer 1 1 Regional Agreement
Onebi-annualwasteauditfortheCouncilMainOfficebuilding.
0 1 Internal Audit
NumberofreportedillegaldumpingeventsintheDistrictdecreasesby2023
34 30 Internal Customer RequestManagement System (CRM)
3.4 Targets
3.5 Gap Analysis
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|5150|
4.1 Statement of OptionsThis sectioncontainsasummaryof the reasonablypracticableoptionsavailable tomeet theSouthTaranakidistrict’s forecastdemand. Regional waste officers have collectively compiled options and undertaken a comprehensive assessment using thefollowingcriteria:
ValueProposition Isthisinitiativealignedtostakeholderneeds?Isthisinitiativebeingdeliveredthroughpartnerships/collaboration?Does this address our goals?
Cost/Revenue Whatisthecostofimplementingthisinitiative?What are the ongoing costs? Dowehavesufficientexistingstaffresources?Willsavingsbemadebytheinitiative?Isrevenuegeneratedbytheinitiative(whererelevant)?
Infrastructure/Resources Doestheinitiativeutiliseexistinginfrastructureordoesnewinfrastructureneedtobedevel-oped?Dowehavesufficientresources?
CustomerInteraction Doesthisinitiativeencourageinteractionwithourstakeholders?
Risk Whataretheriskstothesuccessoftheproject?
Opportunities Whatopportunitiesaretheretoalignthisinitiativewith?
TheoptionsavailabletotheCouncilinaddressingitsvisionarelistedbelow,includinganassessmentbasedontheabovecriteria,priorityrankingandtheCouncil’sintendedrole.Thetargetaudienceforeachoptionisidentified.ThislistincludesoptionsthatmayormaynotbeadoptedintheWMMP.Optionspresentedinthissectionwouldneedtobefullyresearchedandthecostimplicationunderstood before being implemented. Regionally,wasteofficersscoredeachoptionbasedontheabovecriteriafrom1to5,5beinghigh,1low.Theoptionslistedbelowhavebeenprioritisedbasedonrelativescoringintheassessmentprocessaseitherstatusquo,priority1(scoresgreaterthan24)or2(scoresbetween21and23),orareleftblank(currentlynotapriority;scoredlessthan21).Thosethatareapriority1or2willrequireadditionalresourceand/orbudgetfromCouncilabovecurrent levelsandwillneedtobeconsideredviatheLong-TermPlan.StatusquooptionsencompassallthecommitmentsthattheCouncilalreadyhasinrelationtowastemanagementandminimisation.
KEY TO TARGET GROUPS: CG–Communitygroup.M–Iwi,hapuandMāoricommunitygroupsC&I–CommercialandIndustrial.Ed-Educationprovider.Int–InternalCouncil.Res–Residential.ALL–alloftheabove.
4 How Are We Going to Get There?
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|5352|
BEH
AVIO
UR
CHA
NG
EIs
sue
addr
esse
dRe
fOpti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Achievere
ducti
on
ofpriority
waste
stre
ams
ente
ring
land
fill.
B1Und
ertakeanan
nualpub
lic
educati
onprogram
mean
dassociated
acti
vitie
swith
in
curr
ent r
esou
rces
.
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tedu
catio
n.Regiona
lcollabo
ratio
nwith
inCou
ncils;n
otdelivered
throug
hcollabo
ratio
nwith
othersectors.Intan
giblebe
nefit.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: W
ithinexisting
bud
geta
ndre
sources.Poten
tialred
uctio
nindispo
salcostsdue
to
chan
gesinbeh
aviour.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:C
ommun
icati
onre
sourcesan
dgiveaw
ays.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
onside
rableateacheven
tbutnotbroad
.Ri
sk: Insuffi
cien
tbeh
aviourcha
ngefollo
winged
ucati
on.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Plann
edin
advan
ce.
R: S
tatu
s Q
uoC:
Sta
tus
Quo
B2Und
ertakeaqua
rterlypub
lic
educati
onprogram
me.
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tedu
catio
n.Regiona
lcollabo
ratio
nwith
inCou
ncils;n
otdelivered
throug
hcollabo
ratio
nwith
othersectors.Intan
giblebe
nefit.G
reaterinvolvem
entw
ithcom
mun
itywhe
ncompa
redwith
firsto
ption
.Co
st /
Rev
enue
: Req
uiresad
ditio
nalb
udgeta
ndre
sources.Poten
tialred
uctio
nincostd
ueto
cha
ngesin
be
havior.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: R
equiresde
velopm
ento
fcom
mun
icati
onre
sourcesan
dgiveaw
ays.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
onside
rableinteracti
onate
acheven
tand
acti
vitybutnotbroad
.Ri
sk: Insuffi
cien
tbeh
aviourcha
ngefollo
winged
ucati
on.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Linktoprojectsan
dcurren
tissue
s.
C: N
ot a
pr
iori
ty
B3Im
plem
ent a
targ
eted
ed
ucati
onprogram
mewhich
willre
sultinbeh
aviour
chan
ge th
at a
ddre
sses
the
goal
s of
the
stra
tegy
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tedu
catio
n.Cou
ldbede
livered
throug
hcollabo
ratio
n.Defi
ned
custom
ersegmen
tsin
clud
ingcommercial,fam
ilies,children,elderly,M
āori.Intan
giblebe
nefit.
Cost/B
enefi
t:Req
uiresad
ditio
nalb
udgeta
ndre
sources.Poten
tialred
uctio
nincostd
ueto
cha
ngesin
be
haviou
r.Riskth
athighe
rinvestmen
tmaynotre
sultingreaterben
efit(maynotbelin
earor
expo
nenti
alcorrelatio
n).
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:R
equiresregu
larcommun
icati
onre
sourcesan
dgiveaw
ays.Resea
rchba
sed.
Canalignwith
infrastructure/policyresulting
inin
crea
sedeff
ectiv
eness.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Interactio
nconsiderab
leate
acheven
tand
acti
vity.C
anbetargeted
topartic
ular
audien
cesforgreatereff
ectiv
eness.
Risk
:Riskthatinvestmen
tmaynotachievebroad
levelb
ehaviourcha
nge.Riskofto
oman
ymessages.
Opp
ortunities:Linktoprojectsan
dcurren
tissue
san
dserviceproviders;Id
entifi
esbarrierstocha
nge
andim
plem
entssoluti
onstoadd
ressth
ese,in
crea
sing
likelih
oodofgreaterbeh
aviourcha
nge.Resea
rch
willre
sultinm
orecollabo
ratio
nwith
stakeho
lders.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: N
ot a
pr
iori
ty
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Achievere
ducti
on
ofpriority
waste
stre
ams
ente
ring
land
fill.
B4Und
ertake,p
artic
ipatean
dfu
nd s
ome
regi
onal
and
na
tiona
lresea
rchba
sed
onsustainab
lebeh
aviour
chan
gepracti
cesan
dap
ply
finding
stowaste
minim
isati
onand
m
anag
emen
t pro
gram
mes
.
Valueprop
osition
:Relati
velylo
wcostresea
rchop
tiondu
etoecono
myofscale.C
ollabo
rativ
eap
proa
ch.
Loca
lly a
pplic
able
rese
arch
. Dec
isio
ns b
ased
on
fact
. Co
st /
Rev
enue
:Varies.Smallcon
tributi
onusuallyre
quire
d.Nati
onalro
lloutofp
rogram
mesfu
nded
by
natio
nalb
odye.g.LoveFood
HateWaste,red
ucingou
rcosts.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:N
oinfrastructurere
quire
d.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
forsurveyonly.W
illlead
togreatercustomerinteracti
onifprogram
mesare
impl
emen
ted
base
d on
rese
arch
.Ri
sk: R
elati
velylo
wriskforam
ountspe
nt.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Linkwith
nati
onalprojects;greaterim
pactand
abilitytousepoo
ledresourcesthatcou
ld
notb
ede
velope
dlocally.
R:Statusqu
oC:Statusqu
o
B5Prom
otetheuseofexisting
so
cial
med
ia s
ites
and
faci
li-tie
ssuchascharity
sho
ps.
Res,
M
, CG
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
topp
ortunityto
divertg
oodsand
eng
agewith
others.Reu
seof
good
s.Sup
portcom
mun
ityinfrastructure.C
analsotacklein
approp
riatedu
mping
atc
haritysho
ps.W
ill
need
collabo
ratio
n.Add
ressesourgoa
ls.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Low
cost–
socialm
edia,existing
web
site.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: E
xisting
staffre
sources.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:T
hrou
ghevents,and
online.
Risk
:Socialm
ediasite
scande
clineinuse.B
eing
heldrespon
sibleifan
ything
goe
swrong
(safegua
rds
andcond
ition
stoaccom
panyanyedu
catio
n).C
ouldbepe
rceivedasunfairifon
lypromoti
ngaselectio
nof
cha
rity
sho
ps.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Sup
portin
itiati
vesasth
eyarise.O
pportunityto
link
peo
plewith
wastem
inim
isati
on.
R: P
rior
ity 1
B6 C
: Sta
tus
Quo
B6Prom
oteho
mecompo
sting
uti
lisingexistin
gcommun
ica-
tionaven
uesan
dresources.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tedu
catio
n.Onlylikelytore
achthosealread
yen
gagedincom
post
-in
g.Co
st /
Rev
enue
:Low
cost.
Infrastructure/re
sourcesrequ
ired
:Com
mun
icati
onre
sources.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
Risk
: Low
risk.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Min
imal
.
R:Statusqu
oC:
Pri
ority
1
B7Deliverhom
ecompo
sting
worksho
psand
incenti
ves.
Res,
M
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tedu
catio
n.Resea
rchiden
tifiesnee
dforon
goingsupp
ortincom
-po
sting
forlong
term
beh
aviourcha
nge.Priority
wastestrea
m.C
anbede
livered
app
ropriatelyfo
rtarget
commun
ities.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: E
xterna
ltrainerorstaff
resource.V
enue
and
resources.Cou
ldcon
side
rbinsubsidies.
Potenti
alfo
rspon
sorship.
Infrastructure/re
sourcesrequ
ired
:Ven
ue,stafftime,edu
catio
nresources.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:W
orksho
ppa
rticipa
ntsan
don
goingsupp
ortforatten
dees.
Risk
: Low
risk.Partic
ipan
tsm
aynotim
plem
entlea
rningslo
ngte
rm(b
utth
iswou
ldberedu
cedwith
on
goin
g su
ppor
t).
Opp
ortu
nity
: Alignwith
garde
nfestivals.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|5554|
COLL
ABO
RATI
ON
AN
D P
ART
NER
SHIP
SIs
sue
addr
esse
dRe
fOpti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Supp
ort a
nd
prom
ote
orga
ni-
satio
nsand
busi-
ness
es c
ontr
ibut
-ingtowardsgoa
ls
of th
is p
lan.
C1Providead
hocwastelevy
distribu
tion.
CG,
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Com
mun
itygroup
s/ind
ividua
lshaveaccessto
fund
ingsupp
ortforwastere
lated
initiati
ves.
Cost/Ben
efit:Havewastelevyavailablefordistribu
tionbu
tund
ertakenon
adh
ocbasis.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:Staffre
sourcestore
view
app
licati
onsforwastelevy.Lessad
ministrati
on
than
con
testab
lefu
nd.A
llocatio
noffu
ndsmaynotbeop
timal.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:D
irectwith
app
lican
tonly.In
directth
roug
hprojectsth
athaveinteracti
onwith
in
com
mun
ity.
Risk
: Successfulapp
lican
tmaynotachieveintend
edoutcome.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Sup
portin
itiati
vesasth
eyarise.
R: S
tatu
s Q
uoC:
Sta
tus
Quo
C2Providecontestablefund
for
wastelevy.
CG,
M,
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Com
mun
itygroup
s/ind
ividua
lshaveaccessto
fund
ingsupp
ortforwastere
lated
initiati
ves.Tim
eframesand
processcan
bead
vertisedwidely.Cou
ldbean
opp
ortunityfo
rgreatercol-
labo
ratio
nam
ongstg
roup
san
dwith
Cou
ncil.Can
requ
ireeng
agem
entw
ithspe
cificcom
mun
ities.
Cost/Ben
efit:Havewastelevyavailablefordistribu
tion.Transpa
rentand
wellp
ublicised
.Ifn
otre
gion
-allycoo
rdinated
therewou
ldbead
ditio
naladm
inistrati
vecostscom
paredtoamou
ntoffun
ding
avail-
able
. In
fras
truc
ture
/ R
esou
rces
: Staffre
sourcestore
view
app
licati
onsforwastelevywith
inadvertised
time-
fram
es.R
equireprocessto
bede
velope
d.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:D
irectwith
app
lican
tonly.In
directth
roug
hprojectsth
athaveinteracti
onwith
in
commun
ity.Interactio
nmightin
crea
sewith
advertising.
Risk
: Successfulapp
lican
tdoe
sn’tachieveintend
edoutcome.Com
petiti
veenviro
nmen
tand
assessm
ent
canlowerrisk.Low
riskofnotspe
ndingmon
eyifnoorlimite
dnu
mbe
rofapp
licati
ons.Riskofsub
siding
a
busi
ness
(can
be
addr
esse
d th
roug
h cr
iteri
a).
Opp
ortu
nity
: Toad
vertiseata
rgeted
outcomewan
tedbyapp
lican
ts,e.g.app
licati
onstore
ducefo
od
waste.C
anbean
othe
rop
portun
ityto
encou
ragere
search,edu
catio
n,in
novatio
norhavean
othe
rstake-
holderpromoti
ngwastem
inim
isati
on.A
udita
bletrail.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C:
Not
a
prio
rity
C3Provideothe
rsupp
orttoor
-ganisatio
nsand
businesses,
e.g.th
roug
haw
ards,n
et-
working
events,worksho
ps,
med
ia,sup
porting
and
pro
-moti
ngre
cyclingatevents.
CG,
M,
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Com
mun
itygroup
s/ind
ividua
lshaveaccessto
fund
ingan
dothe
rsupp
orta
ndac-
colade
sforwastere
latedinitiati
ves.Cou
ldbean
opp
ortunityfo
rgreatercollabo
ratio
nam
ongstg
roup
san
dwith
Cou
ncil.
Cost/B
enefi
t:Dep
ende
ntonactiv
ity.C
ouldm
akewastelevyfu
ndingavailableforthis.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:Staffre
sourcestom
anagerequ
estsand
acti
vitie
s.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:D
irectwith
app
lican
tonly.In
directth
roug
hprojectsth
athaveinteracti
onwith
in
commun
ity.O
pportunityfo
rprom
otion
onbinsand
throug
haw
ards.W
iderinteracti
onasseekingspon
-so
rshi
p.Ri
sk:Low
risk.Poten
tialcon
taminati
onth
roug
huseofre
cyclingbinsate
vents.Possibleissuewith
fund
-ingspon
sorship(e.g.spo
nsorshipwith
draw
nordisconti
nued
).Opp
ortunities:Sup
portin
itiati
vesasth
eyarise.C
anprovide
opp
ortunityto
alignwith
infrastructure/
policye.g.green
wastesub
sidy.
R:Statusqu
oC:Statusqu
o
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Redu
cewaste
gene
rate
d in
Tarana
ki.
C4Co
llabo
ratewith
others
includ
ingscho
ols,te
rtiary
educati
onprovide
rs,com
-mun
ityorgan
isati
ons,and
bu
sine
ssesto
promotewaste
minim
isati
on,w
hichcan
lead
toth
ede
velopm
ento
finno
vativ
esolutio
nsto
waste
chal
leng
es.
CG,
M, E
d,
C&I
ValueProp
osition
:Ind
ustrykeen
tocollabo
rate,com
mun
itygroup
swan
tto.In
directeffe
ct–lo
ngte
rm.
Cost/ben
efit:Hardtodetermine,cou
ldbestaff
timeorinfrastructure.See
dmon
eym
ayberequ
ired(if
fund
ingrequ
esttoCo
uncil,projectw
ouldhavetoalignwith
WMMP).R
even
uewilldep
endon
opti
ons
beingpu
rsue
d.M
ayachieveecono
miesofscaleth
roug
hcollabo
ratio
n.M
aygetsom
eothe
rfund
ing.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: D
epen
dsonproject.Low
erifsee
ding
.Collabo
ratio
nwillre
duceCou
ncil
resourcebutalsorequ
iresCo
uncilresou
rceab
ovecurren
t.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:M
ed–highasnotbee
ndo
nebefore.M
aynotsee
resultsin
sho
rtte
rmwhich
mayim
pactoncontribu
tion.
Risk
: Par
tner
s co
uld
pull
out.
O
ppor
tuni
ty: H
igh–op
portun
itiesfo
rfuturedevelop
men
tand
significan
tcha
nge.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
Provideconsisten-
cyand
efficien
cies
for
our
cust
omer
s th
roug
h re
gion
al
collabo
ratio
n.
C5Develop
region
allycon
sisten
tco
ntra
cts,
co
nsis
tent
mes
sagi
ng a
nd
bylaws,and
supp
ortin
gsche
mesth
at
supp
ort o
ur g
oals
suc
h as
agrecoveryagriche
micalcol
-lecti
ons.
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Highexpe
ctati
onfo
rregion
alcollabo
ratio
nfrom
reside
nts,businessan
dCo
uncil.
Jointcon
tracts.C
oste
ffecti
veinfrastructureand
region
allycon
sisten
t.Accesstoqua
lityfaciliti
es.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Increased
efficien
cies,d
ecreased
costsfrom
econo
miesofscale.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: InvestinWMO–sha
redcost.Econo
miesofscale–sha
ring
costo
fresou
rces
(e.g
. des
ign
cost
s).
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
onsisten
tmessaging
tocom
mun
ities.Taran
akiSolidW
asteM
anagem
entC
om-
mittee
.Ri
sk: Y
es.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Yes.A
saregion
iden
tifyne
wopp
ortunitie
stogetherand
sha
reinform
ation
.
R: S
tatu
s Q
uoC:Statusqu
o
C6Th
e TA
s an
d TR
C co
llabo
rate
toprovide
aW
MOto
imple-
men
t the
Reg
iona
l Was
te
Strategy,W
asteEdu
catio
nSt
rate
gy a
nd W
MM
P.
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Highexpe
ctati
onfo
rregion
alcollabo
ratio
nfrom
reside
nts,businessan
dCo
uncil.Ad-
dressessomeofth
eCo
uncils’n
eedforresources.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:R
educed
costa
ndre
sourcere
quire
men
ts–sha
redbe
twee
ncoun
cils.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:P
rovide
sresources.Drivesprod
uctiv
ity.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
onsisten
cyacrossregion
and
avenu
eforna
tiona
lcollabo
ratio
nRi
sk: Sha
redlowrisk.Staffm
anagem
ent.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Alignm
entw
ithTRC
and
TAs.Sha
redkn
owledg
ean
dprocesses.
R: S
tatu
s Q
uoC:Statusqu
o
C7Re
gion
allyalignsolid
waste
bylawsthatwillcon
side
rcentrallan
dfill,con
tamina-
tionan
dredu
cing
wasteto
land
fill.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Highforad
dressing
WMA’sgo
als,add
ressesCou
ncilsnee
dforda
ta(b
enefi
tnati
on-
ally)a
ndcon
sisten
trules.Low
ercrossbou
ndarywasteissues.N
eedsto
beaccompa
nied
byap
prop
riate
infr
astr
uctu
re.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:O
ne-offcostsfo
rlegalreview.C
onsulta
tioncosts(w
ithinbud
geta
sinclud
edin
current
review
sched
ule).C
ouldre
ducecostd
ueto
region
alcollabo
ratio
n.W
illre
quire
add
ition
alre
sourcesto
implem
ent.Som
ecostin
develop
ingsoftwareforprocessing
licenses.Som
erevenu
ethroug
had
min
cost
s.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: R
equiresad
ditio
nalresou
rcesfo
rim
plem
entatio
nofcha
nged
bylaw
s.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
onsisten
cyacrossregion
and
avenu
eforna
tiona
lcollabo
ratio
n.Sho
uldgene
rate
engagemen
twith
provide
rsand
usersofservice.
Risk
:Som
eriskin
negati
vecom
mun
ityre
spon
seto
cha
ngesin
bylaw
s.Im
plem
entatio
nmaynotbeef
-fecti
veifin
sufficien
tresou
rcesto
implem
enta
ndpow
erto
enforce.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Con
sisten
trulesacrossregion
and
nati
onaldatacollecti
on.Low
ercrossbou
ndarywaste
issu
es.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|5756|
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Provideconsisten-
cyand
efficien
cies
for
our
cust
omer
s th
roug
h re
gion
al
collabo
ratio
n.
C8Providemod
elcon
tract
clau
sesarou
ndwastem
an-
agem
enta
ndm
inim
isati
on
and
infr
astr
uctu
re.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Highforad
dressing
goa
lsand
collabo
ratio
n.Regiona
llycon
sisten
t.Accesstoqua
lity
faciliti
es.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Increased
efficien
ciesfo
rbu
sine
ssado
pting
con
tractsorinfrastructure;d
ecreased
costs
from
eco
nom
ies
of s
cale
. In
fras
truc
ture
/ R
esou
rces
:Initia
ldevelop
men
tcostb
utong
oing
lowcosttomaintain.
Custom
erin
teracti
on: C
onsi
sten
cy a
cros
s re
gion
in c
omm
erci
al s
ecto
r.Ri
sk:Sha
redrisk.W
hatisit?
Opp
ortu
nity
: Whe
ncontractscomeup
forrene
wal.U
pdateprocurem
entm
anua
land
processto
includ
eso
me
sust
aina
bilit
y cl
ause
s
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 2
C9Bringforw
ardtheWastePlan
cycl
e fo
r ST
DC
and
SDC
to
beado
pted
in202
3toalign
with
NPD
Can
dallowfo
ra
region
alwasteplan.
Int
Valueprop
osition
:Processm
oreeffi
cien
tand
con
sisten
cy.B
etteralignm
ento
fanycha
ngesacross
region
.Highe
rcollabo
ratio
ninplann
ingprocess.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Increased
efficien
cies,d
ecreased
costsfrom
econo
miesofscale.IncreaseforSTDC,SDC
incon
sulting
outside
ofLTP.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: N
o ch
ange
. Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:C
onsisten
tmessaging
tocom
mun
ities.
Risk
:Gen
erallylo
w,excep
tifo
neparto
fcom
mun
itywan
tsdifferen
toutcomes.R
educingriskto
SDC/
STDCasinform
ation
availableyearpriorto
LTP.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Regionwideconsultatio
nan
didea
s.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
LEA
DER
SHIP
AN
D IN
NO
VAT
ION
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
“WalktheTalk”
L1Develop
anin-hou
sewaste
stra
tegy
for
the
Coun
cil,
iden
tifying
allwastestrea
ms
and
plan
for
redu
cing
or
diverting
these7
2 .
Int
Valueprop
osition
:Sho
wslead
ership,m
odelsgo
odbeh
avioran
dmakesiteasierforothe
rorganisatio
ns.
Educati
onto
ol.Low
collabo
ratio
n.Red
uceswasteto
land
fill.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Staffcost,cou
ldlead
tom
oreexpe
nsivego
odsan
dprocesses;Con
tractcost.Cou
ld
haveinfrastructurecosts.C
anbesaving
sinre
ducedwasteto
land
fill.Norevenu
eop
portun
ities.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:C
ouldhaveInfrastructure.Staffre
sourceto
develop
strategyan
dim
ple-
men
t.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:In-hou
secustomers.Com
mun
ityfa
ciliti
escou
ldbehigh
.Ri
sk: C
ostm
ayoutweigh
ben
efit.
Opp
ortu
nity
:With
otherorgan
isati
ons.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
Achievehighe
rratesofdiversion
of
recy
clab
les
from
reside
ntial
refu
se.
L2Worktogetherwith
waste
serviceproviderstoprovide
op
tionsfo
rdiversionan
dredu
cecon
taminati
onin
re
cycl
ing7
3 .
Res,
M
, C&
I
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
tgreaterra
ngeofitem
srecycled
.Som
eop
tionsm
aynotbeascon
-venien
taskerbside
recycling.Req
uiredforMRF
torun
efficien
tly,m
inim
iseriskto
workersand
ensure
prod
uctsellsonmarket.In
crea
sedon
e-on
-one
ifhaveincrea
sedresourceto
‘coa
ch’residen
tsabo
ut
wha
ttorecycle.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: N
ewserviceslikelytobeprovided
byothe
rs.R
equireson
goingtargeted
edu
catio
n/
commun
icati
ons.Reven
uefrom
saleofcom
mod
ities.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: Staffre
sourceswillin
crea
seth
roug
hau
dits,m
oreface-to-facecom
mun
ica-
tionsetc;advertisingan
dbylawim
plem
entatio
n.Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:H
ighthroug
htargeted
and
relevantcom
mun
icati
onRi
sk: Schem
esusuallyro
lledou
ttomajorcen
tresin
itially.R
iskofhighcontam
inati
onre
sulting
inth
een
dofth
eprog
rammeinth
eregion
.Tha
tinvestm
entd
oesno
tprodu
cedesire
dchan
ge.R
iskoflimite
dmarketfornew
wastestrea
mth
atisdiverted(e.g.p
olystyrene
).O
ppor
tuni
ty: A
lignwith
otherre
gion
s.Useexisting
markets,socialm
edia,exposand
recyclingpick-up
daysto
deliverm
essage.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C:
Pri
ority
1
L3Prom
oteim
proved
sou
rce
sepa
ratio
nan
dexistin
gservices.
Res,
M
, C&
I
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
topp
ortunitie
stodivertw
asteand
redu
cecosts.R
equiresthou
ght
andtim
ebyusers.A
chievesgo
alsofre
use,re
cycle.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: R
equirestargeted
edu
catio
nan
dmasscommun
icati
on.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:Staffre
sources
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Targetedcommun
icati
onto
com
mun
itiesand
indirectviasocialm
edia.
Risk
: Tha
tinvestm
entd
oesno
tprodu
cedesire
dchan
ge.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Utiliseexistin
gmed
iaplatforms.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 1
L4Co
nsiderin
itiati
vesthatsup
-po
rtth
erecyclingofwaste
stre
ams
not r
ecyc
led
or n
ot
recycled
effe
ctively.
Res,
M
, C&
I
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
topp
ortunitie
stodivertw
asteand
redu
cecosts.A
chievesgo
alsof
reuse,re
cycle.Id
eallywou
ldnee
dtobefree
foruserto
maxim
iseuse.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: D
epen
dentonite
mand
market.Cou
ldalsocostCou
ncilmoretim
etore
cordinfoand
de
alwith
produ
ct/snotnecessarilyin
clud
edin
con
tract.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: H
&Sprovisioniflocatedattran
sferstatio
ns.D
atacollecti
onbyservicepro-
vide
r.Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk: R
ecyclin
gmarketsarevolati
le.R
iskofsub
siding
awastesteam
thatdoe
sno
trea
chnew
peo
ple
who
willre
cycle,and
wesubsidisethosewho
arealre
adyrecyclingtheseite
ms(e.g.u
sedoil).
Opp
ortu
nity
: Respo
ndto
marketo
pportunitie
s.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|5958|
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Redu
ceenviro
n-m
enta
l har
m a
nd
costbydiverting
organicwaste
from
land
fill.
L5Prom
otetheuseofexisting
gree
nwasteprovide
rs.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Highde
man
dforCo
uncil-p
rovide
dkerbside
green
wastecollecti
on.P
riority
waste
stream
.Sup
portsexistin
gbu
sine
sses.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Stafftimean
dcommun
icati
ons.Red
uceprob
lemwasteto
man
ageatland
fill.
Infrastructure/re
sourcesrequ
ired
:Low
resourcesrequ
ired.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Com
mun
icati
onstore
side
nts.
Risk
: Provide
rsdono
tprovide
qua
lityofservicewan
tedbystakeho
lders.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Buildbusinessesofexisting
wasteserviceprovide
rs.Low
requ
iremen
tforCou
ncilsto
invest/rep
licateinfrastructureth
atisalre
adyincom
mun
ity.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
L6Im
plem
entb
ylaw
s,licens
-in
g an
d pr
icin
g to
enc
oura
ge
diversionofgreen
waste.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Willbeeff
ectiv
einachieving
diversion
,ife
nforced.W
illhavene
gativ
e(sho
rtte
rm?)
impa
ctonwasteserviceprovide
rsand
usersofservice(e
speciallyifpricesarehigh
forwastedispo
sal).
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Inten
sivecap
ital–legalinp
ut,staffre
sources.Cou
ldre
ducecosto
fman
agingpriority
wasteto
land
fill.So
rted
waste,b
etterdata,re
ducecostsate
nd.
Infrastructure/re
sourcesrequ
ired
:Staffre
sourcesan
dexternalprofessiona
l/legalservicesreview
.Extensiveconsultatio
nwou
ldberequ
iredtoado
ptnew
bylaw
.Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:H
ighwith
serviceprovide
r.Ri
sk:Insuffi
cien
tstaffre
sourceto
enforcebylaw
s.Serviceprovide
rsnotadh
eringtobylaw
s.Nee
dto
ensureth
ereisinfrastructurein
placeto
caterfo
rchan
gestobylaw
setc.(a
lternati
vestoland
fill).
Opp
ortu
nity
: Linktore
view
ofw
astebylaw
san
dlicen
sing
.The
ope
ning
ofthe
Cen
tralland
fillcou
ldbe
anopp
ortunityto
encou
rage/en
forcegreatergree
nwastediversion
.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
Redu
cepoten
tial
environm
ental
and
pers
onal
ha
rm, a
nd im
-proveae
sthe
tics
of c
omm
unity
by
redu
cing
ille
gal
dum
ping
and
lit-
teri
ng74
L7Develop
acom
preh
ensive
stra
tegy
to re
duce
ille
gal
dumping
and
littering7
5
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Stron
gde
sirebypu
blic,con
tractors,cha
ritystores,m
arineen
vironm
enta
dvocates
toend
illegald
umping
and
littering.W
illre
quire
collabo
rativ
eap
proa
chbetwee
nagen
ciesand
com
-mun
ities.Implem
entatio
nba
sedon
bestp
racti
ceand
researchlikelyto
havemoresuccessfuloutcome.
Implem
entatio
nwilladd
ressgoa
lofred
ucingha
rm.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: R
esea
rch,fo
rensicsad
vice,con
sulta
tionan
dstrategydevelop
men
t.Im
plem
entatio
nof
strategym
ayin
clud
eed
ucati
on,cha
ngeofpricing
,enforcemen
tcosts,and
collecti
onofd
umping
.Poten
-tia
lrecoveryofcostsfrom
offe
nders.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: Strategyde
velopm
ent–
staff/externa
linp
ut.Implem
entatio
nwillre
quire
resourcesan
dpo
tenti
allyinfrastructure.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:H
ighbe
twee
nagen
ciesinvolved
.Mod
erateinteracti
onwith
pub
licasim
plem
ent-
ed(d
evelop
men
tofstrategymayhavelessinteracti
on).
Risk
:Strategyde
velopm
entislowrisk.Riskofagenciesno
thavingresourcestocon
tributetostrategy
developm
ent.Lim
itedbu
dget/resou
rcesfo
rim
plem
entatio
noffind
ings.D
ueto
num
berofagencies
(and
team
swith
inagencies)th
ereisariskoflo
wagencyen
gagemen
t–nee
dtohavea‘driver’with
in
eachagency.Diffi
culttoeng
agewith
‘dum
pers’com
mun
ity.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Linktoexisting
research.N
ation
aldiscussionarou
ndserviceprovision
forfree
domcam
p-er
s.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Redu
cepoten
tial
environm
ental
and
pers
onal
ha
rm, a
nd im
-proveae
sthe
tics
of c
omm
unity
by
redu
cing
ille
gal
dum
ping
and
lit-
teri
ng74
L8I nvestigateim
proved
recy
-clingop
tionsin
pub
licplaces.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Provide
sconsistentm
essaging
and
aservicesim
ilartohom
e.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:C
apita
lofb
ins,collecti
onand
sortin
gofre
cyclingan
ddisposalofresidua
lwaste(m
ight
endup
with
morewastecollected
forsomearea
s).
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: B
insan
dcollecti
oncon
tract.Cou
ldin
clud
e‘W
astestatio
ns’rathe
rthan
just
having
litterbins.Can
useacon
sisten
tmessagealigne
dtokerbsidebran
d.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:M
oder
ate.
Risk
: Cou
ldattractdum
ping
nea
rbins.C
ouldbegreaterpo
tenti
alfo
rcontam
inati
onofrecyclin
gbins.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Cou
ldin
corporateservicingofbinsintonextregiona
lcollecti
oncon
tracttogetb
etter
econ
omiesofscale(currentlyissep
aratecontractsrunbydifferen
tcou
ncilteam
s).O
pportunityto
sup
-po
rtbeh
aviourcha
nge.Alte
rnati
vefu
ndingmaybeavailable.Cou
ldalignwith
the“clean
green
”im
age
ofth
ecoun
trydirected
towardsinternati
onalto
urists.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 1
L9Su
pportC
lean
-upWee
k–by
prom
oting
and
providing
free
accessto
tran
sferstatio
nfor
Clea
n-up
Wee
keven
ts76
.
CGVa
lueprop
osition
:Existing
eventcoo
rdinated
ata
nati
onallevel.En
courageslo
calcom
mun
ityto
pickup
rubb
ish(and
poten
tiallynotdroprubb
ish).
Cost
/ R
even
ue: P
roviding
free
dispo
salw
ouldcom
eatacosttoCo
uncil(curren
tlylessth
an$2,00
0pe
rye
ar).
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: Socialm
ediaposts.C
ommun
icati
onwith
tran
sferstatio
ns.D
ispo
salatR
TS.
H&S(trafficman
agem
entp
lans).
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk: M
orecollecti
onsha
ppen
ingou
tsideofwee
k.Hea
lthand
safety.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Leveragesoffnati
onalcam
paign.
R:Statusqu
oC:
Sta
tus
Quo
L10
Conti
nuetoprovide
aweb
fo
rm a
nd p
hone
line
for
the
publ
ic to
repo
rt il
lega
l dum
p-in
g.
ALL
Valueprop
osition
:Easyforpu
blicto
repo
rtdum
pedrubb
ish.NPD
Ccoordina
tescontactin
gcorrect
agen
cyto
organ
isecollecti
on.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: M
inorcostsfo
rman
aging,covered
byexistin
gbu
dgets.Collecti
oncovered
byexistin
gco
ntra
cts.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:W
ebfo
rm,p
hone
line
con
nected
toNPD
Ccallcentre.R
equiresresources
ineachagen
cyto
respon
d–with
inexisting
bud
getsbutwou
ldnee
dtohavemoreresourceto
man
age
consistentlywell.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:O
ne-w
ayto
Cou
ncilviasocialm
ediaorcallcentre.
Risk
: Trustth
atre
spon
sibleagen
cywillre
spon
d.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Com
mun
ityvigilance.
R:Statusqu
o
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
Agg
rega
te c
om-
mer
cial
and
in-
dustrialwastesto
accessdiversion
markets.
L11
Investigateopti
onsforaggre-
gatin
gC&
Iwasteto
maxim
ise
diversion.In
clud
ingaC&
IMRF.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Wellaligne
dtocustomernee
ds.Stron
gcollabo
ratio
n.Buildingrelatio
nships.Sho
uld
lead
tore
ducti
onin
wasteorha
rm(o
utcomeofinvestigatio
n).
Cost
/ R
even
ue:C
ontractorcosts.Poten
tialforbusinesstoinvestin
study.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: N
oinfrastructurein
itially.P
rofessiona
lservicesrequ
ired(costu
nqua
ntifia
ble
at th
is s
tage
). Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:Stron
g.Resea
rchwilleng
agecustom
ers.
Risk
:Fea
sibilitystud
ycouldbe
outda
teddu
etocha
ngeofte
chno
logy.C
ouldlead
todem
andbycom
mu-
nityfo
rinvestmen
t.M
ayid
entifylowvalue
/highcostin
proceed
ing.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Mayid
entifyne
wopti
ons.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: N
ot a
pri
-or
ity
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|6160|
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Facilitatelocal
diversionan
ddis-
posalo
ption
sfor
theC&
Isector.
L12
Develop
aninform
ation
po
rtal
78.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Collabo
ratio
n,C&Iw
antb
etterinfoand
poo
lresou
rces.Ind
irectwayto
redu
ce
waste.Targetsth
osethatwan
ttoredu
cewaste.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Soft
warede
velopm
enta
ndm
anagem
ent.Staffto
adm
inister.Po
tenti
alfo
rcommercial
fund
ing(advertisingsales).
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:Soft
ware,and
uncertaintie
son
thestaff
mem
berman
agingthepo
rtal.
Custom
erin
teracti
on: H
igh
for
thos
e en
gagi
ng in
por
tal.
Risk
:Riskoflo
wlevelo
fuse.Infrequ
entu
se.H
ighup
fron
tthe
nde
cline.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Forum
forCo
uncilw
antin
gtocon
sult.Datacollecti
on.LinktootherC&Iinitia
tives.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
L13
Con
sider
alte
rnat
ive
tech
nolo
gies
for p
roce
ss-
ing
of w
aste
for c
om-
mer
cial
sect
or.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Desire
toworktowardszerowasteto
land
fill.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Fea
sibilitystud
y.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:E
xterna
lcon
sulta
nt.Stafftime.Resea
rch.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Poten
tialsup
pliersand
users.
Risk
:Low
butm
ayra
iseexpe
ctati
ons.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Cou
ldid
entifylocalsoluti
ons.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: N
ot a
pri
-or
ity
Increa
sediversion
ofCon
structi
on
andDem
olition
W
aste
L14
Investigateopti
onsforthe
establishm
ento
faclean
fillin
the
dist
rict
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Provide
foralternati
vedispo
salo
ption
/s.R
educeC&
Dwasteto
land
fill.Add
resscur
-re
nt c
usto
mer
nee
d.
Cost/Reven
ue:Fea
sibilitystud
y.
Infrastructure/Resou
rces:E
xterna
lcon
sulta
nt.Stafftime.Resea
rch.
Custom
erinteracti
on:Low
.Risk:Low
butm
ayra
iseexpe
ctati
ons.
Opp
ortunity:C
ouldprovide
aserviceth
atiscurrentlynotprovide
d.Possibleprivate/commercialdevel
-op
men
t.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 1
L15
Investigateopti
onsfortran
s-po
rtand
dispo
salo
fC&D
waste
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Provide
foralternati
vedispo
salo
ption
/s.R
educeC&
Dwasteto
land
fill.Add
resscur
-re
nt c
usto
mer
nee
d.
Cost
/ R
even
ue:Fea
sibilitystud
y.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:E
xterna
lcon
sulta
nt.Stafftime.Resea
rch.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Poten
tialsup
pliersand
users.
Risk
:Low
butm
ayra
iseexpe
ctati
ons.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Cou
ldprovide
aserviceth
atiscurrentlynotprovide
d.Possibleprivate/commercial
agreem
ent/s.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 1
L16
Incenti
visecon
tractoran
dcustom
erstodivertm
aterials
from
gen
eralre
fusewhe
re
poss
ible
(at a
ll tr
ansf
er s
ta-
tions).
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Increasewastediversion
.Co
st /
Rev
enue
: Investigatio
nrequ
ired.In
-hou
se.M
ayre
quire
con
tractv
ariatio
ntoim
plem
ent.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: Stafftimetoinvestigate.H
aveSW
APfin
ding
s;m
ayre
quire
mod
ificatio
nto
infr
astr
uctu
re.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk: C
ouldra
iseH&Srisksinim
plem
entatio
n–maybehigh
costinrelatio
ntodesigning
infrastructure
toelim
inateH&Srisk.R
iskofcostly
diversion
due
toth
elackofe
stab
lishe
dlocalsoluti
ons.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Aud
itshow
spo
tenti
alfo
rdiversion.
C: P
rior
ity 2
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Develop
and
im-
plem
ente
ffecti
ve
andeffi
cien
tpol
-icyan
dpractic
es
basedon
qua
lity
data
to s
uppo
rt
our
goal
s.
L17
Alignda
tacollecti
onto
Nati
onalW
asteDataFram
e-work.
Int
Valueprop
osition
:Aligne
dtootherTAsan
dna
tiona
ldataset.Framew
orkde
velope
dincollabo
ratio
nwith
othercou
ncils.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Som
eda
taalre
adycollated.Bylaw
nee
dsto
bereview
edto
ena
bleda
tacollecti
on.
Somead
ditio
nalstafftimetocollect,p
rocessand
ana
lysedatainacon
sisten
tman
ner.Maynee
dto
investin
ded
icated
soft
ware.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: N
oinfrastructurere
quire
d.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk: C
onfid
entia
lityofdatatobemaintaine
d.O
ppor
tuni
ty:R
egiona
llycon
sisten
tbylaw
stogathe
rda
ta.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
L18
Mon
itorsuccessofwaste
minim
isati
onprogram
mes
throug
hwastedispo
sal
reco
rds,
SW
AP,
and
cus
tom
er
surveys.
Int,
Re
sVa
lueprop
osition
:Program
mesbased
onproven
success.Finan
ciallyprude
nt.
Decisionsfo
rfutureinvestmen
tbased
onfact.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: SWAPalread
yun
dertaken
6yea
rly.Surveysand
datareview
requ
irestafftimetoad-
min
iste
r. In
fras
truc
ture
/ R
esou
rces
: Noinfrastructurere
quire
d.M
aynee
dtoinvestin
ded
icated
soft
ware.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
–surveyon
ly.
Risk
:Poo
rrespon
seonsurveys.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Can
inform
futureprogram
mesbased
onsuccessfactorsiden
tified
inm
onito
ring
.
R:Statusqu
o
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
L19
Engagewith
ruralcom
mun
ity
toid
entifywastebeh
aviours,
gapsin
service/sand
cus
-tomersati
sfactio
n.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Notahighde
man
dorawaren
essofissuesin
ruralwastesector.Po
tenti
alfo
rhigh
ha
rmto
enviro
nmen
t.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Low
costa
swou
ldbefeasibilitystudy
only.M
aybesomerecommen
datio
nsto
imple-
men
t.In
fras
truc
ture
/ R
esou
rces
: Professiona
lservicesforsurvey/con
sulta
tion.Con
sulta
tionwith
ruralcom
-mun
itiesin
clud
ingda
iry,lifestyleblockow
ner,Māo
ri.W
ouldnee
dtobeinde
pend
ento
fTAs.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:H
ighwith
ruralcom
mun
ity.
Risk
: Mayra
iseexpe
ctati
ons.Com
mun
itym
aynoteng
agewith
Cou
ncil.Nee
dsm
aynotbeachievab
le.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Qua
ntifyissuesand
usedatatom
axim
iseruralservicesne
eded
.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
L20
Und
erstan
decon
omicli
-ab
ilityofw
astein
thefuture,
incl
udin
g co
nsid
erin
g al
ter-
nativ
etechno
logies.
Int
Valueprop
osition
:Lon
gterm
strategicand
fina
ncialp
lann
ing.W
orking
towardszerowaste.
Cost/Reven
ue:C
onsultan
torin-hou
sestaffcosts.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:N
oinfrastructurere
quire
d.Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk:Low
risk.Red
ucesriskbyund
erstan
ding
long
-termim
plicati
onsofwaste.N
ewte
chno
logiesand
socialexpectatio
nscon
stan
tlycha
nging.
Opp
ortu
nity
: New
techno
logies.Fee
dintofu
tureplann
ingdo
cumen
ts.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity
2 Co
uld
be-
com
e Pr
iori
ty
1ifrequ
ired
thro
ugh
legi
s-latio
n
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|6362|
ACC
ESSI
BLE
SERV
ICES
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Enha
nce
recy
clin
g diversionratesfor
thosewho
dono
treceiveCo
uncil
provided
kerbside
collecti
onservice.
A1
Review
infrastructureand
cu
stom
er e
xper
ienc
e pr
o-vide
d(attransferstati
ons)to
increa
sere
cyclingan
ddiver-
sion
of r
ecyc
labl
es .
Res,
M
, C&
I
Valueprop
osition
:Pub
lichasra
ised
dissatisfacti
onwith
currenttran
sferstatio
nrecyclinglayout.Im
-provem
entswillbemad
eincollabo
ratio
nwith
con
tractors.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: C
ost-tran
sferstatio
nsurveyand
accessibilityau
dit.In
frastructureupg
rade
s.Reven
ue-
selling
ofcom
mod
ities/reu
sableite
ms.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: Staff/externa
l-survey.Con
sultwith
rang
eofcom
mun
itiesth
atusefa
cili-
ties.In
frastructureupg
rade
s-m
aybeab
leto
improvecustom
erexperienceatruralRTS’swith
out
sign
ificantcap
italinp
ut.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:C
ustomersurveys.
Risk
:Surveymayra
iseexpe
ctati
ons.Im
provem
entsm
aynotachievehighe
rratesofdiversion
.Lim
ited
incomeforthesolid
wasteacti
vitylead
ingtopoten
tialservicelevelcha
nges.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Cha
ngeofm
etho
dologyatR
TSlead
ingtoapositiveexperienceforou
rcustom
ers,re
sult-
inginm
orediversion.Im
proveorre
move24
/7re
cyclingop
tionsato
urre
motetran
sferstatio
nsth
at
curren
tlyoffe
rthislevelo
fservice.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C: P
rior
ity 1
Facilitatelocal
diversionan
ddis-
posalo
ption
sfor
theC&
Isector.
A2
EncourageNPD
Ctoprovide
commercialaccesstoM
RF.
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Alignsto
stakeho
ldersne
eds.Serviceagree
men
tswith
MRF
provide
r.Divertm
ore
potenti
alwastefrom
land
fill.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: R
even
uegen
erated
bysaleofcom
mod
ity.R
educeprocessing
cost.Slightin
crea
sein
staff
toadm
inisterserviceagreem
ent.Add
ition
alcostm
ayoccurifcom
mod
itypricelo
worifexceed
capa
cityofM
RFand
requ
ireadd
ition
alstaff.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: N
oad
ditio
nalinfrastructure.Cou
ldlo
ngte
rmre
quire
add
ition
alprocessing
capa
cityto
run
MRF.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Ind
irectlyth
roug
hwasteserviceprovide
rs.
Risk
: Highe
rcontam
inati
on.C
ouncilsta
keonriskofcom
mod
itym
arketc
hang
es.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Expan
dsserviceavailabletoallwasteserviceprovide
rs.C
rossdistrictw
astem
ovem
ents–
originofw
aste.
R: P
rior
ity 1
C:
Pri
ority
1
Providesafedis
-po
salo
fwaste.
A3
Provideareliablekerbside
collecti
onservice.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Servicesexpe
cted
bypu
blic.Servicedelivered
ininterestofp
ublichea
lthto
urban
reside
ntsan
doff
ered
toruralre
side
ntsthatareonthecurren
tcollecti
onro
ute.Red
ucepo
tenti
alharm
from
waste.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: E
xisting
bud
getp
rovide
scurren
tlevelofservice.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:N
osign
ificantcha
ngesre
quire
d.Cu
stom
erin
teracti
on:Edu
catio
nan
dcommun
icati
onscouldbe
improved
.Con
nectswith
reside
ntial
commun
itywith
inservicedarea
s.Ri
sk: E
ncou
rageswastegen
erati
on.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Increasingdiversionthroug
hon
goinged
ucati
on.
R:Statusqu
oC:
Sta
tus
Quo
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Providesafedis
-po
salo
fwaste.
A4
Providereliabletran
sfer
stati
onservicesinclud
ing
hazardou
swastedrop-off
.
Res
Valueprop
osition
:Servicesrequ
iredan
dexpe
cted
bypu
blicand
con
senti
ngautho
rity.R
educepo
tenti
al
harm
from
waste.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Serviceprovide
dwith
inexisting
bud
gets.B
udgetsm
aynee
dtoin
crea
seifbett
erpro
-moti
onand
increa
seduse.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: U
seofe
xisting
infrastructure.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:R
TScustomers;ruralcom
mun
ities,com
mercialand
reside
ntialcom
mun
ities.
Risk
: Lim
iteduseoftran
sferstatio
nsand
resulta
ntin
comecouldlead
toare
view
ofthe
infrastructure
available.
Opp
ortu
nity
: Collecti
onofw
asteth
atwedo
notcollectwith
thekerbside
collecti
onservice,e.g.C
om-
mercialwaste,h
azardo
uswaste,tyres,etc.
R:Statusqu
oC:Statusqu
o
A5
Investigatee-w
asteservice
anddrop
-offpointsinth
eD
istr
ict.
Res,
C&
IVa
lueprop
osition
:Servicesrequ
iredan
dexpe
cted
bypu
blic.R
educepo
tenti
alharmfrom
waste.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Interna
lresou
rcesand
/orexternalcon
sulta
nt/s.Low
costforCou
ncil.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es:N
onerequ
ired.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Lim
itedtopoten
tialstakeho
lders.
Risk
: Risklow.
Opp
ortu
nity
:Diverta
nincrea
sing
wastestrea
mfrom
land
fill.
C: P
rior
ity 1
A6
Provideasubsidyfore-waste
recy
clin
g.Re
s,
C&I
Valueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
topp
ortunitie
stodivertw
aste.Sub
sidy
requ
iresuserpayspa
rt.
Redu
cesha
rmfulw
asteatlan
dfill.
Cost
/ R
even
ue: Num
berofunitsdropp
ed-offequ
atesto
highe
rinvestmen
tifsub
sidised.Poten
tialto
increa
sesub
sidy
iffu
ndingallows.M
ayre
ducecosto
fman
agingwasteatlan
dfill.
Infr
astr
uctu
re /
Res
ourc
es: D
rop-off
areasre
quire
dattran
sferstatio
noralte
rnati
veoffe
redby
contractor/s.C
ontractm
anagem
entw
ithcollectorand
recycler.D
atacollecti
on.
Custom
erin
teracti
on:Low
.Ri
sk: R
ecyclerno
tfulfillin
gcontract(a
lternati
vere
cyclersareavailable);H
ighqu
antiti
esdropp
edoffre
-qu
iringhigh
erinvestmen
tbyCo
uncil.Increa
sing
costsofrecyclin
gmaym
eanincrea
sedsubsidybyCou
n-cil.Tren
dsin
expen
siveitem
s(CRT
)isredu
cing
somaygetre
ducedrequ
iremen
tforsub
sidy
onsome
items.Unk
nownnu
mbe
rofe-w
asteitem
sthrownaw
ayand
unk
nownfutureprojecti
ons(highturnover
ofelectronicgo
ods)whichm
eansbud
getcou
ldvarygreatly
(alth
ough
cou
ldhaveafixed
num
berof
subsidies:e.g.fi
rst2
00item
saresubsidised
).O
ppor
tuni
ty: P
artnershipwith
localb
usinesstodivertm
oree-wastefrom
land
fill.Link
with
otherser
-vices/prog
rammes,e.g.R
E:MOBILEcellpho
nere
cyclingan
dba
tteries.
R:Statusqu
oC:
Sta
tus
Quo
A7
Esta
blis
h an
d op
erat
e a
region
alClass1land
fillb
ased
on
bestp
racti
ce.
Valueprop
osition
:Servicesrequ
iredan
dexpe
cted
bypu
blicand
con
senti
ngautho
rity.R
educepo
tenti
al
harm
from
waste.
Cost/Reven
ue:E
xisting
land
filltoclose.M
OUfo
rne
wland
fill.Notra
tesfund
ed(u
serfees).
Infrastructure/Resou
rces:N
ewland
fillreq
uired;highinfrastructurere
quire
men
t.Cu
stom
erinteracti
on:Lan
dfillcustom
ers;wastedispo
sers(e
itherdire
ctlyorindirectly);indu
strialusers.
Risk:C
ollabo
ratio
nbe
twee
n3coun
cilsto
redu
ceriskan
dcost.R
iskoflo
wusebycommercialcustom
-erson
ceCen
tralLan
dfillisope
n(in
crea
sedcostoftranspo
rt).Sign
ificantsen
sitiv
ityana
lysisha
sbe
en
completed
aroun
drisk.
Opp
ortunity:C
ollabo
ratio
n;havingaregion
aldispo
salo
ption
.Red
ucespoten
tialforprivatem
onop
oly.
R:Statusqu
o
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|6564|
Issu
e ad
dres
sed
Ref
Opti
onTa
rget
G
roup
Ass
essm
ent
Prio
rity
Providesafedis
-po
salo
fwaste.
A8
Ope
rate
the
Coun
cil‘s
clo
sed
land
fillsaccording
tore
-sourcecon
sentcon
ditio
ns.
Valueprop
osition
:Servicesrequ
iredan
dexpe
cted
bypu
blicand
con
senti
ngautho
rity.R
educepo
tenti
al
harm
from
waste.
Cost/Reven
ue:C
ostsho
uldbe
decreasingwith
time.Costcovered
throug
hgene
ralrates.
Infrastructure/Resou
rces:
Custom
erinteracti
on:Low
.Risk:
Opp
ortu
nity
:
C: S
tatu
s Q
uo
Redu
ceenviro
n-m
enta
l har
m fr
om
specialw
astes
A9
Publ
icis
e di
spos
al o
r al
tern
a-tiv
erecyclingop
tionsfo
rall
catego
riesofspe
cialwastes,
includ
ingprom
otion
ofb
usi-
nessesand
organ
isati
onsin
theregion
thatta
keback
or re
spon
sibl
y di
spos
e of
wastesgene
ratedorsup
plied
by th
em.
Res,
C&
IVa
lueprop
osition
:Stakeho
lderswan
ttokn
owwha
tservicesareavailablefordiversion.Collabo
rates
with
provide
rsin
theregion
.Achievesgo
als.
Cost/Reven
ue:Low
cost–
com
mun
icati
ons,web
site
,socialm
edia.N
orevenu
e–po
tenti
allylesscost
forman
agingspecialw
astesatland
fill.
Infrastructure/Resou
rces:N
oinfrastructurere
quire
d.Existing
web
sitesan
dfacebo
okand
pho
ne.
Custom
erinteracti
on:Likelytobeweb
based
interacti
onwith
customers.Som
eph
onecontact.
Risk:C
hang
eofdetailsand
serviceoffe
redbyprovide
rs.R
equiresregu
larchecking
.Opp
ortunity:Linkwith
develop
ingbu
sine
sses.
R:Statusqu
oC:
Sta
tus
Quo
A10
Enco
urag
e us
ers
of h
azar
d-ou
ssubstancesto
avoid
or re
duce
the
use
of th
ese
subs
tanc
es a
nd to
dis
pose
of
thes
e ap
prop
riat
ely.
Res,
C&
IVa
lueprop
osition
:Edu
catestakeho
lderstore
duceuseand
dispo
seapp
ropriately.M
inim
iseen
viron-
men
taleffe
cts.
Cost/Reven
ue:Low
cost.
Infrastructure/re
sources:Existing
resources.
Custom
erinteracti
on:Low
.Risk:Low
riskan
dredu
cesen
vironm
entalrisk.
Opp
ortunity:Edu
catecustomersan
den
couragegreaterdiversionthroug
htheuseofexisting
hazardo
us
wasteservices.
R: P
rior
ity 2
C: P
rior
ity 2
4.2 Statement of ProposalsDrawingonthepreferredoptionsandtheCouncils’intendedroleinmeetingfuturedemand,councilsmust: Includea statementof theTA’sproposals formeeting the forecastdemands includingproposals fornewor replacementinfrastructure. Astatementabouttheextenttowhichtheproposalswill:a. Ensurethatpublichealthisadequatelyprotected.b. Promoteeffectiveandefficientwastemanagementandminimisation.
Table 15 summarises the options that the Council proposes formeeting the forecast demands onwaste in the district. ThehighlightedcellsdenotetheoptionsthattheCouncilproposetoimplement(subjecttoconsultationandLTP).Priority2optionswillbeimplementedifstaffandbudgetaryresourcesallow.
TABLE15-PREFERREDOPTIONS
Status Quo Priority 1 Priority 2 Council’s Intended Role
BEHAVIOR CHANGE
Undertakeanannualpubliceducationprogramme and associatedactivitieswithincurrentresources (B1).
TheCouncilwilldevelop,fund,andhavethisprogrammedelivered.
Undertake,participateand fund some regional andnationalresearchbased on sustainable behaviourchangepracticesandapplyfindingstowasteminimisationandmanagement programmes (B4).
TheCouncilwillfundandsupport programmes it hasapproved.
Promote the use of exist-ing social media sites andfacilitiessuchascharity shops (B5).
TheCouncilwillpromoteservicesavailableintheDistrict.
Promote home compostingutilisingexistingcommunicationavenuesandresources(BC6).
Deliverhomecompostingworkshopsandincentives(B7).
TheCouncilwilldevelop,fundcontentinformationforeducationandfortheseworkshops.
COLLABORATION AND PARTNERSHIPS
Provideadhocwastelevydistribution(C1).
TheCouncilwilladministerthewastelevyaccordingtotheMfE guidance.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|6766|
Status Quo Priority 1 Priority 2 Council’s Intended Role
COLLABORATION AND PARTNERSHIPS
Provideothersupportoforganisationsandbusinesses, e.g. through awards,networkingevents,workshops,media,supportingandpromotingrecyclingatevents(C3).
TheCouncilwillfacilitate, promote, fund, andsupportinitiatives.
Collaboratewithothers including schools, tertiaryeducationproviders,communityorganisations,andbusinesses to promote wasteminimisation,whichcanleadtothedevelopmentofinnovativesolutionstowastechallenges(C4).
TheCouncilwillcollaborate, facilitate, and support others in the limit of its ability.
Developregionallyconsistent contracts, consistent messaging andbylaws,andsupportingschemesthatsupport our goals such asagrecoveryagrichemicalcollections(C5).
BringforwardtheWastePlan cycle for STDC and SDC to be adopted in 2023toalignwithNPDCandallowforaregionalwasteplan(C9).
Regionally align solid wastebylawsthatwillconsider central landfill,contaminationandreducingwastetolandfill(C7).Providemodelcontractclausesaroundwastemanagement and minimisationandinfrastructure(C8).
TheCouncilwilldevelopand administer these clauses and schemes in collaborationwithNPDCand SDC.
Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
The TAs and TRC collaboratetoprovideaWMO to implement the Regional Waste Strategy, WasteEducationStrategy and WMMP (C6).
TheCouncilwillcontinueto part-fund a regional WMO and collaborate withNPDC,SDC,andTRCtodeveloparegionalapproachonsolidwaste.
LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION
Developanin-housewastestrategyfortheCouncil,identifyingallwastestreamsandplanforreducingordivertingthese (L1).
TheCouncilwilldevelopa strategy, fund and implement it.
Worktogetherwithwasteserviceproviderstoprovideoptionsfordiversionandreducecontaminationinrecycling (L2).
TheCouncilwillfacilitatediscussions and developmentofoptionsand support their implementation.
Promoteimprovedsourceseparationandexistingservices(L3).
TheCouncilwilladvocateforandpubliciseoptionsthatallowwastediversion.
Considerinitiativesthatsupport the recycling of wastestreamsthatarenotrecycledornoteffec-tivelyrecycled(L4).
TheCouncilwillfacilitatediscussionsanddevel-opmentofoptionsandsupportimplementation.Council may fund initiatives.
Status Quo Priority 1 Priority 2 Council’s Intended Role
LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION
Promoteuseofexistinggreenwasteproviders(L5).
TheCouncilwillpromoteservicesavailableintheDistrict.
Implementbylaws,licensing and pricing to encouragediversionofgreenwaste(L6).
TheCouncilwillincludeclausesinregulationithascontrolovertoencouragethediversionofgreenwasteandwillsubsidise the disposal of greenwaste.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
Developacomprehen-sivestrategytoreduceillegal dumping and lit-tering(L7).
TheCouncilwillprovidea phone line, respond andfundthecollectionofillegaldumpingwhenin the Council jurisdiction,andreviewits strategy.
Investigateimprovedre-cyclingoptionsinpublicplaces(L8).
TheCouncilwillfacilitatediscussions and report.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION
SupportClean-upWeek–bypromotingandprovidingfreewastedis-posalforClean-upWeekevents(L9).
TheCouncilwillprovidefree access to transfer stationforwastecol-lected as part of Clean-upweekevents.
Continuetoprovideawebformandphonelinefor the public to report illegaldumping(L10).
TheCouncilwillprovidea phone line, respond andfundthecollectionofdumpingwhenintheCounciljurisdiction,facilitateandreviewitsstrategy.
DevelopaninformationportalfortheC&Isector(L12).
TheCouncilwillcollateandshareinformationonwasteminimisationfortheC&Isector.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
Investigateoptionsforthe establishment of a cleanfillintheDistrict(L14).Investigateoptionsfortransport and disposal of C&Dwaste(L15).
TheCouncilwillresearchand report.
Incentivisecontractorandcustomerstodivertmaterials from general refusewherepossible(atalltransferstations)(L16).
TheCouncilwillcollabo-ratewiththecontractorandfacilitatethedevel-opment of a strategy to divertmorewastefromthetransferstations.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|6968|
Status Quo Priority 1 Priority 2 Council’s Intended Role
LEADERSHIP AND INNOVATION
AligndatacollectiontoNationalWasteDataFramework(L17).
TheCouncilwillcollectand report on data.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
Monitor success of wasteminimisationpro-grammesthroughwastedisposal records, SWAP, andcustomersurveys(L18).
TheCouncilwillcollectand report on data.
Engagewithruralcommunitytoidentifywastebehaviours,gapsinservice/sandcustomersatisfaction(L19).
TheCouncilwillresearchand report.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
Understandeconomicliabilityofwasteinthefuture including consideringalternativetechnologies(L20).
TheCouncilwillresearchand report.Priority 2 depending on staffandresourcebudg-ets. Could become Priority1ifrequiredthroughlegislation.
ACCESSIBILITY Reviewinfrastructureand customer experi-enceprovidedattransferstationstoimprovere-cyclinganddiversionofrecyclablewaste(A1).
TheCouncilwillconsultwiththeCommunityontheirlevelofsatisfac-tion,reviewtheresultstodevelopastrategytoimprovewasteminimisationattheCouncil’stransferstations.
Encourage NPDC to pro-videcommercialaccesstotheMRF(A2).
TheCouncilwilladvocatewithinitscapacityforcommercial access to the MRF.
Provideareliablekerbsidecollectionservice(A3).
TheCouncilwillprovideaservice,fund(throughtargeted rates) and administer contracts.
Providereliabletransferstationservicesincludinghazardouswastedrop-off(A4).
TheCouncilwillresearch, fund, publicise, and administer contracts.
Investigatee-wasteserviceanddrop-offpoints in the District (A5).
TheCouncilwillresearchand report.
Provideasubsidyfore-wasterecycling(A6).
Councilwillfundasubsidy for selected items.
Establish and operate a regionalClass1landfillbasedonbestpractice(A7).
CouncilwillcollaboratewithSTDCandSDCtoprovidearegionallandfillandfund(byuserfees) and manage the landfill.
Status Quo Priority 1 Priority 2 Council’s Intended Role
ACCESSIBILITY OperatetheCouncil’sclosedlandfillsaccording to resource consentconditions(A8).
TheCouncilwillmonitoritsclosedlandfillsagainsttheir resource consent conditions.
Publicise disposal or alternativerecyclingoptionsforallcategories of special wastes,includingpromotionofbusinessesandorganisationsintheregionthattakebackorresponsibly dispose of wastesgeneratedorsupplied by them (A9).
TheCouncilwillpubliciseservicesavailableintheDistrict and in the region.
Encourage users of hazardous substances to avoidorreducetheuseof these substances and to dispose of these appropriately(A10).
TheCouncilwillpubliciseoptionsthatare availableforasafedisposal of hazardous wasteandwillcontinuetosupportAgrecoverycollectionsinthelimitsof its capability.Priority 2 depending onstaffandresourcebudgets.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|7170|
4.3 Theoretic Impact of Options on Forecast
4.4 Council’s Intended Role in Meeting the Forecast
Demand
TonkinandTaylorwerecommissionedtomodelsomeoftheproposedwastemanagementscenariostoidentifylikelyimpactonwaste in theregion (Appendix 1: Taranaki Regional Waste Modelling Summary Report) .TheCouncil requestedtomodel theimpactofalocalcleanfillopentothepublicinSouthTaranaki.Figure36illustratesdifferencesbetweenthemodelledquantitiesofwastelandfilledin2020forvariousscenariosfortheTaranakiRegion.Thegreylineisthecurrentlylandfilledamount(2016)andthebluelineisamountprojectedfor2020withnochangeincurrentservicesandinfrastructure.Thisgraphhighlightsthatthe‘cleanfill’scenariohasnosignificantimpactonquantitiesofwastelandfilled.
4.4.1. StatutoryObligationsTheCouncil’s statutoryobligations in respectof theplanningand provision of waste services are detailed in the previoussections. The Council needs to ensure that the statutoryobligationsaremetinthedeliveryoftheWMMP.
4.4.2. OverallStrategicDirectionandRoleTheCouncil currentlyprovidesasignificantproportionof thewasteservicesintheDistrictviaaregionalcontractforkerbsideandtransferstationservices.AwastedisposaloptionhasbeenagreedonataregionallevelwithNPDCandSDC.Theprovisionoftheseservicesensurespublichealthisadequatelyprotected,whilegivingeffecttotheWMA.Inaddition,theCouncilprovidesand/orfundswasteminimisationactivities,including: working with others including community groups, theprivatesectorandtheothercouncils intheregiontoachievewastemanagementandminimisationgoals; distributing waste levy funds in support of wastemanagementandminimisationgoals; educating the community as to the benefits of wasteminimisation; monitoringandmeasuringwasteflowsandinformationinordertoinformplanninganddecisionmaking; researchandconsideringimplementationofnewactivitiestodivertwastefromlandfill.
It is intendedthattheCouncilwillcontinuetobuildontheseactivitiesasoutlinedinTable15.
Thedatapresented inFigure37representa ‘bestguess’basedona rangeofparameters includingcost toCouncil, collectionsystemandprocessingperformance.Withthelikelycostofeachoptionconsidered,thegraphshowstheoptionsthatmaybemostcosteffectiveandachievethemostdiversion(i.e.thelowerlefthandpartofthegraph).Withanestimatedcostofover$11mperyear,theoperationofacleanfillinSouthTaranakibytheCouncilcouldbeanineffectiveoptiontoachievesignificantwasteminimisation.
Severaloptionsarenotattractiveinthecontextofconsideringdiversionfromlandfillandcost.However,thesemaybeattractivebased on local benefits, an increased level of service for the community or broader education and community engagementbenefits.Forexample,educationhasbeenmodelledtosomeextentthroughtheoptionofimprovedrecognition(achievedthroughbettereducationofserviceusersincreasingtheamountofwastedivertedintorecyclingorrecovery).Theimpactofeducationonwastereductionisdifficulttoquantifywithoutresearchbasedprogrammesthatcollectdataoneffectiveness.ItisconsideredthateffectiveeducationwillhavelongtermbenefitsforwasteminimisationandassuchresearchbasedprogrammesisconsideredaPriority1option.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|7372|
4.5 Medical Officer of Health Statement 4.6 DefinitionsTobepopulatedfollowingconsultationwithMoH. Activity sourcereferstothetypeofactivitythatgeneratesthe
wastebeingrecorded.Thesemayinclude:domestickerbside,residential,commercialandindustrial,landscape,constructionanddemolition,special,andvirginexcavatednaturalmaterial(VENM).
Biosolidsreferstotreatedsewagesludgethatisstabilisedandsuitableforbeneficialreuse.
Cleanfill material refers to material that when buried willhavenoadverseeffectonpeopleortheenvironment.Cleanfillmaterial includesVENMsuchasclay,soilandrock,andotherinertmaterialssuchasconcreteorbrickthatarefreeof:• Combustible,putrescible,degradableorleachable components,• Hazardous substances,• Productsormaterialsderivedfromhazardouswaste treatmentstabilisationanddisposalpractices,• Materialsthatmaypresentarisktohumanoranimal healthsuchasmedicalandveterinarywasteasbestosor radioactivesubstances,• Liquidwaste.
Cleanfill site refers toawastedisposal site thatacceptsonlycleanfillmaterial.
Commercial and Industrial (C&I) wastes refertowastesourcedfrom industrial, commercial and institutional sources (e.g.supermarkets,shops,schools,hospitals,offices).Thiswastecanalsobereferredtoas industrial,commercialand institutionalwaste.
Construction and Demolition (C&D) wastes refer to wastematerial from the construction or demolition of a building,includingthepreparationandorclearanceofthepropertyorsite.
Contaminated land means land that has a hazardous substance in or on it that:(i) Hassignificantadverseeffectsontheenvironment;or(ii) Isreasonably likelytohavesignificantadverseeffectsontheenvironment.
Contaminated sites refer to land areas that are contaminated, asdefinedabove.
CouncilreferstotheSouthTaranakiDistrictCouncil.
Disposal*, unless the context requires another meaning,means — (a) Thefinal(ormorethanshort-term)depositofwaste intoorontolandsetapartforthatpurpose;or (b) Theincinerationofwaste.
Disposal facility*,unlessthecontextrequiresanothermeaning,means — (a) Afacility,includingalandfill,- (i) Atwhichwasteisdisposedof;and (ii) Atwhichthewasteisdisposedofincludes householdwaste;and (iii) That operates, at least in part, as a business todisposeofwaste;and (b) Anyotherfacilityorclassoffacilityatwhich wasteisdisposedofthatisprescribedasadisposal facility.
District refers to the district of a territorial authority.
Diverted material*meansanythingthatisnolongerrequiredforitsoriginalpurposeand,butforcommercialorotherwasteminimisationactivities,wouldbedisposedofordiscarded.
Domestic kerbside waste refers to domestic-type wastecollected from residential premises by the local council (orbyacontractoronbehalfofthecouncil),orbyprivatewastecollections(throughkerbsideorsimilarcollection).
Hazardous waste refers to materials that are flammable,explosive, oxidising, corrosive, toxic, ecotoxic, radioactive orinfectious. Examples include unused agricultural chemicals,solventsandcleaningfluids,medicalwasteandmanyindustrialwastes.
Household waste*meanswastefromahouseholdthatisnotentirely from construction, renovation or demolition of thehouse.
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL WASTE ASSESSMENT 2018
|7572|
Inert material referstomaterialthatwhenplacedinthegroundhasminimaladverseeffectsonthesurroundingenvironment.
Landfill refers to an area used for the controlled disposal of solidwaste.
Landscape waste referstowastefromlandscapingactivityandgardenmaintenance(includingpublicgardens),bothdomesticandcommercial,aswellasfromearthworksactivity,unlessthewaste contains only VENM, or unless the earthworks are forpurposesofconstructionordemolitionofastructure
Local authority refers to any territorial authority or regional councilwithinthemeaningoftheLocalGovernmentAct2002.
Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) refers to the facility where recyclables are received, sorted, and sold to end-usermanufacturers.
Medical Officer of Health* asdefinedundersection7AoftheHealth Act 1956.
Organic waste includes garden, kitchen waste, food processwastesandbiosolids.
Product stewardship refers to requirements for producers,brand owners, importers, retailers, consumers and otherparties to accept responsibility for the environmental effectsof products – from the beginning of the production processthroughto,andincluding,disposalattheendoftheproduct’slife.
Recovery*meansextractionofmaterialsorenergyfromwasteordivertedmaterialforfurtheruseorprocessingandincludesmakingwasteordivertedmaterialintocompost.
Recycling* means the reprocessing of waste or divertedmaterialtoproducenewmaterial.
Reduction meanslesseningwastegenerationbyusingproductsmoreefficientlyorthroughthedesignofproducts.
Region referstotheTaranakiregion,whichismadeupofthelandwithinthejurisdictionoftheNewPlymouth,theStratfordandtheSouthTaranakidistrictcouncils.
Regional council meansaregionalcouncilwithinthemeaningoftheLocalGovernmentAct2002.
Residential waste referstoallwasteoriginatingfromresidentialpremises,otherthanthatcoveredbyanyoftheotherActivitySourcecategories.Forexample,apersonarrivingwithatrailerloadaftercleaningoutthegaragewouldclassifyasresidentialwaste.
Reuse* means the further use of waste or divertedmaterialinitsexistingformfortheoriginalpurposeofthematerialsorproductsthatconstitutethewasteordivertedmaterial,orfora similar purpose.
Sewage sludge referstoaby-productofsewagecollectionandtreatmentprocesseswhichwhentreatedcanbecomebiosolids.
Solid wastereferstoallwastegeneratedasasolidorconvertedto a solid for disposal. It includes wastes like paper, plastic,glass, metal, electronic goods, furnishings, garden and other organicwastes.
Solid Waste Analysis Protocol (SWAP) programmewhich isaclassificationandsamplingtechniquetomeasurethequantityandcompositionofwaste. Special wastes are those that cause particular managementand/ordisposalproblemsandneedspecialcare.Thisincludes,butisnotrestrictedto,hazardousandmedicalwastes,includinge-wastes.Italsoincludesanysubstantialwastestreamsuchasbiosolids,infrastructurefillorindustrialwastethatsignificantlyaffectstheoverallcompositionofthewastestream,andmaybe markedly different from waste streams at other disposalfacilities.
Taranaki Solid Waste Management Committee (TSWMC) refers tothejointcommitteechargedbytheTaranakiRegionalCouncilandthreeterritorialauthoritiestoconsiderwastemanagementissuesintheregion.TheCommitteeconsistsofrepresentationfromTRC,NPDC,STDC,SDCandtheMedicalOfficerofHealth.
Territorial authority means a city council or district council named in Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act2002.
Trade waste refers to liquid wastes generated by businessanddisposedofthroughthetradewastesystem.Tradewasteincludesarangeofhazardousmaterialsresultingfromindustrialand manufacturing processes.
Transfer stationreferstoafacilitywherewasteisconsolidated,possibly processed to some degree, and transported to another facilityfordisposal,recovery,recyclingorreuse.
Treatment*(a) Meanssubjectingwastetoanyphysical,biological,or chemicalprocesstochangeitsvolumeorcharacterso that it may be disposed of with no or reduced adverseeffectsontheenvironment;but(b) Doesnotincludedilutionofwaste.
Virgin Excavated Natural Material (VENM) refers to material that when discharged to the environment will not have adetectable effect relative to the background and comprisingmaterialssuchasclay,soil,androckthatarefreeof:• manufacturedmaterialssuchasconcreteandbrick,even thoughthesemaybeinert;• combustible,putrescible,degradable,orleachable components;• hazardous substances or materials (such as municipal solid waste) likely to create leachate by means of biological breakdown;• anyproductsormaterialsderivedfromhazardouswaste treatment,stabilisationordisposalpractices;• materialssuchasmedicalandveterinarywaste,asbestos, orradioactivesubstancesthatmaypresentarisktohuman healthifexcavated;• contaminatedsoilandothercontaminatedmaterials;or• liquidwaste.
Waste* means:(a) Anythingdisposedofordiscarded;and(b) Includes a type of waste that is defined by its composition or source (for example, organic waste, electronic waste, or construction and demolition waste);and(c) Toavoiddoubt, includesanycomponentorelement that is disposed of or discarded.
Waste management and minimisation* means wasteminimisationandthetreatmentanddisposalofwaste.
Waste minimisation* means:(a) Thereductionofwaste;and(b) Thereuse,recycling,andrecoveryofwasteand divertedmaterial.
*denotes the definition is sourced from the WMA.
C&D waste: ConstructionandDemolitionwasteC&I waste: Commercial and Industrial WasteDDT: DichlorodiphenyltrichloroethaneGDP:GrossDomesticProductKg: KilogramKm: KilometerLGA: LocalGovernmentAct2002MBIE:MinistryofBusiness,InnovationandEmploymentMfE:MinistryfortheEnvironmentMRF:MaterialsRecoveryFacilityNPDC:NewPlymouthDistrictCouncilNZ ETS:NewZealandEmissionsTradingSchemeNZWS: New Zealand Waste Strategy – Reducing Waste,ImprovingEfficiency(2010)OECD: Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopmentRRF: ResourceRecoveryFacilityRTS: RefuseTransferStationSDC:StratfordDistrictCouncilSTDC: SouthTaranakiDistrictCouncilSWAP: Solid Waste Analysis ProtocolTRC:TaranakiRegionalCouncilTSWMC: TaranakiSolidWasteManagementCommitteeTA: Territorial AuthorityVENM: VirginExcavatedNaturalMaterialWMA:WasteMinimisationAct2008WMO:WasteMinimisationOfficerWMMP: WasteManagementandMinimisationPlan
4.7 Initials and Acronyms
SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL
36|
Phone:(06)2780555Email: Contact@stdc.govt.nzWebsite: www.southtaranaki.com
Recommended