Recycling Plastics in Australia

8/11/2019 Recycling Plastics in Australia

1/33

Labels and plastic

recycling in AustraliaA design problem and solution

Design Practical 1

Assessment 1

Eunice Ching

131FCG4105

23 August 2013


2/33

Part 1: A design problem


3/33

1Design practical 1: Defining the problem

Intro

In todays world of fast living and disposable items, recycling is becoming an increasingly important option for

waste management. It has become such an ingrained part the lives of Australian residents that most people today

recycle. However, according to an analysis of peoples recycling habits by Victoria University, approximately 95%

of Australians see recycling as a high priority and 99% of Australian households claim to recycle, but compared

to these numbers, the recycling rates in actuality are relatively low (Buelow, Lewis & Sonneveld 2009, p. 2). The

large difference between intention and result may sound strange, but it is actually due to the fact that Australians

may be confused about what materials should be recycled and what should end up in the landfill. I first came

across this problem when I was still investigating sustainable yogurt packaging. An article by Reportage Enviro,

a web magazine part of the University of Technology in Sydney (UTS), outlined the lack of recycling regulations

in Australia and consumers confusions towards various recycling labels (Michael, 2010). This article made me

think about my recycling habits in Australia and I began to think of how I could go about defining this as a design

problem.

First step: secondary research

Before I could observe peoples recycling habits around me, I needed to know some general facts about recycling.

Benefits of recycling

In terms of environmental benefits regarding recycling, there are many. Recycling items when appropriate reduces

greenhouse gases and air pollution as well as conserves energy due to the fact it uses little or no raw materials

(Scarff, 2011). According to a RMIT University document, substituting raw materials with recycled goods recovered

to make new products would result in the environmental benefits of saving almost 93 million gigajoules of energy,

preventing more than 5 million tons of greenhouse gasses from being emitted into the atmosphere, and saving

more than 61,000 megalitres of water (Sustainability Victoria, 2013). This was measured by the amount of recycled

waste collected in Victoria between 2010-2011 (abid).

Recycling in Australia

Australia has recycling-conscious residents with a government continually working to improve its environmental

waste management systems. According to PACIA (the Plastic and Chemicals Industry Association) in their 2011-2012 National Plastics Survey, the recycling rate of plastics have been steadily increasing especially since 2007

(PACIA, 2012). Victoria is known to collect more recycling than any other state with a recovery rate of about 60

per cent from kerbside collected plastics (Sustainability Victoria, 2013). The Australian Government is also keen to

promote recycling and strive toward a more sustainable country. In 2009, its Environmental Ministers proposed the

National Waste Policy, aiming to reduce the environmental harm of waste disposal (Commonwealth of Australia,

2012). This initiation is endorsed by the Council of Australian Governments, and came about due to recyclings

inability to keep up with the rising generation of waste (abid). Between 2002 and 2007, waste generation

increased by 31 per cent (abid). The National Waste Policy outlines 16 waste management strategies that would

benefit from a national, coordinated approach including better packaging management, better sustainable


4/33


procurement practices and improvements in the avoidance of waste and the re-use of materials in commercial and

industrial sectors (abid).

Are people recycling wrong?

Before I did primary research on this matter, I wanted to see what experts had to say on this topic. Figures show in

the NSW Department of Local Government that 37 per cent of Sydney household waste is currently being recycled

(IRecycle, n.d.). If people recycled correctly, the percentage of recycled household waste could go up to 80 per cent

(abid). A study done by Victoria University showed that a little less than half of the recyclable material found in

an Australian household end up in garbage bins (Buelow, Lewis & Sonneveld 2009, p. 3). One interesting study

showed that some maybe recycling wrong due to confusing or incorrect labels (abid, p6). In the study, people

were given a flexible foil wrapper with the labels below marked on it and were asked to either dispose or recycle

the product (abid).

Surprisingly, people appropriately disposed of the item in the waste bin (abid). When people were asked to

perform the same task looking solely at the labels, only 23% came up the with same answers (abid). This could

suggest that people are more confused with the labelling than the materials themselves. The study also pointed

to the importance of clear labelling by claiming the most well understood labels were those that clearly instructed

consumers on how to dispose the product, for example: please recycle (abid).

How recycling wrong can be harmful?

One of the most important points that I had to research was if recycling incorrectly was actually harmful. If

recycling inappropriately caused no damages, there would be no need for a design solution to this matter.

The following research shows that recycling incorrectly could have serious implications to the whole process.

According to Banyules waste education coordinator Margaret Morgan, putting items that dont belong in therecycling bin such as plastic bags, plastic film, drinking glasses and clothing can have disastrous effects, such

as having contaminated loads ending up in the landfill (Scarff, 2011). Plastic bags, one the worlds most used

products, are seen to be the biggest contaminant of kerbside recycling (IRecycle, n.d.). This is because human

sorters at pre-sorting stations do not have time to open plastic bags to find out what is inside, and some bags

have been to known to hold dangerous materials such as dirty diapers and medical equipment (Planet Ark, 2012).

Another reasons is that they get caught in conveyor belts and jam spinning wheels in the automatic sorting

process (abid). Consequently, most recyclables in plastic bags are sent to landfills (abid).

From left to right:The International Tidy Man

symbol (Wikimedia, 2005), the Green Dot symbol

(Wikimedia, 2009), and the triangular plastic #5

symbol (Planet Ark 2006, p. 17).


5/33


Second step: Design thinking

The second part of defining my design problem was find out peoples thoughts on recycling in Australia, their

experiences with it, and if they are actually recycling incorrectly and why.

Empathize

Observe

Before I observed others, I started to observe my recycling habits. I went through my recycling box to analyze what

I have been recycling. After doing some research on recycling I have realized that I too have also been recycling

incorrectly. Items such as #7 triangle labels and polystyrene are not recyclable. Then I took a peek in the two yellow

boxes of my building to see what my neighbours have been recycling. Some people have also been recycling

incorrectly as I found porcelain plates in the yellow bin.

Engage

Based on the results of my observations I decided to take my primary research further by conducting a survey1.

I made a simple eight-question survey based on the research I gathered in step 1 and requested as wide of ademographic as possible to take the survey as previous research has shown that most Australians recycle. The

following demographics were asked to take the survey:

People living in Western Australia, New South Wales, Tasmania, Queensland, North Territory and South

Australia. I excluded Australian Capital Territory as I did not know anyone living there.

Recent residents of Australia (those who have lived here 5 years or less)

First generation Australians (immigrants who are now Australian citizens and having been living here for 5

years or longer)

The various items found in my

recycling bin. As you can see, I try to

recycle anything with the triangular

arrow label.

The survey can be accessed at:

http://kwiksurveys.com/app/rendersurvey.asp?sid=xjyvqrkarz8lcz5200231&refer=kwiksurveys.com

or a link from here: http://designthinkereunice.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/week4-1/

1.


6/33


Citizens who have been born and raised in Australia

People between the ages of 16-65

Both males and females

Based on the survey results, I chose three demographics that I wanted more information from. Thus I conducted

a phone or a face-to-face interview with the following three people to get more in depth information regarding

their thoughts on recycling in Australia.

Persona A:A first generation Australian female in her 40s, married with two children. She lives in the

suburbs of Sydney (West Pennant Hills), and immigrated from Hong Kong more than 20 years ago.

Persona B:A recently arrived expat male, married, 29, living and working in the Manly area.

Persona C: An Australian male, 30, born and raised in Victoria, currently a university student in Melbourne.

My final interview2was with Julien Gastaldi, an environmental engineer that specializes in waste management in

Australia. His interview was highly informative and was very constructive to the defining of my design problem.

Define

Based on my survey, I have come to the following conclusions regarding my audience. My first conclusion was that

most people I have surveyed recycle.

According to IRecycle, a recycling initiative made by the Australian waste logistics company 1300Rubbish, the

majority of Australians think that recycling is important (IRecycle, n.d.). A Roy Morgan research conducted in 2006

also showed that 86% Australians recycle as much as possible (abid).

My second conclusion is that people are not familiar with the triangular number system (see diagram on next

page). Only 6 per cent of my respondents (2 people) knew what every symbol meant.

Most of the time

50%

Always

32.35%

About half the time

Once in a while

11.76%

5.88%

How often do you recycle?When asked how often one recycles most people

answered most of the time, or always. No one

answered never.

Please see my blog for the full paraphrased interview here:

http://designthinkereunice.wordpress.com/2013/08/18/week4-2/

2.


7/33


This triangle system was not actually developed for consumers to identify whether or not the product is recyclable.

It is developed by manufacturers to indicate to the recycling industry whether the product can be recycled or

reused (Scarff, 2011). It is also used to as a label to categorize the type of plastic used to manufacture the product

(Gastaldi, 2013). Below is a chart of the plastic labeling and their meanings.

Another survey result refers to human nature. Although many have been confused whether a product could be

recycled, very few have taken the next step to confirm whether a product was recyclable. This shows that people

are keen to recycle only if it is made easy for them. It is also one of the reasons for the one bin recycling system in

Australia and shows how simplicity leads to high recycling rates (Gastaldi, 2013).

Polyethylene Terephthalate

(PET)soft drink or detergent bottles

High Density Polyethylene

(HDPE)milk, cream or shampoo bottles

Polyvinyl Chloride

(PVC)

cordial or juice bottles

Low Density Polyethylene

(LDPE)squeeze bottles

Polypropylene

(PP)ice cream containers , take away containers

Polystyrene

(PS)

yogurt containers, margarine containers and

some polystyrene

Other soft plastics like bags

Symbol Technical name Usually found in

Numbers 1 and 2 are the most common plastics for kerbside pickup. Some communities will pick up items

with numbers 3-6 (except for polystyrene), number 7 are usually not recyclable at all (Zero Waste SA, 2011).

The seven numbers of the triangle system used to indicate plastic material (Planet Ark 2006, p. 17).


8/33


In one of the questions, I asked the survey participates if they would recycle a polystyrene product. Polystyrene

products are usually not recyclable in Australia3even though there is a triangle-recycling label on it (City of Sydney,

2012). The diagram below shows the product I used and the participants answers.

Define the problems

Based on my research, these were the following problems that I defined:

1. Plastic that cannot be recycled that ends up being recycled causes contamination, lowering the quality of

recycled material and sometimes causing whole batches of plastic to end up in the landfill

2. People are confused about what products can be recycled due to labelling

3. Current labelling system on plastic products in Australia are numbered 1-7, not indicating easily to

consumers whether it can or cannot be recycled

4. Labels are hard to see on some packages

5. Different countries, states and areas have different types of recycling plants, affecting the labelling of

products: This mainly has to do with funding and how recycling is governed in Australia. It also leads to

another reason why there are only one or two types of recycling bins. Recycling is left to the responsibility

of the local council, which already have too much responsibilities and too little budget. Thus, four to five

different councils have to pool together to pay for one recycling system. This accounts for the variations in

the recycling abilities of different areas.

Would you recycle the

following product?

Yes41.18%

No26.47%

Dont know29.41%

Does not apply

2.94%

(The Science Guy, n.d.)

As you can see, the

amount of people who

would recycle this or are

uncertain show that very

few people are actually

recycling correctly.

Polystyrene is actually a very recyclable product and can be expanded and crushed 1000 times before

it decays (Gastaldi, 2013). For financial reasons, it is not recycled because recycled goods are charged

by the ton it is not worth the cost of transporting such light and space consuming material (abid). For

more information regarding this please read the interview.

3.


9/33


6. Sometimes, recyclable products do not have the recycling symbol such as some yogurt and dairy dessert

containers (Upstart, 2011)

7. Different cultures may recycle differently: My qualitative interviews with the three personas provided me

with insight on their recycling habits. Persona A, the first generation Australian, finds recycling important,

but acknowledges that her children, born and raised in Australia, have better recycling knowledge than

she. Persona B, the expat, has been living with very few facts on recycling in Australia. He often recycles as

he would in Sweden, putting many items in the yellow bin that may not be recycled here. Persona C, the

born and raised Victorian, finds recycling extremely important and has found recycling facilities increasing

around Melbourne. Although he has received recycling education in school, he goes by the triangular

number system as indication whether items are recyclable or not (therefore, have been recycling incorrectly

without knowing it).

Therefore, my main design problem is this:

People in Australia are recycling plastics incorrectly due to confusing labeling on products, leading to problems

such as contamination and waste in plastic recycling processes.

Ideate

Based on the conclusions above I have come to conclude that people in Australia will benefit from clearer recycling

labels on their products in order to recycle properly. I have drawn a concept map4to brainstorm on this conclusion

and three important concerns have come to mind.

Social sustainabilityMy first main concern was if my design solution would cause job loss. According to my interview with Gastaldi,

recycling actually creates seven times more jobs than if everything was just sent to the landfill. If people were to

recycle well enough that the sorting jobs became obsolete, new, higher quality jobs will emerge such as selling

and market creation for the increased amount of recycled materials, due to the changed nature of recycling

(Gastaldi, 2013).

Environmental sustainability

Materials, manufacturing and distribution must be carried out in a way that damages the environment as little aspossible.

Economical sustainability

Materials, manufacturing and distribution must also be carried out with as low cost as possible, or else the solution

will not be desirable.

Please see the concept map here:

http://designthinkereunice.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/week4-1/

4.


10/33


Conclusion

Based on my extensive research and observations, I have come to conclude that most people in Australia have the

intention to recycle, as it has become a part of their lives. Their main problem is that they are not getting the clear

indication on how to recycle properly, thus leading to contamination and waste in the recycling process. As Julien

Gastaldi (2013) pointed out in our interview the solution is basically to make it easy for people. If it is made easy,

no one will willfully do the wrong thing anymore, because it becomes part of general culture.


11/33


Bibliography

Buelow, S, Lewis, H & Sonneveld, K 2009, The Role of Labels in Directing Consumer Packaging Waste, Victoria

University, accessed 14 August, 2013, .

Commonwealth of Australia 2012, National Waste Policy, Australian Government Department of Sustainability,

Environment, Waster Population and Communities, accessed 17 August 2013, .

Interview J Gastaldi, Environmental Engineer, 18 August, 2013.

IRecycle n.d.,A Guide to Kerbside Recycling, IRecycle, accessed 17 August 2013, .

Michael, S 2010, Lack of recycling regulations in Australia, Reportage Enviro, accessed 14 August 2013, .

PACIA 2012, 2011-12 National Plastics Recycling Survey, PACIA, accessed 18 August 2013,

Planet Ark 2012, Why are plastic bags so bad for your recycling bin?, Planet Ark, accessed 14 August 2013, .

Scarff, K 2011, Doing the Right Thing, Upstart, accessed 14 August 2013, .

Sustainability Victoria 2013, The environmental benefits of recycling, Sustainability Victoria, accessed 14 August

2013, < http://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/www/html/1351-sustainability-the-benefits-of-recycling.asp>.

The City of Sydney 2012, Recycling, The City of Sydney, accessed 14 August 2013, .

Images

Bottom foam try no label[image], in Hammer Down Catapult Gliders, The Science Guy, accessed 15 August 2013,

.

Green Dot logo [image], in File:Green dot logo.svg 2009, Wikimedia, accessed 19 August 2013, .


12/33


International Tidy Man Logo [image]. inFile: International tidyman.jpg2005, Wikimedia, accessed 19 August 2013,

.

PET, HDPF, PVC, LDPE, PP, PS, OTHER [image], in What do the numbers and symbols on plastics mean?2011, Zero

Waste SA, accessed 21 August 2013, .

The plastics identification code [image], in Recycling Myths: Sorting the fact from the fiction, Planet Ark, accessed 13

August 2013, .


13/33

Part 2: A design solution


14/33

Design practical 1: Design 1

INTRODUCTION

As environmental problems are increasingly affecting our daily lives, it is now more important to come up with

solutions for these problems. Based on the research in my first assignment, I have concluded the followingdesign

problem: people in Australia are not getting clear indication on how to recycle plastics properly, leading

to contamination of waste in the recycling process.In this paper, I will attempt to solve this design problem by

evaluating different solutions.

RESEARCH METHODS

I have used various methods to reach my conclusions. One method used was secondary research to pin point

existing solutions that may solve this design problem. I also used the data collected in my first assignment to

formulate a third solution. To answer questions posed in each criteria of the evaluation process, I used secondary

research and also conducted a quantitative survey asking residents in different parts of Australia how they felt

about certain elements of each solution (see Annex A for survey questions and results). Individual interviews were

also conducted with people who have experienced existing solutions (see Annex B for interviews).

Based on my research I have chosen to evaluate the following three solutions: Plastics recycling in Japan, the

container depositing scheme in South Australia, and a sticker labeling system that I have come up with.

SOLUTION1: PLASTICS RECYCLING IN JAPAN

I decided to research Japan as a solution as they are seen as a global leader in plastics recycling (McCurry 2011). In

2010, 77% of their plastics were recycled compared to that of 39% in 1996 (abid). This may be due to the various

recycling laws that Japan passed in the late 1990s and early 2000s such as compulsory separation of plastic waste,

mandatory printing of unified recycling symbols on plastic products, and encouragement of using recycled

material in manufacturing production (abid). Japans decision to take such drastic recycling measures stem from

their tendency to overuse packaging material and their lack of landfill space (abid).

Japans own recycling symbols. As most symbolscontain words, only consumers who understandJapanese will be able to use the system withoutguidance (all-recycling-facts.com 2013)


15/33


How it works

Japan has their own system of recycling symbols on their products known as recycling identification marks, and

the government passed a law in 2001 obliging manufacturing companies to put these symbols on their products

(all-recycling-facts.com 2013). They have from 5-44 bins for dividing up their trash, including burnable waste,

nonburnable waste, cardboard, aluminum etc (abid). In terms of plastics, they have one for plastics containers and

packaging and one for PET plastic (abid). For example, a product such as cup noodle packaging will have 1 or more

labels indicating recycling.

Culturally, it works on a system of responsibility as part of a law that came into effect in 2000 called the containers

and recycling law which held consumers responsible for sorting out their waste. Municipalities were also

responsible in providing facilities to collect these items, and businesses to recycle and use whatever has been

collected to make new products (all-recycling-facts.com 2013). In Yokohama 27 page guideline is given to each

resident outlining correct recycling practices (Onishi 2005).

It seems to work in Japan as the Japanese invests a lot of money into the development of new technology

enabling them to use more of the recycled PET (McCurry 2011). For example, Ajinomoto, a food company, recently

developed a plastic bottle made entirely from recycled PET (abid). The Japanese also take recycling very seriously,

as far as having volunteers patrol their area/building to check the waste of residents who fail to follow garbage

sorting and recycling guidelines and leaving them reminders to improve their practices of disposal (Onishi 2005).

SOLUTION 2: CONTAINER DEPOSITING SCHEME

The container depositing scheme is used in South Australia to encourage people to recycle their cans and bottles

for money (White 2013). In South Australia, this scheme is said to remove 80% of cans and bottles, twice that of

kerbside recycling (abid).

How it works

A ten-cent increase is added to the price of plastic bottles and cans (Borelle 2013). Consumers get a ten-cents

per item when they return the empty containers such as plastic drink bottles or aluminum cans to authorized

This cup noodle packaging indicates thedifferent ways to recycle the product. (all-recycling-facts.com 2013)


16/33


17/33


Each shop and supermarket will be informed that plastics of certain resin numbers are recyclable while others are

not. If a certain item is not on the list, the shop can contact the councils support center to ask.

The shops and supermarkets will receive the stickers from a centralized sticker producer and implement them on

plastic products when they are stocking shelves.

EVALUATION

In order to evaluate the solutions fairly, I have used a decision matrix which evaluates options and prioritizes

certain criteria (Tague, in American Society for Quality 2013). I have used a set of criteria to evaluate each solution.

Each criteria will have a numerical value attached to it based on its priority to the over all design problem (1=

important, 2= very important). A set of questions will also be asked in each criteria to help evaluate the solutions.

The answers will also be given a numerical value based on their ability to satisfy the requirements presented

by each question (1= low, 2=medium, 3=high). Each solution will be given a final numerical score based on the

importance of the criteria and their ability to fulfill the questions presented in each criteria. The total scores of each

criteria will be added up to give the solution a final overall score. To better understand the decision matrix please

see the evaluation table in the analysis section and a breakdown of the formula below.

I used the following criteria to evaluate the three solutions:

User experience:This is based on my experience of the target audience, the consumers. Since user experience isthe basis of the problem, it gets a value of 2.

Triple Bottom Line: A popular concept in implementation and business evaluation mainly used in the non-

profit world (Hall & Slaper 2011). Here I will focus on economic sustainability (cost), to ensure that these

solutions will be cost efficient to implement. It will also get a value of 2 as cost is an important criteria of

every solution. Social sustainability (human resources and people)is a criteria used to ensure people are

not negatively affected by these solutions and that jobs are not lost, and gets a value of 1. Environmental

sustainabilityis also a criteria as the main goal of these solutions is to improve our environment and gets a value

of 1.

Example

FORMULA FOR SCORING SYSTEM

importance of criteria x score from criteria question =total score

User experience is a very important criteria so it gets a value of 2.

Criteria question: Are product symbols easily understood by the consumer?Score:3 (high)Reason: 100% of the consumers tested correctly identified the product as recyclable due to the clear symbol.

Therefore the total score for this criteria is:

Importance of criteria (2)xscore from criteria question (3) =total score (6)


18/33


Feasibility:Ensures that these solutions are relatively easy to implement. Feasibility is an very important criteria

as solutions that are hard to implement will unlikely be used, thus it gets a value of 2.

Effectiveness:Evaluates the overall effectiveness of the solution to the problem at hand once it has been

implemented. It is also a basis of the design problem thus also gets a value of 2.

Solution 1: Plastics recycling in Japan

User Experience: (importance value= 2)

1) Are product symbols easy to understand for the consumer?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reason: Product symbols are easy to understandbut are partly written in a language, thus not effectively

communicating to those who do not speak the language.

2) Is the solution convenient and easy to use for the consumer?Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:This system has too many bins, making recycling more difficult as the number of categories of

recycling sorting can range from 5-44 (all-recycling-facts.com 2013). A Japanese native currently living in

Nagoya has also pointed out in an interview that there are too many rules to keep track of, discouraging

those who are not especially interested in the environment from recycling (Iwai 2013). Japans recycling laws

are enforced well due to Japans culture of cleanliness and cooperation of locals who constantly spy on

their neighbors recycling habits. This specific part of the solution may not work in a heterogeneous society

like Australia. Australians also see this as an invasion of their privacy, as only 22% of people surveyed said

that they would participate in such program. Saying this, people are willing to comply with being forced to

recycle properly as 74% of people surveyed said that they would a agree or strongly agree with a law that

forces people in Australia to do so.

Total score: (2x2) + (2x1)= 6

Economic Sustainability (Costs) (importance value = 2)

1) Will there be extra cost to the stakeholders?

Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:There would be extra cost for manufacturers to print labels on their products. This especially

pertains to products that are not directly printed on (ie: labels are printed on a plastic sheet stuck on the

product), as machines that print on various product shapes will have to be made. This may in may turn lead

to a price increase in certain products for consumers.More money will also have to be invested to developnew materials used to produce more products from recycled plastics, due to laws enforcing manufacturers to

take this step. There will also be a cost to pay people to design labels, and produce outreach material such as

guidelines (see more jobs needed below). Finally the cost of government to enforce laws, and cost of people

to ensure these laws are enforced may be high.

Total score: (2x1)= 2

Social Sustainability (Human resources and people) (importance value = 1)

1) Will this solution affect the job market positively?

Score: 3 (high)

Reasons:This solution will result in various job positions created. In the realm of science and technology,

higher paying jobs would be created to further techniques in creating goods made from recycling, in the

manufacturing business, people will be needed to print labels on the products, and in communications,


19/33


designers will be needed to make clear symbols as well as give the public recycling guidelines.

2) Will solution be harmful to people in any way?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:This solution will not be harmful to people in any way but it will not be particularly beneficial either.


Environmental Sustainability (importance value = 1)

1) Will this solution affect the environment negatively in any way?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons: If the same inks are being used to print these symbols as other existing information on the product,

environmentally friendly inks may not be used. It would be hard for quality control unless it was made part of

the law. Some manufacturers who do not print on the actual product will have to get more machines made

to do this step, causing more environmental damage. On a positive note, there will be no extra waste added

to the product, as symbols are directly printed on them.


Feasibility (importance value = 2)

1) Is this solution easy to implement?

Score: 1 (low)

Reasons: Implementing laws to require mandatory label printing and use of recycled materials in

manufacturing goods may take a lot of time and effort. Implementing such a law in Australia would require

the cooperation of the government to make big changes (which is unlikely in Australia, especially with the

current government) and pressuring manufacturers to spend more on new technology required to make

products from recycled material.

Also, asking people to participate in program that involves having someone look through their trash may be

difficult.

2) Are physical parts needed for solution easily made?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:As mentioned before, it is easy to make the labels if the products already have images printed on

them directly, but if not, then printers may have to be made to print the labels specifically on the products.


Effectiveness: (importance value = 2)

1) How effective will this system be if implemented?Score: 3 (high)

Reasons:This solution actually solves the problem of confusing recycling labels, given if everyone can read

the language contained in the recycling symbols. It would also increase the rate of recycling and decrease

the rate of improper recycling if the solution was implemented successfully.

2) Are there functional drawbacks that will impede the effectiveness of this solution?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:The law obliging manufacturers to print labels work only for domestically manufactured products

thus only affecting domestic products as imported goods will not have these signs.


Final overall score: 32


20/33


Solution 2: Container depositing scheme

User Experience: (importance value = 2)


Score: 1 (low)

Reason:This solution does not give consumers easy to read recycling symbols, but rather just indicates the

products that could be put in the reverse vending machine.

2) Is the solution convenient and easy to use for the consumer?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:The rewards system is straight forward and a good incentive psychologically, giving people money

for recycling their plastic bottles (even though the 10 cents was added to the cost of the product already).

However, users that I have interviewed have said that this solution is rather inconvenient. One user claimed

that recycling depots were open at odd hours which was not practical for those working full time jobs and

the amount of money people get back for the products was sometimes not worth the trip (Howard 2013).




Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:There will be added costs for implementing the scheme.In South Australia it is said to cost 1.4-1.7

billion AUD/year, mainly coming from private sector investment in building infrastructure depots to operate

the scheme (White 2013). If implemented nationwide there will also be added costs for people to pick up the

recycled plastic as well as additional costs for people keep the depots functioning.

Both kerbside recycling and depositing schemes will have to be maintained as only 25.9% of people

surveyed said that they would rather recycle their plastics in a container depositing depot than use the

current kerbside recycling system for plastics. This may not be cost efficient as additional trucks will be

needed to pick up from depositing stations as well as from kerbside recycling (Carter, Gross & Toscano 2013).

In Northern Territory, the container depositing scheme was abolished due to companies, namely Coca Cola,

Lion Nathan, and Schweppes taking legal action against the Northern Territory government and winning,

claiming that the adding of an extra 10 cents to their products was unfair to consumers. However, a surplus is

said to come with the scheme, as those who do not recycle their bottles in the deposit systems forfeits the 10

cents, which could be used towards more recycling (Angel et al 2012).




Score: 3 (high)

Reason: UTS has estimated such a scheme can create up to 1500 new jobs (in collection depots, trucks

operations and maintenance of deposit machines) (Angel et al 2012). More jobs will be created as more

working hours will be needed for people to pick up the bottles from the depots and bring them to council

recycling depots. Jobs in finance and administration will be needed to make sure that funds given back to

the public are equal to or do not outweigh costs taken from them.

2) Will solution be harmful to people in any way?

Score: 3 (high)Reason:This solution is beneficial to lower income sectors of society and the homeless. According to an

interview subject who lived in South Australia, it was a way for people who had lower income or were


21/33


homeless to make extra money by collecting a lot of cans. She often left cans out for them to be picked up

(Howard 2013).



1) Will this solution affect the environment negatively in any way?Score: 1 (low)

Reasons: Numerous recycling depositing depots will need to be built, making this part of the solution

environmentally unfriendlyas plastics will need to be used to build these depositing stations. If made from

recycled plastics it would reduce the environmental impact. Extra trucks will be needed to pick up from the

recycling depots, effecting the environment negatively.



1) Is this solution easy to implement?Score: 2 (medium)

Reason: Hundreds of deposit drop off points will need to be implemented in order for the scheme to work

well (Angel et al 2012).


Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:There will be some difficulty manufacturing these depositing depots as it is slightly more complex

than printing symbols.

Total score: (2x2) + (2x1) = 7


1) How effective will this system be if implemented?

Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:This solution is rather inefficient for the design problem as does not solve the problem of consumer

confusion in labeling. Also, less than half of people surveyed (44%) said that they would recycle more if this

system was implemented and subjects I have interviewed said that they stuck to kerbside recycling and

rarely used the container depositing scheme, citing inconvenience. Financial incentive is too low for most

people to make the extra effort.


Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:This solution also only focuses on the recycling of limited plastics as it only affects drink bottles and

cans, not other plastic recyclables.



Solution #3: Sticker labeling system

User Experience: (importance value = 2)


Score: 3 (high)Reason:The sticker labeling will be same in all of Australia for easy in terms of consumer usage as stickers

will be easy to recognize. As mentioned earlier, the meaning of both stickers were very clear to most people

surveyed (refer to Annex A for the survey results).


22/33


2) Is the solution convenient and easy to use for the consumer?

Score: 3 (high)

Reasons:Consumers do not have to make extra effort to recycle as there is very little change in consumer

behavior. This may be the solution closest to a nationwide consolidated recycling system without having

to make major changes as 89% of people surveyed have expressed that they would like a consolidated

recycling system in Australia.




Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:More taxes may be added in order for this solution to be implemented as stickers should be paid

by the government and shops/supermarket should probably be subsidized for the extra hours it takes to

implement the stickers. Manufacturing and distributing the stickers will cost money. The cost of making and

printing the stickers are low due to product material being cheap and stickers could be made from a singlesupplier, avoiding the extra costs to build large printing facilities and ensuring quality control. The cost of

distribution may be higher as transportation vehicles such as trains and trucks will be needed and multiple

smaller offices will be needed in order to distribute items locally after receiving stickers from the central

production center (maybe 1 or 2 near every big city).

The cost of extra human resources may also be high due to the amount of jobs created (see social

sustainability for outlines of jobs needed) and supermarkets may need to hire a few extra stock people to put

stickers on the products

Information for yje recycling potential of products will be all digital, lowering costs, but websites and

databases of recycled products will need to be set up.




Score: 3 (high)

Reasons:This solution will create a wide variety of jobs that will be inclusive to women and men with

both high and low levels of education. It will need people to find out if products are recyclable, people

to set up the IT systems (website, support, plug in information for each council), more stock people to

implement these stickers in bigger shops, people to roll out communication, people to do the supply chain

management of the stickers, people to handle the logistics of distribution, people to handle the finances and

human resources to handle the workforce of this operation.2) Will solution be harmful to people in any way?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:This solution will not be harmful to people in any way but it will not be particularly beneficial either.



1) Will this solution affect the environment negatively in any way?

Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:The sticker material will be environmentally friendly as it will made from recycled coated paper and

printed with vegetable inks. However, distribution of stickers will cause some environmental effects, due to

the harm caused by transportation vehicles. To minimize this effect, stickers can be delivered by rail to more


23/33


cities, then only delivered by trucks when necessary. Also, the production of stickers will be continuous,

which will exhaust resources continually.



1) Is this solution easy to implement?Score: 2 (medium)

Reasons:To make sure that shops/supermarkets comply, a law to enforce the sticker system may be needed,

which may take time and effort to implement. Identifying which products are recyclable will also be tedious

at first. Implementation will only affect shops and supermarkets, but not the user as change in consumer

behavior will be minimal, thus making easier to recycle. This solution will also work with current recycling

systems in Australia (ie: how different councils recycle differently), thus making it easier to implement than

changing the entire recycling system.


Score: 3 (high)

Reason: Stickers are easy to print and manufacture.



1) How effective will this system be if implemented?

Score: 3 (high)

Reasons:If implemented properly, this solution will be very effective, as clear indications will help people

recycle properly.


Score: 1 (low)

Reasons:There will still be chance when people travel to different councils their products may not be

recyclable there. Also, products containing different plastics need more than one sticker.




24/33


25/33


both solutions and eliminate parts that do not work. For example, utilizing the multiple disposal indications found

in solution 1 could solve the problem of recyclable products unrecyclable containing plastics. Part of solution

3 was also modified after the survey conducted showed that people had trouble understanding the do not

recycle symbol. I also thought about how the sticker would be used in different settings. This made me realize

that the sticker should also have a strong adhesive and have a waterproof coating to prevent it from peeling off or

deteriorating in wet situations (such as with washing, or condensation).

CONCLUSION

Based on the research, evaluation and analysis of different solutions to the design problem, I have concluded that

the sticker labeling system I formulated is the most fitting solution. The other two solutions, plastics recycling in

Japan and the container depositing scheme in South Australia although less viable solutions still have positive

effects and are operating smoothly in their respective locations. The evaluation may prove that the sticker labeling

system is the best solution but more product testing and changes may have to be made during the development

stage of this product. This solution aids in how we should appropriately deal with waste by making consumers

recycle properly without thinking. Hopefully this solution will solve one of many environmental problems we face,

leaving us room to focus on solving problems that aid to waste creation such our habit of over consuming, our

disposable culture and the manufacturers decision to overuse packaging.

What plastic products could look likewith revised recycling stickers.


26/33


ANNEX A: SURVEY

This survey was taken by people in different parts of Australia. A total number of 28 people answered the survey.

Strongly agree (55.56%) Somewhat agree (33.33%) Neutral (3.7%)Somewhat disagree (0%) Strongly disagree (0%) Don t know (7.41%)

Strongly agree (48.15%) Somewhat agree (29.63%) Neutral (14.81%)Somewhat disagree (7.41%) Strongly disagree (0%) Don t know (0%)

Strongly agree (33.33%) Somewhat agree (40.74%) Neutral (14.81%)Somewhat disagree (3.7%) Strongly disagree (7.41%) Dont know (0%)

Strongly agree (59.26%) Somewhat agree (29.63%) Neutral (7.41%)Somewhat disagree (3.7%) Strongly disagree (0%) Dont know (0%)

Question 1

Australia should have one consolidated recyclingsystem.

Question 3I would recycle more if I had more guidance on howto recycle properly.

Question 2

Australia should have a law that forces people torecycle properly.

Question 2I would recycle more if I had more information onthe outcome of my products after I recycle them.


27/33


Strongly agree (25.93%) Somewhat agree (29.63%) Neutral (25.93%)Somewhat disagree (11.11%) Strongly disagree (3.7%) Dont know (3.7%)

Strongly agree (14.81%) Somewhat agree (29.63%) Neutral (22.22%)Somewhat disagree (25.93%) Strongly disagree (7.41%) Dont know (0%)



Question 5I would participate in a programme that involvessorting my waste into 5 or more categories in order

to have a more effective recycling system.

Question 7

I would recycle more if I received 10 cents for everyplastic container I deposited in designated recyclingcentres even if it required more effort.

Question 6I would participate in a programme that includesmarking my kerbside waste bags with my contact

information and have a recycling police check themperiodically to make sure I was recycling properly.

Question 8

I would rather recycle my plastics in a containerdepositing depot (and receive 10 cents for everycontainer) than use the current kerbside recyclingsystem for plastics.


28/33


Yes (44.44%) No (29.63%) Don't Know (25.93%)

Yes (96.3% ) No (0% ) Don't know (3.7% )

Yes (22.22%) No (70.37%) Don't know (7.41%)

Question 9Would you recycle this product?



* I was approached by the 3.7% (1 person) who answered dontknow. Apparently this person could not see the image on hisphone which resulted in such answer.

*This was to show that without any indication stickers,people are confused whether the product is recyclable, asa large percentage answered dont know.

*This indicated that product needs to be redesignedas people still seem confused whether this productis recyclable or not.


29/33


ANNEX B: INTERVIEWS

Interview with Asuka, Japanese resident from Nagoya

Q: Can you tell me about your daily recycling routine of plastics is usually in Japan? (ie- do you recycle most of your

plastic? All in one container? Or multiple containers?)

Asuka: After we use plastics, we put them in designated garbage bags of each city and take away outside

of each place once a week. If the plastics were dirty like food dishes, we have to rinse them. If it s hassle toclean them up, actually we can put them in burnable garbage bags. Or, there are some bins include plastics,

bottles, caps and cartons in almost all supermarkets. We sometimes bring recyclable things and put into bins

so that we can reduce our home garbage a little.

Q: Do you find it straightforward to recycle in Japan? Are recycling labels easy to read?

Asuka: Its too complicated for us to recycle. Ive never thought of labels which means. Its ok to read, I guess.

Q: I heard there are 10 different compartments to sort your trash, and a 27 page guide on how to recycle properly.

Is this true? Do you use it?Asuka: 10 different... Yes, I think so. But almost all people separate just burnable, nonburnable and plastics.

There are citys free monthly magazine, it includes the guide but its too detail to understand. I dont think

citizens read it and doing it.

Q: What area do you currently live in?

Asuka: I live in Nagoya.

Q: How many categories of waste do you have in your area? How many of those are for plastic recycling?

Asuka: Do not know. I think its five, one of those is for plastic recycling.

Q: Do you think recycling works well in Japan? (Maybe compared to Canada?) If so, why do you think it works?

Asuka: They say recycling is important, but we dont know where after recycling properties go. Thats why we

dont find its serious, we just do it as a routine. Just separate them correctly because we want them to pick

our garbage up. But compared with Canada, weve try to aware the importance. I didnt separate anything

in Canada (which surprised me and it was actually very easy and convenient!). Do you know the saying,

Mottainai? We usually hesitate to go junk, so we hope some small pieces will recycle and reuse in the future

So I think all we need is a clear guideline and government should let us know how recycling things work in

the future.

Interview with Angela and Elise, former residents of South Australia

Q: Did South Australia have kerbside recycling for plastics as well as the container depositing scheme? If so, which

one did you use more often to recycle your plastic drink bottles? (kerbside more, container depositing more, or

same amount for both?)

Angela: Yes it did, we always used kerbside.

Elise: We had kerbside recycling for plastics and I used that far more than the container depositing scheme.

Q: Did you find the container depositing scheme useful?

Angela: It was used more by people short on money, quite often there would be homeless folk with trolleys

full & older pensioner types collecting from peoples roadside using a bike with a basket. So potentially usefulbut only really enticed those low on cash.

Elise: I only used the container deposit scheme when we had a big party and there were lots of empty drink


30/33


containers. Otherwise, I didnt really collect the cash, especially since it was only 5c when I lived in SA.

Q: Did you find the scheme easy to use, and convenient?

Angela: No it was quite far away from our home, and open odd hours so not practical for people working full

time - we quite often figured the time spent to take our $1.35 worth out there wasnt worth it, though people

with a whole trolley would have more incentive! I always thought it was nicer to leave it out for the old man

with the bike who came past our street!

Elise: It wasnt that convenient, I guess thats why I didnt take bottles more often. I just recycled them as

normal, without collecting the coin.

Q: Did you and people you know use it very often?

Angela: No

Elise: Nope didnt use it that often. I think its a really great thing though, especially for homeless people who

can collect bottles or cans and earn some money.

Q: How did you dispose of your other recyclable plastics?Angela: Roadside collection

Elise: Using our rubbish bin. In SA we had special garbage bins where we filled half with normal rubbish and

the other half with recyclable items. The garbage collectors would ensure that the recyclables were collected

together and the garbage was collected together.

Q: Would you like this scheme implemented in Perth? Or would you prefer a different recycle scheme from your

current one in WA?

Angela: No, I think people are lazy and it really isnt much of a financial incentive for most people. I would

prefer a more separate roadside bin system, Melbourne has paper / glass & cans / green all separate which is

what I was used to so we had dividing bins inside the house too to make it all easy.Elise: I think it would be nice to spread this scheme to other locations.


31/33


ANNEXC:CU

STOMERJOURNEYMAP

Customers&

Stakeholders

Councils

Recyclingcentr

es

Government

Shops/supermarkets

Stockworkers

Users(consumers)

Shop

ping

forproduct

Anxiety

Overw

helmed

Happy

Positiv

e

Nothing

Supe

rmarket

Shop

Website

Responsible

Contemplative

Indecisive

Decisive

Product

Pricetag

Productinfo

Productlabel

onbottom

Responsible

Contemplative

Indecisive

Decisive

Confusion

Cont

emplative

Indecisive

DecisiveH

ome

Outdoors

Work

School

Checkmaterial,

price,qualityand

labels

B

uying

p

roduct

Satisfaction

Cashier

Satisfaction

Home

Fridge

Cupboard

Bag

Sa

tisfaction

Product

Website

Binlabels

Callcouncil

Bringing

itemhome

Storag

e

of

product

Use

product

Check

productlabel

Recycle

Throwin

wastebin

Wastefu

l

Defeate

d

Responsible

Satisfied

Happy

Responsible

Wastebin

Averagerecycler

livinginAustralia

Likes

itwhenthings

aree

asytouse

Does

ntconsciously

think

ofrecycling

Wouldnottake

extra

stepstoseek

outifitemsare

recyclablewhen

confusedandeither

throwitem

inthe

wastebinorrecycle

boxblindly

Japaneseplastics

recyclingsy

stem

Swissmulti

-bin

recyclingsy

stem

Container

depositing

scheme

Puttingsim

ple

labelsonproducts

thatcanbe

implemented

independentlyand

easily

BenA.

Ideas

Pers

ona

Touchdowns Actions Mindset

Recyclingbin


32/33


BIBLIOGRAPHY

All-recycling-facts.com 2013,Japans Recycling Pictures, All-recycling-facts.com, accessed 21 August 2013, .

Angel, J, Annison, G & Gray, S 2012, Should NSW adopt a container deposit scheme?, The Sydney Morning Herald,

26 May, accessed 2 September 2012, .

American Society for Quality, n.d., Decision Matrix, American Society for Quality, accessed 15 September 2013,

.

Borrelle, J 2013, Container deposit schemes work and thats what matters,Australian Conservation Foundation,

March 26, accessed 2 September 2013, .

Carter, P, Gross, D & Toscano, M 2013, Container deposit laws past their use-by date, The Conversation, 19

June, accessed 2 September 2013, .

Clean Up, n.d., What is a container deposit scheme?,Clean Up, accessed 2 September 2013, .

Earth Odyssey, LLC 2012, Recycling symbols (Japan), Earth Odyssey, LLC, accessed 21 August 2013, .

Gyekye, L 2013, Coke under fire from angry consumers after successful bid to abolish container deposit scheme,

Packaging News, March 12, accessed 2 September 2013, .

Hall, T & Slaper, T 2011, The Triple Bottom Line: What Is It and How Does It Work?, Indian Business Review, accessed 13September 2013, .

Hays, J 2009, Trash and Garbage in Japan, Facts and Details, accessed 21 August 2013, .

Interview with A Howard, Riverlands Montessori School teacher, 11 September 2013.

Interview with E Beacom, United Nations Office for Project Services Communications Assistant, 13 September

2013.


33/33

Interview with Asuka Iwai, ECC Foreign Language Institute teacher, 8 September 2013.

Martin, D 2011, Reverse Vending Machine [Image], in Money for Empties, ABC Radio National, accessed

14 September 2013, .

McCurry J, 2011, Japan streets ahead in global plastic recycling race, The Guardian, 29 December, accessed 21

August 2013, .

METI-integratedindicationII [image], inJapans Recycling Pictures, All-recycling-facts.com 2013, accessed 21 August

2013, .

METI-recyclingidentificationmarksI [image], inJapans Recycling Pictures, All-recycling-facts.com 2013, accessed 21

August 2013, .

Onishi, N 2005, How Do Japanese Dump Trash? Let Us Count the Myriad Ways, The New York Times, 12

May, accessed 21 August 2013, .

Pickles, J 2013, Cash-for-cans not the answer,ABC Environment, 18 April, accessed 2 September 2013, .

Terzieff, J 2012, Japan a leader in global plastic recycling, Tech Planet Journal, 3 March, accessed 21 August 2013, .

Vogel-Misicka, S 2010, Room to grow in Swiss plastic recycling, Swissinfo.ch, 30 July, accessed 8 September 2013,

.

White, D 2013, Container deposit laws: cleaner, more sustainable, The Conversation,10 July, accessed 2 September

2013, .

Documents

Recycling Plastics in Australia